Speaker 1: Mr garbusch Off teared down this wall. Either you're with
Speaker 1: us where you were with the terrorists. If you got
Speaker 1: healthcare already, then you can keep your plan. If you're
Speaker 1: satisfied with is not. When President of the United States
Speaker 1: take it to the bank. Together, we will make America
Speaker 1: great again. It's what you've been waiting for all day.
Speaker 1: The Buck Sexton Show joined the conversation called Buck toll
Speaker 1: Free at eight four four nine hundred Buck, that's eight
Speaker 1: four four nine hundred to eight to five the Future
Speaker 1: of talk radio. Buck Sexton, Welcome to the Buck Saxton Show. Everybody,
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining, and honor and a
Speaker 1: privilege to have you with me here in the Freedom Huh.
Speaker 1: We have much to discuss, much to get into today.
Speaker 1: I want to first create, if I could, a h
Speaker 1: a breakdown of where we'll go in the whole gun
Speaker 1: control discussion here, because to me, there's really two movements
Speaker 1: going on in the country. There are two simultaneous you
Speaker 1: could say, conversations. On the one hand, you have an
Speaker 1: effort at the White House is engaged in as well,
Speaker 1: you have an effort to listen, to hear people out,
Speaker 1: to exchange ideas and to Also, I think heal one
Speaker 1: of the reasons why President Trump gathered together for a
Speaker 1: listening session with students and parents, including parents of those
Speaker 1: who had lost their children in school recent school shootings,
Speaker 1: at the White House. He's doing a listening session, I
Speaker 1: believe he's actually just just doing it while we're on air,
Speaker 1: and doing it a bit before. So he's hearing out
Speaker 1: people that want to share their views on this issue.
Speaker 1: And he's also expressed that this time it will not
Speaker 1: just be a knee jerk response out of partisanship. He'll
Speaker 1: at least listen to what is going on and be
Speaker 1: doing very strong background checks, very strong emplusis on the
Speaker 1: mental health with somebody, and that we are going to
Speaker 1: do plenty of other things again next week, the governors
Speaker 1: are coming in from most of the stakes and avery
Speaker 1: serious talk about what's going on, the schools safety, very good,
Speaker 1: and the covered every aspect of the many ideas that
Speaker 1: I have to have, many ideas that other people have,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna pick out the strongest ideas, the most
Speaker 1: important idea of the ideas that are gonna work, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna get him done. It's not going to be
Speaker 1: taught like it has been in the best. It's been
Speaker 1: going on too long, too many instances. We're gonna get
Speaker 1: it done. The President is saying this time is going
Speaker 1: to be different in that there will be action taken.
Speaker 1: This is not just a situation that we've seen in
Speaker 1: the past where there's a temporary surge of interest and
Speaker 1: and passion over the issue of violence in school. School shooting,
Speaker 1: specifically mass shootings is really what we're talking about here.
Speaker 1: He's saying that there will be This is a time
Speaker 1: for us to listen to all the different ideas that
Speaker 1: are out there. Now. I think this is, from the
Speaker 1: President's point of view, a smart move. I think it's
Speaker 1: the right move. I think it's a smart move. Listen
Speaker 1: to the other side. No harm in listening. A lot
Speaker 1: of people should just be heard so that the American
Speaker 1: people know their stories. Um, I I agree with that.
Speaker 1: I agree that we should be um that we should
Speaker 1: be hearing stories, For example, from from this father who
Speaker 1: was at the listening session. Play because my daughter has
Speaker 1: no voice. She was murdered last week and she was
Speaker 1: taken from us, shot nine times on the third floor. Now,
Speaker 1: we as a country failed our children. This shouldn't happen.
Speaker 1: We go to the airport. I can't get on a
Speaker 1: plane with a bottled water, but we leave it. Some
Speaker 1: animal could walk into a school and shoot our children,
Speaker 1: and so it's just not right and we need to
Speaker 1: come together as a country and work on what's important,
Speaker 1: and that's protecting our children in the schools. I think
Speaker 1: everything that father says, and you know, it's it's heartbreaking.
Speaker 1: You can just hear the painters voice. He just lost
Speaker 1: his is as a little girl last week in that shooting.
Speaker 1: But I think everything he says is completely reasonable, and
Speaker 1: I agree with him. We should come together and find
Speaker 1: a way to protect our kids. We should hear out
Speaker 1: all the different proposed, if not solutions, at least means
Speaker 1: of addressing this problem, lessening the threat, doing whatever they
Speaker 1: can so that there are fewer of these I want
Speaker 1: to hear all of that, but that doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: we will cast aside judgment of the proposals. It would
Speaker 1: be fantastic. It's certainly a praiseworthy goal to try and
Speaker 1: find a way to protect our kids in schools, and
Speaker 1: to do so with a success. I think it's almost impossible.
Speaker 1: It is impossible, actually to do it at a hundred
Speaker 1: percent success, and with each proposal that they put forward,
Speaker 1: we will have to think, well, what is the counterbalance
Speaker 1: of this, what comes out of this that we may
Speaker 1: not want to give up, What are the unintended consequences
Speaker 1: of this action? And that's where you when you push
Speaker 1: a little harder on this issue, when you dig a
Speaker 1: little deeper, that's when you start to run into the
Speaker 1: other side of this conversation. Right now, as I said,
Speaker 1: there are those who want to talk about solutions and
Speaker 1: and I also believe that President Trump sitting with parents
Speaker 1: and and students, teachers and others who want to discuss
Speaker 1: this issue is part of a national healing that is
Speaker 1: something we should do right now. But on the other
Speaker 1: side of it, there's also a clearly partisan and deeply
Speaker 1: politicized effort to make this yet another part of the
Speaker 1: hashtag resistance, to make this a partisan battle that is
Speaker 1: very very comfortable smearring. It's its opponents, defaming people, saying
Speaker 1: terrible things. As I mentioned, you know the billboard in
Speaker 1: Louisville kill the n r A. I mean, that's just
Speaker 1: one example. But this refrain you're here, you're with the children,
Speaker 1: you're against them. That's not helpful. That's not constructive. So
Speaker 1: we should and will talk about the other side of this,
Speaker 1: which is that there are people out there right now,
Speaker 1: many of them across the country, who see this as
Speaker 1: an opportunity not to save kids, but to help the
Speaker 1: Democrat Party and to harm the Trump administration and the
Speaker 1: Republican Party's political fortunes. That level of opportunism should make
Speaker 1: us all feel like we need a long shower. It
Speaker 1: is gross, but it is happening, and you are seeing
Speaker 1: this now with the talking points that are out there.
Speaker 1: We the way that uh, some of the networks are
Speaker 1: choosing to go about this, um, choosing to to cover
Speaker 1: this issue, it is an absolute disgrace. Do we have
Speaker 1: the woman who was approached by CNN on the front lawn,
Speaker 1: which h this is this is astonishing, folks. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: you have a woman who well that's on I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: that's on Russia. We'll get to this in a little bit.
Speaker 1: You have a whole bunch of different media outlets though
Speaker 1: that's a rush up component. I was looking on my
Speaker 1: list here for a second. You have a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of different media outlets that can't seem to find an
Speaker 1: articulate and uh, well versed defender of the Second Amendment
Speaker 1: to put on TV. You can't seem to find, you know,
Speaker 1: I know, a whole bunch. I could sit here and
Speaker 1: rattle dozens of them off the top of my head,
Speaker 1: one after another, to have a really serious discussion about this.
Speaker 1: But instead there's a lot out of let's find the
Speaker 1: most inept Republican congressmen possible and put him on TV
Speaker 1: and bash him and say that he's, you know, he's
Speaker 1: being disingenuous on the issue, that he doesn't stand with
Speaker 1: the with the kids. And this, I think is where
Speaker 1: we start to see that there's just no real bipartisan
Speaker 1: good faith and not at the congressional level that goes
Speaker 1: into this whole issue trying to fix gun control. It
Speaker 1: just doesn't It just doesn't really exist. Um. I think
Speaker 1: it is troubling to see. And you've got oh, here's
Speaker 1: here's CNN weighing in that they've been. They've been just
Speaker 1: as bad on this as I've seen has seen them
Speaker 1: on anything. I mean, they're they're weighing in. They're using
Speaker 1: kids and the questions they asked them to make this
Speaker 1: explicitly about Trump children are dying. Did you hear from
Speaker 1: any leaders. Did you hear from anybody in power after that? Yesterday?
Speaker 1: President Troup has been known to watch cable news on occasion.
Speaker 1: If he were watching right now, what would you want
Speaker 1: to say to him? I want to read one of
Speaker 1: the President's tweets from over the weekend. Do you have
Speaker 1: a message for the lawmakers? Do you have a message
Speaker 1: for Congress? For the president? You know, President Trump made
Speaker 1: some statements about this, uh yesterday he spoke about it,
Speaker 1: but he didn't mention gun Look, and we have examples
Speaker 1: of other countries that have done more and have passed
Speaker 1: the national gun control laws. And guess what gun violence
Speaker 1: wept down. There's someone the right that they're attacking students personally.
Speaker 1: They're saying that you're tools of the anti gun lobby.
Speaker 1: How do you respond to that kind of poisonous environment.
Speaker 1: You'll notice with a lot of those questions, it's you know,
Speaker 1: so so those evil Republicans have they Have they done
Speaker 1: what you want them to do? Yet? You know, this
Speaker 1: is if we were in a court, you could say
Speaker 1: they were they were leading the witness, leading the witness.
Speaker 1: And it's quite clear what many of the journalists out
Speaker 1: there think about the n R a about the gun
Speaker 1: control issue. And in case you needed any additional refresher.
Speaker 1: You know, for a lot of people, even those who
Speaker 1: are grieving with these kids in this community, when they hear, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, the n r A is a terrorist organization,
Speaker 1: you know what they're going to hear that There was
Speaker 1: a lot of people who don't believe that that was
Speaker 1: that was one upset teenager who was speaking there, and
Speaker 1: that that's relatively I think they're allowed to use those
Speaker 1: kinds of I mean, I think it actually might be effective. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it might be effective to call the n r a
Speaker 1: terrorist organization. It's wildly unfair and irresponsible and inaccurate, but
Speaker 1: you know, maybe it's effective. You'll notice though that was
Speaker 1: actually a that was something of a revelation there from
Speaker 1: a Camarado over at CNN. That's the point of this.
Speaker 1: What's effective, what gets the message across. It's not about
Speaker 1: what's reasonable, what's fair, what's honest. It is to force
Speaker 1: the right in this case, to bend the kneel on
Speaker 1: this issue. That's what's motivating somebody, the journalists and everyone else.
Speaker 1: That's what is this world they really think they're gonna
Speaker 1: be living in where there's something that the President of
Speaker 1: the United States could do to stop kids from getting
Speaker 1: shot in school, and he just doesn't want to do it,
Speaker 1: just doesn't care. How how do they really formulate that
Speaker 1: in their minds? I know that's a belief that a
Speaker 1: lot of leftists have that Republicans, the n RA, etcetera,
Speaker 1: they don't care about this. It's a really terrible thing
Speaker 1: to believe about a fellow human being, never mind a
Speaker 1: fellow American. And yet this is the rhetoric, this is
Speaker 1: what's out there you're either with. I don't even know
Speaker 1: what the policy is they're advocating, yet it's in some
Speaker 1: ways it reminds me in that sense of Occupy Wall Street,
Speaker 1: Black Lives Matter, I mean, groups that came together left
Speaker 1: wing political activism of the moment and they had a
Speaker 1: rallying cry, but not a specific policy platform. Maybe that
Speaker 1: will change, And I don't know if that will be
Speaker 1: from the grassroots level or if that's going to be
Speaker 1: handed to these protests groups that are popping up now
Speaker 1: all across the country. Um, but as I was saying,
Speaker 1: there's the administration willing to listen on this issue. The
Speaker 1: administration is trying to do what it can in order
Speaker 1: to hear out both the people affected by this and
Speaker 1: give them a national platform, and I think it is
Speaker 1: a helpful part of the nation healing um. But then
Speaker 1: there's also the well, what are we actually gonna do
Speaker 1: what comes from this that we'll have impact in it's worthwhile?
Speaker 1: And why is there so much animosity against the president
Speaker 1: who's been in office. I mean, you know the answer
Speaker 1: to this, but it's worth asking anyway, so much animosity
Speaker 1: on this issue against Trump. He's been in office for
Speaker 1: a year, and it's like the gun problem is his
Speaker 1: fault and his doing. And on the in the real world,
Speaker 1: when we're listening to what the president says and what
Speaker 1: the White House is up to, we know that this
Speaker 1: is actually a president who's not shutting down discussion, who's
Speaker 1: not dismissing any of this out of hand. I think,
Speaker 1: to the surprise maybe of some on the right, he's
Speaker 1: really considering some restrictions on firearms. He's really considering some
Speaker 1: of these proposals. And Harris Faulkner over at at Fox
Speaker 1: was speaking to uh, one of the most well known
Speaker 1: of the student protesters as student activists, and I think
Speaker 1: she asked me a very important question President Trump right now,
Speaker 1: and and in fact, one of his early tweets because
Speaker 1: about mental health. So he is now putting a plan
Speaker 1: into action that he would like to see lawmakers and act.
Speaker 1: Of course, he can't do it all himself, so he
Speaker 1: has come some distance where other presidents have not. I
Speaker 1: want to get your thought on that. So the way
Speaker 1: that I think President trym might do things differently, if
Speaker 1: at all, is I don't know, honestly, I really don't.
Speaker 1: It's kind of it's a similar situation as to where
Speaker 1: it was a few years ago, where his party is
Speaker 1: in control of about the House and Senate. It's a
Speaker 1: question of whether or not they can actually get something
Speaker 1: done because we're sick and tired of the promises of
Speaker 1: politicians that they're gonna send up their prayers and their
Speaker 1: condolences when we have no action. And that's why you're
Speaker 1: hearing those cheers behind me no action. What is the
Speaker 1: action supposed to be? I would also note, and some
Speaker 1: of you listening, I just want to I want to
Speaker 1: put this out there. You're listening, probably thinking this and
Speaker 1: feeling this right now. Why is it different this time?
Speaker 1: What's different now? When we're talking about policy what's different
Speaker 1: now than after San Bernardino, the Pult nightclub shooting, New Town,
Speaker 1: any number of other school shootings that we can talk
Speaker 1: about them that have occurred in recent years. Why not?
Speaker 1: I think some of you are asking that question. I
Speaker 1: know I've seen people asking it, and I don't have
Speaker 1: a good answer. Seems like the emotional import of the
Speaker 1: moment is pushing the conversation. Well, is that the way
Speaker 1: we want to make national policy? Mhm? What do you think? Folks?
Speaker 1: Do you do you think that Trump's making the right
Speaker 1: move here by sounding like he's got I mean, I
Speaker 1: think he already said bump stocks, he wants something in
Speaker 1: bump stocks. You think he's making the right move? Or
Speaker 1: is this just bound to be another politicized moment where
Speaker 1: the left doesn't want to actually get anything that makes
Speaker 1: anything better. They just want to make the right bend
Speaker 1: the knee. We'll see eight four, four to five. Let
Speaker 1: up those lines of my friends will be back with
Speaker 1: more in second hour. We'll get into some of the
Speaker 1: latest on Russia stuff, because there's a lot to stay
Speaker 1: with me. He want to learn everything we can learn,
Speaker 1: and we're going to go starting about two minutes after
Speaker 1: this meeting. We're going to work because this is a
Speaker 1: long term situation that we have to solve. We'll solve
Speaker 1: it together. And you've gone through extraordinary pain and we
Speaker 1: don't want others to go through the kind of pain
Speaker 1: that you've gone through. President Trump is coming across in
Speaker 1: every way with this discussion as open minded, reasonable, wanting
Speaker 1: to solve problems, not just throw them one at the
Speaker 1: other side or throw up a wall and be obstinate.
Speaker 1: But he wants to find ways to make things better.
Speaker 1: We have been discussing on this show here what some
Speaker 1: of those proposals involved. But there's another component of all
Speaker 1: this too, and that is that you have a lot
Speaker 1: of activism now going on. You have people who are
Speaker 1: marching who aren't from the high school, and question, do
Speaker 1: we have the audio of the kids in dcen to
Speaker 1: marching Montgomery County schools. Uh, there was a bunch of
Speaker 1: a bunch of students. They're doing walkouts demanding yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: play it, go for it. If our government is not
Speaker 1: protecting us, what is he doing? You You get the idea. Hey, look,
Speaker 1: we live in a culture now that there's really a
Speaker 1: subculture of activist hashtag activism and the YouTube and twitterification
Speaker 1: of all political ideas. You know, everyone now is everyone
Speaker 1: now is a pundit, everyone now is building a following.
Speaker 1: And you've got kids now from all across the country.
Speaker 1: So not kids that were nearer shooting, involved in a shooting,
Speaker 1: or anything like that, just kids who want their opinions
Speaker 1: to be heard making demands. And you know, this is
Speaker 1: where we run into some trouble with just listening and
Speaker 1: not responding, because the truth is they're talking about gun control.
Speaker 1: They're not talking about just what goes on in schools.
Speaker 1: This is just about schools at all. This is about
Speaker 1: guns everywhere and every for everyone else across the country.
Speaker 1: If they get their way, I'm sorry, but there is
Speaker 1: no other issue that anybody would say. Let's listen to
Speaker 1: what all of the marching, screaming teenagers say. He's holding
Speaker 1: the line for America Bucks. Next thing is back welcome
Speaker 1: back teams. So, as I was saying, there's a uh,
Speaker 1: there is a lot of cultural back and forth that
Speaker 1: comes into play with the gun controlled debate. Most of
Speaker 1: the reason that you see journalists so uniformly opposed to
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment and gun rights comes from their disdain
Speaker 1: for people who they think generally owned guns in in
Speaker 1: civilian private life. Right. There's a tweet here from a
Speaker 1: blue check, which means they're one of those verified you know,
Speaker 1: real people on Twitter, or you know they've said you're real,
Speaker 1: not that there are other real people. And I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna name him because I don't want to give them
Speaker 1: the free publicity he's got like seventy thousand Twitter followers. Though,
Speaker 1: this is the kind of stuf off as you expect
Speaker 1: from commentary and common commentators and journalists on the left.
Speaker 1: Everyone has fantasies, this is this guy. Leftist journalists who
Speaker 1: will remain unnamed. Quote. Everyone has fantasies. Some of mine
Speaker 1: involve ripping guns from the hands of pathetic bubba's who
Speaker 1: think firepower equals manhood. I want to rip their guns
Speaker 1: from them in front of their children while they scream
Speaker 1: and wail about their freedoms and evil government. Sorry not sorry.
Speaker 1: End quote. That's a pretty accurate description of how a
Speaker 1: lot of national journalists feel about this issue. They don't
Speaker 1: like people who own guns, and this is an opportunity
Speaker 1: to stick their thumb in the eyes of those who
Speaker 1: do own guns. Um, and that's what this is really about.
Speaker 1: There's that. There's also the sense of a political mobilization
Speaker 1: against Trump. I played some of the I played some
Speaker 1: of the students that have been marching and yelling for
Speaker 1: gun control, gun changed. Still not clearing what they want exactly.
Speaker 1: As I said, there's not a specific policy. They just
Speaker 1: want something to be done. But when the other side,
Speaker 1: in this case, the I guess we could say broadly
Speaker 1: termed the right the second amend and crowd when they
Speaker 1: come back with okay, here's an idea, well she here here,
Speaker 1: here's the president himself saying it concealed carey for teachers
Speaker 1: and for people of talent, of that type of talent.
Speaker 1: So let's say you had of your teaching force, because
Speaker 1: that's pretty much the number, and you said it. Uh.
Speaker 1: An attack has lasted, on average about three minutes. It
Speaker 1: takes five to eight minutes for responders for the police
Speaker 1: to come in, so the attack is over. If you
Speaker 1: had a teacher with who's adept at firearms, they could
Speaker 1: very well end the attack very quickly. This is the
Speaker 1: present working through reality as to what it means to
Speaker 1: be dealing with a school shooting. Is the present saying okay, look,
Speaker 1: you want to be able to stop an active shooter
Speaker 1: in a school first responder times, I mean, to get
Speaker 1: it under five minutes. You basically have to have an
Speaker 1: armed guard in every hallway, on every floor of every school.
Speaker 1: That's just and at that point, well, why not arm
Speaker 1: all the teachers. You've you've got people in and practically
Speaker 1: every classroom who are armed anyway. But now you see
Speaker 1: whether they're being serious on the other side of this
Speaker 1: argument or not when you put forward arming teachers as
Speaker 1: a an action to take, not a solution. We're not
Speaker 1: talking here because they're not gonna solve this, and I
Speaker 1: gonna go away when you talk about arming teachers. Sure enough,
Speaker 1: the other side goes, no, they don't want that. That's
Speaker 1: not what they want. That's not what they're calling for.
Speaker 1: It makes some monk. I just saw one of the
Speaker 1: CNN UH anchors sharing some tweet about how you know
Speaker 1: students don't want teachers to be armed. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: this is a complicated issue, and it's one thing for
Speaker 1: students to mobilize and say we want to be protected.
Speaker 1: It's an nothing to say we want to be protected.
Speaker 1: And here's how it has to be done. Because there's
Speaker 1: a reason we have a government we have a legislature,
Speaker 1: we have elected representatives, we have federal law enforcement, local
Speaker 1: law enforcement, people that are paid and that have expertise
Speaker 1: in these matters trying to come up with ideas and solutions.
Speaker 1: There are reasons for that. It's not just what did
Speaker 1: the kids think that they need in this case? Now
Speaker 1: that's this is now also a big game on the
Speaker 1: left where they're trying to tempt people into overstepping. And
Speaker 1: I will say there have been some conservatives, one or
Speaker 1: two in particularly come to mind, who are very publicly
Speaker 1: uh debased their reputations by personally attacking these kids. It's
Speaker 1: not it's not. This is not personal. It is not
Speaker 1: about mocking individuals who are stepping forward to say to
Speaker 1: say that they believe that this is a necessary gun
Speaker 1: control policy, or that's necessary, whatever the case may be.
Speaker 1: It's not about that. But it's also not we're gonna
Speaker 1: sit here while national laws are ching, you know, while
Speaker 1: federal laws are changed, national policy is shifted, and do
Speaker 1: all that in silence, just because because we feel bad.
Speaker 1: I wonder there is a part of me that thinks
Speaker 1: that the Trump administration here, you know, he's hearing everything out,
Speaker 1: but bump stocks Okay, that was a post Las Vegas
Speaker 1: shooting concession, to which I will note will stop no
Speaker 1: shootings whatsoever. And the bump stock thing is, it's such
Speaker 1: a it's such a non action in the sense that
Speaker 1: it's hard to be opposed to it because it's it
Speaker 1: falls into the well, it's minutia of the of even
Speaker 1: the gun control debate, which often gets bogged down in
Speaker 1: the minutia. But that's really way down the scale. I
Speaker 1: know a lot of people that own firearms and around
Speaker 1: farms our whole lives, never used a bump stock, don't
Speaker 1: know about bump stocks. Yeah, whatever, no interest. It's actually
Speaker 1: a much more interesting discussion when we start to talk
Speaker 1: about suppressors and laws around suppressors. I anybody who watches
Speaker 1: too many movies thinks that suppressors mean that you can
Speaker 1: get away with you know, makes a pew pew noise.
Speaker 1: That's not you fire an a are or the suppressor,
Speaker 1: and it just means that you're not doing permanent hearing
Speaker 1: damage to yourself. But it's still real loud anyway. That's
Speaker 1: that's some arteresting discussion and form for my end, and
Speaker 1: that would be a lessening of the laws that are
Speaker 1: in place, not a That would be a loosening of them,
Speaker 1: not a a strengthening of them. So Trump is raising
Speaker 1: the issue of arming teachers. Why is the left so
Speaker 1: opposed to that, because it's really about not liking guns,
Speaker 1: if it they say, it's about saving kids in schools.
Speaker 1: But then when you propose something that may in fact
Speaker 1: save kids in schools, it's not good enough. They say,
Speaker 1: take action, we want to save kids in schools. And
Speaker 1: we come back with, Okay, let's think about concealed Carrie.
Speaker 1: Let's arm teachers. Let's increase armed security at schools. They say, no,
Speaker 1: we want to ban and we say, well, hold on
Speaker 1: a second. I thought you just wanted action, You wanted
Speaker 1: the kids to be safer. In what way would arming
Speaker 1: teachers and having more security at schools not at least
Speaker 1: be a good faith attempt to address those primary concerns.
Speaker 1: This is where you see, This is where it all
Speaker 1: comes together. It's not about just keeping kids safe. It
Speaker 1: is about being opposed to guns. Guns are a cultural
Speaker 1: signifier in this country. If you say that you believe
Speaker 1: in the Second Amendment, if you say that you believe
Speaker 1: in a right to bear arms and individuals right to
Speaker 1: own firearms to defend himself or herself and as a
Speaker 1: collective American defense against tyranny. Yes, that is still real,
Speaker 1: and yes we still believe that. If you say that,
Speaker 1: then there are a whole bunch of other things that
Speaker 1: generally but not always come along with that and have
Speaker 1: a more traditional religious view. Um you know, you know
Speaker 1: all they basically tend to be a Republican. You go
Speaker 1: down the whole slew of different issues, more likely to
Speaker 1: be pro life, more likely to any number of things.
Speaker 1: And so that's why the gun issue just becomes a
Speaker 1: signifier for everything else. And that's why solutions to school
Speaker 1: shootings that aren't explicitly anti gun, anti firearm ownership, or
Speaker 1: unacceptable to the left. Even though they're screaming do something,
Speaker 1: do something, we come back and say, Okay, here's something.
Speaker 1: They say, no, no, not that thing. Do this other
Speaker 1: thing that we really insist on. But that won't work
Speaker 1: and it's not a good idea. And also it's an
Speaker 1: infringement on freedoms. Why do you not care about dead children?
Speaker 1: They yell, Well, hold on a second, I thought we
Speaker 1: were having an adult discussion. There's that term I mean,
Speaker 1: but I thought we were having a responsible exchange of
Speaker 1: ideas on what to do here. I mean, I think
Speaker 1: if you get a chance, you go back and you
Speaker 1: see some of and we played some of the clips
Speaker 1: for you, some of the listening, the listening session that
Speaker 1: the President had with these families. This is important for
Speaker 1: the country to see and people should be heard, and
Speaker 1: they are being heard. I've also noticed though, that there
Speaker 1: are complaints among some of the media that their favorite
Speaker 1: students are not being heard from. They've already picked favorites,
Speaker 1: you know, the ones that are saying the n r
Speaker 1: A are child murderers. Those are the ones that we
Speaker 1: should be hearing from all the time. Well, there are
Speaker 1: a lot of students, as I said, three thousand in
Speaker 1: the Douglas High School in Parkland, close to three thousands,
Speaker 1: something like over hundred. I've seen a handful on TV
Speaker 1: many times already. I don't think that's an accident. I
Speaker 1: don't think they're the only ones who have opinions. And
Speaker 1: I've already seen. So I'm going back to the blue
Speaker 1: check Twitter, which is a journalist. It's like a big
Speaker 1: chat session among all the different journalists on Twitter. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know a lot of you, like who cares about Twitter.
Speaker 1: But it's just the way that we keep keep tabs
Speaker 1: on each other and see what everyone's saying. A lot
Speaker 1: of them are already complaining that they're not hearing from
Speaker 1: the voices they want to hear from. Well, is it
Speaker 1: about hearing from the kids that the high school in Parkland?
Speaker 1: Or is it just about hearing from kids that pushing
Speaker 1: agenda that some adult one. This is where we we
Speaker 1: have to be very careful with what comes out of
Speaker 1: this and what the direction is after this tragedy. It's
Speaker 1: clear it's a very emotional moments, very difficult for the country.
Speaker 1: I understand all of that. I want to band bump stocks, fine,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not about to fall on my sword
Speaker 1: for bump stocks. I don't really care. But once we
Speaker 1: start talking about assault rifle band we've already been there,
Speaker 1: wouldn't stop anything. What is what is an assault rifle
Speaker 1: under the context of a federal law? Anyway? Didn't didn't
Speaker 1: help when Bill Clinton did it back in the nineties.
Speaker 1: In fact, gun violence went up a little bit. Less
Speaker 1: than two percent of all firearms related deaths involve a
Speaker 1: long gun of any kind. Gun violence is almost entirely
Speaker 1: a function of handguns which are not even under discussion
Speaker 1: right now, and handguns which were used two of them
Speaker 1: in the biggest single mass school shooting of all time,
Speaker 1: which was at Virginia Tech. So we're skipping over are
Speaker 1: a lot of facts and figures here to do what
Speaker 1: feels good to one side of the political spectrum so that
Speaker 1: that the other side in this case, conservatives don't feel bad,
Speaker 1: don't feel like they're unwilling to budge on this. But
Speaker 1: I do come back, and I'm not trying to just
Speaker 1: take a hard line for its own sake here. I
Speaker 1: come back to, is anything really different this time We've
Speaker 1: we have been here before, the same. I almost want
Speaker 1: to go back and I don't know, listen to my
Speaker 1: own show. That'd be kind of weird. But you can
Speaker 1: go back to some of the previous news cycles after
Speaker 1: large scale shootings, school shootings and other shootings where the
Speaker 1: gun debate became fierce and it's nasty, it's vicious, as
Speaker 1: you know, these are all these are all things I've
Speaker 1: heard before. The only thing that has gone attention. I
Speaker 1: will say that is different this time around in terms
Speaker 1: of policy solution or possible legal remedy for what's going on.
Speaker 1: Is the temporary street any order based on a mental
Speaker 1: you know, essentially a mental illness that would make you dangerous.
Speaker 1: So temporary restraining order from buying guns. That's the only
Speaker 1: one that I've heard that I'm like, Okay, that's kind
Speaker 1: of new, or that's getting a little more and all right,
Speaker 1: that that that strikes me as reasonable. That strikes me
Speaker 1: depending on how it's worded and what the legislation is.
Speaker 1: But here's what I'm Here's what I'm offering up to you.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's that wouldn't be acceptable either. They won't.
Speaker 1: They the movement such as it is right now. They
Speaker 1: want a band. They want no guns. Which guns, They'll
Speaker 1: figure that out. They want a ban on guns though
Speaker 1: guns equal bad. That's what this comes down to. It's
Speaker 1: not about safety and schools first and foremost. It is
Speaker 1: about a political position and an entire cultural backdrop to
Speaker 1: all that as well. Eight four four, eight to five.
Speaker 1: My friends, phone lines open, will take some calls. We
Speaker 1: will be right back. What is your message to the
Speaker 1: President Unites States? Here are voices, and take what we
Speaker 1: say and put that into action, because um, we're dying.
Speaker 1: Kids are dying, and it's it's a lot of this
Speaker 1: is a life or death situation, and I think at
Speaker 1: this point we really have to focus on the fact
Speaker 1: that it's way too easy for teenagers to buy guns,
Speaker 1: and it's ridiculous that nothing is being actively done for that.
Speaker 1: I mean, here, we that was another one of the
Speaker 1: students just speaking to press there. You know, when they
Speaker 1: say things like it's too easy for teenagers to buy guns,
Speaker 1: do they mean it's too easy for a while biding
Speaker 1: adult with no criminal background to buy a gun. Because
Speaker 1: once you're eighteen, you are an adult. You can say,
Speaker 1: this is something that happens a lot. Right When is
Speaker 1: it when do we refer to someone as a teenager
Speaker 1: and when we refer to them as an adult? A
Speaker 1: eighteen if you're nineteen, is in the case of the shooter,
Speaker 1: you are an adult. If we want to start having
Speaker 1: a whole nation wide discussion about changing that, that's one thing.
Speaker 1: But I don't think we're there, and I think that
Speaker 1: this is not a place where we're fine. We're not
Speaker 1: gonna find a lot of solutions in Oh, let's let's
Speaker 1: just raise the age of people to buy firearms. I
Speaker 1: don't see that being being a way to handle this either,
Speaker 1: especially because we had Sean Davison yesterday. A lot of
Speaker 1: mass shooters are in their mid thirties, So what what's
Speaker 1: what's the age? What's the age limn gonna be for
Speaker 1: somebody to buy a firearm? You know, I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't think that's gonna work. And at some point we
Speaker 1: also have lost sight of the fact this is a
Speaker 1: constitutionally protected right. There is a process for removing it.
Speaker 1: It's not like it could never change. If this was
Speaker 1: such a terrible thing the founding Dollars have done. There
Speaker 1: is a government mechanism for changing it. It It would just
Speaker 1: take a lot of people do agree, and they don't,
Speaker 1: a lot of elected representatives to go in the same direction,
Speaker 1: and they're not. But it is a constituently protected right,
Speaker 1: has been for a very long time, and we're talking
Speaker 1: about it like it's this or the media is trying
Speaker 1: to get us to talk about it like it's this irritation,
Speaker 1: This this anachronism that just results in unnecessary bloodshed. Charlie
Speaker 1: and Ocean, Ocean City, Maryland. Hey, Charlie, Hey Buck, thanks
Speaker 1: for taking my call. I've been I've been listening to
Speaker 1: a lot of different people talking about this gun issue,
Speaker 1: and they bring me to the point of Israel. I
Speaker 1: haven't heard any mass shootings in schools in Israel, and
Speaker 1: I would venture to say that that's for per population,
Speaker 1: that's probably the biggest gun owners in the world, because
Speaker 1: there have been attack every day forever, and they have
Speaker 1: concealed carry people in schools, they protect their children. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the look Israeli security is often looked at as a
Speaker 1: model for US counterparts, whether we're talking about airport and
Speaker 1: airline security. So it certainly is worth looking at what
Speaker 1: the Israelis are doing in schools. They have a particular
Speaker 1: threat though, and that is that, on top of just
Speaker 1: the possibility of a psychopath going into a school, Charlie,
Speaker 1: they have had numerous terrorist entities uh Islamic jihadists who
Speaker 1: have who would very much like to go into a
Speaker 1: school and engage in a mass shooting for the purposes
Speaker 1: of a political violence, for terrorism. So they have an
Speaker 1: additional layer that they have to consider. But you'll notice, Charlie,
Speaker 1: they the moment that people start talking about armoring, arming
Speaker 1: war folks in schools, maybe concealed cary for teachers, more
Speaker 1: training for teachers, and dealing with active shooters that involved
Speaker 1: the teachers being able to shoot back. Now it's not
Speaker 1: just do something, it's oh no, no, I didn't mean
Speaker 1: just do something. I meant do the thing I want
Speaker 1: you to do. Well, that's not the same, right, that's
Speaker 1: a that's shifting the goalpost. But thank you for calling,
Speaker 1: and Charlie appreciate it. Folks. I'm sorry there's you've been holding.
Speaker 1: I've gone a little along here and we're gonna get
Speaker 1: into the next hour talking about Russia collusion. So apologies
Speaker 1: for my my rambles. We're gonna change up topics here
Speaker 1: and discuss the latest on the troll farms. He's back
Speaker 1: with you now, because when it comes to the fight
Speaker 1: for truth, the fuck never stops. Welcome back to the
Speaker 1: buck Sex and show everybody our two. We are gonna
Speaker 1: get into some Russia investigation, Russia collusion, all that good stuff.
Speaker 1: That's what we're gonna talk about now. Uh as a
Speaker 1: as a an appetizer for this discussion, maybe as a
Speaker 1: way of and textualizing where we're gonna go what's coming
Speaker 1: up next here. I just want to take a little
Speaker 1: trip down memory lane with you. You wouldn't mind you
Speaker 1: recall this whole thing happened back back a few years ago,
Speaker 1: different president at a different time in this country. Remember this,
Speaker 1: this is my last les Basel. Yes, and that's not
Speaker 1: my muntion that I have more poxibleyn't understand. Let's just
Speaker 1: make this pumission to Lisima unless ever l t runsmit
Speaker 1: disinformation to Vladimir I must break you. I mean, you know, really,
Speaker 1: that was President Obama who is talking to Medvedev there,
Speaker 1: and he's just saying, yeah, look, you know, don't worry,
Speaker 1: I got more leeway to do stuff that will make
Speaker 1: you guys happy after my next election. And that's for
Speaker 1: the the same Russia folks that has been were all
Speaker 1: kind of Russian hacking and Ukraine and Syria and putting
Speaker 1: deep cover agents into the US and all kinds of stuff.
Speaker 1: That same Russia. Obama's caught right there saying, you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: well that's and literally you've got Putin's at the time,
Speaker 1: right ahead, man med Videav being like able thruns mideast
Speaker 1: of Lathermere, I will pass the information of your willingness
Speaker 1: to sell out principles for the greatness of Russia. I mean,
Speaker 1: no one really freaked out about it at the time.
Speaker 1: Some conservatives like me, We're like, we've got a problem
Speaker 1: with this. This is troubling to me. I see some
Speaker 1: issues here. It was a little strange, and in light
Speaker 1: of what we know now, it's particularly problematic because not
Speaker 1: a lot of tough guy talk when it kind of
Speaker 1: when it came to Russia when Obama was in office.
Speaker 1: It's certainly not when Hillary was trying to become the
Speaker 1: next president United States, and they wanted to keep things cool,
Speaker 1: keep things quiet. And now they're saying, or some say,
Speaker 1: it's the biggest attack in the US and it's not eleven,
Speaker 1: which strikes me as crazy. But this has become a
Speaker 1: mass hysteria. This has become a delusion. As I have
Speaker 1: told you, the Russia collusion delusion is powerful. It has
Speaker 1: spread far and wide across the country, and it has
Speaker 1: forced journalists to act in ways that not only destroy
Speaker 1: any pretense of objectivity they may have, but also makes
Speaker 1: some of them act like jerks. A lot of them
Speaker 1: act like jerks because of the Russia collusion fairy tale. Now, remember,
Speaker 1: Russian interference is not the same as Russian collusion. But
Speaker 1: they're so desperate to keep Russian collusion alive. But they're
Speaker 1: willing to magnify the Russian interference, which, as I've said,
Speaker 1: was sure Facebook and Twitter campaign to tell people some
Speaker 1: stuff about the election, as well as a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of other things. That's all. That's what we're really that's
Speaker 1: what we're really talking about here. I was aghast when
Speaker 1: I first saw this clip, and I'm about to play
Speaker 1: for you. You've got a woman who is down in
Speaker 1: Florida and she was involved in uh in organizing for Trump,
Speaker 1: and she's an ardent Trump supporter, but she's just a
Speaker 1: private citizen. Her name is Floorine Goldfarv and she's a
Speaker 1: Team Trump Broward County Facebook page I guess Facebook page founder,
Speaker 1: or she set up a Facebook page for Trump. Completely legitimate,
Speaker 1: audible very you know, yea civic doing or civic not
Speaker 1: her civic duty, but engaging in her right as a
Speaker 1: citizen to express her ideas and support of candidates. She's
Speaker 1: a woman. I don't want to engage any agism here,
Speaker 1: but she looks to me to be probably of retire
Speaker 1: as she's a retiree age and she's just living at
Speaker 1: her home in Florida. And CNN decides to send journalists
Speaker 1: that she's a private citizen. Right, she just did some
Speaker 1: hey like my Facebook group for Trump. This could literally
Speaker 1: happen to any of you across the country, alright, anyone
Speaker 1: who shares their views on Facebook, anyone who is on Twitter,
Speaker 1: which I know not that many of you are, but
Speaker 1: I'm sure most of you, by the numbers, are on Facebook.
Speaker 1: It's gonna happen to you all of a sudden. You've
Speaker 1: got some smug CNN reporter literally standing on your front
Speaker 1: lawn and doing this. We're gonna play this clip, play
Speaker 1: what part of it? And this is the cover up
Speaker 1: what you're saying that's not true or what the Russians.
Speaker 1: I don't care if they were involved or not. That's
Speaker 1: that to me is the least important things. But they
Speaker 1: were involved with you. Did you guys know that they
Speaker 1: weren't involved with us? You know? Just make sure that
Speaker 1: you reported correctly that you know what you guys were
Speaker 1: involved with being patriotic, right, very very patriotic, but not
Speaker 1: being patriotic? Was the group that contacted and helped organize
Speaker 1: some of these activities that you posted on your own
Speaker 1: Facebook account. Those were legitimate. Those were Russians. They were
Speaker 1: not Russians. I don't go with the Russians. That group
Speaker 1: was Russians. I have nothing to do with the Russians.
Speaker 1: Well apparently you did. Now maybe you didn't know it did.
Speaker 1: When you're talking like this, I don't want to have
Speaker 1: anything to do with you. Well, I'm talking what Those
Speaker 1: people that were with me were all Trump's supporters, very
Speaker 1: very much so, and all apparently following the direction of
Speaker 1: groups that were associated with Russians who were actually infiltrating.
Speaker 1: And please please report that. I don't believe that that's both.
Speaker 1: I know all the people that were with me, Okay,
Speaker 1: they were at my meetings. They're all Trump's supporters. Okay,
Speaker 1: but did you realize that you guys were in communication
Speaker 1: electronically with Russian You were posting stuff on Facebook. Hillary
Speaker 1: Clinton was, and so was all horror bandits some of
Speaker 1: the stuff that you were in charge of the Facebook coup, right,
Speaker 1: You were posting and reposting almost word for word, the
Speaker 1: information that was coming out of this internet research agency
Speaker 1: in St. Petersburg. You don't believe that you, First of all,
Speaker 1: this is just mean spirited. The whole thing is I
Speaker 1: think a breach. I don't even think there's such a
Speaker 1: thing as journalistic ethics anymore. They're just all ativists there there.
Speaker 1: You know, it's just let's stop with the games and
Speaker 1: and the lies and and act like there's some this
Speaker 1: is some this is some honorable profession of big j journalism.
Speaker 1: You know, just tell people where you're coming from and
Speaker 1: present them with the facts and let them decide this
Speaker 1: is nasty. This woman was just trying to organize her
Speaker 1: fellow Trump supporters in her area. She's just sharing things
Speaker 1: and posting things on Facebook. And there's just nothing about
Speaker 1: this that in any way is unethical or problematic or
Speaker 1: anything else. And what really this turns into is it's
Speaker 1: like the it's like a person and an older person,
Speaker 1: which we're talking about social media usage also, I think
Speaker 1: does come into the discussion. But you know, look, anyone
Speaker 1: can be trolled, anyone can be uh, you know, catfish,
Speaker 1: and this was kind of political cat fishing. And you know,
Speaker 1: would it be nice if somebody showed up to a
Speaker 1: retirees home who was just trying to share thoughts about
Speaker 1: politics and and said, well, you know, you thought you
Speaker 1: were talking to your friend who supports Trump, but it
Speaker 1: was really someone named you know, Igor, who's in st
Speaker 1: Petersburg and is just pretending to be a Trump supporter.
Speaker 1: Who what does that have to do with anything? And
Speaker 1: it's just it's a nasty thing to do. And put
Speaker 1: this woman the spot. Just show up at her home
Speaker 1: two docks her. I mean, her name is already out there.
Speaker 1: I'm only using because I want to defend her. You know, Oh,
Speaker 1: look at this woman. The implication here is that this
Speaker 1: nice old lady is somehow a part of the Russia
Speaker 1: conspiracy because there was some Russian bots that were on
Speaker 1: her Facebook page, or because you know, they were sharing.
Speaker 1: I mean, keep in mind the stuff that the Russians
Speaker 1: were dumping into the election, where things like you know,
Speaker 1: maga and vote Trump. So who the heck cares where
Speaker 1: it comes from. It doesn't really matter. It doesn't undermine
Speaker 1: the beliefs of this woman or any of the other
Speaker 1: people that were part of her Facebook page. You know,
Speaker 1: think about it this way. If you're at a protest
Speaker 1: and you're holding up a sign that says, you know,
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton is the worst, which would be a great sign,
Speaker 1: by the way, and you're surrounded a bunch of your
Speaker 1: friends they all have signs that say Hillary Clinton is
Speaker 1: the worst, then you find out that some other people
Speaker 1: showed up were actually Democrat operatives and they had Hillary
Speaker 1: is the worst signs too? Does that mean that your
Speaker 1: message is now invalid? That you're a stooge of of
Speaker 1: Democrat operatives now means that they're playing dirty, But you're
Speaker 1: still there with your message. There's nothing about this that
Speaker 1: first of all, requires a CNN camera crew to go
Speaker 1: up to her home. And I gotta tell you, if
Speaker 1: you know, if this were like my grandma or something
Speaker 1: I and I had been there, I would have been
Speaker 1: very uh what is the word? Very aggressive with this
Speaker 1: guy who wants to harass somebody for their completely legitimate
Speaker 1: and in every way fine, And I would even say
Speaker 1: commendable political activity, just trying to be a good member
Speaker 1: of our community, trying to get people to support Trump.
Speaker 1: And this is this was meant to be a swipe.
Speaker 1: This was meant to be mean spirited. It's look at you,
Speaker 1: you foolish Trump supporting Rube. The Russians tricked you, ha
Speaker 1: ha ha. What do they expect her to say? Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're right, some guy you know, Igor and an old
Speaker 1: leg and the whole squad. You know, I was, I
Speaker 1: was in on the whole thing. And what's she supposed
Speaker 1: to say? It's just an ambush, it's meaningless, it's some
Speaker 1: nasty thing to do. You know, are they gonna what's next?
Speaker 1: By the way, they're gonna show up and ask people, hey,
Speaker 1: you know you shared this tweet from the election. You
Speaker 1: know that turned out out to be true. Do you
Speaker 1: know that you're a purveyor of fake news? Like well,
Speaker 1: just a private citizen. You know, people make mistakes, back off,
Speaker 1: so you know how to investigate of team. But here's
Speaker 1: the even better question. So now that we're establishing harassing,
Speaker 1: semi stalking, and doxing private citizens because they were engaged
Speaker 1: in political activity on the internet that the Russians intentionally
Speaker 1: involved themselves in through subterfuge and in very few places
Speaker 1: and with very with no real success. But anyway, did
Speaker 1: happen somewhat a couple of people whatever, If that's the
Speaker 1: new standard, though, I want to know when CNN shows
Speaker 1: up on James Comes lawn and says, excuse me, former
Speaker 1: FBI director, did you know that a foreign agent Christopher
Speaker 1: Steele fed you Russian disinformation to affect the outcome of
Speaker 1: an election, lied to you in the FBI about it.
Speaker 1: We think and almost changed the course of American history
Speaker 1: through this foreign scheme paid for by the d n
Speaker 1: C and Hillary Clinton. Do you have a comment on that, sir.
Speaker 1: They could wait outside at Comby's home. I'm sure they
Speaker 1: could find him really easy, ask him, did you know
Speaker 1: you were being duped? They could do the same thing
Speaker 1: with McCabe, with Yates, all these fancy d o J
Speaker 1: folks who thought they were doing the country a big
Speaker 1: favor by making sure that they turned the screws as
Speaker 1: tight as they could on the Trump team. No, Sena
Speaker 1: is not going to do that. I'm not gonna do
Speaker 1: that at all. Oh. These these are the kind of
Speaker 1: journalists that that can really they really stir, stir the emotions,
Speaker 1: you know, they really make you feel make you feel
Speaker 1: proud of big J journalism in this country. They are
Speaker 1: afflicting the afflicted and comforting the comfortable. That's what CNN
Speaker 1: likes to do, go after people harassed. It was gross.
Speaker 1: I watched it a couple of times. I just thought,
Speaker 1: I just will what what are they trying? You know,
Speaker 1: he's trying to humiliate this woman. She didn't do anything wrong.
Speaker 1: What are they trying to prove? What was the purpose
Speaker 1: of that segment, you know. And by the way, do
Speaker 1: we think that she now has also had people writing
Speaker 1: her saying terrible things to her, targeting her, because of
Speaker 1: course she does, right, We all can expect that every
Speaker 1: left wing idiot out there is gonna be writing her
Speaker 1: nasty stuff. And you know, you old blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Thanks CNN really doing your part to enlighten the conversation,
Speaker 1: really really doing your part to make sure that people
Speaker 1: act responsibly and in a decent fashion to each other.
Speaker 1: You know, if we're gonna get all these lectures about
Speaker 1: how we need how we need to be treating each
Speaker 1: other with with particular dignity in the aftermath of the
Speaker 1: shooting from CNN, I would also like seeing then to
Speaker 1: extend that beyond just the issue where they really mean
Speaker 1: silence from the opposition. That's what they think dignity that,
Speaker 1: that's what they think being respectful is. You know, just
Speaker 1: be quiet while we lecture you. We got more on
Speaker 1: the rush the thing too, because it's been quite a
Speaker 1: week for that eight four four to five, eight four
Speaker 1: four nine, much more coming. I'll be right back. We
Speaker 1: think that there's a bit of a revision of history
Speaker 1: going on about how this president has confronted Russia and
Speaker 1: dealt with Russia, and how the last administration dealt and
Speaker 1: confronted Russia. Remember the Obama administration uh implemented the Russia
Speaker 1: Reset policy, a failure of making concession and concession after
Speaker 1: concession to putin with very little in return. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: this president has confronted Russia when appropriate. He has stepped
Speaker 1: forward and authorized the sale of offensive weapons in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: He did authorize air strikes in Syria over Russian objections.
Speaker 1: Just last week, the White House called out Russia for
Speaker 1: the largest cyber attack in global history. We have been tough,
Speaker 1: we have been measured, We have been smart and appropriate
Speaker 1: and dealing with Russia. You know, what you had from
Speaker 1: the administration is a lot of hot rhetoric with very
Speaker 1: little results. That's Ron Shaw, who's the White House Deputy
Speaker 1: Press Secretary, and he raises some very important points when
Speaker 1: you look at actions not words, the Trump administration has
Speaker 1: done many things that are not in Russia's interest that
Speaker 1: you would not expect someone who is overly friendly towards
Speaker 1: Russia to do. Perhaps most notable of all, You know,
Speaker 1: if you really want to curtail Putin's power. If you
Speaker 1: want to put Russia in a tough spot, among the
Speaker 1: very best ways for America to do that that does
Speaker 1: not involve, obviously anything crazy and military, would be what
Speaker 1: the Trump administration is doing, which is just trying to
Speaker 1: open the floodgates of US energy exports onto the global market.
Speaker 1: That has a much bigger influence on Russia's future and
Speaker 1: Putin's power than anything else that they're talking about. You
Speaker 1: want to talk about sanctions, Russia with the price of
Speaker 1: a barrel of oil where it is now is a
Speaker 1: very different place than Russia with soil at a twenty
Speaker 1: dollars a barrel, and that affects their military spending, that
Speaker 1: affects their everything. It affects their ability to project power
Speaker 1: by supporting regimes that do their bidding right. And so
Speaker 1: some of what Trump does has the added effect of
Speaker 1: annoying Russia, but just also happens to be good for
Speaker 1: the United States. So it's not a nice thing. He
Speaker 1: doesn't go around picking on necessary fights with the Russian government,
Speaker 1: and he's not full of all this anti Putin bluster.
Speaker 1: I would also note that you know you had I
Speaker 1: played the audio for you of Obama with Medvedev when
Speaker 1: he was the Russian premier. You know, Obama is like
Speaker 1: holding his hand and saying, tell Putin that I've got
Speaker 1: his you know, we're gonna be able to work more
Speaker 1: together and everything else. Putin was just as bad then
Speaker 1: than he is now. This is just a complete historical
Speaker 1: rewrite they're engaged in. It's a you right on how
Speaker 1: seriously they took the election interference. It's a rewrite on
Speaker 1: the Russia reset of Hillary Clinton. Did she have the
Speaker 1: dumb button for that one or was that the Asia?
Speaker 1: But yeah, it was the Russia reset button, right, she
Speaker 1: had like this is She's like, oh the button, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna press the button. And she pressed it and nothing
Speaker 1: happened except corruption because she's Hillary. So you know, Hillary
Speaker 1: sneezes and foreign despots throw money at her. But you know,
Speaker 1: I'm seriously, there was nothing that came of that that
Speaker 1: was notable from the whole Obama period in power. And
Speaker 1: this isn't what about isn't this is just history. This
Speaker 1: is just understanding the context of the discussion that we're
Speaker 1: currently trying to have. It just seems to me to
Speaker 1: be so clearly one sided and unfair to take this
Speaker 1: view of trumpus so pro putin win his actions. He
Speaker 1: also is as a put through under the Trump administration,
Speaker 1: the Pentagon is sending lethal the Ukraine to fight against
Speaker 1: Russian paramilitaries, largely in Eastern Ukraine. That's a big deal.
Speaker 1: Didn't get a lot of media coverage because they don't
Speaker 1: want to talk about it, but that's something that means that,
Speaker 1: that's something that could actually result in Russian casualties. And
Speaker 1: the Obama administration explicitly chose not to do that. They
Speaker 1: did not want to do that because they didn't want
Speaker 1: antagonize Russia too much. So Trump is willing to do
Speaker 1: things in Ukraine that Obama and his team was not
Speaker 1: willing to do because they thought it would be too antagonistic.
Speaker 1: But Trump is the Russia patsy. I just does somebody
Speaker 1: who want to try to explain this other than just
Speaker 1: to call me and tell me, well, yeah, they're lying,
Speaker 1: which yet correct they are. They're being dishonest about all this.
Speaker 1: So that's what I think it port to keep mind.
Speaker 1: By the way, we will, I think we're gonna have
Speaker 1: to have a little Nancy Pelosi discussion coming up here
Speaker 1: because she said some stuff recently that will be worth
Speaker 1: our time. Uh, and we'll have a lot more also
Speaker 1: come up the next hour. We'll talk about jerrymandering. Whoa
Speaker 1: you like that? Back in just a few other shows,
Speaker 1: just talk at you in the Freedom Mud. We have
Speaker 1: a mission. We fight for the truth in a team
Speaker 1: effort and buck us back with our next play. When
Speaker 1: did politics and money from the n r I become
Speaker 1: more important than our lives? We're doing it so that
Speaker 1: our legislators, so that our lawmakers will make a change,
Speaker 1: so that they will take us seriously, so that they
Speaker 1: will not dismiss us any longer, so they won't reschedule,
Speaker 1: so they won't push us into another room if they
Speaker 1: dance around our questions. But we will not be silenced.
Speaker 1: It has gone on long enough. Those in power have
Speaker 1: not taken action. They've been using their words. They have
Speaker 1: used political double talk as much as they can. The
Speaker 1: laws of our beloved country allowed for the range gunmen
Speaker 1: to purchase a gun legally. The law has failed us.
Speaker 1: All students, maybe some are a voting age, I don't know,
Speaker 1: but some are certainly not. All students are talking about
Speaker 1: what they want right now, which is gun control, and
Speaker 1: how they want action and I wanted to return to
Speaker 1: the gun control issue for a moment here. I thought
Speaker 1: we had left it behind for the show. But there's
Speaker 1: a there's a reason, not just because I want to. No,
Speaker 1: I've in it with you once again. Just saw this piece.
Speaker 1: You remember what I said to you yesterday. I remember
Speaker 1: I said, you know, it doesn't really some of the
Speaker 1: signs you see at protests, you kind of get a
Speaker 1: sense that this isn't just some spontaneous thing. And also,
Speaker 1: why are other schools involved in this if it's just
Speaker 1: about the traumatized students from what is it Marjorie Douglas
Speaker 1: High School? What's what's with now? The school? In the
Speaker 1: DC suburbs people are marching, And I would note, so
Speaker 1: there's one school. I just saw this here. A school
Speaker 1: district down in Florida will actually suspend kids who leave
Speaker 1: I'm seeing here. This is from CBS local affiliate in
Speaker 1: Florida district will suspend kids who leave class to protest
Speaker 1: Florida shooting. Quote. We are here for an education and
Speaker 1: not a political protest. Yeah, you don't say true. By
Speaker 1: the way you want to protest, you actually should be
Speaker 1: protesting on your own time, should not be school walkouts
Speaker 1: for this. What about the students that actually want to
Speaker 1: have class and learn. They're deprived of an education because
Speaker 1: some people wanna go petition their legislators. You do that
Speaker 1: on your own time. What about the adults are with them?
Speaker 1: By the way, they're paid by the state, They're they're
Speaker 1: holding placards and signs on school time. I wonder if
Speaker 1: you poked around, I bet you'd see plenty of it.
Speaker 1: But here's the bigger, the bigger thing right now. As
Speaker 1: I said to yesterday, because this is this was an
Speaker 1: fitable and they were trying to fight against it until
Speaker 1: they really had it all in place. Well, here's the
Speaker 1: big story on the Washington Post just went up as
Speaker 1: we're on air. Students take charge of gun safety movement
Speaker 1: with some help from existing groups. Mm hmm, Wait a second,
Speaker 1: what do you mean help from existing I thought this
Speaker 1: was just spontaneous. I thought we if you listened to
Speaker 1: the kids, help from groups like like what groups? Oh,
Speaker 1: like every Town for Gun Safety, the Michael Bloomberg group.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg the billionaires started this group and just goes all
Speaker 1: over the country advocating against the Second Amendment in every
Speaker 1: possible way, at every and every time. So like the
Speaker 1: single biggest opponent of Second Amendment rights in the country
Speaker 1: as an organization, right, the anti n r A, if
Speaker 1: you will, is is connected to this already, these are
Speaker 1: they're they're already ready. And now, by the way, what
Speaker 1: they're telling you in this in this story, I'm sure
Speaker 1: it's just the beginning of the reality here. A lot
Speaker 1: of these students found their way very quickly to see
Speaker 1: an n Anchors and to national news coverage, and all
Speaker 1: of this wasn't an accident. These are decisions, editorial decisions
Speaker 1: being made by the networking about which students get put
Speaker 1: on TV H. And also you have these upcoming marches
Speaker 1: which they're saying is going to be like the Women's March,
Speaker 1: These upcoming marches that have received money, I think did
Speaker 1: they get money from Oprah and Cluney too? I think so.
Speaker 1: So now we're in that phase of this where they're
Speaker 1: gonna Now now they've got em talking about it and
Speaker 1: we're all focused on it, they want to move into
Speaker 1: the part of this where they can't hide entirely that
Speaker 1: anti gun groups are very much involved in this whole thing.
Speaker 1: That adults who have raised money, who have a political
Speaker 1: agenda are involved in the organization, behind the scenes and
Speaker 1: all that other stuff. This is the beginning of us
Speaker 1: coming to that realization, which you and I have known
Speaker 1: now for a couple of days, but maybe longer. It
Speaker 1: wasn't okay to say it until now. Oh you're you're
Speaker 1: you're undermining their message. You know, you're I've seen a
Speaker 1: few people that are because someone somewhere said something nasty
Speaker 1: about one of these kids. Now, any conservative that questions
Speaker 1: the message comes under fire. I also know that there
Speaker 1: was a a video I forget the name of the
Speaker 1: you never the name of the guy he went into
Speaker 1: buy an A R fifteen, and it went totally viral.
Speaker 1: And in fact, one of the students from the Parkland
Speaker 1: High School who was at the Trump listening session in
Speaker 1: the White House mentioned because I was watching it before
Speaker 1: we came under mentions mentioned this activists, you know, anti
Speaker 1: gun activists, who went into a store, a gun store
Speaker 1: in Florida and he says, you know, I haven't expired,
Speaker 1: I d and I'm twenty and I bought in an
Speaker 1: A R fifteen in five minutes or something like that.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm talking about. That this got a
Speaker 1: lot of play. Um uh, it's got a lot of play.
Speaker 1: And here's the problem with it. He didn't buy the gun.
Speaker 1: I mean he walked in I was able to see
Speaker 1: and unloaded, you know, a R fifteen, and they looked
Speaker 1: at his idea, you know, they looked at his I D.
Speaker 1: But they didn't process any paperwork, they didn't do a
Speaker 1: background check. Nothing happened. He didn't walk out of there
Speaker 1: with a rifle. But the story became I could go
Speaker 1: in there as a twenty year old with with an
Speaker 1: I D that's expired, not fake, and buy a rifle
Speaker 1: in five minutes. This is not what happens. Not true.
Speaker 1: He didn't go through the background check. He didn't. He
Speaker 1: didn't actually buy it, and the press were running around
Speaker 1: with well it doesn't matter, right, It just shows you
Speaker 1: how easy it would be had he tried to buy it.
Speaker 1: I'm like, well, there's a pretty big difference here. It's
Speaker 1: a pretty big difference. If somebody walks into a liquor store,
Speaker 1: let's say, and they're underage, and they walk around and
Speaker 1: they look and they see some peach snaps, and they
Speaker 1: see some soco and lime and you know all that
Speaker 1: other stuff that I used to drink when I was
Speaker 1: in college. Not really. Peach snaps with the other stuff
Speaker 1: and they walk and they look around and they and
Speaker 1: they say, you know, hey, you've got a great selection
Speaker 1: of alcohol here. And then they walk out and say
Speaker 1: I could have bought booze in two minutes in there,
Speaker 1: or they said I bought booze in two minutes. You'd say, well, no,
Speaker 1: you didn't. You didn't actually purchase it. You didn't go
Speaker 1: through the process here, and that's a lie. That's just
Speaker 1: not true. You did not purchase They did not check
Speaker 1: your I D which they probably would have rejected. But
Speaker 1: the narrative is too important for facts to get in
Speaker 1: the way. That's what it really all comes down to.
Speaker 1: Jake in Hawaii, what's up, Jake? Fuck? Wow, it's really
Speaker 1: cool to be uh thought into you. Um So, first
Speaker 1: of all, I love your show. I'm not oss but
Speaker 1: pretty close, and uh yeah, it's a great show, all right.
Speaker 1: So the reason I wanted to call in though, is,
Speaker 1: uh so, I'm listen. I'm a podcast listener. I'm listening
Speaker 1: to the Yesterdays and you're you're talking about the reasons
Speaker 1: why you think there's so many of these kids are
Speaker 1: on the news right now and uh, and I do
Speaker 1: think you're you're right that um there. You know, maybe
Speaker 1: somebody's kind of pushing that agenda. But I mean, I've
Speaker 1: got little kids, and I think little kids are the
Speaker 1: same as the old kids. The thing that kids want
Speaker 1: more than anything is attention. And so somebody has given
Speaker 1: him a microphone and put them in front of a camera.
Speaker 1: And and so you somebody, you know, one kid sees
Speaker 1: somebody get put in front of a microphone. Well now
Speaker 1: they've got a big opinion that they want to share
Speaker 1: it too. I think it's we're just sort of getting
Speaker 1: them fired up because it gets some attention. I mean, look,
Speaker 1: I I don't I I understand what you're saying, Jacob.
Speaker 1: I would just say that I don't want to automatically
Speaker 1: out of hand, you know, in Pune, the earnestness or
Speaker 1: the motives of any of the kids who are speaking
Speaker 1: out of you know, look, they're not only allowed to
Speaker 1: share their opinions. I understand why they would want to.
Speaker 1: That said, if somebody says that the n r A
Speaker 1: is full of child murderers, I have a problem with that.
Speaker 1: I don't care what's happened to them, right, I don't
Speaker 1: care what their backstory is that's not a true statement,
Speaker 1: that's not a fair statement, that's not something that should
Speaker 1: go unchallenged. And you've seen that the media has given
Speaker 1: a particular amount of attention and platform. I should say
Speaker 1: to those who take that approach, right, who take the
Speaker 1: scorched earth, there's one side here that's good, the gun controllers,
Speaker 1: and there's one side that's evil, the Second Amendment crowd,
Speaker 1: and that that's not helpful. It's it's a distortion. And also,
Speaker 1: you know, when you really look at all this stuff, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that we're not hearing from the
Speaker 1: full spectrum of opinions. And you've got these organizations, these
Speaker 1: anti gun organizations that are behind this stuff. How much
Speaker 1: we don't know yet, but we'll find out more and more.
Speaker 1: This was that they swooped in and were very much
Speaker 1: involved in choreographing some of these marches and everything else.
Speaker 1: There's just no way. And then why why do we
Speaker 1: see the Washington Post writing the story today? Yeah, you
Speaker 1: know that the students are in the lead, but they're
Speaker 1: actually established groups that are involved here too. We weren't
Speaker 1: hearing that yesterday. It was just the students. Yeah, the
Speaker 1: organized port portion of it. I couldn't agree with you more.
Speaker 1: And uh. And the thing that I don't I don't
Speaker 1: know if the other side realizes, is that the more
Speaker 1: that you, you uh, project bad intentions on someone who
Speaker 1: doesn't have bad intentions, the more you sort of infuriate,
Speaker 1: infuriate that group of people and that person because you know,
Speaker 1: we don't we don't want kids to get shot. I mean, legal, lawful,
Speaker 1: responsible gun owners are the people you want protecting your kid,
Speaker 1: not the ones you want to take guns away from. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and you know, and events set a thousand times. Lawbreakers
Speaker 1: don't care about laws against guns. They're going to figure
Speaker 1: out a way to get them. But the way that
Speaker 1: they impugne you or whatever it is that you believe in,
Speaker 1: it's a detailed belief and then they throw it in
Speaker 1: your face and say that that actually makes you that person.
Speaker 1: The more that happens, the more it creates this animosity
Speaker 1: in it in any way. I don't know about you,
Speaker 1: but driving me crazy now. And look, I appreciate you
Speaker 1: calling in Jake from Hawaii, Thank you. Uh, And I
Speaker 1: just say that, yeah, without any good faith in the discussion,
Speaker 1: it just breaks down into uh, it just breaks down
Speaker 1: into a nastiness and it doesn't go anywhere. And if
Speaker 1: one side is really going to keep saying that the
Speaker 1: other side doesn't care about dead kids, which is a
Speaker 1: common refrain and the left, this is going nowhere. Um,
Speaker 1: I want to we'll talk about this clearance issue, with
Speaker 1: this feud in the White House. I don't know how
Speaker 1: much you guys care about that or not. I'm seeing
Speaker 1: a lot of news coverage of it. I could offer
Speaker 1: maybe some insight on it from the perspective of somebody
Speaker 1: who's had actually, uh, you know, top secret clearance, So
Speaker 1: maybe we could talk about that for a little bit.
Speaker 1: After this, we will get Selina Zito on the line
Speaker 1: in just a little bit, which we'll talk to us
Speaker 1: about the jerrymandering situation in Pennsylvania and how that has
Speaker 1: implications for the midterms and the rest of the country.
Speaker 1: And uh, I'm gonna tell you a nice story in
Speaker 1: the third hour through some roll call. It's gonna be fun,
Speaker 1: So stay with me and we'll be right back. I
Speaker 1: was gonna talk about cleanerance issues in the White House.
Speaker 1: I don't know who cares. It's not really that big
Speaker 1: a deal. I don't know. The media seems to care
Speaker 1: more than I do. Uh. I thought it'd be more
Speaker 1: fun to do a buck slap. Y. Yeah, we should
Speaker 1: probably get like a non karate chop noise for that one.
Speaker 1: But I've actually started to embrace the old school karate
Speaker 1: karate South Also, we really think about a karate chop,
Speaker 1: not a not a particularly effective you know, it used
Speaker 1: to be in movies like the guy would do the
Speaker 1: karate chop and if you hit the person in the
Speaker 1: right place, they'd like pass out. False, It's not how
Speaker 1: it goes I've seen. I've seen my fair share of fights,
Speaker 1: and uh, I have never seen somebody pull the karate
Speaker 1: chop at exactly the right time and make the other
Speaker 1: guy just yeah, like the vulcan isn't the vulcan grip
Speaker 1: or whatever? Yeah, doesn't really doesn't really work that way,
Speaker 1: But up up for a buck slop? Are we gotta
Speaker 1: get into this now first? Just because it's fun. Uh
Speaker 1: See Nancy Pelosi, she got she got heckled a little bit,
Speaker 1: and I just want to play it because I enjoy
Speaker 1: the heckling of Pelosi. I really didn't intend, never intended
Speaker 1: one group of people to live in superfluous inordinate wealth
Speaker 1: while others live in abject, deadening poverty. Most people have
Speaker 1: to struggle to make make ends meet. So now we're
Speaker 1: not talking about that. So in any event, I don't
Speaker 1: know if you can hear about there. But somebody at
Speaker 1: the back of the meeting, Pelosi's droning on about the usual.
Speaker 1: You know, people are subtract thing and I want to
Speaker 1: have that everything else. Someone's like, you know, Nancy, how
Speaker 1: much do you really ever she really care about the
Speaker 1: working folks? You know, what are you? What are you worth? Nancy?
Speaker 1: It's just a little to preachy. Look, I know there
Speaker 1: are a lot of wealthy politicians on both sides. Everyone
Speaker 1: says they care about the working folks because most folks
Speaker 1: have to work. So that's a smart thing to do
Speaker 1: if you want to be a politician who gets votes.
Speaker 1: But Pelosi is a particularly odious private jet progressive. I mean,
Speaker 1: she is among the if you're gonna talk about limousine
Speaker 1: limousine liberals, Pelosi's limousine has got like a hot tub
Speaker 1: in it. I mean it's really also with like the
Speaker 1: the neon lights, you know, like on the undercarriage, the
Speaker 1: purple neon and the hot tub. That's her limousine liberalness.
Speaker 1: But she's also got some policy proposals. As she once said,
Speaker 1: he is a master legislator. A master legislator, I believe,
Speaker 1: was the the the particular term of art that she
Speaker 1: used to describe herself, which was none too humble of her.
Speaker 1: I was, wow, Nancy, that's how she decided to go
Speaker 1: with that. She what was the context of the other
Speaker 1: It just I don't even know. I just I love
Speaker 1: the sound bites. I wanted to play it. But with
Speaker 1: the mowing the grass, Where was this that she decided
Speaker 1: to talk about this? I'm not just actly sure where
Speaker 1: she was, but was in the context of it was
Speaker 1: it was immigration alright, immigration alright? So she got she's
Speaker 1: got a new idea to help on the issue of immigration.
Speaker 1: This idea is worthy of a buck slab. And here
Speaker 1: it is like, let's talk about where that a more
Speaker 1: serious structure might be necessary, where fencing will do. We're
Speaker 1: mowing the grass so that people can't be smuggled through
Speaker 1: the grass, and that's something levies technology personnel. You guys
Speaker 1: all catch that. I mean, I guess maybe there's I
Speaker 1: don't know, I don't know what she meant there, but
Speaker 1: it's kind of funny, you know, mow the grass so
Speaker 1: that illegals can't sneak through the grass. I don't know
Speaker 1: how how she thinks that really goes. But that's gonna
Speaker 1: be some really tall grass, and you're gonna have to
Speaker 1: use a really big more for the Southern Porter if
Speaker 1: you're going to prevent people from sneaking in the country
Speaker 1: because of that one. But there, that's that's Pelosi for you.
Speaker 1: So she's in for a bucks last and she's not
Speaker 1: the only one. Uh, there's others as well. On here.
Speaker 1: Oh I didn't I was gonna get to Michael Moore,
Speaker 1: but I guess that was yesterday over at MSNBC. That's right, MSNBC.
Speaker 1: This is what she's a former Republican strategist or something.
Speaker 1: Does she wh does she work for the Bush White House?
Speaker 1: I forget what she did. Nicole Wallace over there, here's
Speaker 1: here's her nugget of wisdom over at MSNBC on Obama
Speaker 1: versus Trump when it comes to the media. I guess
Speaker 1: one of the differences between UM any any stipulated UM
Speaker 1: lack of of fulsomeness in the Obama era response was
Speaker 1: it didn't have a network. UM distorting the truth for it,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, does Fox News existed as an echo chamber
Speaker 1: for the politicians they supported. You don't have the politician
Speaker 1: himself echoing the echo chamber. So it's I don't know
Speaker 1: what you call it, stereo in in in three for
Speaker 1: it could not be more ironic. It couldn't be any
Speaker 1: funnier then a conservative who's been or actions to conserve
Speaker 1: a former Republican who's been brought over to MSNBC to
Speaker 1: bash the current Republican administration talking about the echo chamber
Speaker 1: effect of Fox versus Oh, nothing else like that exists,
Speaker 1: She says, Oh, hold on a second, I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: MSNBC was effectively state news for all eight years of
Speaker 1: the obaministration. In fact, their numbers, their ratings dropped considerably
Speaker 1: because they were so uh in the tank for Obama.
Speaker 1: They were so willing to bend over backwards and do
Speaker 1: any of the obamais ration that even people on the
Speaker 1: left we're like, oh, gosh, stop too much, too much
Speaker 1: with the hugging and the p d A, and you know,
Speaker 1: there's too much and that's what was going on over there.
Speaker 1: So there's a lack of self awareness that is pervasive
Speaker 1: in in the media about why we just don't want
Speaker 1: to hear it when it comes to how it was
Speaker 1: better or more transparent under the obamabistration or any of
Speaker 1: that stuff we've got. Oh, I do have some additional
Speaker 1: Winter Olympics thoughts that I wanted to share with you
Speaker 1: my my follow up to my little screen about the
Speaker 1: Winter Olympics from yesterday. Selena Zito will be joining. She
Speaker 1: can talk about jerry mandering. Is gonna be fascinating. Stay
Speaker 1: for that. Hey, all right, welcome to our three of
Speaker 1: the buck Sucks and show everybody. We will be joined
Speaker 1: by Selena Zito here shortly. She'll be talking to us
Speaker 1: about should be talking to us about what's going on
Speaker 1: with redistricting, which doesn't sound necessarily like, oh wow, redistricting,
Speaker 1: but actually it could be the difference between control of
Speaker 1: the House for the Republicans and the loss of the House.
Speaker 1: It has implications across the whole country. So it's one
Speaker 1: of those things that's really important. Even though it's not
Speaker 1: a shouting match with a dumb Hollywood celebrity, we don't
Speaker 1: we can all just kind of laugh at them, right,
Speaker 1: This is actually something that's down in the policy reads
Speaker 1: a little bit. We will have Selina joining because Pennsylvania
Speaker 1: is becoming a bell weather. It is a bell weather
Speaker 1: for how this is all going to shake out. And
Speaker 1: there's the country. You also have a special election coming
Speaker 1: up there. We'll get to that. I just had some
Speaker 1: other thoughts I want to throw in here, like, for example,
Speaker 1: I'm not the only one who is, let's just say,
Speaker 1: not deeply impressed by the whole Winter Olympics thing. There
Speaker 1: was a piece up on that was this PJ media
Speaker 1: that I found that I found particularly of music. It
Speaker 1: tells you about how you know some of these sports
Speaker 1: it's really not that impressive when you look at the
Speaker 1: background and what's going on here with some of them, right,
Speaker 1: I know, downhill skiing is incredible and super competitive and
Speaker 1: all this stuff, But you know, I've always looked at,
Speaker 1: for example, the guys who are on the ice luge,
Speaker 1: and I'm like, I know there's I'm sure that there's
Speaker 1: you know, talent and ability here. And this is where
Speaker 1: someone's gonna yell at me for comparing it to being
Speaker 1: a race car driver. But being a race car driver
Speaker 1: is an incredible skill, but I don't know if it
Speaker 1: is an athletics skill. Because what are you saying now,
Speaker 1: I'm saying, like you could bob slid like that, I
Speaker 1: could be up. I could do a bob slid, all right,
Speaker 1: And that's not saying much when you look at some
Speaker 1: of this stuff. I'm not trying to hate on the
Speaker 1: Winter Olympics. I'm just trying to keep it real when
Speaker 1: you look at some of this stuff you have. For example,
Speaker 1: for example, and this is pointed out p J Media's
Speaker 1: piece here, German Madrazo, who is across country skier from
Speaker 1: Mexico and German from Mexico, finished dead last a hundred
Speaker 1: and fifteen out of a hundred and fifteen. But he
Speaker 1: took up skiing. Let's just be clear. He took up skiing.
Speaker 1: He's forty three years old, he started skiing last year,
Speaker 1: and he's in the Olympics now. I people, you can
Speaker 1: tell me as much as you want that it requires
Speaker 1: all this skill and everything else, but I can't even
Speaker 1: tell you about this from my own experience. So you know,
Speaker 1: when I when I was in college, what they used
Speaker 1: to like to do, or they would pick up all
Speaker 1: the walk on athletes or people that were gonna walk
Speaker 1: onto sports that weren't recruited, they wanted to pick them
Speaker 1: up for either crew or or rugby. Now, crew was
Speaker 1: competing at the intercollegiate level. Rugby did, but also I
Speaker 1: think rugby was was a lot of it was in
Speaker 1: her mural. So it was did you want to get
Speaker 1: up at five o'clock in the morning or did you
Speaker 1: want to have some two pound dude squashing you and
Speaker 1: like stabbing you through the heart with his cleats. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know that was kind of the that was the
Speaker 1: choice that you had. But the truth is that neither
Speaker 1: of those sports at the college level required much more
Speaker 1: than basic basic athletic ability and willingness to endure pain
Speaker 1: of different kinds. And I'm somebody who wrote cruise, I
Speaker 1: can tell you that's what crewis. Just it's it's endurance,
Speaker 1: but not just like physical endurance. It's you've gotta get
Speaker 1: up at four thirty in the morning and you gotta
Speaker 1: get out there, and it's freezing cold, and you're you
Speaker 1: chew up your hands on the wooden oar, and if
Speaker 1: you wear gloves you get made fun of so much
Speaker 1: you're not allowed to wear gloves. So there's like there's
Speaker 1: some stuff that goes into it that has nothing to
Speaker 1: do with being a good athlete. It's just do you
Speaker 1: want to do this? So this is kind of how
Speaker 1: I feel about the you know, winner limit. Whereas, for example,
Speaker 1: the you know, the amerst basketball team, there were guys
Speaker 1: who are trying out, who are walk on. Never mind,
Speaker 1: the recruits were like really good and they were way
Speaker 1: more really good basketball players than there were slots on
Speaker 1: the team, many of whom had played at a high
Speaker 1: level in high school, etcetera, etcetera. You know. It's whereas
Speaker 1: in rugby was like do you like to run people over? Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. I didn't like Yeah, rugby. I wasn't a
Speaker 1: fan of rugby folks. Really, I'm just gonna be honest
Speaker 1: with you. The Crew people were a little like we
Speaker 1: wrote Crew, you know, there's some of that going on.
Speaker 1: But rugby was all like we ran out of keg bis,
Speaker 1: so now we're going to run over each other. It
Speaker 1: was a lot of that. Rugby was unimpressive at amirs.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying, uh anyway, but with this Winter Olympic stuff,
Speaker 1: I look at it and I see some of these sports,
Speaker 1: I'm like, you know, how good do you really have
Speaker 1: to be? Just saying if you could pick up a
Speaker 1: sport for the first time and make it to the Olympics.
Speaker 1: There's really only a couple of options here. One, you're
Speaker 1: competing from a country where potentially not all countries qualify, right,
Speaker 1: So that's the thing, Right, So you're competing in a
Speaker 1: country to begin with, though, where there's not a lot
Speaker 1: of competition and a lot of folks trying to do it.
Speaker 1: You know, at some point, being the best bullfighter in Alaska,
Speaker 1: for example, would not be all that impressive. I think
Speaker 1: we could say that it is in fact possible that
Speaker 1: if I were to study bullfighting in Spain or Mexico
Speaker 1: and then go up to Alaska, I may be the
Speaker 1: most talented bullfighter in Alaska. But that wouldn't mean that
Speaker 1: I was a good bullfighter. Also, by the way, I'm
Speaker 1: very opposed to bullfighting. I think it's gross. But that's
Speaker 1: a whole other discussion. Uh, this is kind of how
Speaker 1: I feel about somebod these winter winter Olympic sports. The
Speaker 1: competition is just not the same as it as for
Speaker 1: other things. If you're the fastest human being on land
Speaker 1: on the planet, that's incredible, right, And if you're even
Speaker 1: close to one of the fastest human because everybody can run,
Speaker 1: I mean pretty much right, everybody is able to you know,
Speaker 1: is able to do some form of UH track and
Speaker 1: field sport in one way or another. And so if
Speaker 1: you're the fastest, that's really really impressive. But if you're
Speaker 1: the best person at getting into a kind of year
Speaker 1: snow space shuttle like thing and going real fast down
Speaker 1: a hill, aren't you kind of just the best letter
Speaker 1: among the people that are using sleds. I know that
Speaker 1: this is sacrilege to some people and they would yell
Speaker 1: at me and win or you know, but I just
Speaker 1: the moment you introduce that you need to have snow
Speaker 1: and elevation for a sport to to go on, you're
Speaker 1: cutting out like a huge, popular, huge part of the
Speaker 1: world population. There's a reason why if you're in one
Speaker 1: of the most competitive soccer leagues on the planet, and
Speaker 1: a lot of you are like boo soccer. But I'm
Speaker 1: just saying it's because kids whether they are in the
Speaker 1: UH you know, in the the inner city of Guadalajara,
Speaker 1: all the way out to Spain, Italy to Germany, China
Speaker 1: to Japan. I mean, you know, they can play soccer
Speaker 1: anywhere all across the African content. They can play soccer anywhere,
Speaker 1: So if you're really good at it, it it means you're
Speaker 1: better than a whole lot of people. I feel with
Speaker 1: some of this Winter Olympics stuff, I'm just saying there's
Speaker 1: some of these sports where it's like, well, do you
Speaker 1: want to do it? Because if you want to do it,
Speaker 1: you're already like top five hundred in the world. You know,
Speaker 1: this is this is uh. This kind of reminds me
Speaker 1: of a guy that I work with some years ago
Speaker 1: who used to tell me that, you know, he was
Speaker 1: a professional lacrosse player, and I was like, how can
Speaker 1: you be a professional lacrosse player? We we work together,
Speaker 1: and he's like, well, you know, it's it's like a
Speaker 1: it's a part time thing. And I'm like, well, is
Speaker 1: that the only league. Who's yeah, yeah, it's the only
Speaker 1: it's the only professional across Because I said, it's so
Speaker 1: you're a professional in that this is not your full
Speaker 1: time job. I feel like that's saying something about the
Speaker 1: level of interest and competition in lacrosse across the across
Speaker 1: the country. I think that's telling us something. I think
Speaker 1: the market is speaking there in some way, and that
Speaker 1: factor is into then why is it that a professional
Speaker 1: across player maybe makes I don't know, I have no idea,
Speaker 1: but a salary that a person makes to do another
Speaker 1: kind a job, whereas if you're a baseball, basketball, football,
Speaker 1: et cetera player, you're making crazy money at the professional level.
Speaker 1: It has to do at some levels supply and demand. Yes,
Speaker 1: the the audience sets supply to mend with what they
Speaker 1: want to see, but also the athletes. You know, this
Speaker 1: is what I'm saying. You know, this is also how
Speaker 1: they try to game the system with college admissions. People
Speaker 1: say that I want my kid to learn the obo
Speaker 1: because I want them to get into the school of
Speaker 1: their dreams. Nobody really wants to play the obo, But
Speaker 1: if you play the violin, there are other people that
Speaker 1: are gonna be playing the violin. If you play the obo,
Speaker 1: they're like, oh my gosh, we have an obo player. Like,
Speaker 1: you know, you might be the best oboist, and you know,
Speaker 1: best oboist in southern Louisiana. All actually, Louisiana's got great music,
Speaker 1: so that wouldn't be easy. But you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: you might be the best oboist and northern South Dakota,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, it probably wouldn't be that hard.
Speaker 1: I don't know how many oboists are running around up there.
Speaker 1: So this is this is kind of my feeling about
Speaker 1: the Winter Olympic. Others are noticing it too. Yes, I know,
Speaker 1: come at me, you can tell me I'm wrong, But
Speaker 1: I just think that it's it's not the same as
Speaker 1: the Olympics, where it's incredible feats of strength and skill
Speaker 1: and speed on land. All right, I'm just saying that's
Speaker 1: my thought. That's the last I'm gonna say about the
Speaker 1: Wind Olympics. I promised. We've got Selena Zito on some
Speaker 1: politics coming up now, stay with me. You know, we're
Speaker 1: already thinking about the mid terms, but we are seeing
Speaker 1: some things in the political landscape shift in advance of
Speaker 1: those mid terms, particularly in Pennsylvania, which right now is
Speaker 1: at the heart of fights over jerrymandering. There's also a
Speaker 1: special election coming up there. This has given us a
Speaker 1: sense of what to expect going forward, and a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of other congressional races has national implications. But let's
Speaker 1: drill down into the Pennsylvania political scene for a moment
Speaker 1: so we can understand those lessons. To do it, We've
Speaker 1: got Selena Zito with us now. She is a national
Speaker 1: political reporter. Selena, great to have you back. Thanks so
Speaker 1: much for having me. So tell me about, first off,
Speaker 1: the jerrymandering situation in Pennsylvania, which which has gotten pretty
Speaker 1: gotten pretty interesting. Yeah. So, about to two and a
Speaker 1: half weeks ago, the State Supreme Court UH ruled that
Speaker 1: the the redistricting, the jereman daring done here in Pennsylvania
Speaker 1: in two thousand eleven after the two census was was
Speaker 1: They said it was constitutional, unconstitutional because it's partisans Well,
Speaker 1: by definition, jerrymandering is partisan. But anyways, so through a
Speaker 1: fight back and forth, as the state constitution or the
Speaker 1: state Supreme Court said that the state, the state legislature,
Speaker 1: which is majority Republican, had to redraw a map and
Speaker 1: have it approved by a Democratic governor. Tom Wolf, Well,
Speaker 1: that's not gonna happen. They can't even do a budget
Speaker 1: every year, let alone agree on a map. And it's
Speaker 1: been you know, just a span of days now. But
Speaker 1: so that you will understand what the court system, state
Speaker 1: Supreme court system is like here in Pennsylvania. It is
Speaker 1: elected and it is partisan. And in two thousand and fifteen,
Speaker 1: the Republicans did not have their eyes on the ball
Speaker 1: in the state. Despite being flushed with money, the National
Speaker 1: Party did not invest in the State Supreme Court um elections,
Speaker 1: which I found. I remember writing about it at the time,
Speaker 1: thinking this is really foolish, because you know is the
Speaker 1: redistrict gen will come up in twenty one. Nonetheless, they
Speaker 1: didn't invest. Democrats invested heavily. The Trial Lawyers Association and
Speaker 1: the unions spent millions and millions of dollars double digit
Speaker 1: at Democrats one. So this is a partisan court. The
Speaker 1: parties of court made the decision. And now they because
Speaker 1: both the state legislative body which they directed to draw
Speaker 1: the map, and the governor could not decide and or
Speaker 1: agree on the map that the Republicans gave the figure
Speaker 1: um of the States Supreme Court, which is Democrat, drew
Speaker 1: their own map, and shockingly, they drew a partisan map,
Speaker 1: the exact opposite of what their ruling said, which was
Speaker 1: to draw a non partisan that they put the thumb
Speaker 1: on the scale. The district's now favor the Democrats, and
Speaker 1: it gives the um Democrats a a larger than fifty
Speaker 1: percent chance of at least splitting the eighteen congressional seat
Speaker 1: majority if not perhaps winning it. Now, why does this
Speaker 1: matter anywhere else outside of Pennsylvania, Well, for a couple
Speaker 1: of reasons. First of all, this is a really creepy precedent.
Speaker 1: And I I don't usually weigh down heavy on on
Speaker 1: on partisan thing, but this is really bad to have
Speaker 1: the courts decide um to get into politics in this way.
Speaker 1: It's just it's just really bad. And and second of all,
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania is a bell weather for this for this country. So,
Speaker 1: as I've written this several times, over as goes Pennsylvania,
Speaker 1: so goes the best the rest of the country. So
Speaker 1: the impact of the Republicans losing possibly eight seats in
Speaker 1: this state could impact the majority in the House for
Speaker 1: the Republicans. Speaking of Selena Zito, she is a columnist
Speaker 1: for the DC Examiner and the New York Post, also
Speaker 1: senn contributor. Tell me what is this? Uh? What is
Speaker 1: this going to tell us? You think, Selena, about what
Speaker 1: the Democrat plans are for jerrymandering elsewhere? I mean, is
Speaker 1: it just going to go into the courts? Then? How
Speaker 1: is this supposed to because what is a non partisan
Speaker 1: juryman or? I don't really understand how this is supposed
Speaker 1: to work. Right. I mean, by definition, to the winners
Speaker 1: go the spoils. I mean, if you win the state
Speaker 1: legislative racists in the year before a census, it is
Speaker 1: your turn. You have earned the right through winning to
Speaker 1: draw the lines. We have done this since for over
Speaker 1: two hundred and forty years. It's not like we just
Speaker 1: started doing this. And for four years the Democrats had
Speaker 1: the power in doing this. They held the state legislative
Speaker 1: majorities in almost every state from from f DR up
Speaker 1: until the late nineties. It just started to flip in
Speaker 1: in this century. Uh and and as of two thousand
Speaker 1: and nine, the Republicans held the majority of state legislative
Speaker 1: bodies across the country, which meant they held the majorities
Speaker 1: of um uh the or they held the ability to
Speaker 1: redraw the line. There are Democrats in frustration, unable to
Speaker 1: win down ballance seats, have um have taken to the courts.
Speaker 1: If there's successful in Pennsylvania in doing this, Katie har
Speaker 1: um bar the door. This is going to happen everywhere.
Speaker 1: What can you tell us about the upcoming special election
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania that gets a little copy, So the state
Speaker 1: legist state um special or the House special election in
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania in the district that I live in is to
Speaker 1: replace um uh Congressman Kim Murphy. He left in a
Speaker 1: bit of a scandal UH in in October, and the
Speaker 1: two candidates, Connor Lamb and Rix con Democrat and Republicans,
Speaker 1: they have been redistricted out of the seat that they'll
Speaker 1: be running for, so they will no longer be in
Speaker 1: the district UH come November after the election, or I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: come come March thirteenth, that district will cease to exist.
Speaker 1: So sort of takes the wind out of the sale
Speaker 1: of this election because it doesn't really matter. Neither man
Speaker 1: will live in that district they have been the Democrats
Speaker 1: placed the Democrats and mcconnor Lamb into a much more
Speaker 1: favorable district for him, and they placed Rick Scone in
Speaker 1: a horribly unfavorable district for him, placing him in the
Speaker 1: city of Pittsburgh. It actually should be the opposite. Um
Speaker 1: Lamb should actually be in the city of Pittsburgh. But
Speaker 1: there's another Democrat there, so you know which, how does it?
Speaker 1: How can they be how can they be German and
Speaker 1: outside the district? What does this mean? Again? Just so
Speaker 1: I'm trying to follow this right, it's so goofy. So
Speaker 1: the special election is March eighteen, but by the I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: March thirteenth, but they that that district will no longer
Speaker 1: exist any more. Are It's done, It's gone. So whoever
Speaker 1: wins that special election, what happens to them? Well, well,
Speaker 1: they'll hold that seat until November. But you know that beings,
Speaker 1: both of them have to go out not not only
Speaker 1: do I have to do get out the vote um effort,
Speaker 1: they also have to do petitioning in a district they
Speaker 1: don't live in anymore, or don't live in yet. So
Speaker 1: I see, so they're gonna be interim congress whoever wins
Speaker 1: will be an interim congressman for not very long. And oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, all their efforts will be in a
Speaker 1: district that they will not then be running for the
Speaker 1: next time around. It's like it's like they're switching schools
Speaker 1: and they can't transfer all their credits over right. It's
Speaker 1: it's it's a terrible decision. And can I just reinforce
Speaker 1: the fact that this really creeps me out? But the
Speaker 1: courts have gotten involved in this, I just I just
Speaker 1: find it fundamentally wrong. Yeah, because it shows an obvious
Speaker 1: partisan hand from the judicial side of things, which is
Speaker 1: always that should always make us uncomfortable. And it's one
Speaker 1: thing for Congress to have a winner, to take winner,
Speaker 1: take all of you of of what's going to be
Speaker 1: a partisan and somewhat arbitrary process anyway, But for judges
Speaker 1: to get involved, it's like, oh, so, what kind of
Speaker 1: judge are you? Yeah, it's really it's it's just completely unnerving.
Speaker 1: I really don't like the precedents this sets, and I
Speaker 1: don't care who holds power. I don't care if it
Speaker 1: was helping the Republicans in this stake. I just think
Speaker 1: it's a wrong direction for us to go and and
Speaker 1: I never like governing by this by the corps. Selena Zito,
Speaker 1: everybody read her ladies at the Washington Examine or the
Speaker 1: New York Post, check her out on CNN. Selna, thank
Speaker 1: you as always for making the time great to talk
Speaker 1: to you. Thanks so much for having me, Dame. We're
Speaker 1: going to roll into a quick break and we come back.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna just tell you a story because that'll be fun.
Speaker 1: You know. Occasionally, even though I'm deep behind liberal lines
Speaker 1: here in New York City, once in a while I
Speaker 1: find myself getting to bump into a member of Team
Speaker 1: Buck out there, I get to chat with one of
Speaker 1: the one of the our own. Usually it starts as
Speaker 1: I passed on the street. You know, somebody will be like, hey,
Speaker 1: that's everyone just says hey, you know, once in a
Speaker 1: while the yell Buck, which I always really appreciate to.
Speaker 1: But hey, it's fine because you know, I'm a roughly
Speaker 1: six ft tall, five eleven and three quarters, uh, white
Speaker 1: dude with a side part brown hair. New York City.
Speaker 1: I'm not exactly you know, uh standing out from the
Speaker 1: crowd necessarily, especially walking in the the dense thicket of
Speaker 1: humanity that is New York City. But last night I
Speaker 1: was on my way home from the show and it
Speaker 1: was a great show obviously because that's the only kind
Speaker 1: of show we have here in the Freedom Hunt, and
Speaker 1: the guys walking past me and he pointed at me
Speaker 1: and he goes TV Guy, and I was kind of like,
Speaker 1: you know, I was on my way home, and you know,
Speaker 1: you know, I gave him, I gave him the friendly
Speaker 1: wave smile, right, but but still walking because you never
Speaker 1: know if in New York City, TV Guy is going
Speaker 1: to turn into TV guy. I hate what you stand
Speaker 1: for jerk blah blah blah. You know what I mean?
Speaker 1: Like you you never know, uh that hasn't knock on
Speaker 1: would really happen in New York. I've gotten some people.
Speaker 1: There was a guy on the subway once who was like, uh,
Speaker 1: he had seen me on CNN and he started off
Speaker 1: with you know you make you make very very good
Speaker 1: arguments on TV. And I said, well, thank you, and
Speaker 1: then he said, but all of your arguments are wrong,
Speaker 1: and then he started asking me why do you think
Speaker 1: this and why? And I'm like stuck on the subway,
Speaker 1: I was really crowded, like, uh, I don't know about this.
Speaker 1: I didn't really sign up for this subway ride. So anyway,
Speaker 1: I passed this guy on the street last night and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, it's happened to be a a really warm
Speaker 1: night in New York City as it is today, it's gorgeous.
Speaker 1: I'm walking around in a T shirt today here in
Speaker 1: New York, which for February is pretty great. I think
Speaker 1: it's gonna start getting cold and raining in a day.
Speaker 1: But nonetheless, you can just tell everyone's in a better mood.
Speaker 1: It's kind of amazing to think about it. We're ah, yes,
Speaker 1: it's human beings. We are simple creatures. If we have
Speaker 1: great weather out of nowhere all of a sudden, we're like,
Speaker 1: I like the world. Things are good, things are okay
Speaker 1: after all. And I so I stopped and this guy
Speaker 1: and he's like, he's like Fox News, right, And so
Speaker 1: I realized, all right, this guy kind of wants to chat.
Speaker 1: So I kind of turned around and he extended his hand.
Speaker 1: He kind of walked towards the extended hand to shake
Speaker 1: my hand, and I was like, all right, you know,
Speaker 1: this is a friendly gesture. You know, I'm gonna watch
Speaker 1: what his other hands doing. You know, it's a friendly gesture.
Speaker 1: So he shook my He's actually the guy turned out
Speaker 1: to be really nice and he he says, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm a I'm a Democrat. So he told me that,
Speaker 1: which is all right. You know, it's just let me
Speaker 1: know what I'm dealing with. I appreciate that He's like,
Speaker 1: I'm a Democrat, and I just want to say that
Speaker 1: I saw you a few times on CNN in and
Speaker 1: I thought this is really interesting to hear from a
Speaker 1: democratic perspective. He's like, those those guys were being really
Speaker 1: unfair to you, were trying to ambush you, and and
Speaker 1: once or twice I really saw you like slice and
Speaker 1: dice them, even though they were clearly coming at you.
Speaker 1: And he's like, and they came at you for no reason.
Speaker 1: I was like, yeah, that's how it happens over there.
Speaker 1: That's the that's the way it goes. And he's like, well,
Speaker 1: you did a really good job. And he's like, and
Speaker 1: you know what, as a matter of fact, just you know,
Speaker 1: I happened to be the manager of a very swanky
Speaker 1: nightclub in New York City. He's like, do you have
Speaker 1: a girlfriend? I said yes, in fact I do. Says, well,
Speaker 1: anytime you would like to come by the very swanky nightclub,
Speaker 1: you are invited here, and he gave me his card
Speaker 1: and I was like, look at this hook up for
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hunt. This never happens in New York City.
Speaker 1: I told him. I told Miss Molly. I texted her.
Speaker 1: I was like, hey, honey, guess what happened. And then
Speaker 1: I wrote I'm a cool cat and I I sure
Speaker 1: were back, Yeah so hip, and I'm like see and
Speaker 1: then she went back I was being sarcastic, um, but yeah,
Speaker 1: so it was. It was a nice It was a
Speaker 1: nice little exchange so that happened. I got I got
Speaker 1: that going for me, which is nice. You know, you
Speaker 1: never know people in New York they'll uh will surprise you.
Speaker 1: You know, there's there's a lot of nice folks here.
Speaker 1: This gentleman was very was very friendly, very kind. Will
Speaker 1: you actually get me into a nightclub if I ever
Speaker 1: call him? I don't know. Will I be the oldest
Speaker 1: dude in there? Actually tell you the truth? In New
Speaker 1: York City nightclubs, there's a lot of finance guys in
Speaker 1: their forties who are trying to go on dates with
Speaker 1: girls in their mid twenties. There's a lot of that.
Speaker 1: And by forties, I mean fifties and sixties too. But
Speaker 1: that's a pretty standard dynamic you'll see out at the
Speaker 1: swanky nightclubs here in New York City. I haven't really
Speaker 1: been out like that to a nightclub where it's like
Speaker 1: I haven't been to one of those places. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: I don't even know. It's been years, man, it's been years.
Speaker 1: Like early thirties. I started to check out of that
Speaker 1: and I was never into that scene. But I definitely
Speaker 1: am not somebody who could tell you what the the
Speaker 1: coolest places to go are. I always like that SNL
Speaker 1: character Stephen with I can't do a good impression of it.
Speaker 1: But with the different nightclubs, New York's Hottest club is
Speaker 1: and then he would do all the weird stuff. I
Speaker 1: definitely am not up on what the cool places to
Speaker 1: go are. Producer Mike is And and Brandon Brandon can
Speaker 1: tell me where all the all the tunes are, but
Speaker 1: I do not know these things. I am somebody who
Speaker 1: really enjoys quiet time, which is pretty much the exact
Speaker 1: opposite of nightclub time nightclub very loud. And I realized
Speaker 1: also as a as a youth out on the scene,
Speaker 1: I realized that nightclubs nullified one of my you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not. I wasn't a guy that could walk up
Speaker 1: to the lady and just expected to talk to him
Speaker 1: because I was so dashing and well dressed at everything. No,
Speaker 1: I usually need to say something self deprecating, a little
Speaker 1: funny maybe, and you're going to use use a little wit,
Speaker 1: maybe a little buck wisdom on the fly. And a nightclub,
Speaker 1: there's no way to be cool when you have to
Speaker 1: get so close to somebody that you're yelling in her ear.
Speaker 1: It's like, are you having a good night, and it
Speaker 1: does a thing where it tickles the inside of her
Speaker 1: ear drumlow but not in a good way, you know,
Speaker 1: And then she yells back to you. It's like, why
Speaker 1: are you talking to me? I don't know you. It's
Speaker 1: amazing to me. It's really the worst possible environment two
Speaker 1: meet people. It's the worst place to try and meet people.
Speaker 1: And and there's this whole industry. You know, these clubs
Speaker 1: make millions of dollars. Not so much anymore. I feel
Speaker 1: like the internet and apps have really changed this scene.
Speaker 1: But it used to be they would sell here in
Speaker 1: New York City and then they do this. They replicated
Speaker 1: this model. Obviously they had an in l A, but
Speaker 1: now it's in every city across the country. They got
Speaker 1: the nightclub. They sell you a bottle of vodka that
Speaker 1: costs like four or five bucks to them wholesale. They
Speaker 1: sell it to you for literally five bucks. That's like baseline.
Speaker 1: And but they're selling you real estate. So then you
Speaker 1: get to sit at a little table and you get
Speaker 1: to look cool. And the whole idea is that you're
Speaker 1: really buying social status at the nightclub so that you
Speaker 1: can bring women over to sit at your tiny and
Speaker 1: when I mean tiny, I mean like it looks like
Speaker 1: a table for toddlers. Like it's a really small little table,
Speaker 1: and you've got your eight hundred dollar bottle of Absolute vodka,
Speaker 1: which you all know it is not a steel, that
Speaker 1: is not a good value for you. And then you're
Speaker 1: supposed to be like, hey, yeah, sure, calm do my
Speaker 1: t It's the whole thing. I mean, I've I've been
Speaker 1: there before, I've been through it. I've I am a
Speaker 1: veteran of the New York City, uh nightclub scene, but
Speaker 1: well in small doses, only a few times. But I
Speaker 1: will go, I'll go check this place out because it's
Speaker 1: cool and uh, you know, Ms Molly, I want to.
Speaker 1: I want her to know that I'm a hip I'm
Speaker 1: a hip cat, daddio, I'm hip. So uh that's that's
Speaker 1: my plan with with all that. I'm not somebody though,
Speaker 1: who usually likes to find the place that's loud. I'm
Speaker 1: actually people are always amazed that I'll do this. I
Speaker 1: actually did this. Uh you know Sean Parnell and I
Speaker 1: you guys know from the show we're out grabbing, grabbing
Speaker 1: beers after the show. What was it last week or
Speaker 1: the week before and we're in a place. It just
Speaker 1: happened really loud. There were a lot of people in there,
Speaker 1: and I just asked. It was like, hey, you know,
Speaker 1: can you guys just maybe like turn them it's super
Speaker 1: loud in here for no reason. There's no one like
Speaker 1: can we turn the music down a little bit? They're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I think we could probably do that, and Sharon's like
Speaker 1: really like yeah, asking did so. If I can't talk
Speaker 1: to you, dude, and you're sitting right across the table
Speaker 1: from me, what are we doing here? Dwo dudes trying
Speaker 1: to talk about freedom in America? I don't want to
Speaker 1: be yelling across the table. So I'm that guy. I
Speaker 1: will even if I'm the only person at the borrow. Though.
Speaker 1: This has got me into trouble. I've been like, hey,
Speaker 1: that giant flat screen that you've got like right next
Speaker 1: to my face? Do we really need that on? I
Speaker 1: will tell you that the bar owner tends to not
Speaker 1: I tend to not get my way with that one.
Speaker 1: I've gotten, uh gotten told once or twice. Any buddy,
Speaker 1: why don't you why don't you check yourself before you
Speaker 1: wreck yourself? But you know, hey, you don't ask, you
Speaker 1: don't get you know, you know, the customer is not
Speaker 1: always right, but the customer can always ask. It's had
Speaker 1: a nice little nice look exchange and we'll see how
Speaker 1: it goes. If I do venture out, I'll do kind
Speaker 1: of an after action report of bucking ms Molly out
Speaker 1: at a nightclub. Although also as a guy who's got
Speaker 1: a very serious lady in his life. You know what,
Speaker 1: what do you even doing a nightclub? Most of it,
Speaker 1: I feel like for guys is to and you know,
Speaker 1: the girls are there to dance, and the guys are
Speaker 1: there to be around girls who are dancing. For the
Speaker 1: most part, that's mine or that that's my understanding of
Speaker 1: the business model. But it's been a while and I'm
Speaker 1: getting a little old for this stuff, so let you
Speaker 1: know how it goes. Oh, I didn't even get to
Speaker 1: some role calls. So why don't we do some role
Speaker 1: call coming up right after the break? All right, it's
Speaker 1: that time in the hut when we get to hear
Speaker 1: from all of you, which is a great way to
Speaker 1: top things off and close things out. Closing Tom on
Speaker 1: the Bucks acton show. I know that was not in key,
Speaker 1: but that's all right, It's all right. Producer Mike I'm
Speaker 1: getting better, all right. If I don't, if I don't
Speaker 1: share my music with people, they'll never know I don't
Speaker 1: show them my creative side. People are changing the dial
Speaker 1: right now. Okay, let's get to it. We've got roll call.
Speaker 1: Pardon me there, it's time for roll call. Uh So,
Speaker 1: first up on the roll we'll go to some of
Speaker 1: the emails roll call emails, because usually we go mostly
Speaker 1: to the Facebook stuff. But I want to mix it up.
Speaker 1: If you want to write us an email, official Team
Speaker 1: Buck at gmail dot com, thoughts, comments, questions, suggestions, uh sonnets,
Speaker 1: any kind of rhyming verse. Actually, we love that stuff
Speaker 1: and just just keep it clean. That's the only that's
Speaker 1: the only real proviso, because Mike gets to read them first,
Speaker 1: and producer Mike, we don't want to. We don't want
Speaker 1: to scar his his psyche with meme comments that are
Speaker 1: meant for me, but he'll see them first and he'll
Speaker 1: feel bad for me. So be nice because on Mike's behalf.
Speaker 1: All right, we have first here. Uh we got Alex
Speaker 1: Alex from South Carolina. Here he writes, Hey, Buck, my
Speaker 1: father and I are both original Saturday Squad. That's O
Speaker 1: s S. He is a Navy veteran and I uh
Speaker 1: and we are both active duty. My wife and I
Speaker 1: rather are both active duty. Thank you for being one
Speaker 1: of the few hobs to talk about the abhorrent budget deal.
Speaker 1: But unfortunately is much worse than just a deficit increase.
Speaker 1: An increase in military spending is not more money than
Speaker 1: the troops. And instead we'll just mostly go to contractors.
Speaker 1: Since there'll be a rush to incorporate that budget increase
Speaker 1: with little negotiations and more profit uh, we will instead
Speaker 1: get very little for this trillion dollar increase. Thanks and
Speaker 1: shields high from Alex Wallox. Thank you very much. And
Speaker 1: I can't say that I know that much about the
Speaker 1: specifics of d D and military budgeting, only what I
Speaker 1: would know from being a pundit who reads a lot
Speaker 1: of stuff. I've never been a part of that process,
Speaker 1: but I I believe it, man. I mean, there's the
Speaker 1: amount of waste in the government. I did tell you
Speaker 1: guys that there had never been until now a full
Speaker 1: audit of the military's budget until this year, and it's
Speaker 1: gonna cost like tens of millions of dollars. They've never
Speaker 1: done it before. That's that's pretty crazy. You think about
Speaker 1: it like now we don't need to We didn't audit
Speaker 1: the budget of the military, Well, we want to do that.
Speaker 1: I want to know how we're spending money. Wouldn't work
Speaker 1: for a private company, probably shouldn't work for the military either.
Speaker 1: We should probably know where the money's going. But all right,
Speaker 1: here we go. Next up is Carrie Shield tie Buck.
Speaker 1: I enjoy your radio show very much, especially when you
Speaker 1: do your Hillary voice that happens to sound exactly what
Speaker 1: I imagine her voice sounds like it does. I just
Speaker 1: wanted to say that from time to time, I can
Speaker 1: remember I was told constantly that anyone could grow up
Speaker 1: to be president, and I believe that my whole life,
Speaker 1: and Donald Trump just proved it. Proved it. I can't
Speaker 1: begin to express how much I've thoroughly enjoyed every single
Speaker 1: second of the Trump presidency. I'm so thankful to Trump
Speaker 1: for having the willingness to take them all on and win.
Speaker 1: I feel like even the people that weren't too keen
Speaker 1: in him are impressed. Take care, Buck, and remember, Miss
Speaker 1: Molly is always right, Carrie. We'll carry You're absolutely correct.
Speaker 1: Miss Molly is always right. And yes, I am impressed
Speaker 1: with Trump as well. I think it has gone very
Speaker 1: very is it has gone? It's been great so far.
Speaker 1: I can say that. Next, we got some Oh, Anthony
Speaker 1: wants to share share some Netflix suggestions. Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries.
Speaker 1: You guys know this one. I am unfamiliar. Really great
Speaker 1: art deco and quite entertaining. I've never even heard of that.
Speaker 1: Ms Fisher's motor mries. I have no idea what that is.
Speaker 1: If you have Amazon pri the marvelous Mrs Maisie. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I watched that. It was good. Um and I'm original
Speaker 1: Saturday Squad. And if you ever if I could ever
Speaker 1: give you computer help, just ask all right, Anthony, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. I appreciate that, buddy. That is very
Speaker 1: kind of you. And with that, I think, yep, we'll
Speaker 1: go into some of the Facebook now. Now, now we
Speaker 1: get into the Facebook stuff. We have Chris up first
Speaker 1: here politicians. Oh and if you want to send me
Speaker 1: something Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton, Chris writes politicians.
Speaker 1: And now the high school students keep calling for common
Speaker 1: sense gun laws. I've tried searching for what these might be,
Speaker 1: but I can't really find a clear answer. Could you
Speaker 1: briefly discussed during tonight's show what they mean by common
Speaker 1: sense gun laws? Well, Chris, I hope you've gotten what
Speaker 1: I mean, or what they mean and how I analyze
Speaker 1: what they mean from recent shows. Obviously, we've only got
Speaker 1: a couple of minutes here before I've got a close
Speaker 1: up shop for the night, so I won't get into
Speaker 1: too much more about the gun control issue right now.
Speaker 1: But it's not going away anywhere. This is this has
Speaker 1: become the focal point of the left's organizing efforts, of
Speaker 1: their get out the vote efforts that are gonna come
Speaker 1: out for the mid terms, all that stuff, right, this
Speaker 1: is gonna be the center of political gravity. Well, the
Speaker 1: vote stuff is early, but you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: This is they're raising money off of this and uh
Speaker 1: they're they're planning to use this as much as they
Speaker 1: possibly can. Uh. So, thank you though very much. Uh, Levi,
Speaker 1: You've probably been asked a thousand times, but are there
Speaker 1: going to be any more podcasts of Shields High? The
Speaker 1: work you've done on Shieldsy is really spot all on.
Speaker 1: I like what you have to say in your history
Speaker 1: is right on. It's outstanding, and appreciate your hard work. Levi.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Yeah, I'm gonna do it. You
Speaker 1: know why I'm gonna do because I love all of you.
Speaker 1: Because right now, it's just a labor of love. There
Speaker 1: is no it's just a it's just something that I do.
Speaker 1: Right We're not h We would love to get a
Speaker 1: sponsor for her. By the way, if there's somebody out
Speaker 1: there who would like to sponsor the podcast, that would
Speaker 1: allow me to turn them out master, because I could
Speaker 1: devote time that I'm supposed to be devoted to the
Speaker 1: radio show in the day to day of preparation to
Speaker 1: actually putting that podcast together. So if you're listening and
Speaker 1: you love history and you want to sponsor podcast, I
Speaker 1: know a guy, get you a get you a good price.
Speaker 1: But Shields High is is it's coming. There'll be more. Uh.
Speaker 1: And this is also, keep in mind, kind of a
Speaker 1: test run for what will eventually be a history series
Speaker 1: on the Barbary Wars. I think that's where I'm heading
Speaker 1: with all this, because I think you all enjoy that
Speaker 1: very much. Uh. And now we have Joshua who rights Hey, buck,
Speaker 1: I don't see why we have to knuckle under and
Speaker 1: stay silent when the left screams, when kids are yelling
Speaker 1: that if you aren't for gun control, then you like
Speaker 1: child murder. Why do we have to just take it?
Speaker 1: Why doesn't the right respond with if you want gun control,
Speaker 1: you are allowing child murder by making schools gun free
Speaker 1: zones and disarming the only people who may be able
Speaker 1: to help. The point is we don't have to be
Speaker 1: the silent majority. We could be the loud majority. And
Speaker 1: I'm not sure why the rights stays so silent. Shields
Speaker 1: high Josh, Well, Josh, hopefully, Uh. I'm part of of
Speaker 1: the not being silent side of all this. Hopefully, you know.
Speaker 1: We feel like the the other the counter message and
Speaker 1: the other part of the argument, other side of the
Speaker 1: argument gets out there. Certainly one of the things that
Speaker 1: I try to do here on the show, and I
Speaker 1: do find as you know, from listening to this show,
Speaker 1: I find it really distasteful. I find it grotesque, but
Speaker 1: not surprising that this issue has now been it has
Speaker 1: been packaged and and formulated and weaponized as just a
Speaker 1: pure partisan play. It's really not about saving lives, it's
Speaker 1: really not about gun control. It's just about the left
Speaker 1: finding ways to bash the right with impunity. Are we
Speaker 1: gonna leave it there for today? My friends, back tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Shields high