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, Former CI director Brennan gets his security
Speaker 1: clearance swiped by Trump. We'll talk about that. Plus also
Speaker 1: Cuomo says he wants to throw his hat in the ring.
Speaker 1: Maybe maybe you know that Donald was ready for him.
Speaker 1: And also why is it that socialists don't math good?
Speaker 1: We'll get into that more coming up. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake
Speaker 1: American ring, You're a great American Again. The Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show begins analysts. As the head of the Executive and
Speaker 1: and Commander in Chief, I have a unique constitutional responsibility
Speaker 1: to protect the nation's classified information, including by controlling access
Speaker 1: to it today and fulfilling that responsibility, I've decided to
Speaker 1: revoke the security clearance of John Brennan, former director of
Speaker 1: the Central Intelligence Agency. Historically, former heads of intelligence and
Speaker 1: law enforcement agencies have been allowed to retain access to
Speaker 1: classified information after their government service so that they can
Speaker 1: consult with their successors regarding matters about which they may
Speaker 1: have special insights, and as a professional courtesy. Neither of
Speaker 1: these justifications supports Mr Brennan's continued access to classified information.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Buck Saxton Show. You know he did it.
Speaker 1: Trump did it. He said he was gonna do it.
Speaker 1: He said in fact that this was gonna happen. And uh,
Speaker 1: and now there's some other folks that he may just
Speaker 1: decide to uh pull some clearances from. You know, I've
Speaker 1: got I've got so much on this. And here here's
Speaker 1: a nice advantage. By the way, I'm coming to you
Speaker 1: live from New York City today instead of from the
Speaker 1: swamp in DC. Nice to be up here in the
Speaker 1: Big Apple, my hometown. I would just want to get
Speaker 1: this out there. I'm one of the rare hosts on
Speaker 1: radio who has had a clearance, had a security clearance,
Speaker 1: had a t S clearance in fact top secret, and
Speaker 1: knows a bit about this. So I can speak with
Speaker 1: some degree of background, which is which is good, which
Speaker 1: is fun. But also I know something that until you've
Speaker 1: been working around these people you can't know, and that
Speaker 1: is that they all think they're much more you know,
Speaker 1: these heads of these different agencies. You know, once they're
Speaker 1: out of government, they all think they're much more indispensable
Speaker 1: than they are. That there's something there's some mystique around them, right,
Speaker 1: and and that I think was in part from especially
Speaker 1: on the intelligence side. You know, the whole situation of
Speaker 1: you know that Jason Bourne, James Bond World, James Bond
Speaker 1: is still a cooler superspy. All the best superspive all
Speaker 1: time is still British. Unfortunately, people would say Ethan Ethan
Speaker 1: Hunter or not Ethan Hunt. That's the actor Ethan what's
Speaker 1: his name from Mission Impossible? You know? Is it? Is
Speaker 1: it Ethan Hunt? Yeah? I was the Ethan Hawk, Ethan Hunt.
Speaker 1: You know, it's all the same. Hawk is the actor. Uh,
Speaker 1: James Bond is still the best spy of all time.
Speaker 1: But when you get to know some of these spy
Speaker 1: agency heads, these director you realize that they're not that impressive.
Speaker 1: Some of them are, some of them really aren't, and
Speaker 1: that it's a very bureaucratic job, and that a lot
Speaker 1: of people who have had the job kind of stunk
Speaker 1: at it, and we don't have some great need of
Speaker 1: them to just be able to show up and and
Speaker 1: do whatever they want. And and here's the big divine
Speaker 1: because I'm getting heat from this already. I already have said,
Speaker 1: you know, and I went on Tucker Show a few
Speaker 1: weeks ago. I was like, this is there's no reason
Speaker 1: these guys to have these clearances and people the old bugged.
Speaker 1: There have to one there's a government program. But only
Speaker 1: if there's a government program that only the former director
Speaker 1: knows about. We got a big problem, folks. You got
Speaker 1: congressional oversight that has to know about these things. You've
Speaker 1: got the different there's a whole big tree, a bureaucratic
Speaker 1: tree below the whether it's the head of the d
Speaker 1: J or the CIA or the d i A or
Speaker 1: any of these different acronym agencies, it's a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of people that have much greater institutional knowledge on this
Speaker 1: stuff than than the director generally will a lot of
Speaker 1: directors come and go. There are people that, you know,
Speaker 1: you want to talk about the the Defense Department of
Speaker 1: the c I A look at Leon Panetta, perfect example, right,
Speaker 1: former director. Yeah, he was in the agency for a
Speaker 1: few years. I forget how many off the top of
Speaker 1: my head. I was actually at the agency when when
Speaker 1: Panetta was there. But there are people that are there
Speaker 1: for decades, people that are way longer. And so this
Speaker 1: whole thing of oh my gosh, you know without him,
Speaker 1: we want it's just this is just nonsense. And there's
Speaker 1: by the way, there's a lot of and now you know,
Speaker 1: people don't want to hear this stuff. But there's a
Speaker 1: lot of kind of influence selling, and you know, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna be a consultant, but I still have a little
Speaker 1: bit of access. No, no, no, no, you're out. You're out.
Speaker 1: You're no longer in government service. We're doing work for
Speaker 1: the government, because there's some people. If you work for
Speaker 1: you know, Lockheed or something, you've got to have a
Speaker 1: clearance if working on sensitive government projects. But if you're
Speaker 1: not involved in government stuff, you shouldn't have an active clearance.
Speaker 1: So then that's let's establish that general principle right now,
Speaker 1: because you're gonna see a lot of amar gosh, it's
Speaker 1: the dark Knight of fascism. Now, no false, do not
Speaker 1: believe these people. They don't know anything or they're just
Speaker 1: blinded by their hatred of Trump. I'm not even gonna
Speaker 1: say partisanship, blinded by partisans I'm a partisan, openly, proudly, honestly,
Speaker 1: i am a partisan. I tell you this. You know
Speaker 1: where I come from. And this is the way information
Speaker 1: gathering and analyzing and sharing should be done going forward.
Speaker 1: People should be honest about who they are, what they believe,
Speaker 1: not pretend I'm just no troll. Later on, we'll have
Speaker 1: a neutral story. Brian Williams. We've done some Google searchers
Speaker 1: for Trump's dogs, not a lot of dog photos. Folks
Speaker 1: don't know what to say about that, sou But I'm
Speaker 1: here to tell you that anybody who's claiming that this
Speaker 1: is some terrible calamity and that this is oh here
Speaker 1: we go, we got we got Senator Bloomenthal on CNN
Speaker 1: saying we're voking Brennan's clearance is illegal. Now, Bloomenthal is
Speaker 1: an idiot, and I don't say that lightly, but he
Speaker 1: says stupid stuff all the time on TV. I mean,
Speaker 1: he just just says stuff that's just it's just not true.
Speaker 1: He's kind of up there, it's sort of nerdy, and
Speaker 1: you know that it's just there's nothing from this guy
Speaker 1: that you should believe on this issue at all. By
Speaker 1: the way, he's sitting across the table right now on
Speaker 1: Wolf Blitzer Show from Jim Shuto, who is a quote
Speaker 1: journalist who used to work for the Obama administration. So
Speaker 1: I think that's always an interesting thing. Right, you can
Speaker 1: do that and you're just considered a journalist, But I
Speaker 1: think of a conservative, do you think that anybody who's
Speaker 1: worked for Trump is going to be able to just
Speaker 1: go out in the media and be a quote objective journalist.
Speaker 1: And you see the the hypocrisy one, it's just the
Speaker 1: hypocrisy slapping us all in the face of the time.
Speaker 1: But now with Trump we get to paunch back buck slab.
Speaker 1: Isn't that fun? So that's on the basics of the
Speaker 1: whole clearance process for former Look, I don't still maintain
Speaker 1: my clearance, and that's a darn good thing, because it
Speaker 1: would be inappropriate for me to be access and classified,
Speaker 1: even if I'm trying to be very clear about access
Speaker 1: and classified on a regular basis or on a fresh
Speaker 1: new basis, and then going on there and being like,
Speaker 1: well this is what I think is gonna happen, you
Speaker 1: know tomorrow in this place. Right, that's not cool. You
Speaker 1: can't do that. Why should it be different for the
Speaker 1: former directors that you heard that as a courtesy? Heck?
Speaker 1: Is that? Well what do you mean as a courtesy?
Speaker 1: Why should they be able to go on air and
Speaker 1: trash the president and maintain their access to classified information
Speaker 1: in this way? You know? What is what is that
Speaker 1: all about? And this is where you get another level
Speaker 1: of distinction. You know, it used to be that the
Speaker 1: Intel agency heads were thought of as being kind of
Speaker 1: above of the partisan fray. They were thought of as
Speaker 1: people who were just they were professionals doing a job.
Speaker 1: And in that, you know, with that reality, I could
Speaker 1: see I could understand some of the procedurals and some
Speaker 1: of the things that they've been doing in the past
Speaker 1: with maintaining access and and keeping clearances active for people.
Speaker 1: I get I get it, and I can kind of
Speaker 1: understand that. But you see what the cabal of Clapper, Brennan,
Speaker 1: Comi or struck Yates. I'm doing this off top of
Speaker 1: my head. I'm I'm missing a bunch of you know,
Speaker 1: a couple of high level left BI guys that resigned.
Speaker 1: Some d O J lawyers are out of there. You know,
Speaker 1: when you look at that whole never mind the straight
Speaker 1: up political appointee folks that were brought in by the
Speaker 1: Obama administration like Susan Rice and Samantha Powers, but when
Speaker 1: you look at the national security officials, specifically national security
Speaker 1: officials that have shown themselves to be part of hashtag resistance,
Speaker 1: they are working to actively undermine the current commander in chief,
Speaker 1: and they're using both there recently vacated offices and their
Speaker 1: continued access to give them additional ammunition against the administration.
Speaker 1: That's what they're doing. That's why when Brennan goes on
Speaker 1: TV and says, oh, you know I have you know,
Speaker 1: I have reasonablieve that you know they have something on Trump, folks.
Speaker 1: When the when the most recently departed CIA director is
Speaker 1: going on TV and saying the current president might be
Speaker 1: an asset of the Russian government, that's crazy. That's you
Speaker 1: want to talk about undermining institutions for what it undermines
Speaker 1: the presidency, it also undermines the CIA, my former home agency,
Speaker 1: because how can you trust that the person running this
Speaker 1: is not going to use their access and the credibility
Speaker 1: that comes along with that to be partisans later on.
Speaker 1: I mean, you're you're seeing this now with a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of differ and people with very senior level access.
Speaker 1: And this is what's so important to remember, because they're
Speaker 1: gonna make all this noise about Brennan's clearance, which also
Speaker 1: is in no way some national security emergency, some big
Speaker 1: First Amendment issue. It is unprecedented to have as many
Speaker 1: senior national security officials for the previous administration immediately turned
Speaker 1: into the not just the harshest critics of the current administration,
Speaker 1: but to be involved in ongoing criminal investigation of that
Speaker 1: administration that they pushed for. And now they're on TV.
Speaker 1: Brennan created the Russia collusion narrative, then left the CIA
Speaker 1: before he could be thrown out of the CIA, which
Speaker 1: I think would have happened if he had stayed and
Speaker 1: we figured out some stuff, but left, and then goes
Speaker 1: on TV and says outrageous, Okay, Hayden, I worked for Hayden.
Speaker 1: I don't know what's happened to that guy. Mike Hayden
Speaker 1: has lost his mind. But they go out now on
Speaker 1: TV and they use the additional credibility they have for
Speaker 1: former CIA director, of former n s A director, or
Speaker 1: former you know whatever to hammer the president. And yes,
Speaker 1: they have a constitutionally protected right to say those things
Speaker 1: about the president. I'm not challenging them on that, But
Speaker 1: they do not have a constitutionally protected right to maintain
Speaker 1: a security clearance while they do it. And they also
Speaker 1: do not have a right to be free from criticism
Speaker 1: from the very president that they are not just trying
Speaker 1: to undermine with their arguments, but that they are working
Speaker 1: to see drummed out of office and maybe even put
Speaker 1: in prison. The damage that they have done it and
Speaker 1: and this is so important for you all to hear
Speaker 1: because you're not hearing it from anyone else. The damage
Speaker 1: that is being done to our national security institutions, the FBI,
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, the law enforcement arm of the
Speaker 1: federal government, and to the intelligence community, which is vast.
Speaker 1: It's way too big, by the way, and as you've
Speaker 1: seen with the fies A warrants and Carter Page tremendous power.
Speaker 1: But the damage that's being done to those institutions will
Speaker 1: last long after Trump leaves office in six years. It's
Speaker 1: going to continue on because this is unprecedented. All these
Speaker 1: people right now who are saying what Brennan and Clapper
Speaker 1: and Hayden and others are doing is okay, would have
Speaker 1: lost their minds if the Bush administrations national security officials
Speaker 1: had all gathered together created a narrative not just of
Speaker 1: Obama's unfitness for office, but that they were trying to
Speaker 1: subvert Obama. And we know, folks, there have been leaks,
Speaker 1: including illegal leaks, from senior folks in the national security
Speaker 1: bureaucracy to the major newspapers and then the anti Trump
Speaker 1: news outlets like CNN, and it's this is stuff that
Speaker 1: came from high level. Somebody spilled Flynn's phone call to
Speaker 1: the press. Somebody was using their access to submarine to
Speaker 1: deep six this White House and every way that they could. Okay,
Speaker 1: so Trump is trying to clear this out, and he's
Speaker 1: when when you have a mole, when you have somebody
Speaker 1: who was using their access for the bad guys, sometimes
Speaker 1: you gotta pull. You gotta pull access for a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of people. So I think this is this is
Speaker 1: it's both completely sensible and also not really that big
Speaker 1: a deal. They're going to tell you that this is
Speaker 1: a a huge problem, and this is Oh, they're claiming
Speaker 1: that Trump is politicizing you know, intelligence and intelligence access. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: they're holding up people that sworn oath to uphold and
Speaker 1: defend the Constitution, and we're appointees of a previous administration
Speaker 1: and they are working to subvert the current president of
Speaker 1: the United States without evidence and without even a shred
Speaker 1: of professionalism. They have they have become ranked partisans, and
Speaker 1: it's an embarrassment. I speak to people still in the
Speaker 1: community not you know, I'm not you know. So when
Speaker 1: most journalists do folks as they talked to a couple
Speaker 1: of all the very top at whether it's you know,
Speaker 1: the c I A or if it's you know, the
Speaker 1: d O J. They have a couple of people the
Speaker 1: very top that they know can talk and probably won't
Speaker 1: get in trouble, and they think that that's though, that
Speaker 1: gives them a sense of the rank and file. I
Speaker 1: talk to people still in the community. They are embarrassed
Speaker 1: by what is going on. The rank and file that
Speaker 1: I speak to are embarrassed by what the former CI director,
Speaker 1: the former FBI director, uh, they've been doing with this administration.
Speaker 1: And it's not about politics for them. It's about the
Speaker 1: professionalism of those institutions being just just thrown into a bonfire. Here.
Speaker 1: It's crazy what is going on. So I know there's
Speaker 1: all this, you know, there's all these claims where this
Speaker 1: is an abuse of power. Guess what, it's within the
Speaker 1: president's power. He can do it, he has done it,
Speaker 1: and maybe it's time we just start telling the Democrats,
Speaker 1: you know what, deal with it. Eight four four eight
Speaker 1: to five eight four buck. We have oh so much
Speaker 1: more to get to some stuff from the elections, the
Speaker 1: primary election stuff that's come in. Well, maybe a bit
Speaker 1: more of an update on Turkey, which you know we've
Speaker 1: been following closely here in the Freedom Hunt eight four
Speaker 1: four buck. We will be right back. Did you know
Speaker 1: who commissioned the Steel dossier? I don't. Did the CEE?
Speaker 1: I rely on it? No? Why not? Because we we didn't.
Speaker 1: It wasn't part of the corpus of intelligence. Uh information
Speaker 1: that we had. It was not in any way used
Speaker 1: as a basis for the Intel's Community assessment that was done.
Speaker 1: You see, that intelligence community assessment was about Russian meddling.
Speaker 1: Who who created a connection between the Facebook accounts and
Speaker 1: what was a pathetically small scale attempt by the financial
Speaker 1: numbers involved, by the different but by by any objective
Speaker 1: metric of how media works, how social media works in
Speaker 1: the current environment. But who created this of them that
Speaker 1: it was somehow tied to Trump. Somebody must have been
Speaker 1: pushing that story and pushing it at a very senior
Speaker 1: level of government. Now you can believe that the FBI
Speaker 1: just came up with this on their own, that somehow
Speaker 1: Papadopolis got on the radar of the FBI, As they said,
Speaker 1: which I don't believe by the way that carter Page,
Speaker 1: they decided to turn on carter Page. Carter Page had
Speaker 1: worked with the FBI, had had sat down with the FBI,
Speaker 1: has by the way, never been even never been accused
Speaker 1: of a crime, even whispered what the crime was that
Speaker 1: Carter Page could have committed, never been, never mind being indicted.
Speaker 1: He has and I've spoken to about this. He said
Speaker 1: that he is a patriot. He says that he disagrees
Speaker 1: with some U. S. Foreign policy in terms of what's
Speaker 1: going on with Russia. But I mean, look, you know,
Speaker 1: I the Obama administration, look what they did with Iran.
Speaker 1: I don't think their traitors. I just think they weren't
Speaker 1: very smart, right, I Mean, there's a difference. But I'm
Speaker 1: not running around claiming that the Mullah's had in giving
Speaker 1: bags of cash to Ben Rhodes or something like that.
Speaker 1: But that's basically what they say about about people around
Speaker 1: in Trump's orbit. It's not even just those nationals, curty ficials.
Speaker 1: Got pre Berrara, the former U. S. Attorney for for
Speaker 1: the Southern District here in New York, and all these
Speaker 1: government officials that have come out and they're not opposing
Speaker 1: Trump policies. They're trying to take down the man himself.
Speaker 1: This is unheard of, and you know, Brennan and some
Speaker 1: of these other figures, they are desperate to make sure
Speaker 1: that they can muddy the waters and stop the Republican
Speaker 1: majority House of Representatives from from these investigations into just
Speaker 1: how how did all this get going? How do we
Speaker 1: get so far down this pathwy? This is crazy? This
Speaker 1: a little collusion thing going on for two years here.
Speaker 1: It's just all a big bunch of nothing. Think of
Speaker 1: all the time on all the investigation and the air
Speaker 1: waves with all the different news channels. It's the biggest
Speaker 1: waste of time in my lifetime. Uh In, I'd rather
Speaker 1: than start telling me that they're going to just cover
Speaker 1: then the missing plane NonStop again. At least there's the
Speaker 1: there's a possibility you'll find out something interesting there. With this,
Speaker 1: There's no possibility. This It is all a Russia collusion delusion,
Speaker 1: and I am I've run out of patients with it.
Speaker 1: I wish we could just stop this whole thing. I
Speaker 1: like that Juliani is telling uh Mueller that he better
Speaker 1: finish this thing up or else, you know, he's gonna
Speaker 1: get turned up even more because Mueller's engaged in a
Speaker 1: political exercise, whether he will admit that or not. And
Speaker 1: and Brennan and these other political actors, they need it.
Speaker 1: There needs to be a reckoning here with what they're
Speaker 1: really doing and what their motivations not just are now,
Speaker 1: but we're back when they were in government's dirty folks.
Speaker 1: There is a cabal. There is a deep state, all right,
Speaker 1: and they were spying on Trump. So let's figure out
Speaker 1: just how much he's holding the line for America. Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton is back. I was called by a friend of
Speaker 1: the Associate Um when Sarahoop Sanders was giving that statement,
Speaker 1: so I had no knowledge of it beforehand. No one
Speaker 1: contacted me, nobody reached out to me over the past
Speaker 1: several weeks when this issue was first had first surfaced.
Speaker 1: So the first I heard about it was when I
Speaker 1: was able to turn on the television and listen to
Speaker 1: miss Sanders um and I have not heard heard anything
Speaker 1: from any govern official since then. You know, like I said,
Speaker 1: although the president is allowed to do this, I don't
Speaker 1: know anybody who's been able to make an argument yet
Speaker 1: that the president controls access to classified information that this
Speaker 1: is within the executive branch folks. I think that part
Speaker 1: of this is that they just don't really believe that
Speaker 1: Trump is the president. I mean, that was Brennan there,
Speaker 1: the formercy I director, saying that he found out about
Speaker 1: this from the White House press briefing today. Trump had
Speaker 1: said he was gonna do this for a while. I
Speaker 1: will say I was wrong. The one thing I did
Speaker 1: big Trump is going to do it. So I'll be
Speaker 1: totally honest with you about that. I didn't think it
Speaker 1: was really going to happen. But I also said along
Speaker 1: it wasn't really that, it wasn't really that big of
Speaker 1: a deal. And here's the guy who's running around now,
Speaker 1: who's the former CI director who's running around on TV
Speaker 1: the kind of stuff that he says about the current
Speaker 1: commander in chief. I think Donald Trump has badly sullied
Speaker 1: the reputation of the office of the presidency with his invective,
Speaker 1: with his constant um disregard I think for human decency,
Speaker 1: as well as his befriending of autocratic leaders around the
Speaker 1: world and his continued pursuit of relationships to benefit himself
Speaker 1: as opposed to country. I do think that America standing
Speaker 1: in the world has also been tarnished. But I think
Speaker 1: even more fundamentally, what he is doing here in the
Speaker 1: United States is very polarizing, and he is I think
Speaker 1: the most divisive president we've ever had in the Oval office.
Speaker 1: Why do you think they put Brennan on TV so much? Folks,
Speaker 1: Let's really be honest about this from him. Why do
Speaker 1: you think John Brennan's on TV? He doesn't say anything
Speaker 1: particularly interesting and eloquent. He goes way overboard with a
Speaker 1: lot of his analysis. So why does he get so
Speaker 1: much airtime? Could it be because two people who are
Speaker 1: Trump anti Trump deranged that to have a former CIA
Speaker 1: director and the most recent There is a difference here.
Speaker 1: By the way, if even the CI director ten years ago,
Speaker 1: I'd be like, all right, you know, the guy moved
Speaker 1: on with this love. He just left the agency. He's
Speaker 1: on TV. He's saying that Trumper friends autocrats. He's saying
Speaker 1: all these terrible things with the president United States. The
Speaker 1: only reason that he gets the airtime he does is
Speaker 1: because of the gravitas that he has as the most
Speaker 1: recent CI director, So so he is trading on that
Speaker 1: and also the continued access that he has because there's
Speaker 1: this assumption in the mind of viewers. Well, he must
Speaker 1: really know the truth about Trump because he was a
Speaker 1: CI director. Otherwise what he says is it's like third
Speaker 1: tier huffing and post comments section stuff. It doesn't matter
Speaker 1: who cares. The reason they like him so much, the
Speaker 1: reason he's such a useful uh antagonist to the President
Speaker 1: the United States right now is because he was Obama
Speaker 1: CIA director and because he maintains classified access, and so
Speaker 1: when he goes on TV and says all these terrible things, it's, oh, well,
Speaker 1: the CIA director thinks us about Trump, it must be true.
Speaker 1: That's very damaging. It is very damaging. I mean a
Speaker 1: lot of us know, and you know this is true
Speaker 1: to anyone who says, oh, balk, this is terrible. The
Speaker 1: partnersanship Hayden is tweeting out photos of constant of Nazi
Speaker 1: concentration camps and saying that's what that's what Trump is
Speaker 1: doing at the border. That's right. The former CIA director
Speaker 1: did that and didn't back down from it. By the way,
Speaker 1: it's like, yeah, that's right. That that seems about fair.
Speaker 1: That seems about right. So let's not pretend that their
Speaker 1: side has not completely lost their minds over this already.
Speaker 1: Uh We've got a lot of calls, so I want
Speaker 1: to take a couple of them here. Um Bill in Oregon.
Speaker 1: Hey Bill, how's it going. I'm good, sir, Thank you
Speaker 1: for your call. Yeah, I just wanted to make a
Speaker 1: fine about something. You know, they're all started with Johnson,
Speaker 1: if you remember, I don't. I was born in one, Okay,
Speaker 1: the fall of the black community started with Johnson. Are
Speaker 1: you talking about like the great like great Society programs
Speaker 1: and the welfare state and the destruction of minority communities?
Speaker 1: Is that what we're trying to get out of here?
Speaker 1: I got recruited for Arab air America. I didn't know
Speaker 1: what I was getting into. I don't know what I'm
Speaker 1: getting into right now. What are you talking about? Well,
Speaker 1: we were I was there was we had two aircraft.
Speaker 1: We had two DC seven I mean yeah, d C eight,
Speaker 1: I should say, and we were flying gam You never left,
Speaker 1: Sam never left, you know, territory of the United States
Speaker 1: that we had never had to go to a custom.
Speaker 1: But we're bringing stuff back in San Francisco, Chicago, and
Speaker 1: Florida bringing what's stuff back? How about China? White? That's
Speaker 1: quite a Mike, Where do we This is quite well Um, okay,
Speaker 1: So you're saying you were bringing drugs in the United
Speaker 1: States under the orders of the government. I mean, I've
Speaker 1: heard this conspiracy before from people. Do you have any
Speaker 1: Why am I hearing about this now from you? Bill?
Speaker 1: I'm just tired of we finally got a president but
Speaker 1: standing up, and I think everything needs to fall out.
Speaker 1: I think all the laundry needs to be washed. Alright, alright,
Speaker 1: fair enough, thank you? All the water? Who's washed? And
Speaker 1: producer Mike's gonna get a code read for that phone call?
Speaker 1: Uh Bill? Also Bill in Florida, we're tired law enforcement officer.
Speaker 1: Hey Bill, Yes, how you doing? And I think you've
Speaker 1: got something that cannot be taught in college, and that's
Speaker 1: called common sense. Thank you? Now, Yes, sir, I'm born
Speaker 1: with that myself, and that's the only way you get it.
Speaker 1: I do about like Hillary now that she still have
Speaker 1: a security clearance. Um, that is a good question. She
Speaker 1: was the Secretary of State. My guests would be if
Speaker 1: she wanted access, they probably still give it to her.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't we think somebody would observe that,
Speaker 1: you know, being a former secretary of say, these people
Speaker 1: when they get these situations and they're not on duty. Okay, sublience,
Speaker 1: they're sublient citizens. They don't have to write to that.
Speaker 1: Even when I call in if I'm going to go
Speaker 1: on duty and I'm retired, but once in a while
Speaker 1: and the emergency type thing or something on law enforcement,
Speaker 1: I have to call in and use the code and
Speaker 1: then they tell me, okay, well you need your help,
Speaker 1: but we don't. Why don't they do that because I'm
Speaker 1: just you know, a classic by now is a retired
Speaker 1: law enforcement civilian citizen. That's all I am. You know,
Speaker 1: there ought to be some sort of reformat for this.
Speaker 1: If the president decides he wants to knock this guy
Speaker 1: off the security, he should have all the right in
Speaker 1: the world to do it. He doesn't. It's what's amazing, Bill,
Speaker 1: is he does No one's really at least knowing that
Speaker 1: I'm listening to her paying attention to is saying that
Speaker 1: he does not have the ability to do this right.
Speaker 1: It's so people who are saying, oh my gosh, they
Speaker 1: just don't like that he has exercise authority that he has,
Speaker 1: which this is a constant problem with Trump. Trump does
Speaker 1: things that the other side doesn't like, and then they
Speaker 1: act like there's something you know, inherently wrong with the
Speaker 1: act when really they just don't like the decision, right,
Speaker 1: It's not that he doesn't have the authority to do it,
Speaker 1: they just don't like he chose to use that authority.
Speaker 1: Who is the rank person which was a female and
Speaker 1: a nonstand factor that he's losing is you know where
Speaker 1: is she? I don't know exactly who that was, but
Speaker 1: she's the one that announced it, trumped it. Oh ye,
Speaker 1: that's right, yeah, Sarah Huckaby Sanders announced it. Bill. Thank
Speaker 1: you for calling in from Florida. Do appreciate it? Uh?
Speaker 1: Wade in Mississippi? Hey Wade, how's it going today, sir?
Speaker 1: I'm good, sir, Thank you for your call. She was
Speaker 1: h I want to do all right? Oh wow, my
Speaker 1: my tweet is currently on Brett Bear Show on the screen.
Speaker 1: That was kind of fun. That's just that's a weird
Speaker 1: thing to happen when you're doing radio, Like, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: that's me. Go ahead, sir, all right. I just wanted
Speaker 1: to hill right you. I don't think it's no surprise
Speaker 1: that that Trump pulls a clearance because he tweeted out
Speaker 1: a week ago or so that he was gonna pull
Speaker 1: a lot of clearances. Yeah, he was looking at pulling
Speaker 1: a lot. I believe that's gonna happen. I really do.
Speaker 1: Trump seems to be a man of his words so far.
Speaker 1: That is true. By the way, Wait, I think you're
Speaker 1: making a good point, which is I should I shouldn't
Speaker 1: have doubted the Trumpster on this one. He said he
Speaker 1: was gonna do it. You did it. You can't do it.
Speaker 1: He came doubt at moment, not not when when he lies,
Speaker 1: will call him out on it. You know. Of course,
Speaker 1: the other media believes that he's lying four thousand and
Speaker 1: sometimes since he's been at office. I think this, Yeah,
Speaker 1: if you believe what they're saying, Uh, you know, everything
Speaker 1: he says a lie. I mean nothing, There's nothing he
Speaker 1: says that is not a lie. That's pretty much what
Speaker 1: they That's the opinion. They seem to be. Uh, they
Speaker 1: seem to be. But what do you think about this way?
Speaker 1: Is this? Uh? Is this a justified move? Definitely justified moved.
Speaker 1: I think it's uh. Uh should have been done seven
Speaker 1: eight months ago, probably to all of them, all of
Speaker 1: the and Trumpers. Anyway, you saw her strokes. Oh no,
Speaker 1: our texts were just they what that was not What
Speaker 1: it meant is you've got security clearance and you should
Speaker 1: keep your mouth set. Yeah. I mean, look, active duty,
Speaker 1: active duty military all know that. You know that right
Speaker 1: there there are limitations on you. You can't be active
Speaker 1: duty military and you know, doing videos in your military
Speaker 1: uniform be like, yeah, I hate the commander in chief
Speaker 1: and I won't obey his order. Right. You don't get
Speaker 1: to say, oh, that's free speech. Why should you have
Speaker 1: access to classified information as a non political you know,
Speaker 1: as somebody who's no longer in that role, and and
Speaker 1: be able to go out there and constantly trash the president.
Speaker 1: I mean, the president should be able to say, if
Speaker 1: you're gonna do this, I'm not gonna you know, you're
Speaker 1: not gonna continue to have access. Awesome, That's that's true.
Speaker 1: I got one more quick question for you. Yes, sir,
Speaker 1: you mentioned free speech. What what what are your ideas
Speaker 1: and feelings on the free speech war that's going on
Speaker 1: right now against our our first Amendment. Oh that's a
Speaker 1: very that's a very very important question. In fact, you know, wait,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna use that to transition to our next segment,
Speaker 1: Shields High from down Mississippi. Thank you for calling in um.
Speaker 1: I think anyone who believes that they're just gonna leave
Speaker 1: it at Alex Jones is kidding themselves. Anybody who uh,
Speaker 1: anybody who believes that they're going to the left and
Speaker 1: the social media platforms and all these d platforming efforts
Speaker 1: and conversational health and all this Orwellian mind control, thought control,
Speaker 1: word control crap that they're trying now is going to
Speaker 1: stop at just the you know, the most outrageous or
Speaker 1: the most egregious. They are kidding themselves. Let me let
Speaker 1: me get into that's an excellent question from Wade. Let
Speaker 1: me get into this little bit more on the other
Speaker 1: side of this, breaks they were. It's very important that
Speaker 1: you all know that what the left seeks is not
Speaker 1: a level playing field for ideas and debate. They seek
Speaker 1: the powers of unfettered censorship, and they seek information dominance
Speaker 1: in the political space and the cultural space all across
Speaker 1: the board, not based on what you want, not based
Speaker 1: on individual choice, not based on even what the group
Speaker 1: cares to read or share, but what they determine you
Speaker 1: should see and those around you should see and be
Speaker 1: subjected to and be around. They are doing everything they
Speaker 1: can now and I have seen this coming for a
Speaker 1: long time. I've told you about this for a long time,
Speaker 1: to restore what they had for most of the post
Speaker 1: World War two century, which was the ability to control
Speaker 1: the narrative by controlling the dissemination of information itself. You
Speaker 1: control where and how information goes around places. Then you,
Speaker 1: in fact can control what people think to some degree.
Speaker 1: Your propaganda is that much more effective the social media platforms.
Speaker 1: It's not just for people, you know, checking up on
Speaker 1: their high school sweetheart now that she's all grown up
Speaker 1: and has five kids of her own, And it's not
Speaker 1: just for you know, instant messaging back and forth. In
Speaker 1: the office, we're being told by people that a small
Speaker 1: Russian Facebook by and some Facebook trolls from Russia were
Speaker 1: If you believe the leftist narrative able to influence a
Speaker 1: presidential election, think about what the actual platform controllers can
Speaker 1: do at Twitter and Facebook and Google. Think about the
Speaker 1: power that they have two in much more subtle ways,
Speaker 1: influence what all of us see and how we think,
Speaker 1: and how we think about those topics that are top
Speaker 1: of mind. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has been asked about
Speaker 1: Alex Jones. He gave an interview to Lester Holt on
Speaker 1: NBC News. He said, quote, we can't build a service
Speaker 1: that is subjective just to the whims of what we
Speaker 1: personally believe. You know, Dorsey realizes at the moment, Twitter
Speaker 1: becomes part of the lie of the mainstream media, right,
Speaker 1: the moment Twitter becomes like NPR. What is MPR, folks,
Speaker 1: It's just the news for people who tell the news
Speaker 1: like this, who have this neutral tone of voice, and
Speaker 1: then therefore must also have a neutral point of view.
Speaker 1: That's not true, though, right. NPR is very liberal, as
Speaker 1: you know. Uh, and they pretend that there should be
Speaker 1: public funding for some of these liberal platforms by continuing
Speaker 1: on with this ridiculous idea that oh no, it's not
Speaker 1: really it's not really pushing a point of view, it's
Speaker 1: just providing a public service. What you will see continue
Speaker 1: to happen with the major social media platforms and Silicon Valley.
Speaker 1: Remember Silicon Valley is really an extension of San Francisco.
Speaker 1: San Francisco is the single most liberal city in the
Speaker 1: United States. Number two is DC the swamp I've told you,
Speaker 1: but San Francisco is number one. The politics of the
Speaker 1: Bay Area are left of Bernie Sanders Okay, you don't
Speaker 1: think that that's going to influence how they set their
Speaker 1: terms of service, how they please it. How many instances
Speaker 1: can of this? Can we see where people are going
Speaker 1: to be banned or people are going to be eliminated
Speaker 1: who are conservative, only to have all of us say,
Speaker 1: hold on a second. That person they got and I
Speaker 1: just saw what was it? Earlier this week they banned
Speaker 1: Gavin McInnis. I used to do Red Eye at Fox
Speaker 1: News with Gavin McGinnis, would be a pretty regular guest.
Speaker 1: He's banned from Twitter now, um, and you know it's
Speaker 1: they They started this with that guy Milo a long
Speaker 1: time ago, and he got banned permanently from Twitter, And
Speaker 1: if I recall correctly, he was banned not for what
Speaker 1: he did or said, but for what some of his
Speaker 1: supporters were involved in in writing on Twitter. But if
Speaker 1: these are not open platforms, they increasingly for political debate
Speaker 1: and discussion and become effectively worthless. If there are going
Speaker 1: to be rules of the road determined four us by
Speaker 1: the overseers of these platforms, then they ceased to have
Speaker 1: the value that they've had in the past as the
Speaker 1: one place where other than talk radio, Thank you very much,
Speaker 1: where the left had a vast advantage over the right.
Speaker 1: You know the reason that Facebook has been so appealing
Speaker 1: for conservatives over the last you know, decade or two,
Speaker 1: I guess it's less than two. Facebook came on line
Speaker 1: in two thousand four, right, I remember when I was
Speaker 1: in school, but my school was one of the first
Speaker 1: fifty or one hundred or whatever that got Facebook. And
Speaker 1: as we all know, it really was just about people
Speaker 1: wanted to see who else was in their class. It
Speaker 1: was just about photos of people. And now it's one
Speaker 1: of most valuable companies, one of the most capital efficient
Speaker 1: companies on the planet. Uh, but they are incredibly powerful now.
Speaker 1: They are only going to grow more powerful over time,
Speaker 1: and they need we need to at least be honest
Speaker 1: and upfront about what's gonna happen with them. I mean,
Speaker 1: Jack Dorsey is saying now that people are gonna be
Speaker 1: getting time outs. He's the CEO of Twitter. People will
Speaker 1: get time outs if they misbehave on Twitter. This is
Speaker 1: going to be who are the people that always boycott?
Speaker 1: Who are the people that like to be the hall
Speaker 1: monitors of speech, that like to go tattle to the teacher.
Speaker 1: It's always liberals that do this, my friends, You know this.
Speaker 1: It's always the liberals that want somebody else to weigh
Speaker 1: in and make the big, bad mean conservatives. Stop saying
Speaker 1: those mean things about you know, constitutionalism and low low
Speaker 1: taxes and limited governments so mean. We just don't have
Speaker 1: it in our you know, culturally conservatives, in our d
Speaker 1: n A and our ideology whatever you however you want
Speaker 1: to put it. We're not Russian to boycott people all
Speaker 1: the time. We're not running off and hoping that somebody
Speaker 1: else is gonna make the bad mean people. Stop saying
Speaker 1: things we don't like. The left does this all the time,
Speaker 1: and they're gonna keep doing it, and I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't have an answer for you right now other than
Speaker 1: we need to be aware of it and we need
Speaker 1: to come up with some ways forward. I mean, maybe
Speaker 1: that means that means some conservative platforms for free and
Speaker 1: unfettered discussion and debate. We'll have to see big art
Speaker 1: coming off. You know. I talked about home security a
Speaker 1: lot on the show because it matters a lot to me,
Speaker 1: and I have a simply safe system, which is simply
Speaker 1: the best system you can get. It offers you fantastic protection.
Speaker 1: It's very easy to use. And you know I've got
Speaker 1: some additional news for you. Simply Safe is now worth
Speaker 1: a billion dollars as a company. Okay, I've known the
Speaker 1: Simply Safe folks for a long time. They're all about
Speaker 1: keeping you and your stuff safe and secure, giving you
Speaker 1: protection against intruders, fires, leaks, and burst pipes. And that's
Speaker 1: why they protect over two million people right now. This
Speaker 1: is the most user friendly and best system you can
Speaker 1: so we get. It's the one that I have at home.
Speaker 1: I want you to check it out to order your
Speaker 1: simply Safe system now. My listeners get free shipping and
Speaker 1: free returns. Just visit simply Safe s I m p
Speaker 1: L I Safe dot com slash book. That's simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash box to protect your home with a
Speaker 1: simply Safe system. Again, no contracts are hidden fees, folks,
Speaker 1: very intuitive, very straightforward system. Simply Safe dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: They want to end your Second Amendment and they're putting
Speaker 1: a big move on it. And Cuomo wants to end
Speaker 1: your second Amendment more than anything. Cuomo wants to take
Speaker 1: away your second Amendment. Now, he called me and he said,
Speaker 1: I'll never run for president against you, but maybe he
Speaker 1: wants to oh please do it, please please? He did
Speaker 1: say that head that maybe maybe he amazing. The one
Speaker 1: thing we know they do say anybody that runs against
Speaker 1: Trump suffers the way you did that Game of Thrones
Speaker 1: level slogan from Trump. Anyone who runs against Trump suffers.
Speaker 1: That's up there with you know, we do not sew
Speaker 1: or you know, things like that. I mean, that's really
Speaker 1: those of your Game of Thrones watchers. Welcome back to
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Uh. I like that Trump is
Speaker 1: already just he He's not waiting for the Democrats to
Speaker 1: put forward whoever they want. He's gonna try to to
Speaker 1: goad them a little bit with you know, who are
Speaker 1: you really gonna put up against mere? Gonna put you
Speaker 1: gonna put Sanders up against me? You're gonna put Cuomo,
Speaker 1: not broke Cuomo. We might get to him later on, um,
Speaker 1: but no, No, Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York,
Speaker 1: the one who always talks like this, who generally yells
Speaker 1: and has nothing important, interesting or even vaguely intelligent, who say,
Speaker 1: I would likes to give his speeches, A deeply uncharismatic
Speaker 1: politician I would like to know other then his name.
Speaker 1: I mean it's kind of name recognition. I suppose, uh,
Speaker 1: why it is that he is even in a position
Speaker 1: he's in right now. But but to give you a
Speaker 1: sense of what Trump would be up against right would
Speaker 1: be up against you? Uh. Kamala Harris recently when asked
Speaker 1: what what accomplishments have you had in the Senate, and
Speaker 1: it was, well, I'm on some committees, you know, stuff
Speaker 1: TPS reports. I mean, there wasn't a lot of substance there.
Speaker 1: You have Bernie Sanders, who's like free stuff for everybody
Speaker 1: who needs to pay for anything. It's gonna be amazing.
Speaker 1: You have Occasio Cortez like and I gosh, like whatever,
Speaker 1: like I just want socially justice to be justifiably social.
Speaker 1: And I don't know who else, Elizabeth Elizabeth Warren. The
Speaker 1: problem right now is my Elizabeth warrempression. Is this gonna
Speaker 1: be my Hillary impression down an octave? Hello, the same,
Speaker 1: because he's just as charming as Hillary. Uh. And then
Speaker 1: you get Cuomo, who's up here. Cuomo, nobody needs a
Speaker 1: Buzuka to shoot a rabbit. N r Ray is evil.
Speaker 1: They want chainsaw bayonets to chop up small woodland creatures
Speaker 1: with it is a very mean thing they do. Um. Oh. Also,
Speaker 1: Cuomo does not particularly of America from what I understand
Speaker 1: Play nineteen. Please, We're not gonna make America great again.
Speaker 1: It was never that great. We have not reached greatness.
Speaker 1: We will reach greatness when every American is fully engaged.
Speaker 1: We will reach greatness when discrimination and stereotyping against women
Speaker 1: of our population is gone and every woman's full potential
Speaker 1: is realized and unleashed, and every woman is making her
Speaker 1: full contribution. And when I can penda shamelessly and continuously
Speaker 1: without saying a thing of any worth whatsoever. Wow, America
Speaker 1: was never America was never great. This is a folks,
Speaker 1: This is a return to Obamaism. If this is what
Speaker 1: you want, we can go back to this. We can
Speaker 1: go back to politicians who claim that only through the
Speaker 1: vessel of voting for them, not can we make the
Speaker 1: country better because remember Trump, make America great again? No, no, no,
Speaker 1: Only then can we begin to atone for the sins
Speaker 1: of the past. Only then can we begin to get
Speaker 1: away from our failures as a country. Because we are
Speaker 1: not a great country. The Democrats believe we have never
Speaker 1: been a great country. We have to adhere to their principles,
Speaker 1: their ideology, and then perhaps we can become great. Whereas
Speaker 1: what Trump has said is we're the greatest country in
Speaker 1: the world, the greatest military, greatest economy, greatest culture. Yes,
Speaker 1: that's right, I'll say it. American culture is the greatest
Speaker 1: culture in the world, the most freedom, the most prosperity,
Speaker 1: the most happiness, for the greatest number of people ever,
Speaker 1: not just Americans, but for our fellow human beings around
Speaker 1: the globe. You see, you have to take that into
Speaker 1: account as well. We don't just grow in our prosperity
Speaker 1: here at home. We also have prosperity that reverberates around
Speaker 1: the rest of the world. And our way of life
Speaker 1: and our system has been so successful that others wish
Speaker 1: to emulate it. America is more than just a little
Speaker 1: bit great. America is the greatest ever all time. For
Speaker 1: about eight years, we were being told that we weren't
Speaker 1: so great. That's when President Trump came along and said,
Speaker 1: let's make us great again. His reference was to a
Speaker 1: restoration of what had always been there, but what what
Speaker 1: had been suppressed. What we have been told to abandon.
Speaker 1: Much of what we knew about ourselves Americans. We were
Speaker 1: told to forget, and then Trump comes along and he says, no, no,
Speaker 1: we shall revel in our strength. We shall leave once
Speaker 1: again in our exceptionalism, and we shall be proud of
Speaker 1: what we have done as a country. Overall, that doesn't
Speaker 1: mean everything. Nothing is perfect. No country is perfect. Every
Speaker 1: country has history to grapple with, has injustice in its past,
Speaker 1: has oppression, has tyranny, but we have less of it
Speaker 1: than any other country. Of our relative importance to the
Speaker 1: rest of the world by a huge factor. And also
Speaker 1: when you look at the greatness and the good that
Speaker 1: has been done and the rest of the world because
Speaker 1: of us, through us, and in response to us as Americans,
Speaker 1: we have a lot to be proud of. And it's
Speaker 1: a remarkable thing that you have Cuomo there, who believes
Speaker 1: an effective way to pander to his audience is one
Speaker 1: to claim that, you know, there's this still this vast
Speaker 1: discrimination against women that's going on in this country, you know,
Speaker 1: until they reached their full potential. Uh. And then also
Speaker 1: just to say that we have never that America was
Speaker 1: never that great. Wow. What an inspiring message from a
Speaker 1: guy who's only able to stand up and say this
Speaker 1: and be the governor like a great state of New
Speaker 1: York because of much better men and women who came
Speaker 1: before him, who had an understanding. I don't just mean
Speaker 1: the founders, I mean generations and generations of people who
Speaker 1: were doing the work to make this the freest, greatest
Speaker 1: country ever. It is an interesting thing, folks, that the Democrats, culturally,
Speaker 1: the left has always taken a condescending view towards the
Speaker 1: very country that allows them incomplete not just safety, but
Speaker 1: from a privileged perch in society, to condescend to the
Speaker 1: rest of that country. This is that sense of elitism
Speaker 1: that Trump has been so successfully exposing and pushing back on. Finally,
Speaker 1: somebody who shows up who says, I have been among them.
Speaker 1: I am a billionaire, I am famous, and I don't
Speaker 1: view my fellow Americans the way that they do. I
Speaker 1: want everyone to be able to pursue their own dream.
Speaker 1: I don't want to tell people that they didn't build that.
Speaker 1: I don't want to tell people they have to share
Speaker 1: the wealth more. These are philosophies, my friends, that have
Speaker 1: been tried in other places, and are still being tried
Speaker 1: in other places, with at very high failure rate of
Speaker 1: a It's just a question of the timeline eventually you
Speaker 1: will run into catastrophe. If you try to build a
Speaker 1: society based not upon individual rights and individual interests, but
Speaker 1: a collective good that's decided by a group of elites,
Speaker 1: it is always a disaster. It's just a question of
Speaker 1: how quickly it gets there. Trump understands this. Cuomo clearly
Speaker 1: does not. But this is the problem that Democrats have,
Speaker 1: is that in this era of in this era of
Speaker 1: constant communication and the ability for all of us to
Speaker 1: see and hear what the Democrats really think. At the
Speaker 1: end of the day, the problem that Democrats are going
Speaker 1: to have and winning back the White House is that
Speaker 1: the American people do not like what Democrats are really about.
Speaker 1: Not they say, you know, you notice that in all
Speaker 1: these Midwestern states. I saw a piece today and I
Speaker 1: think it was Politico, which is the left wing version
Speaker 1: of The Hill where I work. Uh, And they will
Speaker 1: go off and talk about how the candidates that are
Speaker 1: winning for the Democrats, or that have won primaries in
Speaker 1: the Midwest, they are boring and white. That's what the
Speaker 1: Democrats have been saying. I meanwhile, I'm just thinking myself,
Speaker 1: They're just trying to run candidates who can win these
Speaker 1: places and not playing identity politics, because identity politics in
Speaker 1: the state, uh, like you know, Indiana or Missouri isn't
Speaker 1: necessarily going to be a winning formula for the Democrats.
Speaker 1: But that's still a problem for the left. You know
Speaker 1: that they have this focus on diversity over all else
Speaker 1: and on the intersectionality of American society, meaning the power
Speaker 1: dynamics between different people that are it's just levels of oppression.
Speaker 1: And this has become a psychle logical rot with the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party, and it's why they view American not just
Speaker 1: American society, but American foreign policy and American our way
Speaker 1: of of economics as all in some way tainted by oppression.
Speaker 1: And clearly Cuomo thinks that this is a way that
Speaker 1: he can leap ahead of the rest of the Democrats
Speaker 1: in the field by by embracing this nonsensical uh ideology,
Speaker 1: because it is not I mean, it always falls into disrepair,
Speaker 1: it always falls into self contradiction. You can't hold these
Speaker 1: beliefs at the same time and and and still keep
Speaker 1: it all together. It's it's uh huh, we'll see. I mean.
Speaker 1: The good news is, I don't think anything can take
Speaker 1: out Trump. Nobody's even close right now. They've got nothing, folks,
Speaker 1: nothing at all. We've got much more coming up. Eight
Speaker 1: four four to five, eight four four nine bucks. I'll
Speaker 1: be right back. What if I told you that I
Speaker 1: could give you a little extra boost to get through
Speaker 1: your day or to get your day started. What if
Speaker 1: I said that you could just mix it in as
Speaker 1: a little added flavor or whatever you're already drinking or eating. Well,
Speaker 1: you can do that now with Strike Force Energy. Strikeforce
Speaker 1: is veteran owned. It was founded by a Navy seal.
Speaker 1: This is a guy who understands what it is to
Speaker 1: get in the fight and stay in the fight and win.
Speaker 1: Over the last three years, Strikeforce Energy Drink has shipped
Speaker 1: millions of packets two troops, abroad and at home. And
Speaker 1: right now, folks, they are bringing this proven battlefield liquid
Speaker 1: directly to your door. It's available in four flavors, has
Speaker 1: zero sugar and zero calories, only the best ingredients. Go
Speaker 1: check it out for yourself. Go to strike Force Energy
Speaker 1: dot com and or discount code b U c K
Speaker 1: at checkout. You just mix this in with you know,
Speaker 1: sixteen ounces or so whatever drink you're already have an
Speaker 1: add in that Strike Force liquid, Folks, Strike Force Energy
Speaker 1: dot com discount code buck. For every packet you buy,
Speaker 1: they will donate a packet to military members around the globe.
Speaker 1: Strike Force Energy is fuel for the fight. This crimination
Speaker 1: is alive and well in this country. Mind friends, in
Speaker 1: many ways, but discrimination against Christians, I mean the believing, traditional,
Speaker 1: actual God is God Christians. Not that like social justice,
Speaker 1: left open borders Marxist Christians anyway, but for actual Christians
Speaker 1: who you know, the Bible and Church and those are
Speaker 1: things that the matter to them. Uh, they are being
Speaker 1: discriminated against. It is very real. I know the Snyde
Speaker 1: elites of the left will mock people for saying this,
Speaker 1: but it's true. And we have a great example of
Speaker 1: this in that once again they're going after not just
Speaker 1: general free freedom of religion, but going after master Peace
Speaker 1: cake Shop. Now you may be saying buck, Hold on
Speaker 1: a second, why do I know that name? Oh, that's right.
Speaker 1: Master Piece Cake Shop was at the center of that
Speaker 1: Supreme Court case decided seven to earlier this year that
Speaker 1: was all about this. I named Jack Phillips, who was
Speaker 1: making custom cakes in Colorado and a gay couple wanted
Speaker 1: him to make a gay wedding cake for them or
Speaker 1: a wedding cake for a gay couple that would have
Speaker 1: celebrated their nuptials. You know, however, they wanted to be designed,
Speaker 1: and he, because of his religious beliefs, was willing to
Speaker 1: sell them a cake. Folks. He wasn't turning them down.
Speaker 1: He wasn't saying I won't serve you. He was saying,
Speaker 1: I will not use my creative talents in celebration of this.
Speaker 1: A very good way of understanding this case is to
Speaker 1: say if you walked into a Jewish bake shop here
Speaker 1: in New York City and said, I want you to
Speaker 1: draw all over this cake, you know, swastikas and pro
Speaker 1: hitler slogans, and that person said, sorry, I'll sell you
Speaker 1: a cake, but I'm not gonna do that. We would
Speaker 1: all understand. Right, maybe, and you take it even further.
Speaker 1: Are we gonna make the you know, the family of
Speaker 1: or or even still a living Holocaust survivor, right, suastikas
Speaker 1: all over a cake that you know, he and his
Speaker 1: private business or she and her private businesses. Uh? No,
Speaker 1: all right, we we wouldn't do that. But but you know,
Speaker 1: Colorado with this Civil Rights Commission, which is a total
Speaker 1: kangaroo court all about social justice and leftist causes. They
Speaker 1: went after this guy, Jack Phillips, and the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: said that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated his free
Speaker 1: exercise of religion. And they were there were clear signs
Speaker 1: of hatred members. These are the anti hate people of
Speaker 1: hatred toward Jack, towards Jack Phillips from the Colorado Civil
Speaker 1: Rights Commission just you know, I mean, basically just disdain
Speaker 1: for this whole Christian e thing and its traditional marriage position.
Speaker 1: They thought it was just disgusting. They made that very clear.
Speaker 1: That's why, folks, it wasn't a five four decision, it
Speaker 1: was a seven to decision. Now you might say the
Speaker 1: Colorado Civil Rights Commission went back down. Nope, they are
Speaker 1: sanctioning him once again, this same individual, folks targeted. This
Speaker 1: is hounding somebody. Now, this is going after some They
Speaker 1: the left, the progressive left, wants to make an example
Speaker 1: out of Jack Phillips, even though the Supreme Court agreed
Speaker 1: with him. They simply will not stop. And this is
Speaker 1: this is a part of the problem of the narrowness
Speaker 1: of the decision, the Supreme Court decision. But let let
Speaker 1: me just first tell you what's going on here. So
Speaker 1: he wouldn't do the gay wedding cake. And so what's
Speaker 1: happened now is that right after that Supreme Court decision
Speaker 1: came down, um, somebody called a lawyer called Masterpiece cake
Speaker 1: Shop and quote as Masterpiece cake Shop to create a
Speaker 1: custom cake with a blue exterior and a pink interior,
Speaker 1: a cake that would have celebrated the transition from male
Speaker 1: to female because this this alleged lawyer had come out
Speaker 1: as transgender. Uh, folks, the same person, according to David
Speaker 1: French your National Review, made a number of requests to
Speaker 1: master Peaks cake Shop, including asking earlier for a birthday
Speaker 1: cake for Satan that would feature an image of Satan
Speaker 1: smoking marijuana. That was the same person a few days
Speaker 1: before that. This is all going to Masterpiece Cake Shop. Folks.
Speaker 1: They are this is straight out of a lynskey. They're
Speaker 1: freezing the target, they're destroying the target, and the target
Speaker 1: is Jack Phillips because now Supreme Court sided with him,
Speaker 1: So now they're just trying to take him down anyway
Speaker 1: they can. If this guy's a baker, get your cakes
Speaker 1: somewhere else. This is a reminder, folks, the real tyrants
Speaker 1: are on the left. It's true, the real tyrants are
Speaker 1: on the left in American side today. It's a fact.
Speaker 1: They're always talking, Oh, fascism, a rise of fact. Please,
Speaker 1: conservatives hate fascism. I don't like to be told to
Speaker 1: do anything, not even like paying my taxes. I don't
Speaker 1: like being told to do anything. Certainly not going to
Speaker 1: be a fascist, and certainly not going to be a
Speaker 1: tyrant over somebody else. I want everybody to have the
Speaker 1: maximum individual liberty they possibly can without a completely disordered
Speaker 1: and antarchic sis. That's my view, but I digress. A
Speaker 1: few days before that, when they asked for the Satan cake,
Speaker 1: they asked for an upside down cross, the same caller
Speaker 1: an upside down cross under the head of Lucifer. And
Speaker 1: they reminded Phillips that religion is a protected class. And
Speaker 1: you know, you know what they're doing now. Now they're
Speaker 1: trying to use this religion versus religion argument of Satanists
Speaker 1: deserve that you can't discriminate against Satanists if you're a
Speaker 1: Christian when it comes to cake baking. Um show Uh.
Speaker 1: They emailed also and said, I'm thinking of a three
Speaker 1: tiered white cake, cheesecake frosting, and the topper should be
Speaker 1: a large figure of Satan licking a nine inch black
Speaker 1: blank will not say the word. I would like the
Speaker 1: blank to be an actual working model that can be
Speaker 1: turned on before we unveil the cake. I can provide
Speaker 1: it for you if you don't have the means. I
Speaker 1: mean talking about putting, you know, sexual paraphernalia on a cake.
Speaker 1: I mean, they're just folks. They're just hounding this guy.
Speaker 1: This is pure malice. And the problem here is a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court didn't do what it needed to do in
Speaker 1: this decision. The Supreme Court needed to say, sorry, you
Speaker 1: have to respect people's religious beliefs when it comes to expression,
Speaker 1: because that's what we're not talking about. You. It's not
Speaker 1: you can't sell and don't listen to the idiots. You
Speaker 1: don't actually read these cases, don't know anything. I read
Speaker 1: the case. I can actually tell you what's going on here.
Speaker 1: It's not that they're denying any service to people. It's
Speaker 1: that they're denying the specifics of service that requires First
Speaker 1: Amendment consent for the activity, which is an entirely different
Speaker 1: part of protected speech. It's not that this is a
Speaker 1: public accommodation that has to be open to any and
Speaker 1: all people of you know that that walk in of
Speaker 1: any persuasion, it's it's baked that cake with what I
Speaker 1: say on that cake. I mean, at what point do
Speaker 1: they draw the line? Can you can you have somebody
Speaker 1: renounce God on a cake that you're paying for, so
Speaker 1: you force a religious Christian to say God is dead?
Speaker 1: I want you to write that on the cakes, Signed
Speaker 1: Jack Phillips. Why why don't you do that? I'm a
Speaker 1: paying customer. What's the problem. These are the games that
Speaker 1: the left is playing, folks. And it's because the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court needed to come out and say that you cannot
Speaker 1: force somebody to violate the rights of conscience. Instead, all
Speaker 1: they said was don't be wildly bigoted against Christians. Colorado
Speaker 1: Civil Rights or you know, Human Rights Commission, whatever it is. Well,
Speaker 1: guess what, Colorado Human Rights Commission didn't get the message, folks,
Speaker 1: and the social justice left shows its tyrannical side once again.
Speaker 1: Only half the people you can't paying for one their
Speaker 1: primaries so far. So maybe maybe there's a little there's
Speaker 1: a little taint to socialism the turns people, I thought,
Speaker 1: I don't really think so. I think the real issue
Speaker 1: is that the ideas that we have been talking about
Speaker 1: almost without exception, Stephen, are now ideas that are mainstream
Speaker 1: ideas that are supported by the vast majority of the
Speaker 1: American people. Yeah, except I think about twenty five percent
Speaker 1: of Americans the latest poll I saw today would vote
Speaker 1: for socialist. This is why I've I've been of the
Speaker 1: belief for a long time that Bernie Sanders is one
Speaker 1: of these. He's a candidate who the left is always
Speaker 1: gonna say, oh, would have could have showed it with him,
Speaker 1: but at the national level, it just it just wouldn't work.
Speaker 1: The big enemy of socialism and socialists, well, one of
Speaker 1: them is history, but in a contemporary sense, the other
Speaker 1: one is numbers. This is why I like Alexandra Cortez.
Speaker 1: Cortez is like like whatever, like, well, just find a
Speaker 1: way to pay for her with like the things that
Speaker 1: come with the money, stuff and the places with all
Speaker 1: the money, and the things like I want free stuff,
Speaker 1: you want free stuff, like free stuff. And people hear
Speaker 1: this and they go, well, if somebody that the press
Speaker 1: is holding up as the future of the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: is capable of of convincing themselves that this is a
Speaker 1: good idea, well, then clearly there there must be some
Speaker 1: way to make this happen, right, there must be some
Speaker 1: way to pay for all this or do all these things.
Speaker 1: But the problem is no, there isn't away. In fact,
Speaker 1: you see, this is what always gets left out of
Speaker 1: this equation um by the socialists in this country, and
Speaker 1: increasingly Democratic Party is actually a socialist party. They don't
Speaker 1: call themselves that because there's a there's a still in
Speaker 1: aversion among the American people to that term. But the
Speaker 1: policies are People keep saying, oh, why don't we have
Speaker 1: something like they have in Europe. It's like, okay, well,
Speaker 1: we already have a trillion dollar welfare state. We already
Speaker 1: have essentially free community college almost free, if not free.
Speaker 1: We have medical care for all starting at age sixty five,
Speaker 1: and we have social secure I mean, you know, we
Speaker 1: do have a lot of programs in place that are
Speaker 1: that borrow from what you would consider to be democratic
Speaker 1: socialism in Europe. These people just want to push it
Speaker 1: even further though, And what they won't tell you is
Speaker 1: that the only way to even get close to the
Speaker 1: kind of programs that they want. And this is why
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders think that it's made stream. Everybody wants to
Speaker 1: do this. This is the way of the future. Well,
Speaker 1: it's the way of the future until people have to
Speaker 1: look at a price tag, right, Bernie Sanders version of
Speaker 1: socialism is to send somebody into a store and say,
Speaker 1: look at all these things. Do you want these things?
Speaker 1: The person says, well, yeah, yeah, and he said, but
Speaker 1: you can't see the price tag. And and let me
Speaker 1: tell you this, not only can you not see the
Speaker 1: price tag, somebody else is gonna pay for it. You're
Speaker 1: not gonna pay for it. And that's that's the fundamental
Speaker 1: lie here. I know it's used over and over, but
Speaker 1: Margaret Thatcher's line about the problem with socialism is that
Speaker 1: you always run out of other people's money is true.
Speaker 1: It is timeless because it is so accurate. At Sanders
Speaker 1: going on Colbert, he knows Colbert doesn't push back that
Speaker 1: much on this. If you want what Denmark has, for example,
Speaker 1: your or let's let's take Sweden, I think that's the
Speaker 1: That is the prototypical example of what democrats point to
Speaker 1: is by the way, Mike uh, I think there were
Speaker 1: sixty cars lit on fire earlier this week by Swedish
Speaker 1: quote youths. I'm gonna go out on a limb and
Speaker 1: say that those youths were not named, uh spin and
Speaker 1: spin all off. I'm gonna I'm gonna go even further
Speaker 1: and suggest that just based on the headlines here without
Speaker 1: digging too deep, and you can let me know, Mike
Speaker 1: if I'm getting this one wrong, that some of them
Speaker 1: would be more recent arrivals in Sweden. Sixty cars lit
Speaker 1: on firefolks up to more than a hundred. There you go,
Speaker 1: burning down cars left and right in neighborhoods and Sweden.
Speaker 1: This is something they're not used to. By the way,
Speaker 1: there's also been grenade attacks in Sweden, something they're not
Speaker 1: used to courtesy of some of the more recent refugee
Speaker 1: population arrivals there. But put that aside for a moment.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I've actually talked to Swedes about
Speaker 1: this burger and that's where I speak sweet SPURGERG good.
Speaker 1: I'll stop, but I I've talked to some of them,
Speaker 1: and they there's an anxiety that they won't discuss in
Speaker 1: this country. There's a reason why they lie about the
Speaker 1: crime statistic. There's a reason why they don't want people
Speaker 1: to know the full extent of what's going on in Sweden,
Speaker 1: meaning the Swedish people, because when they start to find
Speaker 1: out what the demographic change has been in that country,
Speaker 1: what it means for Swedish society. Uh, the ones who
Speaker 1: haven't been brainwashed are saying, maybe this is a problem,
Speaker 1: Maybe this isn't a good, maybe this is unsustainable. How
Speaker 1: large a non Swedish speaking foreign based welfare or foreign
Speaker 1: entrance into sweden welfare state can you really have before
Speaker 1: you over tax the system? Um. And and this is
Speaker 1: where I would say, you know the problem with the
Speaker 1: Bertie Sanders approach on this because people that they we
Speaker 1: this is what ends up happening. We point to Venezuela,
Speaker 1: they point to Sweden. Okay, well, which one is a
Speaker 1: more apt example. Um, In Sweden you have a middle
Speaker 1: class that first of all, you have a very high
Speaker 1: respect for rule of law. And that's across the board.
Speaker 1: Swedes just culturally obey rules and regulations. This is just
Speaker 1: the case. Whereas I spoke to the U. S Ambassador
Speaker 1: in fact two senior ambassadors to Mexico and other Latin
Speaker 1: American countries, and they said that of crimes in Mexico
Speaker 1: and never punished, you can imagine what that does to
Speaker 1: the sense of rule of law in a country. But Sweden,
Speaker 1: which also is true now in Venezuela. I mean there's
Speaker 1: no law and order. Sweden has very very long standing
Speaker 1: cultural respect for the for institutions and for regulations and
Speaker 1: for order. It also has very high taxes on everybody.
Speaker 1: So if Bernie Sanders wants to make this case that
Speaker 1: Americans want democratic socialism here like they have it in Europe,
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders needs to go around telling truck drivers and carpenters,
Speaker 1: and you know, he's got to tell people like my
Speaker 1: uncle Jeames, who's a locksmith and a carpenter. Hey, you
Speaker 1: have to pay sixty of your income to the federal government.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter what you really make, and you have
Speaker 1: to write that check. You know, everybody's got to be contributing.
Speaker 1: Whereas we have a country right now where half of
Speaker 1: people don't pay any federal income tax, half of adults
Speaker 1: no federal income tax. Wow, that's a That's an interesting
Speaker 1: state of affairs, isn't it. So he's not even being
Speaker 1: honest about um, he's not even being honest about what
Speaker 1: it would take to get where he wants to go.
Speaker 1: And also, as I've told you Sweden and Denmark, it'd
Speaker 1: be people in Norway doesn't count because Norway is like
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia with Norwegians, meaning that they've got a ton
Speaker 1: of oil. They have a huge sovereign wealth fund that
Speaker 1: funds a lot of their you know, the funds a
Speaker 1: lot of their social spending and welfare program social welfare programs.
Speaker 1: It's also a country of very few people, relatively speaking,
Speaker 1: a small population. What is it it's reading here about
Speaker 1: the tax rate? What's the tax rate in Sweden? Mind?
Speaker 1: So if you make thirty two thousand Isna Corona Corona,
Speaker 1: you're a tax between forty nine and sixty What am
Speaker 1: I saying on the show all the time? Mike? You know,
Speaker 1: Papa Buck does his research. You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is what I'm telling people. You, Bernie Sanders,
Speaker 1: if you want Sweden, thank you Mike for doing the
Speaker 1: you know, Mike is like the sniper doing Overwatch, making
Speaker 1: sure that I'm hitting the center of the target all
Speaker 1: the time. But I mean, I I'm I'm glad to
Speaker 1: know that my my research on this in the past
Speaker 1: is still accurate. If you want Sanders, isn't In America
Speaker 1: you have to tell house painters you're paying fifty. You're
Speaker 1: incoming taxes now. And and by the way, if if
Speaker 1: the American people want to do that, then we can
Speaker 1: talk about free college for all, free health care for all,
Speaker 1: you know, then we can have that discussion. And I
Speaker 1: still think it's a terrible idea. But short of that,
Speaker 1: this is magic being that will grow into like never
Speaker 1: never Land, thinking this is crazy. Meanwhile, Sanders was on
Speaker 1: the Colberto Pool, which I haven't been on the Colbert Show.
Speaker 1: You know, it's kind of rough. Stephen makes me sad.
Speaker 1: Actually that's not true. My hands, My hands were on
Speaker 1: the show. Oh and I was making my eggs. Let's
Speaker 1: go to Bucks eggs. Those are some good eggs. But
Speaker 1: here's what Sanders said about Pelosi's leadership. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: Nancy has done a good job. Let me say good job.
Speaker 1: I think they have demon if they is bankrupt intellectually, Uh,
Speaker 1: they are not going to campaign on their views of
Speaker 1: giving tax breaks the billions and cutting Social Security, Medicare,
Speaker 1: and Medicaid, so they have to come up with some demon.
Speaker 1: I guess the demon now is Nancy Pelosi. You know
Speaker 1: another word for or or an explanation. When Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: says Republicans are intellectually bankrupt. What he means is they
Speaker 1: can do maths. Because we are twenty now heading to
Speaker 1: twenty one trillion dollars in debt. This will become unsustainable, folks.
Speaker 1: And the problem with this debt issue is that when
Speaker 1: you when it is when everyone has to admit that
Speaker 1: it's a problem, it is too late. Um. And And
Speaker 1: all that's going on is the generation right now that's
Speaker 1: in political power. The boomers sorry, are affording themselves benefits
Speaker 1: that future generations will not have and leading those and
Speaker 1: leaving those future generations with the tab that is mathematically
Speaker 1: what is going on in people? They call me, they
Speaker 1: get mad, They say, oh, buck, I paid into Medicare,
Speaker 1: I paid into Social Security. Well, the average Medicare recipient
Speaker 1: takes out twice what they paid in over their entire lifetime.
Speaker 1: The math doesn't work, folks. Math doesn't work. So the
Speaker 1: debt keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger, and eventually
Speaker 1: debt service payments will start to crowd out other spending.
Speaker 1: And when people if people lose confidence in the dollar,
Speaker 1: we've got big problems. But but before we even get
Speaker 1: to that, I don't think that anybody really needs to
Speaker 1: take Sanders or Occasio Cortez or any of these people
Speaker 1: seriously until they're going out there saying I want health
Speaker 1: care for all. It's gonna cost you half of what
Speaker 1: you make. You in the steel mill, you in the
Speaker 1: you know, in the third grade classroom, police officers, Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, you're all paying fifty percent of your income
Speaker 1: in taxes. When Democrats will make that case, honestly, I
Speaker 1: will listen to them. Short of that, it's just demagoguery.
Speaker 1: Short of that, it's Bernie Sanders hoping that the rest
Speaker 1: of us are are either unwilling or incapable of doing
Speaker 1: basic arithmetic. And I really hope that you know, the
Speaker 1: the American American youth. Now I sound like a grumpy
Speaker 1: old man, but it's true. Just learn something about what's
Speaker 1: what really, what socialism actually means and how it works
Speaker 1: in practice. Learn something about it. You know, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you this, Mike, would you want to start it? Would
Speaker 1: you want to start your business right now? In Sweden?
Speaker 1: The notice not a lot of Americans are like, let
Speaker 1: me go start my business in Denmark. There's a reason
Speaker 1: for that. There's a reason why people are coming here,
Speaker 1: and we're not all running over there. Trust me. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's plenty of reasons. There's plenty of reasons to like Sweden.
Speaker 1: I won't get on them right now, but you know
Speaker 1: Sweden can be a fun place to be eight four
Speaker 1: four to five eight four four nine buck, if you
Speaker 1: would like to please do light up those lines. Team.
Speaker 1: We have much more coming up, and in the third hour,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna talk about immigration and also dogs. I think
Speaker 1: they're doing it in order to put pressure on others
Speaker 1: in the administration not to kiss and tell or not
Speaker 1: to get a job and then try to make money
Speaker 1: on a book so soon after leaving the employee of
Speaker 1: the person and the government. The question is whether or
Speaker 1: not a contract is enforceable. That contract may violate principles
Speaker 1: of freedom of speech. That's why it's a complicated case.
Speaker 1: In general, I think government employees should be free to
Speaker 1: disclose what they want, acceptive it's classified material. So if
Speaker 1: I had to make a prediction, I would think she
Speaker 1: would probably win this arbitration. Can they silence omar Rossa?
Speaker 1: Can anybody silence olmar Rossa? That's probably even better question.
Speaker 1: We we will get into this now. We actually have
Speaker 1: an attorney here with us. Who's gonna be representing the
Speaker 1: side of freedom, truth and justice In this case, we
Speaker 1: have Emily Campania with this. She is an attorney, legal analyst,
Speaker 1: sports analyst, and uh also hosted The Five recently on Foxes.
Speaker 1: Here on TV, Emily compiled, great to have you back,
Speaker 1: Thanks for having me back. All right, omar rossa. People
Speaker 1: are saying they're gonna try to shut her down with
Speaker 1: these nd as. What's going on with these? Can the
Speaker 1: White House forget about the classified stuff that's totally different
Speaker 1: the spederal statutes that govern that other n d a's campaign.
Speaker 1: White House? Can they shut somebody up with those things?
Speaker 1: Are they enforceable? How does this work? Right? It's kind
Speaker 1: of you know, I hate to give that typical attorney
Speaker 1: evasive answer, but it kind of depends. And I think
Speaker 1: what's important for listeners to understand here is that, first
Speaker 1: of all, the n d A that um that has
Speaker 1: just been that the enforcement has just been filed in arbitration.
Speaker 1: That's with the Trump campaign. So it's a whole different
Speaker 1: ball of west than the White House to begin with.
Speaker 1: But the thing about arbitration is that it opens a
Speaker 1: whole can of worms in terms of the what happens
Speaker 1: with it, and you're essentially saying, look, we want the
Speaker 1: efficiency of an arbitrator, and it's generally behind closed doors,
Speaker 1: so it's super secret and whatnot. But there's all still
Speaker 1: a whole host of information and subpoenaing and documents and
Speaker 1: evidence that oh, Morossa might um basically petition the quote
Speaker 1: unquote court or the arbiter to release. So it could
Speaker 1: backfire tremendously, is what I'm trying to say. And I
Speaker 1: also think that for listeners, you know, arbitration is generally
Speaker 1: it's not like a court. It's usually a practicing attorney
Speaker 1: who isn't a judge by profession um. And there's a
Speaker 1: lot of issues with it as well in terms of appealability.
Speaker 1: So it just doesn't go the way that the you know,
Speaker 1: officially Trump campaign, non officially White House wants it to go.
Speaker 1: Then there's not a lot of room to move forward.
Speaker 1: And if it's not, if it is ruled in their
Speaker 1: favor or even in hers, what's the enforcement like what
Speaker 1: damages can they prove? That's another huge element of this
Speaker 1: that I think is missing in the kind of larger conversation. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, you have to convince somebody to say or
Speaker 1: you have to convince this. You said the arbiter in
Speaker 1: this case, right not not a jury, UM, that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump has suffered some kind of arm that given all
Speaker 1: the the the you know, public right to know with
Speaker 1: what's going on with the presidency and everything else, that
Speaker 1: he should be compensated by a former employee. I just
Speaker 1: it seems to me like kind of a stretch. But
Speaker 1: the White House has been thrown thrown around this nd
Speaker 1: A situation like they actually think they can get some
Speaker 1: mileage out of it. Well, and what happens if she
Speaker 1: just ignores this whole thing and just like she says,
Speaker 1: she doesn't believe she's found by the contract, But let's
Speaker 1: just say that the arbiter says, no, you you are
Speaker 1: bound by the contract and you do have to have
Speaker 1: to retain this confidentiality. Well, first of all, you can argue,
Speaker 1: of the cat is out of the bag that we
Speaker 1: know of, and you could also argue, well, even if
Speaker 1: she goes ahead and does it, what is she going
Speaker 1: to be liable for? I think one tactic that UM
Speaker 1: the White House could participate or could pursue would be
Speaker 1: um financially and essentially if they sue her. They actually
Speaker 1: sue her, and they obviously would have to be specific.
Speaker 1: Trump campaign sues her in a court of law, then
Speaker 1: they could essentially stall ring this out for as long
Speaker 1: as possible so that she's paying a tremendous about or
Speaker 1: defense built. But given the attention they keep shining on her,
Speaker 1: it seems like she's probably profiting from her book sales
Speaker 1: at this point. So the best remedy would likely to
Speaker 1: just stop talking about it now. First, for some companies,
Speaker 1: I do know, I think of of nd as that
Speaker 1: involve trade secrets, right, I mean, if there's if you
Speaker 1: can actually point to real monetary damages from the release
Speaker 1: of specific trade secrets information, right, Like if you work
Speaker 1: for Apple and sign an NDA, I feel like the
Speaker 1: Apple police can come for you, right, I mean they
Speaker 1: take that stuff very seriously. So there are places that
Speaker 1: aren't government, uh that can still that I believe it
Speaker 1: come after people successfully if there's very specific information that
Speaker 1: they've I think even somebody did this with a trading
Speaker 1: algorithm at Goldman Sachs or one of those places, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, did have there been cases you know of,
Speaker 1: Emily where people have gotten nailed on NDIA violations? Absolutely absolutely,
Speaker 1: And that's an important distinction here that in the proprietary world,
Speaker 1: in the trade secret world, and even in the UM
Speaker 1: knowledge of an industry or of that particular company, absolutely
Speaker 1: and they're the onus would be on the UM employee
Speaker 1: to prove that they that the company was not damaged
Speaker 1: in some way UM, and that by he or she
Speaker 1: jumping ship or getting a job in the same industry
Speaker 1: too tune or whatever, that indeed UM didn't have the
Speaker 1: effects that the company is arguing. But I also want
Speaker 1: to say that in that realm, it's adhered to you know,
Speaker 1: much much more, I mean riddled in those industries, especially
Speaker 1: in tech, especially in even healthcare and the biosciences like that,
Speaker 1: people absolutely adhere to those n d A s UM.
Speaker 1: I think for the reasons that we're just talking about,
Speaker 1: which is almost a far there's real monetary damages. Well,
Speaker 1: O'marrose is not gonna stop talking no matter what. I think.
Speaker 1: We'd all agree on that everyone, Emily Campano dot com.
Speaker 1: Check her out on Twitter Emily Campano, Emily, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. Come back soon. Phil. We just hope no
Speaker 1: one in the dog community is watching. Does this president
Speaker 1: really fas clean? Not like dogs. That's right, Brian. He's
Speaker 1: actually the first president in more than a hundred years
Speaker 1: who has not had a dog as a pet in
Speaker 1: the White House. He has lived with a dog before.
Speaker 1: When he first got married to his first wife, Havannah,
Speaker 1: she brought with her a poodle. He resisted the dog.
Speaker 1: He didn't want to have anything to do with the poodle,
Speaker 1: but she said, the poodles coming along. Chapp He's coming along.
Speaker 1: Turns out Chappie didn't like Trump very much because whenever
Speaker 1: Trump would come near Avanna's closet, Chappy would bark at
Speaker 1: him territorially. Ivana writes about this in her memoirs. This
Speaker 1: is a new level of APO where a story about
Speaker 1: how a dog by his ex wife twenty years ago
Speaker 1: didn't like him. And so this just goes to show
Speaker 1: you there is nothing about Trump that they can't find
Speaker 1: a way to turn it into. Trump is the worst
Speaker 1: they hate him. That's there's nothing that is that is
Speaker 1: safe from this now troll. Brian, first all, Brian Williams
Speaker 1: coming back, The fact that we still have to deal
Speaker 1: with this guy's hilarious right, just goes to show you
Speaker 1: it's all about which executives like you at these places. Wow,
Speaker 1: there are telling Osama bin laden with a with with
Speaker 1: my bare hands. You know, It's like, Okay, Brian Williams
Speaker 1: is still out there doing his thing. But Donald Trump
Speaker 1: do dogs dislike him? News tonight at ten uh, and
Speaker 1: they're pushing this whole thing and your how is this
Speaker 1: a news story? How is this? First of all, I
Speaker 1: don't like poodles that much. I'll just get that out
Speaker 1: of the way. But how is this a news story?
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you something I actually met. You know,
Speaker 1: this is funny, little little side note for you, producer
Speaker 1: Mike I actually met his first wife's dogs on many
Speaker 1: on many an occasion. They were very small and very yappy.
Speaker 1: I love dogs tremendously. I think dogs are incredible. They're
Speaker 1: They're a gift for all of us. Ivan's dogs where
Speaker 1: you know a lot of little like ankle biters not
Speaker 1: not my favorite dogs. You know, they were very uh
Speaker 1: they had like the little little fruit fruity haircuts with
Speaker 1: little ribbons and things too. You know, it was not
Speaker 1: this isn't like Trump didn't like a yellow yellow lab
Speaker 1: named Rufus. This is like Trump didn't like dogs that
Speaker 1: are look like they're going to be held by an
Speaker 1: old lady in one hand, you know what I mean, Like,
Speaker 1: that's that's just not my thing. It's just not my jam.
Speaker 1: But notice how Trump is a bad guy for this.
Speaker 1: That's that's the real takeaway is how do we make
Speaker 1: now add to the list of Trump's a racist, he's
Speaker 1: a misogynist, he's a homophobe, he's a he's a trader,
Speaker 1: he's crazy. He's now I have to add dogs don't
Speaker 1: like him either to this list. And this is breaking
Speaker 1: this a Brian Williams, We did a lot of research
Speaker 1: on this one. Only one photo of Trump with a dog.
Speaker 1: Oh gosh, man, And they wonder why we don't take
Speaker 1: them seriously. They wonder why this is a moment of
Speaker 1: tom and people don't have a lot of respect for
Speaker 1: the press. That the guest that Brian Williams had on said,
Speaker 1: that's right, Brian, He's the first president more than a
Speaker 1: hundred years. That's not how a dog as a pet
Speaker 1: in the White House. So what First of all, he
Speaker 1: he likes to travel around a lot. I'll let you
Speaker 1: know that, you know, having the dog, I mean, do
Speaker 1: they have room for the dog in Air Force one somewhere.
Speaker 1: But how does that even go. I'm sure they do,
Speaker 1: but you know, he probably doesn't want to deal with it.
Speaker 1: Do they have dogs at Mara Lago that he can
Speaker 1: play with? I'm sure they do. Why are we even
Speaker 1: talking about this? Why? But but a better question is
Speaker 1: why is Brian Williams talking about this on TV? But
Speaker 1: one thing that's interesting and hat tip the Daily Caller here, Um,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of photos of Trump with dogs
Speaker 1: in the internet. So why is Williams going on air
Speaker 1: saying we could only find one photo of Trump with
Speaker 1: a dog? There are lots of photos of Trump with dogs.
Speaker 1: Better questions, who the heck cares? They are so deranged
Speaker 1: about this guy that they view things that nobody cares
Speaker 1: about hearing when it comes to the president as a
Speaker 1: possible look, I'm gonna tell you right now, Obama had
Speaker 1: a couple of dogs, bow and whatever. I don't like
Speaker 1: those dogs. I didn't. I those will be very low
Speaker 1: on my But I didn't have a problem with the
Speaker 1: bottom because he's allowed to choose ugly dogs. That's his choice.
Speaker 1: You know. I think they were the and they were
Speaker 1: the designer dogs too. They were like, uh not cocka poos,
Speaker 1: but like something poos, you know what I mean? You
Speaker 1: know what any of the not a shelty pooh? What
Speaker 1: do they call them? You know what I mean? Oh?
Speaker 1: Golden do I think there were golden doodles, doodles. I
Speaker 1: think they're golden doodles that they weren't poos, there were doodles.
Speaker 1: I don't see Trump's dogs or anyone's dogs is really
Speaker 1: having all that much. Although I will say that the presidents,
Speaker 1: as I've seen, uh, they don't pick that. They don't
Speaker 1: make the best picks when it comes to canoes. If
Speaker 1: we're really gonna dig into this, you know, if we're
Speaker 1: gonna be breaking news here in presidential canines, you know,
Speaker 1: I've I've did. Has any president in recent memory had
Speaker 1: like a Golden Retriever or a Labrador or an English
Speaker 1: bulldog anything that's really cool? I think not. They all
Speaker 1: go for like, you know, cocker spaniels and it's okay,
Speaker 1: all right, you know what I mean? What, Brandy, don't
Speaker 1: are you not a dog guy? I am allergic to dogs?
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, I am a mess, you know my
Speaker 1: You know, my girlfriend's Molly's actually allergic to dogs, but
Speaker 1: she loves them so much that she does not care
Speaker 1: and just takes his her text so she can be
Speaker 1: around them. Well, my girlfriend has a cat. I'm less
Speaker 1: allergic to cats, but I take Claridon, So we all
Speaker 1: have our problems there. Hey, hey, like I can't eat
Speaker 1: a piece of bread without like probably having to go
Speaker 1: to the speaking of and part of the phrasing speaking
Speaker 1: of poos. I grew up with a poodle toy poodle
Speaker 1: was not allergic. However, my mom's dog, now a multi pooh,
Speaker 1: supposed to be hypoallergenic. I'm allergic to I'm the ultimate nerd.
Speaker 1: Maybe you just don't like the dog, you know. A
Speaker 1: long time ago, I dated a girl who had a cat,
Speaker 1: uh that she just referred to as as Gordita because
Speaker 1: it was so fat. It was like this fat and
Speaker 1: I figured, it's a fat cat, so it should be
Speaker 1: like lethargic and and maybe kind of friendly like Garfield. False.
Speaker 1: That was the meanest cat. Ever. The cat used to
Speaker 1: scratch me. That cat was not friendly at all, and
Speaker 1: I should have that was That's what you call a
Speaker 1: red flag in the dating scene. Whenever somebody has a
Speaker 1: pet that you have to be careful around. Red flag
Speaker 1: because the pet is always a reflytion of the owner. Folks,
Speaker 1: this is this is uh so if Brian Williams giving
Speaker 1: you anything, it's just remember that, all right, that the
Speaker 1: pet is. So Trump doesn't have a dog. So we
Speaker 1: can't do any analysis here. But if you spend time
Speaker 1: around somebody's dog, you know who that person is their anxieties.
Speaker 1: There nerses, What do you got from? Mike gerald Ford
Speaker 1: had a goldie? There we go. He's the only one.
Speaker 1: He's the only one. Gerald Ford's a real American. There
Speaker 1: you go. You know that's no no surprise there got
Speaker 1: got a bum wrap for his time in the in
Speaker 1: the presidency. But all right, we gotta let's talk about
Speaker 1: some serious stuff. You're coming up. Immigration got a comparison
Speaker 1: of Democrats then and Trump now, it might surprise you
Speaker 1: stay with me. Thanks to the president's actions, we've seen
Speaker 1: a crisis unfolding on our southern border and across the country.
Speaker 1: Crisis was willfully and purposefully created by this president through
Speaker 1: his zero tolerance policy at the border. We all know
Speaker 1: how we got here. The situation is a big mess.
Speaker 1: It's the big mess, they say on immigration. You'll notice
Speaker 1: that they have no solutions Uh, they have absolutely nothing
Speaker 1: to offer up in terms of what to do at
Speaker 1: the at the border. Um, they have nothing that they
Speaker 1: can can because the alternative is to do what was
Speaker 1: being done before, which is anybody who shows up at
Speaker 1: the border. I mean, this is what Chuck Schumer must want,
Speaker 1: and I want everybody to remember this going into the midterms.
Speaker 1: The alternative is that if you show up at the
Speaker 1: border and you've got kids, you get let into the
Speaker 1: United States and are told to show up maybe in
Speaker 1: five years for an immigration hearing. That's what That's what
Speaker 1: the Obama administration pushed for. That is what they wanted
Speaker 1: and what I what I really think is important. Is
Speaker 1: it right now they're telling you all on all this
Speaker 1: immigration stuff, they're pretending like this is you know, they're
Speaker 1: they're the moral ones. How could people be such monsters
Speaker 1: on these on these issues if just family separation and
Speaker 1: it's so terrible, and there's all the xenophobia they say
Speaker 1: all of these things. Meanwhile, it was just a few
Speaker 1: years ago that there were folks that were sounding very
Speaker 1: much like the loudest and most critical voices of Republicans
Speaker 1: in the Democratic Party on the issue of immigration. We
Speaker 1: have a little mash up here courtesy your producer, Mike
Speaker 1: of what Chuck Schumer sounded like on immigration back in
Speaker 1: the Obama era, back in the Obama years, and what
Speaker 1: Trump sounds like now. And this might shock some of
Speaker 1: you to hear, so let's play it. We use phrases
Speaker 1: like undocumented workers. We convey a message to the American
Speaker 1: people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration. Now.
Speaker 1: They'd like to use the word undocumented because it's more political.
Speaker 1: I don't use that word. They're illegal immigrants. They came
Speaker 1: over illegally. Some are wonderful people, and they've been here
Speaker 1: for a while. They got to go out above all else,
Speaker 1: The American people want their government to be serious about
Speaker 1: protecting the public, enforcing the rule of law, and creating
Speaker 1: a rational system of legal immigration that will proactively fit
Speaker 1: our needs rather than reactively responding to future waves of
Speaker 1: illegal immigration. But we want an immigration policy that's fair, equitable,
Speaker 1: but that's going to protect our people. What the American
Speaker 1: people are pleading for is sanity and common sense in
Speaker 1: our immigration system. People who enter the United States without
Speaker 1: our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not
Speaker 1: be treated the same as people who entered the US legally.
Speaker 1: You cannot obtain legal status or become a citizen of
Speaker 1: the United States by illegally entering our country. Can't. And
Speaker 1: you'll notice that there was a lot of similarity. There
Speaker 1: wasn't there, folks. That was Chuck Schumer, most powerful Democrat
Speaker 1: senator in the country. I think you would clearly say
Speaker 1: right now, I don't think there's really a there's not
Speaker 1: even really a second choice. And Donald Trump, now, the
Speaker 1: Democrats used to pretend that they wanted border security, used
Speaker 1: to pretend that they were for the American worker, and
Speaker 1: new that that the issue of supply and demand when
Speaker 1: it comes to labor does not go away just because
Speaker 1: it's politically convenient for Democrats that when you have a
Speaker 1: supply issue with workers, guess what, you pay them more.
Speaker 1: All of a sudden you have the workers that you need.
Speaker 1: This is what This is not really that complicated, but
Speaker 1: it's made complicated by people who are lying about this,
Speaker 1: who refused to tell the truth about what is really
Speaker 1: happening in the world in the realm of immigration. And
Speaker 1: I I sit here and I play this back for you,
Speaker 1: and I could even read to you from some of
Speaker 1: the editorials written by The New York Times back in
Speaker 1: the late nineties, where they were saying that illegal immigration
Speaker 1: is a problem. It's destroying our sovereignty. It pushes down
Speaker 1: wages that the American worker, particularly I would note, illegal
Speaker 1: grant to compete with disproportionately with the African American community,
Speaker 1: with Black Americans who are trying to move themselves up
Speaker 1: the economic ladder, that illegal immigrants compete for those jobs
Speaker 1: and and create problems in the black community. You know,
Speaker 1: this was all consensus opinion within the Democrat Party for
Speaker 1: a long time. This was all the way that they
Speaker 1: viewed it until things started to change, until Democrats realized
Speaker 1: that the key to unified, unipolar, uniparty control of the
Speaker 1: entire US government, at least at the federal level, was
Speaker 1: bringing as many illegals as possible from disparate cultures who
Speaker 1: generally don't speak English, don't have a background that would
Speaker 1: make them able to compete quickly in the in the
Speaker 1: American economy, except in the most uh low skill, low
Speaker 1: wage jobs, and bringing as many of those people as possible,
Speaker 1: they'll be more dependent on government and they will vote
Speaker 1: for Democrats. It's a it's really straightforward. It's it's actually
Speaker 1: not a complicated plan that they are executing, but we
Speaker 1: should at least be honest that that's what they're doing.
Speaker 1: They should be honest. That's with it. What happened to
Speaker 1: Chuck Schumer. Illegal aliens were bad years ago. Undocumented was
Speaker 1: a nonsense, nonsense term years like, I mean, give me
Speaker 1: a break, folks. I just saw. I know, this is
Speaker 1: a total what's this thing with Ruth Bader Ginsburg is
Speaker 1: like some kind of pop culture hero. Now, Ruth Bader
Speaker 1: Ginsberg is an old lady. Okay, she I'm not impressed
Speaker 1: by her workouts. She's not a hip hop star. They
Speaker 1: gotta stop with this stuff. It's so pathetic, it's so cloying.
Speaker 1: This whole Oh RBG is such a badass. No, she's
Speaker 1: an old lady who's a lawyer, who's on the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: That's it. I just saw that they're doing a CNN
Speaker 1: documentary on our the Notorious RBG. It's it's so there's
Speaker 1: RBG action figures what is wrong with people anyway? It's
Speaker 1: just it's look, I'm not saying it on the arbiter
Speaker 1: of what's cool, but she is not cool. You can
Speaker 1: say you think she's intellectual, she's eloquent. She's important for
Speaker 1: you know, the liberal left to get what they want
Speaker 1: through the Supreme Court they can't get through the legislature.
Speaker 1: But don't tell me that she's some see some pop
Speaker 1: culture icon. It's just creepy Democrats anyway. So back back
Speaker 1: to sorry that was I just saw the commercial for Senna.
Speaker 1: Back to immigration here. Um Trump is where the Democrat
Speaker 1: Party was ten years ago, and now they say that
Speaker 1: he's a racist. And in fact, now that's the main
Speaker 1: opposition on the immigration argument is that they're just trying
Speaker 1: to make this a moral a moral issue. In fact,
Speaker 1: they're trying to engage in a kind of moral blackmail
Speaker 1: all of the Republican Party, of everybody who supports Trump
Speaker 1: by saying that it's all about race and racism. You
Speaker 1: have people from major platforms who say that all of
Speaker 1: Trump's supporters are racist. You can simply believe that racism
Speaker 1: and West supremacy produced better outcomes for everyone, that black
Speaker 1: and brown people will be better off too if white
Speaker 1: people are just in charge. If you just follow this man,
Speaker 1: what what what he wants to do, you'll be better
Speaker 1: off for this that people do think like that that
Speaker 1: has turned a blind eye to what he's doing, or
Speaker 1: they are actively cheering it. If you look at some
Speaker 1: of those rallies what he's doing, they're part of it.
Speaker 1: There's no separation from me between the person who has
Speaker 1: the racist philosophy and the person who supports the person
Speaker 1: with the racist philosophy. Not all the Germans who stayed
Speaker 1: silent while they drag people into gas chambers hated the Jews,
Speaker 1: but you were silent and then you let it happen.
Speaker 1: This is a repeat of what you've heard before, which
Speaker 1: is that if you support Trump at all, you are
Speaker 1: complicit in everything that they say that Trump that's doing
Speaker 1: is evil. That was Charles Blow of the New York Times,
Speaker 1: and his arguments on on this issue are the same
Speaker 1: as they are on every issue, which is that it's
Speaker 1: always about race, it's always racism. I never hear anything
Speaker 1: from him that does revolve around charges of racism. I've
Speaker 1: been on TV the same time he's been on TV
Speaker 1: at CNN, and I can tell you that he has
Speaker 1: He's got one storyline he really likes to talk about.
Speaker 1: That's how racist America is all the time, and that
Speaker 1: is as he's going on national TV and collecting six
Speaker 1: figure paychecks for his New York Times gig and for CNN,
Speaker 1: I'm sure, and probably also for lots of speaking engagements
Speaker 1: across the country where he just talks about how racist
Speaker 1: the American people are, and liberals like to hear this.
Speaker 1: I don't you know. Liberals have been so infused with this,
Speaker 1: with both white guilt and the only way that they
Speaker 1: think they can overcome white guilt, which is to agree
Speaker 1: with all this progressive race obsessed demagoguery. An immigration is
Speaker 1: where you see this in some of the most profound
Speaker 1: ways of an immigration. Now, if you are not effectively
Speaker 1: for open borders, you're considered a racist. That's what they've done.
Speaker 1: That's the new rallying cry. Because they won't be able
Speaker 1: to make an open argument about why open borders is
Speaker 1: good for the country. They're not going to be in
Speaker 1: a position to look you in the eye and say,
Speaker 1: you know, would be a great idea. We just took
Speaker 1: millions and millions and millions more people on top of
Speaker 1: the millions of millions we already have who are overwhelming
Speaker 1: the processes of assimilation in this country, who are maintaining
Speaker 1: incredibly close ties to their country of origin, because their
Speaker 1: country of origin is within walking distance of the United States.
Speaker 1: Very different thing, folks, than when you come from across
Speaker 1: an ocean and realized this is it. Uh, if you
Speaker 1: say any of this now, they're just going to tell
Speaker 1: you that you are racist. That is the that is
Speaker 1: the new storyline. That is a new thing that you
Speaker 1: will well, I should say it's it's just a repeat
Speaker 1: of the old story line. But that's where we are
Speaker 1: right now. That's right, that's how the situation is unfolding.
Speaker 1: And on immigration, you know, apparently Chuck Schumer was racist
Speaker 1: ten years ago. That's what I find so strange. Apparently
Speaker 1: Obama was a bigot when he went into office because
Speaker 1: he was in favor of traditional marriage. He was not
Speaker 1: somebody who what's supportive of gay marriage, So he must
Speaker 1: have been a big at them. But they allowed him
Speaker 1: to be a biggot. The same people that are telling
Speaker 1: you day that Trump and his ideology are it's it's
Speaker 1: you're not even allowed to support him politically without yourself
Speaker 1: being a racist. They're willing to say that supporting Obama
Speaker 1: while he was opposed to single sex marriage same sex
Speaker 1: marriage was was fine. These people have no principles folks.
Speaker 1: They have They have no argument that is not rooted
Speaker 1: in emotion and emotional blackmail. It's just all virtue signaling
Speaker 1: mixed with hysteria mixed with rage these days. And that's
Speaker 1: really troubling and I wish it weren't the case, but
Speaker 1: that's where we are. And on immigration, I'm gonna continue
Speaker 1: to hammer this because it's important we have real conversations
Speaker 1: about it. Um, they boycott a brewery because Trump liked
Speaker 1: the owner like Trump's tax cuts. We'll talk about that
Speaker 1: coming up. Brewers making the best beer in the world,
Speaker 1: and the tax reform was a very big deal for
Speaker 1: all of it. They have boycott sam Adams, folks. That's right.
Speaker 1: That is how the liberals are playing the game now.
Speaker 1: They're even willing to boycott sam Adams because the the mayor.
Speaker 1: UM Well, because the owner rather of Samuel Adams said
Speaker 1: that the tax cut. He didn't even say he loved Trump,
Speaker 1: he just said that the tax cut that Trump put
Speaker 1: into effect helped his business. And I just think this
Speaker 1: is perfect. You have liberals, in response to free speech,
Speaker 1: boycotting a an iconic domestic American beer named for a
Speaker 1: patriot and founding father. I feel like, that's a that's
Speaker 1: pretty much a summation of of contemporary or modern liberalism.
Speaker 1: You know, they're even willing to boycott Sam Adams. Now
Speaker 1: this is just by the Somerville, Massachusetts mayor, Joseph Curtatone,
Speaker 1: whom I have to say I am not I was
Speaker 1: not familiar with Mr Kurtatone's work before this, or Curtatone
Speaker 1: or whatever is Curtatone probably is what he says his name.
Speaker 1: But this just goes to show you how sensitive all
Speaker 1: of the all the liberals are about all this stuff
Speaker 1: when they're unwilling to even give a little bit of
Speaker 1: leeway to a as I said, an iconic American brand
Speaker 1: like Samuel Adams. He said, the mayor of Summerville, Massachusetts,
Speaker 1: by they do we know how popery big, right, that's
Speaker 1: one of these Massachusetts towns where people still kind of
Speaker 1: walk around and breaches a few times a year and
Speaker 1: carry musket's, you know, do some re enactments that that
Speaker 1: he will never drink Sam Adams beer again because the
Speaker 1: founder of or co founder of that Boston brewery said
Speaker 1: that that he liked the Trump tax cut. See this
Speaker 1: is really the expectation. And then this is the important pointer.
Speaker 1: This is the expectation of of of liberals today. You
Speaker 1: aren't even allowed to say. You aren't even allowed to
Speaker 1: say what is good for you or good for your
Speaker 1: business without that being used against you. You aren't even
Speaker 1: allowed to take the position should that at tax cut,
Speaker 1: which just means more money for more money that you
Speaker 1: are able to keep, less money that the government takes
Speaker 1: away from you. To say that is a good thing
Speaker 1: is now a deeply politicized statement, so politicized that you
Speaker 1: should be boycott for boycotted for this whole process. Uh.
Speaker 1: And that's just insane, right, It is insane, By the way, Brandon,
Speaker 1: if I were to ask you, what is the I
Speaker 1: haven't had beer in almost ten years now because I
Speaker 1: can't because beer is essentially liquid gluten. What is the
Speaker 1: greatest domestic American beer right now? Well, you're asking somebody
Speaker 1: who hasn't had a drink in two and a half years. Really, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's just that's just because I just decided I have
Speaker 1: a brother. I have a brother who's like, I just
Speaker 1: don't drink no reason other than he's like, why, I
Speaker 1: was never a heavy drinker, so I did enjoy say same,
Speaker 1: Adam yeah, well, I mean like I I feel like
Speaker 1: sam Adam for me is the most is the most
Speaker 1: iconically in terms of its imagery, at least the most
Speaker 1: iconically American beer. But this when I did drink, I
Speaker 1: would have sam Adams Winter. I would go with the
Speaker 1: sam Adam seasonals. Two. Look, it's not gonna hurt it
Speaker 1: sales because no one's even really heard of this place,
Speaker 1: so who really knows. But I do think that when
Speaker 1: you're boycotting a great American beer because you don't like
Speaker 1: what the founder said about tax cuts, maybe it's time
Speaker 1: to reevaluate some of those priorities a little bit. Maybe
Speaker 1: it's time to take a step back and say, hey,
Speaker 1: not absolutely everything has to be political. There is some
Speaker 1: space in life to enjoy sand Adams Winter and maybe
Speaker 1: even summer, all without arguing about politics. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call. Indeed, roll call time everybody's favorite time, at
Speaker 1: least my favorite time where I get to uh lean
Speaker 1: on the thoughts and insights and all the stuff that
Speaker 1: you bring to the table. So there you have it.
Speaker 1: I very much appreciate it, and I look forward to
Speaker 1: getting into it with you today. Well, let's get to it.
Speaker 1: Facebook dot Com slash buck sex and if you want
Speaker 1: to be a part of it. By the way, I'm
Speaker 1: coming to you from the from the NYC Freedom Hunt
Speaker 1: a New York. It's just like a breath of fresh,
Speaker 1: stinky air every time I come up here. Man, it's
Speaker 1: amazing this. You know. One thing I always noticed when
Speaker 1: I was in different parts of the world, especially back
Speaker 1: in my agency days, is how different places smell. And
Speaker 1: you know, New York smells very different. I don't need
Speaker 1: in any one place, all right, I know that. You know,
Speaker 1: you go to like the Port Authority and you're in
Speaker 1: the wrong corner and you smell things. No, I just
Speaker 1: mean the overall air in that city has a different brand.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm talking about. It just smells different.
Speaker 1: You know, d C smells different from New York. I
Speaker 1: can tell you Cobble smells very different from Baghdad. And
Speaker 1: you know they both smelled very different from anywhere else
Speaker 1: in America. Uh. That's usually because of the burning of
Speaker 1: trash as well as Uh there's a lot of burning
Speaker 1: of human waste that goes on, which then aerosolizes it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you can figure out on your own what that means.
Speaker 1: It's not good when you're coughing and you're like, wait,
Speaker 1: what am I? Oh that's not good? Alright, alright, alright,
Speaker 1: So Facebook dot com slash box sexon roll called Erica
Speaker 1: writes rebuttal to Trump is destroying American institutions. Under Obama,
Speaker 1: v A employees through serious efforts, made sure vets didn't
Speaker 1: get the care they deserved while guaranteeing those same employees
Speaker 1: got their undeserved productivity bonuses. Under Obama, the A t
Speaker 1: F lost the credibility of keeping guns out of the
Speaker 1: hands of criminals with fast and furious. Under Obama, the
Speaker 1: Secret Service that an uninvited and unvetted couple into a
Speaker 1: white House function while investigating a suspicious package. Another agent
Speaker 1: drove that suspicious package while in South America to prefer
Speaker 1: Obama's upcoming visit agents not only use prostitutes, they got
Speaker 1: in a fight with the locals be because they refuse
Speaker 1: to pay those prostitutes. Okay, and there's more and more.
Speaker 1: Erica taken the Obama administer russion two tasks and are
Speaker 1: doing quite a good job of it. So yes and eed, Erica,
Speaker 1: and thank you for your thoughts, thank you for writing it.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm gonna do tonight, Brandon, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: have a decent slice of pizza. Perhaps tomorrow morning I
Speaker 1: will go get I'll buy a bagel. You may say, Buck,
Speaker 1: you can't even eat a bagel because you are Celiac.
Speaker 1: That is true. I'll buy it anyway that because you
Speaker 1: know what I know about that bagel, Brandon. It's better
Speaker 1: than any bagels I'm getting in the swamp. I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna stare at it, say, oh, you perfect New York bagel.
Speaker 1: You you perfect piece of pizza, maybe even some ethnic
Speaker 1: food that doesn't taste like it was frozen before I
Speaker 1: ate it. I'm just I'm just saying, DCS, Okay, it's
Speaker 1: good for my swamp access. It's good for my swamp access,
Speaker 1: but NYC is better. And Austin for my barbecue, will
Speaker 1: be even better than that. When I get out there
Speaker 1: for the Austin barbecue meat, will you come, Brandon? Do
Speaker 1: you like barbecue? Am I an American? Aren't? Are you
Speaker 1: an American? That's a good question. I mean you're you're
Speaker 1: kind of like a New York Northeastern creature like me.
Speaker 1: You know you're New Yorker, But I love barbecue. Barbecue
Speaker 1: is amazing. So it's one of those few things that
Speaker 1: brings together all of America is that barbecues. But what
Speaker 1: is the best of the barbecue meats brand that I'm
Speaker 1: putting you on the spot here, what is the top
Speaker 1: of the barbecue food chain. I'm just an old fashioned
Speaker 1: hamburger guy. It just depends that kind of you mean.
Speaker 1: I mean, like what kind you mean, like barbecue bar
Speaker 1: You know what I mean, Like when you go to
Speaker 1: a barbecue joint, like pulled pork, and you know, I
Speaker 1: recently went to one. You not, maybe my second time,
Speaker 1: so the first time in a while. You don't you
Speaker 1: don't keepsture obviously, no, no, I'm not good with my
Speaker 1: my faith. I got you well, you know. Look, I
Speaker 1: mean I can't eat in the pork. It's delicious, my
Speaker 1: favorite meat. So if we're getting eat these things. But
Speaker 1: I'm a brisket guy. That's the thing. A brisket is
Speaker 1: my favorite of the barbecue meats. I think that's that's
Speaker 1: the best. Some people are like I like barbecue chicken
Speaker 1: the most. I'm like really probably also probably also like
Speaker 1: Bruce Springsteen, if you like barbecue chicken the most. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying overrated alright, Amanda. Next up here, in Roll
Speaker 1: Call on Monday show, you discussed what would happen if
Speaker 1: big tech companies decided to get in the social justice business.
Speaker 1: You should talk to Ross Patterson. He's the director of
Speaker 1: the movie Range, and he recently wrote a book that
Speaker 1: was eagerly awaited by a veterans group. He was close
Speaker 1: to getting on the best seller list when Amazon blacklisted
Speaker 1: his book on release day for excessive violence. Huh, who knew?
Speaker 1: I did not know that story, but I have to
Speaker 1: say I'm not particularly surprised by that story either. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: they they're gonna use folks. They're gonna use these terms
Speaker 1: of service violations, They're gonna use all these different little
Speaker 1: tricks two uh, skew things against conservatives. I assure you,
Speaker 1: I promise you that will happen. Bob. Next up here,
Speaker 1: Shield time. Brother. I'm out sure if you've seen it,
Speaker 1: but check out the Socialist Rifle Association here on Facebook. Huh.
Speaker 1: Keep fighting the good fight, as we hear in Pennsylvania,
Speaker 1: stand up and oppose Antifa as part of the constitutional militia.
Speaker 1: Thanks for all you do, Bob. Uh Okay, Thanks Bob.
Speaker 1: The Socialist Rifle Association I've never heard about that before.
Speaker 1: That sounds Brandon. You want to go, Brandon, you can
Speaker 1: be our special Socialist Rifle Association correspoted. I've never heard
Speaker 1: of that before. I'm kind of scared. Um. I'm sure
Speaker 1: it's just people like do a little shooting on the weekends.
Speaker 1: Um and I that's uh, what's what's next year? I'm
Speaker 1: trying to find. Oh, here we go, Mud writes, Buck,
Speaker 1: love your heart, Please keep sticking the truth in our faces.
Speaker 1: Remind everyone that life is a zero sum game. When
Speaker 1: is miss Molly settling him the swamp? Cheers from Matthew
Speaker 1: a k A. Mud, Ms. Molly is already in the swamp,
Speaker 1: my friend. She just happens to be away on business
Speaker 1: for the week. But she is a She is now
Speaker 1: a swamp dweller. She gets you know, I get her mail.
Speaker 1: She's she's now a DC resident like me. Yes. Indeed,
Speaker 1: that's that's the making making all kinds of moves down
Speaker 1: to our nation's capital, where even though the presidents of
Speaker 1: Republican it feels like you're supposed to feel weird about
Speaker 1: being a Republican. That's the way it is down there. Oh,
Speaker 1: let's see, we have whoops sorry, I just made it.
Speaker 1: I just made it go away here but all Bart,
Speaker 1: my buddy Bart, I can I can always tell when
Speaker 1: it's one of my old school original Saturday Squad oss folks. Um,
Speaker 1: we have Bart saying buck regarding what you said on
Speaker 1: the show on Friday, August tent about the never Trump Republicans.
Speaker 1: Uh here here we're you know. Bart. Bart doesn't mince words.
Speaker 1: Bart doesn't mess around. He's a guy who get's right
Speaker 1: to it. Um. Uh, never Trump, who would rather let
Speaker 1: Democrats win then support Trump. Psychiatrists have long ago identified
Speaker 1: a type of behavior often seen in teenagers who suffer
Speaker 1: from an enlarged self of self importance, a sense of
Speaker 1: self importance, and who uh feel all events happening around
Speaker 1: them strictly in terms of themselves. This is why teenagers
Speaker 1: often resort to suicide attempts as the best solution, wanting
Speaker 1: to shake the world around them up and garner attention. Uh.
Speaker 1: Those who survived these turbulent years then become never Trump
Speaker 1: Republicans and once again practice their art with an undeveloped
Speaker 1: teenager's brain whoa willing to sacrifice their country, their party,
Speaker 1: and greater issues that supposedly stands for for minor offenses,
Speaker 1: or to win personal favor, or just as the attention
Speaker 1: that it gets them from mainstream media. Bart Bart doesn't
Speaker 1: Bart doesn't go with the light stuff. You know what
Speaker 1: I mean. Bart's not writing in to tell me that
Speaker 1: I should really watch? But are you? Are you a
Speaker 1: Battlestar Galactical guy? By the way, Brandon, am I making
Speaker 1: judgments about you? Right? Judgments? I'm making judgments. That was okay, okay, alright,
Speaker 1: But my geeked him goes only So where where where
Speaker 1: does producer Brandon geek out the most? I was, okay, well,
Speaker 1: that's that's wild. I was big into who is your
Speaker 1: favorite turtle? Uh, Donna Tello? I know I like respected
Speaker 1: as long as you don't like Leonardo because he's like
Speaker 1: the hall monitor of the Ninja Turtles. Well, I have
Speaker 1: three younger brothers, so I am the Leonardo of our group.
Speaker 1: Well that it wasn't my favorite, but but as long
Speaker 1: as you know, I was a Rafael guy. Except here's
Speaker 1: my problem. I was like Rafael. Rafael was the best
Speaker 1: hand to hand based on the movies and also the
Speaker 1: cartoons um and also was the toughest. But his weapons
Speaker 1: are the lamest the side. Come on, dude, I would
Speaker 1: rather I would rather have any of those weapons. Although uh,
Speaker 1: nunchuck oose also known as numb chucks, are highly ineffective.
Speaker 1: They look cool in Bruce Lee movies, but they're highly affective.
Speaker 1: But I will have you know they're actually banned in
Speaker 1: New York City. People got so scared of numb chucks,
Speaker 1: as they improperly call them, that you were not allowed
Speaker 1: to have them. They're banned up there with brass knuckles
Speaker 1: and uh, I think collapsible batons too. You can't carre
Speaker 1: on you in New York. Hey, I was unfamiliar with
Speaker 1: the proper pronunciation, so thank you. That's what I'm here for.
Speaker 1: But also I'm surprised you didn't say Donna Tello because
Speaker 1: he has the bow staff. Usually people make fun of
Speaker 1: him because it's just quote, just because if you can
Speaker 1: kick butt with a stick, you actually know what you're doing, right.
Speaker 1: Leonardo has two unsharped knives. Basically, I mean starring Leonardo.
Speaker 1: Raphael has two unsharpened knives. You know, one of one?
Speaker 1: A little fun a fun bit of of trivia for you,
Speaker 1: by the way, you know what the the guy who
Speaker 1: is um uh the creator of Two and a half Men.
Speaker 1: His biggest credit before getting Yeah, Chuck Lorie, Chuck Lori
Speaker 1: wrote the theme song Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. That was
Speaker 1: his claim to fame for years until he became like
Speaker 1: a good jillionaire from Two and a half Men, Banky
Speaker 1: Chuck Lori. Yeah, thank you, Chuck Lori. So there's so
Speaker 1: there is that. Um, all right, I've diverted from the
Speaker 1: role call I know you're gonna get mad at me.
Speaker 1: Hold on a second team, Brian Right Buck saw and
Speaker 1: promoted some of your tweets about the real truths on
Speaker 1: the d C streets during the Antifa anti police protests
Speaker 1: as you and your brother saw it in person. Yeah
Speaker 1: the quote extreme right protests. How does the media get
Speaker 1: away with these crazy lies? Stay safe out there in
Speaker 1: the swamp. Brother. Also just wanted to let you know
Speaker 1: how much I enjoy your and Porter's Weekly Investment Our
Speaker 1: podcast and how much I get from it. Make sure
Speaker 1: to let the rest of the team know about it
Speaker 1: more often. You all have some really intelligent minds in
Speaker 1: the financial industry on there, and I get a lot
Speaker 1: from it. Appreciate the name of last week's podcast were
Speaker 1: referencing referencing Omar Bummer Porter didn't get the winning fish
Speaker 1: at the White Marlin Open next years. From Brian. First
Speaker 1: of all, Brian, I'm so glad you enjoy the UH
Speaker 1: the Investor our podcast, the Stansbury Investor Hour, which is
Speaker 1: I have to say, UH, if you're interested in finance,
Speaker 1: which I am, I'm I'm learning right, I am the
Speaker 1: student UH Porter who's the CEO of a very successful
Speaker 1: UH financial newsletter and research company called Stansbury Stansbury Research.
Speaker 1: Porter the CEO of this company which has a couple
Speaker 1: of hundred employees, and he does this podcast with me
Speaker 1: once a week, and I am, you know, he is
Speaker 1: obi Wan and I am Patawan on finance. I don't
Speaker 1: know any of my finance, but I've been learning a
Speaker 1: lot from doing the show and reading their research and that.
Speaker 1: I just like that part of life where you're just
Speaker 1: learning entirely new stuff. And Porter is want a really
Speaker 1: charismatic guy, but also just an encyclopedia of knowledge about
Speaker 1: the markets. You know, should you buy Gold, should you
Speaker 1: buy Google? Should you buy he? You know? So if
Speaker 1: you're interested in that kind of stuff, folks, I think
Speaker 1: it's the best finance podcast out there, and I've listened
Speaker 1: to a bunch of them, more famous ones. I think
Speaker 1: he does a phenomenal job. And I kind of sit
Speaker 1: there and just play the everyman and talk to him
Speaker 1: a little bit about this and that little political analysis.
Speaker 1: But it's mostly for me to learn, and that's kind
Speaker 1: of the role. I play the role of guy who
Speaker 1: is learning and uh about finance, and Porter plays the
Speaker 1: role of, um, you know, guy who actually is is
Speaker 1: teaching about finance and stuff. So you can check that
Speaker 1: at investor our dot com if any of your here.
Speaker 1: It's totally free and download any time you wants once
Speaker 1: a week. This past week or two of shows hasn't
Speaker 1: had porters, so don't start you want to show reporters on,
Speaker 1: So don't don't jump into the guest host shows because
Speaker 1: those are a little different. Um and speaking of shows,
Speaker 1: make sure that you check out the Freedom Hunt podcast folks.
Speaker 1: They are evergreen, which means you can listen to any
Speaker 1: time if you've missed anything in the past. Go back
Speaker 1: my conversation with a Colt, or my conversation with the
Speaker 1: Heam Kasam with Benny Johnson. These are all really fun
Speaker 1: things to listen to. Uh, just type in the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt on iTunes. You can check it out there. I'll
Speaker 1: be here, uh in swamp. Actually not here, darn it.
Speaker 1: But I'll be doing the show as I always do,
Speaker 1: tomorrow from the Swamp in d C. It's been fun
Speaker 1: being up here in NYC with producer Mike, producer Brandon,
Speaker 1: the rest of the gang. Please do be sure to
Speaker 1: tip your waitress. Remember it's all on the reflexes and shields.
Speaker 1: I