Speaker 1: This is bucks first thoughts, the news you need to
Speaker 1: get for your day in forty five minutes. Make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe on the iHeart app or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. Perhaps the Biden team was never serious about
Speaker 1: calls for unity because they certainly didn't last very long,
Speaker 1: did they. As the nation prepares for the January twentieth
Speaker 1: peaceful transfer of power, there's an air of menace hanging
Speaker 1: over our nation's capital. Instead of pomp and circumstance, DC
Speaker 1: is bristling with barbed wire and HESCO barriers and thousands
Speaker 1: and thousands of National Guard deployed. What's going on here?
Speaker 1: It's hard to think that national healing is the Biden
Speaker 1: Harris objective while their underlings transform the streets of DC
Speaker 1: into a fortress on lockdown. You've no doubt heard the
Speaker 1: media outlet's talking about how there will be more National
Speaker 1: Guard deployed in DC than in Iraq and Afghanistan, two
Speaker 1: theaters of war combined. They will share this continuously until
Speaker 1: the moment Biden is sworn in, and then well afterwards,
Speaker 1: because the whole purpose here is to heighten the public's
Speaker 1: anxiety of the perceived risk of another insurrection. Oh what
Speaker 1: was that insurrection the first time around? You might ask,
Speaker 1: You mean the one that involved a mostly peaceful protest
Speaker 1: that then did have a section of it devolved into
Speaker 1: a riot and one police officer was killed, one protester
Speaker 1: was killed by direct action of law enforcement and also
Speaker 1: of participants, depending on which one we're talking about, And
Speaker 1: they were trying to do what exactly. The belief is
Speaker 1: that they were going to overthrow the government. That QAnon
Speaker 1: Shaman or whatever walking around in a furry hat with
Speaker 1: a spear was really going to see control of the Congress.
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody, including that guy, believe that's what
Speaker 1: was going to happen. But you see, the theatrics that
Speaker 1: are underway in DC are meant to exceed the actual threat.
Speaker 1: We've talked about the Capitol Hill ride on January sixth.
Speaker 1: It was lawless, it was awful, it was stupid, and
Speaker 1: anyone who broke the law should be held to account,
Speaker 1: But there was no real effort to overthrow the government
Speaker 1: by force. Calling that an insurrection is an exaggeration, and
Speaker 1: it's an intentional one. It's one with real consequences. The
Speaker 1: unprecedented martial preparations for this inauguration are meant to look
Speaker 1: as though they're preparing for a foreign military to invade
Speaker 1: our nation's capital at any minute. What's the real threat here?
Speaker 1: Internet chatter? Do you remember how we were told constantly
Speaker 1: during the Obama administration about how there were an unprecedented
Speaker 1: number of threats online against President Obama? And then you
Speaker 1: also recall that there were people who somehow lost their
Speaker 1: jobs for mere criticism of Obama or for crossing the
Speaker 1: press when it came to Obama. Because they create a
Speaker 1: climate of fear in which everyone gets treated as though
Speaker 1: they're insurrectionists, as though they're far radical extremists. That's why
Speaker 1: they exaggerate all of this all along. They expand out
Speaker 1: the net. They want to capture everyone. Whether you're reasonable
Speaker 1: or not, you get lumped in with the crazies. Right
Speaker 1: and speech equals violence, you see, so your words have
Speaker 1: to be suppressed. It's not enough merely to say we
Speaker 1: can have political differences. You are no longer in this
Speaker 1: country allowed to say what you think happened in the election.
Speaker 1: They're saying, including the lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania, for example,
Speaker 1: that that has not protected speech. Now, what's the formulation
Speaker 1: they use for that. Well, if people can say that
Speaker 1: they think the election was stolen, then people will act
Speaker 1: on that. They'll be violent because of that, and so
Speaker 1: we have to stop it. You see, this is what
Speaker 1: they do. If people can say that they thought that
Speaker 1: Barack Obama was a socialist and a bad president, a leftist,
Speaker 1: then there'll be other people who decide to act on
Speaker 1: that and write in threats, and the Secret Service then
Speaker 1: has to investigate it. They lump it all together. They
Speaker 1: treat it like it's the same. What an effective mechanism
Speaker 1: of control. They're trying to show us right now what
Speaker 1: the next four years are going to look like. That's
Speaker 1: why there are photos of National Guard troops sleeping on
Speaker 1: the marble floors of the Capitol Building. That's meant to
Speaker 1: get all of this attention. Very few people have asked,
Speaker 1: are these measures even necessary? Don't they have sleeping pads
Speaker 1: and sleeping bags, and why are they on the cold
Speaker 1: marble floor of the Capitol building. Doesn't that seem excessive?
Speaker 1: But the implication is clear. The Democrats want America to
Speaker 1: c DC as a city under siege, and that means
Speaker 1: that you have to ask the next question, who is
Speaker 1: it under siege? From Trump voters. Those are the optics
Speaker 1: right now. That's what they want people to think and
Speaker 1: believe about our nation's capital. They are setting up a
Speaker 1: show of force commensurate with their overblown fears of this
Speaker 1: recent right wing coup attempt from Trump voters. They've convinced
Speaker 1: a large number of Democrats that these extreme measures are
Speaker 1: necessary because unless they were to deploy twenty six twenty
Speaker 1: seven thousand National Guard plus all the Secret Service and FBI,
Speaker 1: unless they deploy all of them, another right wing faction
Speaker 1: will attempt a second overthrow of the United States government.
Speaker 1: Hold on a second. There wasn't a first attempt at
Speaker 1: an overthrow of the government. There was a riot. There
Speaker 1: was a protest that got out of control and turned
Speaker 1: into in part, a riot in the United States capital
Speaker 1: that did not last very long, was put down, and
Speaker 1: for which people are being punished, in some cases punished severely.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, while all this is happening, that there's
Speaker 1: actually no there's no intelligence or proof that such a
Speaker 1: plot against our government is imminent. There might be some
Speaker 1: online chatter from people who are upset about the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty election outcome. They're venting, they're trying to get attention
Speaker 1: from their buddies. But that's not a serious or credible threat.
Speaker 1: And there are threats all the time. People who work
Speaker 1: in media get threats. I get threats. What do you
Speaker 1: do about this? You go on with life. Unless it's
Speaker 1: credible and actionable, you can't worry about it. And yet
Speaker 1: what we see here is the elevation of bits of
Speaker 1: internet chatter to being an imminent threat to our very
Speaker 1: system of government. That's what they want America to thing
Speaker 1: in DC right now. And let's not forget the four
Speaker 1: years of Russia collusion lunacy, since we're talking about conspiracy
Speaker 1: theories here, that was mainstream among elected Democrats and their
Speaker 1: corporate media lackeys, completely mainstream Russia collusion. You said it,
Speaker 1: you got more clicks, more viewers. There was never any
Speaker 1: punishment for this. There was never any backlash against it
Speaker 1: from the system, from the elites, from the apparatus. Look,
Speaker 1: let's be very clear, from a purely security based standpoint,
Speaker 1: the military preparations this week in DC are an overreaction.
Speaker 1: DC is the most heavily police and patrolled city in America.
Speaker 1: Even during normal times, just try to cross the street
Speaker 1: and jaywalk near a Capitol police officer under under normal circumstances,
Speaker 1: and you'll see the ferocity with which even the most
Speaker 1: mundane and trivial rules are forced in and around our
Speaker 1: nation's capital. And it's understandable that there are some concern.
Speaker 1: There's understandable that crowd control should be taken into account.
Speaker 1: Let's also remember that in twenty sixteen, Antifa was running
Speaker 1: riot through the streets of DC and there were no
Speaker 1: major charges brought against them. They lit a limousine on
Speaker 1: fire in our nation's capital in broad daylight on Inauguration Day,
Speaker 1: and we're screaming, not my president. But that was just fine.
Speaker 1: There was no real worry about that. According to the Democrats,
Speaker 1: that was a mostly peaceful protest. Every American should feel like,
Speaker 1: on a process level, the continuation of our political tradition
Speaker 1: of the peaceful transfer of power is important and should
Speaker 1: be supported, and it almost will be a peaceful, orderly event.
Speaker 1: Whatever Trump voters think of the integrity of the last
Speaker 1: election or the policies of the incoming administration, there should
Speaker 1: be an understanding that this is how it goes right.
Speaker 1: And I know our politics are messy. I know people
Speaker 1: are angry right now, but we have ways to deal
Speaker 1: with that. But what the Democrat Party is doing right
Speaker 1: now is intentionally making the inauguration seem like it's occurring
Speaker 1: under a state of actual siege of our capital, as
Speaker 1: though this is eighteen twelve and the British are on
Speaker 1: the way to burn down the White House. This is nuts,
Speaker 1: and we know who they blame for this. This is
Speaker 1: being done for political leverage and almost certainly is going
Speaker 1: to be the justification for more aggressive surveillance, not against
Speaker 1: actual extremists or people who are planning violence, but against
Speaker 1: people with pro Trump anti Democrat views. You see, this
Speaker 1: is part of the playbook. The Democrats are all posing
Speaker 1: as aggrieved victims, now terrified for their very existence, so
Speaker 1: that they can make real victims of their political opponents
Speaker 1: later on. This, unfortunately, is likely to work, which means
Speaker 1: it's a troubling time for the country. The people claiming
Speaker 1: to be the oppressed, the people claiming to be the
Speaker 1: ones that aren't allowed to share their politics publicly without fear,
Speaker 1: are the ones who are actually doing the purges. They're
Speaker 1: the ones who are actually shutting down news sites, shutting
Speaker 1: down social media apps, and calling for boycotts and the
Speaker 1: surveillance state to expand to keep an eye on their
Speaker 1: political opponents. That's what's happening right now. We can all
Speaker 1: see it. And that's why even the pretense of calls
Speaker 1: for unity from the Biden Harris Camp ring hollow. You're
Speaker 1: listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure you
Speaker 1: subscribe to the podcast on the iHeart radio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Absolutely, and it's so easily debunked.
Speaker 1: It's simply false that thousands of dead people voted. It
Speaker 1: is false that there were thousands of ballot signature signatures
Speaker 1: that were fake. It's also false that dominion voting machines
Speaker 1: switched thousands of votes. None of this is true. And
Speaker 1: all Republican leaders have to do is to say that
Speaker 1: the election was not stolen. And if they do that,
Speaker 1: then they can calm down tension. All you have to
Speaker 1: do is submit. Congressman Ted Loose says, all if it
Speaker 1: was bending the knee, say everything you said was wrong,
Speaker 1: and then we can have unity until we need you
Speaker 1: to bend the knee again and admit that you're wrong
Speaker 1: on something else. Well, why isn't that working better? I
Speaker 1: don't understand why. Why isn't it really bringing everybody together? Gee,
Speaker 1: I don't know, Ted, Maybe some people still have questions
Speaker 1: and they don't trust Democrats who lied about the last
Speaker 1: election for four years and still do to this day.
Speaker 1: All Right, they still continue with this nonsense, but it's
Speaker 1: something that the left wants to hear. They want to believe.
Speaker 1: The Democrats want to believe that they have extended a
Speaker 1: hand to the other side and we're the ones who
Speaker 1: are slapping it away. The Democrats want to believe that
Speaker 1: it is conservatives who are being unreasonable in this whole
Speaker 1: process and are adding fuel to the fire of our
Speaker 1: political discontent, and the Democrats are just being great, open minded,
Speaker 1: patriotic Americans, who you know, come on, we see what's
Speaker 1: really happening. They're putting people on TV night after night,
Speaker 1: day after day who are saying that Trump terrorists are
Speaker 1: more dangerous than al Qaeda. We played that audio for
Speaker 1: you yesterday. They're actually saying this stuff, that we should
Speaker 1: increase the surveillance state to look at Trump voters, and
Speaker 1: that we should scan the National Guard, we should vet
Speaker 1: National Guard members for Trumpian sympathies. I'm not exaggerating here.
Speaker 1: You go MSNBC some guy who used to be a
Speaker 1: senior FBI official. If that's not terrifying enough, Figliutsi here
Speaker 1: he has played thirteen. There's more and more evidence develops,
Speaker 1: Andrea that there were active and former military and police
Speaker 1: within that insurrections crowd. I think this is a very
Speaker 1: valid precautionary measure, but I want to also caution that
Speaker 1: this not be some false sense of security. Well, everyone
Speaker 1: has been checked out by the FBI. Let's understand something,
Speaker 1: and we learned it painfully during the insurrection. Though. Signs
Speaker 1: of radicalization really are not that someone has a criminal
Speaker 1: record or that someone is on a terrorist watch list,
Speaker 1: but rather that they have online postings that indicate radicalization
Speaker 1: and an intention for violence. The FBI doesn't have those
Speaker 1: kinds of resources, nor do they have a time the
Speaker 1: timeframe in this race against the clock to check out
Speaker 1: twenty five thousand people's social media postings, nor may they
Speaker 1: even have legal authority to do so. That's my concern.
Speaker 1: I just want to point out that this this has
Speaker 1: been widely reported. I should say this should have been
Speaker 1: widely reported. It has been reported, but not nearly enough.
Speaker 1: Hashtag kill Mike Pence was trending for a while on
Speaker 1: Twitter recently. Okay, that was a hashtag on Twitter, and
Speaker 1: I just want to do do you think the FBI
Speaker 1: is going to track down all those people? Do you
Speaker 1: think they're all gonna all gonna face prosecution for a
Speaker 1: threat against the federal official and interstate commerce? No they
Speaker 1: are not. Oh wow, it's almost like there's a huge
Speaker 1: double standard here. Political violence is something the left excelled
Speaker 1: in through all of twenty twenty. But there was one
Speaker 1: incident that they can attribute to the right at the
Speaker 1: Capitol Building after the election in the beginning of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one. And we're supposed to forget who was burning
Speaker 1: down buildings all summer. We're supposed to forget who was
Speaker 1: rioting a atacking police. Attacking a federal courthouse is also
Speaker 1: an attack on our system. For example. Yeah, I know,
Speaker 1: it's not the Capitol Building, but it's also, you know,
Speaker 1: not an outhouse in the middle of a field somewhere
Speaker 1: that no one cares about. It's a federal building. They
Speaker 1: try to light it on fire in Portland, but don't
Speaker 1: you don't see any effort to Oh no, Antifa's just
Speaker 1: an idea, they say, it's not even a movement. It's
Speaker 1: not even a real thing. They're not scanning people social
Speaker 1: media enough. What what'll get you, what'll get you tossed
Speaker 1: off social media? What'll get you in trouble? These days?
Speaker 1: You already know you can't say the election was stolen,
Speaker 1: which is that that is First Amendment protected speech. But
Speaker 1: you can't say it. If you do, they'll take action
Speaker 1: against you. And how far a leap is it from
Speaker 1: you are now kicked off social media to you are
Speaker 1: now on the radar? I just have to remind you
Speaker 1: of this. They used informants, they use used agents, you know,
Speaker 1: people acting on behalf of the government to go after
Speaker 1: George Papadopoulos. And they used FISA warrants on carter page.
Speaker 1: What was that all about? Trying to get after Trump
Speaker 1: and go after Trump people? But those are completely absurd,
Speaker 1: fabricated cases, you don't think. And they paid no real
Speaker 1: penalty for this. A few people the FBI lost their
Speaker 1: jobs or their pensions. Nobody went to prison. Andy McCabe,
Speaker 1: former acting FBI director, lied about it. No real consequences
Speaker 1: for him. So what's the message. What's the lesson? More importantly,
Speaker 1: what's the lesson that we take from this? They can
Speaker 1: get away with stuff like this, but now they're they're
Speaker 1: bringing pressure, they're mobilizing all across society for the suppression
Speaker 1: of what you could say is Trumpist ideas. Okay, they're
Speaker 1: they're trying to destroy Trumpist ideas, not even just repudiate
Speaker 1: Trump the man. And so what are you even allowed
Speaker 1: to say online? Are you allowed to say that the
Speaker 1: Russia collusion investigation was a hoax? I'm saying it, But
Speaker 1: is that now? Is that? Do independent fact checkers disagree
Speaker 1: with me? They're gonna shut that down too. They're going
Speaker 1: to rewrite the history. In fact, they're even telling us
Speaker 1: they plan to rewrite our history. Play sixteen. They will
Speaker 1: not write their history. We will write their history, and
Speaker 1: their shame will last forever. They are carved like they
Speaker 1: are carved, like etching into granite, granit onto history's list
Speaker 1: of villains in this country, Mark Meadows, Lindsey Graham, Kevin McCarthy,
Speaker 1: Josh Holly, Ted Cruz, Looe Brooks, and two man and
Speaker 1: match it. There will be no forgetting, There will be
Speaker 1: no forgiveness. We do not seek retribution, but we do
Speaker 1: seek accountability and justice for an assaultant attack on the
Speaker 1: government of the United States of America. They killed six people,
Speaker 1: and for the first time in the history of our
Speaker 1: count from one hundred and fifty years after the end
Speaker 1: of the Civil War, the Confederate flag at long last
Speaker 1: reached United States Capital. It was braided through the road
Speaker 1: funda as this liberal fascistic mob desecrated the floors of
Speaker 1: the House of Representatives in the state. They don't get
Speaker 1: to rewrite what happened. I want to be very clear.
Speaker 1: They do seek retribution. Don't forget that. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show podcast. Follow Buck on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. Historically,
Speaker 1: we will find out who he's beholden to, who pulls
Speaker 1: his strings. I would love to see his phone records
Speaker 1: to see whether he was talking to Putin the day
Speaker 1: that the insurgents invaded our capital. But we now know
Speaker 1: that not just him, but his enablers, his accomplices, his
Speaker 1: cult members have the same disregard for democracy. Do you
Speaker 1: think we need an eleven type commission to investigate and
Speaker 1: report everything that they can pull together and explain what happened.
Speaker 1: I do. Let me again to your point of who
Speaker 1: is he beholden to? As I've said over and over,
Speaker 1: as I said to him in that picture with my
Speaker 1: blue suit right as I was leaving. What I was
Speaker 1: saying to him, as I was pointing rudely at him,
Speaker 1: with you, mister president, all roads lead to Putin. I
Speaker 1: don't know what Putin has on him politically, financially or personally,
Speaker 1: but what happened last week was a gift to Putin
Speaker 1: because Puttin wants to undermine democracy in our country and
Speaker 1: throughout the world. And these people, unbeknownst to them, maybe
Speaker 1: are Putin puppets. They were doing Putin's business when they
Speaker 1: did that at the incitement of an insurrection by the
Speaker 1: President of the United States. So yes, we should have
Speaker 1: a nine to eleven commission, and there is strong support
Speaker 1: in the Congress to do that. You need to hear
Speaker 1: this because this is what is going to happen. That's
Speaker 1: hurry and Nancy Pelosi podcastle commission. Chardonay. Nancy strikes again.
Speaker 1: She's sitting there with Hillary and they're having this chit
Speaker 1: chat about Putin, Putin's role in this. She says she
Speaker 1: wants to pull the president's phone records. You heard it.
Speaker 1: Let's pull the president's phone records to see if he's
Speaker 1: talking to Putin. On the day of what happened at
Speaker 1: Capitol Hill. These people are insane. This has nothing to
Speaker 1: do with Putin or Russia. Nothing. And yeah, you could
Speaker 1: always make the case that any day that's a bad
Speaker 1: day for America, any day of riots or lawlessness. And
Speaker 1: we know this is true. China also benefits from that.
Speaker 1: Any country that is an adversary of the United States
Speaker 1: likes to see unrest, destabilization, dissension, you know, at the
Speaker 1: deepest levels divisiveness. Yeah, they benefit from that. But that's
Speaker 1: not you nique to the situation at all. On behalf
Speaker 1: of Putin, really quwan'm shaman or whatever running around there
Speaker 1: with the furry had on. He was doing this on
Speaker 1: behalf of Putin unbeknownst to him though. Look, this is
Speaker 1: one of the reasons that I was so and I
Speaker 1: know people the initial reaction was, but buck, people are
Speaker 1: so upset, they're so angry, And I said, I know,
Speaker 1: but this is you know, it's it's like the boss
Speaker 1: in all the movies. You know, this was really you
Speaker 1: saw this a lot in nineties movies, nineties action movies.
Speaker 1: There's this you know, smug jerk of a boss. And
Speaker 1: this is often true in like the cop movies, and
Speaker 1: you know the rogue police officer who's trying to get
Speaker 1: the job done, and what he really wants is to
Speaker 1: get up in the in the hero's face and just
Speaker 1: antagonize him and be so you know, unfair to him
Speaker 1: that he finally just you know, pops them one in
Speaker 1: the face, punches them right in the jaw. And as
Speaker 1: much as that may feel like it's a reaction that's
Speaker 1: been building up over time, guess what. And it's hand
Speaker 1: in your badge and your gun. You know, now your
Speaker 1: job's in jeopardy and this smug bureaucrat gets what he wants.
Speaker 1: I knew that this Capitol Hill riot was going to
Speaker 1: be used to the maximum by the Democrats. The moment
Speaker 1: that it started happening, I said, oh my god, what
Speaker 1: is going on here? First of all, that it was
Speaker 1: just it was just upsetting. It should not have happened
Speaker 1: on any level as an American. But beyond that, I said,
Speaker 1: they're they're going to take something that's you know, on
Speaker 1: the scale of let's say, on the scale of insurrection,
Speaker 1: one being a person standing on a street corner with
Speaker 1: a sign that says, you know, overthrow America by himself
Speaker 1: and ten being you know, battalion level armed insurgency guys
Speaker 1: with machine gun and heavy weapons making a move to
Speaker 1: secure government buildings and opening fire. Right, that's a ten.
Speaker 1: That's a straight up coup. You know, this was like
Speaker 1: a I don't know, a four or five maybe, and
Speaker 1: they're treating it like it was a nine. That's the point.
Speaker 1: They're treating it like it went far beyond, like this
Speaker 1: was we just barely maintained control of the Capitol. They're
Speaker 1: grossly exaggerated, but I knew they would because there's political
Speaker 1: benefit in it for them. And some of you saying buckets,
Speaker 1: it's a two or three. You know, you understand what
Speaker 1: I'm saying that they've taken this and made it a
Speaker 1: They've treated it like this was a Trump backed full on.
Speaker 1: They're calling it an insurrection. I mean, you know what
Speaker 1: that means. I mean, there's a reason we have something
Speaker 1: called the Insurrection Act. It's to put down armed rebellions
Speaker 1: within our own borders. That's what they The history that
Speaker 1: Democrats are writing right now is they they just avoided
Speaker 1: thousands of people on the Capitol on Capitol grounds that
Speaker 1: they've said kidnapping and even executing members of Congress, you know,
Speaker 1: opening fire and seizing the Capitol building and creating a
Speaker 1: military confrontation. They're treating it like it's that's what happened.
Speaker 1: That is not what happened. Okay, it was a riot.
Speaker 1: It was people being stupid. They got rowdy, and some
Speaker 1: people got hurt, some people got killed. Shouldn't have happened.
Speaker 1: But this is not an open coup effort against the
Speaker 1: United States government. But because they're setting that narrative in place,
Speaker 1: the Democrats are solidifying that narrative right now as they're
Speaker 1: also taking power of the government. Their reaction to this,
Speaker 1: and this is what I'm trying to tell you, this
Speaker 1: is what I'm trying to warn you of. Their reaction,
Speaker 1: as unfair as it is, as wrong as it is,
Speaker 1: is going to be based upon treating this as an
Speaker 1: actual armed insurrection again the United States government, do you see, Yes,
Speaker 1: we're going to argue against us and try to convince
Speaker 1: as many of our fellow Americans as possible. Come on, guys,
Speaker 1: it wasn't what they're saying it is. It was a riot,
Speaker 1: it was wrong, but it wasn't a real concerted effort
Speaker 1: called on by the actual president United States to overthrow
Speaker 1: the government. But all the all the pieces they're putting
Speaker 1: in place right now, all the things that they're talking about,
Speaker 1: expansion of surveillance of their political opponents, changing laws and
Speaker 1: statutes to focus more on right wing extremism. It's geared
Speaker 1: toward that. They've now created a narrative and they're going
Speaker 1: to execut. Look what they were able to do with
Speaker 1: Russia collusion. It was a fabrication. It was all based
Speaker 1: on some guy collecting rumors from people that were Russian disinformation,
Speaker 1: Christopher Steele, and they used this to go to the
Speaker 1: They took this to the top of the FBI. They
Speaker 1: had the FBI director, they had other people, they had
Speaker 1: the CIA director, all spun up, all freaked out about
Speaker 1: Russia using Trump as a pawn and there was there
Speaker 1: must be deeper ties. You just heard Hillary and Pelosi.
Speaker 1: Clinton and Pelosi talking about this on a podcast. I
Speaker 1: can't believe Hillary Clinton has a podcast. What's a listen
Speaker 1: to Hillary Clinton? Good God, But they're still going with this,
Speaker 1: this whole Putent's puppet thing. It was never true, it
Speaker 1: doesn't exist, it's not real. But look what they were
Speaker 1: able to do with that. Now they have something, make
Speaker 1: no mistake about it. This gives them an opening, This
Speaker 1: gives them an opportunity to push for the most tyrannical
Speaker 1: suppression of conservative speech, ideas, and ideology in my lifetime.
Speaker 1: That's what we're going into right now. That is the
Speaker 1: storm that we are steering right into the center of.
Speaker 1: And people still, I think, are stuck in a state
Speaker 1: of belief. They can't imagine that their fellow Democrats would
Speaker 1: really do that, or or perhaps they can't imagine it,
Speaker 1: but they think that Trump has a plan and Trump
Speaker 1: is going to swoop in and save us. No, we
Speaker 1: have to take what Trump represented, and we have to
Speaker 1: be the ones. We have to be the Americans who
Speaker 1: represent those ideas and that style of pushing back against
Speaker 1: the establishment, the swamp, and the elites. It's now on
Speaker 1: all of us, you know Trump. You know. In ancient times,
Speaker 1: sometimes they would send forward a champion. Have you ever
Speaker 1: seen the movie the movie Troy with you know, Brad
Speaker 1: Pain and a bunch of other famous actors. This was
Speaker 1: this was practice sometimes where you would send forward a
Speaker 1: champion and whoever won the battle would then the other
Speaker 1: the other army would submit right and depending on whichever
Speaker 1: side won that one v one battle. You know, I
Speaker 1: understand for a lot of people, Trump was the champion
Speaker 1: sent out before the conservative and I'm speaking metaphorically here,
Speaker 1: of course, the conservative army, so to speak. And he
Speaker 1: was vanquishing foes left and right, and that was the perception.
Speaker 1: And I'm here to tell you that Trump is no
Speaker 1: longer in that position. We don't we don't have one
Speaker 1: person standing in the front of the rest of the movement,
Speaker 1: who is blazing the trail, who is pushing back, and
Speaker 1: who who is invincible. We had a sense that Trump
Speaker 1: was invincible. I understand politically they could not stop him,
Speaker 1: and now they just did. And we can talk about
Speaker 1: the election and integrity and and the media and the
Speaker 1: suppression of the Hunter Biden story and the suppression of
Speaker 1: the truth about COVID lockdowns, all these different things, and
Speaker 1: we will, but we also need to take stock of
Speaker 1: where we are right now. Who's standing for conservative values
Speaker 1: ideas constitutionalism in this country? Right now? You are to
Speaker 1: all of us, there is no hero, There is no
Speaker 1: champion right now who is the great defender of any
Speaker 1: of this. Perhaps one will emerge, but in the meantime,
Speaker 1: it's on you. It's on me, and it requires us
Speaker 1: to understand exactly what we face from the opposition, because
Speaker 1: they are mobilizing to use the apparatus of the state
Speaker 1: to use the media's bitterness about Trump for four years
Speaker 1: you Interestand they don't just want dominance in the ratings back.
Speaker 1: They don't just want the ability to be the narrative creators.
Speaker 1: They want payback. They want to go after people that
Speaker 1: they think stole their glory from them for years. Here,
Speaker 1: that's what's happening. This is why all the DP platform
Speaker 1: and everything else that's going on is something we must
Speaker 1: pay attention to. And of course, while they do all this,
Speaker 1: there are still some who are pretending that, yeah, Democrats
Speaker 1: are calling unity. I will say this, if you submit,
Speaker 1: you will be unified in a sense. You'll just give
Speaker 1: up who you are as part of that unity. That's
Speaker 1: the choice they offer. You just admit that everything you
Speaker 1: believed in was wrong. Every vote that you cast for
Speaker 1: the last four years, or every idea that you shared
Speaker 1: that was in any way echoed by or perhaps you
Speaker 1: were echoing Trump, Trump's ideas. Anything you did with that,
Speaker 1: you have to pay penance for that. Now you have
Speaker 1: to repudiate it, you were totally wrong, bend the knee,
Speaker 1: beg forgiveness, and they're hoping you don't figure out that
Speaker 1: they still want to destroy you even after you do
Speaker 1: all that. But maybe they'll let you think you've got
Speaker 1: unity for a day or two. But they still want
Speaker 1: to make you give up that part of yourself, abandon
Speaker 1: those ideas, admit you were wrong and you were less
Speaker 1: than for thinking what you did. That's that's the unity
Speaker 1: the left is calling for right now. So you do
Speaker 1: have a choice. I have a choice. We all do.
Speaker 1: I could turn right now on the whole Trump movement.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, become one of these celebrated former conservatives.
Speaker 1: You know, I'd spend six months. Oh, I'd get a
Speaker 1: book deal. I'd spend six months going on MSNBC and CNN.
Speaker 1: That oh buck, you all of us, What made you
Speaker 1: come to realize that everything Trump ever said or stood
Speaker 1: for was awful and evil and wrong? You know, tell
Speaker 1: us more about this. Liberals at home saying he's still
Speaker 1: disgusting and I hate him, but this sex and guy
Speaker 1: at least woke up the Trump Now, I say no,
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't back off the ideas. I don't
Speaker 1: back off what the movement stood for one bit. I
Speaker 1: just have never put that much stock or faith in
Speaker 1: any one man or any one persons as the embodiment
Speaker 1: of a political movement. This is a movement, It is
Speaker 1: not a cult, and the movement continues on. That's where
Speaker 1: our focus has to be. Now, what are the ideas
Speaker 1: that really mattered? What can we do to support them today?
Speaker 1: Because the other option is submit, bend the knee, you know,
Speaker 1: and if you want tell, tell all your liberal friends
Speaker 1: about how you've you've totally changed your outlook here, and
Speaker 1: they'll patch you on the head for a day or two,
Speaker 1: and then a week later they'll still think that you're
Speaker 1: some some rube, some easily fooled buffoon who fell, who
Speaker 1: fell for the Trump spell. I say, no, bring it,
Speaker 1: We're not done yet. You're in the freedom hunt. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Get the
Speaker 1: latest from Buck at buck Sexton dot com. And so
Speaker 1: I just want Senator Schumer to understand that he is
Speaker 1: the right person at this time for this moment to
Speaker 1: deliver the relief that hopefully President elect Biden and Vice
Speaker 1: President Lex Harris will bring forward with the support of
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer so that we can heal
Speaker 1: this country, and he is well poised to do that
Speaker 1: job extremely well. Yeah, Schumer. When I think heal the nation,
Speaker 1: when I think bring everybody together, the first name that
Speaker 1: comes to mind is Chuck Schumer. Sure, that's one way
Speaker 1: to go, That's one approach with all of this. Let's
Speaker 1: let's hear from the man himself. He's telling us let's heal,
Speaker 1: but first, let's just continue to trash the former president
Speaker 1: in place seven. Well, it's tremendous responsibility, and there's so
Speaker 1: many things we have to do to make this country better.
Speaker 1: We have to recover from all of the treatise that
Speaker 1: the Trump administration has left, but even more important than that,
Speaker 1: we have to recover from the COVID crisis and then
Speaker 1: move America forward so that every working person, every family,
Speaker 1: every person in America feels they have a real chance
Speaker 1: to advance. That has been that feeling hasn't been very
Speaker 1: strong in the American people over the last while, and
Speaker 1: we must do everything we can in our power to
Speaker 1: restore it. Well, I'm glad Biden's in the White House
Speaker 1: either way, But the bottom line is I will as
Speaker 1: Majority leader I'll try to help him get his agenda done.
Speaker 1: Schumer in charge, Pelosi in charge, Biden Harris in charge.
Speaker 1: And I think you're gonna hear the Biden administration is
Speaker 1: going to be a hyphenated administration. You know, people take
Speaker 1: a hyphenated name once they marry something. And you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know, that's not not not, not
Speaker 1: my move. And again I've never been married. But it's good.
Speaker 1: It's not just the Biden administration. It's gonna be the
Speaker 1: Biden Harris administration because she's gonna have a much larger
Speaker 1: role in this. Because I still believe they're gonna pass
Speaker 1: this off to her. I don't know how soon I've
Speaker 1: said to you, maybe before the mid terms, but the
Speaker 1: more I thought about it, it it might make more sense
Speaker 1: to win until after the mid terms and that way. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and Biden at one point said he was only gonna
Speaker 1: run for one term. This has now been all forgotten,
Speaker 1: but there was a there was time at which he
Speaker 1: was kind of admitting, yeah, I'm really old and I
Speaker 1: don't know if I can do this, but you know,
Speaker 1: I'll pass it off term two. Now it's oh no,
Speaker 1: he's gonna last all eight years. I just don't think. Look,
Speaker 1: the percentages are not on his side that he'd be
Speaker 1: in a physical capacity to go eight years from where
Speaker 1: he is right now. But you see this, there's this
Speaker 1: generation of politicians who never, never want to not be
Speaker 1: important and be powerful, never want to let it go.
Speaker 1: They'll they'll be the one you know, they'll they'll go
Speaker 1: into their hundreds if they can. I mean Pelosi certainly
Speaker 1: is one of them. Same thing with Joe Biden. This
Speaker 1: is Buck's first thoughts. The news You need to get
Speaker 1: through your day in forty five minutes. Make sure you
Speaker 1: subscribe on the iHeart app or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Harsani time everybody our friend David Harsani from National Review
Speaker 1: in the mix Good or Nashview dot com to read
Speaker 1: his latest David Good to have him. Man, let's jump
Speaker 1: right into the free speech issue. I do not think
Speaker 1: it is even a little bit of an exaggeration. In fact,
Speaker 1: I would just pause it right now that this is
Speaker 1: the most dangerous time for the suppression of speech in
Speaker 1: the country in my lifetime. I think even more so
Speaker 1: than post nine to eleven because of the implications of
Speaker 1: what's being said right now. What do you make of it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I agree with that. I think it's the worst time
Speaker 1: for free speech since maybe Withdrew Wilson in the First
Speaker 1: World War, Suedition Act and stuff like that. I think
Speaker 1: that people have figured out a way around the First
Speaker 1: Amendment suppressed millions of people and the things that they say.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that I have any sort of good,
Speaker 1: you know, ideas and how to stop them. But I
Speaker 1: do know that people who are whose inclination is to
Speaker 1: shut down speech do not care about free expression. They
Speaker 1: don't care about the First Amendment. I think I've noted
Speaker 1: this on the show before, but simply saying I believe
Speaker 1: in the First Amendment doesn't mean anything if you don't
Speaker 1: believe in the values that gird all of that. Lots
Speaker 1: of places don't have a First Amendment. That doesn't mean
Speaker 1: we don't believe in their freedom of speech as well.
Speaker 1: It's a value that we share, but we don't share
Speaker 1: it anymore. We have CNN and Oliver Darcy and other
Speaker 1: people like that. We're just authoritarians who want to shut
Speaker 1: down their competitors. I want to shut down people who
Speaker 1: say things they don't like, and the media is the
Speaker 1: biggest defender but I think the Democratic Party's pretty bad,
Speaker 1: and I think it both's very poorly moving forward. I
Speaker 1: think there are people, I think there are a lot
Speaker 1: of powerful corporations and voices who would very much like
Speaker 1: to return to a time when they're well, I mean,
Speaker 1: they don't view it as I think people have gotten
Speaker 1: used to Fox News being dominant in ratings, for example,
Speaker 1: in cable. But there are a lot of folks out
Speaker 1: there who remember, you know, if you work at CBS
Speaker 1: News or something, you remember that there was no Fox
Speaker 1: News until nineteen ninety six, and we could go back
Speaker 1: to a country in which there is no full spectrum,
Speaker 1: district abution conservative cable channel. I mean they're they're already
Speaker 1: also going after Newsmax and and Oan and pressuring the
Speaker 1: cable providers with and unlike Fox. Those are those are
Speaker 1: two channels that they might actually be successful trying to
Speaker 1: get them to get carriage pulled. I mean that's and
Speaker 1: and other cable personalities are calling for this. They of
Speaker 1: course they are, yeah, and listen, I don't you know.
Speaker 1: The argument is these people are saying dangerous things like
Speaker 1: the election was stolen. First of all, I don't care
Speaker 1: that they're dangerous things. I think you'd be able to
Speaker 1: say whatever you want, whatever you want as want, and
Speaker 1: if if you're saying something that's slander, someone should sue you,
Speaker 1: you know, or or or whatever. So I don't care
Speaker 1: if there's a cute and non cable network, right, I
Speaker 1: think they deserve to be on the air now people,
Speaker 1: because people are always like trying to make, you know,
Speaker 1: offer some line on what's acceptable or not. That's not
Speaker 1: the point. It's a neutral principle. I am for free
Speaker 1: speech and just because it's difficult to defend doesn't mean
Speaker 1: I'm not for it. And the idea that we and
Speaker 1: like you mentioned, they're going after o an or whatever
Speaker 1: it's called, but they're also going after podcasts. I saw
Speaker 1: I think I forget where it was USA today at
Speaker 1: a piece about how podcasters are finding a like a
Speaker 1: loophole in which to speak about certain things. Is that
Speaker 1: a loophole to speak about certain things? You're just an
Speaker 1: authoritarian censor the loophole. There is an no loophole. The
Speaker 1: loophole is the one that they are using to shut
Speaker 1: down speech they don't like. And so anyway, it's just
Speaker 1: a dangerous way to think about the world. To start
Speaker 1: saying this is acceptable and this isn't you know, people
Speaker 1: always mentioned yelling fire in a theater. You can yell
Speaker 1: fire in a theater. That was from a Supreme Court
Speaker 1: decision around World War One that allowed Withdrew Wilson to
Speaker 1: throw social anti weere socialists into jail. Yeah, Shank v. Us.
Speaker 1: It was pure authoritarianism and the Holmes the Holmes decision
Speaker 1: was an abomination. But people still yell this like it's
Speaker 1: an argument ender. I know. So anyway, so we're in
Speaker 1: degree is yeah, I mean, I look, I'll give you
Speaker 1: an example even today. You know how I feel about lockdowns,
Speaker 1: and I'm sorry it is. My view of this has
Speaker 1: always been if we're even having and I just mean
Speaker 1: in general society is even having a debate about how
Speaker 1: effective lockdowns were, that means they weren't effective. Because we
Speaker 1: got put into this with the belief that it would
Speaker 1: be it would be, it would be clear. I mean,
Speaker 1: you saw the Atlantic and all these different experts, these
Speaker 1: people were writing in major journals and publications back in
Speaker 1: May and June. You know, we'd have a sixty percent,
Speaker 1: eighty percent reduction in the virus. And now you look
Speaker 1: at places like California all time record, right. I mean, so,
Speaker 1: if it's not obvious that lockdowns are really effective, they're
Speaker 1: clearly not effective enough to justify and by the way,
Speaker 1: I would argue even an even more extreme position than that,
Speaker 1: but clearly not effective enough to justify the abuse of
Speaker 1: power and authority. But but here we are. I was
Speaker 1: just trying to tell I was just trying to tell
Speaker 1: people my thoughts on this, and and David I got
Speaker 1: a I got dinged on on Facebook for writing after
Speaker 1: covid let's match and put this in quotes after covid
Speaker 1: let's mask up during Flu season two. It's already starting.
Speaker 1: Just a few voices here there are in support of
Speaker 1: this comment, but it will grow and grow until mask
Speaker 1: up forever. It's the polite thing to do, is the
Speaker 1: new mantra. There are people right now who are starting
Speaker 1: the you know, guys, we probably should actually wear masks
Speaker 1: after this, because it's so effective and we want to
Speaker 1: stop the flu as well. Look what we've done to
Speaker 1: flucases in this country. I'm making an argument about a
Speaker 1: future policy. I'm not even negating or questioning mask effectiveness.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying that. And I get a you know,
Speaker 1: this is dinged for you know, you have to go
Speaker 1: to the CDC for more information. And the way this
Speaker 1: works now is I'm I'm going to be shadow band
Speaker 1: on Facebook for the next month for what for pointing
Speaker 1: out what is true? There are people advocating for masking
Speaker 1: even after the mass vaccination happens. The argument for masking
Speaker 1: after you've been vaccinated is insane, but people are making
Speaker 1: that argument still. Yeah, I mean, I don't even understand,
Speaker 1: Like you can't say the election was stolen, Like why
Speaker 1: can't I say those words? It's ridiculous. But I'm a
Speaker 1: mask thing. I mean, I'm pretti radicalized on this now
Speaker 1: in the sense that I'm sorry that I supported any
Speaker 1: lockdowns ever at all. I mean, I just don't think
Speaker 1: the government has the right to tell you not to
Speaker 1: go to church or not to go to your business.
Speaker 1: If people want to lock themselves down, that's their business.
Speaker 1: If people want to tell you not to want to
Speaker 1: tell you to wear a mask in their place of business,
Speaker 1: that's fine. But I shouldn't be forced to do it,
Speaker 1: you know, to be fined if I'm walking in the street,
Speaker 1: et cetera. There's just no government has no power to
Speaker 1: do that. And I mentioned it again on this show.
Speaker 1: You have governors who act like dictators, and I mean
Speaker 1: that in the most literal sense. In the Roman Empire,
Speaker 1: they had dictators and times of emergencies that have full
Speaker 1: power to do whatever they wanted. And that's exactly what
Speaker 1: we have now for almost a year in states in
Speaker 1: Michigan and Virginia and in other states New York. It's
Speaker 1: just an American and I just can't believe that the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court allows them to do that. There is just
Speaker 1: no precedent for it in American history. I'm furious as
Speaker 1: well that not only has there been all this overreach
Speaker 1: and as you point out, the tyranny of these governors
Speaker 1: and primarily Democrat governors, although there are some Republican governors
Speaker 1: that have really been way too willing to go along
Speaker 1: with the the Fauci consensus on this stuff. That guy,
Speaker 1: doctor Fauchi, I mean, I don't care what anybody says.
Speaker 1: He's a disaster. I mean, this guy is not helpful,
Speaker 1: his ideas are not sound, he does not have good judgment,
Speaker 1: but he's used as this he's almost this uh you
Speaker 1: know this you know, superhuman figure that we all if
Speaker 1: you challenge him, You're this guy was wrong about the
Speaker 1: risks and spread of HIV for years in years when
Speaker 1: he was a top public health authority about that. That That
Speaker 1: was decades ago. He's been wrong about this time and
Speaker 1: time again. But you see in Europe, David like, there
Speaker 1: was just a protest in the Netherlands and there's a
Speaker 1: photo of a guy jumping on this police machine that's
Speaker 1: essentially like a water cannon, you know, anti protest vehicle,
Speaker 1: and he's he's on the windshield. This protesters jumped on
Speaker 1: the windshield. He's, you know, putting out the middle finger
Speaker 1: to the sky. And I was like, where is that
Speaker 1: in this country? They've had huge anti lockdown protests in Spain,
Speaker 1: in Germany, in the Netherlands, I mean, in the UK,
Speaker 1: you know, thousands of people gathering together. Here in America,
Speaker 1: we just sort of sit around like, yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe one day the vaccine, Well, what's it gonna take.
Speaker 1: I don't know. That's an interesting that's an interesting thought.
Speaker 1: Maybe people are less inclined to listen here as it
Speaker 1: is in many places, So I don't I don't know.
Speaker 1: You know, when you have urban areas with tons of people,
Speaker 1: it probably becomes more you know, apparent or maybe they're
Speaker 1: enforcing it or harsher, but those are just guesses. I
Speaker 1: don't know why. I don't know why Americans aren't more
Speaker 1: upset by this. I think they've been. There's a lot
Speaker 1: of scare mongering going on. And again, I'm not diminishing
Speaker 1: what's happened. We know what's happened. Hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 1: people have died. But the idea that we should just
Speaker 1: shut everyone down when mostly this is a disease that
Speaker 1: affects older people, we could have protected them, We could
Speaker 1: have protected other, you know, parts of the population that
Speaker 1: we're suceptible to it and allowed us, you know, allowed
Speaker 1: the economy to move on and to go on, and
Speaker 1: it just didn't happen that way. And you're right with
Speaker 1: Saint Fauci. You know, my problem with him isn't even
Speaker 1: that he's wrong about a lot of things. My problem
Speaker 1: is that he treats people and American citizens as children,
Speaker 1: like he will tell us, you know, oh, I had
Speaker 1: to say that what was it? Herd immunity is going
Speaker 1: to be at sixty five percent, because I didn't want
Speaker 1: to scare people and say it was ninety like that's
Speaker 1: not up to you. You're a public official, you need
Speaker 1: to tell us the information that you have and then
Speaker 1: we make decisions. This is why him when people say
Speaker 1: scientists should be running things, scientists do not balance out,
Speaker 1: you know, in their thought process, all the things that
Speaker 1: go on in society. It is dangerous to allot run things,
Speaker 1: to allow them to lie to people. Saint Fauci David
Speaker 1: the the the original sin for me of Saint Fauci
Speaker 1: was and I do not I believe this is bs.
Speaker 1: I do not believe that this is even really true.
Speaker 1: He was dismissive about the public wearing masks, and we're
Speaker 1: told because he didn't want us to all run out
Speaker 1: and buy the N ninety five masks and there wouldn't
Speaker 1: be enough for healthcare providers. That means this would be
Speaker 1: like someone telling you, as a doctor, don't take that
Speaker 1: antibiotic because I'm worried that somebody else who might need
Speaker 1: it more to say their life, won't have it. That
Speaker 1: is what he did. That is immoral, It is wrong,
Speaker 1: but he gets this pass on it. He gets this
Speaker 1: pass and you know what the truth is. It's because
Speaker 1: he knew that the data up until then, and he
Speaker 1: knew that the science up until then did not support
Speaker 1: the trade off of what he now tells us is obvious,
Speaker 1: but he can't say that, so he says, oh, I
Speaker 1: made this what this idea that he lied to us
Speaker 1: for our own good about masks? This is awful. But
Speaker 1: people think that this is an excuse like their children,
Speaker 1: and and you know, and and there's there's a piece
Speaker 1: in the Times I think today or yesterday where they
Speaker 1: talk about vaccines and how a lot of these public
Speaker 1: officials in government are downplaying the effectiveness of vaccines for
Speaker 1: I don't know why, because they think that, you know,
Speaker 1: people are gonna act I responsibly or whatever. That's not
Speaker 1: up to them. We act. This is a free country
Speaker 1: or was, and we can act in any way we
Speaker 1: feel like within the law. And it's not for them
Speaker 1: to treat us like children. The next it's also it
Speaker 1: also go ahead, go ahead, dated policy because yeah, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: because politicians are not as bright as everyone thinks. I
Speaker 1: hope and or I mean, I hope they don't think that,
Speaker 1: but they aren't bright, and they make policies on what
Speaker 1: foult she says. The governor of Michigan is not bright.
Speaker 1: She just does whatever Foult She says, so if he's lying,
Speaker 1: she's basing public policy on his lies, and that's dangerous
Speaker 1: or not just him, other CDC officials and government officials.
Speaker 1: And we're speaking to David Harsani of National Review. Read
Speaker 1: his latest. He's a clear thinker and he actually cares
Speaker 1: about free speech at National Review dot com. David, the
Speaker 1: next the next fight, And you're already seeing the start
Speaker 1: to happen because this CAMS comes up in that New
Speaker 1: York Times article, This idea that we should all mask
Speaker 1: up after we're vaccinated, that is rooted in a premise
Speaker 1: that they'll start to lose control of making people mask
Speaker 1: and so maybe then we'll all be safer if we
Speaker 1: all mask until we're all sure. But but on an
Speaker 1: individual basis, it is irrational. It is irrational to tell
Speaker 1: someone they have to wear a mask after they've been
Speaker 1: vaccinated because of I mean, in the Fiser trial, one
Speaker 1: out of thirty thousand people actually got sick, didn't die,
Speaker 1: got sick with COVID after being vaccinated. If you have
Speaker 1: a one in thirty thousand chance of getting sick, which
Speaker 1: means a one and thirty thousand chance of even getting
Speaker 1: it and passing it to anybody else. So now that's
Speaker 1: not you know not, you still have to work. These
Speaker 1: people are insane. I mean, this is crazy. They like
Speaker 1: to control you, and you know they're gonna say, why
Speaker 1: is you know, why is it okay to fifty thousand
Speaker 1: people a year die of flu and we can just
Speaker 1: stop flu and put masks on as if we're supposed
Speaker 1: to walk around being safe from all things all the time.
Speaker 1: It's ridiculous. As soon as I get that vaccine, I'm
Speaker 1: not wearing a mask anymore. I hate wearing a mask now,
Speaker 1: and I don't think it's good for society to wear
Speaker 1: a mask. I don't want to get into the specifics,
Speaker 1: but just interactions with people are weird. No, it's dehuman
Speaker 1: It dehumanizes, it dehumanizes all of us. There's a reason
Speaker 1: why the Taliban dresses women like beekeepers. There's a dehumanization
Speaker 1: to the depersonalization of your appearance in this way. It
Speaker 1: is not good for society, and I mean this is
Speaker 1: a I'm gearing up for this fight. I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: banned from social media for it, though, David, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: get kicked off of platforms for saying post vaccine, you
Speaker 1: should not have to mask, and Fauci, if he had
Speaker 1: any any guts whatsoever, would say that. But we still
Speaker 1: have about forty percent of New York City schools closed
Speaker 1: down because he doesn't have the guts to say it's
Speaker 1: outrageous that they still have schools shutdown. He won't he
Speaker 1: doesn't want to offend the lib CNN watching consensus. But
Speaker 1: have you have you noticed the psychs a shift in
Speaker 1: sort of the shutdown stuff since Biden won the election,
Speaker 1: with Cuomo saying we can't go on doing this forever
Speaker 1: and oh yeah, for liberals, I think you're going to yeah,
Speaker 1: I think now because it's not useful to them. And
Speaker 1: people call me a conspiracy theorist about that this, but
Speaker 1: I don't think I am. I think that you'll see
Speaker 1: people being more positive, putting more positive spins on things,
Speaker 1: wanting to open things up. They don't want the economy
Speaker 1: failing under Biden, and but they do want to keep
Speaker 1: controlling you. So I think that will be interesting, especially
Speaker 1: with the masks. But more than that, the speech. The
Speaker 1: speech bothers me more than anything. There's no reason I
Speaker 1: shouldn't be able to say the election was stolen because
Speaker 1: you know what, maybe it was maybe one day it
Speaker 1: will be and what I can't say those words because
Speaker 1: it offend someone. It's it's it's also this sort of
Speaker 1: they've used the Capitol Riots to sort of smear everyone.
Speaker 1: Jake Tapper does it all the time on seeing it
Speaker 1: to smear everyone as some kind of radical conspiracy theorists
Speaker 1: for having any questions that do not comport to his worldview.
Speaker 1: And h and it's it's it's it's a way to
Speaker 1: sort of chill debate. And I think it's it's it's dangerous.
Speaker 1: R Sonny. We're in this. We're in this one together,
Speaker 1: my friend. Thank you so much for joining us National
Speaker 1: Review dot Com. Read David's latest, please support his work,
Speaker 1: follow him on social media before both of us get
Speaker 1: kicked off. David, thanks so much. Thank you,