Speaker 1: Why pay your hard earned money to join an organization
Speaker 1: that fought tooth and nail for a government run healthcare system.
Speaker 1: Well in that scripted portions of White House speeches behind
Speaker 1: closed doors to ensure the passage of the Affordable Care Act,
Speaker 1: the organization that stood against tax cuts for middle class
Speaker 1: Americans and small business owners. You know that's AARP. Join
Speaker 1: AMAC instead. The conservative alternative AMAC offers the same kinds
Speaker 1: of money saving benefits of AARP without the liberal agenda.
Speaker 1: Become an AMAC member right now at AMAC dot us
Speaker 1: slash buck. AMAC fights for your values, protecting our borders
Speaker 1: by enforcing common sense immigration laws, supporting small business, and
Speaker 1: standing up for your individual God given freedoms. AMAC is
Speaker 1: the way to go. Stand with AMAC as they fight
Speaker 1: the good fight by becoming a member today. The benefits
Speaker 1: are great, but the cause is even greater. Join right
Speaker 1: now at AMAC dot us slash buck. That's AMAC dot
Speaker 1: us slash buck. AMAC is better, better for you, better
Speaker 1: for America. You are entering the freedom hunt. Booming job
Speaker 1: numbers for Trump and the Democrats look like they need excuses,
Speaker 1: not just on that, but also for his latest actions
Speaker 1: with regard to Russia. We'll talk about that and where
Speaker 1: the negotiations over the wall stand and will Roger Stone
Speaker 1: be silenced by the statists who are chasing after him?
Speaker 1: That in more coming up on the buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton Show where the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again, The
Speaker 1: buck Sexton Show begins, No, break it down for us?
Speaker 1: What do these numbers mean? They mean that the economy
Speaker 1: is still going strong and that actually employers aren't really
Speaker 1: phased by the shutdown. I'll just point you to the
Speaker 1: private payrolls number. They increase by almost three hundred thousand,
Speaker 1: So that means while the government was partially shut down,
Speaker 1: companies didn't hesitate to hire. It did not shake competence.
Speaker 1: If you look at all of last year, and we
Speaker 1: are coming off a bumper year for job creation, the
Speaker 1: average per month for private employment within the choose, this
Speaker 1: number is higher than the average for every month of
Speaker 1: last year. So no, I would say, no effect really
Speaker 1: in terms of a competence hit in terms of hiring
Speaker 1: for private employers as a result of the shutdown, given
Speaker 1: the other party got into office instead of being up
Speaker 1: and having these phenomenal three hundred and four thousand jobs added,
Speaker 1: and we had so many great months. And you know,
Speaker 1: it's been a little bit tricky because I'm in the
Speaker 1: middle of some very big trade deals, which is disruptive
Speaker 1: before you make it, but after you make it, those
Speaker 1: deals are much better than they were before. I don't
Speaker 1: even mean much better, I mean better like nobody's ever
Speaker 1: seen before, but the strongest station in the world. So
Speaker 1: that was really good. But those numbers were very, very impressive.
Speaker 1: Who were doing fantastically well. So we'll take that every
Speaker 1: single time. Welcome to the Buck, sex and Show everybody,
Speaker 1: Happy Friday, Thank you for being here, coming to you
Speaker 1: live from New York City, my hometown. Odd. It is cold,
Speaker 1: it is smelly, it is overcrowded, but it is home.
Speaker 1: Producer Mike. Yeah, but when it's cold, it stinks a
Speaker 1: little less. You know. That's a good point. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: like I always tell people, if you're gonna go to Venice,
Speaker 1: don't go in the summer. No doubt, those open canals
Speaker 1: can get funk. Key also got DJ John the House
Speaker 1: and special guests. Little Brother is visiting one of these
Speaker 1: Sexon brothers Keats. He is here. He is in the house.
Speaker 1: He is watching the magic unfold. I think this is
Speaker 1: his first time in the whole thing. Yeah, and he
Speaker 1: I just found out he works like two blocks away.
Speaker 1: He's never come over. Yea, and what's all without that.
Speaker 1: It's a little sad for me too. But all right,
Speaker 1: we'll let him see. We'll let him see the super
Speaker 1: fancy studio next door, the Hannity studio, you know where
Speaker 1: everything is, just where the streets are paved of gold
Speaker 1: and the microphones are made of Yeah, I don't know,
Speaker 1: faberge eggs and things. So we'll take them over there
Speaker 1: next Yeah, that's where the real that's where the real
Speaker 1: magic happens. So we got things to talk about today.
Speaker 1: We have a lot of talk about. Actually a pretty
Speaker 1: out of nowhere breaking news story on Northam, not the
Speaker 1: one about abortion. We got a different we'll talk to
Speaker 1: you about later on this hour. I just saw it.
Speaker 1: We're gonna read in and make sure we bring that
Speaker 1: to your attention. It's kind of a vague teaser, but
Speaker 1: I think sometimes that's sometimes the best teasers are a
Speaker 1: little bit vague. Obviously, the economy, we started off with
Speaker 1: that three hundred four thousand jobs created in January. What
Speaker 1: I remember being told that because of the government shutdown,
Speaker 1: gonna have dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria. You know,
Speaker 1: I was told there's gonna be all this bad stuff
Speaker 1: that happens because the shutdown. Well, everybody got paid, at
Speaker 1: least all the federal government workers got paid. They're all
Speaker 1: back at work, and the economy look like he's doing
Speaker 1: pretty well. Last month job growth picking up basically double
Speaker 1: what they thought it would be, So that seems pretty significant.
Speaker 1: That seems pretty significant to me. And this is one
Speaker 1: of those days where you have to remember, we were
Speaker 1: told that Trump was going to destroy the economy and
Speaker 1: it would be terrible, and you know, he's so inept,
Speaker 1: They say, he's so incapable of understanding any of this
Speaker 1: that it's just a matter of time before things are
Speaker 1: going to all collapse. Well, now we're going on what
Speaker 1: we're in year three here, and things haven't collapsed. Things
Speaker 1: are actually doing pretty well. So I'm gonna need someone
Speaker 1: to tell me why we should turn over the keys
Speaker 1: to our economy to the ideology of a twenty nine
Speaker 1: year old bartender who seems to have problems with math.
Speaker 1: If you want Okazio Cortez, Warren Sanders. If you want
Speaker 1: them to be the ones making the decisions about the
Speaker 1: economy and about America, then just be prepared to deal
Speaker 1: with a lot of people that are short on answers
Speaker 1: and long on sanctimony, a lot of Oh, it's just
Speaker 1: to help the poor people, and why don't you want
Speaker 1: to help the poor? You know, the best way to
Speaker 1: help poor people is from a government perspective. Creatives robust
Speaker 1: and rapidly growing in economy as possible, so people have
Speaker 1: as much money as possible, so that communities are in
Speaker 1: a position to help those who are in need and
Speaker 1: who are less fortunate, and not just rely on a
Speaker 1: massive government safety net, as we know, can often turn
Speaker 1: into a hammock and has lots of long term, downstream
Speaker 1: negative social ramifications. So that's a conversation, I suppose for
Speaker 1: another time. It's going pretty well in Trump Land when
Speaker 1: it comes to the economy. There's some other areas still
Speaker 1: need a lot of work. We'll talk about the border
Speaker 1: and what's going on there over the fight on the wall.
Speaker 1: Still amazed. I still see people saying that walls don't work.
Speaker 1: I don't know what it's going to take what it's
Speaker 1: gonna say. I wish we could set up some kind
Speaker 1: of an experiment where anybody who says walls don't work,
Speaker 1: we'll take them to a place and we'll say, hey,
Speaker 1: we'll give you a thousand dollars if you get from
Speaker 1: A to B, but we're gonna put a twenty foot
Speaker 1: wall in your way and it's going to stretch for
Speaker 1: you know, miles, and at the end of the wall,
Speaker 1: we're also going to set up people who are in
Speaker 1: vehicles who are there to prevent you from getting over
Speaker 1: the wall. And there's surveillance systems attached to it, and
Speaker 1: there's motion sensors attached to it. Yeah, let's see if
Speaker 1: it's easy. Let's see how that goes for you. And
Speaker 1: then you can tell me, well, if you can hop
Speaker 1: over the twenty foot wall or the fifteen foot wall
Speaker 1: with the motion sensors and the cameras and roving border patrols,
Speaker 1: then we can have a conversation about how they don't work.
Speaker 1: They're still saying it, and we're we're preparing for this
Speaker 1: State of the Union address. I think the expectation is
Speaker 1: that Trump's probably going to say that this is when
Speaker 1: the national emergency will be declared, and national emergency is
Speaker 1: not as as scary as it sounds. Keep in mind
Speaker 1: that the people that are saying this is tyrannical. It's
Speaker 1: a national emergency to build a fence, folks, Okay, it's
Speaker 1: really what we're talking about. It's not a national emergency
Speaker 1: to you know, seize your bank account or take anyone's
Speaker 1: guns away, although Democrats would love that. You know, it's
Speaker 1: not a national emergency that suspends habeas corpus or no.
Speaker 1: It's a national emergency to build offense. I think will
Speaker 1: be okay, you know, I think this will all be
Speaker 1: all right, but it'll obviously go into the go into
Speaker 1: the system, and there'll be a lot of legal back
Speaker 1: and forth over it. But I think the Trump's basic
Speaker 1: pitch on the economy and the good news is the
Speaker 1: economy will be strong for the state of the Union.
Speaker 1: And we've heard the Democrats over the last month being crazy.
Speaker 1: The last thirty days has been really clarifying. You can't
Speaker 1: let these people be in charge. You can argue with Trump,
Speaker 1: you know, if you're on the right, if you're a conservative,
Speaker 1: if you if you despise Trump's persona and his personal
Speaker 1: you know, proclivities and everything else. That's one thing. If
Speaker 1: you want to talk about how you know he didn't
Speaker 1: move fast enough on the wall, he did not. He
Speaker 1: is talking about DACA, which should be concerning. It's a
Speaker 1: lot of areas to criticize Trump, but let's just remember that.
Speaker 1: You know, you can work within the world of Trump
Speaker 1: and the people around him on the economy. You can
Speaker 1: work within the world of Trump and the people around
Speaker 1: him on immigration and push for better ideas and better policy.
Speaker 1: And Trump has done that right. Trump has adjusted what
Speaker 1: he has been advocating for based on either the feedback
Speaker 1: of the American people or feedback of experts, people in
Speaker 1: Congress who know what's up. It's not very many of them.
Speaker 1: But the alternative is the far left, infanticides, porting socialism,
Speaker 1: loving open borders, wanting left. That's not a good look.
Speaker 1: That's not a good thing. That's not going to help
Speaker 1: this country at all. And you know they're going to
Speaker 1: try to normalize to borrow work from a left. A
Speaker 1: lot of this stuff that they're saying right now, a
Speaker 1: lot of what you're hearing about a seventy percent or
Speaker 1: a ninety percent tax rate, they're going to say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: it'll look what happened in the fifties. Because the more
Speaker 1: people pay attention to this and understand what the real
Speaker 1: long term implications would be, the more likely it is
Speaker 1: that they'll say, you know, I think I'll stick with
Speaker 1: the I'll I'll stick with the capitalists over the commies.
Speaker 1: You know, that's a rough approximation for the two sides.
Speaker 1: But I think I'd rather go with people that believe
Speaker 1: in individual individual rights and the free market and rewarding
Speaker 1: success and hard work and keeping the government out of
Speaker 1: your life over people who seem I think the government
Speaker 1: has the answer to everything. The governor has he answered
Speaker 1: everything we haven't answered. By the way, about Elizabeth Warren's DNA,
Speaker 1: now she agrees that that was a mistake. I think
Speaker 1: it's funny because CNN rolled that out initially, like, look,
Speaker 1: she's proved all the haters wrong. No, CNN, but you
Speaker 1: have proved all the haters right once again. Elizabeth Warren
Speaker 1: has had to apologize. We'll see what comes next on that.
Speaker 1: We've got more on immigration the wall. On this story
Speaker 1: about Governor Northam, you are going to have to hear it.
Speaker 1: That's coming up. I think Nancy Pelosi is hurting our
Speaker 1: country very badly by doing what she's doing. And ultimately,
Speaker 1: I think I've set the table very nicely. I think
Speaker 1: people understand well, they understand Peter. They didn't know what
Speaker 1: was going on in the southern border. Now they know.
Speaker 1: They had no idea the amount of crime, the amount
Speaker 1: of drugs, the amount of human trafficking, which can be
Speaker 1: stopped with a proper system. I've set the table. I've
Speaker 1: set the stage for doing what I'm going to do. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna wait till the fifteenth. I think it's a
Speaker 1: waste of time. I hope the President's right. I do
Speaker 1: think that more people than ever are aware of what's
Speaker 1: happening at the border, and also know that the Democrats
Speaker 1: have been lying. The media has been lying about what's
Speaker 1: happening the border, this whole idea that barriers don't work,
Speaker 1: that there's no crisis, that there's no problem, that border
Speaker 1: patrol isn't overwhelmed, that there's not a systematic effort, you know,
Speaker 1: a coordinated strategic effort to overwhelm our southern border with
Speaker 1: asylum requests, with NGOs and all these legal aid organizations
Speaker 1: helping pass the word down to people. What do you
Speaker 1: need to say to game the system. You know, there
Speaker 1: were these arrests for birth tourism that happened. You know,
Speaker 1: these prosecutions that are underway now for birth tourism. Essentially,
Speaker 1: women come from China, they stay in a hotel in
Speaker 1: the US that is set up for this, They give
Speaker 1: birth in that hotel. They make sure they get all
Speaker 1: the paperwork and everything so that that baby is a
Speaker 1: US citizen. Then they go home to China. But what
Speaker 1: that means is that when the child is grown up
Speaker 1: and wants to go to America for school, or wants
Speaker 1: to go to America for whatever reason, they're a US citizen.
Speaker 1: As a matter of law. They're is American as you
Speaker 1: and me. But they grew up in Beijing or Shanghai,
Speaker 1: maybe have no affinity or loyalty for this country whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Now we're prosecuting them. This is a scam. People will
Speaker 1: send will send individuals to prison. Prosecutors will send people
Speaker 1: to prison for doing this because they recognize that it
Speaker 1: is wrong. They recognize that this is an abuse of
Speaker 1: the system. It's done in bad faith, and we cannot
Speaker 1: allow it. But what I need to know, I need
Speaker 1: the Democrats to explain because they can't. Is why is
Speaker 1: it that when someone flies into a hotel, remember there,
Speaker 1: at least they're paying money here, and you know they're
Speaker 1: maybe boosting the economy a little bit. You could say,
Speaker 1: they fly into La or San Francisco and the whole
Speaker 1: purpose of it is to give birth in the US.
Speaker 1: They are committing an a legal act, right The Chinese
Speaker 1: national who shows up in La as part of a
Speaker 1: scheme to give birth here, you know that's a legal
Speaker 1: But a Honduran who shows up at our border nine
Speaker 1: months pregnant and says I fear gang violence and knows
Speaker 1: that she's going to be led into the US right away,
Speaker 1: she's already lied about the gang violence. But who can
Speaker 1: really prove that one or the other? And then she
Speaker 1: gives birth in this country, and then that child is
Speaker 1: an American citizen. What's what's really the difference? You know,
Speaker 1: I'm sure we could get some smug Democrat lawyer to
Speaker 1: tell me, but well, we don't need that because we
Speaker 1: know there is no difference. I mean, the difference between
Speaker 1: birth tourism and people who show up here illegally and
Speaker 1: give birth in this country is just a function of
Speaker 1: the process. I mean there's it's the same idea. You're
Speaker 1: going to break the law to get the benefits of
Speaker 1: US citizenship for somebody, and that benefit, by the way,
Speaker 1: also extends to the person who breaks the law. It's
Speaker 1: not just for the child. You know, your US citizen
Speaker 1: child can sponsor you later on in life to have
Speaker 1: family reunification. And if you're not in favor of family reunification,
Speaker 1: well then you're some kind of a monster. Then you're
Speaker 1: a terrible person, and everyone should hate you and all
Speaker 1: the rest of it. So, you know, think about it
Speaker 1: this way. We're willing to prosecute birth tourism hotels, but
Speaker 1: we're not willing to prosecute people who show up at
Speaker 1: the border and lie and then don't show up for
Speaker 1: their immigration hearing for asylum because they know that's not
Speaker 1: the political will. This is all about political will. Remember,
Speaker 1: tyranny is not the direct and strenuous but across the
Speaker 1: board application of strict law. Tyranny is the capricious application
Speaker 1: of law. It is the some people live by the law,
Speaker 1: some people don't. That's what a real tyranny is. That's
Speaker 1: what the Soviet Union was. That's what show me a country.
Speaker 1: You know, look at North Korea. All North Koreans don't
Speaker 1: live under strict laws. Kim John Un doesn't live under
Speaker 1: strict laws. Kim Jong uns henchmen don't live under strict laws. Right,
Speaker 1: So that's the way you need to think of what
Speaker 1: is tyrannical when people are using the law as a
Speaker 1: tool of politics and only enforcing against some people and
Speaker 1: not against others. By the way, I just also, you know,
Speaker 1: I think that Trump. I think that Trump has made
Speaker 1: some progress on the border, and at least people understand
Speaker 1: what's going on there. They know that anyone who says
Speaker 1: walls don't work is just making stuff up and doesn't
Speaker 1: know what the heck they're talking about. There. There's a
Speaker 1: greater understanding of that now as well, which is important.
Speaker 1: But I gotta tell you I'm not I am not
Speaker 1: particularly optimistic that there will be any kind of a
Speaker 1: deal with the Democrats on this. And all that's gonna
Speaker 1: happen is it gonna be a declaration of national emergency
Speaker 1: and then sure enough it'll go into the courts and
Speaker 1: both sides will declare victory. We've got to deal with this.
Speaker 1: Later on the show, we'll have an actual arms expert
Speaker 1: come to tell us what's happening with the Russians and
Speaker 1: this treaty. But it's not. It's so funny this week,
Speaker 1: I've been hearing that Trump is Putin's puppet for a whole,
Speaker 1: but in all, Trump is Putin's puppet. It's come a
Speaker 1: bunch of times. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi is out there, and
Speaker 1: you know, she's saying that Trump is risking a new
Speaker 1: arms race with Russia because he's not Putin's puppet. It
Speaker 1: turns out he's not doing whatever Putin wants. And here's
Speaker 1: what Trump had to say about that. He says, you're
Speaker 1: resking new arms races. Honestly, I don't think she has
Speaker 1: a clue. I really don't. I don't think Nancy has
Speaker 1: a clue. And I see that when she says wolves
Speaker 1: are a moral she doesn't have. She doesn't know, and
Speaker 1: I wish she did, because she's hurting this country so badly.
Speaker 1: It's all rhetorical, not delivered well, but it's all rhetorical.
Speaker 1: She's hurting our country very very badly, even with statements
Speaker 1: like that. Okay, thank you very much, everybody. It's true,
Speaker 1: it's true. Hurting the country with statements like that doesn't
Speaker 1: doesn't have a clue is the most true part. Nancy blues.
Speaker 1: He does not have a clue. I mean, she really
Speaker 1: represents the classic Democrat machine, politician rich, disconnected from from
Speaker 1: normal people, but ensconced in a in a just looney
Speaker 1: liberal district in California, so there's no pressure on her
Speaker 1: to be a normal person. She gets to just be
Speaker 1: as far left as she wants and do whatever she wants.
Speaker 1: And I just wish more people would see her for
Speaker 1: what she is and all this stuff. But Trump's right.
Speaker 1: At least Trump calls her out on that. We got
Speaker 1: a lot more going up here in just a moment, team,
Speaker 1: so stay with me. Well, he told he told the
Speaker 1: attorneys that I'm not a subject. I'm not a target
Speaker 1: of Yeah, oh yeah, about which I don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know about that that I don't know about. Not
Speaker 1: a target. Trump says that rodenes he told the attorneys
Speaker 1: that he's not a subject to the Russia probe. Totally
Speaker 1: turns not a subject, not a target. So that's from
Speaker 1: the New York Times interview on January thirty. First. All right,
Speaker 1: so now here we have the president who is coming
Speaker 1: out and saying all this stuff. The New York Times. Look,
Speaker 1: people that that beat up on him for talking to
Speaker 1: the Times because he says to the family New York
Speaker 1: Times he trashes a lot. Yeah, but that's it still
Speaker 1: has a wide readership. And if he didn't, if he
Speaker 1: didn't talk to the New York Times, they would say, oh,
Speaker 1: he's afraid and he's playing favorites and all this other stuff. Right,
Speaker 1: if he wasn't willing to speak to the Times, then
Speaker 1: the issue would be that, you know, he's he's hiding
Speaker 1: from them. But so when he does speak, then he
Speaker 1: of course Trump is damned if he does, damned if
Speaker 1: he doesn't. I mean, that's the way that it works
Speaker 1: with this media, there's no question about it. But is
Speaker 1: an interesting that he says that he's told he's not
Speaker 1: a subject, not a target. I think we're gonna find
Speaker 1: out at the end of this thing that they never
Speaker 1: even came close, they never even came close to having anything,
Speaker 1: you know, to get Trump on. And the stuff that
Speaker 1: we've already heard, you know, the Trump Tower meeting and
Speaker 1: the what's his name Cohen? Uh, that that's that's the
Speaker 1: most quote damning stuff that they've got, and that's nowhere
Speaker 1: near enough for anything, as we know, so there will
Speaker 1: also come a time when we have to say, well,
Speaker 1: hold on a minute, what exactly was all of this for?
Speaker 1: What was all of this for? And the Democrats are
Speaker 1: gonna say a whole lot of stuff, but Russia and
Speaker 1: the elections. But but the truth is that all of
Speaker 1: this was a rage session. It was a kind of
Speaker 1: anger therapy for Democrats that can't handle that Trump won
Speaker 1: and that and then Hillary lost. That's really what the
Speaker 1: Special Counsel has been all about from the beginning. I mean,
Speaker 1: if anyone thinks that Russia is now afraid of us
Speaker 1: and Russia is no longer going to meddle in elections,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's that's hysterical, right. That's first of all,
Speaker 1: Russian meddling in the election was pretty irrelevant, didn't you know? Pooh,
Speaker 1: you're saying they didn't I'm not saying they didn't meddle.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying it didn't matter. If one person votes
Speaker 1: twice in a national election, that means that there was
Speaker 1: election fraud during the election. Does that mean that the
Speaker 1: election shouldn't count? Of course not, because we need to
Speaker 1: understand proportion. But the Left doesn't care about proportion. They
Speaker 1: just care that they can make some case that is
Speaker 1: technically or superficially accurate about Russia meddling in the election,
Speaker 1: and then that just comes Russia medal Russia. This is
Speaker 1: like what they do with climate change. Do you believe
Speaker 1: in climate change? Yeah, sure, I believe in climate change. Well,
Speaker 1: then you have to do all these things. I won't know.
Speaker 1: I don't think the climate change means that there's this
Speaker 1: catastrophic environmental global problem that we're you know, that's going
Speaker 1: to destroy us and kill us and all this other stuff, right,
Speaker 1: I mean that's so, so, there is that, um, but
Speaker 1: also who gets who gets prosecuted for lying is going
Speaker 1: to be something that we have to spend more time on.
Speaker 1: Who gets prosecuted for lying is not something that we
Speaker 1: should just let fly under the radar. Here Matt Gates,
Speaker 1: who's a congressman, he spoke about this one recently, because
Speaker 1: you know, I talked to Roger Stone, what yesterday, the
Speaker 1: day before? Yeah, I guess it was yesterday. I supposed
Speaker 1: to Roger Stone on By the way, I like Roger Stone, Mike,
Speaker 1: You remember Rogerston. Rogers Stones is a he's an interesting character.
Speaker 1: No never never him. He's a snappy dresser. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: and he's a nice guy. You know, he's weird, I mean,
Speaker 1: definitely weird. I'm not saying that. But he's sharp too.
Speaker 1: He says insightful things. He knows who the worst people
Speaker 1: at CNN are, which is fun. So we had a
Speaker 1: nice chat about that. You know who who is worst
Speaker 1: at CNN? He knows, he's he's correct, He's on the money.
Speaker 1: He's also a fighter. I mean, he says that he's
Speaker 1: he's got no plans to back down against the Special Counsel,
Speaker 1: which is in a position to essentially bankrupt him and
Speaker 1: maybe ruin his life, is in a position to do
Speaker 1: all that stuff. But he still says he's going to
Speaker 1: fight it out. He's gonna keep fighting. And he's getting
Speaker 1: prosecuted for lies about stuff that are Mickey mouse, They're
Speaker 1: just not serious. And he's saying, you know, okay, well
Speaker 1: I told them. You know, he said, plead the fifth
Speaker 1: anything to protect the plan. He says he joked he
Speaker 1: was making a joke, which when you read the full
Speaker 1: context of one of the text messages, I believe he
Speaker 1: was joking, plead the fifth protect the plan, like he
Speaker 1: was trying to be funny, and he's a weird guy,
Speaker 1: so he tells weird jokes. That doesn't surprise me. They
Speaker 1: want to lock him up in federal prison, and they
Speaker 1: want to tell us that, oh, it's because the law
Speaker 1: is the law. We know Democrats dun't believe that the
Speaker 1: law wasn't the law. But it came to Hillary and
Speaker 1: her emails wasn't the law, then how much is for sure?
Speaker 1: There are a lot of other people that have told
Speaker 1: lies to Congress that have not been criminally prosecuted. Former
Speaker 1: Acting Director of the FBI, Andy McCabe, he told lies
Speaker 1: to Congress. I'm sorry to the FBI. Rather, he told
Speaker 1: lies the FBI, and he has not been prosecuted. Matt
Speaker 1: Gates brought this up. I think he's correct on this
Speaker 1: one play eight. I thought Robert Mueller was supposed to
Speaker 1: be investigating Russia collusion. Now he's become a glorified Hall
Speaker 1: monitor enforcing the provisions of lying to Congress. The problem
Speaker 1: is that he's enforcing them unequally. Hillary Clinton said that
Speaker 1: she didn't send to receive any classified email. We know
Speaker 1: that's a lie. Jim Comey said he was never the
Speaker 1: source or never the director of leaked information. He later
Speaker 1: admitted that that was not true, even though it was
Speaker 1: the subject of his sworn testimony before Congress. And you'll
Speaker 1: remember Clapper told all of the American people before Congress
Speaker 1: that there was no bulk collection of data. The deputy
Speaker 1: director of the FBI, mister McCabe, he lied four times.
Speaker 1: He lied so frequently he was demoted and referred for
Speaker 1: criminal prosecution. But a whole lot of these other people
Speaker 1: haven't been And it's it's the greatest evidence that Robert
Speaker 1: Muller is not a person in search of the truth.
Speaker 1: He's out to get Trump and the people close to Trump,
Speaker 1: because if he wasn't, if he was unbiased, you would
Speaker 1: have seen similar charges brought against these other people. The
Speaker 1: whole thing is a get Trump operation, true, The whole
Speaker 1: thing is a get Trump Democrat revenge plot. And I
Speaker 1: was sitting around talking to some friends yesterday about this,
Speaker 1: about how if you had told me a few years
Speaker 1: ago that opposition research would be opposite of research about
Speaker 1: a Republican president that claimed that he had been engaged
Speaker 1: in all kinds of just bizarrely sexual and degrading acts
Speaker 1: in Russia with prostitutes. You know, if you told me
Speaker 1: that that would make its way not just to the
Speaker 1: press who with no verification of it whatsoever, which still
Speaker 1: they have no verification whatsoever, and that that would be
Speaker 1: used as a document in the intelligence community to get
Speaker 1: a fize a warrant on people. I mean to use
Speaker 1: some of the most powerful tools the federal government has
Speaker 1: for surveillance, and to do surveillance on people like Carter Page,
Speaker 1: someone who is so clearly innocent of any wrongdoing and
Speaker 1: not a threat to the United States. For any reasonable person,
Speaker 1: I would have said, no way, But here we are.
Speaker 1: But oh, they've got Roger Stone because he said he
Speaker 1: emailed somebody when he called them, or he called them
Speaker 1: when he actually emailed them. What a surprise. Democrats get away,
Speaker 1: they get the benefit of the doubt. Republicans get get crushed.
Speaker 1: They never get the benefit of the doubt. This is
Speaker 1: not an accident. This is the weaponization of the justice
Speaker 1: apparatus against our side. It has to stop. And Mother
Speaker 1: Probe is a giant Neon red flashing sign saying you
Speaker 1: got to stop this now. Well, this is an unexpected
Speaker 1: story for a Friday producer. Mike and I are just
Speaker 1: seeing this now as we go on air and I
Speaker 1: want to start by saying that there are certain certain
Speaker 1: rules that we should all have in place. We talked
Speaker 1: with these kind of stories. Right there's new information that
Speaker 1: comes to light, we got to make sure that this
Speaker 1: is verified, it's accurate, and know the full context, because
Speaker 1: we have been hammering and rightly so hammering the left
Speaker 1: and the left wing press for what they've been doing
Speaker 1: recently where they see some kind of an opening to
Speaker 1: spread a narrative and they just jump right into it
Speaker 1: right away, and they don't wait for the facts. They
Speaker 1: don't care about, you know, the possibility that they may
Speaker 1: or may not be getting it wrong. They just want
Speaker 1: to know that they can tell the story. When they
Speaker 1: can tell the story, and there you have it right.
Speaker 1: So I don't want to do that because it's early,
Speaker 1: but I do have to tell you. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is the number. This is the biggest story on the
Speaker 1: Drudge Report right now, and it is a doozy, it
Speaker 1: is a wow kind of story. So Ralph Northam we'll
Speaker 1: talk about later in the show again a little bit
Speaker 1: because he's the guy who said those comments about abortion
Speaker 1: on that radio show where he said, you know, you'll
Speaker 1: take a baby out, make the baby comfortable and then
Speaker 1: decide what to do with the baby when it's outside
Speaker 1: the womb, which to anybody who was being honest and
Speaker 1: was listening, sounds pretty pretty much like, you know, you
Speaker 1: make a decision whether to kill a live baby or not,
Speaker 1: which is in fantaside, which is murder. So this is
Speaker 1: a guy speaking about a murderer like he's speaking about
Speaker 1: somebody getting a hip replacement, you know, like you know,
Speaker 1: after you figure it out, you get the hip and
Speaker 1: you're done. So he had a very bad day estray,
Speaker 1: and he came out today and was trying to trying
Speaker 1: to say that you know, he's that's not what he said,
Speaker 1: or it was out of context, or you know, he
Speaker 1: went defense, this is the governor of Virginia. We've got
Speaker 1: a governor that Bill Crystal of the Weekly Standard and
Speaker 1: some of the other super never trumpers were you know,
Speaker 1: this is the kind of guy that we should be supporting,
Speaker 1: you know, a moderate Democrat or whatever, you know, the Yeats,
Speaker 1: that's what they were saying. There was a lot of
Speaker 1: that going on. This story just broke today and it
Speaker 1: came out originally with Big League Politics in Big League Politics,
Speaker 1: and it's Ralph Northam yearbook page. Now it's the Pilot
Speaker 1: online and it's Virginia, the Virginia Pilot rather, it has
Speaker 1: picked this one up, so it's getting These are the
Speaker 1: outlets that are picking this up. And it's purportedly a
Speaker 1: yearbook page that's of Ralph Northam, not from high school,
Speaker 1: which was what I initially thought. So he's not like
Speaker 1: a fourteen or fifteen year old from medical school, which
Speaker 1: means that he is. He is an adult, probably in
Speaker 1: his you know, twenty, in his mid twenties. Let's say,
Speaker 1: I don't know around there. But this is a page
Speaker 1: from the nineteen eighty four, nineteen eighty four Virginia Medical
Speaker 1: School yearbook and it says, well, I'm sorry, I forget
Speaker 1: what it says. Well, no, it says Alma Mater, Virginia
Speaker 1: Military Institute, Interest, et cetera, et cetera, Ralph Shearer Northam.
Speaker 1: And on his personal yearbook page, if this is correct,
Speaker 1: is a photo of a guy very clearly in black face.
Speaker 1: And standing next to the person in blackface is someone
Speaker 1: in a full ku Klux Klan uniform. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: the hat and the whole thing. KKK guy right there
Speaker 1: on his page. Now, this has not been verified yet.
Speaker 1: We don't know, you know, so, so, I mean it
Speaker 1: looks it could it be a hoax? Yes, it could
Speaker 1: be a hoax. Is there up CNN's running it right now. Yeah,
Speaker 1: CNN just popped up on CNN on their app on
Speaker 1: tv UM. So yeah, it doesn't look like a hoax
Speaker 1: to me. Man, looks looks like looks like Ralph Northum
Speaker 1: is about twelve hours away from resigning. Yeah. It uh,
Speaker 1: it's a privide a little context. CNN reports that it
Speaker 1: was obtained by a CNN affiliate w t KR, and it,
Speaker 1: like you just said, it appears in the nineteen eighty
Speaker 1: four yearbook for the Eastern Virginia Medical School. So wow,
Speaker 1: Virginia is gonna have to find a new governor. I think.
Speaker 1: I don't think now there will be people that want
Speaker 1: to have a discussion about, you know, how long ago
Speaker 1: was this and I'm sure give it, give it, you know,
Speaker 1: mark my words, producer, Mike. There will be some left
Speaker 1: wing idiot who's like, right around the time when Brett
Speaker 1: Covenol was, you know, raping women. They'll say that, right,
Speaker 1: they'll say, oh and you th Cavanols. Okay, right, there's
Speaker 1: no photo of Cavanaugh doing anything, because he didn't do anything.
Speaker 1: In fact, no one can even tell where he was
Speaker 1: or you know, there's no evidence at all. This in
Speaker 1: a court you'd call evidence, you know, unless somebody went
Speaker 1: back and engaged in a very elaborate, you know, Dan
Speaker 1: Rather style document hoax. Here, this is, this is pretty
Speaker 1: much I think this is lights out for Northaman. He
Speaker 1: might have had the worst one two political punch here,
Speaker 1: the worst twenty four hours of any politician since Anthony Weener.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is about as who of course, as
Speaker 1: we don't ended up going to federal prison. This is
Speaker 1: about as bad as it gets. You know, killing babies,
Speaker 1: Ralph Northam killing babies, okay, under our law, it's not
Speaker 1: a big deal. And oh, by the way, when I
Speaker 1: was in medical school, not even a high school student,
Speaker 1: that wouldn't be okay. But at least he'd say he
Speaker 1: was really young, and maybe there's some mitigation there. Uh college,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, post grad student, I mean. And by the way,
Speaker 1: people are already saying, you know, which way it's not
Speaker 1: clear if he's in the black face or if he's
Speaker 1: in the KKK uniform. I don't think it matters. I
Speaker 1: don't think anyone's gonna identify one is worse than the
Speaker 1: other for him. So I think he's Mike. What do
Speaker 1: you think he's he toast? Can he survive this one?
Speaker 1: I don't think so. But you know liberals have given
Speaker 1: themselves passes on things, you know, Yeah, I mean Bird?
Speaker 1: What's his name? A senator? Senator Robert Bird. He was
Speaker 1: a grand Wizard of the KKK. Right, so he was
Speaker 1: actually senior member other KKK. They became a beloved senator
Speaker 1: from h what was it, West Virginia? H John? What
Speaker 1: do you think this guy survived this one? Now? You
Speaker 1: can just you can just nod your head. One of
Speaker 1: the other. I'm not sure. How does it get into
Speaker 1: a school yearbook? First of all, it's on his page.
Speaker 1: You know how you picked the photos? This is like
Speaker 1: his montage and one of his montage photios photos is
Speaker 1: a By the way, how did say it has to
Speaker 1: be a moderator to say this is inappropriate. That's why
Speaker 1: I think I've been saying to Mike uh and here
Speaker 1: that something's not right about that. It looks bad. I
Speaker 1: saw the picture looks bad, but something's not right. And
Speaker 1: a moderator of the yearbook would say something before that
Speaker 1: I got into the book. Someone has to edit because
Speaker 1: I've you know, I used to work on my yearbook.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know how much editing there was
Speaker 1: for racial sensitivity at Eastern Virginia Medical School in the
Speaker 1: early eighties. Yeah, I don't think there was any. John.
Speaker 1: I mean, I agree with you. But if this were
Speaker 1: like last year, I'd say, yeah, that seems you know,
Speaker 1: particularly egregious in terms of missing the you know, in
Speaker 1: terms of editors that would have said, what is this
Speaker 1: and make sure it didn't go in the yearbook. Uh,
Speaker 1: this looks pretty bad. I think. I think Governor Northam
Speaker 1: is not going to be a Governor Northam all that
Speaker 1: much longer. But we'll see it. Maybe he comes out says,
Speaker 1: you know, I didn't that's not me, that's doctorate. I
Speaker 1: wasn't in that fall. You know, you never know. But
Speaker 1: what a strange thing for somebody to to fabricate, if
Speaker 1: that worth the case. So I think he's in big
Speaker 1: I think he's in big trouble. And it also just
Speaker 1: goes to show you, man, you know, you get you
Speaker 1: get out there in a way where everyone all of
Speaker 1: a sudden wants to look into your stuff. It can
Speaker 1: find stuff. You know, in the Internet era, people find
Speaker 1: stuff really fast. But I think this is going to
Speaker 1: be the end of the governorship of Routh Sheer Northam.
Speaker 1: Morning Coffee is an American institution. That's why when it
Speaker 1: comes to kicking off my day the right way, I
Speaker 1: reached for one and only one American coffee, Black Rifle Coffee.
Speaker 1: I drink it every morning and probably the afternoons too,
Speaker 1: especially if I need to get through a long day.
Speaker 1: Black Rifle coffee is delicious. It is roast to order,
Speaker 1: small batch call coffee that can get sent right to
Speaker 1: your front door. Just join the coffee Club. You'll never
Speaker 1: have to think about buying coffee again. So it'll get
Speaker 1: sent to you and you'll be good to go. Hole beans,
Speaker 1: pre ground, all different kinds of blends. I'm telling you
Speaker 1: this is coffee for people who love coffee but also
Speaker 1: love America. So wake up with America's coffee. Black Rifle Coffee.
Speaker 1: Is it? Black Riflecoffee dot com? Slash buck and receive
Speaker 1: fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Riflecoffee dot com.
Speaker 1: Slash buck for fifteen percent off again, Black Riflecoffee dot Com.
Speaker 1: Slash buck. Join that coffee club, pick your blend, the
Speaker 1: amount you want, have it delivered every month. Black Riflecoffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash Buck. Let's be really clear, capitalism without
Speaker 1: rules is theft. Encouraging companies to build their business models
Speaker 1: on cheating people. That's not capitalism. That's not competition in
Speaker 1: the marketplace. That's not producing consumer surplus. So what I
Speaker 1: believe is capitalism with serious rules, and that means rules
Speaker 1: where everybody gets chance to play. Elizabeth Warren is telling
Speaker 1: you where the Democrats really are on this. It's important
Speaker 1: to heed what she is saying. This is going to
Speaker 1: be a central fight, perhaps the central fight of the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty election. We're getting a preview of it right now.
Speaker 1: She's saying here is that capitalism without rules is theft.
Speaker 1: Now that's a giant straw man. You know this, right,
Speaker 1: We have a tremendous amount of rules in our system
Speaker 1: of capitalism in this country. We have so many rules.
Speaker 1: But what she's saying is that they want to rewrite
Speaker 1: the rules of capitalism, and they want to do it
Speaker 1: by suggesting that if you don't agree with them, then
Speaker 1: you are supporting theft. You know, this is a sort
Speaker 1: of corollary or you know, this is a now aligus
Speaker 1: in some way to behind every great fortune is a
Speaker 1: great theft. You know, she believes that she believes that
Speaker 1: people who are very successful financially, people are very successful
Speaker 1: financially must have done so through illicit exploitation of other people.
Speaker 1: You know, there must have been some laws that they broke.
Speaker 1: And here's the thing. If they didn't break laws, the
Speaker 1: problem is that we don't have strong enough laws for
Speaker 1: them to break. So they're gonna want to change this.
Speaker 1: Remember she was somebody over at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,
Speaker 1: which is an agency that when Trump came in, they
Speaker 1: basically said, sorry, we don't care that you're the commander
Speaker 1: in chief and you're the head of the executive branch.
Speaker 1: We're kind of outside of your purview, but we're still
Speaker 1: a federal government agency. It's like, that's not how this
Speaker 1: is supposed to work. But they tried to just burrow
Speaker 1: in a lot. There's a lot of deep state burrowing
Speaker 1: that has occurred at different all agencies. I can talk
Speaker 1: to you about that maybe another time. But capitalism without
Speaker 1: rules is theft serious rules. Everyone gets a chance to play.
Speaker 1: There's very little here in terms of specifics, there's very
Speaker 1: little that the Democrats that Warren and her ilk are
Speaker 1: going to provide you with other than taxing the rich,
Speaker 1: taxing the billionaires, right, or as Bernie Sanders famous used
Speaker 1: to say, the millionaires and the billions. Elizaeth Warren's a millionaire.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders is definitely worth somewhere in the seven figures.
Speaker 1: I don't know what. He's got three houses, so the
Speaker 1: ottomillion is not this one. This one does not count.
Speaker 1: That's what they offer you. They tell you that if
Speaker 1: only we have stricter rules, only we do more to
Speaker 1: make life well a little more difficult for very rich people,
Speaker 1: than your life will mean a lot easier. And that's
Speaker 1: just not true. It is not the case. It is
Speaker 1: not the case that your life will be easier, that
Speaker 1: you will be wealthier if there are these rules and restrictions.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind that this is where we have to
Speaker 1: do a lot of re educating of the American people,
Speaker 1: because the media goes along with this stuff like here,
Speaker 1: here's the narrative. I'll give you two narratives about where
Speaker 1: capitalism has failed in them. What the truth of them is, right,
Speaker 1: The narrative of the financial crisis of two thousand and
Speaker 1: eight in shorthand Walls Street sold houses to people with
Speaker 1: fine print that they couldn't understand, that they couldn't afford,
Speaker 1: and then took those obligations, took those debts and essentially
Speaker 1: merged them all together and sold them to each other,
Speaker 1: sold them to other other financial entities. And they did this,
Speaker 1: and then they sold insurance on the sales of those,
Speaker 1: you know, credit to fault swapped and all that. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's so essentially Wall Street greed almost destroyed the entire economy.
Speaker 1: The real story, which a lot of people just don't
Speaker 1: seem to care about or aren't going to care about,
Speaker 1: the real story is that over a series of decades,
Speaker 1: federal laws were passed, and these laws were also supported
Speaker 1: by the enormous and very expensive federal quasi federal agencies
Speaker 1: of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack. Federal laws were passed
Speaker 1: that banks had to lend to people even if they
Speaker 1: had bad credit. This was because there was a disproportionate
Speaker 1: effect on particularly the African American community, of not getting
Speaker 1: credit right. So black people were not being given loans
Speaker 1: based on their FICO scores by the banks. And they
Speaker 1: called it redlining, and I'm sure there are were discriminatory
Speaker 1: practices too, but it went from no discrimination and lending
Speaker 1: to it doesn't matter if you can show that this
Speaker 1: person is a bad bet, you have to lend to
Speaker 1: them if they are a minority, or else we're going
Speaker 1: to come after you. And the Clinton administration, for example,
Speaker 1: made a big deal of going after banks and suing
Speaker 1: banks because they were not lending sufficiently to African American lenders.
Speaker 1: But then it expanded because once you've gotten rid of
Speaker 1: FYCO scores for some people, it's easier to get rhythm
Speaker 1: for more people. Right. And then we had this bipartisan
Speaker 1: consensus and the government pushing this if everybody should own
Speaker 1: we have a homeownerships aside, and Bush administration bought into it.
Speaker 1: So we get rid of the lending standards. And then
Speaker 1: we're told everybody should own a home, and then everybody
Speaker 1: should put it on credit. And then Wall Street comes
Speaker 1: in and says, well, we got all this credit that's
Speaker 1: backed by the federal government. You know, we can't lose.
Speaker 1: And then when they were about to lose and they
Speaker 1: got bailed out by the government. But there was a
Speaker 1: lot of social justice and social engineering and all that
Speaker 1: stuff in the run up to this, and that just
Speaker 1: gets left out of the discussion. So you know, at
Speaker 1: the very end of this you get the Financial Protection Bureau,
Speaker 1: which is just saying, oh, you know there's illegal and
Speaker 1: bad lending practice. Yes, there are badly bad lending practices.
Speaker 1: The government has been dictating lending practices for decades. The
Speaker 1: Community Reinvestment Act stretches back to I think the nineteen sixties,
Speaker 1: which was the start of this idea that you have
Speaker 1: to lend into certain neighborhoods if you're a bank, you
Speaker 1: have to or else the government will sue you, or
Speaker 1: discrimination and saying well, this person, they have a history
Speaker 1: of not paying their bills, I don't want to lend them. Sorry,
Speaker 1: that's racist. That's the very short version of that much
Speaker 1: longer story. And then on healthcare, which we could do
Speaker 1: a similar thing on healthcare. Truth about healthcare is that,
Speaker 1: as we talked to Ovic Roy about this earlier in
Speaker 1: the week, almost half almost half of healthcare spending already
Speaker 1: is government healthcare spending in some way, and the government
Speaker 1: is involved in hospital probably way. Hospitals are scams. Go
Speaker 1: into an emergency room sometime they take your food pressure
Speaker 1: to charge you a thousand dollars. I'm not even kidding.
Speaker 1: It's crazy. Hospitals are scams. Only go to a hospital
Speaker 1: if you have literally no choice, there's no other choice.
Speaker 1: But that's government regulation, right, I mean, there's so much
Speaker 1: government regulation that goes through that process. But we're told
Speaker 1: that it's unfair because of the greedy capitalists at the top. No,
Speaker 1: what makes it unfair are the market distortions that are created,
Speaker 1: yes by some special interests and pharmaceutical companies, but also
Speaker 1: by the government thinking that it's good at helping to
Speaker 1: set prices, that it's good at making determinations about how
Speaker 1: private industry, in this case, private healthcare should function. It
Speaker 1: is not good at that. So, you know what, We're
Speaker 1: going to be told stories about the failures of capitalism
Speaker 1: that are often and these are stories that if people
Speaker 1: believe them, it could change the future of this country
Speaker 1: because they're gonna put wackos like Warren in charge. We
Speaker 1: need to know and spread the word about the truth,
Speaker 1: which is that there are already as a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of regulation of law in our capitalist system. We do
Speaker 1: not have a free market. So if we're going to
Speaker 1: identify failures. We can't just say it's a failure of
Speaker 1: the free market. It's often a failure of government intervention
Speaker 1: in the market that creates the distortion that's then exploited
Speaker 1: by special interests who then maintain that by by putting
Speaker 1: money in the pockets of politicians. But it's a lot
Speaker 1: easier to say, yeah, the big me and rich people
Speaker 1: are the problem. It is a lot. I will say
Speaker 1: it's a lot easier, and Democrats will do that. They
Speaker 1: will go that route. They will say that it's all
Speaker 1: about things being a lot easier for them, and that
Speaker 1: is my expectation. So we have a whole lot more
Speaker 1: coming up. Team stay with me. Hiring can be tough
Speaker 1: and it can take a lot of time. You don't
Speaker 1: want to burn up your time trying to find the
Speaker 1: best resumes. I got a better idea. Why don't you
Speaker 1: do things the right way, the smart way. That's why
Speaker 1: you should go to zip recruiter, dot com, slash buck.
Speaker 1: Unlike other job sites, zip recruiter finds qualified candidates for you.
Speaker 1: It's got a powerful matching technology that will scan thousands
Speaker 1: of resumes and identify the people with the right skills, education,
Speaker 1: and experience and actively invite them to apply to your
Speaker 1: job opening. So this way you're going to get qualified
Speaker 1: candidates fast. We use zip recruiter with great success at HILLTV.
Speaker 1: I have colleagues we hired through my zip recruiter account.
Speaker 1: You should check it out too. Right now, my listeners
Speaker 1: can try zippercruiter for free at this exclusive web address,
Speaker 1: zip recruiter dot com slash buck. Show your support for
Speaker 1: this show and for zippercruiter by going to zip recruiter
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck again one more time, zip recruiter
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck because zip recruiter is the smartest
Speaker 1: way to hire. I think all of us know is
Speaker 1: that so many Americans are losing faith in this country's
Speaker 1: ability to work for them. People are feeling left out,
Speaker 1: left behind, and I think a lot of folks will
Speaker 1: begin the field. But the forces that are tearing us
Speaker 1: apart in this country are stronger than the forces that
Speaker 1: tie us together. I don't believe that, and so I'm
Speaker 1: running to restore our sense of common purpose, to focus
Speaker 1: on the common pain that we have all over this country.
Speaker 1: My record, I think when I have a chance to
Speaker 1: put it before people, they're going to see a very
Speaker 1: different sort of not usual path in politics. And where
Speaker 1: I live. You know, I still live in the central
Speaker 1: ward of Newark, New Jersey. The only senator that goes
Speaker 1: home to a community that's you know, still a low
Speaker 1: income community, inner city community. We got Corey Booker throwing
Speaker 1: his hat in the ring for twenty twenty as we
Speaker 1: all knew he would. I even said he would last week.
Speaker 1: But that's not a prediction, it's it's obvious. Corey Booker
Speaker 1: now officially wants to be the president the United States. Okay,
Speaker 1: first of all, notice how he positions himself. And I
Speaker 1: know that this is all all the tradecraft of the politico,
Speaker 1: but you know, he comes out and he's talking about
Speaker 1: the shared concerns, shared problems. He wants to run as
Speaker 1: the bipartisan moderate Democrat guy. He wants to run as
Speaker 1: you know, I all feel your pain, and I'll fix
Speaker 1: it if you give me tremendous power. You know, that's
Speaker 1: what he's saying. You know, that's what he's saying. He's
Speaker 1: saying he will feel, he will feel your he already
Speaker 1: feels your pain, and in fact, he'll try to make
Speaker 1: the pain go away if you just make him president
Speaker 1: of the United States, So he sees his lane in
Speaker 1: this whole thing. Right, You got you know Warren, who
Speaker 1: apologize you see that apologize the Cherokee nation today. So
Speaker 1: she so she's a fraud. So we now now she's
Speaker 1: a you know, it's like you don't apologize for murdering
Speaker 1: somebody unless you murdered somebody. You know, she committed a fraud.
Speaker 1: So this is pretty clear she's a fraud. Fine, at
Speaker 1: least she did say sorry. Do we think she's really sorry?
Speaker 1: Do you think she just got caught? I'll leave that
Speaker 1: to you. She did release those DNA results, so that's
Speaker 1: something that somebody would have to explain how you could
Speaker 1: think that that's a good idea. But she did, you know,
Speaker 1: she did. She released him. So she's now obviously running
Speaker 1: as the female Bernie Sanders, or maybe Bernie Sanders is
Speaker 1: running as the mail Elizabeth Warren. Really you know, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to man explain over here. They're both
Speaker 1: in nightmare exactly, or Mike explain. Perhaps I've seen I've
Speaker 1: seen how fights do you get? Uh? So you got
Speaker 1: these democrats that are lining up some of their different
Speaker 1: some of their different pathways and their their version of
Speaker 1: you know, the Republican primary from twenty sixteen, where you're
Speaker 1: gonna have a lot of people, so they have to
Speaker 1: differentiate themselves. So Corey Booker differentiates himself from the eyes
Speaker 1: of being that you know, I'm just I'm just a
Speaker 1: guy who's just gonna like bring everyone together, and I
Speaker 1: just want everyone to be friends, and I just want
Speaker 1: to fix things. And okay, fine, there's a little problem
Speaker 1: though with that. First of all, you will recall just
Speaker 1: this past summer, Corey Booker was the guy who decided
Speaker 1: to be mister tough street fighter on the political beat.
Speaker 1: Play it. I openly invite and accept the consequences of
Speaker 1: my team releasing that email right now, and I'm releasing
Speaker 1: it to expose a number one. The emails are being
Speaker 1: withheld from the public have nothing to do with national security. Now.
Speaker 1: I appreciate the comments of my colleagues. This is about
Speaker 1: the closest I'll probably ever have in my life to
Speaker 1: an I Am Spartacus moment. Pretty far from Spartacus, as
Speaker 1: we all know. You know what he should do, though,
Speaker 1: and I'm serious, he should show up at a at
Speaker 1: like a low key campaign event wearing like full on
Speaker 1: Spartacus regalia, you know, with like with the sword and
Speaker 1: the whole, the whole get up. You know, he should
Speaker 1: show up and lean into it a little bit. That
Speaker 1: would make it go away. I think, you know, if
Speaker 1: he were like, yeah, whatever I said it, that'd be
Speaker 1: kind of funny. It can't be. He can't give a
Speaker 1: speech stress like that, although maybe he would. But if
Speaker 1: he showed up with the sandals and the grieves and
Speaker 1: the chess play and the whole thing, what do you think? Yeah,
Speaker 1: that would require a sense of humor, which he does
Speaker 1: not happen, right, Nor do any Democrats that I know. So, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Democrat politicians not funny. It is true, they're not funny.
Speaker 1: Can I tell you something that doesn't that it's kind
Speaker 1: of funny. I've heard this from a very well known,
Speaker 1: uh well, I should say very well known, a very
Speaker 1: connected DC insider and a connected Capitol Hill staffer. Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell loves all the cocaine Mitch stuff. He thinks it
Speaker 1: is hilarious. It's great. Like people go into his office
Speaker 1: and give him like that. They'll give him a print
Speaker 1: out of an article, so he's like her cocaine may
Speaker 1: he loves it. Multiple independent sources have told me Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell thinks cocaine. Mitch hilarious. Yeah, do you want to laugh?
Speaker 1: You want to be happy? Find it conservative exactly. So
Speaker 1: it's true. It's true. We do have the funnier we
Speaker 1: do have the funnier politicians. I have to say, but
Speaker 1: so so Corey Booker. He is most well known from
Speaker 1: at least over the last year. For that, I'm spartic
Speaker 1: this moment. But also I'm never going to forget that
Speaker 1: while he tries to be mister Horne or I just
Speaker 1: I just want everyone to be friends, and I just
Speaker 1: want to get along. I just want to fix problems
Speaker 1: and I want to I want to solve the pain
Speaker 1: and all this stuff, you know. While while he promotes
Speaker 1: himself as that right now, I am not going to
Speaker 1: forget anytime soon that he is also the guy who,
Speaker 1: six months ago or so or whatever it was, was
Speaker 1: part of the effort to not just destroy Brett Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: in front of his wife and children, one of the
Speaker 1: ugliest things I've ever seen in American politics, and in
Speaker 1: front of tens of millions of people who were watching
Speaker 1: that that hearing. He was part of that effort which
Speaker 1: no person of honor or decency could have been a
Speaker 1: part of. Okay, these women were lying. The final one,
Speaker 1: Thank thank heaven, she actually came out with those accusations
Speaker 1: because she was just a clear loon. I mean, somebody
Speaker 1: who was was deranged and just making stuff up for attention.
Speaker 1: I mean, the Democrats and the media were willing to
Speaker 1: put people out there as truth tellers who were about
Speaker 1: as credible as the person wandering around with a big
Speaker 1: piece of cardboard sticking out of the shopping cart that says,
Speaker 1: you know, John three sixteen or whatever, why is it
Speaker 1: always John three sixteen? By the way, You know, I
Speaker 1: don't know. I remember looking at up once and I
Speaker 1: was a kid because I was like, what is it?
Speaker 1: And it didn't make sense to me? You know, I
Speaker 1: can't now. My curiosity has got the best of me.
Speaker 1: And people right now are already without looking it up
Speaker 1: because they're better at this than I am. For God
Speaker 1: so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son,
Speaker 1: that who's ever believe it than him should not perish
Speaker 1: but have everlasting life. For God loved the world in
Speaker 1: this way, he gave his one and only son, so
Speaker 1: that everyone who believes in him will not perish but
Speaker 1: have eternal life. Well that's a great Bible verse. Why
Speaker 1: why do I people? Why do people at football games
Speaker 1: and crazy people in the street and hold up John
Speaker 1: three sixteen posters? Am I missing something? How did this
Speaker 1: become a meme? A meme before there were memes? Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's been popular sports culture forever. Right, it's been popular
Speaker 1: sports culture. So I don't get it. But the Kavanaugh hearing,
Speaker 1: the Kavanaugh hearing told us who Corey Booker really was.
Speaker 1: The Kavanaugh hearing made it clear to us that Corey
Speaker 1: Booker is a person of no integrity or decency or honesty.
Speaker 1: He's just another politician who will do whatever he wants.
Speaker 1: I will never forgive or forget the Senate Democrats who
Speaker 1: were part of that callavaied ritualized torture session of a
Speaker 1: good man who is now thankful a Supreme Court justice.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to let that go. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to let that pass. We saw who they were that day,
Speaker 1: and we should never ever forget it. I certainly am
Speaker 1: not going to any time. So you know, Corey Booker
Speaker 1: is running whoop d He just here's an early prediction
Speaker 1: he just doesn't have it. He just doesn't have it.
Speaker 1: You knows a little. He's a little whimpy, a little boring,
Speaker 1: not really very charismatic. It's just not gonna work. Not
Speaker 1: gonna work. And I think that I don't even think
Speaker 1: he'll last that far into the primary. That's that's my prediction.
Speaker 1: So we can always go back and visit that, and
Speaker 1: that's what we'll do. Team. I've got much more show
Speaker 1: en route. Stay with me. One of the things we're considering, obviously,
Speaker 1: is a national emergency, and it is it's an invasion
Speaker 1: of our country of not only people, not only gangs
Speaker 1: and criminals and human traffickers. It's an invasion of drugs
Speaker 1: into our country. It's an invasion like you've never seen before.
Speaker 1: You talk about heroin, ninety percent of the heroin coming
Speaker 1: into our country comes in through the southern border. We
Speaker 1: can stop so much of that. And I'll tell you this,
Speaker 1: if we build a proper barrier with all of the technology,
Speaker 1: which only really works with the barrier, but if we
Speaker 1: build a proper barrier with great technology too, we will
Speaker 1: see crime throughout the United States go down in percentages
Speaker 1: that we've never seen before. It'll be an amazing thing
Speaker 1: because so much of it comes through the southern border.
Speaker 1: How could it not be considered a crisis when most
Speaker 1: of the drugs coming into this country that are killing
Speaker 1: seventy thousand people a year are coming across our southern border.
Speaker 1: Take this one down to basics. Look at this one
Speaker 1: without all the political heat and the posturing and the demagogue,
Speaker 1: or just look at it for what it is. What
Speaker 1: should we make of the fact that the Democrats continue
Speaker 1: to pretend like there's not a crisis at the border.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's astonishing to me. You know, people
Speaker 1: look at the seizure yesterday and the fact that they're
Speaker 1: the Left's first response to a massive seizure or fentanyl
Speaker 1: at a port of entry is oh, look, it's at
Speaker 1: a port of entry. It's not only at ports of entry.
Speaker 1: And by the way, ports of entry are also under
Speaker 1: greater strain because in terms of the security that's there,
Speaker 1: because you have immigrations and customs enforcement and border patrol
Speaker 1: having to process a lot of people coming into the
Speaker 1: country and dealing with a lot of people who are
Speaker 1: surrounding themselves as family units giving them medical care. This
Speaker 1: is all strain on the system. This all takes people
Speaker 1: away from the job of law enforcement and makes them
Speaker 1: act like a makeshift red cross on our southern border.
Speaker 1: So when we look at that, we should all understand
Speaker 1: that the stakes are life and death. Bernie Sanders and
Speaker 1: Acazio Qutez. Later on we'll talk about how they think
Speaker 1: that green energy is a life and death issue and
Speaker 1: it's not. And it's really an embarrassment that they think
Speaker 1: it is Perhaps no more embarrassing than when Barack Obama
Speaker 1: said when he was speaking at the Coastguard Academy that
Speaker 1: climate change is the greatest national security threat we face.
Speaker 1: Talk about tilting at windmills. This just makes no sense
Speaker 1: at all, It makes no sense, But they really believe this,
Speaker 1: They really believe this. Here we have a true crisis,
Speaker 1: a major emergency, and there's just no interest whatsoever from
Speaker 1: the Democrats and taking serious actions to stop it. When
Speaker 1: they say things like oh, we need drones, we need drones,
Speaker 1: I say, okay, that just means that you'll know someone's
Speaker 1: crossing the border in time to not get there and
Speaker 1: arrest them. So you'll just have nice footage of somebody
Speaker 1: who's doing an illegal crossing. How does that help anyone.
Speaker 1: How does that help anyone that I don't think that
Speaker 1: they have an answer for this. By the way, also,
Speaker 1: how can we not have a crisis at the border
Speaker 1: When you look at how many people are dying and
Speaker 1: you look at the numbers with say, just fentanyl and
Speaker 1: heroin alone, and compare it to ten, fifteen, twenty years ago.
Speaker 1: It's not just the numbers of illegal crossings that are
Speaker 1: so disconcerting, it's how much is pouring into our country
Speaker 1: by way of drugs that kill people. These are more
Speaker 1: lethal drugs, dude. This This isn't you know, bales of
Speaker 1: hero I mean, pardon me. This isn't bales of marijuana
Speaker 1: in the back of someone's truck driving into the US
Speaker 1: or people bringing it down from Canada. These are drugs
Speaker 1: that are so lethal that if you touch them you
Speaker 1: can die. Which the biochemistry of that has been explained
Speaker 1: to me by a doctor before, and it still is
Speaker 1: hard to believe. And as was mentioned, I think on
Speaker 1: this show yesterday, you know, there's a lot of narcan
Speaker 1: out there, so you still have this very high overdose
Speaker 1: death rate, but it would be a lot higher if
Speaker 1: there was not a very effective drug that could counteract
Speaker 1: that could counteract these overdoses. I mean, thankfully it is there.
Speaker 1: But I'm just telling you that the scale of this
Speaker 1: problem is even greater than a lot of people realize,
Speaker 1: because the only thing that has really paid attention to
Speaker 1: our deaths not near deaths, and a lot of lives
Speaker 1: are being saved with narcan. A lot of emergency medical
Speaker 1: responders have to carry Narkan with them now and are
Speaker 1: using it. So this is a very serious issue, and
Speaker 1: you know the China connection to it too. You think
Speaker 1: about the real national security challenges that we face. We've
Speaker 1: gotten so wrapped up in thinking that we need to
Speaker 1: stop every g hottest overseas. And look, I've been guilty
Speaker 1: of it too in the past, thinking well, we've this
Speaker 1: group says they're aligned with al Qaedas, so we've got
Speaker 1: to go after them, or that says they're aligned. Sometimes
Speaker 1: we do, sometimes we don't. But when you have the
Speaker 1: crisis at our southern border, you have China stealing our
Speaker 1: intellectual property at a rate that will give them near
Speaker 1: technological and therefore military parody, if not superiority to us
Speaker 1: going forward. And then yeah, the Chinese not as an
Speaker 1: official state policy, but it is interesting isn't it the
Speaker 1: possibility that maybe maybe the Chinese, which you know, China
Speaker 1: is a police state, maybe they turn a little bit
Speaker 1: of a of a blind eye to some of this.
Speaker 1: Maybe they're not, as you know, not as as clear
Speaker 1: on what's leaving their borders when it comes offense and
Speaker 1: a lot of things as they pretend to be. They
Speaker 1: are providing the precursor chemicals to then be mixed into
Speaker 1: these drugs, into these very deadly drugs in Mexico and
Speaker 1: brought up across the border. Mexico is playing a role
Speaker 1: in this too. You know, if it were so easy
Speaker 1: to do, if it we're not a problem them at all,
Speaker 1: then why not just why wouldn't the cartel is why
Speaker 1: wouldn't the bad guys just be making the stuff here?
Speaker 1: Because they're setting up industrial facilities in Mexico where they
Speaker 1: can make tons of the stuff, bring it over and
Speaker 1: it's killing people. It's killing people that you know, and
Speaker 1: they say it's not a crisis. Trump is taking very seriously,
Speaker 1: and he say, look that the Chinese they better shape
Speaker 1: up on this one too. He says that they're going
Speaker 1: to do some stuff about fentanyl. One of the things
Speaker 1: that we discussed in Argentina was fent at al. This
Speaker 1: is not a trade deal. This is a fact that
Speaker 1: Presidency was extremely good when he said that they would
Speaker 1: criminalize fentanyl because fentotyl is killing a lot of our
Speaker 1: great American people. It's true, it's true, we'll China do
Speaker 1: what's necessary here to help us. I don't know. I
Speaker 1: think that that's very much still an open question. But
Speaker 1: these these drugs are a scourge unlike any we've ever
Speaker 1: seen before in this country. It is orders of magnitude
Speaker 1: worse than the crack epidemic. It is just by the numbers.
Speaker 1: I know people have said there's some kind of a
Speaker 1: class or race dynamic to that. I think that that
Speaker 1: is just refuted when you look at you. We've never
Speaker 1: had a year before last year when seventy thousand people
Speaker 1: died of drug overdoses. That's never happened before in this
Speaker 1: country's history. And it's an astonished number. For every seventy
Speaker 1: for every person who dies, think of how many friends, family, love,
Speaker 1: the ones they have that are shattered by this. So
Speaker 1: it's a crisis, Okay, it's a crisis. Democrats need to
Speaker 1: stop just playing the most pathetic politics with this and
Speaker 1: get on board for securing the border. They just won't
Speaker 1: do it. This is a real life and death issue,
Speaker 1: and they just don't care. A fascinating and very disturbing
Speaker 1: disparity in the way that the abortion bills in New
Speaker 1: York and Virginia are being discussed or not discussed, or
Speaker 1: being covered or not covered by the media. I see
Speaker 1: here that the go to tactic when there's a moment
Speaker 1: when the American people get to see just how grotesque
Speaker 1: in barbaric the true pro choice side of the argument
Speaker 1: is when there is an opportunity for that, the media's
Speaker 1: best response usually. I mean, they can lie, but they
Speaker 1: can only lie so much because it either is or
Speaker 1: is not. We're talking about a matter of law. This
Speaker 1: is why Representative Tran of the Virginia State Legislature who
Speaker 1: said that yes, it would include abortional up to a birth.
Speaker 1: That's because that is what the law says. I mean,
Speaker 1: they can say that, you know, they can try to
Speaker 1: say that it doesn't they can try to say that
Speaker 1: nobody would ever do that, but that is what the
Speaker 1: law says. So this is a yes or no question,
Speaker 1: and when they have to answer tough yes or no questions,
Speaker 1: their Their preferred method is once the word is out,
Speaker 1: they just act like, what do you mean, it's not
Speaker 1: a big story. That's not it's not a big deal
Speaker 1: at all. That doesn't really matter. Who cares about this.
Speaker 1: We should listen to people when they tell us who
Speaker 1: they are, and in the last few days we've gotten
Speaker 1: a real sense of who the progressive left are in
Speaker 1: this country. But it also reminds me of and I
Speaker 1: have to hat hit my friend Rahim Kassam for putting
Speaker 1: this out there on the internet and pointing out to everybody.
Speaker 1: You know, Trump knew who Hillary was on this issue
Speaker 1: quite a long time ago, whoever it was during the
Speaker 1: during the debates, and he got hammered at the time
Speaker 1: by the pro Hillary press, which is ninety percent of them.
Speaker 1: He got hammered because he said, look, you need to
Speaker 1: understand what Hillary Clinton is willing to support. They said, oh, no,
Speaker 1: she won't, she won't support that. That's not true. It
Speaker 1: turns out it is very much the case. But here's
Speaker 1: what he said to her back then, light term partial birth. Well,
Speaker 1: I think it's terrible. If you go with what Hillary
Speaker 1: is saying in the ninth month, you can take the
Speaker 1: baby and rip the baby out of the womb of
Speaker 1: the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.
Speaker 1: Is based on what she's saying and based on where
Speaker 1: she's going and where she's been, you can take the
Speaker 1: baby and rip the baby out of the womb in
Speaker 1: the ninth month, on the final day. Well, that is
Speaker 1: not what happens in these cases. And using that kind
Speaker 1: of scare rhetoric is just terribly unfortunate where it's obvious
Speaker 1: that a woman is about to give birth. That was
Speaker 1: what Hillary said, And now we're just going to play
Speaker 1: over what Hillary is. Oh, that's horrible and barbaric, and
Speaker 1: that's not what happens. Here is what was said on
Speaker 1: the Virginia legislature floor a couple of days ago. Play John,
Speaker 1: would that still be a point at which she could
Speaker 1: request an abortion if she was so certified she's dilating,
Speaker 1: mister chairman. That would be a you know, a decision
Speaker 1: that the doctor, the physician and the woman understand that.
Speaker 1: I'm asking if your bill allows that. My bill would
Speaker 1: allow that. Yes, So what exactly was Hillary saying about
Speaker 1: how that's part you know that that's not fair and
Speaker 1: that's not what happened. It is what would happen, and
Speaker 1: we've all known all along that's what would happen, and
Speaker 1: that they have to you see, they have to legalize
Speaker 1: third trimester abortion because if there were any restrictions on
Speaker 1: abortion and the third trimester, that would be a concession
Speaker 1: that this is a baby. That would be a concession
Speaker 1: that this is a life that is involved. And they
Speaker 1: don't want to make that concession because if it's a
Speaker 1: baby at nine months, if it's a baby when it's
Speaker 1: coming out of the birth canal, you have to ask
Speaker 1: the question, well, is it a baby at eight months, seven, six,
Speaker 1: five four, And they don't want they don't want to
Speaker 1: have to answer those questions. Better to pretend that it's
Speaker 1: not a baby at all, and to do so under
Speaker 1: this rubek of doctors and women making choices about their
Speaker 1: own health. That's just that's just blather. That's not addressing
Speaker 1: the issue. That's not talking to the issue. But I
Speaker 1: would just know that, you know, Hillary, people always say, oh, Trump,
Speaker 1: he's got a problem with the truth. But what he
Speaker 1: said there was correct, and the media was all over him.
Speaker 1: The media pounced. You could say that was that was
Speaker 1: another one. In the last twenty four hours, you've seen
Speaker 1: so many news stories from these different major outlets and
Speaker 1: papers where they keep doing this, Oh, Republicans pounce on
Speaker 1: what Governor Northam says. Well, yeah, I mean they're gonna
Speaker 1: they're gonna react pretty strongly to a guy saying that, yeah,
Speaker 1: you can kill baby sometimes if you if you really,
Speaker 1: if you really have to kill a baby, you can
Speaker 1: kill a baby. When when a state governor says that,
Speaker 1: people are going to quote pounce. But I just think
Speaker 1: it's a fascinating case study in how the media tries
Speaker 1: to run interference and tries to do whatever it can
Speaker 1: to help one side of this argument, tries to be
Speaker 1: helpful to one side of this argument, and that's it's
Speaker 1: never about the initial act that a Democrat has committed
Speaker 1: or the initial thing they've said. It's always all Republicans pounce.
Speaker 1: They're going too far, they've overreached. That's another one. They'd
Speaker 1: like to say, Oh, they've overreached. That is not the
Speaker 1: case at all, certainly not the case here. And that
Speaker 1: brings me to a little bit of a public back
Speaker 1: and forth I had today with a few never Trump
Speaker 1: conservatives online, which is fine. Some of them I like,
Speaker 1: some of them, I detest depends on which one we're
Speaker 1: talking about. But there's a particular sensitivity right now to
Speaker 1: what I had said or what I had written. And
Speaker 1: we'll say now is we have seen that the Democrats
Speaker 1: are in the last month and if you ally with them,
Speaker 1: if you are willing to support them and support they're
Speaker 1: getting into power when they are when they are favorable
Speaker 1: to illegal immigration, pro and fanticide, want a seventy to
Speaker 1: a ninety percent tax rate. You know, you add up
Speaker 1: all these things, and if you are supporting them because
Speaker 1: you think that's a way to chasen Trump or own
Speaker 1: the drum for whatever, there's a name for that, you're
Speaker 1: called a Democrat. Now, I know that never Trump. People
Speaker 1: get very mad when you say this, because I'm not
Speaker 1: saying you can't. You know, first of all, you know
Speaker 1: people can say whatever they want to say, But I'm
Speaker 1: not calling out people who criticize Trump. Have problems with Trump. Look,
Speaker 1: if he doesn't build that wall, I'm gonna have a
Speaker 1: big problem with Trump. And I think that Trump sometimes
Speaker 1: is self defeating in certain ways with his messaging. I
Speaker 1: think that he makes things harder. He certainly makes it
Speaker 1: harder for people like me to make a case for
Speaker 1: the parts of his message that we do really like
Speaker 1: and agree with him on. Right, So there's certainly criticism
Speaker 1: to be had of Trump. And I've talked before about
Speaker 1: the nepotism around Trump. That's I can't defend that, and
Speaker 1: people who think it's okay, just wait until you have
Speaker 1: you know, Kamala Harris's husband as Secretary of the Treasury
Speaker 1: or something, you know, I mean, that's then then you'll
Speaker 1: be like, oh, I don't like nepotism. All too late.
Speaker 1: But there's plenty of ways to criticize the president. That's
Speaker 1: different than allying with the other side though, and this
Speaker 1: shouldn't be that complicated a concept, but people get very
Speaker 1: emotional about this. If you want to say, I don't
Speaker 1: like what Trump is doing, but I do appreciate that
Speaker 1: the Republicans stand for life and the Democrats stand for death,
Speaker 1: and therefore I would rather Republicans be in charge of
Speaker 1: the Congress than the Democrats. Fine, but if you're if
Speaker 1: your response to what you're seeing happening here is you
Speaker 1: know what to really teach the Republicans a lesson? We
Speaker 1: need to give the Occasio Cortez, Warren Sanders, Hillary Clinton,
Speaker 1: wing of the party. We need to give them power.
Speaker 1: We need to put them in power so that they
Speaker 1: can do the things that they want to do. You're
Speaker 1: allowed to do that, but that's just called being a democrat.
Speaker 1: That is what that is. It is called being a democrat.
Speaker 1: So I think we should be able to be pretty
Speaker 1: clear about that. I mean, never Trump. People can as
Speaker 1: mad as me if they want that. I'm not calling
Speaker 1: all them out on this. I'm just saying this is
Speaker 1: how I see it, and I think it's pretty clear
Speaker 1: at this point. The other side has showed us who
Speaker 1: they are. This month, really or the last month, I
Speaker 1: should say, they have showed us who they are. And
Speaker 1: it's not good. It is not pretty. It's not something
Speaker 1: that I would ever want to be a part of.
Speaker 1: So time to double down on conservatism. I've been talking
Speaker 1: about snippy dot com for a little while now. Team,
Speaker 1: if you haven't already, you've got to check it out.
Speaker 1: And if you looked at it one before, look again.
Speaker 1: Snippy dot com is now updated with all kinds of
Speaker 1: improvements and things that you're going to want to use
Speaker 1: to have an unbiased social media Platformat's all about conversation
Speaker 1: and community. Thousands of my listeners have already joined stippy
Speaker 1: dot com and they're expressing their opinions and stirring up
Speaker 1: lively conversations. You don't have any suppression from left wing administrators,
Speaker 1: none of the conversational health initiatives, or any the other
Speaker 1: nonsense that you get with a lot of those progressive
Speaker 1: lefty sites. Snippy is a place where everyone is free
Speaker 1: to express their thoughts and share their opinions. Okay, it's
Speaker 1: totally free to join, open to everyone. So join us
Speaker 1: at snippy dot com and let your opinion matter. No
Speaker 1: shadow banning and no suppression of conservative thought ever. Now,
Speaker 1: with an updated user interface and exciting new features, also
Speaker 1: available in the Apple App Store and for Android, snippy
Speaker 1: dot com your new alternative social media. You're talking about
Speaker 1: zero carbon emissions, no use of fossil fuels within twelve years.
Speaker 1: That is the goal. It's ambitious and that possible. To
Speaker 1: talking about everybody having to drive an electric cart. It's
Speaker 1: going to require a lot of rapid change that we
Speaker 1: don't even conceive as possible right now. That it is
Speaker 1: absolutely imperative and a life and death issue that we
Speaker 1: have got to transform our energy system away from fossil
Speaker 1: fuel to sustainable energy. If you do not, for example,
Speaker 1: close the refrigerator door quickly, you will be letting cold
Speaker 1: out into your kitchen area, and then there will be
Speaker 1: necessary electricity to make the cold thing happen in the refrigerator,
Speaker 1: which is fossil fuels, which do things environment I'll go
Speaker 1: press though, that's all I need to say. This is lunacy.
Speaker 1: This is lunacy from Acasio Cortez and from Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 1: It's it's really similar lunacy. And right now we're being
Speaker 1: told or being told this when it's oh so cold
Speaker 1: that I said, sure enough, there are people out there,
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren one of them. People are going to take
Speaker 1: this approach that, oh, the temperatures are a function or
Speaker 1: you know, the temperature last few days across the Midwest,
Speaker 1: and it's because of climate change. Because we hit some
Speaker 1: records in some places. And I said, well, there are
Speaker 1: other places where we did not hit a record. We
Speaker 1: did not hit a record because oh, that's right, the
Speaker 1: record was hit in the eighties, or the record was
Speaker 1: hit you know, and some other I mean, this is
Speaker 1: just it's silly, It is intellectually unserious. But they keep
Speaker 1: doing this, They keep saying Oh, if we don't do
Speaker 1: something dramatic, I'm calling it the Great Green Leap Forward.
Speaker 1: I should probably run an article on that, Mike. I
Speaker 1: think that would get some attention. See, when Mao was
Speaker 1: running China, China was in a impoverished agrarian society, a
Speaker 1: lot of subsistence farming, very very bad. And you know,
Speaker 1: when you're talking about the nineteen fifties, you're looking at
Speaker 1: a country that was in need of some modernization, to
Speaker 1: be sure. So they figured, all right, let's just push
Speaker 1: this thing forward. Let's make it happen a lot faster
Speaker 1: as a function of central government planning. Right, I mean,
Speaker 1: let's actually make sure that people are doing what the
Speaker 1: government tells them do. I mean, this is the Great
Speaker 1: Leap Forward was from nineteen fifty eight to nineteen sixty two. Right,
Speaker 1: they were forcing people into the cities, taking them out
Speaker 1: of the countryside. Well, it led to mass starvation and
Speaker 1: all kinds of government abuse and very very bad things.
Speaker 1: That wasn't initially the plan, but that is what happens.
Speaker 1: In one of my favorite books on the subject, the
Speaker 1: term that is used to describe this is local improvisation.
Speaker 1: And this is just a corollary relate to what we
Speaker 1: have with our government and the genius of the founding, right,
Speaker 1: the reason that we have local and then state and
Speaker 1: then federal, and they're all separate jurisdictions but also intertwined
Speaker 1: jurisdictions in a sense, And the reason we have federalism,
Speaker 1: we have this system of checks and balances all these
Speaker 1: things is because we want people to be able to
Speaker 1: make the most effective decisions for themselves as often as
Speaker 1: they can and as quickly as they can. And people
Speaker 1: in a certain township, for example, on that town council
Speaker 1: are going to handle town issues better. And somebody in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Who just says, yeah, do it this way.
Speaker 1: And we've seen this time and again in history when
Speaker 1: you let the march of progress occurs, especially technological progress,
Speaker 1: economic progress, when it occurs based upon people that are
Speaker 1: involved in the thing and can engage in improvisation. Oh,
Speaker 1: baking the cookies this way, it doesn't work, I'll bake
Speaker 1: them that way. This is how you got people to
Speaker 1: make better cookies. When DC says make all the cookies
Speaker 1: the same way or else, or else we're gonna take
Speaker 1: away your bakery. That's bad, right, It was very bad
Speaker 1: in China, and they led to mass starvation and horrific
Speaker 1: oppression against the people that tried to push back against it.
Speaker 1: And this does not work. You know, people say, oh,
Speaker 1: but book, what about the Manhattan Project and getting the Moon?
Speaker 1: The Manhattan Project wasn't three hundred million people all trying
Speaker 1: to do advanced math problems on a chalkboard. It was
Speaker 1: a small, secret government program about a technology that was
Speaker 1: necessary for military survival. You know, government can do some
Speaker 1: stuff like that. Sometimes they're they're they're good at that.
Speaker 1: But it was not a collective mobilization of the entire
Speaker 1: country toward the goal of figuring out something incredibly complicated.
Speaker 1: What had taken a lot longer if the Manhattan Project
Speaker 1: had been everybody involved. Yeah, my name is Phil and
Speaker 1: I'm from West Philly, and I just want to say
Speaker 1: that your calculations about fission look a little off to me,
Speaker 1: and I would prefer if you're going to go toward
Speaker 1: the splitting of the neutron in that fashion ego ipso
Speaker 1: day fact though, and I'm done right, Producer Mike, you
Speaker 1: would have your buddy, your buddies would have slowed down
Speaker 1: the Amountain project if they're involved. I think This is true.
Speaker 1: My dad's from West Philly. I've spent some time with
Speaker 1: West Philly. It's uh, it's interesting. Once got held up
Speaker 1: in West Philly at gume Point. Sounds like you've been
Speaker 1: in West Philly. I've been. Yeah, beautiful, Yeah, lovely this
Speaker 1: time of year, I'm sure too. You know. Unfortunately, when
Speaker 1: you're in Philly and there's snow on the ground, they
Speaker 1: don't play like a rocky montage behind you all the time.
Speaker 1: You know, you don't. It's maybe better if you're wearing
Speaker 1: like a sweatsuit you're working out and stuff. But for
Speaker 1: the most part, not really place I want to be.
Speaker 1: But all right, so, but back to the great green
Speaker 1: leap forward. Think about how expensive everything is going to be.
Speaker 1: When everything is more expensive, it's the way to really
Speaker 1: put this into context. Think about what it would mean.
Speaker 1: Because o'casio Quartez and this is this is why we
Speaker 1: don't have real journalists, because they would ask questions like, Okay,
Speaker 1: you want a massive green energy plan, what roughly what
Speaker 1: percentage of gasoline is expended in the t is expended
Speaker 1: by cars and the transportation industry versus in actual products.
Speaker 1: I bet you would have no idea whatsoever. Absolutely none.
Speaker 1: The answer is about half and we think of it. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's just going to affect you at the pump the
Speaker 1: price of gas. That's not true. It's not just the
Speaker 1: price of gas, which also affects the price of products
Speaker 1: because of the transportation side of the equation. It's also
Speaker 1: fossil fuels that are used in products, products, my friends, things,
Speaker 1: the very things itself that you buy or themselves that
Speaker 1: you buy, and that's that's all going to go up
Speaker 1: and be much more expensive. And remember, you wouldn't be
Speaker 1: doing this. You wouldn't be paying all this money for
Speaker 1: something that is good and tangible and real. You would
Speaker 1: be paying this money so that you could deal with
Speaker 1: climate change, which anybody who pays attention knows they're wrong
Speaker 1: about over and over again. And this is so that
Speaker 1: you can stop there from being more co two in
Speaker 1: the air. Point zero four percent of the Earth's atmosphere
Speaker 1: is carbon dioxide. So we're going to spend trillions of dollars,
Speaker 1: put massive breaks on the economy, and do all of
Speaker 1: this so that point zero four percent of the carbon
Speaker 1: dioxide will be adjusted, maybe twenty percent over the next
Speaker 1: twenty years. Normal people don't think this way. But the
Speaker 1: good news is the American people are getting to see
Speaker 1: the extent of the radicalism of the left from people
Speaker 1: like Alexandra Occazio Cortez and Bernie Sanders, people who have
Speaker 1: knowledge of neither science nor economics, but they know how
Speaker 1: to push people's buttons. They know how to sound like
Speaker 1: they care and that they're going to take on the
Speaker 1: big bullies and the mean capitalists. That are the reason
Speaker 1: that they say, the reason that you know things are
Speaker 1: getting more expensive for you. The reality is they're also
Speaker 1: the reason that this country and the people living it
Speaker 1: right now are so incredibly wealthy that if you told
Speaker 1: someone from one hundred years ago this is where we'd be,
Speaker 1: they wouldn't believe you. But that requires some perspective which
Speaker 1: the left does not have. If you're running a business,
Speaker 1: large or small, you've got to have background checks done
Speaker 1: and the people that you're hiring and bringing in right.
Speaker 1: It's important as liability issues, and you also want to
Speaker 1: make sure that you could trust the people around you.
Speaker 1: That's why you need to trust Global Verification Network. Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network is the only dual certified and veteran owned
Speaker 1: background investigation and vetting company so When you use Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network, you are supporting a veteran owned and operated
Speaker 1: company and you're working with people that I know and
Speaker 1: trust and I know they'll do the best for you.
Speaker 1: Call them see what kind of a program they can
Speaker 1: set up for you. Large company, small company, if you're
Speaker 1: in an HR department, or if you're a sole proprietor
Speaker 1: or a proprietor of a small business. These are the
Speaker 1: people that you want to go and talk to about
Speaker 1: background checks or vetting for any of the deals you're
Speaker 1: working on. Call eight seven seven six nine five one
Speaker 1: one seven nine. That's eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: one one seven nine, or go to my GVN dot com.
Speaker 1: Make sure they know that you're part of Team Buck.
Speaker 1: You are now entering the Freedom Hot Titical Operation Center.
Speaker 1: All sense of the programs Musky Caps strictly need to
Speaker 1: know Team Buck is cleared and ready for the Buck Brief.
Speaker 1: We've provided Russia and ample window of time to mend
Speaker 1: its ways and for Russia to honor its commitment tomorrow
Speaker 1: that time runs out. Russia has refused to take any
Speaker 1: steps to return real and verifiable compliance over these sixty days.
Speaker 1: The United States will therefore suspend its obligations under the
Speaker 1: I n F Treaty, effective February second. Russia has jeopardized
Speaker 1: the United States security interest, and we can no longer
Speaker 1: be restricted by the treaty while Russia shamelessly violates it.
Speaker 1: If Russia does not return to full and verifiable compliance
Speaker 1: with the treaty within this six month period by verifiably
Speaker 1: destroying its I n F violating missiles, their launchers, and
Speaker 1: associated equipment, the treaty will terminate. Secretary of State Mike
Speaker 1: Pompeo announced earlier today that the US is suspending the
Speaker 1: Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which is an important part
Speaker 1: of European nuclear security since the Cold War. It seems
Speaker 1: like kind of a big deal. What does it mean
Speaker 1: and what does it tell us about Trump's relationship with Russia?
Speaker 1: Brought on somebody who answers this and oh so much more.
Speaker 1: Rebecca Heinricks is in the house. She is a senior
Speaker 1: hello at the Hudson Institute and a missile super expert. Rebecca,
Speaker 1: thanks for calling in. I'm so happy to do it.
Speaker 1: Thanks for having me. All right, So what is the
Speaker 1: just before we get into the the what comes next?
Speaker 1: Tell us what's come before here a little bit. The
Speaker 1: Intermediate Range Juclear Forces Treaty. What is it? Is it
Speaker 1: a big deal? Why should people care? Sure? Well, at
Speaker 1: the end of the Cold War, this is one of
Speaker 1: those treaties people think of it as it is a
Speaker 1: major Cold War treaty. And what it does is it
Speaker 1: abolished the possession, the testing, and the deployment of a
Speaker 1: whole category of missiles, ground launch cruise missiles. So these
Speaker 1: are missiles that can range Europe, and we removed ours
Speaker 1: from Europe the European theater. The Russians or the Soviet
Speaker 1: Union at the time got rid of theirs. And the
Speaker 1: reason that we don't like them, the reason that we
Speaker 1: thought that they would state realizing at the time, is
Speaker 1: because these particular kind of missiles are their shorter range,
Speaker 1: so that the person who is in range of them,
Speaker 1: these countries who are arranged of them, have much shorter
Speaker 1: decision time if Russia decides to launch one. They had many,
Speaker 1: many of these particular type of missiles, and so we
Speaker 1: Ronald Reagan negotiated this treaty and we abolished and successfully
Speaker 1: removed this particular range of missiles from the European theater. Now,
Speaker 1: since then though Russia has been cheating. They have not
Speaker 1: only been testing this particular type of missile, but now
Speaker 1: they are deploying several battalions of this particular missiles. The
Speaker 1: Obama administration knew they were doing, couldn't get Russia to comply,
Speaker 1: but we're still bound by the treaty. And so now
Speaker 1: the Trump administration tried for a couple of years to
Speaker 1: get Russia to come back into compliance with the treaty,
Speaker 1: and rather than do that, they've just gone the other
Speaker 1: direction and continue to deploy more of them. So the
Speaker 1: Trump administration announced today that we are not going to
Speaker 1: be suckers to use the president. You know, President has
Speaker 1: said that in the past, We're not going to be
Speaker 1: suckers anymore. This is a perfect example of that. And
Speaker 1: so we are. We have announced that in six months
Speaker 1: of freshness, no longer complying with the treaty than we
Speaker 1: are out of the treaty. The treaty's gone, so we
Speaker 1: will be out of this treaty. What what's the concern, right,
Speaker 1: because people, anytime you talk about pulling out of a
Speaker 1: nuclear treaty, you're telling me that Russia is cheating. We've
Speaker 1: been known, we've known for a while that Russia is cheating,
Speaker 1: So why wouldn't we want to pull out of the treaty.
Speaker 1: I'm sure there must be some you know, if Trump
Speaker 1: is doing it, it has to be bad. There are
Speaker 1: a lot of people out there that will think that.
Speaker 1: And so what are they going to say? This is destabilizing,
Speaker 1: this is Trump pushing us to nuclear war. So the arguments,
Speaker 1: it's so the arguments for those who so I support this,
Speaker 1: I support this. I think that you know, for too
Speaker 1: long the United States has thought that we call its
Speaker 1: arms control. These are the treaties we have with other
Speaker 1: countries that constrain those parties to the treaties from what
Speaker 1: can deploy, things that they can possess, different types of
Speaker 1: missiles they can possess, and more head numbers, etc. And
Speaker 1: a lot of people who have a lot of confidence
Speaker 1: in these agreements think that these by having these treaties,
Speaker 1: that the world is safer and more stabilizing. But both
Speaker 1: parties have to abide by them, otherwise it just constrains
Speaker 1: the United States just ties our hands and doesn't constrain stairs.
Speaker 1: So I think it makes a load of sense to
Speaker 1: get out of treaties in which the United States know
Speaker 1: we abide by treaties like boy Scouts because we're Americans.
Speaker 1: It's how we do it. Countries like Russia just try
Speaker 1: to cheat. They treat on the margins, they cheat outright sometimes,
Speaker 1: and then the United States continues to try to get
Speaker 1: them to comply. So the fear is here for those
Speaker 1: who think we should be party to this treaty or
Speaker 1: to continue to try to get the Russians to comply
Speaker 1: and stay in the treaty. They fear that there's going
Speaker 1: to be an armed race if we get out of
Speaker 1: the treaty. But my argument to that is, but the
Speaker 1: Russians are already doing it. The Russians are already developing
Speaker 1: and deploying these missiles, So we're not going to incentivize
Speaker 1: them to do the thing that they're already doing. It
Speaker 1: just now gives us the option to one, perhaps that
Speaker 1: deploy these things back in the European theater, if we
Speaker 1: believe that that's what we need to deter Russia, or
Speaker 1: perhaps in the Asian theater, because the Chinese have never
Speaker 1: been party to this treaty, and if the Chinese were
Speaker 1: party to the treaty, more than ninety percent of their
Speaker 1: entire missile force would be in violation of it. It's
Speaker 1: basically like their entire missile force as I n F
Speaker 1: noncompliant missiles if they were party to the treaty. And
Speaker 1: so this gives the United States an option now to
Speaker 1: look at different theaters and say, hey, maybe we might
Speaker 1: want to invest in this particular weapons system. Again, also politics, right,
Speaker 1: they're going to be able to look at this through
Speaker 1: that lens. Here's what Kelly ha and Conway had to
Speaker 1: say after the announcement came out today. Yeah, well, he's
Speaker 1: been tough on Russia for a while, and I would
Speaker 1: like to see how they're going to spin this one.
Speaker 1: This is a president who has put additional sanctions on Russians,
Speaker 1: on bad actors where he and his Treasury Department have
Speaker 1: seen fit. He's expelled sixty plus Russians from this country,
Speaker 1: shut down two of their consulates at last count, and
Speaker 1: I think pushed back on Putin at once but twice
Speaker 1: when one of his puppets, Assad in Syria gassed his
Speaker 1: own people. When the President saw that, he took action immediately.
Speaker 1: People have to start looking at the facts and the
Speaker 1: figures about how tough this president has been on Russia
Speaker 1: at the same time trying to negotiate peace where he
Speaker 1: can and big resolved by two major countries where it's appropriate.
Speaker 1: What do you make of this? I mean, we always
Speaker 1: hear from at least some of the media that Trump
Speaker 1: is not just soft on Russia, but he's Putin's puppet.
Speaker 1: People actually say this kind of stuff, and yet you
Speaker 1: just heard that recitation of different facts from Kelly Ann Conway.
Speaker 1: I could throw a few others in there too that
Speaker 1: she left off. What do you make of it? I
Speaker 1: think that Kelly An Conway is exactly right. Listen, I've
Speaker 1: been watching I Nuclear Deterrent. I've been you know, that's
Speaker 1: kind of my main area of specialty. I focus on
Speaker 1: US Russia relations, US China relations because these are the
Speaker 1: great powers that have a lot of nuclear weapons. So
Speaker 1: this is an area that I focused on for many years.
Speaker 1: And a lot of people have asked me, Rebecca, aren't
Speaker 1: you worried about Trump? Aren't you worried that the Russians
Speaker 1: have something on Trump that could harm US security? And
Speaker 1: I have said since he was the Republican nominee, you know,
Speaker 1: and since then, I'm going to be able to tell
Speaker 1: if there's something on Trump by the way he conducts
Speaker 1: US foreign policy views of the Russia, and Kelly and
Speaker 1: Kanway is exactly right. This administration has been far tougher
Speaker 1: as a matter of policy on Russia in doing what
Speaker 1: the United States needs to do, not looking to aggravate Russia,
Speaker 1: but to look but to pursue US interests, regardless of
Speaker 1: if the Russians complain about what the thing is that
Speaker 1: we're doing. And I support presidents trying to look for
Speaker 1: opportunities to extend an open hand to Russia where we
Speaker 1: can get along with them, because what we don't want
Speaker 1: to happen is an alliance between Russia and China. If
Speaker 1: we can find opportunities to cooperate with the Russians so
Speaker 1: that we can count our rising China, then we should
Speaker 1: do that. If we can find counter terrorism opportunities to
Speaker 1: work together, we should do that. And we should pursue
Speaker 1: our interests like like the I n F treaty for instance.
Speaker 1: If they're not going to comply, then we don't. We
Speaker 1: shouldn't be party to that treaty. So Kelly and Conway
Speaker 1: is exactly right. And you can see now the same
Speaker 1: people who accuse President Trump of being an agent of
Speaker 1: the Russian government are pretty quiet now when it comes
Speaker 1: to the ion F treaty, or they're saying, oh no,
Speaker 1: the are going to aggravate Putin. You know, they're kind
Speaker 1: of all over the board on this. So the President
Speaker 1: Trump does not get enough credit for leading an American
Speaker 1: foreign policy that's good for the United States and tous
Speaker 1: when the Russia tuf one Russia when the Russian needs
Speaker 1: need it, and its farm truffer than the Obama administration
Speaker 1: was by far. Rebecca Hinrich everybody Hudson Institute Senior Fellow
Speaker 1: Hudson Hudson Institute dot org. Check out her latest research
Speaker 1: there and you'll see her on Fox News. Rebecca, great
Speaker 1: to have you on. Thanks so much, have a good weekend.
Speaker 1: We right back, team Hey, Team Buck, It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call. And I didn't pick that. I didn't pick
Speaker 1: the best weather for NYC. John. It's a little a
Speaker 1: little bit chilly up in here. Not exactly what I
Speaker 1: had in mind, But it was worse yesterday. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: it was DC yesterday. It was painful to walk around outside,
Speaker 1: but then again, it wasn't like Chicago, where from what
Speaker 1: I understand, people were throwing buckets of water up in
Speaker 1: the air, and they would turn to icicles or whatever.
Speaker 1: Not icicles, but you know, snow, yes, snow, there you go,
Speaker 1: they turned it. That's right, they would turn to snow,
Speaker 1: not icicle. Buck, get it together, Sexton. I am happy
Speaker 1: that'll be up in New York City hometown, even when
Speaker 1: it's congested and freezing and there's a lot of sludge
Speaker 1: and snow and the snow is yellow in a lot
Speaker 1: of places. You know, that's special New York snow. That's
Speaker 1: the special New York snow. You know what I mean.
Speaker 1: You're like, oh, look at that. We have multi colored
Speaker 1: snow here in New York City. There's no place like home, right,
Speaker 1: but I do miss it. Yeah, man, there's there's no place.
Speaker 1: There's definitely no place like home. Is it? Is it
Speaker 1: the best place? That's a whole other conversation. Alrighty, Jeremy,
Speaker 1: First up on Facebook, We're gonna double the Facebook this weekend,
Speaker 1: Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton. That's the way to
Speaker 1: do it. We can double that action. Here's what Jeremy says. Buck.
Speaker 1: It has been a while, but wanted to say that
Speaker 1: your monologue on the state of the US's military is
Speaker 1: well done. We have fallen into a mindset that warre
Speaker 1: in the Middle East is the norm and will never change.
Speaker 1: It's great to hear someone on the right who calls
Speaker 1: into question our world military presence and hope more people
Speaker 1: will listen. Shields high, Jeremy, Well, Jeremy, I hope that
Speaker 1: your hope comes true. I mean, I think that there's
Speaker 1: plenty of reason and there's lots of evidence to support
Speaker 1: the idea that we probably should not continue to do
Speaker 1: what we're doing. I mean, I've been saying for a
Speaker 1: long time what we're doing in Afghanistan is not going
Speaker 1: to work. It's not going to work. Okay, So we
Speaker 1: can talk a lot about how oh well do you
Speaker 1: know I've been saying for how many years on this
Speaker 1: show that the strategy is the same strategy. I mean,
Speaker 1: you have the same strategy and the same, if not
Speaker 1: worse factors aligned against the strategy. Your prospects for success
Speaker 1: are dim, and that is the truth of the mission
Speaker 1: in Afghanistan. Trying to leave a presence there to hold
Speaker 1: it all together. That all sounds fine. People said to me, oh, buck,
Speaker 1: but we don't have to not doing a lot of
Speaker 1: the front line fighting. That's the Taliban, that's Afghanist I mean,
Speaker 1: that's the Afghan National Army and the Taliban that's up
Speaker 1: to them, and that I just say, that's all true
Speaker 1: until things get really bad. You know, remember that your
Speaker 1: your presence of four or five thousand soldiers becomes a
Speaker 1: much bigger issue when the bad guys are making a
Speaker 1: run on the capitol of the country. You know, when
Speaker 1: the bad guys start threatening to massacre a whole division
Speaker 1: of the Allies, that your soldiers. So, you know, if
Speaker 1: we have four thousand Americans spread around a few bases,
Speaker 1: let's say I think it's more like nine thousand Afghanistans.
Speaker 1: Let's say it's let's say it's ten thousand. You've got
Speaker 1: ten thousand Americans spread around Afghanistan. Okay. What happens when
Speaker 1: you see an Afghan Army division completely encircled by Taliban
Speaker 1: in Helman Province? Okay, yeah, sure, we'll deploy air assets.
Speaker 1: What if that's not enough, then we're gonna send our
Speaker 1: guys in. What if the Taliban has twenty thousand, Now
Speaker 1: we're gonna do what you see, all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: you get pushed into the well. We better do a
Speaker 1: lot more or else our soldiers are going to be
Speaker 1: under real threat. And that's that's where this starts to
Speaker 1: become I think, a very big problem, very quickly. All right, Mike,
Speaker 1: what Mike? Mike writes buck any thoughts on the peace
Speaker 1: negotiations in Afghanistan with the Taliban and the era of Trump.
Speaker 1: It's hard to get news on something like that. Thanks
Speaker 1: Shields High. Well, Mike, I was just kind of turns
Speaker 1: out I was just kind of talking about it, you know.
Speaker 1: I think that here's the reality. There's very little reason
Speaker 1: to believe that whatever deal that we have with the
Speaker 1: Taliban will be respected for any length of time by
Speaker 1: the Taliban. They will, they'll adhere to the deal until
Speaker 1: it's no longer in their interest to do so. The
Speaker 1: Taliban has no honor, there's no agreement, there's no agreement
Speaker 1: that they can sign with us that we should expect
Speaker 1: them to maintain. So that's what I've got for you
Speaker 1: all that. I mean, it's unfortunate but true, But that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean we shouldn't leave. Staying forever is not a
Speaker 1: good idea. And I was just explaining why. You'll hear
Speaker 1: a lot of conservatives saying, oh, it's just a maintenance. President, No,
Speaker 1: Afghanistan is an active combat zone. It's not South Korea,
Speaker 1: it's not Germany, it's not you know, Guam. This is
Speaker 1: a place where you could have a division level military
Speaker 1: engagement that would require a much larger scale of US
Speaker 1: military support. And that's how Mission Creep happens. That's how
Speaker 1: these things occur. All right, let's see here, Mark, right, Buck,
Speaker 1: could you please explain why the left hates rich people
Speaker 1: that were made rich by the left that hates them
Speaker 1: by purchasing the products from them that made them richet
Speaker 1: the love the leftist rich politicians that they made rich
Speaker 1: for voting them. I understand the left things tax money
Speaker 1: disappears at a nowhere, but are they that dumb? Mark? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna go with yeah on that one. We
Speaker 1: ran around in a little bit of a circle there,
Speaker 1: But I think I know what you're going for. Tera Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: love the show as always. Do you know whatever happened
Speaker 1: to the Maga bomber? Keep up the gray work shield
Speaker 1: side terror, you know. I will tell you I have
Speaker 1: actually not seen any follow up stories of any kind
Speaker 1: about the Maga bomber. I am not familiar with what
Speaker 1: the latest information is on him. I'm assuming you mean
Speaker 1: the guy who was in the magamobile in Florida who
Speaker 1: was sending pipe bombs. I always wanted to know if
Speaker 1: those pipe bombs were if those pipe bombs were active devices,
Speaker 1: or if they were dummy devices. I know there was
Speaker 1: some reporting it said that they were lethal devices, but
Speaker 1: I'm curious when they pulled them apart, what the reality was. Jerry.
Speaker 1: Someone at work asked the question about late term abortions,
Speaker 1: is this a new method for harvesting stem cells? Just
Speaker 1: wondering if you have insight, Jerry, I don't think it's
Speaker 1: a new method for harvesting stem cells. Although what we
Speaker 1: saw from the undercover Planned Parenthood videos taken by the
Speaker 1: Center for Medical Progress David de Layden and his group
Speaker 1: is that they do sell the soon to what would
Speaker 1: be otherwise discarded tissue. They do sell it for They're
Speaker 1: not supposed to sell it for a profit, but they
Speaker 1: do so that there is a financial incentive in the
Speaker 1: abortion industry, and we would be fooling ourselves if we
Speaker 1: were not aware of it. Bruce oh Man, Bruce, You're
Speaker 1: opening monologue on the podcast for January thirtieth made me
Speaker 1: tear up how the hell are democrats so evil in America?
Speaker 1: Sale so okay with this? Just want to put my
Speaker 1: hands on my head in the sands sometimes and give up. Oh, Bruce,
Speaker 1: I appreciate that you also feel the passion for the
Speaker 1: topic and the subject matter that I do. And you know,
Speaker 1: I've gotten a little triad on this show more than one.
Speaker 1: So it definitely happens. And in terms of where the
Speaker 1: Democrats are on this, you know, I saw a Washington
Speaker 1: Post reporter say that he considered this to be a
Speaker 1: local news story, and to that I just would respond,
Speaker 1: It's not a local news story when two of the
Speaker 1: most major states in the United States are legalizing what
Speaker 1: is clearly infanticide. Even if, and this is an important
Speaker 1: and important part of all this, even if what could
Speaker 1: happen never does happen, which is not the case, but if,
Speaker 1: just for the sake of argument, even if they were
Speaker 1: saying that nobody would kill a baby that was being
Speaker 1: born under these laws in New York and in Virginia,
Speaker 1: the fact that it would, in theory be legal is
Speaker 1: grotesquely immoral and says very bad things about the state
Speaker 1: of well, the state of ethics in this country, the
Speaker 1: state of the law in this country. Al all rights
Speaker 1: bonfire of progressive lunacy quote. Nice, thanks Al. I try
Speaker 1: to go for the rhetorical flourishes sometimes, you know, trying
Speaker 1: to make sure that everybody listens to the show gets
Speaker 1: they get. Well. I was gonna say, get their money's worth,
Speaker 1: but the show is free, so I guess get their
Speaker 1: time's worth. There you go, try to make sure you
Speaker 1: get your time's worth, which is an important thing. John
Speaker 1: writes buck huge fan. I want to see another shutdown
Speaker 1: because if they see it's gonna happen again, and if
Speaker 1: it lasts way longer, it will scare the DEM base
Speaker 1: because they saw what happened before. I don't want it
Speaker 1: to happen again, and I believe the DEM base will
Speaker 1: force Pelosi's hand. I don't know, John Pelosi is uh.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of a lot of criticism. I have
Speaker 1: heard Pelosi's pretty hardcore, and she will stick. She will
Speaker 1: stick to her side of things, no matter I think
Speaker 1: how much the heat gets turned up because she gets reelected.
Speaker 1: No matter what. Remember that there is no there is
Speaker 1: no sanity check on Nancy Pelosi because her district is
Speaker 1: full of a bunch of maniacs. So there's that. As
Speaker 1: to whether a shutdown would accomplish No, I think Democrats
Speaker 1: would be even more embolded in a second shutdown to
Speaker 1: do what they've done, even though what we see is
Speaker 1: it Pelosi said, Hey, open the government up and we
Speaker 1: will negotiate and we'll talk about fixing the wall. And
Speaker 1: then then Trump opens up the government and they say, sorry,
Speaker 1: no funding for a wall, full stop, period, nothing else.
Speaker 1: I just think that's that's telling us a lot about her,
Speaker 1: but unfortunately won't really matter. Robert Rents book. As much
Speaker 1: as I hate to agree with Rachel Maddow, she isn't
Speaker 1: entirely incorrect when she suggests that a foreign power like
Speaker 1: China or Russia could take out part or all of
Speaker 1: the power grid, a local hacker could do damage. They
Speaker 1: don't do it because we view it as the equivalent
Speaker 1: of a nuclear or the near equivalent of a nuclear attack. Robert,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that it couldn't happen. I'm just saying
Speaker 1: it's part of the only reason the MSNBC audience. And
Speaker 1: remember Rachel matt I was trying to every night give
Speaker 1: the MSNBC audience what they want. That's her job. Her
Speaker 1: job is to give the left wing loons who watched
Speaker 1: that show what they want, tell them what they want
Speaker 1: to hear, you know, show them what they want to see.
Speaker 1: That's the whole point of it. And the reason that
Speaker 1: Russia is high up on their you know, in terms
Speaker 1: of interest level here. The reason they like Russia is
Speaker 1: because Russia has turned into the Left has turned it
Speaker 1: into the number one boogeyman for the United States now
Speaker 1: because they gave Trump the election. That's that's what this
Speaker 1: is really all about. So I think that's that's why
Speaker 1: I was pointing to the Russia thing. Yes, technically they
Speaker 1: could take down the power grid, but do you think
Speaker 1: the left really worries about that as a general national
Speaker 1: security issue. No, it's just Russia scary, that's all they
Speaker 1: want to say. That's what it is. That's what it
Speaker 1: is really about. So quick pause here, team, we're gonna
Speaker 1: come right back, finish up the roll. Call some thoughts
Speaker 1: for the weekend. It's going to be an extravaganza of awesome.
Speaker 1: John looks so excited. I even know what to say,
Speaker 1: because he knows he's got a weekend coming up. Any
Speaker 1: fun weekend plans? John, just chilling when when it's snowy
Speaker 1: and cold like this outside. What the good news is
Speaker 1: you stay in. You can netflix and and hang out
Speaker 1: and uh my bad, I got that wrong once before
Speaker 1: Netflix and hang out is okay. You can netflix and
Speaker 1: hang out and eat some you know, mac and cheese. Man, dude,
Speaker 1: frozen mac and cheese so good. So I want to
Speaker 1: have some right now. We'll be right back. Ain't no
Speaker 1: party like a Team Buck party, because a Team Buck
Speaker 1: party don't stop. Yeah, we got Buck turned up to eleven.
Speaker 1: It's time for roll call. Back into it, my friends.
Speaker 1: Let's get to it. My dudes, here we go more
Speaker 1: roll call. Get it going before the weekend because everybody's
Speaker 1: working full that weekend. Yeah yeah, um Chris, right, can
Speaker 1: you tell me more about yourself? I went to Connecticut College, Okay, Chris.
Speaker 1: I was born and raised in New York City, in Manhattan.
Speaker 1: I went to Regis High School, which is a Jesuit
Speaker 1: school here in the city. Then I went to Amherst College.
Speaker 1: Then I got recruited by the CIA. I worked in
Speaker 1: the CIA from two thousand and five. At two thousand
Speaker 1: and ten, worked at the NYPD Intelligence Division. For part
Speaker 1: of twenty eleven, went to the Lays to work for
Speaker 1: Glenn Beck and twenty midway through twenty eleven and stayed
Speaker 1: there for about six years. Then got a job at
Speaker 1: Premiere Radio Networks. Blah blah, a lot of radio, a
Speaker 1: lot of TV, Fox News, wrote a bunch of articles
Speaker 1: and owned some libs on Twitter, and now here we are.
Speaker 1: You got a girlfriend named Miss Molly and nice family
Speaker 1: here in the city. And I got a yeah, a
Speaker 1: French bulldog named to Lula. That's really my parents French bulldog,
Speaker 1: but we all share her because she's a little love bug.
Speaker 1: And that's pretty much it. Man, that's covered it. We got.
Speaker 1: We got producer Mike and DJ John in the house
Speaker 1: making sure the show sounds good, does what it does.
Speaker 1: So I think you know everything now, man. See that's there.
Speaker 1: You go put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Speaker 1: Thanks for asking. If you're a Connecticut college, you're a
Speaker 1: small liberal arts college guy. Hopefully you're not getting too
Speaker 1: inundated with crazy libs. Razy libs, because a lot of
Speaker 1: crazy lives run around Tia, writes Buck regarding schools being
Speaker 1: closed due to cold I'm all for it. When the
Speaker 1: temp is mine is twenty in Kentucky, which isn't used
Speaker 1: to those extremes. People aren't equipped in short notice to
Speaker 1: deal with it. For example, waiting at a bus stop
Speaker 1: in those temps, you would probably need a ski mask
Speaker 1: to cover your whole face. I live in Virginia and
Speaker 1: haven't seen ski masks in stores since the nineteen seventies, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, is when running shoes came to stores.
Speaker 1: In nineteen seventy three, we were still wearing kids to
Speaker 1: gym class. A lot of information in there. Yeah, really
Speaker 1: cold weather can be tough. I'm not saying it's not.
Speaker 1: I get that, Tim. What up? Tim? Did you see
Speaker 1: this AOC sketch on s n L. No? I did not, Tim,
Speaker 1: But you know what, I will. I will check it out.
Speaker 1: Maybe it was actually funny. That sounds like something that
Speaker 1: maybe Saturday Night Live should try to do more often
Speaker 1: be funny instead of being being social justice warriors. David
Speaker 1: writes Buck Michael Savage was onto something border language and culture. Also,
Speaker 1: liberalism is a mental disorder. I couldn't agree more these days.
Speaker 1: You know I've listened to I've never listened to a
Speaker 1: Michael Savage show, and I've only heard a few excerpts
Speaker 1: of some monologues. He's done. He's probably the host that
Speaker 1: I know, the national level radio host that I know
Speaker 1: the least about. But if you say he's got something good,
Speaker 1: I'll be sure to check it out. Isn't he retiring?
Speaker 1: I thought somebody told me he retired. Spencer Buck finally
Speaker 1: popped up. It took all day to dating it Monday's
Speaker 1: podcast Shield Time. Brother, I know, Spencer. I'm sorry, man.
Speaker 1: We're trying to fix it as best we can, as
Speaker 1: fast as we can. We're working on it. I think
Speaker 1: we should be in better shape now. A lot more
Speaker 1: notes in here about the podcast not being up, but
Speaker 1: we're on it. We're on it all right. Everybody stay
Speaker 1: warm this weekend. Make sure that you snuggle up with
Speaker 1: a loved one and hang out and watch a good movie.
Speaker 1: I will talk to you on Monday, shiell tie. If
Speaker 1: you're in a relationship, there are some important dates that
Speaker 1: require roses. Birthdays, anniversaries and Valentines. And guess what Valentines
Speaker 1: is right around the corner. So when you're trying to
Speaker 1: get the most beautiful, biggest, best quality roses possible, you
Speaker 1: have to check out my friends at one eight hundred
Speaker 1: flowers dot com. They've got an amazing deal right now.
Speaker 1: Eighteen red roses for twenty nine ninety nine or upgrade
Speaker 1: to twenty four red roses for ten dollars more. This
Speaker 1: is an unbelievable offer from one eight hundred Flowers eighteen
Speaker 1: red roses for twenty nine ninety nine or upgrade to
Speaker 1: twenty four red roses only ten bucks more. These bouquet
Speaker 1: prices are gonna be going up soon, so you need
Speaker 1: to take advantage of them today. Take your delivery date
Speaker 1: and let one eight hundred Flowers handle the rest. It's
Speaker 1: so easy. I've done on it. You should too. To
Speaker 1: order eighteen red roses for twenty nine ninety nine or
Speaker 1: upgrade at twenty four red roses only ten bucks more.
Speaker 1: Go to one hundred flowers dot com, click the radio
Speaker 1: icon and a promo code buck. That's one eight hundred
Speaker 1: flowers dot com clickradio icon, promo code buck