Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. President Trump announces the
Speaker 1: death of Abu Baker al Baghdaddi, the head of the
Speaker 1: Islamic State. What does this mean for the fight in
Speaker 1: Syria against ISIS? What does it mean for Trump's foreign policy?
Speaker 1: How did the media react to this? We've got that
Speaker 1: and oh so much more coming up on The buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show. This is the buck Sexton Show. For the
Speaker 1: mission or mission is to decode what really matters with
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Magnom mistake America, You're a great American Again,
Speaker 1: The buck Sexton Show begins analyst, He's a great guy. Now,
Speaker 1: Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everybody, welcome, Welcome. President
Speaker 1: Trump made an announcement. Please play. Last night, the United
Speaker 1: States brought the world's number one terroist leader to justice.
Speaker 1: Abu Bakar al Beghdaddi is dead. He was the founder
Speaker 1: and leader of ISIS, the most ruthless and violent terror
Speaker 1: organization anywhere in the world. The United States has been
Speaker 1: searching for Baghdaddy for many years. Capturing or killing Baghdaddy
Speaker 1: has been the top national security priority of my administration.
Speaker 1: US Special Operations Forces executed a dangerous and daring nighttime
Speaker 1: raid in northwestern Syria and accomplished their mission in grand style.
Speaker 1: The US personnel were incredible. I got to watch much
Speaker 1: of it. No personnel were lost in the operation, while
Speaker 1: a large number of Bagdaddies, fighters and companions were killed.
Speaker 1: With him, President Trump telling the nation, telling the world
Speaker 1: the very good news that the leader of the Islamic
Speaker 1: State is no more. These days and are incredibly polarized
Speaker 1: political climate, there are very few moments, very few opportunities
Speaker 1: when you would expect there to be a true bipartisan
Speaker 1: coming together. But I remember, and the parallels between these
Speaker 1: two incidents will be a theme as we discussed this today.
Speaker 1: I remember when under the Obama administration, Osama bin Laden
Speaker 1: was killed, and I remember that announcement, seeing on TV
Speaker 1: jubilant reporters, seeing people dancing in the street chanting USA USA.
Speaker 1: And now understandably, there was a greater psychological attachment, a
Speaker 1: greater sense of justice delivered when Ubl was killed, because
Speaker 1: he was the mastermind of the nine eleven attacks that
Speaker 1: killed almost three thousand of our fellow Americans. But there
Speaker 1: was an understanding that this was a good thing, that
Speaker 1: justice had been delivered, and there was something of a
Speaker 1: respite from the nasty partisan politics that define almost everything
Speaker 1: in the news these days. You would think you would
Speaker 1: think that when Abu Baker al Baghdati is taken out
Speaker 1: by US special operators, people keep saying special forces. I've
Speaker 1: seen it reported as Delta Force. But when this happens,
Speaker 1: shouldn't we have a pause in the partisan warfare. Shouldn't
Speaker 1: we have a moment where we say enough is enough?
Speaker 1: With all of that, this was a good thing. First
Speaker 1: line of credit goes to our military, goes to those
Speaker 1: in the special operations community who very clearly put their
Speaker 1: lives in the line for this raid and for many
Speaker 1: other raids and just in the day to day national
Speaker 1: security protection of this country. But the credit does make
Speaker 1: its way up to those who gave the order. The
Speaker 1: credit also filters through the intelligence community, which I think
Speaker 1: these days could certainly use quite a bit more public
Speaker 1: confidence and respect, given the way that it has been
Speaker 1: shamelessly politicized against President Trump. But simply put, my friends,
Speaker 1: this is a big win. It's a win for America,
Speaker 1: for Trump, for special operations, for the intelligence community, and
Speaker 1: for Syria, the Middle East, the world, human decency, basic
Speaker 1: human rights, any sense of justice. This guy was a
Speaker 1: monster individual, was a rapist, a mass murderer, a torturer,
Speaker 1: a sadist, and yet the way that the press reported
Speaker 1: on him was such a window into what they really
Speaker 1: care about and what they really think. Astonishing stuff, hard
Speaker 1: to believe, and I truly mean that. Over the weekend,
Speaker 1: I was at Politicon in Nashville, which was a fun event.
Speaker 1: It was mostly fun for me to see some members
Speaker 1: of Team Baku showed up and thank you so much
Speaker 1: for those of you who did, but also to see
Speaker 1: some of my media peers. I have to tell you
Speaker 1: this headline, which has gotten so much attention from the
Speaker 1: Washington Post was so bizarre, a moral and just It's
Speaker 1: hard to explain how anyone could think this way. But
Speaker 1: the Washington Post initially called Abu Bakar al Baghdadi a
Speaker 1: terror in chief. I responded on Twitter yesterday to this
Speaker 1: because they change that headline to the following. Abu Baker
Speaker 1: al Baghdaddi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State,
Speaker 1: dies at forty eight. A. Yeah, austere. You could say
Speaker 1: he was pretty strict, you know, he would you saw
Speaker 1: your head off if you didn't do what he wanted.
Speaker 1: So I guess that's I guess that's one description of him,
Speaker 1: austere religious scholar. Another post had to walk this back,
Speaker 1: change the headline right away. But that was not the
Speaker 1: only place I would know where there were very strange
Speaker 1: descriptions in what was a Washington Post obituary of a
Speaker 1: butcher of men, women and children in the Middle East,
Speaker 1: doing so under the mantle of Islam, bringing tens of
Speaker 1: thousands of recruits. Okay, this isn't I know in this country.
Speaker 1: If you have a white nationalist rally somewhere with ten
Speaker 1: morons who show up, we're told that they're about to
Speaker 1: overthrow the country. Meanwhile, when you're looking at the Islamic state,
Speaker 1: you actually had a Jihadis who brought together tens of
Speaker 1: thousands of recruits from all over the world, took over
Speaker 1: an area that reigned over at least three or four
Speaker 1: million inhabitants and required a multinational coalition, led of course
Speaker 1: by the United States, but also with some very good
Speaker 1: ground finding from our friends the Kurds on the ground.
Speaker 1: But as terrible a human being as you're going to
Speaker 1: find anywhere in the Washington Post, in its obituary of this,
Speaker 1: Abu Baker al Baghdatti referred to him, wrote quote, mister
Speaker 1: Baghdaddy maintained a canny pragmatism. End quote. M I guess enslavement, genocide,
Speaker 1: mass murder. Some people would find a way to describe
Speaker 1: that as pragmatic if you're a psychopath. Another quote from
Speaker 1: the obituary, Acquaintances would remember him as a shy, near
Speaker 1: sighted youth who liked soccer but preferred to spend his
Speaker 1: free time at the local mosque. Now end quote, you
Speaker 1: could tell me that back. Come on, they're doing an obituary.
Speaker 1: They're trying to give a full picture of who this
Speaker 1: monster was. They understand that. As I read through this obituary,
Speaker 1: I could not help but think that if they were
Speaker 1: writing an obituary, if the Washington Post is writing an
Speaker 1: obituary of say, Brett Kavanaugh, there would have been more
Speaker 1: acid tongued attacks. There would have been more nasty, undermining,
Speaker 1: viciousness about a future Kavanaugh obituary, for example, Then you
Speaker 1: would see in this piece about a mass murderer, not
Speaker 1: about an entirely decent and brilliant family man who is
Speaker 1: the worst nightmare of liberals precisely because of his intellect,
Speaker 1: his morality, and his decency. No, no, Abubakar al bag Daddy.
Speaker 1: They can find another way to look at him. If
Speaker 1: you think that that's the only case, by the way,
Speaker 1: I would bring you the way that Bloomberg another major
Speaker 1: news outlet, you know, multi billion dollars. These are huge
Speaker 1: news outlets, employing thousands of journalists, tremendous resources. How about
Speaker 1: just terrorist mastermind killed? Congrats special Forces or special operations.
Speaker 1: Congrats US military and the Trump White House. Sorry they
Speaker 1: get credit for there's the same way that Obama did
Speaker 1: his whole walk out in front of a microphone and
Speaker 1: look what I did. Bin Laden's gone. I'm amazing. Now
Speaker 1: that covered up for a tremendous amount of incompetence in
Speaker 1: the counter terrorism fight from the Obama administration. In fact,
Speaker 1: it was reported that some of the seals that were
Speaker 1: a part of that raid on Bin Lan's compound set afterwards.
Speaker 1: We just got Obama reelected by taking out Osama, And
Speaker 1: I think that there was some degree of truth to that.
Speaker 1: I don't think it was wholly the case that that
Speaker 1: was why Obama got reelected, but a major line of
Speaker 1: attack on foreign p play matters would have been the
Speaker 1: ineptitude and the inability of the Obama administration to even
Speaker 1: see who the good guys are and who the bad
Speaker 1: guys are. It was a way to shut down that
Speaker 1: criticism at a key moment for the Obama administration. They
Speaker 1: shut it down by saying, Oh, I'm sorry, Obama, the
Speaker 1: guy who killed bin Laden isn't tough enough on terrorists. Well, no,
Speaker 1: actually turned out he wasn't tough enough on terrorists. Do
Speaker 1: you remember all the mass casualty attacks that were happening
Speaker 1: abroad and here at home jeehottest attacks inspired by the
Speaker 1: Islamic State. No, I don't think he was tough enough
Speaker 1: on terrorism. They always pointed also to his usage of drones. Well,
Speaker 1: that was because we were being told that drones were
Speaker 1: a precision tactic and that that was all that was needed.
Speaker 1: Of course, that wasn't all that was needed. Drones are
Speaker 1: not a strategy, and drones come with their own collateral
Speaker 1: damage and issues. But Bloomberg tweeted out the following about
Speaker 1: Abu Baker Albuaghdaddi, Islamic State leader albu Baker al Baghdaddi
Speaker 1: transformed himself from a little known teacher of Charanic recitation
Speaker 1: into the self proclaimed ruler of an entity that covered
Speaker 1: squats of Syria and Iraq. Wow, I wonder what his
Speaker 1: favorite color was? Did he have a cat? What was
Speaker 1: the cat's name? This is how they talk about as
Speaker 1: vicious a terrorist mastermind as you would find anywhere, as
Speaker 1: vicious has been Lauden just didn't manage to get in
Speaker 1: a sneak attack on us before we knew we were
Speaker 1: at war, But as vicious as Osama in law and
Speaker 1: in fact, the Islamic State used tactics that were so severe,
Speaker 1: so extreme that there were even al Qaeda members who
Speaker 1: reportedly felt that it might be too much, might turn
Speaker 1: some members of the uma of the Islamic community against
Speaker 1: the Islamic State. And yet here we have reporters in
Speaker 1: more than one instance. And also, and I'm about to
Speaker 1: get into the this is just the way they report
Speaker 1: on Baghdaddy. I will transfer this into how did they
Speaker 1: factor Trump into all this? And then we'll discuss what
Speaker 1: does this mean about Syria. Wasn't it just a week
Speaker 1: ago we were being told that Trump had no idea
Speaker 1: what he was doing in Syria. He's ruined everything, He's
Speaker 1: left all the Kurds to die, The whole regions up
Speaker 1: in flames now because of Trump, all this hysteria from
Speaker 1: so called foreign policy experts. I would note, my dear
Speaker 1: friends and colleagues here in the freedom hunt with me.
Speaker 1: Did we take that position? Were we in hysterics about
Speaker 1: how the counter terrorism fight is over because of Trump's decision,
Speaker 1: How everything has fallen apart, We've lost all of our gains,
Speaker 1: We've abandoned the Kurds for all eternity, We've handed over
Speaker 1: all of our credibility to the Turks and the Russians.
Speaker 1: Were we taking that position? Who looks foolish this week?
Speaker 1: Not us, not in here a lot of other people.
Speaker 1: Though perhaps it's because some of us actually worked on
Speaker 1: these issues and have an understanding of the underlying dynamics,
Speaker 1: and also have some interest in the history not just
Speaker 1: of the region, but of US actions in the region
Speaker 1: and what comes as a result of them in the
Speaker 1: immediate and long term. Make no think about it, This
Speaker 1: was a big win for America, for civilization. Really, it
Speaker 1: does not end the fight against terrorism, It does not
Speaker 1: even end the fight against the Islamic state. But it
Speaker 1: is an important moral and psychological victory in a battle
Speaker 1: that is largely moral and psychological, But the media wasn't
Speaker 1: really necessarily sure what team they were on. Sometimes were they?
Speaker 1: How do we report on this? Don't want this to
Speaker 1: be too much of a win for Trump. Let's focus
Speaker 1: on that for a moment. How does Trump factor in
Speaker 1: to what is the single biggest takeout of a terrorist
Speaker 1: since been lauden and is certainly on the same plane
Speaker 1: as the mission against oslom bin Laden? But what do
Speaker 1: they think of Trump in this whole thing? Bag Daddy
Speaker 1: and the losers who worked for him, and losers they are.
Speaker 1: They had no idea what they were getting into. In
Speaker 1: some cases they were very frightened puppies. In other cases
Speaker 1: they were hardcore killers. President of Trump minced no words
Speaker 1: when he was talking about the operation against Sababah al Baghdatti.
Speaker 1: And also though we i'll refer to him as al Baghdatti,
Speaker 1: of course that means the guy from Baghdad. It's not
Speaker 1: really his name, so to speak, but it's really a
Speaker 1: place name that he took as part of his his numdager.
Speaker 1: But Baghdaddy did not die well, and the President had
Speaker 1: no problem telling the entire world about this. Producer Mark,
Speaker 1: please play a clip ten where the President gives some
Speaker 1: specifics about this. He died after running into a dead
Speaker 1: end tunnel, whimpering and crying and screaming all the way.
Speaker 1: Whimpering and crying and screaming all the way, I believe.
Speaker 1: He also went on to say that he died like
Speaker 1: a like a Oh here we go, play thirteen. He
Speaker 1: did someone who has caused so much hardship and death,
Speaker 1: a brutal killer, one who has caused so much hardship
Speaker 1: and death, has violently been eliminated. He will never again
Speaker 1: harm another innocent man, woman, or child. He died like
Speaker 1: a dog. He died like a coward. The world is
Speaker 1: now a much safer place. Died like a dog, the
Speaker 1: President said. This then resulted in the usual people coming
Speaker 1: out of the out of the woodwork to say that
Speaker 1: this was a bad idea, that there should not be
Speaker 1: this kind of spiking of the football. And in fact
Speaker 1: I saw some supposed national security experts saying that in
Speaker 1: comparison to what happened with bin Laden, this is far
Speaker 1: There are far too many details that are being shared.
Speaker 1: This was a pathetic criticism that was initially because the
Speaker 1: first impulse of many people in the media is not oh, Wow,
Speaker 1: this thing happened. What does this mean for Syria and
Speaker 1: for the region and for America. The first impulse is, oh, no,
Speaker 1: this is a Trump win. How do we make it
Speaker 1: seem like not as much of a Trump win? It
Speaker 1: is clear from the way it was reported. It's clear
Speaker 1: from the analysis pieces as well as the hard news.
Speaker 1: The first concern of American journalists writing about this, by
Speaker 1: and large was to make sure that Trump did not
Speaker 1: get a big win out of this. That also, there
Speaker 1: wasn't a sense of whiplash in the public from Trump
Speaker 1: has ruined our Syria policy. Oh wait, he just called
Speaker 1: for the mission to get rid of the head of
Speaker 1: the Islamic State. What do we do now? How do
Speaker 1: we spin that now? Primary concern this is why people
Speaker 1: don't trust the press. Why they don't trust the media,
Speaker 1: because they should not trust the press. They should not
Speaker 1: trust the media. They show you who they are time
Speaker 1: and again. As Bush once said, Fomi once can't get
Speaker 1: fooled again. You know that's how Bush said it. I
Speaker 1: kind of like the way he said it. I also
Speaker 1: think that his usage of the term decider was excellent.
Speaker 1: And then there was what was the word that he
Speaker 1: made up? A word, and it was a great word
Speaker 1: on them forgetting what it was now misunderestimated. He was misunderestimated,
Speaker 1: that is for sure. The truth here is that President
Speaker 1: Trump does get credit, should get credit from any fair
Speaker 1: minded press and any fair minded American. But there's a
Speaker 1: desperate attempt to make it seem like this is something
Speaker 1: other than that. The comparison to the Ben Laden raid
Speaker 1: that I've seen many in the media making is interesting
Speaker 1: because they say Trump gave away too many details. Trump
Speaker 1: gave away too many details of this raid. There's been
Speaker 1: Laden raid. There were orders in the Obama administration. It
Speaker 1: basically just sit down and like, open up the books
Speaker 1: and tell the zero dark thirty filmmakers whenever they wanted
Speaker 1: to know. People were writing books about the whole thing.
Speaker 1: I mean that it was leaking, Like I said, it
Speaker 1: wasn't even leaks. They were they were told to do it,
Speaker 1: just sharing all the information. He was a sick and
Speaker 1: braved man and now he's gone. Bagh Daddy was vicious
Speaker 1: and violent, and he died in a vicious and violent
Speaker 1: way as a coward, running and crying. Now people are
Speaker 1: claiming as well that there's the secrecy complaint. They were
Speaker 1: all that. You could almost line them up right away
Speaker 1: after this, within hours of this, within minutes of this raid,
Speaker 1: which any normal person would react you with, wow, that's
Speaker 1: that's great work by the military intelligence community. And gould
Speaker 1: call President Trump. That's really it. Maybe start chanting USA
Speaker 1: on the streets or wherever you are if you want.
Speaker 1: But that's the way normal people react, and said the
Speaker 1: way the press reacts is to sort of try to
Speaker 1: be fair to Abu Baker lah blagh Daddi and be
Speaker 1: as unfair as possible the President Trump in terms of
Speaker 1: the credit that he would get in the circumstance. There
Speaker 1: were complaints about secrecy around this, that the President isn't
Speaker 1: allowed to talk about the raid. Well, the raid already happened.
Speaker 1: Abu Baker Lah Baghdad, he's dead. They're announcing that the
Speaker 1: raid happened. Trump wasn't giving away any tactics, techniques, or procedures.
Speaker 1: Trump wasn't giving away anything that would help the enemy.
Speaker 1: Next time I heard the press conference, he's saying there
Speaker 1: that chasing down a tunnel. Guess what the bad guys know,
Speaker 1: Abu Baker is dead. They sent a big detachment of
Speaker 1: special operations to go get him. This is not something
Speaker 1: that once it's happened, it's not doesn't remain some big secret.
Speaker 1: You know, we're not trying to hide this from ISIS.
Speaker 1: They're well aware of it. But another criticism that I
Speaker 1: thought was just so clear in its desperation, the desperation
Speaker 1: of preventing a full benefit political benefit for President Trump
Speaker 1: out of this whole situation, was that they were there
Speaker 1: was a lack of respect, a lack of respect that
Speaker 1: Trump showed by the way he talked about this, and
Speaker 1: I even saw I think it was the former and
Speaker 1: I worked for morale at the at the CIA, the
Speaker 1: former deputy director there. I remember. I think he was
Speaker 1: one that went on CBS and said, you know that
Speaker 1: there were such an effort to be respectful to Bin
Speaker 1: Lauden and they gave him an Islamic burial. Um. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's one way to see it. There's also the they
Speaker 1: blew his head off, took photos of him, and then
Speaker 1: dumped his body in the ocean. So there's that. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure that there's any jihadas who's gonna say, whoa
Speaker 1: they were really? First of all, Buba Baghdaddi suicided himself
Speaker 1: with a suicide vest we'd even get into that detail.
Speaker 1: I killed three of his own children, reportedly ran into
Speaker 1: a tunnel broad kids with him. It's gonna be it's
Speaker 1: gonna be tough for him when he wakes up after
Speaker 1: his so called martyrdom and there's there's no virgins. There's
Speaker 1: something else waiting for him on the other side. I
Speaker 1: can assure you of that. But the complaints about this
Speaker 1: like we weren't as we weren't as gentle or as
Speaker 1: as gentlemanly, I should say, with Abu Baker, because is
Speaker 1: in charge as it worth bin Laden, the seals blew
Speaker 1: blew a hole in bin Laden's head, and then the
Speaker 1: military dumped his body at sea after what was reportedly
Speaker 1: a brief you know Islamic ritual. Not not exactly a
Speaker 1: warm and fuzzy situation, as it shouldn't have been, right
Speaker 1: they would end they killed this guy. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: war is hell. He's not even a warrior, he's a terrorist.
Speaker 1: End of story. What's the big problem here? But there
Speaker 1: were looking, they were looking for ways, looking for things
Speaker 1: to say, anything that could convince the general public, or
Speaker 1: really just that would feed the mania of democrats and
Speaker 1: anti trumpers. Out there that it's not possible for Trump
Speaker 1: to do anything that's really good. And that's what you
Speaker 1: saw from the press here. There must be even when
Speaker 1: Trump Sometimes we'll make jokes about how if Trump were
Speaker 1: to cure cancer, you know, if Trump came out and said, hey,
Speaker 1: my administration, working with the CDC and private researchers, we
Speaker 1: have at all cancer. We joke around, and we're not
Speaker 1: even really that much joking these days. We woke around
Speaker 1: that there would be think pieces on vox dot com
Speaker 1: if you know why cancer has an important Darwinian role.
Speaker 1: I mean, there would be crazy stuff because anything Trump
Speaker 1: does can't be good. So you have to find some way,
Speaker 1: you know, some way to frame it so that Trump
Speaker 1: is the worst person in history is still the takeaway
Speaker 1: for that audience. And that was happening even with this,
Speaker 1: even in this moment of time. It's it's sad to
Speaker 1: see this, and it was particularly sad that it wasn't
Speaker 1: just the press. Now Washington, d C, where I used
Speaker 1: to live, I've lived. I've lived a good chunk of
Speaker 1: my life in Washington, d C. So I know the
Speaker 1: swamp very well. I know the swamp creatures far too well.
Speaker 1: And DC because it is largely now the population of
Speaker 1: DC is an appendage of federal government largesse. They are there,
Speaker 1: generally speaking, because of all of the money, the consolidation
Speaker 1: of power and money in our federal capital. This is
Speaker 1: not what the founders had in mind. This is not
Speaker 1: the way it's supposed to be. But unfortunately there's a
Speaker 1: reason why. I think it's might even be seven of
Speaker 1: the top ten wealthiest counties per capita in the United States,
Speaker 1: just ring Washington, d C. And you got to go
Speaker 1: out in the suburbs to get your multimillion dollar mansion
Speaker 1: if you're a contractor or a lobbyist or someone who's
Speaker 1: real job is essentially influenced peddling inside the Beltway. But
Speaker 1: over ninety four percent, I think it was. It's definitely
Speaker 1: over ninety I think it was over ninety four percent.
Speaker 1: Might have even been ninety six percent of Washington DC
Speaker 1: voters went for Hillary Clinton in the last election who
Speaker 1: worked for the federal government. So if you work for
Speaker 1: the federal government and you were living in Washingt DC,
Speaker 1: you went for Hillary. DC is a political monoculture for
Speaker 1: the permanent state, not just for the Deep state, but
Speaker 1: the permanent state. The bureaucracy. And you got a sense
Speaker 1: of that when last night President Trump was at and
Speaker 1: producer Mark fortunately likes baseball, so he had to tell
Speaker 1: me that there was the World Series going on and
Speaker 1: apparently the DC team is in it, the Gnats, which
Speaker 1: sounds like a bunch of small flies. Do you not
Speaker 1: even know the name of the Washington the Nationals? No, no,
Speaker 1: I'm hip, I know the things. But but there was
Speaker 1: this moment last night when the President of the United
Speaker 1: States is at a baseball game right after the announcement
Speaker 1: of or you know, within hours of the announcement that
Speaker 1: Abu Bakara, like Daddy, has been killed by our elite military.
Speaker 1: And this is how people in our nation's capital, some
Speaker 1: of them at least responded play clip eighteen. Please. There
Speaker 1: was booing. There were people there chanting lock him up
Speaker 1: about the President of the United States. Now it goes
Speaker 1: out saying these people are childish and they're morons. But
Speaker 1: unfortunately they're all over DC, and they think they're really
Speaker 1: wise and superior intellectually. They think that they're the ones.
Speaker 1: They think they're moral too. They're better than the people
Speaker 1: that would at least give the president his due over
Speaker 1: what just happened in Syria. Oh and I if that
Speaker 1: is so, that's disturbing, it's upsetting, but it's not surprising.
Speaker 1: It's not surprising. And can you imagine what the response
Speaker 1: would have been if the same day of the ubl
Speaker 1: raid you had had a big chunk of a sports
Speaker 1: stadium chanting lock him up or you know, send him
Speaker 1: to prison, or just booing Barack Obama. Can you imagine
Speaker 1: what the press reaction would be this it's just supposed
Speaker 1: to take it in stride. You know, Americans booing their
Speaker 1: president on a day like that, I guess they have
Speaker 1: very little recollection, it seems, of the torture videos, the electrocutions,
Speaker 1: the head chopping, decapitations, just the cruelty, the cruelty within
Speaker 1: the Islamic state. That was a clarion call to tens
Speaker 1: of thousands of people in the Islamic world. Some very
Speaker 1: interesting questions still to be answered about how that happens,
Speaker 1: how within a religious tradition there are that many people
Speaker 1: who when they hear that there's someone who's raping women,
Speaker 1: raping in some cases small children, as the Islamic State
Speaker 1: was also doing. There was rampant pedophilia amongst some of
Speaker 1: the senior leadership. You know, underage girls or the atrocities
Speaker 1: that were committed by the Islamic state are horrific, beyond words.
Speaker 1: And yet there are people rushing from around the world
Speaker 1: to join them, in some cases from European countries, from
Speaker 1: our own country, join this group, be a part of
Speaker 1: this group. No, that Abu Baker was chased into a
Speaker 1: corner and blew himself up while killing three of his
Speaker 1: own children is a fitting and to a group that
Speaker 1: is beyond and beneath contempt. And we can't focus on
Speaker 1: that enemy together as a country. We have to have
Speaker 1: the elites sneering at Trump. We have to have people
Speaker 1: in the press telling us that this wasn't such a
Speaker 1: great thing that Trump did because of X, Y or Z.
Speaker 1: This is pathetic. These people are sick the press I'm
Speaker 1: talking about. Now. You know the Austere scholar Abu Baker
Speaker 1: al Baghdadi brought together, as Bloomberg says, you know this
Speaker 1: whole area under his choranic recitations. Wow, I guess they're
Speaker 1: kind of impressed by him. And yet we know how
Speaker 1: they would respond, how they have responded to what should
Speaker 1: be a moment of true bipartisan unity because they can't
Speaker 1: see beyond anything other than their Trump patriot. The Washington Post,
Speaker 1: The New York Times, CNN, these places have destroyed themselves.
Speaker 1: To anybody who has open eyes and any sense of
Speaker 1: judgment whatsoever, those organizations have made a mockery of themselves
Speaker 1: now and they're doing harm to the country. They're not
Speaker 1: telling the truth. They're not truth tellers. They are lying
Speaker 1: about their partisanship and inflicting a very shockingly brazen propaganda
Speaker 1: on the American people on a day to day basis,
Speaker 1: even in moments like this. What does this mean for
Speaker 1: the Islamic State? I mean, let me, I don't want
Speaker 1: to do too much of just the how Trump's arrangement
Speaker 1: syndrome affected this, because it certainly did. It affected the
Speaker 1: way the media and many people across the country saw
Speaker 1: this event. What is the truth of what happens now
Speaker 1: in the Islamic State? And also I want to get
Speaker 1: into a bit of what this means for Syria policy.
Speaker 1: The operation was conducted last night, the president. They proved
Speaker 1: a raid onto the target. The aim was to capture
Speaker 1: Abu Bakar al Baghdatti, and if we couldn't capture him,
Speaker 1: then of course we were going to kill him. And
Speaker 1: like I said, the raid was successful. We pulled our
Speaker 1: troops out. We had two minor injuries to our soldiers,
Speaker 1: but a very successful, flawless raid. Now we get into
Speaker 1: the discussion we've had many times before. In fact, it's
Speaker 1: the discussion that I know a bit about, having been
Speaker 1: at the CIA during the take out of numerous high
Speaker 1: value targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. What does this mean
Speaker 1: for the fight against the Islamic State? What does it
Speaker 1: mean for the insurgency campaign that is currently being wage
Speaker 1: or counter terrorism operations? These are largely one and the
Speaker 1: same in Syria. The truth is we don't know. You
Speaker 1: don't know until after it happens. One of the best
Speaker 1: parts of this, if you're looking at it from a
Speaker 1: tactical and operational perspective, best part of it is that
Speaker 1: there's a other than the psychological benefits and the sense
Speaker 1: of justice. Now, as we look at what happened, we
Speaker 1: also have the information exploitation that occurs. They were able
Speaker 1: to seize, no doubt, a lot of sensitive documents. Who
Speaker 1: knows who they may have been able to, who they
Speaker 1: may be able to track down as a result of this,
Speaker 1: there's been all this focus on how they managed to
Speaker 1: track back Daddy down the first place. People find that interesting.
Speaker 1: I find much more. Yeah, they took out a courier
Speaker 1: and they managed to track him, and it was just
Speaker 1: good intelligence work, which is really investigative work. You know,
Speaker 1: the difference between fighting finding rather a terrorist hiding in
Speaker 1: Idlib in northwest Syria and finding a you know, a
Speaker 1: cartel leader in the highlands of Mexico, it's it's really
Speaker 1: quite similar. You use the tools you have to try
Speaker 1: and get to get a positive idea on where the
Speaker 1: subject may be. You try to track them down. You
Speaker 1: have to then bring kinetic efforts to bear to actually
Speaker 1: grab him or take him out. So it's really investigative work.
Speaker 1: That part of it is. It's from what we know
Speaker 1: right now, seems to be pretty textbook. I found some
Speaker 1: people that were close enough to him that then tracked
Speaker 1: down his location. They knew where he would be. The
Speaker 1: reports are that he didn't move for a while. They
Speaker 1: were hoping to catch him on the move because this
Speaker 1: raid was going to be dangerous. There were going to
Speaker 1: be a lot of fighters around trying to defend him.
Speaker 1: I haven't seen the casualty figures for the other side yet.
Speaker 1: But I can assume that our special operators went in
Speaker 1: at night and were taken out a lot of guys
Speaker 1: before they even got close to Baghdaddy. There is a
Speaker 1: part of me that wishes that one of ours, one
Speaker 1: of ours, have been able to take the final shot
Speaker 1: like they did with Bin Lauden. But I suppose we
Speaker 1: have to be content with Baghdaddy obliterating himself, leaving him
Speaker 1: also casualties of his own children in the process. I
Speaker 1: and it really tells you what a psychopath you were
Speaker 1: dealing with here. And also the need for fundamentalist Islamic
Speaker 1: belief for a jihadis in this process. How could a
Speaker 1: person do this unless they believe that they had some
Speaker 1: celestial justification for it. It just defies any reason or logic.
Speaker 1: You're gonna bring your three kids with you and blow
Speaker 1: them up? But what does it mean for fighting the
Speaker 1: Islamic state. They've already talked about the person who will
Speaker 1: be taking over. They have this, this new leader, and
Speaker 1: this is another way. This is Look, this is a
Speaker 1: legitimate way, but another way of taking the focus off
Speaker 1: the raid. Initially, Abdullah Kardash, who was also known as
Speaker 1: Haji Abdullah Allafari was nominated, they say, back in August
Speaker 1: to run the Islamic state. So how much of the
Speaker 1: day to day was back Daddy really running We don't know,
Speaker 1: or at least we in the public don't necessarily know.
Speaker 1: But there is now this Kardash fellow who could be
Speaker 1: It could be every bit as as evil, could be,
Speaker 1: even perhaps more capable as a terrorist leader. We'll have
Speaker 1: to see. I do recall that after the death again,
Speaker 1: because of special operators and some very good work in
Speaker 1: Iraq of Abu musabas Or Kawi, you had an escalation
Speaker 1: of the violence in Iraq and the insurgency and things
Speaker 1: got substantially worse from a security standpoint. So just killing
Speaker 1: Abu musabos Or Kawi was not the Oh, the head
Speaker 1: of the snake has been cut off there for the
Speaker 1: rest of the body is not a danger. You have
Speaker 1: to think of insurgency and even hvts or how high
Speaker 1: value targets. It's like you're dealing with a hydra, remember
Speaker 1: the creature from Greek mythology, with many many different heads
Speaker 1: to it still useful to chop off a hydra's head,
Speaker 1: but you got a chop off a lot of them,
Speaker 1: and you still have to deal with a body. That's
Speaker 1: perhaps a better way to consider what has happened here.
Speaker 1: The Islamic State is clearly under a lot of pressure
Speaker 1: because of the campaign that the Trump administration has waged
Speaker 1: since he came into office, which he also does not
Speaker 1: get sufficient as commander in chief. He does not get
Speaker 1: sufficient credit for that decision making, right. The credit for
Speaker 1: the raids, the credit for their credit for valor and bravery,
Speaker 1: always goes to our military. That's one component of all
Speaker 1: this that's just period, full stop. The credit for decision making,
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about that strategy, decision making, command
Speaker 1: and responsibility that goes to the people that are making
Speaker 1: those high level calls, and in this case that's President Trump.
Speaker 1: And as much as they may try to muddy the
Speaker 1: waters make that not as clear, they can't change the
Speaker 1: fact that it is because of a Trump administration decision
Speaker 1: that Abu Baker al Baghdadi no longer walks the earth today.
Speaker 1: But there's a broader piece here about foreign policy too.
Speaker 1: What does this mean when we are always being told
Speaker 1: that President Trump is incompetent, he's endangering the world, He
Speaker 1: doesn't know what he's doing. He knew what he was
Speaker 1: doing here, where else does he know? The reality is,
Speaker 1: we've walked away from the Kurts right at the time
Speaker 1: where they were giving us intell legence that apparently was
Speaker 1: key to this operational victory according to them, And what
Speaker 1: my sources are telling me is that takes the counter
Speaker 1: terrors and pressure off licens and that risks an isis resurgence.
Speaker 1: And so this may be, as you said, an operational
Speaker 1: taxle victory, but strategically, Donald Trump has set the fight
Speaker 1: against ices back significantly. Notice how Trump can't get credit
Speaker 1: for this, according to the press, that you cannot say
Speaker 1: that President Trump made the right call, did the right thing.
Speaker 1: They won't, They won't concede it. Their sense of patriotism,
Speaker 1: as weak as it may be, their sense of duty
Speaker 1: and honor, none of that overcomes the hashtag resistance mentality.
Speaker 1: Much more important to than that bash Trump than to
Speaker 1: give credit where it is due. It's one of the
Speaker 1: reasons why I always tell you I give credit where
Speaker 1: it's due. On this show, democrat does something good, I say,
Speaker 1: good job, Democrat. I don't run around pretending that everything
Speaker 1: a Democrat sayser does is bad. In fact, I like
Speaker 1: finding things that democrats do that is praiseworthy because it
Speaker 1: is a reminder that democrats don't have to be crazy.
Speaker 1: Some of them are Democrats don't have to be hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance lunatics. Many of them choose to be normal people.
Speaker 1: We would like to bring them over to our side
Speaker 1: of thinking. That would be far better. I do want converts.
Speaker 1: I don't want converts to this show. I want converts conservatism,
Speaker 1: but start off with converts to this show. So tell
Speaker 1: your liberal friends be like, hey, listen to this guy.
Speaker 1: Maybe he'll get you to stop seeing the world the
Speaker 1: wrong way. New York Times also went around. Then. That
Speaker 1: was Kendlanian at MSNBC. He started at Kendlanian was also
Speaker 1: a big proponent of the Russia collusion hoax, which was
Speaker 1: a hoax. We can say that there's a hoax. There
Speaker 1: was no Russia collusion, So the hoax word is I
Speaker 1: think a very useful one. The death of this is
Speaker 1: from the New York Times. I mean, how many of
Speaker 1: these These are the biggest liberal news outlets in the world.
Speaker 1: Jake Tapper had more important things to do than covered
Speaker 1: the president's full speech and Q and A afterwards cut
Speaker 1: away from it so he could tell us what he
Speaker 1: thinks about the events, because he's very serious as journalist. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the death, this is the near time, the death of
Speaker 1: Abu Baker al Baghdadi, the Islamic State leader, happened largely
Speaker 1: in spite of President Trump. Zach President Trump's actions, not
Speaker 1: because of them. According to military intelligence and counter terrorism officials.
Speaker 1: What does that really mean? How how is that the case?
Speaker 1: I'd like an explanation of that. I'd like them to
Speaker 1: tell us why, other than just finding people who can
Speaker 1: claim the title of military intelligence and counter terrorism official. Yeah,
Speaker 1: government employees. Basically, finding government employees who hate Trump not
Speaker 1: hard to do. Finding people that also would rather believe
Speaker 1: the Trump just got lucky, or this had nothing to do,
Speaker 1: or it happened in spite of him. You know what
Speaker 1: did happen in spite of the bin Laden raid? Happened
Speaker 1: in spite of Joe Biden's opposition to it. But you
Speaker 1: want to hear press coverage of that one. Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: in one of his moments of unintentional honesty, He's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I just didn't think we should do that raid. Good job, Joe.
Speaker 1: We'll get to Biden later on in the show. But
Speaker 1: it happened in spite of it. Not only does Trump
Speaker 1: not get the credit, Trump should be blamed. You see,
Speaker 1: the media wants you to blame Trump because if it
Speaker 1: were up to him, this wouldn't have happened. Well, I
Speaker 1: guess we should just be happy. The press things. That's
Speaker 1: good that albu Baker al Baghdadi is gone. That's something
Speaker 1: of a victory for us, I suppose, for sanity. But
Speaker 1: there's a broader question here, and this ties into the
Speaker 1: sources that are speaking out against President Trump and what's
Speaker 1: happened here in this raid. Because more broadly, foreign policy
Speaker 1: was supposed to be the realm where Trump was out
Speaker 1: of his depth. We have been told from day one
Speaker 1: that Trump is a This is what the media and
Speaker 1: the intelligency and a lot of former government officials, they
Speaker 1: have been telling us that Trump has no curiosity about
Speaker 1: the world, no understanding about the world, doesn't read any books,
Speaker 1: doesn't know anything about anything, and therefore we should not
Speaker 1: support him because he's going to do all these terrible
Speaker 1: things that will harm our natural security. I've heard so
Speaker 1: much criticism of Trump harming our natural security, and I
Speaker 1: look around and say, where has it been harmed exactly
Speaker 1: other than in these rhetorical terms of oh, the perception
Speaker 1: of us in the world. This is just all propaganda,
Speaker 1: This is all just This is bloviating, This is opinions,
Speaker 1: This is pomposity dressed up as analysis. What is this?
Speaker 1: Trump has made the country less safe? How by doing what? Oh?
Speaker 1: And where have we taken thousands of casualties because of
Speaker 1: a stupid decision that Trump has made. Where have we
Speaker 1: enmeshed ourselves much more deeply in a war that we
Speaker 1: had no strategic vision to complete. I think the answer
Speaker 1: is they'd never give us any specifics on this because
Speaker 1: it hasn't happened. You cannot look at the first four
Speaker 1: years of Trump or Bush's for I'm sorry of Trump's
Speaker 1: foreign policy and compare it to Obama or Bush and
Speaker 1: not come away thinking this Trump guy has got some
Speaker 1: good ideas. He's actually making some things happen. And this
Speaker 1: is where you get to the egos involved in the
Speaker 1: Trump opposition, which is a beyond just the hard left.
Speaker 1: This is beyond just the progressive democrats and socialists running
Speaker 1: around who despised Trump because he's not woke because he's,
Speaker 1: you know, a vulgarian who doesn't speak about the thirty
Speaker 1: seven genders and all the rest of it. There are
Speaker 1: a lot of other people, and this is where you
Speaker 1: get folks like Bill Taylor, for example, who testified recently
Speaker 1: as a State Department guy, saying that his perception of
Speaker 1: Trump with the quid pro quel, Yeah, the guy's a
Speaker 1: lifelong diplomat. Has he been right? Has it really? Has
Speaker 1: it really mattered all that much? Is all of this
Speaker 1: State department puffing, puffing up of itself all the time
Speaker 1: really worthwhile? Do we need a state department that's nearly
Speaker 1: as big as we do? Are these bureaucrats are worth
Speaker 1: the federal government as important as they like to think
Speaker 1: they are. And they're expertise. We was here about their expertise.
Speaker 1: I can tell you this. I have a few people
Speaker 1: in my life who are just very They're voracious readers,
Speaker 1: and they read a lot of stuff, and they read
Speaker 1: a lot of stuff in the newspaper, a lot of
Speaker 1: journals and books, and they are as knowledgeable about foreign
Speaker 1: policy as anybody I know from the State Department. And
Speaker 1: then some all right, so this starts to fall also
Speaker 1: into this cult of expertise notion that Trump is outside
Speaker 1: that circle. But what are the people inside the cult
Speaker 1: the intelligent genca on foreign policy? What are they to
Speaker 1: make of themselves when this guy who's like a reality
Speaker 1: TV star, who's you know, tweeting at people like a
Speaker 1: like a crazy man sometimes And I say that with love,
Speaker 1: but he does. And you know, what are they to
Speaker 1: make of the fact that he understands at a gut
Speaker 1: level things that they don't. He has a more realistic
Speaker 1: understanding of some aspects, not just of how domestic policy works,
Speaker 1: but foreign policy works. Who are the good guys and
Speaker 1: who are the bad guys? How do you handle bad guys? Oh?
Speaker 1: A lot of brilliant diplomats will tell you how to
Speaker 1: handle Kim John Un, for example in North Korea? Do
Speaker 1: they know what's the what's their record of success? Like exactly? Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right, it's it's a record of decades of bipartisan failure.
Speaker 1: What about on China? Trump's an idiot, He doesn't know anything.
Speaker 1: He's starting this trade war with China. Where's the where's
Speaker 1: the record of success from previous administrations getting China to
Speaker 1: stop ripping us off, stealing our intellectual problem, pretty engaging
Speaker 1: in predatory trade practices. Who's been able to do They
Speaker 1: didn't even think it was a problem before, at least
Speaker 1: they weren't able to stand up to it and deal
Speaker 1: with it as a problem. So where does that leave us?
Speaker 1: What are we really to think about all of this
Speaker 1: when the President of the United States is not just
Speaker 1: presiding oh s and P. Five hundred is at like
Speaker 1: an all time high. I think today, stock markets still booming,
Speaker 1: household income up, taxes down. The debt's a problem. I
Speaker 1: will not let it go. Almost a trillion dollars unacceptable.
Speaker 1: But there's a lot of other stuff you look at,
Speaker 1: and that gets no attention whatsoever, No focus on the
Speaker 1: things that are going on and Trump's White House and
Speaker 1: what that means for the rest of America. No, we're
Speaker 1: just we're told these things by people who are convinced
Speaker 1: their right and are desperate, desperate to convince the rest
Speaker 1: of the American people that Trump is just oh so wrong.
Speaker 1: There's no idea, what he's doing is way out of
Speaker 1: his depth. Where's the evidence for that? Stop giving me
Speaker 1: anonymous sources, which is what we have here. Sources in
Speaker 1: the government say yeah, like Brennan worked for the government.
Speaker 1: Brennan was CIA director. I wouldn't trust that guy to
Speaker 1: tell me about anything. Guy was a former commie, legitimately
Speaker 1: like a communist. And it's like, you know, people listening
Speaker 1: to Bernie Sanders. I've got to tell you, I had
Speaker 1: some I had some moments over the weekend. I was debating.
Speaker 1: I'll get into that the debate that we had at
Speaker 1: politicon over healthcare, which I think is probably online you
Speaker 1: can watch it, but just looney Tunes kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: I mean, just people saying crazy things. But on foreign policy,
Speaker 1: this is where the smart people were supposed to sneer
Speaker 1: at Trump and be right, he doesn't understand, he doesn't
Speaker 1: get it. And the Obama people, right, the Obama White
Speaker 1: House and the various senior advice who are now treated
Speaker 1: like they're giving a sage commentary on the rest of
Speaker 1: the world. They would always point a well, you know,
Speaker 1: look at the bin Laden rate. Oh, you mean the
Speaker 1: like sort of like the Baghdadi rate where Trump had
Speaker 1: elite operators moving through multiple tiers of enemy airspace. Really
Speaker 1: it's airspace controlled by the Syrians and the Russians. You've
Speaker 1: also got to be concerned about the Turks in this
Speaker 1: region had to deconflict with them. There were people just
Speaker 1: so you know, how crazy the press release. There were
Speaker 1: people who were saying, oh see, he coordinated with the Russians,
Speaker 1: Putin's puppet. Oh yeah, maybe he's Putin's puppet, or maybe
Speaker 1: those journals should know that flying a bunch of US
Speaker 1: airy air assets into someone else's airspace without telling them
Speaker 1: when they have advanced surface to air defense systems like
Speaker 1: the Russians do, as well as their own planes and helicopters,
Speaker 1: that could be countermeasures. Maybe we just didn't want to
Speaker 1: get our guys blown out of the sky by the Russians.
Speaker 1: To not DeConick with the Russians before and would have
Speaker 1: been the suicidal, would have been insane. And yet doing
Speaker 1: that very basic step is pointed to as further evidence
Speaker 1: of Trump is Putin's puppet. Trump's a bad guy. Can't
Speaker 1: trust Trump, can't trust him even when he's ordering this raid.
Speaker 1: The Obama foreign policy, I can point to places all
Speaker 1: over the world and say got worse, got worse, Afghanistan worse, Iraq, worse,
Speaker 1: Syria worse, Libya, worse, Egypt worse. Give me a country
Speaker 1: that mattered in terms of US foreign policy where there
Speaker 1: were problems, and I will tell you under the Obama aministration,
Speaker 1: and I'll point to it and say, oh, yeah, you
Speaker 1: mean the one that got dramatically worse while Obama's team
Speaker 1: was running things. Look at who's in charge. Would you
Speaker 1: rather have Susan Rice, who called Lindsey Graham a piece
Speaker 1: of blank recently publicly? Would rather Susan Rice making decisions
Speaker 1: or Pompeo making decisions about foreign policy? You'd rather have
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton making foreign policy decisions? I certainly hope not yet.
Speaker 1: Here we are. This is what we were dealing with it.
Speaker 1: It was disgraceful the way the press reacted this, But
Speaker 1: as we know, it's all about narrative, and the narrative
Speaker 1: has to be the Trump's foreign policy is bad, and
Speaker 1: this can't be used the way that it was used
Speaker 1: very effectively. I might add, to create a false perception
Speaker 1: that Obama's foreign policy was competent, because it was not.
Speaker 1: They don't want that to happen now because Trump's foreign
Speaker 1: policy so far has been competent, and now he has
Speaker 1: this counter terrorism success. They're terrified about what this means
Speaker 1: for twenty twenty. Once the foreign policy criticism going to be, Oh, NATO,
Speaker 1: Trump is too rough with NATO and so he's going
Speaker 1: to break up the alliance. That's false. NATO allies are
Speaker 1: not paying more money they did before Trump. All Trump
Speaker 1: has done is hold them to account for their promises
Speaker 1: or for their targets, the goals that they've set for themselves.
Speaker 1: NATO Alliance about to break up. But what matters is
Speaker 1: just the narrative. These people are just you know, the left.
Speaker 1: I got used to having a government apparatus for eight
Speaker 1: years of the Obama administration that was more or less
Speaker 1: always reflecting something other than my view on policy matters,
Speaker 1: and said, all right, well we're out of power right now.
Speaker 1: We got to make the case, and we gotta I
Speaker 1: didn't wake up every day and some kind of a
Speaker 1: cold sweat freaking out about how we can't survive another administrator,
Speaker 1: another Obama industry. Now they really think that about Trump.
Speaker 1: And if you really believe that, what are you unwilling
Speaker 1: to do? And say? The press completely embarrassed themselves. I mean,
Speaker 1: these these legacy media outlets, they really should just slowly
Speaker 1: go away. I mean that would be that I'm hoping
Speaker 1: the market does that to them all they have so
Speaker 1: much money behind them, and it takes a while for
Speaker 1: them to really you know, the New York Times would
Speaker 1: already be bankrupt. That hadn't gotten a billionaire. The Washington
Speaker 1: Post would already be bankrupt. I hadn't that a billionaire backing.
Speaker 1: I mean, these these legacy media outlets are now largely
Speaker 1: turning into artistic projects for liberal billionaires. That's really what
Speaker 1: they're That's really what's going on. Oh and also, you
Speaker 1: don't want to mess with somebody who's got a massive newspaper.
Speaker 1: You know, don't don't pick fights with somebody who buys
Speaker 1: ink by the barrel, so to speak, or in this case,
Speaker 1: employs a whole bunch of people to write stuff online. Team,
Speaker 1: Just a quick note, welcome back the bucks Ecton show.
Speaker 1: You know when President Trump said that Habu Baker al Baghdaddi,
Speaker 1: you know, died like a dog, and he kind of
Speaker 1: said it like that, it really it reminded me of something.
Speaker 1: I'm wondering who among you will will know this line
Speaker 1: right out, because there's a part of it feels like
Speaker 1: maybe Trump, I'm sure he's seen this movie. Is it
Speaker 1: possible that Trump got this from the movie producer Mark,
Speaker 1: would you please play well, I don't want to say
Speaker 1: what it is. We'll see if people can pick it
Speaker 1: out before I tell them. Play play the clip, you
Speaker 1: know the one. I mean, tell me about the night
Speaker 1: he killed your parents. He said your father begged for mercy,
Speaker 1: begged like a dog, like a dog. I mean, he
Speaker 1: said it just like Trump said it just like Trump. Now.
Speaker 1: I know, I mean maybe say it's a common phrase,
Speaker 1: but I mean, how many of you have ever heard
Speaker 1: a line from a movie and and maybe just sort
Speaker 1: of said it later without thinking about it. I'm not
Speaker 1: I'm not saying this is dude, don't don't tell me
Speaker 1: this is fake news. I can't prove this, but it
Speaker 1: just when Trump gave his initial speech, I was like,
Speaker 1: that sounds a little bit like who guessed it? Falcone
Speaker 1: the gangster talking to Bruce Wayne in Batman begins like
Speaker 1: a dog, and then of course Falconi gets his his
Speaker 1: come up and later on. So I was at at
Speaker 1: Politicon of the weekend. I did get to see some
Speaker 1: of you who listen to the show, which I really
Speaker 1: do appreciate. I have to tell you, Nashville is a
Speaker 1: great town. I got nothing Nashville's fantastic, and I knew
Speaker 1: it would be. That's why I really want to get
Speaker 1: to keep saying I want to get to Austin. That's
Speaker 1: top of my list. I really want to get to
Speaker 1: Austin soon. KLBJ in the highs Our radio affiliate down
Speaker 1: in Austin. I really want to get down there. I
Speaker 1: ate barbecue and Nashville. It was delicious, the food was amazing,
Speaker 1: that people are awesome, the music scenes fantastic, and there's
Speaker 1: such a vibrancy to that city. Now it's growing so fast.
Speaker 1: There's someone told me there are forty construction cranes now
Speaker 1: going in downtown building all these towers and any Austin,
Speaker 1: I mean Austin. Nashville was a great town. I really
Speaker 1: enjoyed it. And I'll get into someone what I saw
Speaker 1: a Politicon a second. But I want to tell you,
Speaker 1: single best thing at Politicon for me, single coolest moment
Speaker 1: by far, was someone who listens to the show. So
Speaker 1: someone from Team Buck who's a member of the special
Speaker 1: Operations community, came up and told me that when he
Speaker 1: was let's just say engage in anti Isis Operations, his
Speaker 1: guys were listening to this show. And I thought that
Speaker 1: was so cool and I appreciated it so much, and
Speaker 1: he said that, you know, they really they like that
Speaker 1: I have familiarity with what I'm talking about. I've experienced
Speaker 1: being in some of these places trying to help the
Speaker 1: war fighters as a civilian intelligence analyst. But there is
Speaker 1: no greater compliment than I can I can have than
Speaker 1: to be talking about issues of well the fight of
Speaker 1: what was called the War on Terror and have the
Speaker 1: actual war fighters rolling around and I don't want to
Speaker 1: say where or how We're rolling around listening to this show,
Speaker 1: listening to this show on podcast and appreciating what we
Speaker 1: do here and feeling like I'm representing their perspective and
Speaker 1: what they're doing well enough that they respect this show
Speaker 1: and they listen to this show. So thank you, sir,
Speaker 1: I won't name you whatever. Thank you for coming up
Speaker 1: and sharing that with me. And it really made my
Speaker 1: weekend that guys in the special operations community involved in
Speaker 1: the Anti Iis fight like the Bucks acident show. Today
Speaker 1: in America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world,
Speaker 1: half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. And
Speaker 1: Rashida took me around her district here in Detroit and
Speaker 1: I met with beautiful young people who are going to
Speaker 1: schools in which they don't have adequate textbooks. They are
Speaker 1: going to schools where their teachers are forced to work
Speaker 1: two or three jobs just to make a living. I
Speaker 1: don't think it is too much to ask that in
Speaker 1: the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we
Speaker 1: pay our teachers a living salary. Bernie Sanders is just
Speaker 1: a socialist. I know we're always supposed to say he's
Speaker 1: a democratic socialist. He's a socialist. So let's start from
Speaker 1: the real core of his belief system. Yes, he believes
Speaker 1: in the process of voting, the democratic process of voting.
Speaker 1: He believes in also the imposition of socialism by the state.
Speaker 1: That your work, your time, your hours, part of your
Speaker 1: life that you are devoting to be productive. He can
Speaker 1: take any amount of that away from you he wants,
Speaker 1: because it's the right thing to do, because you're too rich.
Speaker 1: People who have been paycheck to paycheck. It's not fair,
Speaker 1: it's not right. And the richest country, the richest country
Speaker 1: in the world, should not have teachers with five jobs, well,
Speaker 1: ten job, I mean, I know he said two or
Speaker 1: three first of all teachers, Every teacher that I know
Speaker 1: pretty much has at least more than one job, because yeah,
Speaker 1: they have three months off in the summer. And please,
Speaker 1: I know this is some teachers get mad at me.
Speaker 1: Don't give me this like, oh, but we're just working
Speaker 1: on lesson plans the whole time. I know some teacher.
Speaker 1: I've been on some dates with some teachers. I know
Speaker 1: what really goes on. All right, don't give you this like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're just all we do is our teachers are working
Speaker 1: more than investment bankers. No, some might and congratulations, but
Speaker 1: most don't. In fact, most public school teachers are in
Speaker 1: and this is not their fault, although many of them
Speaker 1: are very supportive of the unions that make this the case.
Speaker 1: They're in what is really a first and foremost a
Speaker 1: jobs program for adults, because that's what the public school
Speaker 1: system in this country is. It's not really about the children,
Speaker 1: it's not really about the education. But this was a
Speaker 1: perfect Bernie Sanders moment here, because he said a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of things that would not withstand much scrutiny at all,
Speaker 1: but gets the crowd to go boo. We don't like
Speaker 1: the rich people to take it too much. If they
Speaker 1: have less, you'd have more that's the basis of the
Speaker 1: whole Bernie ideology. They have less, you'll have Moore doesn't
Speaker 1: work that way. Paycheck to paycheck. I lived check to
Speaker 1: paycheck for the first pooh out of college, at least
Speaker 1: the first decade of my life, ten years working paycheck
Speaker 1: to paycheck. I mean I was, you know, one uncovered
Speaker 1: visit from a doctor or you know, one away from
Speaker 1: like living on credit cards for about the first decade.
Speaker 1: I was running around and I know what it's like
Speaker 1: to have worked for many years and go to the
Speaker 1: ATM machine. I think I was twenty eight or twenty
Speaker 1: nine years old. I remember went to the ATM machine
Speaker 1: and I had you know what a lot of Americans have,
Speaker 1: which is that they'd have trouble paying for a five
Speaker 1: hundred emergency. I went to ATM. I had working for
Speaker 1: years working at the government, but I'd moved to New York.
Speaker 1: I was trying to apply to graduate school and had
Speaker 1: cashed out my four oh one k, which is a
Speaker 1: terrible idea, but you gotta do what you gotta do.
Speaker 1: Don't do that, by the way, go deliver pizza's work
Speaker 1: as apera. Whatever you gotta, don't cash out your four oh,
Speaker 1: one k, you're just putting yourself in a you know,
Speaker 1: a more difficult position to catch up later on. So
Speaker 1: don't do as I did with that one. But I
Speaker 1: know what it is to go to an ATM machine
Speaker 1: and have less than a thousand dollars in the bank,
Speaker 1: and you've been working for years, years, but you know,
Speaker 1: things are expensive and you gotta pay for things. And
Speaker 1: I was not making much money when I started the
Speaker 1: federal government. I was not making much money during my
Speaker 1: time at the NYPD. I mean, I was a government employee.
Speaker 1: So I understand this concern. I mean, economic anxiety is
Speaker 1: very real and we all have it. And the truth
Speaker 1: is that absolute financial security doesn't really exist exist for
Speaker 1: very few people, and even those people are always worried
Speaker 1: about not being as rich. You know, look at how
Speaker 1: how anxious many hundred millionaire and billionaires get the millionaires
Speaker 1: to billion one hundred millionaires. That's what Bernie has to
Speaker 1: separate out and do, because he's just he's just a
Speaker 1: lowly like ten millionaire or something. He's not a hundred millionaire.
Speaker 1: There's too much money. But look at the way that
Speaker 1: they get wound up and anxious about the prospect of
Speaker 1: becoming slightly less incredibly rich. It worries them. They don't
Speaker 1: like that idea. Sure, some of them take this giving pledge,
Speaker 1: They're gonna give away a lot of their money, But
Speaker 1: a lot of them don't. Most of them don't. But
Speaker 1: paycheck to paycheck, that is a situation that you make better.
Speaker 1: How how do you make it better? You make it
Speaker 1: better by taxing people more and having there be less
Speaker 1: opportunity for jobs and wage growth for the people that
Speaker 1: are working. That's not going to do it. That's not
Speaker 1: going to do it very well. Then you also made
Speaker 1: him say that the schools don't have textbooks and teachers
Speaker 1: are poor. I know of many teachers at schools here
Speaker 1: in New York City who will I shouldn't say many teachers.
Speaker 1: I have spoken to several teachers at schools here in
Speaker 1: New York City that are schools that are almost entirely
Speaker 1: minority and not high income background. They're generally low income.
Speaker 1: Minority students are the entirety or almost the entire of
Speaker 1: the student body. The problem is not resources. The problem
Speaker 1: is not inadequate textbooks. All right, If we're really going
Speaker 1: to talk about education, that's a whole other discussion. But
Speaker 1: there's plenty of there's brand new computers in the classrooms.
Speaker 1: The classrooms all look great. There's tons of money that's
Speaker 1: being funneled into the public school system in places like
Speaker 1: New York. In DC, I've been in. I was in
Speaker 1: a very poor years ago, very poor in terms of
Speaker 1: the students per capita income of their households. Poor school
Speaker 1: in DC. And all the classrooms are brand new, and
Speaker 1: they had Mac computers everywhere, and it looked inside like
Speaker 1: it could be a private school, and the students were
Speaker 1: all underperforming, and the place was academically a mess, but
Speaker 1: it wasn't a mess because they didn't have textbooks or
Speaker 1: you know, the ceilings were falling in. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that doesn't happen anywhere, but this is just not really
Speaker 1: looking at at the problem. No one's okay with the
Speaker 1: school that's falling apart. There's asbestos or there's you know,
Speaker 1: there's no textbooks or whatever. But but that's really not
Speaker 1: the problem. They can keep pretending that that's that's really
Speaker 1: not problem. And a majority of the schools you can
Speaker 1: point to would say that there's a lack of performance.
Speaker 1: But Bernie Sanders All he's able to do, or what
Speaker 1: he does so well, I should say, is prey upon
Speaker 1: people's envy and whip them up into a kind of
Speaker 1: outrage and then mobilize that for his own political purposes.
Speaker 1: And then that brings me to and I probably should
Speaker 1: have pulled some from it, but I don't know. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure I wanted to relive it. I had to
Speaker 1: do a panel at Politicon where we discussed health Medicare
Speaker 1: for All, and I started out and there was a
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders spokesperson there I do not remember her name,
Speaker 1: a progressive pundit Sally Cone, and then a very liberal
Speaker 1: doctor who's like, I have an MD, and it's like
Speaker 1: that's great, but you're also super liberal. And he was
Speaker 1: a psychiatrist, which, as I've told you before, the most
Speaker 1: liberal people in the medical profession, by the numbers, are psychiatrists.
Speaker 1: If you want people that are you know, Jill Steins supporters,
Speaker 1: go see a shrink, say hey, doc, who do you
Speaker 1: vote for um? And then you had uh oh, and
Speaker 1: you had I know him as Kane from what's Kane's name?
Speaker 1: From the w WE producer Mark, I'm talking about that guy.
Speaker 1: He's He's a great guy, smart dude, too. Isn't he
Speaker 1: just came No, he has a real name, Glenn Glenn H. Jacobs.
Speaker 1: I didn't know his real name. Oh yea, yeah, Glenn
Speaker 1: Jake had no idea. He's the mayor of I think Knoxville, Tennessee.
Speaker 1: First of all, he's he is enormous. You know, you
Speaker 1: see people who are seven footers and they tend to
Speaker 1: be kind of lanky. Usually you don't usually seven footers
Speaker 1: who look like they could have, you know, been in
Speaker 1: Conan the Barbarian back in the day or something like.
Speaker 1: This guy is Jack Still, he's a big dude. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying it's impressive. So you stay next this guy
Speaker 1: are like my, my, heavens and he's a libertarian, and
Speaker 1: we were having It's funny because we were trying to
Speaker 1: represent the reality based view of the problems in the
Speaker 1: medical system that we have right now, or the rather
Speaker 1: the problems in getting good care cheaply to people are
Speaker 1: because of intrusions in the market by the government. It's
Speaker 1: because you don't have price transparency. It's because different hospitals
Speaker 1: don't have to compete with each other on price, because
Speaker 1: you can't even know the price. There's all this back
Speaker 1: room collusion with insurance companies and providers. They bash the
Speaker 1: insurance companies all the time on the left, but they
Speaker 1: forget that the providers are also, you know, just taking
Speaker 1: people to the cleaners. The providers are often some of
Speaker 1: the worst offenders, especially within the hospital system in this realm,
Speaker 1: just doing everything that they can to squeeze every dollar
Speaker 1: of people. Especially if you want to pay out a
Speaker 1: pocket you should be getting the best deal for paying
Speaker 1: cash upfront. You should be getting the best service. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying in a market based economy, for saying, here
Speaker 1: is my credit card. Instead, what you get is, oh,
Speaker 1: you don't have insurance, We're going to charge you four
Speaker 1: or five, ten times as much as we'll charge an
Speaker 1: insurance company for the person who walks in after you
Speaker 1: because of the deal we've struck with them. This is
Speaker 1: the problem. It's not that hard to understand, you know. Why,
Speaker 1: Why is it now that my iPhone is so capable? Instead,
Speaker 1: I don't even want a new iPhone cause I'm like,
Speaker 1: I can't even handle all the stuff that my current
Speaker 1: iPhone can do. I feel like my iPhone, can you
Speaker 1: recite poetry to me while it gives me a BackRub?
Speaker 1: I just need to learn how to make my iPhone
Speaker 1: do that perhaps while it draws me a one bubble bath.
Speaker 1: I'm sure the iPhone probably hasn't happen for that, but
Speaker 1: I don't know how to do it. But why is
Speaker 1: it so sophisticated and getting so much cheaper all the
Speaker 1: time because of market forces? You know, I you know,
Speaker 1: I've gone through the process of moving many times, far
Speaker 1: too many times. Why is it that when you have
Speaker 1: if you come and you get movers to give you
Speaker 1: an estimate, yeah, once you're you know, once they've given
Speaker 1: you that estimate, and usually they'll go a little bit
Speaker 1: over with movers, but you gotta give them a big tip.
Speaker 1: But those guys work hard. I'm always, I'm a big believer,
Speaker 1: and you know, tip well, it's it's never You're never
Speaker 1: going to be out of money. You're never going to
Speaker 1: be broke because you've tipped people well for the service
Speaker 1: as they give you. I just maybe I'm wrong economically,
Speaker 1: but I'm a big believer and you tip people well always,
Speaker 1: and you know, movers, that's standard in New York City
Speaker 1: at least moving at twenty percent, which big. But why
Speaker 1: is it that when you when you have movers come.
Speaker 1: They don't just say yeah, we'll move you. It's gonna
Speaker 1: cost fifty thousand dollars. Well, if there's only one moving
Speaker 1: company and you really needed movers, they could do that.
Speaker 1: And you don't pant a whole lot of money for
Speaker 1: a move. Why is it they'll show up and say no,
Speaker 1: it'll be two or three thousand dollars to move you
Speaker 1: because there's another moving company that they know you can call,
Speaker 1: and they're also going to compete on price. Now, there
Speaker 1: isn't going to be a moving company that shows up
Speaker 1: and says, hey, we'll do this for you for one
Speaker 1: hundred dollars, because they have guys that they have to pay,
Speaker 1: and they have bills, and they have costs and insurance
Speaker 1: and expenses. So this is how a price gets set.
Speaker 1: But it benefits everybody because the price will cover the interests,
Speaker 1: the cost, the needs of the company providing the service.
Speaker 1: But also because there's competition in doing that, it will
Speaker 1: allow the person who is purchasing the service to get
Speaker 1: the benefit of that competition because they, you know, everybody
Speaker 1: wants that business. This is how a market sets a price.
Speaker 1: When you go in and you say, I know I've
Speaker 1: got a you know, my toe is has turned blue.
Speaker 1: You know, I think it's broken or something. I've broken
Speaker 1: the big toe a long time ago. That wasn't fun.
Speaker 1: That you can't say to them, hey, what's this going
Speaker 1: to cost? They can't even tell you. They don't know,
Speaker 1: and they can't tell you at a hospital in New York.
Speaker 1: So then and then what happens is they figure out
Speaker 1: how can we extract the most money from this person possible,
Speaker 1: and it's either going to be setting an outrageous out
Speaker 1: of pocket cost for you or just trying to take
Speaker 1: as much from your insurance company. And then the insurance
Speaker 1: company fights with them. But this is nonsense. This is
Speaker 1: the fundamental problem that we have, and that we don't
Speaker 1: have insurance. What we have is cross subsidized care all
Speaker 1: the time. We already have fifty percent of healthcare spending
Speaker 1: that the federal government's already doing. We're almost a socialist
Speaker 1: healthcare system in many ways, not entirely, been in many
Speaker 1: ways already. And they say, what's your plan, I say, well,
Speaker 1: my plan would be let people buy an insurance health
Speaker 1: insurance the way they buy any other kind of insurance,
Speaker 1: have absolute transparency in pricing and a habit mandatory. What
Speaker 1: is this going to cost? Because one of the reason
Speaker 1: insurance companies and providers, especially hospital networks can get away
Speaker 1: with what they do is nobody knows what a cost
Speaker 1: at this place or that place, so the market can't function.
Speaker 1: And they do this on purpose because it gives them
Speaker 1: more price setting power. And they would say to you,
Speaker 1: will buck, if we couldn't do that, though, we'd go bankrupt.
Speaker 1: Because Medicare Medicaid, where the government sets the price does
Speaker 1: not cover the cost of the procedures, forces them to
Speaker 1: operate at a loss. Again, price is central here. They
Speaker 1: do not operate a word of the prices. And I've
Speaker 1: just got to tell you the stuff that was being
Speaker 1: said from the liberals, you know, the liberal doctor and
Speaker 1: then the two liberal ladies on the stage about how
Speaker 1: the Bernie Sanders healthcare plan is going to function, it
Speaker 1: was just fantasy land stuff. I'm sitting here and I
Speaker 1: still think, I think to myself, they really believe that
Speaker 1: if we just elimit it all all private health and
Speaker 1: just basically throw the insurers out, have the government standing there,
Speaker 1: but keep the rest of the system as it is,
Speaker 1: with the government setting all prices. They don't think that
Speaker 1: that's going to be a disaster. Disastrous and disastrous in
Speaker 1: terms of your ability to get the care you want,
Speaker 1: disastrous in terms of your wait times, in terms of
Speaker 1: the cost to the American taxpayer. Everything we have seen
Speaker 1: in history tells us that this would be catastrophically expensive
Speaker 1: and deeply dysfunctional. But the Sandernistas, even Democrats realize this
Speaker 1: is crazy. But the sander Nist does run around saying, oh, no,
Speaker 1: this is great, and if you don't want it's because
Speaker 1: you're like a tool of the rich. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: my friends. One of the issues dealing with Medicare for
Speaker 1: All is it's hard to argue with crazy. Crazy is
Speaker 1: not an easy debate opponent. But no, he didn't succeed
Speaker 1: in his mission because there was inadequate transparency to the
Speaker 1: American people on whose behalf he was investigating. And when
Speaker 1: I say inadequate, I mean in two different ways. Both
Speaker 1: in the way in which his report was spun, massaged,
Speaker 1: and in my view, misconstrued by the Attorney General and
Speaker 1: the way in which it was physically presented made it
Speaker 1: impossible for the American people to have access to it.
Speaker 1: Comes just delusional. He was at Politicon as well. I
Speaker 1: didn't get a chance to see him all, you know,
Speaker 1: six foot eleven of him. I didn't get a chance
Speaker 1: to see him, which wouldn't be helpful anyway. I mean,
Speaker 1: I have just no I just don't think he's a
Speaker 1: figure worthy of respecter or engagement. I've also never met
Speaker 1: I loved all those stories from the media back to
Speaker 1: the day about how people in the FBI were crying
Speaker 1: when Comy was fired. I really mean this. I have
Speaker 1: never met a human being who worked with James Comey
Speaker 1: or knows James Comey who likes him. And I've met
Speaker 1: a lot of people who worked with him or know him,
Speaker 1: never met one who liked him. Now, I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that there's nobody out there likes and clearly Patrick Fitzgerald,
Speaker 1: who's also a very scummy guy, likes him. But I've
Speaker 1: never been anybody who's like, yeah, he's great, really solid dude.
Speaker 1: Nobody says it about him. Yet he's running around telling
Speaker 1: us I'm serious, he said this is Politicon. If Trump wins,
Speaker 1: he's moving to New Zealand. One can only hope James Comy,
Speaker 1: One can only hope welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. Here,
Speaker 1: I am trying to tell you guys about the Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders Plan for your healthcare, which is also really the
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren plan for your healthcare, which is incorrectly termed
Speaker 1: Medicare for All. It is not Medicare. It is in
Speaker 1: fact more expensive, more expansive than even Medicare is. Medicare
Speaker 1: is an entitled the people pay into over their lives.
Speaker 1: Medicare is like Social Security in a sense, but for
Speaker 1: your healthcare. Unfortunately, and I know people don't like to
Speaker 1: hear this, most Medicare beneficiaries take out over their life
Speaker 1: cycle twice as much as they put in, which is
Speaker 1: why Medicare keeps blowing a huge hole in the deficit
Speaker 1: year in and year out. But at least there is
Speaker 1: that component of paying into it over time. And then
Speaker 1: also there is call sharing. There are plans that you
Speaker 1: can buy Medicare advantage, for example, which is through private
Speaker 1: insurers that deal with what's not covered under Medicare. But
Speaker 1: you have call sharing states kicking money for Medicare too,
Speaker 1: So it's not just you go to a doctor and
Speaker 1: there's never a bill. What Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and
Speaker 1: some of the other Democrats are promising is you go
Speaker 1: to the doctor or the er, the hospital, whatever your
Speaker 1: healthcare situation is, you go there. There's never a bill.
Speaker 1: This is crazy. Not even Canada, for example, Hello Canada.
Speaker 1: Not even Canada has a system that covers that much. Canada.
Speaker 1: If you want dental or vision insurance, guess vision care,
Speaker 1: you have to buy a private insurance or go see
Speaker 1: private practitioners. They don't cover all that. There are some
Speaker 1: areas where, for example, you would have to do it
Speaker 1: on your own. And we know Canadians when they want
Speaker 1: open heart surgery or there are certain procedures that they'll
Speaker 1: leave Canada and come to America for it's through the
Speaker 1: National Health Service in the UK as well. I don't
Speaker 1: want to be the one who has to say this,
Speaker 1: but you see some European countries, Americans generally have better
Speaker 1: dental care. I'm just gonna say it. It's still true.
Speaker 1: I think it was the Simpsons that one had the
Speaker 1: British Book of Bad Smiles or something. They had this
Speaker 1: whole thing about. Because dental care in European countries is
Speaker 1: generally not all European countries, but in some of the
Speaker 1: major ones where there's socialist healthcare. It's not as good
Speaker 1: as this yere in America. Why because the market matters,
Speaker 1: My friends, how many of you would think that it
Speaker 1: would be easy to get really excellent people have lasic surgery,
Speaker 1: for example, We'll Medicare for all cover you or lasic.
Speaker 1: And is that just the way it's gonna be. Everyone's
Speaker 1: gonna have a surgery that runs thousands and thousands of
Speaker 1: dollars that's elective. Well, it's a great surgery, and a
Speaker 1: lot of people have had it. No one really answers
Speaker 1: any of these questions. They don't even know how they're
Speaker 1: gonna pay for this. Elizabeth Warren's like, I have a
Speaker 1: plan for this. I have a plan. We ask, well,
Speaker 1: what's the plan to pay for this? She goes, oh, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know when your daddy always says, two toads jumping
Speaker 1: around the back of a barn turns into a ham sandwich.
Speaker 1: I don't know how that happens, but you know, part
Speaker 1: of these Elizabeth Warren truth telling moments, she just like
Speaker 1: makes up how folksy she is. She's so folksy. He's
Speaker 1: waiting for Elizabeth Warren one day to show up and
Speaker 1: pull out a banjo and just be like, hey, everybody,
Speaker 1: I come from Oklahoma. I went to all these fancy
Speaker 1: schools as a fake Native American. But I'm just want
Speaker 1: to you and the rich wanna take everything away from you.
Speaker 1: Do play in the banjo. Elizabeth Warren is for Medicare
Speaker 1: for all. Bertie Sanders and Medicare for all. You have
Speaker 1: all these different democrats who pretend that this is going
Speaker 1: to work, And the problem is there are a lot
Speaker 1: of very ignorant people out there who don't understand. Forgetting
Speaker 1: there's two ways to attack why a medicare for all?
Speaker 1: I mean, I mean in the broadest sense, the history
Speaker 1: of central planning and socialism, and then the mechanisms of
Speaker 1: central planning and socialism. Now on the history side, what
Speaker 1: you'll get into is often what I think you could
Speaker 1: call the Venezuela vers Venezuela versus Sweden debate. We say,
Speaker 1: look at Venezuela. They say, well, look at Sweden. Even
Speaker 1: though Sweden actually is was getting much poorer the more
Speaker 1: socialists it got, and then it turned around became much
Speaker 1: more free market. It does have very high taxes and
Speaker 1: a large social welfare state, but most Swedes, by the way,
Speaker 1: are happy living a very boxed in middle class lifestyle.
Speaker 1: A lot of Americans would like the opportunity to grow
Speaker 1: wealth over time and leave their children better than they were.
Speaker 1: Swedes aren't leaving their children better than they were, leaving
Speaker 1: their children the same way they were. That's the plan.
Speaker 1: We have a different approach to life. We have a
Speaker 1: more aspirational vision for our day to day. Swedes just
Speaker 1: don't have that. Venezuela, the vision would be, can we
Speaker 1: have bread on the shelves and clean water to drink
Speaker 1: and not be living in this dystopian nightmare brought on
Speaker 1: by the desire or the central government Venezuela and Caracas
Speaker 1: to institute all kinds of economic reforms based in rooted
Speaker 1: in social justice, in socialism. So that's one. But the
Speaker 1: history of what has happened so far is illustrative of
Speaker 1: the problem. But only if you're willing to be honest
Speaker 1: about it. Then you just have the mechanisms of it.
Speaker 1: Why who will set the price for your surgery under
Speaker 1: Medicare for All? Who will determine what doctors you can
Speaker 1: see under Medicare for All? And and who tells you
Speaker 1: that there will not be restrictions placed does not understand
Speaker 1: how the world works. There are some doctors who have
Speaker 1: great reputations and work for facilities that are renowned. There
Speaker 1: are some doctors who went to medical school in the
Speaker 1: South Pacific somewhere in a place no one's ever heard of,
Speaker 1: and I would not personally choose to go under the
Speaker 1: knife with them, will dig it. It's not hard in
Speaker 1: the Internet era to figure out who is who guess
Speaker 1: what people all gonna want to go to the best surgeon.
Speaker 1: Who determines whether you go to the best surgeon or not.
Speaker 1: It's not going to be the market price. It's going
Speaker 1: to be the government. How long will that wait time be?
Speaker 1: In fact, the best place to get sports medicine surgery
Speaker 1: down here in New York City is called HSS Hospital
Speaker 1: for Special Surgery. And I remember when I was thinking
Speaker 1: about having a major surgery there on my ankle, which
Speaker 1: I never did, which some of you have noticed who
Speaker 1: have met me. I kind of not really limp, but
Speaker 1: I kind of have an uneven gait. I walk a
Speaker 1: little strangely because of the blown out tendons in my
Speaker 1: right foot. I don't worry. I could still like crush
Speaker 1: libs and everything, but I do have a you know,
Speaker 1: like everybody, I've got a little bit of an issue.
Speaker 1: We've all got stuff. I remember looking at the different hospitals,
Speaker 1: there was one guy. Of all the surgeons at the
Speaker 1: hospital for special surgery, but they're doing there are surgeries.
Speaker 1: There was one guy who at that time would have
Speaker 1: taken my insurance and the weight and this is private insurance,
Speaker 1: and the way to see him was I think six
Speaker 1: maybe nine months, there was only one surgeon on staff.
Speaker 1: The rest of them didn't take my insurance. In fact,
Speaker 1: a lot of them didn't take any insurance, so you'd
Speaker 1: have the only way you could see them is either
Speaker 1: you pay out a pocket or you have out of
Speaker 1: network benefits, which is always a whole I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: good luck with that, but that already exists here. And
Speaker 1: imagine if now, instead of that system, what you have
Speaker 1: was just everyone everyone's the same, everyone gets the same.
Speaker 1: The government sends the check, so who determines who gets
Speaker 1: to see what doctor? Well, get ready to wait a
Speaker 1: very long time. And then when the costs are going
Speaker 1: up and up and up, because people are gonna want
Speaker 1: to see the best doctors that I want the best care,
Speaker 1: how are they going to limit those costs so they
Speaker 1: don't just completely destroy the economy rationing. This is guaranteed,
Speaker 1: it's guaranteed it happens right now. I had people come
Speaker 1: up with me after this debate who are from the
Speaker 1: who had dealt with the VA system. They said, some
Speaker 1: people in the view, you know, some VA facilities are
Speaker 1: pretty good, some are terrible, but by and large, it's
Speaker 1: not really working the way it's supposed to work. And
Speaker 1: I bring this up just because, well because we're talking
Speaker 1: about healthcare. But fifty percent of millennials, according to Axios
Speaker 1: Today and fifty one percent of Generation Z have a
Speaker 1: somewhat or very unfavorable view of capitalism, and seventy percent
Speaker 1: of millennials say that they would vote for a socialist
Speaker 1: Seventy percent of millennials say they would vote for socialism.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's just it's just stunning. It's stunning, and
Speaker 1: there's such a lack of I mean, I really feel
Speaker 1: like it's a lack of gratitude for what capitalism has
Speaker 1: done for so many of us. I mean, this system.
Speaker 1: Oh and this is another one that came out of
Speaker 1: this survey. One in three millennials sees communism favorably. Now
Speaker 1: we start to get into the definitional separation between communism
Speaker 1: and socialism. Socialism is a system of central planning with
Speaker 1: the rediscrution of wealth at the government at the hands
Speaker 1: of the government. Communism involves a revolutionary elite seizing or
Speaker 1: taking power in some capacity and then instituting a radical
Speaker 1: form of across the board. Pure socialism, where the government
Speaker 1: controls the means of production as well as the means
Speaker 1: of distribution and there's a central committee or a central
Speaker 1: party in charge of all of this is non democratic.
Speaker 1: It's just the people in charge of the people in charge,
Speaker 1: and it's a dictatorship of committee. In some cases just
Speaker 1: becomes a dictatorship of one, as we've seen in plenty
Speaker 1: of communist countries around the world. One in three millennials
Speaker 1: have it a favorable view of communism. I have to
Speaker 1: wonder if this is the case. Is it because they're
Speaker 1: too stupid to know what communism is? Is that? Does
Speaker 1: that make me feel better? Or is it preferable that
Speaker 1: they know what communism is but are so deluded that
Speaker 1: they think that it just wasn't done the right way.
Speaker 1: That's always the excuse. Wasn't done the right way there's
Speaker 1: a good way to do communism. I would like to
Speaker 1: know where has you know, it's one thing to say
Speaker 1: socialism everywhere has been tried, has failed. It's true, but
Speaker 1: they'll cover it up with saying, oh, but look at
Speaker 1: this socialist country or that socialist program that hasn't destroyed everything. Well,
Speaker 1: it doesn't destroy everything, but it hasn't been a good idea.
Speaker 1: Name the place where communism has been tried and has
Speaker 1: not failed. I mean other than CNN, but like, name
Speaker 1: a place where it's really been the government, the governing
Speaker 1: system that hasn't resulted in an economic deprivation and catastrophe.
Speaker 1: It doesn't exist. We don't. We don't learn the lesson.
Speaker 1: We don't learn the lesson. I mean, Bernie Sanders should
Speaker 1: not be taken seriously as a political candidate by anybody
Speaker 1: who knows history or economics. And yet he's number two
Speaker 1: I think right now most of the polls or three.
Speaker 1: He's top three for sure. And Elizabeth Warren is really
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, just with a little bit less craziness that
Speaker 1: doesn't make me feel good about things, that doesn't make
Speaker 1: me think that the future of this country is going
Speaker 1: to be bright. If either of those candidates were to
Speaker 1: become the next president United States, which then, of course
Speaker 1: brings us to Joe Biden, great hope of the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Still to this day, I don't understand how he's been
Speaker 1: able to cling to this this lead in the polls,
Speaker 1: although it's evaporated and Warren is beating him in some places,
Speaker 1: but the fact that he is still probably to be
Speaker 1: considered in a polling sense, the front runner him though
Speaker 1: his money situation has gotten very tight. Joe Biden tells
Speaker 1: us a lot about the Democratic Party today versus where
Speaker 1: it was before. It's clearly gone further to the left,
Speaker 1: which is why Biden has been abandoning a lot of
Speaker 1: his more centrist positions of the past in order to
Speaker 1: be more far left. But Biden's got bigger problems even
Speaker 1: than just his positioning on issues the Democratic Party has
Speaker 1: had Jack Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama. This is your
Speaker 1: third run for it? Why Joe Biden? Well, because I think,
Speaker 1: as I said, there we need somebody who on day
Speaker 1: one knows exactly what to do, can command the world stage.
Speaker 1: No one wonders whether I know a great deal about
Speaker 1: these issues and foreign policy and domestic policy there's things
Speaker 1: I've done, and that might be one of the criticisms too,
Speaker 1: that you're offering essentially four more years of a Obama
Speaker 1: like administration. Well, let me tell you something. I love
Speaker 1: the fact that all of a sudden, the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: doesn't think Obama was that great a president. I find
Speaker 1: that fascinated some of us. Why hasn't President Obama endorsed you?
Speaker 1: You guys served together for eight years? Because I have to,
Speaker 1: I want to earn this on my own. Did he
Speaker 1: offer to endorse you? No, we didn't even get there.
Speaker 1: I asked him not to be said, Okay, I think
Speaker 1: it's better. I think he thinks it's better for me.
Speaker 1: I have no doubt when I'm the nominee, he'll be
Speaker 1: out the campaign trail for me. Does anyone believe that? Well? Actually,
Speaker 1: can we start with the no one his quote that
Speaker 1: no one were whether or questions whether he knows a
Speaker 1: lot about all this stuff? I do. I'm sitting here
Speaker 1: raising my hand. I question whether he knows a lot
Speaker 1: about anything other than playing golf and charging too much
Speaker 1: money for speeches and letting his his son make a
Speaker 1: lot of money because he's related to the Vice president.
Speaker 1: I don't know what Joe Biden thinks. He knows a
Speaker 1: lot about, but I've never seen any evidence of it.
Speaker 1: Going back to that line from a Reagan's I think
Speaker 1: it was from Reagan's diary that he was a pure demagogue,
Speaker 1: a politician. Joe Biden was a politician, and all is
Speaker 1: a politician all the worst ways that one thinks of
Speaker 1: that term. Just says whatever he has to say, whenever
Speaker 1: he has to say it. But the lack of an
Speaker 1: Obama endorsement, I think that this is particularly interesting. His
Speaker 1: claim that, oh, he would be endorsed by Obama. Oh,
Speaker 1: he totally would be endorsed by Obama, but he didn't
Speaker 1: want that. He didn't want to be endorsed by Barack Obama.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna let you make your own determinations whether
Speaker 1: you think that that's accurate or not. I think that
Speaker 1: it's pretty clear, pretty clear to me at least, that
Speaker 1: no serious person would believe that, and not even just
Speaker 1: that that Obama was unwilling when Biden was getting trashed
Speaker 1: by Kamala Harris, who has had a deeply disappointing for
Speaker 1: a lot of media libs out there, deeply disappointing presidential run,
Speaker 1: but that Joe Biden was getting attacked essentially for being
Speaker 1: a racist after having been the vice president to the
Speaker 1: first black president in this country for eight years, and
Speaker 1: Obama didn't feel they need to stay a word for him.
Speaker 1: Obama has said more in defense of the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: of Canada, who wore blackface so many times he can't
Speaker 1: even remember then he has ever said since in this
Speaker 1: election cycle defense of Joe Biden. So Biden got that problem.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden was asked though, about these about the gaffs
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden has and whether they're indicative of something
Speaker 1: bigger going on here. Play clip too. You've made in
Speaker 1: a number of gaffs in the debates. In the October debate,
Speaker 1: you confused Syria with Iraq. In the September debate, you
Speaker 1: conflated Iraq and Afghanistan. When you're watching these debates, do
Speaker 1: you worry about the gaffs? No? I don't worry about
Speaker 1: the gaffs. And you know what, the American people know
Speaker 1: who Joe Biden is. I mean, if he misspeaks one word,
Speaker 1: they don't, that doesn't affect the way they're going to
Speaker 1: vote one way or the other. I've heard from people
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden is actually a very very nice person,
Speaker 1: lovely person. So I'll just say that because I have
Speaker 1: heard that from people who would know. So good for
Speaker 1: Joe Biden making a good choice there. But the gaffs
Speaker 1: are more than just the mistakes. It is this guy
Speaker 1: really Is he foggy upstairs? That's really what people are
Speaker 1: getting at. And as I've said, Liberals open the door
Speaker 1: to this with all their Trump is crazy twenty fifth Amendment,
Speaker 1: Trump is mentally mentally ill twenty fifth Amendment. Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is old. It seems old, and does not seem like
Speaker 1: he has a full command of his own intellectual faculties
Speaker 1: all the time. Seems like sometimes he zones in and out.
Speaker 1: We're gonna sign up to have this guy be president
Speaker 1: for possibly eight years. At what stage of this can
Speaker 1: we start to say that it's just narcissism for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: Speaking of narcissism, you see that an advisor to Hillary
Speaker 1: Clinton said over the weekend that she believes that she
Speaker 1: was put on this earth to be president. I believe
Speaker 1: that that is true of Hillary Clinton, that she does
Speaker 1: believe that she was put on this earth to be president.
Speaker 1: I also believe that Hillary Clinton is narcissistic and kind
Speaker 1: of crazy. I think that the not being president thing
Speaker 1: has affected her in ways that we are still just
Speaker 1: figuring out now that she's speaking out publicly, and that
Speaker 1: the media handlers and all this, there's not as much
Speaker 1: of an investment in perpetuating this mythology of Hillary Clinton
Speaker 1: the brilliant tactician who understands everything and understands what's going on. No,
Speaker 1: I think that people now see that Hillary Clinton was
Speaker 1: what I've known her and many of you have known
Speaker 1: her to be all along, which is a grasping grifter
Speaker 1: who really just looks to advance herself and pretends to
Speaker 1: do so for some loftier principle that really has no
Speaker 1: interest in anything other than the greatness and wealth personal
Speaker 1: wealth of Hillary Clinton and her immediate family. But Joe
Speaker 1: Biden still still clinging to some frontrunner status despite his
Speaker 1: obvious limitations and just also lack of why why should
Speaker 1: it be Joe Biden? Even Joe Biden kenned a tremble
Speaker 1: for my country, knowing how difficult it has become for
Speaker 1: us to stand together as a nation right now, knowing
Speaker 1: that we are living amid a crisis of belonging in
Speaker 1: the United States of America. Right now, we're in the
Speaker 1: midst of a crisis. May Or Pete there says a
Speaker 1: crisis that I think we all are supposed to believe
Speaker 1: is of Donald Trump's making. What is the Democrats answer
Speaker 1: to this? In what way do Democrats really propose to
Speaker 1: bring us together to force us to all pay into
Speaker 1: increasingly massive government coffers? Is socialism really is supposed to
Speaker 1: be the answer? How do Democrats proposed to inspire us
Speaker 1: and to bring us together as one people. I think
Speaker 1: it's also worth noting that the differences between left and
Speaker 1: right now feel like they are reaching irreconcilable difference status,
Speaker 1: that we have a level of separation in our culture,
Speaker 1: even within America, between left and right that seems like
Speaker 1: maybe it's not all that fixable. Sometimes I wish I
Speaker 1: could say that wasn't the case, but I do think
Speaker 1: it can be the case. But the living in a
Speaker 1: crisis line that we hear from so many Democrats, I
Speaker 1: do have to ask, when are we not hearing about
Speaker 1: a crisis from them? Everything is a crisis. I saw
Speaker 1: over the weekend there was there are more of these
Speaker 1: terrible fires going on in California, and Democrats they make it.
Speaker 1: They'll make an immediate leap online from a fire in
Speaker 1: California to climate change to Trump. It's just that's immediately something.
Speaker 1: There's a big forest fire going on California, climate change
Speaker 1: Trump right away that that's where it goes. It's never
Speaker 1: maybe there's a forest fire because there's a fire, or
Speaker 1: even beyond that, maybe because they don't do enough forestry
Speaker 1: in California anymore because of environmentalists concerns to help clear
Speaker 1: out underbrush and prevent the immediate circumstances that can be
Speaker 1: much more likely to result in a catastrophic fire. No,
Speaker 1: everything becomes political right away. There's this immediate leap to
Speaker 1: and not just political, but an effort to bash Trump
Speaker 1: because we are living in a state of alleged crises
Speaker 1: and there's never any Wait a second, was that really
Speaker 1: a crisis? I just saw the weekend again that there
Speaker 1: was a they're doing stories again about polar bears drowning.
Speaker 1: I think we're hearing about that again now, Oh, the
Speaker 1: polar bears, the ice caps are melting. You haven't heard
Speaker 1: about that for about ten or fifteen years because it
Speaker 1: didn't happen, but they kept saying it's going to happen.
Speaker 1: And now we're hearing about the we've got twelve years
Speaker 1: or ten years or eight years or whatever it is
Speaker 1: before we crossed the point of no return, and then
Speaker 1: climate change will come for us. All. I think we're
Speaker 1: getting numb to fake crises, and that worries me because
Speaker 1: we could face a real crisis as a country at
Speaker 1: some point in the future. There could well come a
Speaker 1: time when there's something that all of us would have
Speaker 1: to admit is a crisis. I do worry, for example,
Speaker 1: about the future of the US confronting China. China's got
Speaker 1: a much larger population, it has a much more clear,
Speaker 1: I believe, strategic plan in mind to take down the
Speaker 1: United States. And here's for example, this is what this
Speaker 1: is still what Joe Biden. Not to bring this back
Speaker 1: to Biden, but producer Mark, would you please play a
Speaker 1: clip four. Here's the deal everybody talks about. Biden says
Speaker 1: that China, if we do we have to do, China
Speaker 1: is not a problem. Look, China is in real trouble. Man.
Speaker 1: I spent a lot of time with Shijing King. I
Speaker 1: spent more time within than any world leader before I left. Yeah,
Speaker 1: China is the one that's got all the problems. Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: It also said that China is not a problem in
Speaker 1: the past, and he's not backing away from that. Still,
Speaker 1: that's the strategic leaders. That's a strategic leaders that you
Speaker 1: want to be in place. The guy who can't see
Speaker 1: the rise of China as a threat. I mean, that's
Speaker 1: a crisis. The opioids in this country are a crisis.
Speaker 1: I think what's happening in Mexico right now is at
Speaker 1: least the early indicators of a possible real crisis on
Speaker 1: our southern border. After that takeover of a city by
Speaker 1: cartel members in Kulia Khan, after they had seized Ovideo Guzman,
Speaker 1: the son of El Chapo Guzman, and the president Lopez
Speaker 1: Obrador decided that he would be released. That's scary stuff, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're talking about crist there's real crisis out there,
Speaker 1: and the focus on the from the left on fake crisis,
Speaker 1: and I really will come in the climate change is
Speaker 1: the fake crisis. It's just not a crisis. We can
Speaker 1: sit around to talk to this all day. It's not
Speaker 1: a crisis. But the focus on this takes away not
Speaker 1: only energy and resources from real problems, but it makes
Speaker 1: the discussion so there's so much noise, so much overheated,
Speaker 1: nonsensical rhetoric about things that for people that are trying
Speaker 1: to live their lives and just do what they need
Speaker 1: to do, I'm sure it can feel like, well, how
Speaker 1: do I tell one crisis from another? And maybe we
Speaker 1: should just have other people be in charge of all
Speaker 1: this stuff. Maybe I should vote for the people that
Speaker 1: promise that the government's going to make all the crises
Speaker 1: go a wait. Government creates some of the crises we're facing.
Speaker 1: The government makes some of them worse. But we are
Speaker 1: like the debt, and I wonder tut a crisis no
Speaker 1: one cares anymore. I came into conservative media when the
Speaker 1: Tea Party was basically at its well a year after
Speaker 1: it was really at its absolute height. The Tea Party
Speaker 1: was such a powerful force, and people were very concerned
Speaker 1: and talking about the debt. None of that has changed,
Speaker 1: except it's gotten a lot worse. All of the arguments,
Speaker 1: all the things that were being said then about what
Speaker 1: would happen are still very much applicable today. The only
Speaker 1: real difference, you real the distinction is that we are
Speaker 1: much deeper in debt now than we were in twenty ten,
Speaker 1: and we're not hearing anybody talk about it. And you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's a shame, I think right now in conservative media,
Speaker 1: if you did a and many people who have radio
Speaker 1: shows and TV shows, they're obsessed with the ratings all
Speaker 1: the time, so they look at every segment and everything
Speaker 1: that happens, and they'll say whatever, whatever does well, they'll
Speaker 1: just say more of and whatever doesn't do well, it
Speaker 1: doesn't matter what they think. They won't say that. There
Speaker 1: are a lot of hosts out there. That's how they
Speaker 1: run their shows. And I'm pretty sure right now, if
Speaker 1: you talk about the debt, people just go map, don't care.
Speaker 1: It feels very strange because ten years ago, if you're
Speaker 1: talking about the debt, when it was much less than
Speaker 1: it is now, people were worried about the future of
Speaker 1: this country. They thought it was an existential threat to
Speaker 1: our economy and therefore the American way of life and
Speaker 1: the American experiment that's all gone away. So Pte may
Speaker 1: or Pete's talking about a crisis that doesn't exist. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: a crisis crises that do exist feel if they're getting
Speaker 1: larger and worse around us. And we can't even agree
Speaker 1: on what's a crisis as a country, So how can
Speaker 1: we even begin to think that there will be the
Speaker 1: basis is for real action about any of this when
Speaker 1: we can't even decide what requires action. That's my concern
Speaker 1: for us going forward. That's where I think we've started
Speaker 1: to really run into some issues we are going to
Speaker 1: and the issues that are only gonna get worse. But
Speaker 1: without my friends, it's all gonna be fine. Just keep
Speaker 1: listening to the buck Sexton Show and tell us some
Speaker 1: friends about us. They listened to roll calls up. The
Speaker 1: show ain't over yet, folks, keeping it real, It's time
Speaker 1: for roll call Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton for
Speaker 1: roll call time or Team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com again.
Speaker 1: Thanks to all. Team Bucket came out to Nashville to
Speaker 1: Politicon over the weekend. Great to see you and enjoy
Speaker 1: taking the selfies hanging out. It was a lot of fun.
Speaker 1: Went to mark Its Barbecue. That place is great. Oh
Speaker 1: the brisket was so good. The brisket was just that's
Speaker 1: my I mean, that's my favorite of the barbecue meets
Speaker 1: the brisket. When it's done. The right way, but so
Speaker 1: much barbeue. The problem I have when I go to
Speaker 1: really good barbecue place, same thing with Heart eight and Dallas,
Speaker 1: or the problem with with the best barbecue places I've
Speaker 1: been to is I always want to eat more, you know,
Speaker 1: and you can really only handle so much of that
Speaker 1: stuff before you've really got to tap out. I'm producer Mark.
Speaker 1: Did you are you up on the baseball stud that
Speaker 1: the World Series that is apparently happening right now? Is
Speaker 1: there anything of note for our audience you want to share?
Speaker 1: What do you mean of note? Like? Is this a
Speaker 1: good World Series? I've seen some people complaining the last
Speaker 1: night's game. Yeah, it's been eight one and then seven one.
Speaker 1: Of course it's boring. It's baseball, folks. What do you expect? Actually,
Speaker 1: surprisingly it has been the lowest rated World Series in
Speaker 1: a long time. Well that surprised me at all. You know,
Speaker 1: if you want to spend nine hours drinking looking at
Speaker 1: something from Afar, just go hang out by the train
Speaker 1: tracks somewhere. It'll be free. What baseball game are you
Speaker 1: going through that takes nine hours? I don't know. Baseball
Speaker 1: it takes forever. Man, does it takes the same amount
Speaker 1: of time? As a football or hockey game, except there's
Speaker 1: not as much happen. Except football is amazing, says the
Speaker 1: person who doesn't know who's sake one Barkley. Well, I
Speaker 1: mean it's a busy year, man. We're launching the show
Speaker 1: in here. Yeah, sure, all right, let's get to Facebook,
Speaker 1: Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton. This one comes from
Speaker 1: Douglas Buck. Does this sound like CNN News aim to
Speaker 1: have effect on the broad masses, concentration on a few points,
Speaker 1: constant repetition of those points, framing of the issues in
Speaker 1: disputable one sided. I bet you know where that's from.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you If not. No, I mean, is this
Speaker 1: like propaganda from World War two or something. I don't
Speaker 1: know what that is, but let me know Douglas when
Speaker 1: you're writing again. But yeah, it just sounds like a
Speaker 1: definition of propaganda, which CNN certainly is. But is that
Speaker 1: Jeff right shield hie Buck. Just listen to podcast from
Speaker 1: week regarding Hillary and something came to mind. You may
Speaker 1: have already mentioned this, but I don't recall hearing it
Speaker 1: in the media. The next time we're lectured about why
Speaker 1: the electoral college should be removed from popular vote should
Speaker 1: be implemented. Please remind them that Hillary beat Obama in
Speaker 1: the popular vote during the two thousand and eight Democratic primary,
Speaker 1: and the majority of them had no issue with Obama
Speaker 1: being the nominee. I gotta take your word for that,
Speaker 1: because I actually don't remember if that's true or not.
Speaker 1: But if that's true, that's a very a very interesting,
Speaker 1: very interesting point. Let's see here, Linda rights. Hey, I
Speaker 1: was watching Pluto TV the first in Hawaii, and there
Speaker 1: you are. I'm intrigue. Don't know much about apple pop,
Speaker 1: but we'll look around. You sound like a man with
Speaker 1: a mind, and coming from a grandma, you're kind of hot.
Speaker 1: Best wishes, Linda, Thanks, Linda, I'll take it. I'll take it,
Speaker 1: you know, take a reck, get it. That was good
Speaker 1: to it. Don't no producer Mark now now we don't.
Speaker 1: We don't need to hear to say anything. Okay, all right,
Speaker 1: just so many gotta hit the mute button on producer
Speaker 1: Mark over here right now. You're busy. Make sure the
Speaker 1: podcast goes out with all the cool things that the
Speaker 1: social media things you do. Do those things peep on
Speaker 1: social media? Love when I mock you? So wow? That's
Speaker 1: that true? That too? Or true? Both of those things. James,
Speaker 1: I think the left is on a mission to destroy
Speaker 1: this country for their own personal beliefs. And the Bible
Speaker 1: says is right, they will say is wrong. James. I'll
Speaker 1: just leave that to you, my friend, and let's see here,
Speaker 1: Rick right, Buck, I'm a longtime listener who just upgraded
Speaker 1: to Mac operating system Catalina. It's a long story, but
Speaker 1: Catalina makes moving podcasts onto my iPod very cumbersome. Is
Speaker 1: there a location or a way to download your show
Speaker 1: as an MP three file? This would simplify copying them
Speaker 1: onto my iPod? Ruster, Mark, I don't know. I'm not
Speaker 1: a hun sure, but I feel like if you go
Speaker 1: on bucksexon dot com you might be able to download it. Okay,
Speaker 1: I could double check in on that though. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean let's say that that's uh, we'll try that and
Speaker 1: see if that works. Because I have no ideas, we'll
Speaker 1: just go with whatever producer Mark says. That certainly works
Speaker 1: for me. Douglas, can you give me an example of
Speaker 1: an agreement that is not quid pro quo? Uh? Okay?
Speaker 1: I mean, well, Douglas, Yeah, sure, Like if I if
Speaker 1: I agree to write your son a recommendation for college.
Speaker 1: And I do that, that's not and that's not a
Speaker 1: quid pro quo. Right, So that's there you go. There's
Speaker 1: an example of what's not a quid pro quo. If
Speaker 1: I do that, though, and of your own accord, you
Speaker 1: send me a gift on my birthday, which is right
Speaker 1: around Christmas time, that's still not a quid pro quot.
Speaker 1: But if you say, hey, Buck, my son a letter
Speaker 1: of recommendation for are you guys know they don't have
Speaker 1: to go through the rest of it. You get it.
Speaker 1: Philip Rights, I'm guessing this well, this is a photo
Speaker 1: of a giant trailer that says Team Buck on it,
Speaker 1: and he wrote, I guess I'm guessing this was not
Speaker 1: you doing an outside broadcast in Montana today. Yeah, that is.
Speaker 1: That was not the Team buckmobile. But that's pretty that's
Speaker 1: pretty badass, actually, I gotta say pretty smart. Can see
Speaker 1: this photo in the inbox. It's pretty legit well done
Speaker 1: with a Team Buck Montana. Whatever that is, I'm assuming
Speaker 1: it's related to horses or something. John, if you're still
Speaker 1: in Nashville and anyone anywhere near Morton Steakhouse, I'll buy
Speaker 1: you a mesical John. Thank you for the offer, my friend. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I am back in New York City. I am not
Speaker 1: in Nashville. Nashville was a great town. I want to go.
Speaker 1: I want to go back. I want to go back
Speaker 1: and check it out for sure, for fun. Um. All right,
Speaker 1: here we go, Mark rights Hey. Last Friday, a young
Speaker 1: person wrote into roll Call asking why raising the minimum
Speaker 1: wage would be bad. I'll tell you why. I'm scared
Speaker 1: of it being raised. I'm sixteen years old and I
Speaker 1: work at a feed store, loading bags of animal feed
Speaker 1: into cars and stocking the warehouse. I get paid seven
Speaker 1: fifty an hour for what I do. If they raise
Speaker 1: the minimum wage to ten dollars, I wouldn't be useful
Speaker 1: to the company anymore. I'd be let go because there's
Speaker 1: a limit to how much people are going to pay
Speaker 1: for each job. So in order to get our wages
Speaker 1: to go up, we should work hard and work our
Speaker 1: way up the line. Government regulation won't help us. We'd
Speaker 1: lose our jobs and the price for everything we'd go
Speaker 1: up if we raise it. Thanks Team WHOA WHOA. Mark
Speaker 1: Margaret's a very good explanation of why raising the minimum
Speaker 1: wage is just not the panacea. It's a fun word
Speaker 1: to say, isn't it panacea that everybody says it is?
Speaker 1: Let's see next peer were Scott Scott rights hey Buck,
Speaker 1: longtime listener, great admirer. Am I alone and thinking the
Speaker 1: Drudge Report has swung wildly anti Trump since the impeachment
Speaker 1: farce shifted into fifth gear. Love to hear analysis on
Speaker 1: this and whether and imagine I'm imaging or not, whether
Speaker 1: Drudge has flipped or if it's just playing the If
Speaker 1: Trump has impeached, the Democrats lose big in twenty twenty game.
Speaker 1: Appreciative Scott from New Hampshire. Scott, I have noticed a
Speaker 1: little bit of a assaultiness from the Drudge Reports in
Speaker 1: it's approach to Trump. There's something going on there. Maybe
Speaker 1: maybe Drudge, who is one of the most secretive but
Speaker 1: also influential people in conservative media still to this day,
Speaker 1: maybe he feels like Trump just isn't following through on
Speaker 1: stuff he needs to fall through. Maybe some of the promises,
Speaker 1: you know, are maybe he's out enough. Ronnie rides Buck,
Speaker 1: You have to have dinner in Nashville at rodit Ceo
Speaker 1: Brazilian grill just off Broadway, almost any kind of meat.
Speaker 1: We were just there a couple of weeks ago. Have
Speaker 1: fun well, Ronnie. Next time, I'll definitely check it out.
Speaker 1: I will say one night on Saturday night, we went
Speaker 1: out somewhere on Broadway, and I don't want to name
Speaker 1: it because I know it's it's a new place to
Speaker 1: just helped me the food. The food was not that good,
Speaker 1: but that was our fault because we went somewhere for
Speaker 1: the live music and not for the I didn't really
Speaker 1: do my usual deep dive and whether the food would
Speaker 1: be any good, folks, That's going to be the show
Speaker 1: for it today. As I always say, please do tell
Speaker 1: somebody this week about the Buck Section show telling they
Speaker 1: can download it for free on iTunes or wherever they
Speaker 1: listen to podcasts, the iHeart app for example. We're going
Speaker 1: to have an amazing week of shows for you because
Speaker 1: we always do and that's just how we roll. So
Speaker 1: I'll be back here tomorrow, same time, same place. Remember
Speaker 1: channel to forty eight on Pluto. If you're listening to
Speaker 1: the podcast, just download Pluto TV. See you talk to
Speaker 1: you tomorrow. Shields High