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: iHeartMedia dot com. He may read it on the show.
Speaker 1: I really do think it's depressing that we all expect
Speaker 1: things to just get worse in Minneapolis, and we expect
Speaker 1: that this will spread to other cities. We should be
Speaker 1: able to have a national conversation or at least have
Speaker 1: some kind of understanding that we the American people all
Speaker 1: want justice and that there needs to be a cooling
Speaker 1: of passions and tempers here because a lot of innocent
Speaker 1: people are going to get hurt otherwise. But instead, it's
Speaker 1: just it seems so clear that the wave of mayhem
Speaker 1: and anarchy is just going to continue to build up,
Speaker 1: and the Democrat demagoguery around all this is just going
Speaker 1: to get worse. But you know, these days, what you
Speaker 1: see online is so already curated in gued because the
Speaker 1: big tech sensors are making sure that you can only
Speaker 1: say certain things, and everything that you do online is
Speaker 1: public in a sense. Right. So tech has become so
Speaker 1: advanced now that if you're using your PC, your computer
Speaker 1: anyplace and you're accessing public WiFi, what you're doing online
Speaker 1: what you're doing on your computer. It's just as easy
Speaker 1: to see by someone else at the right technology as
Speaker 1: you're seeing it yourself. Kind of takes away the whole
Speaker 1: no shit of what a personal computer or PC should be.
Speaker 1: Your activities, your data may no longer really be personal
Speaker 1: right the bad guys can get to it. Express VPN
Speaker 1: gives you easy to use software to download and keep
Speaker 1: what's private private on your computer and your smartphone. A
Speaker 1: VPN is a virtual private network, private being a keyword here. Okay.
Speaker 1: It costs less than six bucks a month. It installs
Speaker 1: a layer of privacy for all your devices, so when
Speaker 1: you send an email you're working online, it's much more secure.
Speaker 1: It's like the difference between mailing a postcard and mailing
Speaker 1: a letter. Express VPN is akin to that seal envelope.
Speaker 1: Keep your communications and actions private. Express VPN. That's where
Speaker 1: you want to go. Download the service today for less
Speaker 1: than six dollars a month, give yourself privacy on five
Speaker 1: of your devices. Go to Express vpn dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck that's Express vpn dot com slash buck, and you'll
Speaker 1: get three extra months free on a one year package.
Speaker 1: Express vpn dot com slash buck. They surrounded the police
Speaker 1: station in Brooklyn Center. If you've seen the photos of it,
Speaker 1: if you see what's going on here, it looks like
Speaker 1: they're prepared for a protracted siege. You have law enforcement
Speaker 1: officers that have nothing to do with the specific incident
Speaker 1: of the shooting, the killing of Dante Wright, who are
Speaker 1: being attacked by angry people in a mob. Antifa self
Speaker 1: describe Antifa members now showing up. This is a litmatch
Speaker 1: thrown into a tinderbox, sitting atop a big pool of gasoline.
Speaker 1: This is a highly combustible situation right now, and everyone
Speaker 1: needs to just take a step back and think about
Speaker 1: what's really going on here. The city of Minneapolis has
Speaker 1: already been through far too much, and the rest of
Speaker 1: the country has dealt with the reverberations. As you recall,
Speaker 1: last summer, there were b LM protests that broke out
Speaker 1: across the country, and it needs to be said more
Speaker 1: more people need to know this, need to hear this
Speaker 1: that in a year of a pandemic where we had
Speaker 1: lockdowns and we had people interacting less, far fewer people
Speaker 1: than in living memory, going to bars and restaurants and
Speaker 1: subways and being out in public places, so you should
Speaker 1: expect that the violence rate in the country would be far,
Speaker 1: far lower than in previous years. Instead, what we had
Speaker 1: was a massive spike arise of murder and other violent
Speaker 1: crimes and including rapes, sexual assaults, assault with a deadly
Speaker 1: weapon arise across the country not seen in over twenty years.
Speaker 1: The worst murder rate. They're expecting. They still compile the
Speaker 1: numbers and they'll give us the official date. I believe
Speaker 1: in September the worst murder rate since nineteen ninety five nationwide.
Speaker 1: And there's one major factor in all of this. The
Speaker 1: George Floyd police incident in Minneapolis, his death, the riots
Speaker 1: that ensued afterwards, the undermining of police, the call through
Speaker 1: defund police, and communities becoming less safe as a result.
Speaker 1: People suffer because of these bad ideas. People suffer because
Speaker 1: of these lies. We all need to understand this. We
Speaker 1: need to be honest about it. I know right now
Speaker 1: that there is that cheap virtue signaling going on all
Speaker 1: over the place by people who live in safe communities,
Speaker 1: who don't know from a firsthand experience, and who think
Speaker 1: that standing in solidarity with rioters and looters is somehow
Speaker 1: making anything better. It actually just makes everything worse. But
Speaker 1: the ruling class and the elites, members of the Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley, corporate America, they are very clear and where
Speaker 1: their sympathies lie. And there's also it seems very little
Speaker 1: willingness to say to people, stop being reckless, stop saying
Speaker 1: things that are not true. People with major platforms. Corey Bush,
Speaker 1: member of Congress, tweeted this out about Officer Potter, who
Speaker 1: has already resigned and who is now facing criminal culpability.
Speaker 1: There have been about fifteen of these taser firearm mistake
Speaker 1: shootings that have occurred over the last decade or so.
Speaker 1: So this has happened before, and in most of the
Speaker 1: cases there was no criminal charge, especially if the person
Speaker 1: if no one was killed. In a couple of cases
Speaker 1: there have been criminal charges. An Officer Potter may very
Speaker 1: well get an involuntary manslaughter charge as a result, but
Speaker 1: that's already in process. Right there. There is an accountability
Speaker 1: that is going on here that will never be true
Speaker 1: justice in the sense that you can't bring back Dante,
Speaker 1: right there's nothing to bring him back to stop that
Speaker 1: tragic accident from happening. But here's what Cory Bush Remember
Speaker 1: the House representative said about all this that she would
Speaker 1: rather she tweeted this. The twenty six year veteran cop,
Speaker 1: former president of the police union doesn't know the difference
Speaker 1: between a taser and a gun. And you say more
Speaker 1: training would have fixed this. Nah, But I bet you
Speaker 1: would have known the difference if Dante wasn't a black boy,
Speaker 1: or if he was her loved one. And quote that's
Speaker 1: from a representative, Cory Bush. That is a sighting, unfair
Speaker 1: and deeply unhelpful thing to say. Right now, there is
Speaker 1: absolutely no evidence whatsoever of racial animus in this incident.
Speaker 1: In fact, if anything, what we see on video is
Speaker 1: someone who is clearly trying to do one thing, makes
Speaker 1: an awful mistake that she is responsible for, and then
Speaker 1: realizes the error that she's just committed and that the
Speaker 1: tragedy that ensued, and knows that it's too late and
Speaker 1: she can't take that bullet back. But this has happened
Speaker 1: before the timing of this, I mean beyond just the
Speaker 1: fact that it's a tragedy in and of itself, but
Speaker 1: the timing of this right before we're expected to hear
Speaker 1: about the George Floyd verdict. I mean it rather the
Speaker 1: Derek Chauvin verdict about the death of George Floyd, which
Speaker 1: is next week. I mean the jury could be deliberating
Speaker 1: as soon as next week. Right now, it would be
Speaker 1: hard to think of a more tense situation. And people
Speaker 1: who have platforms, people who have power here in the
Speaker 1: national conversation, should use it responsibly. But we shouldn't expect
Speaker 1: that to happen. Not with today's Democrat party. We've got
Speaker 1: an open border, we've got out of control spending, we've
Speaker 1: got real fears of inflation. People are starting to wise
Speaker 1: up to the fact that the Faucii consensus is never
Speaker 1: going to just let us go back to normal, that
Speaker 1: they're not even really thinking there is such a thing
Speaker 1: as everyone just stops wearing masks and lives their lives,
Speaker 1: that they're not going to give up that control. People
Speaker 1: are starting to see through this Biden administration and so
Speaker 1: what do they want here? That's right, an issue of
Speaker 1: racial justice according to left, to rally around to make
Speaker 1: it seem like there is a righteous cause for the left,
Speaker 1: when in this case and this reality, what they're going
Speaker 1: to do is just create excuses for more destruction, violence,
Speaker 1: and anarchy in the streets. What was better as a
Speaker 1: result of BLM riots last year? What improved? Oh, they
Speaker 1: got the main demand, which was defunding of police in
Speaker 1: some cities, and crime sword and people died and misery spread.
Speaker 1: It's very straightforward. The cops are not the problem, all right.
Speaker 1: We have to be adults in America. We have to
Speaker 1: be willing to say things that are obviously true. We
Speaker 1: have to fight this effort to shut down your ability
Speaker 1: to observe what you know to be true. There is
Speaker 1: a war on observation going on right now. You can't
Speaker 1: see what's actually true and not true about lockdowns and
Speaker 1: vaccine policies and all the rest of it. Shut up
Speaker 1: and do what you're told you can't see and come
Speaker 1: to your own conclusions about how crime is getting worse
Speaker 1: and how BLM activists by million dollar mansions for themselves
Speaker 1: while they're actually supposed to be, you know, helping poor
Speaker 1: communities and dealing with police relations. Right, you're not allowed
Speaker 1: to notice these things. You're told what to think, and
Speaker 1: if you disagree, you're shouted down. They're not even trying
Speaker 1: to convince you of anything anymore. And you're certainly not
Speaker 1: supposed to notice that BLM as a movement has blood
Speaker 1: on its hands. You look at what's happened over the
Speaker 1: last year, over the last twelve months, and because of
Speaker 1: the defunding of police, because of the change in perception
Speaker 1: about community police relations and the fact that law enforcement
Speaker 1: does not feel backed up in their jobs, more people
Speaker 1: are dead than one otherwise be more people have suffered.
Speaker 1: And what exactly is gained by all this defund police
Speaker 1: which I know Ben and Jerry's, the ice cream company,
Speaker 1: has now said that they want to abolish police. Look,
Speaker 1: they're a bunch of morons who have done far too
Speaker 1: much to push type two diabetes on the country. Okay,
Speaker 1: by the way, boycott them. Let me just throw that
Speaker 1: out there right now. Donate that ice cream. If every
Speaker 1: person who had a rational view of America in the country,
Speaker 1: who was center right said I'm not going to buy
Speaker 1: anymore Ben and Jerry's, they may actually feel that a
Speaker 1: little bit. They may actually realize shut up and make
Speaker 1: my you know, Oreo cookie swirl or whatever it is.
Speaker 1: Whatever they make, I usually can't eat it because they
Speaker 1: have gluten and a lot of their ice cream. That's
Speaker 1: the truth. We need to take action or else this
Speaker 1: stuff continues. Defund the police is moronic. It's a stupid
Speaker 1: thing to say. There are bad people in this country.
Speaker 1: There are bad, violent, destructive people of all races and backgrounds,
Speaker 1: and we all need to be universally held to account
Speaker 1: for our actions. We cannot break the law. If we
Speaker 1: become a lawless society, the foundation upon which everything else
Speaker 1: is built, all of our prosperity and all of good
Speaker 1: fun stuff out there, and all the systems that we
Speaker 1: benefit from every day, they all start to crumble if
Speaker 1: we don't have rule of law and we are all
Speaker 1: responsible as individuals, as human beings for our actions. There
Speaker 1: is no license to loot or riot or attack. And
Speaker 1: getting rid of cops is the dumbest thing I have
Speaker 1: ever heard in a public policy debate. It's honestly the
Speaker 1: stupidest thing I've ever heard. What are we going to do? Then?
Speaker 1: We're going to start sending in social workers? Have they
Speaker 1: thought this through? Do they think that unarmed social workers
Speaker 1: are going to want to be involved in violent domestic disputes?
Speaker 1: You're going to send in a social worker if somebody's
Speaker 1: calling the police because they're worried that there could be
Speaker 1: a drive by in their neighborhood. I'm glad that social
Speaker 1: worker will be there to say, hey, let's all be
Speaker 1: nice to each other while the bullets are flying over
Speaker 1: their heads. Could it be any dumber? No, But this
Speaker 1: is where the Democrat Party is now, reckless demagoguery, brainwashing
Speaker 1: and stupidity on a national scale to pretend they care
Speaker 1: so much about minority communities. You know, all these MSNBC
Speaker 1: anchors who are millionaires, who live in very safe areas,
Speaker 1: who send their kids to private school, they're the first
Speaker 1: ones to tell you, Oh, but you know, we don't
Speaker 1: need so much police. Really, they should spend a few
Speaker 1: nights in the highest crime areas of major cities, especially
Speaker 1: these days, and walk around the streets and see how
Speaker 1: they feel about cops after that. I have a feeling
Speaker 1: it would change their tunes. But it's just a bunch
Speaker 1: of virtue signaling cowards, just reveling in their demagoguery. That's
Speaker 1: what they do, and that's what they care about. The
Speaker 1: full text of of of what of your requests and
Speaker 1: h make sure that you know, we sit down and
Speaker 1: and go through it and see how we can implement.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that officers need to necessarily h have weapons. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know every time they they're they're making a traffic
Speaker 1: stop or or engaged in h situations that don't necessarily
Speaker 1: call for for weapons. We know that there are other
Speaker 1: many other jurisdictions or even around the world where that is,
Speaker 1: you know, necessarily the case it's not needed. So that's
Speaker 1: the mayor of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, which, as I understand
Speaker 1: it has been a place that's very much deteriorated of
Speaker 1: the last ten or fifteen years and much higher crime.
Speaker 1: And this is this is someone who has a public platform,
Speaker 1: has public power and trust, who's saying something that is
Speaker 1: just is just shockingly stupid, but also somewhat commonplace these
Speaker 1: days to say things that no rational person would think
Speaker 1: is a good idea. Yes, because we have we've had
Speaker 1: a major surge in violent crime in the country last year.
Speaker 1: Now's the time, in a country with hundreds of millions
Speaker 1: of firearms in circulation already, now's the time to tell
Speaker 1: cops do your jobs, but don't be armed. That's what
Speaker 1: the guys saying. Yeah, for traffic stops, don't don't be armed. Um,
Speaker 1: perhaps the this individual doesn't spend much time on the internet,
Speaker 1: he would know that a New Mexico State Police officer,
Speaker 1: darry And Jarrett, was murdered just over the weekend. You didn't.
Speaker 1: You didn't hear a lot about this one. Not a
Speaker 1: lot of solidarity marches, and not a lot of people
Speaker 1: walking around trying to raise awareness about the risk that
Speaker 1: law enforcements. Law enforcement takes. Omar Felix Queva had a
Speaker 1: rifle and executed Officer darry and Jarrett at close range
Speaker 1: during a routine daylight traffic stop. But sure, let's give
Speaker 1: our cops even less of a chance anytime they pull
Speaker 1: over somebody who has an outstanding warrant for a violent crime, like, oh,
Speaker 1: that's right. As we've now found out, because the stories
Speaker 1: are never accurate in the early hours about the victims.
Speaker 1: When BLM decide that somebody is one of their hallowed victims,
Speaker 1: one of the one of the martyrs of the movement,
Speaker 1: the initial story worries are never really true about their background.
Speaker 1: That that's always the case. There's there's this you know,
Speaker 1: we at first it's usually the person's you know, a
Speaker 1: family man, an honor student and everything else. And then
Speaker 1: when we say, well, hold on a second, this person actually,
Speaker 1: in the case of George Floyd, for example, held a
Speaker 1: gun to a pregnant woman's belly during a home invasion.
Speaker 1: They said, that doesn't matter. Well, it mattered when we
Speaker 1: had all these photos of somebody, you know, either in
Speaker 1: their high school graduation cap and gown, or when we're
Speaker 1: being told that they were an honor student or a
Speaker 1: family man, or a hard working person or whatever whatever
Speaker 1: it is, that's all to be said. But then we
Speaker 1: find out the person either resisted or rest, had a
Speaker 1: long criminal history, had a violent criminal history. In the
Speaker 1: case of Dante Right, the individual, this individual held a
Speaker 1: gun to a woman and tried to rob eight hundred
Speaker 1: dollars from her. Okay, that's that, you know, arm armed robbery.
Speaker 1: But if you talk about this so you're you're it's
Speaker 1: a problem and understand this. That doesn't change anything about
Speaker 1: the culpa of the officer, Officer Potter, but it does
Speaker 1: affect the narrative and the perception of how these events
Speaker 1: affect society, of how people should view these these situations.
Speaker 1: Same thing where you bring up, you know, resisting arrest,
Speaker 1: it is possible to say, don't resist arrest, Comma, and
Speaker 1: this officer made a terrible mistake. Those are both true statements.
Speaker 1: You should not resist arrest, you should not violently fight
Speaker 1: with cops when they're trying to rescue, and you, if
Speaker 1: you're a cop, you gotta be able to discern, even
Speaker 1: in very tense moments, between your taser or your fire
Speaker 1: or or else. You shouldn't be a cop. It's that simple.
Speaker 1: I remember when you know, when I was, when I
Speaker 1: was overseas, it was just on all the basis. I
Speaker 1: mean an a D. If you got an and I
Speaker 1: mean an a D out on the range, accidental discharge,
Speaker 1: an a D. You know, walk into the to the
Speaker 1: dining hall or whatever, if you fire off around by
Speaker 1: accident you or you were going home, basically you were done,
Speaker 1: even if no one was hurt. So you know, that's
Speaker 1: the It's a cardinal rule of firearms safety. And obviously
Speaker 1: Officer Potters is paying, in our own way, a very
Speaker 1: high price for this. But we're gonna we're gonna disarmed
Speaker 1: It was defund police, now it's gonna be disarmed police.
Speaker 1: Who's gonna want to take these jobs? I know there's
Speaker 1: a lot of law enforcement that listens to this show
Speaker 1: all across the country, and I couldn't. I couldn't tell
Speaker 1: them in good in good faith, Yeah, keep doing your job,
Speaker 1: especially if you're in a relatively high crime area, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, I have I have an uncle who is
Speaker 1: a police officer in south central for fifteen years, police
Speaker 1: officer in south central Los Angeles. I'm gonna tell him
Speaker 1: to walk around without a firearm and to go up
Speaker 1: to people and get involved in disputes and pull them
Speaker 1: over and try to write them a ticket and try
Speaker 1: to you know, one of the most dangerous things cops
Speaker 1: do is in fact, traffic stops. But you see the
Speaker 1: voices out there right now that get attention for the
Speaker 1: Democrat media aren't people who actually know anything about law enforcement,
Speaker 1: about you so force incidents. They're people that appeal to
Speaker 1: the masses with their emotions, you know, they're They're the
Speaker 1: people at MSNBC who just oh, they're just channeling all
Speaker 1: this emotion right now, But then they say things that
Speaker 1: end up hurting people when they're implemented. There are negative
Speaker 1: consequences to bad ideas. Something we always have to remember.
Speaker 1: This stuff is not without a cost. But the people
Speaker 1: who bear the cost are not you know, wealthy upper
Speaker 1: middle class journalists or well off or wealthy TV news
Speaker 1: anchors or people who are making pr decisions at big corporations. No,
Speaker 1: they don't pay the price. No. Instead, the people that
Speaker 1: are the most likely to suffer from violent crimes in
Speaker 1: the neighborhoods in the first place, their percentages just go up.
Speaker 1: And when things get worse, and that sense of misery
Speaker 1: and foreboding that exists. And I mean, I've I've spent,
Speaker 1: because of my time the NYPD, considerable time in the
Speaker 1: actual worst neighborhoods in New York City, and I can
Speaker 1: tell you that it feels like a different place than
Speaker 1: the wealthier or even just more run of the mill
Speaker 1: parts in terms of crime of New York City. And
Speaker 1: I wish some of these journos would do the same,
Speaker 1: because maybe they would shut their mouths. There's so much
Speaker 1: you're just not allowed to say about COVID and lockdowns.
Speaker 1: It's very frustrating. As you know, it's been one of
Speaker 1: the things that's made me particularly angry at the big
Speaker 1: tech corporations. I mean, I think I'm one of the
Speaker 1: most vocal anti fauci voices out there, and I know
Speaker 1: there are some others, and I appreciate them. By the way,
Speaker 1: I feel a real solidarity with them. But I've got
Speaker 1: to tell you, the way that big tech has weighed
Speaker 1: on this stuff, it's just appalling. It's awful the way
Speaker 1: that they've shut down free and open exchange of ideas.
Speaker 1: And you know that if you've tried to share your
Speaker 1: political opinions in general, these days, it's really difficult to
Speaker 1: have a civil conversation. You get attacked by trolls, you
Speaker 1: get swarmed by lunatics. Well that's why there's caucus Room
Speaker 1: dot com. This is a social media network exclusively for conservatives.
Speaker 1: Caucus Rooms an online community for conservatives to gather and
Speaker 1: engage locally. Only real people who are verified conservatives can
Speaker 1: become Caucus Room members, but Caucus Room will never share
Speaker 1: your information with anyone ever. A sign up process ensures
Speaker 1: you're communicating with real conservatives in your neighborhood, no bots
Speaker 1: or trolls. It's a great way to get engaged on
Speaker 1: issues where you can make the difference, where you can
Speaker 1: make the biggest difference locally. At Caucus Room, you can
Speaker 1: participate in live virtual meetings, and you know you can
Speaker 1: actually reach out to people in your area. Caucus Room
Speaker 1: is made by conservatives for conservatives to get organized and
Speaker 1: make a difference. Join the Buck Sexton Listeners group on
Speaker 1: caucus room dot com that c au cus r oom
Speaker 1: dot com to interact with other listeners just like you
Speaker 1: Caucus room dot com. Let's talk about if you have
Speaker 1: received the J and J vaccine. A lot of folks
Speaker 1: are probably wondering what should I do, what should I
Speaker 1: look out for. What's your advice to them? Well, the
Speaker 1: first bit of advice is really don't worry very much because,
Speaker 1: just as we've said, it's a very very rare event.
Speaker 1: That's the first thing. The second thing, the bracket of
Speaker 1: time when this occurs was between six and thirteen days,
Speaker 1: so it's between one and two weeks. So if you've
Speaker 1: got your vaccine several weeks ago, then it makes it
Speaker 1: even less likely that you should have any concern at all.
Speaker 1: If you've had it within a few days, just stay
Speaker 1: heads up for symptoms severe headache, abdominal pain, chest pain,
Speaker 1: things like that. But again underscoring Savannah, it is a
Speaker 1: very very rare wind event, so you don't want people
Speaker 1: who've just received the vaccine to be overly worried about this.
Speaker 1: This is a rare occurrence. The pause is just as
Speaker 1: an abundance of caution to really scope out the situation
Speaker 1: a little bit more close. The pause is an abundance
Speaker 1: of caution. You know, you got to mitigate because there
Speaker 1: could be a diminution of the parabellic upswing of the
Speaker 1: hypotheses of the Isosceles triangle. And you know, I really
Speaker 1: do feel like sometimes this guy is just broke it
Speaker 1: into a few high school textbooks and wants to just
Speaker 1: throw out a bunch of a bunch of science sounding jargon,
Speaker 1: math and science jargon at us. You know, when you
Speaker 1: have Savannah, you get the shot, and when the photosynthesis
Speaker 1: kicks in and you have the oxo ribo nucleic acid
Speaker 1: that is a part of the overall you know Dalwinnian
Speaker 1: notion of it. Just just blabber right that. But people
Speaker 1: go home, doctor Foucher, You're so smart. Doctor Foucher's so smart.
Speaker 1: He's such a smart man. What are we doing? So
Speaker 1: now it's don't worry. Yesterday was pause the vaccine. Now
Speaker 1: it's don't worry. And I just want to say when
Speaker 1: I tell you guys, because I'm thinking about this all
Speaker 1: the time, and I know I get I get a
Speaker 1: lot of feedback from you all, and I want the FEEDBA.
Speaker 1: I want you to tell me what you think about
Speaker 1: what we're doing here. You you are this show. This
Speaker 1: show is for you, and I want to know what
Speaker 1: you're thinking. So send us an email at Team Bucket,
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com, or send me a message on Facebook
Speaker 1: or Instagram. Just type in Buck Sexton on what comes
Speaker 1: up send a message. I see it. Producer Mark sees
Speaker 1: it too, but I see it. And because on the vaccines,
Speaker 1: I want to be very clear, I'm not trying to
Speaker 1: you know, push any water, bully anyone in anything. People say, Buck,
Speaker 1: why would you get the vaccine You've already had COVID?
Speaker 1: And I say, I know, isn't it so stupid? The
Speaker 1: only reason that I would get that. I'm scheduled to
Speaker 1: get a vaccine in about sixty days, so in a while,
Speaker 1: because I do it, I've got anybodies in my system,
Speaker 1: I've already had the virus, and in a short period
Speaker 1: of time, I'm going to introduce that same immune response
Speaker 1: through this, you know, genetic coding response or whatever. I mean,
Speaker 1: very just you know, very few people understand how these
Speaker 1: vaccines actually work. This is not your standard. This isn't
Speaker 1: putting just dead virus into your system. This is something else.
Speaker 1: But the reason that I've said I would do it,
Speaker 1: And I'm not trying to push anybody else here. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying because I in New York, where I currently
Speaker 1: live and my family is, and where I work, they
Speaker 1: have already started to experiment with vaccine passports, and you know,
Speaker 1: so I'm willing to take the risk more so so
Speaker 1: I can live a normal I can live a normal life.
Speaker 1: But I agree with some of you say, well, isn't
Speaker 1: that a little bit? I mean, I'm so anti mask
Speaker 1: as you know, outdoor masking moronic, zero reason to do that.
Speaker 1: Indoor masking and limited circumstances at sometimes, you know, maybe,
Speaker 1: but in general, I mean, I think mask mandates don't work.
Speaker 1: I think mask mandates are a disaster. And I think
Speaker 1: that masking is the initial knee bending that leads to
Speaker 1: all this other madness in our society. I actually shared
Speaker 1: this was actually this is great I shared on Twitter today.
Speaker 1: If you haven't you probably you also all should be
Speaker 1: following me on Twitter please if you're not already, And
Speaker 1: it's this. It was almost exactly a year ago. It
Speaker 1: was like a year and a week ago there was
Speaker 1: a piece in the Washington Post. I'm just waiting for
Speaker 1: this too. I'm just waiting for this to be taken
Speaker 1: down or for social media companies to come after me.
Speaker 1: This is the right below the democracy dies in darkness.
Speaker 1: You know header in the Washington Post everyone wore flu
Speaker 1: masks during the nineteen eighteen I'm sorry, everyone wore masks
Speaker 1: during the nineteen eighteen flu pandemic. They were useless. That
Speaker 1: was in the Washington Post a year ago. Everyone wore
Speaker 1: masks during the nineteen eighteen flu pandemic. They were useless.
Speaker 1: That was the headline, not that they didn't work that well. Useless.
Speaker 1: And you know what that line is. That line is
Speaker 1: taken from the considered this seminal work of history on
Speaker 1: the Spanish flu pandemic of nineteen eighteen. The author just writes, Look,
Speaker 1: they did this everywhere. Didn't do a damn thing, but
Speaker 1: people were obsessed, and there was mask fashion, and there
Speaker 1: was you know, mask all kinds of stuff. Right. Oh,
Speaker 1: you know, how do you where does your where should
Speaker 1: you shave your mustache? A lot of mustaches back? Then?
Speaker 1: Where should you save shave your mustache so that it
Speaker 1: doesn't affect your mask and all this stuff, and they
Speaker 1: were useless, was the quote. Now, if I say that today,
Speaker 1: I get kicked off social media and treated like a troglodyte.
Speaker 1: But this was in the Washington Post, friends, a year ago.
Speaker 1: And what's amazing is the sheeple out there, mate, mate,
Speaker 1: they they see stuff like this. And when I point
Speaker 1: this out to them, or I of course show them
Speaker 1: the Fauci lines from a year ago, you know, you
Speaker 1: know it may it may actually make you feel a
Speaker 1: little better, but you know, when you're out into crowd,
Speaker 1: you know it doesn't do anything to wear a mask.
Speaker 1: They say, well, but the science has changed, Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: how and then they point to some uh, some not
Speaker 1: real world study they point to essentially sprang water through
Speaker 1: a mask and saying, well, there's less vapor. So since
Speaker 1: there's less vapor, there's there's you know, it's effective, it's
Speaker 1: stopping the virus. And then then you show them all
Speaker 1: these CDC studies. There was a big one, I think
Speaker 1: it was up in Canada because they say, well, doctors
Speaker 1: to wear them, and you say, okay, Well, the CDC
Speaker 1: study fromp in Canada about masks during flu season for
Speaker 1: dentists specifically for for dental personnel. Showed the dentists who
Speaker 1: wear masks during procedures versus those who don't. No change
Speaker 1: in the transmission for those healthcare personnel during the flu season.
Speaker 1: And it was a pretty big So that's a real
Speaker 1: world study. And there's tons of this out there if
Speaker 1: you want to see it. The Danish mask study. Oh well,
Speaker 1: yeah that you know. Sure it didn't stop people from
Speaker 1: getting it, but you could not give it to another
Speaker 1: person if you have it on and they have it.
Speaker 1: There's always there's always an excuse, right, there's always an excuse.
Speaker 1: The CDC numbers on mask mandates within the margin of error.
Speaker 1: That's how well the mandate works. But you can't bring
Speaker 1: this up. Yeah, I'm not. I'm not letting this go
Speaker 1: because friends, they're they're trying to change the wiring in
Speaker 1: our brains with all this stuff. They are making you
Speaker 1: a compliant little stooge. And I hate it. I resent
Speaker 1: it every They do it to me too, because you'll say, well, buck,
Speaker 1: do you wear a mask in New York? I have.
Speaker 1: They will evict me from my home if I don't,
Speaker 1: I will be kicked out of the grocery store. I
Speaker 1: will I will get you know, even more dad bod
Speaker 1: going on here without even being a dad. Because I
Speaker 1: can't go to the gym, all these things will happen.
Speaker 1: I have no I have no choice. And if they
Speaker 1: call the police, the police will enforce against me. They
Speaker 1: will arrest me. Right so I am. I'm not conceived
Speaker 1: to their argument. I'm conceding to their superior force. I tried.
Speaker 1: I went maskless for months and months and months. Then
Speaker 1: I was told deal man, everyone's complaining about you. This
Speaker 1: is getting out of control. Oh and by the way,
Speaker 1: since I got the virus two months ago when I
Speaker 1: was walking around with no mask on, was I ever infected? No?
Speaker 1: Did I ever put anyone at risk? We know for
Speaker 1: a fact scientifically no. I did not. Never, there was
Speaker 1: no risk, zero risk. But you're not allowed see once again,
Speaker 1: you're not allowed to observe. There's a war on observation
Speaker 1: right now that the Democrats and the left are waging.
Speaker 1: You don't know what you're seeing, you don't know what's
Speaker 1: really happening. You're not allowed to even say, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, they're pausing a vaccine. If you had called
Speaker 1: for a vaccine pause on your Facebook page two weeks ago.
Speaker 1: If you had said, guys, I just I've read some
Speaker 1: data on Johnson and Johnson, and you know something's going
Speaker 1: on here. We gotta really look into this boom. Facebook
Speaker 1: would lock you out, they'd shut you down, they take
Speaker 1: your accountaway. Think of the effect that that has on
Speaker 1: our conversation about this. This is the new public square.
Speaker 1: They are the phone company, you know, circa nineteen fifty.
Speaker 1: This is how people communicate, and they control it. The
Speaker 1: biggest enemies of free speech and free expression in the
Speaker 1: country right now are the most powerful platforms of communication
Speaker 1: in the world. This is the great ironyore dealing with.
Speaker 1: But the point I'm making about the vaccines is does
Speaker 1: that change the thinking at all for the people that
Speaker 1: believe that they have all this figured out? Does that
Speaker 1: change the hubrists and the arrogant mentality of those who say, oh,
Speaker 1: I just listen to the science, I just listen to Fauci.
Speaker 1: How many times did those guys get to be wrong
Speaker 1: before a normal person would say, maybe something's up here now.
Speaker 1: I saw, for example, the Tucker monologue. Lass Tucker did
Speaker 1: the monologue last not on this, and he kept saying,
Speaker 1: why do they want us to wear masks after we're vaccinated.
Speaker 1: He posed this question, and he didn't get to I
Speaker 1: know what their answer is. Even after vaccination, there's a
Speaker 1: tiny percentage of people who could still get infected, five
Speaker 1: percent by the Fiser numbers, whatever it is. And so
Speaker 1: if it saves just one life, this is the this
Speaker 1: is the well spring of all the tyranny. If it
Speaker 1: could theoretically save just one life, you have to deal
Speaker 1: with this for our health policy. Faucism. The fauci i'd
Speaker 1: consensus is the speed limit must now be ten miles
Speaker 1: an hour. That is what has happened in this country,
Speaker 1: where the speed limit now must be ten miles an hour.
Speaker 1: And if you don't like it, you can't drive, you
Speaker 1: can't leave your home, actually, and we'll arrest you if
Speaker 1: you do anything else. It's not the country I want
Speaker 1: to live in. It's not a country I'm going to
Speaker 1: accept either. And the grubby little fingers of the states
Speaker 1: authoritarian democrats here, they're not taking they're not taking their
Speaker 1: hands off the wheels of power. They're not going to
Speaker 1: do it. They want to control you. They want to
Speaker 1: keep this going as long as possible. They like you compliant,
Speaker 1: they like you scared, stay home, wear a mask, don't
Speaker 1: see people, do what we tell you, get whatever shots
Speaker 1: we tell you. Do you think that that upsets the
Speaker 1: Nanni state leftists or is this a dream come true
Speaker 1: in terms of the power they have. It could be
Speaker 1: that possibly someone who's had COVID like myself, could they
Speaker 1: be reinfected. They're very small numbers of it, but guess what,
Speaker 1: almost none of them are really getting sick. You're not
Speaker 1: reading stories of oh my goodness, thousands of people being reinfected,
Speaker 1: they're in the hospital and they're dying. Those stories don't exist.
Speaker 1: You'll read about a random, very rare person getting reinfected
Speaker 1: or getting infected when they've been vaccinated. But the good
Speaker 1: news is that even if you got infected from COVID,
Speaker 1: after you've been vaccinated, you have some immunity, you have
Speaker 1: partial immunity, and it lessens the degree or significance of
Speaker 1: the disease. So almost everything out there's good news. This
Speaker 1: is why I so much think doctor Fauci should be
Speaker 1: voluntarily removed from TV because what he says is such
Speaker 1: a disservice and such fear monitoring, and almost all of
Speaker 1: what he says isn't even matched by the science of
Speaker 1: his own institute. So really what we need to do
Speaker 1: is here from a lot of different experts, and then
Speaker 1: people need to realize that the risk factors are different
Speaker 1: depending on your age. You mentioned that Johnson and Johnson
Speaker 1: vaccine very very safe, and if you're over eighty, without question,
Speaker 1: it's the only one you can get, take it. If
Speaker 1: you're over seventy, take it, But it does depend on
Speaker 1: your age. If you're under twenty five, the chance of
Speaker 1: dying from this is one in a million. So your
Speaker 1: risk factors do depend on whether you judge whether you
Speaker 1: take a vaccine. It's not the same for everybody. Everything
Speaker 1: Senator around Paul all is saying there is provably demonstrably true.
Speaker 1: But do you ever do you ever hear this? I mean,
Speaker 1: they've there have been teachers unions that as part of
Speaker 1: their demands, and the teachers unions have just shown what
Speaker 1: a disgraceful, disgusting mess they are in the past year.
Speaker 1: Just just thuggish Democrat political machinery. It's all the teachers
Speaker 1: unions are good for. But the truth here, with everything
Speaker 1: that's going on, the truth of the situation is that
Speaker 1: we can't have real conversations about risk we can't actually
Speaker 1: have real discussions about who's at risk and who's not.
Speaker 1: They wanted children, Teachers Union wanted children to get vaccinated.
Speaker 1: Why kids, The kids are fine. But what they do
Speaker 1: is they say that's not true. Kids can still get it.
Speaker 1: And they'll point and they'll say, look, you know, one
Speaker 1: hundred children have died believed to have died from COVID
Speaker 1: in the United States. Okay, I mean that's one hundred
Speaker 1: children out of a country three hundred and thirty million people.
Speaker 1: There are viruses that you know, that are that are
Speaker 1: floating around in the air all the time, that kids
Speaker 1: can still get they can die. We have to accept
Speaker 1: that there's not a zero mortality future from COVID. That's
Speaker 1: not realistic. That's not going to happen, just like there's
Speaker 1: not a zero mortality from flu future for the world. So,
Speaker 1: you know, the people that have pushed for all this stuff,
Speaker 1: the lockdowners, you gotta understand what their next moves are
Speaker 1: gonna be. We keep seeing these reports, Oh, the vaccines
Speaker 1: are effective for six months. Okay, what happens then we're
Speaker 1: gonna are we supposed to go through this every year? Oh?
Speaker 1: And you know, you can't actually see people and do things.
Speaker 1: You gotta get the second and then what about when
Speaker 1: the booster, you know, doesn't work on the new variant
Speaker 1: or something. I mean, you're just gonna We're all gonna
Speaker 1: go insane. I mean, we're all just gonna completely lose
Speaker 1: our minds over this stuff over time. And I think
Speaker 1: a lot of people have. I believe that mass media
Speaker 1: has combined to create, combined with mass hysteria, create the
Speaker 1: environment we're currently living in. You've never had so many
Speaker 1: hysterics able to reach out and talk to so many
Speaker 1: other hysterics that at one point in human history speaking
Speaker 1: of hysterics, here's CNN with their I guess he's still
Speaker 1: unpaid as a contributor. But doctor Fauci, who really, you
Speaker 1: know he's I know he's at the National Institute of
Speaker 1: Allergy and Infectious Disease, but he really should just be
Speaker 1: chirond as favorite CNN and MSNBC guest, because they're also
Speaker 1: emotionally and professionally invested in this guy not being a
Speaker 1: little tyrannical moron, which I think he is. But here's
Speaker 1: CNN talking about what Tucker said on his monologue, which
Speaker 1: I brought up before Place six TV personality Tucker Carlson
Speaker 1: said on TV about vaccines in general. He said, if
Speaker 1: the vaccine, if vaccines are effective, there's no reason for
Speaker 1: people who have received the vaccine to wear masks or
Speaker 1: avoid physical contact. So maybe it doesn't work and they're
Speaker 1: simply not telling you that. Let me repeat that again.
Speaker 1: So maybe it doesn't work and they're simply not telling
Speaker 1: you that. What do you have to say to Tucker Carlson. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's just the typical crazy conspiracy theory. Why would we
Speaker 1: not tell people if it doesn't work? Look at the data.
Speaker 1: The data are overwhelming. In the three vaccines that have
Speaker 1: been approved for use in an emergency use authimization, the
Speaker 1: Jay and Jay, the Fiser, and the Moderna. You had
Speaker 1: thirty thousand, forty four thousand, and forty thousand people in
Speaker 1: a clinical trial with an overwhelming signal of efficacy. So
Speaker 1: I don't have any idea what he's talking about. How
Speaker 1: dangerous is it for a TV personality like that, who
Speaker 1: does have an audience of millions to speculate about something
Speaker 1: like that. Well, it's certainly not helpful to the public
Speaker 1: health of this nation or even globally. You know, I
Speaker 1: don't want to get into arguments about Tucker Carlson, But
Speaker 1: to me, it's just, you know, it's counter to what
Speaker 1: we were trying to accomplish to protect the same in
Speaker 1: the health of the American public. Why can't that little
Speaker 1: fascists tell us when we can stop wearing masks? When
Speaker 1: give us a date or give us the numbers, give
Speaker 1: us the metrics. Why can't give up the control? Better
Speaker 1: to attack Tucker Carlson for asking that was a question
Speaker 1: that he brought up in the context of a fifteen
Speaker 1: minute monologue where it's clear he's not anti vaccines and
Speaker 1: he's not saying they don't work. He's just trying to
Speaker 1: work through a problem that we're not allowed to really
Speaker 1: talk about because the lockdowners are authoritarians. You know. I'm
Speaker 1: actually the process of trying to find an employee or
Speaker 1: two to join some of my Freedom Hunt activities. And
Speaker 1: it's a tough out there right now because you've got
Speaker 1: people that don't necessarily know if they're could be able
Speaker 1: to stay remote in their job. I mean, they like it,
Speaker 1: maybe they don't. There's all this change that's currently going on,
Speaker 1: and I think we're just beginning to see how much
Speaker 1: our work life balance has really shifted as a result
Speaker 1: of these pandemic policies, but it's it's getting more complicated
Speaker 1: all the time, and that just reminds me that when
Speaker 1: you're running a business, HR issues can kill you. Right,
Speaker 1: You've got those wrongful termination suits, minimum wage requirements, labor regulations,
Speaker 1: and HR manager salaries are not cheap, as you know,
Speaker 1: an average of seventy thousand dollars a year. Bambi, which
Speaker 1: is spelled Bambee, was created specifically for small business. You
Speaker 1: can get a dedicated HR manager, craft HR policy, and
Speaker 1: maintain your compliance all for just ninety nine dollars a month.
Speaker 1: With Bamby, you can change HR from your biggest liability
Speaker 1: to your biggest strength from onboarding determinations, they customize your
Speaker 1: policies to fit your business, and they help you manage
Speaker 1: your employees day to day just ninety nine dollars a month.
Speaker 1: They do all this for you and there's no hidden fees.
Speaker 1: You can cancel the service anytime. You didn't start your
Speaker 1: business because you wanted to spend time on HR compliance.
Speaker 1: Let Bambi help get your free HR audit today. Go
Speaker 1: to bambi dot com slash buck right now to schedule
Speaker 1: your free hr audit. That's Bambi dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: b ambee dot com slash Buck. President Joe Biden has
Speaker 1: announced that he plans to pull US troops out of
Speaker 1: Afghanistan by September eleventh of this year, clearly noting the
Speaker 1: symbolism here of that day and an end to award
Speaker 1: that has raged for twenty years we have been deployed
Speaker 1: in Afghanistan. We've had US military in Afghanistan for twenty years.
Speaker 1: And I remember I was in Afghanistan a decade ago.
Speaker 1: The situation then was largely the same as the situation now,
Speaker 1: except there were far more troops in the country at
Speaker 1: that time. But the same things you'd hear about how
Speaker 1: the Taliban is on the offensive, and the central government
Speaker 1: is corrupt and weak in an effective and their forces
Speaker 1: toe to toe without US support won't be able to
Speaker 1: go won't be able to go up in battle against
Speaker 1: the Taliban without losing. And I just remember thinking that
Speaker 1: everyone that I knew who was handling that issue at
Speaker 1: the highest levels, honestly of the intelligence community in the
Speaker 1: US government, was very negative on the long term product
Speaker 1: that was in twenty ten, very negative on the prospects
Speaker 1: of Afghanistan's future and felt like we could stay and
Speaker 1: just keep holding it together, or eventually realized that enough
Speaker 1: is enough. Well, the same voice is the very hawkish
Speaker 1: Republican voices that you always hear on this point are
Speaker 1: out there telling you, oh, we we shouldn't do it.
Speaker 1: Here here he is the guy I've never seen. Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham has never seen a troop deployment or a war
Speaker 1: that even't like. As far as I can tell, I
Speaker 1: don't know what it is with this guy always looking
Speaker 1: to bomb another country and show what it's wrong. So
Speaker 1: it gets applause from the think tank set on K
Speaker 1: Street in DC. Here he is play eleven. Biden's become
Speaker 1: an incredibly destabilizing American president. He took a border that
Speaker 1: was pretty calm and turned it into chaos. The Mid
Speaker 1: East had been transformed on Trump's watch, where the Arabs
Speaker 1: were working with Israelis and had Iran in a box.
Speaker 1: He's taken Iran and let him out of the box.
Speaker 1: They're talking about enriching uranium at sixty percent now, which
Speaker 1: is a direct threat to the existence of the state
Speaker 1: of Israel. The Russians are challenging him in the Ukraine,
Speaker 1: and now he is withdrawing forces in Afghanistan against sound
Speaker 1: military advice. To all of you who are listening, you
Speaker 1: remember where you're at. On September eleventh, two thousand and one,
Speaker 1: our military told President Biden that if you withdraw all
Speaker 1: of our forces, al Qaeda and ISIS will come roaring back.
Speaker 1: Afghanistan would disintegrate into civil war, and we can avoid
Speaker 1: all of that by having three to five thousand American
Speaker 1: forces making sure that ISIS and al Kada never come
Speaker 1: back to hurt us. He rejected that advice. Afghanistan is
Speaker 1: going to tear rate pretty rapidly. Awkada and ISIS are
Speaker 1: going to come back. He's paving the way for another
Speaker 1: nine eleven. Now, I want to be very clear that
Speaker 1: I don't care that Joe Biden is a Democrat, and
Speaker 1: I don't care that this may not be the most
Speaker 1: popular thing to say on conservative talk radio right now.
Speaker 1: I think the war in Afghanistan needs to end. I
Speaker 1: wanted Trump to end it. I wanted Trump to end
Speaker 1: our military presence. He did not. I want Biden to
Speaker 1: end our military presence. I'm not going to do this thing.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to play this game of saying I
Speaker 1: want other men and women down range fighting, you know,
Speaker 1: in Afghanistan when it politically suits me. No, you know
Speaker 1: how I felt during the Trump years, I wanted the
Speaker 1: president to end our military involvement in Afghanistan. I am
Speaker 1: going to stand on that same viewpoint now, all right there.
Speaker 1: Otherwise what I am I'm just you know, look, I
Speaker 1: know there's so many conservatives out there, is in the
Speaker 1: media that's just all about I mean, just raising donor
Speaker 1: money and like, you know, maga hats when it's popular,
Speaker 1: and then you know, oh, they're all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: you know, they're hi ekei and free market pioneers when
Speaker 1: they think that's popular, and then back to the maga
Speaker 1: hat they say whatever they've got to say. You all
Speaker 1: know that I want the war in Afghanistan, our involvement,
Speaker 1: I should say, to end there. So I'm not going
Speaker 1: to pretend that that's not what I wanted. If I
Speaker 1: wanted it under Trump last year, I want it under
Speaker 1: Biden now. So I'm not going to do this thing
Speaker 1: and hit him for yet. Is the border a mess
Speaker 1: because of Biden? One hundred percent? Everything else that I've
Speaker 1: said about that stuff is that all stays, but I
Speaker 1: do think the war in Afghanistan are part of the
Speaker 1: war in Afghanistan needs to end, and I understand that
Speaker 1: that is there's a very real possibility the Taliban will
Speaker 1: end up taking over substantial control there. And I will
Speaker 1: tell you right now that I will if there is
Speaker 1: a terrorist attack plan from Afghan soil that involves the
Speaker 1: Afghan regime, the Taliban, whatever part it may be, I
Speaker 1: will advocate for a not a US military you know,
Speaker 1: pinprick invasion, but scorched earth and whatever we gotta do,
Speaker 1: however we gotta do it. Not not letting them take
Speaker 1: another generation of Americans, you know, twenty years worth of
Speaker 1: people who are serving in the military and wound them
Speaker 1: and kill them. And we're trying to create democracy. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: if they if they if they poke the dragon again,
Speaker 1: we go back breathing whatever fire we have to. That
Speaker 1: should be our attitude. It's the way it used to be.
Speaker 1: So it's the old approach in America when we when
Speaker 1: someone decides that they're going to attack us, we go back.
Speaker 1: We hit them with everything we've got until they can't
Speaker 1: hit us anymore. And that's that. So that really should
Speaker 1: be the attitude. I think it's not that we're going
Speaker 1: to go rebuild other people's countries for them, and that
Speaker 1: has been the case for for a while. Now. Now
Speaker 1: I understand people say it's a relatively small military presence. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but maybe in three years it won't be relatively small.
Speaker 1: Maybe the Taliban becomes ascended. In our three thousand troops
Speaker 1: there's not enough. And now now we're going to get
Speaker 1: deeper and deeper into it. You know, there is the
Speaker 1: quagmire theory of how these things work. It's it's it's
Speaker 1: not a lie. This can happen. Marco Ruby another, You've
Speaker 1: got all these Republican foreign policy hawks, you know, making
Speaker 1: sure that the raytheon stock stays where it is and
Speaker 1: keeps going up. Here's Marco Rubio plate twelve. Well, that
Speaker 1: was a decision that began under President Trump, and so
Speaker 1: they've just what they've announced is that they're going to
Speaker 1: stick with President Trump's decision with regards to Afghanistan. Look,
Speaker 1: the outcome is going to be a terrible thing. The Taliban,
Speaker 1: I believe, will eventually take over the country as they
Speaker 1: were in charge before, and it's not going to be
Speaker 1: a good outcome. The flip side of it is that
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what the pathway to a better future
Speaker 1: in the near term ones. And you know, given all
Speaker 1: the other needs we're facing around the world. You know,
Speaker 1: once President Trump made that decision, I think the die
Speaker 1: was cast in that regarden. Do you think the US
Speaker 1: has made enough progress on training the Afghan security force?
Speaker 1: I mean, I hope, so I don't have a tremendous
Speaker 1: amount of I hope I'm wrong because of the implications,
Speaker 1: but I don't have a lot of faith that the
Speaker 1: current government Afghanistan will be able to survive or hold
Speaker 1: on for long the Taliban. My personal opinion everything I
Speaker 1: mean I know is I think the Taliban will have
Speaker 1: an Afghan againstand control by the Taliban again, and that
Speaker 1: not a good outcome. But it's a direction that we're headed,
Speaker 1: and the previous administration agreed to that. The current administration
Speaker 1: stuck with it, and that's where we're going. That's where
Speaker 1: we should go. And I'll have to revisit this, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe in a year, maybe in eighteen months, because I
Speaker 1: think what Mark Rubio says here, he understands the basic
Speaker 1: facts and storyline of this. The gods, the Senate form
Speaker 1: relation committee. I mean he's he's pretty he's pretty knowledgeable
Speaker 1: about this stuff. Yeah, the Taliban will be ascendant, and
Speaker 1: there's a chance of Taliban will take over much, not all,
Speaker 1: but much of the country, and perhaps they will then
Speaker 1: forward some kind of a power sharing agreement. But it's
Speaker 1: not my problem. You know, We've we've gone through this, right,
Speaker 1: we remember, we're rock. We try to build a better country,
Speaker 1: and then they want you know now they want us out,
Speaker 1: and then we had Isis and all this stuff, and
Speaker 1: we're all told, oh, we're imperialless in American. Now we
Speaker 1: we've done this, we try to go in and get
Speaker 1: rid of the bad dictators and get rid of the
Speaker 1: Jihatas and build nice societies. Nope, enough, I'm not I
Speaker 1: don't want anyone being sent on our behalf as the
Speaker 1: American people, to go do this anymore. You know, what
Speaker 1: we really need to be concerned about is if things
Speaker 1: get really hot with China in the next five to
Speaker 1: ten years, are we ready for that? All? Right, Afghanistan
Speaker 1: is done. Well, we we've been through this. We've done
Speaker 1: everything that we can do. Well, we'll still give them
Speaker 1: aid and you know, the things you gotta remember there's
Speaker 1: also going to be support, back channel support and stuff
Speaker 1: that you know, you can't talk about publicly that's going
Speaker 1: to be going on where the US government's gonna be
Speaker 1: helping the Afghan government. That's obviously going to happen, but
Speaker 1: it's just no longer going to be our military presence
Speaker 1: holding this whole place together. And people say, well, what
Speaker 1: about South Korea and what about Germany? The Taliban isn't
Speaker 1: about to take over Germany. I mean, there's not an
Speaker 1: imminent threat of war in these countries. So those are
Speaker 1: strategic military bases with host partner nations that actually want
Speaker 1: us for the most part in country, and our troops
Speaker 1: are not at any risk in Germany, or in South Korea,
Speaker 1: or or in Japan. So that's a very different circumstance,
Speaker 1: isn't it. If the Nazis were still running around Germany
Speaker 1: controlling you know, the whole states, you know, the Nazis
Speaker 1: were running Bavaria as the Taliban is running parts of Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: and then you'd have a more similar circumstance. But it's
Speaker 1: time to go. And you know, like I said, I
Speaker 1: know a lot of people change their stuff. I know
Speaker 1: there you know, there are people who as radio hosts
Speaker 1: were calling Trump an idiot and he's awful, and then
Speaker 1: they were the big Trump cheerleaders, even they were pretending
Speaker 1: they weren't. I thought we should have ended Afghanistan under Trump,
Speaker 1: and this is the timeline that the Trump administration then
Speaker 1: sent out. Biden's going to stay with it. I believe
Speaker 1: this is the right move, and I think it will
Speaker 1: get ugly. I think there will be cost to this,
Speaker 1: but it's not I couldn't sit here and say, if
Speaker 1: you made me Secretary of Defense, I could not sit
Speaker 1: here and say to you the American people, including all
Speaker 1: the people listening to this who are active and former military.
Speaker 1: We've got people in the Special Operations community who listened
Speaker 1: to the show. We have seals, we have sf we
Speaker 1: have Marines who listened to this show. I could not
Speaker 1: say to them, yeah, I want you to I want
Speaker 1: you to stay in Afghanistan. I think this mission is
Speaker 1: worth it. And I certainly couldn't say to any other ears,
Speaker 1: I want to put your children in harm's way for
Speaker 1: this mission set. And so if that's how I feel,
Speaker 1: would I send my own son if I had one,
Speaker 1: to secure Hellman Province at this point, if I were
Speaker 1: the Secretary of Defense, no, I would not, so come
Speaker 1: what may. That's how I feel about this, and I'm
Speaker 1: not going to trash this policy because the Biden administration
Speaker 1: is following through on it. Our troops, our national security
Speaker 1: is more important than those kinds of games. There is
Speaker 1: a process that the federal government can engage in right now.
Speaker 1: They can collect some of the data which was started
Speaker 1: in the Obama administrations flowing the Trumpet administration use of force.
Speaker 1: They can make an assessment of use of force departments
Speaker 1: that appear to have too much use of force. You
Speaker 1: strength and consent decrease. You come in, you say these
Speaker 1: people who have engaged in this behavior, you will lose
Speaker 1: all of your federal funding if these people are not fired.
Speaker 1: This is a breakdown as to what this police department
Speaker 1: does on a regular basis. You're only dealing with violent
Speaker 1: crime fifteen percent of time, so you only need to
Speaker 1: have fifteen percent of your force officers prepared for that.
Speaker 1: The rest of this is traffic stuff. Increase the number
Speaker 1: of cops who handle traffic they don't necessarily have to
Speaker 1: have guns. Increase the amount of social workers that you
Speaker 1: have since you don't have cops negotiating domestic violence instances.
Speaker 1: There are plans out there, there are things the federal
Speaker 1: government can do. This is a lack of will on
Speaker 1: the part of an administration, not a lack of ideas,
Speaker 1: and not a lack of resources. That's all very dumb.
Speaker 1: The stuff that's being said there. This is Jason Johnson
Speaker 1: on MSNBC. The things that he's saying come from somebody
Speaker 1: who does not know what the heck he's talking about,
Speaker 1: does not understand law enforcement, does not know the job.
Speaker 1: But he's a journalist and he's saying the things that
Speaker 1: you're supposed to say. Now, if you're going to go
Speaker 1: on TV, on MSNBC, for example, I mean, this is
Speaker 1: just ignorance. Now, this is actually just parading of ignorance
Speaker 1: on TV. Oh, we'll just send unarmed cops to domestic
Speaker 1: domestic violence or domestic disturbance calls. Does he know that one?
Speaker 1: That's one of the most common calls that police get.
Speaker 1: But also domestic violence calls often result in violence against
Speaker 1: police officers. Now, when I say often, as a percentage
Speaker 1: of overall incidents of attacks on law enforcement, it's not
Speaker 1: hard to see how this happens. Husband and wife are
Speaker 1: fighting it's a terrible thing. Happens all over the countries,
Speaker 1: you know, and you know it's a terrible thing when
Speaker 1: it gets violent. I'm not talking about arguing over who
Speaker 1: does the dishes. You know, some kind of spousal abuses occurred,
Speaker 1: Tempers are flaring, emotions are running very high, and you know,
Speaker 1: police are on the scene, and all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: the police might have to make an arrest, and maybe
Speaker 1: that husband decides that he's gonna go for his legal
Speaker 1: or illegal firearm, and you know, just prove some kind
Speaker 1: of crazy point, right, I mean, you don't know this
Speaker 1: stuff happens. I mean, can you imagine who's gonna want
Speaker 1: this job. You're gonna be an unarmed cop who's going
Speaker 1: into someone's home where there's a report of some kind
Speaker 1: of a domestic dispute, and you're gonna hope that no
Speaker 1: one reaches for a meat cleaver when your back is turned.
Speaker 1: Do you want that job? It's It's remarkable, isn't it.
Speaker 1: It's remarkable. This is the stuff that's being said. Oh,
Speaker 1: traffic stops. We just had a cop executed during a
Speaker 1: traffic stop. He had no idea that guy was going
Speaker 1: to come out of the car with a rifle and
Speaker 1: shoot him and then in the shot the cop multiple
Speaker 1: times in the ground tune really to execute him, make
Speaker 1: sure he's dead. It's horrible. The cop was a routine
Speaker 1: traffic stop, broad daylight side of the highway. But let's
Speaker 1: let's take the guns out of the CoP's hands then,
Speaker 1: because I mean we're talking about what here with the
Speaker 1: with the mix up of the taser and the firearm.
Speaker 1: This has happened about fifteen times in the last twenty years.
Speaker 1: I mean, whatever since whenever tasers really became in such
Speaker 1: common usage. I think it's about ten or fifteen years ago.
Speaker 1: But so let's say in the last decade or so,
Speaker 1: it's been fifteen times. This has happened millions and millions
Speaker 1: and millions of police use of force incidents where they
Speaker 1: had to wrestle somebody to the ground, they to do something.
Speaker 1: This is a tragedy, but it's also at some level
Speaker 1: a freak accident. It just it was somebody who panicked
Speaker 1: in the moment, a law enforce officer panicked and made
Speaker 1: a terrible error. And now she's facing second degree manslaughter
Speaker 1: charges for it. I mean, she's charged. I knew she
Speaker 1: was going to be maybe this was what everyone's expecting.
Speaker 1: And I've seen now she is charged with secondary manslaughter,
Speaker 1: and I think that they're probably going to get her.
Speaker 1: She might even end up taking a plea because she
Speaker 1: faces up to ten years social My guess is she
Speaker 1: might plead to a lesser offense and then she'll end
Speaker 1: up maybe spending two or three years in prison. But
Speaker 1: her life is ruined. I mean, her life is ruined, destroyed,
Speaker 1: And I'm not trying to just focus on that because
Speaker 1: I know also a life was lost here from Dante. Right,
Speaker 1: he's dead, right, he doesn't get he doesn't get another
Speaker 1: day ever, a free life. I understand. That's terrible tread
Speaker 1: terrible tragedy. Right. It's one thing to resist arrest and
Speaker 1: be taser it's nothing to be shot and killed. We
Speaker 1: know these are very different circumstances, very different outcomes, and
Speaker 1: it's the whole thing is said, but we need to
Speaker 1: speak honestly about what's going on here and what would
Speaker 1: make the situation better. I mean, consenticrees for police departments.
Speaker 1: Every cop you talked, you would say, this is just
Speaker 1: you know, if one police officer shoots himself in the
Speaker 1: knee because he mishandles his firearm. That doesn't mean we
Speaker 1: disarm all the cops. If one police officer, you know,
Speaker 1: fumbled his gun and shot an innocent bystander, which is
Speaker 1: not all you know, it's a little bit different than
Speaker 1: this case because it was resisting arrest. But you know
Speaker 1: what I mean, that doesn't mean you're going to disarm
Speaker 1: all the cops. There's you know, cops are imperfect. They
Speaker 1: make mistakes too. We got seven hundred thousand law enforcement
Speaker 1: officers in the country. We got about a little over
Speaker 1: a dozen that have actually mistaken their taser for a
Speaker 1: firearm over the course of years and years and years.
Speaker 1: This is not a systemic problem. This is not a
Speaker 1: problem that can be easily addressed because it is so
Speaker 1: infrequent and random that there's no training that's going to
Speaker 1: deal with this. But so what do they do all
Speaker 1: the other stuff that the anti cop left wants to
Speaker 1: talk about now, they just start talking about that as
Speaker 1: though it would help this problem, when we all know
Speaker 1: it will do nothing. I got to talk to you
Speaker 1: in a second here about wokeness in the schools. There's
Speaker 1: just so much of it these days. They are not
Speaker 1: just brainwashing kids. I think this is really important. They're
Speaker 1: brainwashing adults, they're brainwashing the parents and the people who
Speaker 1: work at these institutions. And that's something that I'll return
Speaker 1: to here. But it's remarkable when you really get a
Speaker 1: view into these places, when you really understand what's going
Speaker 1: on at an elite schools, at very expensive private schools
Speaker 1: as well as in public schools. It's just utter madness.
Speaker 1: But you know the technology from there's all this convenient
Speaker 1: stuff that's going on right now, and public wi Fi
Speaker 1: is one of them. Right you go to places now,
Speaker 1: more and more stores, restaurants, just open spaces even will
Speaker 1: have publicly accessible WiFi. But if you're using either your
Speaker 1: phone or your laptop to connect to them, what you're
Speaker 1: doing could be seen by somebody else if they've got
Speaker 1: the right technology, if they have the right kind of setup,
Speaker 1: and bad guys will actually do this to try to
Speaker 1: trick you to get access to your data, and that
Speaker 1: kind of makes the whole personal computer thing feel not
Speaker 1: so personal, right Your data may be subject to this
Speaker 1: kind of breach. That's why I think you need to
Speaker 1: get Express VPN. A VPN's a virtual private network. Well
Speaker 1: that means is that it adds protection to your digital world.
Speaker 1: It encrypts your information so people can't access it and
Speaker 1: steal it. And it also covers up your IP address
Speaker 1: so when you're surfing the web, when you're doing these things,
Speaker 1: especially in a public Wi Fi for example, people can't
Speaker 1: know who you are and then get access to all
Speaker 1: of your data. Costs. It costs less than six dollars
Speaker 1: a month, and it puts a layer of privacy and
Speaker 1: protection on all of your devices. Express VPN's the best
Speaker 1: name in this business. This is the one that I have.
Speaker 1: It's what you should go with too. Download the service
Speaker 1: today for less than six dollars a month and give
Speaker 1: yourself privacy on five of your devices, your PC, your phone,
Speaker 1: your tablet, whatever devices you're using the most. The website
Speaker 1: to set yourself up is Express vpn dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's Express vpn dot com slash buck. To get three
Speaker 1: months of service with an annual plan extro okay one
Speaker 1: year plan three months free, just go to Express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. Excellent piece on woke schools written
Speaker 1: by a fellow named Paul Rossi and it is put
Speaker 1: on the Barry Weiss substack and it's I refuse to
Speaker 1: stand by while my students are indoctrinated. Not just some
Speaker 1: backstory here. The school and question that we're about to
Speaker 1: talk about is a rival school to the grammar school
Speaker 1: that I went to. I went to a private Catholic
Speaker 1: school in New York City, and this is also a
Speaker 1: private Catholic school in New York City. One that is
Speaker 1: I used to play them in sports. I had friends
Speaker 1: from this school, so I know this place a bit.
Speaker 1: I haven't really spent much time in the actual school,
Speaker 1: but I know this school a bit and that this
Speaker 1: has happened. Now, I can just tell you this isn't
Speaker 1: a one off. What I'm about to talk to you
Speaker 1: about here written by this this math teacher at the
Speaker 1: Grace Church School in New York City, Paul Rossy. This
Speaker 1: has occurred in private schools across New York City, across
Speaker 1: the country, elite schools now, because the people that you
Speaker 1: know that think of themselves as elite educators and many
Speaker 1: of the very wealthy parents are already on board for
Speaker 1: the stuff. But they they have become ultra woke. So
Speaker 1: while they're running these institutions, it's a fascinating situation. They're
Speaker 1: running these institutions that are often costing let's say forty
Speaker 1: fifty sixty thousand dollars a year grammar school. Folks, I
Speaker 1: know this is some parts of the country. You're like, what,
Speaker 1: sixty thousand dollars a year for the first grade. Yes,
Speaker 1: that exists in New York, in Los Angeles, maybe a
Speaker 1: handful of other places, maybe San Francisco, DC's got some
Speaker 1: you know Sidwell friends, where the Obama children went. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's some schools that are forty fifty thousand dollars there
Speaker 1: a year for grammar school. So you're basically paying what
Speaker 1: you used to think you'd pay to go to Harvard.
Speaker 1: I mean, now those places are closer to seventy grand
Speaker 1: when you add in basic living expenses. Anyway, I want
Speaker 1: to read you from this piece because this takes you
Speaker 1: through the real mentality of the woke left in a
Speaker 1: way that you need to be familiar with. They're so
Speaker 1: there's so much cognitive dissonance at work here. There's so
Speaker 1: much absurdity. They will tell you you're allowed to have
Speaker 1: your opinion, you know, the administrator at a school like this,
Speaker 1: and then Comma in the next breath say, but your
Speaker 1: opinion is basically violence and there may be professional consequences
Speaker 1: against you for it. This is really I mean, this
Speaker 1: would be like saying, if we're having a first Amendment,
Speaker 1: a real you know, old school First Amendment debate about
Speaker 1: the government, it would be like if the government showed
Speaker 1: up and said, we're shutting down your you know, oh,
Speaker 1: you're allowed to have your opinions about this you know,
Speaker 1: political issue. You're totally allowed. But we're now going to
Speaker 1: seize and shut down your printing press and close your newspaper.
Speaker 1: But but you're allowed to have your opinion. We're just
Speaker 1: gonna shut it down and punish you and make sure
Speaker 1: you can't have your opinion. I know that's crazy, but
Speaker 1: that's where this is. Now, that's actually the circumstance in
Speaker 1: which we find ourselves with this. So let me read
Speaker 1: you from something excellent. Peace. Barry Weiss, who was supposed
Speaker 1: to get some conservative voices, not even balanced, just voices
Speaker 1: the New York Times editorial page. She left because the
Speaker 1: idiot woke. You know, twenty two to forty year olds
Speaker 1: at the New York Times who work in the newsroom,
Speaker 1: who work as you know, assistant assignment editors or blah
Speaker 1: blah whatever. The different journo jobs are these days. They
Speaker 1: are insane. I mean, they're not normal. They don't view
Speaker 1: the world the way a normal person does. They really
Speaker 1: think they're in some you know, jihad against conservatism and
Speaker 1: free speech as a moral obligation, insofar as they actually
Speaker 1: believe in any kind of morality. Here's what the piece.
Speaker 1: Here's what the piece goes. I refuse to stand by
Speaker 1: while my students are indoctrinated. Children are afraid to challenge
Speaker 1: the repressive ideology that rules our schools. That's why I am.
Speaker 1: Here's what he writes. I'm a teacher at Grace Church
Speaker 1: High School in Manhattan. Ten years ago. I changed careers
Speaker 1: when I discovered how rewarding it is to help young
Speaker 1: people explore the truth and beauty of mathematics. I love
Speaker 1: my work as a teacher. My first obligation is to
Speaker 1: my students. But right now my school is asking me
Speaker 1: to embrace anti racism training and pedagogy that I believe
Speaker 1: is deeply harmful to them and to any person who
Speaker 1: seeks to nurture the virtues of curiosity, empathy, and understanding.
Speaker 1: Anti racist training sounds righteous, but it is the opposite
Speaker 1: of truth in advertising. It requires teachers like myself to
Speaker 1: treat students differently on the basis of race. Furthermore, in
Speaker 1: order to maintain a united front for our students, teachers
Speaker 1: at GRACE are directed to confine our doubts about this
Speaker 1: pedagog ooh about this framework. A pedagogical framework, that's the word.
Speaker 1: I was looking for. Two conversations with an in house
Speaker 1: office of community engagement, for whom every significant objection leads
Speaker 1: to a foregone conclusion. Any doubting students are likewise challenged
Speaker 1: to reframe their views to conform us orthodoxy. It really
Speaker 1: is very maoist, it is. It is very Soviet in
Speaker 1: its approach. This is they're telling you that they want
Speaker 1: to have an open dialogue, but then they tell you
Speaker 1: that what you're supposed to think as part of that
Speaker 1: dialogue at supposedly open dialogue. And then when you say, well,
Speaker 1: I don't agree with that, they say, right, we're going
Speaker 1: to challenge you to think about why you do agree
Speaker 1: with it. There is no room for disagreement, they see.
Speaker 1: This is the point. This is the point. This is
Speaker 1: why they take this approach. Your fighting back or your
Speaker 1: disagreement with what they claim is evidence of further they're
Speaker 1: guilt of what you've done. You see what I'm saying
Speaker 1: this is it's very similar to you know which trials.
Speaker 1: We always think of Salem witch trials this country. People
Speaker 1: don't realize that around the time of the Thirty Years
Speaker 1: War there were witch trial crazes throughout Europe and thousands
Speaker 1: and thousands of women were burned at the stake, drowned.
Speaker 1: And one of the ways they would always approach in
Speaker 1: this trial was that the objection to being called a
Speaker 1: witch was proof of being a witch. And this is
Speaker 1: just like the framework set up in this country for
Speaker 1: racism and white supremacy. Objections to being called or to
Speaker 1: something being described as racism or white supremacy is a
Speaker 1: priori not based on actual observation or based on fact,
Speaker 1: but just based on assumed wisdom, on assumed truth. You
Speaker 1: must in fact be a racist or white supremacist because
Speaker 1: you don't agree that you're a racist or white supremacist.
Speaker 1: This is very dangerous but very prevalent thinking. Here's what
Speaker 1: this guy Rossi, Paul Rossi at the Grace Church School
Speaker 1: in New York, continues with my school. This is the quote.
Speaker 1: My school, like so many others, induces students via shame
Speaker 1: and sophistry to identify primarily with their race before their
Speaker 1: individual identities are fully formed. Students are pressured to conform
Speaker 1: their opinions to those broadly associated with their race and gender,
Speaker 1: and to minimize or dismiss individual experiences that don't match
Speaker 1: those assumptions. The morally compromised status of oppressor is assigned
Speaker 1: to one group of students based on their immutable characteristics.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, dependency, resentment, and moral superiority are cultivated
Speaker 1: in students considered oppressed. End quote. Resentment and moral superiority
Speaker 1: cultivated in the oppressed groups. This is the kind of
Speaker 1: stuff that's you're not allowed to really say out loud,
Speaker 1: are you? But he's writing it. He's saying it. Have
Speaker 1: you ever observed that? And some of your own experiences
Speaker 1: with the wokeness with anti racism training, with corporate diversity seminars,
Speaker 1: He writes that resentment and moral superiority are cultivated in
Speaker 1: the oppressed. And when you hear things like this and
Speaker 1: you and you, they have that ring of immediate truth
Speaker 1: you say to yourself, isn't an astonishing thing when the
Speaker 1: truth can be said aloud or can be written as
Speaker 1: is the case. All of this, he writes quote is
Speaker 1: done in the name of equity, but it is the
Speaker 1: opposite of fair in reality. All of this reinforces the
Speaker 1: worst impulses we have as human beings, are tendency toward tribe,
Speaker 1: bism and sectarianism that a truly liberal education is meant
Speaker 1: to transcend. Recently, this is amazing. I raised questions about
Speaker 1: this ideology at a mandatory white's only student and faculty
Speaker 1: zoom meeting. Such racially segregated sessions are now commonplace at
Speaker 1: my school. It was a bait and switch self care
Speaker 1: seminar that labeled objectivity, individualism, fear of open conflict, and
Speaker 1: even a right to comfort as characteristics of white supremacy.
Speaker 1: I doubted that these human attributes, many of them virtues
Speaker 1: reframed as vices, should be racialized in this way in
Speaker 1: the zoom chat. I also question whether one must define
Speaker 1: oneself in terms of a racial identity at all. My
Speaker 1: goal was to model for students that they should feel
Speaker 1: safe to question ideological assertions if they felt moved to
Speaker 1: do so. It seemed like my questions broke the ice.
Speaker 1: Students and even a few teachers offered a broad range
Speaker 1: of questions and observations. Many students said it was a
Speaker 1: more productive and substantive discussion than they expected. However, when
Speaker 1: my questions were shared outside this forum, violating the school
Speaker 1: norm of confidentiality, I was informed by the head of
Speaker 1: the high school that my philosophical challenges had caused harm
Speaker 1: to students, given that these topics were life and death
Speaker 1: matters about people's flesh and blood and bone. I was
Speaker 1: reprimanded for acting like an independent agent of a set
Speaker 1: of principles or ideas or beliefs, and I was told
Speaker 1: that by doing so, I failed to serve the greater
Speaker 1: good and the higher truth. He further informed me that
Speaker 1: I had created dissonance for vulnerable and unformed thinkers and
Speaker 1: neurological disturbance in students, beings, and systems. The school's director
Speaker 1: of studies added that my remark could even be constant,
Speaker 1: could even constitute harassment. End quote. Yes, the weird pseudo scientific,
Speaker 1: almost Marxist twanged, this is about harm to flesh and
Speaker 1: blood because of these students, you know racial racial differences,
Speaker 1: and you can't talk about this. And by the way,
Speaker 1: if you do talk about this, if you don't embrace
Speaker 1: this sectarian struggle that they're they're putting forward. It's also harassment.
Speaker 1: One somebody who's in a position of authority of you
Speaker 1: at a job starts using the phrase constitutes harassment. That's
Speaker 1: the we might fire ass warning. Right, That's what that is.
Speaker 1: Once you start using phrases like hostile workplace or harassment,
Speaker 1: that's yearing up to take action against you. And that's
Speaker 1: that's not a that's not something that just you can
Speaker 1: you can take as as idol chatter. That's something that
Speaker 1: could be acted upon and could have severe consequences for somebody.
Speaker 1: And it clearly is meant to send a message to
Speaker 1: this fellow. I'm gonna come back with more here of this.
Speaker 1: It's on Barry Weiss's substack, So Barry Weiss dot substack
Speaker 1: dot com. Paul Rossy, math teacher here in New York
Speaker 1: and the truth about wokens it gets even crazier, folks.
Speaker 1: So we're talking about this, uh, this piece from a
Speaker 1: New York City high school in New York City, will
Speaker 1: Grammar School math teacher at an elite school. The costs
Speaker 1: about sixty thousand dollars a year. Elite really just meaning
Speaker 1: it's very very expensive. So it's it's a school for
Speaker 1: rich people, really or close to rich people. Although I
Speaker 1: know these schools and they usually will take in what
Speaker 1: they call in New York City prep for Prep, that
Speaker 1: was the name of the program, and it's underprivileged minority
Speaker 1: students or you know, low income minority students who go
Speaker 1: to these schools for free. There's usually a small number
Speaker 1: of them in each class, and so that's how these
Speaker 1: schools cover themselves like, oh, we've got diversity. You know,
Speaker 1: we've got forty students and it is usually small, forty
Speaker 1: fifty students a class, but we've got you know, three
Speaker 1: or four minority students who are going for free. And
Speaker 1: then they do all this talk about wokeness and diversity.
Speaker 1: But so we've already had this guy get in trouble, right.
Speaker 1: This is a math teacher in New York. He got
Speaker 1: in trouble for at a whites only zoom session mandated
Speaker 1: by the school because they separate people out by race
Speaker 1: in the faculty to have discussions, which is crazy, but
Speaker 1: they do this. Now. He raised that he didn't like
Speaker 1: some of the teaching that was going on, the indoctrination,
Speaker 1: and he was told that it might be harassment. The
Speaker 1: head of the school, his boss says, all this stuff,
Speaker 1: it gets worse. Back into this piece quote, the head
Speaker 1: of the school ordered all high school advisors to read
Speaker 1: a public reprimand of my conduct out loud to every
Speaker 1: student in this school. It was a surreal experience walking
Speaker 1: the halls alone and hearing the words emitting from each classroom.
Speaker 1: Events from last week compel us to underscore some aspects
Speaker 1: of our mission and share some thoughts about our community.
Speaker 1: The statement began at independent schools, with their history of
Speaker 1: predominantly white populations. Racism colludes with other forms of bias, sexism, classism, ableism,
Speaker 1: and so much more to undermine our stated ideals, and
Speaker 1: we must work hard to undo this history. Then, he writes,
Speaker 1: students from low income families experience culture shock at our school,
Speaker 1: Racist incidents happen, and bias can influence relationships. All true,
Speaker 1: but addressing such problems with a call to undo history
Speaker 1: lacks any kind of limiting principle and pairs any allegation
Speaker 1: of bigotry with a priori guilt. My own contract for
Speaker 1: next year requires me to participate in restorative practices designed
Speaker 1: by the Office of Community Engagement in order to heal
Speaker 1: my relationship with students of color and other students in
Speaker 1: my classes. The details of these practices remain unspecified until
Speaker 1: I agree to sign. I asked my uncomfortable questions in
Speaker 1: a self care meeting because I felt the duty to
Speaker 1: my students. I wanted to be a voice for the
Speaker 1: many students of different backgrounds who have approached me over
Speaker 1: the course of the past several years to express their
Speaker 1: frustration with indoctrination at our school, but are afraid to
Speaker 1: speak up. They report that in their classes and other
Speaker 1: discussions they must never challenge any of the premises of
Speaker 1: anti racist teachings, which are deeply informed by critical race theory.
Speaker 1: These concerns are confirmed for me when I attend grade
Speaker 1: level in all school meetings about race or gender issues.
Speaker 1: It's just madness. That's the end of the quote. Therefo
Speaker 1: It's just madness, you know, he goes on. I don't
Speaker 1: have time to get into everything in this piece. Like
Speaker 1: I said, I'll share it on Facebook and on Twitter,
Speaker 1: so you can find that a buck Sexton and we'll
Speaker 1: do a right up if it. We'll put something up
Speaker 1: on bucksexon dot com. But everything in this piece that
Speaker 1: they write about here. You've heard of similar things in
Speaker 1: other places. This is becoming mainstream. The indoctrination is utter
Speaker 1: madness and it needs to stop. People need to understand
Speaker 1: that this is completely unacceptable and they are taking what
Speaker 1: it really is, a stalinist approach to this. This is
Speaker 1: the accepted way to think about things, and if you disagree,
Speaker 1: we will punish you until you agree that any concerns
Speaker 1: you have would just be more evidence of what you know,
Speaker 1: white supremacy really is. That's what they're saying. Crazy. Jack
Speaker 1: Pusso but formerly a naval intelligence officer and now with
Speaker 1: One America News joints. He is following the Derek Chauvin
Speaker 1: trial in Minneapolis and all the situations unfolding in the
Speaker 1: Minneapolis area right now with riots, than the looting, and
Speaker 1: then the craziness that's happening. Jack, Great to have you
Speaker 1: back on the show. Hey, Buck, it's great to be here.
Speaker 1: Wit we did. We were talking last time. I think
Speaker 1: I was on about what would happen in the aftermath
Speaker 1: of the trial, and yet the trial is still going,
Speaker 1: but the riots have already begun. It's it's really a
Speaker 1: tinder box, Jack. We all know that it was a
Speaker 1: tense situation, preparations in downtown Minneapolis at the courthouse, and
Speaker 1: just anything that thought would be a high priority target
Speaker 1: for these riots. It looks like a war zone already.
Speaker 1: And then you add to it this this shooting of Dante, right,
Speaker 1: the riots that have been happening there. Let's drill down
Speaker 1: because because my understanding is that that there have been
Speaker 1: some pretty big bombshells and just the last twenty four
Speaker 1: to forty eight hours in the Chauvin trial, which as
Speaker 1: we know, is going to have an enormous effect on
Speaker 1: what happens in Minneapolis over the next week or so. Yeah, Buck,
Speaker 1: that's absolutely right. So what happened so far is that
Speaker 1: this week, early Monday, the prosecution rested their case in chief,
Speaker 1: and so then what happens is the defense begins to
Speaker 1: put up their side in chief of the defense in chief.
Speaker 1: Up until that point, we'd only really heard from one
Speaker 1: side of the case, that being the prosecution side of
Speaker 1: the state side, which is being sort of quarterbacked like
Speaker 1: Keith Ellison. Now it's the defense's turn. They're coming forward
Speaker 1: with their witnesses, their medical experts, their user force experts.
Speaker 1: If you heard yesterday, we're hearing today, and interestingly enough,
Speaker 1: very interesting I think for a lot of people to
Speaker 1: note is that in that car go all the way
Speaker 1: back to May twenty fifth or twenty twenty, the day
Speaker 1: in question, there were three people in that car. It
Speaker 1: was George Floyd, Maurice Hall, and Swanda Hill. The prosecution
Speaker 1: did not call the two passengers in the car up
Speaker 1: to testify. It was in fact the defense that brought
Speaker 1: forward the two passengers who were with Floyd during that
Speaker 1: day and during the time when the police first arrived.
Speaker 1: That's not usually the type of thing you would see
Speaker 1: in a case like this. Now, what do you take
Speaker 1: from that? Jack? Well, So it's very interesting because Maurice Hall,
Speaker 1: of course, had already been fingered by George Floyd's girlfriend
Speaker 1: as being the man who had sold him drugs in
Speaker 1: the past. He said he was a drug dealer or
Speaker 1: someone she had given him an ultimatum about even spending
Speaker 1: time with. She didn't like this guy, didn't want George
Speaker 1: to be around him. Right, he comes up and takes
Speaker 1: the fifth He says he will not testify because under
Speaker 1: Minnesota law. His lawyer also brought this up as well,
Speaker 1: that if he sold him drugs sold Floyd drugs that
Speaker 1: contributed to Floyd's death mixed with methamphetamine which he was
Speaker 1: telling people where percocetses or street counterfeit drugs. Under that scenario,
Speaker 1: under the law, that's considered third degree murder, so that
Speaker 1: actually could he could be held liable for the murder
Speaker 1: of George Floyd. And of course he has a Fifth
Speaker 1: Amendment rights to not incriminate himself. He took the stand today,
Speaker 1: took the fifth and the judge said that he would
Speaker 1: allow that he would not compel the testimony, and so
Speaker 1: he did not testify. Then Swanda Hill yesterday testified and
Speaker 1: gave some very interesting testimonies to the jury that I
Speaker 1: don't think has been heard yet. And she stated that
Speaker 1: while they were in the car, so Buck, you remember,
Speaker 1: this whole thing started with a counterfeit twenty dollars bill, right,
Speaker 1: And when George Floyd left that store, the Cup Foods
Speaker 1: convenience store workers then came out and said that they
Speaker 1: were asking him, hey, can you just give us the
Speaker 1: twenty dollars so we can square this up, give us
Speaker 1: a real twenty right, And they never really explained why
Speaker 1: it was that until they called police that George Floyd
Speaker 1: simply didn't just drive away right, you know, the scene,
Speaker 1: not stay there. Shawanda Hill and heard that question for
Speaker 1: us yesterday when she got up and testified very strangely
Speaker 1: that George Floyd suddenly fell asleep, almost passed out, seemingly
Speaker 1: in the driver's seat of that vehicle while it was
Speaker 1: sitting outside the convenience store. She said that she took
Speaker 1: a phone call and then she turned over and George
Speaker 1: was asleep, and said that she couldn't rouse him, the
Speaker 1: workers of the store couldn't rouse him, and it was
Speaker 1: only later when police finally arrived, that he was able
Speaker 1: to get up. Now, also, due to issues and self
Speaker 1: incrimination of the Fifth Amendment, the judge didn't allow questioning
Speaker 1: of whether or not she had viewed George Floyd using drugs,
Speaker 1: whether she had supplied him with drugs, etc. However, that's
Speaker 1: something that really speaks to the defenses connotation of their
Speaker 1: argument that Floyd was, as we know, of course from
Speaker 1: the tox scholar report, was using fentanyl and that may
Speaker 1: have ingested a large amount of fentanyl mixed with methamphetamine,
Speaker 1: combined with his already heightened medical condition, which of course
Speaker 1: we've heard from every medical examiner has said that this
Speaker 1: guy definitely had medical what you would consider a cardiac disease,
Speaker 1: ninety percent oclusion on one side, seventy five percent the
Speaker 1: other side of his heart. This guy was a guy
Speaker 1: who did not have a health and heart and for
Speaker 1: him to take that amount of fentanyl, plus we know
Speaker 1: later when police arrived, he then shoot some other fentanyl
Speaker 1: pills to try to potentially try to hide them. They
Speaker 1: or later found much later in the police squad card
Speaker 1: that all of these things may have contributed to this.
Speaker 1: And so it kind of answered that key question of
Speaker 1: why he stayed there and why he didn't simply leave.
Speaker 1: He was not conscious for that entire period, which is
Speaker 1: new information to the journey. Okay, so we're talking to
Speaker 1: Jack Posobik of One America News, and Jack, the use
Speaker 1: of force issue has been central here. I want you
Speaker 1: to tell me what the most recent expert for the
Speaker 1: defense says about the putting the knee on the neck
Speaker 1: and what's where are we on that. Yes, see, this
Speaker 1: expert from the defense who came up, he's positively testify
Speaker 1: that using a prone position is something that's absolutely considered
Speaker 1: a standard for police practice, especially when a suspect is
Speaker 1: resisting arrest and using what he referred to as aggressive
Speaker 1: resistance by Floyd. Again plots from ever from the full
Speaker 1: video that came out, not just the nine minutes but
Speaker 1: the full video. Floyd was was resisting multiple officers who
Speaker 1: were trying who were asking him to sit in the
Speaker 1: back of a police car. He refused to do that,
Speaker 1: he fought them off. Then when they laid him on
Speaker 1: the ground ere he actually requested to be laid on
Speaker 1: the ground. He kicked several times at the officers. And
Speaker 1: so police are trained, and this is what the expert testified.
Speaker 1: They are trained and when they are dealing with that
Speaker 1: type of active aggressive resistance, that holding someone in the
Speaker 1: prone position is not only supported from an objective standard,
Speaker 1: but also recommended not just for the safety the officers,
Speaker 1: but for the safety of the suspect because if they
Speaker 1: may be experiencing intoxication, drugs, or other means, and that
Speaker 1: they may become a harm to themselves. This is actually
Speaker 1: something that's trained to police officers and certainly would have
Speaker 1: been consistent with the training that showed them received. How
Speaker 1: could we be in this place where we're told by
Speaker 1: some law enforcement experts who appearing that this would never
Speaker 1: be a restraint that would be allowed to be used.
Speaker 1: But others are saying no, this is actually right from
Speaker 1: the training manual right. And so you've really got a
Speaker 1: situation where because the way these policies are written, they've
Speaker 1: been rewritten so many times after various use of force
Speaker 1: cases throughout the country that it's something where it can
Speaker 1: become There's a lot of holes in this. It's very complicated.
Speaker 1: There's a ton of bureaucracy. Buck you. I know you
Speaker 1: dealt with this when you're in the intel community. I
Speaker 1: dealt with is certainly in military and in the IC
Speaker 1: where you can any good jag can find a piece
Speaker 1: of policy that they can point to and says that
Speaker 1: you broke it because the policy is that large. What
Speaker 1: it really does come down to is the training and
Speaker 1: it comes down to what would be accepted actresses of
Speaker 1: the officers. Now, Jack, what can you tell us about
Speaker 1: the expected timeline here and where this is all heading.
Speaker 1: I mean, from what I've read, we could have the
Speaker 1: jury going into deliberations as soon as next week. Is
Speaker 1: that's still where things stand, that's correct, borrowing any significant
Speaker 1: delays this week, which quite frankly the defense has been
Speaker 1: rather quick. He actually went through six witnesses yesterday, whereas
Speaker 1: the you know, the prosecution would take one witness and
Speaker 1: seemingly one witness per day almost or just a couple
Speaker 1: of witnesses per day. They're currently scheduled. The judge thinks
Speaker 1: that starting Monday, the joury will go into deliberations. He
Speaker 1: actually pointed out at one point they should probably pack
Speaker 1: a bag because they will. Now this is something that's interesting.
Speaker 1: They will be sequestered throughout their deliberations. So that means
Speaker 1: when they're deliberating, they're in court, when they're not, they're
Speaker 1: going to be sequestered, probably in a hotel somewhere somewhere,
Speaker 1: whe they're kept away from media, they're kept away from
Speaker 1: from all They're not going to be given you know,
Speaker 1: the ability to text, you know, their friends and family,
Speaker 1: that type of thing, full sea questration. And so then
Speaker 1: we may Now that being said, I talked to numerous
Speaker 1: terranies about this. They said, you know what, you can
Speaker 1: really only guess a jury maybe ten to twenty percent
Speaker 1: of the time. So juries come back from verdicts that
Speaker 1: nobody could see gummy in many cases. So this and
Speaker 1: then same goes for the length of deliberations. This could
Speaker 1: be something where it's over very quickly, could be something
Speaker 1: where it's over very over a very lengthy period, could
Speaker 1: be a couple of days. I have heard through sort
Speaker 1: of through the grape vine that some prosecutors and some
Speaker 1: lawyers in the Minneapolis area have reached out to the
Speaker 1: Minnesota National Guard in order to make them know that
Speaker 1: there is a probability that there could be a hung jury. Now,
Speaker 1: hung jury means they that the joury simply votes and
Speaker 1: votes and votes, and as of course we need we
Speaker 1: need twelve to either quit or find guilty. If they
Speaker 1: cannot get to those twelve votes, then it could come
Speaker 1: to a situation where there is a hung jury. There
Speaker 1: is a significant disagreement. If I passed it there and
Speaker 1: not even give me a blockage if they are not
Speaker 1: all out of my pass in which case that would
Speaker 1: go back to the judge and say, look, we have
Speaker 1: not been able to decide this and it is a
Speaker 1: very close case. It is a very close question on
Speaker 1: a number of these issues. Jad the prone factor contributed
Speaker 1: to his death. If so, how much, and wasn't enough
Speaker 1: to include one of these charges either murder or manslaughter.
Speaker 1: That's really what this jury is going to have to question. Jack.
Speaker 1: And before we let you go, it's Jack Posobic of
Speaker 1: One America News. We're speaking to hear about the Derek
Speaker 1: Schouven trial. Do we have any sense I know that
Speaker 1: self described Antifa or just antifa the media says self
Speaker 1: described Antifa has already shown up in the area. We
Speaker 1: have all this this sense of a combustible environment because
Speaker 1: of what's already happened with Dante, right, and it's ten
Speaker 1: miles away. That shooting was ten miles away from his
Speaker 1: court house, so it's right nearby. And if is there
Speaker 1: such a thing that there will be a verdict that
Speaker 1: will stop riots or is the expectation that there will
Speaker 1: likely be riots at the verdict no matter what you know,
Speaker 1: I don't think so. Having studied Antifa, I'm actually putting
Speaker 1: out a book on Antifa very soon. They will use
Speaker 1: either either scenario to justify more riots. It's it's quite
Speaker 1: simple think of it. If he has found that guilty,
Speaker 1: they will say the system is corrupt and so you
Speaker 1: must riot. If he's found guilty, they'll say the police
Speaker 1: or murderers, so you must riot. So they've put themselves
Speaker 1: in a position where either outcome is will support their
Speaker 1: their ends, because they have a predetermined plan to riot,
Speaker 1: to support actual sedition, actual insurrection in the United States,
Speaker 1: and they view the entire United States system as a
Speaker 1: form of social fascism. They would say that that the
Speaker 1: church is fascism. It would say that banks are fascism,
Speaker 1: that law itself is fascism. And so this goes back
Speaker 1: to Stalin and so this in this encompassing you could say,
Speaker 1: ideology that goes to say papology. They will use anything,
Speaker 1: any excuse to justify their means. Jack Psobic one American News.
Speaker 1: Jack always great to have him, and thanks so much.
Speaker 1: Appreciate it. Buck, thanks so much. And now they've got
Speaker 1: this humanitarian crisis, national security crisis down there which is
Speaker 1: desperately in need of a solution. One of the things
Speaker 1: they could do, it's been a lot of talk about infrastructure.
Speaker 1: The administration's talking about infrastructure. Build one important piece of
Speaker 1: infrastructures to finish the building the border wall. That would
Speaker 1: be really important, and it's already been fund that Congress
Speaker 1: has appropriated money for that. The administration has chosen not
Speaker 1: to take those dollars and to finish building out the wall.
Speaker 1: We heard from border patrol how important the wall is.
Speaker 1: Finish the wall. Senator John Thune says, Now, let me
Speaker 1: tell you I'm I'm pro wall because I have actually
Speaker 1: spoken to border border Patrol. I've seen the wall. I
Speaker 1: understand how this would help. It is not a to
Speaker 1: see you, not even close. And with what we see
Speaker 1: going on right now, I gotta tell you the wall
Speaker 1: would help, but it wouldn't help with the primary problem.
Speaker 1: The wall would help with the secondary problem at our border.
Speaker 1: Let me explain. We'll start with the secondary. The secondary
Speaker 1: issue is that because you have border patrol so overwhelmed
Speaker 1: with people coming to the border, they are stretched thin,
Speaker 1: and therefore cartels and just people who aren't even going
Speaker 1: to try to go through the asylum system at all,
Speaker 1: but just want to take a run and run into
Speaker 1: the US approach. But particularly for the drug cartels, that's
Speaker 1: the best thing, right because they're not showing up and
Speaker 1: turning themselves in. They want to get their illegal contraband
Speaker 1: in the country. So for the cartels, the wall is helpful.
Speaker 1: It's helpful to deal with the cartels to have a wall,
Speaker 1: because then you can greater concentrate your border patrol forces
Speaker 1: that you do have in areas where there's high traffic crossings,
Speaker 1: and you can actually cut down on some of that.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna stop it. You can cut down on
Speaker 1: some of that. But the primary issue here is not people.
Speaker 1: Everyone has to understand this, and I think that this
Speaker 1: is getting lost in some of the coverage of what's
Speaker 1: Diviiden administration crisis at our border, which is a tremendous crisis.
Speaker 1: The problem is that people aren't trying to sneak into
Speaker 1: the US. Who are the unaccompanied miners and the family
Speaker 1: units and others who were showing up. They are very
Speaker 1: much flagging down. They walk to the border, the actual
Speaker 1: physical border that separates the United States from Mexicach. In
Speaker 1: some places there is no border. It's just land and
Speaker 1: you just walk and you've crossed over into territory. They
Speaker 1: walk and they say, hey, I'm here, take me. I
Speaker 1: want to claim asylum. A wall does nothing to stop that, right,
Speaker 1: because the best thing that a wall does for you
Speaker 1: is slow down people who are trying to have no
Speaker 1: contact with law enforcement and are just hoping to run
Speaker 1: into the I mean literally run into the United States.
Speaker 1: So a wall, you see them, you say, oh, they're
Speaker 1: trying to cross it illegally, and you stop them, You
Speaker 1: grab them, and then you can put them in process
Speaker 1: and then and then deport them if they're for the
Speaker 1: illegal crossing a wall. With the policies the Biden administration
Speaker 1: is using, doesn't do that much because people just show up.
Speaker 1: Let's say, let's say that I was at an area
Speaker 1: of wall of the border where there is a wall,
Speaker 1: and I show up and I say, and I'm there,
Speaker 1: and I'm part of a family, and I show up
Speaker 1: with my wife and my child. Well, we can get
Speaker 1: over that wall or find a place where the wall ends,
Speaker 1: because the wall is not contiguous anywhere. We just go
Speaker 1: to the edge of the wall and yeah, the cameras
Speaker 1: and the and the censors will let border patrol know
Speaker 1: and they'll be waiting there for me. And you know
Speaker 1: what my approach would be if I was I'd say, great, hey,
Speaker 1: border patrol, I want to claim asylum. Let's start that
Speaker 1: whole process. And they take me in, they feed me,
Speaker 1: and they start fingerprinting and doing all these things. You see,
Speaker 1: the wall does not stop this. And I think everyone
Speaker 1: needs to understand that the wall does not end this.
Speaker 1: So while I'm pro wall, don't get me wrong, the
Speaker 1: wall should be finished. The wall is a good thing,
Speaker 1: it's not enough. It's about political will, it's about rule
Speaker 1: of law. It's about enforcing what's already on the books,
Speaker 1: and the Biden administration will not do that. And as
Speaker 1: long as that is the case, this doesn't change. The
Speaker 1: show ain't over yet, folks. It's time for roll call. Indeed,
Speaker 1: it is Facebook dot com, slash buck sexon or Team Bucket,
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com and all of the good, all of
Speaker 1: the good things go on in the roll call today.
Speaker 1: I appreciate you all writing in, and please do pass
Speaker 1: the buck. These the two things you can do to
Speaker 1: keep the freedom hutter rocking, so don't come a knocking.
Speaker 1: The two things you can do are you can You
Speaker 1: can tell somebody about the show the best not just
Speaker 1: tell them send them a link. You can send them
Speaker 1: a link to bucksex and dot com. Just send them,
Speaker 1: just send them, you know, the actual link on their
Speaker 1: phone buckex and dot com. Check out this guy's podcast.
Speaker 1: Or you can take a Spotify or I iHeartRadio or
Speaker 1: Apple podcast link of the Buck Sex and Show and
Speaker 1: text that or email that to somebody. The most helpful
Speaker 1: thing you can do. Please do spread the word. We
Speaker 1: want more and more people listening. I think this is
Speaker 1: the best conservative show out there. It's gonna say it.
Speaker 1: I do so no qualms about it. So please spread
Speaker 1: the word. And we grow every month thanks to you.
Speaker 1: So we're doing great, but I want us to keep
Speaker 1: doing great. And I'm not going to arrest until you know.
Speaker 1: We are really just at that I don't even know
Speaker 1: what the number would be able, We're just at that
Speaker 1: place where I feel like everyone really understands that this
Speaker 1: is the show that should be listening to. So with that, Oh,
Speaker 1: and speak of shows to listen to, we released a
Speaker 1: multi podcast last night. You'll see it in the feed
Speaker 1: of your podcast. If you're a radio listener, and we
Speaker 1: love all of our radio love our radio affiliates across
Speaker 1: the country. But if you're radio listener, this is your opportunity.
Speaker 1: Go to buck Sexton dot com or go you know
Speaker 1: on Spotify, the iHeart app, pod Bean, Apple podcasts, any
Speaker 1: of those, whichever one you like the most, that are
Speaker 1: pretty all user friendly and easy. But let's say Apple podcasts.
Speaker 1: Go to Apple podcast, go to Buck Sexton Show, and
Speaker 1: even if you listen to the show, the whole show,
Speaker 1: and you listen to radio, that's fine. But the Siege
Speaker 1: of Multi part one podcast is out. It's only about
Speaker 1: forty minutes long, and it is what it really is.
Speaker 1: I want to do a two parter because there's been
Speaker 1: a fair amount of documentary kind of movies and things
Speaker 1: made about the actual siege, which I'm going to get
Speaker 1: to as well, but I want to understand what led
Speaker 1: up to because what leads up to the siege is incredible.
Speaker 1: And there's this guy who is one of the primary
Speaker 1: Knights of Malta, Knights of Saint John Knight's Hospitaller at
Speaker 1: the time of the actual siege, but later to be
Speaker 1: known as the Knights of Malta. There's a guy Madan
Speaker 1: Roma guy. He's French. This guy's a total badass. Okay,
Speaker 1: total badass, and is central to the events leading up
Speaker 1: to Malta the siege and then is at the siege
Speaker 1: and then later is one of the top admirals at
Speaker 1: the Battle of Lepanto, one of the greatest naval battles
Speaker 1: of all time in fifteen seventy one, which comes six
Speaker 1: years after Malta. So Roma guy. You'll learn about him
Speaker 1: in this podcast. I think you'll really appreciate the history
Speaker 1: of the backstory we get into. And again, the more
Speaker 1: people speaking of this, and I'm very open about this.
Speaker 1: I'm a capitalist and I'm all about this show. I
Speaker 1: want more people listening than even do. Right now. We've
Speaker 1: got a lot of people listening, but spread that it's
Speaker 1: a history show that is not no no talk about
Speaker 1: Biden or Trump or anything, no history, pure history shields High.
Speaker 1: The Siege of Malta Part one is out. The Siege
Speaker 1: of Malta Part two. We're looking to release that next week,
Speaker 1: probably Wednesday or Thursday next week, and you'll you'll hear
Speaker 1: that's gonna be the actual battle, which I mean I've read,
Speaker 1: I've read multiple books at this point just about the
Speaker 1: siege itself, and I've just done tons of research into
Speaker 1: this and I really look forward to telling you about this.
Speaker 1: One of the most one of the most amazing. I mean,
Speaker 1: the fact that it hasn't been made into a series
Speaker 1: or a movie, at least not a really well known one.
Speaker 1: It's kind of amazing to me because it's such an
Speaker 1: incredible story. I mean, the most really the most powerful
Speaker 1: military force in the world invades this island and it's
Speaker 1: just an absolute fight to the death for months between
Speaker 1: a pretty small band of Christian Nights, really a vestige
Speaker 1: of the Crusades, the Knights of Knights hospitaller and and
Speaker 1: they managed to spoiler alert, They managed to hold out
Speaker 1: against this which were unbelievable odds and change the course
Speaker 1: of the Mediterranean, change the course of Christendom and of
Speaker 1: world history in the process. Because what people don't often
Speaker 1: know is that the Ottomans were the Ottomans were thinking
Speaker 1: about how to get all the way to Rome, to
Speaker 1: the Vatican to take the seat of Christianity itself. At
Speaker 1: the time, that was the plan. They had already taken
Speaker 1: Constantinople turned into an instantful. The next stop for them
Speaker 1: was going to be Rome. They were going to have
Speaker 1: an invasion of mainland Italy and take the crown jewel
Speaker 1: of the Roman Catholicism and then from there strike into
Speaker 1: the heart of Europe itself. And you got to think
Speaker 1: from the Ottoman perspective, they had control of all of
Speaker 1: Asia minor of what we now think of as the
Speaker 1: Near East North Africa, tremendous empire, and they were stopped
Speaker 1: by this one bent one of the most amazing. If
Speaker 1: you like history, like military history and just history in general,
Speaker 1: you gotta check out The Siege of multipodcast, Part one,
Speaker 1: part of our Shield's High series. These are just passion
Speaker 1: projects for me. I just love this stuff, so I
Speaker 1: do these podcasts and there you go. So please do
Speaker 1: share them and let us know what you think. Let
Speaker 1: us know if there's another topic, a history topic you
Speaker 1: want me to do for Shields. Ye all right, Brad Rights, Hey,
Speaker 1: Buck and Mark love the show. One of my favorite
Speaker 1: parts has been watching your relationship with each other evolved
Speaker 1: over the last couple of years. I used to think
Speaker 1: producer Mark was borderline insubordinate because he would undermine Buck occasionally.
Speaker 1: Once I learned how young Mark was, I understood better. Anyway.
Speaker 1: I'm a huge fan. See you're a salty little fellow,
Speaker 1: mister Mark. I'm a huge fan of all aspects of
Speaker 1: the show now, especially like the way you two work
Speaker 1: together as a solid team. I do think you'll be
Speaker 1: a big part of filling the gaping hole in radio
Speaker 1: that was left by Rush's death. Buck, I thought of
Speaker 1: you as an air apparent long before Rush got sick.
Speaker 1: And even share that opinion with others. One thing you
Speaker 1: have that many others don't is genuine natural humor, which
Speaker 1: is woman throughout the show never seems gimmicky or forced.
Speaker 1: I take your call the patronized sponsor. Seriously, I've done
Speaker 1: the most with Black Rifle Coffee. Not only do I
Speaker 1: have a membership, but I know of at least three
Speaker 1: other households that do based on my experience and recommendation.
Speaker 1: Love you guys, love the show and shields I always
Speaker 1: brad Man, thank you so much for a really supportive
Speaker 1: and and really appreciated a note here for roll call.
Speaker 1: And yes, indeed, once you understand that producer Mark is
Speaker 1: a young whipper snapper and that part of this show
Speaker 1: is you know he's grown from being a a whipper
Speaker 1: snapper to a salty dog, and then you understand what's
Speaker 1: going on. Not even thirty, not even thirty yet, I
Speaker 1: know he sounds like he's fifty to you, guys, I
Speaker 1: don't even know how to respond to all of this
Speaker 1: insupporting it. What. Yeah, you know, when you're a little salty,
Speaker 1: something salty I will agree with, But I never defied. No, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: I know, I know Hey, look, you know people, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you this. You know, people are you know, even
Speaker 1: when I've had guests on who are friends of mine
Speaker 1: on whether it's this show or on TV in the past,
Speaker 1: then people joke around with me. You know, I appreciate
Speaker 1: that that your audience is like your team, and so
Speaker 1: they're you know, they're protective. But you know then, but
Speaker 1: what Brady was saying is that he knows that you're
Speaker 1: you're a right hand man on the team. So it's cool,
Speaker 1: like you know, it's it's fine, it's a little salt
Speaker 1: is all right, you guys. You know, Prucer Mark should
Speaker 1: earmuff himself. Now, this guy takes on so much responsibility
Speaker 1: every day, has to be so reliable and so on
Speaker 1: it and the fact that he does all that at
Speaker 1: I don't know, he's like twenty twenty two or something.
Speaker 1: That kids that the kids are practically in diapers, so well,
Speaker 1: twenty eight. It's not really twenty two. But because when
Speaker 1: did I go from almost twenty to almost thirty, I
Speaker 1: don't Yeah, I'm almo. We're trying to exaggerate it here
Speaker 1: a little bit, you know what I mean. It's part
Speaker 1: of the legend the legend of producer Mark. So that's true. Actually,
Speaker 1: I'm a fifteen years old and just about to be
Speaker 1: a freshman in high school. Yeah, he just sounds like
Speaker 1: he's fifteen. He smokes a packer Marlborough reads every day.
Speaker 1: That's why. That's why my voice is like, hey, it's
Speaker 1: producer Bark. Prucer Bark. All of a sudden sounds like great, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right, So there we go. Oh oh and and
Speaker 1: but Bratt on a on a serious note, it means
Speaker 1: so much to our sponsors because every single time you
Speaker 1: act on one of our one of our call to
Speaker 1: actions for a sponsor, every single one they see it.
Speaker 1: So every person out there everything, oh it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: You know, do I need to do I need to
Speaker 1: get a black rifle? Do I need to use Bamby
Speaker 1: if I own a small business, do I need to
Speaker 1: get express Vpiano whatever. Every single time you do and
Speaker 1: you use our promo code, you are sending a message
Speaker 1: to that sponsor that you support this show and you
Speaker 1: and you're purchasing their products and you keep our show
Speaker 1: on the air. It's like, I mean, it's it's like voting.
Speaker 1: I mean, every single vote counts. Don't ever think, oh, well,
Speaker 1: there's all these other people listening the Bucks action. No,
Speaker 1: we need every single one of you to a on it,
Speaker 1: every single one of you who can look. I know,
Speaker 1: you know, people have things they need, don't need time
Speaker 1: to tie all that. I get it. But if you can,
Speaker 1: I mean, if you you know. I mean, the coffee
Speaker 1: is an obvious one. But there are so many of
Speaker 1: these sponsors we have. You know, I talk to you
Speaker 1: about inflation. I mean, I own real gold and silver.
Speaker 1: I wish I could own a lot more, but I've
Speaker 1: built up some gold and silver that I have and
Speaker 1: I get it from the Oxford Gold Group. But that's true.
Speaker 1: I mean, I am concerned about inflation. I'm taking these
Speaker 1: actions myself. I bought a house through our sponsor. Done
Speaker 1: for your real estate. In fact, I've now worked with
Speaker 1: my brothers to buy more than one house, to set
Speaker 1: up a real estate portfolio to help for my retirement.
Speaker 1: I've done all that. That's all true. So you know,
Speaker 1: I mean everything I tell you about this stuff is true.
Speaker 1: But what I'm saying is, you know these are sponsors
Speaker 1: that I use, that I that I trust, and that
Speaker 1: when you use them as well, you're voting to keep
Speaker 1: the show on the air, and especially these days with
Speaker 1: all the corporate targeting and stuff that's going on, you know,
Speaker 1: it really matters that you support our sponsors. So please
Speaker 1: I ask you to really some thought to that, and
Speaker 1: you know, don't if you're listening on podcasts, don't fast
Speaker 1: forward through the commercials. And if you're listening me to
Speaker 1: a live read on radio, please give it some thought.
Speaker 1: And we appreciate every single one of you who does.
Speaker 1: By the way, we really do. Chris, Hey there, bucking Mark.
Speaker 1: I just want to throw it out there that, yes,
Speaker 1: Ted Lasser was a very good show. The wife and
Speaker 1: I watched it together. It was hilarious pretty much from
Speaker 1: beginning to end. And also Brooklyn nine nine is great
Speaker 1: as well. Toward the later seasons it gets a little
Speaker 1: less interesting and hilarious, but still funny. And on all
Speaker 1: the LEPRECN movies, they were amazingly cheesy and great for
Speaker 1: what they were. But the main thing we can't forget
Speaker 1: is that the very first LEPERCN movie introduced us to
Speaker 1: Jennifer Aniston. Keep Fighting the Good Fight, Fellows, Chris, absolutely
Speaker 1: true little known fact Jennifer Aniston of Friends Stardom, her
Speaker 1: first on screen role in a movie was lepre con one.
Speaker 1: Did you know that? Producer Mark didn't? And then she
Speaker 1: went on to star in one of the worst that
Speaker 1: comes ever. I'm just gonna pretend you didn't say that.
Speaker 1: I just I'm just, you know, I'm just gonna let
Speaker 1: that sadness sit inside me and act like you don't
Speaker 1: understand that Friends is a great show. I mean, you're
Speaker 1: not even You're not even taking the like slightly more
Speaker 1: acceptable position that Seinfeld's a better show than Friends. You're
Speaker 1: saying Friends is bad. Yeah, well, Seinfeld blows it out
Speaker 1: of the water, Like s I felt an example of
Speaker 1: what a good TV show is and Friends is an
Speaker 1: example of boring writing. See, I can't even get like,
Speaker 1: I can't even get the proper level of outrage going
Speaker 1: here because I agree with you it Seinfeld is a
Speaker 1: great show. It's not that. It's just that your denigration
Speaker 1: of Friends, I don't even say. Whenever it's on my
Speaker 1: eyes glass over, I'm like, this is supposed to be funny.
Speaker 1: I don't get it. But yeah, it is true that
Speaker 1: that Jennifer Aniston, you know, wearing a crop top with
Speaker 1: her hair kind of bobbed and everything back in the
Speaker 1: day was. You know, she was running around going, oh gosh,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, I don't know what's going on here, and
Speaker 1: you know, oh jeez, I don't know. I don't know.
Speaker 1: You know, you gotta talking where stuff that she does. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's like, oh gush, guy, he's I don't know what's
Speaker 1: going on. Oh I gesha and little and a lepricaan
Speaker 1: Oh hey, lassie, I am the lea. He's running around
Speaker 1: and you know he's a very mean little lepricaon he bites,
Speaker 1: he's he's a trickster and he kills people. He's a
Speaker 1: mean little LEPrecon. So not all of them are are
Speaker 1: your frosted lucky charm. It's long. I'm telling I'm surprised
Speaker 1: you haven't made faucion yet. Like that seems like a
Speaker 1: slam dunk for you. Yeah. Well, I think I referred
Speaker 1: to him as the lab coated LEPrecon, at least in
Speaker 1: writing pieces that I've done. So yeah, we'll have to
Speaker 1: hear your impression of him another. But the problem is
Speaker 1: he's an eat and a lepricon. You know, pot of gold,
Speaker 1: you gotta mitigate your pot of gold. Um, you know
Speaker 1: the problem with with the with fauci as lepricon is it.
Speaker 1: Usually people think of them is as the nice kind
Speaker 1: you know, but no, they're actually mischievous and can be evil.
Speaker 1: Roll call. Continuing here with Bear. Hello Buck, long time
Speaker 1: listener from the old Weekend on the Blaze days. Wow,
Speaker 1: Bear is original Saturday's suad O s s. You should
Speaker 1: have grown over the years. I love to see people succeed, Bear,
Speaker 1: I really appreciate that, and it's awesome you've been with
Speaker 1: me from those early days. Man, it's Bear. We're gonna
Speaker 1: bet we're gonna be at next next February. It'll be
Speaker 1: ten years of me doing radio next February. Ten years. Man,
Speaker 1: Who are there any books, articles, or sources you can
Speaker 1: recommend about Vladimir Putin? I'm interested in learning about his
Speaker 1: life and career, but I don't really know where to start,
Speaker 1: and I obviously don't know which sources contain verified information
Speaker 1: instead of propaganda. The man is obviously brilliant, if brutal
Speaker 1: and murderers, and it seems to me he truly loves
Speaker 1: his country. Definitely an interesting guy, and I feel I
Speaker 1: should know far more about him than I do. Bear
Speaker 1: a great question, and let me try to approach and
Speaker 1: answer it this way. I actually don't know of a
Speaker 1: great Putin biography, so I can start with that. There's
Speaker 1: a ton about him on the internet, and I'm trying
Speaker 1: to think of what the best profiles are that I've
Speaker 1: read of him. You know, I think there's some pretty
Speaker 1: there's actually been some pretty good stuff on Putin. I
Speaker 1: believe in the New Yorker. New Yorker magazine was very liberal,
Speaker 1: very left wing magazine, don't get me wrong, but I
Speaker 1: think they've done some good Putin profiles. I'm actually right
Speaker 1: now just finishing up a biography of Stalin by Robert's Service,
Speaker 1: which if you've never read about Stalin before, the Service
Speaker 1: biography is very digestible, very readable, moves quickly. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of Stalan biographies, and I'm actually moving to my
Speaker 1: next book right now because Stalin in some ways my
Speaker 1: next book that's related in a sense, because Stalin actively
Speaker 1: read about and patterned himself in some ways after Ivan
Speaker 1: the Terrible, who was the sixteenth century monarch of Muscovy,
Speaker 1: not not technically Russia, but Muscovin included the city of Moscow,
Speaker 1: and it was a prince, a principality or a state
Speaker 1: of Russian ethnic Russians, but at that point in time
Speaker 1: it was actually the Polish and and what would now
Speaker 1: be the Baltic States were were regional powers, and Muscovie
Speaker 1: had lost a lot of its territory to the Tatars,
Speaker 1: who were Mongols. The Mongol Horde had invaded and taken
Speaker 1: large pieces of what is now Russia and had and
Speaker 1: formerly the Soviet Union was Muslim Tatars had taken control. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Ivan the Terrible is the basis for some of I mean,
Speaker 1: from what I'm already have read, is the basis for
Speaker 1: some of the most heinous ideas throughout modern history. Created
Speaker 1: what essentially would be an early version of the SS.
Speaker 1: They addressed all in black, they rode only black horses,
Speaker 1: and they could they could kill, rape, mutilate, murder anyone,
Speaker 1: it will, completely above the law, his own personal police force,
Speaker 1: and not really policing, of course, just essentially a band
Speaker 1: of state enabled thugs. And he also fed his rivals
Speaker 1: to packs of dogs, which you will see if you
Speaker 1: see the Game of Throne series comes up with Ramsey Bolton,
Speaker 1: who's the psychopath, the most evil character perhaps in the
Speaker 1: whole series, which I believe is taken by George R.
Speaker 1: Martin directly from the truth, the true story of Ivan
Speaker 1: the Terrible. So that's a long way of saying I
Speaker 1: got good Stalin biographies and I'm in the Terrible biographies
Speaker 1: for you. But can't say no a great Putin biography,
Speaker 1: So Bear, I will look into that and thank you
Speaker 1: for being with me as long as you've had as
Speaker 1: long as you have my friend appreciated, all right, Everybody
Speaker 1: shields high