Speaker 1: Strike Force Energy veteran owned, American made, and one of
Speaker 1: the hottest new energy products on the market. Strikeforce Energy
Speaker 1: was developed by veterans for one simple reason. The fight
Speaker 1: will always follow you, and it waits for no one
Speaker 1: buck sex in here force strike Force, and I invite
Speaker 1: you this summer to join us in giving back to
Speaker 1: America's troops. Over the last three years, Strikeforce Energy has
Speaker 1: shipped millions of packets to our troops, both at home
Speaker 1: and abroad. And now we're bringing this battlefield proven liquid
Speaker 1: directly to your door. Strikeforce Energy Liquid packs, available in
Speaker 1: four flavors, have zero sugar, zero calories, and are made
Speaker 1: with only the finest ingredients. For the fuel to power
Speaker 1: through your toughest fights, simply adds strike Force to sixteen
Speaker 1: twenty ounces of water, tea, lemonade, yogurt, even a nice
Speaker 1: cold beer. Go to strike Force Energy dot com, enter
Speaker 1: discount code buck at checkout, and for every packet you buy,
Speaker 1: we will donate a packet to military members around the globe.
Speaker 1: Strike Force Energy dot Com discount code buck. Because strike
Speaker 1: Force Energy is the fuel for the fight you are entering,
Speaker 1: the freedom hunt. The media flips out when Trump says
Speaker 1: there could be violence after the election happens, but we
Speaker 1: all know which signed on violence is likely to come
Speaker 1: from if it were to happen. We'll talk about that.
Speaker 1: And also allegations of racism against a Republican governatorial candidate
Speaker 1: looks bogus to me, folks. We'll talk about that. And
Speaker 1: also what is rapid onset gender dysphoria. Here's a hint.
Speaker 1: The left doesn't want you to know, so we'll talk
Speaker 1: about it. Matta and more coming up. This is the
Speaker 1: bus Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake, America,
Speaker 1: let me rank you're a great American Again, The Bucks
Speaker 1: Exton Show begins. Florida elections are always competitive, and um,
Speaker 1: you know this is a guy who, although he's much
Speaker 1: too too liberal for Florida, I think he's got huge
Speaker 1: problems with how he's governed Tallahassee. Uh. You know, he
Speaker 1: is an articulate spokesman for those far left views, and
Speaker 1: he's a charismatic candidate. And you know I watched those
Speaker 1: Democrat debates. None of that it was was my cup
Speaker 1: of tea. But I mean he performed better than the
Speaker 1: other people there. So so we've got to work hard
Speaker 1: to make sure that we continue Florida going in a
Speaker 1: good direction. Let's build off the success we've had on
Speaker 1: Governor Scott. The last thing we need to do is
Speaker 1: to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist
Speaker 1: agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state. Welcome
Speaker 1: to the Buck Section show, everybody. I played for you
Speaker 1: there some audio that was from from Fox where you
Speaker 1: had the the gubernatory all nominee from the Republican Party
Speaker 1: for the state of Florida, Rhonda Santis, and he was
Speaker 1: talking about the the Democrat candidate who just came through
Speaker 1: the primaries or Florida just had their primary, and he
Speaker 1: was discussing their differences on policy, and he said what
Speaker 1: you heard there, He said that let's not let's not
Speaker 1: monkey things up. He means to say, let's not mess
Speaker 1: things up by doing things like what does opponent wants
Speaker 1: to do, which is corporate tax rate hike or you know,
Speaker 1: any number of far left progressive policies. But you see,
Speaker 1: the santiss opponent is African American, and because of the
Speaker 1: term that de Santists used here, now the left is
Speaker 1: playing the game they always play where they're just saying
Speaker 1: that De Santists said something racist. Oh that's right, he's
Speaker 1: a racist, folks. That was you see, that was a
Speaker 1: dog whistle to use the term monkey up in a
Speaker 1: general sense in reference to policies and to the way
Speaker 1: that a state is being run is racist because the
Speaker 1: person who opposes you, they're saying, happens to be black.
Speaker 1: They are creating a racial connection where there where there
Speaker 1: is no, a racist connection where there is none. Um.
Speaker 1: But this tells you a lot about the way the left,
Speaker 1: the way the left plays the game. They they this
Speaker 1: is one of their favorites. I would note when somebody
Speaker 1: has a turn of phrase or or says anything that
Speaker 1: could be even vaguely construed as as racist, even if
Speaker 1: they will admit that it's it was accidental, they'll say,
Speaker 1: well it was it was kind of a Freudian slip,
Speaker 1: then that it was accidental. And I know there are
Speaker 1: different times where this has come up. I think of
Speaker 1: the I feel very badly for him. Still, Honestly, this
Speaker 1: wasn't I don't know if he was an ESPN and now,
Speaker 1: but it was about a tennis match and he said that,
Speaker 1: you know, Serena Williams was in our no venus. Williams
Speaker 1: was engaged in guerilla meaning little warfare Spanish for a
Speaker 1: little war guerilla tactics. But he said guerrilla because that's
Speaker 1: the Americanized version of it, guerilla tactics. Uh, because he
Speaker 1: was doing it or she was doing an all of
Speaker 1: the above approach to try to win the match, right,
Speaker 1: moving around strategy and everything else. He was just throwing
Speaker 1: everything in the kitchen sink and he said guerilla tactics
Speaker 1: and he got fired for that. I got a lot
Speaker 1: of trouble. You know. The guy's life is, you know,
Speaker 1: altered for the worse because people don't like even the
Speaker 1: possibility of something being said that some could think was racist.
Speaker 1: I remember during during the during the Olympics. Remember I
Speaker 1: forget what it was. I think it was like a
Speaker 1: few years back. There was a young woman, African American
Speaker 1: woman who was on the US team and she did
Speaker 1: an event and then right afterwards previously scheduled commercials for
Speaker 1: and it was a commercial for I think an animal
Speaker 1: hospital or something. But they had a a a small
Speaker 1: monkey that was engaged in an acrobatic event or whatever.
Speaker 1: But it was supposed to be. It was completely separate
Speaker 1: from the Olympics. But it's just because of the frames
Speaker 1: and how it changed over, and people were outraged about that.
Speaker 1: It was clearly, you know, there was no intent there
Speaker 1: of any kind, but there was outrage right there was
Speaker 1: these those two things had nothing to do with each other.
Speaker 1: No one was trying to make them have anything to
Speaker 1: do with each other, No one was trying to imply
Speaker 1: any kind of a racial slur or anything else, but
Speaker 1: they still got so upset about it. This is how
Speaker 1: the left does what they do, folks. It doesn't matter
Speaker 1: that it's unfair, It doesn't matter that it's a slander.
Speaker 1: If they can get away with saying something was a slur,
Speaker 1: even an unintentional slur, they will do it because it
Speaker 1: is so politically useful. In the case of the of
Speaker 1: the Guerrilla Tactics, by the way that that incident, I
Speaker 1: really break this down, folks. Does anybody you think that
Speaker 1: an announcer who who is who is describing the game
Speaker 1: would would say, would would intentionally use a racial not
Speaker 1: even you know, a racial form of language or in
Speaker 1: a racially tinged language to talk about one of the
Speaker 1: greatest female tennis players of all time, and it is
Speaker 1: that it's the equivalent of saying, this guy wanted to basically,
Speaker 1: in a career sense, light himself on fire on live TV.
Speaker 1: I don't think that that's what he was trying to do. Okay,
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone really thinks that that's what he's
Speaker 1: trying to do. But there's so much sensitivity around it.
Speaker 1: And here with with the Santists, they realized that, you know,
Speaker 1: de Santists, I think is is gonna He's gonna win.
Speaker 1: He's gonna win it. And this was their big opening today.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, so much, so much anger and raid
Speaker 1: thrown at the Santis about about this comment that that no,
Speaker 1: what what what are they really saying here? It's a
Speaker 1: dog whistle? Really, they think that the Santists would just
Speaker 1: insert that phrase in that way and deal with all
Speaker 1: the allegations of racism that he knows is going to
Speaker 1: come from the dishonest left for dog whistle purposes. It's
Speaker 1: just idiotic. There's no it's not just that there's no
Speaker 1: motive for him to do it. All the motives go
Speaker 1: in the opposite direction. But they but they and they're
Speaker 1: not really analyzing this in any kind of a serious sense. Uh,
Speaker 1: there was on MSNBC and analysts who offered this. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is where they go with this on MSNBC. Look,
Speaker 1: I played the audio for you heard it, you know
Speaker 1: this is how they analyzed it over um over at. Well, actually, no,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, before we get tell MSNBC analyst, here's how
Speaker 1: the opponent, Andrew Gillham himself was talking about dis Antists recently. Wait, producer, Mike,
Speaker 1: was this in response to the comment or is this
Speaker 1: just in general? Yeah, Buck, this is a sponsor. It's
Speaker 1: in response to the comment. Okay, that's uh, he was
Speaker 1: on with che folks. Here's what the Here's what the opponent. Yeah, here,
Speaker 1: here's what the opponents said about a plate one. It's
Speaker 1: very clear that Mr de Santists is taking a page
Speaker 1: directly from the campaign manual of Donald Trump. But I
Speaker 1: think he's got another thing coming to him if he
Speaker 1: thinks that in today's day and age, Florida voters are
Speaker 1: going to respond to that level of derision and division.
Speaker 1: They're sick of it. What we're trying to offer in
Speaker 1: this race, ever, was a state? Was that racist or
Speaker 1: a fignative speech? Well? Well, Uh, in the handbumc Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: They no longer uh do whistle calls. They're now using
Speaker 1: full bullhorn. That is so slimy. That is so slimy
Speaker 1: what he just did there. Notice how he he was
Speaker 1: asked a specific question after chef Smith, you know, butcher
Speaker 1: the phrases. Is that a figment of speech? It's figure
Speaker 1: of speech, chep But anyway, good thing to pay him,
Speaker 1: you know, ten million dollars a year or whatever. Uh.
Speaker 1: The question that was asked was was it was what
Speaker 1: dissentists said racist? And what his opponent who's up there
Speaker 1: grandstanding on TV, says is, well, Donald Trump says racist things,
Speaker 1: which is a way of saying, well, I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: say that what he said was racist, but I kind
Speaker 1: of want to imply that he's a racist and make
Speaker 1: my base think that I'm kind of saying he's a racist.
Speaker 1: I mean, it was just a it was a slimy maneuver. Uh.
Speaker 1: And that's what That's what gilhim did. That's what he
Speaker 1: offers up now he'd much rather have for based turnout purposes,
Speaker 1: Gilmill much rather talk about that than, for example, what
Speaker 1: he uh wants to do in the state, which he
Speaker 1: also told Chep Smith here, let let's hear about this
Speaker 1: play play two es. Since you mentioned money, Mr Mayor,
Speaker 1: you you also ran on universal health care, lots more
Speaker 1: money for schools and especially for teachers, raising the minimum
Speaker 1: ways to fifteen dollars for for all Floridians, specifically, Mr Mayor,
Speaker 1: if elected governor, how are you going to pay for that? Yeah? Well,
Speaker 1: what we have proposed is an increase in the corporate
Speaker 1: tax rate, which in the state of Florida is lower
Speaker 1: Alabama and Georgia. Right now we're at five and a
Speaker 1: quarter and we've suggested going up to just over seven,
Speaker 1: which puts us in line with many other states. And
Speaker 1: part of what we've it creates a billion dollars uh
Speaker 1: and funding for our public education system. Uh. And part
Speaker 1: of it is is that I just don't believe that
Speaker 1: corporations choose states to locate in when they are forty
Speaker 1: out of fiftieth in the public education system. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: not even none of this even really holds together. I
Speaker 1: mean it's just yeah, corporations and public education. I mean,
Speaker 1: what now they sign up where they think they have
Speaker 1: a favorable business climate, I mean public education? Uh boy? Um.
Speaker 1: He also I think he wants a fifteen dollar minimum wage.
Speaker 1: You look at it's the progressive it's the progressive wish list.
Speaker 1: This guy eyes offering up uh, and and the left
Speaker 1: is embracing us now. And you know a figure he's
Speaker 1: he is, uh, look, he's he's somebody who they probably
Speaker 1: are already thinking of at at a national level. I mean,
Speaker 1: he win wins the governor's race in Florida, they'll start,
Speaker 1: they'll start talking about this guy going way beyond that,
Speaker 1: which is obviously already a big job. But it's so
Speaker 1: frustrating to see it. And I know that we've come
Speaker 1: to expect it. I know you expected to, but to
Speaker 1: to try to pile onto de Santis here and say
Speaker 1: that he implied something racist. We we gotta push back
Speaker 1: against this this stuff with all, with all that we can, folks,
Speaker 1: we can't let him get away with this game, right.
Speaker 1: We can't let him tag people as racists who haven't
Speaker 1: done anything to deserve that at all, full stop. We
Speaker 1: can't allow that to happen. It's it's a smear tactic.
Speaker 1: It's a grotesque mischaracterization on purpose by people on the left.
Speaker 1: And you know, MSNBC jumped in I mean this guy,
Speaker 1: when this guy Mark Thompson, when even further play play
Speaker 1: twenty three, this andrews the benefit of the doubt in
Speaker 1: thinking that he uses this term in non racist ways
Speaker 1: otherwise and maybe didn't think it through. Is there any
Speaker 1: possibility of that. No, there's no possibility that whatsoever. But
Speaker 1: people used the term monkey something up or No, you've
Speaker 1: not heard it everyone, that's not. No, I don't. People
Speaker 1: don't say who says I've never hear anybody say that.
Speaker 1: And for people say that non racist terms that's in
Speaker 1: in the environment in which I live is an African American,
Speaker 1: That's not something that's normally said, I don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know anybody who says that. Frankly, maybe that's just
Speaker 1: I'm divorced for that. But look, it's not a dog whistle.
Speaker 1: When you say monkey in reference to an African American,
Speaker 1: he might as well have just said And where Donald
Speaker 1: Trump needs to condemn this, De Santis needs to immediately
Speaker 1: apologize and or drop out of the race. I wanna
Speaker 1: be very very clear about that this is absolutely racist,
Speaker 1: and if he gets away with it this time, he's
Speaker 1: going to continue to do it. They did it to
Speaker 1: the Obama's referring to them as primates, and now he's
Speaker 1: going to do it to Andrew Gillum. Monkey up to
Speaker 1: hack together hardware for a particular task, especially a one
Speaker 1: shot job or an extremely uh temporary solution to hack
Speaker 1: up or mess up. That is from Webster's dictionary, folks.
Speaker 1: So now we're at the point where we're gonna say
Speaker 1: that things that are in the dictionary as a general
Speaker 1: term are inherently racist, and we don't actually think that
Speaker 1: they're real terms. This is the you're getting a snapshot
Speaker 1: of the leftist mindset here. That doesn't matter the fact
Speaker 1: that you can go into a dictionary as I just
Speaker 1: did and find that a monkey up is a phrase
Speaker 1: in common usage. But now you'll have commentators go on
Speaker 1: TV that say, that's not even a phrase. And you
Speaker 1: know what, even though it's wrong obviously in anybody with
Speaker 1: with literally three seconds of research, you can prove it
Speaker 1: wrong as I just did. People are gonna hear that
Speaker 1: they're not gonna want to do the research because you
Speaker 1: know what, they want to hear that a Republican is racist,
Speaker 1: and this just reinforces that, and that's what the MSNBC
Speaker 1: audience wants. To be told. They don't want to be
Speaker 1: told the truth. They want to be told the RHN
Speaker 1: descentis is a racist. So they put somebody on TV.
Speaker 1: He will say, oh that thing that he said, Yeah
Speaker 1: he's a racist, and taking even further and say he
Speaker 1: might as well have just used an explicit racial slur.
Speaker 1: This is this is stupidity. I mean, this is and
Speaker 1: this NBC should be ashamed of itself. But I don't
Speaker 1: know if they're really capable of Shane. They should be
Speaker 1: ashamed of themselves. Though, Um, we we have a lot more.
Speaker 1: We gonna talk about my friends. Um eight four or
Speaker 1: four night two five on the lines if you want
Speaker 1: a chat eight four four nine buck. I'm back in
Speaker 1: the swamp in d C. Men in his swampy down
Speaker 1: here today it's like it feels like a hundred degrees.
Speaker 1: I was walking around that I was basically swimming through
Speaker 1: the air. That's how human and gross it is. And
Speaker 1: then there's all the swamp stuff that goes on with
Speaker 1: people that are selling access and all the rest of it.
Speaker 1: But we've got we've got a pack show for you.
Speaker 1: I did see this headline. I want to dig into
Speaker 1: a little bit of Sarah Palin not invited to the
Speaker 1: McCain funeral. Huh um, there's there's something there, I think,
Speaker 1: something that we need to need to discuss a little
Speaker 1: bit of. And then I mentioned President Trump's comments about
Speaker 1: violence possible violence with the election. I will get to
Speaker 1: that coming up. Where where does politically motivated violence come
Speaker 1: from these days? We all know it's left, even though
Speaker 1: they pretend otherwise. We got that a more Stay with me.
Speaker 1: Let's be clear also about what's going on here. The
Speaker 1: theme here is I'm Donald Donald Trump, and I'll protect
Speaker 1: you from the scary black people. ANTIFA is widely perceived
Speaker 1: as an African American organization, and this is just part
Speaker 1: of the same story of Lebron James and Don Lemon
Speaker 1: and Maxine Waters and the NFL players and the u
Speaker 1: c l A basketball players. This is about black versus white.
Speaker 1: This is about Donald Trump's appeal to racism, and it
Speaker 1: just happens all the time, and we never say it,
Speaker 1: or we don't say it enough for what it is.
Speaker 1: But that's what's going on. I mean, Jeffrey Tubin there,
Speaker 1: the chief legal analyst at CNN, is a moron. He's
Speaker 1: a moron, And you know, I don't like to call names,
Speaker 1: but he's actually an idiot. That's the dumbest thing I've
Speaker 1: heard in a long time. Antifa is widely considered a
Speaker 1: a black organization. That is an outright falsehood that anybody
Speaker 1: who pays any attention to the news cycle should know
Speaker 1: that is a complete and utter lie. In fact, I
Speaker 1: can tell you having covered protests in person, where Antifa
Speaker 1: was in their full you know, battle rattle, head to
Speaker 1: toe street warrior gear stuff I've actually never seen personally.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it doesn't mean is I've never seen
Speaker 1: a black member of Antifa. I mean, if if we're
Speaker 1: talking about Antifa as the black block that shows up,
Speaker 1: remember black block of reference to the clothing had to tell,
Speaker 1: the black block that shows up at some of these
Speaker 1: events and engages in violent counter protests, they call it.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not saying that it is, but I've
Speaker 1: actually never even seen somebody who wasn't white, who is
Speaker 1: part of a black block and engaging in violent coast
Speaker 1: so called counter protests. It's really just rioting. But there
Speaker 1: is no person Okay, forget about my antecdode for a second.
Speaker 1: There is no person who thinks and Tifa is a
Speaker 1: black organization. That is that is lunacy, an idiocy from
Speaker 1: somebody who is revered over at CNN. I mean, you
Speaker 1: should be laughed out of the building for saying that.
Speaker 1: And he was black. No, it's not, Oh oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: it's it's amazing though. Folks who they will elevate. I
Speaker 1: mean they're probably they're probably paying that guy a million
Speaker 1: dollars a year plus to go on TV and wrap
Speaker 1: rap rap, say a lot of stupid stuff. He's a
Speaker 1: terrible legal analyst all the time. He just tells liberals
Speaker 1: what they want to hear through the the the the
Speaker 1: facade of objective legal analysis. I mean he's just there
Speaker 1: to launder liberalism for seeing his audience. That's what that's
Speaker 1: what he does. That is his role. Um. I don't know.
Speaker 1: Perhaps he does that well for them, but I just
Speaker 1: I had to just jump on that. I mean, Antifa
Speaker 1: is known as a black organization, not by anybody who
Speaker 1: knows anything. Dumb person I was gonna call him. I
Speaker 1: can see the a S word right, dumb personally, Yeah, dumbass.
Speaker 1: There we got, Thank you, Mike gave me permission. The
Speaker 1: guy's a dumbass. Things are getting crazy. Feel a little better, Yeah,
Speaker 1: getting wild on the show. I feel a little better
Speaker 1: about things. Yeah, that's right. I feel like I got
Speaker 1: to let loose there for a second. Sorry if you
Speaker 1: got young ones listening and asked, is another name for
Speaker 1: a donkey? Um? So there you have. We will talk
Speaker 1: about this Trump comment about violence in the election. I
Speaker 1: think it's very important to dig into that, maybe a
Speaker 1: little bit of what's going on with Palin and the
Speaker 1: McCain funeral and and oh so much more so sing
Speaker 1: He's hold in the line for America. Buck Sexton is back.
Speaker 1: Welcome Mactine. We've got a lot of lines lit. I
Speaker 1: want to take some calls from our friends out there. First,
Speaker 1: George in l A. George, welcome to Freedom of Man.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry we didn't get to hang out in l A.
Speaker 1: We were in I was in your hometown for a
Speaker 1: few days. Oh yeah, and you saw all the scooters,
Speaker 1: those shooters all over the place. Man's craz schooners are
Speaker 1: taken over. Really well. I just wanted to tell you
Speaker 1: Shield high Buck, you have really a sharp analytic mind,
Speaker 1: and to be able to sit there and look at
Speaker 1: all of these factors coming up and be able to
Speaker 1: comment on them. Uh, just thank you directly. I really
Speaker 1: appreciate that and your honesty and straightforwardness. And um, I
Speaker 1: feel a kinship because I was kind of I'm old
Speaker 1: enough to have had uh college and graduate school experience
Speaker 1: to be able to look at things and you know,
Speaker 1: uh judge antecedent conditions and what the consequences are after
Speaker 1: you know they're there. And I just wondered, what do
Speaker 1: you think or how how are we going to deal
Speaker 1: with these um uh you know neo Marxist Olinsky I
Speaker 1: type people if they can't or won't even deal with
Speaker 1: standard usage of the English language, Well, this is you know,
Speaker 1: it's become a big issue for me, and I've been
Speaker 1: thinking about doing more in depth research and quite honestly,
Speaker 1: I think there's actually a book a book in this
Speaker 1: for me, because I really want to attack the issue
Speaker 1: of the way the left changes and then leverages and
Speaker 1: weaponizes language. And it's usually a gradual process, and it's
Speaker 1: something that has has that tremendous effect in our in
Speaker 1: our national political discussion. And you know that, how do
Speaker 1: how do you deal with people a change language? I
Speaker 1: don't know, I mean, how do you argue with somebody
Speaker 1: who says, for example, that monkey up is not a
Speaker 1: phrase that's that it's inherently a racist because it's not
Speaker 1: a phrase that is a that is a lie that
Speaker 1: is just not true. It's it's objectively not true. But
Speaker 1: how do you argue with somebody when they reject truth
Speaker 1: that that is at their fingertips. By the way, be
Speaker 1: very easy to find out. Uh, you know, I I
Speaker 1: have a problem and and luck, I'll be honest with you.
Speaker 1: It comes up even on my show where people will
Speaker 1: on my TV show where where you know, somebody will say, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, undocumented immigrant and they'll want me to say
Speaker 1: undocumented immigrant and I'm just no, un documented immigrant is
Speaker 1: not a that that does not exist. This is this
Speaker 1: is conjured up. There's a made up phrase. If we're
Speaker 1: talking about somebody who's in violation of US law in
Speaker 1: this country when it comes to immigration, they're an a
Speaker 1: legal alien. Now. That is the term. And the reason
Speaker 1: I won't call them an undocumented immigrant is that it's
Speaker 1: specifically designed as a term to make it seem like
Speaker 1: it's just a question of getting them the documents that
Speaker 1: they need and then everything is okay and they're just
Speaker 1: like other immigrants. But that's not what's happening. No, they're
Speaker 1: described in the law as illegal aliens. Yes, and so
Speaker 1: that's that's why, you know, but look, they do they
Speaker 1: do this too with with with abortion, with any number
Speaker 1: of things where they play all these games with language
Speaker 1: that we can't really get to the truth of the matter.
Speaker 1: And and you know, George, your question, but how do
Speaker 1: we deal with these neo Marxists. One, we have to
Speaker 1: fight on these issues and not not concede. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: talk about and George, thanks for calling in Shields. I
Speaker 1: I'm gonna talk about the rapid onset gender dysphoria issue
Speaker 1: in the third hour today of the show. I really
Speaker 1: hope you stay around for that, folks, because I've read
Speaker 1: into this one in depth and it has to do
Speaker 1: with transgender rights, which is considered very much in the
Speaker 1: vanguard of progressive ideology right now. I mean, they are
Speaker 1: really said on the whole transgender rights crusade or GHAD
Speaker 1: because I want to be inclusive for it could be
Speaker 1: for anybody, um, but they're really set on this, and
Speaker 1: you know they they are fanatical. I mean, that's what
Speaker 1: you have to say. They are actually fanatical on that issue.
Speaker 1: And I haven't. I want to describe to you, uh,
Speaker 1: why they're so upset and and what it is that
Speaker 1: bothers them so much about transgender transgender rights or this
Speaker 1: issue that affects transgender rights. I should say, um, but
Speaker 1: I wanted to a a Felix. Felix in Pennsylvania. We
Speaker 1: haven't heard from me in a while, buddy, what's up, hey, Block?
Speaker 1: I guess I mean, it's just just you, me and
Speaker 1: A and a mid sized US city worth of our
Speaker 1: friends listening to this. So sure, Felix, we can we
Speaker 1: take a bitter from you? Yeah, I guess so. Man,
Speaker 1: You're gonna have to give us some thoughts here. We
Speaker 1: got to move on. We got every line lit. I
Speaker 1: got a suggestion for President Trump. He needs to tweet
Speaker 1: out that Webster's you know, uh dictionary definition on monkey up.
Speaker 1: And that's that's the way to deal. I I think
Speaker 1: I think it would be good with the deal because
Speaker 1: I think that awesome. Hell yeah, we're all listening, buddy, Okay, Felix,
Speaker 1: we gotta go. I feel like Felix, you know, we
Speaker 1: love you, buddy, but a little too much. Uh. I
Speaker 1: don't know if he was trying to get the satellite
Speaker 1: uplink going there, or his calms were his calms were rough.
Speaker 1: We can't have rough colms here on the show bill
Speaker 1: in Mississippi. Hello, sir, I just wanted to say, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm here here, mm hmm, Okay, I'm sorry. I just
Speaker 1: want to say the only uh Anti people I've seen
Speaker 1: are so mad max Emo wanna be basement dwellers. But
Speaker 1: the reason why I called it, I'm over ifty years old,
Speaker 1: and anybody that's ever listened or had a job or anything,
Speaker 1: when something wrong happens you, you always did somebody say,
Speaker 1: I have somebody throw a monkey ranch in it and
Speaker 1: messed it up. So that's a phrase that I've lived
Speaker 1: with all of my life, is that somebody throwing a
Speaker 1: monkey ranch into something to mess it up. And that's
Speaker 1: all the Santos was doing, was using a praise that
Speaker 1: all of us, if you our entire life. Yep, I
Speaker 1: am not backing down on this one all. I totally
Speaker 1: agree with you, Bill. There is no place whatsoever for
Speaker 1: people to to well. What they're doing is they're lying.
Speaker 1: They're lying about what they think he said. Because it's
Speaker 1: on tape, we can all hear it, and we all
Speaker 1: know what was going on, and it's just you know,
Speaker 1: you think about how much damage could be done if
Speaker 1: people like you and me, Bill listen to the mainstream
Speaker 1: media and listen to the analysis on on MSNBC. You know,
Speaker 1: think about the damage that will be done to to
Speaker 1: De Santis and his family and his reputation. It's it's
Speaker 1: really scandalous what they've done. I mean, it's really it's
Speaker 1: it's beneath contempt to call somebody a racist when you
Speaker 1: know they're not a racist, just because you want to
Speaker 1: ruin them. And that is what the left is doing.
Speaker 1: That's what they're that's their approach here. I think it's. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And the thing that makes it so bad is every
Speaker 1: one of them know and they said it too over
Speaker 1: their life is you know, somebody throw a monkey ridge
Speaker 1: into something that messed it up, you know. So, I
Speaker 1: mean it's not like they don't know bad. They just won't. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, they're they're they're they're playing dumb on this
Speaker 1: one right now because it serves their purposes. Bill. I
Speaker 1: appreciate you calling it from Mississippi Shields High. You know,
Speaker 1: the Democrats, democrats, democrats can't trust them, can't trust them.
Speaker 1: You know they're always always playing fast and loose with
Speaker 1: with the truth. By the way, we are going to
Speaker 1: talk a little more in the in the next hour
Speaker 1: for sure about uh, the Trump Trump Mexico trade deal,
Speaker 1: that that they were saying was not only was the
Speaker 1: deal not gonna happen, they were saying the deal was
Speaker 1: bad and that we were thinking for a trade war.
Speaker 1: Now it looks like the deal is happening and everybody
Speaker 1: thinks it's a good deal and we have Trump to
Speaker 1: thank for it. When does when does the president get
Speaker 1: credit for this stuff? I know that I'm supposed to
Speaker 1: sit around and weep about what my imaginary eight year
Speaker 1: old daughter thinks of about Trump's comments on Hillary. I
Speaker 1: know that that's what they want me to do. Oh
Speaker 1: my god, Trump and hill Um. But no, I just
Speaker 1: look at what's happening to the country. I look around
Speaker 1: that I see so much and I hear about so
Speaker 1: much prosperity. And you know, I I visited one of
Speaker 1: our one of our sponsors actually here on radio. I
Speaker 1: visit one of our sponsors recently, and you know, they've
Speaker 1: gone from a couple of hundred employees to over a
Speaker 1: thousand employees and just the last you know, eighteen months
Speaker 1: or so. Uh, you know, I see these things, and
Speaker 1: I know that you're trying to take a snapshot of
Speaker 1: what's happened to three million people across the country. But
Speaker 1: you know, I remember it was liked in the Obama
Speaker 1: administration when we were being told that America was going
Speaker 1: to have pretty much lackluster growth and our best years
Speaker 1: were behind us, and you know, we just need to
Speaker 1: find a better way to distribute, redistribute the wealth of
Speaker 1: the country already had that's gone away. Doesn't that feel
Speaker 1: better for everybody? Don't you feel like I feel like
Speaker 1: I've got more of a shot. And I'm in a
Speaker 1: brutal business, by the way, but I really do, and
Speaker 1: I feel like I feel like there's a better chance
Speaker 1: right now because of the approach the government's taking. And and
Speaker 1: and really what I mean is it's less likely that
Speaker 1: the government's going to to get in my way. And
Speaker 1: that's enough. That's helpful. It's just such a change in Tony.
Speaker 1: They were writing, they were writing editorials about, you know,
Speaker 1: the in the latter part of the Obama illustration, about
Speaker 1: how you know, it's not Obama's fault, the economy is
Speaker 1: not so great, and you know, this is just the
Speaker 1: way it's gonna be. And now we're finding out what
Speaker 1: was it today? They actually had to revise upward GDP
Speaker 1: growth of the last I think it's from four point
Speaker 1: one to four point two even better. It was great,
Speaker 1: but it's even greater now. You know, we went from
Speaker 1: like eight, you know, even from getting an A to
Speaker 1: getting an A plus. And some are thinking that when
Speaker 1: it comes to economic growth in en we could be
Speaker 1: getting an A plus plus. And I will I will
Speaker 1: tell some of you. I don't know if it's still
Speaker 1: in our arch carves, I should find it. You know,
Speaker 1: late last year I was I did a whole show
Speaker 1: where I said, guys, I'm telling you twenty eighteen is
Speaker 1: gonna be great. The economy is gonna be booming. Don't
Speaker 1: listen to the naysayers. You know, the stock market got
Speaker 1: so hot last December and everybody, you know, with cryptocurrency
Speaker 1: and everything else. And I said, no, good Trump, he
Speaker 1: gets it. He doesn't have these ideological hangups about how
Speaker 1: you didn't build that or you know, it's not you know,
Speaker 1: America is not as great as we think it is,
Speaker 1: and we really need to do more for other countries,
Speaker 1: and climate change is a big national security and economic
Speaker 1: issue we have to address. I mean, all the those
Speaker 1: are ideological impediments to national success. We don't have them
Speaker 1: anymore because we got a different guy at the top
Speaker 1: and different people around him that are executing on an agenda.
Speaker 1: All right, I know, I know more on that in
Speaker 1: the second hour. I gotta finish up on this notion though,
Speaker 1: of of violence if Trump were too or if the
Speaker 1: Republicans were to win, because the left is trying to
Speaker 1: make a lot of this and I've got I have
Speaker 1: definitely some analysis to share it with you on that.
Speaker 1: I think I'm gonna hold off on some of the
Speaker 1: Bruce or and the latest on the Trump Tower and
Speaker 1: the collusion and all this other nonsense until tomorrow because
Speaker 1: my colleague John Solomon at the Hills just broke a
Speaker 1: big piece on it. But I want to I want
Speaker 1: to have John probably join us on that one because
Speaker 1: I want to get into the details with him because
Speaker 1: he's want of broke the story. So we'll get into
Speaker 1: that probably tomorrow. We've got a lot more coming though,
Speaker 1: team um And like I said, that third hour, you
Speaker 1: really if you find the whole transgender rights thing interesting. Uh,
Speaker 1: you really got to stay with me to the third
Speaker 1: hour right of the show, so we'll be right. Quite
Speaker 1: a a snub here, folks. Sarah Palin apparently not just
Speaker 1: not invited to pardon the double negative, they're not but
Speaker 1: it wasn't not invited to McCain's funeral, bright bart And
Speaker 1: this is confirming a People magazine report saying that she
Speaker 1: was told through an intermediary to stay away from the ceremony.
Speaker 1: So it's not even like you weren't invited to the party,
Speaker 1: it's you're not invited and don't show up to the party.
Speaker 1: In this case, obviously it's a funeral, not a party.
Speaker 1: But you know what I mean, I mean, this is
Speaker 1: this is the invite was not lost in the mail.
Speaker 1: This is don't show up, don't show up? Um, this
Speaker 1: is uh wow, you know what a what a slap
Speaker 1: in the what a slap in the face. I'm actually
Speaker 1: a little I guess there was a lot of bad
Speaker 1: blood there for a long time. But anyway, you know,
Speaker 1: thoughts in prayer sue McCain and his family, and you know,
Speaker 1: I know it's a tough time for Megan. I saw
Speaker 1: the h I saw the video today of her and
Speaker 1: it looks she lost her dad. I mean, I can't
Speaker 1: I can't imagine, very very difficult thing. Um. But there
Speaker 1: you know the politics around this, folks. There's still a
Speaker 1: lot of people reporting on it, and you're going to
Speaker 1: see more of this and with the whole paleent situation. Wow,
Speaker 1: but I didn't want to finish up on this. Trump
Speaker 1: warns of of violence, Um if Republicans lose the Fall elections.
Speaker 1: You know, the left is saying this as though Trump
Speaker 1: is somehow instigating or he's the bad guy here. Uh,
Speaker 1: And what they really mean is Trump is pointing out
Speaker 1: that the violence comes from Antifa, right. Trump is is
Speaker 1: pointing out that they will freak out if they lose
Speaker 1: the election. They will, you know, lose their minds even
Speaker 1: more so. I don't know what that looks like. Um,
Speaker 1: I don't know what that looks like. But also warns
Speaker 1: of violence. I Republicans lose the fall, lose the Fall elections.
Speaker 1: So if they lose, there will be violence. If they win,
Speaker 1: there will be violence. That's not as contradictory as some
Speaker 1: people think because the violence comes from the left and
Speaker 1: if they feel like they are ascending and there in power,
Speaker 1: then they'll be but you know, then then you'll have
Speaker 1: antifall all fired up and everything goes. If they lose,
Speaker 1: they'll lose their minds even more. This is the equivalent
Speaker 1: that sort of trump you an equivalent of what I
Speaker 1: used to I used to joke around when I was
Speaker 1: the University of Massachusetts Amherst. I'd go visit, you know,
Speaker 1: I was down the street at Amer's College. And when uh,
Speaker 1: the Patriots would win, some people would riot and light
Speaker 1: trash cans on fire and flip over cars if it
Speaker 1: was a really big game. And when the Patriots would lose,
Speaker 1: some people would riot and flip over cars and uh,
Speaker 1: act like maniacs. And you might see to yourself, what, well,
Speaker 1: that's just because that's what they wanted to do. They
Speaker 1: are too emotionally invested in this. They need to calm down,
Speaker 1: and they are going to act poorly. That is like Antifa.
Speaker 1: If the Democrats win, there will in fact be uh,
Speaker 1: you know, there will in fact be Antifa movements that
Speaker 1: feel like they are you know that this is a
Speaker 1: moment where they should make a statement, and they're gonna
Speaker 1: want to push even more and push even harder. And
Speaker 1: if they lose Oh my gosh. Then then they're really
Speaker 1: then they're really going to think that the dark Knight
Speaker 1: of fascism has arrived at this country. And we you know,
Speaker 1: and I worry that some of them start to take
Speaker 1: the rhetoric seriously and then things because what we've seen
Speaker 1: so far, yes there's violence, there's destruction from Antifa, but
Speaker 1: you know, it hasn't yet crossed over in that threshold
Speaker 1: of all out riots or you know, Antifa hasn't yet
Speaker 1: burned down whole neighborhoods. But we did see that under
Speaker 1: the Obama administration when Black Lives Matter, Remember, neighborhoods were
Speaker 1: burned down, folks. You know, I'm even Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Where it's forgotten out of most residents, But there were
Speaker 1: massive riots, uh after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
Speaker 1: And a whole the whole section of a neighborhood got
Speaker 1: burned down. So it's not that far back in our
Speaker 1: history that those kind of things have happened. And I
Speaker 1: do think that it's worth noting that there was no
Speaker 1: realistic expectation that no matter what happens on the Republican
Speaker 1: side there there's not gonna be right wing riots in
Speaker 1: the streets. This is not gonna happen. But with a
Speaker 1: with Antifa, they were gonna be ryants. I think no
Speaker 1: matter what, I just couldn't tell you right now which one.
Speaker 1: I think it'll be bigger if they lose, but they'll
Speaker 1: still be pretty substantial destruction and and really you know,
Speaker 1: abhorrent activity from the left even if even if they
Speaker 1: win the House, because they'll feel like that's a validation
Speaker 1: of their crazy anti fascist or whatever they call it beliefs.
Speaker 1: So it's heads you win, tails you lose that you
Speaker 1: heads you win. Gosh buck, you know, can't food and
Speaker 1: once can't get can't get fooled again. I'm trying to
Speaker 1: do this. Heads you lose, tales they win. There you go.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm trying to say. Uh we we will
Speaker 1: discuss Google and whether it is biased. Trump called them
Speaker 1: out for it. I've got that coming up for you.
Speaker 1: Also the Mexico US and Canada trade deal and then
Speaker 1: third Hour rapid onset gender dys for you. That's coming up, folks.
Speaker 1: I'm really into home security. It's essential wherever you are
Speaker 1: across the country, whether you're in a city or out
Speaker 1: in the countryside. By yourself. That's why I'm such a
Speaker 1: fan of Simply Save home Security. I know I talked
Speaker 1: to you about them on the show regularly. It's because
Speaker 1: they're an incredible company, folks. I got some news for you.
Speaker 1: They're worth over a billion dollars now. With a simply
Speaker 1: Safe system, you get protection against intruders, fires, working even
Speaker 1: during power outages or down WiFi. So if somebody comes
Speaker 1: in realizes you have a simply Safe system and tries
Speaker 1: to break it, it'll keep working even if they smash
Speaker 1: your keypad. Okay. The system is so easy to use.
Speaker 1: Even I can use them. I'm not so good with technology.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you this is the system for you. Order
Speaker 1: your simply Safe system now. My listeners get free shipping
Speaker 1: and free returns. Just visit simply safe dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's simply safe dot Com slash buck protector at home
Speaker 1: today with again simply Safe dot Com slash Buck month
Speaker 1: for full monitoring. Folks. Check it out for yourself. Simply
Speaker 1: Safe dot Com slash Buck. Yeah. I think Google is
Speaker 1: really taking advantage of a lot of people, and I
Speaker 1: think that's a very serious thing, and it's a very
Speaker 1: serious charge. I think what Google and what others are doing.
Speaker 1: If you look at what's going on in Twitter, if
Speaker 1: you look at what's going on and Facebook, Uh, they
Speaker 1: better be careful because you're you can't do that to people.
Speaker 1: You can't do it. We have tremendous we have literally
Speaker 1: thousands and thousands of complaints coming in and you just
Speaker 1: can't do that. So I think that Google and Twitter
Speaker 1: and Facebook, they're really treading on very, very troubled territory
Speaker 1: and they have to be careful. It's not fair to
Speaker 1: large force is of the population. The President still still
Speaker 1: staying staying on message here about these social media giants
Speaker 1: and the way that they are affecting a discourse in
Speaker 1: this country. Folks. It's this is the single most important
Speaker 1: issue that people don't get fired up about right now. Well,
Speaker 1: some people do, but this should be considered a much,
Speaker 1: a much bigger thing in the minds of a lot
Speaker 1: of folks in my opinion than it is. Because this
Speaker 1: they can control the way we discuss political issues, They
Speaker 1: can control the way that information is shared, and they
Speaker 1: can do it without having uh, you know, transparency. They
Speaker 1: can do it without us even knowing what's going on.
Speaker 1: Right at least when they used to have the full
Speaker 1: mainstream media at their disposal. At least when that was
Speaker 1: the case, it was clear who was saying what, and
Speaker 1: it was is that they were, you know, presenting one
Speaker 1: side of the story. Um, you know, here's the and then,
Speaker 1: by the way, you know Eric Weinstein, who's one of
Speaker 1: these liberal professors that has realized that the liberal left
Speaker 1: has lost their minds um he he did an experiment
Speaker 1: today to show that because because here's what happens. They
Speaker 1: you know, Facebook gets caught and says, oh no, we're
Speaker 1: not doing that, and then it turns out they are.
Speaker 1: Twitter gets caught and says, oh no, we're not doing that,
Speaker 1: and then they get and then they say, okay, we are. Uh.
Speaker 1: And and that's because people push them on this. Here's
Speaker 1: Eric Weinstein, who is this this uh, managing director at
Speaker 1: at Oh I'm sorry, manage director at Teal Capital. I'm
Speaker 1: I'm wrong about about his background. I thought he was.
Speaker 1: I was confusing him with a different with a professor. Um,
Speaker 1: but he's at a Teal Capital, he says. From gun
Speaker 1: control to mind control. Tried locating non gun products on
Speaker 1: Google yesterday with guns in the name glue, Guns Gone, Pistol,
Speaker 1: and he's nope, soldering guns, gone shotgun microphones, forget about it,
Speaker 1: poof with the flick of a switch. Uh, folks. He
Speaker 1: shared all this on I mean this one viral. He
Speaker 1: shared all this on Google. Explain to me how their
Speaker 1: algorithm is not making a political statement. How Google's algorithm
Speaker 1: is not changing what you see, folks, when you look
Speaker 1: for an issue that you care about, when you look
Speaker 1: to buy something, when you look to be connected with
Speaker 1: something or someone on the Internet, and you use search
Speaker 1: thinking that it's just gonna give you the best, the
Speaker 1: most efficient, the most accurate. Explain to me how it
Speaker 1: is that when this guy and he has all the screenshots.
Speaker 1: Eric Wantey at Teal Capital, very serious venture capital funded
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley, Okay, that this guy is just saying, look,
Speaker 1: this is crazy. He did a search for glue gun
Speaker 1: on Google Shopping and nothing shows up. He does a
Speaker 1: search for squirt gun on Google Shopping and nothing comes up.
Speaker 1: I need someone to explain to how that can happen.
Speaker 1: And there's so many other instances of this, folks, where
Speaker 1: you know that there's something is up, and to tell
Speaker 1: me that the algorithm but no, I'm sorry, that's that's
Speaker 1: not what's I refuse to accept their idiotic explanations for this.
Speaker 1: These are folks. Social media giants are very smart. Uh,
Speaker 1: and and the people running them are very intelligent. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's not let's not get this twisted. They know what
Speaker 1: they're doing, they understand the power they have, They have
Speaker 1: almost unlimited funds and resources. And we're just beginning to
Speaker 1: come to grips with the fact I think as a
Speaker 1: country that these social media companies are as liberal as
Speaker 1: the faculty lounge at Brown University. And they are. They
Speaker 1: are liberal propagandists. And the only reason that they're not
Speaker 1: being open and honest about this is because is they
Speaker 1: don't want to lose market share. They want to maintain
Speaker 1: their power and all the wealth and all the money
Speaker 1: that comes with all this. Uh. But you know this
Speaker 1: is this is becoming something that they can hide from anymore.
Speaker 1: They will not be able to keep keep claiming nothing
Speaker 1: goes on. I mean, this is you know I shared
Speaker 1: on the weekend or this on Twitter because Twitter said
Speaker 1: that death threats against Dana Lash's children did not violate
Speaker 1: the platform's policies last week. I told you about that, right, Well,
Speaker 1: this is what I said in response to it. When
Speaker 1: a social media company makes the wrong decision, it's a mistake.
Speaker 1: When it keeps making the wrong decision, it's a policy.
Speaker 1: When it won't stop making the wrong decision, it's politics.
Speaker 1: And that's where we are now. They get caught and
Speaker 1: we see that, you know, sure enough, they they are
Speaker 1: doing the thing that they claim to not be doing.
Speaker 1: They get caught doing it, and then they caught doing
Speaker 1: it multiple times, so it's not you know, aberrant, it's
Speaker 1: not a one off. And then they say, well, you
Speaker 1: know it's not where we're not really doing it or
Speaker 1: we're gonna fix it and something. And then then they
Speaker 1: let us know they're not really gonna stop doing it.
Speaker 1: It's because they want to do it. They just don't
Speaker 1: want to be caught. They don't want to have to
Speaker 1: deal with the consequences of it. Uh. You know this,
Speaker 1: this is not going to get better anytime soon. This
Speaker 1: is gonna keep getting worse and worse. Uh. And the
Speaker 1: denial that Google has, you know, Google denying um that
Speaker 1: they have any politics whatsoever. I mean today on Google Maps,
Speaker 1: you may have seen this the Rayburn building was I
Speaker 1: think was Rayburn? No no wait, I'm getting my build
Speaker 1: I'm getting my congressional buildings, and it wasn't Rayburn. I'm
Speaker 1: forgetting which one it was now, but whatever, want one
Speaker 1: of the the Senate building that they say they're gonna
Speaker 1: rename for um, you know, renamed for McCain, which has
Speaker 1: now become this this issue that I don't think, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's gonna the Russell Building, not Rayburn,
Speaker 1: thank you, sorry, the Russell Building, pardon me, folks. The
Speaker 1: Russell Building on Google Maps today was renamed in favor
Speaker 1: of John McCain. They already did it and then they
Speaker 1: changed it back. You know, Google on different days will
Speaker 1: have you know, all their search stuff will be rainbow
Speaker 1: for like Gay Pride month or all. And they're making
Speaker 1: statements and they're making decisions all the time, just like
Speaker 1: news organizations are. And they can do that. They are
Speaker 1: private companies, but they should at least be honest about it.
Speaker 1: And then there's this other point that I don't think
Speaker 1: enough people understand or hear about. And then is that okay,
Speaker 1: private company, yes, but the FCC regulates private companies. Sinclair
Speaker 1: was not able to merge with Tribune because of the FCC, folks,
Speaker 1: which was just infringing upon speech and free association. And
Speaker 1: you know, it was a corporate merger that wouldn't get
Speaker 1: a because of some bs about reach into local communities
Speaker 1: that the FCC regulates based on the old cable model.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's crazy. So I don't think that this
Speaker 1: is as simple and straightforward just oh well, they're private companies,
Speaker 1: so they can do whatever they want. If they are
Speaker 1: going to be the massive arbiters of what we're hearing,
Speaker 1: what we're seeing, what we're buying, that they are, then
Speaker 1: they will be subject regulation. You'll notice the Democrats are
Speaker 1: a little quiet on regulation of this stuff because they
Speaker 1: don't want to have regulations go into place. When there's
Speaker 1: a Republican administration and a Republican House and Senate. Usually
Speaker 1: they love regulation. Usually they think it's fantastic to regulate
Speaker 1: all kinds of things. I think that's I think it's
Speaker 1: a very it's very important. Look, Google is there's stuff
Speaker 1: going on in Google. There's no question in my mind.
Speaker 1: Search is an immensely powerful thing to have control over
Speaker 1: and to to be able to just say, oh, it's
Speaker 1: just the algorithm. You know, we have no say in this,
Speaker 1: or it's ut there's nothing we can do to change this.
Speaker 1: That's very very convenient, my friends. It's very convenient, and
Speaker 1: it's not true. And Trump is calling them out. And
Speaker 1: that's why there's there's some nervousness in some quarters here
Speaker 1: because I think there's a recognition that the the game
Speaker 1: is changing here. This is not gonna be able to
Speaker 1: continue on, and these social media companies they're gonna feel
Speaker 1: in there while it's eventually if they don't, you know,
Speaker 1: start being an actual neutral pathways to speech and and
Speaker 1: searching all the rest of it. Eight four four nine
Speaker 1: to eight to five eight four four nine hundred buck.
Speaker 1: We will discuss a bit of CNN's need to backpedal
Speaker 1: on something that they won't backpedal on, and then also
Speaker 1: wrap it onset gender. Just for your fascinating concept. I
Speaker 1: think you'll probably hear better here for the first time,
Speaker 1: but you'll be really interested. I know I was to
Speaker 1: read about it. Uh, And that's all coming up. Hiring
Speaker 1: is challenging, folks, But there's one place you can go
Speaker 1: where hiring is simple, fast and smart, a place where
Speaker 1: growing businesses connect to qualified candidates. That place is zip
Speaker 1: recruiter dot com slash buck, Folks, I have colleagues at
Speaker 1: the Hill that we got through zip recruiter. I have
Speaker 1: used this interface. I know how simple it is, how
Speaker 1: effective it is. If you want to hire somebody for
Speaker 1: any job, but particularly to get a job that involves
Speaker 1: any kind of a skilled laborer, or you need somebody
Speaker 1: you know quickly who's the best at whatever it is,
Speaker 1: you want to go to zip recruiter. Go to zip
Speaker 1: recruiter dot com, slash buck, zip recruiter dot com slash buck. Folks,
Speaker 1: that's what you want, I'm telling you you can try
Speaker 1: it for free. That's right free at this exclusive web address.
Speaker 1: Hire for whatever your job needs are at zip recruiter
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck. Zip recruiters the smartest way to hire.
Speaker 1: You're gonna get great candidates so quickly and fill that
Speaker 1: job with the best possible person at zip recruiter. I'm
Speaker 1: going to tell our Naster partners that I intend to
Speaker 1: immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a
Speaker 1: better deal by a lot, not just a little, by
Speaker 1: a lot for our workers. A Trump administration will end
Speaker 1: that war by getting a fair deal for the American
Speaker 1: people and the American worker. The era of economic surrender
Speaker 1: will finally be over. I think it's a very growthy
Speaker 1: trade deal. This thing does a lot. It keeps the
Speaker 1: integrated supply chain going in North America. That is huge
Speaker 1: for business confidence. Um, it opens up a lot of markets.
Speaker 1: It protects intellectual property. It actually extends some patents and
Speaker 1: copyrights for new drugs. All this is very helpful. It
Speaker 1: protects workers, Okay, it has a higher domestic or North
Speaker 1: American content. That's a good thing because you know, we
Speaker 1: don't really want China to uh to come on and encroach.
Speaker 1: They won't let us in their place, so we're gonna
Speaker 1: have to protect our own workers. It shows you two
Speaker 1: sides with goodwill can sit down and work out what
Speaker 1: is essentially a free trade deal, free trade, fair trade
Speaker 1: and get it going. Nobody thought we could do it.
Speaker 1: You know, it wasn't that amazing. That was Trump on
Speaker 1: the campaign trail saying what he was gonna do. That
Speaker 1: was then, and this is now Larry Coudlow saying, yeah,
Speaker 1: they look, we got this deal. Gun looks like it's
Speaker 1: going through. It's great. It's pro growth, protects us but
Speaker 1: fair to them, and it's just gonna be good all around.
Speaker 1: But wait a second, I thought Trump was a buffoon
Speaker 1: who couldn't do anything on the economy. I thought Trump
Speaker 1: didn't know anything. Oh wow, following through and yet yet
Speaker 1: another promise. Here on this U S. Mexico trade deal,
Speaker 1: he's looking good. You know. I had a union rep.
Speaker 1: It was very union like on my on my TV
Speaker 1: show today and and I'm we I got talking. He
Speaker 1: was a represents as steel workers or iron workers and
Speaker 1: iron workers I think, and he was saying, yeah, you
Speaker 1: know this, we gotta see what's in the I prip.
Speaker 1: But it's actually pretty good deal. So I'm like, okay,
Speaker 1: So now we get even union people are saying it's
Speaker 1: a pretty good deal. Free trade people are saying it's
Speaker 1: a pretty good deal. Maybe it is just a pretty
Speaker 1: good deal. And you know, at some point, I think
Speaker 1: it's fair to take stock of what the media was
Speaker 1: saying was gonna happen versus what has happened. Trump said
Speaker 1: he was going to get a great deal. Here we
Speaker 1: are now talking about this deal. It could be really
Speaker 1: really good. What were they saying about this though? Um,
Speaker 1: they were they were claiming that. Well, here here's what
Speaker 1: they were originally saying. Play clip for We're in the
Speaker 1: Mason stages of a full scale trade war, and the
Speaker 1: President simply seems to want to escalate. It's not just
Speaker 1: my state that is involved here, it's our nation. It
Speaker 1: has significant consequences for us here at home, not only
Speaker 1: just economically politically. If you alienate Mexico over the wall,
Speaker 1: over and and over knocked that, what you end up
Speaker 1: doing is electing this summer a much more nationalistic, much
Speaker 1: more radical Mexican president who will not cooperate. Well, that's
Speaker 1: what they were saying. Now where are we? Oh well,
Speaker 1: why don't we hear from um? Why don't we hear
Speaker 1: from the Mexican government? Actually, because you know you're hearing there.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, it's gonna be so bad Trump. Can't
Speaker 1: you know? Trump, we're in a trade war in Mexico.
Speaker 1: Is gonna respond with all kinds of punitive person all
Speaker 1: what what terrors is Mexican really gonna get in a
Speaker 1: trade war with US? I don't think so, right, But
Speaker 1: what does the Mexican government think of this? Because I'm
Speaker 1: sure that there's some Democrats who, in their usual whatever
Speaker 1: Trump is doing is bad, whatever Trump is for I'm
Speaker 1: against mindset, would say, well, you know, the Mexican government
Speaker 1: is not they're not getting as good a deal here
Speaker 1: or something. Well, here's what the Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Speaker 1: for for Mexico starts play five. It's really significance. I
Speaker 1: think it's a breakthrough and it shows that two countries
Speaker 1: can actually get together and do a good deal, and
Speaker 1: a good deal for both of them. That is reciprocal,
Speaker 1: that is fair, and we allow growth on both sides.
Speaker 1: Is good for Mexican workers, is good for the American worker.
Speaker 1: I think that's a brilliant deal. Okay, so can someone
Speaker 1: tell me where where Trump has been wrong? Here? Can
Speaker 1: somebody tell me how you know how this is the disaster? Oh,
Speaker 1: it's a trade war and look what Trump is doing.
Speaker 1: And um meanwhile, you know we see this and this
Speaker 1: is looking good hole around for I mean, isn't it
Speaker 1: just amazing when you at what point do we start
Speaker 1: to say it's it's It must be like the media
Speaker 1: doesn't really believe what they're saying, or or they just
Speaker 1: don't mind being wrong all the time. They are wrong
Speaker 1: all the time on this stuff. They keep being wrong
Speaker 1: when it comes to Trump. This is why, you know,
Speaker 1: even when I'm not even sure and hey, those of
Speaker 1: you losing the show No. Early on with the whole
Speaker 1: trade thing. I was saying, guys, Trump has earned the right,
Speaker 1: in my mind to do this his way. He's beaten,
Speaker 1: he's beaten the conventional wisdoms so many times. Am I
Speaker 1: really going to be the one to sit here and say, well,
Speaker 1: are you gonna free trade? Free trade? He has single
Speaker 1: handedly changed our national conversation about trade, broken us out
Speaker 1: of the constraints of whatever the trade deals were that
Speaker 1: we had were the best deals. It's just it makes
Speaker 1: no sense when you approach you just as a reasonable person.
Speaker 1: But the echo chamber effect was so strong. Trump has
Speaker 1: broken out of that, and now he's already getting results.
Speaker 1: And even though he's showing results, they're still wrong all
Speaker 1: the time. Here's a on on CNN. This was just
Speaker 1: the last in the last few days. Uh. Here here's
Speaker 1: what I'm sorry. Yeah, this is a Washington Post reporter
Speaker 1: on CNN. Play clip six. Trump really needs a win, right,
Speaker 1: He needs a win before the midterms. He wants to
Speaker 1: be able to say that he has renegotiated and after.
Speaker 1: In that case, he needs Canada on board. And you
Speaker 1: have this very short window to get Canada on board.
Speaker 1: Otherwise the whole deal could fall apart on the Mexico side.
Speaker 1: We love Canada and we want to have Canada as
Speaker 1: part of the deal. But in case of there that
Speaker 1: for whatever reason Kinda is not able to join, well
Speaker 1: we'll still have a deal with the US and we'll
Speaker 1: move on. So that was what they were saying. You
Speaker 1: know that, okay, And to be fair, not a full
Speaker 1: scale prediction that Canada wouldn't be a part of this,
Speaker 1: but you know, very very concerned, and Trump needs a win.
Speaker 1: Here's a headline from just a couple of hours ago, folks,
Speaker 1: Canada rejoins nough to talks as US autos tariff details emerge.
Speaker 1: You know, this is uh, it's almost like Trump's approach
Speaker 1: to all this stuff is working and he's right, and
Speaker 1: these naysayers are are wrong. And the haters in the media,
Speaker 1: that's right, the haters in the media, they are just
Speaker 1: they get angrier as they go along because Trump keeps
Speaker 1: showing that he understands this stuff better than they do
Speaker 1: and he's in a better place on this one. Oh.
Speaker 1: By the way, this is over at MSNBC. Here's what
Speaker 1: they're saying about the deal. Play seven. I think it's
Speaker 1: a great big PR stunt. This isn't maga. Okay, this
Speaker 1: isn't going to do a lot for the American economy
Speaker 1: or workers. In fact, in NAFTA was never a problem.
Speaker 1: The whole thing is like a phony issue. He's just
Speaker 1: making everything up as he goes along. There is no
Speaker 1: there is no deal. He says he can get Canada
Speaker 1: to step in and do a deal in a day. No, no,
Speaker 1: he can't. He's come up with a name for a deal.
Speaker 1: There's only one problem. He's got no deal. How wrong
Speaker 1: can one guy be in one day? I mean, Joe
Speaker 1: Scarborough seems like he's trying to hit the Guinness Book
Speaker 1: of World Records. And and with Scarborough, this is just
Speaker 1: all about ego by the way, you know he he
Speaker 1: he feels snubbed by Trump and now he's trying to
Speaker 1: tell everybody how terrible Trump is all the time and
Speaker 1: act like he's so much smarter than Trump when he's
Speaker 1: just making a buffoon of himself. I mean that the U. S.
Speaker 1: Mexico deal is a PR stunt that's just idiotic, and
Speaker 1: and trade real trade experts say that we no matter what,
Speaker 1: need to update NAFTA. It's not a PR stunt. So
Speaker 1: you've got idiots going on TV at MSNBC saying stupid stuff.
Speaker 1: You've got Joe Scarborough there who just looks, you know,
Speaker 1: all the time, it's the same thing with him, looks
Speaker 1: like Trump is, you know, putting the proverbial turd and
Speaker 1: the punch bowl in front of him. And meanwhile, the
Speaker 1: country is actually getting getting a great deal out of
Speaker 1: this and things are going really well, and it's because
Speaker 1: of Trump, I think. Um, the reporting of this story
Speaker 1: got mixed up and in the course of a criminal investigation,
Speaker 1: we were not the source of the story find it
Speaker 1: to be. And obviously this is a high bar one
Speaker 1: of the most humiliating and scandalous moments and the entire
Speaker 1: media behavior of the Trump Russia saga. You know, I've
Speaker 1: been on your show to talk about a lot of
Speaker 1: these humiliating moments, and this might be one of the
Speaker 1: worst ones yet. Um, keep in mind that, in addition
Speaker 1: to all the facts that you just what's so crucial
Speaker 1: about this is that after Lannie Davis went on CNN
Speaker 1: with Anderson Cooper, into Anderson Cooper's shock, admitted that everything
Speaker 1: CNN had been breathlessly hyping is true was actually false.
Speaker 1: Namely that Michael Cohen was there when Trump learned about
Speaker 1: the Trump Tower meeting in advance. The Washington Post in
Speaker 1: the New York Post listened to that and they said,
Speaker 1: wait a minute, we independently confirmed CNN stories based on
Speaker 1: an anonymous source, and our anonymous source was Lannie Davis,
Speaker 1: who was now saying the whole thing is false. So
Speaker 1: they did what they had to do and what they
Speaker 1: what they should have done, which is they attracted the story.
Speaker 1: They outed their own source. They said, our anonymous sources
Speaker 1: Lannie Davis, and we now attracted because he says its fault.
Speaker 1: CNN couldn't do that because they lied to the entire world.
Speaker 1: They said, as you just played that, they tried to
Speaker 1: get ahold of Lannie Davis and he refused to comment,
Speaker 1: when in fact, of course Lannie Davis was also their source,
Speaker 1: and they don't want to admit that they lied to
Speaker 1: the world. So there they can't retract the story, um,
Speaker 1: and they can't admit they lied, So they're just continuing
Speaker 1: to stick to what everybody knows it a lie, but
Speaker 1: not many people care because people think a lot of
Speaker 1: people anyway that it was done for the right political agenda.
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you, I was Glenn Greenwall. He was
Speaker 1: on Fox there on Tucker Show. He's totally right, folks,
Speaker 1: This this debacle at CNN is delicious. You know, it's
Speaker 1: not an apple, it's a banana, or it's not a banana,
Speaker 1: it's an apple. Facts. First, the most trusted name and
Speaker 1: news all that stuff, CNN so full of crap. First
Speaker 1: of all, they they you know, they they always talking
Speaker 1: about their reporting and and they're really just often printing
Speaker 1: gossip about Trump from whomever they can get it from.
Speaker 1: And and they don't care if it's true, if it's plausible,
Speaker 1: it doesn't really matter. It doesn't really matter. They're really
Speaker 1: just looking for a way to hit Trump, and any
Speaker 1: excuse that they can get to hit Trump they are, uh,
Speaker 1: they are happy with. And even if it means that
Speaker 1: they have to eventually walk it back or or admit
Speaker 1: that it was you know, total and utter nonsense, they
Speaker 1: they just don't care. But in this case, it's so
Speaker 1: over the line. I mean, they have gone so beyond
Speaker 1: the bounds of what a news organization should be, you know,
Speaker 1: willing to do here or you know, how it should
Speaker 1: correct itself, how it should police itself. The folks they've
Speaker 1: lost they have lost it over there, they really have.
Speaker 1: They have lost their minds. So so just so I
Speaker 1: can give you the details, You're probably like, Buck, what
Speaker 1: the heck are you talking about? Right, because I love
Speaker 1: this stuffs and we're so serious. Yeah. Right, Uh, here's
Speaker 1: what happened. So there's this big story from Jim Shooto,
Speaker 1: former Obama administration appoint Jim Shootot. You never hear him.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe we should just start calling it liberal CNN.
Speaker 1: You know, they used to introduce me on CNN's air as,
Speaker 1: you know, conservative political pundit, and then they would say
Speaker 1: and political analyst Van Jones, Well, why am I conservative
Speaker 1: political pundit? But he's just a political analyist. Someone explained
Speaker 1: that to me. I mean, I actually spent real time
Speaker 1: working with the government. He's some guy who got famous
Speaker 1: for getting fired from the White House, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: what exactly makes that determination? You know, we should just
Speaker 1: start saying liberal CNN, Liberal ABC, you know, liberal MSNBC.
Speaker 1: They say conservative Fox News, so why not? But but
Speaker 1: liberal CNN with the Jim Shooto. Uh Bernstein, Carl Bernstein
Speaker 1: of Woodward and Bernstein fam Man, that guy has been
Speaker 1: dining out on that whole thing for a long time. Uh.
Speaker 1: And one other journalists I forget who over there, big
Speaker 1: journal Three guys on the by line for this story
Speaker 1: that says that Michael Cohen, according to sources, Michael Cohen, Um,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Yeah, Michael Cohen knew that Trump was uh
Speaker 1: knew about the meeting at Trump Tower before it happened.
Speaker 1: So Cohen, Trump's lawyer says, Trump knew about the Russia
Speaker 1: meeting at Trump Tower with vezzlant Sky before it happened.
Speaker 1: Would this, by the way, be criminal? No, I mean
Speaker 1: it just but it feeds into the oh my gosh
Speaker 1: collusion and Russia frenzy and all that stuff CMN side
Speaker 1: multiple sources. The problem with that is that Cohen had
Speaker 1: said to Congress under oath that he did not know
Speaker 1: that that Trump did not know in advance of the meeting.
Speaker 1: So now if that is in fact true, if seen
Speaker 1: in stories true, Cohen is in perjury jeopardy. So Lannie Davis,
Speaker 1: who is Cohen's lawyer, goes out and says, oh, we'll
Speaker 1: hold on a second. Um, you know this is not true,
Speaker 1: this is inaccurate. And then the Washington Post comes out
Speaker 1: and says, Okay, well, we ran that story too, and
Speaker 1: Lannie Davis was our was our source for it. So
Speaker 1: Lannie Davis was the source for the Washington Post version
Speaker 1: of the Trump knew about the rush about the Trump
Speaker 1: Tower meeting Donald Trump Senior new before it happened. The
Speaker 1: Post says, okay, Landy Davis was our source. If he
Speaker 1: saying that's not true, then it's not true. CNN, however,
Speaker 1: refuses to the Post retracted their story. CNN refuses to
Speaker 1: retract their story, claiming multiple sources, and they say that
Speaker 1: you know that their critics don't know the full extent
Speaker 1: of their sourcing, and so they won't change anything. They
Speaker 1: won't walk it back. And then on top of it,
Speaker 1: you look at this, you say, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: who's going to know more about this? Who's gonna know
Speaker 1: more about Michael Cohen's position on this than Michael Cohen's lawyer, Folks,
Speaker 1: who's gonna know more? To answer, is nobody's gonna know more? So?
Speaker 1: Is it is CNN story even believable? No, it's not believable.
Speaker 1: Now that that Cohen says that Trump or Cohen's going
Speaker 1: to testify to the Special Counsel that's what got people
Speaker 1: really excited that Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting
Speaker 1: before it happened. Right, it's just not it's not credible
Speaker 1: as a story. But then on the sourcing issue, here's
Speaker 1: where CNN got itself into a lot of trouble. Uh,
Speaker 1: And this is why they won't back out of it.
Speaker 1: They didn't just say that they had multiple sources. They
Speaker 1: said multiple sources for the story and Lanny and and
Speaker 1: they asked Lanny Davis for a comment and he didn't
Speaker 1: have one. They were intentionally trying to throw people off
Speaker 1: the scent of their source, who clearly is Lanny Davis
Speaker 1: at least one of their sources, right, I mean, clearly
Speaker 1: it's Lanny Davis. Okay to anybody who's being serious about this.
Speaker 1: But they were dishonest because they wanted to make it
Speaker 1: seem like they were checking all the boxes so that
Speaker 1: they asked Cohen's lawyer, but they also wanted to cover
Speaker 1: for the fact that the source was the lawyer. This
Speaker 1: is you know, this is like patting a bibliography when
Speaker 1: you're writing a paper. You can't do this. It's unethical,
Speaker 1: it's wrong. CNN did it, and they're not gonna walk
Speaker 1: it back because they know that in the current media
Speaker 1: climate it would create an even bigger feeding frenzy for
Speaker 1: them to walk it back, I think. And the reason
Speaker 1: for that is this isn't this goes into this big
Speaker 1: bin of this was not a good faith error. All right,
Speaker 1: this is not a good favor. But we we have
Speaker 1: the initial Here play a play clip twelve. This is
Speaker 1: the initial reporting they did on our play. Sources with
Speaker 1: knowledge tell myself and Carl that Michael Cohen claims that
Speaker 1: then candidate Donald Trump knew in advance about the June
Speaker 1: meeting and Trump Tower, in which Russians were expected to
Speaker 1: offer his campaign dirt on Hillary Clinton. Crucially, these sources
Speaker 1: tell us that Cohen is willing to make that assertion
Speaker 1: to the Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It's very, very significant
Speaker 1: because the president has denied any fore knowledge of this event,
Speaker 1: and this meeting goes to the question of intent to collude.
Speaker 1: You've been saying for a year that we need to
Speaker 1: follow the money, follow the figure out this cover up.
Speaker 1: So how did you do it in this case? Talk
Speaker 1: us about how you got this reporting. Well, I talked
Speaker 1: to sources. Cohen was saying that Donald Trump the candidate
Speaker 1: for president of the United States at the time, had
Speaker 1: authorized the go ahead for that meeting to take place
Speaker 1: with his son. All wrong and and and if not
Speaker 1: outright lies about the sources, certainly dishonest, certainly trying to
Speaker 1: play fast and loose with the truth. And let me
Speaker 1: just say this, folks, You know this is you know, see,
Speaker 1: if CNN wants to be the opposition to Trump, that's fine.
Speaker 1: They have a First Amendment right to be the opposition
Speaker 1: to Trump. But we all have a First Amendment right
Speaker 1: as well to say that they're being dishonest about it,
Speaker 1: that they're lying, that they are often guilty of fake news.
Speaker 1: And this goes into the theory that I've told you
Speaker 1: for a long time, which is that when you have
Speaker 1: every wrong media story that has to be retracted or corrected,
Speaker 1: he's damnag jing to one person and one political one
Speaker 1: political party, and never do they have to attract your
Speaker 1: corrector story that is favorable. We understand that there's more
Speaker 1: at work here than just making errors. This is agenda driven.
Speaker 1: And I don't even think that they necessarily get that.
Speaker 1: They're not upset about the mistakes they've made if it's
Speaker 1: damaging enough in the short term to Trump and feeds
Speaker 1: enough of the anti Trump frenzy. I think they are.
Speaker 1: They're fine with running fake news and then doing triage afterwards.
Speaker 1: They'd rather run with the false story that's damaging day
Speaker 1: one and then day seven, because remember they don't correct
Speaker 1: it right away, they slow walk it day and then
Speaker 1: day seven they'll issue some and not retraction but a correction.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, so the basic premise that whole story wasn't correct,
Speaker 1: but you know, we stand by the rest of it.
Speaker 1: This is how, this is how to play the game
Speaker 1: over there, and this is why all of the chin
Speaker 1: wagging and all the pompous b s from the the
Speaker 1: biggest names at CNN. People are just rejecting it, you know,
Speaker 1: and and anyone who's being honest with themselves. You know,
Speaker 1: if if you want that, if you want hashtag resistance,
Speaker 1: you should turn on MSNBC, because at least you know
Speaker 1: what you're getting with CNN. They are living in a
Speaker 1: fantasy land and that this story is still out there
Speaker 1: and they think that they can get away with this.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, multiple sources stuff is preposterous, utterly and completely preposterous.
Speaker 1: But you know this, this is what you're dealing with them,
Speaker 1: you know, the most trusted name and news. Yeah right, alright, team,
Speaker 1: stay with me. We'll be back in just a moment.
Speaker 1: We are going to talk about the rapid onset gender dysphoria,
Speaker 1: which is I think you're gonna look, we're gonna go
Speaker 1: deep into that discussion. You'll know more about it for
Speaker 1: listening to this show than I bet pretty much any
Speaker 1: other show in the country right now, because I really
Speaker 1: have done some research into it. Very big, uh well
Speaker 1: scandal on campus about this, but it affects the whole
Speaker 1: discussion about transgenderism and transgender rights and tells you a
Speaker 1: lot about the tyrannical left and how it does what
Speaker 1: it does. We'll be right back with that more. I
Speaker 1: also proved that the polls still are are pretty useless
Speaker 1: when it comes to some of this stuff, because none
Speaker 1: of the polls had him winning. Um, which just makes
Speaker 1: you think, Okay, who knows what's actually gonna happen when
Speaker 1: you when you get to November. Yeah, sort of what
Speaker 1: we saw in to a lot of the posters scratching
Speaker 1: their heads trying to figure out the result after the fact.
Speaker 1: Andrew Gillham here the Tallahassee mayor on the Democratic side.
Speaker 1: I read this morning he didn't lead in a single
Speaker 1: poll in the run up to this, So that tells you,
Speaker 1: you know, we're we're sort of flying blind journalist, trying
Speaker 1: to see what's going to happen. Yeah, exactly, Florida. When
Speaker 1: people start talking about a blue wave, you want to
Speaker 1: point out to them, Florida is likely to be a
Speaker 1: desert island for the Democrats with no wave at all,
Speaker 1: given these kind of outcomes. And by the way, in Arizona,
Speaker 1: President Trump was very gracious and supportive of Congressman excally
Speaker 1: she was the first woman to fly in combat and
Speaker 1: has a remarkable record. Don't win the center race there,
Speaker 1: and again, the so called blue wave is gonna disappear
Speaker 1: in the sand. And I think you're gonna see if
Speaker 1: anything more of a red wave by the time we
Speaker 1: get to November than a blue wave. You know, folks,
Speaker 1: you got a bunch of a bunch of insights there
Speaker 1: from one was from us from what c NBC's Becky
Speaker 1: Quick talking about Florida. And then of course I'm in
Speaker 1: New New g Newt gingrich uh that for for the
Speaker 1: the polsters out there, they gotta get this one right,
Speaker 1: meaning they gotta get the mid terms right or else
Speaker 1: people are really gonna start asking some some some tough
Speaker 1: questions about what exactly is the utility of all this
Speaker 1: all this polling um right now, according to the average
Speaker 1: on real clear politics, the battle for the House of Representatives,
Speaker 1: you got a hundred Democrat versus uh GOP with forty
Speaker 1: three toss ups. That's what they've got listed here. And
Speaker 1: then for the in the Senate battle GOP forty forty
Speaker 1: five with seven toss ups. So so here's here's what
Speaker 1: I just want to say. One is that is that
Speaker 1: you gotta take polls with a grain of salt, and
Speaker 1: that doesn't make you a flat earther. And a lot
Speaker 1: of people out there are still you know, the polsters.
Speaker 1: We saw what happen in twenty sixteen. I will never
Speaker 1: forget the New York Times saying that Hillary Clinton had
Speaker 1: a ninety seven percent chance of winning the election. On
Speaker 1: election at ninety seven percent chance. Folks, if I told
Speaker 1: you you had a ninety seven percent chance of waking
Speaker 1: up tomorrow and feeling fine and a three percent chance
Speaker 1: of dying in your sleep and not waking up, I
Speaker 1: think most of you would sleep Okay, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't I don't think. I mean, I think that you'd
Speaker 1: be like, well, that's not amazing to hear. But if
Speaker 1: I told you your fifty fifty probably wouldn't sleep awin, right,
Speaker 1: But ninety seven percent chance of waking up tomorrow, you're
Speaker 1: gonna You're gonna take those odds. You'll be Okay. They
Speaker 1: thought ninety seven that Hillary was gonna win, as we know,
Speaker 1: and then the the odds changed overnight. It's the most
Speaker 1: amazing thing. Sometimes, just for fun, whenever I'm having a
Speaker 1: bad day, I'm gonna have producer Mike put on that,
Speaker 1: uh that montage again from election night where there's like,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, up his winning. This is so fun,
Speaker 1: so fantastic. Ah. But that that what you saw here
Speaker 1: in Florida. And I do find this interesting, uh is
Speaker 1: because everyone looks at Florida's all all races in Florida
Speaker 1: are very tight. That's kind of the basics of it.
Speaker 1: You have the Democrats can win, Republicans can win. It
Speaker 1: really depends on the candidate at the time and the
Speaker 1: issues that are at hand. Um, but you know, I
Speaker 1: think you're gonna have Rick Scott beat incumbent Senator Nelson.
Speaker 1: That's my prediction on that when I think Rick Scott's
Speaker 1: gonna take it, and I also think that Rhonda Santists
Speaker 1: is going to gonna win the um the governorship, you know,
Speaker 1: I I do think that that it's likely that the
Speaker 1: Santist is gonna come out come out on top there.
Speaker 1: And you know, this is this is where we start
Speaker 1: to get what happens if the Democrats, What happens that
Speaker 1: the Democrats don't win. I mean, I know E've ben
Speaker 1: discussing this all along, but I don't know if they
Speaker 1: could handle you know, that they might actually make good
Speaker 1: on their whole like I'm gonna move to Canada. They
Speaker 1: some of them might flee. I don't know if they
Speaker 1: can handle two more years of Republicans in control. Even
Speaker 1: though I think not only are things good in this country,
Speaker 1: it's not like their life is so you know, their
Speaker 1: life is in such disarray because of Trump. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's all just that's all just their their perception. By
Speaker 1: the way, I just gotta tell you all tomorrow we're
Speaker 1: gonna have a an interview on Hill TV. I believe
Speaker 1: we're gonna air it tomorrow that I did with a
Speaker 1: Lissa Milano. That's right, that a Lissa Milano U of
Speaker 1: Twitter and Project Runaway fame. H. She is an activist
Speaker 1: now mostly not even really an actor anymore. And I'll
Speaker 1: just tell you this. It was interesting to go to
Speaker 1: her mansion in her gated community, uh, and have to
Speaker 1: get through armed security at the gate and be on
Speaker 1: a list just to even get on the roadway to
Speaker 1: get within miles of her house. And then of course
Speaker 1: the gate at her house and the security that came
Speaker 1: up and met me there, at least the personnel who
Speaker 1: met me there. Um. And and of course she's very
Speaker 1: pro gun control. And I gotta say you shoul watched
Speaker 1: the interview because I thought I was too polite, which
Speaker 1: is a problem, which is a knock that some people
Speaker 1: have on me that I am. I am too polite
Speaker 1: to people. It's just, you know, my parents raised me right,
Speaker 1: but in media you kind of sometimes you gotta be
Speaker 1: a little bit of a jerk. And I gotta work
Speaker 1: on that a little bit. That's that's a note for me.
Speaker 1: She thought I was mean. She thought I was mean.
Speaker 1: She was complaining afterwards that I was mean to her,
Speaker 1: and I'm like, God, mean, do you that was the
Speaker 1: biggest cream puff interview. I'm like ashamed of how friendly
Speaker 1: and and and kind I was. I mean, I asked
Speaker 1: her some questions that she had trouble with obviously, but
Speaker 1: you know, I was very nice. But for all her
Speaker 1: millions of Twitter followers, she she doesn't like it with
Speaker 1: somebody asked you a real question, So get ready for
Speaker 1: that tomorrow on Hill TV. You know, I was out
Speaker 1: on the Left Coast for a few days and they
Speaker 1: got a lot of coffee shops out there, but you
Speaker 1: know what they didn't have, My friends coffee. That's all
Speaker 1: about freedom, America and deliciousness. That's what you get with
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee. Okay, this is my coffee company. This
Speaker 1: is my coffee brand. It is delicious and when you
Speaker 1: go and check out their website, you'll see this is
Speaker 1: a company it's all about veterans, patriotism and giving back
Speaker 1: to the veterans community and to America. You will love
Speaker 1: these guys. I know them personally. The folks and Black
Speaker 1: Rifle Coffee are doing it right top to bottom. Go
Speaker 1: to Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck you'll get
Speaker 1: fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: Com slash Buck do what I do. Join the Coffee Club.
Speaker 1: They'll send it to your front door every month. You'll
Speaker 1: have all the coffee ground up, whole being or cake up.
Speaker 1: Whatever you need. They've got. They've even got a decalf
Speaker 1: option for you. Now, folks, go to Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: dot Com slash Buck Again Black Rifle Coffee dot Com
Speaker 1: slash Buck for fent off your order. If you want
Speaker 1: the best home security system on the market, one that
Speaker 1: you'll find intuitive, easy to use, unobtrusive in your home right,
Speaker 1: it fits right in with whatever you've got. It's not
Speaker 1: some big system, doesn't require installation. You can do it yourself. Folks,
Speaker 1: Simply Safe is what you on. Okay, they give you
Speaker 1: twenty four seven monitoring for only fourteen dollars and cents
Speaker 1: a month. Seen at PC mag The wire Cutter all
Speaker 1: have said Simply Safe is their top pick for home security.
Speaker 1: I have a Simply Safe system at home. Let me
Speaker 1: tell you that it gives me a little extra piece
Speaker 1: of mind knowing that whenever I closed my door, I
Speaker 1: know that my windows, my front door and fire of
Speaker 1: all kinds of possible concerns, leaks, burst pipes, intruders. All
Speaker 1: that covered because I've got simply safe. Order your simply
Speaker 1: safe system. Now my listeners get free shipping and free
Speaker 1: returns by going to simply safe dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's simply safe dot com slash buck again one more
Speaker 1: time for the best system in the business, simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. What is rapid on set Gender
Speaker 1: Dysphoria Team If you don't know, that makes perfect a
Speaker 1: new concept? Uh. And this is gonna take us right
Speaker 1: into the heart of the war over what is now
Speaker 1: considered the culture war over transgender rights. Transgender rights are
Speaker 1: now civil rights. This is what they are telling us.
Speaker 1: This is what the left is is pushing culturally in
Speaker 1: every way it can with TV shows and social media campaigns,
Speaker 1: and increasingly we are being forced to use pronouns that
Speaker 1: do not correspond to sex. And as I've told you,
Speaker 1: that's wrong. I disagree with it. He is not a
Speaker 1: she and she is not a he. And being told
Speaker 1: that I have to be a party to somebody else's
Speaker 1: incorrect self identification or or even delusion is problematic in
Speaker 1: many ways. But I'm also not going to be a martyr.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna put myself in a position where I
Speaker 1: could be sued or or even have have professional action
Speaker 1: taken against me. So and uh as at a certain level,
Speaker 1: you will concede to the mob, and we're getting very
Speaker 1: close to that on this transgender issue. But this is
Speaker 1: a big, a big story that's getting very little play
Speaker 1: because of what it really entails and has to do with,
Speaker 1: not just the illiberalism of the left, which is now
Speaker 1: beyond any real debate. I mean, it's it's a reality,
Speaker 1: it's a thing. But but also and particularly on college campuses,
Speaker 1: and Brown University, which we're about to talk about, is
Speaker 1: among the worst. And I have a particular disdain for
Speaker 1: Brown has a long history of being Brown was a
Speaker 1: social justice warrior factory before that was cool. You know,
Speaker 1: Brown was the has been the most left wing prominent university.
Speaker 1: People say it's elite because it's Ivy League. I gotta
Speaker 1: tell you, I've I've never been particularly impressed with the
Speaker 1: product as in the students that come out of Brown.
Speaker 1: I know there's exceptions, you know, and I'm sure you
Speaker 1: gotta you know somebody who's a friend of yours, who's
Speaker 1: a you know, Rhodes scholar, Navy seal who went to Brown.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying everybody, but in general, I find Brown
Speaker 1: produces a lot of people who think they're much more
Speaker 1: impressive than they are. That's been my personal anecdotal experience.
Speaker 1: But the transgender fight, or the fight for transgender rights
Speaker 1: it's being discussed, received quite a uh an unwelcome bit
Speaker 1: of science recently, and it comes courtesy of a a
Speaker 1: a peer reviewed article that came out at at Brown
Speaker 1: University that had to do with this notion of rapid
Speaker 1: onset gender dysphoria. Now, folks, I get really deep into
Speaker 1: the weeds here on this left wing stuff so that
Speaker 1: I can explain to you. But you know this is
Speaker 1: this is where it all happens. And the people that
Speaker 1: are making these decisions at a Brown University about a
Speaker 1: scientific paper, it is a scientific paper we're about to discuss.
Speaker 1: They're the same ones who want to tell you that
Speaker 1: you know, your ten year old should be showering with
Speaker 1: the ten year old of the opposite sex right next
Speaker 1: to him or her, and you know this is that.
Speaker 1: So so it's important. This matters. It matters because the
Speaker 1: truth matters. That also matters because national level policy is
Speaker 1: affected by this thinking. Do not forget any of you
Speaker 1: who have children. Remember that the Obama administration was threatening
Speaker 1: to pull federal funding from grammar schools, from primary schools
Speaker 1: across the country, but particularly in South Carolina because of
Speaker 1: the battle going on there over this unless they adhere
Speaker 1: to the new Department Education transgender bathroom policy. So this
Speaker 1: affects you. You know, you can't just say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: this isn't my problem. Now this is gonna be a
Speaker 1: problem for everybody, or this is gonna be something you are.
Speaker 1: You're gonna be forced to submit. That's what they're gonna say.
Speaker 1: You're gonna be forced to submit to their lunacy. Here, now,
Speaker 1: let me give you the what happened. I mentioned Brown.
Speaker 1: Brown University had a um published right through its through
Speaker 1: one of its uh through one of its graduate programs
Speaker 1: a student. They're published in the journal plus one a
Speaker 1: case study on on and not a case that you're
Speaker 1: a a scientific journal on rapid onset gender dysphoria. And
Speaker 1: this is from the Brown University School of Public Health. Okay,
Speaker 1: so they just published this, and here's gender to sphoria.
Speaker 1: So we understand the definitions. Gender dysphoria is when somebody
Speaker 1: has feelings that their biological sex does not match up
Speaker 1: with the identity of what they think their sex should be. Essentially,
Speaker 1: I am physically female and think I'm actually a male.
Speaker 1: Now this and then this leads. Uh. People used to
Speaker 1: call a gender identity disorder. Now it's called gender dysphoria.
Speaker 1: They've changed that. Don't forget that, folks. They change the
Speaker 1: terminology as a way of skewing the debate and to
Speaker 1: make this a it's not a disorder, right, remember that,
Speaker 1: the same way that it's you know, it's not chained migration,
Speaker 1: it's family reunification on the immigration issue. And with transgender surgery,
Speaker 1: it's not it's not a sex change operation. It's a
Speaker 1: gender affirmation process. Ah. Isn't that interesting how they've changed
Speaker 1: the emphasis. They have changed the way that we should
Speaker 1: think about it merely by changing the language itself. So
Speaker 1: on gender dysphoria formally gender identity disorder. But we've gotten
Speaker 1: rid of that now and gender dysphoria, okay, fine, we'll
Speaker 1: use that term. It's sooner it'll be you know, gender affirmation. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, gender affirmation conception or something off, some other
Speaker 1: way of describing it. Uh, but wrap it on set.
Speaker 1: That's what this study looked at and wrap it onset
Speaker 1: gender dysphoria is based on this paper and the significant
Speaker 1: research that it draws upon, you know, hundreds and hundreds
Speaker 1: and hundreds of case studies. Um. It says that essentially,
Speaker 1: gender dysphoria maybe a socially pressured and learned condition. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh. People don't want to hear this. What do
Speaker 1: you mean? This is going to bring them back to
Speaker 1: the days of oh, well, you know, are you are
Speaker 1: you born same sex attracted? Are you born gear? Or
Speaker 1: do you become big? Remember that was a big debate
Speaker 1: for a long time, and now that that's gone away
Speaker 1: at everyone now well I shouldn't say everybody, but the
Speaker 1: predominant view is that you know, you are born with
Speaker 1: a certain sexual preference. Uh. But think about this. With
Speaker 1: gender dysphoria, people are are being led to believe that
Speaker 1: this is an innate Uh, it's affirmation now right, it's
Speaker 1: you actually becoming who you are, and that your brain
Speaker 1: is the disconnect between the brain and the body. Here
Speaker 1: on gender, the brain wins, right, The brain knows what
Speaker 1: you really are the fact that you have male or
Speaker 1: female genitalia is irrelevant. That's what you're being led to
Speaker 1: believe with gender dysphoria. Well, what happens when they look
Speaker 1: at this study is that, and this is of of
Speaker 1: teenagers with gender dysphoria. Here's something that won't shock any
Speaker 1: of you who just think about things and don't accept everything.
Speaker 1: That the that the mainstream media and the liberal left
Speaker 1: force feeds us kids teenagers who are same sex attractive,
Speaker 1: who have other people in their lives, who become gender dysphoric,
Speaker 1: meaning they believe that they are now you know that
Speaker 1: they are now part of the transgender community. Those kids
Speaker 1: are more likely to themselves become members of or or
Speaker 1: want to be members of the transgender community. There is
Speaker 1: a copycat effect at work here, and that there is
Speaker 1: a social pressure effect at work here, meaning that when
Speaker 1: you are subjected to social media that prominently supports the
Speaker 1: notion of genderis for you, guess what more teenagers start
Speaker 1: to say, Yeah, I'm gender dysphoric too. Now. Look, I
Speaker 1: know there's people would say, oh buck, maybe it's just
Speaker 1: awareness or they there's a lot of ways to break
Speaker 1: this down. Here's what the study actually says. Quote. Among
Speaker 1: the noteworthy patterns Litman the research are found in the
Speaker 1: survey data of parents reported their child had one or
Speaker 1: more friends become transgender ident deified at around the same time,
Speaker 1: reported an increase in their child social media use around
Speaker 1: the same time as experiencing gender dysphoria symptoms, and reported both.
Speaker 1: So I mean almost half of the people who are
Speaker 1: are teenagers that are claiming to have adopted gender dysphoria
Speaker 1: here or that they have gender dysphoria a condition, developed
Speaker 1: the condition when somebody else they know has it, and
Speaker 1: developed the condition when they have a much greater usage
Speaker 1: of social media where transgender and transgender rights are a
Speaker 1: prominent topic of discussion. And it goes on quote the
Speaker 1: pattern of clusters of teens and friend groups becoming transgender
Speaker 1: identified that the group dynamics, dynamics of these friend groups
Speaker 1: and the types of advice viewed online led to the
Speaker 1: hypothesis that friends and online sources could spread certain beliefs.
Speaker 1: Exact amples include the belief that non specific symptoms such
Speaker 1: as feeling uncomfortable in their own skins or feeling that
Speaker 1: they don't fit in, which could be part of a
Speaker 1: normal puberty or associated with trauma, should be perceived as
Speaker 1: gender dysphoria. Folks if you can't hear it already. There
Speaker 1: are lib heads exploding all over the place on this one.
Speaker 1: Gender dysphoria transgenderism could be a trait that is, or
Speaker 1: rather a condition that is socially imposed or socially advocated
Speaker 1: for is essentially learned via environment. Through social osmosis of sorts,
Speaker 1: one becomes gender dysphoric. We're not. That's not supposed to
Speaker 1: be what happens here. It's supposed to be who you
Speaker 1: really are at your core. Right, this is this is
Speaker 1: a medical condition. It should be respected. It's a civil
Speaker 1: rights issue. That's what we've been told. This study is
Speaker 1: implying that there's a great degree of peer pressure involved
Speaker 1: in this or pere imitation. She continues on the belief
Speaker 1: that the only path to happiness is transition and the
Speaker 1: belief that anyone who disagrees with the team is transphobic
Speaker 1: and should be cut out of their life. That's all
Speaker 1: part of it. Additionally, six parents reported their teen or
Speaker 1: young adult had one or more diagnoses of a psychiatric
Speaker 1: disorder or neurodevelopmental disability before the onset of gender dysphoria.
Speaker 1: Forty percent reported that their child had experienced a traumatic
Speaker 1: or stressful event prior to the onset of their gender dysphoria,
Speaker 1: including being bullied, sexually assaulted, or having their parents get divorced.
Speaker 1: This suggests that the drive a transition expressed by these
Speaker 1: teens and young adults could be a harmful coping mechanism
Speaker 1: like drugs, alcohol, or cutting. With harmful coping coping mechanisms,
Speaker 1: certain behaviors are used to avoid feeling negative emotions in
Speaker 1: the short term, but they do not solve the underlying problems,
Speaker 1: and they often cause additional problems. And quote my friends, Wow,
Speaker 1: this is a study based on real research, peer reviewed
Speaker 1: published in a journal that is challenging the whole notion
Speaker 1: of what makes somebody transgender. It's essentially saying that transgenderism
Speaker 1: is rooted in trauma and in many cases a psychiatric disorder,
Speaker 1: and those two things can also go hand in hand,
Speaker 1: and that it is increasingly the result of social pressure
Speaker 1: and imitation of peers, could be a coping mechanism and
Speaker 1: is not in fact a a a civil rights issue,
Speaker 1: but is a psychiatric and social issue. Wow. This is
Speaker 1: this is radioactive stuff on the left. They've been waging
Speaker 1: this campaign for a while for us to believe that
Speaker 1: that effectively, if you have any questions about transgenderism, if
Speaker 1: you wonder that maybe a teenagers shouldn't take massive doses
Speaker 1: of hormones irreparably damage his or her body for the
Speaker 1: future in ways that we can't even fathom right now.
Speaker 1: If you have any questions about that, you're basically morally
Speaker 1: the equivalent of a racist. You're a bigot. You're backwards thinking.
Speaker 1: Don't you see how important transgenderism is to civil rights movement? Well,
Speaker 1: here's a study that suggests that transgenderism is something very
Speaker 1: different from the affirmation of one's core and inner self.
Speaker 1: It could be rooted in social pressure, in psychiatric problems,
Speaker 1: or in trauma. We'll continue this in just a moment.
Speaker 1: The FBI calls home title theft one of the fastest
Speaker 1: growing crimes. Brace yourselves, folks, because having your credit card
Speaker 1: stolen is nothing compared to the hell you're in for
Speaker 1: once an identity thief takes control of your home's title
Speaker 1: and folks, I was out in Los Angeles and and
Speaker 1: I actually had a a an uber driver who's telling
Speaker 1: me about her situation of home title theft. It was
Speaker 1: it was scary stuff and it cost her She said
Speaker 1: thousands and thousands of dollars to try to get it fixed.
Speaker 1: It was a nightmare. You don't want to go through it.
Speaker 1: It can happen to you. All they need, all the
Speaker 1: bad guys need is internet access. They'll take your information,
Speaker 1: replace your home's title with an alias of their own,
Speaker 1: and borrow every penny against it. You don't want to
Speaker 1: deal with it, folks. For just pennies a day, home
Speaker 1: title Lock protects my most viable asset, my family's home.
Speaker 1: Registered now for a free analysis and discovered if your
Speaker 1: home's title has been compromised. That's a sixty dollar value.
Speaker 1: Free visit home title lock dot com. Again, that's home
Speaker 1: title lock dot com. So we're continuing on with our discussion.
Speaker 1: You of rappid onset, gender dysphor you, I mean this
Speaker 1: is this is a big story, folks, because they're gonna
Speaker 1: do everything that can to suppress the truth here. Uh.
Speaker 1: They don't want the science, never mind the science to
Speaker 1: be settled. They don't want the science to be pursued
Speaker 1: because the Left has made such an investment in this
Speaker 1: notion of gender is fluid, and and this is there,
Speaker 1: this is their new civil rights struggle. The struggle for
Speaker 1: transgender rights when you have evidence that's pointing to this
Speaker 1: as a as in fact a psychiatric disorder. And by
Speaker 1: the way, I don't say that in a disparaging fashion,
Speaker 1: all right. I think that mental health is every bit
Speaker 1: as important as physical health. I think mental health and
Speaker 1: physical health are effectively one and the same. But I
Speaker 1: believe that if somebody has a psychiatric disorder, a psychiatric problem,
Speaker 1: they should be medically assisted. They should not expect there
Speaker 1: to be a societal movement to uh normalize and in
Speaker 1: fact celebrate what would be a disorder. And for people
Speaker 1: who say, well buck, people used to say that about homosexuality, well,
Speaker 1: first of all, people used to say a lot of things.
Speaker 1: And if we're gonna play that game, then I'll also
Speaker 1: say that there are some people who believe that they
Speaker 1: should have a limb removed that they they just do
Speaker 1: not believe that they should have the legs that they do,
Speaker 1: and they want them to be surgically removed. Should we
Speaker 1: and they really believe this this is a real disorder.
Speaker 1: Should we have doctors remove their legs? Should we do that?
Speaker 1: Uh So? Um, I just I just wanted to put
Speaker 1: us in in the proper context. Here the Brown University
Speaker 1: where the study was done, which is thinks of itself
Speaker 1: as on the forefront of you know, transgenderism and gender
Speaker 1: rights issues and all the rest of it. And Brown
Speaker 1: is you go back and look at his record. I mean,
Speaker 1: this was the place where you know, students there was
Speaker 1: people have been expelled for any any violation in the
Speaker 1: eyes of the social justice gods and your toast at Brown. Um.
Speaker 1: But but here's here's what they did. They pulled down.
Speaker 1: I mean this is the equivalent of book burning in
Speaker 1: a sense, folks. I mean they digitally deleted UH this
Speaker 1: journal entry in plus one Plos one about rapid onset
Speaker 1: gender dysphoria, and the dean of Brown University just a
Speaker 1: few days ago wrote the following. In light of questions
Speaker 1: raised about research design and data collection related to Lisa
Speaker 1: Litman study on rapid onset gender dysphoria, Brown determined that
Speaker 1: removing the article from news distribution is the most responsible
Speaker 1: course of action. Folks, Fox, come on, come on, We're
Speaker 1: not all idiots, right. This has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: questions about uh data collection and research design. What a
Speaker 1: bunch of cowards at Brown, What a bunch of utter cowards. Okay,
Speaker 1: just say it, Just say what's really going on here?
Speaker 1: You do not want this study to be out there
Speaker 1: with Brown's you know, with Brown's impromoter on it because
Speaker 1: it challenges core beliefs of the looney left when it
Speaker 1: comes to gender. That's what's really going on here. Here's
Speaker 1: and it continue by the way. I mean, I can't
Speaker 1: read the whole statement to you, but it's it's exactly
Speaker 1: what you would expect, a lot of just you know,
Speaker 1: merely mouth, weasel word nonsense quote. The school's commitment to
Speaker 1: studying and supporting the health and well being of our
Speaker 1: sexual and gender minority populations is unwavering. Our faculty and
Speaker 1: students are on the cutting edge of research on transgender
Speaker 1: populations domestically and global. The commitment of the school to
Speaker 1: diversity and inclusion is central to our mission, and we
Speaker 1: pride ourselves on being a community that fully recognizes and
Speaker 1: affirms the full diversity of gender and sexual identity and
Speaker 1: its members. These commitments are an unshakable part of our
Speaker 1: core values as a community. End quote. That's right. Gender
Speaker 1: diversity is more important than the truth at an American university.
Speaker 1: That's what this is. That is what they're saying, forget science,
Speaker 1: who cares about the data? Who cares about science? It's
Speaker 1: more important than we be inclusive to the full spectrum
Speaker 1: of gender identity. And this is what we were up against.
Speaker 1: You know, these are the people on the left to
Speaker 1: want electuross about truth and facts and science and all
Speaker 1: this other stuff, when they really just want the affirmation
Speaker 1: of their emotional needs through politics. That's what really this
Speaker 1: all comes down to. Uh. They want the data to
Speaker 1: support their virtue signaling on gender on everything, and when
Speaker 1: it doesn't, they scrap the data. And they also send
Speaker 1: a very clear message here, folks, to anyone else at
Speaker 1: Brown or elsewhere across the country. You think about doing
Speaker 1: the numbers on this running the numbers, they're gonna come
Speaker 1: after you. So next time they try to tell you, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know this is what the experts say, just say no. Actually,
Speaker 1: the experts are mostly scared on this issue because that's
Speaker 1: the truth, certainly the truth of Brown folks. Sometimes science
Speaker 1: gets it right. What am I talking about this time? Well,
Speaker 1: it turns out there's a little study that broke over
Speaker 1: the weekend that says that eating red meat and cheese
Speaker 1: is good for you. Folks, come on, we've known this
Speaker 1: all you and I have known all along that, of
Speaker 1: course eating red meat and cheese is good for you,
Speaker 1: because red meat and cheese or what great Americans eat. Okay,
Speaker 1: this notion that we should be eating the processed, carb heavy,
Speaker 1: sugar laden crap that the big food companies want to
Speaker 1: just keep because it's shelf stable, because it's easy to ship,
Speaker 1: it's easy to to store, and it lasts forever. The
Speaker 1: that that should be a part of, or a major
Speaker 1: part I should say of you're you're diet. It's just
Speaker 1: it's just crazy. Okay, it's crazy, but that's what we
Speaker 1: were told for a long time. Now, it turns out
Speaker 1: according to researchers at McMaster University in Hamilton's, Ontario, they
Speaker 1: found out that people who scarf down higher levels of
Speaker 1: red meat and cheese are likely to live longer. That's right, folks,
Speaker 1: eat that burger, pound that seddar, because you will live longer.
Speaker 1: According to this study quote, our findings on full fat,
Speaker 1: dairy and unprocessed red meat do challenge conventional thinking. Those
Speaker 1: eating the most dairy and red meat saw their chances
Speaker 1: of early death fall by twenty five percent, and fatal
Speaker 1: heart attacks decreased by two percent. My friends. Look, I've
Speaker 1: I've run this experiment before. I went through a period
Speaker 1: where I was trying to do that. You know, I
Speaker 1: was trying to eat whole grains and and toast and
Speaker 1: all these things, and trying to eat these you know,
Speaker 1: sort of smaller lighter uh carb you know, heart healthy
Speaker 1: car bladon meals and and I was really struggling to
Speaker 1: shed any excess weight. And I mean the best shape
Speaker 1: I've been in recent years would have been about eighteen
Speaker 1: months ago, when I had dropped about fifteen and was
Speaker 1: lean for me, uh and I was eating I was
Speaker 1: eating three eg gaumelets and bacon every day. My cholesterol
Speaker 1: was fantastic, my body fat was way down. And it's
Speaker 1: just I'm telling you, you want to eat real food,
Speaker 1: and real food means things that you want to eat.
Speaker 1: It doesn't mean the high sugar crap that they're put
Speaker 1: in front of you. But it also just reminds us,
Speaker 1: all right that that, you know, a little bit of
Speaker 1: humility in this whole world of of diet and science
Speaker 1: and everything would be a nice thing from the media,
Speaker 1: you know, did they change our dietary advice all the time?
Speaker 1: And yet we're always told, well, the scientific consensus, the
Speaker 1: scientific consensus, consensus is not science. All right, we all
Speaker 1: know this consensus is not science. It's all about proving,
Speaker 1: it's all about the data. It's replicating the same experiment
Speaker 1: over and over. Um. And you know, oh, by the way,
Speaker 1: another study. Oh no, I'm sorry, darn it. Wait is
Speaker 1: this the same study? This would be amazing, folks, if
Speaker 1: this just came across my screen. Now, I think it
Speaker 1: may be. I think it may be. Um, hold on,
Speaker 1: new research. This the same one current advice two No, folks,
Speaker 1: this is this is additional evidence. This is the European
Speaker 1: Society of Cardiology. According to NBC News, it's time to
Speaker 1: reconsider low dairy diets. That's right, Cheese and yogurt found
Speaker 1: to protect against death from any cause and debt and
Speaker 1: also death from cerebral vascular causes like stroke. Folks. Another
Speaker 1: study here that just this is from today. I wasn't
Speaker 1: even thinking that these were I actually thought I had
Speaker 1: two pieces of research in front of me here that
Speaker 1: were the same story. You know, so I wanted to
Speaker 1: but no, actually, these are two different stories. This is amazing.
Speaker 1: This is dot from the Medical University of uh poland
Speaker 1: take that as you will. Who lead this study say
Speaker 1: that the average age of the participan anyway, They went
Speaker 1: into all the different details, but this is the point.
Speaker 1: The consumption of any kind of dairy associated with a
Speaker 1: two percent lower risk of death from any cause, folks,
Speaker 1: eight percent lower more total mortality risk with a dai
Speaker 1: area of a lot of cheese. I mean this is
Speaker 1: eat red meat and eat full fat cheese, folks. That's
Speaker 1: what you're being told. You eat real food, Eat food
Speaker 1: as it exists in nature. Don't believe all the you know,
Speaker 1: all the fad based dietary craplet's out there. Eat real food.
Speaker 1: Uh And you know that this is you kind of
Speaker 1: know this intuitively, but then when you see the science
Speaker 1: go in this direction, it's just a great day for America.
Speaker 1: Eat red meat, eat cheese. Now. I know people say
Speaker 1: a book you know, everything in moderation and yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to do a steakhouts not long ago that
Speaker 1: had all the calories listed for steaks, and like, I
Speaker 1: don't want to know how many calories are in my ribbi.
Speaker 1: I know it's too much, Okay, I don't need to
Speaker 1: be told this. I'm here to enjoy my ribbi. But
Speaker 1: you know that the point here is that this all
Speaker 1: this stuff about stay away from this, stay away from
Speaker 1: not eat all this cardboard tasting crap, the stuff we
Speaker 1: were told for so long it was wrong, it was wrong.
Speaker 1: And now you're being told to eat the food that
Speaker 1: you want to eat, eat the food that tastes delicious.
Speaker 1: And I just think that's in general and exciting, an
Speaker 1: exciting proposition. Um, And I'm happy about all all that stuff.
Speaker 1: So you know, I got good news for you today,
Speaker 1: and i'd like to share with you. That's what I'm
Speaker 1: here for, folks, here to bring you the good news
Speaker 1: and others will skip over the mainstream media. Can't trust them.
Speaker 1: We're gonna get into a roll call here in just
Speaker 1: a moment. Also, please make sure that you subscribe to
Speaker 1: the podcast of this show, because there's extras that go
Speaker 1: into your feed, like Shields High and also the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hut podcast, which this week is going to be a
Speaker 1: phenomenal one. We'll be right back, Hey, tem Bug, it's
Speaker 1: time for roll call. Call. It is back my friends
Speaker 1: the dub Step and uh I watched you know, I
Speaker 1: flew back from Los Angeles? What was it last night?
Speaker 1: Got in kind of late, was doing a rising this
Speaker 1: morning on about four hours sleep as one does and
Speaker 1: b D no big deal as the kids say. But
Speaker 1: I watched Deadpool two, which I I liked Deadpool one. Brandon,
Speaker 1: you support this. I thought Deadpool one was very good
Speaker 1: for what it was. I did enjoy Deadpool one did
Speaker 1: it was good. It was funny. Yeah, I liked. I
Speaker 1: liked Deadpool one. I thought it was good. H Deadpool
Speaker 1: two was okay, kind of lacked plot and and purpose,
Speaker 1: but there was a lot of There was some funny.
Speaker 1: There was a lot of funny stuff. I thought there's
Speaker 1: almost too much funy stuff. But one thing is a
Speaker 1: recurring joke in Deadpool two is dub steps, specifically uh
Speaker 1: them making fun of dub step, and I just thought
Speaker 1: that was that was amusing because it is it had
Speaker 1: its moment in the sun. I don't know if it's
Speaker 1: ever to come back. For those of you who don't know,
Speaker 1: dub step is what it's kind of like what we
Speaker 1: played as the intro. It is, um, how do we
Speaker 1: put this? It's like heavy beat electronic music. How would
Speaker 1: you did, Brandon, You're you're a DJ? How do you
Speaker 1: define dub stat I think you gotta nailed it pretty well. Okay,
Speaker 1: heavy electronic music, heavy electronic music like very beat beat
Speaker 1: and base heavy electronic music. All right, fair enough, let's
Speaker 1: get you a role call Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: That is the role call rallying cry, that is where
Speaker 1: we do all the things that we do. And let's
Speaker 1: get right to it. We have Nicholas who writes Buck.
Speaker 1: I listen to your show as many others do. I
Speaker 1: am concerned if conservatism is lost in this November's election,
Speaker 1: what will happen to our country? Are we headed to
Speaker 1: another civil war instead of segregation, though it will be
Speaker 1: between Dems and Republicans thoughts, Nicholas, I am unlike some
Speaker 1: of the others out there who know that being a
Speaker 1: catastrophist is good for business. I'm here to tell you
Speaker 1: that we're gonna be okay, it's gonna be all right.
Speaker 1: Doesn't mean it's gonna be easy, doesn't mean we're not
Speaker 1: gonna take losses and take some hits. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that there won't be some really ugly stuff if Conservatives, well,
Speaker 1: if if the GOP loses in this midterm election, you
Speaker 1: can mark my words. They are going to try and
Speaker 1: criminally prosecute a member of the Trump family. I don't
Speaker 1: know which one, I don't know how, but that will
Speaker 1: be the mission, that will be the goal that That's
Speaker 1: something that I'm I'm very confident of. And think about
Speaker 1: what that will do to the country, you know, think
Speaker 1: about how they have been willing to destroy somebody like
Speaker 1: General Flynn the service country for thirty years in the military.
Speaker 1: But what what was Flynn's real sin? Was it that
Speaker 1: he lied or was it that he supported Trump? We
Speaker 1: all know the answer to that, right, we all know
Speaker 1: why he's facing a federal why he had to plead
Speaker 1: guilty to a federal felony. UM. But I don't think
Speaker 1: we're heading for a civil war. I won't say that,
Speaker 1: um And I I think that ultimately, one thing that
Speaker 1: that we have on our side here is the country's doing.
Speaker 1: I give things. The country is doing really well. We
Speaker 1: We've got an incredible economic boom going on right now, jobs, manufacturing,
Speaker 1: the economy across the board. Plus uh, the you know,
Speaker 1: we're we're not We're not in the midst of a
Speaker 1: major war. We're not in the midst of you know,
Speaker 1: receiving daily casualty counts about our true troops overseas. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, there's a lot to be really thankful for
Speaker 1: right now, folks. I mean, I'm not saying everything is
Speaker 1: great and we had no problems, of course not. But
Speaker 1: things are good. You know, we don't have this sense
Speaker 1: that radical Islam is about to fly a bunch more
Speaker 1: planes into our buildings or or you know, park truck
Speaker 1: bombs in front of major populated areas, and and that
Speaker 1: was our reality for years, for years in recent memory.
Speaker 1: So the country is doing really well, and I think
Speaker 1: that's important for all of us to remember, Brian, which
Speaker 1: also means I think we're not going to the Civil War.
Speaker 1: Listening to the the end of Monday's podcast, I imagine a
Speaker 1: scene in my head starring you and the Godfather Buck.
Speaker 1: I feel like I want to trash the trash talk
Speaker 1: the Boondoc Saints, but I'm afraid it will anger some
Speaker 1: of my listeners. Godfather. If you do, you may want
Speaker 1: to lay low afterwards. Buck, can you cover for me
Speaker 1: on Tuesday? Shields high? Buck, Shields very high? Brian, you
Speaker 1: may be onto something I could neither confirm nor do not.
Speaker 1: People love the Boondocks Saints is producer Mike within earshot
Speaker 1: or is he getting is he getting a phone number
Speaker 1: for one of the lovely ladies that works in finance
Speaker 1: in the building on the different floors or whatever. Oh,
Speaker 1: so he is getting somebody's phone now, alright, producer, producer
Speaker 1: Mike Man, that guy's always you gotta keep an eye,
Speaker 1: producer Mike. He's a ladies man. Um. But anyway, the Briant,
Speaker 1: I mean, Brandon Boon, Brian's writing Brandon, I'm talking to
Speaker 1: Boondocks Saints. What's your grade for it? B plus? Nothing crazy?
Speaker 1: You know, I think it's I enjoyed it, but I
Speaker 1: never got the immense hype. I I don't understand the
Speaker 1: immense hype either. And the best part of the movie
Speaker 1: is the is the intro and the intro music. That's
Speaker 1: the best part of the whole movie and the rest
Speaker 1: of it. I mean, when you, okay, let me just
Speaker 1: do this. When you compare the gun play in Boondocks, saynes,
Speaker 1: I know, people say this is unfair, but compare that
Speaker 1: to like John Wick and just the and they're very
Speaker 1: similar movies in a lot of ways. Right, there's a
Speaker 1: there's some similar stuff going on. John Wick is like
Speaker 1: John Wick is just incredible and it's just so stylish
Speaker 1: and well done. I was surprised by how good John
Speaker 1: Wick was. I agree with you, right, I think boo,
Speaker 1: I think John Wick is great. Uh, and you know
Speaker 1: John mccew delivers. It's not quite as awesome as John
Speaker 1: Wick one, but it delivers. It's solid anyway. But Brian
Speaker 1: to reach it to each his own. Melissa, greetings, I
Speaker 1: wish you would have Mic Rohan as a guest. Besides
Speaker 1: being an excellent raconteur, he has a wealth of knowledge
Speaker 1: about choosing trade at schools over college. I think he
Speaker 1: would be great on the show. Thanks. Keeping the shields
Speaker 1: high and are plums leveled? Oh? Look at Melissa throwing
Speaker 1: in a little reference to the ancient Roman javelin known
Speaker 1: as the peelum. It was a weighted spear with a
Speaker 1: wooden shaft and then it and then at the end
Speaker 1: the tip was metal and it kind of had a
Speaker 1: a a metal projection out of the top as well.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to describe the peelum to you, but it's uh,
Speaker 1: the way it was weighted. It was a very effective
Speaker 1: short distance throwing spear. At the Roman legions carried legionaries
Speaker 1: carried David next up here. UM. Oh, by the way, Mike, sorry,
Speaker 1: Melissa Micro is a guest. It would be fantastic, Folks.
Speaker 1: I'll always be honest with you. There are some of
Speaker 1: these guests that you ask us for and there you know,
Speaker 1: they are respect They respect what we do here in
Speaker 1: the freedom hout it. And it's just tough to coordinate schedules,
Speaker 1: you know. I was actually trying to get my last
Speaker 1: trip out to l A. Of course I reached out
Speaker 1: to Ben Shapiro. I'm like, Ben, we'd love to sit
Speaker 1: down to an interview with you. And Ben says great,
Speaker 1: you know, and and we just couldn't make the schedules
Speaker 1: work this time, but next time we'll do it. So
Speaker 1: you know, there's plenty of folks that are on the radar.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to trying to get involved with UH and
Speaker 1: have on his guests and particularly his podcast guests, and
Speaker 1: it's just a question of getting them out of time
Speaker 1: when they can do it, um, and when I can
Speaker 1: do it. T J writes Buck long Time No Talk.
Speaker 1: I was in Europe for the last two weeks. Try
Speaker 1: to keep up with you on podcasts, but hard to
Speaker 1: do while on vacations. All right, t J. You're allowed
Speaker 1: to take a break. We had lots of good food,
Speaker 1: good beer German of course, good wine Tuscan, and fun
Speaker 1: in general. But nothing's as good as the good old
Speaker 1: us of A. This especially became apparent when the last
Speaker 1: day I was talking to my distant relative. Apparently in
Speaker 1: Germany it is illegal to home school your children. The
Speaker 1: state literally requires you to send your kids to public school.
Speaker 1: This was definitely alarming for me as my wife is expecting.
Speaker 1: Although it maybe likely that our child ends up going
Speaker 1: to public school, I just can't fathom being required to
Speaker 1: send them there and really brings into perspective how free
Speaker 1: we are. God bless the USA from t J. T
Speaker 1: J is a great American patriot and a friend of
Speaker 1: the show. Um, yeah, man, it's you know, Europe, there's
Speaker 1: a lot we we we are more free. I think
Speaker 1: we often get this sense from the media, and it's
Speaker 1: because they love the the big welfare state stuff in Europe.
Speaker 1: But that, oh, Europe is just as free as we are. False. False.
Speaker 1: There's really no First Amendment in Europe does not exist,
Speaker 1: certainly not the sense that we think of. It doesn't
Speaker 1: even exist in great Britain, folks, the First Amendment free
Speaker 1: speech is way less protected in the UK there. It
Speaker 1: is in America way less protected. So you know, don't
Speaker 1: don't forget that when everyone's said, oh, we should just
Speaker 1: be look at European socialist going now, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: about that, folks. There's a lot of downside that comes
Speaker 1: with that. Uh, and I would not want to just
Speaker 1: sign onto it. Um Alan writes, Hey, Buck, did you
Speaker 1: get a chance to stroll around Venice Beach? Interesting place?
Speaker 1: You should have seen it thirty years ago. It was
Speaker 1: not so gentrified. Just read about just read about Hillary
Speaker 1: and her thirty thousand emails. Can you imagine the power
Speaker 1: the Chinese would have over her if she became president
Speaker 1: and they had all those emails? Scary stuff? Alan, Yeah, Alan,
Speaker 1: I really want to Okay, well, two things. Let's first
Speaker 1: deal with the Hillary emails. Then I'll talk about Venice
Speaker 1: Beach for a moment. I really want to get verification
Speaker 1: of this story about the Chinese hack of Hillary's emails.
Speaker 1: I look Daily Callers put it up. I like the
Speaker 1: folks the Daily Caller a lot, but but I want
Speaker 1: to make sure that we're on solid ground there. I
Speaker 1: don't want to pull a CNN and run with the
Speaker 1: story because I would honestly like it to be true
Speaker 1: in a sense, I mean, as much as it would
Speaker 1: be bad for the country. I've always believed that Hillary's
Speaker 1: emails were hacked and somebody does have them, so it's
Speaker 1: not like it would be a new thing. We just
Speaker 1: would know it now we know the truth. Um So
Speaker 1: I want to get a little more a little more
Speaker 1: background on that one. And then as for the discussion
Speaker 1: about um Venice Beach or rather ask for your comment
Speaker 1: with Venice Beach. Yeah, I did get to Venice. I
Speaker 1: was on the boardwalk. I gotta say, it's a little
Speaker 1: you know, a little bit like the East Village on
Speaker 1: a beach. It was okay, I'm not I mean, I
Speaker 1: didn't love it. I wouldn't run back to go to
Speaker 1: the boardwalk in Venice. I'm more of a Santa Monica
Speaker 1: guying myself, which probably surprises none of you. A little
Speaker 1: little more of a Santa Monica dude. Uh so, Yeah,
Speaker 1: but miss Mallin had a great time. It's beautiful weather,
Speaker 1: and look, I understand California. It's very seductive folks. Put
Speaker 1: all the liberalism aside. California is a very seductive place
Speaker 1: to to call home. We're gonna leave it there for
Speaker 1: today in the Freedom Hunt. We're gonna have Jesse Kelly
Speaker 1: and Sean Parnell this week on the Freedom Hunt podcast. Folks,
Speaker 1: that's gonna be amazing, So I'll be sure you subscribe
Speaker 1: and download to that. See you tomorrow from The Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt live from d C. As always, Shields Hie. If
Speaker 1: you want the best home security system on the market,
Speaker 1: one that you'll find intuitive, easy to use, unobtrusive in
Speaker 1: your home, right, it fits right in with whatever you've got.
Speaker 1: It's not some big system, doesn't require installation. You can
Speaker 1: do it yourself. Folks, Simply Safe is what you want, Okay.
Speaker 1: They give you twenty four seven monitoring for only fourteen
Speaker 1: dollars and cents a month. Sen at PC mag the
Speaker 1: Wire Cutter all have said Simply Safe is their top
Speaker 1: pick for home security. I have a simply Safe system
Speaker 1: at home. Let me tell you that it gives me
Speaker 1: a little extra piece of mind knowing that whenever I
Speaker 1: closed my door, I know that my windows, my front door,
Speaker 1: and fire of all kinds of possible concerns, leaks, burst pipes, intruders.
Speaker 1: All that covered because I've got simply Safe. Order your
Speaker 1: simply safe system now. My listeners get free shipping and
Speaker 1: free returns by going to simply safe dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's simply safe dot com slash buck again one more
Speaker 1: time for the best system in the business. Simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck