Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Join the conversation
Speaker 1: and message Buck on Facebook, Instagram, or email team Bucket
Speaker 1: higheartmedia dot com. He may read it on the show.
Speaker 1: One of the things that we've had to learn the
Speaker 1: hard way on the right side of the political spectrum
Speaker 1: conservatives in the last few months is that control of
Speaker 1: institutions really matters. It isn't just something that you can
Speaker 1: leave to chance. Because the left views this as a
Speaker 1: vocation into itself, right, I mean, this is something that
Speaker 1: they do as a matter of strategy. They want to
Speaker 1: be They want to be in charge of things. They
Speaker 1: want to be in charge of the schools, of Hollywood,
Speaker 1: of the media. They want to make the decisions about
Speaker 1: who gets into elite educational institutions. They want to be
Speaker 1: the ones who hold the door, who are the gatekeepers,
Speaker 1: and then they can mold society in their image. And
Speaker 1: we're just beginning to see now among conservatives, among Republicans
Speaker 1: are willingness to finally push back against this in a
Speaker 1: way that matters, perhaps because we're defending on our own
Speaker 1: five yard line at this point on these cultural issues,
Speaker 1: on schools, on so many things, but it has finally
Speaker 1: crossed over we finally seen that if we allow this
Speaker 1: to continue, politics is in fact downstream from culture, and
Speaker 1: if they control the culture and the institutions of culture,
Speaker 1: we will be in a place we cannot win because
Speaker 1: the country will have decided to move past what we believe,
Speaker 1: move past what we think. And you know, one area
Speaker 1: where there's actually a lot of control that they're always
Speaker 1: instituting over us is on the Internet, which is the
Speaker 1: primary means of communication. It's how a lot of us
Speaker 1: not only do our jobs now but also talk to
Speaker 1: everybody buy things. But they watch everything you do. You
Speaker 1: know that, right. But you can anonymize your connection so
Speaker 1: that you can serve the Internet freely without wondering who
Speaker 1: will get a whole of your search history or your
Speaker 1: viewing habits, or what they'll do with that information. Do
Speaker 1: you want these private companies that are now working closer
Speaker 1: and closer with the government to have the data on
Speaker 1: everything you type, every website you go to. That's why
Speaker 1: I use express VPN. These companies can't see my IP
Speaker 1: address at all. My identity is anonymized by a secure
Speaker 1: VPN server and my data is encrypted for maximum protection.
Speaker 1: Beside hiding all my Internet activity, what I like most
Speaker 1: about Express VPN is how easy it is to use.
Speaker 1: I just download the app onto my phone. You just
Speaker 1: set it up and then you run it and you're protected.
Speaker 1: Stop handing over your data to big tech companies. This
Speaker 1: is a must, all right. This is something that you
Speaker 1: have to have. And think of it like insurance for
Speaker 1: your home. Okay, you gotta do this. You must protect
Speaker 1: your privacy online with Express vpn. Defend your rights. Go
Speaker 1: to Express vpn dot com slash buck. That's Express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. You'll get three extra months of protection.
Speaker 1: That's right, three three months when you go to express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slash buck. Florida Civics curriculum will incorporate
Speaker 1: foundational concepts with the best materials, and it will expressly
Speaker 1: exclude unsanctioned narratives like critical race theory and other unsubstantiated theories.
Speaker 1: Let me be clear, there's no room in our classrooms
Speaker 1: for things like critical race theory. Teaching kids to hate
Speaker 1: their country and to hate each other is not worth
Speaker 1: one red cent of taxpayer money. So we will invest
Speaker 1: in actual, solid, true curriculum, and we will be a
Speaker 1: leader in the development an implementation of a world class
Speaker 1: civics education, a world class civics education. This is what
Speaker 1: Florida is on a pathway to you now thanks to
Speaker 1: Governor Rond santists in public schools. That's right. People should
Speaker 1: learn the truth about how government works, how their country works,
Speaker 1: and we shouldn't allow for this brain rot of critical
Speaker 1: race theory to continue to spread all across campuses, all
Speaker 1: across not just high school, but now grade school, grammar
Speaker 1: school curriculum. Ronda Santis is increasingly feeling like the leader
Speaker 1: of the Republican Party. I know that that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: still holds the for a lot of people, holds the
Speaker 1: reins of the GOP's future, but Ronda Santis is showing
Speaker 1: with his actions. Ronda Santis is accomplishing with his results
Speaker 1: so much that at this point you have to figure
Speaker 1: that he's a likely twenty twenty four presidential candidate. But
Speaker 1: it's even more than that, he's creating a template for
Speaker 1: other states to follow, because now with the Democrats and
Speaker 1: control of the House and a day factor majority in
Speaker 1: the Senate, what we see and of course the White
Speaker 1: House under Biden, who everyone's realized now really is just
Speaker 1: a pass through for the left wing agenda. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's the Obama administration with Biden as a puppet, right.
Speaker 1: Biden just sort of shuffles around. Yeah, you know, sort
Speaker 1: of just say some things, and then I kind of
Speaker 1: say things like this. I come down here and I
Speaker 1: read the speech, and I mumble some stuff, and then
Speaker 1: I say some things kind of loud. See you think
Speaker 1: I'm still awake. And then I mumble some more stuff,
Speaker 1: and I pretend to be a great leader because you know,
Speaker 1: I'm Joe Biden. Yeah, people are figuring out what this
Speaker 1: was all about. It's exactly what I told you it
Speaker 1: would be, so you're not surprised at all. But we
Speaker 1: need states to step up and show a better way forward.
Speaker 1: You'll notice that it's also Florida that has taken the
Speaker 1: lead and trying to create protections for people social media
Speaker 1: companies effectively defrauding them. These companies were built on the
Speaker 1: back of a promise. The promise was that you'd be
Speaker 1: able to share information, you'd be able to use their
Speaker 1: platforms without respect to your politics, that they were platforms
Speaker 1: for the free exchange of ideas, that they were First
Speaker 1: Amendment defenders, that they were nonpartisan, non political. That's an
Speaker 1: absolute lie, and it is shifting our national conversation about
Speaker 1: every issue on a day to day basis. And if
Speaker 1: we don't tackle this, we'll lose. If we don't change this,
Speaker 1: we cannot win the future. It will already be decided
Speaker 1: for us. And this is also why critical race theory
Speaker 1: in schools. We are paying attention to this now because
Speaker 1: you see that the left has a need for an
Speaker 1: overarching narrative of hysteria. The left is defined by a
Speaker 1: widespread psychological defect right now, of overwhelming fear from things
Speaker 1: that are either a minimal risk or a very limited challenge,
Speaker 1: very limited threat against them. I mean, the big example
Speaker 1: is white supremacy, which I'll be talking to you more about.
Speaker 1: As you know the term white supremacy if you just
Speaker 1: look for a Google search of white supremacy use in
Speaker 1: the media ten years ago versus now, it's just taken
Speaker 1: off like a rocket ship. This has become a narrative.
Speaker 1: And what they've done is just like in the nineties
Speaker 1: when racism was used as a club to beat people
Speaker 1: that you didn't agree with politically and on the right generally,
Speaker 1: but also to keep people on your own side in line. Right,
Speaker 1: if you are a liberal now leftist, as I think
Speaker 1: the more appropriate terms, I'll use that one in place
Speaker 1: of if you are a leftist and you step out
Speaker 1: a line. You know, they sometimes will feed their own
Speaker 1: to the mob. You know, they'll feed their own to
Speaker 1: the wolves in order to show just how woke they are.
Speaker 1: This is a mechanism of control. It's a mechanism of
Speaker 1: achieving power and of control. And critical race theory is
Speaker 1: an indoctrination. In fact, I wrote I wrote my college
Speaker 1: thesis at Amherst in part about Herbert Marcus and critical
Speaker 1: race theory and the way that it was used to
Speaker 1: justify campus speech codes, which have been around for a
Speaker 1: long time. But the campus speech codes were an early
Speaker 1: indicator at colleges and universities of where we were heading.
Speaker 1: We were going to a place. It's where we are
Speaker 1: now you say things I don't like. That's basically violence.
Speaker 1: Speech equals violence. That took decades to create that perception,
Speaker 1: to create the groundwork so that it would finally take root,
Speaker 1: and we were warning about it. We're saying, look at
Speaker 1: how insane they are at Harvard, at Yale, at Michigan State,
Speaker 1: at Missoo, at Reed College, at UCLA. I mean, you
Speaker 1: go all over the country ut Austin, look at how
Speaker 1: crazy some of the stuff on campuses. But because we
Speaker 1: are conservatives, because we're people that don't sit around constantly
Speaker 1: terrified about everything all the time, we said, Okay, they'll
Speaker 1: grow out of it. I think that was our attitude.
Speaker 1: They'll grow out of it. They'll recognize that this is foolish,
Speaker 1: they'll recognize this doesn't make sense. And now we live
Speaker 1: in a society where we see, oh no, they didn't
Speaker 1: grow out of it, and in fact, they run some
Speaker 1: of the most important they have seen some of the
Speaker 1: commanding heights of our culture. Of politics, of the economy,
Speaker 1: of corporations, the nodes of control. Sure, half the country
Speaker 1: can be Republican and half the country is by party
Speaker 1: affiliation roughly speaking, But if they control the corporations, Hollywood,
Speaker 1: the news media, not just college campuses. Now law schools,
Speaker 1: I mean international relations school I can tell you because
Speaker 1: I've actually done some study at them, are are basically
Speaker 1: like communist on claves. I mean, they're completely insane, And
Speaker 1: to get a master's in international affairs it means you're
Speaker 1: effectively you know, they're creating a stooge to go work
Speaker 1: for the UN and who thinks that America is really bad?
Speaker 1: All these other countries do great things for the world.
Speaker 1: America is really bad. But if they control all these things,
Speaker 1: and then they also control the credentialing institutions, so then
Speaker 1: it becomes a well, we're just the smarter people. We're
Speaker 1: just smarter than you are. Now, it's just because you
Speaker 1: create the reality on these campuses of the people that
Speaker 1: you want, you decide that you are in a place
Speaker 1: that you can create a socially engineered future of this country.
Speaker 1: And that's what they've done. And critical race theory is
Speaker 1: essential in that. Critical race theory is a major component
Speaker 1: of this. It's the it's the view if you were
Speaker 1: to just look up a definition of it, that law
Speaker 1: and legal this from Britannica dot com, law and legal
Speaker 1: institutions are inherently racist, and that race itself, instead of
Speaker 1: being biologically grounded, are natural is a socially constructed concept
Speaker 1: that are used by white people to further their economic
Speaker 1: and political interests at the expense of people of color.
Speaker 1: According to critical race theory, racial inequality emerges from the social, economic,
Speaker 1: and legal differences that white people create between races to
Speaker 1: maintain elite white interests in labor, markets and politics, give
Speaker 1: rise to poverty and criminality in many minority communities, and
Speaker 1: giving rise to the CRT movement, officially organized itself in
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty nine at the first Annual Workshop on Critical
Speaker 1: Race Theory, though it's intellectual origins go back much further
Speaker 1: to the nineteen sixties and nineteen seventies. I mentioned to
Speaker 1: you that I had studied Herbert Marc's back when I
Speaker 1: was in college, which now is about twenty almost twenty
Speaker 1: years ago. And he is somebody who his ideas, his
Speaker 1: view of a society in which everyone is constantly competing
Speaker 1: with the I mean, he's basically a Marxist, and he's
Speaker 1: a cultural or a social Marxist or the Marks believed
Speaker 1: in his theories of course, affecting every aspect, every time,
Speaker 1: every facet of society, including family relations, including relations between
Speaker 1: husband and wife. Marks didn't think there was just some
Speaker 1: solely economic rationale for everything. It wasn't just an economic interest.
Speaker 1: It was all of society. But this belief system. You'll
Speaker 1: notice that they really got it going on campuses officially
Speaker 1: in the nineteen nineties, which is also when you saw
Speaker 1: the rise of PC culture. PC culture was the precursor
Speaker 1: to cancel culture. PC culture led to everything is racist.
Speaker 1: Racism is the reason for all these problems in society.
Speaker 1: Even if you don't do something or you yourself are
Speaker 1: not racist, you are a part of a racist system. Therefore,
Speaker 1: you are furthering racism by your very existence, unless you are,
Speaker 1: of course not white, or you are somebody who agrees
Speaker 1: with all of our doctrine. Oh and actually, if you're
Speaker 1: a minority who doesn't agree, they will take away your
Speaker 1: minority noess, they will say that you don't you don't
Speaker 1: really count. This is how the left has created a
Speaker 1: perception that, you know, Justice Thomas, for example, is not
Speaker 1: really representative in some way of the black community. And
Speaker 1: they'll say really horrible things to that, but that's what
Speaker 1: they'll say. Critical race theory is the well spring for
Speaker 1: so much of our social misery and despair and so
Speaker 1: much of what tears us apart, and it undermines foundational
Speaker 1: concepts of what this American experiment is all about. That
Speaker 1: we are individuals alike in the equal in dignity and
Speaker 1: grace and made in the image of God. That is
Speaker 1: all cast aside with this notion that wherever we are,
Speaker 1: whoever you are, your individual actions, your decency, your character,
Speaker 1: your ethics don't matter. You're part of a collective, a
Speaker 1: racial collective, and you have to either make amends or
Speaker 1: demands amends depending on where you are, and also be
Speaker 1: relieved of any individual responsibility. Notice that this is all
Speaker 1: just a way of shifting power dynamics. People aren't responsible
Speaker 1: for their own life, for their own actions. It's the collective,
Speaker 1: it's society, and you can either pay you pay obedience
Speaker 1: to this. You can either make amends for this, or
Speaker 1: you can be one of the bad people. You can
Speaker 1: be somebody that has called out, you can be somebody
Speaker 1: who is considered a part of the problem. You must
Speaker 1: be not just non racist, but anti racist. This all
Speaker 1: comes from critical race theory, and this is pulling the
Speaker 1: country apart. It is toxic, and I'm very happy to
Speaker 1: see that there are some states that are finally saying
Speaker 1: enough is enough. What happens when critical race theory goes unrestricted,
Speaker 1: when it actually becomes the doctrine what it's what people
Speaker 1: are taught there made to believe, or they're brought to believe.
Speaker 1: What kind of things happen? Well, it erodes your ability
Speaker 1: to think critically, which is of course the irony of
Speaker 1: this about anything, because everything goes into this framework of
Speaker 1: a racial determinism. You're part of a racial collective wherever
Speaker 1: you are, and that has a pull on you, your worth,
Speaker 1: your decency, who you are in society is largely determined
Speaker 1: by whatever critical race theory says. So are you a
Speaker 1: good person or your racist? Not racist? Doesn't matter. You
Speaker 1: have to be an anti racist, which means doing what
Speaker 1: they say, and I means seeing white supremacy everywhere. For example,
Speaker 1: everything has some white supremacist angle. It means believing the
Speaker 1: sixteen nineteen project is the true history of America. For example.
Speaker 1: It means thinking that America is an irredeemably racist and
Speaker 1: awful place. And it creates this vortex of bad thinking
Speaker 1: and resentment and divisiveness which marksist love because divisiveness separation
Speaker 1: of society especially is what is generally a healthy and
Speaker 1: prosperous and free society like our own. When you pull
Speaker 1: people apart, when you create balkanization, you can start to
Speaker 1: establish control over groups. And then you put enough groups
Speaker 1: together and you have a collective, and then you can
Speaker 1: seize power which is the point of all of this.
Speaker 1: But how much can critical race theory change one's thinking?
Speaker 1: How much can this cultural Marxist approach change one's thinking.
Speaker 1: They have to get to a point, you see, where
Speaker 1: objective reality doesn't count anymore. They have to get to
Speaker 1: a point where you can't even sharing certain facts, saying
Speaker 1: certain data is de facto racist. What's an example of this? Okay?
Speaker 1: In New York City, we will often see here a
Speaker 1: news report where there will be a male twenty four
Speaker 1: five foot ten wearing a hooded sweatshirt, be on the
Speaker 1: lookout because just trying to rob someone, or just trying
Speaker 1: to just trying to rape someone in an alleyway, or
Speaker 1: just you know, shots at somebody. And you'll say, well,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, why I think we need a
Speaker 1: better descript can't we have a more of a description
Speaker 1: if we're supposed to help the police find No, because
Speaker 1: depending on the race of the suspect, that itself the
Speaker 1: facts of the case could be considered racist, could be
Speaker 1: construed as racist. This happens all the time. The show
Speaker 1: Cops canceled because they felt they were there was too
Speaker 1: high of a percentage of minorities involved in a rest situations.
Speaker 1: Even though people's faces are blurred, their identities are protected,
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter, just becomes racist. So some aspects of
Speaker 1: objective reality are therefore racists. Some things that are just
Speaker 1: true or factual, cannot share, cannot say, you know, if
Speaker 1: you were to point out, I mean even there's so
Speaker 1: many aspects that you you could see all throughout society. If
Speaker 1: you point out that Asian Americans will be talking more
Speaker 1: obviously about this issue during the show. But Asian Americans
Speaker 1: are discriminated against in colleges. Why is it that Asian
Speaker 1: Americans have the highest household income, higher than white Americans
Speaker 1: and a white supremacist society. Why is it that Asian Americans,
Speaker 1: including those who arrive as refugees from Southeast Asia, those
Speaker 1: who arrive penniless from East Asia, from or from South Asia,
Speaker 1: do very well in America, are prosperous, quickly find themselves
Speaker 1: in the middle even the upper middle class. And what's
Speaker 1: different about the Asian experience in America in that regard
Speaker 1: than other minority groups that continue to struggle. You better
Speaker 1: only say the allowable narrative, or else you're destroyed. You'll
Speaker 1: be ruined. That's the way critical race theory works that
Speaker 1: you know there and the only allowable narrative is that
Speaker 1: white supremacy is the reason for all of this. Just
Speaker 1: so you understand, that's where this is. And when up
Speaker 1: is down and down is up, and when we can't
Speaker 1: have agreement upon fundamental facts and it's just a contest
Speaker 1: of power. Senator Kennedy Yes today on Capital Hildering and
Speaker 1: centered Hearing, asked an LGPD lg BTQ activist Alphonso David
Speaker 1: how many biological genders are there? Very straightforward question. This
Speaker 1: is what he said. Mister David, let me ask you
Speaker 1: a question, how many? How many sexes do you think
Speaker 1: there are? How many sexes? I mean there's a difference
Speaker 1: between sex and gender identity. If that's what you're getting,
Speaker 1: I'm asking biological sexes? How many do you think there are? Well,
Speaker 1: I would defer to the medical practitioners, but I think
Speaker 1: there's been studies showing that if you're talking about sex,
Speaker 1: sex is defined by many different characteristics and cooling chromosome
Speaker 1: are there more than there are? There more than two?
Speaker 1: You could make that argument that they might be. Are
Speaker 1: you making that our individual but a center? I can't
Speaker 1: ignore the fact that they're individuals who are intersexed, and
Speaker 1: so so I'm just trying. There is not an out
Speaker 1: of time. Are there are more than two sexes in Europe?
Speaker 1: Is not limited to two? Okay, there are more than
Speaker 1: two genders. That's where we are now, you heard him.
Speaker 1: I mean that we can't get a straight answer them
Speaker 1: this other than well maybe kind of we don't. That's
Speaker 1: where we are. This does have a Soviet field to it.
Speaker 1: I'm somebody who reads a lot about the former Soviet Union,
Speaker 1: the totalitarianism of it. Whatever the state told you, you
Speaker 1: had to believe whatever the party told you, or read
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty four orwell, and you can see what a
Speaker 1: fictional totalitarian state was like. But they actually enacted it
Speaker 1: in the twentieth century in some places. That whatever they
Speaker 1: tell you must not only you must not only accept
Speaker 1: it without challenging, you must celebrate it. It's not enough
Speaker 1: to bend the knee. You have to proclaim your allegiance
Speaker 1: to falsehood now. Because if they can get you, if
Speaker 1: the critical race theorists, if the left in America, which
Speaker 1: is ascended and which is in control of so much,
Speaker 1: can get you to agree to falsehood, they get you
Speaker 1: to do anything. Terrible mass shooting in the Atlanta area yesterday.
Speaker 1: People still in shock as we as we see this,
Speaker 1: uh more information about Robert Aaron Long, twenty one years old,
Speaker 1: killed eight people, six Asian women, a white woman, and
Speaker 1: a white man. Three hour crime spree, three different spas.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, this was on Tuesday, and there's a lot
Speaker 1: there's a lot of video of this that's now circulating.
Speaker 1: And this is one of those moments where you you
Speaker 1: have seen somebody who is clearly deranged and evil, and
Speaker 1: it's it's just an awful story where you live in
Speaker 1: a in a very big country with a lot of
Speaker 1: a lot of individuals who unfortunately, when you got three
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty million people, it only takes a handful
Speaker 1: of evil crazies to create an incident like this or
Speaker 1: or will continue to create incidents like this over the
Speaker 1: course of a year. What do we do about it? Well,
Speaker 1: there's the first reaction, which is that we want law
Speaker 1: enforcement to take action and there to be swift justice.
Speaker 1: But then there's the immediate politicization that happens in the
Speaker 1: media now too. You see this all over the place.
Speaker 1: Let's just let's stick with the facts. Here shall we.
Speaker 1: Robert Aaron Long has said that he was a sex
Speaker 1: addict and that he was targeting these massage parlors for
Speaker 1: what was effectively a mass assassination because they were a
Speaker 1: temptation to him. That's what he said. Now, I understand
Speaker 1: that you can't always take the word of a clearly
Speaker 1: deranged and evil person on their motivations, but this does
Speaker 1: seem to line up with his past. He did go
Speaker 1: see sex addiction treatment. This guy seems to be something
Speaker 1: of perhaps an in cell have. It reminds me of
Speaker 1: that the guy who out in California wanted to wanted
Speaker 1: to shoot the Sorority, the Sorority sisters and who was
Speaker 1: a wealthy guy but would make the you know, kind
Speaker 1: of a well off, spoiled brat guy who would make
Speaker 1: these videos in his car and said that he was
Speaker 1: going to go shoot these women. So I believe his
Speaker 1: name is well, I'll look it up. I don't want
Speaker 1: to say the wrong name. But here's what the Democrats
Speaker 1: have turned this inju right away. I mean, and this
Speaker 1: is where we're heading towards. We have a terrible incident
Speaker 1: of mass shooting. And now it's well, what are all
Speaker 1: the political lanes. And the first one that you see
Speaker 1: from the news media in an incident like this is
Speaker 1: that they still find a way to blame this on Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right, to blame this on Donald Trump. Here is
Speaker 1: representative Chew on the murders in Georgia, Play three. Actually,
Speaker 1: this day was coming because it's been a whole year
Speaker 1: of ugly braderick by Donald Trump, who used the word
Speaker 1: China virus, who hunt virus, and even cool flu to
Speaker 1: describe COVID nineteen. We saw a spike recently in places
Speaker 1: like New York and in California ugly actions against the
Speaker 1: elderly and the more vulnerable, including an eighty four year
Speaker 1: old time man who was assaulted and murdered in San Francisco,
Speaker 1: and ninety one year old man who was assaulted pushed
Speaker 1: to the ground in Oakland, Chinatown, and in my own city,
Speaker 1: a man who was beaten with his own cane and
Speaker 1: then lost part of his finger. So we need to
Speaker 1: bring attention to this so we can stand together to
Speaker 1: combat anti Asian hate crimes. Anti Asian bigotry is absolutely disgusting.
Speaker 1: Bigotry of any kind against an individual for their ethnicity,
Speaker 1: of their skin color is the most disgusting immorality that
Speaker 1: you can come up with. And yet we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about the politics of this, and we're gonna say
Speaker 1: this is Donald Trump's fault. They're going to have to
Speaker 1: actually deal with the facts. We have to actually look
Speaker 1: at what really happened here. And in some of the
Speaker 1: incidents that she names, it has already known that the
Speaker 1: assailant was in fact a black male. Now I'm not
Speaker 1: saying because there obviously are people who are fit that
Speaker 1: profile who are Trump voters, but I have a feeling
Speaker 1: that there there's a pretty high likelihood that some of
Speaker 1: the individuals who are who are African American and who
Speaker 1: attacked in some cases killed Asian Americans, and some of
Speaker 1: these incidents it didn't have a darn thing to do
Speaker 1: with Donald Trump or the Wuhan virus or anything else.
Speaker 1: You see, when there's when there's an incident that they
Speaker 1: can turn to their political favor, they are quick. They
Speaker 1: are quick to run with the story before they even
Speaker 1: let any of the facts get in the way. Now,
Speaker 1: that's what they did right away, That's what they did
Speaker 1: it at the first opportunity with this, the first chance
Speaker 1: they got. This was attacked Donald Trump. I mean, I
Speaker 1: could sit and just keep playing clips. It's all ab out.
Speaker 1: It's all about blaming Donald Trump, who's no longer president
Speaker 1: and who doesn't even really have that much to say
Speaker 1: in public these days. Here's a guy over at MSNBC,
Speaker 1: same thing. It's the mass shooting in Atlanta. Is Trump's
Speaker 1: fall play four. We've been talking about things that have
Speaker 1: been existent in America for quite some time, but enhanced
Speaker 1: over the last four years with the presidential seal of
Speaker 1: approval given to intolerance, given to fear, given to suspicion,
Speaker 1: given to anger, given to saying very little about racial
Speaker 1: strife in this country and the causes of it, never
Speaker 1: addressing it, of lying, of lying about nearly everything you
Speaker 1: can imagine, from the dangers of the virus to the
Speaker 1: dangers of racial animosity and what it's doing to our country,
Speaker 1: and the root of it is in the form of
Speaker 1: presidents four years, in his language and his behavior, and
Speaker 1: we're still living in it, we're still playing it out
Speaker 1: and it affects us every day. Now. Donald Trump didn't
Speaker 1: pull the trigger in Atlanta, but Donald Trump certainly was
Speaker 1: responsible for the anger and the fear and the suspicion
Speaker 1: that exists in great degree in this country, much more
Speaker 1: so than ever in the past. And he's not to
Speaker 1: blame for a history of racial strife in this country,
Speaker 1: but he certainly is to be blamed for enhancing it
Speaker 1: with his inaction and his cowardice in addressing it. Blamed
Speaker 1: for this shooting Donald Trump somehow. I mean, you've you've
Speaker 1: got a stretch very far to find a way to
Speaker 1: make this about Donald Trump. This guy had a sex addiction.
Speaker 1: He's clearly deranged, he's clearly evil. But it's because Donald Trump. Really,
Speaker 1: I just want to know, in five years, in ten years,
Speaker 1: when there's another match, there have been mass shootings before this,
Speaker 1: and fortunately they'll be mass shootings after this, will it
Speaker 1: still be Donald Trump's fault? I mean, this is this
Speaker 1: is pathetic. I mean, this isn't a serious argument they're making,
Speaker 1: are they. Well, no, they they think it is. They
Speaker 1: believe this. You know, what's notable is that we're told
Speaker 1: that there's this big spike of attacks on Asian Americans,
Speaker 1: and you know, Asian Americans predominantly sometimes Asians perhaps we're
Speaker 1: in the country who are not citizens, but Asian Americans.
Speaker 1: And it's concerning, and it's wrong and there needs to
Speaker 1: be action taken here, but we don't really hear very
Speaker 1: much about who's responsible for the attacks. And what the
Speaker 1: media then does is they fill in this narrative of oh,
Speaker 1: it's actually white supremacy, and that's what they've been doing
Speaker 1: for the last week or so. There's been a huge
Speaker 1: spike in attacks on I should say huge spike. There's
Speaker 1: been a surgeon attacks on Asians, on assaults against Asians
Speaker 1: in the last year, and most of the attacks that
Speaker 1: you'll see most of the news stories are involving individuals
Speaker 1: who are not white, so it's interesting that white supremacy
Speaker 1: is behind this. In fact, I found a graphic of
Speaker 1: FBI data based on the number of violent incidents against
Speaker 1: people white, Black, Hispanic, and Asian, and then the offender,
Speaker 1: the percentage of offenders, and sure enough, it's it's unsurprising,
Speaker 1: I'm sure for you to hear that most violence occurs
Speaker 1: within ethnic groups. So white people are responsible for most
Speaker 1: violence against white people. Black people are responsible for most
Speaker 1: violence against black people, Hispanic and Asian, the same thing.
Speaker 1: Black assailants, according to this FBI data, are responsible for
Speaker 1: twenty set. This was for twenty eighteen, so this is
Speaker 1: not for even this year in twenty eighteen, responsible for
Speaker 1: twenty seven point five percent I'm sorry, yes, twenty seven
Speaker 1: point five percent of attacks on Asian Americans. So there's
Speaker 1: a spike in that or there's a substantial number there.
Speaker 1: The numbers that you see here here I can give
Speaker 1: you the rest of it. You have Asian Americans twenty
Speaker 1: seven point five percent, Black, twenty four percent White for
Speaker 1: attacks on Asian Americans, Hispanic seven percent, Asian twenty four percent,
Speaker 1: and then other fourteen percent. That's the FBI data on this.
Speaker 1: So the African American population of the United States is
Speaker 1: about thirteen fourteen percent something like that, the single most
Speaker 1: likely perpetrator for violent assaults against Asian Americans, based on
Speaker 1: the FBI data from twenty eighteen. Now we don't have
Speaker 1: this year's data yet, but we're African Americans. That's just
Speaker 1: These are just numbers. These are facts. This is what
Speaker 1: the FBI data compiled says about this. And I think
Speaker 1: it's interesting because we're told and by the way attacks
Speaker 1: on Asians are there is a spread. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: pretty widely distributed. You have Asians attack Agians, if whites
Speaker 1: attack Asians. You have Blacks attacking Asians. You have a
Speaker 1: very small number of Hispanics attacking Asians, but it does happen.
Speaker 1: But we're told that this is all about white supremacy
Speaker 1: and that this is Donald Trump's fault. Well, I mean,
Speaker 1: what's the data, what's the actual support for that in
Speaker 1: the numbers? Why would that be the case? Yes, I
Speaker 1: guess it's possible that a number of the the black
Speaker 1: um and there's recent high profile cases. I mean there
Speaker 1: was somebody was just somebody just killed in San Francisco
Speaker 1: Asian American and what I thought was a hate crime attack,
Speaker 1: and the attackers were two black males, And it's possible
Speaker 1: that they're Trump supported, not saying it's not, but I
Speaker 1: don't think that if we're looking at the likely motive here,
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure that it's not actually Donald Trump that
Speaker 1: has created this mentality. And that's a stretch where you
Speaker 1: could you could say this about any politicians. You start
Speaker 1: blaming whoever you want for any violent act anywhere because
Speaker 1: they're being divisive. Someone saying things that are that are
Speaker 1: divisive can't then be used to claim that a person
Speaker 1: who attacks another human being who breaks the law isn't
Speaker 1: fully responsible. For their actions or isn't you know, shouldn't
Speaker 1: be viewed that their motivation shouldn't be viewed based upon
Speaker 1: the actual circumstances around them. Blame Trump, basic is well,
Speaker 1: this comes down Blame Trump. Oh, and blame white supremacy,
Speaker 1: which we're supposed to believe is everywhere, our whole country
Speaker 1: is is just soaked in white supremacy. Now, what a horrible,
Speaker 1: awful thing, What a terrible way to view the greatest
Speaker 1: nation that has ever existed on the planet. But this
Speaker 1: is what the left believes now. And they'll even take
Speaker 1: a terrible, tragic incident like this and they will use
Speaker 1: it as an opportunity for politics, and that's what they're doing.
Speaker 1: But before I begin, I do want to talk about
Speaker 1: what happened in Georgia, in Atlanta. It is tragic our country,
Speaker 1: the president of nine all of us. We grieve for
Speaker 1: the loss. Our prayers are extended to the families of
Speaker 1: those who have been killed. And it speaks to a
Speaker 1: larger issue, which is the issue of violence in our
Speaker 1: country and what we must do to never tolerated and
Speaker 1: to always speak out against it. The investigation is ongoing.
Speaker 1: We don't yet know, we're not yet clear about the motive,
Speaker 1: But I do want to say to our Asian American
Speaker 1: community that we stand with you and understand how this
Speaker 1: has frightened and shocked and outraged all people. But knowing
Speaker 1: the increasing level of hate crime against our Asian American
Speaker 1: brothers and sisters, we also want to speak out in
Speaker 1: solidarity with them and acknowledge that none of us should
Speaker 1: ever be silent in the face of any form of hate.
Speaker 1: It is true, none of us should ever be silent
Speaker 1: in the face of any form of hate. Hate is
Speaker 1: a terrible thing and is disgusting. I also think it's
Speaker 1: very it's worth noting that we have to have these
Speaker 1: conversations constantly about this from a from a politicized angle,
Speaker 1: instead of using this as an opportunity to bring everybody
Speaker 1: together on our shared common humanity. What you see are
Speaker 1: people immediately retreating into their their preferred political narratives. Gun
Speaker 1: controls another one that comes up out of this, We're
Speaker 1: gonna hear and I haven't seen it quite yet because
Speaker 1: they went with the initial it's Trump, it's white supremacy,
Speaker 1: even though it does seem to be more a in
Speaker 1: cell slash misogynist evil hate lunatic situation. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not a psychiatrist. I don't know how to specifically
Speaker 1: diagnose this. But I also think that we have all
Speaker 1: these We're always told to have conversations about this, and
Speaker 1: that's it's fine to have a conversation, and we should
Speaker 1: have conversations about violence in society. But I get the
Speaker 1: sense that Democrats are never really serious about trying to
Speaker 1: address this stuff in a way that's actually going to
Speaker 1: fix anything. It feels like the immediate discussion switches very
Speaker 1: quickly to attacking political opponents to attacking political enemies. It's
Speaker 1: like the Donald Trump situation. They go right after Trump
Speaker 1: people are shot. It's a terrible situation in Atlanta. You
Speaker 1: have an evil individual acting with hateful motives. It's white
Speaker 1: supremacy and Donald Trump. Right away, it'll turn into gun
Speaker 1: control and you'll be hearing pundits going on TV saying
Speaker 1: for for quite some time after this that this goes
Speaker 1: in a sense, this incident goes in a column alongside,
Speaker 1: you know, other incidents that everybody who's supportive of Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: for example, or everybody who doesn't agree with critical race
Speaker 1: theory is responsible for at some level, Right that's what
Speaker 1: will be said, that's what will actually happen here. And
Speaker 1: you'll notice that with the attempted mass assassination of members
Speaker 1: of Congress in twenty eighteen by Bernie Sanders support order,
Speaker 1: it was not, in fact create it did not create
Speaker 1: a whole narrative of the Democrats because they dehumanize Republicans
Speaker 1: because they say that Republicans don't want they don't want
Speaker 1: people to have healthcare, they don't care about people dying.
Speaker 1: I mean, the guy was actually firing off an AAR
Speaker 1: fifteen it members of Congress yelling this, you know, this
Speaker 1: is for healthcare. That's what rand Paul said who was there.
Speaker 1: But that doesn't go on, you know, their moral side
Speaker 1: of the ledger as in terms of something baggage that
Speaker 1: the Democrat the left has to carry. But immediately it
Speaker 1: gets politicized whenever there's an ugly incident, even if it's
Speaker 1: not clear that it ties into the preferred narrative of
Speaker 1: the left, it gets put into this situation. In this circumstance,
Speaker 1: the same way that when you hear about about anti
Speaker 1: Semitic attacks in New York City, we're told they tried
Speaker 1: for a while to say the anti Semitic and that
Speaker 1: was often Orthodox Orthodox Jews who were being attacked on
Speaker 1: the street or being assaulted. And you know Orthodox Jews,
Speaker 1: especially Hasidic Jews, Orthodox Jews that you can tell because
Speaker 1: of their dress and because of their appearance what their
Speaker 1: religious beliefs are. And they're being attacked. And we're told
Speaker 1: initially this is part of the intolerance and the white
Speaker 1: supremacy from Donald Trump, and then it turns out that no,
Speaker 1: it's actually it has in New York City been predominantly minorities,
Speaker 1: black and Latino men who have attacked Orthodox Jewish people
Speaker 1: in these in these anti Semitic taxies, hate crimes. But
Speaker 1: it's still Trump's fault and it's still white supremacy, which
Speaker 1: is It's a fascinating version of events, Isn't it Almost
Speaker 1: like what happens doesn't really matter to the people in
Speaker 1: charge based on the facts. The most important thing is
Speaker 1: how is this leverage for political purposes. It's Harsani time,
Speaker 1: our friend David Harsani in the mix. Go Nashalview dot
Speaker 1: com for his latest mister Harsani, great to have you, sir,
Speaker 1: always great to be here. Thank you. So we have
Speaker 1: a terrible incident that happens in the Atlanta area, a
Speaker 1: mass shooting. You had I believe six of the victims
Speaker 1: were Asian, two or white. The individual who is in custody, whoever,
Speaker 1: is certain, I mean, the guys can fast he's the shooter,
Speaker 1: he's the murderer. Said that he had a sex addiction,
Speaker 1: and this was some kind of I don't know, in
Speaker 1: cell rage, you know, murder spree or something. And yet
Speaker 1: yesterday you had you know, the root an online you know,
Speaker 1: web magazine, website say that this is part of the
Speaker 1: white supremacy pandemic. You had a lot of headlines about
Speaker 1: how this is white supremacy, what is going on here? Well,
Speaker 1: every you know, when everything when when everything is synthesized
Speaker 1: through the prism of racism and race, and you're so
Speaker 1: used to relying on that as as the only kind
Speaker 1: of you know, view of the world, and you think
Speaker 1: everyone functions just like you and sees the world just
Speaker 1: like you. You know you're going to say things like that.
Speaker 1: And it's also, you know, a very easy way to
Speaker 1: make appropriate a tragedy for your own political cause. You
Speaker 1: can bash people that you dislike and blame them for it.
Speaker 1: The world is not that simple. It's almost never that simple,
Speaker 1: and it's certainly in this case it's it's complicated and
Speaker 1: not complicated really in that it is a terrible tragedy
Speaker 1: no matter how you slice it, but it's complicated, and
Speaker 1: who knows why this guy did it. And I sort
Speaker 1: of quickly said, even if he had it, done it
Speaker 1: for some dumb ugly political reason, the way that they
Speaker 1: take that and then blame mainstream Republicans or Donald Trump
Speaker 1: or whatever they're doing, it would still be crazy to
Speaker 1: say that. And now it's just sort of amped up crazy.
Speaker 1: And you know, the people you mentioned aren't the only one.
Speaker 1: I see all these celebrities doing it as well. There's
Speaker 1: no evidence. They can't even wait for any evidence to
Speaker 1: appear before they say stuff like that. It's just insane.
Speaker 1: It's insanity. Well, I mean, by the way, the route
Speaker 1: the magazine actually the title or rather the line that
Speaker 1: got the attention, it wasn't that white supremacy is a pandemic.
Speaker 1: It is whiteness. The quote was whiteness itself is a pandemic.
Speaker 1: I mean, I really do think that this is now
Speaker 1: attacking whiteness as as a concept has become very fashionable
Speaker 1: and a lot of I mean you pointed out to
Speaker 1: celebrities and people in news media. You know, it has
Speaker 1: it's pathetic to watch. But what you'll see are multi
Speaker 1: millionaire white CNN anchors, for example, who go on air
Speaker 1: to bash whiteness because it somehow gets them. But the
Speaker 1: points on the left, it gets them credibility. And to me,
Speaker 1: it just all seems so phony, transparent, idiotic, and also
Speaker 1: really damaging. It's racism. It's real life racism, and I
Speaker 1: judging people by this color of their skin, which doesn't
Speaker 1: mean anything really. I mean that's like it never means
Speaker 1: anything in history, but it doesn't really mean define who
Speaker 1: you are, what you think, or what you do or believe.
Speaker 1: I know a lot of white people I disagree with
Speaker 1: probably most of white people I know, and you know
Speaker 1: we disagree on things. We don't you know, we don't
Speaker 1: share any kind of ideology because we're white. I mean,
Speaker 1: we share an idiology because we believe certain things. So
Speaker 1: it's dangerous and it is all the things that people
Speaker 1: who fought against racism for real in the past fought against,
Speaker 1: and they embrace it. There's you know, it's a big joke.
Speaker 1: I know others have done this and there's memes about it.
Speaker 1: But the right sort of identitarians of the far right
Speaker 1: and far left, they sound almost the same. You just
Speaker 1: have to switch color sometimes, but they sound the same.
Speaker 1: It is the most dangerous I think it's one of
Speaker 1: the most dangerous beliefs in idiologies right now in American philosophies.
Speaker 1: Do you think that some of the people who are
Speaker 1: speaking to David Harsani of National View You can go
Speaker 1: to National Review dot com for his latest David, do
Speaker 1: you think that's that some of the people who are
Speaker 1: professing this from the news media, from from Big Perchase
Speaker 1: on TV, or or you know, well known news or
Speaker 1: journalistic organizations. Do you think they they don't believe it,
Speaker 1: but they just mouth the preferred slogans of the of
Speaker 1: the party orthodoxy Or do you think that this has
Speaker 1: really turned into a a moral panic that has convinced
Speaker 1: you know, you know, does Chris Cuomo really think that
Speaker 1: we're going through a white supremacy pandemic? I mean, does
Speaker 1: you know, does Rachel Maddow really think we're going through
Speaker 1: a white supremacy pandemic? The New York Times editorial board,
Speaker 1: or do they just do this because it's popular right
Speaker 1: now to say this, I don't know, maybe a bit
Speaker 1: of both, but I think increasingly I believe people believe it.
Speaker 1: I think you can convince yourself to believe anything, especially
Speaker 1: when you start dehumanizing people you dislike, which is what
Speaker 1: they're doing. And it's also I mean for someone like Cuomo,
Speaker 1: let's say, you know, he is not an intellectually curious person,
Speaker 1: so this is the easiest thing for him to do
Speaker 1: and to say, and he knows that he'll he'll have
Speaker 1: they'll be accolades for saying it, you know, from from
Speaker 1: people he cares about. He's a privileged life, and he
Speaker 1: doesn't just have a privileged life in the sense that
Speaker 1: he earned some privilege, you know, that he earned it,
Speaker 1: or that he's rich or whatever he you know, he
Speaker 1: inherited it as well. So I'm not sure that he
Speaker 1: guy like that should be able to lecture anyone but
Speaker 1: about that sort of thing. But I think it is
Speaker 1: a world panic as well. You know, I used to
Speaker 1: not think it, but then I see the comments on
Speaker 1: like Twitter and elsewhere, and I think people are so
Speaker 1: tribal and so mad and so hateful of others that
Speaker 1: they want to bring everything back to something very identifiable
Speaker 1: like color about hating you know, Donald Trump and his
Speaker 1: supporters of pretending that they're all white supremacists. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I've always said that this divisiveness doesn't really exist in
Speaker 1: the world itself as much as it does on you know,
Speaker 1: social media. But it worries me more and more that
Speaker 1: this ends in some really ugly and bad way, or
Speaker 1: it doesn't end but becomes something much uglier. And this
Speaker 1: kind of rhetoric is just terrible. Now. I don't blame people,
Speaker 1: you know, they want to make political arguments. I'm a
Speaker 1: free speech guy, that's for sure, but I think that
Speaker 1: people are really thinking through what they're saying. Now, David,
Speaker 1: I wanted to switch to the filibuster because I think
Speaker 1: that the thing that conservatives and Republicans have had to
Speaker 1: learn and in the last few months that they didn't
Speaker 1: already know it beforehand, which maybe a lot of people
Speaker 1: did in their own way, is that double standards are
Speaker 1: that that's not even something the left there they don't care,
Speaker 1: don't feel sheepish about it, they don't pretend they don't
Speaker 1: have double standards. They just, you know, when they can
Speaker 1: do something, they want to do it, and I think
Speaker 1: that what we see with the talk of filibuster reform,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is just laughable. But it's putting the
Speaker 1: smallest of fig leafs over what would be if they
Speaker 1: do it. And I believe they are going to try
Speaker 1: to do it. I don't know if they'll be successful,
Speaker 1: but I believe they will try to do this. What
Speaker 1: would be an enormously consequential change to our Congress and
Speaker 1: how it functions. I mean, and they act like it's
Speaker 1: there's some emergency, some reason it must happen. Now. We
Speaker 1: can't have obstructionism from the White House, I mean from
Speaker 1: the Republicans. Rather, that's what the White House is saying.
Speaker 1: This just seems like the most obvious stuff. David. Can
Speaker 1: you imagine complaining about obstructionism a less than a week
Speaker 1: after he signed a two trillion dollar bill that was
Speaker 1: filled with all kinds of goodies for yourself. I mean,
Speaker 1: it is just it is the most ridiculous thing I've
Speaker 1: ever heard. But there are three things about this. One,
Speaker 1: of course, it's a huge double standard. There are a
Speaker 1: massive hypocrites. They used it, They used the filibuster Morgan's
Speaker 1: Donald Trump in one term that then any president has
Speaker 1: ever had to deal with and that's fine. They should
Speaker 1: be able to do that, but they don't care. It's
Speaker 1: and ends justifies the means argument that they make. The
Speaker 1: second one, of course, is that if they undo this filibuster,
Speaker 1: which to me would be the worst thing they could
Speaker 1: possibly do that I can imagine because it would allow
Speaker 1: a slim majority to essentially pass gigantic federal direct democracy bills,
Speaker 1: and the rest of the country, it would I think
Speaker 1: create a lot of anger in a lot of red
Speaker 1: states because there's no consensus, no by genuine debate. You
Speaker 1: saw how that stimulus was passed, and imagine that over
Speaker 1: and over again. It is just to me, I'm a
Speaker 1: real big process guy, and I know that's boring, and
Speaker 1: I know people don't care that much about it, but
Speaker 1: the stimulus is one of the few and it's not
Speaker 1: in the Constitution, but it is one of the few
Speaker 1: things still preserving the Temp Amendment and some basic federalism.
Speaker 1: The filibuster. You mean, yeah, the filibuster. Sorry. So the
Speaker 1: last thing, though, is I'm not I don't. I'm very
Speaker 1: worried that it's going to happen, but it might not.
Speaker 1: I don't understand really why they're even bringing it up
Speaker 1: as much when they don't even have the votes to
Speaker 1: pass the bills they would need it for. They don't
Speaker 1: have the votes for a minimum wage. They don't have
Speaker 1: the votes yet as far as I know, for a
Speaker 1: for any of the big bills, for HR one, for
Speaker 1: anything they want to do. Maybe they have it for
Speaker 1: some sort of gun control bill on a universal background checks,
Speaker 1: But is Mansion going to destroy the filibuster over a
Speaker 1: bill that gets them what is not a very big deal.
Speaker 1: I mean, I know they pretend that there aren't background checks,
Speaker 1: but most guns are background checks. So I don't know.
Speaker 1: We'll see what happens, but I really hope it doesn't.
Speaker 1: David Arsani everybody go to nash Review dot com to
Speaker 1: read his latest there. David always appreciate a buddy. Talk
Speaker 1: to you soon. Thank you, talk too soon. Well, the
Speaker 1: situation on the ground is certainly challenging, in part because
Speaker 1: we inherited it, dismantled system that wasn't prepared for processing
Speaker 1: asylum requests that had left in place the remain in
Speaker 1: Mesic Mexico program. Yeah, it's because the people befouri You see,
Speaker 1: they did a bad job. That's why. That's why we
Speaker 1: are being told there's a massive crisis at the border.
Speaker 1: We don't actually believe that. We know that's absurd, we
Speaker 1: know that's ridiculous, but that is what Jensaki is saying,
Speaker 1: and that's going to be the official line of Bide
Speaker 1: administration because with thirteen thousand miners, that's right, that's the
Speaker 1: latest number you've seen, thirteen thousand unaccompanied miners now in custody.
Speaker 1: They have got a problem here, They've got a problem.
Speaker 1: Why is this the that's the most I think that
Speaker 1: we've ever seen for un accompanied minors. Why are they
Speaker 1: all coming right now? Because the things that the Trump
Speaker 1: administration did to gain control of the border, the Biden
Speaker 1: administration immediately came into office and right away undid them.
Speaker 1: That's going to cause a problem. Right when you come
Speaker 1: in when something has been fixed and you unfix it,
Speaker 1: you're back to where you were beforehand. And that is
Speaker 1: what anybody who's being honest sees here. But of course
Speaker 1: the Democrats are not honest about this, and they will
Speaker 1: continue to just be absolutely full of it because this
Speaker 1: is a problem for them. And here's the White House
Speaker 1: Border Coordinator ROBERTA. Jacobson on well, well before I get
Speaker 1: to what she says. Do you really think that they're
Speaker 1: going to let people see these facilities? Do you think
Speaker 1: that they're going to this is our own federal government, now,
Speaker 1: this is your tax dollars at work. You believe they're
Speaker 1: really gonna allow for transparency. You think that they're going
Speaker 1: to allow people from the press to get access to
Speaker 1: what's going on. Are they going to get numbers? Are
Speaker 1: they going to have members of Border Patrol and Immigrations
Speaker 1: and Customs Enforcement who will tell them what's really going on,
Speaker 1: who will speak to them about all of this. Nope,
Speaker 1: there is a lockdown. I've already heard about about this.
Speaker 1: There is a total shutdown of communication between members a
Speaker 1: lot of members of the press, especially if you're identified
Speaker 1: as being from a conservative outlet. I mean, they're they're
Speaker 1: just going to give you the runaround. This is how
Speaker 1: it works if you want to talk. And I'm going
Speaker 1: through this right now because I'm trying to set up
Speaker 1: a border trip in the next couple of weeks. I'm
Speaker 1: trying to get down there myself and we're trying to
Speaker 1: set up conversations with members of Border Patrol, Immigrations and
Speaker 1: Customs Enforcement, and as we do that. A lot of
Speaker 1: the time, what happens is there's just no response. What
Speaker 1: do you mean? This is the communications shop, right, this
Speaker 1: is the public affairs office of Border Patrol for a
Speaker 1: certain sector. I'm from a media organization. I've a nationally
Speaker 1: syndicated radio show. Can I can I get somebody to
Speaker 1: tell me if I can get an interview or sit
Speaker 1: down or at least some data. Nothing, you get non responses.
Speaker 1: What's that all about? Now? This is the kind of
Speaker 1: situation where I know that as this, they can only
Speaker 1: do this for so long, and then what they'll start
Speaker 1: to do is give minimal response. They'll give you the running.
Speaker 1: There are a million ways the bureaucracy can play. We
Speaker 1: won't be held accountable game. We're not going to give
Speaker 1: you the facts and data you need a lot of
Speaker 1: ways that that happened. And by the way, I don't
Speaker 1: blame Boarder Patrol, Immigrations and Customs enforcement. This is from
Speaker 1: the federal government at the very top. This from the
Speaker 1: Biden White House telling them this. But you've had NBC
Speaker 1: News reporting on it, you'd You've had many others who
Speaker 1: are saying, hey, they're just not giving us the information.
Speaker 1: They're just not giving us access. So how can we
Speaker 1: cover this crisis that the government is in the middle
Speaker 1: of it and supposed to be handling when government entities
Speaker 1: are saying, you don't get the numbers, you don't get
Speaker 1: the access you need for this. Here is for example,
Speaker 1: well here is ROBERTA. Jackson talking about Jacobson rather talking
Speaker 1: about exactly this place. Six. I also think that it's
Speaker 1: really important that we be setting about the task of
Speaker 1: moving children to appropriate places. We're not hiding anything. We
Speaker 1: do want to be sure that the story is told transparently.
Speaker 1: But we're also in a situation of urgent need for
Speaker 1: children and need to move children, and that has to
Speaker 1: take first priority. Not a lack of transparency. No, no,
Speaker 1: of course not. The Bide administration would never do that.
Speaker 1: Bide administration is all about presenting you with things that
Speaker 1: are really happening. Remember this is an administration that is
Speaker 1: the whole thing is a facade. The whole situation is
Speaker 1: the emperor has no clothes and they're all walking around
Speaker 1: acting like the guy who's naked. And now you're thinking
Speaker 1: about the emperor being Joe Biden. Walking around with no
Speaker 1: clothes is kind of a weird image, but you get
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. That they're telling you that he is
Speaker 1: able to run the country and be the leader of
Speaker 1: the free world. We all know that's ridiculous. But that's
Speaker 1: just the first of many lies. That's the first of
Speaker 1: many things that you're you're going to be told for
Speaker 1: the next four years or until they decide that somebody
Speaker 1: else needs to take over for him. And everything else
Speaker 1: that you see should be through this prism of understanding
Speaker 1: that they're not telling you the truth. There is a
Speaker 1: fundamental dishonesty at work here from this administration. On the
Speaker 1: border issues, on a whole lot of issues. They say
Speaker 1: that this is a crisis they inherited. That's a lie.
Speaker 1: They say that they are being transparent, that's a lie.
Speaker 1: They say that they want the immigration, the illegal immigration
Speaker 1: problem to stop. That's a lie. They say that they're
Speaker 1: trying to apply the rule of law. That's a lie.
Speaker 1: I mean, you go down the list. They say that
Speaker 1: these are people that are gonna that that should be
Speaker 1: heard for asylum and they will show up for their hearings,
Speaker 1: that everything is fine. That's a lie. How much of
Speaker 1: it can you withstand? How much of us are you
Speaker 1: supposed to? Are you supposed to hear before you say
Speaker 1: they can't be trusted on any of these issues, and
Speaker 1: the truth is they can't. I think I think you
Speaker 1: already see that. I think you already understand this. Oh,
Speaker 1: but Biden's not going to visit the border because he's
Speaker 1: taking action. I mean, does this work with other crises
Speaker 1: when a Republican doesn't go if there's a big storm
Speaker 1: or if there's a problem, if a Republican president is
Speaker 1: not there while it's still happening, he's heartless and he's
Speaker 1: awful and he's But Joe Biden can't get, you know,
Speaker 1: on Air Force one to go on a quick flight
Speaker 1: down to the southern border to see what's happening, because
Speaker 1: Jensaki wants you to believe he's taking so much action.
Speaker 1: Play nine. The President said yesterday he does not have
Speaker 1: plans to visit the border. Why not, because his focus
Speaker 1: is on action and taking actions and moving forward policies
Speaker 1: to ensure we are expediting the processing at the order
Speaker 1: that we are opening more facilities, that we are putting
Speaker 1: in place, policies that will move kids more quickly through
Speaker 1: the border patrol facilities more quickly into safe and secure homes.
Speaker 1: And that's where his focus is. Yeah, he's just getting
Speaker 1: it done. That's right, Joe Biden. He's a guy who
Speaker 1: gets things done. Nobody believes this, but they like to
Speaker 1: lie to your face and smile knowing that the media
Speaker 1: is going to back them up, and that this is
Speaker 1: the ultimate gas lighting, is that Joe Biden should be,
Speaker 1: is capable of and will be a competent presidence of
Speaker 1: the United States. No one really believes this. No one
Speaker 1: really thinks this can be true. Who has good judgment,
Speaker 1: who pays attention, and who knows what's going on. Even
Speaker 1: the media knows it's a lie, but they don't care
Speaker 1: because he's not the one really making the decisions. Well,
Speaker 1: what the president is not willing to do, Halle, is
Speaker 1: to allow progress and to allow benefits the herd of
Speaker 1: people to be help hostage in the process. And so
Speaker 1: they're going to be conversations. They're going to be conversations,
Speaker 1: and he's open to hearing different ideas. At the end
Speaker 1: of the day, his goal is to ensure that we
Speaker 1: can get things done for the American people, and he's
Speaker 1: open to a discussion about what that look. So it
Speaker 1: sounds like what I'm hearing you say, is the door
Speaker 1: is not shut for the potential for the President to
Speaker 1: throw his weight and throw his support behind eliminating that
Speaker 1: sixty vote threshold. Is that fair, he said many times
Speaker 1: that's not That's not his preference. But he is interested
Speaker 1: in the conversations that are happening. There are a lot
Speaker 1: of different ideas out there. He again, as you said yesterday,
Speaker 1: signals is openness to reverting to the talking filibuster. So
Speaker 1: he's open to the conversation. The preference is to continue
Speaker 1: to work in a bipartisan manner because he thinks that
Speaker 1: we're stronger and we're better served when we're coming together
Speaker 1: and working across the aisle. That's always going to be
Speaker 1: a preference. But he is open to ideas, and we'll
Speaker 1: see how that conversation developed. Yeah, we'll see how the
Speaker 1: conversation about nuke and the filibuster goes. Here. Nice Senate
Speaker 1: rules he got there. Conn'll be a shame if something
Speaker 1: happened to it. That's how the Democrats play the game.
Speaker 1: This is White House. What if she comes director Kate
Speaker 1: Bettingfield on the filibuster? Will it go away? You know,
Speaker 1: it really depends do Republicans do everything we want. If
Speaker 1: the answers no, we might have to get rid of
Speaker 1: that filibuster. You know, do Republicans cave, do they bend
Speaker 1: the knee? If not, they're making us we don't want
Speaker 1: to do it. Oh no, they don't want to do it,
Speaker 1: of course. No, no, no, they don't want to do
Speaker 1: that anything with that. Don't want to get with the filibuster.
Speaker 1: But sure enough, that is on the table. That is
Speaker 1: a situation. That is the circumstance that we see. And
Speaker 1: if they go with it, if they go all out
Speaker 1: and design that they're going to to get rid of
Speaker 1: the filibuster, I want to be very clear that we're
Speaker 1: in for a rough ride until at least the mid
Speaker 1: terms because the Democrats are talking a very big game
Speaker 1: here about the kind of things that they want to
Speaker 1: get done. They want to do. We're talking about a
Speaker 1: trillion to two trillion dollar infrastructure package. Oh, I'm sure
Speaker 1: that's going to be really efficient and well that's not
Speaker 1: going to be a huge giveaway to the unions and no, no,
Speaker 1: of course not. Oh my gosh. Really, what they see
Speaker 1: this as as an opportunity to use the public public purse,
Speaker 1: to use the Treasury Department to shore up and buy
Speaker 1: off and strengthen the Democrat Party's political position, and to
Speaker 1: just use taxpayer dollars to do it. That's that's how
Speaker 1: Democrats get it all done. That's that's their view. Look
Speaker 1: at what they did with at one point nine trillion
Speaker 1: dollars spending package. They gave all this money to cities
Speaker 1: and states, Blue states and cities, many of which were
Speaker 1: running huge deficits and having all kinds of financial problems
Speaker 1: before COVID. But they just want to funnel them a
Speaker 1: lot of money. They want to They want to use
Speaker 1: the taxpayers as a bailout for poorly run Democrat enclaves.
Speaker 1: And that's what's going on here. But yeah, getting rid
Speaker 1: of the filibuster is something that they're they're very much considering.
Speaker 1: Depends on I think that with the phrase that the
Speaker 1: White House Comments Director there said was being held a
Speaker 1: hostage to the process. Oh so when the process doesn't
Speaker 1: give you the outcome you want. The Democrat version of
Speaker 1: this is you're being held hostage to it. Oh Okay,
Speaker 1: isn't that fascinating. You know, if you don't get what
Speaker 1: you want out of this, you get to destroy the process.
Speaker 1: Because Democrats say so that's what they're that's what they're pushing.
Speaker 1: What that's what they're trying to do. It's stunning. Here
Speaker 1: is oh speaking of the of the Senate. I thought
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell had a pretty good line here. It reminds
Speaker 1: me of what somebody on this show, namely me, said
Speaker 1: a few days ago, which is it's it's so not
Speaker 1: a crisis at the border. It's not an emergency, but
Speaker 1: you have to send the federal Emergency Management Agency down there.
Speaker 1: Here is what he said, play thirteen. My definition for
Speaker 1: a crisis is when you send the Emergency Management Agency,
Speaker 1: which only goes to emergencies, down to the border, it is,
Speaker 1: by definition an emergency. This administration walked away from the
Speaker 1: policy the previous administration was able to negotiate with the
Speaker 1: Evectionum government where people are detained on the other side
Speaker 1: of the border. They got rid of the solution. Hence
Speaker 1: the creation of the surge, the crisis, the emergency, whatever
Speaker 1: you want to call it. That the lawlessness that is
Speaker 1: rampant down there. Now, all of it. We see what
Speaker 1: happened here. We're all aware of how we got to
Speaker 1: this point. But they're going to keep lying to you. Better.
Speaker 1: They're going to keep pretending that there's some other reason,
Speaker 1: some other rationale for all of this, and we just
Speaker 1: have to keep fighting back against the lines. I mean
Speaker 1: the Biden administrate. Biden said at so many times during
Speaker 1: all this that there was that he was going to
Speaker 1: do this essentially. I mean, he made it very clear
Speaker 1: to anybody who was watching that one of his goals
Speaker 1: and all this was to make the border a more
Speaker 1: hospitable at a better place for people to come to illegally, right.
Speaker 1: I mean that that's really been a central, essential theme
Speaker 1: of everything that he has said on the immigration issue.
Speaker 1: And I think it's important that everybody understand that if
Speaker 1: you go back and you watch, you listen, you hear
Speaker 1: about it, there is nothing there is nothing surprising about
Speaker 1: this outcome. There there is nothing even a little bit um,
Speaker 1: you know, out of out of what was promised here,
Speaker 1: there's nothing out of line. You know. This is that
Speaker 1: that Biden is getting what he should have based on
Speaker 1: the things that he was saying about the border. And
Speaker 1: that's what that's just where we are with all this.
Speaker 1: They can try to tell you other things as much
Speaker 1: as they want, it's total nonsense. And then of course
Speaker 1: there's the pushing on HR one two, which is another place.
Speaker 1: I don't think they're going to go for breaking the
Speaker 1: filibuster on this one. But you know, if you're looking
Speaker 1: for someone who's going to be particularly smarmy, disingenuous, and dishonest,
Speaker 1: I think it's hard to do better than Senator Chuck Schumer.
Speaker 1: Here he is on what HR one's all about and why, Well,
Speaker 1: really Republicans oppose HR one and you know what that means.
Speaker 1: They don't want people voting, he says, play fifteen. These
Speaker 1: bills sadly are aimed at Americans of color, Black Americans, Latinos,
Speaker 1: Native Americans. Despicably, efforts to target these historic disenfranchised communities
Speaker 1: have become a central component of the electoral strategy of
Speaker 1: one of America's major political parties. Shame on them. Shame
Speaker 1: is infuriating, infuriating that they are when you lose an election,
Speaker 1: you're supposed to win over the people you lost, not
Speaker 1: stop them from voting. That is unairb American, autocratic, and
Speaker 1: against the fundamentals of our democracy. But this is happening
Speaker 1: in states all across the country, all across the country.
Speaker 1: Maybe the most reprehensible effort is underway in Georgia, where
Speaker 1: state Republicans are trying to limit absentee and mail in voting,
Speaker 1: make it harder to post a ballot by dropbox, and
Speaker 1: disallowing early voting on Sunday, a day when many church
Speaker 1: going African Americans participate in voter drives. Does anyone in
Speaker 1: this on the other side of the I'll think taking
Speaker 1: Sunday way voting in Georgia is not bigoted? What's the rationale?
Speaker 1: Stop it? If you want to stand for equality and justice,
Speaker 1: why not early voting for six months? I just want why?
Speaker 1: Why not early running for six months? Let's ask the
Speaker 1: question of Chuck Schumer. How about that? Why why even
Speaker 1: even pretend that you know which? The whole thing should
Speaker 1: just be on the honor system. I'm a drop box
Speaker 1: is basically the honor system, right, I mean, you know
Speaker 1: you'll leave it, you drop it in there. No one
Speaker 1: knows you, know who you are, what you dropped off,
Speaker 1: you know, but there you go. Why have any rules
Speaker 1: about elections? Whats Why have an age restriction? That's not fair?
Speaker 1: You know they're they're twelve year olds who have ideas too.
Speaker 1: Why not twelve year olds vote? We know, the Democrats
Speaker 1: are already advocating this is real for sixteen year olds
Speaker 1: to vote? Why not twelve year olds? At some point
Speaker 1: they're agreed upon rules, and the rules are in force
Speaker 1: so that we're on an equal playing field in an election.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are the ones who want to keep changing
Speaker 1: the rules. States are supposed to be able to conduct
Speaker 1: elections in the way that the state legislature sees fit.
Speaker 1: That's how this is supposed to happen. And yet they
Speaker 1: want a national lies election process through HR one, And
Speaker 1: because Republicans won't go along with it, the Democrats are
Speaker 1: screaming about about things being about it being a bigotted situation, right,
Speaker 1: that's what they say. Every every voter restriction. Notice how
Speaker 1: whether it's I D, whether it's not allowing votes to
Speaker 1: come in after voting day after election day, voting day, sorry,
Speaker 1: election day, that's a problem too. Well, you know, when
Speaker 1: you when you start to work through this, when you
Speaker 1: start to actually look at it and ask the questions
Speaker 1: and understand what's going on, you see that as far
Speaker 1: as they're concerned, there can be there's no rule that
Speaker 1: can't be changing the election. Why why one person, one vote?
Speaker 1: You know, we've got what about disenfranchised groups? Why not
Speaker 1: count some groups as having two votes? Doesn't seem like
Speaker 1: it's that far away from what the left seems to
Speaker 1: believe these days anyway, Right, Why why not have some
Speaker 1: people have you know, they have additional voting time, but
Speaker 1: other people don't. I mean, they just they will blow
Speaker 1: out the rule book, do whatever they can, do whatever
Speaker 1: they want to do, as long as the final election
Speaker 1: result is that they win. We all see it. We're
Speaker 1: all very aware of this. But it worked against Trump
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty. And men they want to hold on
Speaker 1: in those midterms to the power they currently have. They
Speaker 1: think that they between now and the next presidential election,
Speaker 1: they think they'll be able to fundamentally transform the country,
Speaker 1: something that Barack Obama promised during his term. He put
Speaker 1: it on a pathway to transformation. And now Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: supposed to take us, take us all the way to
Speaker 1: whatever that transformation is going to be. I think you're
Speaker 1: getting a sense of it. Censorship, social justice, and socialism,
Speaker 1: that's pretty much gonna be that those are the defining
Speaker 1: characteristics of the new America that the Democrat Party is
Speaker 1: trying to create. Welcome today, three sixty seven of fifteen
Speaker 1: days to slow the spread. Proponents of the economic lockdowns
Speaker 1: promised it would be US fifteen days to flatten the
Speaker 1: curve instead of fifteen days. The lockdown has now gone
Speaker 1: on for over a year. Early on in the pandemic,
Speaker 1: as we all remember, there were projections that hospitals would
Speaker 1: be full and have to turn away people. Medical equipment
Speaker 1: was in short supply. Businesses were closing what they hoped
Speaker 1: would be on a temporary basis as government started locking
Speaker 1: down their economies and telling people to stay home. At
Speaker 1: that time, when programs like PPP were created, no one
Speaker 1: was under the belief that we would still be doing
Speaker 1: this a year later with no end in sight. This
Speaker 1: is something that we cannot let go without a real
Speaker 1: repudiation of the ideology, the mindset behind this, the idea
Speaker 1: that the government that it was okay to say, just
Speaker 1: do this for fifteen days and then extend it and
Speaker 1: extend it and extend it and then bring it back
Speaker 1: and then, you know, and then then bring it down
Speaker 1: a little bit, then bring it back, then dial it
Speaker 1: down a little bit, then bring it back for what
Speaker 1: for what? What was the benefit of this? Governor Rhonda
Speaker 1: Santis says lockdowns do not work. It's a governor of
Speaker 1: a state of twenty one million people and he's straight
Speaker 1: up telling you they don't work. But yet we're still
Speaker 1: in a lockdown here in New York City. You still
Speaker 1: have all these restrictions in place. It's utter, utter madness.
Speaker 1: What has happened to this country? The greatest threat to
Speaker 1: our freedom in my life, on the greatest restrictions on
Speaker 1: our freedom in my life. Nothing else like this has
Speaker 1: ever happened. It's not since since I've been on the earth,
Speaker 1: going on forty years here, folks, And guess what what
Speaker 1: we see is that the authoritarian left and a mass
Speaker 1: hysteria mixed with mass media created this willingness in so
Speaker 1: much of the population to just do what they're told,
Speaker 1: no matter how stupid it is. I mean, I was
Speaker 1: at a day, I was at dinner last night. I
Speaker 1: went out with the snow Princess and a friend of hers,
Speaker 1: and we're at dinner last night, and I'm telling you,
Speaker 1: I sat down. There's no one around us. Where at
Speaker 1: the table, is no one anywhere near us. I sat down,
Speaker 1: and I know, Okay, I gotta go downstairs, gotta have
Speaker 1: to go use the restroom. I stand up, I have
Speaker 1: my mask in my hand, you know, and I'm unfolding
Speaker 1: it to put it up to my mouth, and a
Speaker 1: server comes sort of, you know, running over to me
Speaker 1: and says, excuse me, you really need to have your
Speaker 1: mask on, and I'm like, you know, man, I'm obviously
Speaker 1: doing it. This is obviously moronic, All right, can you
Speaker 1: just but no? He's probably he probably watches a lot
Speaker 1: of CNN with the with the COVID ticker at the bottom,
Speaker 1: and oh my gosh, if we only massed up, we'd
Speaker 1: all be okay, you know. And I feel, on the
Speaker 1: one hand, I get angry. The other hand, I feel
Speaker 1: badly for people like this that they go through life
Speaker 1: with such a cloud of fear and anxiety all the time.
Speaker 1: And doctor Alita, when this woman was formerly the head
Speaker 1: of Planned Parenthood, and then they got rid of her
Speaker 1: because she wasn't enough of a you have to be
Speaker 1: an abortion zealot to run Planned parent You have to
Speaker 1: think that abortion is something to be celebrated, which is
Speaker 1: a truly just appalling, an awful thing. But she was
Speaker 1: not to some shred of I guess credit on her behalf.
Speaker 1: She was not enough of an abortion extremist for planned parenthood,
Speaker 1: so they pushed her aside. And here, I mean, really,
Speaker 1: the people that have run Planned parent in the past,
Speaker 1: if they're ghoulish, I mean they're they're awful human beings. Anyway,
Speaker 1: here she is though, she's a doctor, so they put
Speaker 1: her on She's a doctor who's famous, so they put
Speaker 1: her on TV telling us we're going to see a
Speaker 1: surge in COVID infections. Play five. Unfortunately, Chris, I think
Speaker 1: that we are on the cusp of that fourth surge
Speaker 1: that we've been dreading. And we see that you mentioned
Speaker 1: fifteen or so states that are seeing an increase in
Speaker 1: the number of actions already. We're also increasing over a
Speaker 1: high baseline of infections, and we have the variable that
Speaker 1: we now have these more transmissible variants becoming dominant here
Speaker 1: in the US very quickly. Okay, we keep hearing this
Speaker 1: about the variants, we keep hearing this about the surge.
Speaker 1: We have to tune these individuals out. You have to
Speaker 1: stop listening them, folks. I'm telling you I I just
Speaker 1: interviewed the governor of Mississippi, Governor Reeves, yesterday for my
Speaker 1: TV show on the first and I said, how are
Speaker 1: your number, you've reopened. How are your numbers? How's it
Speaker 1: all looking? Who wants to guess? Are things looking terrible?
Speaker 1: Are things all going in the right direction, It's all
Speaker 1: going to be fine. Are things pretty much working as
Speaker 1: planned there with the reopen or are they about to
Speaker 1: go into a second lockdown because of the huge surgeon cases.
Speaker 1: We all can guess things are fine. The cases are
Speaker 1: still going down. They got rid, they got rid of
Speaker 1: additional restrictions, and it hasn't changed the trajectory toward lower
Speaker 1: and lower case load hospitalizations and deaths. Now, when that's
Speaker 1: the case, a normal approach, a scientific approach, would be
Speaker 1: look at the data and then turn around and look
Speaker 1: at what's going on because of these restrictions. And when
Speaker 1: those restrictions go away, if the data tells you that
Speaker 1: you're still getting the same kind of numbers in terms
Speaker 1: of reduction, what were the restrictions doing for you? Not
Speaker 1: allowed to think about it this way, not allowed to
Speaker 1: approach it in that manner. This is a religious belief. Now,
Speaker 1: restrictions work because they work, and if you challenge it,
Speaker 1: you don't take the virus seriously. What do we make
Speaker 1: of the political conversation out there in the aftermath of
Speaker 1: this a terrible shooting, this mash shooting the Atlanta area.
Speaker 1: We want to talk about that and if we also
Speaker 1: get a chance to ask about the change in critical
Speaker 1: race theory in the closs Us rooms in Florida. From
Speaker 1: our friend down in Florida, formerly of the NYPD, mister
Speaker 1: John Cardillo. He is also a conservative commentator, TV and
Speaker 1: radio host. John Great to have you, always good to
Speaker 1: be with you, Buck. How's it going, good Man? So, John,
Speaker 1: you know you because you work in law enforcement side.
Speaker 1: You're familiar with you know, hate Crime task Force, and
Speaker 1: you know FBI statistics on this and and right now
Speaker 1: we're being told that there's a there's a particular there's
Speaker 1: a particular moment where it seems Asian Americans are being
Speaker 1: the target of hate crime attacks. But there's an immediate
Speaker 1: shift to this is Donald Trump's fault and it's white supremacy.
Speaker 1: What do you make of this? Well, it's nonsense, right,
Speaker 1: So all this is stemming from this horrible series mass
Speaker 1: shootings in Atlanta. But investigators knew pretty quickly that the shooter,
Speaker 1: the killer wasn't motivated at all by race, but instead
Speaker 1: blamed Asian and a couple of whites were shot as well.
Speaker 1: Blamed sex workers for his sex addiction. This just looks
Speaker 1: to be a really disturbed guy. He went out and
Speaker 1: he targeted sex workers, He targeted Asian massage parlors, slash prothels.
Speaker 1: It looks like that's the working investigative theory and the
Speaker 1: track they're going down. And those people within happen to
Speaker 1: be Asian. They happen to be the people that were
Speaker 1: running and working in those establishments. The narrative that the
Speaker 1: left is trying to spin though, that white supremacy is
Speaker 1: now attacking Asians is because even some center left to
Speaker 1: left leaning outlets of the last couple of months have
Speaker 1: acknowledged a nationwide problem. And that's and this isn't a
Speaker 1: John Cardillo opinion or a Buck Sexton opinion. This is
Speaker 1: verifiable public record crime data. There's been an uptick in
Speaker 1: black on Asian attacks in cities like La San Francisco,
Speaker 1: New York. Now, Buck, remember this goes back in nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety two, the La riots, which were over the Rodney
Speaker 1: King incident. But a byproduct that shook out of that,
Speaker 1: if you remember what they called roof Koreans. All these
Speaker 1: Korean merchants on their rooms with long guns. It's because
Speaker 1: the black community also had this problem with the Korean
Speaker 1: community at the time, gentrifying areas, and they began attacking
Speaker 1: those stores, merchants, people as a byproduct of the riots.
Speaker 1: And so it's just the left way of trying to
Speaker 1: blame everything on Trump been quite supremacy and all these
Speaker 1: fabricated turns. But in the end, then attack wasn't about
Speaker 1: race at all. John, I've got to say, the hatred
Speaker 1: that is being put out there right now for anything
Speaker 1: Trump associated conservative, it hasn't it feels like it hasn't dissipated.
Speaker 1: I mean, the news media is clearly. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: the liberal news media is in this place where they
Speaker 1: haven't gotten used to not having the great boogeyman that
Speaker 1: they can use it to get ratings going. You know,
Speaker 1: CNN has lost I think I saw the headline was
Speaker 1: a million viewers a night on average recently. I don't
Speaker 1: even know they had a million viewers to lose, but
Speaker 1: apparently they do because Trump is no longer in office.
Speaker 1: I worry though that actually, as we see the continued
Speaker 1: absurdity of cognitive cognitively declining Joe Biden in office, that
Speaker 1: the radical left within the Democrat Party is calling the shots.
Speaker 1: There is no unity, there is no good governance from
Speaker 1: this White House or return to normalcy. That the way
Speaker 1: they're gonna they're gonna try to keep their opposition off
Speaker 1: balance is by running these campaigns of anti Trump hate,
Speaker 1: even though he's not president anymore and they're in charge. Yeah, look,
Speaker 1: I think I think it goes even further than that.
Speaker 1: They're running campaigns of anti Trump hate, and they're doing
Speaker 1: it knowingly, maliciously, and intentionally on bad information. The White
Speaker 1: House knows full well if the FBI director is absolutely
Speaker 1: in touch with authorities in the Atlanta area, Atlanta PD,
Speaker 1: Fulton County, whatever the lead agency is, they know full
Speaker 1: well that this was about killing sex workers because this
Speaker 1: guy had a sex addiction and all kinds of psyche problems.
Speaker 1: But what is the administration due today? They lower the
Speaker 1: flags at the White House to half mast, and they imply,
Speaker 1: through Jen Psaki and their media cohorts on the left,
Speaker 1: that they're doing that in solidarity with the Asian community
Speaker 1: against white supremacy. So this is pretty chilling third world
Speaker 1: Banana Republic's type stuff. Buck You've got the White House
Speaker 1: knowingly pushing disinformation. You've got members of Congress having uniformed
Speaker 1: National Guard troops march on Marjorie Jayler Green's office because
Speaker 1: she made a comment about Guam. You've got armed troops
Speaker 1: and razor wire outside the US Capital. I can't think
Speaker 1: of things more Unamerican than what the Biden administration is
Speaker 1: now journeying out twice a day, three times a day.
Speaker 1: It's chilling. Every American should be very concerned right now.
Speaker 1: I remember when Trump pulling or the Trump White House
Speaker 1: pulling a CNN reporter's hard passed meaning that they don't
Speaker 1: have to check in, they can just go in and
Speaker 1: out of the White House at will. Was fascism, was
Speaker 1: a threat to our democracy. Was the worst thing that
Speaker 1: was going on in the country at the time. That
Speaker 1: he would actually have to, just like other people do,
Speaker 1: show an ID, get a visitor's pass. No, no, you can't.
Speaker 1: You can't pull a journalist who's acting like a jackass.
Speaker 1: That was a big deal, and that was the fascism
Speaker 1: of the Trump administration. Biden's administration comes in, they wrap
Speaker 1: the Capitol in fencing and barbed wire, deploy thousands of
Speaker 1: National Guard troops. And then you have official accounts from
Speaker 1: you know, under the under the umbrella of the Pentagon
Speaker 1: going after one of the lone conservative voices out there
Speaker 1: that's really a thorn in the side, that has the
Speaker 1: kind of a kind of you know, magnificant amplification of
Speaker 1: his voice to be a thorn of the side of
Speaker 1: the left, Tucker Carlson, and and they don't seem to
Speaker 1: see that, they don't seem to understand John that if
Speaker 1: if anyone has to be worried about where fascism is
Speaker 1: going to come from it America, it's actually gonna come
Speaker 1: from the left. It's gonna come from the Democrats. Well, look,
Speaker 1: I can't recall it. I mean we, you know people
Speaker 1: we and I say we, I mean us on the right,
Speaker 1: people like you and I and media will mock, will
Speaker 1: beat up on metaphorically, people on the left will We'll
Speaker 1: mock Brian Stelter and Jim Acosta and Jake Tapper for
Speaker 1: their dishonesty. But there's never been as far as I
Speaker 1: could remember. And then you and I are in this
Speaker 1: every day a campaign to cancel, to shame, to threaten
Speaker 1: the families of anybody on the left Look, it's the
Speaker 1: news business is a business. We know most of these
Speaker 1: people are opinion commentators posing as journalists, and we mocked
Speaker 1: them and we critiqued them in the public sphere. But
Speaker 1: what the left does they're doing a Tucker Carlson, what
Speaker 1: they did to people like Laura Logan, what they do
Speaker 1: to anybody that disrupts their narrative that that counters their
Speaker 1: manufactured narrative. Is they really go to hurt these people.
Speaker 1: And I mean that in the physical sense as well.
Speaker 1: But they know Tucker Carlston has a wife and young kids.
Speaker 1: They want to put his address out there, and we
Speaker 1: all know why they want to do that. They love
Speaker 1: to see anti in Black Lives Matter outside of this
Speaker 1: guy's house, threatening him and his family because they hope
Speaker 1: that'll pacify Tucker Carlson and the rest of us into
Speaker 1: fear and into silence. This is the less It's beyond
Speaker 1: fascism at this point. I've been saying for years we've
Speaker 1: been in cultural civil war, ideological civil war two point
Speaker 1: zero for many years now, before Trump, during the Obama
Speaker 1: administration it started, but the Left is the only one
Speaker 1: acknowledging it and fighting and they would love nothing more
Speaker 1: than the criminalize. You're starting to see some of the
Speaker 1: friend far love members of Congress. They want to criminalize
Speaker 1: conservative opinions. They want to equate conservative opinions with criminal
Speaker 1: terroristic threats, and hate speech. I mean, this is really
Speaker 1: bizarre stuff we're living through and buck no one, no one,
Speaker 1: bar a few on the right, too few, far too
Speaker 1: q elective Republicans are opening their mouths, saying a word
Speaker 1: or doing a thing about it, and that's pretty disgraceful
Speaker 1: in itself. We're speaking of John Dillo, formerly of the
Speaker 1: NYPD and a conservative commentator. Follow him on Twitter if
Speaker 1: you don't already at John Cardillo and John. To that end,
Speaker 1: I feel like we don't really have much of a
Speaker 1: CounterPunch of a counter narrative going on right now. I
Speaker 1: think people are really scared, including those who have pretty
Speaker 1: big platforms, of having their sponsors attacked. I think people
Speaker 1: are worried about losing their social media access, which, as
Speaker 1: you know, in our business for a lot of folks,
Speaker 1: you know, there are conservative websites that would go out
Speaker 1: of business in a month if they if they couldn't
Speaker 1: push their content on Facebook. I think that we're going
Speaker 1: through a period where we're we're on defense in ways
Speaker 1: that we've never really even seen before in this country
Speaker 1: on the right in general. Yeah, not only around defense
Speaker 1: in those wages or there was a right, but never
Speaker 1: before have we also had the referees acknowledge that they're
Speaker 1: rigging the game for the other side. And now it's
Speaker 1: playing as day. I mean, they're just coming out and
Speaker 1: staying So how do you fight that? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think conservative outlets are getting smarter. They're making capital
Speaker 1: investments in their own technology infrastructure, local, noncloud based, so
Speaker 1: that they can't be the platform by the Amazon and
Speaker 1: the big guys. But like you say, how do they
Speaker 1: disseminate their content and impart monetize the content to keep
Speaker 1: generating it if they're deplatformed off the facebooks, to Twitters, etc.
Speaker 1: So it's a really really scary place. And you know
Speaker 1: that point book. One of the things that drives me
Speaker 1: nuts is when people say, well, we need a conservative Twitter.
Speaker 1: It's not that easy. It takes years and billions of dollars,
Speaker 1: and the biggest problem is you're not going to have
Speaker 1: enough influencers and enough personalities migrate off of Twitter onto
Speaker 1: a new platform to bring the masses with them to
Speaker 1: make it as powerful as a marketing, advertising and revenue
Speaker 1: generation tools Twitter or Facebook. And so it's a much
Speaker 1: bigger problem than just the platitude of wellow which conservative
Speaker 1: should start a new ABC, then that platitude could ever solve.
Speaker 1: John I also wanted to ask about you know, I
Speaker 1: don't like to do too much of the you know,
Speaker 1: ra Ron descentis because I feel like I leave out
Speaker 1: a lot of the rest of the country. But I
Speaker 1: gotta be honest with you. A lot of us see
Speaker 1: what's going on down in Florida, we say okay. So
Speaker 1: he kept the state open despite all the pressure and
Speaker 1: came out came out the big winner in terms of
Speaker 1: leadership from the pandemic. He is trying to protect free
Speaker 1: speech on these social media platforms by pushing for state
Speaker 1: laws that will create essentially a protected class for conservatives
Speaker 1: on platforms that are operating at least in the state
Speaker 1: of Florida. And now he's even saying that he's getting
Speaker 1: rid of critical race theory from classrooms in Florida. Is
Speaker 1: this the model you think that other conservative governors are
Speaker 1: going to start to wake up and understood. Republican governors
Speaker 1: will wake up and understand that needs to be followed.
Speaker 1: What do you see happening? Yeah, I mean, if they
Speaker 1: want to win, it's the model. You know. The most
Speaker 1: interesting thing about Ron De Santis is what many of
Speaker 1: us here who backed him thought was going to be
Speaker 1: a maze. Your weakness became his greatest strength. And it's
Speaker 1: that he was a relatively weak retailed Kennedy because he
Speaker 1: didn't care about being loved. But man as a governor,
Speaker 1: when when the rubber meets the road, it's become his
Speaker 1: greatest strength because the guy doesn't care about being loved.
Speaker 1: He looks at things with a very brilliant, brilliant guy
Speaker 1: de Santus academically, analytically, and he looked at these things
Speaker 1: through that analytical lens. And when it doesn't make sense
Speaker 1: to him, like mask mandates and locking businesses down and
Speaker 1: slanted critical race theory, he has no qualms about saying, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're getting rid of this because this makes no sense.
Speaker 1: And the paraphrase him, it's not getting a penny attacks
Speaker 1: payer of dollars. And so, yeah, I think if Republicans
Speaker 1: want to get elected, they need to start following the
Speaker 1: RHN De santiss and Christy nomes of the world in
Speaker 1: terms of how they're handling their states. And I gotta say,
Speaker 1: just before let you go, John, I don't know if
Speaker 1: you saw the photo circulating of John Kerry on an
Speaker 1: American Airlines flight in first class, no mask on, not
Speaker 1: even aun you know, not even like down around his
Speaker 1: chin or anything, just there, no mask visible anywhere, just
Speaker 1: on the plane. This just goes to by theory you
Speaker 1: and I've talked about this, the people that are the
Speaker 1: most sanctimonious about telling everybody to mask up are the
Speaker 1: ones that derive the most joy from not wearing a
Speaker 1: mask the second they think they can get away with it.
Speaker 1: And he got away with it. And look, Americans now
Speaker 1: trying to deflect from this, and they're saying our policies
Speaker 1: having changed, and we're beating them up pretty good on
Speaker 1: social media. But we don't know what happened here. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm sure it was some woke Democrat flight attendant that
Speaker 1: was starstruck by carry and let him do whatever he wanted.
Speaker 1: They're probably serving fourteen marteinis if he asked for him
Speaker 1: and told people sitting next to him, you have to
Speaker 1: keep your mask on, and you can't have a drink,
Speaker 1: because the concept that equal anything is dead in this
Speaker 1: country and it's being flaunted in our faces. John Cardillo, everybody, John,
Speaker 1: great to have you on man, Thanks so much for joining.
Speaker 1: Appreciate it. Always a great time. Thanks. This is still
Speaker 1: not a time to travel just because in the CDC
Speaker 1: has encouraged people to. Obviously you should check the CDC website.
Speaker 1: I think twice before traveling if you don't have to.
Speaker 1: I'm among the many Americans who feels that that impatience,
Speaker 1: that urge to get out to travel to see people
Speaker 1: that we care about, to be able to travel for
Speaker 1: work more and more, and yet we know that we
Speaker 1: should do that only when it's responsible. This is no
Speaker 1: time to let down our guard. This is certainly no
Speaker 1: time to surrender to the virus. Don't surrender to the virus.
Speaker 1: Everybody not allowed to surrender to the virus. I mean
Speaker 1: the rhetoric here, give me a break. People would just
Speaker 1: want to live our lives without being nagged, nagged into insanity,
Speaker 1: which is what the lockdowners are doing. Just shot up
Speaker 1: your way did not work. It did not stop the virus,
Speaker 1: the mass the lockdowns. It didn't work. We did all
Speaker 1: this stuff. We've done it for a year. And you
Speaker 1: know that's why when I see this photo of John
Speaker 1: carry On American Airlines and that was the Transportations are
Speaker 1: or whatever Minister or not Minister of Transfer, which it
Speaker 1: called the Secretary of the Department of Transportation Pete Buddha
Speaker 1: judge U. I like transport transportations are sounds better though,
Speaker 1: but you know when you see John carry On that
Speaker 1: American Airline's flight, and it's so clear that he's just
Speaker 1: chilling out in first class, no mask on, because he
Speaker 1: knows no one's gonna tell John Cary to put a
Speaker 1: mask on. You know, no one's really gonna tell him
Speaker 1: to do it. I mean, the reason they keep pretending
Speaker 1: that they won't let you unmask after vaccination because they
Speaker 1: don't really know. It's it's not because they don't they
Speaker 1: don't know if you're still going to affect people. That's
Speaker 1: just that's not that's the cover story. It's because they
Speaker 1: know that if it actually turned into some people, if
Speaker 1: some people can start to not mask, everyone's gonna everyone's
Speaker 1: gonna unmask pretty quickly. Not everybody, but you know, fifty
Speaker 1: percent of the country be like, yeah, sure, I'm vaccinated.
Speaker 1: Good luck. That's what it's all. It's just about control.
Speaker 1: They're not really worried at all it is gonna be
Speaker 1: so much spread because people are gonna say that they
Speaker 1: people who are vaccinated are are going to be able
Speaker 1: to spread this. No, they're worried that people are going
Speaker 1: to have an excuse than to not mask. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, if it were more clear in New York,
Speaker 1: I would totally be one of these people that walks
Speaker 1: around with you. I have a health restriction that prevents
Speaker 1: me from wearing a mask. Yeah, when I want to
Speaker 1: go on the treadmill and I'm by myself, there's no
Speaker 1: one around me, I would I would pull that card.
Speaker 1: I'd say, yeah, sorry, I have a mysterious health element
Speaker 1: that prevents me from being on the mask. But in
Speaker 1: New York you won't get away with that. I think
Speaker 1: in some places in Florida you can probably get away
Speaker 1: with that, and maybe in some other states. But you
Speaker 1: know that this or how dare you? And you know
Speaker 1: there's a hip hop privacy rules that they're not supposed
Speaker 1: to be able to ask you, but they do. They do. Anyway.
Speaker 1: I had a friend who was in Florida. She went
Speaker 1: into a how she went into a grocery store without
Speaker 1: a mask. Oh no, this was I'm sorry. I wasn't
Speaker 1: a mask thing. It was a dog thing. She brought
Speaker 1: her dog and said that it was an emotional support dog.
Speaker 1: And then they said, or you know that it was
Speaker 1: a service dog, and they said, well you have to
Speaker 1: show us as she said, Actually I don't because it's
Speaker 1: there's a hip of privacy rules that you can't violate.
Speaker 1: That could be applied I think to masking two in
Speaker 1: different places. But look, they that you're being trained to obey,
Speaker 1: like we're all a bunch of dogs, Like we're all
Speaker 1: a bunch of lab rats in an experiment. Obey even
Speaker 1: though it doesn't work. Obey, even though it hasn't done
Speaker 1: anything for you, even when it's unreasonable in every sense.
Speaker 1: After vaccination, it is totally unreasonable to expect people to
Speaker 1: continue to mask. All right, that is a that is
Speaker 1: a psycho thing to do. But that's the official policy.
Speaker 1: It's the official CDC. It's official you know, control mechanism.
Speaker 1: So I'm sorry that we still live in a country
Speaker 1: that has not yet regained its senses. But we're still fighting.
Speaker 1: The show ain't over yet. Folks, It's time for roll Call.
Speaker 1: Roll Call everybody, Facebook dot com, slash buck Sexton team
Speaker 1: Buck at iHeartMedia dot com. You want to send me
Speaker 1: a message, please do and let's get right to it.
Speaker 1: Oh and also go to buck Sexton dot com. You
Speaker 1: listen to the podcast there, Laurie deer Buck started listening
Speaker 1: a few months back. Really enjoy the mental engagement you offer. Credible,
Speaker 1: credible information presented in an entertaining manner. Rush would be
Speaker 1: proud of you. Well, thank you, Laurie. I appreciate that.
Speaker 1: Just to let you know, we are a military family
Speaker 1: with our fourth generation West Point grad who is now
Speaker 1: an infantry officer. We buy support, Black Rifle coffee, my pillow,
Speaker 1: and many of the authors you present us. Well, Laurie,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. That's what keeps me employed. So
Speaker 1: really really does mean a lot. I just purchased and
Speaker 1: downloaded the audiobook of The Parasitic Mind after listening, then
Speaker 1: realist to you and your guest. God sad, just awesome presentation.
Speaker 1: As a former military nurse, I didn't have shields high,
Speaker 1: but I did have morphine and TLC many military patients needed.
Speaker 1: God bless Buck. Keep up the great work well, Laurie,
Speaker 1: your your your role call message today has brightened up
Speaker 1: my day kind of a gloomy, gray, not great day
Speaker 1: in New York City, and you've certainly put a smile
Speaker 1: on my face. So thank you so much for that, Mark,
Speaker 1: and I really appreciated. God bless you and your family,
Speaker 1: and thank you for listening, for writing in, and of
Speaker 1: course for supporting our sponsors. I mean, that's it's absolutely
Speaker 1: critical for us. I mean, if we're gonna stay, we're
Speaker 1: gonna stay on the air. We need people to to
Speaker 1: trust and try out our different sponsors. All those products
Speaker 1: that I say I'm using, I do, and I like
Speaker 1: them and they're a part of my daily routine. And
Speaker 1: if you want to help the show, yeah, I get
Speaker 1: people to listen. But the level even beyond that is
Speaker 1: to is to actually buy products from our sponsors with
Speaker 1: that promo code, Buck or whatever my promo code. It is,
Speaker 1: as I say to you, that's how you that's how
Speaker 1: you vote with your dollars to keep the show on
Speaker 1: the air. It really, it really is. Sarah Hey, Buck
Speaker 1: and Mark. A report from Flyover Country. While Blue states
Speaker 1: continue to oppress their citizen reciting COVID nineteen concerns. Life
Speaker 1: just got a little more normal for us. The kids
Speaker 1: school district just announced no more mask requirement for kids
Speaker 1: or staff. Hallelujah. Of course, there's always the possibility that
Speaker 1: requirements could be reinstated if the numbers go back up,
Speaker 1: but anyway, it's sad being allowed such basic inalienable rights,
Speaker 1: or it's sad when being allowed such basic unalienable rights
Speaker 1: like breathing feels like freedom. Still, I'll take it. I'm
Speaker 1: sorry for my friends in Blue States. Yeah, I think. Look,
Speaker 1: that's great news that there's no more requirements, a mass
Speaker 1: requirement for kids or staff. And I don't know where
Speaker 1: you are in the country. You didn't tell us, but
Speaker 1: I think I might need to move there. It's just
Speaker 1: so it's just so absurd now, folks. I mean, I
Speaker 1: just have no tolerance anymore. It's not even about me
Speaker 1: being right and them being wrong or anything else. It's
Speaker 1: just can you stop being a bunch of crazy nags lockdowners,
Speaker 1: you know, just nagging everybody all the time, A bunch
Speaker 1: of hall monitors, yamp, are you making it? No? How
Speaker 1: about no? This is dumb? Leave me alone. But they
Speaker 1: won't do it. They won't do it. They're so convinced
Speaker 1: when I can't wait for them, they're finally being the
Speaker 1: MSNBC credits. They will fout you says we can finally
Speaker 1: put our mess when I'll say, I'm sorry. Is the
Speaker 1: flu gone? Why are you subjecting people to the possibility
Speaker 1: of dying from flu? Why are you such a monster?
Speaker 1: By breathing normally? What could be? What really could behave
Speaker 1: more a more fundamental freedom than the right to breathe,
Speaker 1: To breathe air normally. I mean breathing, even more so
Speaker 1: than food and shelter, and breathing is the first thing
Speaker 1: you needn't can't breathe comfortably or normally because the Libs
Speaker 1: say so. So really, it's really like a psychological warfare technique.
Speaker 1: Get everybody to start complying, obeying, get uncomfortable, do it
Speaker 1: because we say so, and if you don't, you're a
Speaker 1: bad person. They're arresting. I just had a new store
Speaker 1: I was gonna talk about. They arrested some lady recently.
Speaker 1: Where where was it here? I'll track it down for you,
Speaker 1: so I'm not just talking about this in general terms.
Speaker 1: They arrested her for not putting um, you know, not
Speaker 1: putting on a mask. Where was this? You know, so
Speaker 1: they will do that. They will, they will actually take
Speaker 1: you here. Texas woman detained for second time within days
Speaker 1: over refusal to wear a mask. Here we go, Where
Speaker 1: was this? Texas woman was arrested on Wednesday or refusing
Speaker 1: to wear a face mask inside of business uh Texas
Speaker 1: City Police just after nine am on Wednesday. She had
Speaker 1: been asked by employees at an office depot to leave
Speaker 1: unless you put on a facial covering the second time,
Speaker 1: and police have been called the rights refusal to wear
Speaker 1: a mask within six days, she was placed in handcuffs
Speaker 1: by a police that's right there. They are arrested there. Look,
Speaker 1: I know you say it's a private business, but we
Speaker 1: all understand that we've been psychologically damaged by the by
Speaker 1: the grotesquely incompetent and moronic CDC and a little tyrant fauci,
Speaker 1: and so businesses don't want to be sued. It's not
Speaker 1: as simple as just this is what a business chooses
Speaker 1: to do. That's that's the excuse. If businesses don't do this,
Speaker 1: they may be subject subject to to the lawsuits and
Speaker 1: all kinds of problems. So there you go. Uh, Sarah, Hey,
Speaker 1: oh no, that's that was Sarah h Adam Buck. Is
Speaker 1: the snow Princess a secret dad bob, A dad Bob enthusiast.
Speaker 1: You don't need the horror of the gym in a mask,
Speaker 1: She'll say, Um, Adam, I'd like to think no, but
Speaker 1: I think she you know, my I think my dad
Speaker 1: bot is Okay, that's what I would say. But then
Speaker 1: I really go to become a dad soon, because otherwise
Speaker 1: this is you know, you can't call it a really
Speaker 1: a dad bought. It's just that otherwise you're just a
Speaker 1: pleasantly plump you know. So yeah, exactly right, exactly, Um,
Speaker 1: but no, she is a very fit um. She was
Speaker 1: a actually a professional on the side from her other job,
Speaker 1: from her corporate job. She was a professional yoga instructor
Speaker 1: for years. So she she is in excellent shape. I
Speaker 1: am trying to catch up, but producer Mark, I gotta
Speaker 1: I gotta ways to go. She'sn't good enough shape for
Speaker 1: the both of you. That exactly. She's got abs. Why
Speaker 1: do I need abs? The snow Princess has got abs.
Speaker 1: If there's enough abs for one apartment, yeah, well shit,
Speaker 1: we can share her abs. That's my that's my story
Speaker 1: and I'm sticking to it. There you go, Frank, Right.
Speaker 1: I read the book The Power Couple by Alex Barrenson
Speaker 1: at your recommendation. Absolutely loved it. I didn't think I
Speaker 1: could appreciate Alex more than I already did. Thanks Buck
Speaker 1: for your excellent guest choices, and of course you're great
Speaker 1: show on podcast. Barely a day goes by that I
Speaker 1: don't listen. Well, Frank, that means a lot. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much, And you know, I really really do appreciate
Speaker 1: that you. First of all, it's it's great you support
Speaker 1: my work, which is my primary consideration here doing what
Speaker 1: I do. But I also appreciate that you support the
Speaker 1: people that we have on because you know, people come
Speaker 1: on this show because they want to. You know, I
Speaker 1: can't pay our guests to come on. I'm not Fox News,
Speaker 1: so I can't promise them, you know, a three million
Speaker 1: person video audience or something. You know, they come on
Speaker 1: the show because they appreciate what I do, and they
Speaker 1: know that it'll be a good conversation, and and they
Speaker 1: know that we've got a great audience of really engaged,
Speaker 1: intelligent people that that I honestly just have really good
Speaker 1: taste in radio shows. I'm just gonna say it. I mean,
Speaker 1: this radio show is better than I mean. I think
Speaker 1: this is the best radio show on the air right now.
Speaker 1: People can you know, they can disagree and they can
Speaker 1: yell at me, and I don't care. I listen. I've
Speaker 1: heard everybody else out there right now, and you know,
Speaker 1: I think this is the best show. I'm entitled in
Speaker 1: my opinion as a host. So there you go. There
Speaker 1: are some other great shows, and I have total respect
Speaker 1: for the people that have great shows. But I think
Speaker 1: this show is as good or better than any other
Speaker 1: show out there. So that's that's my story and I'm
Speaker 1: sticking to it. Pablo Hey Buckshieldside. Oh wait, sorry, Frank,
Speaker 1: one more thing about the Power Couple. I bought The
Speaker 1: Power Couple too, so I appreciate that you're supporting our
Speaker 1: friend Alex Barnson. I believe in doing that. I can
Speaker 1: get all these different books for free, usually from publishers
Speaker 1: because they want the pr that we can give them
Speaker 1: here on the show. But I like to buy people's
Speaker 1: books and I like to do show because I want
Speaker 1: to support them, and I just think it's a good principle.
Speaker 1: You know, It's like an artist's work, right, You want
Speaker 1: to actually buy the painting of an artist that you
Speaker 1: really like, you don't just ask your artist friend, you know,
Speaker 1: give me your painting, because you know you want to
Speaker 1: be help helping them stay the same way I tell you,
Speaker 1: please buy stuff from our sponsors. You know that's a
Speaker 1: very important thing to do. I haven't read The Power
Speaker 1: Couple yet, but I did buy it. It It is on
Speaker 1: my kindle, So, Frank, now that you've said this, I'm
Speaker 1: going to check it out too. And you know, I
Speaker 1: am very appreciative of Alex Barnson's work on masks and lockdowns,
Speaker 1: and he's still very much involved in the vaccine covered situation.
Speaker 1: I asked him to see you know, I've asked Alex
Speaker 1: a couple of times in the last couple of weeks. Well,
Speaker 1: I've asked him twice in the last month, I think
Speaker 1: to come on, and he keeps saying he will. He will.
Speaker 1: He's just working on some research. So we'll get him
Speaker 1: back on again soon because I want to talk to
Speaker 1: him about the vaccine situation. He certainly has. Alex is
Speaker 1: more skeptical of the vaccine success from what I see
Speaker 1: than I am, and I want to hear him out
Speaker 1: of no. I want to know why, because I like,
Speaker 1: I trust that he's very astute, very honest, and does
Speaker 1: his research, so I want to hear him out. So
Speaker 1: I'm going to bring him on as soon as we
Speaker 1: can talk about all right. Roll Call continues here with
Speaker 1: Pablo hey Buck Shields. Ye. I was listening to you
Speaker 1: today and you played a clip where Biden mentioned the
Speaker 1: MAGA people. I actually detected a disdain in his voice.
Speaker 1: I get the impression he doesn't like Trump supporters. He
Speaker 1: really doesn't care about half of the country. I think
Speaker 1: he may actually dislike us. On another note, as much
Speaker 1: as I want Donald J. Trump to be president right now,
Speaker 1: in four years, I'm not sure he will be a
Speaker 1: lame duc president if he can't get Mike Pence to
Speaker 1: run with that would be bad optics. I believe you're
Speaker 1: currently correct about Government of Santist's chances for winning the presidency.
Speaker 1: I think his running mate should be Pompeo. Mike Pompeo
Speaker 1: talk about a power ticket. Just one more thing you
Speaker 1: and produce him. Mark had a conversation about Denzel movies.
Speaker 1: You didn't mention my favorites, which are Man on Fire
Speaker 1: and Book of Eli Shields High. Well, Pablo, A few
Speaker 1: things here. Man on Fire is very watchable for what
Speaker 1: it is. I will say a book of Eli I
Speaker 1: found a little there's some very cool scenes in that,
Speaker 1: very good, very engaging sequences. I thought it was a
Speaker 1: little grim as a movie, like a little a little
Speaker 1: depressing for my taste. So there's that. And uh, what
Speaker 1: did Prince Mark? Did you say? What your favorite Denzel
Speaker 1: movie was? I forget? Now, well remember the Titans of course?
Speaker 1: All right, right, right, remember the Titans. Yeah? For me,
Speaker 1: it's I mean, his best movie, although he's not the
Speaker 1: lead in it. Maybe Glory. But then there's also Training Day.
Speaker 1: He's amazing and Training Day. Uh, you know, Denzel, he's
Speaker 1: really good an American gangster too, which is another highly
Speaker 1: Why have you ever seen that one? Yeah? I think so? Yeah,
Speaker 1: very very good movie. Is The Taking of Pelham one,
Speaker 1: two three as well? I think he might be Is
Speaker 1: that with Ethan Hawk? I think so great movie. I
Speaker 1: love his thrillers. Whenever Denzel is in a thriller, signed
Speaker 1: me up. I've never seen that. Isn't that about? Is
Speaker 1: that about a money train? Or is a different movie
Speaker 1: they stole a subway car? Okay, and then they're in
Speaker 1: the New York City subway state system and they can't
Speaker 1: stop them. I think Denzela is the operator who's trying
Speaker 1: to stop them, or he's involved in some he's a
Speaker 1: main character obviously, But why would you why would you
Speaker 1: steal a subway car? Like the whole plot, but I
Speaker 1: know it mostly takes place in the New York City subways.
Speaker 1: But I mean, like, wouldn't that wouldn't that not work out?
Speaker 1: So well? You're going, you know, you're like posting on Craigslist.
Speaker 1: You know, hey, subway car fresh off the tracks, you know,
Speaker 1: a million dollars or I believe it was a getaway
Speaker 1: from a crime of some sort. Okay, it's like steal
Speaker 1: a subway car. You imagine this is like you post
Speaker 1: this online, you know, like on Zillo or something. You know, Hey,
Speaker 1: subway car can turn into a one bedroom apartment. Just
Speaker 1: have to deal with the rat feces, human urine, and
Speaker 1: graffiti all over the place. But once you take care
Speaker 1: of that, you're good to go. I mean, plus you
Speaker 1: have to bring it above ground. A subway car is
Speaker 1: probably bigger than your apartment. That's that's harsh but fair.
Speaker 1: I mean, any NYC apartment. I wasn't. No, I know,
Speaker 1: I know it's true. I mean, you know it's away.
Speaker 1: Carp probably does have more square footage than the apartment
Speaker 1: I live in. So yeah, I think I think you're honestly.
Speaker 1: Wasn't there a movie? There was a movie called Money
Speaker 1: Train as well, right where there was some train that
Speaker 1: was transporting money and they took it over. I don't,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I can't keep it. There's another Denzel
Speaker 1: movie about a train where the runaway train, where he
Speaker 1: has to stop it. He's in a lot of movies.
Speaker 1: I don't even I can't keep up with all of them.
Speaker 1: He's one of the more he's one of the more
Speaker 1: prolific actors on the scene. That's certainly true. So as
Speaker 1: for the politics that Pablo brought up here, uh, let's
Speaker 1: see Governor de Santists his chances for winning the presidency. Um, okay,
Speaker 1: a few things. Governor de santists a chance for the presidency.
Speaker 1: I think that he would be at this at this
Speaker 1: stage right now, with Donald Trump's blessing and machinery behind him.
Speaker 1: I think Desantists is the best option we've got right now.
Speaker 1: And I think that Trump now look, you know, there
Speaker 1: are some other interesting ideas. What about the descantist ticket,
Speaker 1: and maybe, you know, you might you could have a
Speaker 1: member of the Trump family running as a VP. You
Speaker 1: could have Junior maybe run as VP. That's a possibility.
Speaker 1: Who know, you know that may be a way that
Speaker 1: you bring the Trump machinery together with a descantist ticket.
Speaker 1: I don't know, I'm just I'm just spitballing here, but
Speaker 1: I do think ron Descantist is the best option we've
Speaker 1: got right now. You know, Trump, when you're when you're
Speaker 1: seventy four, three seventy four or four years a long time, folks.
Speaker 1: We all know that four years a long time when
Speaker 1: you're that age, and and we would like to think
Speaker 1: that that Trump will still be the the dynamo of
Speaker 1: energy and vitality that he was U during his first term.
Speaker 1: But who knows, you know, I mean, God willing he
Speaker 1: will be. But we just got to see JR. Many
Speaker 1: of ponder the successful teaming of bucking producer more. I
Speaker 1: see this as a margarita. Well, the Buckster is the
Speaker 1: intoxicating elixir. Producer Mark is the salt rimming the glass.
Speaker 1: One is incomplete without the other. Plus Producer Mark, being
Speaker 1: salteam makes you thirst for more the perfect margharita. What
Speaker 1: do you think, Producer Mark, that's a quite a description.
Speaker 1: I like it. And then we both love margaritas, so
Speaker 1: that's also true in Producer Mark and Buck the Margarita
Speaker 1: Team in Pennsylvania, Governor Wolf is allowing you to drink
Speaker 1: the barb getting April fourth, All Pennsylvania Team Buck members
Speaker 1: should demand the podcast at their local bars and salute
Speaker 1: the best team in the business, shielding one end and
Speaker 1: glass raised high in the other. Well, Jr. I love
Speaker 1: this plan. I love this idea is fantastic, and thank
Speaker 1: you so much for Thank you so much, man, I
Speaker 1: appreciate it, and let's get it going. Eric. I have
Speaker 1: to wonder how many people have left Facebook over the
Speaker 1: way the website treated people because of pictures of January six.
Speaker 1: My friends and I were discussing a picture of two
Speaker 1: guys hold flags with a guy wearing horns. We never
Speaker 1: said anything giving explicit or task it support or what
Speaker 1: was happening, and Facebook put me in time out. So
Speaker 1: I decided I was not going to waste more time
Speaker 1: on the website, deleted the app off my phone. I
Speaker 1: haven't deleted my profile because I haven't figured out what
Speaker 1: to do with ten years of pictures yet. But that
Speaker 1: day of reckoning is coming. If more people would delete
Speaker 1: the app, delete their profiles, it would hurt them. I
Speaker 1: feel like I've reclaimed my life since leaving Eric. We
Speaker 1: are gonna have to take action against social media companies,
Speaker 1: and it's going to have to hurt them in the wallet.
Speaker 1: Otherwise nothing changes. That's a continuing conversation we'll keep having
Speaker 1: here on the show. Team. Thanks is always for being here.
Speaker 1: God bless and no matter what comes your way, no
Speaker 1: matter what we face, you know what your orders are.
Speaker 1: Shield's high.