Speaker 1: You're listening to the Fuck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio act or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. I mean, we all saw
Speaker 1: this coming, right, nobody's even a little bit surprised by this.
Speaker 1: It turns out, when you've got a Biden administration that
Speaker 1: wants to have a de facto open border, and the
Speaker 1: whole world knows that, including Central America, including countries all
Speaker 1: over the world, things happen. We're gonna break down this
Speaker 1: border fiasco for you because it has enormous implications for
Speaker 1: the country, for politics, and then of course Biden forgetting
Speaker 1: the Secretary of Defense's name. I mean, I don't know
Speaker 1: how much more of the cognitive decline has to be
Speaker 1: a thing that we all see before we can talk
Speaker 1: about it without being told that we're a bunch of
Speaker 1: big meanis we're being bad people about this and the
Speaker 1: one point nine trillion dollars of just larded pork spending unbelievable.
Speaker 1: But you know, first I want to talk to you
Speaker 1: about censorship on social media and what you can do
Speaker 1: about it. You see, the left really likes to silence
Speaker 1: people like you and me. They do it to me
Speaker 1: all the time. I'm sure they do it to you too.
Speaker 1: Twitter and Facebook, we're supposed to be open platforms, that's
Speaker 1: how they were built. But now they've got these content
Speaker 1: moderators and fact checkers who are really just the op
Speaker 1: ed section of the New York Times with smaller words.
Speaker 1: So instead of letting social media sites revoke your right
Speaker 1: to free speech, I got an idea for you. How
Speaker 1: about revoking their right to your data. Now you could
Speaker 1: just deactivate all your social media accounts, but that would
Speaker 1: be giving the left what they wanted in the first place.
Speaker 1: So I do something much better. I use Express VPN.
Speaker 1: Have you ever wondered how sites like Facebook make all
Speaker 1: their money? For example, they track your searches, your video history,
Speaker 1: everything you click on. When you use express VPN, you
Speaker 1: anonymize much of your online presence by hiding your IP address.
Speaker 1: It's amazing. Honestly, you got to give this a shot.
Speaker 1: Makes your activity much more difficult to trace. So if
Speaker 1: you want privacy, if you want to feel like you're
Speaker 1: not being constantly surveiled online, express VPNs for you. And
Speaker 1: also the social media companies might think twice about the
Speaker 1: way they treat half the country because we're starting to say,
Speaker 1: you know what, We're gonna make it harder for you
Speaker 1: to sell our data. So this is a win all around.
Speaker 1: Express vpn also encrypts one hundred percent of your data
Speaker 1: to protect you from hackers and internet bad guys. It's
Speaker 1: finally time to say no to censorship. Take back your
Speaker 1: online privacy. Go to Express vpn dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: By visiting my special link will get an extra three
Speaker 1: months of Express VPN service for free. Again, that's Express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slash buck. Express vpn dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck to protect your data today. It's not possible, Okay,
Speaker 1: it's not possible that the Biden administration is surprised by
Speaker 1: any of the things that are going on right now
Speaker 1: at the border. Nobody is that stupid. Nobody is that dumb.
Speaker 1: We all knew that this is what would happen when
Speaker 1: we came into an administration that doesn't believe that there's
Speaker 1: such a thing as an illegal person. Think about the rhetoric,
Speaker 1: Think about the things that have been said by Democrats
Speaker 1: in recent years. I'm never going to let it go
Speaker 1: that the Democrats on stage in night one of two
Speaker 1: nights of the debates in the primary all raise their
Speaker 1: hand for whether they would give free healthcare to illegal aliens,
Speaker 1: and I have to keep an eye on this. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure when they changed if they have yet changed
Speaker 1: the official terminology. I know they don't want you to
Speaker 1: say a legal alien, even though it's in the federal code,
Speaker 1: but that's all part of it. You see. Now they
Speaker 1: want you to just say a non citizen or undocumented person,
Speaker 1: which is even more absurd and werewelling in. But this
Speaker 1: is entirely predictable. In fact, I would argue that many
Speaker 1: predicted it, including myself. The left wants de facto open borders,
Speaker 1: and now we're seeing what that looks like. The US
Speaker 1: Mexico border is spiraling out of control because when millions
Speaker 1: of impover Central Americans have reason to believe they can
Speaker 1: skip the legal immigration process and stay in America forever
Speaker 1: just for claiming phony asylum, they show up in large
Speaker 1: numbers and demand processing as soon as they can. In
Speaker 1: case you're wondering whether this is really because of Biden,
Speaker 1: there are already photos circulating of migrant groups wearing Biden
Speaker 1: let us in t shirts at the border. It's a
Speaker 1: completely logical response on their part to the open borders
Speaker 1: madness of the Democrat Party. Of course they want to
Speaker 1: get into America now. President Biden has no intention of
Speaker 1: sending them home. Ever, That's what this is all about.
Speaker 1: We understand what's really happening here. We can see it.
Speaker 1: This isn't all that complicated. I mean, the immigration topic
Speaker 1: is overall complicated, but what's happening right now the border
Speaker 1: is actually quite straightforward. And they can say as much
Speaker 1: as they want about how it's not a crisis, but
Speaker 1: it is by any definition they have previously used about
Speaker 1: the border, clearly a crisis. In fact, there's a New
Speaker 1: York Times report that says it's akin to jails. What
Speaker 1: the children are being held in right now, akin to
Speaker 1: a jail. The number of migrant children, this is from
Speaker 1: that New York Times piece detained that the border has
Speaker 1: tripled in the last two weeks. That's right, it has
Speaker 1: tripled in the last two weeks, more than three thousand,
Speaker 1: two hundred and fifty filling facilities, as I said, a
Speaker 1: kind to jails, as the Biden administration struggles to find
Speaker 1: room for them in shelters. According to documents obtained by
Speaker 1: the New York Times, more than one thousand three hundred
Speaker 1: and sixty of the children have been detained beyond the
Speaker 1: seventy two hours permitted by law. Remember kids in cages,
Speaker 1: Kids in cages. That's what they were yelling at Trump,
Speaker 1: Abolish ice. They have kids in cages. The former CIA
Speaker 1: director Mike Hayden said that it was concentration camps. We're
Speaker 1: running at the border. Gene, Mike, where are you now?
Speaker 1: The concentration camps as you call them, are back up
Speaker 1: and running, and they're already getting to capacity. Former CIA
Speaker 1: director wanted disgrace. Turns out that it is a complicated situation.
Speaker 1: And when you have children who are showing up and
Speaker 1: you have a humanitarian desire to make sure they're safe
Speaker 1: and take care of them, but you're also incentivizing further
Speaker 1: loo loopholes where people are unable to well, what's really
Speaker 1: happening here? And I was gonna say they don't want
Speaker 1: due process. Actually they're not trying to get due process.
Speaker 1: They're trying to circumvent the process. You know, they're showing
Speaker 1: up and saying I want to claim asylum, and then
Speaker 1: later on they're saying, well, I'm not even going to
Speaker 1: show up for my asylum hearing and with the children
Speaker 1: that are being sent to the country. Why is this happening,
Speaker 1: Why are their kids showing up alone at the border. Well,
Speaker 1: because they will then be placed, usually with family members
Speaker 1: already in the US. So this is a means of
Speaker 1: just getting them immediate, immediate, permanent residency in the US,
Speaker 1: and then those children, as you know, are likely to
Speaker 1: be used as a tether for the adults home in
Speaker 1: Guatemala or Honduras to bring them into the United States
Speaker 1: as part of family reunification under the Biden administration. That's
Speaker 1: what's actually happening here. So what we see our numbers
Speaker 1: that should show anybody that there is, in fact a crisis.
Speaker 1: Seventy eight thousand migrants at the border in January, all right,
Speaker 1: that's that's how many of the border. This is all
Speaker 1: New York Times reporting. I'm not telling you anything that's
Speaker 1: not being reported as fact right now about when it
Speaker 1: comes to the numbers, and they believe over one hundred
Speaker 1: thousand was the number back in February. So you've got
Speaker 1: a lot of people showing up at the border and
Speaker 1: it's gonna just keep going up. The winter is not
Speaker 1: the primary time for crossings. We're heading into the high season, right,
Speaker 1: You're gonna see a lot of people in April and May.
Speaker 1: That's the best time to try to make this journey.
Speaker 1: You don't really want to do it in the dead
Speaker 1: of the summer. You don't want to do in the
Speaker 1: dead of winter. So unaccompanied children who show up at
Speaker 1: the border are taken into custody there put into jail
Speaker 1: like facilities. The New York Times calls them, I mean,
Speaker 1: they're just holding facilities. What are they supposed to do?
Speaker 1: Biden team hasn't really figured this out, But it's hard
Speaker 1: to have any real sympathy for the fact that they're
Speaker 1: in a crisis right now. It's hard to feel like
Speaker 1: I'm talking about now from the administration perspective, from the
Speaker 1: people who are in charge, because they want open borders, really,
Speaker 1: and this is what an open border looks like. In fact,
Speaker 1: I think you could argue that to the Democrats it
Speaker 1: isn't even really a crisis because what's going on right
Speaker 1: now allows them to enlarge the apparatus for processing at
Speaker 1: our southern border to get more people in faster, more comfortably.
Speaker 1: That's really what this is all about. Now they're going
Speaker 1: to say, we need more resources. We got to spend
Speaker 1: even more taxpayer dollars to handle this influx of illegal immigrants.
Speaker 1: That's what's going on. And people who say, oh, it's
Speaker 1: not illegal, they're not telling you the truth. You're not
Speaker 1: allowed to cross the border, not at a port of entry.
Speaker 1: These people are showing up at the border by and
Speaker 1: large and they are surrendering, meaning they cross illegally. They
Speaker 1: even will flag I've seen this, I've been there. When
Speaker 1: they do it, they will flag down border patrol because
Speaker 1: this was the same process that they were using back
Speaker 1: in twenty eighteen, but Trump put a stop to it.
Speaker 1: But they flag down border patrol and they want, you know,
Speaker 1: they will they will demand a meal, they will demand
Speaker 1: their process, including the belief that they have the rights
Speaker 1: to immediate medical care and food and facilities in the
Speaker 1: United States. That's what they end up telling border patrol
Speaker 1: who have told me that sometimes it feels like there
Speaker 1: are a food delivery service for illegal immorants that are
Speaker 1: showing up and saying right away, you know, where where
Speaker 1: is my sandwich. Essentially, this is the Biden administration deciding
Speaker 1: that what Trump did to stop this process, the remain
Speaker 1: in Mexico policy, for example, no longer counts, doesn't matter
Speaker 1: what is remain in Mexico. You want asylum, fine, we'll
Speaker 1: give you a whole here, will do the whole process.
Speaker 1: But so you can't just disappear into the American interior.
Speaker 1: You stay in Mexico. You wait in Mexico until your
Speaker 1: court date, and then you show up and then a
Speaker 1: judge will hear you. But you know they don't want
Speaker 1: to do this because they're not a psiles. I come
Speaker 1: from a poor country and I want a better economy.
Speaker 1: Is a position that I have sympathy with. I don't
Speaker 1: blame the people who are trying to gain the system
Speaker 1: in this way. If I felt my circumstances were so desperate,
Speaker 1: you know, I can see how this would happen. I continue,
Speaker 1: you decide to do this, But we have a system
Speaker 1: that is not supposed to reward that kind of gamesmanship
Speaker 1: in the system, right, we have a system that's supposed
Speaker 1: to take into account whether people will be immediately additive
Speaker 1: to the United States, whether on a merit based system
Speaker 1: that we want to include them in the American family.
Speaker 1: We are already taking a million people a year and
Speaker 1: making them permanent, permanent residence citizens, Green card holders, a
Speaker 1: million a year. All right, that's the lead immigration system.
Speaker 1: Now we're going to have hundreds and hundreds of thousands
Speaker 1: showing up and adding to that number because they want
Speaker 1: to basically and because the Democrats think they benefit from
Speaker 1: it politically. They got rid of them remain in Mexico
Speaker 1: policy because it showed that the people who are actually
Speaker 1: showing up at the border, we're not showing up at
Speaker 1: their hearings. They weren't really assile's that's the whole point.
Speaker 1: And sending children to the border is just another means
Speaker 1: of getting around immigration system because without it used to
Speaker 1: remember the problem with Trump was the Democrats said that
Speaker 1: they're separating They're they're taking children from their parents, right,
Speaker 1: they're separating them, which is what happens when you process
Speaker 1: people for a criminal offense anywhere in the country anytime.
Speaker 1: But we decided, okay, for humanitarian reasons, we want we're
Speaker 1: a decent country of decent people. We're going to keep
Speaker 1: the family unit together. But then you know, if the
Speaker 1: child stays with the adult, then they're processed within that
Speaker 1: system and can actually be sent back. No. No, now
Speaker 1: you send your kid, your kid gets immediately deployed in
Speaker 1: the interior of the United States, either with other family
Speaker 1: or in a group home or whatever it may be.
Speaker 1: But one of the big problems here is that the
Speaker 1: Democrats don't want the same thing from this that well
Speaker 1: much a majority of the country does. They're not looking
Speaker 1: to shut down the crisis at the border. They've already
Speaker 1: had the DHS chief say that it's not that we
Speaker 1: don't want you to come. We don't want you to come.
Speaker 1: Yet they're using this now, this crisis that they've created
Speaker 1: is now also creating opportunities for them to create a
Speaker 1: day factor open border, which is what this looks like
Speaker 1: a lot of processing facilities. You just show up, you
Speaker 1: go into the processing, and you're released in the US
Speaker 1: and there's some oh yeah, at some point maybe you
Speaker 1: got to show up in a corp, but we're never
Speaker 1: going to support you. And so that's what an open
Speaker 1: border actually looks like. And remember under Trump, there were
Speaker 1: loopholes being exploited that led to a similar circumstance to this,
Speaker 1: and of course the Democrats said it was Nazism and
Speaker 1: kids in cages and all this. But then then the
Speaker 1: Trump administration, with Democrats finding them every step of the way,
Speaker 1: said hold on a second, Let's set up the remain
Speaker 1: in Mexico policy. Let's pressure Mexico and Central American partner
Speaker 1: governments to stem the flow. We don't want this, we
Speaker 1: don't want this to continue. And they got the number
Speaker 1: way down, so they secured the border, and now the
Speaker 1: Biden team comes in and unsecures it. That's what's happening
Speaker 1: right now. Biden's border crisis is his most predictable debacle yet.
Speaker 1: Got the piece up on bucksexton dot com right now.
Speaker 1: Please go check it out. It's an editorial that I wrote.
Speaker 1: I am writing for Bucksexen dot com obviously on a
Speaker 1: weekly basis, and so this is my piece for you
Speaker 1: get into the details the numbers. Please check it out
Speaker 1: Bucksexen dot com. And also, if you could give us
Speaker 1: a review in the Apple podcast Store for the Bucksexton Podcast,
Speaker 1: even if you're listening on radio, please feel free, I'm
Speaker 1: sure you've listened on podcast to give us a review
Speaker 1: five stars and write something that would really help us
Speaker 1: out with the algorithm, because this show is bigger than
Speaker 1: one would think based on the Apple podcast substantially bigger
Speaker 1: based on the Apple podcast stores way of presenting things.
Speaker 1: But we don't I don't ask everybody for that call
Speaker 1: to action, and now I'm asking you please give us
Speaker 1: some reviews, give us give us some five star ratings,
Speaker 1: and that will really be a big favor to the show.
Speaker 1: Would really really appreciate it. But I just want to
Speaker 1: finish up on this immigration point, because instead of trying
Speaker 1: to stem the flow, what you see is the Biden
Speaker 1: administration scrambling to find ways to make the most comfortable
Speaker 1: arrangements possible for anyone who is intentionally scamming the immigration system,
Speaker 1: which is what this is. You're going to see, I mean,
Speaker 1: get ready for this. You're going to see over one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand migrants cross in February. I mean when they
Speaker 1: give the final number, when you see that tally, it'll
Speaker 1: be over one hundred thousand, and it'll be over one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand in March. And that number is just going
Speaker 1: to keep going until there's a reason for it to stop.
Speaker 1: Why would it stop. Isn't now the best time in
Speaker 1: recent memory if you're going to be an illegal immigrant
Speaker 1: in the United States? Isn't now the best time? So
Speaker 1: this is likely to stretch on for months. But remember,
Speaker 1: well we can argue with the Biden folks about how
Speaker 1: they said before under Trump the situation was a crisis.
Speaker 1: They really view what's going on to the border as
Speaker 1: an opportunity. What's going to happen is that there will
Speaker 1: be a massive Biden, Pelosi Schumer push for amnesty, and
Speaker 1: as you know, if Democrats get their way on that,
Speaker 1: there won't really be any electoral consequences for the lawlessness
Speaker 1: currently under way. It essentially nullifies whatever lawlessness the Democrats
Speaker 1: have encouraged at this phase because there'll be an an
Speaker 1: unassailable electoral position once mass amnesty goes through, because of
Speaker 1: what it will mean for the vote, particularly among the
Speaker 1: Hispanic community in this country, but also what it will
Speaker 1: mean when they are pushing for voting rights for people
Speaker 1: that were formerly illegal immigrants, which they will do, of
Speaker 1: course they will do. The question that I have right
Speaker 1: now is what will they eliminate the filibuster for? Where
Speaker 1: will they decide they're going to make their post to
Speaker 1: eliminate the filibuster. I'm not sure yet. Will it be
Speaker 1: hr One, will it be on amnesty, will it be
Speaker 1: who knows. There's a number of I think those are
Speaker 1: two of the most likely. But that's where you'll see
Speaker 1: what the real agenda is and what they're really pushing for.
Speaker 1: And I think on the issue of amnesty, they may
Speaker 1: find themselves finally unify. The Democrats may feel strong enough
Speaker 1: that they're willing to say, let's go for it. Let's
Speaker 1: do this thing where we decide that we're going to
Speaker 1: we're going to get get our way no matter what
Speaker 1: it does to the system. And at that point, if
Speaker 1: you do manage to see amnesty under this bid administration,
Speaker 1: it will be an enormous victory for the left. Remember,
Speaker 1: the border at that point will just be a place
Speaker 1: where people show up and they get They essentially get
Speaker 1: you brought into the United States. They're just moved into
Speaker 1: the US. Because how can you stop Eddie? If you
Speaker 1: could show up at the border and say, yeah, I
Speaker 1: fear violence in my home country, and it's oh wow,
Speaker 1: that sounds like credible fear. Now you're in the US.
Speaker 1: Please show up at this later court date. But you're
Speaker 1: not a threat, so they're not really going to deport you.
Speaker 1: And even if they do showing up again at the border,
Speaker 1: you're not going to be penalized. You just take another
Speaker 1: shot at it. Paying the cartels all the way. I
Speaker 1: should know, the cartels make hundreds of millions of dollars
Speaker 1: from this human smuggling. I know it seems maybe a
Speaker 1: little counterintuitive, but even though you can just walk up
Speaker 1: the US Mexico border, these are cartel controlled areas and
Speaker 1: to get up to the border in some places to
Speaker 1: pay off these smugglers, and there's a whole business, a
Speaker 1: whole black market that's being run here, an enormous one
Speaker 1: for bringing migrants to the border. As part of this,
Speaker 1: they are paying cartels. Just remember that transnational drug organizations
Speaker 1: that are poisoning tens of thousands of Americans a year.
Speaker 1: I think almost thousand last year died from drug overdoses.
Speaker 1: Those drugs are coming from south of our border. They're
Speaker 1: coming from the cartels, and it is the cartels who
Speaker 1: are making money in all of this and getting stronger
Speaker 1: and more powerful. Don't forget that. But if we do
Speaker 1: get to amnesty, the GOP will effectively be toast. It'll
Speaker 1: be done. And then if the border stays open. Once
Speaker 1: you get to that amnesty, which I think is likely,
Speaker 1: limited government conservatism and constitutionalism will be quaint relics of
Speaker 1: a past that we vaguely remember. It'll be all over.
Speaker 1: And this is the way the Democrats can essentially flood
Speaker 1: the zone with votes to cancel out the votes of Americans,
Speaker 1: because they're just going to make new Americans in a sense.
Speaker 1: They're going to take people who are in fact illegal immigrants,
Speaker 1: who are not supposed to even be here, and say,
Speaker 1: you know what, you now get the same voting rights
Speaker 1: as people that went through the process to come here
Speaker 1: legally as immigrants, or people who have been born and
Speaker 1: raised here and spent their whole lives and this is
Speaker 1: the only country they know. So someone's if Joe Biden
Speaker 1: has his way, the vote of somebody who shows up
Speaker 1: doesn't speak English, broke the law to come here, didn't
Speaker 1: respect our immigration laws, paid off the cartels, their vote
Speaker 1: will count as much as your vote wherever you are
Speaker 1: across the country. That's what Joe Biden thinks is fair.
Speaker 1: That's the democracy that he wants you to be living in.
Speaker 1: And you just see it. You know, every time we
Speaker 1: push and push back and say this is where they're
Speaker 1: going next, they scream and shout and say that that's
Speaker 1: so unfair, it's not true. And they do that so
Speaker 1: that we can't mount the proper opposition to their policies
Speaker 1: in advance, and then they do that thing. They get
Speaker 1: what they want. They take the position on immigration, on
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of things that they said they never would.
Speaker 1: And when we say, well, I said you were going
Speaker 1: to do that and you swore you promise you never would, Democrats,
Speaker 1: they say, yeah, what are you going to do about it?
Speaker 1: Now we move on to the next one. This is
Speaker 1: how they play the game. We sit around, you know,
Speaker 1: arguing about whether Mitt Romney is really a man of principle.
Speaker 1: They figure, how do we actually change the country so
Speaker 1: that the ideology of our political opponents, people that have
Speaker 1: a different vision of the future of this country lose
Speaker 1: every time? How do we do that? How do we
Speaker 1: achieve that the annihilation of our political enemies. That's how
Speaker 1: the left seeks to conduct its business when it's in power.
Speaker 1: On the right, we sit around and say, maybe we
Speaker 1: could do some more tax cuts, maybe we could send
Speaker 1: around some think tank papers about the size of the debt,
Speaker 1: and people will start to pay attention to it. I've
Speaker 1: got news for you. Their way will win over the
Speaker 1: long run. Really, Representative Cheney was one of the very
Speaker 1: few Republicans in Congress who did stand up. And I
Speaker 1: give all of them who spoke up, who voted for impeachment,
Speaker 1: who voted for conviction in the Senate, you credit for
Speaker 1: doing what was right. I just wish that more Republicans
Speaker 1: had had either the bridge or the understanding of what
Speaker 1: they needed to do, that they too had stood up
Speaker 1: and spoken out. Right now, Jonathan, it is really troubling
Speaker 1: to see the Republican Party turn themselves into a cult
Speaker 1: and you know, basically pledge allegiance not to the United
Speaker 1: States of America but to Donald Trump, something I do
Speaker 1: not understand, I cannot accept, and I don't think the
Speaker 1: majority of Americans, as we have seen with the very
Speaker 1: large popular victory of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, the you know,
Speaker 1: the passage of the American Rescue Plan, which is so popular.
Speaker 1: I don't understand why the Republican Party is so afraid
Speaker 1: of itself, because that's what it comes down to. I
Speaker 1: know you probably are thinking, why did you just assault
Speaker 1: my ears with that? What happened? Oh she's back? But
Speaker 1: I want you to I want you to hear Hillary Now,
Speaker 1: it's been a little while since you've been subjected to that.
Speaker 1: It's been a little a period of time here since
Speaker 1: you've had to actually here Hillary lecture the rest of
Speaker 1: the country on an issue. And what I would say
Speaker 1: to you is this, She's awful. We've all known it
Speaker 1: all along. But they assured you in twenty sixteen that
Speaker 1: she would be a great president, that she would break
Speaker 1: the ultimate class ceiling, that she would bring forth all
Speaker 1: kinds of intelligence and good governance and all this. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's ridiculous. She's she's a horror show. I mean, it's awful.
Speaker 1: What happened? You know? She is. She is a disingenuous, smarmy,
Speaker 1: narcissistic phony. Just the whole thing is what Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 1: You've gotta be kidding me. They wanted her to be
Speaker 1: president before. But I want you to remember that because
Speaker 1: you know I told you the Democrats their favorite game
Speaker 1: to play the progressives really who democrats? Progressive? You use
Speaker 1: these pretty interchangeably. The progressives love to say, how dare
Speaker 1: you say that I'm going to do this thing in
Speaker 1: this period of time? And then when they do it
Speaker 1: exactly as you said. This happens to me with all
Speaker 1: the COVID stuff all the time, when they do exactly
Speaker 1: what you said, they're gonna do, but they didn't want
Speaker 1: people to know because they didn't want the opposition amount
Speaker 1: before it. Then that you're on look at you and say, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right, we did it. What are you going to
Speaker 1: do about it? Now? Now on to the next one.
Speaker 1: We'll lie again, We'll get our way again. Look what
Speaker 1: they do with these political candidates. Hillary Clinton, Oh, the
Speaker 1: great Hillary Clinton. She's amazing, She's gonna nobody really believed that.
Speaker 1: I mean some people did, but there they're delusional people
Speaker 1: all over the place. Right. And then you see this
Speaker 1: with the Lincoln Project. I know that's the political candidate,
Speaker 1: but oh, it turns out and the New York Times
Speaker 1: has the piece on this. It turns out that the
Speaker 1: Lincoln Project, which almost had its own show on MSNBC.
Speaker 1: I mean, the Lincoln Project was getting so much attention
Speaker 1: in the media, and we were told they were the
Speaker 1: principaled Republicans. Right. Look, look what Hillary Clinton just did.
Speaker 1: Liz Cheney, she's the real principal Republican. Yeah, because she
Speaker 1: was useful for the Democrats. She allowed herself to be
Speaker 1: weaponized for the purpose of the Democrats against her own team.
Speaker 1: There's always gonna be a pad on the head for
Speaker 1: you if you do that for a day or two,
Speaker 1: from the New York Times or from Hillary Clinton or MSNBC. Here,
Speaker 1: this is from this New York Time. So I'm gonna
Speaker 1: get back to Hillary and then Biden in a second.
Speaker 1: But this is from this New York Times piece. A
Speaker 1: few days before the presidential election, the leadership of the
Speaker 1: Anti Trump Lincoln Project gathered at the Utah home of
Speaker 1: Steve Schmidt, one of the group's co founders, and listened
Speaker 1: as he plotted out the organization's future. None of the
Speaker 1: dissident Republican consultants who created a Lincoln Project a year
Speaker 1: earlier had imagined how wildly successful it would be, pulling
Speaker 1: in more than eighty seven million dollars in donations and
Speaker 1: producing scores of viral videos that doubled as a psy
Speaker 1: ops campaign intended to drive President Donald Trump to distraction,
Speaker 1: confident that a Biden administration was on the horizon, Mister Schmidt,
Speaker 1: a swaggering former political advisor he's a moron to John
Speaker 1: McCain and Arnold Schwarzenegger, pitched the other attendees on his
Speaker 1: post Trump vision for the project over a breakfast of
Speaker 1: bagels and muffins. It was ambitious. Five years from now
Speaker 1: there will be a dozen billion dollar media companies that
Speaker 1: don't exist today. He told the group, I would like
Speaker 1: to build one and would invite all of you to
Speaker 1: be a part of that. In fact, mister Schmidt and
Speaker 1: the three other men who started the Lincoln Project, John Weaver,
Speaker 1: Read Galen and Rick Wilson, had already quietly moved to
Speaker 1: set themselves up in the New Media Enterprise, drafting and
Speaker 1: filing papers to create TLP Media in September and October
Speaker 1: Record show it's aim was to transform the original project
Speaker 1: a superpack, into a far more lucrative venture under their control.
Speaker 1: This was not the only private financial arrangement among the
Speaker 1: four men. Shortly after they created the group in late
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, they'd agree to pay themselves millions of dollars
Speaker 1: in management fees. Three people with knowledge of the deal said,
Speaker 1: I mean, the whole thing was a grift. It was
Speaker 1: a scam for the benefit of the people involved, and
Speaker 1: of course the Democrat Party. But it was all by
Speaker 1: people claiming that they were the principled ones, and the
Speaker 1: media took it and ran with it. They loved it. Right.
Speaker 1: The good Republicans are the ones like Steve Schmidt and
Speaker 1: Rick Wilson, who will be vicious in the pursuit of
Speaker 1: assisting the political party that they've spent their entire adult
Speaker 1: life trying to defeat. To help them, right, the good
Speaker 1: Republicans are the traitors and the turncoats. That was the
Speaker 1: whole purpose of the Lincoln Project until it wasn't until
Speaker 1: we saw that they were just lining their pockets and
Speaker 1: that John Weaver was allegedly trying to groom young men,
Speaker 1: including some who allegedly were underage. And this is what
Speaker 1: the Lincoln Project was really all about. But notice there's
Speaker 1: no shame. There's no shame in how the Lincoln Project
Speaker 1: was used as a weapon against Trump in the most
Speaker 1: disingenuous and dishonest fashion. There's no shame in elevating Andrew Cuomo,
Speaker 1: making him a guy who gets an Emmy and a
Speaker 1: million dollar book deal for his leadership during the pandemic.
Speaker 1: That's right, a million dollars, folks. I can tell you
Speaker 1: it's hard to get a million dollar book deal these
Speaker 1: days unless you're a prominent Democrat or celebrity Democrat. Then
Speaker 1: you can get whatever you want. Yeah, but they want
Speaker 1: you to listen to them now, they're all about being ethical.
Speaker 1: They're all about making the really the honest case. You see,
Speaker 1: they will gaslight you now and forever. If you let
Speaker 1: them get away with it, there will be no end
Speaker 1: to this whatsoever. Lincoln Project, Andrew Cuomo. Hillary Clinton in
Speaker 1: twenty sixte I know, I started that club. It was
Speaker 1: tough to even listen to. That's what Hillary sounds like
Speaker 1: to me. You know, it's like it's like some kind
Speaker 1: of like a bobcat that's caught in a trap or something.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's really it's just awful. But she should
Speaker 1: have been president. She would have been great. They tell you. Yeah, anyway,
Speaker 1: it's amazing, isn't it. Get Ready for an even more
Speaker 1: stunning version of this. I mean, the one that I
Speaker 1: think we can all see coming at some level is
Speaker 1: the one that involves the single most powerful person in
Speaker 1: the world right now, the single most powerful Democrat. But
Speaker 1: he's the most powerful person in the world right now,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, the guy with the nuclear codes. And remember
Speaker 1: how they would tell you that Donald Trump was going
Speaker 1: to start a war with North Korea, who was going
Speaker 1: to start a war with Iran? They started out for
Speaker 1: about two years, the media, the Democrats. They were telling
Speaker 1: you that Trump was a threat. Trump was the warmonger,
Speaker 1: And then it got tougher to make that case because no,
Speaker 1: he was actually the guy who didn't start wars. He
Speaker 1: was the guy who didn't send our troops in a
Speaker 1: harm's way without clear purpose, strategy and success in mind. Right.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's that's a tough case to make when
Speaker 1: you're just seeing the reality of what's going on. But
Speaker 1: they tried that for a couple of years. Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is the guy with the nuclear codes, and you should
Speaker 1: know that because hopefully somebody else has those codes written
Speaker 1: down for him at all times, and he's not expected
Speaker 1: to remember very much at all because he can't remember
Speaker 1: the name of the secretary of Defense that he appointed.
Speaker 1: Who is his secretary of defense? This was yesterday, play one.
Speaker 1: I just want to thank you both, and I want
Speaker 1: to thank the former general. I keep calling him general,
Speaker 1: the guy who runs that outfit over there. I want
Speaker 1: to make sure we thank the secretary for all he's
Speaker 1: done to try to implement what we just talked about
Speaker 1: and for recommending these two women for promotion. Thank you all.
Speaker 1: May God bless you all, and may God protect our troops. Yeah,
Speaker 1: does he know the name of the Secretary Defense? Does
Speaker 1: you know? Does he actually remember? Now? I know what
Speaker 1: they're gonna say. They're gonna claim that this is just
Speaker 1: a lapse. Anybody can forget something. You can forget the
Speaker 1: name of one of your kids if you're in a
Speaker 1: you know, a heated moment and you're trying to get
Speaker 1: the van loaded up in the supermarket parking lot or whatever.
Speaker 1: I understand. But we've seen so much of this. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's almost eighty years old. Those of us who have
Speaker 1: family members who are or have had family members who
Speaker 1: were eighty we understand that. You know, we love them,
Speaker 1: we support them, We try to you know, engage engage
Speaker 1: them in day to day life and with us as
Speaker 1: much as we possibly can. But used are to slow
Speaker 1: down a little bit. That's what happens. We are all
Speaker 1: going to the same place, we are all aging, and
Speaker 1: we're all going to reach our our terminus in one
Speaker 1: way or another. And before the very end, generally there
Speaker 1: is that slow down period. There is that cognitive decline
Speaker 1: now in so much much more serious, such much more
Speaker 1: stark than another's. But they foisted this guy upon America
Speaker 1: because they figured they could get it done. They presented
Speaker 1: a politician who's like out of central casting for a
Speaker 1: Democrat that what does he even stand for? What does
Speaker 1: he believe? And nobody really knows, but he's given a
Speaker 1: lot of speeches and he you know, he knows how
Speaker 1: to dress the part and sound the part, and he's
Speaker 1: been around a long time. So what a great way
Speaker 1: to push for your push through a radical agenda have
Speaker 1: somebody who's a kind of boring mediocrity as the frontman
Speaker 1: for it while the system, the apparatus of the Democrat
Speaker 1: Party behind the scenes is pushing in every which way,
Speaker 1: in the most extreme ways they can or a lot
Speaker 1: of policy items and n issues, and then anytime we
Speaker 1: say wow, they're moving really fast on the stuff, they say,
Speaker 1: what do you mean? Joe Biden, Good old Joe. You
Speaker 1: can trust him. He's the guy you can trust. It
Speaker 1: does remind me so much of that Eddie Murphy movie
Speaker 1: What Not, one of Eddie Murphy's most celebrated films, which
Speaker 1: are of course Beverly Hills, cop In forty eight Hours
Speaker 1: and and Coming to America and Trading Places, all great films.
Speaker 1: By the way, if you haven't seen any of them,
Speaker 1: highly highly recommend. Eddie Murphy went through it went through
Speaker 1: a period where he was just just the golden touch
Speaker 1: of any movie that he was in, and then he
Speaker 1: had the opposite of that, whatever you would call that,
Speaker 1: that kind of touch. But you know, you see this, Oh,
Speaker 1: The Distinguished Gentleman is a movie that people don't really
Speaker 1: know very well. But he runs for Congress, and the
Speaker 1: whole thing is he takes the name of a former
Speaker 1: congressman because his name is close enough to his and
Speaker 1: it's just, you know, Jeff Johnson the name, you know,
Speaker 1: and that's really with Joe Biden. It's Joe Biden the name,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, that's it. That was the whole slogan.
Speaker 1: You know, Joe Biden. He's not Trump, and his name
Speaker 1: is Joe Biden. And you know, Joe, what a fraud
Speaker 1: the whole thing is. And when eventually it becomes all
Speaker 1: too clear when Joe Biden walks out on the stage
Speaker 1: or has a candid moment, when he just starts wandering
Speaker 1: into gibberish, which he will do within the next four years,
Speaker 1: the Democrats will look at you like we never talked
Speaker 1: about this, like it never even came up, never even
Speaker 1: occurred to them, and they won't be shocked, they won't
Speaker 1: be angry that. They'll say, oh, well, who could have known, Hey, Kamala,
Speaker 1: we got a job for you, the big job, number
Speaker 1: one president United States. We can all see it, we
Speaker 1: all And just like they do with everything else, they'll
Speaker 1: act like you're crazy for seeing what they want to
Speaker 1: do beforehand. And then when they do exactly what we've
Speaker 1: said they're going to do, they're gonna say, yeah, so
Speaker 1: what what are you going to do about it? Now?
Speaker 1: Follow that a different subject. I mean, you mentioned last
Speaker 1: week that the president is expected to give a formal
Speaker 1: press briefing the fresh conference. Yes, yes, before the end
Speaker 1: of the month. So that is a commitment before in
Speaker 1: the next few weeks we will see him in give
Speaker 1: okay questions and follow us and so for it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he has done about about forty q and as since
Speaker 1: he took office. But in terms of a formal press conference,
Speaker 1: which I understand there's a big focus on, yes, we
Speaker 1: will have one before the end of the month. And
Speaker 1: what does it mean going forward? Will we see more
Speaker 1: of the president by end more than forty q and
Speaker 1: as in the last month, or you will be submitted
Speaker 1: to more extensive questions, follow ups, the kind of things
Speaker 1: we're doing today. We will we see him regularly. Well,
Speaker 1: I don't know that you'll see him more than forty
Speaker 1: times a month, but I'll have to tell I'm happy
Speaker 1: to a ask him that question. Listen to the smarmy
Speaker 1: gas sliding from Saki bomb. I'm sorry, you mean more
Speaker 1: than forty times? Oh yeah, Oh sure, you wanted to
Speaker 1: do a thing that's more than the forty times. He's
Speaker 1: already done something that's not the same thing you're asking about.
Speaker 1: But I'm just gonna keep saying forty times. Do you
Speaker 1: know wait, how many times has there been a quick
Speaker 1: ask of a question and he's walking away? I think
Speaker 1: the numbers forty times? It is forty times. Jen Saki says, right, okay,
Speaker 1: we all understand the difference here. Right, when Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is done with some scripted event and is walking off
Speaker 1: stage and can pick one or two people that he knows,
Speaker 1: you're gonna ask a friendly question and we'll just say, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: I did the thing with the thing with the thing, yeah,
Speaker 1: and just walk And also if he has a moment
Speaker 1: where it's not going well, it's not an official presentation
Speaker 1: of him on stage where he's expected to take questions
Speaker 1: for a period of time. So guess what he does?
Speaker 1: All right? You later, everybody take care. You know, they
Speaker 1: just you know, Jill just shuffles him off the stage.
Speaker 1: You know, it goes to take him to feed peanuts
Speaker 1: to the squirrels in the park. Right. That's we all
Speaker 1: know this is a different thing. We're all very aware
Speaker 1: of this. But nonetheless, Jensaki wants to pretend that, you know,
Speaker 1: forty times he's subjected himself to this as fine. And oh,
Speaker 1: also on the is Joe Biden a centrist or not?
Speaker 1: Play eight? First, let me say the president's position on
Speaker 1: the rights of transgender kids to play sports is clear.
Speaker 1: He signs an executive order and he believes transgender rights
Speaker 1: are human rights and wants to see kids have the
Speaker 1: opportunity to play sports and participate in a range of activities. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden thinks that it's it's a human right for
Speaker 1: a sixteen year old boy who thinks he's a girl
Speaker 1: to play sports against sixteen year girls. I know it
Speaker 1: doesn't happen everywhere. I know this isn't a widespread but
Speaker 1: democrat I think it's very important Day one executive order.
Speaker 1: But we're the crazy ones, not the Democrats, right, we're
Speaker 1: the radicals because we like Trump so much, not the
Speaker 1: people that think that. You know, if an eighteen year
Speaker 1: old boy wants to play against women on a competitive
Speaker 1: sports field, including what involved scholarships and their futures, that's fine,
Speaker 1: that's fine. This is your modern Democratic party, everybody, and
Speaker 1: they made it an issue day one. Harsani time. Our
Speaker 1: friend David Harsani in the mix with us once again
Speaker 1: to talk about all the latest going on. He's a
Speaker 1: senior writer at National Review National Review dot com. You
Speaker 1: want to read his column, which I highly recommend because
Speaker 1: they're excellent. Mister David. Good to have you back. Always
Speaker 1: happy to be here. Thanks. Book HR one I view
Speaker 1: as Nancy Pelosi's plan. I know she's not the only
Speaker 1: one pushing it or behind it, obviously, but she's Speaker
Speaker 1: of the House and they did just pass this in
Speaker 1: the House earlier this month. HR one is Pelosi's plan
Speaker 1: to create a permanent majority for the Democrats and effectively
Speaker 1: annihilate the GOP. As I see it, what do you see?
Speaker 1: I mean, that's definitely why she's doing it. And it's
Speaker 1: definitely part of why she's doing it. But you know,
Speaker 1: just as on a principled level, it is it's an
Speaker 1: authoritarian bill that overrides and undermines federalism as it's meant
Speaker 1: to be in as stated in the Constitution. It compels
Speaker 1: states to do all kinds of ridiculous things that they're
Speaker 1: voting law that of course helped Democrats because they wouldn't
Speaker 1: do it otherwise, But even just setting all that aside,
Speaker 1: it sets an immense and ridiculous precedent that allows, you know,
Speaker 1: if they mess with the filibuster, but even if they don't,
Speaker 1: let's Pelosi, you know, California, New York decide how the
Speaker 1: rest of the country is going to vote with a
Speaker 1: slim majority and perpetuity. So it is in every way
Speaker 1: an Unamerican bill. It is, and when you read through it,
Speaker 1: all the things in it, it is just a disaster.
Speaker 1: One of the worst bills I've ever seen in my
Speaker 1: twenty five years of covering and they've already they've already
Speaker 1: got it through the House. I feel like there's very
Speaker 1: little media attention on this because I think they're just
Speaker 1: trying to slip this one, you know, through the through
Speaker 1: the back entrance or something, David. It feels like they
Speaker 1: are only only the people. It's called HR one or
Speaker 1: you know, the For the People Act of twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: so vague, and while there's big one point nine trillion dollars,
Speaker 1: you know, spending Colossus is getting all the attention. HR
Speaker 1: one is just a you know, Senate vote in a
Speaker 1: Biden signature away from becoming the law. And I feel
Speaker 1: like people don't understand that this is an imminent issue.
Speaker 1: This isn't like theoretically in a year or two, we
Speaker 1: might have to be concerned about this. Yeah, no, that's
Speaker 1: all right. And the thing with this is that of
Speaker 1: course most of the media probably wanted to pass, but
Speaker 1: also that that you know, they get to frame it
Speaker 1: in ways like, you know, this is a voting rights bill.
Speaker 1: It will expand voting rights, you know, and if you're
Speaker 1: against it, you're a for voting restriction, which is insane. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, you have no right to vote days after
Speaker 1: an election. You have no right even to get a
Speaker 1: paper ballot, You have no right to vote early even
Speaker 1: there is no right in the constitution for those things.
Speaker 1: Those are just extras And I don't know if I
Speaker 1: mentioned this, I think that when when when they use
Speaker 1: voting restrictions for things that you don't want, which is
Speaker 1: just open ended, and basically, if you're not driving your
Speaker 1: neighbor to the you know, taking his mail ballot and
Speaker 1: driving it to the mailbox, you're you know, you're you're
Speaker 1: undermining and suppressing the vote. But it's like saying that
Speaker 1: every time you have to show a license, that's a
Speaker 1: voter restriction, or every time you have to stop at
Speaker 1: a stop sign that's a driving restriction. I mean, so
Speaker 1: it's just a lot in the wording and a lot
Speaker 1: in the framing, and it is you know, it's just
Speaker 1: it's disastrous because it actually completely corrodes the integrity of
Speaker 1: elections across the country, and it's just Banana Republic stuff
Speaker 1: and the way that it's all. I've actually read through
Speaker 1: much of the bill. I can't say I read every
Speaker 1: single word. Say it's big, there's a lot, there's a
Speaker 1: lot in there, but I've read a lot of the
Speaker 1: relevant sections of HR one, and there's one there's a
Speaker 1: theme that keeps coming through, which is that anything that
Speaker 1: makes it anything that you could consider a regulation or
Speaker 1: a safeguard for voting is eliminated. Whatever it is, whatever
Speaker 1: could stop someone somewhere, for any reason whatsoever, from casting
Speaker 1: a ballot is gone, and whatever would allow for the
Speaker 1: greatest amount of leeway to the point whereas you mentioned voting,
Speaker 1: you know, voting after an election, having one person. I mean,
Speaker 1: does anybody really think that if it becomes widespread practice,
Speaker 1: that you can go around and do ballot harvesting, which
Speaker 1: is illegal in twenty four states right now, you can't
Speaker 1: do in twenty four. Twenty six states have different kinds
Speaker 1: of ballot harvesting. Some places it's a family member, other
Speaker 1: places it's it's a you know, an even bigger loophole
Speaker 1: than that. But you can go around and collect one
Speaker 1: hundred ballots at a time. People are gonna, you know,
Speaker 1: community organizers are going to go to seniors homes in
Speaker 1: places like that and they're gonna say, hey, I'm here
Speaker 1: to help you fill out your ballot. You want to
Speaker 1: vote for that guy? As if, as if we think
Speaker 1: that's not going to happen, No one's gonna go to
Speaker 1: prison for that. If ballot harvesting is legal, No, no
Speaker 1: one's ever gonna get caught walking around saying, hey, you
Speaker 1: know why don't you put the ballot, you put the
Speaker 1: sig that you're there. Yeah, that sounds right. I mean,
Speaker 1: I mean the bill forces states to ban you know,
Speaker 1: voter ID laws like you know, photo ID laws, or
Speaker 1: tells them to ban you know, or to compels them
Speaker 1: to allow balance to vote, or and compels them to
Speaker 1: allow ballot harvesting. Now, setting aside the arguments for those
Speaker 1: separate things and maybe your forum maybe or not that
Speaker 1: should be decided by states. You can't all have the
Speaker 1: same voting systems. It's clear clearly stated in the Constitution
Speaker 1: that states that up their votes, and I just I
Speaker 1: just don't understand how we're going to it. Though. I
Speaker 1: will say, you know, when they pull and they ask you,
Speaker 1: are you for you know, expanding voter rights, and everyone's
Speaker 1: like hell, yeah, you know, but they never ask them
Speaker 1: specific questions like do you think that people should show
Speaker 1: a photo ide von voting? I mean Johnason Shade said,
Speaker 1: if you stop this, you know you're basically American democracy
Speaker 1: is finished, which means of course that until this point,
Speaker 1: I guess we haven't had to American democracy. But more
Speaker 1: than that, in Western Europe, every single country you have
Speaker 1: to show state issues voter idea, you know ide you know,
Speaker 1: a state issued idea to vote. And it's not like
Speaker 1: this is some authorityarian thing to ask people to vote.
Speaker 1: This bill doesn't allow you know, election officials to even
Speaker 1: challenge someone's vote or signature at that, you know, the
Speaker 1: day of voting. And it was on on you know,
Speaker 1: regis registering to vote on the day of the election.
Speaker 1: It's just insanity. Yeah, and yet it's hard. It's already
Speaker 1: gone through the House and Joe Biden is advocating openly
Speaker 1: for the Democrats to push this all the way through.
Speaker 1: And I think they also saw what they were able
Speaker 1: to accomplish with universal mail in balloting in different states
Speaker 1: and all the changes to election rules. And I still believe,
Speaker 1: for example, what was done in Pennsylvania was unconstitutional. I
Speaker 1: know the Supreme Court didn't take it up, but I
Speaker 1: think there's a lot of cowardice in the judiciary about
Speaker 1: being willing to look at issues that affect elections, especially
Speaker 1: just the anti Trump mania that's out there and the
Speaker 1: concerns about what it would do to the country if
Speaker 1: we actually had a state like Pennsylvania where the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court weighed in. But anyway, but let me just quickly say,
Speaker 1: but liberals argued that Pennsylvania should be able to do
Speaker 1: whatever it wants because it's its own state. Now they're
Speaker 1: saying the federal governments tell everyone how to do it.
Speaker 1: That's a great point. Yeah, they make any argument, you know,
Speaker 1: it's Calvin Ball. They make any argument that works at
Speaker 1: that moment, and then you can never hold them, you know,
Speaker 1: you can never hold them to anything because they can
Speaker 1: always change their mind whatever they want. Well, this is
Speaker 1: what I've been I've been talking about really all this week, David,
Speaker 1: is that everyone needs to get used this. I've seen
Speaker 1: this a lot with COVID, and we're speaking to David Harshawnie.
Speaker 1: He's a senior writer at National Review, and go check
Speaker 1: out his latest at National Review dot com. But David,
Speaker 1: the way that everything with this Biden administration has gone
Speaker 1: so far, and in my view a lot of the
Speaker 1: COVID stuff too, has been people make arguments about what
Speaker 1: they are going to do right, whether it's Biden or
Speaker 1: it's the Fauciite view of things, and then it's that's crazy,
Speaker 1: we're not going to do that, we don't want that,
Speaker 1: and then they do it, and then they turn around
Speaker 1: to look at you and say, yeah, well we got
Speaker 1: what we wanted. Let's move on to the next one.
Speaker 1: This happens time and time again. I mean, I feel
Speaker 1: like that's, in a sense, the defining mechanism of Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's presidency because on the one hand, they're always telling
Speaker 1: us Joe Biden's a he's a moderate Democrat, you know,
Speaker 1: you know, good old blue collar Joe, and then he's
Speaker 1: signing executive orders on transgender you know, sports events or
Speaker 1: you know, transgender men playing in women's sports, and the latest,
Speaker 1: I mean, you actually brought this to my attention because
Speaker 1: this is getting no media coverage. They're going back to
Speaker 1: the absurd kangaroo courts for people accused of sexual misconduct
Speaker 1: in colleges now as a as a Title nine in
Speaker 1: Department of Education issue. Yeah, yeah, they're just stripping and
Speaker 1: tell everybody what that is, because then no one, no
Speaker 1: one's reading or seeing about that. Well. Title nine in
Speaker 1: twenty you know, covers colleges and equal equality among men
Speaker 1: and win genders and things of that nature. But but
Speaker 1: obviously it's the mission creep is said in a long
Speaker 1: time ago in twenty eleven Obama administration, you know, it's
Speaker 1: it's difficult to explain, it's not an edict, but basically
Speaker 1: it is then that told colleges that they should no
Speaker 1: longer allow certain kinds of activities or certain kind of
Speaker 1: defenses and do basically, they stripped college students accused sexual
Speaker 1: assault or misconduct of due process rights. They can't you
Speaker 1: can't face your accuser, you can't call witnesses, you can't,
Speaker 1: you know, just all the basics of due process that
Speaker 1: have worked for frankly for you know, hundreds of years,
Speaker 1: with thousands of years almost right, with thousand years almost
Speaker 1: so just stripped of them because you know, and destroying lives.
Speaker 1: Well anyway, So they did that, and Betsy DeVos came
Speaker 1: in and changed it back temporarily and not fully. And
Speaker 1: but in between twenty eleven and twenty twenty one right now,
Speaker 1: there have been thousands of cases where they've gone to
Speaker 1: court either settled or you know, lost the cases. It's
Speaker 1: completely unconstitutional to do, but Joe Biden's going to do
Speaker 1: it again. And and what makes me really angry about
Speaker 1: it is that Joe Biden was accused of up raped
Speaker 1: and if he had to live by the standards, he
Speaker 1: wants to set for powerless usually young men in colleges.
Speaker 1: He would be you know, he would be thrown out
Speaker 1: of office, and he would be thought of as a rapist.
Speaker 1: But he doesn't use those standards, but he wants those
Speaker 1: standards for others. And we're speaking of David Harsani here
Speaker 1: of National Review. Everybody, David speaking of those accused of
Speaker 1: sexual misconduct or sexual harassment. And I do, I do
Speaker 1: think it's important that you know, unlike what other people
Speaker 1: do when they just see a political target. You know,
Speaker 1: Cuomo is accused of workplace violations. He's not accused yet
Speaker 1: of you know, criminal sexual behavior. I think that's important
Speaker 1: for me. You know, he hasn't forced you know, they haven't.
Speaker 1: David said he forced himself on somebody or anything like that.
Speaker 1: But it's still gross and it's not good, and you
Speaker 1: don't need somebody in a leadership position, the top position
Speaker 1: in New York. I think Andrew Cuomo, though, is almost
Speaker 1: a remarkable case study in power today in the Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: because this guy's gonna he's gonna stick it out through this,
Speaker 1: isn't he, David? I mean that's my prediction. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: what they do. They at least Listen. He is not liked, right.
Speaker 1: I don't think he's very held within the party in
Speaker 1: New York. I think people think of him as a bully.
Speaker 1: But his usefulness as far as a political cudgel against
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has done so now we can move forward
Speaker 1: with this, even though I have to say his actions
Speaker 1: with the elderly in New York are to me far
Speaker 1: more consequential, and not saying that this isn't consequential, but
Speaker 1: I can't believe how much coverage this gets as compared
Speaker 1: to his actual killing people. But anyway, he you know,
Speaker 1: he will just stay in there and he'll probably be reelected,
Speaker 1: right yeah, you know, and because no one's going to
Speaker 1: really challenge him. And that's it because they get away
Speaker 1: with it. Bill Clinton got away with it. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: others have gotten away with it, and uh, that's it.
Speaker 1: That's just how it is, because of the double standard
Speaker 1: and coverage. Why do you think, Why do you think?
Speaker 1: Because I've had this debate with some liberals recently and
Speaker 1: they would say, but what about Al Frankin? And I
Speaker 1: feel like Frankin, there is no downside to getting rid
Speaker 1: of him, right yeah, because they could just replace him
Speaker 1: with another Democrat, they would when when the governor was
Speaker 1: his name, governor of Virginia who you know, was caught
Speaker 1: in his yearbook wearing a clan and or a black face, right,
Speaker 1: he didn't Northam Northamb Right, he didn't step down. Setting
Speaker 1: aside what he said about babies, you know who who
Speaker 1: who had survived abortion attempts. But just setting that aside,
Speaker 1: you know, do you think that a Republican being caught
Speaker 1: in a clan outfit or black face would survive? No way.
Speaker 1: The only reason if if if they were sure a
Speaker 1: Democrat would take over for him, he would maybe not
Speaker 1: have survived. And that's only Al Frankin was gone, he
Speaker 1: would they would never have turned onto him if the
Speaker 1: governor was a Republican and would have replaced him. It's
Speaker 1: a good point because yeah, I mean, that's he's really
Speaker 1: the only Democrat you could think of that got metued
Speaker 1: and not you know, not for the most egregious kinds
Speaker 1: of things. I mean, not including people like uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the Harvey Weinstein and those guys. But he's the only
Speaker 1: one that you've seen who didn't rise to the kind
Speaker 1: of criminal criminal level who lost his job that I
Speaker 1: could think of. But Yeah, I know. I think I
Speaker 1: think Cuomo is gonna stay right where he is, and
Speaker 1: I think, give it, give it six months to a year,
Speaker 1: he'll be back on CNN and they're treating him like
Speaker 1: he's a he's a great leader and the whole thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't be surprised if that happened. You know, he
Speaker 1: is such an unlikable person in general though that I
Speaker 1: don't know. He might survive it, but I don't think
Speaker 1: he's going to be as popular as he was, but
Speaker 1: others are, and you know, without Frankin, for instance, I'm
Speaker 1: not even really sure he deserved to lose his job
Speaker 1: over that. Paige. Yeah, No, that was the one that
Speaker 1: serves surprised me because I was I mean, he was
Speaker 1: before he was even a politician, and he apologized and
Speaker 1: I was surprised that that was. But Chris didn't cursed whatever.
Speaker 1: Karsten Jilla Brand of New York decided that it was
Speaker 1: time Frohm to go, and so he had to go. Yeah,
Speaker 1: David Arsani, everybody sacrifice people. Yeah, David Arsani, you got
Speaker 1: a Nash Review dot Com forerce latest. David, thanks so
Speaker 1: much anytime, Thank you. What has happened with Prince Harry
Speaker 1: in this situation, he walked behind his mother's coffin at
Speaker 1: a tender, tender age in front of the globe that
Speaker 1: is going to shape a young boy for the rest
Speaker 1: of his life. So I think that we need to
Speaker 1: all take a step back. And I understand that you
Speaker 1: don't like Megan Markle. You've made it so clear a
Speaker 1: number of times on this program, a number of times.
Speaker 1: And I understand that you've got a personal relationship with
Speaker 1: Mega Market or had one, and she cut you off.
Speaker 1: She's entitled to cut you off if she wants to.
Speaker 1: Has she said anything about you since she cut you off?
Speaker 1: I don't think she has. But yet you continue to
Speaker 1: trash her. Okay, I'm done with this. No, no, nor
Speaker 1: do you know what that's pretty good? No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry because absolutely diabolical behavior. You see. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: but Pierce spouts off on a regular basis and we
Speaker 1: all have to sit there and listen. Six thirty to
Speaker 1: seven o'clock yesterday, Man, the Brits are really upset with
Speaker 1: each other over this whole Megan Markle thing. Here there
Speaker 1: you had an IV presenter very named Alex Beresford. I've
Speaker 1: never heard of this guy before. I've never seen this
Speaker 1: guy before, but very upset where where he and Piers
Speaker 1: Morgan really going after each other on this one? Isn't
Speaker 1: it a fascinating to watch? There are people for whom,
Speaker 1: clearly Megan Markle is representative of something, you know, bigger
Speaker 1: than just the issue of the Royal family and Great
Speaker 1: Britain all this other stuff. I mean, there are people
Speaker 1: for whom this is a major This is a major
Speaker 1: wokeness moment the Royal family in sinu way, She's don't
Speaker 1: really accusations but just without any specifics of racism against
Speaker 1: the English royal family. And some people clearly really want
Speaker 1: to take the Meghan Markle side in this, and Piers
Speaker 1: Morgan is taking the other side of it, does not
Speaker 1: like Megan Markle speaking of Meghan's Meghan Kelly has also
Speaker 1: gotten in the middle of this debate, this discussion about
Speaker 1: the Royal family feud, and here is what her take
Speaker 1: is on all that stuff that we saw Meg Meghan's
Speaker 1: not pulling any punches about Meghan markol play nine. But
Speaker 1: what I saw tonight was somebody who's totally unself aware,
Speaker 1: I mean, completely unaware of how she sounded right, like,
Speaker 1: I wasn't planning on saying anything shocking, except for my
Speaker 1: husband's racist family almost drove me to suicidal thoughts while
Speaker 1: I was pregnant with my baby. And by the way,
Speaker 1: I had no idea what the Internet said about Harry.
Speaker 1: Nobody believes that, And I thought meeting the queen was
Speaker 1: going to be just like meeting a celebrity in Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: like like meeting a Chris Jenner, right, like nobody believes that.
Speaker 1: Then she goes on to say, like I'm not, I
Speaker 1: don't I don't believe in any of the grandeur. You know,
Speaker 1: there's an article already up on the New York coast
Speaker 1: here in the States saying this is the person who
Speaker 1: had Clooney and Oprah at her wedding even though she
Speaker 1: didn't even know them, and then covered herself in blood
Speaker 1: diamonds from the Saudi prince, so like Sparris that you're
Speaker 1: not into any of the grandeur. And then while she's
Speaker 1: spinning this tale about how tough she had it in
Speaker 1: the castle, how lonely she was in the castles, she's
Speaker 1: painting herself and sort of these adorations like it was
Speaker 1: incredibly courageous of me to come forward about my depression
Speaker 1: and I just love saving things. And it was like
Speaker 1: it was just peppered with these compliments of herself while
Speaker 1: she was making these complaints that will be totally unrelatable
Speaker 1: to ninety nine percent of people out there. It's true
Speaker 1: that we have a society now and I know to
Speaker 1: see this brings together a reality from the UK and
Speaker 1: the US all at once. That's why I think there's
Speaker 1: been such a focus on this. But we now live
Speaker 1: in a country where if you are a child of
Speaker 1: let's say you have you have two I'm sorry, a
Speaker 1: child of two white grandparents on one side and then
Speaker 1: another white grandparent and a and a black grandparent on
Speaker 1: the other side, you can claim victims status because of
Speaker 1: your race, even if you are a globally recognized celebrity
Speaker 1: worth unbelievable amounts of money, with with tremendous influence, riches
Speaker 1: and all the benefits that come with that, based on
Speaker 1: the narrative that there is racism against you, that's a
Speaker 1: pretty remarkable thing. I mean for a country where there
Speaker 1: are going to be a lot of people who are
Speaker 1: you know, of of all races, black, White, Latino, Asian,
Speaker 1: who are working you know, minimum wage jobs, or who
Speaker 1: are working really hard, as as plumbers, as welders, as
Speaker 1: truck drivers, as they get to see Megan Markle doing
Speaker 1: what we see so many other elite celebrities do, which
Speaker 1: is wine and cry about how hard everything is and
Speaker 1: how they're oppressed. I don't think so. I have never
Speaker 1: seen a situation that even came close to this with
Speaker 1: regard to divisiveness over ideology, political ideology that actually swept
Speaker 1: over into the issue of public health, where people, as
Speaker 1: you mentioned correctly in your statement and your question, that
Speaker 1: health officials who push for common sense, well accepted public
Speaker 1: health measures of wearing masks, physical distancing, avoiding congregate settings
Speaker 1: including indoor, are actually looked upon as the enemy, the
Speaker 1: enemy of getting the economy opened, the enemy of getting
Speaker 1: people's jobs back, when in fact the common enemy is
Speaker 1: the virus. No, Fauci's the enemy. Actually Fauci is the enemy. Want.
Speaker 1: I want to be very clear about this, not as
Speaker 1: a human being, but his policies, his role in all this,
Speaker 1: his politicization of this, his love of the spotlight. He
Speaker 1: has in his official capacity, been an enemy during this pandemic.
Speaker 1: He's not even honest about what he's saying, no common
Speaker 1: sense measures. Really, Faucci mass masking is a common sense
Speaker 1: measure because a year ago, almost to the day, he
Speaker 1: basically laughed at the idea of mass masking March eighth,
Speaker 1: last year, Fauci said that you know, it'll make you
Speaker 1: feel better, but it won't actually do anything for the
Speaker 1: public to wear a mask. But now it's common and sense.
Speaker 1: If you have any if you have any concerns, any
Speaker 1: issues about this at all, you're just a science denier.
Speaker 1: Where was Faucci on schools staying open the data? We're
Speaker 1: clear on that. Where is Faucci on outdoor mask wearing.
Speaker 1: Why won't he come out and say that there is
Speaker 1: no reasonable risk that you run, or that there's no
Speaker 1: reasonable concern you should have being outdoors by yourself without
Speaker 1: a mask on. You're not gonna get sick walking around
Speaker 1: outside without a mask on by yourself. And even if
Speaker 1: you walk past somebody or you know, there's that casual
Speaker 1: contact where you're not touching them, you're not you know,
Speaker 1: having a long, close face to face conversation, You're not
Speaker 1: at risk. Why won't he say that? But we all
Speaker 1: know why he wants to be a hero to the left.
Speaker 1: You want to talk about the politicization of this, This
Speaker 1: is this is fascinating to me, I have to tell you,
Speaker 1: absolutely fascinating when you see the data here on the
Speaker 1: breakdown of all of this, and you see the way
Speaker 1: the left and the right view this issue. Here's this
Speaker 1: is a Pew poll. Okay, a Pew poll, and it
Speaker 1: looks at where people were in March of twenty twenty
Speaker 1: versus February of twenty twenty one. All right, and in
Speaker 1: March of twenty twenty, Republicans and Democrats were essentially aligned.
Speaker 1: You know, we're not the partisan lunatics. They can pretend
Speaker 1: we are, but we're not. We were aligned on Okay,
Speaker 1: we're all really concerned about this. Let's do what we
Speaker 1: have to do to try to get this thing under
Speaker 1: control in the early stages. Let's see what works and
Speaker 1: what doesn't. Requiring face masks for travel on airplanes and
Speaker 1: public transport wasn't even asked in March of twenty twenty
Speaker 1: because that wasn't thought to be something we would need
Speaker 1: to do. Restricting international travel the US Democrats ninety four
Speaker 1: percent Republican I'm sorry, uh yeah, Democrats ninety four percent
Speaker 1: Republicans ninety six percent. So Republicans, because Trump said that
Speaker 1: he was restricting travel from China, were even more willing
Speaker 1: to restrict international travel than Democrats. But it's basically right
Speaker 1: in line with each other, all of them. Everyone was
Speaker 1: saying restricted, asking people to avoid gathering in large groups,
Speaker 1: a little bit more Democrat than Republican ninety two to
Speaker 1: eighty two, but essentially aligned. Limiting restaurants to carry out
Speaker 1: only ninety one to seventy eight. Again pretty much aligned
Speaker 1: in March of twenty twenty, but clearly a little bit
Speaker 1: more Republican desire for normal life, and even closing K
Speaker 1: through twelve schools for in person learning. This was again
Speaker 1: in March of twenty twenty, right when the pandemic was
Speaker 1: at its peak of panic and fear and everything else.
Speaker 1: Democrats and Republicans ninety four Democrats, eighty four Republicans. So
Speaker 1: I want, I want us to look at this and
Speaker 1: under stand that it's not like we've all all along
Speaker 1: been obstinate Fauci's terrible don't listen to them. No, we
Speaker 1: were willing to see how this goes. We were willing
Speaker 1: to listen to the so called experts in the early phase,
Speaker 1: but we've seen what's actually happened. What's even more interesting
Speaker 1: to me is requiring face mask for travel on airplanes
Speaker 1: and public transport. Ninety six percent of Democrats they're obsessed
Speaker 1: with masking, seventy two percent of Republicans as of February
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, So pretty high level of Republicans for
Speaker 1: public transport one masking. I was actually a little surprised
Speaker 1: by that. Restricting international travel the US eighty seven percent
Speaker 1: of Democrats versus seventy one percent of Republicans. Asking people
Speaker 1: to avoid gathering in large groups ninety three percent of
Speaker 1: Democrats as of last month don't want groups to gather
Speaker 1: fifty six percent of Republicans. Okay, so Republicans are like, no,
Speaker 1: it's time for us to be able to be in groups. Again.
Speaker 1: This is you know about but less Look, it's less
Speaker 1: than half. There's still a lot of GOP out there
Speaker 1: that are really worried about this. Okay, but then you
Speaker 1: get into these two levels. Limiting restaurants to carry out
Speaker 1: only seventy four percent of Democrats as of last month
Speaker 1: want restaurants to be carry out only. This is insane.
Speaker 1: This is insane. Twenty three percent of republic Republicans are
Speaker 1: finally figured out restaurants are safe. This is not where
Speaker 1: the spread is really happening. This is it's wrong to
Speaker 1: destroy the entire industry because of you know, one percent
Speaker 1: of cases in New York City, for example, which is
Speaker 1: probably higher than it is elsewhere in the country. Not
Speaker 1: even outdoor dining allowed carry out only seventy four percent
Speaker 1: of Democrats, say, twenty three percent of Republicans. And here's
Speaker 1: the real key, this is the best one of all
Speaker 1: closing K through twelve schools for in person learning, sixty
Speaker 1: six percent of Democrats as of last month still wanted
Speaker 1: public schools to be closed for in person learning. Twenty
Speaker 1: five percent of Republicans. Who's listening to the science? All right,
Speaker 1: it's a The argument for keeping schools closed is crap.
Speaker 1: There are schools that are open. They are fine, They
Speaker 1: are not super spreadors. It is very low, low, low risk.
Speaker 1: It is entirely acceptable risk. The arguments for keeping school
Speaker 1: closed are just pure political tribal loyalty. Democrats know that.
Speaker 1: That's what their leadership is saying, and the Democrat leadership
Speaker 1: is saying it because they don't want to upset the teachers. Unions.
Speaker 1: That's what's actually happening. Here's a sake bomb though, telling you, oh, no, no,
Speaker 1: we really want to get kids back in the classroom.
Speaker 1: Place six, I want schools to open. Two. I have kids,
Speaker 1: You have kids. You know many of the hosts sitting
Speaker 1: around the table have kids. We all want our schools
Speaker 1: to open. And you set you touched on the mental
Speaker 1: health impact kids being back and learning. We're seeing that
Speaker 1: all happening. But the President wants them to open safely.
Speaker 1: He's taken a couple steps. We want this to happen rapidly.
Speaker 1: The CDC has put out these guidelines which shows that
Speaker 1: teachers that one of the steps that can be taken
Speaker 1: is for them to be vaccinated, but there are a
Speaker 1: number of other mitigation steps that can be taken that
Speaker 1: schools can manage to do, hiring more teachers, hiring more
Speaker 1: bus drivers, social distancing, upgrading facilities. And we also are
Speaker 1: on the verge as we've been talking about, of passing
Speaker 1: the American Rescue Plan that has one hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: billion dollars in it to help some of these school
Speaker 1: districts that don't have those resources get that job done. Thankfully,
Speaker 1: we also have a Secretary of Education. This is good
Speaker 1: now in place, confirmed, and this is going to be
Speaker 1: his top priority. So you're absolutely right. We want these
Speaker 1: schools to open, but we want them to open safely.
Speaker 1: And we're encouraged by some of the progress we're seeing.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of schools that have opened around DC.
Speaker 1: I know that's happening around the country, and that we're
Speaker 1: going to continue to work with school districts to get
Speaker 1: this done and get kids back in the classrooms. Blather,
Speaker 1: blather wrapped in propaganda, that's all that is. Or propaganda
Speaker 1: wrapped in blather, nonsense. Schools are safe, Open them tomorrow.
Speaker 1: You don't need to do this vaccination. You don't need
Speaker 1: to do this mitigation dance they're talking about. That's just absurd. Plus,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of teachers that don't want to
Speaker 1: get vaccina. What do you do about them? But there
Speaker 1: was something she said there. You want to know what's
Speaker 1: really going on here, she said she gave away the
Speaker 1: whole game. It's just in her long word salad. They're
Speaker 1: the saky salad of words that came out when she
Speaker 1: said we got to hire more staff. We need to
Speaker 1: hire more teachers. Oh, the answer right now is to
Speaker 1: create an even bigger jobs program and Democrat political machinery
Speaker 1: funded with taxpayer dollars. That's the answer, that's what's necessary.
Speaker 1: Let me Let me also wonder what happens those teachers
Speaker 1: when they're not as needed because of the mitigation measures,
Speaker 1: when we actually when we're finally beyond this pandemic, when
Speaker 1: we do have her community. Do you think they're gonna
Speaker 1: let them go? No, of course not. They're going to
Speaker 1: be administrators. They're just gonna lard up the employment roles
Speaker 1: with even more Department of you know, Department of Education
Speaker 1: for either the state or local you know, depends on
Speaker 1: where we are. But more people. That's what this is
Speaker 1: uses as a jobs program, hiring people that there's no
Speaker 1: need of them to be hired. But if they think
Speaker 1: about this, you get more teachers in the system than
Speaker 1: you already have. Teachers already have summers off, folks. Okay, Oh,
Speaker 1: they do their lesson plans all summer. Some of them do.
Speaker 1: The good ones. The good teachers aren't the ones that
Speaker 1: are whining and say they don't want to go back
Speaker 1: to the classroom either. Okay, so we could just separate
Speaker 1: that out. This is the teachers unions trying to get
Speaker 1: their way, holding kids hostage in the process. But if
Speaker 1: they have, what they're really hoping to accomplish now is
Speaker 1: create essentially an extended team of teachers at different schools,
Speaker 1: so that you could do one or two days in
Speaker 1: person learning and then it's somebody else's time for the
Speaker 1: other two or three day. What a great gig that is.
Speaker 1: Think with this if I if I could get paid
Speaker 1: my full salary to do radio, but I could have
Speaker 1: some other radio hosts come in and do the show,
Speaker 1: you know, two or three days a week, you know,
Speaker 1: for safety reasons. Wow, that sounds like actually I would
Speaker 1: hate that because I want to always talk to you
Speaker 1: every day. But I'm saying if I wanted to do
Speaker 1: less work, if I were lazy, that's a great gig.
Speaker 1: Be amazing, Right, Producer Mark, We'd have a different producer
Speaker 1: Mark in every day and you and you get paid
Speaker 1: your full salary. You only have to work one day.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't that be nice? It sounds lovely. I mean, you're
Speaker 1: already doing two or three jobs yourself, but imagine if
Speaker 1: instead of that, we just had you doing only one
Speaker 1: job and there are five people that are also doing
Speaker 1: that one job with you. Wait, you so you're saying
Speaker 1: I would manage a staff rather than being the staff. Yeah, no, no,
Speaker 1: but not manage a staff. No no, you only do
Speaker 1: your job, but you do it one day a week
Speaker 1: instead of five. I'm down right, that sounds nice. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm you know, it's a shame that would you know,
Speaker 1: it's a shame that that as a business model doesn't work.
Speaker 1: And the only reason it works for the teachers is
Speaker 1: because it's taxpayer dollars. They're not running a business, and
Speaker 1: so they are looking to just create This is just
Speaker 1: goodies for the teachers unions, that's all this is. The
Speaker 1: Biden administration is totally bending over backwards for them. We
Speaker 1: can all see it. It's gross, it's wrong, and kids
Speaker 1: are suffering for it. But you know that whole thing
Speaker 1: about Fauci saying, you know, they're not the enemy, Yeah,
Speaker 1: actually they are. They've been horrible, all right, They've been
Speaker 1: absolutely awful during this The CDC is an abomination, an abomination,
Speaker 1: and they should be ashamed of themselves. All the politicization,
Speaker 1: all the all the craft. Remember where we used to live,
Speaker 1: we like lived and died by the IHM and the
Speaker 1: and the ferguson this guy from the UK projections about
Speaker 1: COVID and cases and death, all wrong, wrong, over and
Speaker 1: over again. How many times do we have to hear
Speaker 1: the public health experts you know, we're worried about a
Speaker 1: not a project not a projection and the number could
Speaker 1: go up even higher if we had you know how
Speaker 1: many times we have to hear that from Fauci and
Speaker 1: it was wrong. I have marked on my calendar, Remember
Speaker 1: I told you this, I've marked on my calendar that
Speaker 1: the states that reopened they're not going to have spikes.
Speaker 1: It's not going to go against them. It's all gonna
Speaker 1: be okay, And we're gonna go back and we're gonna
Speaker 1: revisit what they were saying and what actually happened, because
Speaker 1: they've been wrong at every step of the way. With
Speaker 1: today's initial guidance, it's important to note that we are
Speaker 1: focusing on activities of fully vaccinated people can resume in
Speaker 1: private settings, such as their homes under two scenarios. The
Speaker 1: first scenario is fully vaccinated people visiting with other fully
Speaker 1: vaccinated people. In this slide, these individuals are represented by
Speaker 1: solid green circles. In this scenario, CDC recommends that's fully
Speaker 1: vaccinated people can visit with other fully vaccinated people in
Speaker 1: small gatherings indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing. Remember
Speaker 1: here we are talking about private settings where everyone is vaccinated. Um,
Speaker 1: here's what I have to say to CDC Director Lenski
Speaker 1: about private settings, also known as like my home. They
Speaker 1: can all go fauci themselves. I don't care what they
Speaker 1: think about gatherings in my home. They can go. I mean,
Speaker 1: I honestly want to start dropping some language here. It's
Speaker 1: it's appalling that they think that they have some what
Speaker 1: oh people are gonna say that they're giving us advice
Speaker 1: about this was if we need. I don't need to
Speaker 1: hear their advice. We've all been saturated with, you know,
Speaker 1: the the fear of COVID, the risks of COVID, all
Speaker 1: all this different stuff. And now they think they're gonna
Speaker 1: tell us who we see at our own homes. Remember
Speaker 1: they did go through a period in the late fall
Speaker 1: where there were some places in the country where if
Speaker 1: you were how to gather of more than six people,
Speaker 1: they were going to call the cops on you. This
Speaker 1: is tyranny. It is tyranny. That's not an exaggeration. When
Speaker 1: the government thinks they can tell you who among your
Speaker 1: family you can see because of the vague threat of
Speaker 1: a virus with a ninety nine point nine percent survival rate,
Speaker 1: you are in tyranny. That is true. You can debate
Speaker 1: how serious the tyranny is, you can debate how extreme
Speaker 1: the overreaches. But this is outrageous, outrageous, and this has
Speaker 1: been normalized. This is something that we accept. They've shut
Speaker 1: They shut down churches and synagogues and mosques and you know,
Speaker 1: wherever else you know, people go for their religious services
Speaker 1: for months and months on end. Sorry, too dangerous, can't
Speaker 1: go to church. Not too dangerous to you know, go
Speaker 1: shop at a costco. You're not too dangerous for people
Speaker 1: to keep the Amazon warehouses going, but too dangerous for
Speaker 1: you to go actually live your spiritual life. That's not
Speaker 1: allowed because we say so. That's unconstitutional, that's wrong, all right,
Speaker 1: And the fact that we haven't had more people that
Speaker 1: are willing to stand up and take the heat on
Speaker 1: this in the name of rights and freedom and liberty
Speaker 1: is really disconcerting. Don't ever forget who was quiet during
Speaker 1: this this great tyrannical overreach of the COVID nineteen pandemic,
Speaker 1: who was quiet and who actually held the line, who
Speaker 1: actually decided that they would take the slings and arrows
Speaker 1: to make the case publicly that we should have liberty
Speaker 1: and freedom, and that that's not just a suggestion, but
Speaker 1: it is a it is an order that we the
Speaker 1: people make of the government. I am angry about what
Speaker 1: has happened in this country. I'm angry about what has
Speaker 1: been done to us, the dehumanizing effects of these idiotic
Speaker 1: policies about mask mandates and all social social distancing as
Speaker 1: a fancy way of saying, avoid other human beings. That's
Speaker 1: all it is. We all know somebody has a cold,
Speaker 1: stay away from them. We didn't need a government to
Speaker 1: come up with some plan to implement that. At the
Speaker 1: same time, you know, we want to make sure that
Speaker 1: all these appointments are filled up. We want to make
Speaker 1: sure that everyone has an opportunity to get a vaccine
Speaker 1: who may be at increased risk. And while eighty three
Speaker 1: percent eighty two eighty three percent of the COVID related
Speaker 1: mortality is concentrated amongst those who are sixty five and up,
Speaker 1: it is the case that people who are between sixty
Speaker 1: and sixty four are at an elevated risk visa VI
Speaker 1: those who are much younger, and so I'm happy to
Speaker 1: announce today that starting one week from today, next Monday,
Speaker 1: we will be lowering the age in the state of
Speaker 1: Florida to sixty plus for vaccinations, and that will across
Speaker 1: the board at all of the state pods, all of
Speaker 1: the pharmacies, all of the different drive through sites that
Speaker 1: are being operated. So again, one week from today, if
Speaker 1: you're sixty plus, you will be able to get sign
Speaker 1: up and be able to get the vaccine. Thank God
Speaker 1: for a governor Ron descent as of Florida in so
Speaker 1: many ways, I mean one just being a more capable administrator,
Speaker 1: being a more capable leader has undoubtedly saved lives as
Speaker 1: well as businesses and futures and economies and hopes and
Speaker 1: dreams of millions of Floridians. So, for all of our
Speaker 1: Florida listeners, you have been blessed with the best governor
Speaker 1: of the entire pandemic, and that has made a real
Speaker 1: difference to your state and to your lives and your
Speaker 1: family's lives. So there's a debt of gratitude that is
Speaker 1: owed from certainly Floridians, but also from the whole country,
Speaker 1: because without Florida, we would have no control group to
Speaker 1: borrow from assigned to scientific experiment. We would have no
Speaker 1: method of really knowing did California do the right thing?
Speaker 1: Did New York do the right thing? Obviously not, and
Speaker 1: they'll never admit it. They'll never say, you know what,
Speaker 1: we were wrong because that would hurt their prospects for
Speaker 1: power in the future, and that's all that really matters
Speaker 1: to them. But now descentis is lowering vaccine eligibility people
Speaker 1: over sixty. Once you get everybody over sixty vaccinated by
Speaker 1: the numbers, your risk of death and hospitalization you know
Speaker 1: in that group is going to go down eighty to
Speaker 1: eighty five. I mean that that pretty much destroyed. If
Speaker 1: everybody over sixty is vaccinated, it's no longer a pandemic.
Speaker 1: It's a it's a dangerous you know, virus for some
Speaker 1: people that occasionally will claim a life, but it's not
Speaker 1: really a pandemic anymore at that point, just based on
Speaker 1: the numbers. So, and this is I think where we're
Speaker 1: going to be relatively soon. I don't want to note
Speaker 1: at that Wall Street journal piece where you had at
Speaker 1: Johns Hopkins University, MD and epidemiologist projecting that will be
Speaker 1: at hurt immunity by the end of April. And they said,
Speaker 1: and they fact check this and said it's wrong. It's
Speaker 1: making a prediction. They say, it's wrong. I think it
Speaker 1: might be May. But we're going to get there, and
Speaker 1: then you're really going to see the shrill hysterics from
Speaker 1: the libs because they're gonna be like, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: and I don't want to go back to normal life.
Speaker 1: I don't want to go back to normal. It's scary
Speaker 1: of the virus. They've become so hyper anxious, the hypochondria, right,
Speaker 1: the irrational fear of sickness that has overtaken so many people.
Speaker 1: But yes, there's a real virus out there. Yes it
Speaker 1: has killed five hundred thousand people. But we know who's
Speaker 1: at risk, we know what the factors are, and we
Speaker 1: also know that all these things that we've been told
Speaker 1: to do, all these hoops we've been jumping through, really
Speaker 1: haven't done anything to stop it, really haven't haven't ended it.
Speaker 1: So you know, I just I sit here and and
Speaker 1: I'm so agitated by the way that people have been
Speaker 1: lying about this all along they've been lying about this
Speaker 1: to you. One of the things that I always get
Speaker 1: is people who trash me online for my positions on
Speaker 1: and by the way I've said, I am, I am
Speaker 1: so proud. I think I have in some ways as
Speaker 1: proud of the way that we kept it real here
Speaker 1: on the buck Sex and showed her in the pandemic
Speaker 1: because I have everything, We've got, anything we've ever done
Speaker 1: on the show. Because the pressure to conform, to go
Speaker 1: along with the little fauciite whimps and just in their hysterics,
Speaker 1: it was immense. But I always people would say, you know,
Speaker 1: they'd yell at me. I've had mds come at me
Speaker 1: on Twitter, for example, or these people that say they're mds.
Speaker 1: You know how many people have died because you deny
Speaker 1: the virus exists. It's like, if you say that to me,
Speaker 1: you're a moron. Never denied the virus exists, never denied
Speaker 1: it's dangerous, never denied it's gonna it has killed a
Speaker 1: lot of people, and he's gonna keep killing people for
Speaker 1: a while. I look at the policies around this and
Speaker 1: the facts and the data around it and come to
Speaker 1: conclusions that are based in reason and logic and judgment
Speaker 1: instead of panic and hysteria and the desire to control.
Speaker 1: There will be some people who are going to start
Speaker 1: trying to rewrite their history during this pandemic, rewrite their actions.
Speaker 1: You'll see this in the media for sure, especially among conservatives,
Speaker 1: because there were a lot of people that were, oh man,
Speaker 1: they were taken in by the virtue signaling of mask
Speaker 1: religion for a while. I gotta say, people that change
Speaker 1: their photos on social media to show that they're they're
Speaker 1: masked up in their photo, what the heck was that about?
Speaker 1: The whole point of the photo in your social media profile,
Speaker 1: your avatar is people can see your face. You're going
Speaker 1: to put a big stupid mask over your face to
Speaker 1: show everybody, you know, how much you believe in the science.
Speaker 1: But it really belief in the science is really the
Speaker 1: key word, isn't. It's not about what's true, It's about
Speaker 1: what people believed, what they wanted to believe. Here's a
Speaker 1: Lib journal who's making the claim that there's some anti
Speaker 1: that Trump is part of the leader of an anti
Speaker 1: science movement. Here play fourteen. Well, first of all, Nicole,
Speaker 1: think of the good that Donald Trump could have done
Speaker 1: had he taken his dose of the vaccine in public
Speaker 1: instead of having it quietly released through an aid during
Speaker 1: Seapack suggested, Oh, the President and First Lady Milania Trump
Speaker 1: had the vaccine behind closed doors the White House in
Speaker 1: January before he left office. Donald Trump is the forefront
Speaker 1: of an anti science movement that has swept through the
Speaker 1: Republican Party. It's not a recent development, but it accelerated
Speaker 1: under Trump. And we know that he, of course is
Speaker 1: the one who disparaged the mask use. He played down
Speaker 1: of how dangerous this virus was. Had he been had
Speaker 1: put one a mass, you know, faithfully, had he encouraged
Speaker 1: others to do so, had he not had those super
Speaker 1: spreader events known as his rallies, things have been very
Speaker 1: different from the start. And even then, had he simply
Speaker 1: done had put on a vent and used the vaccine
Speaker 1: as he's on his way out of office, that would
Speaker 1: have done some good too. So much bullcrap in this
Speaker 1: one statement here from this Jonathan Lemyer. I don't even
Speaker 1: know who this guy is, but you know, he goes
Speaker 1: on TV, and so we're supposed to believe that he's
Speaker 1: a person that we should listen to about any of
Speaker 1: this stuff. A journal another journal. What the heck does
Speaker 1: the journal know about sign nothing, nothing, But it's unbelievable,
Speaker 1: isn't it. Yeah, if Donald Trump hadn't held his rallies,
Speaker 1: there wouldn't have been you know, one hundred million COVID
Speaker 1: cases in the country, right, Just blame Trump. If Trump
Speaker 1: hadn't downplayed that's their favorite thing to downplay the virus.
Speaker 1: Fauci downplayed the virus your jackasses a year ago. Yesterday,
Speaker 1: Fauci said, come on, don't wear masks, no need or
Speaker 1: whatever it was in March. The virus had been circulating
Speaker 1: for months at that point. But it's all it's all
Speaker 1: blamed on trumpets. It's their delusion that Trump was really
Speaker 1: the problem. Like I said, journals are the worst people
Speaker 1: in America. It's really, It's really true. Journals are the
Speaker 1: worst because people go to them for truth, for facts,
Speaker 1: for information, and what they get is just bile and
Speaker 1: propaganda and lies. You know, people could say whatever they
Speaker 1: want about this show. I tell people what I think,
Speaker 1: how I think, where I come from, who I'm rooting for.
Speaker 1: I'm honest about what I believe. Journals are a bunch
Speaker 1: of little petty frauds, and there are huge frauds when
Speaker 1: it comes to the issue of Donald Trump and what
Speaker 1: he did and did not do over the course of
Speaker 1: the pandemic, and what he said and the actions he took.
Speaker 1: Trump let Fauci run pandemic response or really gave it,
Speaker 1: and Mike Pence who let Fauci run pandemic response, if
Speaker 1: we're gonna be honest about it, and now they act
Speaker 1: like he ignored the science. I mean, look at how
Speaker 1: Republicans are the ones who are a lot, a lot
Speaker 1: of ticke cases. They're saying, yeah, let's get those vaccinations
Speaker 1: out there sooner. Look at Rohn de Santis. We're not
Speaker 1: anti science, we're anti nonsense. Okay, they've now said. Someone
Speaker 1: explained to me how we're supposed to trust the CDC
Speaker 1: knows what it's talking about on masking when mask mandates have,
Speaker 1: according to CDC numbers, a roughly one percent, which is
Speaker 1: within the margin of error, which means it could be
Speaker 1: zero percent effect on deaths in the United States from
Speaker 1: COVID nineteen over a sixty day period or you know,
Speaker 1: over the period of masking in a certain region. And
Speaker 1: how are we supposed to think they have all the
Speaker 1: answers when doctor Auster Home weeks ago said wearing two
Speaker 1: masks is actually worse than wearing one, But the CDC says, no,
Speaker 1: you got to wear two masks. Well, is it obvious?
Speaker 1: Which is it? Their arguments are garbage, garbage. That's why
Speaker 1: you never see the mask proponents actually have somebody that
Speaker 1: has doubts about the effectiveness of mass masking as a pilot.
Speaker 1: You never you never see these debates. You're not even
Speaker 1: They don't allow the debate to happen because this is
Speaker 1: so deeply rooted in the psychology of the left. This
Speaker 1: has been such an amazing mechanism for them to test
Speaker 1: out how much control can they exert over you? If
Speaker 1: the government can determine how you can breathe, if the
Speaker 1: government can force you to breathe with difficulty and in discomfort.
Speaker 1: Because they say, so, what can't the government do? Where
Speaker 1: does the government draw the line? You know, whatever happened
Speaker 1: to my body? My choice only for killing babies, they'll
Speaker 1: say that for Oh, they're so into science, right, is
Speaker 1: what is a fetus? Oh, a fetus is a you know,
Speaker 1: it's not really a person who really it's a person.
Speaker 1: But oh, they're so into science. The democrats. But what
Speaker 1: a woman? I know what a woman is? You know
Speaker 1: what a woman is? Do democrats? Not clear? They won't
Speaker 1: define it. They won't define it. What is a woman?
Speaker 1: Is a woman a man that thinks he's a woman.
Speaker 1: Because the answer that they give you is yes, that
Speaker 1: you know, the mother that you have, the the woman
Speaker 1: who gave you life. If you're listening to this, has
Speaker 1: no inherent distinction from a transgender male who believes that
Speaker 1: he is a woman. No, there's no difference in their
Speaker 1: woman leness. That is the official position of the left.
Speaker 1: That is their position. They when you put things in
Speaker 1: very clear terms, they get upset about this sometimes, but
Speaker 1: you it is in fact their position is in the
Speaker 1: fact that there can be no distinction. Made I remember
Speaker 1: for a little while they were even trying to convince
Speaker 1: people that it was bigoted on on dating apps for
Speaker 1: guys to reject trans gender transgender females on dating apps.
Speaker 1: Who you know, guys who are heterosexual don't want to
Speaker 1: date a or don't want to go out on dates,
Speaker 1: you know, romantic dates with a biological male who claims
Speaker 1: to be female. The Left went through a little period,
Speaker 1: but then they really, okay, we're not actually going to
Speaker 1: go to that length quite yet. They'll get there eventually. Again,
Speaker 1: don't think they won't, but they realized that was that
Speaker 1: was a little too over the edge for even where
Speaker 1: you know, the Huffington Post can go right now and
Speaker 1: these other sites of left wing insanity, science deniers. Where's
Speaker 1: the science denying among among Republicans? Where's the science denial
Speaker 1: among people like Rhonda Santis who look at the data,
Speaker 1: look at the numbers, and make reasonable can take reasonable
Speaker 1: action and make reasonable conclusions from it. Versus the other side.
Speaker 1: The Democrats all of a sudden say, yeah, let's double mask. Really,
Speaker 1: why all of a sudden it's so obvious. Why wasn't
Speaker 1: an obvious six months ago. They don't have answers. They
Speaker 1: want you to comply. You've been dehumanized. You have been
Speaker 1: trained by all of this to think the government has
Speaker 1: a right to do anything to you as long as
Speaker 1: the government says they have a good reason. That is
Speaker 1: the most dangerous thing that a free society could convince
Speaker 1: itself of the government could do whatever it wants to
Speaker 1: you as long as it's got a really good reason.
Speaker 1: Masking is the gateway drug for totalitarianism. We all know it.
Speaker 1: We all see it. And this is why the lib
Speaker 1: why the left adopt this so thoroughly. Notice how Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is not president, hasn't be president for a while.
Speaker 1: Have I changed my tune at all in any of
Speaker 1: this stuff now? My Yeah, you know, it was never
Speaker 1: about Trump for me, masking and lockdowns, it was never
Speaker 1: about the press. I didn't care with them, honestly. I
Speaker 1: felt like the president was too down with the Faucci,
Speaker 1: the Fauci clown. I thought that it was too much
Speaker 1: belief in the experts from this administration and not enough
Speaker 1: policy decision making. And I think that it probably caused
Speaker 1: Trump the presidency. I think it probably caused trump reelection
Speaker 1: at least was one of the major factors. And then
Speaker 1: there's going to be the rewriting of what people did
Speaker 1: and said and the finger pointing as more and more
Speaker 1: folks wake up to the truth of the lockdowns than
Speaker 1: everything else. Remember Oxyris Barbo, some of you remember her.
Speaker 1: She was the health director for New York City whatever.
Speaker 1: She's the chief of the New York City Health Department,
Speaker 1: whatever the title is. And she was early on one
Speaker 1: of the people who were saying, oh, it's fine, you know,
Speaker 1: don't worry about the pandemic, just go out, go to
Speaker 1: the Wuhan Strong Festival and all these sorts of things.
Speaker 1: And now she's trying to tell everybody because she left
Speaker 1: her job and you know, wants to probably get a
Speaker 1: book deal and wants people to think well of her
Speaker 1: and wants to make money and advance herself, that she
Speaker 1: was a hero in all of this. Somehow, here's the
Speaker 1: former city health Commissioner Oxyris Barbo in New York and
Speaker 1: behind the scenes, you know, we had talked to the
Speaker 1: mayor and his team that we could see tens of
Speaker 1: thousands of people die if we don't act quickly, and
Speaker 1: they're being sort of this panic in the room of like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, you can't say that to the public
Speaker 1: because we're gonna lose their trust, and me feeling really
Speaker 1: strongly that we needed to prepare New Yorkers emotionally for
Speaker 1: what was coming. And so, you know, what I ended
Speaker 1: up saying was something to the effect of in a
Speaker 1: regular flu season, you know, there's anywhere from a thousand
Speaker 1: to two thousand people that die because of the flu.
Speaker 1: This is going to be much much worse. And what's
Speaker 1: going to make it even more. I'm trying to think
Speaker 1: of what the word was in my mind. I wanted
Speaker 1: to say, what's going to be even more horrifying? But
Speaker 1: what I think I ended up saying is what's going
Speaker 1: to make it even more challenging is that it's going
Speaker 1: to happen in such a short amount of time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the doctor Oxyrius Barbo, she was a pediatrician who hasn't
Speaker 1: practiced medicine in like twenty years, but she became a
Speaker 1: health bureaucrat in New York. She's a hero, hero and
Speaker 1: all this her and Deblasio, whom she worked for, who's
Speaker 1: a moron and the worst mayor in the country. I
Speaker 1: would argue, some of you, I know Portland, you're saying
Speaker 1: Ted Wheeler, I know what the Portland team Buck is saying.
Speaker 1: You're all yell like Ted Wheeler, And you may be right.
Speaker 1: That's he's close. He's close. That's a fair point. But
Speaker 1: de Blasio is pretty damn awful. But Oxyrius Barbo, for
Speaker 1: those who are wondering, was also the woman who said
Speaker 1: when the NYPD, which is forty some odd thousand members,
Speaker 1: when the NYPDE was continue to do their jobs and
Speaker 1: wanted more ppe from the city. Her quote was, I
Speaker 1: don't give a rats ass about your cops to one
Speaker 1: of the senior members of the NYPD when he was
Speaker 1: saying that they needed more masks and more ppe from
Speaker 1: the city health authorities. I don't give a rat's ass
Speaker 1: about your cops. That's you, that's your public. And then
Speaker 1: she apologized for that, because of course, when that came out,
Speaker 1: what are you gonna do? Not apologize? But that is
Speaker 1: your health director for the City of New York. New York's,
Speaker 1: I mean, America's largest city, doesn't give a rat's ass
Speaker 1: about the cops or on the front lines of not
Speaker 1: just keeping her society together, but also are the true
Speaker 1: essential workers who during the worst parts of the pandemic
Speaker 1: kept showing up. They're not public school teachers. They didn't
Speaker 1: get to stay home. Sorry, they had to actually be
Speaker 1: out there dealing with the public doing their jobs. But
Speaker 1: get ready for a lot of revisionist history. Many of
Speaker 1: the health experts who have been the worst in all
Speaker 1: of us, many of the health experts who were wrong
Speaker 1: in credible cool ways at key times, are now going
Speaker 1: to turn around and say, actually, I saw this all coming,
Speaker 1: and you should buy my book about leadership during a pandemic.
Speaker 1: You know the Cuomo maneuver. You could call it rock
Speaker 1: and roll. Fellow patriots, it's time for roll. Call Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck Sexton or Team Buck at Iheartmaty
Speaker 1: dot com. You're going to email us and please Team
Speaker 1: I really would appreciate if you give us on if
Speaker 1: you listen, even if you're not a big podcast listener
Speaker 1: in general, but if you're somebody who has listened to the
Speaker 1: the podcast, give us a five star rating on the
Speaker 1: Apple podcast Store, and also write up a quick review
Speaker 1: of why the Buck Sexton Show is awesome, a couple
Speaker 1: of lines, two lines, a line anything. We need more
Speaker 1: reviews because we have, we'll get more love from the
Speaker 1: Apple podcast Store. Based on our audience size, we should
Speaker 1: get a lot more love in the Apple podcast Store
Speaker 1: in terms of suggested listening things like that. If you
Speaker 1: do those reviews so that really helps us out those
Speaker 1: you just take it, take its twenty seconds. If you
Speaker 1: don't mind some of you listening to this, please give
Speaker 1: us reviews, give us five stars, help spread the word
Speaker 1: about help pass the buck an Apple podcast. And also
Speaker 1: you can always listen to the iHeart Radio app. Right
Speaker 1: Producer Mark. Yes, we are the number one company for podcasts. Yes, indeed,
Speaker 1: and I believe on the iHeart Radio app we are
Speaker 1: in top ten podcasts for the month. So there's that.
Speaker 1: So listening on the iHeartRadio app, we are a show
Speaker 1: that is getting a lot of listeners there, absolutely, Yes, indeed,
Speaker 1: let's get to your thoughts in roll call, we get
Speaker 1: to t J. Buck. I'm of two minds about Biden's
Speaker 1: current faculty if any Like everyone else on the right,
Speaker 1: I want to know just how bad as cognitive functions
Speaker 1: really are. However, I'm slightly concerned about the ramifications what
Speaker 1: they might be if everyone else the country, in the
Speaker 1: world come to know what many of us on the
Speaker 1: right I've suspected all along, that Biden is just not
Speaker 1: There a few worst case scenarios being a Harris takeover,
Speaker 1: some very aggressive action from some of our overseas adversaries, etc.
Speaker 1: All of which make want to say, for the love
Speaker 1: of God, please keep hide and Biden. Regardless though, if
Speaker 1: he does actually have a press conference by the end
Speaker 1: of the month, can someone please ask him to show
Speaker 1: us the science of why he needs to be double
Speaker 1: masking If he's already vaccinated, Doctor Fauci's orders or what. Well, TJ.
Speaker 1: You gotta like you threw a lot in here, so
Speaker 1: let me try to take these one by one. Yeah,
Speaker 1: if I mean, I guess you're saying if the world
Speaker 1: figured out somehow that the commander in chief in the
Speaker 1: United States that Hyden Biden was declined in, that there
Speaker 1: would be a bad outcome for us. You know, maybe
Speaker 1: our enemies would circle and try to do something to us.
Speaker 1: And to that, I just want to say, we're kind
Speaker 1: of already there. I mean, I think they already know.
Speaker 1: I think China sees Hide and Biden and things, well,
Speaker 1: this is going to be a great four years for us.
Speaker 1: And look, I've been telling all my friends I think
Speaker 1: that I think the Chinese economy is going to have
Speaker 1: boom years going forward. Here. Now, there are some reasons
Speaker 1: why that may not happen, and I could be wrong,
Speaker 1: but I think the Chinese economy is going to be
Speaker 1: a real, you know, really get revved up as an engine.
Speaker 1: And so, yes, TJ. I do believe that there's an
Speaker 1: issue here with the restaurant figuring out, but I think
Speaker 1: they already kind of know. So I don't know if
Speaker 1: it's going to make that much of a difference if
Speaker 1: there's a moment of recognition that would change that. And
Speaker 1: then about the yeah about double masking when you're Biden
Speaker 1: is double masking after having been vaccinated. So he's really
Speaker 1: going around by the numbers, and he's taking the precaution
Speaker 1: that there's like a one in ten thousand or one
Speaker 1: in fifty thousand chance that he's going to infect somebody
Speaker 1: at any point in time, and so he's taking precautions.
Speaker 1: He gets that. No, what he would say is that
Speaker 1: what he would say is that he's showing other people
Speaker 1: by example. You know, surely by example, you're gonna see
Speaker 1: the left is gonna get crazy and crazier on this.
Speaker 1: They're gonna say, even if it saves a thousand lives
Speaker 1: a year, we should keep asking forever. They're gonna people
Speaker 1: to take that position. They've gone. We've gone full circle
Speaker 1: in twelve months. Exactly the arguments that I was making,
Speaker 1: Why didn't we mask up for flu? Why isn't the
Speaker 1: speed limit fifteen miles an hour? All that was all
Speaker 1: valid and true, and they didn't have a response to
Speaker 1: it other than shut up and wear a mask. That
Speaker 1: was their answer. That was what we got and yeah,
Speaker 1: and it worked so well, don't we all see that?
Speaker 1: The point is, if you wear a mask five days
Speaker 1: of the week and then on the sixth day you
Speaker 1: don't for a certain you know, and you get infected,
Speaker 1: you're only gonna get You only get infected once with this.
Speaker 1: So if you wear a mask for five days, in
Speaker 1: the sixth day of the week, you get infected, and
Speaker 1: and you then pass it to one person three days
Speaker 1: later when you're also not wearing your mask, you've now
Speaker 1: created you know, you've sort of been a part of
Speaker 1: the overall chain of transmission for everything. I mean, the
Speaker 1: only real reason that you could think of where masking
Speaker 1: might have played a real role and bring down the
Speaker 1: numbers here would be would be if you thought that
Speaker 1: it prevented super spreader events. But remember, you could be
Speaker 1: a super spreader for one day, one time when you're
Speaker 1: not wearing your mask enough or where you pull your
Speaker 1: mask down. You know, there's so much about this that
Speaker 1: we don't know. And look, there are things that I'll
Speaker 1: tell you that are theories that I have, and I'm
Speaker 1: there are theories. I'm not saying that the v of
Speaker 1: the data proves this or that I'm right but I
Speaker 1: think we're going to find out that there are very
Speaker 1: specific genetic markers for severe reaction to this disease. That
Speaker 1: this goes. There's whole layers here of susceptibility that we
Speaker 1: don't really understand, but we will understand in time, even
Speaker 1: among those who are at high risk. You know, why
Speaker 1: is it that you know, you hear about seventy five
Speaker 1: year olds who have hypertension, for whom this virus is
Speaker 1: devastating and can be very deadly, But there are other
Speaker 1: seventy five year olds who get this and they're basically
Speaker 1: am asymptomatic or have a very mild kate. Why is that?
Speaker 1: You know? There's a lot of factors that go into it.
Speaker 1: But I think that this is a prediction. I think
Speaker 1: we will find, and this might take a matter of years,
Speaker 1: that there were certain genetic predispositions of genetic markers for
Speaker 1: this disease. And also I think we'll find a lot
Speaker 1: more about T cell immunity that people had from other
Speaker 1: coronavirus infections that played a major role in this. But
Speaker 1: that's not even really talked about right now. Right it's
Speaker 1: all just do you wear a mask enough? I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm going into the gym every day, and I wish
Speaker 1: every day I'm going to the gym two or three
Speaker 1: times a week. I really need to get up the
Speaker 1: four or five times a week promise. I know how
Speaker 1: to moderate my eating, but I'm hungry. I get hungry,
Speaker 1: and then I want to eat more because I got
Speaker 1: to do radio all. Then I get stressed. But I
Speaker 1: guess I gotta get more comfortable at it, because going
Speaker 1: to the gym I'm fine with. It's the it's the
Speaker 1: changing my diet for health and fitness purposes that I
Speaker 1: find so very challenging. But anyway, I go into the
Speaker 1: gym and I throw the mask on and I'm sitting there.
Speaker 1: I'm like, I'm other people around me. There's only two
Speaker 1: or three of them usually at a time in a
Speaker 1: gym that's maybe twelve hundred square feet, and they're masking
Speaker 1: up and I'm sitting here, like we're really supposed to
Speaker 1: believe this is this is serving a purpose. I think
Speaker 1: it's really I think it's really so stupid, as you know.
Speaker 1: But John Heybaker, producer, Mark, I love the show, and
Speaker 1: with Rush Gone, you are now my number one. I've
Speaker 1: appreciated your remembrance of Rush and the humility you show
Speaker 1: by giving him credit for your radio career. It's time
Speaker 1: to hit corporations where it really matters. I'm pulling my
Speaker 1: business from all left leaning commie corporations and putting my
Speaker 1: money where things like free speech are still valued. I've
Speaker 1: canceled my Facebook and Twitter accounts, and canceled my Amazon Prime.
Speaker 1: I don't use YouTube anymore, and I actually use Duck
Speaker 1: Duck Go for search. When Google sent me an email
Speaker 1: letting me know that they now own Fitbit, I replied,
Speaker 1: and that's why I'm throwing my fitbit in the trash.
Speaker 1: Google pulled it's don't be evil model from the corporate
Speaker 1: handbook in twenty eighteen, and everywhere everywhere there seems have
Speaker 1: gotten the message. Everyone there seems have gotten the message.
Speaker 1: Shield Tide Well, John, First off, thank you for your
Speaker 1: very kind words about me being your your number one
Speaker 1: in the radio world now really does mean a lot
Speaker 1: and uh and thanks also for appreciating that I do
Speaker 1: you know, I owe Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck a
Speaker 1: tremendous amount for my radio career, both of them, and
Speaker 1: I am somebody who believes in paying his paying his
Speaker 1: debts and paying his respects. So that's one reason why,
Speaker 1: you know, even even in moments where I think that
Speaker 1: there would have been political disagreement back in the day,
Speaker 1: once I had my own show and Glenn had his
Speaker 1: show and about Trump, for example, never hear me say
Speaker 1: a bad word about Glenbeck because Glenn's a Glen's somebody
Speaker 1: that I owe a debt of gratitude too, and I
Speaker 1: believe in you. I believe in points of personal honor
Speaker 1: like that, and you don't violate that. You know. I've
Speaker 1: seen some conservatives going after each other recently on different
Speaker 1: things publicly, and it's just I always feel like, come on,
Speaker 1: why are where are we doing that. We've got enough
Speaker 1: to fight with the other side. We're gonna fight with
Speaker 1: our own side publicly. We're gonna have our own spats,
Speaker 1: and look at it. I've you know, one day I'll explain.
Speaker 1: I know I'm sort of cryptic about it, but you know,
Speaker 1: there are one or two conservatives, one in particular, who
Speaker 1: have just always made a point of coming after me publicly.
Speaker 1: I've never I've never gone after that individual. I've never reciprocated,
Speaker 1: I've never started anything. I'm just doing my I'm just
Speaker 1: doing my work in my job. But you know, there're
Speaker 1: people out there who are very petty and insecure and
Speaker 1: kind of nasty and not as good as they want
Speaker 1: people to believe they are at something. And you know,
Speaker 1: so that's why some of you know I'm talking about.
Speaker 1: Very few of you do, though, So I'll give you that.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I'll just say like I've never
Speaker 1: had I I've no beef. Some people seem to think
Speaker 1: I have a problem with um that when I'm talking
Speaker 1: this way, I'll tell you it's absolutely not Ben Shapiro.
Speaker 1: People seem to think it's not Ben Shapiro. Ben and
Speaker 1: I don't know each other, really, never really met each other.
Speaker 1: A lot of a lot of respect for what he's
Speaker 1: done and the businesses that he's created. I've never said
Speaker 1: a bad word about Ben, you know, officially or on
Speaker 1: a you know, openly or covertly. Never, I've actually never,
Speaker 1: I've never been So maybe maybe I'm narrowing it down
Speaker 1: for you. So I love Rush forever and owe him forever,
Speaker 1: and and oh Glenn, and appreciate Glenn, and Glenn is
Speaker 1: my friend, and appreciate Sean Hannity and what he's done
Speaker 1: for this business, and what he's done also for my
Speaker 1: career on radio at different times. And I have no
Speaker 1: problem whatsoever with Ben Shapiro. I'm just saying those are
Speaker 1: all people that I respect and have nothing And you know,
Speaker 1: I like Dan Bongino a lot and think Dan Bongino
Speaker 1: is a great guy who's built a great business. You know,
Speaker 1: i'd go to but see, I'd rather talk about who
Speaker 1: I'm positively disposed to on the show. I'd rather say
Speaker 1: nice things about people on my side. And so that's
Speaker 1: what I do. That's that's that's my approach. And if
Speaker 1: other people out there want to take shots at me
Speaker 1: for no reason other than they're kind of petty and
Speaker 1: realize that, you know, my talent is something that makes
Speaker 1: them upset for whatever reason, or what I do makes
Speaker 1: them upset for I can't even get into it. Well
Speaker 1: that's on them. I don't do that, and you listen
Speaker 1: to the show. Know that. So as for John pulling
Speaker 1: all of your different pulling all of your different things,
Speaker 1: I would just say good for you that putting your
Speaker 1: money where your mouth is and actually taking action based
Speaker 1: upon all this stuff is a is a thing to
Speaker 1: be admired, and very few people are willing to do what.
Speaker 1: I will say that I'm not even at the point
Speaker 1: yet where where I'm able to disentangle myself from some
Speaker 1: of these big tech companies. I'm honest about that, because
Speaker 1: I can't do what I do. I can't compete in
Speaker 1: the media marketplace without using some of these platforms as
Speaker 1: long as I can use them before I get kicked
Speaker 1: off of them entirely. So yeah, there that's John. You're
Speaker 1: you're a man who is taking action, and I encourage
Speaker 1: all the rest of you who can. Now there's again
Speaker 1: that's taking action where you're cutting off a company or
Speaker 1: you're saying, you know, you can always take positive action
Speaker 1: like the sponsors on this show supporting them. You know,
Speaker 1: get on my pillow mattress topper and pillows, get you know,
Speaker 1: get black Rifle coffee, check out Express VPN. You know,
Speaker 1: do these things use my promo code. That's a way
Speaker 1: of putting your money where your mouth is too. That's
Speaker 1: a way of taking action based upon what matters to you.
Speaker 1: Continuing on with our roll call, remember Facebook dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck Sexton for getting in on the roll call.
Speaker 1: Love hearing from all of you all across the country.
Speaker 1: Thank you, so much for writing in and let's see
Speaker 1: here Steve hey Bucket Mark a word of advice on
Speaker 1: the bobcat rescue leave them alone. A good friend found
Speaker 1: one in a trap, he released it and then fought
Speaker 1: with a thing for forty five minutes. By his account,
Speaker 1: his story was confirmed by all the damage done to
Speaker 1: his person and the dead Bobcat. Get an ocelot or
Speaker 1: an exotic cat hybrid. Check out Bengal cats both legal
Speaker 1: and Florida with a class to permit. So, Producer Mark,
Speaker 1: I don't know if we're gonna be able to do
Speaker 1: a bobcat rescue situation. I never planned on it. Maybe
Speaker 1: you should just get a dog. But you you back
Speaker 1: to your producer, Mark, you back my play. So you know,
Speaker 1: if I had to, if you and missus Mark had
Speaker 1: to babysit my rescue bobcat for the weekend while I
Speaker 1: went down to you know, no, I'd leave you with
Speaker 1: the cage and some tranquilizer darts if need be, it
Speaker 1: would not happen. I would not watch the Bobcat for
Speaker 1: you yet. Dog in the shore anytime? Yeah, yeah, you
Speaker 1: and the snow. This from the same page about this
Speaker 1: what she really she's like, what is it with you
Speaker 1: and thinking having like a you know, an exotic rescue
Speaker 1: pet would be so fun and great. I'm like, come on,
Speaker 1: who doesn't want to have a pet otter? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think it will be if you want something to exotic,
Speaker 1: get like a husky. I have a Husky's exotic. But
Speaker 1: I hear what you I mean in terms of it's
Speaker 1: a lot of dog. Yeah they are. They're amazing animals,
Speaker 1: very smart, very loyal, intelligent. But you know, it's a
Speaker 1: lot of dogs, all right, tiktoks of them howling all
Speaker 1: the time. Oh my god, I couldn't deal with that. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: they're allowed too. I saw, I saw. You know, I've
Speaker 1: got dogs in the minkcause I actually went to visit
Speaker 1: to Lula last night. She's really back with my parents
Speaker 1: now because my parents thankfully are vaccinated, and you know,
Speaker 1: with the pandemic receding now, they want their dog back,
Speaker 1: which is understandable. So now I can literally go visit her.
Speaker 1: She's not in my care anymore. But I'm definitely there's
Speaker 1: gonna be a Team Buck, a new Team Buck mascot
Speaker 1: here pretty soon. The other question is is it gonna
Speaker 1: be producer Mark Junior, who because he and missus Mark
Speaker 1: are gonna have a baby or is it gonna be
Speaker 1: buckets a puppy, which one happens, Let's not make any
Speaker 1: birth announcements on the air. There is no baby, there's
Speaker 1: no butN in the oven. I just want to clarify that. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's a fair, that's fair, that's fair. I'm just wondering
Speaker 1: which one of these things is gonna it's gonna be
Speaker 1: the dog. It's gonna be the dog for both of us.
Speaker 1: We'll both get a dog before that happens, I promise.
Speaker 1: All right, Oh, are you do you have to get
Speaker 1: the hypoallergenic dog? Are you a hypo you know, does
Speaker 1: missus Mark have the allergy? No? Oh, we would just
Speaker 1: prefer to get a dog that doesn't shed a lot.
Speaker 1: Because my little brother who's in Florida, now, my brother
Speaker 1: keats he got a cava pooh. And I will say,
Speaker 1: so it's a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel mix with a
Speaker 1: miniature poodle. And the thing is adorable. I will say,
Speaker 1: really cute dog. I mean, I'm a I'm a big
Speaker 1: fan and hypoallergenic for those who want that it's just
Speaker 1: it's just the sweetest little animal. So anyway, I'm a
Speaker 1: big funny dog that ends with a pooh. And I
Speaker 1: don't mean that literally is the cutest thing in the world. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: they're good. They're good. Uh okay, so Steve says, no,
Speaker 1: Bobcat rescue Dave hey Buck. Watch Murder among the Mormons
Speaker 1: on Netflix. It'll blow you away. Biggest counterfeiting scheme ever attempted,
Speaker 1: and this guy almost pulled it off. It's a pretty
Speaker 1: quick watch. Keep up the great work with the show.
Speaker 1: I listened daily and promote it to my friends. Well, Dave,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for listening daily and promoting it
Speaker 1: to your friends. That means a lot. That really helps us.
Speaker 1: And when we when producer Mark gets to like his
Speaker 1: fourth and fifth kids, for example, it's gonna have a
Speaker 1: lot of mouths to feed. So we're gonna we're gonna
Speaker 1: need this show to be pretty successful. And I five
Speaker 1: would be a lot of kids, Mark, I would say,
Speaker 1: that's a lot. That's what that gives me. Harp palpetitions. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a lot. I mean, look now that it's great
Speaker 1: for anybody who does it. If I would, I'm one
Speaker 1: of four but five's a lot of kids. I give
Speaker 1: you credit if you can do it, but I don't
Speaker 1: think that exactly like I give you, know, all all
Speaker 1: due credit and uh and you know, props to somebody
Speaker 1: who has five kids. Anyway, Um, yeah, what do we
Speaker 1: got here? Murder among the Mormons. I'll check it out.
Speaker 1: I'll check it out, probably faster than producer Mark checks
Speaker 1: out the always on Amazon Prime. Anyway, everybody, that's going
Speaker 1: to be the show for today until next time. She'll
Speaker 1: tie