Speaker 1: Mr garbutschaf teared down this wall. Either you're with us
Speaker 1: or you were with the terrorists. If you've got healthcare,
Speaker 1: all of it, then you can keep your plan. If
Speaker 1: you are satisfied with it is not present, take it
Speaker 1: to the bank. Together, we will make America great again.
Speaker 1: It's what you've been waiting for all day. The buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show. Join the conversation called Buck toll free at
Speaker 1: eight four four nine hundred buck. That's eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred to eight to five the future of talk radio.
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton, Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everybody rates
Speaker 1: to have you here with me as always eight four
Speaker 1: four nine eight five eight war four buck. A privilege
Speaker 1: and a pleasure to get to hang out with you
Speaker 1: in the hut. We've got a bunch of things to
Speaker 1: talk about today, and instead of just keeping you in suspense,
Speaker 1: I figured and give you something of a roadmap for
Speaker 1: we're heading on the show. We will start it off
Speaker 1: with a talk about the state of the immigration debate
Speaker 1: right now, and that will lead us into a deep
Speaker 1: dive on MS thirteen, which I have been meaning to
Speaker 1: get to for some time. I have been doing a
Speaker 1: lot of research on the cartels and the role of
Speaker 1: the cartels in the as bad as it has been
Speaker 1: in living memory. Drug trade in this country, well, m
Speaker 1: S thirteen also plays quite a role, and the Trump
Speaker 1: administration has elevated MS thirteen in the conversation about what
Speaker 1: the costs of immigration illegal immigration are and what it
Speaker 1: means to not have a secure border. And I will
Speaker 1: get into some of that discussion with you. I think
Speaker 1: you'll find some of what I have to tell you
Speaker 1: about m S thirteen to be both fascinating and terrifying.
Speaker 1: And here is a a preview at the heart of
Speaker 1: some of the most vicious and vile stuff that m
Speaker 1: S thirteen does is in fact, a long history of
Speaker 1: devil worship of Satanism. We will talk about it. You're
Speaker 1: probably thinking, what, Oh, yes, my friends, I will give
Speaker 1: you some of the background on that. And and this
Speaker 1: is not some theory that I've come up with. This
Speaker 1: is based on those who have done a lot of
Speaker 1: research into the group Satanism, and that all of a
Speaker 1: sudden begins to explain much of what you've read. Much
Speaker 1: of the headlines on this vicious group and what it
Speaker 1: does with machete is another edged implements. So that will
Speaker 1: be later on in this hour. Also talk a bit
Speaker 1: about what's happening with the memo so far. My memo
Speaker 1: predictions I think have been the spot on. We will
Speaker 1: look at the Democrat memo and maybe a little bit
Speaker 1: of a talk about the wake up that some have had,
Speaker 1: although I don't think it will last very long. On
Speaker 1: the economy, meaning that the whole debt deficit thing might
Speaker 1: be worth talking about that again, maybe that's something that
Speaker 1: deserves a bit more attention than it has gotten previously.
Speaker 1: But we will get there, and then third hour will
Speaker 1: have some fun. There's a space shuttle, you know, a
Speaker 1: space shuttle launch come out of the coast. Have a
Speaker 1: few laughs, you know, a space shuttle launch today. That
Speaker 1: was fun. We've also got to talk. We might do
Speaker 1: some campus reform stuff, right is that? Who put out
Speaker 1: the clip? Yeah? Do they like it when Trump says it? No?
Speaker 1: But what about Obama saying it? Oh, isn't that a
Speaker 1: bit of a bit of a shock. Oh, my friend
Speaker 1: Lawrence Jones, by the way, just got picked up by
Speaker 1: campus reform, I believe unless I'm yes, Lawrence, a colleague
Speaker 1: of mine from the Blaze previously big big high five
Speaker 1: and congratulations to Lawrence. So the third hour have some fun. Um.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I got your notes yesterday about
Speaker 1: the UH. If you didn't hear it, I mean you
Speaker 1: should go back and listen to the podcast for the
Speaker 1: end of the show on the wisdom, the wisdom for
Speaker 1: all of us that comes from children who are in
Speaker 1: palliative and terminal care. Um. I mean it's still I
Speaker 1: actually can't talk to you about it much more right
Speaker 1: now because it starts to make me tear up. But
Speaker 1: it's really worth listening to. If you didn't get a
Speaker 1: chance to yesterday, you can just go on iTunes or
Speaker 1: on the I heart app Um, it's not for me.
Speaker 1: It's from this doctor who compiled it's a It's an
Speaker 1: amazing and really powerful and moving project he did, this
Speaker 1: pediatrician who works with terminal UH pediatric patients and just
Speaker 1: what matters to them, because what matters to them is
Speaker 1: what actually matters to all of us. So I hope
Speaker 1: you get a chance to listen to if you did
Speaker 1: not already, And I appreciate the outpouring of of UH
Speaker 1: well that you liked it, that you thought that that
Speaker 1: was a worthwhile place for us to take the show.
Speaker 1: So with all of that, we delve into the latest.
Speaker 1: The latest on immigration. For example, uh, Chief of Staff Kelly,
Speaker 1: General John Kelly had some interesting comments today to say
Speaker 1: about this. We'll get to those in just a little bit.
Speaker 1: But first Trump is setting this up as quite a
Speaker 1: battle over immigration. We have a shutdown. Woman, what is
Speaker 1: the February? Wait, when is it supposed to be? When
Speaker 1: is the shutdown is supposed to happen? Guys, I'm getting
Speaker 1: soon that much. I know it's soon, So I'll check
Speaker 1: the date on that. It slipped my mind. But I
Speaker 1: don't want to give you the wrong one. Uh. But
Speaker 1: Trump made quite clear where he stands on this today.
Speaker 1: And this is what the commander in chief had to say.
Speaker 1: If we don't change the legislation, if we don't get
Speaker 1: rid of these loopholes, what killers are allowed to come
Speaker 1: into our country and continue to kill gang members? And
Speaker 1: we're just talking about MS thirteen. There are many gang
Speaker 1: members that we don't even mention. If we don't change it,
Speaker 1: let's have a shutdown. We'll do a shutdown, and it's
Speaker 1: worth it for our country. I'd love to see a
Speaker 1: shutdown if we don't get this stuff taken care of.
Speaker 1: We have to shut it down because the Democrats don't
Speaker 1: want safety and unrelated but still related, they don't want
Speaker 1: to take care of our military. Then shut it down.
Speaker 1: Trump knows that he won the last shutdown. He knows that, Uh,
Speaker 1: the Democrats had assumed until this most recent, this recent
Speaker 1: face off, that they would always win because the media
Speaker 1: is in their pocket, right, the media is a tool
Speaker 1: of the d n C. And they figured that they
Speaker 1: last time, just to take a step back for a moment, everyone,
Speaker 1: they thought that last time they could be the ones
Speaker 1: to say we will block funding for the government. We
Speaker 1: are in the minority, but the Republicans are guilty of
Speaker 1: causing the shutdown. You know, this is as I said.
Speaker 1: I think it's a pretty accurate. It's like they were
Speaker 1: breaking into a house and screaming about how somebody else
Speaker 1: was a burglar. It couldn't have been any more apparent. Now,
Speaker 1: I think that the difference here was largely Trump. And
Speaker 1: I've said that all along. I referred to him as
Speaker 1: the X factor in the shutdown fight. Um, and that's
Speaker 1: what happened. I think this most recent, in this most
Speaker 1: recent iteration, so the shutdown that looms right now, I
Speaker 1: think Trump realizes this has to be used as leverage
Speaker 1: in the immigration debate and the negotiations. Trump's opening bid
Speaker 1: to the other side was more generous than I would
Speaker 1: have started off with his opening gambit, the idea that
Speaker 1: he give legalization to one eight million. That's if you
Speaker 1: would asked me six months ago, what's Trump does, he'd
Speaker 1: probably say, I'm Trump and I've got a majority in
Speaker 1: both houses. I don't you know, Democrats, you better get
Speaker 1: in line here. You know, there's none of this You're
Speaker 1: gonna dictate because at some point, what's the purpose everybody, mean,
Speaker 1: let's be honest here, why do we even vote for
Speaker 1: the Republicans? If you do, I know some of your
Speaker 1: like Buck, I do not even but if you did
Speaker 1: go out there and vote, or maybe do some campaign work,
Speaker 1: even volunteering, whatever it is, right, just trying to convince
Speaker 1: your you're foolish neighbors on social media to stop supporting
Speaker 1: the Democrat left. What's the point of doing all that
Speaker 1: if in fact, the Democrats will get their way at
Speaker 1: a policy level even when they're in the minority. And
Speaker 1: I would also I would be remiss if I did
Speaker 1: not bring into this discussion that Trump one the election
Speaker 1: in large part because of his stance on immigration, because
Speaker 1: of what he's been saying, and he's now put out
Speaker 1: there the uh, the key components that he would want
Speaker 1: wait seventy two hours remaining to avert anover another. We
Speaker 1: only got seventy two hours. I thought it was. That's
Speaker 1: why I was like, Wow, this is really coming, this
Speaker 1: is coming up fast. I've been talking about memo memo. Right,
Speaker 1: it's seventy two our Thursday. The government shutdowns right here,
Speaker 1: so we're we're poised. For some reason, I had in
Speaker 1: my head it was Monday, and then I got confused
Speaker 1: for a second, and you know, I didn't get enough
Speaker 1: sleep last night. No, but this is gonna happen in
Speaker 1: the next few days or not. I think they're gonna
Speaker 1: kick the can down the road. I know what the
Speaker 1: other bills are. We'll talk about McCain was the other
Speaker 1: guy that's with him, Is it McCain Coon's right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what I thought, McCain Coon's. We'll talk about the
Speaker 1: McCain coon Coon's planned in a second or in a
Speaker 1: few minutes. But first Trump has said, look, you need
Speaker 1: border security, you need to get the following in order
Speaker 1: and we'll make you a really good deal. And I've
Speaker 1: seen some of the Democrats sur gets out there on
Speaker 1: TV on the various channels, and they keep saying, well,
Speaker 1: it's only you know, of the illegal immigrant population or
Speaker 1: something like that that would be covering os DAKA, and
Speaker 1: so Trump should only get of border security. And this
Speaker 1: is just such a preposterous bargaining position for them to take,
Speaker 1: as if to think about what they're saying. The Democrat
Speaker 1: Party's position now on immigration is we will start to
Speaker 1: enforce the rules. We will start to obey the law more,
Speaker 1: enforce the law more if you give us a large
Speaker 1: constituency of soon to be Democrat voters. But but you'll
Speaker 1: notice that the law as something that matters and that's
Speaker 1: something that should be enforced. The law is in fact
Speaker 1: a Republican issue. Like it's as though there are platforms
Speaker 1: and rule of law as a Republican party platform, and
Speaker 1: Democrats are like, I don't know so much about that
Speaker 1: rule loss stuff. Not an immigration that's what they're telling us, folks.
Speaker 1: You'll notice that Republicans are willing to at least Trump
Speaker 1: is willing to look at this and perhaps make a
Speaker 1: concession about those who are in violation of law in
Speaker 1: exchange for a return to rule of law and border security,
Speaker 1: and Democrats are saying, oh, you know, I don't know
Speaker 1: if you're gonna get that border security. Everybody. Shouldn't everyone
Speaker 1: want this, shouldn't this be it's supposed to be bipartisan.
Speaker 1: For years Democrats were saying they're all about border security too.
Speaker 1: And then there's another component of this that just is
Speaker 1: really coming to the forefront, I think this week, and
Speaker 1: that is that you'll notice that with immigration, we we
Speaker 1: are forced to have a debate at the at the
Speaker 1: polar opposite ends of the spectrum are at the extremes
Speaker 1: right now. And Trump is right to do this, but
Speaker 1: he's fighting fire with fire. And this is part of
Speaker 1: why MS there team, which I'll talk to you about
Speaker 1: in more detail in a few minutes. But this is
Speaker 1: part of why we see that the Democrats only want
Speaker 1: to talk about quote dreamers, they only want to talk
Speaker 1: about DOCCA, and yet we know that DOCCA is just
Speaker 1: the beginning. DOCCA is the start of a much larger
Speaker 1: program and demand for amnesty. On the other side, the
Speaker 1: Rubio GOP establishment approach to this issue, stretching back to
Speaker 1: the Romney era, which in political terms, feels like the
Speaker 1: Paleolithic error or something. Now, right, I mean that's like whoa,
Speaker 1: it's way back when. Although although Mit MIT's running for Senate,
Speaker 1: I think, right, we haven't. It's not official yet, but
Speaker 1: it's kind of official. Um, you know, mitted or quit it.
Speaker 1: Uh so mit may be running anyway. The old school
Speaker 1: Republican position on this was, you know, the Rubio approach was, well,
Speaker 1: you know, let's create a pathway and we'll work with
Speaker 1: existing immigration infrastructure and everything. And what you notice about
Speaker 1: this is that that then lends itself to just becoming
Speaker 1: a giant amnesty discussion. You know, there'll be a pathway
Speaker 1: to learn English, will play back taxes, fines. It's like
Speaker 1: blah blah blah, amnesty. That's what the discussion quickly turns
Speaker 1: into with Trump, because there's a wall, because there's end
Speaker 1: to change migration, because there's actual changes to immigration policy.
Speaker 1: It's not just arguing over the application of discretion within
Speaker 1: the executive branch, right, And that's what Obama was abusing
Speaker 1: so much during his time in office, was you know,
Speaker 1: will enforce these laws. We will enforce those laws. I
Speaker 1: like this. I don't like that I'm a one man legislature.
Speaker 1: That's the Obama administration approach. Trump is not saying, yeah,
Speaker 1: let's just hope that, you know, we enforce these laws better,
Speaker 1: although that's certainly a part of this immigration debate and
Speaker 1: the negotiations. Trump is saying, let's actually make changes to
Speaker 1: the laws so that we can take action on those
Speaker 1: changes that will bring about markedly different outcomes for our
Speaker 1: immigration system and to chain migration. And you know, a wall, right,
Speaker 1: a wall is a thing. A wall is or is not.
Speaker 1: There's no well, you know, we're gonna enforce the wall today.
Speaker 1: We're not gonna enforce the wal tomorrow. If it's there,
Speaker 1: it's there. What you see is that instead of engaging
Speaker 1: on their terms, which is just a haggling over the
Speaker 1: cost of amnesty, which was what Rubio and the gang
Speaker 1: of the Gang of six, the Gang of eight, the
Speaker 1: Gang of however many senators gang of six I think,
Speaker 1: or not the Gang of eight whatever, uh, but they
Speaker 1: were haggling over the cost of amnesty, meaning how much
Speaker 1: is this amnesty gonna cost us? Trump is saying, Okay,
Speaker 1: you want amnesty, you want a limited amnesty. How about this,
Speaker 1: You're gonna give US the following and the Democrats already
Speaker 1: setting themselves up to walk away from it entirely. I
Speaker 1: think I am hoping that they try to take this
Speaker 1: to the mat and they try to force the Republicans
Speaker 1: on another shutdown because they are weakened after the last one.
Speaker 1: Trump won the last game a chicken. You know, the
Speaker 1: the Democrats, Schumer and Pelosian company, they pulled off the road.
Speaker 1: They're like, whoa, that was scary. So he has to
Speaker 1: keep his eye on the prize this time around. And
Speaker 1: instead of making it a big debate over the cost
Speaker 1: of amnesty, you now have Trump saying, what about ms
Speaker 1: their team? What about the murders that are occurring in
Speaker 1: this country? What about the U. S Citizens who are
Speaker 1: losing their lives to illegal aliens because of sanctuary city policies,
Speaker 1: because of the lawlessness that Democrats embrace. Oh you notice
Speaker 1: that is a powerful counterpoint to the dreamers. Are just
Speaker 1: all the all valedictorians that are curing diseases and just
Speaker 1: doing the jobs Americans won't do. And like everyone's crying,
Speaker 1: Trump's like, yeah, you know who else is crying? The
Speaker 1: people that have lost their family members to gang violence
Speaker 1: from illegal aliens. They're crying. Oh yeah, he understands this fight.
Speaker 1: And that's where we are right now. And there's a
Speaker 1: lot of reason I think to be um optimistic about
Speaker 1: Trump winning this winning winning this round again. I am
Speaker 1: hopefully he was the X factor last time. All right,
Speaker 1: I'm running late here. I gotta run into a break
Speaker 1: eight four four two five. Do I have the right
Speaker 1: read on this? Do you have any thoughts on it
Speaker 1: or anything else you want me to talk about. Hit
Speaker 1: me up on those lines, Team, I will be right back.
Speaker 1: Six thousand official data registrants, and uh, the President sent
Speaker 1: over what amounts to be two and a half times
Speaker 1: that number to one point eight million. The difference between
Speaker 1: six one point a million were the people that some
Speaker 1: would say we're too afraid to sign up, others would
Speaker 1: say we're too lazy to get off their asses. But
Speaker 1: they didn't sign up. So the President, shockingly, you said okay,
Speaker 1: one point eight million. And then probably the biggest shock
Speaker 1: was in a path to sit a ship. Um, that's
Speaker 1: beyond what anyone could have imagined. General Kelly or White
Speaker 1: House Chief of Staff. Kelly is correct about the kind
Speaker 1: of offer this is. He's noting this isn't just DOCCA,
Speaker 1: this is DOCA plus. This is anybody who could claim
Speaker 1: to be covered. And I would remember I told you
Speaker 1: that it's not just those that are under the doctor
Speaker 1: program that are going to be an issue here, and
Speaker 1: they're just I would note, they're beating them to the
Speaker 1: past here right there. They're they're getting to this first,
Speaker 1: because all that was going to happen was that the
Speaker 1: seven hundred thousand or six hundred eighty thousand, or six
Speaker 1: or nine thousand. Uh, we're going to balloon into two
Speaker 1: or three million the moment that you legalize the six thousand,
Speaker 1: because those who didn't apply, as Kelly pointed out, we're
Speaker 1: just gonna come forward and say, oh, well, but you know,
Speaker 1: there's a there's an equal protection argument here, and I
Speaker 1: should be covered under this program too, and I was
Speaker 1: scared of the federal government and you know, etcetera, etcetera.
Speaker 1: But he did say that they were too lazy to
Speaker 1: get off their rear ends. That was not the word
Speaker 1: he used. And then none other than Jim Acosta, today
Speaker 1: chief White House Pondit, pretending to be a correspondent for CNN,
Speaker 1: he decided to have a have a go with the
Speaker 1: question at Sarah Huckaby Standers chief staff saying that so
Speaker 1: much Dreamers may just have been too lazy to get
Speaker 1: off their asses, just on the face of it, not
Speaker 1: just a wildly offensive comment about these undocumented immigrants from Look,
Speaker 1: the only person that's actually offered a solution is this administration.
Speaker 1: The President has been a champion of giving one point
Speaker 1: eight million documents recipients and DOCTA eligible people a pathway
Speaker 1: to citizenship, and he's laid out a plan and a
Speaker 1: solution that actually addresses both Republicans and Democrats concerns. I
Speaker 1: think it's hard to argue with that. On the surface
Speaker 1: of that, it wasn't it just a It's just an
Speaker 1: offensive comment, though, Isn't it just on its surface? I
Speaker 1: think that's something you would have to decide for yourself.
Speaker 1: I would note that, you know, Sarah Huckaby Centers is
Speaker 1: like a costa really action talks. Jim Acosta walks. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is nonsense, But there you have it. Oh, isn't
Speaker 1: it Isn't this offensive? That's the whole argument here is emotion.
Speaker 1: Isn't it offensive? It's racist? It's so unfair all this
Speaker 1: stuff Trump's Look, I understand and this is why I
Speaker 1: try to withhold some of the dare I say, you know,
Speaker 1: fire and fury. Now, this is why I try to
Speaker 1: withhold some of my criticism. I don't fail to air
Speaker 1: it here on the show. But I don't go all
Speaker 1: and oh my gosh, you sold out the base and
Speaker 1: go to like you know, Trump con one or something
Speaker 1: and freak out, because hold on a second, what if
Speaker 1: Democrats just show with this whole doc negotiation they didn't
Speaker 1: want to negotiate. That's what I think we're about to
Speaker 1: find out, folks, And that's pretty big. He's holding the
Speaker 1: line for America. Buck sex in his back. MS thirteen
Speaker 1: recruits to our broken immigration system, violating our borders, and
Speaker 1: it just comes right through. Whenever they want to come through,
Speaker 1: they come through. It's much tougher now since we've been there.
Speaker 1: But we need much better border mechanisms and much better
Speaker 1: border security. We need the wall. I'm going to get
Speaker 1: the wall. We don't have the wall. We're never going
Speaker 1: to solve this problem. President Trump saying we need a
Speaker 1: wall if we're going to deal with m S thirteen.
Speaker 1: He's right, that's a necessary component all the strategy to
Speaker 1: degrade and defeat this transnational criminal gang. I wanted to
Speaker 1: spend some time on the show here telling you about
Speaker 1: MS thirteen or Mara Salvatruccia thirteen. It is only possible.
Speaker 1: This gang is only possible. It's it's reach and it's
Speaker 1: long and bloody reign of terror in over forty U
Speaker 1: s States now in different neighborhoods that it has been
Speaker 1: terrorizing for for decades um. It's only possible because of
Speaker 1: illegal immigration. That's we'll get into how and why in
Speaker 1: a moment, But just some some background. I mentioned to
Speaker 1: you that Satanism has not just ties to or that
Speaker 1: Masalvatrucha M S their teen has ties to Satanism and
Speaker 1: devil worship, and in fact goes to the very origins
Speaker 1: of the gang. So here's what happened. In nine seventy nine,
Speaker 1: a civil war broke out in Al Salvador. Would end
Speaker 1: up killing somewhere in the neighborhood of seventy to a
Speaker 1: hundred thousand people, which keep in mind Al Salvador is
Speaker 1: a very small country, so that's a large percentage of
Speaker 1: the population that doesn't even include all of the displaced
Speaker 1: and and brutalized and raped and all the terrible things
Speaker 1: that were happening in El Salvador. And during that period
Speaker 1: you had a number of refugees, immigrants, legal and illegal,
Speaker 1: coming into the United States from El Salvador. I think
Speaker 1: over the period of the Civil War, which went on
Speaker 1: for quite some time, something like seven hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: thousand El Salvadorans came in the United States. And look,
Speaker 1: it goes without saying over them are in no way
Speaker 1: affiliated with or partake in gang activity. The problem, though,
Speaker 1: is that that less than one percent has been a
Speaker 1: terrible blight and a vicious scourge on many US cities
Speaker 1: and stretching even beyond major urban centers. As I said,
Speaker 1: it's in forty two states, I believe, but you know,
Speaker 1: at this point, it's in any in any place that
Speaker 1: has urban centers, and in any Latino immigrant population. The
Speaker 1: Satanic origins go back to the earliest days of the
Speaker 1: MS thirteen gang. It was initially called the MS Stoners.
Speaker 1: They like to smoke weed. They were based in Los Angeles.
Speaker 1: You had El Salvadorans who had fled the Civil War.
Speaker 1: They were in Los Angeles, they were part of this
Speaker 1: community there and they were into smoking weed. Petty criminal activity,
Speaker 1: and so they were the Mara Salvatruca stoners. Mara means
Speaker 1: gang and Salvatruca is the peasants. It refers to the
Speaker 1: peasants who were trained to fight in the in the war, right,
Speaker 1: so it's kind of like gang of peasant warriors. That's
Speaker 1: what Mara Salvatrucchi is. I'll get to the thirteen in
Speaker 1: a second. Initially, the El Salvadoran showed up and they
Speaker 1: wanted to This is in Los Angeles. Los Angeles was
Speaker 1: the epicenter of this, well, the founding of the gang
Speaker 1: and also for a long time an epicenter of the
Speaker 1: MS group. And they lived near the Mexican predominantly mex
Speaker 1: And community in Los Angeles and came into contact with
Speaker 1: a gang called the Eighteenth Street Gang, and that set
Speaker 1: off a longstanding feud between the Mexican gang bangers and
Speaker 1: the Al Salvadorans, who felt that they were being h
Speaker 1: picked on, beaten up, attacked by the by the You know,
Speaker 1: these are guys mostly in their late teens and into
Speaker 1: their twenties, and so MS and Eighteen Street Gang in
Speaker 1: Los Angeles in the eighties or so. We're in this
Speaker 1: long standing blood feud, but some of the earliest practice practitioners,
Speaker 1: some of the earliest founders and members of the M. S. Gang,
Speaker 1: promoted this notion of how they were tied to Satanism
Speaker 1: and demonic activity and Satan worship so much so that
Speaker 1: actually if you see even present day MS thirteen gang bangers,
Speaker 1: whether we're talking about Central America, which became another major hub.
Speaker 1: In fact, that Central America is almost where the MS
Speaker 1: thirteen virus spread and then took hold of the of
Speaker 1: the host and and it went from being an infection
Speaker 1: to a pandemic in the countries of Honduras and El
Speaker 1: Salvador and Guatemala. Also why I would note those countries,
Speaker 1: particularly Al Salvador and Honduras, for a period in the
Speaker 1: mid two thousands had the highest per capita murder rate
Speaker 1: in the Western world, and I think had the highest
Speaker 1: per capita murder rates of any country not at war,
Speaker 1: not in the mid midst of an active conflict. So
Speaker 1: you have this early demonic Satan worshiper component of the M. S. Gang.
Speaker 1: And that's why to this day in prisons you'll see
Speaker 1: MS Gang members who have something called lagara on them,
Speaker 1: which is uh devil horns. It's a reference to Satan's
Speaker 1: clause and that's their gang symbol. They make this symbol
Speaker 1: with their hands, but the symbol is supposed to represent
Speaker 1: the clause of Satan. Now, this is obviously meant to
Speaker 1: intimidate rival gangs. It's also meant to make them seem
Speaker 1: more fearsome. But it's not just rhetorical. The Satanic worship
Speaker 1: of the early remember this gang has been around for decades.
Speaker 1: Of the early m S Gang meant that they engaged
Speaker 1: in ritual slaughter of animals and then within a short
Speaker 1: period of time escalated that to the ritual slaughter of
Speaker 1: human beings. And by the way, those of you who
Speaker 1: have little ones listening, this may be a time when
Speaker 1: you this is definitely a kind of a sixteen and
Speaker 1: up conversation we're about to get into here about the
Speaker 1: M S thirteen gang. So just fair warning on that
Speaker 1: for a moment. No profanity obviously, but the descriptions I'm
Speaker 1: going to give you or not stuff that I would
Speaker 1: want little ones to hear. So MS thirteen has Satanic
Speaker 1: worship in the in its origins, and that's why even
Speaker 1: within recent years you have of after these horrific ritual
Speaker 1: gangland murders where they will take a machete and they
Speaker 1: will in fact decapitate a corpse. They will cut the
Speaker 1: body up into many small pieces. They will remove the
Speaker 1: entrails and arrange it in a pentagram supposed to be
Speaker 1: the sign of the devil, and leave it for people
Speaker 1: to find that way. This is all an extension of
Speaker 1: the early founding and lure of MS thirteen as having
Speaker 1: roots in Satanism. And this is all well established. Brother,
Speaker 1: There's a professor at University of Southern California who's written
Speaker 1: probably the most comprehensive work on MS thirteen as a
Speaker 1: transnational gang, has actually written a book on this, and
Speaker 1: he goes into this at some length. But when you
Speaker 1: have some of these m S thirteen gangsters in custody,
Speaker 1: and I know for a lot of listening you probably
Speaker 1: have MS thirteen in your area. It's gotten more attention
Speaker 1: in recent years because they're in northern Virginia. They're right
Speaker 1: across the right, across the Potomac from Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: And there are been some terrible murders and people found
Speaker 1: and as I mentioned, in these kind of ritual sacrifice,
Speaker 1: uh circumstances within a few minutes of our nation's capital, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, just just next door so to speak, in
Speaker 1: northern Virginia and Alexandria area. Um and the spread of
Speaker 1: m S. Thirteen has been going on since the late
Speaker 1: nineties into the early two thousands into all these different states.
Speaker 1: But when they arrest some of these gang bangers, and
Speaker 1: the term for in the mafia, you'd be considered a
Speaker 1: maide guy. You know, you're a made man. They referred
Speaker 1: to as a homeboy. So if you are officially a
Speaker 1: part of m S. Thirteen, you're called the homeboy and
Speaker 1: you get a thirteen minute long beat down to be
Speaker 1: formally inducted into the group. That usually happens that's by
Speaker 1: the people that are your your new fellow homeboys. But
Speaker 1: that's also after usually you've committed an act of extreme
Speaker 1: violence to get into the gang as part of the
Speaker 1: gang initiation. But when they have some of these quote
Speaker 1: homeboys and custom it, they'll say that they'll tell investigators,
Speaker 1: why do you do this with the beast made me
Speaker 1: do it? Reference to the devil, and that sometimes the
Speaker 1: devil asks you to do things for him. I mean,
Speaker 1: these are quotes from transcripts of interviews with murderers from
Speaker 1: within the animals that from recent years in the MS
Speaker 1: thirteen gang, and they also have a long history of
Speaker 1: brutal rape as a tactic of of terror and torture.
Speaker 1: And so these guys are so vicious and violent that
Speaker 1: other gangs sometimes are surprised, although not the Mexican cartels
Speaker 1: because they're just as bad, but other gangs in some
Speaker 1: of these areas are like, whoa, these guys are brutal.
Speaker 1: They act in a really savage fashion, and that's how
Speaker 1: they've built their reputation over all these years. The thirteen,
Speaker 1: I would know, it comes from the thirteenth letter of
Speaker 1: the alphabet UH, and it has to do with M
Speaker 1: or m May, which is the Mexican Mafia. The Mexican
Speaker 1: Mafia was the most powerful prison based gang in California
Speaker 1: and they they werethy um third party, so to speak.
Speaker 1: That created a truce between the Mexican Eighteenth Street Gang
Speaker 1: and MS thirteen. But then so then so that's how
Speaker 1: they took on the Mexican Mafia. Thirteen as a we're
Speaker 1: kind of it's almost like a merger, thinking like a
Speaker 1: gang merger. Marasalva Trucia and the Mexican mafia. And this
Speaker 1: is back in the nights. In late nineties, they started
Speaker 1: deporting some of the worst offenders from MS thirteen to
Speaker 1: Central America. Well, that's when these guys with the so
Speaker 1: called street cred of having been gang bangers in l
Speaker 1: A and dozens of cities across the country, but predominantly
Speaker 1: than the biggest one was definitely at Los Angeles. They
Speaker 1: would show up in impoverished Honduras, uh in impoverished and depopulated,
Speaker 1: and just in despair El Salvador, and they would take
Speaker 1: all of their gang activity and skill sets, so to speak,
Speaker 1: and recruit down there. And unlike Los Ange Angelists, the
Speaker 1: police forces in Honduras and El Salvador were ill equipped
Speaker 1: to deal with hardened gang members and their tactics. So
Speaker 1: all of a sudden they became so very powerful that
Speaker 1: the police were terrified of dealing with them, and their
Speaker 1: power grew tremendously. In so then you had the US
Speaker 1: outposts of MS thirteen as well as the major base
Speaker 1: of external operations in Honduras, Nicola, I'm sorry, Honduras, Al Salvador,
Speaker 1: and Guatemalan on Nicaragua uh and they were using the border,
Speaker 1: and they were using our lax immigration laws to go
Speaker 1: back and forth. So if the heat got to be
Speaker 1: too much for an MS gang banger in Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: he could take refuge with his MS brothers and sisters
Speaker 1: in El Salvador or in Honduras and continue operations there
Speaker 1: and and go back and forth. There was a way
Speaker 1: of evading law enforce and scrutiny, a way of evading police.
Speaker 1: And so this is how the gang was able to
Speaker 1: exploit our lacks border security, lacks immigration policies, sanctuary city policies,
Speaker 1: especially in places like Los Angeles, where law enforcement was
Speaker 1: was not willing to work with federal authorities to deal
Speaker 1: with this problem. And this is how you have a
Speaker 1: gang that now has estimated to have eighty two maybe
Speaker 1: a hundred thousand actual members, whatever that means, that, as
Speaker 1: I said, is in over forty states of the Union
Speaker 1: and is one of the most violent and vicious gangs
Speaker 1: in the history of this country. Is responsible for thousands
Speaker 1: of murders, assaults, rapes. It's just and and the appalling
Speaker 1: level of brutality and lack of respect for fellow human
Speaker 1: beings and for life. That's the calling card of this group.
Speaker 1: That is what m S. Thirteen is first foremost about.
Speaker 1: Whatever you think they're unwilling to do, whoever you think
Speaker 1: they won't kill because the person is helpless, not a
Speaker 1: threat to them. That's who they go after. And they
Speaker 1: will gut their victims and make a satanic display of
Speaker 1: their entrails because of the origins of the group, that's
Speaker 1: who they are, that's how they make their name. And
Speaker 1: Trump wants to take them on no more. Oh but
Speaker 1: we don't. We're worried about different communities feeling like law
Speaker 1: enforcement is singling them out. Now he wants them gone.
Speaker 1: As he once said, they are bad Embrais, and he
Speaker 1: is correct. These are bad people. Gang members need to
Speaker 1: get sent back to the countries from which they came,
Speaker 1: and gang members who are US citizens need to spend
Speaker 1: long terms in prison for their violent acts. And MS
Speaker 1: their team is a true blight, a scourge and infection
Speaker 1: in this country that needs to be dealt with. But
Speaker 1: you can't deal with it effectively. People can run back
Speaker 1: and forth across the border. You can't deal with it
Speaker 1: effectively if you have sanctuary cities in place, and for
Speaker 1: each of the victims of this group and a quick
Speaker 1: Google search will show you that they have been victimizing
Speaker 1: communities for years in the most horrific fashion, including countless
Speaker 1: Latino victims, young women, young girls walking back to us
Speaker 1: from school, and the worst of the worst everyone. And
Speaker 1: I don't think that it's an accident that had had
Speaker 1: Satanic origins the group ideologically, and I'm not overplying that.
Speaker 1: By the way, their gang symbol is based in Santanism.
Speaker 1: So remember this the worst of the worst, and Trump
Speaker 1: wants to take them on, and the Schumers and the
Speaker 1: Pelosi's of the world want to make excuses, and they
Speaker 1: just want votes, and they don't want to deal with
Speaker 1: the problem. They don't want to tackle this issue and
Speaker 1: make law enforcement, give law enforcement the tools and the
Speaker 1: leeway to eliminate m s their teen as a threat
Speaker 1: from our community. So that's the that's what I've been
Speaker 1: thinking about talking about for some time. I think it's
Speaker 1: important to know the background of that. And that's why
Speaker 1: when you have people over at MSNBC say nobody's ever
Speaker 1: heard of ms their team, that's an insult. It's an insult.
Speaker 1: It's an insult from an idiot, but it's an insult. Nonetheless,
Speaker 1: all right, we'll take some calls and we'll get into
Speaker 1: some memo stuff in the next Our team must stay
Speaker 1: right there. President Trump made a very serious and sincere
Speaker 1: offer of goodwill with the reforms that he sent to
Speaker 1: the Hill. That is what we should be working off of.
Speaker 1: Those are the bipartisan negotiations that the Majority leader is
Speaker 1: conducting on our behalf. So we're not going to bring
Speaker 1: immigration legislation through that the President doesn't support. We're working
Speaker 1: on something here in the House. We're working on biparts
Speaker 1: and negotiations. It's going to be a bill that we
Speaker 1: support that the President supports. All right, Well, we'll see.
Speaker 1: We'll see if that's Paul Ryan there, we'll see what
Speaker 1: happens with this immigration immigration showdown right now. Uh, let's
Speaker 1: take some We've got lots of calls here, let's do this. Uh.
Speaker 1: Ted in Florida. Ted, welcome the Buck Sexon show. Hi,
Speaker 1: how's it going. It's good man, Thanks for the call,
Speaker 1: all your points of view. I love your take on
Speaker 1: intelligence as well. So what I'd like to see is, uh,
Speaker 1: I'd like to see our Republican representatives get more in
Speaker 1: lockstep like the Democrats have, and let's force some of
Speaker 1: this legislation through. Well, the problem Ted, as you know,
Speaker 1: is that the Democrats and the Senate will use the
Speaker 1: filibuster and they that's why you need to get a
Speaker 1: sixty vote threshold. Right, that's the problem. So we can't
Speaker 1: get any legislation through as long as Democrats are willing
Speaker 1: to use the filibuster against it. But I'm with you
Speaker 1: that this should be all in. And you know, I
Speaker 1: think that Trump and and the Republicans need to be
Speaker 1: making the case as strongly as they can that Demo
Speaker 1: crats are they want a legal immigration open as an
Speaker 1: issue to fund raise off of with their base, and
Speaker 1: they want they actually don't want to solve the issue
Speaker 1: of illegal immigration because they would like continue the legal
Speaker 1: immigration going forward. And they're just not acting in good
Speaker 1: faith on this. Yeah, it's a it's a tough decision,
Speaker 1: but I would like to see some of the things
Speaker 1: that we're forced down basically our throats, I hear you. Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: it's you know, their their side seem to just get
Speaker 1: things like Obamacare. We can't seem to get ours all already,
Speaker 1: go that they had sixty Remember if you're back in
Speaker 1: the Obamacare days. Thanks for calling in Ted appreciate it,
Speaker 1: Sandy and swamp Scott mass real quick. Sandy got about
Speaker 1: forty five seconds. Wanted to get you in thank you.
Speaker 1: Hick stops by the way, I hope so the buck
Speaker 1: never stops it? Okay. The pointer I wanted to bring
Speaker 1: up is all the money that they're talking about up
Speaker 1: ending on our illegals. The Moneys are talking about its
Speaker 1: spending on this harbor harble gang. Why do we not
Speaker 1: take care of our seniors and the people that are
Speaker 1: in social security? Why do they allegate money and can
Speaker 1: do it? Alligate money to the illegal, but they can't
Speaker 1: allegate and put back into it. Danny, I think the
Speaker 1: answer we gotta run here a second with thank you
Speaker 1: for your call. I think the answer is this is
Speaker 1: why we got Trump. We'll be right back. He's back
Speaker 1: with you now, because when it comes to the fight
Speaker 1: for truth, the fuck never stops. Welcome back to the
Speaker 1: Bucks X and show everybody our two rocking and rolling here.
Speaker 1: If you missed our deep dive on the MS thirteen gang,
Speaker 1: it's origins, it's satanic ideology, you should definitely go back
Speaker 1: and listen to the podcast of the show, and you
Speaker 1: should hopefully do that any day you miss any part
Speaker 1: of it. It is the Bucks acton show on iTunes.
Speaker 1: Check it out there, and thank you as always for
Speaker 1: joining me here. I see we've got a lot of
Speaker 1: lines litt We will get to that shortly. I wanted
Speaker 1: to switch gears for a moment here with a little
Speaker 1: bit of Russia memo FISA abuse stuff, because here we
Speaker 1: are now looking at the Democrat memos release, and that's
Speaker 1: getting a lot of attention and a lot of people
Speaker 1: are saying, hold on a second, what's what's gonna happen
Speaker 1: with the Democrat memo. I already made my prediction on that,
Speaker 1: and we've got it saved, so we'll see if I'm right. Um,
Speaker 1: although there's a there's a redaction game that may be
Speaker 1: played here. I'll explain what I mean by that in
Speaker 1: just a moment. But first, Carter Page. Let's not forget
Speaker 1: Carter Page, Naval Academy grad by the way, he's at
Speaker 1: the center of all this stuff, right. It was leaks
Speaker 1: to the press about Carter Page and about the fives
Speaker 1: A warrants on him, which I would know it is
Speaker 1: illegal to leak that to the press. It was leaks
Speaker 1: about Carter Page, that we're essential in the whole Russia
Speaker 1: collusion narrative to begin with, and yet Carter pages running around.
Speaker 1: He was on Laura Ingram show last night on Fox News.
Speaker 1: He was on George Stefanopolis his show on Not To
Speaker 1: We can choose with? Is it who's the Papadopoulis? He's not.
Speaker 1: It's not George, but it's Steve Papadopoulos, right, So it's
Speaker 1: Steve Papadopoulos and George Stephanopolis. There we go, fun name
Speaker 1: fund names to say pretty sure that the ulos is
Speaker 1: the suffix of someone's name if they're from the Greek Peloponnese. Hey,
Speaker 1: if Aristo Paracolo I lived in Greece for a summer,
Speaker 1: as long there's fun times, drank a lot of uzzo,
Speaker 1: hung out a lot of foreigners. Stories for another day.
Speaker 1: Maybe you're like Buck, forget about the memo tell us
Speaker 1: about staying out late and drinking uzzo as uh, twenty
Speaker 1: two year old or twenty one year old or whatever
Speaker 1: in Greece. I will say it was good times, my friends.
Speaker 1: Greek food is great. Greek bureaucracy makes the US Postal
Speaker 1: Service look like the you know, Amazon. I t department.
Speaker 1: But Greek food, Greek beaches, good stuff. All right, back
Speaker 1: to Stephanopolis, carter Page, what's going on there? Uh? Stephanopolis
Speaker 1: asked carter Page, Well, let me just play the let's
Speaker 1: get into this for a bit here, see, because you'd
Speaker 1: think that if this guy were at the center of
Speaker 1: some international conspiracy. Carter Page, not Stephanopolis. We just know
Speaker 1: he's a Hillary plant in the media. But if you,
Speaker 1: if you you think that maybe this guy would either
Speaker 1: lay a little low or given that the Muller probe
Speaker 1: has already swept up people, they're prosecuting people who haven't
Speaker 1: really done anything with regard to Russia collusion. They've either
Speaker 1: lied or they didn't pay their taxes or those are
Speaker 1: the allegations. I would not, that's none of that's been
Speaker 1: proven yet. Carter Pages run around given interviews and he
Speaker 1: saying stuff like this. You should hear. But you've been
Speaker 1: under surveillance from the Court of since October two thousand
Speaker 1: and sixteen. Since that time, have you ever spoken to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump? I didn't never spoke with him, since I
Speaker 1: never spoke with him any time in my life. You've
Speaker 1: never spoken to Donald Trump in your life? No email,
Speaker 1: no text nothing like that. Never. Now I need someone
Speaker 1: to explain this to me. How could Trump? How could
Speaker 1: Trump be involved in a conspiracy with the Kremlin? Where
Speaker 1: Carter Page is the focal point of all of this, right,
Speaker 1: Carter Page is what the the the anti Trump, never Trump,
Speaker 1: throw Trump in prison chorus, that's what they hang their
Speaker 1: hat on. Really, that in the meeting at Trump Tower
Speaker 1: right with the Russian lawyer. That didn't go anywhere. But
Speaker 1: that's it. That's all they've got. And here we are,
Speaker 1: over a year into this thing, and that's all they've got,
Speaker 1: despite the fact that as we know, as we know
Speaker 1: thanks to Devin Nonez and others, Trey Goudy uh, they
Speaker 1: were running fights a warrant on this guy. Don't you
Speaker 1: think if he were part of an espionage conspiracy with
Speaker 1: the Russians against the United States, wouldn't there be some
Speaker 1: kind of a charge maybe at some point would there
Speaker 1: be wouldn't there be a problem that this guy would face.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't he be afraid to go on TV and say
Speaker 1: things like I never spoke to Trump. How is it
Speaker 1: possible that carter Page, this guy of honestly no particular significance, really,
Speaker 1: who claims we have never spoken to Trump could be
Speaker 1: the center of this Russia collusion Maelstrom. If he's never
Speaker 1: spoken to Trump, how does how does that work? I'm
Speaker 1: just wondering. It's did one of Trump's like lower level
Speaker 1: people just concoct this whole scheme and you know, run
Speaker 1: around with Putin and the whole thing is that? Is
Speaker 1: that what we're supposed to believe? This is fantasy land stuff, folks, right,
Speaker 1: we all we all get that, I would assume. And
Speaker 1: this guy Popadopolis, the most damn anything about him is
Speaker 1: that he shared or he said something in a conversation
Speaker 1: with somebody in London that is information that he could
Speaker 1: have gotten off the front page of Breitbart, you know,
Speaker 1: two days prior. I mean, come on, that's it. Let's
Speaker 1: look at what we've really learned here. We've learned that
Speaker 1: there are people in the FBHI, the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: who are snakes, who cannot be trusted, who are pro
Speaker 1: Hillary partisans, who used the powers of their offices, who
Speaker 1: used the facade of a nonpartisan executive branch law enforcement
Speaker 1: agency in order to engage in partisan macinnations. And we
Speaker 1: see that they're willing to exploit the surveillance apparatus of
Speaker 1: the intelligence community against the U. S. Citizen. If Carter
Speaker 1: Page folks can be under surveillance, any of US can,
Speaker 1: and if you could be under surveillance based upon complete nonsense,
Speaker 1: but what a trip to Russia? That you could be
Speaker 1: under surveillance for a trip to any foreign country. None
Speaker 1: of this was verified, everybody, That's what we know. None
Speaker 1: of this was proven. This was all hearsay. The federal
Speaker 1: government now thinks that they can put you under surveillance
Speaker 1: looking for espionage, which I would note is a charge
Speaker 1: that can carry the death penalty. Uh, they can do
Speaker 1: that to you based upon what some guy who's sitting
Speaker 1: around getting all palsy and friendly with various left wing
Speaker 1: media outlets, what he tells the FBI. That's it. Like
Speaker 1: I said, this is a high tech swatting. This is
Speaker 1: using the surveillance apparatus for partisan ends and exposing to
Speaker 1: us that. By the way, this is not the first
Speaker 1: time this has happened with VISA. There's a whole lot
Speaker 1: of other stuff in there. No, no one really is
Speaker 1: gonna want to look under the head. Why don't the
Speaker 1: FBI was fighting this so much? Why was the f
Speaker 1: B I slow rolling the release of this information. It's
Speaker 1: not just because of what we know now, it's because
Speaker 1: of what we may know in the future. What else
Speaker 1: might be added onto the pile here? The Obama administration
Speaker 1: was run on the show for eight years. Let me
Speaker 1: just pose this one to you. We know that Loretta
Speaker 1: Lynch has the kind of ethics where she would meet
Speaker 1: with Bill Clinton on a tarmac days before his wife,
Speaker 1: then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, was cleared of charges for
Speaker 1: crimes that she committed. But what do we think about
Speaker 1: like Eric Holder, as the Attorney general did do you
Speaker 1: think that he would have been cracking down or any
Speaker 1: fives abuse against Republicans are looking around for information? You
Speaker 1: really think that it was something that would have kept
Speaker 1: him up late at night. Now I don't think so.
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I wonder where else this has
Speaker 1: happened and what else it has led to. I'm not
Speaker 1: coming up with some crazy conspiracy on the weaponization of FISA.
Speaker 1: By the way, look at what they did to General Flynn.
Speaker 1: He had a phone call. Somebody with access to that
Speaker 1: classified information leaked it to the press to get Flynn.
Speaker 1: So they have used this, folks to set all political scores.
Speaker 1: I'm not just theorizing they've already done it. You think
Speaker 1: they might have been done with some other stuff. How
Speaker 1: else did Democrats get oppo research on top top Republican candidates,
Speaker 1: Republican office seekers. What a great way to be able
Speaker 1: to go about this. Any Republican who's ever traveled anywhere
Speaker 1: in the world under the rules we've seen from the
Speaker 1: Obama administration, if they had a talk with somebody who's
Speaker 1: close to the intelligence service in some foreign country, which
Speaker 1: by the way is pretty much anybody in authority in
Speaker 1: a foreign country. You know I have to do is
Speaker 1: convince the Comys, the McCabe's, the sally ates is of
Speaker 1: the world that you know, they should maybe open up
Speaker 1: a file on this guy. Let's take a look see
Speaker 1: what you can pull together. Talk about the greatest I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's terrifying and it's disgraceful, but what a great
Speaker 1: Apple research tool Everyone who needs to dig through public records,
Speaker 1: filings and talk to ex girlfriends and wives and all
Speaker 1: the rest of it. When you can just have the
Speaker 1: intelligence community pull all of somebody's stuff and see what
Speaker 1: you can get. If you don't get anything, you know
Speaker 1: what no worries because it's all secret. Ah. Yeah, all
Speaker 1: starts to make sense, doesn't it. Carter Page. Meanwhile, that's
Speaker 1: what they're that he's the conspiracy lynchpin. He's the center
Speaker 1: of this whole thing. I mean, the guy I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't really have much of a read on him
Speaker 1: based on his interviews. I haven't met him, but he
Speaker 1: certainly isn't someone who seems to be scared of a
Speaker 1: looming espionage prosecution. In fact, he claimed in that interview
Speaker 1: with Stephanopolis that yeah, he was on the FBI's radar before,
Speaker 1: which I would note a lot of left wing journal
Speaker 1: us running around after the memo was released last week
Speaker 1: saying I'm sorry, didn't start a quarter page already on
Speaker 1: the FBI's radar. And as I was saying to you,
Speaker 1: remember Acam's razor. Oh, so they had such good dirt
Speaker 1: on page that they had to just throw this crap
Speaker 1: dossier in there too. Doesn't make sense, right, Remember my
Speaker 1: college admissions maxim, the thicker the file, the thicker the candidate.
Speaker 1: When you have a good case, it's not it's not
Speaker 1: complicated to make. It's pretty straightforward, right, think about it?
Speaker 1: In like first date terms. You know, you know, in
Speaker 1: the first ten minutes or so, whether you kind of
Speaker 1: maybe the first five minutes some of you're saying the
Speaker 1: first two minutes, whether you like somebody or not. If
Speaker 1: they tell you that after dinner they're gonna have ten
Speaker 1: of their friends show up and they're all going to
Speaker 1: tell you how great so and so is, You're like, hmmm,
Speaker 1: this is not this is not helping your cause. You
Speaker 1: don't add week. You don't add weak evidence to a
Speaker 1: strong case. So why put the dossier in the file
Speaker 1: at all? Because it was necess Sarah to put the
Speaker 1: Darcy in else they would not have had a case.
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, Harder Page says, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: was on the FBI's radar before I was helping them
Speaker 1: with another case, so I was known to the FBI.
Speaker 1: I was on their radar, but at the time I
Speaker 1: was considered a witness. Remember there's target subject, witness, and
Speaker 1: people who have spent time around law enforcement know that
Speaker 1: it all sounds nice and tidy, but you can go
Speaker 1: from one to the other real fast. Yeah, come in here.
Speaker 1: You know you're just a witness. We just wanna just
Speaker 1: wanna ask you a few questions. Is one of the
Speaker 1: ways the FBI gets people online. The FBI, they bring
Speaker 1: you in, they tell you you're just they're just hoping
Speaker 1: you can help them with something. You know, you're not
Speaker 1: under any suspicion and you and that's great, right, because
Speaker 1: you're just gonna say some stuff and you don't need
Speaker 1: a lawyer. And I know you just lied to the FBI.
Speaker 1: And actually we think you're the one who did it.
Speaker 1: We've already got you now on a five years didn't
Speaker 1: federal penitentiary. Why don't you cut a deal, buddy. Well,
Speaker 1: it's quite a way to do law enforcement, isn't it.
Speaker 1: That is how the game is played for those of
Speaker 1: us who know what the game is. But Carter Page
Speaker 1: may have been on their radar for reasons that we're
Speaker 1: either innocent or completely overblown from the FBI's perspective. And
Speaker 1: yet we're told, oh, no, the fines. He was already
Speaker 1: under surveillance before then. Okay, can we know why? Please?
Speaker 1: Does it bother anyone that the USA doesn't look I'm
Speaker 1: not like Carter Pages best buddy from the fraternity or something, right,
Speaker 1: I just look at this as somebody who cares about
Speaker 1: rule of law and the way that our government respects
Speaker 1: or fails to respect all rights and individual liberties. Does
Speaker 1: anyone care? This guy was under surveillance from where you
Speaker 1: can see right now for no good reason. Nothing. In fact,
Speaker 1: he's under surveillance based upon a dossier that is really
Speaker 1: a steamy pile of horse maneuver in paper form. Does
Speaker 1: that obscenity one? I mean, you know, as Democrats are all, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, he was already under surveillance. Yeah, Carter Page.
Speaker 1: That Carter Page is the Russia collusion boogeyman that they've
Speaker 1: been holding up there for all this time. This guy,
Speaker 1: this is the best they can do. They can nothing
Speaker 1: on him. He's going around giving interviews, which if he
Speaker 1: had done anything conspiratorial, shady, illegal, he would have to
Speaker 1: be certifiably insane to be going on TV like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I didn't do nothing, No big deal, alright, any lawyer
Speaker 1: would tell you, not a not a good thing. I
Speaker 1: also know today that this is an aside that reminds
Speaker 1: me of this all the breathless reporter on Trump. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh. Trump's lawyers say he should not speak to Mueller. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. Obviously he shouldn't speak to Muller. Obviously, there's
Speaker 1: no particular crime that Mueller is investigating, which really undermines
Speaker 1: the credibility of his entire investigation. You're not supposed to
Speaker 1: investigate a general happening, right. The FBI is not a
Speaker 1: documentary unit. They're not supposed to go around The Special
Speaker 1: Council is not supposed to be spending its time just
Speaker 1: creating a broad narrative to put in the history books
Speaker 1: for us. They're supposed to be did this crime happen?
Speaker 1: If it did, who did it, and how should we
Speaker 1: punish them? That's the way this is supposed to work.
Speaker 1: But in the world of the Mueller Probe, the Mueller
Speaker 1: Special Council, it's yes, we've we have ideas about Russia collusion.
Speaker 1: We have ideas that somehow something went to ry in
Speaker 1: the last election, namely that Hillary Clinton didn't win, and
Speaker 1: we're quite bitter about it. So let's just grind through
Speaker 1: this process and see who we can prosecute for mickey
Speaker 1: mouse nonsense. Along the way, we're gonna talk about undermining
Speaker 1: our faith and institutions. This does not look good for
Speaker 1: the FBI, this does not look good for the d
Speaker 1: o J. And Democrats can wind and complain about it
Speaker 1: all day, but the reality is, if we do have
Speaker 1: rogue elements inside those particular organizations that are trying to
Speaker 1: put their hand on the ale for one political party
Speaker 1: or even worse, in some ways, one political candidate, we
Speaker 1: need to know about that, and there needs to be
Speaker 1: a reckoning with those federal entities. It used to be
Speaker 1: a house cleaning. But we will see if we get there.
Speaker 1: Eight four five eight buck the Democrat memo, let's talk
Speaker 1: about it, We'll get into it. We'll be right back.
Speaker 1: We have an active investigation into the State Department that
Speaker 1: has been ongoing for a while now, and as soon
Speaker 1: as we can get that information out, we will. As
Speaker 1: the investigation unfolds, I want to know what goes on
Speaker 1: with that State Department investigation. I think that's gonna be
Speaker 1: much more interesting than the Democrat memo fall out, although
Speaker 1: I'll talk to you a bit more about what I
Speaker 1: expect in that Democrat memo the response to the new
Speaker 1: NAZ memo right after the break coming up. But just first,
Speaker 1: a couple of things. One is this guy I mentioned
Speaker 1: this yesterday. You have this FBI guy, former FBI guy,
Speaker 1: Josh Campbell, who wrote this editorial and he's not the
Speaker 1: first one. There was a former Obama guy who did
Speaker 1: this whole Like, I'm leaving the intelligence community because it
Speaker 1: just makes me so angry. How mean Trump is the
Speaker 1: intelligence community And it turns out he's donating to Democrats
Speaker 1: all along, and he like runs right over to MSNBC.
Speaker 1: But you know, I'm not on partisan man, I'm just
Speaker 1: here too. Yeah, so we've seen this before, but yeah,
Speaker 1: this guy is particularly Oh my, here's FBI agent Josh
Speaker 1: Campbell on CNN with Jake Tapper. Get in the the oh,
Speaker 1: he's just a decent public servant who needs to stand
Speaker 1: up against Trump. If you ask them in and women
Speaker 1: of the FBI what the last year and a half
Speaker 1: has been, Like I think to a person, they would
Speaker 1: say either perplexing, um, some sometimes angering when you see
Speaker 1: the political attacks on the FBI. Criticism of the FBI
Speaker 1: is needed. We have to have oversight. We cannot police ourselves.
Speaker 1: But what myself and my colleagues have been concerned about
Speaker 1: are the political attacks. I could not speak out now
Speaker 1: as I am to defend the bureau, to defend our
Speaker 1: people and to explain, you know, what it is we do.
Speaker 1: If I was still in the FBI, Nor would you
Speaker 1: want that. You wouldn't want an FBI agent in the
Speaker 1: organization anonymously, Um, you know, speaking out against partisans. It's
Speaker 1: not what we do. I made the difficult decision career.
Speaker 1: I love an organization I still love and always love
Speaker 1: in order to defend it. Yeah, he just he just
Speaker 1: felt compelled by honor to take that contract from CNNA
Speaker 1: get paid to bash Trump on behalf of the law
Speaker 1: enforcing community. I would note never never listen to anybody
Speaker 1: or give anyone credibility who claims to speak for an
Speaker 1: organization of or is holding them themselves up as somebody
Speaker 1: who speaks for an organization of tens of thousands of
Speaker 1: people like the FBI. I got news for this guy.
Speaker 1: And yeah, he's spent a lot more time at the FBI,
Speaker 1: knows a lot more FBI people than I do. But
Speaker 1: you know, then again, I spent a lot more time
Speaker 1: in Langley and a lot more people there than he does.
Speaker 1: Uh point here being I gotta news for him. A
Speaker 1: lot of Trump supporters the FBI too, and a lot
Speaker 1: of them don't give you know what about whatever Shift
Speaker 1: and the rest of the Democrat cabal are saying about
Speaker 1: the latest Trump tweet or the newest memo or anything else.
Speaker 1: All right, the FBI is not is not a place
Speaker 1: full of snowflakes. Oh we can. Trump is criticized. Trump
Speaker 1: is criticizing Comey and McCabe. These are lawyers everyone. I
Speaker 1: keep telling you. These aren't even FBI agents. Their lawyers.
Speaker 1: They're rich, connected lawyers with pretensions to higher office as democrats.
Speaker 1: I would note see McCabe's wife for example. But oh yeah, comeby,
Speaker 1: he used the FBI. Please tell you something. All these places,
Speaker 1: the directors, whether it's you know, Langley, FBI, everything else,
Speaker 1: none of us really care. We're just doing the job.
Speaker 1: Directors come and go. It's the rank and file that
Speaker 1: is in fact on the front line. Other shows just
Speaker 1: talking you in the freedom mud. We have a mission.
Speaker 1: We fight for the truth in a team effort and
Speaker 1: buck us back with our next play a right. The
Speaker 1: mainstream media is totally uninterested in this. Can you imagine
Speaker 1: if the shoe was on the other foot and Donald
Speaker 1: Trump or George Bush or Carl Row had paid for information,
Speaker 1: and then George W. Bush's FBI had opened an investigation
Speaker 1: into the Obama campaign because they were talking to Russians, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, really did happen. The Obama campaign was
Speaker 1: talking to sans back in two thousand and eight. Uh,
Speaker 1: and open up a counterintelligence investigation using dirt dug up
Speaker 1: and paid for by the RNC and George W. Bush supporters.
Speaker 1: This town would be on fire. Every reporter would be
Speaker 1: following around Karl Rode and George W. Bush all over town.
Speaker 1: Yet it's crickets from the media. I mean it is.
Speaker 1: It's embarrassing. Uh, it's absolutely embarrassing. I mean I'm almost
Speaker 1: flabbergassed because I thought at least there would be some
Speaker 1: ounce of credibility left, but there really is none. Down
Speaker 1: that's really important. You've got to think about, Uh, You've
Speaker 1: got to think about what the reality would be if
Speaker 1: this had happened to the Obama administration under a Bush
Speaker 1: Attorney general. I mean, the media would would be completely
Speaker 1: out of control. They would have they would they be
Speaker 1: picketing outside the White House themselves. I mean, it would
Speaker 1: be a disaster. It would be dogs and cats living together,
Speaker 1: a mass hysteria. People would be freaking out, and the
Speaker 1: media would be freaking out if that had happened. And
Speaker 1: yet here we are with the current state of play
Speaker 1: of this investigation. US citizen under surveillance for no good
Speaker 1: reason and no big deal. A bunch of Trump haters
Speaker 1: at the top of the d J and the FBI
Speaker 1: doing everything that can to help Hillary bal and Hillary
Speaker 1: out from the crime she committed when she was secretary,
Speaker 1: was Secretary of State. Everybody, I mean, for damn, she
Speaker 1: can't figure out classified if she imbeciled. Now she just
Speaker 1: thinks she's above the law. I am. She thinks she is,
Speaker 1: and she was. It's pathetic. Start to add all this
Speaker 1: stuff out. This is when I begin to lose patients
Speaker 1: with some of my well intentioned but increasingly irritating never
Speaker 1: Trump conservative colleagues out there. I'm like, guys and gals,
Speaker 1: come on, get get it together here, folks start, you know,
Speaker 1: they'll go, We'll connect the dots. Yeah, I've connected the dots.
Speaker 1: There's nothing on Russia. There's all this other stuff. There's
Speaker 1: all this other disgraceful conduct from the Democrats side. And
Speaker 1: I can sit here and talk about Hillary's emails, the
Speaker 1: surveillance of Carter Page, go through the whole list, right,
Speaker 1: James Comey leaking so that he could get a special
Speaker 1: counsel going somebody, probably somebody who was pretty good friends
Speaker 1: with Comey leaking stuff the Washington Post about kissel yacht
Speaker 1: talking to Flynn, I mean, criminal leaks. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: so much, and it's all on one side. On the
Speaker 1: other side, you have you know, Russia, you know Trump
Speaker 1: like you know the sanctions, you know Russia and the
Speaker 1: sanctions and stuff, and you know, I just yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: it's the Kremlin, and you know I saw Hunt for
Speaker 1: Red October. I know, man, and he's Russians are just scary,
Speaker 1: that's all they've got. And they're willing to go through
Speaker 1: so many different versions of delusion and to engage in
Speaker 1: such a Yeah, it should be embarrassing, but I guess
Speaker 1: they're in capable of embarrassment when it comes to dealing
Speaker 1: with Trump. And now we've got the the But by
Speaker 1: the way, you know, here's what Trump said about democrats.
Speaker 1: I didn't want to skip over this. This got some attention.
Speaker 1: They would rather see Trump too badly, Okay, then our
Speaker 1: country do well, that's what it means. It's very selfish.
Speaker 1: And it got to a point where I really didn't
Speaker 1: even want to look too much during the speech over
Speaker 1: to that side. Because honestly, it was bad energy. Now
Speaker 1: it's bad energy. You're up there, You've got half the
Speaker 1: room going totally crazy wild. They loved everything. They want
Speaker 1: to do something great for our country, and you have
Speaker 1: the other side. Even on positive news, really positive news
Speaker 1: like that, they were like death an un American, un American.
Speaker 1: Somebody said treason US. I mean, yeah, I guess why not?
Speaker 1: Can we call that treason? Why not? I like him
Speaker 1: more every everything, certainly didn't seem to love our country
Speaker 1: very much. The further we get of the Trump administration,
Speaker 1: the better I think Trump is doing. I mean, I
Speaker 1: just love it. It's great. How else could a president
Speaker 1: respond to this insanity around him, to this just mass dishonesty,
Speaker 1: this widespread hysteria, a pandemic of Democrat delusion. That's what
Speaker 1: we are living through right now. He's got to just
Speaker 1: throw punches and fight back. He can't sit there and
Speaker 1: pretend that he's Oh it's not presidential for him to
Speaker 1: call him Please call them out. This is ridiculous. This
Speaker 1: whole Russia thing, what was it all going to be about? Again?
Speaker 1: Didn't even know, Oh there's a hacking the machines. I
Speaker 1: know they didn't do that oh they conspired with WikiLeaks
Speaker 1: release the emails. No, that's not what happened. Ah, I swear.
Speaker 1: I'm it's almost exhausting to try to put yourself in
Speaker 1: the mindset of these left wing loons because they are
Speaker 1: so divorced from any sense of fairness, honesty, and and
Speaker 1: just a willingness to look at things for what they
Speaker 1: are that, you know, it's I feel dirty afterwards when
Speaker 1: I think about what the way they're thinking about this stuff.
Speaker 1: I'm like, all right, saved me from some of this nonsense.
Speaker 1: Team eight four four five, lots of lines lit, let's
Speaker 1: get into it. Mark in Burlington, North Carolina. Hey Mark,
Speaker 1: Hey Buck, how are you tonight. I'm good, sir, thank
Speaker 1: you for your call. Well, you've stolen about of my
Speaker 1: thunder Mainly I was trying to just find out, you know,
Speaker 1: to me, the biggest nothing burger here is who in
Speaker 1: the act is Carter Page. It's like they spent all
Speaker 1: this capital political and espionage and doing everything wrong and illegal,
Speaker 1: you know, order to tap this guy just you know,
Speaker 1: four times for what It's like complete It's like the
Speaker 1: Keystone Cops. It makes no sense. And that port I
Speaker 1: was like, please explain to me, who Carter pages that
Speaker 1: he would be worth them doing all these things. Totally, Mark,
Speaker 1: totally agree. And let me just add on to that,
Speaker 1: and and I completely am with you on this observation.
Speaker 1: Let me add on to that that this notion that
Speaker 1: if Paige was talking to some Russians about how you know,
Speaker 1: that they were going to take a different approach under
Speaker 1: a Trump administration and they would look at pulling back
Speaker 1: the sanctions on Russia. That's all completely legitimate. People do
Speaker 1: that all the time, alright. This notion that you know
Speaker 1: Obama was meeting with Russians before before he was president,
Speaker 1: as as Trump pointed out, And there's just this rush
Speaker 1: of fearmongering to like anybody who's ever come from the
Speaker 1: Russian Federation is one step away from Vladimir Putin and
Speaker 1: is about to like steal our nuclear codes or something.
Speaker 1: It's just well, and that leads me to something that
Speaker 1: I was going to try to figure out how to
Speaker 1: fit in, but you just gave me the opening. But
Speaker 1: I know how much of a history buff you are,
Speaker 1: and I think the Russian hysteria has driven us to
Speaker 1: believe that, you know, Russians are from another alien planet
Speaker 1: and they're about to invade and kill us all, when
Speaker 1: in reality they're just good people too. And so I
Speaker 1: don't know if you've ever heard of this is World
Speaker 1: War two trivia a group called the Night Witches. Are
Speaker 1: you familiar? No, I am not familiar with the night
Speaker 1: Which are they are? Those like a Russian snipers? They
Speaker 1: were Russian female Night Bomber Squadron Night Bomber squad And
Speaker 1: there we go. Okay, yes, and they flew old World
Speaker 1: War One biplanes and they were just young girls seventeen
Speaker 1: to twenty six years old who just absolutely harassed the
Speaker 1: Germans nearly to death, dropped over twenty three thousand tons
Speaker 1: of munitions on them until the end of the war.
Speaker 1: You should do a little research on them. They're absolutely
Speaker 1: fascinating and very heroic women. And you talk about something
Speaker 1: that the Women's March should look into. These are women
Speaker 1: who really and truly do love their country. It just
Speaker 1: happened to be Russia and the Motherland. But boy, these
Speaker 1: girls were absolutely awesome. And I encourage you to do
Speaker 1: some research and bring it back up some time when
Speaker 1: it fits. But we'll do we'll do Mark, great call man,
Speaker 1: Thank you, very very good. Thank you. Very much, Mark,
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. Man Shields Ye des in San Antonio, Texas.
Speaker 1: You're speaking of Buck Dex, Hey, Buck, how are you?
Speaker 1: I'm good? Thank you for your call. Field Hie. Listen,
Speaker 1: you're probably I'm gonna make this quick so that you
Speaker 1: can just get to talking about it, but you're probably
Speaker 1: the best qualified talk show host answer this. Given that
Speaker 1: the the Father warrant was issued on bogus information, and
Speaker 1: there is a guarantee against the law search and seizure
Speaker 1: or part of the unreasonable search and seizure in the
Speaker 1: Fourth Amendment, does Carter Page have grounds to sue the
Speaker 1: federal government for violation of his civil rights? Now I'll
Speaker 1: get off the line so that you can ask this.
Speaker 1: Oh Dex you can stay if you want, but whatever
Speaker 1: you want. My friends, thank you very much for the
Speaker 1: question and and for the call. What I would say is,
Speaker 1: yes he has grounds, but no, it won't go anywhere.
Speaker 1: And here's why this is part of what makes FISA
Speaker 1: so pernicious. When it's abused, they will hide in the
Speaker 1: endless folds of secrecy. They will find so many different
Speaker 1: ways to say that we cannot you know that that
Speaker 1: on national security grounds we cannot, for example, give you discovery. Um,
Speaker 1: and that's that's what you'll run into very very quickly.
Speaker 1: And the federal courts are very deferential to the federal
Speaker 1: government when it comes to what just gets to stay
Speaker 1: secret because they say so, given what we saw here
Speaker 1: Decks with the memo and what they were claiming was secret,
Speaker 1: and now we all saw it, and it's a joke. Man.
Speaker 1: There's nothing secret. I mean secret as in damaging or
Speaker 1: dangerous to be out there. There's no sources and methods,
Speaker 1: threat whatsoever from anything that was in the noon as memo.
Speaker 1: Trust me, they'll play all kinds of games with Carter
Speaker 1: Pages request. But I still think he should do it.
Speaker 1: And I would note that actually the New York Times,
Speaker 1: I think is filing a court case or a foyer
Speaker 1: request right now for the surrounding information on Carter Page.
Speaker 1: Here's what I'm here's a prediction for you. If we
Speaker 1: ever do find out what the totality of the Carter
Speaker 1: Page surveillance was based on, We're gonna be even more
Speaker 1: outraged and more upset because we're gonna just think to
Speaker 1: ourselves what I've been saying is completely true, which is
Speaker 1: you could get a fight as a warrant started on
Speaker 1: anybody under this standard, it's just a question of what
Speaker 1: the people signing off on it want to see and hear. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: I agree with you, and that's one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why I opposed the Patriarch. And understand I worked in
Speaker 1: counter terrorism, so but I have because there were laws
Speaker 1: already on the book that the Patriarch covered, but but
Speaker 1: the Patriarch consolidated them and I felt was way too
Speaker 1: much power for the pogram. I think you and looking
Speaker 1: now and now we're finally seeing a deck. Some have
Speaker 1: been warning about it for a long time, but I
Speaker 1: think it's very much real. Shield high sir. Thank you
Speaker 1: very much for your call. Decks, appreciate get a chance
Speaker 1: to chat with you. Yeah, look, this is this is bad.
Speaker 1: This whole surveillance situation that they have, they have engaged
Speaker 1: and it is really an embarrassment. You'll notice that there's
Speaker 1: there's not any recalibration whatsoever from the various anti Trump
Speaker 1: media outlets you know, uh, you know right now and
Speaker 1: seen in the running Trump tells Pentagon to plan a
Speaker 1: military parade. I mean, it's just all Trump bashing all
Speaker 1: the time. They have really created you know how they'll
Speaker 1: they'll do these stories about how few spend too much
Speaker 1: time looking at people's social media profiles. You'll feel a
Speaker 1: little bad about yourself because you start to think that
Speaker 1: that's their real life. And no, in fact, it's not
Speaker 1: the case that everyone is just taking photos on a
Speaker 1: beautiful beach of their feet and living in paradise. Right,
Speaker 1: that's like two days out of the year for them.
Speaker 1: The rest of the year, they're just like you, grinding
Speaker 1: it out, trying to figure out life. But if you
Speaker 1: believe the social media profile, then you'll you'll start to
Speaker 1: change the way you feel about yourself and your day
Speaker 1: to day just through saturation exposure. That's true with the
Speaker 1: Trump stuff. Just the Trump hatred all the time is
Speaker 1: turning people into nincom poops on this. I mean, they
Speaker 1: are so force fed a steady diet of anti Trump nonsense.
Speaker 1: And it's really one of the good things that on
Speaker 1: the conservative side, a lot of never trumpers have just
Speaker 1: they have undermined themselves with just their shrill, shrieking, inane
Speaker 1: hatred for Trump all the time, right, And it's just
Speaker 1: everything Trump does is bad. I mean, if I if
Speaker 1: I see one more tweet from Evan McMullan about how
Speaker 1: you know, it's about the constitution and liberty and respect
Speaker 1: for the rule of law, and Trump's destroying all of that. Really,
Speaker 1: I think I think he's just playing golf today. Like
Speaker 1: I think we can calm down a little bit, you know. OI,
Speaker 1: all right, we'll take some calls, and then I actually
Speaker 1: had a little in the third hour here. We got
Speaker 1: some some different fair ready for you, um, including a
Speaker 1: little bit of a celebration. It's a celebration, team buck,
Speaker 1: We'll get to that, So stay with me and we'll
Speaker 1: be our back ours. Bolsters the credibility of the FBI
Speaker 1: to point out that they actually did go through the
Speaker 1: correct process, that a voluminous amount of evidence was presented
Speaker 1: to the FISA court, that they mischaracterized Annie McCabe's testimony
Speaker 1: to our committee. Also that they did this close to
Speaker 1: the court, that there was a political motivation of one
Speaker 1: of the witnesses, and a much larger package that was submitted.
Speaker 1: That's Democrat Swallwell saying that the dem memo is going
Speaker 1: to make the FBI look good. Um, but shouldn't that
Speaker 1: not be what this is all about. It's it's not
Speaker 1: supposed to be about making the FBI look good or
Speaker 1: about it's supposed to be the truth, and yet clearly
Speaker 1: we're already veering from that mission statement. I would also
Speaker 1: note that all this really, all this other information came
Speaker 1: to the FBI on and yet they had to include
Speaker 1: the dossier. M hmm, seems weird, right, Oh the way,
Speaker 1: have we heard about any of that other information? No,
Speaker 1: none of that, None of that's been league now that's
Speaker 1: been talked about. Seems a little odd, doesn't it. Here's
Speaker 1: what I think you're going to see happening, and this
Speaker 1: is what the fight will turn into the next couple
Speaker 1: of days. The Democrats are likely to play a little
Speaker 1: game here with redactions. Redactions are the blacked out lines
Speaker 1: that you will see in government documents that have classified
Speaker 1: information in them. What the Democrats will do, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: is one of two things here. And this is so cynical,
Speaker 1: but come on there, Democrats, right, they have no standards
Speaker 1: to protect, so they can get away with a lot.
Speaker 1: They will either intentionally include information that is not important
Speaker 1: to the Carter Page case, but that actually is classified. Right,
Speaker 1: just add in a few names of of people that
Speaker 1: work for the government, or so there's any number of things,
Speaker 1: and I could sit here and come up with a
Speaker 1: bunch of them. But the point is there's information that
Speaker 1: would not be relevant to answering the question about why
Speaker 1: they were looking at Carter Page. But they could include
Speaker 1: it in their memo and then and have it blacked
Speaker 1: out because they can't actually justify the release of that information,
Speaker 1: and then put out there a memo with blacked out lines.
Speaker 1: Guess what that does, and everybody goes, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: Republicans are not letting the truth be known, right. It
Speaker 1: could just be, you know, if super secret Squirrel was
Speaker 1: a really really classified thing, they could just write super
Speaker 1: secret Squirrel, and then carter Page supersecret Squirrel, and then
Speaker 1: carter Page also supersecret Squirrel, and they black out those sections,
Speaker 1: and then they presented to the public and say and remember,
Speaker 1: Republicans wouldn't be able to tell you what it was.
Speaker 1: All they can say is that, oh, well, they were
Speaker 1: playing games here and what you're gonna see are blacked outlines.
Speaker 1: That's one way they could go. I don't know if
Speaker 1: they'll do that. Another one would be a form of
Speaker 1: redaction blackmail, which is to say that the Democrats could
Speaker 1: intentionally include highly classified information in their version of the memo,
Speaker 1: and then Republicans could legitimately say, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: you can't have this stuff involved, you can't have this
Speaker 1: come on, and then they say, see, the Republicans aren't
Speaker 1: about transparency. They won't release our memo because it would
Speaker 1: actually have sensitive information in it that should not be
Speaker 1: released that has nothing to do with Carter Page or
Speaker 1: this case. You see what I'm saying. They might play
Speaker 1: redaction games here. I think that's very possible. See, because
Speaker 1: the Republicans have said, yeah, we'll release your memo, So
Speaker 1: now they could go back and try to add stuff
Speaker 1: into it, or you know, there's any number of ways
Speaker 1: that they could get a little dirty here, all right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: a little bit tricky. That's how we know. That's how
Speaker 1: Democrats like to play the game dirty. Um So, coming off,
Speaker 1: I got some things including what am I? What am
Speaker 1: I going to talk about the next hour? We've got
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, Jimmy Kimmel saying that only smart, that liberals
Speaker 1: have to be smart. That's or liberals are smart. That's
Speaker 1: why all late night comedians are liberal. I didn't know
Speaker 1: that late night comedians and brain surgeons are like on
Speaker 1: the same plane. Also, what else is the other? Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: school dance got canceled because you know, miss jen Ring,
Speaker 1: the father daughter dance, he can't have that. That's here
Speaker 1: in New York City. We'll talk about that and some
Speaker 1: other stuff. So teen our three coming up. He's holding
Speaker 1: the line for America. Buck Sexton his back. Our three
Speaker 1: of the Buck Sexton Show is here. Everybody. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for hanging out, thank you for joining, for
Speaker 1: just tuning in now. And like I said, coming up
Speaker 1: this hour, we will talk about, oh gosh, a few
Speaker 1: different things. We will get into a father daughter dance
Speaker 1: that was canceled because father daughter is now a triggering
Speaker 1: situation for progressives, right, the notion of a father and
Speaker 1: a daughter and a dance is too much for them.
Speaker 1: I will also talk about Justin Trudeau's woke moment, the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister of Canada who doesn't want the term mankind
Speaker 1: to be used. Of course, and yes, Trudeau opposes the
Speaker 1: usage of the term of of man in a word
Speaker 1: that is not surprising. And we'll also get it is
Speaker 1: some of our roll call. But I wanted to take
Speaker 1: a moment here with all of you, if I may,
Speaker 1: to celebrate an anniversary of sorts. Um. Well, actually, first
Speaker 1: I had my my my parents anniversary of forty years
Speaker 1: of marriage was last week. That's like a real anniversary.
Speaker 1: That's very important. So yeah, I know, forty years. It's
Speaker 1: pretty amazing. Really, congrats Mom and Dad. Very very cool.
Speaker 1: I love you guys. Um. But I got another anniversary
Speaker 1: to talk about here, and that is of me being
Speaker 1: on this show, the nationally syndicated Buck Sexton Show. It
Speaker 1: started one year ago this week, I think, in fact
Speaker 1: one year ago today was the first time I went
Speaker 1: on air as the new host for Premiere Radio Networks
Speaker 1: in this time slot, and usually around the Christmas holidays
Speaker 1: when I would because my birthday is also December twenty eight,
Speaker 1: so I usually would share with with you some of
Speaker 1: the things that I would tell you now. But this
Speaker 1: year I actually got to take a week off because
Speaker 1: now that I have my own show, I can't fill
Speaker 1: in for Glenn Rush and Sean Um. That's just not
Speaker 1: really done now. I'm not I'm not able to be
Speaker 1: a fill in anymore. So I had a week off,
Speaker 1: didn get a chance to tell you all this. But
Speaker 1: this is where I get to tell you things like
Speaker 1: I actually had a speech impediment growing up, and so
Speaker 1: for somebody to now be one of a very small
Speaker 1: group of nationally syndicated radio hosts. Um, we're on a
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty plus stations right now across the country.
Speaker 1: Give it some time, we'll be up to two or three.
Speaker 1: But I just wanted to note that I actually had
Speaker 1: to go to a speech therapist when I was a kid,
Speaker 1: and I had to practice saying very simple things. In
Speaker 1: fact that they couldn't even really come up with much
Speaker 1: of a diagnosis as to why I had the problems
Speaker 1: that I did. It didn't really fit into some of
Speaker 1: the established I think this is around the first and
Speaker 1: second grade. So I was an elementary school for second
Speaker 1: third grade, and I wasn't doing very well in school either,
Speaker 1: and there were concerns that they were going to have
Speaker 1: to pull me out of the school. It's called St.
Speaker 1: David's here in New York City. They might have to
Speaker 1: pull me out of the school and send me to
Speaker 1: a school where I get a little more special attention
Speaker 1: as a I guess it's an eight year old and
Speaker 1: nine year old something like that. That's around the age
Speaker 1: of ten year old, around the age we're talking about,
Speaker 1: but This is where I'll also tell you, because you
Speaker 1: are all now my extended my extended family, so to speak,
Speaker 1: that his team Buck. So my name is Buckman, my
Speaker 1: middle name is Buckman. My first name is James. I've
Speaker 1: always been called buck. It's not a stage name. It's
Speaker 1: not something that I came upon. And I've joked with
Speaker 1: my parents many times, why do you guys have to
Speaker 1: complicate things? You know, I signed. I signed a name
Speaker 1: that's different than the name that people call me and
Speaker 1: I anyway, there's I had. I had teachers in elementary
Speaker 1: school who refused to call me buck One in particular,
Speaker 1: so we had to settle on Buckman. And the Jesuits
Speaker 1: act actually, for whatever reason, tended to go for Buckman
Speaker 1: as the A lot of them called me that instead. Uh,
Speaker 1: but I print because I had a speech impediment when
Speaker 1: I was a kid. I had speech problems really is
Speaker 1: a better way of putting it. But at a clinical level,
Speaker 1: and I said my name was but Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: I would walk around ten eleven years old and introduce
Speaker 1: myself as but Wit. You can imagine my parents, who
Speaker 1: wanted the best for me in life. Real life was
Speaker 1: going to be a problem on the playground, and so
Speaker 1: my mom did everything she could researched, finding me the
Speaker 1: best speech pathologist. I still remember the woman's name, I
Speaker 1: tell you many years later. Her daughter was like a
Speaker 1: year ahead of me in high school and was it
Speaker 1: was rather attractive, and once my speech impediment had been
Speaker 1: all worked out, I remembered um striking up quite a
Speaker 1: conversation with my speech pathologist daughter, who was a year
Speaker 1: ahead of me in school. But that's the story for
Speaker 1: another time. I'd actually just come back from a speech
Speaker 1: and debate tournament that I had. One was on the
Speaker 1: first try, so yave me first speech and debate tournament,
Speaker 1: won the whole thing. And I saw her and I said, well,
Speaker 1: you know, you should tell your mom, But I'm getting
Speaker 1: ahead of myself. And then I was like, hey, would
Speaker 1: you like to uh share this wine cooler because you know,
Speaker 1: when you're like sixteen, you drink wine coolers. Maybe I
Speaker 1: know you never should drink wine coolers, but unless it's zema,
Speaker 1: because that has kind of a retro field now. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I I so I had a speech impediment. I had
Speaker 1: to work on it for a few years, and I
Speaker 1: just always thought it was worth telling folks out there,
Speaker 1: because I know a lot of you or parents, and
Speaker 1: you've got kids that you've got to help work through
Speaker 1: any number of stuff that comes up, either health stuff
Speaker 1: or learning disabilities, school uh, school issues, all of all
Speaker 1: different kinds. And here I sit before you. Not only
Speaker 1: did I manage to learn to speak without I would
Speaker 1: mispronounce different words for whatever reason they're getting mixed up.
Speaker 1: It was almost like a dyslexia, but I would say
Speaker 1: things differently than I meant to. That was the root
Speaker 1: of the problem with the speech. And then I also
Speaker 1: managed to with a little extra tutoring, I'll turnaround stuff
Speaker 1: in school and ended up going to the best high
Speaker 1: school in New York City on a four year full scholarship,
Speaker 1: so you know, and was number one of my number
Speaker 1: one of my class leading up to that and everything else.
Speaker 1: So you know, the work you put in with the
Speaker 1: kids is is everything. Don't give up on anything that
Speaker 1: anything that your kid is willing to fight for, you
Speaker 1: should be willing to fight for just as hard, if
Speaker 1: not harder, because you never know when they'll be able
Speaker 1: to turn it around. And you gotta fight even if
Speaker 1: you don't necessar farely get where you're trying to go
Speaker 1: with it. You gotta fight anyway, you'll get closer than
Speaker 1: you think. I think it's an unusual story that I'm
Speaker 1: here on radio now talking across the country. Like I said,
Speaker 1: one year anniversary of the show. I've been on the air.
Speaker 1: One year. We're picking up stations all over the place.
Speaker 1: The show is doing really well. That's thanks to all
Speaker 1: of you, by the way, So this is a celebration
Speaker 1: of all of you who listen and who passed the
Speaker 1: show around to friends tell people about it. Um. But
Speaker 1: if a kid who pronounced his name but and got
Speaker 1: made fun of for the weird way, I would say
Speaker 1: Tookey and would get made fun of for the way
Speaker 1: that he spoke for years and I remembered and it
Speaker 1: it it. You know, that's not fun when you're a kid.
Speaker 1: If he could go on to be the first person
Speaker 1: in the history of talk radio to guest host the
Speaker 1: three biggest radio shows in the country Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity,
Speaker 1: and Glenn Beck and Do Sell in rapid succession, and
Speaker 1: then have his own show and over a hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty stations across the country, and have goals that becoming
Speaker 1: the have a goal of becoming the the next in
Speaker 1: a line of greats in this wonderful medium known as radio.
Speaker 1: Then whatever your kid wants to do, whatever your your
Speaker 1: children believe they can accomplish, you should stay with them
Speaker 1: on it and and and make every effort. I know
Speaker 1: you will anyway, But just it is possible to pull
Speaker 1: off some stuff nobody in a million years. I mean
Speaker 1: my parents now and they might be might be listening.
Speaker 1: I'm sure that my mom is kind of laughing a
Speaker 1: little bit. I mean, if someone had told my parents
Speaker 1: when I was in the third grade and I literally
Speaker 1: couldn't pronounce my name, that I would go on to
Speaker 1: be a nationally syndicated radio host, debate champion, brief the
Speaker 1: President before I was thirty years old, in the Oval Office,
Speaker 1: and you know, for the CIA, all things that require speaking. Um,
Speaker 1: I think she would have laughed, but Mom and Dad
Speaker 1: stuck with me. So Happy anniversary to them for their
Speaker 1: recent anniversary, and happy anniversary for all of us here
Speaker 1: in the Freedom Hunt for a great year and another
Speaker 1: fantastic one to come here in twenty teen. Thank you
Speaker 1: all so much. Jam Honestly, you guys are are an
Speaker 1: incredible bunch. You listened to this show I appreciate all
Speaker 1: your messages, all your calls, and all your support, and
Speaker 1: we'll be right back. Maternal love is the love that's
Speaker 1: going to change the future of mankind. So we'd like
Speaker 1: you to we would like to say people kind, not
Speaker 1: necessarily mankind, more inclusive. That was the Prime Minister of Canada.
Speaker 1: Everybody at some event up in Canada. You notice a
Speaker 1: young woman was trying to ask him a question and
Speaker 1: she said mankind, and Trudeau stops her, and at all
Speaker 1: seriousness is like, no, no, we should say people kind,
Speaker 1: which I would just note is not even something that weird.
Speaker 1: People that are too politically correct say like justin Trudeau
Speaker 1: makes up his own word, because I guess that means
Speaker 1: you're even more woke, as the terminology goes, right, if
Speaker 1: you are uh, if you have been brainwashed with the
Speaker 1: dictates of leftist political correctness, you are woke. Right, if
Speaker 1: you are a social justice warrior, you are woke. This
Speaker 1: is the term that is still used by many on
Speaker 1: the left, although I'm sure at some point they'll replace
Speaker 1: it with some other terms, because controlling the language is
Speaker 1: a favorite tactic of leftists, and this is something that
Speaker 1: you should see, not just in our current discourse. But
Speaker 1: it's the case even when you look in back in
Speaker 1: history with any well, with any political movement. Quite honestly,
Speaker 1: there are fights over language. But particularly in totalitarian societies,
Speaker 1: there are all purpose labels that are created as a
Speaker 1: means of shutting down debate and dissent. Within the Soviet Union,
Speaker 1: it was to be a counter revolutionary because the entire
Speaker 1: purpose of the state, and therefore everyone within the state,
Speaker 1: their reason for existing, was not individual rights or liberty
Speaker 1: or anything else. Although the Soviet Union did have a
Speaker 1: rather expansive and uh and luxurious constitution, it was just
Speaker 1: completely meaningless because it was not based on individual rights
Speaker 1: and there was not rule of law or civil society
Speaker 1: or anything else. But they would say you were a
Speaker 1: counter revolutionary, and that was really too deep personify you.
Speaker 1: You were no longer really a person, You were just
Speaker 1: an enemy of problem to be dealt with. So the
Speaker 1: control of language is so very, very important. We see
Speaker 1: this today with the discussions over immigration. I keep yelling
Speaker 1: about how we cannot refer to one subset of illegal
Speaker 1: aliens in this country as dreamers, just because the Left,
Speaker 1: in a straight up public relations campaign, came up with
Speaker 1: the term dreamers. If you want to say DOCTA recipients fine,
Speaker 1: people covered under DOCCA fine, deferred action for childhood arrivals.
Speaker 1: That is a bureaucratic term that I'm willing to use
Speaker 1: because I think it is accurate and not overly prejudicial
Speaker 1: one way or the other to how we view what
Speaker 1: we should do about the illegal aliens brought here by
Speaker 1: their parents. Somebody knew they were breaking the law, and
Speaker 1: somebody benefits from breaking that law if we don't do
Speaker 1: anything about it. But with Trudeau, I I back to
Speaker 1: circling back to the beginning here. So this guy won't
Speaker 1: let a woman at a at a forum say mankind? Alright, fine,
Speaker 1: I mean that's crazy to begin with, But wouldn't you
Speaker 1: go with humankind? Why go to people kind? That just
Speaker 1: strikes me as so weird. It's like it's not enough.
Speaker 1: Are we saying that it's not just humans? Are there
Speaker 1: other people that were concerned about meaning? Is the animal
Speaker 1: kingdom now? Or are there zoological reasons for why we
Speaker 1: would say people kind instead of humankind? You know what
Speaker 1: I mean is it's supposed to be more expansive. These
Speaker 1: linguistic games that they play, they'll all have a very
Speaker 1: clear purpose, and it's intended. It's intended to cow us
Speaker 1: all into submission, because you find yourself and you'll notice,
Speaker 1: I catch myself on the show sometime, uh I, I I
Speaker 1: catch myself using terminology that is really all about what
Speaker 1: the left wants me to say instead of what I
Speaker 1: would like to say, you know, instead of the way
Speaker 1: that I would approach an issue or a problem. And
Speaker 1: it's just because it filters into your brain, right, But
Speaker 1: that was a new one. Anyway, I mean, Trudeau is
Speaker 1: such a clown, that guy. You know. I know some
Speaker 1: of my lady friends, I know they love him. I
Speaker 1: don't even want to. I'm not even gonna ask Ms
Speaker 1: Molly what she thinks of Justin Trudeau because I get
Speaker 1: so frustrated. All my female friends are, even the good
Speaker 1: conservative female friends of mine, are just like, yeah, he's
Speaker 1: an idiot, but I mean he's kind of handsome. I'm like, no,
Speaker 1: stop it, ladies, don't fall for it. Don't do it. Um.
Speaker 1: But anyway, Canada, you know you're You're a great country
Speaker 1: with wonderful people, you know, the with a lot of
Speaker 1: fresh water, by the way, which at some point in
Speaker 1: the future could become a very increasingly valuable resource. You
Speaker 1: know that South Africa is almost out of water. You
Speaker 1: know that by the way they're shutting the tops, I
Speaker 1: mean they're I mean, I should say Cape Town I
Speaker 1: think specifically is in a complete water shutdown where people
Speaker 1: have to go to distribution centers for water. So that's
Speaker 1: you're gonna see this more of an issue, I would know.
Speaker 1: And I it also is the case with the Yemen
Speaker 1: that it is expected to be the first country in
Speaker 1: the world, the entire country of Yemen, which right now
Speaker 1: is in the midst of a terrible civil war, that
Speaker 1: it will completely run out of money. I'm sorry, run
Speaker 1: out of water, not money, It'll completely run out of water.
Speaker 1: So I have veered quite a bit from Justin Trudeau,
Speaker 1: but it's the third hour, so I can veer into
Speaker 1: things and and why not one of the story that
Speaker 1: I'm going to jam into this segment because I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk about it, but it's just it's part of
Speaker 1: this mania right now, this uh spreading psychosis over terminology
Speaker 1: and whether we're giving offense or not, which has been
Speaker 1: going on for a long time and keeps getting worse.
Speaker 1: I would note Trump has been something of a pushback
Speaker 1: against the progression. I think it's kind of like when
Speaker 1: we have a decrease in the increase in spending when
Speaker 1: it comes to our national debt and and the way
Speaker 1: that we're just spending ourselves into oblivion. We don't actually
Speaker 1: have an overall decrease, it's just a decrease in the increase.
Speaker 1: The same is true of political correctness. Right now, we're
Speaker 1: still moving away from away from freedom of speech, away
Speaker 1: from uh, liberty and a society that is all about
Speaker 1: people being adults and being respectful of each other, to
Speaker 1: this totalitarian nanny state that is always looking over all
Speaker 1: the words we use and everything that we say. Uh.
Speaker 1: That's happening less rapidly now that Trump's in office than
Speaker 1: it was when Obama was in office. But we haven't
Speaker 1: really turned it around just yet. But here's this the
Speaker 1: story I wanted to just mention for a moment. Here
Speaker 1: a grade school in Staten Island, a place I know
Speaker 1: pretty well. Actually here in New York City, stant Owl
Speaker 1: it's kind of the forgotten borough. You know, there are
Speaker 1: five boroughs of New York City. Statan Island feels a
Speaker 1: little bit like one part New Jersey, one part Long Island,
Speaker 1: and it kind of gets left out of the party.
Speaker 1: Although I will also note it's the only part of
Speaker 1: New York City, the only borough of New York City
Speaker 1: that I believe voted for the Republican candidate for mayor
Speaker 1: the last time around. The rest of the city was
Speaker 1: deep blue. The Upper east Side they went for the Republican.
Speaker 1: Good job Upper east Side and Staten Island. That now,
Speaker 1: I was like, yeah, well with those Upper east Side,
Speaker 1: it's good Job Island. So anyway, there's a grade school
Speaker 1: over there, and I used to play sports against some
Speaker 1: Staten Island schools in high school, so I spent some
Speaker 1: time over there. And they have been forced to cancel
Speaker 1: their annual father daughter dance because it violated a New
Speaker 1: school district policy regarding transgender and gender nonconforming students. According
Speaker 1: to Fox News, that's right, guys, Now you can't have
Speaker 1: father daughter dances because what's the father, what's the daughter?
Speaker 1: Why are we being so gender normative? Why don't we
Speaker 1: have a z Z and z Z dance? These are
Speaker 1: some of there. You know those twenty seven pronouns now
Speaker 1: that you can choose for yourself when you go to
Speaker 1: Harvard seven different pronouns or maybe it's thirty seven. I
Speaker 1: can't even keep it. I can't even keep it straight anymore.
Speaker 1: Um and and by the way it's keeping it saying
Speaker 1: keeping it straight? Is that A? Is that a microaggressions?
Speaker 1: I just accidentally veer into using the wrong verbiags there.
Speaker 1: I think, I think that has nothing to do with it,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure somebody would make the case. So the
Speaker 1: Department of Education New York City has directed schools to
Speaker 1: get rid of any gender based practices like the daddy
Speaker 1: daughter dance unless they send a clear educational purpose. That's
Speaker 1: what they're saying now. Quote father daughter dances inherently leave
Speaker 1: people out, not just because of transgender status, just life
Speaker 1: in general. These can be really uncomfortable and triggering events.
Speaker 1: A you know, if you don't have a dad for
Speaker 1: any number of reasons, whether it's that you know, dad
Speaker 1: left home when you were young, dad tragically passed away
Speaker 1: when you were young, or you happen to have two mommies.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I just feel like, is it really
Speaker 1: triggering if you know you don't go to that dance?
Speaker 1: I mean, I feel like I skipped all kinds of activities.
Speaker 1: I wasn't really a Joiner in high school. You know,
Speaker 1: I didn't really go to a lot of the clubs
Speaker 1: and thinks sports. That was really it for me. I
Speaker 1: wasn't one to stick around all that much. But this
Speaker 1: is what we're heading for now. It's gonna spread from
Speaker 1: New York City. You're gonna see this more and more
Speaker 1: across the country. It's coming to a school district near you.
Speaker 1: And it really is a waste, and it's and it's
Speaker 1: sad that this is what it's come to. But the
Speaker 1: control of land, the control of gender stereotypes and gendering
Speaker 1: and mis gendering, this is what the left focuses its
Speaker 1: time on. And they wonder why when they tell us
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is a treader, a trade and a treader
Speaker 1: a trader and commits treason. Uh, we don't pay much
Speaker 1: attention to it because we've got other stuff to worry
Speaker 1: about here. Um. Anyway, enjoy your last year or two
Speaker 1: of father daughter dancers for those of you out there,
Speaker 1: because I'm sure it's just a matter of time before
Speaker 1: your school board gets this one wrong. All right, I'll
Speaker 1: be back with much more, including a discussion, a late
Speaker 1: night comedy, and some roll calls. Stay with me, liberals
Speaker 1: have been killing comedy for years, the constraints of political
Speaker 1: correctness making it increasingly impossible to enjoy a lighthearted remark
Speaker 1: or joke. I don't even know what you're allowed to
Speaker 1: make fun of anymore, except for conservatives, Christians, Republicans, and
Speaker 1: straight white males. Those are the only targets of comedy
Speaker 1: that I know you won't get in trouble for. And
Speaker 1: in fact, you don't even have to be funny. You
Speaker 1: can just go after any of those targets and people
Speaker 1: will hold you up as some kind of talent in
Speaker 1: the media. And we see this time and again. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a recent photo that's making the rounds. I forget
Speaker 1: and what publication, But it had all these different late
Speaker 1: night guys, Colbert and Fallon and Kimmel, and you go
Speaker 1: through the whole what's his name, Trevor Noah? Who is
Speaker 1: who is painfully unfunny and not a talented comedian in
Speaker 1: any way from what I have seen, and I've actually
Speaker 1: watched the show and seeing some of his stand up.
Speaker 1: John Stewart was a dishonest propagandist and a snide, nasty
Speaker 1: little man on the Daily Show, but he was clever
Speaker 1: and he was pretty funny. Sometimes Trevor Noah is just
Speaker 1: not very good and has been given a job that
Speaker 1: I don't think he is talented enough to do at
Speaker 1: the level required based on his predecessor and the kind
Speaker 1: of show that he was doing. But nonetheless, you notice
Speaker 1: that all these different comedians you see a whole slew
Speaker 1: of them in the various late night shows, every single
Speaker 1: one of them is a liberal. They all take left
Speaker 1: wing policies. They all, you know, will say things about
Speaker 1: about Trump and about the conservative conservatives and media conservative
Speaker 1: right wing that, lets you know, no question about it.
Speaker 1: They are pandering to the coastal blue state audience, coastal
Speaker 1: in Chicago. Uh. And you even had Jimmy Kimmel, who
Speaker 1: I would note has a reputation for not being a
Speaker 1: very nice guy, at least he used to. Now he's
Speaker 1: somehow America's new conscience. Like he's the guy that stands
Speaker 1: up and says, we're better than this. You're you're a
Speaker 1: late night show guy who used to be asking women
Speaker 1: to play a game literally called What's in my Pants
Speaker 1: on the street. That's what he used to do. He
Speaker 1: was on a show called The Man Show, which I
Speaker 1: will tell you if you have not seen it. Uh,
Speaker 1: there are some things that maybe aren't just it's not
Speaker 1: just political correctness that would make them a problem for
Speaker 1: today's viewers. In some cases it is just a little
Speaker 1: too borish and exploitative. And The Man Show wasn't really funny.
Speaker 1: It was actually exploitative. And I'm all for a bit
Speaker 1: of college frat brow humor here and there, but it
Speaker 1: was a bit too much. I mean, watching women literally
Speaker 1: jump up and down on trampolines on video as tho,
Speaker 1: that was the ha ha funniest gag that anybody had
Speaker 1: seen all day. That's what Jimmy Kimmel's background is. And
Speaker 1: yet Jimmy Kimmel when he is on this podcast of
Speaker 1: former Obama acolytes uh called Pod Save America. You won't
Speaker 1: like it, don't download it, don't listen to it. It's
Speaker 1: just a bunch of Obama Obama worshipers sitting around in
Speaker 1: a circle talking to other Obama worshippers about the good
Speaker 1: old days of the Obama administration and how terrible Trump is.
Speaker 1: Nothing insightful, nothing particularly knowledgeable about any of the They're
Speaker 1: about my age, I think to the guys who are
Speaker 1: on the show, um, but you know, that's what you
Speaker 1: get with the current state of Unfortunately, podcasting is still
Speaker 1: very left dominated, much to my chagrin. We need to
Speaker 1: make inroads on that team on the right, but we're
Speaker 1: working on that. So here's what happened though on on
Speaker 1: Pod Save America, on this podcast this left wing Obama LoveFest,
Speaker 1: they asked Jimmy or it came up with Jimmy Kimmel
Speaker 1: about why is it that all of late night comedy
Speaker 1: right now? Which I'll tell you there were times when
Speaker 1: I would stay up a little late. You know, my
Speaker 1: mom I was too busy taking care of four kids
Speaker 1: and everything and a little Boston Terrier running around the house.
Speaker 1: Boston entire is a great dog, by the way. And
Speaker 1: I would stay up a little late sometimes and watch
Speaker 1: Jay Leno. And when I was a high school kid,
Speaker 1: Eve Jane Leno, it was pretty funny, it was, and
Speaker 1: there was a certain uh positivity to the show. You know,
Speaker 1: it was really supposed to just be funny. I don't
Speaker 1: remember feeling like I was getting some kind of a
Speaker 1: lecture or a political brow beating from Leno. And anyway,
Speaker 1: Kimmel is now in that slot and he does do
Speaker 1: the tear eyed you know, Oh my god, they shot
Speaker 1: a lion. Oh there shot a lion and lion got shot,
Speaker 1: And like, I'm I love animals as much as anybody,
Speaker 1: but I gotta say, there's a lot of stuff I
Speaker 1: would cry for before a lion getting shot in Africa,
Speaker 1: on the other side of the the other side of
Speaker 1: the world. But Kimmel is is on the Pots a
Speaker 1: Thing and this podcast, and this is what he says
Speaker 1: about late night comedy. Just so happens that pretty much
Speaker 1: every late night talk show host is a liberal, and
Speaker 1: that because it requires a measure of intelligence. Now he's
Speaker 1: saying that, and I'm sure if pushed on it, he
Speaker 1: would pull the classic Jon Stewart of the formula, the
Speaker 1: Daily Show maneuver of oh, it was just a joke,
Speaker 1: but you know, it's not really just a joke with
Speaker 1: these guys. He actually is dumb enough to believe that
Speaker 1: Jimmy Kimmel is dumb enough to think that he is
Speaker 1: smarter than other people who also would be comedians on
Speaker 1: late night TV who happened to have a more conservative
Speaker 1: point of view. Now I could sit here and talk
Speaker 1: about Colin Quinn, and I could talk about the conservatives
Speaker 1: that I've done many different panels on Red Eye with
Speaker 1: over the years, different stand up comedians, and I'm actually
Speaker 1: blanking on the name of the guy from Rescue Me.
Speaker 1: What's the guy's name from Rescue Me? You know, Dennis Leary?
Speaker 1: Thank you? I mean we could say Dennis Miller. I mean,
Speaker 1: we could sit here and talk about all the right
Speaker 1: of center, libertarian leaning not necessarily political. Oh wow, you
Speaker 1: don't have to be political to be a comedian. But
Speaker 1: that's even giving this argument too much credit and too
Speaker 1: much credibility, because it's really not to be taken seriously.
Speaker 1: It's really a a slander and a smear that just
Speaker 1: panders to this stupid audience that believes this stuff that
Speaker 1: will look look at Jimmy Kimmela in this case, listen
Speaker 1: to Jimmy Kimmel on a podcast, and you know note
Speaker 1: also that you know kiml went after a Fox host
Speaker 1: awhile back and and did so in a really nasty
Speaker 1: personal matter. And it's he just showed everybody who he was,
Speaker 1: and we could all think that he's the smiling, nice guy,
Speaker 1: but he's actually shown himself publicly to be pretty classless
Speaker 1: and and not nice and I'm sure they'll say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: he gives this money to charity somewhere. Yeah, that guy's
Speaker 1: making like twenty million dollars a year. I'm sure he
Speaker 1: gives a couple of hundred grand to charity. It's called
Speaker 1: great pr It doesn't make him a wonderful humanitarian. But
Speaker 1: the notion that you are liberal because you are more intelligent,
Speaker 1: he'll laugh like John Stewart would and say, oh, I
Speaker 1: was just come on, it's just comedy's just kidding. But
Speaker 1: he's really not. They really believe that, they really think
Speaker 1: that this is true. And it just reminds me of
Speaker 1: that moment many years ago when Christopher Hitchins was also
Speaker 1: on the not funny liberal echo chamber known as the
Speaker 1: Bill Maher Show, and Christopher Hitchins, who was not really
Speaker 1: conservative or a man entirely of the left, although he
Speaker 1: was for most of his career leftists, said that Bill
Speaker 1: Maher's audience, uh was essentially feckless, and he extended one
Speaker 1: finger to all of them to show them how he
Speaker 1: feels about them. Well to anyone in Jimmy Fallon's audience,
Speaker 1: who really believes that the reason all late night comedians
Speaker 1: it's not because that democrats control the different media entities
Speaker 1: that make these decisions. No, no, it's because they're smart.
Speaker 1: Right to anyone in Jimmy Kimmel's audience who believes that
Speaker 1: they should be extended the Christopher Hitchens style one finger salute,
Speaker 1: I will roll into a quick break, will come back
Speaker 1: with roll calls. Stay with me. Well, team, we've reached
Speaker 1: the final phase of our Freedom Hut extravaganza today. So
Speaker 1: I think that means it's just a perfect time for us,
Speaker 1: especially considering we didn't get any time to do it yesterday.
Speaker 1: To go into roll call, Team Buck, it's time for
Speaker 1: roll call, al right, first in the roll call this week. Gosh,
Speaker 1: I just did that today. Today you have uh, Dana
Speaker 1: or is it Donna? I'll go with Dana. I absolutely
Speaker 1: love your Shields High podcast. You're the only person that
Speaker 1: can get me to enjoy history. That's high praise, my friend. Anyway,
Speaker 1: after listening to the Fall of Constantinople, it reminded me
Speaker 1: of the They Might Be Giants cover of the song
Speaker 1: is Standbull. After listening to it a couple of times,
Speaker 1: I realized that it really trivializes the atrocities that occurred
Speaker 1: during the fall of the City, love the show, Keep
Speaker 1: it up, h Dana, thank you so much. I'm planning
Speaker 1: to have another Shield High out next week. We're gonna
Speaker 1: kind of do them now as I can, which will
Speaker 1: be either every other week or maybe every three weeks
Speaker 1: or so. That's the plan. It's a it's a heavy lift.
Speaker 1: I wanted to get it going and see what the
Speaker 1: interest level is. You team, you want me to keep
Speaker 1: doing it, But I'm gonna have to spread them out
Speaker 1: a little bit because it takes up pretty much the
Speaker 1: entire weekend and much of the week to pull one
Speaker 1: of those thirty or forty minute episodes together properly. Next
Speaker 1: one is going to be on Malta Susannah. She writes
Speaker 1: the following, love Love, Love the Shield HiPE podcasts, and
Speaker 1: it makes Mondays something to look forward to. Don't stop
Speaker 1: and listening to Monday's podcast. When you talk about the
Speaker 1: most important things to children who are terminal, it really
Speaker 1: touched my heart as I have been there with a
Speaker 1: child who had cancer and two other children with mental
Speaker 1: health issues. There is no time to waste on things
Speaker 1: that have no lasting value. Love is spelled t I
Speaker 1: M E. Time. Thanks for all you do well, Susanna,
Speaker 1: thank you for sharing your personal story, and I hope
Speaker 1: that you all found that it was worthwhile and and
Speaker 1: also it'll stay with you a bit. The wisdom from
Speaker 1: those children who are terminal patients, a lot of them
Speaker 1: terminal cancer patients, and just what what matters to them,
Speaker 1: right without all the all the distractions of adulthood, ego
Speaker 1: and career, and what really matters. It was wisdom from
Speaker 1: from children, people who make you laugh, people who are
Speaker 1: kind to you, your family, people who love you being
Speaker 1: with them, That's what matters. And I thought that it
Speaker 1: was really powerful, and I'm glad that many of you
Speaker 1: got a chance to listen to it yesterday. If you didn't,
Speaker 1: by the way, I would recommend you go listen to
Speaker 1: the podcast. It's on iTunes. Just go to the Buck
Speaker 1: Section show on i tunes. And it was in the
Speaker 1: end of yesterday's radio program, ah Tara with the following
Speaker 1: thank you for your reminder yesterday about what's important in life.
Speaker 1: I'm dealing with some mental health issues and trying to
Speaker 1: be a good mom. Somehow your words and stories inspired
Speaker 1: me to commit to doing something as simple as reading
Speaker 1: more to my son. I can do that even on
Speaker 1: a bad day, I'll Tara, absolutely reading to your son
Speaker 1: is something he will always always remember. And you know,
Speaker 1: one of the most important shifts in my own life
Speaker 1: philosophy that I've made that I find really helpful is
Speaker 1: instead of focusing on accomplishments in life as though it's
Speaker 1: a resume, instead of looking at things as you know,
Speaker 1: how am I doing in the totality of my entire life.
Speaker 1: I just look at each day now and what can
Speaker 1: I do today to be productive, to improve myself a
Speaker 1: little bit, to take care of myself, to be kind
Speaker 1: to people, and to take care of those who matter
Speaker 1: to me. And that's really the that's really the daily checklist.
Speaker 1: Those are the things that keep me going each day
Speaker 1: and to be a little better each day, a little
Speaker 1: kinder each day, become a little more knowledgeable, two show
Speaker 1: the people who matter to me that they care to
Speaker 1: take care of them. And also to take care of yourself.
Speaker 1: That's a very important part of of at least the
Speaker 1: philosophy that I've started to pull together for myself that
Speaker 1: affects everything else. Right, You need to go easy on yourself.
Speaker 1: Sometimes you need to get enough sleep, you need to
Speaker 1: give yourself enough time to rest. You need time for
Speaker 1: leisure because you will be a better person for all
Speaker 1: those around you if you are functioning in every in
Speaker 1: every sense at your highest capacity. That doesn't mean perfect,
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean everything is great. It just means that
Speaker 1: you are able to be the best version of you
Speaker 1: for everyone else as well. I think that a lot
Speaker 1: of really decent, responsible, kind, hardworking people allow themselves to
Speaker 1: get so run down, and they have all the best
Speaker 1: intentions that they don't realize that. You know, if you
Speaker 1: end up in a position where you're too tired, or
Speaker 1: where you get really sick, or where you have some
Speaker 1: kind of a breakdown, whether at work or at home,
Speaker 1: you're not going to be able to be the person
Speaker 1: that you want to be for those around you who
Speaker 1: love you and that you love. So take care of
Speaker 1: yourself as part of this too. It's not just take
Speaker 1: care of other people. That's just Those are some thoughts
Speaker 1: that I have for whatever, for whatever they're worth, uh
Speaker 1: David with the following on Roll Call, Hey, but a
Speaker 1: couple of items. My daughter Emily, who is an actress,
Speaker 1: received a Team Buck t shirt for Christmas, and she
Speaker 1: wore to rehearsal one night where she had to explain
Speaker 1: to all your liberal friends who you were making inroads.
Speaker 1: The other thing is what happened with Tyrone and Amy.
Speaker 1: Maybe I missed it Shields ye Oss, David, Well, David,
Speaker 1: I'm glad you're your daughter. I hope she likes a
Speaker 1: T shirt. And I'm sure it was a conversation starter.
Speaker 1: Now with Tie and Amy. I mentioned this before, but
Speaker 1: in case any of you missed it, Uh, Amy got
Speaker 1: a great job at Fox News. She's a producer on
Speaker 1: one of the shows at Fox News now. So she
Speaker 1: moved on to Fox. She had been with me for
Speaker 1: almost two years, and I totally she's really somebody who
Speaker 1: her her heart is in television and she wanted to
Speaker 1: go back and do that. So I was very happy
Speaker 1: for and Tyrone. I had known from my time at
Speaker 1: The Blaze as well, and we had become very good
Speaker 1: team and colleagues together. And he got an offer to
Speaker 1: go do his own radio show in Philadelphia, and he
Speaker 1: it's this is the business we're in. He took the
Speaker 1: offer and it was pretty quick. It really happened all
Speaker 1: at the very end of the year. So I wish
Speaker 1: them both all best. I'm happy that their work with
Speaker 1: me was um as well. Obviously as fruitful as it
Speaker 1: was concerning they both got great jobs that they really
Speaker 1: wanted after working here on the Buck Section show. So
Speaker 1: that's all good. We have Mike now with this producer. Mike,
Speaker 1: he's running the show, and we have either John or
Speaker 1: Brandon running the board. So if you hear me talking
Speaker 1: to Mike, John or Brandon, those are the folks that
Speaker 1: are that are on the team in the hut. Now,
Speaker 1: so there you have it. There is your update. Now
Speaker 1: we have David writing in, Hey, Buck, I love the
Speaker 1: Monday Show, very informative as a former as a former
Speaker 1: State Department guy, I had to laugh at your diplomat stereotype.
Speaker 1: Too funny, too true, David. Well, thanks buddy. And yeah,
Speaker 1: look I when I tell you I know something, I
Speaker 1: know something, and I know State Department people and I've
Speaker 1: had plenty of back and forth with them over the years. Um,
Speaker 1: so there's that. I'm glad you enjoyed that. David. Denny writes,
Speaker 1: Hey Buck, I just heard you read my last note
Speaker 1: on Roll Call. Thanks. I was referring to the regular
Speaker 1: show podcast, not Shields High. Uh, don't smack him around
Speaker 1: too much. And just so you know, I listen on
Speaker 1: an Android phone, so it's not my device. Okay, Well,
Speaker 1: thank you Denny. Thanks for the clarification. And anytime you
Speaker 1: guys have a tech issue or problem bringing to my
Speaker 1: attention because I can flag it for our engineering folks
Speaker 1: here and they can go from there and they can
Speaker 1: hopefully address it. Joey, Joey rets falling Shields high. I
Speaker 1: want to give you a pad on the back for
Speaker 1: the history podcasts. Also, I appreciate your ability to give
Speaker 1: political commentary in this day and age without the profanity
Speaker 1: of other talk show hosts. I'd like to share your
Speaker 1: podcasts with my wife and children, and since I don't
Speaker 1: curse in their presence, I wouldn't want to expose them
Speaker 1: to someone else cursing. Thanks for being a straight arrow,
Speaker 1: a title I heard from an old state sergeant major
Speaker 1: years ago. You are a rare man among the masses.
Speaker 1: As a side note, I found you on the Blaze.
Speaker 1: Your program makes up of my daily brief. Keep up
Speaker 1: the great work well, Joey, thank you very much. It's
Speaker 1: very kind. I am honored, and yeah, I look. I
Speaker 1: always have to behave because most days my mom is
Speaker 1: listening to the show and I can't can't disappoint Mama
Speaker 1: Sexton with any any potty mouth stuff, any bad words.
Speaker 1: And I know that many of you have kids that
Speaker 1: listen to and I obviously completely respect that. I want
Speaker 1: them to go listen to the show. Look, we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about serious stuff here, intense stuff, and sometimes
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to get into some details about either
Speaker 1: violence or and you know, I'll make some jokes that
Speaker 1: might push the envelope a little bit, but no profanity
Speaker 1: and nothing that's inappropriate, nothing that I wouldn't let my
Speaker 1: own if I had one, which I don't yet. Twelve
Speaker 1: year old listened to. That's kind of my that's kind
Speaker 1: of my approach. All right, Team, thank you for all
Speaker 1: your oats and roll call Official Team bucket gmail dot
Speaker 1: com if you want to email me. See you tomorrow,
Speaker 1: same time, same place, in the Freedom Hunt Shields High