Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. The French are here
Speaker 1: from pasad his first state visit with Emmanuel mccron. Plus,
Speaker 1: will the Iran nuclear deal survive? Will North Korea de nuclearize?
Speaker 1: And is Ronnie Jackson gonna stay in the running for
Speaker 1: v A Secretary? That and a whole lot more coming up.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake American great, You're a great American Again
Speaker 1: the buck Sexton Show begins. No people know my views
Speaker 1: on the Randy. It was a terrible deal. Should have
Speaker 1: never ever been made. We could have made a good
Speaker 1: deal or a reasonable deal, and the Randall was a
Speaker 1: terrible deal. We paid a hundred and fifty billion dollars.
Speaker 1: We gave one point eight billion in cash. That's actual cash,
Speaker 1: barrels of cash. It's insane, it's ridiculous. It should have
Speaker 1: never been made. But we will be talking about it.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the buck sex and Show. Everyone, Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for being here. Honor, privilege and pleasure as always.
Speaker 1: Uh so you have the big visit today. A lot
Speaker 1: of pomp and circumstance. I mean there was there was
Speaker 1: fife playing. I think there were fives. Perhaps they were piccolos.
Speaker 1: They look like fifes to me though the guy who
Speaker 1: knows his woodwinds uh and they or not as the
Speaker 1: case maybe uh. You know. The French were here a
Speaker 1: lot of people talking about the debt of on Earth
Speaker 1: to a General Lafayette, which is a real thing, Marquis
Speaker 1: de Lafayette. So the French are our buddies. Sometimes we
Speaker 1: have a little disagreements with them, but for the most
Speaker 1: part they were really our first major ally, so there's
Speaker 1: that gave us the Statue of Liberty, which was nice
Speaker 1: of them, and a whole bunch of other stuff. French
Speaker 1: fries among my favorite things, among my favorite things on
Speaker 1: planet Earth. I never called them freedom fries, you know.
Speaker 1: I didn't turn my back on France even during that period.
Speaker 1: Like the French fries. Guys, we all need to get
Speaker 1: a grip. So he had some important policy discussions going
Speaker 1: on today with Trump and Macron or should we should
Speaker 1: we do we americanize it? Do we go Macron? You
Speaker 1: know what I mean? You know, because there's also different
Speaker 1: ways you can americanize it, right, you can do Southern
Speaker 1: like you know, Macron or you could do more like
Speaker 1: Midwestern like mccron, you know, or New Yorker McCrone, Hey McCrone,
Speaker 1: Hey McCrone, or that's New Yorker Philly A. Mccron. What
Speaker 1: are you talking about? The the Iran nuke deal? Nuke
Speaker 1: nuke for who? For what? Uh? So, there there's a
Speaker 1: lot of stuff going on here. You got the Trump
Speaker 1: administration going to de certify or not on the Iran
Speaker 1: nuke deal. Let's start with Iran and then I'll get
Speaker 1: to North Korea. Both of these today, a lot of headlines,
Speaker 1: a lot of talk, and I sometimes feel like we
Speaker 1: get drawn into these conversations about foreign policy, and I'm
Speaker 1: I feel like anyone who refers themselves as a such
Speaker 1: and such nerd is really engaged in a humble brag.
Speaker 1: But so I won't say I'm a foreign policy nerd.
Speaker 1: I'll just say I like foreign policy, I worked in it,
Speaker 1: and I find it very interesting that all said, unless
Speaker 1: we're talking about a war or a major trade issue,
Speaker 1: most foreign policy is an intellectual exercise. And the people
Speaker 1: you're listening to see, I'm just telling you the truth
Speaker 1: here because I am bucket. I cannot I cannot tell
Speaker 1: a lie. Most foreign policy analysis is interesting. Maybe you
Speaker 1: learn some stuff, but does it end up being correct
Speaker 1: or not? People don't really pay attention. A lot of
Speaker 1: people go on TV that have been wrong on foreign policy, wrong, wrong,
Speaker 1: all along, that's really their calling card. There are some
Speaker 1: folks that even have had the ear of previous administrations
Speaker 1: on foreign policy, and I I'm just like, you don't
Speaker 1: want to listen to that guy or gal always wrong.
Speaker 1: I think you can put John Kerry in that category.
Speaker 1: But it's actually useful though, because once you established someone
Speaker 1: so consistently wrong on foreign policy, you're like, well, I
Speaker 1: just know that whatever he's saying is what I don't
Speaker 1: want to do. And on your on Iran and North Korea,
Speaker 1: we're gonna get into some of this. So it is interesting.
Speaker 1: It does affect us if we had a take military action.
Speaker 1: It's North Korea that's obviously very scary and could have
Speaker 1: big ramifications beyond that could spook the markets a whole lot.
Speaker 1: Who knows. I don't think we're heading in that direction
Speaker 1: right now, that's possible. The Iran deal is well when
Speaker 1: you look at it beyond just the nuclear issue with
Speaker 1: Iran and see it as trying to constrain Iranian aggression.
Speaker 1: Now we're talking about an expansionism and really the revival
Speaker 1: of a or you could say, the creation of a
Speaker 1: Shia crescent of power. One of the things that's happening
Speaker 1: right now in the Middle East is you have a
Speaker 1: Sunni Shia civil war that's playing out in a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of different countries, and it's not thought of in
Speaker 1: that way because usually it's within the context of a
Speaker 1: national of a national struggle. Right, So in Syria we
Speaker 1: think of the Syrian Civil War. In Yemen we think
Speaker 1: of the you know, Yumani civil war or whatever we're
Speaker 1: calling some of these struggles. Now, you know, in Iraq
Speaker 1: we've got the insurgency, and but when you really peel
Speaker 1: back the layers and look at what's going on, guess
Speaker 1: what one of the primary dividing lines is between Assad
Speaker 1: and his side and the insurgents and jihadists and all
Speaker 1: the rest on the other side. Sad is Shia is
Speaker 1: Shia alla white, but and the rest of the country
Speaker 1: that is opposed to him are Sunni Muslims. When you
Speaker 1: look at what's going on in Iraq Sunni Shia civil wars,
Speaker 1: there's one of the very scary things that we're trying
Speaker 1: to prevent from happening. But the Al qaeda Ji hottest
Speaker 1: or the iss Gi hottests are are Sunnies, and the
Speaker 1: militias that fight against them are Shia. So that's always
Speaker 1: bubbling beneath the surface, same thing. And yeah, you're getting
Speaker 1: my point right, you're catching my drift. Plus there's a
Speaker 1: Sunni Shia problem in Saudi Arabia. And then on top
Speaker 1: of all that you have the Major Saudi States which
Speaker 1: is really South I'm sorry, Major Sunni States, which is
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia, and it's UH and its Gulf allies against Iran.
Speaker 1: That's now the great Mideast power struggle that's going on,
Speaker 1: and we have interests in this primarily for security reasons.
Speaker 1: Twenty or thirty years ago, we would have been like, whoa,
Speaker 1: we we gotta worry about this because of the Straits
Speaker 1: of Horror moves something like UH. I think even ten
Speaker 1: years ago you might have had or thirty pc of
Speaker 1: the world's oil supply moving through the Straits of Horror moves.
Speaker 1: One of the concerns was that the Iranians, with pretty
Speaker 1: straight with with easy UH missile capacity, they just start
Speaker 1: shutting it down and blowing up oil tankers. These these
Speaker 1: are the theories and the threats that people have had
Speaker 1: for a long time. Well thanks to domestic American energy production,
Speaker 1: the shale oil revolution, which has been probably the single
Speaker 1: greatest foreign policy windfall that we've had in this country.
Speaker 1: In the post nine eleven era, we're a whole lot
Speaker 1: less on edge about what goes on in the Middle
Speaker 1: East from an energy perspective, because we're like, you know what,
Speaker 1: We're actually an energy superpower, so we're trending in the
Speaker 1: right direction on that. One's price of gas is very low.
Speaker 1: It also means those countries like Iran have a whole
Speaker 1: lot less cash to throw around for fancy planes and
Speaker 1: very big missiles that go boom. Uh. So these are
Speaker 1: all the problems that we have to look at right
Speaker 1: now in the Mid East. But it's the it's a
Speaker 1: lens that is shifting over time. It's not quite what
Speaker 1: it was in the early days, say of the first
Speaker 1: Bush are the second president Bush, but its first administration.
Speaker 1: Trump's looking at the Iran deal, and he's looking at
Speaker 1: in that context. He sees this as a series of
Speaker 1: interrelated problems going on in the Middle East. It just
Speaker 1: seems that no matter where you go, especially in the
Speaker 1: Middle East, Iran is behind it. The Iran Deal is
Speaker 1: a disaster. They're testing missiles and what is that all about?
Speaker 1: You look at the ballistic missiles that they're going and testing.
Speaker 1: What kind of a deal is it where you're allowed
Speaker 1: to test missiles all over the place. What kind of
Speaker 1: a deal is it when you don't talk about Yemen
Speaker 1: and you don't talk about all of the other problems
Speaker 1: that we have with respect to Irana, especially look at
Speaker 1: what they're doing in Iraq. And I know John Kerry
Speaker 1: made the statement that he didn't want to discuss other
Speaker 1: things while he was making the deal, to spite all
Speaker 1: of the money that we gave them, he didn't want
Speaker 1: to discuss it because it was too complicated. That's not
Speaker 1: the way to do it, because it was too complicated.
Speaker 1: So we made this terrible deal, but we'll be discussing it.
Speaker 1: Big problems that not just Trump but all those of
Speaker 1: us who have been, including myself, opposed to the Iran
Speaker 1: deal are It doesn't touch conventional missiles, which are quite
Speaker 1: a big problem. If their missile program gets to a
Speaker 1: very advanced level, it means that were they to get
Speaker 1: breakout nuclear capability, they can marry those two programs together
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, now you got big issues.
Speaker 1: Plus the Iranians can export they're increasingly advanced conventional missile
Speaker 1: technology to a whole bunch of bad actors, including it's
Speaker 1: proxies that could come after us in Iraq, but also
Speaker 1: it's proxies that have currently encircled the state of Israel.
Speaker 1: Right If you look at a map right now in
Speaker 1: the Middle East, if you look at Israel, you have
Speaker 1: Hezbollah in a Ani in proxy to the north of
Speaker 1: Israel and Lebanon with missiles pointed at Israel. Assad a
Speaker 1: client regime of the Iranians with I don't know if
Speaker 1: they're pointing their missiles at Israel right now, if they
Speaker 1: know what's good for them, but you know they are
Speaker 1: obviously a hostile towards the Israeli state. And then in
Speaker 1: Gaza Hamas, which despite being a Sunni Muslim entity, is
Speaker 1: also a client. Although there's been some bad blood. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know they're fighting about the Shia Iranians and the
Speaker 1: Sunni members of Hamas in Gaza. They've got some problems,
Speaker 1: but the one thing that unites them, and I don't
Speaker 1: say this in in a glib fashion, it's really true.
Speaker 1: Is their hatred of Jews and Israel, right, That's what
Speaker 1: keeps Hamas and Iran, the state of Iran, willing to
Speaker 1: work together because they hate his Room more than anything else.
Speaker 1: So that's why we have to worry about their conventional
Speaker 1: nuclear I'm sorry, conventional missile technologies. There's also a lack
Speaker 1: of inspection into some of their military facilities, which the
Speaker 1: iranience have said that's a no go. But guess what
Speaker 1: if they have military facilities that we can't see, well,
Speaker 1: how do we know what they're doing? It's pretty straightforward.
Speaker 1: And then finally the sun setting of this at the
Speaker 1: end of the current deal framework, Iran can basically say, okay,
Speaker 1: we're out. You know now we can do what we
Speaker 1: want and they will be richer and better place and
Speaker 1: have an economy that is much more enmeshed with the
Speaker 1: regional and global economy at that point, which means that
Speaker 1: there are more ways they can hurt us, and also
Speaker 1: hurting them will have greater ramifications if there was a need,
Speaker 1: let's say, to go in there and strike, which is
Speaker 1: still something that we could see happening at some point
Speaker 1: still something that could be going on. I'm I'm hoping
Speaker 1: that it doesn't. I don't want there to be. I
Speaker 1: think it would be a mistake unless we were in
Speaker 1: an absolutely last resort, extreme situation. I think a regime
Speaker 1: change in Iran is a nightmare in the making if
Speaker 1: that became US policy. But I can't say it's not possible.
Speaker 1: We know it is so. But those are the big
Speaker 1: problems that they have with the deal. And Trump obviously
Speaker 1: also has a certain hostility to the Iranian regime, which
Speaker 1: is is understandable. We've really had some substantive talks on Iran,
Speaker 1: maybe more than anything else, and we're looking forward to
Speaker 1: doing something. But it has to be done, and it
Speaker 1: has to be done strongly, and they've very much been
Speaker 1: butchers and we can't allow that to happen. And I
Speaker 1: think our meeting are our one on one went very
Speaker 1: very well. I hope you feel the same way. He's
Speaker 1: speaking of m Krans there mentioned him the beginning. I
Speaker 1: feel like we should give the the President of France
Speaker 1: a little bit more attention here in this open a segment.
Speaker 1: He is the reason for this fancy state visit, that
Speaker 1: is going on with all the pomp and circumstance, and
Speaker 1: he he had some interesting comments actually on the Middle East.
Speaker 1: You know, he's it's interesting the way it's talked about
Speaker 1: is is mccron is respected by Trump macrons. He's got
Speaker 1: a business packer. I think he was an eye banker,
Speaker 1: investment banker. Whereas Merkele is like, Donald, why don't you
Speaker 1: return my phone calls? I thought we had something special.
Speaker 1: I thought we'd be allies since he you know the
Speaker 1: things that we're working on, and he's like Angela, sorry,
Speaker 1: they haven't got no time for you. He's not a
Speaker 1: fan of Merkel. We all know this, and she's supposed
Speaker 1: to be the one really leading the EU block of nations.
Speaker 1: Whereas mccron he speaks Trump's language a little bit more,
Speaker 1: not French, but he speaks he speaks in a way
Speaker 1: that Trump I think and can can get behind some
Speaker 1: of it. And and here's what he said about the middies,
Speaker 1: because I want to get his perspective on this too.
Speaker 1: And Randall is an important Huma will discuss about that.
Speaker 1: But we have to take it as a part of
Speaker 1: the broader picture, which is security in the over origin.
Speaker 1: And we have a certain situation. We have upcoming lasition
Speaker 1: in in Iraq. We have the stability to preserve for
Speaker 1: our allies since the origin and what we want to
Speaker 1: do is to contain the Iranian resident since the origin
Speaker 1: and dac Pure is part of this broader picture, part
Speaker 1: of a broader picture. They want to negotiate. If we
Speaker 1: don't negotiate through this, if we don't get some kind
Speaker 1: of an agreement with our allies, notably France and Germany,
Speaker 1: on how to deal with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Speaker 1: That's what the j c p o A is, which
Speaker 1: is the fancy foreign policy speak for the Iran deal,
Speaker 1: and it uh doesn't go forward. The Iranians are talking
Speaker 1: a lot of trash and what they're gonna do if
Speaker 1: we don't keep the deal as is in its totality, Well,
Speaker 1: what does that mean? I got a hint from Trump
Speaker 1: on that come back. And then also North Korea, Trump
Speaker 1: said that Kim Jong had been honorable, and I know
Speaker 1: the we're all they're all over that in the media,
Speaker 1: but let's put that in context. Let's look at what
Speaker 1: he actually said and what he meant him, what the
Speaker 1: purpose of the statement was. We will do all that
Speaker 1: and more coming right up start their nuclear program. We'll
Speaker 1: find out. You'll find out about that. It won't be
Speaker 1: so easy for them to restart. They're not gonna be
Speaker 1: restarting anything they restarted. They can have big problems, bigger
Speaker 1: than they've ever had before. And you can mark it down.
Speaker 1: They restart their nuclear program, they will have bigger problems
Speaker 1: than they have ever had before, Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Trump not messing around there saying, look, if the Iranians
Speaker 1: decided to get cute and try to play games with
Speaker 1: the nuclear program, there's gonna be uh, it's gonna be
Speaker 1: hell to pay. It's gonna be a big, as you're saying,
Speaker 1: a big problem. And he's trying to be as clear
Speaker 1: as he can on that. Um. I I wonder here
Speaker 1: how this is gonna go because I think that there's
Speaker 1: enough of it. There's an understanding among those of us
Speaker 1: who see what Trump's options are here that he's going
Speaker 1: to get a ton of heat from the left if
Speaker 1: he actually does anything to this deal. And it's not
Speaker 1: it's not really about Iran. That's what's so frustrating about it.
Speaker 1: Why you won't know the answer to this, Why will
Speaker 1: the left screen, bloody murder if Trump and the Democrats
Speaker 1: and the media and all the rest of the Trump
Speaker 1: does anything that throws the as they called the j
Speaker 1: c p o A, the Iran Deal. Of course, oh,
Speaker 1: I know, you know the answer, because it was Obama's
Speaker 1: only foreign policy legacy item. Not only is it Obama's
Speaker 1: only legacy item, he mortgaged the best of our Mid
Speaker 1: East policy in order to get the deal. In fact,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of evidence and reason to suggest that
Speaker 1: the Obama administration took a particularly delicate approach in Syria
Speaker 1: because and this is crazy, but get ready for it,
Speaker 1: they didn't want to upset our Iranian counterparts in the
Speaker 1: nuclear deal negotiations. Think about that. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: the Iranian state that for many of you listening I
Speaker 1: know who served in Iraq, you know exactly where I'm
Speaker 1: gonna go with This is the Iranian government that has
Speaker 1: the i r g C and the Coodes Force of
Speaker 1: the I r g C and Kasam Solomani running it
Speaker 1: and making sure that there are e f p s
Speaker 1: flown across Iran into Iraq to blow up our armored
Speaker 1: vehicles and kill our guys in Iraq as they're trying
Speaker 1: to stabilize that country. And this is an Iranian regime
Speaker 1: that has blood of American soldiers on its hands in
Speaker 1: recent years, and Obama didn't want to upset them because
Speaker 1: he wanted to get a nuclear deal. Didn't want to
Speaker 1: upset them in Syria as Syrias has got five hundres
Speaker 1: thousand people that die and then over the course of
Speaker 1: that conflict, most of them while Obama was president here
Speaker 1: and they just didn't want to touch it. So that's
Speaker 1: you have to remember that. A lot of the opposition, Sure,
Speaker 1: it's out of blind hatred of Trump. Right, anything Trump
Speaker 1: does is terrible. Right, Trump could find Trump could show
Speaker 1: up tomorrow will be like, hey, my secret program to
Speaker 1: cure cancer is work. That's the ah, look at him,
Speaker 1: waste money. He's terrible. But on the Iran deal, they're
Speaker 1: going to see this. The left, the Democrat media will
Speaker 1: see this as erasing Obama's foreign policy legacy. He's holding
Speaker 1: the line for America, buck sex in his back. We're
Speaker 1: having very good discussions con Gun on was He really
Speaker 1: has been very open and I think very honorable. From
Speaker 1: everything we're seeing now, a lot of promises have been
Speaker 1: made by North Korea over the years, but they've never
Speaker 1: been in this position. We have been very very tough
Speaker 1: for maximum pressure, which we have been very tough on
Speaker 1: uh as you know, trade, We've been very very tough
Speaker 1: at the border. Sanctions have been the toughest we've ever
Speaker 1: imposed on any country. It's not going to be fair
Speaker 1: and reasonable and good. I will unlike past administrations, I
Speaker 1: will leave the table. But I think we have a
Speaker 1: chance of doing something very special with respect to North Korea.
Speaker 1: You know what the media took from all that I
Speaker 1: saw it today. There there was a lot of attention
Speaker 1: to this. Trump says, Kim Jong un is honorable? How
Speaker 1: could he how could he be so thoughtless, so cruel,
Speaker 1: so one feeling looked? No one things. I mean, I
Speaker 1: mean literally, no one in this country thinks that Kim
Speaker 1: Jong un is an honorable guy in terms of the
Speaker 1: totality of what he's doing and done as the leader
Speaker 1: of North Korea. Yeah, it's it's gonna be tough to
Speaker 1: make the case someone's honorable when they have their half
Speaker 1: brother assassinated in an airport in Malaysia using v X. Yes,
Speaker 1: that's gonna be a tough one, right, Or if you're
Speaker 1: gonna have rivals at the upper reaches of the North
Speaker 1: Korean military executed by tying them to anti aircraft guns.
Speaker 1: That that's also you know, people are aware of these things. Yes,
Speaker 1: North Korea is a massive concentration camp where some are
Speaker 1: treated slightly better than others, but everyone's everyone's in the
Speaker 1: camp in one way or another. Trump wasn't saying Kim
Speaker 1: jong n is a great guy. Okay, he's not pulling
Speaker 1: a Dennis Rodman here. I remember when that happened. What
Speaker 1: he's saying is, so far Kim jong un has kept
Speaker 1: to what he said he would do. The big news here,
Speaker 1: after all this was that the North Koreans have agreed
Speaker 1: in at least in theory to de nuclearization or Trump
Speaker 1: spoke about this on North Korea. You said you believe
Speaker 1: in complete denuclearization. What does that mean exactly? It means
Speaker 1: they get rid of their nukes. Very simple. They get
Speaker 1: rid of their nukes, and nobody else would say it
Speaker 1: would be very easy for me to make a simple
Speaker 1: deal in claim victory. I don't want to do that.
Speaker 1: I want them to get rid of their nukes pretty straightforward.
Speaker 1: They get rid of their nukes, right, That's that's what
Speaker 1: d nuclearized means they got to give up the program.
Speaker 1: I don't think North Korea is ever going to do that. Well,
Speaker 1: we gotta try, because we have set up a to
Speaker 1: track future for ourselves here, whereby you have either impending
Speaker 1: military action at some point the future from the U. S.
Speaker 1: Maybe some ally is against North Korea to destroy their program.
Speaker 1: Who knows where that's gonna go, or this an aggressive
Speaker 1: diplomatic approach, which is what's going on here. On the
Speaker 1: point about Trump saying he's been honorable, and I think
Speaker 1: that it didn't last longer. They pushed this, Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: Trump said he's honorable, so terrible. I saw it. It It
Speaker 1: was I was somewhere today. I'm like, I'll just come
Speaker 1: I'll just come clean and tell you. I was getting
Speaker 1: my hair cut and they had MSNBC on, so I
Speaker 1: was seeing this. Oh my gosh, Trump said, the dictator
Speaker 1: of North Korea's being honorable. Go to heavens. Yeah, he
Speaker 1: didn't mean like he's a good guy. What he's saying
Speaker 1: is so far he's keeping his word in this whole thing.
Speaker 1: It reminds me also of how the media responds whatever
Speaker 1: Trump meets with Putin or there's anything relating to Russia.
Speaker 1: They're like, why didn't he tell Putin what an big,
Speaker 1: ugly meme bully he is, because he's the head of
Speaker 1: state with a lot of nuclear weapons and it's an
Speaker 1: important country, and we don't get to just pretend like
Speaker 1: Russia is not there and doesn't matter at all, and
Speaker 1: spitting in the face of a Russian premier is just
Speaker 1: first of all, it's not what an American presidents to do.
Speaker 1: And also it's it's not helpful, and first and foremost,
Speaker 1: the president is trying to get good outcomes. See, that's
Speaker 1: where there's a big disconnect with a lot of what
Speaker 1: the media thinks about all this stuff. You and I
Speaker 1: sit here and we're like, look, what's Trump accomplishing? What's
Speaker 1: he doing? Yeah, there's a part of this is narrative,
Speaker 1: the narrative fight, but also he accomplishes a lot there.
Speaker 1: He accomplishes a lot within the the the narrative struggle
Speaker 1: with the media. But I mean, on the policy side
Speaker 1: of things, what's he given us, what is he doing?
Speaker 1: What's he what has he done for us lately? And
Speaker 1: so I evaluate this, So his tone about Putin or
Speaker 1: his words about Kim Jong un is way less important
Speaker 1: to me than the outcome of these negotiations, which is
Speaker 1: what he's trying to do. This why it is his
Speaker 1: honorable Keep in mind, the same meat you folks today
Speaker 1: we were like, oh my gosh, you call them honorable?
Speaker 1: Were the ones who were saying nuclear war is gonna come?
Speaker 1: When Trump said this little rocket man, I love that man,
Speaker 1: Little rocket There we go, little rocket man. Remember that.
Speaker 1: You can go back and see it. That's why one
Speaker 1: of the reasons I love Twitter is for journalists, it
Speaker 1: gets them on the record with there, Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: I'm hysterical. I'm so freaked out, and then later on
Speaker 1: when they switch sides, you're like, wait a second. So
Speaker 1: when Trump was saying mean things about Kim Jong Owen,
Speaker 1: which was just a few months ago, with with with
Speaker 1: little rocket man and all the rest of it. And
Speaker 1: Trump is so good with the nicknames, by the way,
Speaker 1: he really is. I think that I'm pretty good with nicknames,
Speaker 1: Like I've given a fair amount of my friends nicknames
Speaker 1: that have stuck. I've even given a family member to
Speaker 1: nicknames that have now just become the way that we
Speaker 1: were for Like, I'm pretty good with the nicknames. Uh,
Speaker 1: But Trump is better. I'm like, you know, he he
Speaker 1: is straight up master of the Shallon Temple. And I'm like,
Speaker 1: I'm like a mid level you know. I mean, I
Speaker 1: can do some cool stuff, but he can do like
Speaker 1: the one inch punch in the death touch and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. Yeah, exactly, thank you, John. I didn't plan that.
Speaker 1: That was perfect. That's right. Sweep the leg. Frum knows.
Speaker 1: He knows what's up. So uh where where was that
Speaker 1: North Korea? Um? I think that he's doing. He's already
Speaker 1: gotten further with this. Just getting the North Korean leader
Speaker 1: to say that they'll didn't de nuclearize at this point
Speaker 1: is further along. And I think a lot of Trump's
Speaker 1: attractors would have said he would get And there is
Speaker 1: a panic. It's a quiet panic right now among the
Speaker 1: media elites, among the swampy types, the deep staters who
Speaker 1: still remain within the federal government, and certainly over it CNN,
Speaker 1: you know, over at seeing an MSNBC, at places they
Speaker 1: don't talk about at cocktail parties. They're feeling a little,
Speaker 1: you know, a little uneasy because what happens, I mean,
Speaker 1: just as a as a little fun thought experiment, folks,
Speaker 1: what happens if Trump succeeds and we get to the
Speaker 1: point where there are opening, verifiable steps to North Korea.
Speaker 1: You know what happens if if North Korea says, you
Speaker 1: know what, no more testing and we'll let you inspect
Speaker 1: our facilities and will continue. I mean, even just getting
Speaker 1: to that level. The media, they won't know what to
Speaker 1: do with themselves because we've been told all along, We
Speaker 1: have been told all along that Trump is on foreign
Speaker 1: policy more than any other issue out of his element.
Speaker 1: Doesn't get it, doesn't understand he's not, even though it's
Speaker 1: just funny, he's not some fancy type. The media always
Speaker 1: tells us he's not some you know, educated Harvard man.
Speaker 1: Well he went to Wharton, which is actually arguably the
Speaker 1: best business school in the world, and he's a billionaire
Speaker 1: and he's from New York City. But somehow, you know,
Speaker 1: they just always it's like we it's like we took
Speaker 1: someone who was a crossing guard before no offense to
Speaker 1: crossing guards necessary, you gotta keep the kids safe. But
Speaker 1: and elevated that person to being the president. They're like, oh,
Speaker 1: no experience whatsoever, can do anything at all. Well, it
Speaker 1: seems to me like he's getting further along this process
Speaker 1: than anybody would have thought at this point in time.
Speaker 1: But look, he he understands that. So I just wanted
Speaker 1: to put that out there for you. Just think about
Speaker 1: their reaction. I mean, I promise you on the day
Speaker 1: that if the day comes and I think it's a
Speaker 1: less than fifty fifty shot, I'm I'm not getting ahead
Speaker 1: of myself here. Look, Trump says, we gotta keep maximum
Speaker 1: pressure on. We're grateful for France's key partnership in our
Speaker 1: campaign of maximum pressure on the North Korean regime. As
Speaker 1: you know, I will soon be meeting with Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un as we seek a future of peace, harmony, and
Speaker 1: security for the whole Korean peninsula and in fact for
Speaker 1: the whole world. However, in pursuit of peace, we will
Speaker 1: not repeat the mistakes of past administrations. The campaign of
Speaker 1: maximum pressure will continue. And I just want to very
Speaker 1: clear here. He understands that this is still a long shot.
Speaker 1: He understands that there's plenty of ways that Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un may cheat, may break his word, this whole thing
Speaker 1: could fall by the wayside. That all said, I think
Speaker 1: there's also recognition that if he manages to do this,
Speaker 1: the media will be beside themselves. They are. And there's
Speaker 1: another way of saying, they're rooting against the end to
Speaker 1: the greatest nuclear threat the world faces right now. Don't
Speaker 1: forget that. A lot of these big name journalists, a
Speaker 1: lot of these TV platform, big j journalist guys are
Speaker 1: out there or or the print ones, the Washington Post,
Speaker 1: New York Times, and they're hoping that Trump fails in
Speaker 1: d nuclear rising the single most ferocious totalitarianism on the planet,
Speaker 1: that is the most aggressive military state in the world.
Speaker 1: They're rooting against him. They won't say it, but I'm
Speaker 1: telling you they are. And if the day comes when
Speaker 1: Trump is successful and the first steps are taking in
Speaker 1: this in this program, and he gets further along than
Speaker 1: any previous administration has ever in the era of a
Speaker 1: nuclear North Korea, even if he gets there, you know
Speaker 1: what they're gonna run on CNN all day, Stormy Daniels.
Speaker 1: Doesn't matter if there's no new news, you'll see a
Speaker 1: lot of Stormy Daniels photos over there. That's they already
Speaker 1: have it. They could run it like it's b roll,
Speaker 1: like it's in the background. They're just gonna be Yeah. Trump,
Speaker 1: Trump signed that historic agreement to d nuclearized North Korea.
Speaker 1: Let's put some stormy dannueals up there. They are utterly
Speaker 1: and completely feckless, feckless. I just just want to get that
Speaker 1: on the record now so when it happens, we can
Speaker 1: go back and play with roll tape, Buck roll tape,
Speaker 1: you know, we go back and play it. I see
Speaker 1: it coming, I know, I know how they operate on
Speaker 1: the other side. Ronnie Jackson. I don't know much about
Speaker 1: Ronnie Jackson, I'll be honest with you, but it looks
Speaker 1: like he's in some rough waters right now. I want
Speaker 1: to get into I want to get into this a
Speaker 1: little bit coming up here, and then I have some
Speaker 1: follow up for you on the Toronto attack yesterday. It
Speaker 1: looks like it wasn't terrorism, which a lot of us
Speaker 1: initially thought I thought it was. I thought it was
Speaker 1: likely terrorism. I said, likely the Islamic State. But remember
Speaker 1: how I went into that whole discussion about the guy's
Speaker 1: name and background, that there were some clues, there were
Speaker 1: some hints. So I want to deconstruct our now, our
Speaker 1: initial analysis and reactions here in the freedom hunt to
Speaker 1: the attack which killed ten people, the worst mass killing
Speaker 1: of its kind in Canada in a long time. If
Speaker 1: agein how many years. I'll break down some we'll do
Speaker 1: some analysis of that um in the next hour, and
Speaker 1: then I've just got a lot more show than we're
Speaker 1: gonna fit in today. Oh and uh, something that I
Speaker 1: know you're gonna want to hear two, but we'll probably
Speaker 1: say this for the third hour. The case of Alfie Evans,
Speaker 1: this three month old baby boy in the UK and
Speaker 1: the just atrocious actions of a hospital there and a
Speaker 1: judge in the UK National Health Service bureaucracy. They're saying, sorry,
Speaker 1: he's just the kids gotta the kid's gonna die when
Speaker 1: not only will we not help him, no one else,
Speaker 1: including the Pope, I kid you not the Pope himself
Speaker 1: not allowed to do anything to help this twenty three
Speaker 1: month old boys happening right now in the UK. It
Speaker 1: is a vision of what is coming to this country
Speaker 1: if the you know, if the Obama It's and the
Speaker 1: and the Sandernista's get their way. So remember, we'll get
Speaker 1: to that in the third hour. You will definitely want
Speaker 1: to hear that. So stay with me. So are you saying,
Speaker 1: Mr President, that you will stand behind him? So I
Speaker 1: would definitely stand behind him. He's a fine man. I'll
Speaker 1: always stand behind him. I'd let it be his choice.
Speaker 1: But he's a man who has just been an extraordinary
Speaker 1: person his family, extraordinary success, great doctor, great everything, and
Speaker 1: he has to listen to the abuse that he has to.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't if I were him. Actually, in many ways,
Speaker 1: I'd love to be him, But the fact is I
Speaker 1: wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it. What does he
Speaker 1: need it for to be abused by a bunch of
Speaker 1: politicians that aren't thinking nicely about our country. I really
Speaker 1: don't think personally he should do it, but it's totally
Speaker 1: his I would stand behind him, totally his decision. So
Speaker 1: Ronnie Jackson's Trump's nominee for Veterans Secretary Veterans Affair Secretary
Speaker 1: at the A. And there's been some reports out there
Speaker 1: that and I think at this point, right producer Mike unverified,
Speaker 1: it's we don't know, right which allegations, Well, we don't,
Speaker 1: it's just out there. It's being reported by news sources
Speaker 1: that what is he's a rear? Is he rear admiral?
Speaker 1: I think is his ranking rear Admiral Jackson his Navy man,
Speaker 1: also obviously an m D and has been a physician
Speaker 1: to numerous presidents and was very well respected in that role.
Speaker 1: But now he's going to be associate with the Trump administrations.
Speaker 1: So all of a sudden, now the long knives come out,
Speaker 1: so to speak. Right now they want to tear this
Speaker 1: guy down. The press is going after him and they're
Speaker 1: saying that Ronnie Jackson is Ah, you know, he's given
Speaker 1: a whole number of um, he's given a whole number
Speaker 1: of elicit prescriptions out of something improper dispensing. I forget
Speaker 1: what the specific charges basically given our prescription drugs is
Speaker 1: not supposed to, which I mean, he's a doctor, so
Speaker 1: I'm assuming who knows what that even really? What they
Speaker 1: even mean by that drinking on the job, I mean
Speaker 1: we all know what that means. I don't know if
Speaker 1: he did it or not, but that's what the l
Speaker 1: And then hostile work environment stuff, which whenever someone and
Speaker 1: that's that's flimsy. I can tell you this having bid
Speaker 1: through some of these discussions and actually been around some
Speaker 1: internal investigations about hostile work stuff. Whatever, someone says that
Speaker 1: someone's created a hostile work environment. Uh, if if it's legit,
Speaker 1: there's usually a story attached to it, right, So there's
Speaker 1: hostile work environment where you just you're, oh, this guy
Speaker 1: created a hostile work environment, and then it will come
Speaker 1: out that you know, he makes like occasionally inappropriate knock
Speaker 1: knock jokes or something, and you're like, oh, I don't
Speaker 1: think that that should derail this person's career if it's
Speaker 1: a real hostile work environment. Though you'll you'll hear it's
Speaker 1: a hostile work environment occasionally this person gets angry and
Speaker 1: like throws reasonably heavy objects at members of the staff,
Speaker 1: and you're like, oh, hostile work environment, right, So usually
Speaker 1: the story is attached to it right away if it's bad.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying always, I'm just saying that in my experience,
Speaker 1: it's you don't have to guess whether or not it's
Speaker 1: it's hostile if it really is, because people know and
Speaker 1: they want to They want it to be talked about,
Speaker 1: and they wanted to be known. So we'll have to see.
Speaker 1: But you know, I I withhold judgment on this too,
Speaker 1: because I agree with what Trump said. I would never people.
Speaker 1: Sometimes some of you are way too kind. You you
Speaker 1: will write me occasionally a few of you have a
Speaker 1: lot of you are like buck, please, we know you're
Speaker 1: not gonna do that would you ever run for office?
Speaker 1: And there's no no interest, never want to do it. Uh,
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter what position I were in it. I
Speaker 1: just don't want to do it. I have no interest
Speaker 1: in ever doing it, won't do it. And and I
Speaker 1: feel badly saying that though, because it's just in response
Speaker 1: to I don't want to ruin my life. I like
Speaker 1: my life and I don't need people trying to, including
Speaker 1: lying about me and everything else to try to tear
Speaker 1: me down. And it's tough to know what's just the
Speaker 1: media doing a hit job on somebody with whether it's
Speaker 1: Ronnie Jackson or Scott Pruett another person who is right
Speaker 1: in the sights of the media right now, and when
Speaker 1: someone's actually you know, Harriet Myers in the making some
Speaker 1: but who's really not the right choice, not up to
Speaker 1: the task. I don't know. With Ronnie Jackson, I don't
Speaker 1: know what they said about him is true, But I
Speaker 1: do know the media is a bunch of smear merchants
Speaker 1: and they destroy people. So I gotta keep that in mind.
Speaker 1: Or talking about the Toronto attacking, update to that coming
Speaker 1: up buck Sexton mission decoding the news and disseminating information
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistakes, American, You're a great
Speaker 1: American Again. This is the Bucks Sexton Show. Analysts. No,
Speaker 1: we have all watched in horror in the aftermath of
Speaker 1: attacks on innocent cities in other cities around the world.
Speaker 1: It is something for which our police and our city
Speaker 1: staff and all the other first line responders here in
Speaker 1: Toronto have prepared. But it's not a moment that you
Speaker 1: ever believe will happen in the city that we all
Speaker 1: call home. Yesterday, as we now know, ten were killed
Speaker 1: and fifteen injured in a horrific and deliberate attack near
Speaker 1: Young and Finch in the north part of our city.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Buck sex And Show. That was
Speaker 1: John Tory, the mayor of Toronto. Uh and um and
Speaker 1: uh we we know a little bit more about this
Speaker 1: attacker now. It was not It doesn't seem to be
Speaker 1: geohot is um because from what we know, the guy's
Speaker 1: not even a Muslim, which one would have to be
Speaker 1: as a precondition for being a jee Hottest. As you know,
Speaker 1: vast majority Muslims are je Hottest. But to be a
Speaker 1: geh Hottest, you have to be a Muslim. As I
Speaker 1: mentioned yesterday, his name is Armenian, so and Armenia is
Speaker 1: a ninety Christian country, so very you'd be very unusual
Speaker 1: if you have an Army Armenian name. I mean maybe
Speaker 1: you know his mom could have been There's all these
Speaker 1: different ways you could look at it at Also, you
Speaker 1: could have had someone and this is important for future reference.
Speaker 1: Whenever you see one of these terrorist attacks, there's people
Speaker 1: do this whole thing. Oh are you assuming because somebody's
Speaker 1: um Muslim and they're involved in an act like this,
Speaker 1: and this guy doesn't seem me Muslim, but you assume
Speaker 1: that they're now it's Jihaddi is um. Well, actually, even
Speaker 1: if they're not from a are part of the world
Speaker 1: that you think of as Islamic, if they're not Middle Eastern,
Speaker 1: there have been Hispanic gee Hottest, there are Caucasian gee hottest.
Speaker 1: There there are people from all different arts that you
Speaker 1: know there are, there are Thai gee Hottest, there are
Speaker 1: Filipino gee hottest. So it's not an ethnicity based thing.
Speaker 1: So you always have to remember that. It's just a
Speaker 1: question of looking at the percentages in the early stages.
Speaker 1: But so the guy's name is as they said, it's
Speaker 1: our Armenian and so doesn't it would be unlikely unless
Speaker 1: he had radicalized, unlikely that he was doing this on
Speaker 1: behalf of the Islamic State or something like that. Turns
Speaker 1: out that inclination that I had seems to be correct.
Speaker 1: H He killed ten because one of those wounded UH
Speaker 1: died in the hospital, four injured, fourteen And from what
Speaker 1: we understand of of him so far, based on the
Speaker 1: initial run throughs of his social media profile and of
Speaker 1: his well, just what we know about this Alec Menascian,
Speaker 1: he was a psychopathic loser who was a psychopathic loser.
Speaker 1: UM had some affinity for that guy. I'm actually Elliott Roger,
Speaker 1: who was the Santa Barbara shooter. Who was this guy
Speaker 1: who thought he was you remember this guy? He made
Speaker 1: these videos back in that's a few years ago. He
Speaker 1: made these videos about how he, you know, he basically
Speaker 1: couldn't get a girl and he was so awesome and
Speaker 1: all these Cretans would get all the beautiful girls that
Speaker 1: were meant for him, and he had essentially become this deluded, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, sexually incompetent lunatic. And he went around on
Speaker 1: this murder spree, the shooting spree, and he tried he
Speaker 1: gunned down six people at the University of California Santa
Speaker 1: Barbara before he killed himself. I believe he was the one.
Speaker 1: Mike wasn't the one who tried to get into a
Speaker 1: sorority but like the door was locked or something. But
Speaker 1: he wanted to go in a killing spree in a
Speaker 1: sorority you see, Santa Barbara, because he was angry that
Speaker 1: women don't like him. So this is another another type,
Speaker 1: another archetype, if you will, of the psychopath here, of
Speaker 1: the sexually frustrated, malignant, narcissist psychopath. Right, somebody who's just
Speaker 1: and it is deluded and feels like everything is so
Speaker 1: unfair and just becomes consumed with rage and and becomes
Speaker 1: becomes evil. Seems. That's what um, that's what Manascian says.
Speaker 1: He in one post on social media, according to Daily Mail,
Speaker 1: here he referred to the rebellion of in cells. Never
Speaker 1: heard of this before, a term used to refer to
Speaker 1: men who have been made involuntarily celibate because women will
Speaker 1: not have sex with them. So this guy couldn't, you know,
Speaker 1: couldn't get any women to sleep with him, and so
Speaker 1: he went out on this murder spreed. It seems that guy,
Speaker 1: I know, it's it seems that's what we've got here.
Speaker 1: I don't know what greater complexity we could add to it.
Speaker 1: I don't know what else there is to to say
Speaker 1: about it at this point other than how appalling and
Speaker 1: evil and disgusting can a human being? Can a human
Speaker 1: being be? Um? You know, he clearly has deep um
Speaker 1: on deep psychological deficiencies. I mean, he's mentally obviously mentally
Speaker 1: ill in a profound way. But this is something that
Speaker 1: we've seen now a couple of at least a couple
Speaker 1: of times. I also think that it manifests itself in
Speaker 1: societies is a little bit of a different discussion. But
Speaker 1: extreme violence, uh does become a a particular problem in
Speaker 1: society where there's a tremendous amount of sexual repression. Places
Speaker 1: where there is a lot of sexual repression are always
Speaker 1: deeply unhappy, and and you tend to have extremes of
Speaker 1: extremes of violence. It's obviously true and parts of the
Speaker 1: world ruled by his long fundamentalism, but not just there
Speaker 1: are other places too, So this is one of those
Speaker 1: cases where and by the way, it's important. This is
Speaker 1: why we don't say, oh, it's clearly isis. This is
Speaker 1: why I said yesterday isis hasn't said it is. We
Speaker 1: we look at this as as a as a function
Speaker 1: of percentages that is likely but can't confirm. But it
Speaker 1: looks like And the reason we don't confirm the reason
Speaker 1: I tell you we gotta see, we gotta get more facts.
Speaker 1: And I was on Shannon Breamshell last night in Fox.
Speaker 1: I said, look, we just don't have the data right
Speaker 1: now as a function of probabilities that looks like it's
Speaker 1: isis inspired. But that's the difference in saying it is
Speaker 1: and it looks like or it is and and this
Speaker 1: is the early stage. And also note though you see
Speaker 1: when you when you put it in those terms, and
Speaker 1: we because you always get in this political fight over all,
Speaker 1: do we you know, are you jumping to conclusions about
Speaker 1: whether it's terrorism or jumping to conclusions about whether it's
Speaker 1: Islamic terrorism. I think we work with what we know
Speaker 1: when we know it. I don't think we pretend to
Speaker 1: know less than we do just because we don't want
Speaker 1: feelings to be heard. And if we get if we
Speaker 1: get ahead of where or if we get it wrong
Speaker 1: on in an analytic sense, as long as we're basically
Speaker 1: on the fact. Well, then you adjust the analysis. It's
Speaker 1: not that hard, right, it's not that crazy as to
Speaker 1: how we should cover these events, how we should think
Speaker 1: about them. Um, and here we have this twenty five
Speaker 1: year old guy who just saw it, clearly is aware
Speaker 1: of how I has inspired attacks using vehicles have gone on,
Speaker 1: and this is a big threat. What what do you do?
Speaker 1: A very frustrating question. Understandable question, but a frustrating question
Speaker 1: that I get one who's worked in counter terrorism in
Speaker 1: the past. People will say, well, you know, and I've
Speaker 1: been in these discussions. I've sat there in conference rooms
Speaker 1: in CTC of the c I of the counter Terrorism Center,
Speaker 1: and you know, how do we prevent this? How do
Speaker 1: we stop that? How do we work against this? And
Speaker 1: with vehicle attacks, you gotta you gotta stop that. You
Speaker 1: gotta stop the attack before it's an attack. That's the
Speaker 1: only way. That is the only method there is for
Speaker 1: finding out, finding out a an attacker, or stopping it
Speaker 1: before it actually happens. So I don't have much more
Speaker 1: for you on the Toronto attack at this point other
Speaker 1: than disguise. Seems like a psycho who couldn't get a girlfriend, right,
Speaker 1: and just it just was full of hatred and and
Speaker 1: overcome with envy and rage. And you know, if you
Speaker 1: want to kill a bunch of people, a car is
Speaker 1: every bit is effective as any firearm that you'll find,
Speaker 1: if you know, if you're playing this out and you
Speaker 1: know the area. And yeah, so Terril Day for Canada,
Speaker 1: feel badly for our Canadian brothers and sisters up north,
Speaker 1: and uh thoughts and prayers. But I don't have any
Speaker 1: analysis for how we can stop it, because honestly, no
Speaker 1: one does. If you see people going on, oh, we
Speaker 1: know how to stop this, no they don't. Okay, there's
Speaker 1: no way to stop this other than find the person
Speaker 1: as they're radicalizing and whatever their ideology is, and take
Speaker 1: them off the street, prevent them from being able to
Speaker 1: get behind the wheel of a car before they try
Speaker 1: to do it. Once they're in that car, you're in
Speaker 1: casualty mitigation instead of casualty elimination. So that's what I
Speaker 1: have for you on the Toronto attack. If there's more,
Speaker 1: I'll certainly go to it. But guys an evil loser.
Speaker 1: I think that's as close to the accurate description of
Speaker 1: them as we can have. You know, here's a story
Speaker 1: courtesy of our friends over at the Daily Wire that
Speaker 1: no surprise, mainstream media didn't didn't want to spend much
Speaker 1: time on um. But you know there's a Parkland survivor
Speaker 1: that they also generally don't want to spend much time on. Uh,
Speaker 1: Kyle Cashev, who is pro Second Amendment but also wants
Speaker 1: to I believe he has an app He's come up
Speaker 1: with some very proactive steps to try and help stop
Speaker 1: a school shooting. And Kyle's gotten some attention, but not
Speaker 1: nearly the same degree of platform, on the same level
Speaker 1: of platform. That's a uh. Some of the David Hogg
Speaker 1: and some of the others have been given by the media, why,
Speaker 1: of course, because he's not saying what they want him
Speaker 1: to say. But this was this was just astonishing, It
Speaker 1: really was. This just happened on Friday, so a few
Speaker 1: days ago. Kyle, on his Twitter account wrote the following,
Speaker 1: It was great learning about our inaliable right of a
Speaker 1: Second Amendment and how to properly use a gun. This
Speaker 1: was my first time ever touching a gun, and it
Speaker 1: made me appreciate the Constitution even more. My instructor was
Speaker 1: very informative. I learned a lot the second Amendment is
Speaker 1: important and we need to preserve it. So he's at
Speaker 1: a shooting range, obviously everything is completely legal, getting instruction
Speaker 1: from a from a trained personnel, and he's learning about firearms.
Speaker 1: You know this guy, Kyle kash Of, this young man
Speaker 1: who was at the park at the Parkland, UH school
Speaker 1: shooting and his dad's there with him, and a lot
Speaker 1: of you were like, yeah, buck there with a family
Speaker 1: member at a gun range. I call this Saturday. But
Speaker 1: if you are Kyle cash Of, Uh, it's a problem.
Speaker 1: All of a sudden, here's what the Daily Wire rights.
Speaker 1: Cash Of was quickly called out. We're visiting the gun
Speaker 1: range and posting about it by bunch of students at
Speaker 1: Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School. But that wasn't the end
Speaker 1: of the story. When Kyle went to school on Monday,
Speaker 1: his principle informed him that other students had been upset
Speaker 1: by his posts, but that he hadn't done anything wrong.
Speaker 1: According to Kyle, in the minting the middle of the morning,
Speaker 1: events took a different turn. Quote near the end of
Speaker 1: this is from Kyle Cashimo is what he wrote on
Speaker 1: I guess on Facebook. Near the end of third period,
Speaker 1: my teacher got a call from the office saying I
Speaker 1: need to go down and see Mr Greenleaf. I didn't
Speaker 1: know Mr Greenleaf, but it turned out he was an
Speaker 1: armed school resource officer. I went down and found him.
Speaker 1: He escorted me to his office. Then a second security
Speaker 1: officer walked in and sat behind me. Both began questioning
Speaker 1: me intensely. First, they began berating my tweet, although neither
Speaker 1: of them had read it. Then they began aggressively asking
Speaker 1: questions about who I went to the range, whose gun
Speaker 1: we use, and about my father. They were incredibly condescending
Speaker 1: and rude. Then a third officer from the Broward County
Speaker 1: Sheriff's office walked in and began asking me the same
Speaker 1: questions again. At that point, I asked whether I could
Speaker 1: record the interview. They said no. I asked if I
Speaker 1: had done anything wrong again they answered no. I asked
Speaker 1: why I was there. One said, don't get snappy with me.
Speaker 1: Do you not remember what happened a few months ago?
Speaker 1: They continued to question me aggressively, though they could cite
Speaker 1: nothing I had done wrong, They kept calling me the
Speaker 1: pro Second Amendment kid. I was shocked and honestly scared.
Speaker 1: It definitely felt like they were trying to intimidate me.
Speaker 1: I was treated like a criminal for no reason other
Speaker 1: than having gone to the gun range and posted about
Speaker 1: it on social media. So that's the way they want
Speaker 1: the conversation to go. Now, that's the way they want
Speaker 1: the narrative to be. You know, if they want to
Speaker 1: ostracize gun owners, they want to treat people who are
Speaker 1: law abiding, lawful gun owners who go to a duly
Speaker 1: you know, uh, ensured and prepared range and you know,
Speaker 1: are shooting there that is now suspect. Remember, there's always
Speaker 1: different ways that they try to go about truncating your
Speaker 1: Second Amendment rights. They can't get it through the legislature,
Speaker 1: but they think they are winning the cultural fight against
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment more now than they have in a
Speaker 1: long time. They think that they can make guns not
Speaker 1: just uncool, but they also can bring people who use
Speaker 1: firearms under suspicion, make their lives more annoying, make their
Speaker 1: lives more difficult, And that has its own implications for
Speaker 1: what's possible via the legislature later on. You know, if
Speaker 1: they can make it that, you should be concerned as
Speaker 1: a parent taking your kid to the range, because your kid,
Speaker 1: as Kyle Cash of was Mike get pulled the side
Speaker 1: and said, what do you mean you're doing with the range?
Speaker 1: I mean, I think about I should probably post it
Speaker 1: on Facebook. I mean there are photos of me with
Speaker 1: my brothers and my dad. I think I'm twelve years old,
Speaker 1: maybe I'm ten, and you know we're out there, what
Speaker 1: are we holding up targets from the range? I mean
Speaker 1: I'm ten or eleven years old? You know. Yeah, my
Speaker 1: dad helped me hold that, you know, helped me hold
Speaker 1: the gun everything. It was like a bolt action twenty two.
Speaker 1: But you know, started at a young age. You learned
Speaker 1: firearms safety and nice uh you know, nice memories with
Speaker 1: pops and my brothers. I can't imagine what I would
Speaker 1: have thought if I as a young guy, especially well,
Speaker 1: I mean Cash it was like seventeen, I think, so
Speaker 1: he's a senior. But imagine if you were in uh
Speaker 1: in grade school, and all of a sudden, because you
Speaker 1: went shooting with your dad over the weekend, which exactly
Speaker 1: what Kyle Cash I did. You got brought in but
Speaker 1: to the principles office and there were dudes with guns
Speaker 1: there who are asking you all kinds of questions and
Speaker 1: so and from the police department. The sheriff's departments, and
Speaker 1: they're asking you questions too, would you would you maybe now?
Speaker 1: And a lot of your like, yeah, buck, bring it
Speaker 1: the police. You know, I'll be at that PTA meeting
Speaker 1: and you'll hear some stuff. I know. But I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: this is what they want. They want you to have
Speaker 1: to think about it. They want you to feel weird
Speaker 1: about it. And people who just don't want to deal
Speaker 1: with the hassle will be like, oh, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: you know, maybe I'll wait the kids a little older
Speaker 1: before I take them the range, or maybe I won't. Yeah.
Speaker 1: You see these stories about schools that discipline kids for
Speaker 1: using their fingers as a gun to go bang bang
Speaker 1: for cowboys and Indians and stuff. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: all It's all happening more and more, you know it.
Speaker 1: It infects the culture. This an anti gun animus comes
Speaker 1: at us from all these different ways. And and the
Speaker 1: reason they're so obsessed with it's nothing to do with
Speaker 1: gun violence, as I keep saying, And people get so
Speaker 1: angry at me for this, and that's why I know
Speaker 1: him right, it's not about gun violence. Because you can
Speaker 1: look at all the different studies and we can get
Speaker 1: our buddy John lott On, he can tell you the
Speaker 1: different statistics. It's about guns as a cultural marker for
Speaker 1: everything else. Right, if you support the Second Amendment, there's
Speaker 1: a very good chance it's you know, it's over seventy
Speaker 1: five probably that you also are you know, pro family,
Speaker 1: pro life, Christian. You know, you got on the whole
Speaker 1: thing right, you go to church on Sunday. You know
Speaker 1: you're not a vegan. You know there's a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of things, good things. And if you are anti gunn
Speaker 1: you know, then you look, there's a whole other bunch
Speaker 1: of things you can kind of assume from that. Right,
Speaker 1: So it's become a central marker in the culture war,
Speaker 1: and that's why they're trying to come in from only
Speaker 1: different perspectives. But could you imagine if one of the
Speaker 1: Parkland kids, some of them have been saying outrageous stuff
Speaker 1: about how the n r A is. I don't even
Speaker 1: play it. There was a chance yesterday, producer, Mike, you
Speaker 1: see this. They were chanting. I guess it's down in
Speaker 1: San Francisco. You know, n r A, how many kids
Speaker 1: have you killed today? The answer is zero? But I
Speaker 1: don't know. Maybe they need to spend a little more
Speaker 1: time in math class or something, because they seem to
Speaker 1: keep repeating this chant at the behest of adults, and
Speaker 1: it's just you know, there their their usefulness is kind
Speaker 1: of passing as a as a political prop for the
Speaker 1: anti gun effort. But they're still gonna kind of put
Speaker 1: it out there. But Kyle Cashev doesn't get any invulnerability
Speaker 1: in the in the press, and in his own school.
Speaker 1: He can get harassed and brought in because he went
Speaker 1: for the crime which it's not a crime, of going
Speaker 1: to the range with his dad the fire and they
Speaker 1: are and learn about the Second Amendment. Just remember that's
Speaker 1: that's the way that the country is going in a
Speaker 1: whole lot of places right now. So we've gotta be
Speaker 1: vigilant about that. Um can they been Christian books in California?
Speaker 1: Not an idle question. We'll tackle that coming up, all right,
Speaker 1: welcome back. You may have seen this story about how
Speaker 1: Google has banned ads from a Christian publishing house due
Speaker 1: to its faith based content. Now we're trying to track
Speaker 1: this down. I want to look into this a little
Speaker 1: bit more, but it wouldn't surprise me that you have
Speaker 1: this kind of censorship going on in the past, it's
Speaker 1: been well what qualifies as hate speech. Now it's faith
Speaker 1: based content under scrutiny from the massive social media platforms
Speaker 1: and the titans of Silicon Valley. But it's not just
Speaker 1: private enterprise that's engaged in this kind of censorship. There's
Speaker 1: the very real threat of similar viewpoint discrimination from some
Speaker 1: state governments, one in particular California. We've got David French
Speaker 1: with us now. He is a senior writer a National Review.
Speaker 1: He's also an attorney and a veteran of the war
Speaker 1: in Iraq. David, great to have you. Thank you so
Speaker 1: much for joining us. Tell me about this premise that
Speaker 1: you've been out there trying to raise the alarm. I
Speaker 1: know people have been pushing back. You push right back.
Speaker 1: But what's going on with California possibly banning Christian books? Yeah?
Speaker 1: It well, so it's really a crazy story. So what
Speaker 1: California has is a consumer fraud statute, like you know
Speaker 1: virtually every other UH state and union does. And these
Speaker 1: are not controversial because fraud isn't protected speech on the
Speaker 1: First Amendment. Consumer fraud isn't protected speech under the First Amendment.
Speaker 1: So consumer fraud statutes are all well good and normal,
Speaker 1: and California is like most bands, the sale of goods
Speaker 1: and services um through various fraudulent means, which again that's
Speaker 1: all normal, but they've decided to try to amend the
Speaker 1: statute to change to add a new category that bans
Speaker 1: the sale of goods, which are good is anything that
Speaker 1: you can basically carry. It's like everything from a hunk
Speaker 1: of cheese to a book and services that are engaged
Speaker 1: in what they call sexual orientation chain effort. So this
Speaker 1: is very strange because it's a directly viewpoint related application
Speaker 1: of a consumer fraud statute. And then when you look
Speaker 1: at the definition of sexual orientation change efforts, it includes
Speaker 1: any effort to change behavior, sexual behavior, or gender identity.
Speaker 1: And so, in other words, if you've got a book
Speaker 1: and so or somebody is selling a book and its
Speaker 1: specifically arguing, say, for example, that if you have a
Speaker 1: nine year old is exhibiting signs of gender dysphoria, that
Speaker 1: you should not call a her by he or change
Speaker 1: her or his name or um have them, you know,
Speaker 1: change their desire to dress and clothing of the opposite gender.
Speaker 1: That that's consumer fraud, or that if you have somebody
Speaker 1: who's trying to leave a you know, a maybe a
Speaker 1: sexually active lifestyle and UM bringing their behavior in line
Speaker 1: with Christian teaching. That trying to assist them in that
Speaker 1: endeavor is consumer fraud. It's incredibly broad, and because it
Speaker 1: applies to goods, it would apply even to books that
Speaker 1: are used in that effort. And so it's it's one
Speaker 1: of the more alarming First Amendment UM threats I've seen
Speaker 1: in some time. We can can you explain to with
Speaker 1: David what does the California state legislature and so you're
Speaker 1: talking about what it could do? What do they intend
Speaker 1: to do with this? Are they trying to ban uh,
Speaker 1: like you know what programs that might be sold I
Speaker 1: don't know, d DVD s or online programs or something
Speaker 1: that can convince people that transgenderism is not real or something.
Speaker 1: What are they what's the intent of this California law. Well,
Speaker 1: if you listen to the authors of it, and they've
Speaker 1: written a very broad and badly written bill, they say
Speaker 1: that what they intend to do is ban reparative therapy
Speaker 1: for money. In other words, that nobody can charge money
Speaker 1: for what they call reparative therapy. And traditionally, reparative therapy
Speaker 1: is an idea that you can change someone's sexual orientation
Speaker 1: in the word in other words, they're they're romantic or
Speaker 1: sexual desire for a person of the same sex has
Speaker 1: been the traditional definition of of reparative therapy. But they've
Speaker 1: gone way beyond that traditional definition, even to arguments about
Speaker 1: behavior or to arguments about gender identity. And so what
Speaker 1: they did is they took this bill, which would be
Speaker 1: unconstitutional anyway, because you couldn't ban reparative therapy when you're
Speaker 1: dealing with, you know, adults who are who are seeking
Speaker 1: that kind of uh, that kind of counseling, um, knowing
Speaker 1: full well what it is and what you know and
Speaker 1: what the risks are, if any. And so they've taken
Speaker 1: something that they advertise as quite limited to this reparative
Speaker 1: therapy for profit or for money, and they've actually applied
Speaker 1: it to a sweeping category of speech that includes just
Speaker 1: standard argument it's about Christian sexual morality. Speaking of David Franch,
Speaker 1: she's a senior writer for National Review. Check out his
Speaker 1: latest on National review dot com. He's also a veteran,
Speaker 1: a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Uh, David, have they
Speaker 1: left this lawso open ended in your estimation and you're
Speaker 1: also an attorney in California, with the idea that they
Speaker 1: will narrow it or do you think that they kind
Speaker 1: of like leaving it out there for interpretation and maybe
Speaker 1: they'll expand the scope of their authority a little bit. Well,
Speaker 1: I think they're leaving it out there intentionally because they
Speaker 1: have been warned about this amply in testimony in front
Speaker 1: of the California Assembly that people have been sounding the alarm,
Speaker 1: So they know the sweeping scope at this But what's
Speaker 1: so alarming is they're deceiving the public when they try
Speaker 1: to explain it. But every now and then, some of
Speaker 1: these guys are actually saying what they mean. For example,
Speaker 1: there was in a California legislature on the Assembly floor
Speaker 1: in the debate over the bill who said that Christian
Speaker 1: beliefs need to evolve with the times. Well, he's certainly
Speaker 1: free as a citizen to argue that Christian beliefs should
Speaker 1: quote evolve with the times. But the state of California
Speaker 1: does not have the constitutional authority to force Christian beliefs
Speaker 1: to evolve with the times. But again, this is a state.
Speaker 1: Let's let's not forget that just was in the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court last month. With oral arguments over their previous effort
Speaker 1: to force crisis pregnancy centers pro life crisis pregnancy centers
Speaker 1: to advertise for free and low cost abortion. So this
Speaker 1: is not a state that necessarily respects First Amendment rights
Speaker 1: when it conflicts with the sexual revolution. I want to
Speaker 1: ask you also about this piece from earlier this morning
Speaker 1: I sought up on Fox is making the rounds about
Speaker 1: the possibility of some conservative justices getting put on the
Speaker 1: Ninth Circuit or some of your friends in mine on
Speaker 1: TV or fur to it the Ninth Circus. Uh, do
Speaker 1: do you think that's you think that's gonna it's gonna
Speaker 1: happen and will not have a major impact. Well, it's
Speaker 1: gonna happen if if the president appoints in the Senate
Speaker 1: Um continues its prior practice of confirming all of his
Speaker 1: all of his qualified appointees. I mean, you know, one
Speaker 1: of the problems you have in the Ninth Circuit is
Speaker 1: you have some of these states with democratic senators, and
Speaker 1: there's been traditionally a deference to the senators in these states.
Speaker 1: But that traditional deference to senators has been predicated on
Speaker 1: good faith and a lot of the decisions to withhold
Speaker 1: senatorial approval of Republican nominees of late have not necessarily
Speaker 1: been in good faith, and so I think it's important
Speaker 1: for the Trump administration um to push through as many
Speaker 1: highly qualified judicial appointees as possible and as possible pick
Speaker 1: up the pace on it because we don't know what's
Speaker 1: going to happen in the mid term election. David coming
Speaker 1: up in just a few minutes, I'm gonna be addressing
Speaker 1: the Alphie Evans case. We've only got about a minute here,
Speaker 1: but I want to just get your take on on
Speaker 1: what you think about this case in the UK where
Speaker 1: twenty three month old boys being denied care and told
Speaker 1: his parents are being told no one's allowed to give
Speaker 1: him care. You know, it's it's vile. I mean, I've
Speaker 1: been having trouble following the story, not not because of inattention,
Speaker 1: but because it's so it's so dreadful, it's so heartbreaking.
Speaker 1: You just don't even want to read about it. It's
Speaker 1: so heartbreaking, and it just strikes you as malicious. It's
Speaker 1: just a raw exercise of state authority over a family.
Speaker 1: When here you have the Nation of Italy willing to
Speaker 1: provide care and so far the nation of Great Britain
Speaker 1: denying that opportunity. Why why it's not a loss of
Speaker 1: resources to Great Britain to allow Italy to care for
Speaker 1: this kid. It just seems like the raw exercise of power.
Speaker 1: And I promise you if if this country starts to
Speaker 1: go down the route of government controlled health care, um,
Speaker 1: we're not far behind. If that's what I want to
Speaker 1: her to know, We're not far behind this uh And
Speaker 1: and I agree with you, David. It's spiteful and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna get into the details. It's spiteful by the UK government.
Speaker 1: But everyone should read David's peace and this California bill
Speaker 1: take a look at it. They will ban Christian books
Speaker 1: that they can. David French, everybody Nashal reviewed. David, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for joining us. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. Dam we're gonna talk about this Alfie
Speaker 1: Evans case in just a few minutes, So stay right there,
Speaker 1: are you? Thank you very much. Stupid question, so anybody else,
Speaker 1: stupid question. We should have that as a drop by
Speaker 1: the way, stupid question. We should have it ready just
Speaker 1: in case, you know, someone calls in there getting a
Speaker 1: little sassy's dropped the keep John can we cut the
Speaker 1: just that part out for stupid question. I like that.
Speaker 1: So that was that was Trump today in response to, uh,
Speaker 1: what was that Jonathan carl of A. Usually, I see,
Speaker 1: I would have thought it was a Costa. I feel
Speaker 1: like a Costa is really carved out a good brand
Speaker 1: for being the most egregious and annoying anti Trump grand
Speaker 1: standard of the White House Press corps. So now you know,
Speaker 1: he's kind of the he's kind the first in class
Speaker 1: when it comes to being the most annoying guy in
Speaker 1: the West wing. You know, so I get a little
Speaker 1: surprised about somebody else. But before I get into the
Speaker 1: broader discussion, here about how much oh wait, that was
Speaker 1: a wait, that was a Trump slap. We should come
Speaker 1: up with a special noise for it. But let's use
Speaker 1: the buckslab for now, because it absolutely there you go,
Speaker 1: Trump slap. But think about how stupid that question is
Speaker 1: for a moment. This is a White House Press conference, okay,
Speaker 1: and you're there, You're getting paid real money. You're supposed
Speaker 1: to be a professionally supposed to know what the heck
Speaker 1: you're talking about, and yet here we are with a
Speaker 1: very uh he used to be didn't he used to
Speaker 1: be with Fox, Jonathan Carl Am I crazy? He's the
Speaker 1: ABC right now? Was he ever with Fox? I might?
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm confused now that's Carl Cameron. That's Carl Cameron
Speaker 1: is who that is? I'm getting him confused. Pardon me
Speaker 1: with that anyway. This guy is a you know, he's
Speaker 1: a he's a big j journalist. He's asking about consideration
Speaker 1: of a pardon for someone who has not even been
Speaker 1: charged with a crime. Now, now that's about as dumb
Speaker 1: a question as I think. I mean, Trump is right,
Speaker 1: it was a very, very dumb question. It's about as
Speaker 1: bad as it's gonna get. But just look at it
Speaker 1: as a perfect way to understand how they play the game.
Speaker 1: No reasonable person would ever come to the conclusion that
Speaker 1: you should ask the President United States if he's going
Speaker 1: to pardon someone use the presidential power of the pardon
Speaker 1: who has not even been charged with a crime. You know,
Speaker 1: this is even going beyond you know, it's it's instead
Speaker 1: of saying to somebody, when did you stop beating your wife,
Speaker 1: it's like, what did you do now that you have
Speaker 1: stopped beating your wife? Going forward? Right, It's just it
Speaker 1: takes it even deeper down the rabbit hole of of stupidity.
Speaker 1: So I'm glad that Trump gave him a slapdown. But
Speaker 1: it all goes in with this whole storyline that Variety,
Speaker 1: which is a magazine that I thought covered Hollywood right, doesn't.
Speaker 1: Isn't it mostly about Hollywood stuff movies? But Variety put
Speaker 1: out a piece inside the intense. I guess it's like
Speaker 1: Playboy there. You know, you come, you come for the
Speaker 1: the actors, and and you know you you you stay
Speaker 1: for the political analysis. You know, Playboy you they're they're
Speaker 1: actually some pretty good essayists that have been published in Playboy.
Speaker 1: So I am told, okay, not place. Come on. I
Speaker 1: grew up in the nineties, nobody was Playboy was like
Speaker 1: an artifact that people would we we'd hear stories about
Speaker 1: how like our dad's had this magazine and you know,
Speaker 1: didn't really exist, Um, although it did, you stay, they
Speaker 1: used to sell it. Look at how much America has changed.
Speaker 1: They used to sell Playboy magazine and Penthouse in the
Speaker 1: subway news stands. So there I'd be a little young buck,
Speaker 1: you know, twelve years old, and there's naked Booby staring
Speaker 1: at me. You know what I mean? What kind of
Speaker 1: world were we living in John and Mike you it
Speaker 1: was crazy, you know. I'm just trying to go to
Speaker 1: my little Catholic school and there's you know, Jenny McCarthy
Speaker 1: up there. Yeah, I remember that Jenny McCarthy up there
Speaker 1: on the news stand. I'm trying to find the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal, obviously, and my eyes are being misled to
Speaker 1: the cover of some magazine of of ill repute. Anyway,
Speaker 1: So the Variety has this piece inside the intense, combative
Speaker 1: world of covering the Trump White House, and I just
Speaker 1: have to laugh. I mean, there's all this stuff about
Speaker 1: how how hard it is for these correspondents in the
Speaker 1: White House, and how uh how how there's the it's
Speaker 1: basically a big pity party in this article. You've got
Speaker 1: a costa in the article, obviously, April Ryan Um, who's saying, quote,
Speaker 1: I actively get death threats just for asking a question.
Speaker 1: I have law enforcement on speed dial. Uh. You know,
Speaker 1: death threats are terrible and they're illegal. I can't think
Speaker 1: of a prominent conservative journalists I know who hasn't gotten
Speaker 1: death threats, and I know conservatives who have gotten attacked
Speaker 1: just for like actually physically attacked just for being conservative.
Speaker 1: But you see this highlighted on the left, not on
Speaker 1: the right. The whole notion though, that the White House
Speaker 1: Press Corps is in this state of siege, it's just
Speaker 1: complete nonsense. They are leveraging this for their brands. They
Speaker 1: are literally making money off of this. Uh. They're increasingly
Speaker 1: in a position where their social media accounts are getting
Speaker 1: more and more attention and they have greater leverage visa
Speaker 1: the other employers and more offers. And this is branded hansing.
Speaker 1: They want to be at the pinnacle of the hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance as journalists, but they also want to be victims
Speaker 1: at the same time. They wanted They wanted both ways.
Speaker 1: They want the public go, oh, it's so hard from
Speaker 1: Jim Acosta or to be up there asking tequurtion projative,
Speaker 1: but they also uh want yeah, that's right, Acosta, get
Speaker 1: in there, take it to him, show him who's boss
Speaker 1: against the President United States. Uh. There is nothing about
Speaker 1: Trump's media fights that at this point I'm I'm not
Speaker 1: kind of in favor. I think he's fighting with the
Speaker 1: media is one of the best things that he does.
Speaker 1: It is not just highly entertaining, and it absolutely is.
Speaker 1: I don't pretend that it's not it's incredibly entertaining. But
Speaker 1: on top of that, it for many of us who
Speaker 1: for eight years had to sit there mouth's wide open,
Speaker 1: eyes bleary with this belief as the press was gonna Obama. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're shredding the constitution and you're doing all kinds of
Speaker 1: things that you know, like pulling the phone records of
Speaker 1: journalists and throwing them in prison. But you're so wonderful
Speaker 1: and you're such a genius, and we just want to
Speaker 1: thank you for being such an amazing, wonderful genius. After
Speaker 1: eight years of that, to be in a position where
Speaker 1: that same press corps is now getting flying elbows from
Speaker 1: the top buckle, so to speak. Never never Back in
Speaker 1: the old days, I used to I watched a lot
Speaker 1: of w w F growing up. Now it's w w
Speaker 1: E remind I gotta watch The Honder of the Giant documentary.
Speaker 1: People say it's really good, total side note, non sequitor.
Speaker 1: But the press corps a bunch of whiny babies right now.
Speaker 1: If they think that what's going on with Trump is
Speaker 1: such a big deal, such a bad thing for them,
Speaker 1: we all know it's a good thing for them. It
Speaker 1: is career enhancing. If I were the rep which is
Speaker 1: uh insider you know, west coast speak or East coast
Speaker 1: speak too, sorry, coastal speak for being somebody's agent. If
Speaker 1: I were the REPS, I would be like, this is
Speaker 1: great for you. Keep it going because you're already not
Speaker 1: a journalist. You're a pundit pretending to be a journalist.
Speaker 1: Not the same thing. So I have I'm shedding no
Speaker 1: tears for them. Uh, no tears at all. Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: to coding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake American. You're a great American. Again is
Speaker 1: the buck Sexton show? Thomas Cia analysts. No, just talks
Speaker 1: of asylum hopefully being prepared. I can't guarantee anything, but
Speaker 1: he said that was right when I said that no
Speaker 1: one has the right to take any children away, or
Speaker 1: any anyone in general away from their loved ones, apart
Speaker 1: from God. The Pope realized, and I'm open the way
Speaker 1: they're realized. Just because you have a pole brain, it's
Speaker 1: kind of doesn't mean you have to die on the
Speaker 1: doctors say, so, we all die in our own way,
Speaker 1: and we'll all die naturally. And that's always one for
Speaker 1: my son, and that's always Kate vicious for you from
Speaker 1: to die in his own way, enough to be made
Speaker 1: at on to be suffocated by a hospital can't diagnose
Speaker 1: him and have failed him. That was Thomas Evans, the
Speaker 1: father of a twenty three month old baby boy, Alfhie Evans,
Speaker 1: who has a degenerative neurological disorder that has now brought
Speaker 1: him to a point where he perhaps has hours to live.
Speaker 1: He's been taken off of life support and we are
Speaker 1: at any moment now likely to hear that young Alphie
Speaker 1: has passed away. This is over the objections of his parents, however,
Speaker 1: who want to take him for emergency medical help at
Speaker 1: the Vatican's own pediatric hospital. The Vatican and the Pope
Speaker 1: have taken an interest in trying to help Alphie Evans,
Speaker 1: and the UK authorities British judges have decided that Alfhie
Speaker 1: Evans as parents, don't get the right to seek a
Speaker 1: cure or any help whatsoever for their son. According the
Speaker 1: UK earlier today decided that Alphie Evans has one right
Speaker 1: at this point, and one right only, and that is
Speaker 1: to die. It's a deeply troubling case and goes to
Speaker 1: many of the core objections that we as conservatives have
Speaker 1: about an all too powerful federal or national level government
Speaker 1: in the UK, the government will step in in cases
Speaker 1: like this and decide that it acts in the best
Speaker 1: interests of the child, not the parents who love the
Speaker 1: child and who are desperate to do anything in their
Speaker 1: power to give it hope, to give the child, perhaps
Speaker 1: a cure, or even just a few more months, a
Speaker 1: few more weeks of life on this earth. But I
Speaker 1: want to be very clear, and this is reminiscent of
Speaker 1: the Charlie Guard case. And while ago Charlie Guard was
Speaker 1: a young boy who was in a similar situation in
Speaker 1: the UK, and he has since passed away. But this
Speaker 1: isn't that the UK government is saying we won't pay
Speaker 1: for some experimental treatment. It's not that the UK government
Speaker 1: is saying just that there's nothing more they can do
Speaker 1: for the boy, although they have said that, and the
Speaker 1: alder Hey Hospital where he's being held has thrown off
Speaker 1: their hands and is essentially just waiting for uh, the
Speaker 1: young boy Alphie to die. But the courts and the
Speaker 1: government in the United Kingdom, where you do have a
Speaker 1: national health service, everyone you have nationalized health care, they've
Speaker 1: decided that no one else is allowed to try and
Speaker 1: help Alfie Evans. That even the intercession of the Pope,
Speaker 1: which has occurred here, the Pope himself has weighed in
Speaker 1: and wants to help provide assistance to Alphie Evans, that
Speaker 1: does not move the authorities in the UK. They are
Speaker 1: telling outsiders here that no one is allowed to try
Speaker 1: and save Alphie at this point, who clearly has nothing
Speaker 1: to lose and his life to gain in the process.
Speaker 1: The UK has said, you aren't allowed to help this boy.
Speaker 1: He is only young. Alphie Evans is only allowed to die.
Speaker 1: They've taken him off life support. He is slowly being
Speaker 1: starved and quite honestly going through a process that could
Speaker 1: only be described as a slow physician assisted suicide courtesy
Speaker 1: of the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. And
Speaker 1: as his dad Thomas Evans said at the at the
Speaker 1: start of the segment, the authorities have already failed Alphie Evans.
Speaker 1: They can't diagnose him at the alder Hey hospital where
Speaker 1: he's held, they have no treatment options available for him.
Speaker 1: They've been able to do nothing for him. And yet
Speaker 1: they claim the absolute certainty of knowing that a boy
Speaker 1: that is days, perhaps hours from dying is better off
Speaker 1: just being allowed to I then getting the possible treatment
Speaker 1: offered to him in Italy, the Vatican, the Italian government,
Speaker 1: They've sent a plane. A plane is sitting on standby
Speaker 1: right now. They have emergency medical personnel in place, ready
Speaker 1: to do everything they can for Alphie Evans. And the
Speaker 1: UK government says no. They say no. Alphie was breathing
Speaker 1: on his own earlier today, had been given some oxygen,
Speaker 1: but his life support has been turned off. This is
Speaker 1: deeply troubling. There's also a lot of security around this.
Speaker 1: The proceedings in court were treated like there was some
Speaker 1: kind of a terrorist who was appearing before the judge.
Speaker 1: They were searching people. I mean, the UK is really
Speaker 1: trying to make some kind of bizarre point here about
Speaker 1: who's really in charge. And the answer my ends and
Speaker 1: most of the world when it comes to who's in
Speaker 1: charge you or the government is the government. This is
Speaker 1: an important reminder for all of us here in the
Speaker 1: United States, where we have the strongest tradition of any
Speaker 1: major country of individual rights and individual liberty, that this
Speaker 1: is a constant battle that we have to wage. When
Speaker 1: you have parents who are told that the state has
Speaker 1: a better sense of the interests of a child that
Speaker 1: the state has already failed and already abandoned. Mind you,
Speaker 1: you know that state is m and authoritarianism are all
Speaker 1: too reel. Even in a developed westernized country, our own,
Speaker 1: uh grandfather country, if you will, the United Kingdom. You
Speaker 1: also have the hubrists of the medical profession here where
Speaker 1: I could sit and talk to you at length about
Speaker 1: the history of conventional wisdom not just within the scientific
Speaker 1: community that was blatantly wrong, but the history of conventional
Speaker 1: wisdom within the medical community that really, until the twentieth
Speaker 1: century was responsible for a lot more harm than good.
Speaker 1: One of the great ironies of the Hippocratic corpus, the
Speaker 1: text from which we get the Hippocratic Oath, is at
Speaker 1: a hippocratic approach to medicine overall. Forget about just the
Speaker 1: do no harm, but the multifaceted, it's all connected approach
Speaker 1: for a long time in history was actually counterproductive. I
Speaker 1: wonder how many of these doctors who can't even say
Speaker 1: what is afflicting Alfhie Evans in the UK. I wonder
Speaker 1: how many of them know the history of their own
Speaker 1: city of London when it came to cholera. Do you
Speaker 1: know that until the mid nineteenth century, the entire medical
Speaker 1: profession in London at that point, the most advanced city
Speaker 1: in the world, was convinced that cholera, which essentially comes
Speaker 1: from human feces in the water supply, was the result
Speaker 1: of bad smells in the air, myasthma's they called it,
Speaker 1: and well into the middle of the nineteenth century, in
Speaker 1: the eighteen fifties eighteen sixties, it was believed in London
Speaker 1: that the cholera outbreaks that would happen near and around
Speaker 1: the Thames River where the result of those bad smells.
Speaker 1: Occasionally a doctor would come along who said, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, if you look at how this disease spreads,
Speaker 1: it's clear that it's the water supply. It's not stinky air,
Speaker 1: you idiots, that is causing outbreaks that would kill thousands
Speaker 1: and thousands of people. But they would shut him down.
Speaker 1: The science was settled. You see. Until we had an
Speaker 1: understanding of microbiology, the medical profession was under the very
Speaker 1: mistaken belief that cholera and other waterborne pathogens were the
Speaker 1: result of bad air myasthma's. As I said, and there's
Speaker 1: still plenty of that. Doctors don't know. It's hard not
Speaker 1: to come away from this Alphi Evans case, and feel
Speaker 1: like there's something of an arrogance that has overtaken the
Speaker 1: medical profession involved with this in the UK, that alder Hey,
Speaker 1: as alder Hey's staff and the various physicians assigned to
Speaker 1: this case. I don't want to be shown up and
Speaker 1: shown that they are wrong, and I don't want to
Speaker 1: hear about how it prevents the suffering of this child.
Speaker 1: After travel, they have a jet waiting for him and
Speaker 1: highly trained medical personnel. The Italian government has offered him citizenship.
Speaker 1: We are talking about a twenty three month old baby
Speaker 1: that needs amnesty to go to Italy, to leave the
Speaker 1: UK and escape the grips of the national health service there.
Speaker 1: That has decided the only thing that anyone is allowed
Speaker 1: to do for twenty three month old Alphie Evans is
Speaker 1: watch him slowly die. Make no mistake about it. This
Speaker 1: can happen just across the Atlantic in a country that
Speaker 1: is quite close to us in its history and also
Speaker 1: its culture and its law. Our own common law comes
Speaker 1: from England. It's not far off from being a reality
Speaker 1: here too. So remember this today. It's very little coverage
Speaker 1: of it will happen in the media. Alphi Evans is
Speaker 1: being denied a right to fight for his life. His
Speaker 1: parents are being denied the right to fight for his life.
Speaker 1: The Pope and the Italian government are being denied the
Speaker 1: ability to try and help this child because government bureaucrats
Speaker 1: say so. I've spoken about Kanye West um so much
Speaker 1: early on in my career here, I've said that he
Speaker 1: is the only person that is in hip hop or
Speaker 1: that has a public stage, that is willing to think independently.
Speaker 1: I do not subscribe to group think. I think independently.
Speaker 1: I'm a free thinker, and I don't believe that because
Speaker 1: I have a certain in skin tone that I absolutely
Speaker 1: have to subscribe to all these ideas which on paper
Speaker 1: do not make any sense whatsoever. You've been following Kanye
Speaker 1: West's career, Kanye West has always been an outlier in
Speaker 1: terms of having his own mind and thinking his own thoughts.
Speaker 1: They told Kanye that he couldn't be in fashion, so
Speaker 1: he created an entire brand. They told Kanye that he
Speaker 1: couldn't like him, so he married her. Okay, so this
Speaker 1: is no surprise whatsoever. This is who Kanye West is.
Speaker 1: Fundamentally a free thinker. Now that was that was kanadas
Speaker 1: Oh and talking about she's getting a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of play in the media right now because Kanye
Speaker 1: West said he likes the way she thinks. We had
Speaker 1: Candice on the show, as I mentioned to you about
Speaker 1: about a year ago. Oh and now she's getting all
Speaker 1: kinds of attention for speaking your mind. And that's all great.
Speaker 1: I do feel though, like there's a part of me
Speaker 1: that wants to just take a step back. Though we
Speaker 1: as conservatives, and this is nothing new with Candice. She's great.
Speaker 1: This totally sevord. This is about Kanye. We need to
Speaker 1: not get quite so excited whenever somebody who happens to
Speaker 1: be a celebrity says something even a little bit conservative.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's you can't point out and say,
Speaker 1: oh I like what Kanye said. Of course I'm doing
Speaker 1: that here on the show. But now there's like this
Speaker 1: whole movement that Look, I'm joking when I say that
Speaker 1: Kanye is the great philosopher of our time. Alright, Emmanuel Kant,
Speaker 1: he is not. But the guy's got some some cool,
Speaker 1: catchy songs, you know, I like. I like some of
Speaker 1: his funky beats. He's got some good tunes. I do
Speaker 1: have some of them on my I was gonna say,
Speaker 1: some of my iPod I really such a child of
Speaker 1: the early two thousand's here now you know, I've got
Speaker 1: it on my shuffle. You remember the shuffle that when
Speaker 1: that thing came out, I was like life change or bro.
Speaker 1: It was so small and you just click and listen
Speaker 1: to the different songs. It could hold like a hundred songs. Uh,
Speaker 1: it was amazing, you know. Actually the original iPod, because
Speaker 1: it's basically a hard drive just for music. They I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's still true, but they went they
Speaker 1: went through a period where you could actually a lot
Speaker 1: for them online on eBay. They became collector's items because
Speaker 1: you can have your whole music library on the whereas
Speaker 1: now for a lot of people, unless you're using a
Speaker 1: cloud service, it takes up too much on your on
Speaker 1: your hard drive. So people kind of like the original iPods.
Speaker 1: It could store like thirty thousand songs or something crazy
Speaker 1: like that, and that's all it does. Right. It's like
Speaker 1: me on radio. It's a lean, mean machine devoted to
Speaker 1: one purpose and one purpose only. It cannot be reasoned
Speaker 1: with and it will never stop. Uh anyway, So we
Speaker 1: shouldn't get so excited about this because inevitably the celebrity
Speaker 1: in question is gonna then say something that that all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, we're like, whoop, whoop. I don't really
Speaker 1: like that, you know, so just give it some time,
Speaker 1: and Kanye is gonna be like, you know, yeah, I
Speaker 1: like I like socialized medicine. And everyone's gonna say, well,
Speaker 1: you know, he was good on the whole free speech stuff.
Speaker 1: But look, it's fine. I'm just telling you don't go
Speaker 1: too far the pathway of thinking that or or embracing
Speaker 1: a celebrity for a limited range of commentary too much. Right.
Speaker 1: So there's that because I didn't even get to mention
Speaker 1: it on the show yesterday. I meant to, but I
Speaker 1: had so much else going on in my mind here.
Speaker 1: But you know, singer Shania Twain has had she has
Speaker 1: made well, really only one mistake, although she's had two
Speaker 1: missteps for her public persona. I'm just gonna say, by
Speaker 1: the way, do we think Shania Twain is a particularly
Speaker 1: you know man? I feel like a woman very uh,
Speaker 1: very commercially successful. I've seen it on a lot of commercials,
Speaker 1: but I've also never been at a party where somebody
Speaker 1: was like, you know, what we really need right now. Bro,
Speaker 1: you know what we we don't get this place lit
Speaker 1: Shania Twain. Is she that you're still the one I love?
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna say because everyone's gonna turn off to
Speaker 1: the radio, but she's You're still the one I love?
Speaker 1: But that, yeah, I remember when I was younger. I
Speaker 1: mean she was quite lovely. There was that when in
Speaker 1: the MTV days when when that sort of thing you
Speaker 1: would see it all over the place. But she had
Speaker 1: the the temerity. Now she's a Canadian, so there's that.
Speaker 1: She the temerity to come out and say, uh, that
Speaker 1: she would have voted for Trump because quote, even even
Speaker 1: though he was offensive, he seemed honest. Do you want
Speaker 1: straight or polite? Not that you shouldn't be able to
Speaker 1: have both. If I were voting, I don't want b s.
Speaker 1: I would have voted for a feeling that it was
Speaker 1: transparent and politics has a reputation of not being that right. Oh,
Speaker 1: she said that, and then over the weekend she had
Speaker 1: to come out and say that, quote, I would like
Speaker 1: to apologize to anybody I have offended. In a recent
Speaker 1: interview with The Guardian relating to the American President, the
Speaker 1: question caught me off guard. As a Canadian, I regret
Speaker 1: answering this unexpected question without giving my response more context.
Speaker 1: All let me say this. You never apologize, folks to
Speaker 1: the outrage mob. This is you only apologize if you,
Speaker 1: as a human being, truly believed that you have aired.
Speaker 1: You have to now stand your ground because the left
Speaker 1: has adopted the King Jeoffrey approach to the public apology.
Speaker 1: Those you don't know in Game of Thrones huge spoiler here,
Speaker 1: So la la la, you know your muff yourself right
Speaker 1: now if you haven't seen Game of Thrones. But the
Speaker 1: guy admits to his trees and to get mercy and
Speaker 1: then he gets his head cut off. Right, that's the
Speaker 1: way the left does it. Now. You no longer go
Speaker 1: out there John that I just ruined Game of Thrones
Speaker 1: for you. I'm sorry, but you don't go out there
Speaker 1: and apologize because then you get you get the disdain
Speaker 1: and all the downside. Right now, they just think you're weak.
Speaker 1: It's also so crazy who gets mad at a country
Speaker 1: music singer for saying she would have voted for Trump?
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is like you know my
Speaker 1: friend Tony the plumber from New Jersey, who's like I
Speaker 1: would have voted for Trump. I'm like, exactly, You're a catalyst,
Speaker 1: a hard working American. This is no surprise to me.
Speaker 1: Why is surprising a country of music? You know, it's
Speaker 1: not like a a PhD in Women's and gender studies
Speaker 1: from the University of the Northwest or something. Is that
Speaker 1: even a place I just made that up. Uh sounds
Speaker 1: like a university though, right. It sounds like a place
Speaker 1: where they'd have one of those crazy protests that we
Speaker 1: would make fun of. You're on the show. But it's
Speaker 1: not like someone like that came out or some you know,
Speaker 1: big left wing Hollywood celebrity. I mean, if country music
Speaker 1: stars Canadian or not I can't come out and say
Speaker 1: they'd vote for Trump, who can? So just I wanted
Speaker 1: to give you a little bit note of caution here
Speaker 1: before we all get too excited about one celebrity. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, I'm actually you've actually on the five earlier
Speaker 1: today they had Trump and Kanye side by side. This
Speaker 1: is really catchy. Go on, look, I celebrate Kanye, not
Speaker 1: his whole catalog, because some of his songs. If you
Speaker 1: saw the thing with him and Kim Kardashian on a
Speaker 1: motorcycle on YouTube, by the way, not for the kids,
Speaker 1: but yeah, haunting in a bad way. And you know
Speaker 1: what I'm talking about. I mean, man has had some
Speaker 1: big misses. He's had some monumental not good stuff that's
Speaker 1: that he's put out there. But he's put out some
Speaker 1: good stuff. I like some of his interesting quips on Twitter,
Speaker 1: some of his philosophy. But just everyone, I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: pumped the brakes a little bit on the celebrity love
Speaker 1: when it comes to their political beliefs, because they're gonna
Speaker 1: break your heart if you get too attached. We gotta
Speaker 1: roll into a quick breaker. When we come back, I
Speaker 1: have amazing news for you, courtesy of France. But it's
Speaker 1: a program we should implement here in the States. We'll
Speaker 1: be right back Vive la France, my friends. Yes, Emmanuel Macron,
Speaker 1: he is in Washington, d C. Here, is hanging with
Speaker 1: the president. Now he's in the Rose Garden, no doubt smoking.
Speaker 1: The girl was staring at your wives, staring at any
Speaker 1: of the ladies and being very French. But Frances in
Speaker 1: the news for another reason right now, and let's give
Speaker 1: him a little props. Play for me, John now in
Speaker 1: the fence. It will no longer be acceptable. Fall zy,
Speaker 1: Oh no, the more mure. Why do you cut off
Speaker 1: so quickly? We're not gonna it's the it's mercy buccoo. Monsieur.
Speaker 1: There is a study now that France will ban the
Speaker 1: use of meat like towns in the packaging for vegetarian food.
Speaker 1: Laraisy stance against the vegetarian is winning, Monsieur fantastique. No,
Speaker 1: this is for real, everybody. You will all right now,
Speaker 1: we thank you John d J. John's having some fun
Speaker 1: in there. Uh, you will no longer and we should
Speaker 1: follow in their footsteps here. I'm not gonna lie to
Speaker 1: you once or twice. I've decided that I, you know,
Speaker 1: I've picked something out of the frozen section, and I
Speaker 1: thought it looked like it was a delicious you know,
Speaker 1: barbecue something or other or burger or burrito of some kind.
Speaker 1: And I did notice the funky spelling of chicken. You know,
Speaker 1: they'll do H y K N, And I'm like, maybe,
Speaker 1: you know, everyone makes typos, everyone makes mistakes, and then
Speaker 1: you bite into it and you're like, what is this
Speaker 1: sponge like tasteless glue blob that i've and and why
Speaker 1: are they calling it chicken with a Y? Or uh,
Speaker 1: you know, calling it a The whole notion of a
Speaker 1: veggie burger, by the way, is like a pacifist action movie.
Speaker 1: It cannot exist, it cannot be. There's no such thing
Speaker 1: as a veggie burger, and therefore there's no such thing
Speaker 1: as or there's no such thing as a lot of
Speaker 1: these others in France. I'm giving them props here because
Speaker 1: they deserve it. May I see Blue Gloomy, see a sexton.
Speaker 1: You are a fantastique vegetarian, and vegan foods will be
Speaker 1: banned from using terms such as vegetarian sausage, vegetarian bacon,
Speaker 1: vegan bacon. That's right, it's not bacon. You may call
Speaker 1: it vegan bacon. But what you're really saying is I
Speaker 1: like to lie about this vegetarian thing you're eating. You're
Speaker 1: not fooling anybody. Yeah, Producer Mike is looking at me.
Speaker 1: There's nothing. If you could make something that was made
Speaker 1: of veggies on this on God's great Earth, that wasn't
Speaker 1: made of bacon, you'd be You'd be a billionaire. You'd
Speaker 1: be smacking Jeff Bezos with rolls of thousand dollar bills.
Speaker 1: You'd be walking around making it rain hondo's just for
Speaker 1: the fun of it all day long. But it's impossible.
Speaker 1: It is scientifically impossible. It cannot be done, and I'm
Speaker 1: just excited. I give a high five to a member
Speaker 1: of Parliament, Jean Baptiste. Morow it doesn't he sound like
Speaker 1: a guy that wears a top hat and carries a
Speaker 1: cane everywhere? Man, Jean Baptiste. It's a French. But he
Speaker 1: said that soya and tofu products cannot be cannot be
Speaker 1: marketed as any kind of milk or butter. This is
Speaker 1: a huge victory people, no more soy milk. The Europeans
Speaker 1: are ahead of us on this one. I'm just gonna
Speaker 1: say it. I'm just gonna come out and let you
Speaker 1: know what's real here. Soy milk is not a thing.
Speaker 1: Milk is delicious, as you know from Ron Swanson. Skim
Speaker 1: milk is water that's lining about being milk. But soy
Speaker 1: milk is really soy drink. If you want that stuff,
Speaker 1: that's fine. I mean, I can't stop you from pouring
Speaker 1: out the basin above your toilet and using that as
Speaker 1: drinking water. I think it's a bad idea. Technically it's
Speaker 1: separate from the bowl, but I can't stop you. Right,
Speaker 1: if you want to drink soy drink, that's up to you.
Speaker 1: But don't defame milk in the process. So that the
Speaker 1: French are are really up to something here, that they're right. Uh,
Speaker 1: they say that no one's ever really fooled by Think
Speaker 1: about who are they trying to fool? Vegetarians are all
Speaker 1: I mean and don't ean and he started on vegans.
Speaker 1: Vegan is like millennial for communists. Now, I mean, vegans
Speaker 1: are radical and you know they they know that what
Speaker 1: they're eating is not like to fur key, is not
Speaker 1: really a thing. So is it just to make them
Speaker 1: feel more socially acceptable around others? Like if I were vegetarian,
Speaker 1: heaven forbid, I'd be like, that's right, I'm rocking out
Speaker 1: with some beats and some celery sticks. If I feel
Speaker 1: really wild, maybe I'll have some porcini mushroom soun like
Speaker 1: you gotta own it, you gotta lean into it. Don't
Speaker 1: be like my porcini mushroom taste just like a cheeseburger.
Speaker 1: False for pinocchios. Your porcini mushrooms to do not taste
Speaker 1: anything like a cheeseburger, Don't you know, buck, don't play
Speaker 1: that don't try that nonsense. So I think we really
Speaker 1: need to start something here. We need to get rid
Speaker 1: of all this. No more of these uh these mess ups.
Speaker 1: What I'm trying to buy stuff in the frozen aisle
Speaker 1: and I see something and look, don't even make it
Speaker 1: look good. I mean, it's just false advertising. Across the board.
Speaker 1: There should be a section that has meat, a section
Speaker 1: that is for vegetarians, and another section for people that
Speaker 1: are super into not having fun in life for the vegans,
Speaker 1: and that's it. That's that. You know, it should be
Speaker 1: clearly marked, and you should call it whatever it is.
Speaker 1: You know, you call it your veggie patty, but don't
Speaker 1: call it a veggie burger. The French are right, we
Speaker 1: pay them homage messieur. So there you have it. Oh no,
Speaker 1: it's time for road call now, so you cannot go
Speaker 1: anywhere because this is like everyone's favorite part of the show.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. The show ain't over yet, folks. Here's
Speaker 1: where you take over, keeping it real, Team Buck. It's
Speaker 1: time for roll call. Remember if you want to be
Speaker 1: a part of roll call my friends Facebook dot com,
Speaker 1: slash Buck sexon or official Team Buck at gmail dot com.
Speaker 1: First up here, we have Peter who writes a buck
Speaker 1: Sorry I got behind on the podcast. Work spoils my
Speaker 1: buck fix. I know what that's like, Peter. Next time
Speaker 1: you plan on San Diego, please reach out. I'll get
Speaker 1: you a behind the scenes, up close and personal tour
Speaker 1: of the zoo. It's amazing to see shields high well, Peter,
Speaker 1: that actually sounds awesome, and I want to take you
Speaker 1: up on that be great. If I could bring Miss Molly,
Speaker 1: I'd get all kinds of brownie points. I mean, short
Speaker 1: of getting her like backstage passes to see t Swift somewhere.
Speaker 1: I think Miss Molly would be uh super excited or
Speaker 1: almost as excited about like hanging with some baby pandas.
Speaker 1: Maybe I don't know what they have at the San
Speaker 1: Diego Zoo, but I'm sure there's some very cool, very
Speaker 1: cute animals. I love animals. When I was a little kid,
Speaker 1: I used to go around telling people that I wanted
Speaker 1: to be an animal conservationist. I was so young I
Speaker 1: couldn't spell. I literally couldn't spell conservationist, but I just
Speaker 1: knew that I liked animals a lot, and uh, later
Speaker 1: on I found out that conservation is still make a
Speaker 1: lot of money. So I decided that as much as
Speaker 1: maybe living in the wilds of the Himalayas looking for
Speaker 1: snow leopards looked cool on TV, uh, it's it's a tough,
Speaker 1: tough go so I didn't want to go that route.
Speaker 1: Next up here we have Julian Rats. Hey, Buck, I'm
Speaker 1: a podcast listener. I'm a little behind, but I heard
Speaker 1: your take on Kelly and Conway talking to Donna Bash.
Speaker 1: Isn't it funny how the left says Hillary lost the
Speaker 1: election because women listened to their husbands and sons about
Speaker 1: who to vote for. Yet the minute Kelly Ann's opinion
Speaker 1: is different from her husband's, CNN jumps all over it.
Speaker 1: I thought they were all for women being independent and
Speaker 1: thinking for themselves. Just my two cents from over here
Speaker 1: in rural New Jersey. Well, Julian, I obviously think there's
Speaker 1: a big double standard at work. That's just how CNN
Speaker 1: does things. It's a shame. I think it used to,
Speaker 1: actually really do. I think it used to make a
Speaker 1: good faith effort at being down the middle as much
Speaker 1: as possible, not perfectly so, always a little bit left skewing.
Speaker 1: But now it's just might as well rebrand itself as
Speaker 1: a Hillary pack with a media wing. Brandon next up
Speaker 1: here Rights. I'm not in Helman Province, but I am
Speaker 1: under Centcom right now and have yet to miss a podcast,
Speaker 1: even if delayed a few days. I missed the History
Speaker 1: Deep Dives. Your history podcasts were on par with Mike
Speaker 1: Duncan's History of Rome. I want to listen when I'm
Speaker 1: peteeing or doing busy work. Semper fi from Brandon. Oh. Also,
Speaker 1: Brandon adds in to monetize the History podcast, think of
Speaker 1: doing a fundraiser story every few months. We'll keep you
Speaker 1: in business. I recommend the History on Byzantium or British
Speaker 1: History podcast models. Not a bad idea at all. First
Speaker 1: of all, thank you for your service and thanks for
Speaker 1: the note. I really wanted the history podcast, but I
Speaker 1: just have. I got so many projects I'm working on
Speaker 1: right now, and I gotta pay the bills here in
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hut too. You know, we got got a staff,
Speaker 1: we got we got air time here, we got stuff
Speaker 1: we gotta do. But it is a labor of love.
Speaker 1: I will get back to it. It just might have
Speaker 1: to be piecemeal. We're thinking about it. I'm also going
Speaker 1: to be launching a different podcast that we're talking about
Speaker 1: this week. That will be a once weekly and it's
Speaker 1: just be kind of a behind the scenes like if
Speaker 1: we were all hanging out on Buck's tiny terraces here
Speaker 1: in New York City drinking say some G four tequila,
Speaker 1: as I am known to do, what would the discussion
Speaker 1: be like. Although it's just been me kind of talking
Speaker 1: to all of you, and we got a name for
Speaker 1: We're gonna launch it soon, but it will be a
Speaker 1: little bit of a of a Buck unfiltered Buck behind
Speaker 1: the scenes and that'll be a once weekly. Um. And
Speaker 1: if we can get that up and running and get
Speaker 1: enough folks subscribing to a downloading it, that will also
Speaker 1: help with returning to Shields High, which I was a
Speaker 1: one man band on it. I tell people that in
Speaker 1: this business and thank you. They're like, you gotta be
Speaker 1: kidding me. How do you all the research? And I'm
Speaker 1: like my old dusty books obviously, So there is that. Uh.
Speaker 1: Seth is next up here and he writes, love the podcast, Buck,
Speaker 1: you weren't lying when you said Miss Molly was quite
Speaker 1: a looker. Nice job, bro. Anyway, God bless and Shields
Speaker 1: High from Seth. Will Seth thank you, And I'm gonna
Speaker 1: pass that along to miss Molly, who is quite lovely
Speaker 1: and a very very sweet person, very sweet young lady,
Speaker 1: and she's always asking how is how is the team doing? Buck,
Speaker 1: and I said, all the team is good. They send
Speaker 1: their love. Um. Next up we get Monica here, who
Speaker 1: writes voting present Obama did it over a hundred and
Speaker 1: thirty times as a state senator. Shields high. Well, Monica,
Speaker 1: you are correct. You get zero pinocchios on that one.
Speaker 1: Obama did vote present many many times. Uh, and then
Speaker 1: came president for eight years. Uh. William writes quote, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna make him work to kill me. Best real life
Speaker 1: quote since less let's roll James Shaw Jr. A real man.
Speaker 1: This guy is a ninja. William. I totally agree that guy. Uh.
Speaker 1: He stepped up and he did what was necessary to
Speaker 1: survive and was a hero in the process. And so
Speaker 1: it's a reminder to all of us. And I agree
Speaker 1: with you. By the way, I'm gonna make him work
Speaker 1: to kill me. That should be a mantra that they
Speaker 1: teach people in any of these extreme situation survival courses,
Speaker 1: self defense courses, because that has to be your attitude
Speaker 1: you can never you know, to borrow from Churchill. You know, never, never, never,
Speaker 1: never give in. Right, you cannot give in. And there
Speaker 1: are some situations where you will be told, even by experts.
Speaker 1: For example, one of them is you never get in
Speaker 1: the trunk of a car if someone's trying to kidnap you,
Speaker 1: or if someone's trying to take you to another location. Nope,
Speaker 1: you fight, because once you're in the trunk of the car,
Speaker 1: they have complete control of the situation and you're probably
Speaker 1: not getting out of there alive. So you fight. You
Speaker 1: never ever get in the trunk. That's just a rule.
Speaker 1: You can put that on the rule of of Buck Wisdom.
Speaker 1: Gardner writes next here, I love your show. Nice die
Speaker 1: Hard reference thrown in tonight as well, cost Get Together.
Speaker 1: It's always fun to work in a die Hard reference
Speaker 1: whenever you can. It is, in fact the greatest Christmas
Speaker 1: movie of all time. Uh John Rightes, Hey, Buck, I
Speaker 1: was just listening to your breakdown of the relaunch of Roseanne,
Speaker 1: and I couldn't help but notice the description of the
Speaker 1: theoretical show which you wished was around to depict a
Speaker 1: healthy conservative family perfectly described the show Last Man Standing
Speaker 1: with Tim Allen. You should check it out sometime. Another
Speaker 1: right leaning show is The Ranch with Aston Kutcher and
Speaker 1: Sam Elliott. Um I will check it out. John. A
Speaker 1: few other folks have given me the recommendation of Last
Speaker 1: Man Standing. Tim Allen's a very talented guy, interesting life
Speaker 1: story too. I haven't seen The Ranch with Ashton Ashton Kutcher,
Speaker 1: but I will also. You know what I'm actually instead
Speaker 1: of just saying this, I have a list of TV
Speaker 1: shows that I want to get to and I am
Speaker 1: I'm adding it on air right now, The Ranch and
Speaker 1: Last Man Standing. For those you're wondering what else is
Speaker 1: on my list? Here, Legion, Uh, The Americans, which I've
Speaker 1: seen a couple of episodes of, and I'm trying to
Speaker 1: get through more Battlestar Galactica, which I know people make
Speaker 1: fun of for being a little nerdy, but I have
Speaker 1: super brilliant nerd friends who say that it's an incredible show,
Speaker 1: so I would like to check it out. One thing
Speaker 1: is I watched the pilot and it seemed like the
Speaker 1: pilot of Battlestar Galactica relied on like a mini series
Speaker 1: that came before it, and I couldn't find the mini
Speaker 1: series can one of you Battlestar Galactica super nerds out there,
Speaker 1: and I say that with love send me a note
Speaker 1: on s book and tell me if I need to
Speaker 1: watch a prequel or something. Because when I tried to
Speaker 1: download off of iTunes Battlestar Galactica it there was stuff
Speaker 1: that had already happened. I'm like, wait, what this is
Speaker 1: episode one? Why am I missing something? Uh? Legion, Outlander,
Speaker 1: The Americans, Battlestar Galactica, The Ranch, Last Man Standing, Longmire,
Speaker 1: I'm already watching, but that's on here up and getting
Speaker 1: through some of that. That's my Oh and The Terror
Speaker 1: on AMC. Those are my shows that I am either
Speaker 1: just starting to watch or hoping to watch soon. So
Speaker 1: you can give me more wrecks on that if you like. Uh,
Speaker 1: we have next uppere Donna, who writes buck I love
Speaker 1: your show, but I'm really missing being able to listen live.
Speaker 1: I was able to hear your online station a couple
Speaker 1: of times last week on I Heart, but today it's
Speaker 1: not working. Uh, it's just not consistent like it used
Speaker 1: to be. Hopefully this will be remedied soon. Missing you Live,
Speaker 1: Donna Original Saturday Squad odd Well, Donna, I obviously want
Speaker 1: to get this fixed. We'll we'll take a look and
Speaker 1: see if there's an issue with the stream of the show.
Speaker 1: And remember wherever you are, guys, if you're out of
Speaker 1: radio range or if you just can't, if you just
Speaker 1: can't actually you know, get to your radio station. You
Speaker 1: can always listen if you have cell service or uh
Speaker 1: internet access, and you can go to Buck Sexton dot
Speaker 1: com and just click there. We have a live stream
Speaker 1: of it there, or if you want, you can listen
Speaker 1: on the I Heart radio app. So there and there's
Speaker 1: always the podcast on iTunes as another another thing to
Speaker 1: throw in there. So there you have it. Um that's
Speaker 1: what I've got going on. What else do we have?
Speaker 1: And thank you so much Donna for listening, by the way,
Speaker 1: I very much appreciate it. We have I got one
Speaker 1: more here, uh, Thomas rights Buck. I think the next
Speaker 1: item on Devin Noon is is to do list will
Speaker 1: be to find the link were message traffic between wait
Speaker 1: What's and the d n C the Obama administration that
Speaker 1: evaded normal channels. Huh Okay, this is a long one, Thomas.
Speaker 1: Let me Uh, this is gonna have to go in
Speaker 1: the read file for later. Um. So So that's it
Speaker 1: from the Hut for tonight. My friends, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for being here with me and honor and a privilege.
Speaker 1: I'll be back with you obviously tomorrow, next day, next
Speaker 1: day after that. Please do pass around the word about
Speaker 1: the show. UH, tell folks to download the podcast. If
Speaker 1: they can't get me on radio, they can always get
Speaker 1: it on podcast or through the ways we discussed. Already
Speaker 1: excited to be hanging out with you tomorrow, but until then,
Speaker 1: you know your orders shields high.