Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. The fight over how
Speaker 1: or whether you can accept political dirt from foreigners continues.
Speaker 1: The Libs are still pretending that that's not something that
Speaker 1: Hillary in the DNC did we know that that's not
Speaker 1: the case. We will break down that for you. Also,
Speaker 1: where do they stand on impeachment? How are we doing
Speaker 1: at the border. We have a senior remember border patrol
Speaker 1: joining to give us some ground truth. And it's Friday,
Speaker 1: so there'll be a freestyle stick with us. Buck Sexton remission,
Speaker 1: decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence mag
Speaker 1: no mistake, America. You're a great American again. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Thomas CIA analysts. I can speak
Speaker 1: for three hours without a phone call. Try doing that sometime.
Speaker 1: It is Sexton. No. At the beginning, I think I said,
Speaker 1: I do both. But how are you going to if
Speaker 1: you don't hear what it is? You don't know what
Speaker 1: they say? Oh he would, he would accept it. Well,
Speaker 1: if I don't listen, you're not going to know. Now
Speaker 1: if I thought anything was incorrect or badly stated, I'd
Speaker 1: reported to the Attorney General, the FBI, I'd reported to
Speaker 1: law enforcement. Welcome to the Buck Sex and show everybody day.
Speaker 1: Two of the Democrats attempts to create an opening to
Speaker 1: begin their impeachment proceedings because oh my gosh, Trump sold
Speaker 1: out the country with the Trump Tower meeting where no
Speaker 1: information was exchanged, nothing illegal happened, and we're still talking
Speaker 1: about this somehow. That's that's where we are, folks. You
Speaker 1: got Trump having to say, okay, i'd report it. Let's
Speaker 1: let's let's game this out a little bit. You're in
Speaker 1: a presidential a very contentious presidential campaign. You receive an email,
Speaker 1: perhaps it's an unsolicited or you know, an email that's
Speaker 1: a friend or a friend or whatever. I've got really
Speaker 1: important information about your about your political opponent. There's a
Speaker 1: high level corruption involving an oil deal in Kazakhstan. Let's
Speaker 1: just move away from Russia for a second. The Kazakh
Speaker 1: government has all the information and you should know about this.
Speaker 1: Let's say that we do of the Democrats tell us
Speaker 1: to tell us now is supposed to be done? You
Speaker 1: call the FBI. Okay, then what are you are you
Speaker 1: not allowed to hear what this information is? Oh, it's
Speaker 1: a thing of value. Buck? Is it a thing of value?
Speaker 1: How can you know unless you hear it is false
Speaker 1: information a thing of value. Notice how they've been acting
Speaker 1: like because bez landed Sky has said the Russian senior
Speaker 1: prosecutor and the Russian government wants to give this information.
Speaker 1: She could be totally full of it. He doesn't know
Speaker 1: who knows what this is? Who knows what this people get.
Speaker 1: I used to work in counter terrorism. There are tips
Speaker 1: coming in from wackos of all kinds all the time.
Speaker 1: You listen to them, though, because sometimes you think someone's
Speaker 1: a wacko, it turns out he actually does know where
Speaker 1: the bad guys are. So you hear them out, you
Speaker 1: hear what they have to say. This you know, I
Speaker 1: know the idea? What was it? The FEC FEC chairwoman
Speaker 1: come out. It's a classic bureaucrat. It is very illegal,
Speaker 1: and it's a felony, and everyone running a sense of felony. Okay,
Speaker 1: how many people have ever been charged under that statute?
Speaker 1: Fancy FEC lawyer lady of accepting information during a political
Speaker 1: campaign from a foreign source? What counts as a foreign source?
Speaker 1: If you use a cutout? Is it still a foreign source? Again?
Speaker 1: People talk about this like they know, and I want
Speaker 1: to make sure that you and I are on the
Speaker 1: same page, or those people are idiots. What they're saying
Speaker 1: makes no sense. Okay, So let's say Veslnidskaya is clever
Speaker 1: and she says, all right, you know what Russian government
Speaker 1: wants to give us information. But what I'm gonna do
Speaker 1: is I'm going to talk to a journalist at Yahoo News.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna talk to somebody who in the media first,
Speaker 1: and then they can brief you on the information to
Speaker 1: your campaign, and then you guys can run with it. Oh,
Speaker 1: you mean coordination with a campaign. The media like what
Speaker 1: Democrats do all the time, but they pretend they don't.
Speaker 1: Can you still not use that information? What about when
Speaker 1: if a foreign newspaper puts it out there in the
Speaker 1: public domain? Can you still not use that information? How
Speaker 1: do you draw these lines? This is completely absurd. How
Speaker 1: would you gauge the value of this thing? Is the
Speaker 1: information worth a dollar? Is it worth a hundred thousand dollars,
Speaker 1: a million dollars? You know who who knows? So to
Speaker 1: call it a thing of value is to put so by.
Speaker 1: The FEC does this all the time. This is why
Speaker 1: you have people who honestly disagree about things. Is this
Speaker 1: campaign expenditure paying off Stormy Daniels. Is that a personal
Speaker 1: or a campaign expenditure? Well, you would do it as
Speaker 1: a person, and if you would do it as a
Speaker 1: person who wasn't running a campaign, it's not a but
Speaker 1: you know, people argue it back and forth. It's like
Speaker 1: in your personal taxes. Okay, you went on a trip.
Speaker 1: The first two days, you had nothing of meetings. A
Speaker 1: third day, you know, you spent on the beach a
Speaker 1: little bit, but you had one meeting. Is that a
Speaker 1: work trip? Can you write that off? Well, you know,
Speaker 1: there's like a formula of the I RSS. Yeah, But
Speaker 1: ultimately it's a judgment call. Ultimately, all this stuff we're
Speaker 1: dealing with here are judgment calls, judgment calls by law enforcement,
Speaker 1: by the FEC. But and the problem that the left
Speaker 1: doesn't recognize is that you and I have figured out
Speaker 1: that the judgment calls always go in favor of the
Speaker 1: Democrat and against the Republican. It always goes in favor
Speaker 1: of the left and against Trump. Whatever it is. You know,
Speaker 1: Hillary gets a pass, gets a special counsel, Hillary's aids
Speaker 1: get immunity, Trump's senior advisors get thrown in prison. Hillary
Speaker 1: can pay a foreigner to collect information from foreign Russian
Speaker 1: government sources. But because she paid for it and did
Speaker 1: not I would note, put this on their campaign expenditures
Speaker 1: and tried to hide it from the public. That's fine.
Speaker 1: But Trump's senior campaign folks taking a meeting with a
Speaker 1: woman who says she's given information from Russian government, they
Speaker 1: want to hear what she has to say. That's the worst.
Speaker 1: That's the crime of the century. All of a sudden.
Speaker 1: Serious people can't think these things. Don't don't get caught
Speaker 1: up in this frenzy. Don't don't allow them to obscure
Speaker 1: what you and I can figure out just by walking
Speaker 1: through what really happened here. You know, this is when
Speaker 1: you hear from people like Senator Mark Warner, who has
Speaker 1: been peddling the Russia collusion lies for two years, should
Speaker 1: have no credibility whatsoever on the issue, and is now
Speaker 1: trying to trying to really get get his momentum going
Speaker 1: as being a chief anti Trumper. And here's what Mark
Speaker 1: Warner is saying about Trump and this whole situation. Play thirteen.
Speaker 1: All of us, when we take an oath of office
Speaker 1: square to protect United States from enemies, both foreign and domestic.
Speaker 1: The comments of President Trump yesterday were extraordinary, even in
Speaker 1: a Trump world. The fact that this president has so
Speaker 1: little moral compass or understanding of the need to protect
Speaker 1: our nation that he says he would still welcome information
Speaker 1: from Russia, China, or any other adversary if it helps
Speaker 1: his political campaign is outrageous. But this is also stupid.
Speaker 1: It's a hypothetical. It all depends on what the information is. Again,
Speaker 1: scenario analysis is what you're doing the CIA all the time,
Speaker 1: when the CI was something of a real place that
Speaker 1: did real work. I mean, now the intelligence community seems
Speaker 1: like it's it's involved in all this deep state coup
Speaker 1: plotting nonsense, at least at the top levels of it,
Speaker 1: which is going to shame the community for many many
Speaker 1: years to come, especially when the Inspector General report at
Speaker 1: the DOJ comes out. But let's let's take this this
Speaker 1: new standard they have of oh, you can't speak to foreigners,
Speaker 1: can't speak to them, can't hear what they have to say.
Speaker 1: And you know there was old Russia. Okay, No, the
Speaker 1: standard has to be foreign government period. It can't just
Speaker 1: there's not a special Russia standard. It has to be
Speaker 1: foreign governments period. Because Christopher Steel is a foreigner. But
Speaker 1: let's say that we have a situation where the Russian
Speaker 1: government is going to pass along to Trump. I remember
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton's husband is taking five hundred thousand dollars checks
Speaker 1: for giving thirty minute long or forty minute long speech
Speaker 1: from a Russian bank, which is effectively a state owned
Speaker 1: enterprise in Russia, the state supported an owned enterprise, and
Speaker 1: her husband's taking half a million dollar checks. That there,
Speaker 1: they've made over one hundred million dollars giving speeches and
Speaker 1: selling access. If the Russian government had an email from
Speaker 1: a Hillary Aid saying, look, we can really move this
Speaker 1: policy for you, but Bill needs to get that check.
Speaker 1: That's quid pro quo corruption. That is a felony, and
Speaker 1: that is any prosecutor would bring that case if they
Speaker 1: had that and Trump found out about that, is he
Speaker 1: then under you know, is he under obligation to not
Speaker 1: say anything about it or no, he's supposed to pass
Speaker 1: it along and hope that Oh, I don't know, James
Speaker 1: Comey and McCabe decided to do something about that. One
Speaker 1: part of this that seems to keep getting lost is
Speaker 1: that the very people who at the top of the
Speaker 1: FBI and the Department of Justice would if this standard
Speaker 1: called the FBI right away was followed, the Hillary partisans
Speaker 1: that were at the top of those organizations would have
Speaker 1: been the ones entrusted with making a determination about what
Speaker 1: to do with this information. And there wasn't even any
Speaker 1: any information. None of this makes any sense when you
Speaker 1: dig deep into it, when you really look at what
Speaker 1: is being said. People were all the FEC ladies said
Speaker 1: that it's a felony. And I know, judging a politano
Speaker 1: whom I like, he's a nice guy, but you know,
Speaker 1: sometimes his legal analysis. I was there at Fox once
Speaker 1: when he said that Obama delisting somebody as a terrorist
Speaker 1: organization could be considered material support to a terrorist group.
Speaker 1: I was like, no, that's not how it works, man.
Speaker 1: You're getting out of your getting out of your Bailywick
Speaker 1: here judge a different kind of law. So man, But
Speaker 1: he's saying that Trump was willing to commit a feling.
Speaker 1: That's not true. It's not a felony to talk to somebody.
Speaker 1: The First Amendment implications from this should be clear to anyone.
Speaker 1: You don't know if someone's a foreigner or not. You
Speaker 1: don't know if they're on behalf of a foreign government
Speaker 1: unless you at least hear them out. This woman presented
Speaker 1: no official credentials. She could have been a total whacko.
Speaker 1: Seems like she kind of is a whacko. She was
Speaker 1: working for Fusion or meeting with Fusion GPS. That's not
Speaker 1: a coincidence. We are told to skip past that. But
Speaker 1: you know, Senator Warrener, you know he also had I believe,
Speaker 1: some contact with the Russians. He had the Democrats reaching
Speaker 1: out to Ukraine try to get an information from them.
Speaker 1: It's anti Trump. But Warner saying, well, you know, first
Speaker 1: thing I did was contact the FBI. Play fourteen. This morning,
Speaker 1: the President tweeted that you should have contacted the FBI
Speaker 1: after being contented by some hoaxter what is he talking about? Wow,
Speaker 1: I don't have any idea. I think he's talking about
Speaker 1: actually something that happened with mister Schiff. But I would
Speaker 1: say this when when I had contact with someone that
Speaker 1: that's been reported, first thing I did was, of course,
Speaker 1: I contact with the FBI. This goes to what we
Speaker 1: saw from Democrats during the effort to smear and destroy Cavanaugh,
Speaker 1: and you've seen it since then in a pop up
Speaker 1: a few more times where Democrats now treat the FBI
Speaker 1: like some kind of super police force, like, oh well,
Speaker 1: they'll problem, Just tell the FBI. Even the same FBI
Speaker 1: that thought that there should be a faizer warrant on
Speaker 1: Carter Page, the same FBI that started a full field
Speaker 1: investigation based on disputed rumors at a bar with George
Speaker 1: Papadopoulos that led to nothing. That FBI, oh yeah, just
Speaker 1: tell the FBI. And then what if the Trump campaign
Speaker 1: had said, hey, FBI, we got this weird pitch. But
Speaker 1: you know, then it's up to the FBI whether or
Speaker 1: not they can talk to this person. They don't have
Speaker 1: that authority. They would have started an investigation, okay, an
Speaker 1: investigation of what that someone said. They've got information about
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton? Is that now? Is that now reasonable suspicion
Speaker 1: or even probable? Cause, Hey, I've got APPO and Hillary.
Speaker 1: I think everybody who's ever read a newspaper has APPO
Speaker 1: on Hillary. This all falls apart. It's all part of
Speaker 1: the hysteria all over again. These people, they just they can't.
Speaker 1: The circuits are now wired in a certain way in
Speaker 1: their brains where they are incapable of thinking rationally and
Speaker 1: normally about this. Everything is a horrendous conspiracy. Trump's destroying
Speaker 1: the country, He's a trader, he worker. None of this
Speaker 1: is true, None of this is real, and they haven't
Speaker 1: gotten any better. You'll note they give no, no slack,
Speaker 1: no credibility to Trump's side of things at all. After
Speaker 1: the Mulla report, they're not even willing to move past
Speaker 1: Russia collusion. Now they've really gone and tried to return
Speaker 1: us to attempted collusion, which is not a thing. There's
Speaker 1: no there's no attempted collusion. It didn't happen. But you
Speaker 1: know the legal theories you're here from people now, this
Speaker 1: is this is just insane. You can't talk to somebody
Speaker 1: because they might be a foreigner, they might have foreign
Speaker 1: government information that they are going to share with you.
Speaker 1: We live in a world where information is global and instantaneous.
Speaker 1: We live in a world where somebody can send you
Speaker 1: an email unsolicited from you know, from from Beijing. It
Speaker 1: comes into your inbox in seconds. And now we're supposed
Speaker 1: to have this traffic cop situation of oh, I can't
Speaker 1: I can't look at that information about about my political opponent,
Speaker 1: because that would be It's one thing if you solicit
Speaker 1: criminal information or if you say you know, hack into
Speaker 1: this and you know, yeah, And that's where some of
Speaker 1: the discussion has been more real about this. It was
Speaker 1: was was there any effort to work with the Russian government,
Speaker 1: to work with you know, well not not Fozzy barrow,
Speaker 1: a fancy bear, Fozzy bear, is something else fozzy bear,
Speaker 1: um fancy bear and and guccafer and all this time. No,
Speaker 1: but there was no effort to do that. So that's
Speaker 1: why they come back to well now they wish they
Speaker 1: could have done. Isn't it exhausting? It must be really
Speaker 1: tiresome to be such a crazy lib in the era
Speaker 1: of Trump, to be this freaked out about the world
Speaker 1: all the time, irrespective of what the facts may be
Speaker 1: in any given moment, it just must must weigh on them.
Speaker 1: It's got to be hard to be this crazy all
Speaker 1: the time. I almost respect it, although no that's not true.
Speaker 1: I disrespect it. But here we are free stuff out it.
Speaker 1: We are in New York City. It's a beautiful day,
Speaker 1: absolutely beautiful day. He hopefully it's beautiful wherever you are too.
Speaker 1: But it's going to be wonderful in the Freedom Hunt,
Speaker 1: no matter what the weather is outside. So stick around, team,
Speaker 1: there's no equivalence between those two examples. For a campaign
Speaker 1: to hire a law firm, an American law firm who
Speaker 1: then turns around and hires an American research company who
Speaker 1: then contracts out with a foreign individual, that is not illegal.
Speaker 1: Oh I'm sorry. So if you create, if you have
Speaker 1: a cutout, then it's okay. If you empower somebody else
Speaker 1: on your behalf to go work with the foreign government,
Speaker 1: do the foreign government research and pull the opera together,
Speaker 1: that's fine. I mean, that was deep state Extraordinaireman McCabe
Speaker 1: and Andrew McCabe, who also was fired from the FBI,
Speaker 1: lied multiple times under oath the Inspector General lied to
Speaker 1: his own team, his own staff at the FBI about
Speaker 1: leaks that he that he gave that then he yelled
Speaker 1: at others four and he's saying that there's nothing comparable
Speaker 1: about this. Are we really to believe that no one
Speaker 1: at the Clinton campaign knew that Christopher Steele was having
Speaker 1: meetings with people at the top of the FBI running
Speaker 1: sources from Russia? Is lous? Oh yeah, just just on behalf,
Speaker 1: on behalf of the law firm. You know nothing to
Speaker 1: see here, nothing, I mean, I can tell you that
Speaker 1: when you hire someone else to do something that would
Speaker 1: be illegal for you to do, you generally are in trouble.
Speaker 1: This is not a place you want to be in.
Speaker 1: When you empower someone to do something on your behalf
Speaker 1: as a political candidate that would be illegal for you
Speaker 1: to do, you're going to be in trouble. But no,
Speaker 1: there's there's no comparison between this. That's why the dossier
Speaker 1: was just fine. Someone should ask McCabe, are you such
Speaker 1: a moron that you still think the dossier is true?
Speaker 1: And why were you and others around you the FBI
Speaker 1: so stupid Because it is a question of stupidity that
Speaker 1: you bought into all this without knowing any of the subsources,
Speaker 1: without knowing anything really about the skill and the expertise
Speaker 1: of Christopher Steele in this whole process. It's probably going
Speaker 1: my word of mouth, if they knew anything at all.
Speaker 1: You're gonna run to the FIS accord with this. You're
Speaker 1: going to use this as one of the one of
Speaker 1: the most fearsome tools of surveillance the federal government has.
Speaker 1: Just skip right around the Fourth Amendment. It's an end
Speaker 1: run in the Fourth Amendment, that's what it is. It's
Speaker 1: no longer in the criminal process. It's in the national
Speaker 1: security side of the House, which is just whatever the
Speaker 1: government says it is, and it was abused, but it's
Speaker 1: not comparable in the Cabe says, here's yeah. Mc cabe
Speaker 1: is among the worst. And the stories about him that
Speaker 1: I've heard are that he's a real, real jerk, which
Speaker 1: doesn't support shouldn't surprise anybody's looking at the guy. He
Speaker 1: looks like he's trying out for the role of FBI
Speaker 1: director all the time. We got more on him in
Speaker 1: the Deep State, and how they pretend that everything was
Speaker 1: fine with the Dacier that's coming up. He's holding the
Speaker 1: line for America. Buck Sexton, his back leader, McConnell seems
Speaker 1: to take great pride in calling himself the Grim Reaper.
Speaker 1: It's part of his political campaign. It's part of the
Speaker 1: pride he takes his Leader of the Senate. For the
Speaker 1: first time in my memory, I agree with now I
Speaker 1: am indeed and the grim Reaper. When it comes to
Speaker 1: the socialist agenda that they've been getting up over in
Speaker 1: the House, well this is a full more socialism. And yeah,
Speaker 1: as long as I'm the majority leader of the Senate,
Speaker 1: none of that stuff is going anywhere. What is the
Speaker 1: better nickname for Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. Is it Cocaine Mitch,
Speaker 1: or is it the grim Reaper. That's it. That's tough
Speaker 1: one man, That's that's I really love the cocaine manche
Speaker 1: until he started calling himself the grim Reaper. He's got
Speaker 1: some great nicknames. You know, Mitch's branding lately, it's been
Speaker 1: very strong. I love our nicknames on our side. You know,
Speaker 1: we're the Grim Reaper, Cocaine engineer, like Nervous Nancy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know they're not good at the nicknames, that's sure.
Speaker 1: I do. I do think that. You know, Mitch is
Speaker 1: doing a good job with what he can with holding
Speaker 1: the line, and that is on judges more than anything else.
Speaker 1: You gotta give Mitch credit. He is a lean, mean
Speaker 1: conservative judge confirming machine. But Pelosi, she doesn't like all
Speaker 1: the all the attention that Mitch gets, So Nervous Nancy
Speaker 1: does not like grim Reaper, slash Cocaine Mitch. Before we
Speaker 1: went to a break, we were talking about Andy McCabe.
Speaker 1: Now any Kabe about fire from the FPI is a
Speaker 1: little bitter. Remember his wife's a Democrat, we know, and
Speaker 1: he's a big lib. I mean, they'll say he was
Speaker 1: a Republican. He's probably registered Republican in like nineteen eighty
Speaker 1: five or something, and since then. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you know who's responsible for transforming him, but he's a
Speaker 1: big lib, or at least a big anti Trumper, which
Speaker 1: for our purposes is the same thing. And don't think
Speaker 1: that there's any shortage of Libs at the top of
Speaker 1: these federal bureaucracies. They're full of really aggressive progressive types.
Speaker 1: You know. That's why before we get in the Cave,
Speaker 1: there was this story, yesty, I meant to get to
Speaker 1: in the show. I just we got a lot of
Speaker 1: other stuff to talk about. Kelly Ann Conway, the Office
Speaker 1: of the Special Counsel, which is separate from the Muller thing.
Speaker 1: They're saying that she's violated the Hatch Act, and oh,
Speaker 1: she's violated the Hatch Acts. She should be fired. And
Speaker 1: that's never that recommendation has never been made before. Let
Speaker 1: me tell you some of the Hatch Act. The Hatch
Speaker 1: Act is Hatch Act is pretty silly. The Hatch Act
Speaker 1: is so broad and can be interpreted in so many
Speaker 1: ways that I remember that we had a joke poster
Speaker 1: with Reagan on it. It was a joke in my office.
Speaker 1: And there were people who made Hatch Act Ronald Reagan Okay,
Speaker 1: I don't think he's running for president again, but there
Speaker 1: are people that made an official they're like Hatch Action.
Speaker 1: And the people that are whiny little hall monitors about
Speaker 1: the Hatch Act are always lives in the federal government.
Speaker 1: You never have conservatives say, hey, you know, can you
Speaker 1: not have that like Bernie wants to save the earth
Speaker 1: go green New Deal sticker on your on your you know,
Speaker 1: official government like computer or whatever. No no one cares.
Speaker 1: So always the whiny libs that are like into your
Speaker 1: Hatch Act volation. I got accuse a few times, producer Mike,
Speaker 1: this may not not officially officially, but people like we're like,
Speaker 1: I think, book, you might be violing the Hatch Act.
Speaker 1: And I'm like, maybe because I love America so much,
Speaker 1: you filthy commie, that's a violation of the Hatch Act.
Speaker 1: Then call me a Hatch criminal. Loving America is not
Speaker 1: is wrong. I don't want to be right, but yeah,
Speaker 1: that was why. That's why, you know what, you know
Speaker 1: what the move is. We'll talk about the White House
Speaker 1: Press secretary role later And guys, I'm not officially throwing
Speaker 1: my hat in the ring. But I'm not not throwing
Speaker 1: my hat in the ring. You know what really would
Speaker 1: really light light libs hair on fire in a way
Speaker 1: that I think it would be great. Um, well, they're
Speaker 1: they're two options the cave of me, Mike, and you
Speaker 1: can tell me which one you like better. One would
Speaker 1: be to make Kelly and Conway white House press secretary,
Speaker 1: especially in response to this she needs to be fired
Speaker 1: because of the hand Jack make her white House press secretary.
Speaker 1: That would just be fun. I don't know if she
Speaker 1: really she probably likes what she does right now without
Speaker 1: all the structure of that, you know, whoul else would
Speaker 1: be a really interesting choice for White House Press secretary.
Speaker 1: What if Trump just said, you know what, we're gonna
Speaker 1: make Candice Owens white House press secretary. I like that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it's a great idea. Yeah, she'd love it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she'd be good. I guess anybody who's a fighter is
Speaker 1: good with me. Man lives with Can you imagine Jim
Speaker 1: Accosta like, excuse me, just want to ask you a question,
Speaker 1: but it's really a speech, right talking. They have bravely am.
Speaker 1: She's like what wow, just verbally slaps him around. Yes,
Speaker 1: it'll be fantastic. I know a man, a man can dream. Candice,
Speaker 1: if you're out there, call the Trumpster, tell him you're
Speaker 1: up for the job. I think that would be That
Speaker 1: would be fun. Um. There's some other we'll talk about.
Speaker 1: Then then there's the the people that are really being
Speaker 1: talked about as the likely contenders. But we were so
Speaker 1: we're talking about McCay before. McCabe is a deep Stater.
Speaker 1: He's at the heart of this whole thing. Remember, Andy's
Speaker 1: office was talked about by Page and Struck as the
Speaker 1: place where the you know, and the insurance policy, and
Speaker 1: that's where they were having the discussion. I the insurance
Speaker 1: policy was the investigation against Trump, which is what they
Speaker 1: did in case he won, which is exactly what has happened.
Speaker 1: So all of us they can pretend like we can't
Speaker 1: figure this out, but we figured all of it out.
Speaker 1: We know what's going on here. But McCabe, until like
Speaker 1: five minutes ago, or until when he got fired for
Speaker 1: misconduct of the FBI by his own people, McCabe, we
Speaker 1: were told he's a just to buy the book and
Speaker 1: incorruptal just like the stuff they said about Comey. They
Speaker 1: always say this about people that are going to take
Speaker 1: down Trump, but they're perfect and you if you question them,
Speaker 1: you're you're selling out your country. You know they're beyond
Speaker 1: beyond doubt. Okay, Well, McCabe has already made it very
Speaker 1: clear where he stands on Trump, and in case we
Speaker 1: needed further evidence, what he says about impeachment in Play sixteen.
Speaker 1: I think we are clearly there with the results of
Speaker 1: the Special Council team. There are so many witnesses who
Speaker 1: could provide important, essential testimony to Congress that can only
Speaker 1: be done in the scope of an impeachment inquiry. I
Speaker 1: think that we are clearly there at the results of
Speaker 1: the Special Council, McCabe is pushing for impeachment. This doesn't
Speaker 1: surprise anyone, right But remember, up until recently, we were
Speaker 1: told that we could treat anything that McCabe said, any actions,
Speaker 1: any decisions that he took with regard to Trump or
Speaker 1: Hillary's emails, or any of this stuff as totally reliable,
Speaker 1: totally reliable. Now we know that he is certainly trying
Speaker 1: to take Trump down today. So let's work backwards a
Speaker 1: little bit, isn't it reasonable that the same guy that
Speaker 1: is now forgetting about the fact that he used to
Speaker 1: work for used to run the most storied federal law
Speaker 1: enforcement agency in the country, and is supposed to present
Speaker 1: himself as a nonpartisan, he is now a hyperpartisan. Isn't
Speaker 1: it quite quite possible that he felt this way before
Speaker 1: that when the ending McCabe of today who's saying that
Speaker 1: Trump should be impeached, the process should move along, should
Speaker 1: destroy this president. That same guy when he was involved
Speaker 1: with whether or not they should investigate the Trump campaign,
Speaker 1: whether they should spin the Trump campaign. Don't we think
Speaker 1: that his judgment may have been suspect? Then whether or
Speaker 1: not Hillary, you know, in consultation with Komy, for example,
Speaker 1: whether or not Hillary should have been indicted and prosecuted
Speaker 1: for the email scandal where she broke the law for
Speaker 1: a hundred times and they keep saying she didn't. You know,
Speaker 1: they tell us the law matters, and then we see
Speaker 1: that it doesn't matter unless they like it to matter.
Speaker 1: This is destroying respect that we talked about destroying institutions.
Speaker 1: Democrats destroy respect for the rule of law by the
Speaker 1: way they approach this. Their people should not get prosecuted,
Speaker 1: ours should there people will not have their lives ruined.
Speaker 1: Ours will. The country can't sustain this double standard all
Speaker 1: that much longer. Something is going to break. Something is
Speaker 1: going to give, and the Democrats are going to be
Speaker 1: the ones who break it. They might try to blame
Speaker 1: Trump for it, but it's on them. It's on them.
Speaker 1: We have more on this, including Mark Warner. Guys are punk,
Speaker 1: We'll get into that. Stay with me, all right. Let's
Speaker 1: do a little round up on where the Dems and
Speaker 1: the deep staters are on impeachment at this point in
Speaker 1: the game, folks, we know they're trying to make sure
Speaker 1: that this is a political win for them. It has
Speaker 1: nothing to do with principle. It has nothing to do
Speaker 1: with you know, it's they just want this to be Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right. It helps the Democrat Party, it helps them out.
Speaker 1: That's the whole plan. And that's why you're hearing different
Speaker 1: things from different members of the different people on the left,
Speaker 1: because they're not really sure yet. Here's let's just start
Speaker 1: with the top of the heap. Nancy Pelosi on where
Speaker 1: she stands as of today. I remember, this is all good.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have to do impeachment updates all the time
Speaker 1: until they get the process going, then we'll do impeachment
Speaker 1: process updates, and then we'll go do you know, impeachment
Speaker 1: vote updates. And this is just all meant to be
Speaker 1: a a funnel. It's meant to be a gathering point
Speaker 1: for anti trump bile. You know, this is where all
Speaker 1: that they're going to direct all the hatred, all the
Speaker 1: Trump's arrangement syndrome into this, into impeachment. Here's what Pelo
Speaker 1: has to say seventeen. I don't think there's anything more
Speaker 1: divisive we can do than to impeach a president of
Speaker 1: the United States. And so you have to handle it
Speaker 1: with great care, have to handle it with great care.
Speaker 1: She says. Oh, she's trying to trying to make sure
Speaker 1: there's a narrative of nuance here, right, She's gonna be
Speaker 1: very very gentle with the whole impeachment thing. She's not
Speaker 1: gonna go overboard with the impeachment thing. Anybody really buy that,
Speaker 1: anybody really think that's the way this is going to
Speaker 1: work out. Nope, It's going to be a throwdown, knockdown,
Speaker 1: drag out fight over impeachment. That is what we are facing.
Speaker 1: That is what is going to happen. So there is that.
Speaker 1: And Nancy Pelosi also continues from around saying that the
Speaker 1: president is a criminal, which is a thing that I
Speaker 1: believe Democrats would be upset about if if that was
Speaker 1: being said by the House Majority leader all the time
Speaker 1: about Barack Obama, not that he had done something wrong
Speaker 1: or bad pup, but that he's a criminal engaged in crimes.
Speaker 1: Here's Pelosi, who, you know, one moment is trying to
Speaker 1: seem like she's the wise, steady elder stateswoman of the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party, and then the next moment she's saying crazy
Speaker 1: stuff that would be right in line with the wor
Speaker 1: respondents over at MSNBC. Here's one of those moments, blame nine.
Speaker 1: We are honoring our oath of office to protect and
Speaker 1: defend the constitution of the United States. Yesterday the President
Speaker 1: gave us once again evidence that he does not know
Speaker 1: right from wrong. It's a very sad thing, very sad
Speaker 1: thing that he does not know right from wrong. I
Speaker 1: believe that he has been involved in a criminal cover up,
Speaker 1: A criminal cover up. She says, huh, what exactly is
Speaker 1: the cover up? They could have held back the Mulla
Speaker 1: report and they did not. They could have claimed executive
Speaker 1: privilege and had fight after fight in federal court to
Speaker 1: prevent information for even making it into the Mulla report
Speaker 1: in the first case, or from Mulla being able to
Speaker 1: get that information. They did not. Where's the cover up?
Speaker 1: What is the criminal will cover up? Is she now
Speaker 1: referring to the obstruction? Well, why doesn't she just refer
Speaker 1: to obstruction? Why is this now that the new flavor
Speaker 1: of the moment is criminal cover up? But Trump responded
Speaker 1: to this specifically, and you know, the Trumpster does it,
Speaker 1: He's good at the responses. Play ten. It's a fascist statement.
Speaker 1: It's a disgraceful statement. I call her nervous Nancy. She's
Speaker 1: a nervous wreck. And I'll tell you what. For her
Speaker 1: to make a statement like that is outrageous. Her party
Speaker 1: got called spying. I mean, if you look at what
Speaker 1: happened Hillary Clinton with the money that ultimately went to
Speaker 1: Russia for the fake dacier, that total fake pile of
Speaker 1: stuff that if money gets paid and by the way,
Speaker 1: the amount of money that was paid and was paid
Speaker 1: by Hillary Clinton in the DNC and it went to Russia,
Speaker 1: that's the criminals. I like what Trump's doing here. Gotta
Speaker 1: go on offense, Gotta fight back against this. It's just
Speaker 1: it's just insane that they keep running with this after
Speaker 1: the Mulla report. They didn't get him. They had so
Speaker 1: many opportunities to get him. They had, you know, they
Speaker 1: weaponized the federal government against Trump during the campaign. Now
Speaker 1: they weaponize the federal government while he's president against him
Speaker 1: by getting the special counsel. The special counsel's really appointed
Speaker 1: because he fired Jim Comey, Jim Collmy, he's a jerk.
Speaker 1: You should have been fired. Who cares the country's fine
Speaker 1: without James comming? We don't need him. He's sanctimonious, he's
Speaker 1: a fraud, he's really self indulgent. Thinks that everybody needs
Speaker 1: to hear from Saint Komy all the time. Guys a jerk.
Speaker 1: But Pelosi says that he's engaged in a criminal cover
Speaker 1: up and should be impeached. What about the Democrat candidates? Right,
Speaker 1: Pelosi's not running for president, thank god. What about some
Speaker 1: of the Democrat candidates out there? Where are they? Remember
Speaker 1: they could change Monday. They're they're all using this as
Speaker 1: a as a narrative building tool and whatever. One of
Speaker 1: them needs to get in the news cycle and get
Speaker 1: a little more attention at any given time, they will
Speaker 1: turn around and just start talking about impeachment, Who should
Speaker 1: be impeach, Wenny should be impeached, all this stuff. It's
Speaker 1: an easy way to get their name up in the headlines.
Speaker 1: Amy Klobuchar, when she's not busy throwing staplers at junior
Speaker 1: staffers or forcing them to watch her eat a salad
Speaker 1: with a used comb, Think about that, dude, Think about that.
Speaker 1: You know, those iceberg lettuce wedges and those little little
Speaker 1: cherry tomatoes covered in a bit of ranch dressing. And
Speaker 1: then just that that big clump of Senator Klobuchar's hair
Speaker 1: that she didn't realize was still on that comb. She
Speaker 1: just starts chomping down on it right in front of
Speaker 1: Do you tell her? Do you let her just chomp
Speaker 1: into her dirty comb? Like I said, savage, she's that
Speaker 1: whole story. Still, I kid's scary. Yeah, she is scary. Ever,
Speaker 1: and by the way, it's true. Stuff about her being
Speaker 1: means all true. I've heard her from people in DC.
Speaker 1: I've heard it from Democrats. That's not that's not made up.
Speaker 1: But she talked about let's get back to impeachment. She
Speaker 1: talked about who should be impeached? Today or whether or
Speaker 1: it should be impeaches but she said Blake eighteen, I
Speaker 1: would support an impeachment proceeding beginning now. But I also
Speaker 1: understand that they may want to be doing investigations leading
Speaker 1: up to it, and I think they should be given
Speaker 1: the time to do that. More investigations, folks, This has
Speaker 1: now become the answer forever. Oh, but they just need
Speaker 1: they just need more investigations. That's all that has to
Speaker 1: happen here. That they didn't get enough so far, they
Speaker 1: haven't had enough time, enough harassmentsh my gosh, it's just nuts.
Speaker 1: When is it enough? I mean, that's the question that
Speaker 1: we have to be able to ask at some point,
Speaker 1: when have they had ample opportunity to go through all
Speaker 1: the information, go through all the evidence, and just make
Speaker 1: their make up their minds. It can't be both things.
Speaker 1: It can't be that Trump is the worst president in
Speaker 1: the history of the world and is so corrupt and
Speaker 1: so criminal and all these things. And they're not sure though,
Speaker 1: if they really should go through with impeachment. There's a
Speaker 1: cognitive dissonance here. There's a problem. This doesn't add up.
Speaker 1: If Trump is as terrible as they say he is,
Speaker 1: then they should have no choice but to take action
Speaker 1: against him. But they're not going to take action against
Speaker 1: him with impeachment if it's going to blow back on
Speaker 1: them politically, which means they're really not about principle at all.
Speaker 1: It's obvious from the way they're proceeding, and I've been
Speaker 1: saying along they're going to impeach just because the base
Speaker 1: is a bunch of frothy mouth maniacs who think that
Speaker 1: Trump is worse than Hitler, and he stole the election,
Speaker 1: and he's Prudent's puppet, and they've fed them this steady
Speaker 1: diet of psychotic propaganda, and now here we are. Now
Speaker 1: we've got a left wing base that's demanding impeachment, regardless
Speaker 1: of where the facts are, regardless of what it will
Speaker 1: really even mean for the Democrats prospects. They just wanted
Speaker 1: to happen. What does impeachment even do. It doesn't lead
Speaker 1: to anything. I could lead though, to a big bounce
Speaker 1: back for Trump, which is what they're also concerned about.
Speaker 1: King at the major's here in the US in the
Speaker 1: red down about two tenths, three tenths of a percent,
Speaker 1: six tenths of percent for the NASAC as we're seeing
Speaker 1: tech get hit pretty badly today. But seems that the
Speaker 1: economy in the US is too healthy for investors. Small
Speaker 1: business optimism is starring in our very blooming and big economy.
Speaker 1: And today we give you even more reason for your
Speaker 1: confidence in the future. Two years ago, in October twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: I signed an executive order to increase healthcare choice and
Speaker 1: competition all across our nation. Since that time, administration has
Speaker 1: worked tirelessly to expand options and drive down the costs
Speaker 1: of health care for the American people. This is the
Speaker 1: strongest pitch you have, I think from Trump for reelection.
Speaker 1: You're hearing it from him, from the man himself. Economy
Speaker 1: is booming. You had Bloomberg, they're reporting the US economy
Speaker 1: is quote too healthy for investors. People are now one
Speaker 1: of the issues is there there's so much prosperity and
Speaker 1: things are going so well that everyone starts saying, well
Speaker 1: that it must it's hard to believe that it will
Speaker 1: continue the way that it is, and that becomes its
Speaker 1: own dragon, the economy. Right. I meancause trying to figure
Speaker 1: out what she was saying there where the see like
Speaker 1: being like we're gonna have a crash, but this has
Speaker 1: been well. See. You do see this though with real estate,
Speaker 1: for example, in some places where real estate will just
Speaker 1: be going up and up, it up, and at some
Speaker 1: point people just go it can't keep doing this, So
Speaker 1: then they don't want to buy real estate, even though
Speaker 1: there are no indicators they can point to other then
Speaker 1: it just feels like this can't continue. Now, it is
Speaker 1: true that what comes up must come down and things
Speaker 1: won't continue on forever. And my worry and I'm we're
Speaker 1: gonna replay this if this comes down to it later,
Speaker 1: because I just have this feeling, my worry for Trump,
Speaker 1: these Democrats, it's a big clown show. Biden's not gonna
Speaker 1: be able to take them. I mean, my concern is
Speaker 1: that we get into a really bad economy, which would
Speaker 1: just be blowing off a lot of the bad debt
Speaker 1: and a lot of the there's a cyclical nature to
Speaker 1: these things, right, there's you look back and stretching for
Speaker 1: what the last fifty years. Really every ten years or so,
Speaker 1: you tend to have some kind of and we haven't
Speaker 1: really you know, well, actually we're about that, we're about
Speaker 1: that point, but we haven't had that reset yet, and
Speaker 1: it could very well come in the next year or two,
Speaker 1: especially because when people don't expect it can that can
Speaker 1: be when it's when it's the worst and everyone's trying
Speaker 1: to gauge the psychology of well, if everyone thinks that's
Speaker 1: going well, but the economy is a that is the
Speaker 1: for me, the deciding factor here for the presidency. I
Speaker 1: know we're gonna have all this coverage of these different
Speaker 1: you know, individuals who are going to run around and
Speaker 1: say that they're the best Democrat and they're the best
Speaker 1: for the job for this reason or that reason, all
Speaker 1: this horse race stuff on LA polling and everything. But
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, I just think that
Speaker 1: what do you what do we really care about? And
Speaker 1: especially in the Trump era, where we stop we've stopped this.
Speaker 1: Oh well, whoever the president is has to have a
Speaker 1: certain affect and a certain decorum all the time, and
Speaker 1: that that's obviously gone. So when you look at it,
Speaker 1: you say to yourself, Okay, well, if prescription drug prices
Speaker 1: are going down, and if healthcare is not skyrocketing at
Speaker 1: least more, that usually does. But the economy is good,
Speaker 1: unemployments low, business investment is up. She cared about that?
Speaker 1: Or you care about whether what was it in Vermont?
Speaker 1: Producer Mike that now with the state of Vermont will
Speaker 1: allow transgender surgery for children. Yes, so they are going
Speaker 1: to allow taxpayer funded transit or sex reassignment surgeries for children.
Speaker 1: Transgender sex assignment surgeries essential on your phone there in
Speaker 1: the state of Vermont. My basically, they don't have to
Speaker 1: wait until they're twenty one now, you know. So people
Speaker 1: might say to me, the you know, the opposition would
Speaker 1: say to me, Fuck, you're not a doctor. What can
Speaker 1: you know about this? Well? I can say this, There
Speaker 1: is no one doctor or no doctor who can tell
Speaker 1: you what the long term effects and implications are psychologically
Speaker 1: or physically of sex reassignment surgery for somebody who is
Speaker 1: still prepubescent. There's because it doesn't it didn't exist. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so it's a safe bet to know. Nobody knows because
Speaker 1: how could you know, because it's never been studied, it's
Speaker 1: never been done, right, But that's how And you know
Speaker 1: this is I didn't talk about this in the show.
Speaker 1: I thought about it. But there's this, uh in a
Speaker 1: Huffington Post that's been putting out all this stuff about
Speaker 1: drag kids. He's even year old. Their eleven year old
Speaker 1: you know, uh, biological males that are dressed up as
Speaker 1: in drag and doing drag shows and talking. It's man,
Speaker 1: that stuff. I wonder when it's too much, I wonder
Speaker 1: it's too much. Democrats could have a compelling pitch. They
Speaker 1: could give a real you know, they could make a
Speaker 1: real move on on the presidency. But they have to
Speaker 1: not be crazy. And I just don't know if they
Speaker 1: can do that. I don't know if Democrats can avoid
Speaker 1: being crazy. Crazy is too baked into the way they
Speaker 1: approach things. Now they have no way, they have no
Speaker 1: way of avoiding the crazy because to me it seems
Speaker 1: they really, they really are crazy. You know, we're talking
Speaker 1: about Hick and Looper later on socialism. The more normal
Speaker 1: Democrats are the ones that everyone thinks are the biggest joke,
Speaker 1: you know, the ones with the exception of Biden. But
Speaker 1: Biden is an empty suit. Biden's he's whatever they want
Speaker 1: him to be. I can't believe Deplasia Deblasio is in
Speaker 1: this right, he's de Blasi was in the mix. Now,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, this is insane. Yeah, he's insane. The Blasio
Speaker 1: is such a clown is and you know he's gonna
Speaker 1: be up there I can't believe guy's running for president.
Speaker 1: Everybody I know who works and I knows people still
Speaker 1: work with the city in New York. They all say
Speaker 1: that the real professionals that work in city government, the
Speaker 1: smart folks in city government, they all just roll their
Speaker 1: eyes at the Blasio all the time, that this guy's
Speaker 1: the mayor. But he look, he knows the system. He's
Speaker 1: like the he's like the mayor. He's like Krketti in
Speaker 1: the wire. You know, he just knows how to work
Speaker 1: the system, knows how to how to make it happen.
Speaker 1: And that's all. You don't have to be smart. You
Speaker 1: don't have to be compelling. You don't have to be
Speaker 1: honorable or ethical, or have a vision or you just
Speaker 1: got to know you know how to keep certain unions
Speaker 1: and certain constituencies on your side in the city and
Speaker 1: you'll end up winning. So when you're a Democrat, all
Speaker 1: those things you just said work in your favor. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's true. Where does a badge of honor to be
Speaker 1: those things? That is absolutely the case. By the way,
Speaker 1: that one thing we're gonna have to get is clarity
Speaker 1: on Here's another area of risk I think for Trump,
Speaker 1: which is the wall he keeps saying, we're going to
Speaker 1: have this great wall, sorry, a big wall twenty five.
Speaker 1: So the wall is going up. It's going up rapidly.
Speaker 1: We're going to have over four hundred miles of wall
Speaker 1: built by the end of next year. The wall is
Speaker 1: very important. It's hard to breach it, it's high, it's strong,
Speaker 1: it's powerful, and it's going up at a much lower
Speaker 1: cost than the wall that was planned prior to me
Speaker 1: getting there. The much better wall to we have. You
Speaker 1: have to see what they built it to disgrace. But
Speaker 1: we're going to have over four hundred miles of wall built,
Speaker 1: and that's going to be in the most important areas,
Speaker 1: and we're going to have all of it built before
Speaker 1: you know. But this is despite tremendous obstacles that have
Speaker 1: been put in front of me by the Democrats. You
Speaker 1: have no idea four hundred miles a wall. But it's
Speaker 1: upgrading existing wall, which does help. It's not enough because
Speaker 1: the wall that was there, I've seen it. It's a joke.
Speaker 1: You could walk through it. It's not really a wall.
Speaker 1: You could hop over it. The wall they're placing with
Speaker 1: is real wall. It will it's it's wall wall. It
Speaker 1: will prevent people from being able to get across in
Speaker 1: those specific areas, or at least slow them down considerably,
Speaker 1: which is very helpful for border security purposes. But but
Speaker 1: breaking new ground on totally new wall. We don't have
Speaker 1: that yet, folks. We'll have more in immigration with Chief
Speaker 1: Hastings a border patrol later on this hour. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: This is a really fun column from my friend Charles
Speaker 1: cook Over at National Review. You know, Charles has been
Speaker 1: on the show many many times, and I always enjoy
Speaker 1: I enjoyed Charles is writing, and I think he's he's
Speaker 1: a fun guy to talk to you. And this is
Speaker 1: I usually wouldn't give you as much of someone's column
Speaker 1: on air as this, but it's pretty short, so with
Speaker 1: with of course, this is all attributable to the one
Speaker 1: and only Charles CW. Cook Over at Nashal Review dot
Speaker 1: com in the corner, which is so this isn't even
Speaker 1: a full editorial, but it's the worst advice column ever written.
Speaker 1: You gotta think yourself. That's that's quite a statement. The
Speaker 1: worst advice column ever written him? And how bad can
Speaker 1: this really be? Well, here we go. From Live Well
Speaker 1: Nebraska comes the most amusingly hysterical and extraordinarily ignorant advice column.
Speaker 1: I this is Charles Cook speaking have read in a
Speaker 1: long while. It consists of a question posed by a
Speaker 1: man writing as dumbfounded Father, a quote, and a response
Speaker 1: offered by syndicated columnist Amy Dickinson. At no point in
Speaker 1: the exchange does either person range within a country mile
Speaker 1: of reality? Have you seen this producer, Mike, By the way,
Speaker 1: this columns, I'm gonna this columns amazing. So this is
Speaker 1: an advice column, a real one that was published in
Speaker 1: a real place. Dumbfounded father, you know, begins his question
Speaker 1: as such, Dear Amy, Amy's the advice columnist. This week,
Speaker 1: I discovered that my intelligent, hard working, responsible, twenty four
Speaker 1: year old daughter who lives with me is a gun owner.
Speaker 1: Charles breaks this down. What exactly is the purpose of
Speaker 1: this description of his daughter is the implication that an intelligent,
Speaker 1: hard working and responsible person should not own a gun?
Speaker 1: Would the purchase be more understandable if it had been
Speaker 1: made by a stupid, lazy and reckless person. Is it
Speaker 1: that women should not own guns? Long live the patriarchy?
Speaker 1: Or should gun owners be older? Perhaps he doesn't say.
Speaker 1: It gets worse from there quote, and it's not a
Speaker 1: normal gun either. It's a forty caliber semi automatic, and
Speaker 1: she has hollow point bullets to go with it. It
Speaker 1: is difficult to think of a more normal gun, Charles writes,
Speaker 1: than a forty caliber semi automatic pistol. If there is
Speaker 1: such a thing as a normal gun in American life,
Speaker 1: it is this one. Likewise, there's nothing especially scary about
Speaker 1: hollow point bullets. More on which later the dumbfounded father
Speaker 1: continues Amy this is the kind of weapon a criminal
Speaker 1: would possess. She says, it is for emergencies. There have
Speaker 1: only been two home invasions in our neighborhood in the
Speaker 1: last eleven years. Charles writes, a forty caliber semi automatic
Speaker 1: is in no way the kind of weapon a criminal
Speaker 1: would possess. Hell, what does that even mean. Millions of
Speaker 1: Americans possess forty caliber semi automatic pistols, tens of millions
Speaker 1: possessed near identical handguns in nine millimeter three five seven
Speaker 1: forty five ACP, among others. There's nothing remotely quote criminal
Speaker 1: about those guns or about the people who own them.
Speaker 1: As for his she says it is for emergencies. Part
Speaker 1: if that's what she says, then why not believe her?
Speaker 1: She's an adult, isn't she? Oh, But the dumbfounded father
Speaker 1: goes on quote, I've given her three choices. She can
Speaker 1: either give her weapon to me, sell it, or move
Speaker 1: out in three weeks. Wow. Charles takes this on give
Speaker 1: the weapon to me as an odd thing to write,
Speaker 1: after writing this is the kind of weapon a criminal
Speaker 1: would possess, as is for that matter, to sell it
Speaker 1: to someone to whom a criminal, because it's the kind
Speaker 1: of weapon a criminal would possess. But the move out
Speaker 1: in three weeks part takes the cake given that dumbfounded
Speaker 1: father follows it up with the following I love my
Speaker 1: daughter and will be so sad for her to move
Speaker 1: into a place that she would hardly be able to afford. Thus,
Speaker 1: the position is, my daughter has bought a gun for emergencies.
Speaker 1: This is irrational because we live in a safe area
Speaker 1: that has hosted only two home invasions in the past decade.
Speaker 1: In consequence, I will force her to live in a
Speaker 1: place that is more dangerous. But then dumbfounded question goes
Speaker 1: fully off the rails. This is what his dad about?
Speaker 1: I mean? Charles's look, stepping away from Charles's cuse, this
Speaker 1: is just so fun that he's written this the National Review.
Speaker 1: I think he's saying this is obviously a fake. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's like a plant. No one is so dumb as
Speaker 1: to write this column. It's not. I don't think it's possible.
Speaker 1: Maybe it is. There's a lot of dumb people out there.
Speaker 1: Dumb and he's dumbfounded, is what he calls himself. So
Speaker 1: and this guy found dumb, for sure, but I think
Speaker 1: he found himself. Quote. This is what the father says
Speaker 1: about his daughter, who legally owns and he says, is responsible,
Speaker 1: an adult, and legally owns a forty Caliberhangen. He writes, quote,
Speaker 1: but now I have to lock my bedroom door at
Speaker 1: night because I don't know what she's going to do.
Speaker 1: Edit to quote, Charles writes, has there ever been a
Speaker 1: better illustration of the weird act that owning a firearm
Speaker 1: turns even intelligent, hard working, responsible people into murderous psychopaths.
Speaker 1: The questioner here is talking about his own daughter. He
Speaker 1: doesn't know what she's going to do. He has to
Speaker 1: lock his bedroom door at night. Good lord, dumbfounded father concludes,
Speaker 1: Now she says that I don't trust her and is
Speaker 1: barely speaking to me. How could I convince her to
Speaker 1: stop in endangering us? Amy's response, Now we're at the
Speaker 1: advice columnist, which could have been common, rational and tethered
Speaker 1: to reality, Charles writes, is arguably even worse. She writes,
Speaker 1: according to my research, possessing hollow point bullets is illegal
Speaker 1: in eleven states. Is it illegal in your state to
Speaker 1: own this sort of exploding ammunition? So let's just step
Speaker 1: away for a second. The advice columnists here is basically like, hey, dad,
Speaker 1: who is clearly a lunatic and needs to be told
Speaker 1: to calm down? Can you actually call the cops on
Speaker 1: your daughter and get her sent to prison? Because maybe
Speaker 1: that's the best way to repair your relationship, Right, Rucer, Mike,
Speaker 1: you would be a better advice columnist than Amy. Oh,
Speaker 1: no doubt, that's for sure. Here's what Charles writes. It's
Speaker 1: remarkable enough that a sentence that begins, according to my research,
Speaker 1: finishes with the characters of hollow point bullets as exploding ammunition.
Speaker 1: Hollow point bullets are not exploding ammunition. They are normal
Speaker 1: bullets designed to expand on impact, which does more damage
Speaker 1: to the target and provides extra stopping to power, but
Speaker 1: also makes them less likely to pass through walls or
Speaker 1: cause collateral damage. As for the is it legal in
Speaker 1: your state to own this sort of exploding ammunition question?
Speaker 1: Does Amy also believe that Dumbfounded's daughter is examining criminal tendencies?
Speaker 1: It's hard to see any other implication. If it is
Speaker 1: not legal to own hollow point bullets, his daughter must
Speaker 1: have a left or state, b bought the ammunition in
Speaker 1: another state, and c returned to her state and violation
Speaker 1: of the law. Does that sound likely or is it
Speaker 1: more likely she was told by the guy in the
Speaker 1: gun store that hollow points are recommended for home defense.
Speaker 1: This is this is amazing. Oh, it goes on. By
Speaker 1: the way, I'm not done here. I mean, Charles found it.
Speaker 1: He's remember this National Review, Charles Cook. He's found a
Speaker 1: real gem. The advice commist goes on. She she randomly
Speaker 1: googled some statistics and then had more insinuation. Quote in
Speaker 1: a report published in twenty fifteen. This is from the
Speaker 1: advice columist Folks. Folks. Researchers at the University of Chicago
Speaker 1: found that thirty one percent of households reported having a
Speaker 1: firearm in twenty fourteen. Down from about forty eight percent
Speaker 1: of nineteen eighty. According to this study, there are more guns,
Speaker 1: but concentrated in fewer households. Why must your household be
Speaker 1: one of them? Where did your daughter get this weapon
Speaker 1: and ammunition? Has she received any safety training or certification?
Speaker 1: Accidental gun death is a substantial risk of owning a gun.
Speaker 1: Is she perhaps engage in another activity outside of her
Speaker 1: household that exposes her to increase risks and makes her
Speaker 1: believe she needs a weapon? I mean, like the advice
Speaker 1: columist is basically like, I mean, is she running some
Speaker 1: drugs on the side. You know, she's a little little
Speaker 1: Pablita Escobar stuff going on here because she owns a
Speaker 1: forty caliber And man, I think this is one hundred
Speaker 1: percent real. You know what. I've gone further, and I
Speaker 1: think this is like the effects of what our liberal
Speaker 1: media has done to everyday people. This is a crazy
Speaker 1: lib Yeah, I think you're right. I was. I wanted
Speaker 1: to believe that it couldn't be real, But now I
Speaker 1: think it is real. I think it is. I think
Speaker 1: it is so. And that way. Then the last thing
Speaker 1: from the advice commis I have news for you. A
Speaker 1: locked bedroom doors No match for this weaponry. As I
Speaker 1: write this, just five days ago, a father in South
Speaker 1: Carolina tragically shot and killed his own twenty three year
Speaker 1: old daughter through a closed door. He mistook her for intruder. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a sad story. But uh, the likelihood of him
Speaker 1: shooting his daughter through a closed doors very very very small.
Speaker 1: Um Man, you know this is due My theory is
Speaker 1: always that people the debate is over guns, but it's
Speaker 1: really around how people don't like gun owners. And this
Speaker 1: is a perfect example of this. There is a a
Speaker 1: a kind of vitriolic, visceral spising of gun owner that
Speaker 1: comes through and this entire advice comment from his dad too.
Speaker 1: Absolutely millions and millions and millions of people on guns
Speaker 1: all across this country. Producer Mike has a rifle on
Speaker 1: his forehead right now. The anti gun folks are nuts. Team,
Speaker 1: just letting you know they are nuts. They this drives
Speaker 1: them into a panic. And this column's fantastic. Thanks to
Speaker 1: hat tip to a big hat tip to Charles Cook
Speaker 1: over a National Review for finding this and pulling it apart.
Speaker 1: It was it was good stuff. You are now entering
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hot Title Operation Center. All of the programs,
Speaker 1: Monkey caps strictly need to know Team Buck is cleared
Speaker 1: and ready for the Buck brief. Well, Iron did do it,
Speaker 1: and you know they did it because you saw the boat.
Speaker 1: I guess one of the mines didn't explode, and it's
Speaker 1: probably got essentially a run written all over it. And
Speaker 1: you saw the boat at night trying to take the
Speaker 1: mine off and successfully took the mine off the boat
Speaker 1: and that was exposed, and that was the boat that
Speaker 1: was them. Bottom line, as it shows a desire about
Speaker 1: Ran to be more provocative, not less. I would applaud
Speaker 1: administration for calling them out, and we need to put
Speaker 1: more pressure, not less. Get they actually did this. This
Speaker 1: would be a major provocation that should be answered with
Speaker 1: a major response. You know, there were media outlets that
Speaker 1: were running with this essentially a version of without evidence.
Speaker 1: I mean you had CNN tweeting out last night US
Speaker 1: Secretary of State Bike Pompeo blamed Iran for an attack
Speaker 1: on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman, and I
Speaker 1: mean this is just classic saying the assessment was based
Speaker 1: on intelligence but offering no evidence for his claim. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm all okay with journalists being skeptical of things and
Speaker 1: getting answers and just the facts that all this stuff.
Speaker 1: But does anyone really think does anyone really believe for
Speaker 1: a second that this kind of in your face obvious
Speaker 1: undermining skepticism would be put forward by a major news
Speaker 1: organization about a Democrat administration's Secretary of State. Do you
Speaker 1: think they ever would have run a story about the
Speaker 1: Secretary Clinton claims without evidence that the attack on a
Speaker 1: US or Allied facility was in fact terrorists. Now this
Speaker 1: is not to say that they shouldn't fact check and
Speaker 1: look into it, and but it's just this is the headline. Remember,
Speaker 1: if you question Bob Muller or Jim Comey, the media
Speaker 1: thinks that you're undermining our core institutions, putting on democracy
Speaker 1: at risk. But if you slip in an offer no
Speaker 1: evidence line to undermine the Secretary of State's assessment after
Speaker 1: an Iranian attack on an oil tanker, well then you
Speaker 1: work for CNN. I just had an exchange with my
Speaker 1: friend Jonathan Schanzer from the Foundation for Defense and Democracies,
Speaker 1: and I just said, to a man, you know, it's
Speaker 1: it's it's pretty stunning how when you're overseas and you
Speaker 1: see how seeing an international presents America the rest of
Speaker 1: the world. It's anti American propaganda. I can't I would
Speaker 1: not be comfortable working or seeing an international given the
Speaker 1: way that it shows America. I think that that's a problem.
Speaker 1: But saying things about Mike Pompeo that make it see
Speaker 1: him like he must be some kind of liar, that's
Speaker 1: that shouldn't surprise any of us. They will take any
Speaker 1: opportunity to trash this administration and even who works with
Speaker 1: this administration. This is just their approach. This is what
Speaker 1: Pompeo had to say about why the Iranians were behind
Speaker 1: this play seven. Iran is lashing out because the regime
Speaker 1: wants our successful maximum pressure campaign lifted no economic sanctions
Speaker 1: entitled the Islamic Republic to attack innocent civilians, disrupt global
Speaker 1: oil markets, and engage in nuclear blackmail. The international community
Speaker 1: condemns Iran's assault on the freedom of navigation and the
Speaker 1: targeting of innocent civilians. Our policy remains an economic and
Speaker 1: diplomatic effort to bring a round back to the negotiating
Speaker 1: table at the right time to encourage a comprehensive deal
Speaker 1: that addresses the broad range of threats. Threats today apparent
Speaker 1: for all the world to see to peace and security.
Speaker 1: Is there anything objectionable about this? Does anyone really think
Speaker 1: that Mike Pompeo is doing something other than trying to
Speaker 1: promote US and allied national security interests in this part
Speaker 1: of the in this part of the world. Well, the
Speaker 1: answer is that there are journalists who clearly think that
Speaker 1: there's something up here, there's some dishonesty at work. They
Speaker 1: will not, they do not take this Secretary of State
Speaker 1: at his word, even when the other side of the
Speaker 1: table is Iran. Until last night, you know, I was
Speaker 1: on Fox News last night. We're talking about this issue.
Speaker 1: Until last night when you had it's amazing video released
Speaker 1: video of Iran removing a limpit mine from an unexploded
Speaker 1: limpit limpit mine from a tanker in the Gulf of Aman.
Speaker 1: So we have video of the Iranians putting a essentially
Speaker 1: a fast mover fast boat right up against the was
Speaker 1: the Kokuru Courageous and the front Altai Year. Those are
Speaker 1: the two tankers that were at t act two explosions
Speaker 1: up alongside them. And we've got video video of the
Speaker 1: Iranians doing this. But they wouldn't they wouldn't wait, they
Speaker 1: wouldn't allow the administration even present anything before this are
Speaker 1: saying without evidence, without evidence, Trump and his administration is
Speaker 1: saying all this stuff. Wow, it's quite a thing when
Speaker 1: you have overpaid and pampered US journalists who would rather
Speaker 1: believe the Iranian government propaganda that the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: lying about this attack, then they would believe the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: And those who will say I saw some of this
Speaker 1: today too. Oh, but Trump lies, But listen that andre's
Speaker 1: all these lies. No. Trump exaggerates, engages in hyperbole and
Speaker 1: in his fights with the media, Yet sometimes he is
Speaker 1: untruthful as a means of trying to fight back against
Speaker 1: the media, but on important issues that affect the American people.
Speaker 1: If you asked me, if you said right now, buck,
Speaker 1: I will give you ten thousand dollars, which it's like
Speaker 1: two months rent in a studio apartment of New York
Speaker 1: City now. But if you like, I give you ten
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. I know market's depressing, isn't it. It's crazy, dude,
Speaker 1: The city's wild, very much. So yeah, ten thousand dollars
Speaker 1: if you could tell me a major lie about an
Speaker 1: important policy issue that Trump has has told not a
Speaker 1: difference of opinion I wouldn't be able to come up
Speaker 1: with one. And when you start taking Trump's FIBs from
Speaker 1: SMS directions, Trump's issues with the truth on minor things,
Speaker 1: and you start expanding that out to well, now we
Speaker 1: can't trust them when they say the Iranians are attacking
Speaker 1: an oil tanker. Sorry, this is a this is a
Speaker 1: stage of Trump's arrangement syndrome. This is not normal, this
Speaker 1: is not acceptable, This is not something that we should
Speaker 1: let pass. That journalists had to be really convinced, you
Speaker 1: know that that this wasn't a false flag or something.
Speaker 1: Who else is going to be attacking an oil vessel
Speaker 1: an oil tanker in the Gulf of Alman if not
Speaker 1: the Iranians, And there's no one else that even makes sense.
Speaker 1: And the administration knows that this is going to be questioned.
Speaker 1: They know that if they got this wrong, the stakes
Speaker 1: are very very high. But you just would not that
Speaker 1: the they'll hide behind and say, oh, our skepticism is
Speaker 1: just because we want the facts. But we know that
Speaker 1: they would never have had this kind of skepticism, and
Speaker 1: an with the Obama administration never it never would have happened,
Speaker 1: absolutely never would have happened. So I'll like Trump just
Speaker 1: quick update here on what's going on with China. Trump
Speaker 1: is saying that things are still looking like they're gonna
Speaker 1: He's confident there'll be some kind of deal. I don't
Speaker 1: think it's gonna happen till after Trump's reelection, which I
Speaker 1: am China, there we go, I am confident in Here's
Speaker 1: what the Trump's are saying about China and how we're
Speaker 1: doing with all this play clip for please. We expect
Speaker 1: to have a meeting with President she. We're doing very
Speaker 1: well with respect to China. We're taking in billions and
Speaker 1: billions of dollars which we never took in before. The
Speaker 1: tariffs are being very strong. We have twenty five percent
Speaker 1: of two hundred and fifty billion dollars, and tremendous money
Speaker 1: is flowing into our treasury. China is subsidizing those companies,
Speaker 1: so our people are not paying for it. If you look,
Speaker 1: our people are not paying for it. China is subsidizing
Speaker 1: those companies so that people continue to work. Now, the
Speaker 1: problem for China is that a lot of companies are
Speaker 1: leaving China because they don't want to pay the tariffs.
Speaker 1: But we're doing very well. We'll see what happens here.
Speaker 1: But Trump is sticking to his guns on the China
Speaker 1: trade fight, and he seems very confident in this. Still,
Speaker 1: our economy is still very strong, as we know, So
Speaker 1: let's see if Trump's able to pull this pull this
Speaker 1: one off. But on a ram, We're not going to
Speaker 1: war with Iran. Don't listen all the media that they're
Speaker 1: hyperventilating about it because it allows them to bash drump
Speaker 1: drumps are warmonger. No, he's not. Obama was. The timing
Speaker 1: is immediate. We are out of money. We will not
Speaker 1: have the money to continue to run this program where
Speaker 1: we take care of children, children who come into this
Speaker 1: country by themselves illegally, they're given to us to care
Speaker 1: for them. By the end of this month or early
Speaker 1: next month, we will have no money, and we've already
Speaker 1: had to take drastic measures to protect their life and
Speaker 1: safety with what little money we have left. This isn't
Speaker 1: about politics. This is about life and safety. It's a
Speaker 1: humanitarian crisis. We are seeing double the number of kids
Speaker 1: coming into this country by themselves. We've already had as
Speaker 1: many kids come to our care as did the entire
Speaker 1: previous year. And Congress simply has to Act. There's not
Speaker 1: a choice because what happens if we don't get this
Speaker 1: money immediately is we go into what's effectively a government
Speaker 1: shutdown where we have to run these facilities on an io.
Speaker 1: We are already functionally out of capacity. Kids are backing
Speaker 1: up at the border because Congress isn't acting. That's Alex
Speaker 1: Asar of HHS. He's a secretary. He's saying that they're
Speaker 1: just running out of money now. I mean, the crisis
Speaker 1: has gone beyond just the numbers that are turning up
Speaker 1: at the board of the individuals. Now, the resources that
Speaker 1: are being deployed are running very, very low. We want
Speaker 1: to bring somebody on who can speak to just exactly
Speaker 1: what's happening now and what they're seeing. We have Brian Hastings, Chief,
Speaker 1: Brian Hastings of US Border Patrol with US right now. Chief.
Speaker 1: We appreciate you making the time. Hey, thanks for having
Speaker 1: me on BUD First, What is going on now? I mean,
Speaker 1: give me give me kind of a view of what's
Speaker 1: happening on the ground for last thirty or so days. Oh,
Speaker 1: happy to so. We're unfortunately seeing we're seeing Bordertrol breaking
Speaker 1: records and those aren't records that we want to break.
Speaker 1: We've seen six hundred and forty two thousand arrest so
Speaker 1: far this year. That's higher than any fiscal year that
Speaker 1: we've had for the last ten years. Like I said,
Speaker 1: breaking records, and almost everything we have seen May arrest.
Speaker 1: We're one hundred and thirty two thousand. We saw daily
Speaker 1: averages or average arrest during May was four thousand, two
Speaker 1: hundred and eighty six. And we saw large groups and
Speaker 1: we've never frankly never seen before. We had six days
Speaker 1: in May that we're over five thousand apprehensions. We had
Speaker 1: multiple numbers of large groups. As I said, forty eight
Speaker 1: large groups just in May alone. So so far this
Speaker 1: fiscal year, we've had over one hundred and ninety two
Speaker 1: large groups. We classify those large groups as a group
Speaker 1: over one hundred. We had a day March twenty nine,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, May twenty ninth, two nineteen, where we actually
Speaker 1: apprehended a group of one thousand and forty five individuals.
Speaker 1: So we are seeing our numbers of those that were
Speaker 1: encountering primarily family units and unaccompanied alien children, dramatically increase
Speaker 1: from day to day, and those records are not records
Speaker 1: we want to be breaking. How are you doing on
Speaker 1: the resource side. You had HHS Secretary Asar saying that
Speaker 1: unless Congress gives funding, they're going to be running short
Speaker 1: and what will that mean specifically for border patrol operations.
Speaker 1: So we have already seen that hit us hard in
Speaker 1: that we we haven't seen a flow like this, and
Speaker 1: especially a demographic like this, where historically we had primarily
Speaker 1: single adults from contiguous Mexico who we could repatriat very quickly.
Speaker 1: Now we have a new demographic of single adults and
Speaker 1: family units, which which make up about sixty five percent
Speaker 1: of our apprehensions right now, who essentially we have nothing
Speaker 1: no consequence that we can apply under floras in TVPR,
Speaker 1: which means we depend heavily on our partners with both
Speaker 1: Health and Human Service Office, a Refugee Resettlement and ro
Speaker 1: ICE to pick up those aliens and transport them from
Speaker 1: our facilities. Now they are not funded properly to do that.
Speaker 1: They don't have the betspace and the funding to do that.
Speaker 1: So our capacity numbers those individuals that we have in
Speaker 1: our short term detention. We've been forced to have them
Speaker 1: in our custody a lot longer than we should have them.
Speaker 1: We're supposed to be short term detention facilities, but due
Speaker 1: to the number, the sheer volume, and the lack of
Speaker 1: betspace for those individuals to be able to move them
Speaker 1: out of our custody, we don't have that, so we're
Speaker 1: stuck holding them a lot longer than we should be,
Speaker 1: which has led us to increase our medical contracts. We
Speaker 1: have dramatically increased our medical screening and our contract capabilities
Speaker 1: across the southwest border. We've had to increase our transportation
Speaker 1: contracts just so we can transport those individuals and high
Speaker 1: volume and those large groups that I spoke to back
Speaker 1: to our stations for processing. And then in addition to
Speaker 1: all that, just the sheer volume of consumables, feeding and
Speaker 1: caring for those individuals who are in our custody. We
Speaker 1: have eaten into a lot of our own operational money
Speaker 1: to do that, and we are in bad need, as
Speaker 1: Secret Secretary Azar said, we're in bad need of additional
Speaker 1: funding now in order to care for the humanitarian crisis
Speaker 1: that we have. Chief pacings, how is this affecting the
Speaker 1: core mission of order patrol on the national security side,
Speaker 1: dealing with the cartels, preventing legal alien smuggling and other
Speaker 1: other bad actors, gang members, cartel assassins, traffickers. What does
Speaker 1: this mean for all those mission set so that that unfortunately,
Speaker 1: we realize that the humanitarian mission is a very important one,
Speaker 1: and our agents risk their lives daily saving those who
Speaker 1: put themselves in a bad situation or who are put
Speaker 1: in a bad situation by smug However, when you're dedicating
Speaker 1: forty to sixty percent of your manpower from the border
Speaker 1: security mission, you're pulling them just to do the transportation,
Speaker 1: the detention, the processing, care and feeding for these individuals.
Speaker 1: Something has to give, and that's border security. Unfortunately, So
Speaker 1: while we're tied up dealing with these large amounts of
Speaker 1: family units and unaccompanied children, there are parts of the
Speaker 1: border that are wide open. We have shut down checkpoints
Speaker 1: in certain locations. We've also shut down or canceled training
Speaker 1: for our agents. We've canceled leave for our agents, annual
Speaker 1: leave and the ability to just take some time off training,
Speaker 1: as I said, and then we've pulled agents off of
Speaker 1: task forces with valuable partners who we get information and
Speaker 1: intelligence from. So all of these things come at a
Speaker 1: very large cost. Not to mention, we're sending on average
Speaker 1: about seventy six individuals that we detain in the secondary
Speaker 1: medical care per day, so that's basically to a hospital
Speaker 1: or a clinic, and with that comes the necessity to
Speaker 1: send an agent with them too, since they're in our
Speaker 1: custody to basically care and watch over them, which is
Speaker 1: also that again pulls more agents from the Border Security Mission.
Speaker 1: Chief Hastings of US Border Patrol Chief, please keep doing
Speaker 1: what you're doing, man, and let us know if we
Speaker 1: can help get the word out some more. You guys
Speaker 1: have got your hands full and then some appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Bout Thank you, all right, team, We'll be back right
Speaker 1: after this break. This has been the honor of a lifetime,
Speaker 1: the opportunity of a lifetime. I couldn't be prouder to
Speaker 1: have had the opportunity to serve my country, and particularly
Speaker 1: to work for this president. He has accomplished so much
Speaker 1: in these two and a half years, and it's truly
Speaker 1: been something I will treasure forever. It's one of the
Speaker 1: greatest jobs I could ever have. I've loved every minute,
Speaker 1: even the hard minutes, I have loved it. I loved
Speaker 1: the President that I love the team that I've had
Speaker 1: the opportunity to work for the presidents, surrounded by some
Speaker 1: of the most incredible and most talented people you could
Speaker 1: ever imagine, And it's truly the most special experience. The
Speaker 1: only one I can think of that might top it
Speaker 1: just a little bit is the fact that I'm a mom.
Speaker 1: I have three amazing kids, and I'm going to spend
Speaker 1: a little more time with them. Sarah Hugabe Sanders getting
Speaker 1: a little emotional. Man has been quite as called it
Speaker 1: quite a ride, probably dramatically understates it, but it has
Speaker 1: been quite an experience to be sure, to have been
Speaker 1: in the role of White House Press secretary, and she's
Speaker 1: been with Trump. Do you see all the people who
Speaker 1: were jumping all over trum because he said three and
Speaker 1: a half years, like, oh, Trump can't do math? These
Speaker 1: were journalists. I mean, I know there's only so many
Speaker 1: times in you to say that journalists so many of
Speaker 1: them are morons. But yes, she has been with Trump
Speaker 1: for three and a half years because she started during
Speaker 1: the campaign. Full so when he says thank you for
Speaker 1: three and a half years, it's not that Trump can't count,
Speaker 1: it's a journals are morons. Did you see this was
Speaker 1: a thing yesterday? Yeah, people were calling him out o.
Speaker 1: Trump can't count. And if he did it the other way,
Speaker 1: they would have said, well, he's been with you three
Speaker 1: and a half years because she started with you back correct,
Speaker 1: either way it goes. They just the hatred for Trump
Speaker 1: is so is so bizarre, it really is. It's just
Speaker 1: it's just out of control. Um, that's that's every day.
Speaker 1: We can say on the show. If they just they
Speaker 1: don't even care, it doesn't even matter anyway. Trump's had
Speaker 1: some nice words to say about Sarah. We're gonna talk
Speaker 1: a little about this press secretary job because I got
Speaker 1: an idea. I know, I know a guy who's got
Speaker 1: a little more time on his hands. But we'll get
Speaker 1: to that in a second. Here's what the President had
Speaker 1: to say about the work, ethic, and skills of Sarah
Speaker 1: Huckabee Sanders. Play clip two. A friend, a woman, a great, great,
Speaker 1: magnificent person actually named Sarah Huckabee Sanders. And she's very proper.
Speaker 1: She's done an incredible job. But we've been through a
Speaker 1: lot together. And she's tough, but she's good. You know,
Speaker 1: you also have tough and bad, right, She's tough and
Speaker 1: she's good. She's great, and she's going to be leaving
Speaker 1: the service of her country, and she is going to
Speaker 1: be going I guess you could say private sector. She
Speaker 1: is a special person, a very very fine woman. She
Speaker 1: has been so great. She has such heart. She's strong
Speaker 1: but with great great heart. And I want to thank
Speaker 1: you for an outstanding job and thank you, come, thank
Speaker 1: you heart. I gotta say she she was better in
Speaker 1: this role than I would have thought at the beginning.
Speaker 1: I thought she really kind of grew into it and
Speaker 1: stepped up her game. And that was I'm sure in
Speaker 1: some at some level, a trial by fire situation where
Speaker 1: she just was thrown to the thrown to the wolves
Speaker 1: and realized it was going to be her or the wolves.
Speaker 1: So she got real, real, real fiery when she had to.
Speaker 1: I think she did a very good job. I think
Speaker 1: she was a very competent member of the administration, and
Speaker 1: also with someone who was among the most I mean
Speaker 1: I right now, they hate bar the most because Bar
Speaker 1: is going to be probleised for them. They know that
Speaker 1: they hate Bar the most, which is not it's not
Speaker 1: that Bar is dumb or you know that all these
Speaker 1: things that they'd like to say about Republicans. He's just
Speaker 1: a threat to their whole narrative, and they know that
Speaker 1: that Inspector General report whenever it comes out, could be
Speaker 1: a real problem for them. So that's why bar is
Speaker 1: just getting in their way and makes them upset and
Speaker 1: all this other stuff. But how could be? Sanders was
Speaker 1: probably the top five of for the media certainly hated
Speaker 1: Trump figures. I mean they really really despised her in
Speaker 1: a way that was it was so unnecessary. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, well, what did she really do? Exactly? They said, oh,
Speaker 1: you know that she lied about this or that, And
Speaker 1: I say, what's the big lie that she told that
Speaker 1: was so important or so upsetting to have to hear
Speaker 1: or deal with? And then oh, but you know, they
Speaker 1: start mumbling about something. They have no idea exactly what
Speaker 1: the lie was, but they know that there's lies. They say.
Speaker 1: That's what they'll always say. Oh, here everything, my word
Speaker 1: for it. CNN. I didn't realize April Ryan is a CNN.
Speaker 1: Now that's perfect, It makes perfect. It's dude. Hashtag resistance.
Speaker 1: It's a real industry. If you if you turn hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance and you get enough attention and you can get
Speaker 1: it enough battles to presidents, CNN will put you on air.
Speaker 1: No matter how generally worthless or political analysis and reporting
Speaker 1: maybe on any one issue. April Ryan. Yeah, and also,
Speaker 1: let's step back from usually you think there's always a
Speaker 1: little bit of a combative. You know, we had Smarmie
Speaker 1: Smurf Jay Carney back in the day. You know, there's
Speaker 1: always a little bit of a when there's an administration
Speaker 1: that is not on your is not your team, or
Speaker 1: is not your political party, there's going to be a
Speaker 1: slightly contentious relationship with the press. But you would think
Speaker 1: that once the Press secretary steps down in a normal time,
Speaker 1: in normal circumstances, you would have some some like, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, we wish you well on the way out. No. No,
Speaker 1: not with the Trump administration, not with the journalists that
Speaker 1: have been surrounding Trump this whole time, and all the
Speaker 1: people that are trying to work for him and do
Speaker 1: what they can for the country. Here's what April Ryan,
Speaker 1: here's the magnanimity, the decency and kindness that April Ryan
Speaker 1: is able to summon. For Sarah huckeby Sanders Departure Play three, Aaron,
Speaker 1: she did the right thing. She did the right thing.
Speaker 1: She should have done the right thing a long time ago.
Speaker 1: The reason why I say that is because she suffers
Speaker 1: from liabetes, and her tenure has been fraught with sex,
Speaker 1: lies and videotape from the moment she stepped into that position.
Speaker 1: There were lies from that podium, from her mouth about
Speaker 1: the videotape grabbed by the p word with the tic tac.
Speaker 1: Then she's lied, lied, livelight live, and then the video,
Speaker 1: that propaganda video that she put out about our own
Speaker 1: gym Acosta, you know, saying that he hit someone when
Speaker 1: he indeed didn't to take his badge from him, and
Speaker 1: he ultimately got it back after court rulings in a
Speaker 1: big fight. But basically, when Sarah Huckaby had no ground
Speaker 1: to stand on, she would make personal attacks. There were
Speaker 1: many times that she would leave after twelve minutes of
Speaker 1: doing a briefing because she could not face the heat.
Speaker 1: That's right, White House Press Corps can't help himself, just
Speaker 1: want to want to trash Sarah Huckabe centers. If if
Speaker 1: you're a Democrat, if you're part of hashtag resistance media,
Speaker 1: you view all opera, you all chances to trash anyone
Speaker 1: associated with Trump as too valuable to pass up, as
Speaker 1: too valuable to agg nor. And so here we are here,
Speaker 1: we are folks, and then you get people saying, well, Buck,
Speaker 1: you know, I know somebody who might be pretty good
Speaker 1: at this job. He's got fine swoop of hair, he
Speaker 1: is fast on his feet, he's got breadth of knowledge.
Speaker 1: Apparently quite a ladies man. Thank you, Buck. That's right,
Speaker 1: Producer Mike, everybody, you know. I was actually gonna go
Speaker 1: with Hogan Gidley, but we'll go with producer Michael. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Hogan Gidley is the one that everyone's talking about right now.
Speaker 1: He's he's a he's a a snappy dresser, to be sure,
Speaker 1: Heather now would be would be great? Um that that
Speaker 1: would be another another one that I would think would
Speaker 1: be very much in the at the top of the list.
Speaker 1: You'd been Steve Cortez too, from CNN. Yeah, is that
Speaker 1: name really? You know? I saw, you know, he's a
Speaker 1: big dude. He played football at g Town. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: saw him. We were hanging out the Trump Hotel. He's
Speaker 1: he's a big dude, and I asked him. I said, due,
Speaker 1: you must have played football, because you don't look like
Speaker 1: when he's like wikipedia, you know, he's like a big
Speaker 1: dead He's Oh yeah, I played football at George John Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I was like, wow, Steve Cortez giving me a
Speaker 1: ticket to the gun show. Yeah, yeah, that's right. I
Speaker 1: was like, which ways the beach, Steve. He wouldn't flex
Speaker 1: from me though, but yeah, his name's in the mix, Heather.
Speaker 1: Now we're Hogan Gidley, my man, Pete heg Seth. His
Speaker 1: name has been floating around a little bit too. You know,
Speaker 1: it's this is all the the intrigue. It's fun because
Speaker 1: everyone can just say, oh, I heard a rumor, and
Speaker 1: we're all here in rumors. But I don't I don't
Speaker 1: know who it's really gonna If I had to put
Speaker 1: money on, I'd probably would probably be Hogan Gidley. I mean,
Speaker 1: the guy's already there, but Hogan or Heather or not.
Speaker 1: I don't even know who. Melani has spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham might.
Speaker 1: I've never seen her before, heard of her, but today
Speaker 1: she's Fox has her at the very top the list
Speaker 1: of possible contenders. You know, it would be amazing, though,
Speaker 1: if Trump just decided to be his own press secretary,
Speaker 1: If he just showed up and he was like, oh right,
Speaker 1: what have you got for me today? You know, and
Speaker 1: he just like was the guy, but that might melt
Speaker 1: too many literally you would watch. It would be like
Speaker 1: the end of Indiana Jones and the what's the first one?
Speaker 1: Not the not the Temple of Doom, not the Lost
Speaker 1: Last Crusade, Arc of the Covernant? Right, yeah, well, what's
Speaker 1: the first Indiana Jones movie called Raiders of Lost? Raiders
Speaker 1: of the Lost Art, thank you, Raiders Lost start. It'd
Speaker 1: be like that when the Nazi faces melt, except it
Speaker 1: would be the journo faces would all like they'd all
Speaker 1: melt if Trump did his own press conferences at the
Speaker 1: end and those you are asking me, No, I'm not,
Speaker 1: you know, and it's just it's not. It's not my thing.
Speaker 1: It's not my thing. I'm not a Yeah, yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna I'm not gonna say I haven't offered the job.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna say i'm not because i haven't been
Speaker 1: offered the job. But I'm not gonna say i'm not
Speaker 1: so or i am maybe who knows, but it's not
Speaker 1: really I'm I'm not. I'm not a swamp creature. Man.
Speaker 1: You gotta really embrace this stinky, methane filled gator swimming
Speaker 1: swampiness of DC. If you're gonna work work with the
Speaker 1: press like that day in a day out. I mean,
Speaker 1: you've gotta be a warrior. You gotta be a warrior
Speaker 1: for your side and know they're just gonna come at
Speaker 1: you with everything, and I don't know, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't need them ask And everybody went to high school
Speaker 1: with you know, what was Buck like in high school?
Speaker 1: And then they write some story in the Daily Beast.
Speaker 1: I'll have that guy k file over at CNN writing
Speaker 1: something about how, you know, Buck Sexton promised girls in
Speaker 1: high school when he took their phone numbers, he'd call them,
Speaker 1: and he never did. He's a mean man, you know,
Speaker 1: something like that. I'll be the enemy. So I don't
Speaker 1: think I'm gonna be the White House press secretary. Um,
Speaker 1: I think that's a safe bet. I don't know if
Speaker 1: producer Mike is gonna be He's got connections. Everybody loves
Speaker 1: Hannity's team loves producer Mike. Rushes Tam loves producer Mike.
Speaker 1: That means that this guy, you don't even know what
Speaker 1: kind of they called wasta in the Middle East. We
Speaker 1: don't know what kind of wasta Producer Mike's got stored up, right,
Speaker 1: now do you do you have a do you have
Speaker 1: a bet, by the way, on who you think is
Speaker 1: gonna be the I don't know. I kidly makes sense. Um,
Speaker 1: I just want somebody a little tough here, doesn't I
Speaker 1: mean he seems like a nice guy, but I want
Speaker 1: I like, I need a puncher man. I need that.
Speaker 1: I'm looking Cortes. Now. You say he played football, means
Speaker 1: a little might be a little aggressive. I like that.
Speaker 1: I want a fighter. I want a brawler. I want
Speaker 1: somebody like Trump. He may challenge a cost to do
Speaker 1: an arm wrestling match, and I can tell you he
Speaker 1: might actually Acosta's arm might get snapped in half. He's
Speaker 1: a little fellow, and I one cortest he's a little fellow. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a possibility. So we'll see what happens. White House
Speaker 1: Press Secretary. Libs are not given any you know, any
Speaker 1: uh leeway or gratitude or any They're not They're not
Speaker 1: being nice to start on the way out. But we
Speaker 1: knew they wouldn't because Libs don't. They don't like to
Speaker 1: play nice. They don't like to be nice. This is
Speaker 1: just not really in there, and they're baillywick, you could say.
Speaker 1: So we'll see, but we got to some roll call
Speaker 1: coming knop. It's Friday, it's the weekend, it's Father's Day.
Speaker 1: Good things. Stay with us. Democrat Fight Night will be
Speaker 1: upon us soon or actually Fight Nights two nights June
Speaker 1: twenty sixth and twenty seventh, a multi a multi night,
Speaker 1: multi part event. Oh man, I'm gonna have to Oh
Speaker 1: that means I'm gonna have to live tweet those things. Man,
Speaker 1: that's gonna get that's gonna get interesting. I enjoy that.
Speaker 1: But you got a lot of candidates gonna be in
Speaker 1: the mix, and I'm hoping, I'm hoping that people will
Speaker 1: really get a chance to see that most of these
Speaker 1: Democrats are pretty clownish. There will be some major issues raised.
Speaker 1: One of them is you'll see Joe Biden saying stuff
Speaker 1: that is completely contrary to the Joe Biden that we're
Speaker 1: all supposed to believe has existed for a long time.
Speaker 1: Just remember, Joe Biden is now a guy who was
Speaker 1: saying that he's going to abolish the High Amendment. He's
Speaker 1: an abortion hardliner. Now he's an abortion hardliner. Before we
Speaker 1: listen to what he has to say to try to
Speaker 1: appease the crazy left wing bass in this next debate.
Speaker 1: This is what Joe Biden sounded like back in two
Speaker 1: thousand and six Play twenty. I do not view abortion
Speaker 1: as a as a choice and a right. I think
Speaker 1: it's always a tragedy, and I think that it should
Speaker 1: be rare and safe, and I think we should be
Speaker 1: focusing on how to limit the number of abortions, and
Speaker 1: there ought to be able to have a common ground
Speaker 1: and consensus as to do that. Common ground s limit,
Speaker 1: not a choice and a right, he says, although I
Speaker 1: don't really know what he what he thinks he's saying.
Speaker 1: With that, he called it a tragedy. Do you think
Speaker 1: you'll hear anything like that from Joe Biden? You're gonna
Speaker 1: get on the twenty six and twenty seventh, I can
Speaker 1: assure you the answer is no. And this is where
Speaker 1: the media advantage that the Democrats have become so important,
Speaker 1: because they will allow they will allow Democrats to say
Speaker 1: whatever they have to to try to win in the primary,
Speaker 1: and then we'll make sure that they're not that there's
Speaker 1: not a major megaphone of the flip flop that's being
Speaker 1: blast out to the rest of the country all the time,
Speaker 1: so that people will know what's going on. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's that's what I think is happening here. Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is going to get away with whatever he has to
Speaker 1: get away so that he can be the nominee. Is
Speaker 1: also why you see them saying that they are really
Speaker 1: hoping that these these polls that show by early on
Speaker 1: ahead of trumpets some key states. They want to see
Speaker 1: if there's some momentum with that. They want to see
Speaker 1: what's going on there. Because Biden's entire repeal to Democrats
Speaker 1: is he'll beat Trump. That's it. They do nothing else.
Speaker 1: If he beats Trump, they'll be If he will beat Trump,
Speaker 1: they're behind him. Nothing else mashes them the policy. But
Speaker 1: Biden could say that he's a space alien from the
Speaker 1: planet you know, Zog or Zod or wherever the is
Speaker 1: that from. Um, you know, what's that flash Gordon, isn't
Speaker 1: a planet Zod or something? Am I am I crazy?
Speaker 1: I'm not sure. I thought we're the bad guys in Superman.
Speaker 1: That's yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right. I think that's what
Speaker 1: it is. Zobed Um, not to be confused with Isad
Speaker 1: the clothing store. So whatever whatever they have to do,
Speaker 1: they're gonna do as long as Biden's numbers are strong.
Speaker 1: But I think you're gonna see Biden's numbers slipping. Um.
Speaker 1: But just remember, he's a guy that changes on a dime.
Speaker 1: Doesn't matter what he used to say. He says whatever
Speaker 1: he has to say whenever he has to say it
Speaker 1: in order to win. And then you've also got the
Speaker 1: debate that will be on display over socialism, which is
Speaker 1: fantastic because Democrats will pretend. But whoever wins this primary,
Speaker 1: by the time that person gets to the general election,
Speaker 1: there will be this move away from the open discussion
Speaker 1: of socialism because the American people, even if the polls
Speaker 1: you see are correct where you got the forty percent
Speaker 1: of Americans, thirty percent of Americans like socialism, whatever it
Speaker 1: may be, that's not enough to win. So they'll act like, oh,
Speaker 1: the Republicans are just making the stuff up about socialism. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: you're gonna hear from guys like John Hickenlooper that the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party should not be the party of socialism. Play nineteen.
Speaker 1: Democrats must say loudly and clearly that we are not socialists.
Speaker 1: I don't think they're gonna say that, and I don't
Speaker 1: think they're going to say that at this point because
Speaker 1: the left wing base, not just because of Bernie Sanders,
Speaker 1: but the Democrat base and the left has largely embraced
Speaker 1: democratic socialism, and I always want to ask them what
Speaker 1: is the real difference? You know, they say democratic socialism
Speaker 1: and it's supposed to immediately moderate their make them seem
Speaker 1: more moderate in their position. Oh, well, it's democratic social
Speaker 1: it's gonna be like European style socialism. Well, what ask
Speaker 1: But when you say Europe, Europe's a big place, a
Speaker 1: lot of countries. Who are we going to be like
Speaker 1: in Europe? Which economy are we going to try to emulate?
Speaker 1: They say, the Nordic countries. Well, then we have We're
Speaker 1: gonna have much higher taxes and much lighter government regulation
Speaker 1: of business and of entrepreneurship, and a lot of free
Speaker 1: market stuff that goes on in those Nordic countries better
Speaker 1: than what we have in this country when it comes
Speaker 1: to the regulatory environment. So is that what they want?
Speaker 1: What will you know? What they want? They want a
Speaker 1: massive government takeover of the well completion of the government
Speaker 1: takeover the healthcare system, and then also a ka a
Speaker 1: a an environmentalism enforced from above that allows them the
Speaker 1: ability to just control every aspect of your life, greater
Speaker 1: redistribution of wealth, the enshrinement of identity politics into law.
Speaker 1: I mean, these are some of the core. Amnesty for
Speaker 1: illegals and a day facto open border status, these are
Speaker 1: all the things that, oh yeah, we have to look
Speaker 1: forward to in these Democrat debates. We'll see what they
Speaker 1: end up saying. But you know what, dude, I think
Speaker 1: I think Elizabeth. I think Elizabeth Warren is gonna she's
Speaker 1: gonna come out of this one looking strong for the Democrats.
Speaker 1: We'll see. The show ain't over yet, folks, keeping it
Speaker 1: real time for Roll Call a Team. I'm doing the
Speaker 1: show from the Freedom Hut, NYC today. And even though
Speaker 1: I grew up here, it's funny when you when you
Speaker 1: leave this place for a while, when you leave for
Speaker 1: a bit and then you, uh, you come back. Even
Speaker 1: if you're in a place like the Swamp in DC,
Speaker 1: which is pretty crowded, but it's just not really crowded
Speaker 1: the way that a place like New York is. It's
Speaker 1: not even the same same league. Man, and walking on
Speaker 1: the streets here, you get the sense they're tourists that
Speaker 1: would just trapes over my dead and mangled body to
Speaker 1: get one of those. I I heart New York T
Speaker 1: shirts they sell by Central Park, Ruster Mark, you know
Speaker 1: what I'm talking about. They see those things. Man, they
Speaker 1: still sell those T shirts people. I don't know why
Speaker 1: they want them either. I don't know. Maybe it's maybe
Speaker 1: it's so kitchy that it's almost cool or something. I
Speaker 1: don't know, but you know, and then you know, they
Speaker 1: move the horses finally from the southern end of Central Park.
Speaker 1: I walk, I did a little walk around the loop
Speaker 1: around the park today, and they move the horses because
Speaker 1: the smell of manure was too much for the residents.
Speaker 1: Finally they banded together and they banished the horse poop
Speaker 1: from their streets. So now they're kind of interior into
Speaker 1: the park. So you know, you learned the city changes
Speaker 1: man stuff, although it just keeps getting more expensive all
Speaker 1: the time. That's the other part of it that one
Speaker 1: has to be aware of. All right, enough of my
Speaker 1: urban adventures here in NYC. And you know, they don't
Speaker 1: have they don't have those little nerdy electric scooters that
Speaker 1: I can neither confirm nor deny I use on a
Speaker 1: regular basis in DC, because if I did use them
Speaker 1: on a regular basis that would be nerdy. So let's
Speaker 1: just leave that as neither confirmed nor deny, but pretty
Speaker 1: sure that they're awesome as long as no one sees
Speaker 1: you on them. But they don't have them here in
Speaker 1: New York. So I kind of missed that, all right, John, Rights, Uh,
Speaker 1: what do we got here? She'll say a prediction of
Speaker 1: the two night Democrat debate coming up, not one question
Speaker 1: will be actually answered, and they will end up beating
Speaker 1: each other up over who's the biggest Trump hater? John.
Speaker 1: I think you're probably right. I think that's likely because
Speaker 1: right now it's all about getting the base to go along,
Speaker 1: getting the base to be you know, on board, and
Speaker 1: so we'll have to see and we'll have to see
Speaker 1: who's able to do that. I mean, you have so
Speaker 1: many contenders at this point, you know, the Democrat twenty
Speaker 1: twenty field is so dense. Here we go. We have
Speaker 1: in the first twenty twenty Democratic primary debate. I can
Speaker 1: give you a I pulled up a graphic of this.
Speaker 1: You have Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado, former Vice President
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, Senator Corey Booker, Democrat in New Jersey, South Bend, Indiana,
Speaker 1: Mayor Pete Buddha judge, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, New
Speaker 1: York City mayor Build A Lazio. Former Representative John Delaney
Speaker 1: of Maryland, Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, Senator Kirsten Jill
Speaker 1: of New York, Senator Kamala Harris Kamala Harris rather of California,
Speaker 1: former Colorado Governor John hicken Looper, Washington Governor j Insley,
Speaker 1: Senator Amy Klobascher of Minnesota. Representative Betto O'Rourke of Texas,
Speaker 1: Tim Ryan of Ohio, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Eric Swawell
Speaker 1: of California, Ward of Massachusetts, Maryann Williamson, activist an entrepreneur,
Speaker 1: and Drew Yang man, that's like, it's like when I
Speaker 1: have to do one of those liveraides where that are
Speaker 1: really long and get it in under sixty seconds. That
Speaker 1: was I felt like the micro machines man. Do you
Speaker 1: remember the micromachines guy. They just sold like tiny little
Speaker 1: plastic models of cars and planes, you know, made in
Speaker 1: China or Taiwan or whatever. And then the micro machines
Speaker 1: guy he was like, man, no, he talk really fast.
Speaker 1: The commercials he was the most famous. He was the
Speaker 1: best part of micro machines, because then when you got them,
Speaker 1: you realize this is just a small crappy toy, and
Speaker 1: he's got a lot of small crappy toys. It's not
Speaker 1: not much you can do with him, all right, back
Speaker 1: to back to, back to business. Sexton Richard writes, Buck
Speaker 1: Trump messed up, but it's not that big of a deal.
Speaker 1: Clinton stude Stephanopolis was obviously sent to create a distraction
Speaker 1: from Trump's success with Mexico, and he fell for it.
Speaker 1: It really needs to stop trying to be nice to
Speaker 1: these criminals. That clown should never have gotten access to
Speaker 1: the president. Also, I know that that fighting back has
Speaker 1: been his strength so far, but I think it's time
Speaker 1: for him to ignore their histrionics and accusations. They're desperate
Speaker 1: and want the attention it brings on their stupid statements.
Speaker 1: When he responds, he needs to get the focus back
Speaker 1: onto his agenda and stop letting them get him off
Speaker 1: the messages he needs to deliver. All right. I agree
Speaker 1: that that the president, it would be a good thing.
Speaker 1: I think if he were able to focus more on
Speaker 1: his message instead of countering their message. This is always
Speaker 1: a concern of mine with his president. He's so good
Speaker 1: at counterpunching that it feels like he's always who's gonna
Speaker 1: hit me next? And because he wants to CounterPunch. But
Speaker 1: you know, he could actually go on offense. He could jab, jab,
Speaker 1: you know, stick and move, float like a butterfly, staying
Speaker 1: like a bee. You know, seven little chipmunks sitting on
Speaker 1: a branch eating a lot of acorns on my uncle's ranch.
Speaker 1: Step into my office. You know what I'm talking about. Mark,
Speaker 1: You've you've seen that movie No Faults? Really? Man? All right, fine, Mark,
Speaker 1: I'm in the I'm in the stew today with Mark.
Speaker 1: So I keep trying to see him, trying to catch him,
Speaker 1: trying to catch him napping over there. It's not it's
Speaker 1: not a weekend yet, man, you can give me dirty
Speaker 1: looks in person. That's right now. It's not Friday, Mr.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's not rather, it's not a weekend yet.
Speaker 1: You got a few more minutes of Nashally Syndicata Rady
Speaker 1: to get your butt through before you can. Do you drink?
Speaker 1: What's your what's your breverage choice? Either beer or vodka?
Speaker 1: What kind of vodka we go for usually Titos. That's
Speaker 1: a good cause. Texas potato potato vodka, unlike that other
Speaker 1: swill that's made with grein. Not too cheap, not too expensive.
Speaker 1: Tito's is my is my go to. Actually, So there
Speaker 1: you have it. Let's see Andrew right, um, hold on, no,
Speaker 1: he tells me it's something. Okay, here we go, David,
Speaker 1: hey Buck, there's no reason to go any further south
Speaker 1: than outer Banks. North Carolina. Charleston and Savannah are great,
Speaker 1: but when you get to Florida, it starts to get dicey. Well, David,
Speaker 1: I like, I don't know, man, I know there's this
Speaker 1: whole Florida man thing. Now when people talk about Florida
Speaker 1: all the time. I like Florida. Well, that's a cool hat.
Speaker 1: Where'd you get that? You get all the all the
Speaker 1: like fancy people come to New York and then they
Speaker 1: don't come visit me in the swamp. You get all
Speaker 1: the good gear up here. Yeah, black rifle coffee guys,
Speaker 1: Black rifle guys hooked you up. Yeah, that's that's some
Speaker 1: I want one of those hats. It's a legit hat.
Speaker 1: They like Producer Mike though. It's legit. But you know
Speaker 1: what I do get funny looks in New York City.
Speaker 1: So the hat is has the American flag and a
Speaker 1: rifle on it, and I do get. I had somebody
Speaker 1: look at me today like just make icon tho my hat.
Speaker 1: I was like, Heaven forbid the American flag and a rifle. Seriously,
Speaker 1: what is the world coming to producer Mike Crazy? It's
Speaker 1: some crazy easy stuff. Let's see. We got Calvin up
Speaker 1: in this piece. Greetings from behind Emmy lines in Central California.
Speaker 1: I've been in beaches from Hawaii to Florida, and the
Speaker 1: central coast of California has by far the best beaches. Ah,
Speaker 1: here we go somebody with a little bit of you know,
Speaker 1: Cali Pride from Pizbo Pizmo north to Morrow Bay, Cambria,
Speaker 1: Monterrey and Santa Cruz. Calvin, there are there are some
Speaker 1: beautiful beaches along the way there, There's no question. And
Speaker 1: I think that big, Sir, and that whole part of
Speaker 1: California that's between San fran and La Is, it's just
Speaker 1: it almost doesn't look real, especially if you're driving the
Speaker 1: Pacific Coast Highway when the sun's starting to set. It's incredible.
Speaker 1: But that said, Hawaii's pretty awesome. Why he's got some
Speaker 1: pretty nice beaches from what I understand, William writes, in
Speaker 1: reference to the lib saying Trump is inviting for an
Speaker 1: interference in our election. Let us not forget that a
Speaker 1: few months ago Hillary Clinton asked China to hack Trump's
Speaker 1: tax returns Shields High. Did that happen? I don't remember
Speaker 1: that happening, But is that the thing that Yeah, pricier Mike,
Speaker 1: let me know if that actually that went down the
Speaker 1: way that this guy says it went down. I don't know.
Speaker 1: Let's see, Matthew. I know you only stayed in the
Speaker 1: first part, but I'd never see where you justified doing
Speaker 1: the second part for the greater good for their Democrats.
Speaker 1: Greater good. You mentioned that if the Democrats win the
Speaker 1: presidency in Congress House, that they will push through amnesty
Speaker 1: with the illegals and flood the Democratic Party. Then everything
Speaker 1: becomes more and more like New York and California, slowly
Speaker 1: or quickly degenerating, and people switched from Democratic Republican and
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party declares martial law for the good of
Speaker 1: the people and controls everyone, just like the book nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty four. WHOA Matthew, it's pretty intense, pretty intense stuff
Speaker 1: we're going for here, my friend. But at least at
Speaker 1: least you're not shy about it getting into it. Larry
Speaker 1: listening to yesterday's podcast about illegal immigrants and remembered an
Speaker 1: article from the Wall Street Journal on April twenty third
Speaker 1: opinion page. It was about the testimony regarding the adding
Speaker 1: of the immigration status question to the census form. The
Speaker 1: testimony of the head of ICE. He said the number
Speaker 1: of people undetermined status was twenty five million, not eleven million.
Speaker 1: This is similar number I've heard you suggest sometime. Love
Speaker 1: your show, Larry from near Cincinnati. Yeah, I know that
Speaker 1: the eleven million number is a joke. I mean I
Speaker 1: the super math nerds at Yale all came together and
Speaker 1: their number was twenty to thirty million. Based on other data.
Speaker 1: The eleven million is we have census data. This is
Speaker 1: what the census data tells us, and the census data
Speaker 1: stays the same somehow year in and year out. That's
Speaker 1: what that's where they get the eleven million. There's nothing
Speaker 1: else that suggests eleven million is correct. It's all based
Speaker 1: on the baseline number comes from census data, but there's
Speaker 1: a lot of other data remittances sent back to Mexico. Oh,
Speaker 1: you can really do can track those remittan's a set
Speaker 1: back to Mexico. Look at the number of visa overstays
Speaker 1: every year. Look at the number. I mean, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of data you can crunch, and professional data crunchers
Speaker 1: who look at this. I believe also there was an
Speaker 1: assessment from the financial community about the number of illegals.
Speaker 1: I think it was people maybe at Morgan Stanley or
Speaker 1: JP Morgan on one of these places. They looked into
Speaker 1: this for financial reasons and they thought it was twenty
Speaker 1: to thirty million. At the twenty millions a big difference
Speaker 1: than eleven million. You know. That's that I can tell you.
Speaker 1: It's a true thing. Good job, Buck, twenty million is
Speaker 1: different than eleven That's that's the kind of insight that
Speaker 1: we like to bring in the Freedom Hunt day in
Speaker 1: and day out. Because of Friday, We're gonna some more
Speaker 1: fun on the other side. Come back with a roll call.
Speaker 1: Stay right there, Michael writes, I'm sure glad I don't
Speaker 1: listen to your show for movie and music opinions, just
Speaker 1: saying shield side, whoa hey, hey, you can't just like
Speaker 1: you can't just throw that out there. Dude, you gotta
Speaker 1: call me out on some specifics. You gotta tell me
Speaker 1: what exactly I've said about about movie or music that
Speaker 1: you disagree with, sir, so then I can buck slap
Speaker 1: right back at you. But if you're just gonna say
Speaker 1: that my movie and music opinions are no bueno, then
Speaker 1: that's you know, how how can I say you're wrong?
Speaker 1: I don't know what you're talking about exactly? Just like
Speaker 1: that Pa, whoa exactly that's how you got that one
Speaker 1: left the sting. Actually that one hurt all right? But fine, man,
Speaker 1: you know, Michael, why don't you come back and bring
Speaker 1: the real ruckets and tell me what you disagree with.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, if you tell me that you're
Speaker 1: you're watching you know you don't like Ghostbusters or something,
Speaker 1: that's important data for me to know, because then I
Speaker 1: can just discount your opinion. There's some movies where it's like, oh,
Speaker 1: you don't like that, And I'm going to tell you
Speaker 1: this right now. Anyone who tells me that they think
Speaker 1: that the Avengers movies are really good movies, I'm not
Speaker 1: saying you can enjoy them, but if you tell me
Speaker 1: they're a good movie you may still be my friend,
Speaker 1: we may still be on the same side of political issues.
Speaker 1: I do not trust your judgment of movies anymore because
Speaker 1: some of those Avengers movies. First of all, it's all
Speaker 1: the same movie. It's all just like the same series
Speaker 1: of actors with a lot of cgi and then there's
Speaker 1: like a plague of monsters at the end that destroyed
Speaker 1: New York City, and they're all, it's all this, it's
Speaker 1: the same movie. And this was like a billion dollars franchise,
Speaker 1: Like how many towns can people see it? A little
Speaker 1: Hulk smash, Like, oh, look, and there's Thor with his
Speaker 1: big arms and what's his name in the Iron Man suit?
Speaker 1: Being all not even really that witty. I mean, he's
Speaker 1: he was better the Ironman movies I thought were great.
Speaker 1: But yeah, see, now I'm digging a hole for myself
Speaker 1: because some of you're like, I love the Avengers movies.
Speaker 1: I certainly hope not, but some of you probably do.
Speaker 1: All Right, here we go, Glan writes, please read a
Speaker 1: good news story. Okay, here we go. My son graduated
Speaker 1: from Blackstone High School Blackstone Millville High School last Friday.
Speaker 1: One of his classmates was age of three, on a
Speaker 1: jet ski with his father and was hit by a speedboat,
Speaker 1: killing his father instantly. Oh my gosh. Bradley the son
Speaker 1: survived due to his life fast, but as a result
Speaker 1: was weird wheelchair bound. Well. At his graduation, his class watched,
Speaker 1: with the help of his physical therapist, he stood and
Speaker 1: walked for the first time in front of his class
Speaker 1: to get his diploma. You can watch the video on YouTube.
Speaker 1: Thanks for sharing this with your audience. Okay, Glenn, Well
Speaker 1: that's quite that's quite an amazing accomplishment. I'll have to
Speaker 1: try to find that one on YouTube, and thank you
Speaker 1: for bringing to my attention. Garth Ween, That's not Wueen's basement.
Speaker 1: Garth always makes me think of that Garth. I've actually
Speaker 1: have I have you ever met at Garth that wasn't
Speaker 1: I have you ever met someone's name was Garth who
Speaker 1: wasn't from the Wayne's World Garth? Noah, I think first,
Speaker 1: is this guy's name really Garth? I don't know more
Speaker 1: NHL goalie and Islander's GM Garth Snow, Oh really yeah,
Speaker 1: I see there we go? Yeah? Could there? I mean,
Speaker 1: could this be v Garth? Doen Buck? The other day?
Speaker 1: You talk? Oh, Garth Brooks. There we go. Now, I
Speaker 1: gotta cod read myself on that one. That's absurd. I
Speaker 1: should have gotten that the other day you talked about
Speaker 1: the homeless of the mentally disturbed. You should reach out
Speaker 1: to Michael Medved. He and his psychiatrist's wife have done
Speaker 1: a lot of good thinking on those two problem groups.
Speaker 1: Yet I am glad that Seb Gorka replace Medved in
Speaker 1: our market. I prefer the kick ass style of conservatism.
Speaker 1: H Garth, I I do not. I don't know Michael Medved.
Speaker 1: I've actually never even I never met him, never talked
Speaker 1: to him, never tweeted out. We've had zero contact of
Speaker 1: any kind, digital or otherwise. And you know, yeah, I
Speaker 1: don't know. That's you know, do you know his stuff, Mike,
Speaker 1: I don't know his stuff. No, not too familiar with him.
Speaker 1: I know who he is, but it's not that familiar.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean, I'm just too busy just
Speaker 1: running this this amazing radio show. I don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know all the other radio shows. Yeah, so what
Speaker 1: can I tell you? Uh, Diane Buck, I confess when
Speaker 1: you first talked about the uber Rider rating system, I
Speaker 1: thought it was too much like China's system. After thinking
Speaker 1: about it for a while, I realized there's an important difference.
Speaker 1: In China. The rating system touches every aspect of the
Speaker 1: citizen's life, and it is enforced by the government. The
Speaker 1: Uber system is only used by that company and only
Speaker 1: applies to their customers. So I'm with you. Good for
Speaker 1: the Uber drivers. I hope their customers are incentivized to
Speaker 1: behave like decent human beings as usual. Your analysis is
Speaker 1: spot on. Shields hide your analysis, not your analysis. That's
Speaker 1: a different thing. I'm just saying, just want to clarify,
Speaker 1: And I would say this that you know, this is
Speaker 1: one of these moments where I'm not going to take
Speaker 1: a victory lap and say I told you so, guys,
Speaker 1: But I mean, I can't told you so on this one.
Speaker 1: The Uber rating, the people that are involved, I don't
Speaker 1: see what the problem is here. I like. I like
Speaker 1: that when somebody's going to engage in a business transaction
Speaker 1: with me in a certain platform or company, they know
Speaker 1: that I'm you know that I'm on the up and up.
Speaker 1: You know, if I say I'm gonna be there for reservation,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna be there if I'm if you're gonna pick
Speaker 1: me up and take me on a long car ride.
Speaker 1: I have a good reputation for, you know, being polite
Speaker 1: and professional and all the rest of us. So I
Speaker 1: like it. And you know, I know a lot of
Speaker 1: you came at me with the heat on that one.
Speaker 1: But at least Diane agrees with me. At least Diane
Speaker 1: is on a team buck on this one. All Right, everybody,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have a fantastic weekend. It's gonna be Father's Day.
Speaker 1: I hope you will have a fantastic Father's Day. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna be with my dad and my family coming up
Speaker 1: on Sunday, So enjoy yourselves. Get the barbecues roaring, eat
Speaker 1: a lot of meats, not fake meat, not beyond meat,
Speaker 1: real meat, please, and I will see you all or
Speaker 1: talk to you all on Monday. She'll tie