Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom hunt if you thought
Speaker 1: the mid terms are over. Unfortunately, my friends, you're wrong.
Speaker 1: The Democrats look like if they are trying shenanigans and
Speaker 1: up to stealing some of these elections. Let's get into that,
Speaker 1: and also some crazy court decisions today. The hashtag judiciary
Speaker 1: is alive and well, trying to stop Trump at all costs.
Speaker 1: Out more coming up on The buck Sexton Show. This
Speaker 1: is the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission
Speaker 1: is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Magnorma
Speaker 1: stake American, you're a great American Again The buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show begins analys No, it's up to him great and
Speaker 1: Robert Muller, what a stupid question? That is? What a
Speaker 1: stupid question. But I watched you a lot. You ask
Speaker 1: a lot of stupid questions. Welcome to the buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Oh man, uh now, now I know there's debate about this.
Speaker 1: We've got a lot of big things to talk about.
Speaker 1: The Democrats look like they're trying to steal a Senate
Speaker 1: seat in a governorship in Florida, maybe even a Senate
Speaker 1: seat out in Arizona. We got a lot to talk
Speaker 1: about today. On the show. Also some crazy bad judicial
Speaker 1: decisions hashtag never Trump judiciary in effect, and we've got
Speaker 1: we've got some big things coming on. Come off to that.
Speaker 1: But I wanted to start with this one because I
Speaker 1: just find it. Find the whole thing, uh, pretty pretty amusing.
Speaker 1: And I know there's some disagreement that some people say,
Speaker 1: Oh no, Buck. First of all, there's this thing that
Speaker 1: there's no such thing as a stupid question. That is false.
Speaker 1: I want to I want to set a ground roller
Speaker 1: for the show. That is not a true thing. I
Speaker 1: don't know why people say that all the time. There
Speaker 1: are so it doesn't mean that, you know, you should
Speaker 1: be mean to people when they don't know something, Right,
Speaker 1: I asked questions all the time. We all have many
Speaker 1: things we have to learn. But it is in fact
Speaker 1: possible to ask a stupid question. So let's let's establish
Speaker 1: that baseline, and then let's let's let's break down for
Speaker 1: a moment there. What the question that was just today?
Speaker 1: Was the president about to hop on hop on the
Speaker 1: the the chopper And that was pretty close and h
Speaker 1: he was stopped into a little impromptu press conference or whatever,
Speaker 1: and he wasn't. I you could tell he's a little
Speaker 1: of a mood today. He wasn't having any of it.
Speaker 1: You know, he's ready, he's ready to smack him some
Speaker 1: punks around a little bit rhetorically speaking. Everybody calmed down.
Speaker 1: And but think about this question that he was asked.
Speaker 1: Ask him, is Muller? Is the Muller problem gonna get
Speaker 1: reined in by Whittaker, this new acting Attorney General. I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess that it's a valid question, except for the
Speaker 1: fact that one he's been asked us a million times already.
Speaker 1: To think about what it would mean if he said yes,
Speaker 1: then he'd be in the in the press's eyes, at least,
Speaker 1: admitting to obstructing the Mueller probe. This would be like saying,
Speaker 1: Mr President, you know, is it your plan to suborn
Speaker 1: perjury in the Russia collusion investigation. I mean, at some
Speaker 1: point the question, you can ask it, but it's a
Speaker 1: stupid and kind of disrespectful question, you know. The the
Speaker 1: only way that he could know if Whittaker is going
Speaker 1: to reign in the Mueller probe, as if he had
Speaker 1: given directions to Whittaker to reign in the Muller probe,
Speaker 1: which would mean that he was interfering in that probe,
Speaker 1: which was, as we know, would send libs to def
Speaker 1: Con one. You know, Russia is taking over? Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: what are we gonna do? So I do think it's uh,
Speaker 1: it's a it was not an excellent question, that's to
Speaker 1: be sure, stupid question. I think. I think a fair
Speaker 1: to say stupid question. And I know questions exactly and
Speaker 1: I know some conservative disagree with me that that's fine,
Speaker 1: but there are a lot of you know, is it
Speaker 1: is it a good question? When Jim Acosta says I'd
Speaker 1: like to challenge you on something, sir, Okay, hold on,
Speaker 1: you remember the press. You're in the White House Press score.
Speaker 1: You're supposed to ask questions. You're not supposed to have
Speaker 1: a debate with the president. You are a rude, terrible person,
Speaker 1: absolutely true. Cost is a rude, terrible person, total total
Speaker 1: punk ass. Really is um? Oh, the President had some
Speaker 1: words about a Costa. I think Jim of Costa is
Speaker 1: a very unprofessional man. I say he does this with everybody.
Speaker 1: He gets paid to do that. You know, he gets
Speaker 1: paid to first and he's a very unprofessional guy. Whether
Speaker 1: it was me or Ronald Reagan or anybody else, he
Speaker 1: would have done the same thing. Uh. Look, I don't
Speaker 1: think he's a smart person, but he's got a loud
Speaker 1: voice and he had further away. Wait, David, do you
Speaker 1: mind if I answered the question? And as far as
Speaker 1: I'm concerned, I haven't made that decision, but it could
Speaker 1: be others. Also, when you're in the White House, this
Speaker 1: is a very sacred place. To me, this is a
Speaker 1: very special place. You have to treat the White House
Speaker 1: with respect. You have to treat the presidency with respect.
Speaker 1: I think that's completely valid. I don't know why it
Speaker 1: should be a surprise to anyone that the president wants
Speaker 1: to be treated like the president. You never saw anything
Speaker 1: like this. You know. The backdrop of all of this
Speaker 1: stuff we're seeing with Trump and the press is that
Speaker 1: now they want to put it on there. Oh, we're
Speaker 1: not serious journalist, the First Amendment or we're all about it.
Speaker 1: They want to put on those serious journal hats and
Speaker 1: the speaking truth to power stuff. We were all alive
Speaker 1: for those of you listening to the show, at least
Speaker 1: for the nine years of Obama, the year that he
Speaker 1: ran and then the eight years he was in office
Speaker 1: when they didn't ask any hard questions. A hard question
Speaker 1: for Obama was anything other than in terms of, you know,
Speaker 1: the level of of what they thought was a hard
Speaker 1: question was you know, how does it feel to be
Speaker 1: so amazing all the time? If somebody said, you know,
Speaker 1: in President Obama, you're almost perfect, well then they would
Speaker 1: have had to stop the question right there because they
Speaker 1: would have been so disrespectful to Obama. What do you
Speaker 1: mean he's almost perfect? He is perfect? How dare you, sir?
Speaker 1: A lot of that, A lot of that, and we
Speaker 1: remember it and and that that is not going to change. Right.
Speaker 1: We understand that the press corps showed us who they
Speaker 1: were under Obama and are showing us who they are
Speaker 1: once again in the other direction under Trump. A bunch
Speaker 1: of activist partisans masquerading as objective truth tellers and guardians
Speaker 1: of accuracy in politics and information, and you know, and
Speaker 1: and the mandarins of our of our democratic norms, you
Speaker 1: know what, all this other stuff, all this really self congratulatory,
Speaker 1: high falutin nonsense that they engage in. Um. But he also,
Speaker 1: by the way, he also had he had some words
Speaker 1: for for April Trump was really he was in fuego
Speaker 1: to day. He also had sports about April Ryan. The
Speaker 1: same thing with April Ryan. I watched her get up.
Speaker 1: I mean, he talked about somebody that's a loser. She
Speaker 1: doesn't know what the hell she's doing. She gets publicity
Speaker 1: and then she gets a pay raiser, she gets to
Speaker 1: contract with I think CNN. But she's very nasty and
Speaker 1: she shouldn't be. She shouldn't be. You've got to treat
Speaker 1: the White House and the Office of the Presidency with respect. Yep,
Speaker 1: you do have to treat the White House the office
Speaker 1: of the President. He was respecting. Liberals refused to do it,
Speaker 1: mostly because they really believe that he is not the president.
Speaker 1: I mean that's they've convinced themselves that he's not actually
Speaker 1: the president. But I like that he points out that
Speaker 1: these people who are holding I mean, Jim Acosta actually
Speaker 1: took a selfie today with the Eiffel Tower in the background.
Speaker 1: It was like, hey, like here, I am doing my
Speaker 1: job covering the president in Paris hashtag First Amendment. It's like, Jim,
Speaker 1: you know this is all to your benefit. There's not
Speaker 1: a none of this is hard, none of this is
Speaker 1: scary for him when it comes to his dealings with
Speaker 1: the president, and people said, oh, but what about that
Speaker 1: this thread or of that threat. I'm like, everyone I
Speaker 1: know in media gets threats. They get to a certain level,
Speaker 1: they all get right left, they all get threats, more
Speaker 1: threats from a left. But you know, everybody gets threats.
Speaker 1: Everybody has their security concerns. If you're in the public eye,
Speaker 1: you know there there can be crazy to come after you.
Speaker 1: True for politicians, true for media people, true for actors.
Speaker 1: So they just very selectively invoked this like, oh but
Speaker 1: look the CNN journalists that are constantly feeling like they're
Speaker 1: under threat, under siege from a hostile Trump supporters, Well,
Speaker 1: what do you think it was? What do you think
Speaker 1: it was like to be a Republican in the years
Speaker 1: of Obama when there was one cable news channel that
Speaker 1: had full spectrum distribution. Okay, if some of you yell
Speaker 1: at me when I say that, what about the Blaze
Speaker 1: and what about One America? I know, but they're not
Speaker 1: in the hundred million homes that's considered full distribute. Um there,
Speaker 1: you know, and probably I don't know how many they're
Speaker 1: in right now, but they're in a fraction of that.
Speaker 1: The only one that has full distributions Fox News, and
Speaker 1: President Obama just would snide ly undermine Fox News without
Speaker 1: a second thought, say you know that it's propaganda. He
Speaker 1: President Obama would call out individual radio hosts for you know,
Speaker 1: basically hurting our democracy. But you know, we didn't hear
Speaker 1: a lot of crying. Got the First Amendment. Then these people,
Speaker 1: these people on the left, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, complex,
Speaker 1: these people are frauds, their clowns, and their liars. That's
Speaker 1: that's what you got. I mean, you know, I mean
Speaker 1: not all of them on his nice people, but the
Speaker 1: big ticket players at these places. Yep, they are. They
Speaker 1: are engaged in a lot of dishonesty. Okay, now let's
Speaker 1: get to some of the I just wanted to smack
Speaker 1: around the media a little bit. Let let's get to
Speaker 1: some of the book. You're in the media and not really,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the freedom hunt. This is uh,
Speaker 1: you know what it is. I love how these people
Speaker 1: think that they are check on power by trashing the
Speaker 1: President and Republicans all the time in the media, But
Speaker 1: they despise other people in the media who are a
Speaker 1: check on their power when they have a dominance of
Speaker 1: market share in the media and platforms and personnel, so
Speaker 1: that you know, they don't want any check on their power,
Speaker 1: but they want to be a check on other people's power.
Speaker 1: Isn't that isn't that convenient for all of them? But okay,
Speaker 1: now what you care about? Even more Democrats are straight
Speaker 1: up trying to steal some elections here. I can't prove
Speaker 1: it yet, but I'm pretty sure. Ye notice how also
Speaker 1: the usage of without evidence this is this has become
Speaker 1: a big tell. Anytime you see a news organization that
Speaker 1: refers to without evidence in a headline or something, it
Speaker 1: always refers to something that's favorable to the left and
Speaker 1: as a criticism of the right. But they don't do it.
Speaker 1: You know, here's a fun one. The Kavanaugh allegations without
Speaker 1: evidence were aired today in the Senate because that's also
Speaker 1: a true statement. You never heard that, though, did you
Speaker 1: never heard that one? No? No, no, But you see
Speaker 1: that with all these other things. Uh, there are a
Speaker 1: few races right now, Cinema versus McSally and Arizona and
Speaker 1: um Gillham versus De Santists in Florida and Scott versus
Speaker 1: I'm blanking you know the other, the other guy with Nelson, right, yeah, Nelson,
Speaker 1: thank you, Scott versus Nelson in Florida. Those races have
Speaker 1: now been called into question. Originally and we were told
Speaker 1: the Republicans won all three. Isn't it interesting? Let's just
Speaker 1: start from this perspective that the only three races that
Speaker 1: were called and are now coming into question because of irregularities,
Speaker 1: at a minimum irregularities, all three of the Mike were
Speaker 1: called for Republicans. I'm not saying that's impossible, but I
Speaker 1: do think that that is statistically significant. There's not a
Speaker 1: single race that was called for a Democrat that they
Speaker 1: go all It looks like the Republican might win. Republican
Speaker 1: and you don't have this expectation that an army of
Speaker 1: left wing, highly paid, uh legal mercenaries are going to
Speaker 1: show up and try to but you know the Democrats
Speaker 1: are doing that stuff. You know that that's underway. Governor
Speaker 1: Scott straight up called this out in Florida. Here's what
Speaker 1: he had to say. There are sixties sixty seven counties
Speaker 1: in Florida. Only these two counties are involved in the Shenanigans.
Speaker 1: Simplie that this is simply ranking covenance. That is clearly true,
Speaker 1: but would also being be naive to not realize that
Speaker 1: they could be trying to overrule the will of the
Speaker 1: voters of Florida. This is where I have to have
Speaker 1: to explain for a moment that this notion that it
Speaker 1: is hard to commit voter fraud is garbage. It's actually,
Speaker 1: if you understand the statutes, for example, in Florida, it's
Speaker 1: really easy. And the chance of you being caught, especially
Speaker 1: in these early stages before that all them, the monitors
Speaker 1: go down, everything else, the chance of being caught is
Speaker 1: effectively zero. Producer, Mike. If I'm sitting here and I'm
Speaker 1: I'm a you know, if somebody who's in the on
Speaker 1: the board of Elections or whatever, and I'm actually manually
Speaker 1: handling a whole bunch of different you know, uh, you
Speaker 1: know that all you have to do if you create
Speaker 1: a little tear, or you create some some stray markings
Speaker 1: on a ballot, you you are legally, in Florida allowed
Speaker 1: to destroy that ballot and replace it with a new ballot,
Speaker 1: which you are, of course supposed to mark the same
Speaker 1: way the initial ballot was marked. How could they prove that?
Speaker 1: How do they know you're starting a you're taking an
Speaker 1: old ballot and you're replacing it with another ballot that
Speaker 1: you are the one that gets to actually put the
Speaker 1: final say so on. There's no there's no audit trail
Speaker 1: of of of who does what with those things and
Speaker 1: the old but you're allowed to destroy the old one
Speaker 1: in that case. So guess what, it's not hard. The
Speaker 1: chance of being caught or non exist. And this is
Speaker 1: also why lips hate voter I D so much and
Speaker 1: and are so opposed to any voter security measures because
Speaker 1: they don't want to be possible for anyone to figure
Speaker 1: out what's going on here. I mean Al Franken stole
Speaker 1: that was a stolen sentency. This already happened. He stole
Speaker 1: a senency from Norm Coleman in Minnesota. That is what happened.
Speaker 1: You go back and read it, You're like, I cannot
Speaker 1: believe they got away with this, But they did. And
Speaker 1: you and Al Franken is a senator for years and years,
Speaker 1: Senator Frankin cheated, cheated in that election. Oh look at this.
Speaker 1: I just happened to have a trunk full of ballots
Speaker 1: that happened to overwhelmingly go for You know, it's always
Speaker 1: like the kid in the class. You've got to be
Speaker 1: smart enough to cheat. Well, you know, you have to
Speaker 1: mix it. You can't do all of the newly found
Speaker 1: ballots go one way because that's a little too obvious.
Speaker 1: Just like if you're the kid that's always getting DS Mike,
Speaker 1: and you steal somebody's homework and you hand it the
Speaker 1: next day. You don't hand it in to get a hundred.
Speaker 1: It's probably a bad idea. You handed and you get like,
Speaker 1: you know, you just take a little little A minus
Speaker 1: maybe a B plus on it. You know, you get
Speaker 1: like a like a ninety. You want to go off
Speaker 1: the full one hundred. Because it's too obvious. You gotta
Speaker 1: throw in some of the things here. And by the way,
Speaker 1: I do not approve eating on your homework. Kids, don't
Speaker 1: do that, stay in school, don't do drugs. We got
Speaker 1: more on this Florida stuff. Also, my buddy Charles Cook,
Speaker 1: remember him, he's got the awesome British. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: who has a better British accent? Charles or raheem? We
Speaker 1: could have an accent off at some point, like have
Speaker 1: them both on and I have them both like read
Speaker 1: Churchill speeches or something on air. No that I actually
Speaker 1: forget that. Have them both read like Paddington Bear Yeah,
Speaker 1: there you go like this, like the Adventures of the
Speaker 1: Adventures of Paddington Bear or Winnie the Pooh, and see
Speaker 1: who has it better, Like I'm so British, like Charles
Speaker 1: and Raheim are both their neck and neck on that.
Speaker 1: By the way, Rahim is gonna be in for me
Speaker 1: one day next week. I gotta travel to give a speech.
Speaker 1: They'll be in next Thursday. On radio. We're going to
Speaker 1: the Lady. I I'll come back. We got more on elections,
Speaker 1: on Whittaker di o J, some crazy judicial decisions. Oh,
Speaker 1: and the the uh. Some of the folks from Black
Speaker 1: Rifle are coming to hang out. Actually, some of the
Speaker 1: former door kickers now coffee connoisseurs and entrepreneurs, Matt Best
Speaker 1: and Emon Hayfer in the flesh here in studio, up
Speaker 1: and end, I see, We'll be right back. There was
Speaker 1: no collusion as a whole hope. This was a thing
Speaker 1: set up by the Democrats, just like they set up
Speaker 1: other things. When you look at what's going on in Florida,
Speaker 1: when you look at what's going on in lots of
Speaker 1: different locations, the Russian investigation is a hope, as a
Speaker 1: phony hope. I didn't speak to Russians. The fact is
Speaker 1: I was a much better candidate than Hillary Clinton. I
Speaker 1: worked much hotter. I went to the right place since
Speaker 1: she went to the wrong places because she didn't know
Speaker 1: what the hell she was doing. I did a great job.
Speaker 1: I was a great candidate. She was a bad candidate.
Speaker 1: I went to Wisconsin, I went more to Michigan. I
Speaker 1: went to Pennsylvania. She didn't do a good job. This
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with Russians. It's a Russian hope.
Speaker 1: When the president just lets it rip. By the way,
Speaker 1: that's my my favorite. Trump is like, I don't give
Speaker 1: a what Trump, you know, he just and that was.
Speaker 1: He was in that mood to day. I don't know
Speaker 1: what it was, but he was. And Mike, he even
Speaker 1: was that way on Twitter. What did you say about
Speaker 1: the this he ties in Russia and Florida. I love
Speaker 1: it absolutely Early this morning he said, uh, you mean
Speaker 1: they are just now finding votes in Florida and Georgia.
Speaker 1: But the election was on Tuesday. Let's blame the Russians
Speaker 1: and demanded immediate pology from Putin. That's so true, though,
Speaker 1: you know, but people people who were apoplectic, I mean,
Speaker 1: we're completely losing their minds about Russian Facebook trolls that
Speaker 1: we're saying, you know, lock her up about Hillary or something,
Speaker 1: seem to have no problem whatsoever with Broward Counties violating
Speaker 1: the law here for the election. I mean, they are
Speaker 1: breaking the law, and I know that they'll say, well,
Speaker 1: no one's really gonna be held accountable. But this is
Speaker 1: also a place that has a history of not just
Speaker 1: negligent but even criminal activity when it comes to elections.
Speaker 1: It's just amazing, it really is, you know, but this
Speaker 1: is the way the conversation goes. You're like, hey, why
Speaker 1: isn't Brown County Why aren't those officials complying with laws
Speaker 1: that are ensure transparency. And then you know the Libs
Speaker 1: like Joe Scarborough, that's right, he's a Lib. You don't
Speaker 1: want them counting every vote, do you. He said that
Speaker 1: about Marker Ruby today and it's well no, actually, I
Speaker 1: just think they should obey the law and follow procedures
Speaker 1: for accuracy. And then it always turns in why you's
Speaker 1: the racist. It's like, wait, what does that have to
Speaker 1: do with anything. I just want I just want the
Speaker 1: election to be the way it's supposed to be. But
Speaker 1: just like with immigration, if you say, enforced the law.
Speaker 1: You're a bad person and a racist with elections. Somehow,
Speaker 1: if you're a Republican you say, hey, can we obey
Speaker 1: election laws and make sure that no one is cheating?
Speaker 1: That's somehow also racist. I don't know how, but that's
Speaker 1: what they say. Either Freendless Knights is corrupt, stupid, or both.
Speaker 1: And I think we've got a lot of examples of
Speaker 1: a variety of those circumstances that it's not just Republicans
Speaker 1: saying that. Remember Freendness Knights destroyed ballots. It who the
Speaker 1: hell destroys ballots? That was Look, she is either doing it?
Speaker 1: When is she was trying to help Harney boss awesome Conchultz,
Speaker 1: or because she didn't know any better not to destroy ballots.
Speaker 1: This is somebody that should not be in office. I
Speaker 1: am calling on Ken Dantzler, the Secretary of State, to
Speaker 1: put this office under a receivership of the State of Florida.
Speaker 1: They do not know what they're doing. You know, her
Speaker 1: punzel spun straw into gold. Here you're spinning tens of
Speaker 1: thousands of ballots out of the air, out of nothing.
Speaker 1: There's no chain of custody for these ballots. There's no Um,
Speaker 1: there's no ballot reconciliation where we see at each polling
Speaker 1: place how many ballots were sent, how many were voted,
Speaker 1: and how many were turned unvoted. That these are the
Speaker 1: checks against corruption, and they're hiding, Uh, Snipes is corrupt. Right,
Speaker 1: that's what because he's referring to Snipes there, who's the
Speaker 1: in charge of elections in Broward County? Right, yeah, she's
Speaker 1: the Broward County Supervisor of elections and they're changing lock
Speaker 1: her up in the background there, Well, they think lock
Speaker 1: her upper or she is corrupt. I think it's I
Speaker 1: think it's Snipes is corrupt. Were they saying lock her up?
Speaker 1: I don't know. It's just like a Laurel or whatever.
Speaker 1: Remember what was it Yanni or Laurel? Yeah, it might
Speaker 1: be maybe you know my ears are old. Look, yeah,
Speaker 1: both ways, it's the same idea. I think we can
Speaker 1: all agree it's either she's corrupt or lock her up
Speaker 1: or both. Um. But yeah, they're definitely yelling stuff she's
Speaker 1: already been I mean, as that was Matt Gates, Congressman Gates,
Speaker 1: who's a fun dude. Um, he's saying that she's already
Speaker 1: gotten in trouble in the past. We have a caller
Speaker 1: who just wants to give a shout out because she
Speaker 1: loves black rifles so much. Who is it, Patty from Alabama?
Speaker 1: All right, Patty from Alabama. Apparently you were very enthusiastic
Speaker 1: about our black rifle friends were coming on the show later.
Speaker 1: Hey back rock Star you Hey Patty. Um, I'm tipsy five,
Speaker 1: so you know, Miss Molly has no competition. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I just wanted to say thank you for turning me
Speaker 1: onto black rifle. It has it has changed my law.
Speaker 1: I am sharing it with I've tried several different blends.
Speaker 1: I started off with Beyond Black, which I grew up
Speaker 1: with Navy coffee, which was like molasses, and so I
Speaker 1: thought that would be right for me, and it was
Speaker 1: just a little too much. So then I kind of
Speaker 1: worked my way down to a little smoother blends and
Speaker 1: I'm at a K forty seven right now. So um,
Speaker 1: but all the beings they say keep, you know, share
Speaker 1: with first responders, that sort of thing, and I've been
Speaker 1: doing that with my postsman and all that. So I
Speaker 1: just want to shout out to the black tell the
Speaker 1: ruffle guys, you know, but Buck, I want to say
Speaker 1: to you that, um, you were doing you were doing
Speaker 1: something that and I feel like that you were going
Speaker 1: to be above and beyond Russian in ball one day.
Speaker 1: And I want you to know that now because that's
Speaker 1: that that's gonna happen. You know, that's that's in your future.
Speaker 1: But you say things in a different way. You know
Speaker 1: they're no Rush and Sean and all of that. They
Speaker 1: do a phenomenal job. And I've been listening to Russia
Speaker 1: and think, so you know, not a babe in the
Speaker 1: woods there, But you do it in a different way
Speaker 1: and you just say it, and you say it just
Speaker 1: like it is. And this thing in Florida is making
Speaker 1: me crazy. It's it is Bush all over again. And
Speaker 1: if only we had Jimes Baker to get back down there.
Speaker 1: I just pray, hope and pray that we have the
Speaker 1: equivalent or even better than James Baker to get down
Speaker 1: there and handle this well. Patty, you're a new favorite person,
Speaker 1: So thank you for calling into the show. I'm glad
Speaker 1: you enjoyed Black Rifle and I will make sure the
Speaker 1: guys when they come in that they hear your clips. Shieldsie,
Speaker 1: and thank you so much for calling in. Look at
Speaker 1: your producer, Mike, you know you pick it picking good
Speaker 1: ones today, producer Mike just kidding you. Usually Mike has
Speaker 1: got all these people on hold, and I'm just I'm
Speaker 1: just blabbing and blabbing and blabbing and blabbing, and I
Speaker 1: forget and he gives me in the little hand signal
Speaker 1: of like, hey, there's other But that's what that's what
Speaker 1: role call is for darnett. Um, it's easier to write
Speaker 1: than to uh get to phone calls or to call
Speaker 1: somebody the phone. I would think, Man, I gotta go
Speaker 1: to another segment of a second here. I didn't even
Speaker 1: I just had. He just gave me the vapors. I
Speaker 1: just lost my I just lost my training. The thought, Um,
Speaker 1: where was I on that? Oh? Yes? Uh Whittaker, the
Speaker 1: dirsh sounded a bit like the buck, which isn't the
Speaker 1: first time. So here's the issue, right. They keep saying
Speaker 1: that that Whittaker, the new acting Attorney General, needs to
Speaker 1: recuse himself. That's what they really want. They want to
Speaker 1: recuse himself. And the problem with that is that they
Speaker 1: want Whittaker, based on nothing saying nothing that is really
Speaker 1: recusa bull to recuse himself. But they don't have an
Speaker 1: answer to this, which is, why is it that Rosenstein,
Speaker 1: who clearly has a conflict of interest as to what
Speaker 1: is going on here because he was involved in aspects
Speaker 1: under investigation, why is there nothing there? And the answer
Speaker 1: is they don't really have an answer. Here is the
Speaker 1: DIRSH doing his thing. What they want is for the
Speaker 1: investigation to be conducted by Rod Rosenstein instead of Whittaker.
Speaker 1: Rod Rosenstein is much much much more subject to recusal
Speaker 1: than Whittaker. Rod Rosenstein is a witness. He's the one
Speaker 1: who wrote the letter, according to the book Fear actually
Speaker 1: it was maybe his idea initially to a fire. Uh comey.
Speaker 1: And that's the main subject of the obstruction of justice investigation.
Speaker 1: And so you have a man overseeing the investigation who
Speaker 1: is a possible subject or target and certainly a witness
Speaker 1: of the investigation, and yet none of these state attorney
Speaker 1: generals are calling for his recusal. Rosenstein's recusal is not
Speaker 1: a matter of dispute. He should have been out of
Speaker 1: this case from day one. Does anybody on the lifet
Speaker 1: have an answer to that? No, of course not, because
Speaker 1: fundamentally what this is really all about is what he said,
Speaker 1: which is that they want Rosenstein. Every analysis that they
Speaker 1: gave you, everything that they say about this is is
Speaker 1: for that purpose. They want Rosenstein. They think Rosenstein is
Speaker 1: anti Trump. Therefore he's the only person that they're comfortable
Speaker 1: in the job. You can pick ten other people from
Speaker 1: the DJ by the way, and they still complain because
Speaker 1: they want Rosenstein because they know that the fixes in
Speaker 1: That's that's what they think on the left, No principles,
Speaker 1: just whining Democrats. There you have it. That's pretty much
Speaker 1: the show. But then we've got more coming up. I'm
Speaker 1: just kidding, including our friends from Black Rifles. Stay with me. Okay,
Speaker 1: So there's a mess in Florida right now. We know
Speaker 1: that much. Florida's gonna Florida. But we've got somebody who
Speaker 1: can actually make some sense of things for us, who
Speaker 1: can perhaps shed some light on just what's happening there.
Speaker 1: How is it that they can't keep two deadlines? Why
Speaker 1: can't they just do what all the other counties do
Speaker 1: in Broward. Charles Cook is with us now. He is
Speaker 1: the editor of National Review dot com. Mr Charles, great
Speaker 1: to have you with us. And by the way, Charles
Speaker 1: is a resident of the Great State of Florida. So
Speaker 1: he's close to the action. I'm a Florida man, now, yeah, indeed,
Speaker 1: But you live in the good part of Florida, right
Speaker 1: where they still love America and freedom very much, so
Speaker 1: very much, sir, in the sec part of Florida, South Georgia,
Speaker 1: basically South Georgia. There you go. So tell me this, Charles,
Speaker 1: What the heck is going on? Why can't they count ballot?
Speaker 1: Why can't they get this right? Well, there's a couple
Speaker 1: of things going on. The first one is that Broward
Speaker 1: County and to a lesser extent, Falm Beats County, are
Speaker 1: extraordinarily incompetent and don't seem to be able to process elections.
Speaker 1: Will surprise nobody to learn that Broward County was the
Speaker 1: county that precipitated Bush Fee Gore all. That friend of
Speaker 1: Snipes who's the commissioner in Broward County has actually been
Speaker 1: in trouble before for breaking federal and state law and
Speaker 1: for destroying ballots illegally. Unfortunately, she's elected, so there's not
Speaker 1: much that anyone can do about it. Uh, that's will
Speaker 1: tell you all you need to know about the voters
Speaker 1: in Barrack County. Um. So, the first thing is they're
Speaker 1: extremely bad at it, and there aren't any excuses that
Speaker 1: can be used to justify this, given that Miami Dade
Speaker 1: County is also huge, Duval County near Jacksonville is huge,
Speaker 1: and they both managed to do what was expected of
Speaker 1: them in a timely manner. So you've got a background
Speaker 1: here of incompetence in Barra County and to a slightly
Speaker 1: lesser extent in Palm Beat, but you've also got rampant
Speaker 1: law breaking. Now, one of the things that I think
Speaker 1: the national press is slightly misunderstood is that it's not
Speaker 1: obvious that these votes that are being found or processed
Speaker 1: two days after the election, after ordilent. What is obvious
Speaker 1: is that we can't tell where they're from, whether they're legitimate,
Speaker 1: um or even how many of them there are. Because
Speaker 1: Barra County and Palm Peace County are both in violation
Speaker 1: of the state Constitution and the Public Records Act. It
Speaker 1: is the lawns Florida that you have to report every
Speaker 1: forty five minutes as to what you're doing. You have
Speaker 1: to be able to account for how many votes there are,
Speaker 1: of what sort they are, and how many you have processed,
Speaker 1: and they weren't hurt and Brenda Smikes simply refuses to it.
Speaker 1: She says she doesn't know who, doesn't care, She won't
Speaker 1: talk to the prayers. She says she's going for a
Speaker 1: rest um today. She started her job an hour and
Speaker 1: a half after she was supposed to. Rick Scott has
Speaker 1: one twice now, once in Palm Beach County this morning
Speaker 1: and once in Barrow County this afternoon, and he is
Speaker 1: essentially forcing the commissioners in those counties to follow the
Speaker 1: law and put out the information that suppose to them
Speaker 1: might have a better idea as to what is going
Speaker 1: on with these ballots that seem to have come out
Speaker 1: of nowhere. This seems like, at a minimum, if one
Speaker 1: was to engage in intentional Snegan's and you've already established
Speaker 1: there's there's a history Irvan competence, and there's no question
Speaker 1: that there's at least in competence because other very large
Speaker 1: UH precincts in Florida have been able to adhere to
Speaker 1: Florida law when it comes to elections. So this is
Speaker 1: a Broward specific issue right now. As we know. Broward,
Speaker 1: I think votes what sevent Democrats generally, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is UH one of the biggest blue strongholds of anywhere
Speaker 1: in Florida when it comes to votes. But if you
Speaker 1: were to maybe be somebody who wanted to engage in
Speaker 1: some kind of shady stuff and it comes to votes, not,
Speaker 1: for example, reporting as you go along so that you
Speaker 1: don't establish a baseline of how many votes there actually are,
Speaker 1: would seem to at least be a precondition for some
Speaker 1: of the ways that this could be skewed. That's correct,
Speaker 1: and that's exactly why these laws exist. And I think
Speaker 1: that even in you think that there's nothing untoward happening,
Speaker 1: but always doing at the moment is ranking competence, you
Speaker 1: should still be deeply, deeply upset by this because it
Speaker 1: makes Broward County look extremely shady. It gives the impression
Speaker 1: that something untoward is happening. It infuriates people quite rightly,
Speaker 1: and it diminishes their trust in the system. I'll give
Speaker 1: you a good example of it again. I'll make this clear.
Speaker 1: I am not saying that there is corruption afoot. I
Speaker 1: don't know. There's been no evidence thus far that there is.
Speaker 1: But a tweet from a reporter who is in the
Speaker 1: room in Broward County eighteen minutes ago says even though
Speaker 1: Broward said yesterday they counted all early votes. Broward s
Speaker 1: o E staff had told us there are several bags
Speaker 1: of uncounted early ballots, not a lot, tens of ballots,
Speaker 1: he said, unclear when they knew about these. Well, there's
Speaker 1: two options, aren't there. One is they're incompetent. They found
Speaker 1: them under a desk, They hadn't processed them properly, they
Speaker 1: didn't put them in the right place. Another is that
Speaker 1: they've invented them now. I think Ockham's raisers suggested incompetence
Speaker 1: is a likely explanation. But it's not unreasonable for someone
Speaker 1: who is all and to look at that and say,
Speaker 1: hold on, that doesn't happen elsewhere. That doesn't happen in
Speaker 1: the Republican strongholds in Florida. This all seems to be
Speaker 1: going in one direction. Well, this is where this is
Speaker 1: where I start to say that you you go from
Speaker 1: being a conspiracy theorist to a coincidence theorist. And and
Speaker 1: this is certainly true in this case in Florida. But
Speaker 1: when you when you extend it beyond Florida, somehow, Charles,
Speaker 1: whenever there's an election that has been called in twenty
Speaker 1: eighteen so far, Uh, that has gone one way, and
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden, there's all this other stuff
Speaker 1: that starts making go the other. It never it never
Speaker 1: tends to to go toward a Republican The trend is
Speaker 1: never for the GOP. When the lawyers descend and all
Speaker 1: of a sudden there's a lot of oh, we just
Speaker 1: found this extra bag, as you just said, just extra
Speaker 1: bag of votes we didn't know about. All of a sudden,
Speaker 1: the Democrats starts gaining. And I can't help but feel
Speaker 1: like this is this is a pattern. Whether it's as
Speaker 1: you say, I can't say that it's intentional, but it
Speaker 1: certainly looks bad. And for people, by the way, who
Speaker 1: in the media in particular, have made such a big
Speaker 1: deal about Russian troll farms and Facebook stuff, to act
Speaker 1: like this isn't a big deal, This is by any
Speaker 1: reasonable standard, a much bigger threat to our faith in
Speaker 1: democratic institutions in this country than some fake news on Facebook.
Speaker 1: I think that's absolutely right, yes, and I think the
Speaker 1: hypocrisy is galling. And it would perhaps surprise some of
Speaker 1: the cigarets within the national media to know that this
Speaker 1: is not a partisan question. Down here. People are angry.
Speaker 1: People are angry on both sides of the Democrats have
Speaker 1: spoken to are angry because they think it undermine the system.
Speaker 1: And one thing you should probably be aware of is
Speaker 1: that this is going to get worse it Okay, that's
Speaker 1: usually a safe bed go ahead. Well, what I mean
Speaker 1: by that is that, by my calculations, by the time
Speaker 1: that the unofficial vote deadline rolls around tomorrow at noon, UM,
Speaker 1: there are still going to be considerable lead for both
Speaker 1: Rhonda Santis and Rick Scott. But we are going, nevertheless
Speaker 1: to head into a recount because they will fall under
Speaker 1: the threshold in both cases. And at that point you
Speaker 1: are going to see the worst of the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1: You're going to see lawfare. You're going to see extremely
Speaker 1: highly paid and creative attorneys descending on the stage of
Speaker 1: Florida and coming up with all sorts of reasons as
Speaker 1: to why this vote shouldn't be counted with this one
Speaker 1: should as to why people's inability to vote for the
Speaker 1: Senate in dis County means that they must have been confused,
Speaker 1: their rights has been violated, and votes must be carried up.
Speaker 1: For Bill Nelson. You are going to see, um, some
Speaker 1: of the sorts of Shenanigan that we saw with Bush
Speaker 1: fri Gore. Unfortunately, and and I think you know one
Speaker 1: of the disservices the press has done at the national
Speaker 1: level as they've made it seem as if the race
Speaker 1: is closer than it is. It is close, don't get me,
Speaker 1: but it's not incredibly close. It's not our Franken close.
Speaker 1: I mean, as it stands right now, the Sanities is
Speaker 1: winning by thirty six thousand votes and Rick Scott by
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand. That doesn't look like it's going to change
Speaker 1: a huge amount um. But that won't be the end
Speaker 1: of it, because recounts are notoriously a magnet for the
Speaker 1: worst sort of legal hucksters. And I'm afraid, given that
Speaker 1: the deadline for the whole thing is the eighteenth of November,
Speaker 1: there's a lot more of the story. It's come. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, we'll have to have you back to talk
Speaker 1: about it, Charles, because I totally agree with you on this.
Speaker 1: And just for everybody listening, give in mind that any
Speaker 1: damage at all to a ballot in Florida, as I
Speaker 1: read it, under Florida statute, means that they can create
Speaker 1: a new ballot and that then becomes the ballot, and
Speaker 1: it all is based upon the trust in the people
Speaker 1: running the election, of people that are actually manually doing
Speaker 1: this that they mark it the same way. That's a
Speaker 1: lot of trust. That is yeah. Um, now we will
Speaker 1: have observers so much in both parties will come in. Um,
Speaker 1: both sets of lawyers will come in. But there are
Speaker 1: eight million votes. So once you start losing people's trust,
Speaker 1: it's difficult to regain across the system of that big Well, Charles,
Speaker 1: and when we when we finally have more on this one,
Speaker 1: if if there's still the Shenanigans going on, would let
Speaker 1: to have you back hold the line down there in Florida,
Speaker 1: my friend, I think you're living life the right way.
Speaker 1: Warmer weather, lower taxes, embracing conservatism in day to day life.
Speaker 1: I should learn this from the swamp. But Charles, thanks
Speaker 1: so much for joining his National Review dot com. He's
Speaker 1: the editor there. Check it out. Charles will talk to
Speaker 1: you soon. Thank you for having me. Team. We got
Speaker 1: more coming. Stay with us. You know what I did
Speaker 1: right before I came on air today posted on snippy
Speaker 1: dot com. You've probably heard me talk about Snippy for
Speaker 1: a while. Well, if you've looked at snippy dot com
Speaker 1: and left. Look again. Thousands of my listeners have joined
Speaker 1: Snippy and they're expressing their opinions and stirring up live
Speaker 1: e conversations. Snippy is an unbiased social media platform. It's
Speaker 1: all about conversation and Community's maybe not only encourages freedom
Speaker 1: of expression, but guarantees its users the ability to discuss
Speaker 1: topics freely without suppression from administrators. This name is a
Speaker 1: place where everyone is free to express their thoughts and
Speaker 1: share their opinions and tell the world what makes them Snippy.
Speaker 1: It's totally free to join and it's open to everyone.
Speaker 1: So join me and thousands of fellow Team buck folks
Speaker 1: and let your opinion matter. There's no shadow banning, no
Speaker 1: suppression of conservative thought ever. Now with an updated user
Speaker 1: interface and exciting new features, also available in the Apple
Speaker 1: App Store and now available for Android, Snippy your new
Speaker 1: alternative social media. Start your account today at snippy dot com.
Speaker 1: At Harmon's in New York City. Um wearing my mainmareath
Speaker 1: is Great Again shirt and hat um. We originally walked
Speaker 1: inside and asked for a table for two and he
Speaker 1: said that the way it was two hours because of
Speaker 1: our hats Um. Then when we walked in. As you
Speaker 1: can see from the video, Um he completely avoided us,
Speaker 1: but he had a table prior to for um, just
Speaker 1: a random incomer. So so we got turned down as
Speaker 1: two Jewish women to Jewish women, just got turned down
Speaker 1: of a restaurant in New York. So than that, Carmines?
Speaker 1: What are you doing here? John? You ever been to
Speaker 1: Carmines in New York City? Yeah, it's a good, It's
Speaker 1: all right. I think they have a Carmines in d C. Two. Okay, folks,
Speaker 1: So what happened? You got a couple of women are
Speaker 1: on video. It's getting a lot of attention to course,
Speaker 1: because they're wearing maga hats and they're they're saying that
Speaker 1: they didn't get seated at a restaurant because of their
Speaker 1: uh maga hats. And I would just say, all right,
Speaker 1: let's take a step back from one. Is it possible
Speaker 1: that these women maybe miss under misrepresented, misunderstood the situation.
Speaker 1: And it's possible. I think they probably knew exactly what
Speaker 1: was going on there, and they were in fact denied, denied,
Speaker 1: you know, decent treatment in a restaurant because of their politics,
Speaker 1: because they're wearing Make America great again. Hats Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that's pretty likely. I think that is that is
Speaker 1: probably what happened. And one of the reasons I think
Speaker 1: it's probable is because that's just the environment we're in now.
Speaker 1: You know, we we talked about some of these big events.
Speaker 1: We talked about some of these very troubling and in
Speaker 1: some cases even scary incidents that the Tucker Carlson thing,
Speaker 1: that's just scary, that was just frightening to read about.
Speaker 1: Never Mind, I can't you imagine for for Mrs Carlson
Speaker 1: inside the house. But you know, we see these big
Speaker 1: these these big events that occur that get a lot
Speaker 1: of media attention because they're so scary. But you know,
Speaker 1: then there's the lower level stuff which is very widespread,
Speaker 1: and I'm here to say I think it's also very
Speaker 1: pernicious in its own way. I think it's also really
Speaker 1: really troubling. Um where you have little things literally, you know,
Speaker 1: minor things like here, here's an example, and I was
Speaker 1: speaking in front of mine recently, who's uh, you know,
Speaker 1: he's on the on the dating scene, you know, and
Speaker 1: he's he's doing a fair amount of the apps. You know,
Speaker 1: he's on the different apps and things and he says,
Speaker 1: it's just remarkable how many women you know. And this
Speaker 1: guy is in his in his late late thirties, but
Speaker 1: he says, it's remarkable how many women have in their
Speaker 1: online dating profile. You know, no Trump supporters, you know,
Speaker 1: don't you know, no one Trumpy allowed, no Maga hats,
Speaker 1: you know whatever. And this is on the on the first,
Speaker 1: you know, because these things are set up so that
Speaker 1: you're swiping left or right and it's all very you know,
Speaker 1: kind of based on the lizard part of the brain
Speaker 1: making the decisions here. Um, is it the amygdala? I
Speaker 1: got that one right? Is that? Is that the lizard brain?
Speaker 1: The amygdala? I think it is when I when I
Speaker 1: doubt my myself, I tend to be right. When I'm smug,
Speaker 1: I tend to be wrong. So that's why I try
Speaker 1: to limit my smug. But the anyway, with with the
Speaker 1: dating apps, you know, producer Mike, I know you don't
Speaker 1: do the dating apps, but I'm sure you've got friends
Speaker 1: who I know. I know you don't do them, but
Speaker 1: you've got friends who do. Are you here? Do you
Speaker 1: ever hear the same thing? Like if you there are
Speaker 1: a lot of women is especially in places like New York, Philly,
Speaker 1: d C. A lot of women are like, no Trump,
Speaker 1: I will not go on a date with a Trump supporter,
Speaker 1: and they they profess that in their profile. Now, this
Speaker 1: is the thing, that's a thing. I'm sure it's crazy.
Speaker 1: Think about that. You're cutting out half the population right
Speaker 1: off the bat. You know, I just think, aren't they
Speaker 1: actually doing the guy a favor? Though? Oh? Absolutely? If
Speaker 1: I were single, I'd be like, I want everyone to
Speaker 1: put it out, you know, I'd want to go right away. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to know, because if you're really gonna have
Speaker 1: a problem, if you're gonna do with these people that
Speaker 1: can't get past your your politics. And like, I've got
Speaker 1: so many liberal friends. I mean, there's so many people
Speaker 1: that I interact with all the time that are that
Speaker 1: I don't agree with them in anything. But you know,
Speaker 1: it's American, man. I thought, we're all allowed to like
Speaker 1: think different things. We obey the same laws, we have
Speaker 1: the same constitution, love the same country. Other than that,
Speaker 1: we're allowed to we're allowed to disagree on whatever we want.
Speaker 1: You know, I just I think that that's unless you're
Speaker 1: a Trump supporter. Unless you're Trump supporter, man, the rules
Speaker 1: are changed here. You know what. You know, I was
Speaker 1: thinking about the other day. I'll think about how I
Speaker 1: never I've never worn him. I don't have a Maga had.
Speaker 1: I've never worn a Maga had and I don't. It's
Speaker 1: just not my style. I mean, I also don't. I'm
Speaker 1: not a guy who like wears flag pins and I'm
Speaker 1: just not. It's just a personal choice. I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't tend to show my politics in my in my dress.
Speaker 1: You know that makes it sound like a waring a
Speaker 1: ladies dress, you know what I mean, in the way
Speaker 1: that I attire myself. Um, but I would be legitimately uncomfortable.
Speaker 1: And I think this is a really and I've almost
Speaker 1: thought about trying it out, but I don't want to
Speaker 1: ruin my day. I would be uncomfortable walking around d
Speaker 1: C in a Maga hat, meaning that I would pick
Speaker 1: up on the weird looks and and the heat I
Speaker 1: would get and I think there would be an incident,
Speaker 1: and not because anybody would know, because I don't do
Speaker 1: see it anymore. So the libs don't know, you know,
Speaker 1: they don't know my face like they used to. Uh,
Speaker 1: I don't think that they would. Uh would be would
Speaker 1: be okay? With it meaning it. I think that I'd
Speaker 1: have an incident if I if I spend a day
Speaker 1: in d C out and about on the street, going
Speaker 1: to restaurants, walking into coffee shops with a manga hat on,
Speaker 1: somebody would say something. And I promise you I could
Speaker 1: walk around in d C for a week with a
Speaker 1: you know, a Biden Bernie hammer and sickle t shirt
Speaker 1: on and nobody would say a damn thing now And
Speaker 1: in fact, in fact I'd get I'd get a free
Speaker 1: pumpkin spice latte producer Mike Yeah. Which now going back
Speaker 1: to that, See, my theory is with these people is
Speaker 1: they rarely say to you when they're by themselves or
Speaker 1: one on one. See they traveling like Antifa, they traveling packs.
Speaker 1: They never do it by themselves. So would they do
Speaker 1: it to you if they're by themselves or would they
Speaker 1: wait and get their little packcrats with them say something
Speaker 1: to I think, I think, yes, you're correct, But I
Speaker 1: also think that if they're in a a public setting
Speaker 1: where they have like a security camera and a counter
Speaker 1: and everything, and they feel like, you know, you're not
Speaker 1: not in my Starbucks buddy, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: That's why I drink. Black. Actually was talking to my
Speaker 1: mo about this the other night, and she's like, I'm
Speaker 1: worried about like you guys. You know, I'm worried about
Speaker 1: Buck in d C. I'm worried about you New York
Speaker 1: and these people are crazy. And I said, Mom, they're punks.
Speaker 1: You know, they don't do they don't do this stuff
Speaker 1: by themselves. No, it's it's it's when there's a pack
Speaker 1: of them. Sure, you know you you rarely see anybody
Speaker 1: any of these lefties. It's really true, because there would
Speaker 1: be videos that you really see a lefty who is
Speaker 1: one on one go up to somebody who's a Trump
Speaker 1: supporter and just like really get into with him. It's
Speaker 1: always really group. The only exception this is sometimes on
Speaker 1: college campuses. But I feel like they're they feel like
Speaker 1: they're all in a safe space and they can do
Speaker 1: whatever they want and there'll be no consequence. Did you
Speaker 1: see that that the woman who went crazy in that
Speaker 1: video about was it Crowder? One of those guys was like,
Speaker 1: I was messing with some of the college I forget. No,
Speaker 1: it wasn't Crowder, it wasn't even I think it was
Speaker 1: just a campus reform. I forget there's a video of
Speaker 1: this woman who goes crazy about how uh the Nazis
Speaker 1: weren't socialists? Did you see this video? And she's like,
Speaker 1: I have a history major. The Nazis were I don't
Speaker 1: think we played on the show because there's so many curses.
Speaker 1: She cursed so much. Oh oh, she's a history major.
Speaker 1: And she's furious because she claims the Nazis were not socialists,
Speaker 1: and and I forget who it is. The person says,
Speaker 1: we're no, no, they were national socialists. That's actually what
Speaker 1: they were called, and and she loses her mind. You know.
Speaker 1: So that's that's the stuff you have to deal with.
Speaker 1: But a question for you, Mike, I actually I would
Speaker 1: feel much more comfortable, This is true. I feel much
Speaker 1: more comfortable walking around with a Maga hat in New
Speaker 1: York City. Maybe because I'm a New York native and
Speaker 1: I just like this is my town and no one's
Speaker 1: gonna take that away from me. But I would feel
Speaker 1: much more comforable with a red Maga had on a
Speaker 1: New York than I would in d C. No question.
Speaker 1: I feel like people at least are going to their
Speaker 1: jobs because capitalism. In d C, they're all going to
Speaker 1: their kind of jobs, as in they work for the
Speaker 1: federal bureaucracy, are unfire able and bitter at life's out
Speaker 1: of that. Yeah, and plusant people in New York are
Speaker 1: just sort of like they care what they're like there at.
Speaker 1: One of the great things about New York is we
Speaker 1: do have a there is anonymity in the masses here
Speaker 1: that you are doing your own thing. You know, it's
Speaker 1: of you know, So if you like that, this is
Speaker 1: the place for you. And I think if through the
Speaker 1: store where I used to go and do a coffee
Speaker 1: shop in the West Village. It was a small it
Speaker 1: was like a little hipster coffee shop, like right out
Speaker 1: of the set of Friends. But I used to go
Speaker 1: and I and I kept seeing what's his name that
Speaker 1: one of the greatest actors actually of of my lifetime, Um,
Speaker 1: the guy from Last the Mohicans, Daniel de Lewis. I
Speaker 1: saw Daniel de Lewis sitting in this little coffee shop
Speaker 1: in New York like three or four times. And there's
Speaker 1: five seats. I mean, like there's no he's sitting, he's
Speaker 1: got the New York Times open, he's got his legs
Speaker 1: crossed like hanging out there. And I kept seeing it
Speaker 1: was in my neighborhood. I'm like, what is damn? This
Speaker 1: is just like hanging out of here, you know. And
Speaker 1: I remember I knew the people worked there, and I
Speaker 1: asked one of one of the girls worked there. I'm like, hey, like, mo,
Speaker 1: well you know what's you know? Does he just She's like, oh,
Speaker 1: he loves it here. And I'm like yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: you guys have good coffee. But like, and she's like yeah,
Speaker 1: but she's like it's the West Village man. Like I'm like,
Speaker 1: does anyone ever bother him? She's like, no, no one
Speaker 1: ever bothers him New York. And I was like, you
Speaker 1: know what, You're right, it's you just don't do that here,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean. That's why when people say
Speaker 1: this thing about, oh I see a Republican that I
Speaker 1: don't like, I'm gonna get up in their face. I'm like,
Speaker 1: what kind of a savage are you? Like? We don't
Speaker 1: do that. You know, if you see somebody in the
Speaker 1: hallway of the Senate and you want to address them
Speaker 1: with a question or whatever, as long as you maintain
Speaker 1: some you know, you obey the laws in basic decorum,
Speaker 1: all right, do you want to yell out a question,
Speaker 1: or you know, yell out some of the senator so
Speaker 1: and so, fine, shee's somebody having dinner with the wife.
Speaker 1: There have dinner with their wife. They're a human being
Speaker 1: at that point. I don't think you have to go
Speaker 1: up there unless there's some urgent, you know, particular need.
Speaker 1: I think that you don't get to go up to
Speaker 1: them and cause a scene. Anyway. I just this thing,
Speaker 1: this thing about these girls not getting served. It's a
Speaker 1: small thing, but when you add all these small things up,
Speaker 1: it's a big thing. Well, we're decent people. We don't
Speaker 1: think like that. So hard for us to comprehend the conservatives.
Speaker 1: Where are not Barbara? We're not barbarians? You know, that's
Speaker 1: a little difference. One of the separations John between us
Speaker 1: and the left is conservatives we are civilized people, and
Speaker 1: the left they like to act like a bunch of
Speaker 1: a bunch of total maniacs. So so there's that. Um,
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about a weird story
Speaker 1: coming up, So stay with me. We live a large
Speaker 1: portion of our lives online these days. You have no choice, right,
Speaker 1: you pay bills, you're interacting with email, social media sides, browsing.
Speaker 1: Do you want companies, marketing companies and maybe even hackers
Speaker 1: to get access to that data. You know, they can
Speaker 1: record your browsing history and they can sell it to
Speaker 1: other corporations who profit from your personal information. I decided
Speaker 1: to take my privacy back using express VPN. I recommend
Speaker 1: you do the same. You see express VPN that's a
Speaker 1: virtual private network, which means that you are protected when
Speaker 1: you are online. Your history doesn't go to the internet provider,
Speaker 1: data reseller to be sent all around. Express VPN is
Speaker 1: your answer for online privacy. Protect your online activity today
Speaker 1: and find out how you can get three months free
Speaker 1: at express vpn dot com slash buck. That's express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck for three months free with a
Speaker 1: one year package again, that's express vpn dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I like to talk about,
Speaker 1: as you know, when it comes to the the edges
Speaker 1: of the progressive left, is this whole transgender rights movement
Speaker 1: and what it really entails, and what it's going to
Speaker 1: turn into, what it really means, and how it it inevitably,
Speaker 1: inevitably devolves into complete incoherence and the moment you try
Speaker 1: to test out some of the things that they're saying
Speaker 1: you find yourself saying, uh, this is this is just
Speaker 1: not feasible, like you cannot hold position A and hold
Speaker 1: position B. A perfect example, whenever they say that biology
Speaker 1: is not or rather the gender is not a binary
Speaker 1: issue and is not biological, they will then say, because
Speaker 1: you will say, okay, well then why can't I be
Speaker 1: a different age? We've brought this up. Why can't you
Speaker 1: change your age, you know, for say tender purposes, which
Speaker 1: is what this guy is actually trying to do right
Speaker 1: now in or is it Holland? I think, um, why
Speaker 1: is an age a state of mind? Why is it
Speaker 1: racist state of mind? They said, well, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: because there is such a thing as intersects, which people
Speaker 1: refer to as a hermaphrodite and or used to refer
Speaker 1: to as a hermaphrodite. Now it's considered intersect but that's
Speaker 1: biologically based. So if the distinction is biological, then the
Speaker 1: people that only have a psychological condition that makes them
Speaker 1: think that they are a different gender from what they're
Speaker 1: physically born as they don't fall into that category. So
Speaker 1: it's not it's really a nonsecretory. So they can hold
Speaker 1: A and B. But here's an example of just how
Speaker 1: absurd these things will get. And this is from Amanda
Speaker 1: Prest Jacamo's fun name to say, John, are you like
Speaker 1: John's Italian press? The Jacks were there pressed the Jacomos
Speaker 1: in the old Country. You're related to John? Maybe you
Speaker 1: don't know that's a fun I always thought Jacomo was
Speaker 1: kind of a cool name. Uh. Sixteen Canadian women have
Speaker 1: had human rights complaints filed against them by a male
Speaker 1: to female transgender individual. This is in Canada, so this
Speaker 1: isn't in some far far off place. This is our
Speaker 1: cousins to the north. A male to female transgender transgender
Speaker 1: individual has sued them for gender identity discrimination. You're ready
Speaker 1: for this, producer, Mike, we might have to ear muffiel
Speaker 1: on this one. I don't know. You're not gonna be
Speaker 1: able to forget this. What I have to tell you.
Speaker 1: He's suing these women because they refused to wax. He's Genitalia. Now,
Speaker 1: this is one of these moments you say, Buck, this
Speaker 1: is sobas are Why are you're telling me this? No, no no, no,
Speaker 1: we we have to play this out for a moment
Speaker 1: because as some of you no doubt, no, there are
Speaker 1: salons where they will wax areas of the female the female,
Speaker 1: and that I'm just describing the procedure. I'm not being
Speaker 1: pruri intier. Uh. They will wax in order to deal
Speaker 1: with hair. It could be your armpit, it could be
Speaker 1: your four arms, if you've got kind of hairy foe arms,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean, like the old virgin, or
Speaker 1: or you could be either dude who just wants to
Speaker 1: take care of that chest hair, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: It could be. But usually the understanding is that if
Speaker 1: you are female and you are going to have people
Speaker 1: down in the special parts region for a procedure, that
Speaker 1: you'll have a female that does it. And if you're
Speaker 1: a male, I you know, I don't I don't know
Speaker 1: who does the male verb. I don't know. Maybe you
Speaker 1: get maybe you get to pick and you get to ask,
Speaker 1: but at least it's it's understandable why somebody would be
Speaker 1: uncomfortable if they were told that, no, you're going to
Speaker 1: have to wax these these special parts of somebody of
Speaker 1: the in gender, because now you're touching somebody of the
Speaker 1: opposing gender's genitalia. I mean, you know in that you know,
Speaker 1: doing doing things down around there, And I don't know
Speaker 1: how spec I'm not trying to get too specificlar, but
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, depends on the degree of the
Speaker 1: waxing too. But this is being taken seriously. The British
Speaker 1: Columbia Human Rights trans Tribunal is actually taking this all
Speaker 1: the way. And this guy, um, well, whoops, now male
Speaker 1: to female so now female transgender? Uh is demanding I
Speaker 1: think dollars a person that's right to withdraw the complaint.
Speaker 1: So this male to female and individual in Canada under
Speaker 1: transgender rights law in Canada told a bunch of women
Speaker 1: in a salon you have to doom a special area
Speaker 1: or else I will see you in court and you
Speaker 1: will have to pay me a bunch of money. And
Speaker 1: the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is saying next time, you know,
Speaker 1: you probably should just suck it up. And maybe that's
Speaker 1: not the right turner for you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: You need to do the waxing. You need to do
Speaker 1: the waxing. Um. So, yeah, that's what we got going
Speaker 1: on here. That's what we got going on here. I
Speaker 1: gotta say, I'm I wouldn't have seen this one coming.
Speaker 1: I would not have expected that we would be at
Speaker 1: a at a human rights tribunal in Canada in tween,
Speaker 1: where women were officially being told that they have to
Speaker 1: wax male genitalia as part of their job. They do
Speaker 1: not have as a private establishment, the discretion to say
Speaker 1: we don't do that here. And they're gonna have to
Speaker 1: pay a fine. I mean there, that's real money. This
Speaker 1: guy's gonna I mean whatever, this transgender female is going
Speaker 1: to get a h thirty five I could get thirty
Speaker 1: five grand. Oh, by the way, fighting this, just to
Speaker 1: fight this in court, the Human Rights Commissions is costing
Speaker 1: each of these women and estimated twenty in legal bills.
Speaker 1: This is what's coming. This is Canada, folks, this is
Speaker 1: what's coming to this country because the left thinks that
Speaker 1: this is a this is about basic human rights. So
Speaker 1: when I come up with these different scenarios about how, well,
Speaker 1: what if you're a man who's who wants to go
Speaker 1: to a woman's by if you're facing life in prison
Speaker 1: and you could without having to actually change your physiology
Speaker 1: having to go through the surgery, right, you could. You
Speaker 1: could spend life in prison as as a man and
Speaker 1: all women's prison, or you could spend life in prison,
Speaker 1: you know with all the scary dudes in the yard um,
Speaker 1: I think people might take door number one there, and
Speaker 1: if they don't have a clear explanation as to why
Speaker 1: you can't do that, you know, I need to know
Speaker 1: what the rule, what the rules are going to be.
Speaker 1: The les falls into incoherence on this and that's that's
Speaker 1: the bottom line. And this is also why you know
Speaker 1: they keep yelling at us, Oh why didn't Democrats do
Speaker 1: better in the mid terms? Why why does this happen?
Speaker 1: They always just say, oh, we're racist, we're racist. It's
Speaker 1: always about how we're racist, and it's never about how
Speaker 1: maybe the left can just stop being crazy and then
Speaker 1: we could have a normal conversation. Maybe maybe they can
Speaker 1: stop pushing policies and ideas that any normal person who
Speaker 1: had not been endlessly propagandized to by the mainstream media
Speaker 1: and the cultural left would say, well, that doesn't make
Speaker 1: any sense now that that's not that's not the way
Speaker 1: that we should do things here. So anyway, just just
Speaker 1: be careful if you go to waxing facility in Canada,
Speaker 1: can get wild up there, wild and woollie. You could say, now, DOCTA,
Speaker 1: that was actually good news yesterday, because you never win
Speaker 1: in the night circuit. If you're on this half of
Speaker 1: the equation. When I say half, it could be half
Speaker 1: or more. But you haven't win. You rarely win in
Speaker 1: the Ninth Circuit. The good news is by rejecting Docta
Speaker 1: in the Ninth Circuit yesterday, finally we've been waiting for that,
Speaker 1: we get to the Supreme Court, and we want to
Speaker 1: be in the Supreme Court. On DOCTA. President Obama said
Speaker 1: he had no right to sign it. He had no rights,
Speaker 1: but it was upheld in the Ninth Circuit as usual.
Speaker 1: If you take President Obama's statements, you know he knew
Speaker 1: that he couldn't sign it. So this whole thing is
Speaker 1: it's a terrible thing what's happening with the courts. The
Speaker 1: docta will now hopefully go to the Supreme Court where
Speaker 1: we'll be given a fair decision. He's right, it is
Speaker 1: a terrible thing what's happening here with the courts, because
Speaker 1: this is a a just a stupid, a stupid ruling
Speaker 1: that is driven entirely by the whims of some left
Speaker 1: wing members of the court instead of the law. Look,
Speaker 1: this is this is an issue that they can complicate,
Speaker 1: but it doesn't have to be complicated because there's a
Speaker 1: very straightforward line of argument here that we can all
Speaker 1: follow that we all we don't need a lot I
Speaker 1: don't have a lot of degree. Some of you do,
Speaker 1: but not all of you. Obama point one said that
Speaker 1: he did not have the right to unilaterally suspend congressional
Speaker 1: legislation when it comes to immigration by declaring that some
Speaker 1: people cannot legally or cannot be will not be deported
Speaker 1: from the United States, even if they're here legally. Point one.
Speaker 1: Point two. Obama then changed his mind because he couldn't
Speaker 1: get Congress to go along. I've got to put on
Speaker 1: a phone. I've got on the phone, and he decided
Speaker 1: that he would do this, that it was within the
Speaker 1: executive branches discretion to implement deferred action for childhood arrivals. Okay.
Speaker 1: And then point three President Trump comes along and says, Okay,
Speaker 1: I disagree with with the notion that Obama had this authority,
Speaker 1: but if he's going to have this authority and no
Speaker 1: court stopped him, by the way, then I have the
Speaker 1: authority to say, well, I'm actually not going to do this.
Speaker 1: I am going to adhere to Congressional statute and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna stop this this phony Bologny protection of DOCCA based
Speaker 1: upon executive whim and then point five here we are.
Speaker 1: They say, oh no, you can't do that. So someone
Speaker 1: just explained to me, I mean a court now has
Speaker 1: said that to the president. Someone explained to me, how
Speaker 1: is it possible that one president can have the authority
Speaker 1: to implement a policy and another president cannot have the
Speaker 1: authority to stop. I mean, we're not talking to something
Speaker 1: where there's a treaty that's you know, been uh signed
Speaker 1: off on by the senator. There, there's no there's no
Speaker 1: competing there's no competing branch of government here, there's no
Speaker 1: overlap that. No, no, no, this is just this would
Speaker 1: be like someone saying, well, a president took us to war,
Speaker 1: let's say in one country, and the next president says
Speaker 1: we're gonna end the war in that country, and then
Speaker 1: people and then the the federal courts say whoa, whoa
Speaker 1: the president before you started this war, you're not allowed
Speaker 1: to end that war. How can you have the authority
Speaker 1: to go or no go? And then they tell you
Speaker 1: you can't no go. I'm not trying to run in circles.
Speaker 1: I really mean this though, it's this isn't a complicated matter.
Speaker 1: This is a straight forward matter. And this is where
Speaker 1: you see the ugly liberal left showing its true colors.
Speaker 1: This is where you see what they're really all about,
Speaker 1: which is the relentless and and uh no holds barred
Speaker 1: pursuit of power and the hashtag resistance. Judiciary is gonna
Speaker 1: do whatever it can at every stage of the game
Speaker 1: to try and even if they they're willing to be
Speaker 1: wrong on the law if it delays Trump right, the
Speaker 1: this is if this were a sporting event, the refs
Speaker 1: would have to call them out for delay? How to
Speaker 1: give them penalties for delay a game? Because that's all
Speaker 1: this is. They don't really believe. I mean, they ultimately
Speaker 1: can't think that they will win in the end. Here,
Speaker 1: there's no way how could How is every executive Oh
Speaker 1: that's right, you were probably saying, buckle. How do they
Speaker 1: justify this? They essentially say, this is a three judge
Speaker 1: panel of the U. S. Nine Circuit Court of Appeals
Speaker 1: based in San Francisco, No less, what a shock uh
Speaker 1: left Coast ninth Circuit Circus. But they say that the
Speaker 1: administration cannot phase out deferred action for childhood arrivals essentially
Speaker 1: because they say that they're they're saying that they move
Speaker 1: too quickly and there's a due process concern here um
Speaker 1: that they deserve more process. What does that even mean?
Speaker 1: It doesn't even make any sense. They say that the
Speaker 1: administration was acting in the quote arbitrary and capricious manner.
Speaker 1: That's not arbitrary and capricious. This is the executive This
Speaker 1: is the discretion of the executive branch. This is very similar,
Speaker 1: very similar to say, if someone came along and they
Speaker 1: let's say a court came along and said, you know,
Speaker 1: you can't fire Jeff Sessions. You can't do it. I'm
Speaker 1: a federal judge and I'm I'm you know, because someone
Speaker 1: files suit they say that that it's illegal for the
Speaker 1: president Trump to fire Jeff Session. The federal court says,
Speaker 1: you know where it is illegal fire Jeff Session. Court
Speaker 1: has no jurisdiction there. That's the president's call. There. There
Speaker 1: is no way that a federal court has standing to
Speaker 1: say to the president, a coequal branch of government, that
Speaker 1: in an area of your purview, you can't do that.
Speaker 1: It's up to his discretion. This is also up to
Speaker 1: the president's discretion. So how can how can the think
Speaker 1: about how convoluted. This becomes how bizarre this is. Now,
Speaker 1: if they can say that this is arbitrary and capricious,
Speaker 1: what can they not say as arbitrary and capricious that
Speaker 1: the president does? Can't They can't they claim that any
Speaker 1: regulatory rollback from the executive branch arbitrary and capricious. The
Speaker 1: president negotiating a new NAFTA deal arbitrary and capricious. He
Speaker 1: doesn't have to do that. He's just decidt even do that.
Speaker 1: This is really taking us into a place where you
Speaker 1: see that there's no good faith from the left when
Speaker 1: it comes to dealing with this administration. None. None. Their
Speaker 1: whole plan here is just to use everything they can
Speaker 1: a Lynsky style in the federal courts, to slow down,
Speaker 1: to obstruct, and to mess up this administration. That is
Speaker 1: what they're doing, and it is lawless. This is lawlessness
Speaker 1: from federal judges. Make no mistake about it. Hello is
Speaker 1: a political decision made by a judge. I think it's
Speaker 1: a disgrace. That's forty eight thousand jobs. I approved it.
Speaker 1: It's ready to start, and they went out I guess
Speaker 1: to end up going to the Ninth Circuit. As usual,
Speaker 1: we're slowly putting new judges in the Ninth Circuit. The
Speaker 1: key Stone x L pipe blind has been blocked once again. Folks.
Speaker 1: This is nothing less than politically driven judicial activism masquerading
Speaker 1: as law. It is, in fact a lawless, a stupid
Speaker 1: and indefensible decision. Um. Keystone XCEL. By the way, Excel
Speaker 1: stands for Export Limited. Who knew that? One fun fact?
Speaker 1: That's what I'm here for, to bring the fun facts
Speaker 1: in the hut. Um. So that's the that's Keystone XEL
Speaker 1: for you. But this federal judge blocked it. Um, Judge
Speaker 1: Bryan Morris of the United States just disreccord from Montana.
Speaker 1: I have so many thoughts on this, Let's start with
Speaker 1: this one. We always hear that Trump is essentially a dictator,
Speaker 1: like he's this autocrat in in waiting, and yet or
Speaker 1: he's an autocrat already. And yet, when a single federal
Speaker 1: judge decides to override a point of executive branch policy,
Speaker 1: no matter how flimsy the pretext, and this is a
Speaker 1: flimsy pretext, by the way, but no matter how flimsy
Speaker 1: the pretext, the response to the administration is not, well,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna order the executive branch to override. I mean,
Speaker 1: that would start to get that's a constitutional crisis. Maybe
Speaker 1: r that starts to feel a little scary when the
Speaker 1: executive branch has now the judiciary doesn't have doesn't have
Speaker 1: jurisdiction here. Sorry, right, yeah, then I could understand people
Speaker 1: starting to get nervous. But no, that's not what Trump does.
Speaker 1: Trump says, okay, fine, we'll see you in court. Right.
Speaker 1: He completely has has completely respected the system and wins
Speaker 1: in court. I mean he won on the travel ban
Speaker 1: for example, which everyone said, oh, it's so unconstitutional and
Speaker 1: all this stuff, but yeah, it's so on institutional that
Speaker 1: Trump one with the travel band issue, went to the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court and he was correct. So that's at just
Speaker 1: point one of this is I hate that everything Trump
Speaker 1: does makes him an authoritarian. Everything Trump does makes him
Speaker 1: a deskpot. You know, firing Jeff Sessions, he's an authoritarian.
Speaker 1: But he has total he has the right to do it.
Speaker 1: You know, he he is allowed to fire Jeff Sessions.
Speaker 1: There's no there's no prohibition on what he did under
Speaker 1: the constitution. But they still say, oh, it's a constitutional crisis.
Speaker 1: No it's not. But let's let's dig into this Keystone
Speaker 1: Xcel thing for a while. Well, what this does is
Speaker 1: this one federal judge now means that they've got to
Speaker 1: go back and redo the whole federal process to get
Speaker 1: approval for this. And you know this is this is
Speaker 1: there's a lot of symbolism here as well as some
Speaker 1: important policy that's at stake. I mean this the symbolism
Speaker 1: is first of all, regulation and the slashing of regulations.
Speaker 1: Trump and his team realized that the federal government is
Speaker 1: involved in way too much stuff, way too many regular
Speaker 1: There's way too much regulatory overreach, and it's just crazy.
Speaker 1: So this is an example of the government just coming
Speaker 1: up the works on something that they have no real
Speaker 1: need to be involved. I mean, there should not be
Speaker 1: as involved and as slow in resolving any problems as
Speaker 1: they have been. So that that's you start with that one,
Speaker 1: all right. And and then you also have the environmental
Speaker 1: component of all this. And this is where I just
Speaker 1: I just want to throw something at the wall, because
Speaker 1: the people that think that this is an environmental issue
Speaker 1: or a climate change issue, I don't know what the
Speaker 1: heck they're talking about. All Right, let's start with this,
Speaker 1: I mean, the Keystone XL pipeline is an eleven seventy
Speaker 1: nine mile pipeline would carry eight hundred thousand barrels of
Speaker 1: oil from the Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast.
Speaker 1: And this has become a big political issue because you
Speaker 1: have all these environmentalist wacko types that say, well, this
Speaker 1: is this is bad, and you say why is it bad?
Speaker 1: And they say, well, it's bad because pipelines can fail
Speaker 1: and then we could have an oil spill and that
Speaker 1: could be really bad for the surrounding environment wherever you
Speaker 1: know in the areas that the pipeline traverses. You say, okay,
Speaker 1: but guess what. Pipelines are actually much less likely to
Speaker 1: fail and much much safer from environmental impacts standpoint than
Speaker 1: rails are. Then then trains are true true, right, that
Speaker 1: that's so start with that, So that notion is just
Speaker 1: that's just a falsehood. But the bigger problem, the bigger
Speaker 1: issue is they say, oh, but but climate change is
Speaker 1: what's at stake here. This has become a symbol for
Speaker 1: the left, for the Sierra Club and these other wacko
Speaker 1: lefty green groups out there, environmentalist extremist types. They think
Speaker 1: that there's gonna be more c o two in the
Speaker 1: air because because of this, and so they want to
Speaker 1: stop it. Right, this is this is symbolical on the
Speaker 1: on the climate change issue. And here's the truth about that.
Speaker 1: If they don't allow this pipeline to go from the
Speaker 1: Canadian oil sands to the Gulf coast, it will go
Speaker 1: east to west and be set up for transshipment to
Speaker 1: you guessed it, Asian markets. So you'll just have tankers
Speaker 1: taking this stuff. They're not gonna keep it in the
Speaker 1: tankers off the coast of Asia. They're gonna use it.
Speaker 1: If climate change is truly a global issue, which they
Speaker 1: say it is. And as I point out, climate change
Speaker 1: is a real phenomenon that is meaningless. It's real. It
Speaker 1: just doesn't really have any meaning, doesn't doesn't change anything.
Speaker 1: Climate change doesn't change anything. Yeah, I know that sounds silly,
Speaker 1: but you know what I'm saying. There's there's no imminent threat,
Speaker 1: there's no big problem. That's all nonsense. Okay, So but
Speaker 1: you look at this, you say, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: that the net effect of the Keystone XL pipeline crossing
Speaker 1: the United States in terms of the climate is non existent.
Speaker 1: There is no effect, there's nothing there, there's no reason
Speaker 1: to be concerned about what this will do the environment
Speaker 1: and the environment because we we can't stop Asia from
Speaker 1: getting the gas it's coming out, or this is money
Speaker 1: in the ground. They're they're pumping this stuff out. They've
Speaker 1: already gotten the approval for that, so you know. But
Speaker 1: but this goes back to you know, Obama as well.
Speaker 1: This was an Obama legacy item. Barack Obama rejected the
Speaker 1: Keystone permit. Why oh, that's right, because he was just
Speaker 1: about to uh negotiate the Paris Climate Change Accord. So
Speaker 1: this is really a religious climate change article of faith
Speaker 1: for the left. That's why they care so much about this.
Speaker 1: And they certainly don't care about the the jobs, the
Speaker 1: construction dollars, the you know all that, they don't they
Speaker 1: that doesn't factor into their analysis. They just want this
Speaker 1: to stop. Um. The pipeline has been looked at now
Speaker 1: for ten years, I think. And and the federal judge
Speaker 1: that's slapping this down, you know what his explanation is.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a forties or fifty four page long ruling,
Speaker 1: but I can tell you, having skimmed through today, he's
Speaker 1: basically saying it needs more study. And I don't like
Speaker 1: that I don't like the conclusions they drew from this process.
Speaker 1: Therefore they need to redo the process and think more
Speaker 1: about the evidence that I think they should think about.
Speaker 1: This is just a federal judge thinking that he can
Speaker 1: override the executive branch of the United States government because
Speaker 1: he says so, because he thinks he's saving the planet.
Speaker 1: This is lawlessness. Uh, this is lawlessness. And but this
Speaker 1: is really a form of law fare that the left
Speaker 1: is engaged in against the Trump administration in general. But
Speaker 1: they say this is just an extension, by the way
Speaker 1: of of the same legal framework that they are really
Speaker 1: pseudo legal framework that they use to prevent the administration
Speaker 1: from stopping UH from continuing well, stopping data. They say
Speaker 1: they didn't go through the process slowly and deliberately enough.
Speaker 1: It's not fair. Well, a judge doesn't get to decide
Speaker 1: what the executive processes for areas of executive discretion, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you were buying a house, and you
Speaker 1: decided to buy a house, and then I showed up
Speaker 1: and I said, a hold on a second, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, I don't know if you spent enough time
Speaker 1: touring the house before you bought it, you would say
Speaker 1: but that's not your call, Like this is irrelevant, you're not.
Speaker 1: You don't get to tell me how much I have
Speaker 1: to put into the deliberation about a decision that's mine
Speaker 1: to make. I get to make the decision these judges,
Speaker 1: whether it's on DACCA or on Keystone Excel client, Ke's
Speaker 1: on Excel climate, KE'STI on Excel pipeline, that's what they're doing.
Speaker 1: They're taking upon themselves the right to tell the federal
Speaker 1: government you need to think more about this before you
Speaker 1: can make this decision. I'm not saying you don't have
Speaker 1: the right to make the decision, but you need to
Speaker 1: think more about it. No, no, no, this is delay
Speaker 1: based on politics. This is hashtag resistance judiciary at work.
Speaker 1: That's what's going on here. This will get this absolutely
Speaker 1: not survive higher judicial scrutiny. This is a joke, an
Speaker 1: absolute joke. But nonetheless they think of it as a
Speaker 1: victory because for all their talk about institutions, for all
Speaker 1: the Democrats and the lefts desire to portray themselves as
Speaker 1: the defenders of our democracy, they'll throw all this stuff
Speaker 1: out in the heartbeat if it means that they get
Speaker 1: power and they get their way. Democrats emotionally and psychologically
Speaker 1: are obsessed with getting their way at any cost. You've
Speaker 1: been hearing me talking about Black Rifle Coffee for a
Speaker 1: while now, so it should be obvious that this Veteran's Day,
Speaker 1: the only thing you should be drinking is a delicious
Speaker 1: cup of veteran crafted coffee from America's favorite coffee company,
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee. I drink Black Rifle every morning. I
Speaker 1: have converted dozens of people in my office now from
Speaker 1: whatever corporate, weirdo left wing coffee brand they were drinking
Speaker 1: in the past to Black Rifle Coffee. Not only do
Speaker 1: they love the flavor, they love the fact that they're
Speaker 1: drinking coffee that's as good as anything you'll get in
Speaker 1: any fancy fruit fruit bourgeois coffee store. But also they
Speaker 1: know they're supporting veterans and a veteran owned company, and
Speaker 1: this Veteran's Day, get your coffee from Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: and contribute to a company that's actually making a difference
Speaker 1: in the veteran community. Visit Black Rifle Coffee dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck and receive fifteen percent or off your order.
Speaker 1: That's Black Rifle Coffee dot com, slash buck for fifteen
Speaker 1: percent off again one more time for Veterans Day. Black
Speaker 1: Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck special treat for all
Speaker 1: of you this Friday. We have with us the folks
Speaker 1: from Black Rifle Coffee. You know them because one they
Speaker 1: sponsor the show. Thank you guys. The lights they're on
Speaker 1: because of you, So we appreciate that the hut has
Speaker 1: heat and running water because of you guys, which is
Speaker 1: very much appreciated. I was actually just talking about how
Speaker 1: I do drink my black Rifle every morning, um and
Speaker 1: and I've is it black coffee? Is keto, right, so
Speaker 1: that that counts. That's right, Catosis, I read about it.
Speaker 1: I wish I actually did it, that would make more sense.
Speaker 1: But we've got Evan, Evan Hayfer with this now he's
Speaker 1: a CEO, and Matt Best who is VP, and also
Speaker 1: the guy from all the funny videos. Although you're in
Speaker 1: the videos to Mr I am yeah and a few
Speaker 1: of them. I think most of that is like it's
Speaker 1: a collaborative between the two of us. But my favorite
Speaker 1: is coming out as a conservative, where he really plays
Speaker 1: the antithesis of what Evan stands for in being a
Speaker 1: very hyper hyper progressive individual and it's quite hilarious progressive
Speaker 1: suicide bomber and one that sub stars. He I do
Speaker 1: remember that, Yes, no, yes, the dude. I will tell
Speaker 1: you that I've sent many folks to UH to familiarize
Speaker 1: with them with with what you guys do on the
Speaker 1: coffee side. By the way, where's my I don't have
Speaker 1: a T shirt. I'm just saying you and T shirts green.
Speaker 1: Look at this they've got. You guys are always prepared.
Speaker 1: You show. This is amazing. I seriously, John, there's so
Speaker 1: much love in this room right now. I was gonna
Speaker 1: start talking smack about how Nine Line give me all
Speaker 1: this gear. So I walk around my nine Line T
Speaker 1: shirt drinking my Black Rifle coffee. But now I can
Speaker 1: go all Black Rifles. You know, they're a veteran owned company.
Speaker 1: We're partners with them and some pretty awesome stuff. So
Speaker 1: we're all about it. No, I know. I was at
Speaker 1: your team opening in Savannah where you had Black Rifle
Speaker 1: and Nine Line. I think of you guys as like
Speaker 1: brother companies. So anyway, but I just like to play
Speaker 1: you off each other so I get more free gears. Course,
Speaker 1: all right, so let's we got some real stuff going on. Here. Um,
Speaker 1: we have veterans Veterans Day coming up obviously, and and
Speaker 1: you guys are involved in in some initiatives. Why don't
Speaker 1: we start with that, And then I just want to
Speaker 1: talk to you generally about how you think the veteran
Speaker 1: community is doing right now. You know how how the
Speaker 1: Trumpster is going with all that stuff. But first, what's
Speaker 1: some of the good stuff that you're you're working on
Speaker 1: four veterans right now, It's start with the big one
Speaker 1: is it's it's veteran transition and employment. And for us,
Speaker 1: we're very concentrated on creating an ecosystem a black refle
Speaker 1: coffee that encourages healthy employment environment for guys that are
Speaker 1: getting out of the military or civil service, where they're
Speaker 1: going to find an ecosystem that supports them. And it's
Speaker 1: really difficult. I think a lot of people haven't invested
Speaker 1: a lot of intellectual energy and to try and to
Speaker 1: figure this out. When you have roughly twenty four million
Speaker 1: people in the United States that have served the country,
Speaker 1: which accounts for insignificant when I say insignificant portion of
Speaker 1: the employment of America, but it is very significant as
Speaker 1: far as service to our country and what we actually
Speaker 1: owe service members once they come back, um and with
Speaker 1: they're under employment numbers because they're underemployed compared to the
Speaker 1: rest of the workforce. Black revel coffees really focused on
Speaker 1: creating this this holistic environment for them to excel. And
Speaker 1: I think a lot of people don't understand going from
Speaker 1: possibly one of the most non corporate structured environments and
Speaker 1: non PC environments, especially the combat related military occupational skills
Speaker 1: into corporate America. That's a long and hard pendulum swing
Speaker 1: for a lot of guys, guys and girls. And what's
Speaker 1: the biggest thing they need in terms of help to transition, right,
Speaker 1: Because I mean I hear about this. I know you
Speaker 1: guys were in the community and now you're on the
Speaker 1: other side, successful entrepreneurs. But you know, everyone knows, everyone
Speaker 1: knows military has skills, discipline, all these things. Private sector
Speaker 1: wants those things. Is it just helping military, uh, military
Speaker 1: folks when they come out understand how to market those
Speaker 1: things to the private set? Like where is the discord?
Speaker 1: It is it the private sector doesn't really understand what
Speaker 1: the skills are. Where it's that is part of it, right,
Speaker 1: So there's a couple different issues in that transition which
Speaker 1: have to be dealt with. One is the corporate entity
Speaker 1: hiring the veteran has to understand what they did, so
Speaker 1: break down their military occupational skill and then how long
Speaker 1: they were in and what positions breaking down all of
Speaker 1: that experience. It's really easy to look at somebody with
Speaker 1: a four year degree in business or whatever it might
Speaker 1: be and be able to put numbers to that and
Speaker 1: assess that person. The people on the other side in
Speaker 1: HR and recruiting typically know how to do that. Now,
Speaker 1: in HR and recruiting in corporate America, it's really difficult
Speaker 1: for them to understand what a guy has done in
Speaker 1: the military. It's very difficult. So part of that is
Speaker 1: just translating that experience over into the corporate environment and
Speaker 1: then placing them in the right place. So that's part.
Speaker 1: And then too, when you're creating this, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: I can't I equate it to creating a communication that
Speaker 1: starts to train this person out of a military communication
Speaker 1: procedures where they use a lot of acronyms, they use
Speaker 1: a specific type of candor that is somewhat non PC.
Speaker 1: When you look at a lot of veterans transitioning, UM,
Speaker 1: I've heard this a lot where I've got a veteran
Speaker 1: in my office and he's really aggressive. I've heard that
Speaker 1: so many times, and it's it's our communication style necessarily,
Speaker 1: how they're they're acting right, and it's you know, you
Speaker 1: have a mission first, so you have a person that
Speaker 1: is very mission oriented. They're driven to accomplish the mission.
Speaker 1: They don't want to a lot of white note noise.
Speaker 1: They've learned how to chop all that stuff away, go
Speaker 1: straight to the bone and try to get something done
Speaker 1: well that can be interpreted. When I get calls in
Speaker 1: from people all across the country all the time, I
Speaker 1: say I've got and the guy's a background of us
Speaker 1: about a seventy accuracy rating of were you former military,
Speaker 1: sir or ma'am, just based on just based on the
Speaker 1: way we're talking, especially because we're down on an issue,
Speaker 1: and the way they present information wherever. But you know,
Speaker 1: the the assertion, the rhythm that there's a there's a
Speaker 1: cadence to whether you get used to so. And that's
Speaker 1: not because they're telling our call screen of their military.
Speaker 1: But usually I can having spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: with folks like you guys, and in a rock and Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: you pick up on it. So there's definitely a communication
Speaker 1: style there is, you know, so it's a translation, so
Speaker 1: taking how they were communicating their prior in their prior jobs,
Speaker 1: and a lot of these guys who spent you know,
Speaker 1: ten plus years now and a constant rotation cycle in
Speaker 1: Iraq and Afghanistan. When we look at September eleven, two
Speaker 1: thousand and one, that's that was a long time ago.
Speaker 1: Now we're looking at seventeen years of operational experience and
Speaker 1: continuous deployments for a lot of these men and women
Speaker 1: that have served the country. Well, they're institutionalized in a
Speaker 1: in a very specific way of accomplishing a goal and
Speaker 1: a mission. Well, taking that and then putting them into
Speaker 1: a corporate environment with zero translation and then expecting them
Speaker 1: to excel. There is an expectation there, an assumption that
Speaker 1: I think is somewhat inaccurate. They have to get, uh,
Speaker 1: I guess a training program that takes their military experience,
Speaker 1: translates that for the corporate environment and then teaches the
Speaker 1: military prior military service person and the corporate entity to
Speaker 1: communicate and work together a little bit more effectively. So
Speaker 1: what what specifically and I want to get you guys
Speaker 1: a host of other issues too. But just before we
Speaker 1: go into a break, here, what are the specific initiatives
Speaker 1: that you guys are doing. Where can people go how
Speaker 1: can they find out how Black Rifle Coffee is helping
Speaker 1: veterans in this specific context. Well, the big one is
Speaker 1: is is we we've got above a fifty percent higher
Speaker 1: rate at Black Rifle Coffee. So as we've expanded into
Speaker 1: Tennessee and Texas, we're continuing to hire more veterans, and
Speaker 1: our culture and our ecosystem is very military friendly in
Speaker 1: our communication procedures. Actually civilians have to adapt to that
Speaker 1: more more so than the reverse, So that's one big
Speaker 1: one too. We're expanding into the more bricks and mortar
Speaker 1: sections of the business a little bit, even more hiring
Speaker 1: opportunities for veterans for pen FED initiative is well right,
Speaker 1: and we've also teamed up with the Pentagon Federal Credit
Speaker 1: Union in order to launch the Veteran Entrepreneur Investment Program.
Speaker 1: So if you're looking at starting a business, you can
Speaker 1: head over to Black Rifle Coffee or the Pentagon Federal
Speaker 1: Credit Union, submit an application, and depending on how the
Speaker 1: application procedure goes, you could be funded by one of
Speaker 1: the companies in this initiative. We're talking to Matt Best
Speaker 1: and Evan heyfer a black Rifle coffee or hitting a
Speaker 1: quick break team. We will be right back. Online security
Speaker 1: is essential, you know, just this week I was on
Speaker 1: a train. I had no choice but to use public WiFi.
Speaker 1: You know, now you're on an unsecure network. Do you
Speaker 1: want someone to be able to track what you're doing,
Speaker 1: sell it to a third party, maybe even into your system.
Speaker 1: What you need is a virtual private network that will
Speaker 1: protect you online, and Express vpn is the best one
Speaker 1: you can find. Express vpn has easy to use apps
Speaker 1: that run seamlessly in the background of my computer, phone
Speaker 1: and tablet, and the protection I get from Express vpn
Speaker 1: takes only one click seven bucks a month. That's all
Speaker 1: you need to get this going. If you ever use
Speaker 1: public WiFi and you want to keep yourself secure online,
Speaker 1: check out Express vpn Protect Yourself today and find out
Speaker 1: how you can get three months free at Express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. That's Express vpn dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck for three months free with a one year package
Speaker 1: again express vpn dot com slash buck to learn more
Speaker 1: to keep yourself secure. Alright, So we're here in studio
Speaker 1: in n y C. The Freedom Hunt, New York. Baby.
Speaker 1: We've got Matt Best Evan Hafer, the VP CEO, respectively
Speaker 1: of Black Rifle Coffee, which I do drink every morning.
Speaker 1: It's actually nice to like a product, by the way
Speaker 1: that you have to do making delicious coffee. I do.
Speaker 1: I do very much appreciate it. Um, But but I
Speaker 1: want to just we got Veterans Day, Veterans Day coming up. Matt,
Speaker 1: how are veterans doing in the country right now? I
Speaker 1: think they're doing pretty phenomenal, you know. I think we
Speaker 1: don't give enough credit to people post GUAD even it's
Speaker 1: still going on, and their successes in the civilian community. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I think there's still a lot of issues
Speaker 1: that we have to combat as a veteran culture, and
Speaker 1: civilians have to understand that veterans are hyper successful and
Speaker 1: hyper talented individuals and then the very small segment that
Speaker 1: actually need outreach and help, you know. As a company,
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee really try to combat that. Partnering with
Speaker 1: UM organizations like the Boot Campaign in the Warrior's Heart
Speaker 1: is really getting the individual treated for their specific issues
Speaker 1: and some of these UM organizations like the Warrior Heart,
Speaker 1: they're actually doing blood work and mental testing and finding
Speaker 1: out what's wrong with that said individual and then putting
Speaker 1: them through the appropriate treatment and then reassembling and backed
Speaker 1: them to civilian culture and making sure that the success rates.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think they have like an eighty something
Speaker 1: percent success rate that people are getting past their issues,
Speaker 1: whether that's a UM, a moral issue, a PTS issue,
Speaker 1: a mental health issue, there's it's it's pretty amazing and
Speaker 1: I couldn't be more proud of where the community is
Speaker 1: at today. But you know, you never settle. UM, We're
Speaker 1: always going to do better. And it's up for us
Speaker 1: to look out for veterans because everybody says we want
Speaker 1: to support veterans, but um, when it's time to support them,
Speaker 1: they tend not to. And I really just want to
Speaker 1: rally the civilian community, the veteran community, and come together
Speaker 1: to support the people that have put life limb eyesight
Speaker 1: on the line to protect the freedoms that we enjoy
Speaker 1: every single day. And I mean, we live in the
Speaker 1: greatest country in the world, hands down, and we do
Speaker 1: that because of so much years of sacrifice, not just
Speaker 1: our generation but past generations through the whole since the
Speaker 1: inception of UM America America, we all we all move America.
Speaker 1: But you know, Evan, uh, when when I look at
Speaker 1: what's going across the country, I mean, I will say
Speaker 1: that it feels like every every look these days, there's
Speaker 1: you know, there's new there's new initiatives to try to
Speaker 1: do something to help veterans, whether it's dealing with PTSD
Speaker 1: issues as Matt was talking about, or or just in
Speaker 1: general to to celebrate the service and sacrifice of of
Speaker 1: the veteran community. So is it still trending in that
Speaker 1: direction though, even though there's not the same level of look,
Speaker 1: let's be on, there's not the same level of active
Speaker 1: combat operations. I know you're still guys in the rock
Speaker 1: and Afghanisan and speak to that too, But people forget,
Speaker 1: we have a war still going on. There are still
Speaker 1: men and women out there outside of the wire getting
Speaker 1: blown up, getting shot at every single day. We cannot forget.
Speaker 1: Just have that green on blue attack and last week exactly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So I mean that's that absolutely needs to be And
Speaker 1: by the way, I also think that Afghanistan, I'm curious,
Speaker 1: I'll get your take on this one. To Afghanistan is
Speaker 1: a place that no one wants to deal with the reality,
Speaker 1: which is that it's not gonna work. I don't think
Speaker 1: it's gonna work, meaning that the plan there is the
Speaker 1: same planet was ten years ago, and the same planet
Speaker 1: was their years before. That's that's an interesting point. You know.
Speaker 1: Even when I was there, my first rotation to Afghanistan
Speaker 1: in two thousand nine, mine I would jokingly say America's
Speaker 1: plan is just more cash. That's basically what their plan is.
Speaker 1: And I would always say, hey, we need more plan,
Speaker 1: we need more plan, we need more plan, because they
Speaker 1: just like to throw money through a combination of things
Speaker 1: in order to try to fix a problem. Well that
Speaker 1: that doesn't really get the job done. You have to
Speaker 1: have a long term strategic goals that are met, you know,
Speaker 1: month by month, year by year, and you do have
Speaker 1: to have a plan in order to get out of
Speaker 1: the country eventually. So I I would say, yes, I
Speaker 1: agree with you, and that I would say Part two
Speaker 1: is the first part of your question, which is how
Speaker 1: are we doing as far as as these veteran initiatives
Speaker 1: in order to transition guys more effectively take care of them.
Speaker 1: Is there just as much inertia. I would say there is,
Speaker 1: and I think it's getting better because you've had a
Speaker 1: lot of white when I say white noise, you've had
Speaker 1: a lot of these foundations in the last we'll call
Speaker 1: it two decades that were non effective, and some of
Speaker 1: them were started by people that maybe had great intentions
Speaker 1: but ultimately didn't quite understand how to fix some problems.
Speaker 1: And that doesn't mean they weren't good. It just means
Speaker 1: that these guys have long term and sometimes and sometimes
Speaker 1: systemic problems that came from combat UH, and there's a
Speaker 1: lot of institutions that didn't quite understand. You know, it's
Speaker 1: not a car rack, it's not UH in trauma's trauma,
Speaker 1: but it's a very specific type of trauma. I think
Speaker 1: we're at a point now with the community that we've
Speaker 1: focused in with several really good foundations that know what
Speaker 1: they're doing and have a lot of experience doing it.
Speaker 1: So I think they're becoming more effective, if that makes sense.
Speaker 1: So there's there's less, but there's more, So they're doing
Speaker 1: it more. They're getting more effective at this, I think. So.
Speaker 1: I've actually also heard stories about some of the new
Speaker 1: UH advances in particularly some of the prosthetics and other
Speaker 1: technology with very serious wounds. I mean, really, I don't
Speaker 1: know how to say it, a very futuristic space age
Speaker 1: kind of stuff that's coming as a result the brilliance
Speaker 1: of that. How much military technology applies to the civilian sector.
Speaker 1: I mean, if we apply resources and funding to getting
Speaker 1: better you know, prosthetics for military amputees will subsequently than
Speaker 1: the girl born without a leg. We can actually apply
Speaker 1: those same that same technology and see a six year
Speaker 1: old walk for the first time. Like it's one team,
Speaker 1: one fight. And we don't want to have these segmented. Um,
Speaker 1: we're Americans as veterans, but they're still the men and
Speaker 1: women who raise their hand to put themselves knowingly in
Speaker 1: harm's way. And there has to be the utmost reverence
Speaker 1: for the people that did that well. And I can
Speaker 1: I'll back that up with with the you know, the House,
Speaker 1: Senate and the Executive Office. Basically, when we look at
Speaker 1: the approval of these wars, we have to look at
Speaker 1: not only funding the war, but looking at taking care
Speaker 1: of the men that have volunteered to do the actual act.
Speaker 1: So when we sign up for these these these wars
Speaker 1: and in Central Asia, the Middle East, or wherever they are.
Speaker 1: We can't just look at the budget for invasion. We
Speaker 1: have to look at how many people are going to
Speaker 1: be affected and being able to take care of them
Speaker 1: for the rest of their lives. And I think this
Speaker 1: is my feeling. I think there has been a lack
Speaker 1: of emphasis in both the House and Senate and being
Speaker 1: able to take care of veterans effectively. There's been more
Speaker 1: priority in the v A in the system, but veterans
Speaker 1: have seen a lot of their their funding for education
Speaker 1: and things like that, they've seen that dwindle and be cut,
Speaker 1: and there's less priority on that because we want these wars,
Speaker 1: but we don't want to pay for the bill when
Speaker 1: it comes. And now that's an absolute tragedy. It's an
Speaker 1: absolute tragedy that as as a society we can vote
Speaker 1: to say YEA, we're going to war, but we're not
Speaker 1: going to take care of our veterans. It is the
Speaker 1: ethical responsibility of the stage. So for people listening to
Speaker 1: this across the country right now, guys, how can I
Speaker 1: feel like people that are tied in the veteran community,
Speaker 1: they already have First of all, they are veterans where
Speaker 1: they're related to or or married to veterans, But for
Speaker 1: for the civilians out there, like you know, what's veterans
Speaker 1: I'd like I'd like to do something. I'd like to
Speaker 1: actually take some kind of a positive step or action
Speaker 1: to to uh, to assist that all these things you're
Speaker 1: talking about. What would you recommend? Where should people start?
Speaker 1: That's a that's a loaded question. I would just say, participate,
Speaker 1: vet and act, right, So you have to participate in
Speaker 1: the veteran community. You have to vet to make sure
Speaker 1: that the organization and the people are true and honest,
Speaker 1: and then action. You know, work requires action, and you
Speaker 1: can talk and throw hot air out there all single day,
Speaker 1: but you have to participate to an individual level to
Speaker 1: make a difference. And you know you could. There's lots
Speaker 1: of amazing organizations out there. You just have to find
Speaker 1: them yourself, do the action, do the work, vet it,
Speaker 1: make sure that they're consistent in their their ethical behavior,
Speaker 1: and then action on it and do the work. Haven't
Speaker 1: anything from you, Yeah, I think you know for us too,
Speaker 1: I think we've worked with so many of these different organizations.
Speaker 1: We do a ton of outreach, specifically within the veteran community.
Speaker 1: We have products that are specifically designed to just support,
Speaker 1: for instance, Warriors Heart. All the profits, all the profit
Speaker 1: goes back to that organization. We're we're not profiting whatsoever.
Speaker 1: That would be completely unethical for Black Rifle to do.
Speaker 1: What I say is vote with your dollar support the
Speaker 1: companies that support the community. Uh So, if at the
Speaker 1: very least you can go to Black Rifle Coffee and
Speaker 1: buy the Warrior's Heart coffee and you know that you're
Speaker 1: going to be doing something for the veteran community. Evan
Speaker 1: Hey for Matt Best, gentleman of Black Rifle Coffee. Thank
Speaker 1: you first of all for your service, especially during the
Speaker 1: Veterans Day where you're talking abo veterans as you think
Speaker 1: for your thank you and uh and also thank you
Speaker 1: for for all that you guys do. It's pleasure. And
Speaker 1: for the delicious coffee by the very very good. All right,
Speaker 1: we'll be back in a moment. Team stay with us,
Speaker 1: Team Buck. It's time for roll call. Oh yeah, roll
Speaker 1: call time. And I'm up here at NYC for the weekend.
Speaker 1: You know, even though it's kind of a glum day
Speaker 1: here in the city, it's it's cold but rainy. You know,
Speaker 1: I'll take snow over cold and rainy any day. You
Speaker 1: at these snow has a certain charm to it, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, John, the cold rain. You're like,
Speaker 1: so now I'm wet and I'm freezing, and I don't
Speaker 1: even get to throw snowballs of people, Like there's nothing
Speaker 1: to recommend that. But it's still great to be up
Speaker 1: here in New York City. I mean, I haven't smelled
Speaker 1: that particular odorific mix of street urine, black tar coming
Speaker 1: out of the tail pipes of big trucks and whatever
Speaker 1: trash bags have been left to rot on the streets
Speaker 1: for a few days in a while. I miss it,
Speaker 1: you know, I miss it. I'm like, ah, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: that's send that smell. It is New York. It is
Speaker 1: so fantastic. Salts assaults my nostrils like an invading force. Well,
Speaker 1: I love it so much. New York is. It's quite
Speaker 1: a quite a place. Um. I really do miss it, though.
Speaker 1: I like. I like being back up here. I'm visiting
Speaker 1: the family and miss Molly for the weekend, which is exciting.
Speaker 1: All right, Now, let's get right to it. We're gonna
Speaker 1: have a double roll call because it's Friday, Fried Yea.
Speaker 1: You know, I actually had a guy in my I've
Speaker 1: got a great crew TV crew at at Hill TV,
Speaker 1: I mean the actual guys that run the cameras and everything.
Speaker 1: And one of them said to me, um, uh, Thursday
Speaker 1: is Friday Jr. And I like that attitude. I need
Speaker 1: more of that. I need more of that random positivity,
Speaker 1: you know, in my day to day. All right, Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck Sexton, if you want to be
Speaker 1: a part of any of this, now, let's get to it.
Speaker 1: Tom writes, thank you for calling out fake Jake Tapper,
Speaker 1: so sick of other conservatives stick up for him and
Speaker 1: call him fair. Also, I'd love to hear the liberty
Speaker 1: loving Latino Chris Salcedo cover when you're off stay safe
Speaker 1: down there in the swamp shields high. Yeah. Well, you
Speaker 1: know I've I've once or twice had some interactions with
Speaker 1: Jake where he showed himself to be a thin skinned,
Speaker 1: nasty and someone underhanded fellow, so I have. I do
Speaker 1: not have anything positive to say about the man in
Speaker 1: any sense. I think that what he does on TV
Speaker 1: is largely fraudulent. I think that his his uh virtue
Speaker 1: signaling via just extraordinary love of heroes all the time
Speaker 1: is about brand building more than is really giving a
Speaker 1: giving a much of a care about anybody who's actually
Speaker 1: putting themselves in harm's way. And I think that he's
Speaker 1: part of really the the forefront of the vanguard of
Speaker 1: what happens at seeing all all the time, which is
Speaker 1: the laundering of liberalism through a prism of neutrality. So
Speaker 1: they're not giving you left wing bias, you see, they're
Speaker 1: not giving you a narrative that the Democrats want to hear.
Speaker 1: The Democrats, of course that comprise plus of their audience.
Speaker 1: They're just giving you the facts. And their audience loves
Speaker 1: that because they think, oh, I watch CNN. I'm not
Speaker 1: like some of those people that watch Fox. And you know,
Speaker 1: you're just not a very sophisticated thinker. If you really
Speaker 1: believe that people who watch Fox are getting skewed news
Speaker 1: but people who watch CNN are getting the truth. You're
Speaker 1: just not sophisticated in your in your news consumption. You
Speaker 1: may be, you know, a brilliant astro physicist, but you
Speaker 1: don't understand how media works. And so I think Tapper
Speaker 1: is part of what is essentially a daily fraud. Uh.
Speaker 1: And there's that, but there's a whole crew. I mean,
Speaker 1: Don Lemon, same thing, Chris Cuomo same thing. And it's
Speaker 1: not just Tapper. There's a whole bunch over there. There
Speaker 1: are some objective journalists I mean when I say objective,
Speaker 1: pardon me. There are some journalists that I think strive
Speaker 1: for objectivity. They're still left of center, but I think
Speaker 1: they do make a real, a real point of it.
Speaker 1: But Jake, he fills a roll over there, which is
Speaker 1: they go, oh, well, you know, Tapper will call out.
Speaker 1: He'll call out both sides, not really once in a while,
Speaker 1: just just enough to make it seem legit, but not really.
Speaker 1: Um So, I'm glad to hear that you agree with
Speaker 1: that assessment. Tom uh Let's see here yo ha. Right. Hello, Buck,
Speaker 1: was listening last night and you mentioned the Caribbean Parade
Speaker 1: in New York City. I'm pretty sure we call it
Speaker 1: the West Indian Day Parade and it happened in Brooklyn.
Speaker 1: You're correct, Johan, it is the West Indian Day Parade.
Speaker 1: The reason you brought it up was because a caller
Speaker 1: inquired about the device that detects gunshots. You made the
Speaker 1: right connection about the two. I worked in Queens in
Speaker 1: the eighties and every year they asked volunteers to work
Speaker 1: over time for that parade. I know of no one
Speaker 1: that did. UM. Yeah, for whatever reason, the the West
Speaker 1: Indian Day Parade. There's a lot of gunfire in Brooklyn.
Speaker 1: Not at people necessarily, I don't think that's happened too,
Speaker 1: but celebratory gunfire is a thing that would happen, and
Speaker 1: some people don't seem to understand that when you fire
Speaker 1: from say a rooftop or a yard up in the air,
Speaker 1: those rounds what goes up must come down. So it's
Speaker 1: a it's a very serious public safety threat. It's not
Speaker 1: just like a noise ordinance issue. I know all of
Speaker 1: you know that, but some other people go, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: you fire guns off in the air. I'm a right
Speaker 1: a friend when I was in UM, when I was
Speaker 1: in I Rock he told me that right before I
Speaker 1: was actually in the facility, we were discussing. Uh. He
Speaker 1: said that the Rocky there was some kind of a
Speaker 1: Rocky soccer team win, and all of a sudden, there
Speaker 1: was it sounded like there was rain on the rooftop
Speaker 1: where he was, and it was actually a K forty
Speaker 1: seven rounds that were pinging off the rooftop because nearby
Speaker 1: there were people who were firing in the air and
Speaker 1: celebration firing a K forty seven's in the air. Ah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that that's the thing that happens. Um frail right, Please,
Speaker 1: I beg you make your show either downloadable on your
Speaker 1: website or available on SoundCloud. Again. Um, you can't download
Speaker 1: off of I Heart Radio. I can't download the list
Speaker 1: of the podcasts offline. Um. Yeah, I I don't know
Speaker 1: why we can't be on sound John, why can't we
Speaker 1: be on SoundCloud? Is there a reason? No SoundCloud? No? No,
Speaker 1: not allowed. I don't you don't know why. Okay, I'll
Speaker 1: try to. I'll try to figure that out. Why can't
Speaker 1: be on on SoundCloud? Uh, Douglas writes, Tell Chris that'll
Speaker 1: stop calling everyone a racist? Um? Uh, Doug, you know
Speaker 1: if you saw this morning, I I just will say
Speaker 1: that I obviously did not like my co host analysis
Speaker 1: on that point, and I just have to I have
Speaker 1: to leave it there for now, for the sake of
Speaker 1: of comedy. I'll leave it there. Um, Keith right buck,
Speaker 1: what happened in Florida with Al Frank in the Minnesota
Speaker 1: is nothing new. In two thousand and four, Dino Rossi
Speaker 1: won the initial count for state governor in Washington State
Speaker 1: against Christine greg War. Then an activist group in Seattle Acorn,
Speaker 1: claimed they found a bag of votes missed in the
Speaker 1: initial count. This bag of magic votes were counted and
Speaker 1: greg War still lost the election. So a Acorn found
Speaker 1: yet another bag of magic votes and Christine one more bag.
Speaker 1: Greg War won the election. The state and the city
Speaker 1: of Seattle have been marching off the left coast cliff
Speaker 1: ever since. I was born and raised here. But I
Speaker 1: retired two and a half years. I feel bad leaving
Speaker 1: the state. In my rearview mirror. Even the lefty sister
Speaker 1: moved to Missoula because it's so bad. Keep up the
Speaker 1: good fight from Keith, Well, Kith, thank you so much
Speaker 1: for writing in. And Yep, people cheating elections. There's voter fraud.
Speaker 1: It does happen. People cheating elections. I know we're supposed to.
Speaker 1: We're always told, oh no, that never, they would never
Speaker 1: do that. People do a lot of crazy things, the
Speaker 1: craziest among them would not be trying to cheat an election. Especially.
Speaker 1: Think of it this way, if you really believe that
Speaker 1: fascism is coming to America, would would a little voter
Speaker 1: fraud really be too much for you? You know, I'm
Speaker 1: not advocating for voter fraud. I'm just saying, if you
Speaker 1: were crazy enough to believe that you know, voter fraud
Speaker 1: was coming to America, I mean, sorry, that's fascism was
Speaker 1: coming to America. I feel like you would probably be
Speaker 1: willing to break some some voting laws, um and and
Speaker 1: and even be willing to suffer the consequences of breaking them.
Speaker 1: That is that is my sense of it. So there
Speaker 1: you have it. Um let's see what we get here. Hope, Tom,
Speaker 1: what's next? Uh? Eric writes Buck. I wouldn't say it's
Speaker 1: a draw. The mid terms. We gained enough seats in
Speaker 1: the Senate that he can push through any nominee with
Speaker 1: no problems. Can't wait for the Dems in the House
Speaker 1: to negotiate with the president. Hopefully he will stand on
Speaker 1: conservative principles. Eric, Eric, I mean, I see what you're saying.
Speaker 1: It's really a win in both directions. I mean, I'm
Speaker 1: not you can quibble with whether or not we should
Speaker 1: we should describe that as a draw. I would just
Speaker 1: say that there's gonna be no deal with the House.
Speaker 1: I mean Pelosi, I wonder if she's gonna try to
Speaker 1: rope a dope Trump, but she knows better than she's
Speaker 1: not gonna get him. It's not like she's I'm not
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say it might sound a little means she's
Speaker 1: not dealing with Bush. You know, she's not gonna swindle
Speaker 1: him with some fake olive branch. And then all of
Speaker 1: a sudden it's, oh, you know, I think maybe Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi wants to be friends. No, false, untrue. Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: does not want to be friends. She does not want
Speaker 1: to do a deal with you. Trump knows that. And
Speaker 1: I just can't see there being anything other than the
Speaker 1: most just you know, not real kind of outreach situation
Speaker 1: with Pelosi. That that's how I see it, at least
Speaker 1: that's my estimation of where all this is going. People.
Speaker 1: I know they talk about infrastructure, well, the Democrats are
Speaker 1: gonna say, you know, it has to be all all
Speaker 1: union labor, that does it. I think they're gonna they're
Speaker 1: gonna all these little side pork projects and stuff. They're
Speaker 1: gonna make a mess of the whole thing. It's not
Speaker 1: gonna be oh, what can we do to most efficiently
Speaker 1: improve our infrastructure? Democrats have no interest in now. They
Speaker 1: just want to take your money and give it to
Speaker 1: other people so that they can be in power. That's
Speaker 1: really the Democrat mantra. More roll Call coming up like
Speaker 1: soft butter on warm toast. Time to spread some freedom,
Speaker 1: coast to coast. It's time for Roll Call, Roll Call
Speaker 1: Part two. It's always fun when the Black Rifle guys
Speaker 1: come by, is it. I'm Mike. It's like I get
Speaker 1: to hang out with the cool kids for the day.
Speaker 1: You know what I mean. They're They're a fun bunch.
Speaker 1: I like them. You can hear me, can he not? Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's just ignoring me. It's all right, Producer, Mike. I
Speaker 1: how often am I in New York and you just
Speaker 1: ignore me? It's like, I'm not even here, doesn't have
Speaker 1: his ear piece in. I know you're pulling clips and
Speaker 1: making the show happen. Man, I can multitest that. I'd
Speaker 1: like to get I'd like to give you a hard time.
Speaker 1: I was just saying, the Black Rifle guys, it's like
Speaker 1: I get to hang out with the cool kids in
Speaker 1: the high school. You know what I mean. They're awesome,
Speaker 1: They're great. They're there, and then the company is doing
Speaker 1: incredibly well, which is it's so nice to see people
Speaker 1: that are great guys and doing all these cool things
Speaker 1: and also are being really successful and not uh not
Speaker 1: letting it change them at all either, which is cool.
Speaker 1: And they just come back here and tell us some
Speaker 1: stuff and hang out. It's great there in New York.
Speaker 1: I know they came back, came by with all this shag.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to start working out, so I look
Speaker 1: okay in this Black Rifle T shirt. That would be it.
Speaker 1: That would be a good a good start to things. Um.
Speaker 1: But do you drink the coffee? By the way, Mike,
Speaker 1: do you ever drink it? You hook it up right?
Speaker 1: I do? Yeah, it's really good. It actually is really
Speaker 1: I know it sounds like we're doing a Black Rifle
Speaker 1: infomercialist hour, but it actually is delicious. Actually, Like they're there.
Speaker 1: They have their coffee mugs are and their accessories they
Speaker 1: have on their website, like their coffee mugs are really cool. O.
Speaker 1: They're big and like them Black Rifle dot Com, slash
Speaker 1: buck everyone check it out, all right, so I said,
Speaker 1: I said in roll call. I meant roll call. I
Speaker 1: was not intending on skipping past the roll call. Jen.
Speaker 1: I'm about as sick of hearing a constitutional crisis as
Speaker 1: I am. Common sense gun control, Jen, I totally and
Speaker 1: completely understand. I'm sick of it. To a constitutional crisis,
Speaker 1: dear lives, it does not mean something that you do
Speaker 1: not like. That is not what a constitutional crisis is.
Speaker 1: That that does not count as a constitutional crisis. So
Speaker 1: I just think it's important that everybody understands. Let's get
Speaker 1: on the same page. You with that one right now,
Speaker 1: that is not what it means. Uh, let's see we
Speaker 1: get here. Dennis writes Buck, if you're gonna wear a
Speaker 1: sport coat, you need to tie. Dennis, I'm gonna throw
Speaker 1: a flag on that one. I don't think that. I
Speaker 1: don't think that's true. What do you mean you can't
Speaker 1: wear I think sport coat. I think you're gonna wear
Speaker 1: a suit. Maybe you you know, a tie is a
Speaker 1: little bit more a propos. But I don't think sport
Speaker 1: coat and tie necessarily go together. I think sport coat,
Speaker 1: no ties the way to go, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: I don't know what do you think? By the way,
Speaker 1: Producer Mike, I got a little heat recently because someone
Speaker 1: saw me wearing a navy suit with with like chestnut
Speaker 1: brown shoes. I got some heat online. I feel like
Speaker 1: you wear chestnut brown shoes whenever you want black shoes.
Speaker 1: Black shoes are for weddings and funerals. Everyone needs to
Speaker 1: just check themselves before they wreck themselves. Yeah, I'm just
Speaker 1: saying I wear brown shoes. I have a gray suit
Speaker 1: that I were recently. The pron with black shoes is
Speaker 1: that all black shoes kind of look the same, you know,
Speaker 1: and if they're shiny, you better be wearing a tuxedo
Speaker 1: with them. That's all I can tell you. Whereas brown shoes,
Speaker 1: the richness of the leather, the contrast, the contour, the
Speaker 1: quality can come through. Black shoe is a black shoe.
Speaker 1: You know. It's just not that exciting person obviously didn't
Speaker 1: know how to dress. I'm not gonna say it, but
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna not say it. Mike, you know, probably
Speaker 1: probably could have sent me a photo of his square
Speaker 1: toed loafers. Yeah, that's right, producer, Mike can can drop bombs.
Speaker 1: I have to be the I have to be the
Speaker 1: diplomatic one at all times here, um Kenny writes, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: One other thing, I wouldn't get too ahead of ourselves.
Speaker 1: That Whittaker is friendly and fair. We've heard that before,
Speaker 1: only to be disappointed. And shocked. We also thought Jeff
Speaker 1: Sessions was gonna light it up, and sadly it appears
Speaker 1: that he was put in a box by deep state forces.
Speaker 1: I don't think Sessions had much choice but to behave
Speaker 1: I'd like to know how they accomplished sessions handcuffing, but
Speaker 1: I don't necessarily blame him. Almost anyone else might have
Speaker 1: reacted similarly. Uh yeah, I think that Sessions gets a
Speaker 1: raw deal on the guys. I'll be honest with he
Speaker 1: he had to recuse himself or that just we're gonna
Speaker 1: freak out and make him crazy. I mean, I don't
Speaker 1: think he had a choice but to recuse himself because
Speaker 1: of the noise the media was going to make over
Speaker 1: the whole thing. And he was good on policies, and
Speaker 1: that that's important. Every need to understand. He was good
Speaker 1: on policy, and I think that, you know, people should
Speaker 1: keep that in mind as they kind of celebrate that
Speaker 1: Sessions is gonne. Although I do disagree with them a
Speaker 1: marijuana and this is a really a generational thing because
Speaker 1: I know a fair amount of you listening very much
Speaker 1: disagree with me on marijuana legalization. I feel pretty strongly
Speaker 1: about it, not because I I don't smoke marijuana, and
Speaker 1: I have not in a couple almost two decades now.
Speaker 1: I think it's been almost two decades since I had
Speaker 1: smoked marijuana. It's been a late Yeah. I know, John right,
Speaker 1: who would have thought? And and I grew up in
Speaker 1: New York City where there were drugs all over the place.
Speaker 1: But I was not somebody who would I just I
Speaker 1: just never thought it was a good idea. I don't know,
Speaker 1: it was never really my thing. Um, but I do
Speaker 1: think that for criminal justice reasons, you shouldn't go to
Speaker 1: prison for marijuana. That's that's how I feel about that,
Speaker 1: all right, Hannah, Alright, heck yes, buck time. I feel
Speaker 1: as if Trump has been laying in wait to see
Speaker 1: how this election went to go full Duke Nukem on
Speaker 1: the left. I'm glad I just bought some popcorn shields
Speaker 1: a Hannah. Yeah. This is the one thing about the
Speaker 1: ugly arrow we find ourselves entering here. Um, We I
Speaker 1: think are assured to see Trump engaged in what Trump
Speaker 1: does best, which is just political pugilism. He's gonna be
Speaker 1: throwing down with Libs left and right, and they can't
Speaker 1: beat him at that game. They really can't. They've tried,
Speaker 1: but I think he'll do well. Hey, man's from Alex.
Speaker 1: What's the name of that pro Second Amendment gun book
Speaker 1: you talked to the author about not long ago. I
Speaker 1: thought it was called First Freedom, but couldn't find it,
Speaker 1: Thanks and Shields High. It is, in fact Alex called
Speaker 1: First Freedom, and it is a book written by David Harsani,
Speaker 1: who's a very talented, very nice fellow writer. UM that
Speaker 1: is a senior writer for the Federalist First Freedom is
Speaker 1: his book. I recommend it to you, and I've always
Speaker 1: liked David. I thought he's a good guy. I think
Speaker 1: he's a good guy. One more your Jennifer ries. Hey,
Speaker 1: they're a great show. Is always quick suggestion. Garlic press
Speaker 1: and everything I cook garlic and shalots makes an appearance somewhere.
Speaker 1: A good quality garlic press is a must. Also a
Speaker 1: bar of stainless steel soap to get the onion stink off.
Speaker 1: These are a must. Okay, I could I could get
Speaker 1: in with that, um garlic press. I did get a
Speaker 1: basting brush recently, which is very exciting. I have a
Speaker 1: basting brush now so I can just based things. That's
Speaker 1: gonna be it for freedom hunt NYC today, my friends
Speaker 1: with you next week. Ready for it? All feels high.
Speaker 1: I've had to do hiring in the last year, and
Speaker 1: it's a jungle out there, folks. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: people send it now, crazy resumes. You don't know if
Speaker 1: it's true. You know what's going on. You know it's
Speaker 1: not smart hoping you get lucky when you're hiring for
Speaker 1: a position. You know it's not smart putting it out
Speaker 1: there on one site that you don't know much about
Speaker 1: and just assuming well people will find me hire. The
Speaker 1: smart way go to zip recruiter dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: to hire the right person. Zip recruiter doesn't depend on
Speaker 1: candidates finding you, it finds them for you. It's powerful
Speaker 1: matching technology scans thousands of resumes, identifies people with the
Speaker 1: right skills, education, and experience for your job, and actively
Speaker 1: invites them to apply so you get qualified candidates fast.
Speaker 1: That's why zip Recruiters rated number one by employers in
Speaker 1: the US. This rating comes from hiring sites on trust
Speaker 1: Pilot with over a thousand reviews, and right now, my
Speaker 1: listeners can try zip recruiter for free at this exclusive
Speaker 1: web address zip recruiter dot com slash buck. That's zip
Speaker 1: recruiter dot com slash buck again one more time. Zip
Speaker 1: recruiter dot com slash buck zip recruiter the smartest way
Speaker 1: to hire