Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Looks like the president
Speaker 1: main fact sign a budget deal, but he could also
Speaker 1: declare a shutdown. That's what we are being told right now.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, declare a national emergency. That's where we're being
Speaker 1: told right now. Kind of feels like a shutdown. We'll
Speaker 1: talk about that, and also some crazy stuff from the
Speaker 1: FBI former FBI Director Andy McCabe. Folks, we got a
Speaker 1: lot to dive into, so strap in. We'll be right
Speaker 1: with it. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the
Speaker 1: mission or mission is to decode what really matters with
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again,
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show begins. Analysts, remember this is a
Speaker 1: president who has performed over and over and over again.
Speaker 1: He's moved the embassy to Jerusalem. He's brought back jobs
Speaker 1: from China to America. The economy is roaring. We've got
Speaker 1: a number of people that were hostages brought home. Every
Speaker 1: time they say he won't do it, he does do it.
Speaker 1: He's going to do it this time. I'm confident of that.
Speaker 1: I believe that he will take it executive action to
Speaker 1: make sure he gets the dollars that he needs to
Speaker 1: make sure that that wall gets built. Congress won't do
Speaker 1: his job. Quite frankly, we could have done a lot better.
Speaker 1: We could have given him the five point seven billion
Speaker 1: that he requested, but instead he's having to embark on
Speaker 1: a three step process that I applaud. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: I can tell you that I wish that the executive
Speaker 1: branch would have less ability to do things on their own.
Speaker 1: We'll be voting to deliver another down payment on the
Speaker 1: President's comment just occurring our nation's borders and keeping American
Speaker 1: immunity to shape, and we'll do it free from the
Speaker 1: influence of poison pills that's thought to the derail progress
Speaker 1: and schipel compromise. Welcome to the buck, Sex and show
Speaker 1: everybody here. We are about to find out if what
Speaker 1: has been reported is true that they're awaiting as we
Speaker 1: go to air, they're awaiting a House vote on an
Speaker 1: omnimus bill to avoid a shutdown, right so, a continued
Speaker 1: spending bill, and the Senate has already put it through.
Speaker 1: We're awaiting the House to vote on it. The White
Speaker 1: House has already said that the President is going to
Speaker 1: sign it, and then we are told the plan is
Speaker 1: for there to be a declaration of a national emergency,
Speaker 1: which I would wager would only last hours before probably
Speaker 1: the ninth circuit, but who knows which circuit shuts it down,
Speaker 1: and then the government just continues on as it is.
Speaker 1: This is not a victory. It would not be true.
Speaker 1: It would not be honest for me to say that
Speaker 1: it's a victory assuming this all goes through as plan.
Speaker 1: Remember I'm doing this show live, and this is where
Speaker 1: we are right now. Trump originally wanted twenty five billion
Speaker 1: dollars for the border wall. Later on, after consultation with experts,
Speaker 1: they pick some key areas, and I'm okay with this
Speaker 1: more pointed and more exact expansion of the already hundreds
Speaker 1: of miles of barrier fencing based upon areas with the
Speaker 1: greatest need. I think that's reasonable, and I think that
Speaker 1: it's an easier sell to if not the Democrats who
Speaker 1: are completely unreasonable on this, it's an easier sell to
Speaker 1: the public that hey, we need this stuff, let's do it,
Speaker 1: and then you can show as you build in these
Speaker 1: key areas, the metrics prove that what we already know,
Speaker 1: which is that wall's work, is in fact the case.
Speaker 1: But it went from twenty five billion two five billion,
Speaker 1: and now Democrats agreed to one point six billion when
Speaker 1: the five point six billion was asked for, and then
Speaker 1: it now has come to pass that the bill called
Speaker 1: the bill is at one point three seven five billion,
Speaker 1: which is enough to construct fifty five miles. That's not
Speaker 1: a whole lot when you're talking about a two thousand
Speaker 1: mile border, and I know that it would take time
Speaker 1: to build this, but I can't get excited about fifty
Speaker 1: five miles of border fencing when you already have hundreds
Speaker 1: and you need a whole lot more. There's also prohibitions
Speaker 1: in this omnibuses and this is just from what I've
Speaker 1: been reading today, so some of this could be in
Speaker 1: the process of getting changed on the hill. In the bill,
Speaker 1: there's a prohibition against any wall being built, and there's
Speaker 1: also a so so they just that's mostly a political thing.
Speaker 1: Because the ballard fencing, as I've seen when I was
Speaker 1: in San Diego at the border, the ballard fencing, which
Speaker 1: is these these metal these metal posts, and they also
Speaker 1: have a jump shield at the top, a jump plate
Speaker 1: at the top. That's the most effective stuff they've got,
Speaker 1: So I'm fine with It's also a lot easier to replace.
Speaker 1: You can break through a wall pretty easily, and if
Speaker 1: you break through a cement wall, it's really hard to rebuild.
Speaker 1: The fencing can be rebuilt in pieces quickly and easily,
Speaker 1: and it also allows you to see through to the
Speaker 1: other side, which is important for border patrol. So the fencing,
Speaker 1: but that just shows you how petty really the Democrats
Speaker 1: are being no wall so that way that they just
Speaker 1: want it to be impossible for Trump to say that
Speaker 1: any wall is being built, but fencing will be built.
Speaker 1: But then you have some other prohibitions I see in
Speaker 1: here that they have to consult. Section twenty three two
Speaker 1: three two A of the bill says that quote prior
Speaker 1: to use of any funds available by this Act for
Speaker 1: the construction of physical barriers, Department of Homeland Security shall
Speaker 1: confer and seek to reach mutual agreement regarding the design
Speaker 1: and alignment of physical barriers within that city. Who do
Speaker 1: you think they have to reach agreement with, folks? That's right,
Speaker 1: local politicians. What has become one of the favorite talking points,
Speaker 1: one of the favorite talking points of Democrats on this
Speaker 1: whole issue. Oh, let's put a congressman from a border
Speaker 1: a border district on TV to say he doesn't want offense,
Speaker 1: he doesn't want to Well, yeah, that's because the demographics
Speaker 1: have changed so much because of illegal immigration that congressmen
Speaker 1: and mayors and different elected officials along the border don't
Speaker 1: want to be seen as pro wall because to be
Speaker 1: pro wall, thanks to the Democrats, is to be anti
Speaker 1: Central American and Ti Mexican. This is what they say.
Speaker 1: It's it's rooted in racism. And while that's unfair and
Speaker 1: it's not true, that has political consequences. So of course politicians,
Speaker 1: not the experts, not border patrol, not the people that
Speaker 1: have to really deal with this. Politicians are going to
Speaker 1: go with whatever's popular and in some bordering in some
Speaker 1: border districts, they don't want to have to be in
Speaker 1: favor of something that might cost them their job. They
Speaker 1: don't care what it does. You also have. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's there's a piece today that really got my attention
Speaker 1: from from Daniel Horowitz on this one, who's running over
Speaker 1: at Conservative Review, who just breaks this down. He says
Speaker 1: he's got five areas, five provisions of the bill that
Speaker 1: contains or that are problematic. His number three here is
Speaker 1: that the bill contains a blatant amnesty for the worst
Speaker 1: cartel smugglers. Section two to four A prohibits the deportation
Speaker 1: of anyone who is sponsoring an unaccompanied miner, an illegal alien,
Speaker 1: or who says they might sponsor an unaccompanied minor, or
Speaker 1: lives in a household with an unccompanied minor, or a
Speaker 1: household that potentially might sponsor one. He writes, it's truly
Speaker 1: difficult to understate the betrayal behind this provision. One of
Speaker 1: the driving factors of the invasion is the misrepresentation of
Speaker 1: the unaccompanied minor under law. Under current law, Central American
Speaker 1: teenagers are only treat as refugees if they are a
Speaker 1: victim of a severe form of trafficking and have no
Speaker 1: relatives in the country. Yet almost all of them are
Speaker 1: self trafficked by these very illegal relatives who are indeed
Speaker 1: president in the country. Rather than clamping down on this
Speaker 1: fleecing of the American people, the bill gives amnesty to
Speaker 1: the very people paying the cartels to invade us. And
Speaker 1: then he goes on and this is the part that
Speaker 1: I knew is going to be the case. Well, the
Speaker 1: Democrats wants more funding for the areas of the immigration
Speaker 1: system right now, and again we're waiting here for a
Speaker 1: House vote as we're on air, a House vote on
Speaker 1: averting another government shutdown by putting forward this spending bill
Speaker 1: that would carry carry the government through for X amount
Speaker 1: of months, and then Trump is going to declare a
Speaker 1: national emergency. I think some of us are going to say, well,
Speaker 1: I guess the negotiations have shown that Democrats are extremists.
Speaker 1: That's good. Democrats are extremists on the border. The Democrats
Speaker 1: are totally unreasonable on this issue of immigration, that they
Speaker 1: are pro illegal immigration, that they do not want these
Speaker 1: laws to be enforced at the border or in the interior.
Speaker 1: And we've got a real problem because one of two
Speaker 1: political parties in this country is effectively now anti sovereignty.
Speaker 1: They won't say it, they would argue if you said
Speaker 1: this to them, but it is true. Are opposed to
Speaker 1: us having any meaningful control over who comes into the
Speaker 1: country and stays and who does not is unsustainable. This
Speaker 1: is a major problem. Back to this piece and conservative view,
Speaker 1: which was excellent today, I have to say a hoards
Speaker 1: did a really good job with a number four more
Speaker 1: funding to manage and induce the invasion rather than to
Speaker 1: deter it, while offering no new funding for ice, deportation
Speaker 1: agents or immigration judges to speed up asylum claims. As
Speaker 1: the President requested, This bill adds another forty million dollars
Speaker 1: for the Alternatives to Detention program, which moves asylum seekers
Speaker 1: to facilities in the interior of the country where they
Speaker 1: are usually released. This bill will further expand and institutionalize
Speaker 1: the catch and release policies for those arriving illegally at
Speaker 1: the border from all over the world. Most of these
Speaker 1: people have no intention of asking for asylum and know
Speaker 1: they don't qualify it, but they are simply joining the
Speaker 1: illegal population, knowing it's unlikely that they will be deported.
Speaker 1: What have I been telling you all along, it's a
Speaker 1: huge scam. If you understand our current system, you know
Speaker 1: how to game it, you know how to get around it,
Speaker 1: and you will be able to stay in the interior
Speaker 1: of the United States without any realistic fear of deportation.
Speaker 1: No matter who we're talking about here now, you could.
Speaker 1: The only possible exception would be if you are a
Speaker 1: hardened criminal who's already been deported, or you're on a
Speaker 1: terror watch list and they take your fingerprints and they're
Speaker 1: able to tell that you're somebody who's a real concern.
Speaker 1: But if you're just an average person from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua,
Speaker 1: l Salvador, China, India, in all these countries where we
Speaker 1: do have Bangladesh illegal aliens showing up, you will know
Speaker 1: that you can stay in the United States. Now if
Speaker 1: you come to the bar. I almost hesitate sometimes to
Speaker 1: talk about it because part of the only thing that
Speaker 1: saves us here is that not more or migrants know
Speaker 1: about this. If they knew what was going on, I
Speaker 1: think they would have a harder time doing anything but
Speaker 1: this right. They wouldn't want it. They wouldn't want to
Speaker 1: pay smugglers and do all this that. They'd want to
Speaker 1: just do caravents. And there's more caravents forming. Why because
Speaker 1: they are safe in numbers to get to the border,
Speaker 1: there's media presence there to cover their their plight, and
Speaker 1: then they can just show up and surrender. They can
Speaker 1: show up and they can surrender. This. By the end
Speaker 1: of this year, as I've been saying, we're going to
Speaker 1: be at a half a million, half a million illegal entries,
Speaker 1: or rather a half a million people who are effectively
Speaker 1: about to be illegal, and Democrats are saying that we
Speaker 1: should not care. This is not a problem, there's no crisis,
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter. It's all racism. It's all because Trump
Speaker 1: is bad. Orange Trump equal bad. That's all. That's all
Speaker 1: they really think about. And we should all be very
Speaker 1: trouble the fact that the Democratic Party is now selling
Speaker 1: this country out. They are selling us out, all of us, everybody,
Speaker 1: everybody who's an American is being sold out by the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party because they do not care about assimilation in
Speaker 1: this country. They do not care about rule of law
Speaker 1: in this country. All they care about is the relentless
Speaker 1: pursuit of power. And they see continue illegal immigration, the lawlessness,
Speaker 1: the pain, the suffering that comes along with it, both
Speaker 1: for the illegal immigrant in many cases and for the
Speaker 1: people that have to deal with this in their communities
Speaker 1: or at the border. They see that as the cost
Speaker 1: of doing business. Now, that's the Democrat view of it,
Speaker 1: and even it says otherwise is either kidding themselves or
Speaker 1: an idiot. I've got more on this, by the way,
Speaker 1: I as soon we've got some breaking news. They'll tell
Speaker 1: you about running the side of the break. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: I've just had an opportunity to speak with President Trump,
Speaker 1: and he would say to all my colleagues, is indicated
Speaker 1: he's prepared to sign the bill. He will also be
Speaker 1: issuing a national emergency declaration at same time, and I've
Speaker 1: indicated to him that I'm going to prepare. I've got
Speaker 1: to support the national emergency declaration. So for all of
Speaker 1: my colleagues, the President will sign the bill, will be
Speaker 1: voting on it shortly. It's not good enough. It's not
Speaker 1: good enough. I wish I could say otherwise. I was
Speaker 1: just digging in a little more into the fine print,
Speaker 1: and this bill has some real trojan horse stuff in it.
Speaker 1: I mentioned this to you at the top of the show,
Speaker 1: but I was looking at it again. And you can't
Speaker 1: remove any potential sponsor member of a household of a
Speaker 1: potential sponsor. So this means that anyone who is in
Speaker 1: the family of somebody that has an unaccompanied minor border
Speaker 1: crosser cannot cannot be deported. Think about the incentive structure here. Now,
Speaker 1: if you haven't sent your kid to the southern border,
Speaker 1: you better darn will do it a sap send as
Speaker 1: many kids as you can to the border. For families
Speaker 1: that have already been split up by some people coming
Speaker 1: into America illegally. There's lots of that going on. And
Speaker 1: once you've done that, this bill, if Trump signs it.
Speaker 1: As i'm reading it here, I mean, I'm seeing it
Speaker 1: described as quote a bill to turn a children into
Speaker 1: human shields against deportation for would be illegal immigrants from
Speaker 1: a Mickey Couse here who is a Democrat, but an
Speaker 1: immigration really I lives in California, and he understands what
Speaker 1: immigration is really doing. This is this is a big problem.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't think Trump can sign this. I
Speaker 1: don't know if he's going to. We will know by
Speaker 1: the time I guess the show is over tonight. But
Speaker 1: I don't think Trump is going to be in a
Speaker 1: position to sign this thing without when when we realize
Speaker 1: what's well, it's over a thousand pages this bill, folks,
Speaker 1: this is a disaster. This is not good. Oh my gosh.
Speaker 1: This is what we've been fighting for this whole time.
Speaker 1: This is what we've been trying to trying to get to.
Speaker 1: This is the the end state. It's just not good enough.
Speaker 1: The local veto against the wall for politicians along the way,
Speaker 1: these are all Democrat districts now, because they're along the border.
Speaker 1: Because of the impact of illegal immigration over years and
Speaker 1: years and years, these are now even in places like Texas,
Speaker 1: these are flipped flipped in terms of their partisan affiliation.
Speaker 1: It's it has already happened. But this shielding of people
Speaker 1: from deportation if they have any connection whatsoever to an
Speaker 1: illegal alien crosser child. Keep in mind that people are
Speaker 1: saying that they are sixteen who are thirty, and they
Speaker 1: very rarely will go through the process of trying to
Speaker 1: medically prove that they are not sixteen or seventeen. They
Speaker 1: just let them in the interior of the country. This
Speaker 1: is less money than Democrats originally agreed to veto power
Speaker 1: over the wall. You know, this encourages even more legal immigration.
Speaker 1: This is a bad the bad bill, folks. I wish
Speaker 1: I know, I'm a bummer. I'm sure there's some like
Speaker 1: little Trump cheerleaders somewhere. They're doing radio shows or something.
Speaker 1: They'll say, Oh, it's great easy. Nope, I'm sorry. I
Speaker 1: wish I could tell you this was good. It's not good.
Speaker 1: I wish I could say that this negotiation has yielded
Speaker 1: the results that I've been hoping for all this time. Nope,
Speaker 1: And There's also a concern about if he signs the
Speaker 1: budget bill and then declares a national emergency, why wouldn't
Speaker 1: you declare the national emergency before signing the bill. I
Speaker 1: know it sounds like just a process issue or a
Speaker 1: process question, but I think that there could be some
Speaker 1: ramifications to that too. You're just gonna You're gonna tell
Speaker 1: us as a national emergency, but you're just gonna sign
Speaker 1: a budget for business as usual. This is a little
Speaker 1: bit of cross purposes, isn't it. I know I'm keeping
Speaker 1: it real and people don't always get excited about that.
Speaker 1: But we've got a much more show coming up. I
Speaker 1: think the presidents will get a spot. It depends on
Speaker 1: how they right away. He's certainly inclined to sign it
Speaker 1: or some things in there that that are dead for
Speaker 1: a word, security and let him march toward billions de
Speaker 1: gaps by executive action. Executive action. Huh, that's what this
Speaker 1: has all come down to. Look, we were told that
Speaker 1: Trump was he said it. I'm not saying that. This
Speaker 1: isn't even somebody else describing this way. He's the greatest negotiator. Ever,
Speaker 1: how am I to tell you sitting here that this
Speaker 1: negotiation is one the Trumps has been successful and I
Speaker 1: can't say that. Yeah, I speak the truth to you.
Speaker 1: It's what I that's my mandate every day here on
Speaker 1: the show. This negotiation did not go Trump's way. This
Speaker 1: bill is a bad bill. The money, it's not just
Speaker 1: the money, it's the provisions within the bill. It's the
Speaker 1: eleven hundred pages. You dig into some of this stuff,
Speaker 1: you say, wait a second, this is gonna make the
Speaker 1: problem worse at the border. This is gonna be more lawless,
Speaker 1: this more open borders. They're just trying to slam this
Speaker 1: thing through and hope that nobody reads it. I'm just
Speaker 1: looking at certain provisions of it. I haven't a time
Speaker 1: to read an eleven hundred page bill. Who's going to
Speaker 1: read the eleven hundred page bill? Why is it eleven
Speaker 1: hundred pages? And it's dealing with immigration issues that no
Speaker 1: one talking about. They're trying to just this is classic
Speaker 1: swamp behavior. This is all of this stuff that we've
Speaker 1: believe that Trump was fighting against. And I'm not blaming
Speaker 1: it entirely on the president. That wouldn't that's not fair either.
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to describe the situation as it is,
Speaker 1: and this is a loss for anybody who wants border
Speaker 1: security and interior enforcement and an end to all the
Speaker 1: different scams that are currently being run to get around
Speaker 1: our legal immigration system, for people who think that they
Speaker 1: have a right to be here, and a Democratic Party
Speaker 1: that is absolutely shameless on this. You know, Trump said
Speaker 1: that we were you know that he was going to
Speaker 1: fight on this one. And now we're going to go
Speaker 1: into a declaration of emergency. Now that the Democrats and
Speaker 1: this I can tune out a lot of their criticism
Speaker 1: on those Oh, it's gonna said a terrible precedent, a
Speaker 1: couple of things on the precedent talking point. You're gonna
Speaker 1: hear a lot of that assuming Trump sign signs us
Speaker 1: thing tonight. Oh, by the way, I told you those
Speaker 1: breaking news side note, Bill Barr has been sworn in
Speaker 1: as the attorney general, so we have a new attorney general, everybody,
Speaker 1: Bill Barr. I also think we're going to hear the
Speaker 1: end of the Muller probe within the next two weeks.
Speaker 1: That's why that's right, John, I put I put it
Speaker 1: on the table, my friend. I make the bold predictions here.
Speaker 1: I think you're gonna have it within two weeks, and
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that this ends. They're just going to
Speaker 1: go into different investigations. They're just going to act like
Speaker 1: the Muller probe was the appetizer, and the main course
Speaker 1: is going to be all the different congressional inquiries and
Speaker 1: all the subpoenas that are gonna fly. And these are
Speaker 1: just remember these are just don't don't get all caught
Speaker 1: up in the title's Deputy Attorney General, deputy assistant Attorney
Speaker 1: General all this stuff. These are just Democrat lawyers for
Speaker 1: the most part. And Bob Barr, I'm sorry, Bill Barr.
Speaker 1: I'm not the only one who does that every instance,
Speaker 1: Bob bar Bill Barr is a competent guy, and I
Speaker 1: think he'll do I think he'll be do a solid job.
Speaker 1: Bill Barr is solid. But the DOJ problems and we're
Speaker 1: going to get more into this the next hour and
Speaker 1: what we found out about what's going on with what
Speaker 1: was going on with Annie McCabe and really bad stuff,
Speaker 1: really really bad stuff. All right, So back to just
Speaker 1: the executive order, the executive order component of this one.
Speaker 1: Obama was essentially ruling by executive order. In the second term,
Speaker 1: Obama gave us DACA, which is now treated as law
Speaker 1: that can't be overturned. DACA is almost to the left
Speaker 1: now like a constitutional right. The president can't overturn DOCCA.
Speaker 1: It was just presidential discretion. But now they're saying because
Speaker 1: of the processes of fair notice, and I mean, they're
Speaker 1: just they're just making stuff up anything in the court
Speaker 1: to keep DACA alive and well. And even if you say, buck,
Speaker 1: we're not going to deport a lot of people covered
Speaker 1: on a doctor. Yeah, but it becomes then part of
Speaker 1: the bargain for a real deal on immigration. But Obama
Speaker 1: was doing this stuff and we all said, you know,
Speaker 1: this sets a really bad precedent. They didn't care. They
Speaker 1: didn't care. As long as the left was getting what
Speaker 1: they wanted, they were fine with it. So that's part
Speaker 1: one of this, all right. And then on the oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, look at the president. Trump is setting boy
Speaker 1: declaring a national emergency. This will be like other things
Speaker 1: that Trump has done that he has a legal right
Speaker 1: to do as president. In some cases that he has
Speaker 1: statutory support for specific laws passed by Congress to help
Speaker 1: him accomplish something, and they still stop him. The court
Speaker 1: still shut him down. And now we'll have to look
Speaker 1: at is all right, what comes next after the court
Speaker 1: shut this down? And how quickly can the Trump administration
Speaker 1: prevail on this. I don't think it'll be able to
Speaker 1: prevail before the next election. So really, this just punts
Speaker 1: it past twenty twenty. But those who were saying that
Speaker 1: the liberals are gonna seize on this and they're gonna, yeah,
Speaker 1: they would seize on it any if they get power again,
Speaker 1: do you think they're gonna say, well, we were gonna
Speaker 1: do this by executive fiat, but you know, we want
Speaker 1: to play fair because Trump was fair on this one.
Speaker 1: This is nonsense. This is just allowing a kind of
Speaker 1: boy scout No offense to the boy scouts, but boy
Speaker 1: scout attitude to prevail in what is a an all
Speaker 1: out political street fight. And that's what the Trump administration's
Speaker 1: in right now. And I'm telling you, this is a
Speaker 1: bad bill that they're about to sign, and the National
Speaker 1: Emergency is not going to change anything. So we're not
Speaker 1: winning this fight right now. The fight's not over. I
Speaker 1: got to hear from the White House. I gotta make
Speaker 1: some calls what they're planning next. But right now Trump
Speaker 1: is not winning. Trump is not in fact going to
Speaker 1: come out on top of this, what is the strategy
Speaker 1: and how do we get the base fired up? I
Speaker 1: don't remember it was build the wall. If we have
Speaker 1: sixty senators, you know, build the wall. If we have
Speaker 1: a supermajority, build the wall. If we have all of
Speaker 1: government and Republicans that are whimps on this issue. You
Speaker 1: know that that was not the chant. It would make
Speaker 1: me president. We will build a wall if we can't.
Speaker 1: Now as a country, have an election where the central,
Speaker 1: the central differentiation point for the winning candidate is a
Speaker 1: promise to build a barrier at our southern border. If
Speaker 1: we can't accomplish that, these people are talking about a
Speaker 1: Green New Deal and how we went to the moon.
Speaker 1: I want to say to them, you guys, won't even
Speaker 1: let us build a fence. Won't let us build a
Speaker 1: fence unless it's around some fancy celebrity's house right back.
Speaker 1: Oh look, all they gotta do as you said the
Speaker 1: earlier talks to the engine moms. But you know, Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi and Chuck Schuman refused to talk to angie moms.
Speaker 1: They refuse to go down the border and talk to
Speaker 1: the experts. To be women in green, to put their
Speaker 1: lives alone, every day, so they don't know what manufactured crisis.
Speaker 1: They say the walls and marls an effective. They refuse
Speaker 1: to look at the data because the data shows every
Speaker 1: place that various build has worked. And you forgot one
Speaker 1: umbers John one hundred and thirty eight thousand criminal Amians
Speaker 1: were arrested by ISIS past year. It will to goal
Speaker 1: Alians that committed crimes in this country. They just didn't
Speaker 1: appear here. They come across the southwest border. So it's
Speaker 1: it's terrible glad Tom Holman's out there making the case,
Speaker 1: and it's important for as many Americans as possible to
Speaker 1: be brought the truth. And the truth is that the
Speaker 1: Democrats have aligned themselves now with the status quo at
Speaker 1: the border, which means the Democrats have aligned themselves with
Speaker 1: accepting large numbers of illegal ch of illegal aliens entering
Speaker 1: the country, a massive asylum scam, the flooding of our
Speaker 1: communities with drugs that come from across the border, and
Speaker 1: all of the political and social and economic disruptions of
Speaker 1: the lawlessness that occurs not just at the border but
Speaker 1: also in communities across the country that have to bear
Speaker 1: the brunt of sanctuary city policies. Of they say that
Speaker 1: there's no downside to this. They act like it's not
Speaker 1: a big deal. Well, guess what. Sixteen hundred murderers, illegal
Speaker 1: alien murderers are currently in ice custody. So it's just
Speaker 1: not a tenable position that they try to cling to this.
Speaker 1: But it's not a tenable position for them to claim
Speaker 1: that there is not in fact a major problem here,
Speaker 1: but they don't want to deal with it. In fact,
Speaker 1: the only funding that they really want to do, the
Speaker 1: only way they really want to tackle this problem is
Speaker 1: by saying that they want more money to process those
Speaker 1: who are scamming our system, to get them into the
Speaker 1: country even faster, and to ensure that there are even
Speaker 1: more left wing judges who are going to just say,
Speaker 1: you know what, we're not gonna We're never gonna enforce
Speaker 1: our laws, so we might as well not start now,
Speaker 1: and we might as well just keep letting people stay,
Speaker 1: just keep letting people say at a minimum, I know
Speaker 1: I'm upset with Trump on this issue, and I think
Speaker 1: that this is this is not what it should be
Speaker 1: in terms of the deal. I think the deal is
Speaker 1: it's not a good deal. And if Trump is going
Speaker 1: to sign it and declare national emergency. I've seen this
Speaker 1: coming for a long time. A lot of people have.
Speaker 1: It's not correct to call this a win. It's just
Speaker 1: the fight continues, but it's not a win. At a minimum,
Speaker 1: though the administration has woken I hope gosh. I hate
Speaker 1: using the term woke now because of the Left, but
Speaker 1: has made a lot of people realize who would not
Speaker 1: have otherwise, that there's a real problem going on and
Speaker 1: it has to be dealt with, and that we do
Speaker 1: not have willing partners in the Democrats for dealing with this.
Speaker 1: In fact, they are complicit in the continued illegality. They
Speaker 1: are seemingly unbothered by all of the negative effects of
Speaker 1: the drugs that are flooding into this country and by
Speaker 1: the cartel activity the cartels. The human trafficking is funding
Speaker 1: the cartels the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars
Speaker 1: a year. Human trafficking is the people that are being
Speaker 1: currently brought to the border or brought in the United
Speaker 1: States illegally by coyotes who all work with the cartels.
Speaker 1: Those same cartel organizations have made the Mexican government it's puppet.
Speaker 1: They have made police forces across the country, military forces
Speaker 1: in many cases their pawns. They absolutely corrupt them, and
Speaker 1: they're responsible for tens of thousands of murders a year.
Speaker 1: So once again we have Democrats posing as people who
Speaker 1: really care about these kinds of problems, posing as individuals
Speaker 1: who want to do everything in their power to make
Speaker 1: life easier for these migrants. But what about all the
Speaker 1: Mexicans and Hondurans who don't come to this country. Shouldn't
Speaker 1: they have some hope that their neighbors to the north
Speaker 1: don't want the cartels to be able to make hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars a year doing illegal alien and
Speaker 1: human smuggling operations. So I do give Trump credit at
Speaker 1: least for that. Romney was actually good on immigration, right,
Speaker 1: You know, there's a total nonsense, total aside, but Ronnie
Speaker 1: is actually good on a legal immigration one of the
Speaker 1: few Republicans. You think back to what Republicans have been
Speaker 1: saying this issue for a while. Every time they were
Speaker 1: supposed to be running for reelection and the border came
Speaker 1: up in some capacity, they're all border hawks, and then
Speaker 1: their legislation is always, well, yeah, we got to do amnesteam,
Speaker 1: We'll figure out the rest. Trump at least is not
Speaker 1: that at least is not that he has not won
Speaker 1: this battle, but he still seems willing to fight it.
Speaker 1: So much crime comes in through our southern border. Illegal
Speaker 1: immigration provides a lucrative cash flow, to put it mildly
Speaker 1: lucrative to some of the most dangerous criminal organizations on
Speaker 1: the planet. These deadly cartels flood our cities with narcotics
Speaker 1: that kill thousands of our citizens, ruined families. They use fear, intimidation,
Speaker 1: and violence to get their way. There's only one moral
Speaker 1: course of action to put these ruthless criminal cartels out
Speaker 1: of business, and out of business fast. I will never
Speaker 1: waver from my sacred duty to defend this nation and
Speaker 1: its people. We will get the job done. I can't
Speaker 1: think of a single policy that Democrats are advocating right
Speaker 1: now in this whole border dispute that would really make
Speaker 1: things harder for the cartels. In fact, the most important
Speaker 1: thing you could do would be to stop the human smuggling.
Speaker 1: That would Maybe you could argue with me about whether
Speaker 1: we could stop the importation of drugs or not, or
Speaker 1: cut it down, whether that would just affect the street price.
Speaker 1: I know those arguments. I'm familiar with it. I'm familiar
Speaker 1: with the history of the drug or I get it.
Speaker 1: But the people that are being brought into the country
Speaker 1: are currently a huge source of funding for the operations
Speaker 1: of the cartels, and there's just no willingness in the
Speaker 1: Democrats side to try and tackle that problem. Set So,
Speaker 1: you know, we're in this situation right now where I
Speaker 1: think the President did what right now he had to do.
Speaker 1: I don't think that another shutdown would have been a
Speaker 1: smart political thing to do. The Democrats would have just
Speaker 1: dug in and they would have just rubbed Trump's face
Speaker 1: in it once again. There would have been no change
Speaker 1: in that dynamic. And if he does sign this and
Speaker 1: declare the national emergency, we've I've been saying along, everyone
Speaker 1: knows it, it goes in the courts right away, and
Speaker 1: then we kind of return to business as usual. And
Speaker 1: then we get into a situation for the next election,
Speaker 1: I guess, and we're gonna have Republicans saying, see, we tried.
Speaker 1: But I'm not going to forget that the Republicans did
Speaker 1: almost nothing on this issue for the first two years.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to forget that. They made a lot
Speaker 1: of promises, but then when push came to shove, not
Speaker 1: just on immigration, but on healthcare. On a bunch of places,
Speaker 1: the Republican Party could not get it done. I know,
Speaker 1: we don't. I don't have the alternative because the left
Speaker 1: is so crazy. I mean, you know, the Republicans of
Speaker 1: the party we've got, but we can't just go along
Speaker 1: and say, hey, you know what, We're going to support
Speaker 1: you no matter what, and it's all okay, and it's
Speaker 1: all fine. We've got to push them to take the
Speaker 1: right actions. And when we don't, when we're just kind
Speaker 1: of happy with funny tweets and smacking around annoying left
Speaker 1: wing reporters on TV and all that stuff, you know,
Speaker 1: when that's the standard, how surprised can we really be
Speaker 1: when it doesn't result in any actual change. So look,
Speaker 1: I I'm I don't know. And by the time you
Speaker 1: listen to this, maybe it'll already be signed and then
Speaker 1: we'll already be in the state of emergency. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm as we go to air, this is what we're
Speaker 1: being told. I think this situation has been pretty disappointing,
Speaker 1: and I think that the president you know, maybe I
Speaker 1: don't know, Mike, what do you think? Know what? What
Speaker 1: if we want to do a shutdown again. Is there
Speaker 1: any the Democrats will just dig in, They'll outlast I'm
Speaker 1: like they did the last time. I don't see how
Speaker 1: we get around this. Yeah, I agree with you, So
Speaker 1: what's the this is? I'm not familiar with any time
Speaker 1: when a shutdown has resulted in the Republicans getting what
Speaker 1: they want and they took it. They took a political
Speaker 1: beating this last time around because of the shutdown. I
Speaker 1: don't see how that would change. And we do have
Speaker 1: to be mindful of the fact that we're heading into
Speaker 1: a twenty twenty election cycle here. I think June or
Speaker 1: July is the first Democrat debates, right the primaries of
Speaker 1: the primary. And while I don't think people will remember
Speaker 1: the last shutdown, if you do two shutdowns and the
Speaker 1: media gets to run wild with it and talk about
Speaker 1: how heartless and terrible Trump is because of all this,
Speaker 1: then we may be in a bad spot, and we
Speaker 1: may be in a situation where it has ramifications for
Speaker 1: twenty twenty. But we should have had we should have
Speaker 1: had a wall in progress already, and we don't, and
Speaker 1: that is a disappointment. We do have, however, a confirmation
Speaker 1: of the attempted soft coup against the president the United
Speaker 1: States courtesy of one former acting FBI director and Dye McCabe.
Speaker 1: This is a huge story from today that we are
Speaker 1: going to have to talk about. And I don't know
Speaker 1: if some people in the conservative media are just exhausted
Speaker 1: by this, but I'm surprised there's not more outrage. Man.
Speaker 1: You gotta get fired up every day, right, you know
Speaker 1: how it is, You got to get into the grind. Well,
Speaker 1: if you're gonna be grinding, might as well have some
Speaker 1: black rifle coffee, right, That's the way I do it.
Speaker 1: Black rifle coffee is absolutely delicious. I'm now probably a
Speaker 1: three cup of day guy was it too? But I
Speaker 1: just need my black rifle. And the good news is
Speaker 1: that this is coffee that can be delivered to you.
Speaker 1: So not only is it delicious, not only does it
Speaker 1: taste amazing, it also is a company that will send
Speaker 1: it to you to your front door if you join
Speaker 1: the Coffee Club and they support veteran and first responder causes.
Speaker 1: So support a great company, drink great coffee, have it
Speaker 1: delivered to you. This has got nothing but win win
Speaker 1: win all the way down the line. Wake up with
Speaker 1: America's Coffee Black Rifle Coffee. Visit black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck received fifteen percent off your order. That's
Speaker 1: black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck for fifteen percent off again,
Speaker 1: black Riflecoffee dot com slash Buck. I was speaking to
Speaker 1: the man who had just run for the presidency and
Speaker 1: won the election for the presidency, and who might have
Speaker 1: done so with the aid of the government of Russia.
Speaker 1: How long was it after that that you decided to
Speaker 1: start the obstruction of justice and counterintelligence investigations involving the president.
Speaker 1: I think the next day I met with the team
Speaker 1: investigating the Russia cases, and I asked the team to
Speaker 1: go back and conduct an assessment to determine where are
Speaker 1: we with these efforts and what steps do we need
Speaker 1: to take going forward. I was very concerned that I
Speaker 1: was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid
Speaker 1: ground in an indelible fashion, that were I removed quickly
Speaker 1: or reassigned or fired, that the case could not be
Speaker 1: closed or vanish in the night without a trace. That
Speaker 1: is the interview that was rocketing across the Internet today,
Speaker 1: with former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe saying that, well,
Speaker 1: among many things, we're talking about, of course, but saying
Speaker 1: that he was deeply concerned that somebody would try to
Speaker 1: shut down the Russia investigation after Coomy was fired, that
Speaker 1: Komy was the firing of Komi was a red line
Speaker 1: in essence that had been crossed, and that people I've seen,
Speaker 1: I mean, I've read more and more of this guy
Speaker 1: stuff today, that people were wandering the hallways crying. If
Speaker 1: that's the case. If you think that the firing of
Speaker 1: the director, I can tell you this, I worked at
Speaker 1: the CIA. Nobody that I knew would have cried at
Speaker 1: the CIA director had been fired. That is a bizarre,
Speaker 1: childish thing to do. So there's there's some perspective that
Speaker 1: I can give you here that you won't hear from
Speaker 1: a lot of other folks because they've never been in
Speaker 1: these kinds of large bureaucracies. We don't give a what
Speaker 1: who the director is in these places, the people that
Speaker 1: are doing And remember, I was a little I was
Speaker 1: low down, the low down the ORG chart. I was
Speaker 1: gonna say totem pole, but I feel like that's gonna
Speaker 1: get Can I say that am I appropriating? Hey? Maybe
Speaker 1: I'll ask Elizabeth Warren. So I was low down the
Speaker 1: ORG chart. That's right, John, I'll lean into it. I
Speaker 1: look around, I look over the edge that I say, boo, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna jump. So you are a rude, terrible person.
Speaker 1: Fair point, fair point. So I look at this though,
Speaker 1: when I say the stories that McCabe is telling about
Speaker 1: how adults are crying in the hallway because James Comey
Speaker 1: was fired by the president. Comey acted in egregiously politicized fashion.
Speaker 1: And there's no debate about this. When he stood in
Speaker 1: front of the country and said that there will be
Speaker 1: no charges against Hillary. That's just a fact. Now. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's really not a two sides to that discussion. That
Speaker 1: is just what has happened. That is the reality. And
Speaker 1: here we are listening to McCabe, who, according to the
Speaker 1: FBI Zone Inspector General, lied multiple times under oath and
Speaker 1: lied in regards to leaks to the press about Russia,
Speaker 1: investigated Russia investigation related materials. And I want to know
Speaker 1: some things like why shouldn't he be prosecuted, Why shouldn't
Speaker 1: he be you know, found guilty and sent to prison
Speaker 1: if in fact he did lie. Remember we have been
Speaker 1: told many times now process crimes are real crimes. If
Speaker 1: you lie to the FBI, you should go to prison. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: those people who say that the anti Trump lunatics out
Speaker 1: there's like, oh, let's right, lock up, lock up Roger Stone,
Speaker 1: who thinks that the world's a better place because Roger
Speaker 1: Stone goes to prison for lying about trivialities, lying about
Speaker 1: effectively nothing. But they say that, lock him up, Lock
Speaker 1: him up. Meanwhile, if you lie to border patrol, you're
Speaker 1: also supposed to be able to be prosecuted. But border
Speaker 1: patrol gets lied to so much. It's part of the
Speaker 1: whole lawlessness of the system down there. That prosecutors know
Speaker 1: if they start prosecuting people for that, that they're the
Speaker 1: system will come to a screeching halt. All they'll be
Speaker 1: doing is prosecuting people who lie to a border control
Speaker 1: all the time. So that should tell you. That doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that it does it's not a problem. It means
Speaker 1: that the problem is so big that they can't even
Speaker 1: begin to deal with it. But back to McCabe. He
Speaker 1: has lied multiple times. He has not been charged. I
Speaker 1: would like to know why. And he is now coming
Speaker 1: out and saying and confirming what we've already known for
Speaker 1: quite a while, but which is now I think beyond
Speaker 1: any reasonable doubt that the FBI was engaged in an
Speaker 1: effort to overthrow the president of the United States, have
Speaker 1: a coup, get rid of the president, get him out
Speaker 1: of office. The top of the FBI was trying to
Speaker 1: get rid of this president. That should be a stunning revelation,
Speaker 1: that should be oh my gosh, what are we going
Speaker 1: to do about this? Meanwhile, the meeting the press is like, Wow,
Speaker 1: any McCabe's really saying some troubling things about the president.
Speaker 1: I think the troubling thing is that this bureaucrat, this
Speaker 1: obvious Democrat wife, was buddy buddy with mccauliffe and the
Speaker 1: Clinton's and got all this money to run as a Democrat.
Speaker 1: We're reaching a point now because things are so polarized
Speaker 1: that it's increasingly hard to trust any lib in the
Speaker 1: senior reaches of the law enforcement bureaucracy and trust that
Speaker 1: they're not trying to get their extra points for wokeness,
Speaker 1: trying to get their extra points for being some kind
Speaker 1: of a social justice warrior. You know, we're rapidly reaching
Speaker 1: a point where, you know, we're going to have to
Speaker 1: look at this and say, hold on a second, what
Speaker 1: is going on here. This is crazy, This is completely nuts.
Speaker 1: The FBI director, former acting FBI director, is admitting to
Speaker 1: trying to leave in place an investigation that cannot be overturned,
Speaker 1: an investigation to find Russian collusion that Mueller after two years,
Speaker 1: has not been able to find. What was this based on.
Speaker 1: Are these idiots that he's talking about at the FBI?
Speaker 1: Are they still trying to cling to this whole Oh
Speaker 1: it's Carter Page and Papa Dot' that's what he was
Speaker 1: so worried about. Unless they have something that we don't
Speaker 1: know about, which I think is increasingly in the realm
Speaker 1: of fantasy. But unless there's some huge thing that somehow
Speaker 1: has not come to light about what the FBI not
Speaker 1: even necessarily knew but thought they knew about Russia Trump collusion,
Speaker 1: how can they justify any of this? How does this
Speaker 1: make any sense? And now you have Muller, I mean,
Speaker 1: you have a McCabe coming out and saying that there
Speaker 1: were discussions about the twenty fifth Amendment that was all real.
Speaker 1: And Rod Rosenstein, who is the Deputy Attorney General who's
Speaker 1: been overseeing the Muller probe, thought about wearing a wire
Speaker 1: against this president. We were supposed to think that these
Speaker 1: people have fair judgment about but based on what I
Speaker 1: just wish they could tell me one thing, Rosenstein, McCabe, comey,
Speaker 1: where is the they're there? Where is the thing that
Speaker 1: I'm supposed to say? Oh, my Trump really did cross
Speaker 1: a line. I hear all this stuff about all his
Speaker 1: undermining democracy at our institutions, and we got to make
Speaker 1: sure that. And then I said, okay, well, what is it?
Speaker 1: What did he do? Uh? Manafort didn't pay his taxes
Speaker 1: and lied to the investigation that was sicked on him
Speaker 1: because he worked for Trump for a few months in
Speaker 1: the campaign as the campaign director. That doesn't That doesn't
Speaker 1: get it done. Sorry that that doesn't put Humpty dumpty
Speaker 1: back together again. This is just crazy. Oh yeah, Roger
Speaker 1: Stone maybe lied about No, no, no, false? How is
Speaker 1: there hump We're outrage about this? How are people not more?
Speaker 1: Were unsettled at the prospect of these bureaucrats at the
Speaker 1: top of the FBI, the top of the DOJ thinking
Speaker 1: that they have a right to just go with these
Speaker 1: rogue investigations of the president justify a lot of it
Speaker 1: after the fact, I'm sure, in an effort to stop
Speaker 1: him from being the president. And you know when we say, okay,
Speaker 1: you know what, tell us why why were you so
Speaker 1: worried about Trump? Andy McCabe, why were you so concerned?
Speaker 1: We're supposed to believe you. Oh, you got to protect
Speaker 1: the investigation. Oh we can't. Okay, what was going to happen?
Speaker 1: What was going to be that big reveal or what
Speaker 1: is the big reveal? Absolutely nothing so far. And Chris
Speaker 1: Starwalt said it, well, today we know, let's think of
Speaker 1: the Russian investigation. That is the House that said there's
Speaker 1: no inclusion. The Senate has said there's no inclusion. I
Speaker 1: would bet my house that says there's no collusion, there
Speaker 1: is no evidence of it. Two years later, and what
Speaker 1: I think we have to ask ourselves is how in
Speaker 1: the world was this man, the acting director of the FBI,
Speaker 1: when he exercised this kind of judgment, an individual who
Speaker 1: seriously said we should implement the twenty fifth Amendment, which
Speaker 1: is essentially a coup. I mean, it's essentially treason to
Speaker 1: say we're going to remove this president based on what
Speaker 1: based on nothing, and that is the person who is
Speaker 1: acting director of the FBI on Komi's recommendation. It brings
Speaker 1: into question every other subsequent investigation, and as you said,
Speaker 1: Faiza carter Page, Look, carter Page has been accused of
Speaker 1: treason for two and a half years. Now, what is
Speaker 1: the evidence of that? Nothing? I totally agree with the
Speaker 1: representative years Representative Chris Stewart. Where are we supposed to
Speaker 1: look for this smoking gun, a gun of any a
Speaker 1: water gun I would take at this point, give me something.
Speaker 1: Two years in all the news coverage, all the supposed
Speaker 1: bombshell stories, all the fake news everything, where is the
Speaker 1: aha moment? And remember it's not just an aha moment,
Speaker 1: it's where is the aha moment to justify this absolutely insane,
Speaker 1: absolutely insane effort to try and get rid of this president?
Speaker 1: Where is it? How could any of this be justified?
Speaker 1: I mean, I see, you know Komi's staffer who is
Speaker 1: like the like pajama boy meets the FBI, going on
Speaker 1: TV at CNN all the time talking about how you
Speaker 1: know this is all fine, and yeah they're gonna Muller
Speaker 1: and you know he's one of these little Mueller cheerleaders.
Speaker 1: They got a hole slew them over at CNN. Okay,
Speaker 1: what are they cheering for? Exactly? What are we supposed
Speaker 1: to find out. It's it's mind blow what has happened here,
Speaker 1: It really is. It is completely and utterly wild. What
Speaker 1: these These are democrats in bure you know, these are
Speaker 1: Democrat bureaucrats. That's it. These are partisan actors in the
Speaker 1: most powerful justice and law enforcement agencies in the country.
Speaker 1: And they couldn't handle Hillary's loss, and they don't like
Speaker 1: Trump and they think he's ikey, and so they wanted
Speaker 1: to come up with some way to get rid of him.
Speaker 1: And now this is you can't even deny it. How
Speaker 1: is any other story right now about the Muller probe
Speaker 1: getting any attention. I mean, you know, I know that
Speaker 1: the media can't be trusted, but this is beyond this
Speaker 1: is it's wild. I reading the stuff today with McCabe.
Speaker 1: I also want to if he is not prosecuted, If
Speaker 1: McCabe is not prosecuted for lying, justice is dead in
Speaker 1: this country. McCabe multiple times under oath about a matter
Speaker 1: under investigation and of importance to the FBI, to the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice. If he is not prosecuted, justice in
Speaker 1: this country is a sham. We have a two tiered
Speaker 1: system of justice. I'm just gonna put it all on
Speaker 1: this because I'm pretty confident they're not going to prosecute.
Speaker 1: They're gonna find some special Oh, we like Andy, he
Speaker 1: was one of us carve out for this guy. You know.
Speaker 1: I'll say this. They do this at the FBI, at
Speaker 1: the CIA. Man, if you get on the if you
Speaker 1: get on the wrong side a loss of how the
Speaker 1: CIA they throw you under the bus and light you
Speaker 1: on fire. They don't care FBI, though, DJ they seem
Speaker 1: to cover for their own in a weird way. So
Speaker 1: we'll be right back. You're probably familiar with AARP. Somebody
Speaker 1: you know could already be a member, But did you
Speaker 1: know that the AARP is really left wing. That's why
Speaker 1: I recommend AMAC, because AMAC gives you all the benefits
Speaker 1: of a seniors organization that's going to advocate for you,
Speaker 1: but it's also going to advocate for your beliefs because
Speaker 1: it shares your values. So sure, with AMAC, you get
Speaker 1: discounts on car insurance, hotels, roadside assistance, but you also
Speaker 1: have an organization that's going to be pushing for the
Speaker 1: policies that matter to you, an organization that fights for
Speaker 1: your values like protecting our borders and enforcing a smaller
Speaker 1: government and less taxation. All right, So stand with AMAK
Speaker 1: as they fight the good fight by becoming a member today.
Speaker 1: Join right now at AMAC dot us slash buck. That's
Speaker 1: am AC dot us slash buck because AMAC is better,
Speaker 1: better for you, better for America. Become a member today.
Speaker 1: Tell some friends and you will hear impeachment. Ben talked
Speaker 1: about more and more. Eighty percent of Democrats believe that
Speaker 1: he should be impeached. Get up in the face of
Speaker 1: some congress people. We're here to say that an agency
Speaker 1: like ICE, which repeatedly and systematically violates human rights, does
Speaker 1: not deserve a dime. I think we need to abolish ICE.
Speaker 1: That seems really clear, eliminating ICE for instance, and President
Speaker 1: Trump yes, by replacing ICE with something that reflects our morality.
Speaker 1: Capitalism without rules is theft, brothers and sisters. There's plenty
Speaker 1: of money in the world. There's plenty of money in
Speaker 1: this city. It's just in the wrong hands. Going to
Speaker 1: a text. All your assets wherever located around the globe.
Speaker 1: The world is going to end in twelve years if
Speaker 1: we don't address climate change. Who came forward to save
Speaker 1: Earth from the scourge of Nazi until talitarian regimes. We
Speaker 1: came forward humanity is in crisis. For mothers in labor,
Speaker 1: the infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable,
Speaker 1: the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother
Speaker 1: and the family desired, and then discussion would ensue between
Speaker 1: the physicians and the mother. How late in the third
Speaker 1: trimester could a physician perform an abortion if he indicated
Speaker 1: it would impair the mental health of the woman? So
Speaker 1: I mean through the third trimester. The third trimester goes
Speaker 1: all the way up to forty weeks, okay, but to
Speaker 1: the end of the third trimester, yep. I don't think
Speaker 1: we have a limit in the bill where it's obvious
Speaker 1: that a woman is about to give birth, she has
Speaker 1: physical signs that she is about to give a birth,
Speaker 1: would that still be a point at which she could
Speaker 1: request an abortion if she was so certified she's dilating.
Speaker 1: My bill would allow that. Yes, we are in a
Speaker 1: war for the soul of this country, my friends, I know,
Speaker 1: we just pulled together. There a whole bunch of different,
Speaker 1: very memorable moments from the progressive left in recent weeks
Speaker 1: and months. That is what we were up against. And
Speaker 1: when you understand that, and you see and you hear
Speaker 1: the radicalism of the Democratic Party, everything that we are
Speaker 1: talking about now and finding out about McCabe, about the
Speaker 1: invocation of the twenty fifth Amendment, about the effort to
Speaker 1: engage in a soft coup against a duly elected president who, yes,
Speaker 1: has has plenty of laws, folks, I'm aware of just
Speaker 1: about all of them. No one's saying he's perfect, no
Speaker 1: one saying he's been able to do everything he said
Speaker 1: he's going to do. Yet I think he's a lot
Speaker 1: better than Hillary Clinton, and I think that he's actually
Speaker 1: done some pretty great stuff as president. Yet they absolutely
Speaker 1: hate his guts and the same mentality that has people
Speaker 1: that are supposed to be wise and educated and influential
Speaker 1: clapping for the Green New Deal, clapping for infanticide in
Speaker 1: those bills in Virginia and New York State. You know,
Speaker 1: those same people get jobs in the federal government. Those
Speaker 1: same people can become CIA or FBI director. Once you
Speaker 1: understand that, then it's really not that surprising that Annie
Speaker 1: McCabe is coming out and saying that they were running
Speaker 1: essentially a counter intelligence operation, not investigation, account intelligence operation
Speaker 1: against the president United States. I mean, they were thinking
Speaker 1: about wiring up the acting Attorney General and the Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General rather, and we're supposed to think that that
Speaker 1: guy Rod Rosenstein is an honest arbiter of what's going
Speaker 1: on in the Mother probe. I mean, who can take
Speaker 1: this stuff seriously? Who can believe this this lunacy? Where's
Speaker 1: the accountability, where's the honesty? I mean, CNN tonight was
Speaker 1: running Chiron's on how breaking news. I'm not making this
Speaker 1: up breaking news. President Trump's latest physical says he's obese.
Speaker 1: I mean, they specialize now in fake news, wos and
Speaker 1: fat shaming. Where's the President's an older guy? You know,
Speaker 1: he's got a little more Trump's got a little more
Speaker 1: junk in the trunk. He's got a little more to love.
Speaker 1: You know, he's cuddling. Leave him, leave the man alone?
Speaker 1: Did the MSNBC tried it out a former Obama doctor
Speaker 1: who said, I'm a little concerned with Trump's difficulty finding
Speaker 1: words when he speaks. Oh my gosh, they're going the healths.
Speaker 1: They're not birthers, they're healths. The healths are back now surfacing.
Speaker 1: We're gonna we're gonna start putting the psychiatric community from
Speaker 1: afar right the the I'm gonna diagnose Trump without ever
Speaker 1: having spoken to him, stuff which any actual psychiatrists will
Speaker 1: tell you is wildly unethical. They're gonna start doing that.
Speaker 1: I saw the president on TV you last night, bomb,
Speaker 1: and I think that he's actually crazy. And we're coming up.
Speaker 1: You got all these uh, all these people talking about
Speaker 1: socialism all of a sudden. My great friend Winston Churchill,
Speaker 1: you know, I know him and I commune with him
Speaker 1: on a regular basis. Nowadays, if you're not a socialist
Speaker 1: in your twenties, you have no heart. And if you're
Speaker 1: not a capitalist in your thirties, you have no mind.
Speaker 1: Working folks wants who embrace capitalism, not some state run,
Speaker 1: state controlled socialism that will set our economy back one
Speaker 1: hundred years or more. Just shows what happens when you
Speaker 1: have a generation without growth. We're just beginning to get growth.
Speaker 1: Is you get envy? And most Americans don't care if
Speaker 1: Bill Gates is worth ninety six billion or nine hundred
Speaker 1: and sixty trillion. They want to know are there opportunities
Speaker 1: in life improving? Are their wages going up? Are they're
Speaker 1: going to have chances for a better job for themselves,
Speaker 1: better future for the kids. That's what Americans want this
Speaker 1: redistribution mentality we have today, are they paying too much
Speaker 1: or too little? Everyone should pay less and the government
Speaker 1: would collect more from the prosperity resulting thereof. So they
Speaker 1: now what democrats want. They want higher taxes. They are
Speaker 1: embracing socialism. And I think it's important to take a
Speaker 1: step back and say, well, hold on a second. It's
Speaker 1: really not that they've changed all that much. It's not
Speaker 1: that the agenda has all of a sudden been a
Speaker 1: radical departure from what the agenda had previously been. It's
Speaker 1: just that now they're open about what they're trying to accomplish.
Speaker 1: It's that the ends have become so clear that it's
Speaker 1: increasingly difficult, I think, for anybody to believe that they
Speaker 1: aren't pushing openly for socialism. So this is a clarification.
Speaker 1: It's not a sea change, it's not a massive shift
Speaker 1: in mentality. This is a clarification on what the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party is and has become. But I did think it
Speaker 1: was an interesting and I was interesting to hear from
Speaker 1: Steve Forbes. There you obviously had could Low being could Low,
Speaker 1: I could look, I got it right. He's like, I
Speaker 1: can see why people like the guy and why he
Speaker 1: was a successful TV host and everything. He does have
Speaker 1: a charm to him, for sure, but he could low
Speaker 1: and Steve Forbes, Steve Forbes is talking about this too,
Speaker 1: how people are feeling like they're not getting ahead, and
Speaker 1: there are a lot of other people who do you
Speaker 1: know the truth is that the kind of concentration of wealth.
Speaker 1: And you know, some of my conservative friends get very
Speaker 1: oh no, no, you can and the free market, the
Speaker 1: free market, Well, when you have the kind of concentration
Speaker 1: of wealth that we have seen now, you are talking
Speaker 1: about the building of multi generational dynasties. And people that
Speaker 1: are tied to are a part of those financial dynasties.
Speaker 1: They are going to be living very different lives from
Speaker 1: the folks who are competing on a global scale for
Speaker 1: their jobs now and also are competing with the influx
Speaker 1: of unskilled workers, which, as I've mentioned, I believe the
Speaker 1: bill that the President is supposed to sign, Mike, do
Speaker 1: we know when it's going to get signed? By the way,
Speaker 1: do we know when when it's supposed to happen? I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure today, but a Donahemmerson's sure they haven't. I
Speaker 1: guess they got to go through the process, right, But
Speaker 1: I don't know if sometimes they get word out to
Speaker 1: hear about how the bill will get signed at a
Speaker 1: certain time. So regardless, I think that people look at
Speaker 1: this now and they say, hold on a second, I
Speaker 1: have to compete with a globalized economy, which was not
Speaker 1: the case before the internet. The technology of the Internet
Speaker 1: has dramatically changed things. A lot of great stuff, but
Speaker 1: also some pretty serious social upheaval and shifts that have
Speaker 1: occurred as a result of it. And then you've got
Speaker 1: the influx of legal and illegal labor. By the the
Speaker 1: legal labor issues, there's gonna be more, is it h
Speaker 1: one bs? I gotta check. But they're they're bringing in
Speaker 1: even more people to come to the legal immigration process
Speaker 1: as part of this bill. They always like to sneak
Speaker 1: that stuff in there because the donor class likes it.
Speaker 1: The donor class likes it, and what you end up seeing,
Speaker 1: and this is what is really concerning to me going
Speaker 1: to twenty twenty is an economy that right now, because
Speaker 1: things feel pretty stable, it's fine if things get really bad,
Speaker 1: if we have a maid and remember, nobody saw the
Speaker 1: major you know, if you could see a major downturn
Speaker 1: coming maybe you could avert it. We got twenty two
Speaker 1: trillion dollars of debt right now. You go back to
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, I was working at the CIA.
Speaker 1: I remember when the first real murmurs of the financial
Speaker 1: crisis we're starting to, you know, bubble up to the surface.
Speaker 1: People didn't know, and by the time they knew, it
Speaker 1: was too late. You know. Once Lehman Brothers was the
Speaker 1: first one to be sacrificed of these Wall Street banks
Speaker 1: for its profligate insanity. Once that happened, then it was like,
Speaker 1: oh wow, we got a real problem here. But it's
Speaker 1: too late to just sort of turn around the cruise ship.
Speaker 1: At that point, you're heading. You're heading for the rocks.
Speaker 1: If we get a bad economy going into twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: the Trump administration is going to be in trouble for reelection,
Speaker 1: and socialism is going to sound very appealing to a
Speaker 1: lot of people. Remember it doesn't have to sound appealing
Speaker 1: to eighty percent of the country. It just has to
Speaker 1: sound appealing to enough people to win, to win the
Speaker 1: electoral college. And we're talking about a few hundred thousand
Speaker 1: people likely being the determining factor in that. So this
Speaker 1: is not oh my gosh, there are there's no way
Speaker 1: that these you know, on the one hand, I'm talking
Speaker 1: about how extreme the left is, and that's important so
Speaker 1: that we know these are unseerious people. But just because
Speaker 1: they're unserious in their policy it does not mean they
Speaker 1: are not a serious threat to implement those policies. Just
Speaker 1: because they're nuts doesn't mean they can't be in control.
Speaker 1: And the hyper capitalist feeling right now in some sectors
Speaker 1: of the Republican Party, where any kind of economic nationalism,
Speaker 1: any sense of a duty to country and not just
Speaker 1: to the global free market, which, as I've been saying,
Speaker 1: is not truly free. That's looked down upon for the
Speaker 1: most part on the right, except for Trump, but you
Speaker 1: still have the conservative mainstream and most of the establishment
Speaker 1: Republican Party thinks that telling people, you know, learn to code,
Speaker 1: which now we've turned around on liberal journalists of course,
Speaker 1: but telling people learn to code is a solution. You
Speaker 1: should just adapt to the change in the marketplace. Well,
Speaker 1: it's simply not that simple. And I think that this
Speaker 1: is this is a moment that the Republican Party needs
Speaker 1: to really make sure that it stays connected with normal,
Speaker 1: everyday folks who do feel like there's something there's something
Speaker 1: amiss that the concentration of wealth that's going on. It's
Speaker 1: not the one percent, it's really the point zero zero
Speaker 1: one percent. But the concentration of wealth allows people to
Speaker 1: have not just an outsized influence in everything that's going
Speaker 1: on in the country. We see this with the bezos
Speaker 1: Is and the Bloombergs and others, but also there's a
Speaker 1: sense that there are far too all to create lives
Speaker 1: that separate them from the Americans that they should be
Speaker 1: ostensibly living next to and dealing with. And you know,
Speaker 1: Charles Murray does a very good job of this in
Speaker 1: a book that I recommend to all of you coming Apart,
Speaker 1: where he says that this is no longer you know,
Speaker 1: the CEO lives in a bigger house than his workers,
Speaker 1: but he lives in the same general neighborhood. Maybe he
Speaker 1: drives a fancier car, but his kids go to the
Speaker 1: same school as some of the workers do. Or you know, ah,
Speaker 1: these people are living at a different financial universe now.
Speaker 1: And you can say, Buck, that's fine, that's great. They're
Speaker 1: the people that give everyone else jobs. Right, Well, there's
Speaker 1: the economic reality, and there's the political reality, and they
Speaker 1: don't necessarily meet up, and they're not necessarily the same thing.
Speaker 1: In fact, they're often not the same thing. And that's
Speaker 1: why I think when we're talking about what these super
Speaker 1: lefties are pushing for, we need to be careful. You know.
Speaker 1: It's one thing. Yeah, I can make fun of them
Speaker 1: and all. That's all well and good. If things get
Speaker 1: really nasty in the economy, though, and it could be cyclical,
Speaker 1: it might not be Trump's fault. I don't think it
Speaker 1: would be Trump's fault. You could have a rush, a
Speaker 1: kind of stampede left in which socialism would be a
Speaker 1: much more serious, we're much more imminent concern for all
Speaker 1: of us. But then again, there's also AOC who's going
Speaker 1: to say a lot of dumb stuff. Medicare for all
Speaker 1: would save the American people a very large amount of money.
Speaker 1: Why aren't we incorporating the cost of all the funeral
Speaker 1: expenses of those who die because they can't afford access
Speaker 1: to healthcare. We look at these figures and we say, oh,
Speaker 1: unemployment is low, everything is fine, right, Well, unemployment is
Speaker 1: low because everyone has two jobs. I need to occupy
Speaker 1: every airport, we need to occupy every border, We need
Speaker 1: to occupy every ice office if we work our butts
Speaker 1: off to make sure that we take back all three
Speaker 1: chambers of Congress, rather all three chambers of government, the Presidency,
Speaker 1: the Senate, and the House. You use the term the
Speaker 1: occupation of Palestine. What did you mean by that? Oh?
Speaker 1: I think what I meant is like the settlement. Just
Speaker 1: last year, we gave the military a seven hundred billion
Speaker 1: dollars attack, a budget increase which they didn't even ask for,
Speaker 1: and we're like, the world is going to end in
Speaker 1: twelve years. I'm getting climate change. I'm gonna stop. I mean,
Speaker 1: the folks listening are probably like, Buck, what are you doing?
Speaker 1: That voice that you hear, Remember all the dumb things
Speaker 1: that we just pulled together there for you. That voice
Speaker 1: that you hear is currently the most prominent and probably
Speaker 1: in the left wing zeitgeist politician in the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: right now. It's hilarious and terrifying at the same time.
Speaker 1: And if we have a major financial downturn, it'll be
Speaker 1: mostly terrifying. What happens next. That's the first time he's
Speaker 1: given a detailed account, an account that Chicago police have
Speaker 1: said has been consistent. He hasn't changed his story. They
Speaker 1: also said it's credible. Police have said that also that
Speaker 1: he has been very cooperative. Have you ever been threatened before? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I get threatened all the time. And I asked him
Speaker 1: about if there were other possible threats that he had,
Speaker 1: threats that he had received, and he did talk about
Speaker 1: the letter that was sent to the Fox studio. Police
Speaker 1: have confirmed that letter, and despite lack of video surveillance footage,
Speaker 1: Smalltt hopes to rewrite the narrative about that night. There's
Speaker 1: many reasons why Jesse wanted to sit down and do this.
Speaker 1: First of us to say thank you to his many supporters.
Speaker 1: The times when he became emotional is when he was
Speaker 1: talking about gay youth in the LGBTQ community. What do
Speaker 1: you say to a young gay man, a young gay
Speaker 1: person to learn to fight? Why do you think you
Speaker 1: were targeted? I can just assume. I mean I come really,
Speaker 1: really hard against forty five. As I said earlier, The
Speaker 1: police have said he's been consistent, that he has been credible,
Speaker 1: that he has been cooperative. Ending. Wow, they're trying really hard, guys,
Speaker 1: to make the Jessie Smallett story seemed like it all
Speaker 1: holds together. And what you are also hearing there and
Speaker 1: that was all from what Robin, what's your from ABC?
Speaker 1: What's your name? Robin Roberts, Thank you Robin Roberts. Who
Speaker 1: is setting it up so that he's essentially now a
Speaker 1: hero even if he made this up, why might because
Speaker 1: he has raised awareness of anti LGBTQ sentiment, He has
Speaker 1: raised awareness of the vitriol across the country because of Trump.
Speaker 1: And even if he lied to raise the awareness, it's fine.
Speaker 1: He's already a hero because he's speaking out. They have
Speaker 1: they have built this guy. Look, it's there's a part
Speaker 1: of me that that's sort of the same way that
Speaker 1: the Fire Festival Guy and those who are listening to
Speaker 1: the show, If you have not watched on either Netflix
Speaker 1: or Hulu the Fire Festival documentary, I'm telling you it's
Speaker 1: worth your time. It's pretty incredible. I've watched them both.
Speaker 1: I've heard there's a third one even though might be
Speaker 1: coming out. I think you you've got to check out.
Speaker 1: But the Fire Festival Guy is a massive fraud, a liar,
Speaker 1: and hurt a lot of people that said the hubris
Speaker 1: and the skill with which he executes that con right,
Speaker 1: I mean you all, you've almost got to respect I mean,
Speaker 1: he's a horrible guy that you've almost got to respect. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's insane. He was a sociopath. But I jusi's smallest
Speaker 1: story here, And look is it? Am I am? I
Speaker 1: one hundred percent sure he's lying. No, I'm ninety nine
Speaker 1: percent sure he's lying. Now I'm not ninety nine percent sure.
Speaker 1: And we've talked about this that nothing happened to him
Speaker 1: and then he didn't maybe have some kind of a
Speaker 1: you know, a scuffle on the street with some people.
Speaker 1: I just don't believe all these flourishes about the noose
Speaker 1: and the Maga country and all that just doesn't doesn't wash.
Speaker 1: So what do you got? I was just saying, like,
Speaker 1: you're right, It's like, how come all these Robbin Roberts
Speaker 1: questions were all about like the actives inside, But how
Speaker 1: come they weren't about details of the attack. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: a say, it was a say it was a puff piece.
Speaker 1: I mean it was a let's make this guy into
Speaker 1: a hero such that it will be irrelevant. I'd be
Speaker 1: asking what the guy look like, what they say are
Speaker 1: they from? Why they approach you? We're worried before they
Speaker 1: approached you. You stop with all that stop with all
Speaker 1: that truth searching stuff. I just want to point out
Speaker 1: that Kyle Smith over at National Review wrote this today,
Speaker 1: Jesse Smollett changes his story again. The actor Jesse Smollett
Speaker 1: talked about the alleged January twentieth attack on him during
Speaker 1: a Fridge of nine in Chicago, giving Good Morning America
Speaker 1: his fullest description yet of his claims. It differs substantially
Speaker 1: from what he told police initially after the alleged assault.
Speaker 1: Smollett told GMA that the alleged attack began with a
Speaker 1: nasty comment from one person who accosted him on the street.
Speaker 1: He heard someone yell empire and then f empire and
Speaker 1: then the N word, and then he replied, he now says,
Speaker 1: what the f did you do to me? The man added,
Speaker 1: this is maga country N word, then punched him in
Speaker 1: the face. He says he fought with the two attackers,
Speaker 1: and as the two tussled, he became aware that a
Speaker 1: second assailant was present, kicking his back. After all of this,
Speaker 1: the two assailants simply ran away, and a shaken Smollett
Speaker 1: real that there was a rope around his neck. Police
Speaker 1: has said that there's only a sixty second gap in
Speaker 1: the surveillance footage between an image of small with no
Speaker 1: rope around his neck and an image of him with
Speaker 1: a rope around his neck. He told both GMA that
Speaker 1: he was talking to his manager Brandon Moore during the
Speaker 1: attack and that the phone was in his pocket, but
Speaker 1: that it fell on the ground in the scuffle. After
Speaker 1: the encounter, Smallett realized that Moore was still on the line,
Speaker 1: he picked up the phone and shouted it more, there's
Speaker 1: a blanking rope around my neck. He didn't call the
Speaker 1: police to tell them about the attack and the direction
Speaker 1: in which his attackers had fled. This is where and
Speaker 1: so that's this is all from Kyle Smith's breaking down
Speaker 1: the versions of the story over Nashal review. He writes,
Speaker 1: in previous versions of the story, Smollett didn't mention the
Speaker 1: Maga comment in his first interview with police. Forty minutes later,
Speaker 1: and b in a TMZ story based on sources directly
Speaker 1: connected to Jessie, said the attackers yelled this is Maga
Speaker 1: country without the N word. Not at the outset of attack,
Speaker 1: by the way, by the way, but as they were leaving.
Speaker 1: That TMZ story also claimed Smollett had suffered a fractured rib.
Speaker 1: Smollett now says he suffered merely a bruise rib. That's
Speaker 1: a pretty substantial difference too. And then you have the
Speaker 1: police request here in the report, which was foyed. Males
Speaker 1: dressed in black, one with a black ski mask covering
Speaker 1: his face, appeared simultaneously and both began with verbal abuse.
Speaker 1: There was no delay between when Smollett became aware of
Speaker 1: the first and second attack. The report says two unknown
Speaker 1: males approached him and gained his attention by yelling empire redacted,
Speaker 1: redacted homophobic racial slurs. Yet Smollett told GMA, I saw
Speaker 1: where they ran. How does he know now if he
Speaker 1: did not know then, because in the initial police report
Speaker 1: said the victim does not remember any distinguishing features or
Speaker 1: in which direction they fled. So the police report is
Speaker 1: inconsistent with the stuff that he's saying on Tim. And
Speaker 1: there's more and more. I'm not gonna read all of
Speaker 1: Kyle's piece or two, but there's more and more of this. Now.
Speaker 1: I understand that people are going to say, oh buck,
Speaker 1: in the heat of the moment, when one is scared
Speaker 1: and frightened and all that. In the heat of the
Speaker 1: moment you could forget details. How many allowances here are
Speaker 1: we going to make for this guy? How many? Yeah,
Speaker 1: that doesn't really add up, but maybe it's possible. I
Speaker 1: think we all know the answer to that. The only
Speaker 1: reason I stay on this is because in the first
Speaker 1: days when I was skeptical, I got a lot of
Speaker 1: I got a lot of heat from some people on Twitter,
Speaker 1: some blue check mark folks on Twitter, and I just
Speaker 1: want to follow on this because they're gonna drop this
Speaker 1: story and it's gonna be like it never happened. And
Speaker 1: they're gonna drop the story because no one's going to
Speaker 1: believe that it's true anymore. We're not there yet. There's
Speaker 1: some people still believe this, Fewer and fewer people are
Speaker 1: believing it, and I'm not gonna let it go. Don't
Speaker 1: go with some liberal email system. Okay, they support progressive causes,
Speaker 1: they do not share your values. You want a great
Speaker 1: email system that will make sure that they are supporting
Speaker 1: your values, and that's what you get with ipatriots dot us.
Speaker 1: Ipatriots dot us is the conservative alternative to liberal based
Speaker 1: email services. It's secure, its private, gives you more of
Speaker 1: what you want without all the ads and spam. Your
Speaker 1: email and files are safe with ipatriots premium anti virus,
Speaker 1: anti spam, two hundred and fifty six bit encryption, and
Speaker 1: Ipatriots won't sell your information or support liberal agenda items.
Speaker 1: Like most free email providers, it's compatible with most email
Speaker 1: and most mobile devices iPhone, iPad, Android, Windows Mobile, and BlackBerry.
Speaker 1: Show your Patriot enter promo code buck when you check
Speaker 1: out this new offer, sign up month to month for
Speaker 1: your service and get the first month free. You won't
Speaker 1: be charged until your second month of service at the
Speaker 1: specified rate, and you can cancel anytime. Input your desired
Speaker 1: Ipatriots email address during checkout. I thought this was a
Speaker 1: fascinating piece and we will put it up on Facebook.
Speaker 1: Here it's on this site Quillette that does a fair
Speaker 1: amount of this outside the bounds of political correctness thinking
Speaker 1: and writing, which of course is great. It's that's where
Speaker 1: our friend Andy know who did all that work on Antifa,
Speaker 1: that's where he works. That's what he has been up to.
Speaker 1: But this piece is really a must read, and it's
Speaker 1: called public Education, Dirty Secret, written by woman named Mary Hudson.
Speaker 1: Now I've talked to producer Mike about this one because
Speaker 1: I asked Mary to come on the show, and we
Speaker 1: are an email contacts. She knows who I am. But
Speaker 1: she has a PhD in French. I think in French
Speaker 1: literature or maybe just French language. I forget and Mike,
Speaker 1: if you're teaching and you have a PhD in French,
Speaker 1: not a PhD in astrophysics or something, or you know, chemistry,
Speaker 1: PhD in French, you're probably a live right, So which
Speaker 1: is okay? Eto she She may be a little I
Speaker 1: don't know if she's a lib or not. We're just
Speaker 1: playing that. We're playing the odds here because she didn't
Speaker 1: respond when I said, would you like to come on?
Speaker 1: You know, would you I've never heard of her before.
Speaker 1: She's just an educator from what I understand. We did
Speaker 1: ask her to come on the show, and she ghosted me,
Speaker 1: man ghosted me. So I don't know what to tell you.
Speaker 1: She said, I heard you really like my piece. That's
Speaker 1: really nice. And I said, yes, we want to have
Speaker 1: you on, ready to talk about it silence or as
Speaker 1: we say, radio silence. So now I'm gonna talk about
Speaker 1: her piece without her Because I tried, right, we invited
Speaker 1: her on. I wanted her to be the one to
Speaker 1: tell us about it. You have got to read this thing.
Speaker 1: It's I want to just read the opening paragraph, and
Speaker 1: then I'll kind of tell you all about how she's
Speaker 1: tackling some of the sacred cows of the public education system,
Speaker 1: how she is completely fed up with what has been
Speaker 1: going on in some of the schools that she worked
Speaker 1: in a New York City. Let me just give you
Speaker 1: at this is our opening paragraph. Then i'll tell you
Speaker 1: the stuff she talks about. Bad teaching is a common
Speaker 1: explanation given for the disastrously inadequate public education received by
Speaker 1: America's most vulnerable populations. This is a myth. Aside from
Speaker 1: a few lemons who were notable for their rarity, the
Speaker 1: majority of teachers I worked with for nine years in
Speaker 1: New York City's public school system or dedicated talented professionals
Speaker 1: before joining the system. I was mystified by these schools
Speaker 1: abysmal results. I too, assume there must be something wrong
Speaker 1: with the teaching. This could not have been farther from
Speaker 1: the truth. Teaching French and Italian job balat, that's all
Speaker 1: anyone knows how to say Italian right that? And Luella,
Speaker 1: which I guess isn't really Italian, but true or false. Guys,
Speaker 1: you put into tela on anything, it is delicious. It's
Speaker 1: dangerous to have it in your house because all of
Speaker 1: a sudden you be like, oh, like that old banana peal,
Speaker 1: that'll taste great with some motela on it if you
Speaker 1: don't have anything better. Mike, you know you'll do it exactly.
Speaker 1: I haven't got in years because I instantly put on
Speaker 1: twenty pens. I can't even tell you. I know I
Speaker 1: have to keep it on my because I can't even
Speaker 1: tell you if it If it's around, I'll be like, oh, like,
Speaker 1: obviously you should put in a tell on like rich
Speaker 1: crackers or something. I mean I used to eat those
Speaker 1: things before I had tulliac disease. But yeah, I'll just
Speaker 1: put it on anything. I once dated a girl who
Speaker 1: hated to tell. I broke up with her twenty four
Speaker 1: hours later. I think that's a smart move. I mean this.
Speaker 1: You know you can't be dealing with something like that. Mike.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you got yourself out of that unacceptable. I
Speaker 1: clearly have my priorities straight. You sent it, sent you
Speaker 1: sent any one eight hundred flowers sent Amy Today producer
Speaker 1: Mike uh the mom got Sherry's berries. Okay, but uh
Speaker 1: I went in her flowers. Huh. I see how it is.
Speaker 1: Miss Molly got one eight hundred flowers. It's all that
Speaker 1: really matters, all right. I'm sure she liked her Sherry's
Speaker 1: berries though, Dude, anything on Valentine's Day is nice, So yeah,
Speaker 1: to tell is delicious. I've put it on weird things.
Speaker 1: I maybe even have put it on I'm trying to
Speaker 1: think of the strangest thing. It probably made its way
Speaker 1: onto a luncheon meet at some point, which it's really
Speaker 1: the that's the out Yeah, John is shaking his head.
Speaker 1: That's the outer reaches of what you should put in
Speaker 1: the tele on. When you're putting the tele on, Ham,
Speaker 1: you've probably got a problem. But so anyway, this sorry
Speaker 1: back to the story, which is the important part of
Speaker 1: all this. Teaching French and Italian New York City high schools,
Speaker 1: I finally figured out why this was Again this is
Speaker 1: in the words of Mary Hudson, because the reason was
Speaker 1: so antithetical to the prevailing mindset. I worked at three
Speaker 1: very different high schools over the years, spanning a fairly
Speaker 1: representative sample. That was a while ago, but the system
Speaker 1: has not improved since as the fundamental problem has not
Speaker 1: been acknowledged, let alone addressed, it would not be hard
Speaker 1: or expensive to fix. And then she goes into some
Speaker 1: details here and well, here, here's some of it. The
Speaker 1: next three years were a nightmare. School always teetered on
Speaker 1: the verge of chaos. The previous principle had just been dismissed,
Speaker 1: although it was never stated, all that was expected of
Speaker 1: teachers was to keep students in their seats and the
Speaker 1: vaulvolume down. This was an enormous school on five floors,
Speaker 1: with students court and off into separate programs, And she
Speaker 1: just goes in. As the week's tracked painfully into months,
Speaker 1: it became apparent the students wouldn't learn anything. It was dumbfounding.
Speaker 1: It was all I could do to keep them quiet,
Speaker 1: that is, seated and talking amongst themselves. Sometimes I had
Speaker 1: to stop girls from grooming themselves or each other. A
Speaker 1: few brave souls try to keep up with instruction. Are
Speaker 1: particularly good. History teacher once told me that she interrupted
Speaker 1: a conversation between two girls asking them to pay attention
Speaker 1: to the lesson. One of them looked up at her,
Speaker 1: scornfully and sneered. I don't talk to teachers, turning her
Speaker 1: back to resume their chat, and it goes on and
Speaker 1: on and on. This is a declaration from a seasoned
Speaker 1: teacher in the New York City school system. She went
Speaker 1: to various public schools here, and this is a declaration
Speaker 1: of how these students that she was supposed to be
Speaker 1: teaching were completely and utterly disrespectful to authority, suffered no consequences,
Speaker 1: and did not care. I you know, you won't see
Speaker 1: people talking about this. It's so much more fashionable to
Speaker 1: say that the problem is that there's not enough funding.
Speaker 1: The problem is that the teachers need more, the teachers
Speaker 1: need smaller class eyes. As you hear all this stuff
Speaker 1: all the time, why do some of these schools have
Speaker 1: such atrocious I mean, she talks about how people are
Speaker 1: graduating with what she would would she would honestly claim
Speaker 1: to be a fifth grade reading level. They're graduating from
Speaker 1: high school regularly and people also then at the other
Speaker 1: end of this will say we need to make college
Speaker 1: free for everybody. So now you're going to have everybody
Speaker 1: making the decision they need to take four years in
Speaker 1: getting an undergraduate degree, which is going to mean that
Speaker 1: if everyone can do that because it's free, You're gonna
Speaker 1: have a lot of people going to college with fifth
Speaker 1: grade reading levels. Does anyone think that really benefits those
Speaker 1: people who are going to college? Would they be better
Speaker 1: off learning a trade or skill? Is an interesting when
Speaker 1: you say that, even as I say it, I realize
Speaker 1: people would sneer at that. They would sneer at How
Speaker 1: dare you say that people should what learned to provide
Speaker 1: provide a professional service that people need, that they'd be
Speaker 1: well compensated for, and that they could have career growth
Speaker 1: in and go back to school. No one saying that
Speaker 1: if you were to become some kind of technician, some
Speaker 1: kind of skilled tradesmen, whether you're whether you're talking about
Speaker 1: being a welder or just getting a job for a
Speaker 1: few years to make some money and then go no
Speaker 1: one says he can't go back to school. People just
Speaker 1: don't want to speak the truth about this though, that
Speaker 1: we have much more fundamental problems in the educational system
Speaker 1: in this country than small class size or the need
Speaker 1: for small class size and the need for more funding.
Speaker 1: We spend an incredible amount of money on public education
Speaker 1: in this country, but this whole piece public education, dirty
Speaker 1: little secret is just about how you have all these kids,
Speaker 1: And she says it's really at the high school age
Speaker 1: is where it manifests itself. All these kids who don't
Speaker 1: want to listen, know that there were no consequences for
Speaker 1: not listening, are openly disrespectful to teachers, have no inclination
Speaker 1: whatsoever to study or to learn. But also, and I
Speaker 1: thought this is really interesting, all believe that they should
Speaker 1: be able to go to college. So they won't study,
Speaker 1: they won't be quiet, but they think that they'll somehow
Speaker 1: just be pushed, That they'll be pushed because they've been
Speaker 1: pushed through the system so far, that they will be
Speaker 1: pushed through into college as well. That essentially the educational
Speaker 1: system exists to cater to them, exists to paper over
Speaker 1: their indifference there ineptitude as they get older. Right, it's
Speaker 1: not a good thing to be an eighteen year old
Speaker 1: who reads at the level of a twelve year old.
Speaker 1: And these are based on statewide or national standards. No
Speaker 1: one ever talks about education this way. I mean, I
Speaker 1: know this. I remember my college girlfriend, well, one of
Speaker 1: two college girlfriends, but that's more information than he needs
Speaker 1: to know. One of my college girlfriends went into the
Speaker 1: Teach for America program, and this woman, Mary Hudson, talks
Speaker 1: about Teach for America and she says, these kids show
Speaker 1: up from Teach for America that are twenty three, and
Speaker 1: they've all been so programmed by Teach for America but
Speaker 1: also the universities that they're these little social justice advocates,
Speaker 1: and they always feel like they're the ones failing the kids. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: an adult with a real educational background looks at them
Speaker 1: and says, no, these kids are acting like disrespectful punks,
Speaker 1: and you can't teach people who are disrespectful punks and
Speaker 1: don't care and believe the systems should cater to them
Speaker 1: and the systems should make everything go away. Mike A,
Speaker 1: this is an article about reality. My friend, you know
Speaker 1: who teach them? Their parents? Yep, where are they doing this?
Speaker 1: Where are they in this equation? M i A. We'll
Speaker 1: be right back. Global Verification Network the only dual certified
Speaker 1: veteran owned background investigation and vetting company out there. Look,
Speaker 1: if you own a business, if you run a business,
Speaker 1: if you are in the HR Department, got to do
Speaker 1: background checks. People have a lot of ways of falsifying
Speaker 1: their information. This could become a liability for you, And
Speaker 1: don't you want to have the peace of mind of
Speaker 1: knowing that whoever you're hiring or whoever you're leasing out
Speaker 1: of property to you or engaging in business transactions with,
Speaker 1: is the person they say they are, somebody that you
Speaker 1: can trust. You know, well, that's why you want Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network to be doing these background checks for you.
Speaker 1: They have risk mitigation experts across the country. They're headquarters
Speaker 1: or in Chicago. Just give them a call, tell them
Speaker 1: about the way that you need this to get done right,
Speaker 1: whether you've got a lot of background checks because you've
Speaker 1: got a huge company or small, they can take care
Speaker 1: of for you. Call eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: one seven nine. That's eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: eleven seventy nine. Or go to my GVN dot com again,
Speaker 1: that's my GBN dot com. I failed to understand why
Speaker 1: members of this committee or the American people should find
Speaker 1: any testimony that you give today to be truthful. If
Speaker 1: I can respond to that it wasn't a question that
Speaker 1: was not That was not a question that was the
Speaker 1: high I reserve the right to my time, Yes or no?
Speaker 1: Do you think that massacre was a fabulous achievement that
Speaker 1: happened under our watch. That is a ridiculous question. Yes
Speaker 1: or no, No, I will I will take that. Yes,
Speaker 1: I am not going to respond to that kind of
Speaker 1: personal attack, which is not a question. It's amazing to
Speaker 1: watch somebody who is as as ignorant and foolish as
Speaker 1: ilhan Omar try to go after someone of whether you
Speaker 1: like him or not, or like his record or not.
Speaker 1: As a long time and very senior member of the
Speaker 1: Diplomatic Corps, Elliot Abrams there, the US Envoy to Venezuela.
Speaker 1: You know, you have the the House Foreign Affairs Committee,
Speaker 1: which ilhan Omar sits on, much to the shock and
Speaker 1: displeasure of people who are not completely insane, deciding to
Speaker 1: grill Abrams here and trying to score some cheap political
Speaker 1: points by talking about massacre and El Salvador that occurred
Speaker 1: decades ago, and you know, leaves out of course the
Speaker 1: context about how he didn't want communism taking root in
Speaker 1: Central America. Communism took root in Cuba and it has
Speaker 1: been a problem for US ever since, in fact is
Speaker 1: a problem to this day. So while we can certainly
Speaker 1: have a robust and serious discussion about the merits of
Speaker 1: anti communist policy, particularly during the Reagan and HW Bush years.
Speaker 1: And you know, we could have that talk. But that
Speaker 1: does not mean that it's okay to say is the
Speaker 1: massacre good? I mean, she's just trolling him. This is
Speaker 1: all this is. I mean, this is how people now
Speaker 1: on the left get elected a higher office. They just
Speaker 1: try to slam and shame conservatives whenever they have an opportunity.
Speaker 1: And I just think it's interesting that the left has
Speaker 1: taken a position on this. And I've seen this. I've
Speaker 1: even had a couple of Twitter exchanges with people that
Speaker 1: on some issues are reasonably intelligent, but on this issue
Speaker 1: they're they're just idiots where they're accusing the US of
Speaker 1: fomenting a coup in Venezuela. And let me say that
Speaker 1: it is not possible for us to do much realistically
Speaker 1: in Venezuela that would make anything worse than it already is.
Speaker 1: This is really bad. Now. That doesn't mean we should
Speaker 1: send in troops. And there are obviously our limitations to this.
Speaker 1: But in terms of upsetting the apple cart, people are starving,
Speaker 1: people are losing twenty or thirty pounds because they don't
Speaker 1: have access to food. Inflation is ten million percent or something.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's completely out of control. The country is collapsing,
Speaker 1: it's in free fall, and the left takes this approach.
Speaker 1: Of the problem here is that America is supporting Guido
Speaker 1: instead of Maduro. The problem here is that the duly
Speaker 1: elected speaker of the parliament there is saying that he's
Speaker 1: the rightful because the last election was marved with for all,
Speaker 1: that he's the rightful president. You know, it's not like
Speaker 1: we trotted in and look, we've done this before, right,
Speaker 1: we picked somebody who's in exile. It's not like we
Speaker 1: trotted in some individual that no one has ever heard
Speaker 1: of in that country, and no what has happened here.
Speaker 1: You just we finally have said, look, we're not gonna
Speaker 1: be a part of We're not gonna be a part
Speaker 1: of this Maduro dumpster fire situation. We are going to
Speaker 1: give diplomatic support to Guido in Venezuela and the left
Speaker 1: when you have people who are impoverished in Venezuela, who
Speaker 1: are starving in Venezuela, the country is a disaster. It
Speaker 1: is now a failed state. It has effectively narco state government.
Speaker 1: You have some of the top figures in the Venezuelan
Speaker 1: government are sanctioned for being narco traffickers. You know, you
Speaker 1: just got on the litter. You've got thirty thousand some
Speaker 1: odd murders I think a year there. I mean, the
Speaker 1: murder rate is sky high. There's no rule of law
Speaker 1: to speak of. There's no bread on the shelves, no
Speaker 1: milk in the in this store. And the problem that
Speaker 1: ilhan Omar and others have with this is that America
Speaker 1: is meddling. I can understand. You don't meddle in places
Speaker 1: where you know, we don't have an interest or we
Speaker 1: don't care, or where maybe you know, the people should
Speaker 1: be allowed to determine their own fate. All we're doing
Speaker 1: is saying our American presence there, our diplomatic presidence, is
Speaker 1: going to be interfacing with this guy, not this guy.
Speaker 1: And we're joining with all of the decent countries of
Speaker 1: the Western hemisphere to say that we're not going to
Speaker 1: play games anymore with this guy Maduro. We want to
Speaker 1: be involved with Guido and ilhan Omar and these extreme
Speaker 1: leftist types. See they just view this as an opportunity
Speaker 1: to try to trash Trump foreign policy. They don't really
Speaker 1: care about the suffering of people in a place like Venezuela,
Speaker 1: which I think is so interesting here. If they cared
Speaker 1: about the suffering of the Venezuelan people, wouldn't they be
Speaker 1: in favor of the US supporting a Venezuelan leader who
Speaker 1: is duly elected, who based on the Venezuelan constitution and
Speaker 1: on everyone's understanding of what happened in the last election there,
Speaker 1: sham elect that Maduro Ran is the president is the
Speaker 1: president event as well, we're not imposing somebody, we're not.
Speaker 1: And if people say that we're engaged in a coup,
Speaker 1: wouldn't we be engaged in a coup if we supported
Speaker 1: a dictator who's broken the law there in continuing to
Speaker 1: be in office. See, this is where foreign policy can
Speaker 1: get a little complicated. Just status quo is not the
Speaker 1: same as non intervention. Status quo can actually be being
Speaker 1: a part of the of the problem. Right if you
Speaker 1: are are support Let's say we have diplomatic relations with
Speaker 1: a country and then all of a sudden, the leadership
Speaker 1: in that country decides that they're not going to recognize
Speaker 1: new elections that just happened, and we say, sorry, you know,
Speaker 1: there's actually a government now that's that's supposed to supplant
Speaker 1: you or supposed to replace you. We're going to work
Speaker 1: with them. Are we engaged in a coup? You got
Speaker 1: to you gotta pick sides here. There's there's no standing
Speaker 1: on the silence. But Ilhan Omar doesn't think about any
Speaker 1: of that. Ilan Omar just likes to make foolish comments
Speaker 1: about how Elliot Abrams is responsible for a massacre in
Speaker 1: El Salvador decades ago, because she's really trying to take
Speaker 1: pot shots at the guy, and this is how she
Speaker 1: gets her base excited. And this is how the left
Speaker 1: wing views people like Elliot Abrams who are trying to
Speaker 1: make things better for the people of Venezuela. This is
Speaker 1: why a lot of the posturing you see on the
Speaker 1: left it bothers me. A lot of the posturing you
Speaker 1: see on the left is hollow. You know. Oh, they
Speaker 1: care so much about people who are impoverished and who
Speaker 1: are oppressed, and they care so much about the third world. Well, really,
Speaker 1: what they care about is how does playing to people's
Speaker 1: emotions affect their ability to be in power, to have
Speaker 1: authority over other Americans and to get their way. That
Speaker 1: seems to be the single most important thing for a
Speaker 1: lot of these leftists, people like Ilhano more that that
Speaker 1: talk the like they speak the language of social justice,
Speaker 1: but they don't really care about justice, care about sounding
Speaker 1: like somebody who wants to make a difference in these areas.
Speaker 1: But really, when there are people who are oppressed, if
Speaker 1: it doesn't add up in a way that benefits them politically,
Speaker 1: they're done with it. They don't care anyone shows that
Speaker 1: everyday Americans still have the power to organize, fight for
Speaker 1: their communities and they can have more saying this, even
Speaker 1: the this man in the world, Yeah, she thinks it's incredible.
Speaker 1: All right, AOC happy that Amazon is not in fact
Speaker 1: going to build its New York City headquarters. I am
Speaker 1: here in New York City right now. I can tell
Speaker 1: you that I'm sure there are some people in the
Speaker 1: Long Island City section of Queens who are not going
Speaker 1: to be thrilled about what this might do to their
Speaker 1: real estate value. But Amazon has said that after much
Speaker 1: thought and deliberation, we've decided not to move forward with
Speaker 1: our plans to build a headquarters for Amazon and Long
Speaker 1: Island City. That was according to a spokeswoman from Amazon.
Speaker 1: Today turns out that seventy percent John seventy percent of
Speaker 1: New Yorkers polled support Amazon coming to New York with
Speaker 1: the twenty five thousand jobs that it would bring with
Speaker 1: the campus, the headquarters, the restaurants and support systems that
Speaker 1: would probably pop up right next to the campus. But
Speaker 1: you had local politicians, that's right, the very left wing,
Speaker 1: very progressive types who proliferate here in New York City.
Speaker 1: They thought that it was not okay to give one
Speaker 1: of the world's most valuable companies billions of dollars in
Speaker 1: tax incentives. According to the Wall Street Journal here, that's
Speaker 1: the main reason. So this is quite a reversal because
Speaker 1: there had been a long search for Amazon to find this.
Speaker 1: This is gonna be its second headquarters and actually, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry it says fifty thousand jobs was another estimate here,
Speaker 1: five billion dollars in investment, and instead it's going to
Speaker 1: go forward within Nashville and Virginia, Northern Virginia, which depending
Speaker 1: on where you are, I find Northern Virginia to be
Speaker 1: a pretty uninspiring place. But this just goes to show
Speaker 1: you that, you know, the progressive mentality here in New
Speaker 1: York City is powerful enough that even Amazon can't break
Speaker 1: through it that's Hey, we're gonna hire a lot of people.
Speaker 1: We're gonna hire a whole lot of folks. And that
Speaker 1: wasn't good enough because of the tax breaks they're going
Speaker 1: to move here. You know, I'm a little bit of
Speaker 1: two minds, two minds about this because on the one hand,
Speaker 1: it does seem strange that a company should have to
Speaker 1: be wooed to set up in a state via tax breaks.
Speaker 1: That is cronyism. On the other hand, doesn't New York
Speaker 1: want to have Amazon here? Doesn't New York City want
Speaker 1: that to be part of the jobs in financial ecosystem here?
Speaker 1: So we'll see. But Amazon is not going to be
Speaker 1: getting built here. And the progressives view this as some
Speaker 1: kind of a win. And you had like Councilman Jimmy
Speaker 1: Van Bramer say, quote, Amazon refused to change and accept
Speaker 1: New York values, And yeah, Kazio Cortez view this as
Speaker 1: a as a huge victory. Oh you know what this
Speaker 1: really comes down to, folks, now that I see this
Speaker 1: in this piece, anti union? Amazon is anti union. That
Speaker 1: that was a You see, anytime you're anti union, you're
Speaker 1: going to run into the Democrat machinery in a buzz
Speaker 1: saw like fashion and that was a that was a
Speaker 1: big problem. I left that out of the conversation up
Speaker 1: to this point. But you have Amazon executives who had
Speaker 1: to sit there and get grilled about how much they're paid.
Speaker 1: And then also the fact that Amazon is not good
Speaker 1: when it comes to dealing with with unions, meaning that
Speaker 1: they don't cave to union demands. And yeah, that's that's
Speaker 1: why the because if you want to get elected in
Speaker 1: a place like New York City, you have to essentially
Speaker 1: you have to play ball with the unions. You have
Speaker 1: to do what they want you to do. You have
Speaker 1: to support the policies they want you to support. So
Speaker 1: I'm not surprised given that they went on they went
Speaker 1: on an anti union well, they went on the anti
Speaker 1: union list that was going to be enough to essentially
Speaker 1: knock them out of being warmly received in New York City.
Speaker 1: I am a little surprised that they managed. They managed
Speaker 1: to do this and then then Amazon pulled it after
Speaker 1: the fact. I figured they would have gotten this done beforehand,
Speaker 1: but but no, it seems like turns out Amazon just
Speaker 1: couldn't take the heat and decided to get out of
Speaker 1: New York's kitchen. Like soft butter on warm toast. Time
Speaker 1: to spread some freedom coast to coast. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call. Indeed, roll call time. Before I get into
Speaker 1: it today though, let me say that today is just
Speaker 1: kind of a kind of a tough day, not the
Speaker 1: most fun day I've had in a while. I had
Speaker 1: to deal with some business issues and Miss Molly had
Speaker 1: a family emergency, so I am solo on Valentine's Day,
Speaker 1: which we were not anticipating, but she had a true
Speaker 1: family emergency she had to deal with. So that you
Speaker 1: know the day, the day wasn't going wasn't going great,
Speaker 1: I could put it that way. But I was walking
Speaker 1: through I went to visit a friend of mine over
Speaker 1: who works over at the thirty Rock building here in
Speaker 1: New York City, and I was walking through the lobby
Speaker 1: there and a young gentleman named Raheem with a few
Speaker 1: of his friends were walking past, and I had my
Speaker 1: earbuds in. I actually was listening to UM listening to
Speaker 1: a call at the time, and a guy rahim waves
Speaker 1: the unit says you buck Sexton. I'm like, as a
Speaker 1: matter of fact, I am, sir, and he goes, I
Speaker 1: listened to you all the time, And I said, Raheim,
Speaker 1: you just made my day. I'll give you a shout
Speaker 1: out tonight on radio, and so here we are, right
Speaker 1: he a shout out, man, Thank you so much for
Speaker 1: the high five. Always nice to see a member of
Speaker 1: the team out and about and really did, really did
Speaker 1: appreciate it. And I hope you had a good rest
Speaker 1: of your day with the folks you were hanging out with.
Speaker 1: So thank you so much and great to see you,
Speaker 1: my friend. All right, with that, we will do some
Speaker 1: roll call. I say this to you, of course, and
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden my Facebook freezes. All right,
Speaker 1: here we go, Bart, right buck. I always enjoy when
Speaker 1: you or your listeners recommend books, films, or music. The
Speaker 1: band Sabbatan is now a favorite. The Last Kingdom Season
Speaker 1: one was great, season two not so much. I agree
Speaker 1: with you, Bart when it comes to country music. I
Speaker 1: grew up in the South, but I still can't seem
Speaker 1: to get into it. However, I'm a big fan of
Speaker 1: southern rock. Check out the band Jive Mother Mary for
Speaker 1: sound that is reminiscent of CCR and SKINNERD and their
Speaker 1: song The Great Decline tells you what side the right
Speaker 1: one of the political spectrum they sit on. Because Contrary
Speaker 1: to what you may I thought, the music of the
Speaker 1: South is southern rock, not country. Well, Barret, always good
Speaker 1: to hear from you, my friend, and I I had
Speaker 1: never heard this southern rock versus country paradigm. John, are
Speaker 1: you familiar with this? I'm not. I don't really a
Speaker 1: little bit. Yeah, maybe so we'll see Andre's rights. The
Speaker 1: AOC joke regarding ice cream clever. The punchline nothing because
Speaker 1: there's nothing there to freeze. It took me four seconds
Speaker 1: to get it. Funny, but kind of a want wampum.
Speaker 1: It is definitely a want wamp So the AOC joke,
Speaker 1: I guess we read off from the Roll Call yesterday.
Speaker 1: There you have it, Harry whoa Harry. Harry has written
Speaker 1: quite an opus here, Harry rights. Hey Buck, I'm behind
Speaker 1: my essential podcast listening, so forgive me if you've moved
Speaker 1: on from this subject. Diversity is our strength. My medicare
Speaker 1: communications come with notices in fifteen different languages. Of course,
Speaker 1: all Americans should read and speak these languages and fluently,
Speaker 1: so that in their day to day lives. I can
Speaker 1: interact with anyone who's not taking the effort to learn
Speaker 1: English in America. Right do they do that in bilingual
Speaker 1: Canada or trilingual Switzerland, the fifteen languages thing. That is,
Speaker 1: when I visited France, I was so insulted that all
Speaker 1: the natives would not speak English that it really what
Speaker 1: do you say to me? When you worked overseas, you
Speaker 1: definitely expected anyone you met to be able to speak English,
Speaker 1: didn't you. It annoys me when you see containers and
Speaker 1: stories written in Spanish, though I do understand it when
Speaker 1: instructions enclosed are more than one language for products to
Speaker 1: be sold internationally. Borders we don't need no stinking borders
Speaker 1: or national identity shows, Hi, Harry, Harry was there's a
Speaker 1: lot like going on there, Harry. I try to get
Speaker 1: through that, and I think I get I think I
Speaker 1: get what you're putting down, and I appreciate it. So
Speaker 1: thank you very much for that. Charles writes, he sent
Speaker 1: me a link that's that's not that's not gonna be
Speaker 1: fun to be like x y q rs dot dot
Speaker 1: backslash underscore. I can't. I can't read the link off
Speaker 1: on it. That wouldn't make sense. Kristen White, your Beto
Speaker 1: impression kills me. Has anyone told you what sounds like?
Speaker 1: Care from Napoleon Dynamite. Yeah, because if you really listen
Speaker 1: to Beto, like he kind of sounds like that, like
Speaker 1: he's got like a little more raspy in his voice,
Speaker 1: Like I can't really do it, but he kind of
Speaker 1: does this thing like air. Well, that's what Betos sounds like,
Speaker 1: and it's just like it's so hip, a millennial sounding. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's uh, he's not going to be president that I
Speaker 1: can tell you. Will he be the Democrat nominee. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I'd have to leave that to uh, some
Speaker 1: of you. Peter writes, Hey Buck, I'm not sure if
Speaker 1: you saw it, but the border deal includes protection for
Speaker 1: a butterfly sanctuary on the border, preventing a wall from
Speaker 1: being built there. Yep, Democrats care more about butterflies than
Speaker 1: American lives. Shield tie Pete up in Michigan. Yeah, Pete,
Speaker 1: I hopefully I've made at least some of my objections
Speaker 1: to this clear. But you are correct in that there's
Speaker 1: a lot of stuff in this in this omnibus that
Speaker 1: is going to get signed here, or rather the Senate
Speaker 1: has passed that is a problem, and Trump says he's
Speaker 1: going to sign it, so we'll see faith. Hey Buck,
Speaker 1: podcast listener here. If you're delving into country music, do
Speaker 1: yourself a favor and try Graham Parsons, Emmy Lua Harris.
Speaker 1: A good alt country pick is Ryan Bingham. His first
Speaker 1: three albums are very solid. Anything coming out of Nashville
Speaker 1: this century is crap. But Dwight Yoakum never disappoints. Faith
Speaker 1: from NYC, Hey, Faith from NYC. I will add those
Speaker 1: to my list. Tyson writes, I'm a little late the
Speaker 1: conversation about country music, but here's my take. Most country
Speaker 1: music on the radio is basically pop. You need to
Speaker 1: check out red dirt music like Reckless Kelly, Ryan Bingham, Turnpike, Troubadors,
Speaker 1: just to name a few. Shields High John, I've heard
Speaker 1: of none of those. Do you know these? I am
Speaker 1: not familiar with any of these. Lauren writes, O MG,
Speaker 1: Tucker just played your favorite Ghostbusters clip. My life is
Speaker 1: now complete. I'm assuming it was guts and dogs living
Speaker 1: together a mass hysteria, which is up there with when
Speaker 1: someone asks you if you're a god, you say yes
Speaker 1: and egon your mucus. There's so many, so many quotable
Speaker 1: lines and Ghostbusters, John, choose, what do you mean? Choose
Speaker 1: Matt Rights hey Buck. Lots of great country suggestions so far.
Speaker 1: Give Chris le Doux a listen very popular out here
Speaker 1: in the West. If you want something a bit heavier,
Speaker 1: try dark country shields high. I don't know about any
Speaker 1: of that. Do you know about any stuff? I'd still
Speaker 1: very much coming up short here in my knowledge of
Speaker 1: the country music. Oh let's see we have Cade hey
Speaker 1: Buck with AOC's Green New Deal and Ilhan Omar rambling
Speaker 1: her rambling attack on Elliott Abrams. It's clear that neither
Speaker 1: one had much input on what actually spilled out onto
Speaker 1: the page. Who do you think is writing their work
Speaker 1: for them? Omar could barely read out loud what was
Speaker 1: on the page and can barely properly pronounce the words.
Speaker 1: Who is behind her work? That's a that's a fair question.
Speaker 1: I assume there are people not just on her staff,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure there are different left wing groups and
Speaker 1: organizations that are giving her information. It was I mean,
Speaker 1: she was embarrassing herself in my opinion when it comes
Speaker 1: to talking to Elliot Abrams, because he's just The knowledge
Speaker 1: disparity there is substantial, but doesn't matter to the left.
Speaker 1: I mean, the knowledge disparity as far as the left
Speaker 1: is concerned, is Irrell because it's all about scoring points
Speaker 1: against a hated enemy. In this case, the hated enemy
Speaker 1: is Elliott Abrams. Nikki, Hey Buck, the time of your
Speaker 1: show was changed up here. My husband and I would
Speaker 1: listen from eighteen hundred twenty one hundred hours, and now
Speaker 1: you're on from fifteen hundred to eighteen hundred. Since I'm working,
Speaker 1: I only catch the last hour usually, But I'm doing
Speaker 1: a one hundred mile fat bike race this weekend, and
Speaker 1: I download a bunch of your podcasts. Someone will need
Speaker 1: to keep me company in the Alaskan wilderness. I usually
Speaker 1: listen to Serial Killer, but when it's dark and you're
Speaker 1: middle of nowhere, the podcast can freak you out. Ha
Speaker 1: ha Shield's Eye Nikki, Well, Nikki, I'm so glad I
Speaker 1: can keep you company up there via the podcast in
Speaker 1: the freezing cold weather of a nighttime Alaska. And what
Speaker 1: is a John? What is a fat bike? I feel
Speaker 1: like I feel like are we shaming bikes now? We
Speaker 1: shouldn't shame bikes. All bikes are All bikes are beautiful, John,
Speaker 1: All bikes come in different sizes. Let's see we have
Speaker 1: John more on the Smallett situation looks like his manager
Speaker 1: is refusing to turn over his phone records. Our friend
Speaker 1: Andy No over at a quillet. Andy does some great
Speaker 1: work on the social justice left. Andy No has put
Speaker 1: out a tweet on this one saying that the yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, you know why the managers refusing to turn
Speaker 1: over his phone records because they're lying about this. There's
Speaker 1: no other there's no other explanation. There's no other explanation
Speaker 1: for this. Okay, So I just think that that's pretty
Speaker 1: clear at this point, and let's see we get here. Michael, right,
Speaker 1: oh Buck, you're killing me, man. Just listen to Monday's show.
Speaker 1: And I completely agree that Corrella Deville was the worst.
Speaker 1: But as a Dalmatian, I knew I was going to
Speaker 1: get a Dalmatian. I knew I was gonna get some
Speaker 1: Dalmatian owners to come at me hard on this one.
Speaker 1: As a Dalmatian owner myself, I have to say, overall,
Speaker 1: the breed's temperament are not that bad. They are a
Speaker 1: high energy breed and if not given a sufficient outlet
Speaker 1: for that energy, they can be terrors as them being biters.
Speaker 1: This is partially true, okay. Let's I mean if you're
Speaker 1: the owner, and you're saying they're kind of bitters because
Speaker 1: they're biters. This give me partially true. The breed is
Speaker 1: prone to deafness, and for obvious reasons, a deaf dog
Speaker 1: will be more prone to biting. Can never get mad
Speaker 1: at the buckster, but I gotta defend my kiddos. Have
Speaker 1: a good day in Shield's High. And also, Michael sent
Speaker 1: a photo of his mustache. His mustache is world class.
Speaker 1: His mustache is what you would expect to see on
Speaker 1: a guy who's like wearing the pants but shirtless and
Speaker 1: has the arms out from like a boxing print from
Speaker 1: the nineteen twenties. He's got that. He's got a nineteen
Speaker 1: twenties boss mustache. So there you have it. But yeah, Dalmatians,
Speaker 1: everyone loves, just like everyone loves their children. Everyone loves
Speaker 1: their furry children. Dalmatians, if they're your breed, I understand.
Speaker 1: But the reputation is the reputation, which is that they
Speaker 1: tend to be they tend to be a little high strong,
Speaker 1: they tend to be biters. So there is that we
Speaker 1: have time for one more here, John right, hey, buck,
Speaker 1: let's get rid of California and add Puerto Rico. Will
Speaker 1: still have fifty states, just saying, well, John, that's an
Speaker 1: interesting idea. I'm wondering why you'd want to go that route,
Speaker 1: but I can't say that, you know, wouldn't be interesting.
Speaker 1: Both places have nice speeches. I mean, we're doing a
Speaker 1: pluses and minuses of Puerto Rico versus California. The politics
Speaker 1: are probably about the same, though I think Puerto Rico
Speaker 1: is maybe even as liberal or more liberal than California
Speaker 1: is overall. But they have some nice speeches and some
Speaker 1: fun stuff going on. Let's give me a show for today, team.
Speaker 1: I'll be on Kennedy tonight on Fox Business talking about
Speaker 1: all the nonsense with McCabe, or really the revelations about well,
Speaker 1: we already knew some of this stuff. I shouldn't say
Speaker 1: the confirmations of what we thought we knew from the
Speaker 1: McCabe situation. So I'll be on Kennedy around nine fifteen
Speaker 1: or nine thirty Eastern turn on Fox Business. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be out tomorrow. My man Ben Weingartner is going to
Speaker 1: be in for me, so he'll do a great show.
Speaker 1: Be sure to tune in for that. And I will
Speaker 1: talk to you all on Monday from DC shields high.
Speaker 1: When do you want to spot that burglar when he's
Speaker 1: chasing your home or after he's already in well, Ask
Speaker 1: John who's Blink camera alerted him to burglars trying to
Speaker 1: break in while he and his family were home, or Shannon,
Speaker 1: who's Blink camera caught a thief stealing packages. Both times,
Speaker 1: Blink video clips were sent to police to help convict
Speaker 1: the crooks. Blink motion activated indoor and outdoor cameras are
Speaker 1: wire free. They set up in minutes and run on
Speaker 1: two DOUBLEA batteries that last up to two years. And
Speaker 1: if you're traveling, blinks Live feed option lets you monitor
Speaker 1: your home and check it on pads from anywhere using
Speaker 1: the Blink smartphone app. No contracts, no subscriptions, totally affordable,
Speaker 1: and Blink works with Alexa. Blink camera systems make great
Speaker 1: gifts and they're a brilliant way to monitor your package deliveries.
Speaker 1: Visit blink protect dot com slash buck. Again, that's blink
Speaker 1: Protect dot Com slash Buck. Blink Protect dot Com slash Buck. Remember,
Speaker 1: Blink is an Amazon company. This is the system you
Speaker 1: want to protect you your home, your loved ones, and
Speaker 1: your valuables.