Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Border patrol is overwhelmed,
Speaker 1: and the crisis down here on the US Mexico border
Speaker 1: is worsening. I'm coming to you live today from El Paso,
Speaker 1: Texas with all of the latest troth and tribulations. For
Speaker 1: those who believe that we have a border that is secure,
Speaker 1: let me tell you it is a day facto open border. Here.
Speaker 1: I'll give you the frontline ground truth on that and
Speaker 1: more coming up on the Buck Sexton Show. Bucks Sexton
Speaker 1: Mission decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Mag no mistake, America, You're a great American Again. This
Speaker 1: is the Buck Sexton Show. Former CIA analysts. Remember I
Speaker 1: can speak for three hours without a phone call. Try
Speaker 1: doing that sometimes it is Buck Sexton. No forty children
Speaker 1: expected to enter the process this month. We are doing
Speaker 1: everything we can to simply avoid a tragedy in a
Speaker 1: CBP facility. So with these numbers, with the types of
Speaker 1: illnesses we're seeing at the border, I fear that it's
Speaker 1: just a matter of time. Welcome to the Buck Sex
Speaker 1: and Show, my friends. I'm here in El Paso, Texas.
Speaker 1: I spent the day with Border patrol and the news
Speaker 1: I have to share with you is not good. The
Speaker 1: situation is deteriorating, the numbers are skyrocketing. The border is
Speaker 1: not secure. In fact, the border, if you know what
Speaker 1: you're doing, if you have gotten word of our system
Speaker 1: and the loopholes in it, border is wide open. I
Speaker 1: saw surrenders happening in real time today. I saw arrests
Speaker 1: happening in real time today. Scores, if not hundreds of
Speaker 1: people in the just few hours that I spent doing
Speaker 1: a ride along and going to different points along the border. Here,
Speaker 1: they have set records in the last week thousands in
Speaker 1: a day along the entirety of the El Paso border sector.
Speaker 1: They by this time last year had nine thousand arrests. Remember,
Speaker 1: even when people claim asylum and initially they that is
Speaker 1: counted as an arrest because they're crossing, not at a
Speaker 1: point of entry. When they surrender, they are an illegal crosser.
Speaker 1: But after being in illegal then they get processed and
Speaker 1: put into the system for asylum. And what you have
Speaker 1: in many cases are people try to come in illegally
Speaker 1: and just try to get into America and then once
Speaker 1: captured by border patrol and put through the process, then
Speaker 1: they claim asylum because why not take that first shot,
Speaker 1: you get through the whole process. You don't really have
Speaker 1: to wait. This is unsustainable. The number is going to
Speaker 1: be over one hundred thousand for the month of March.
Speaker 1: That's along the border. That's people arrested and detained all
Speaker 1: along the southern border. One hundred thousand in one month.
Speaker 1: That number is far more impactful, far more significant, even
Speaker 1: than the numbers back in the mid two thousand, say,
Speaker 1: two thousand and four to two thousand and five, when
Speaker 1: they would have as much as two hundred thousand in
Speaker 1: a month along the border. Right, people would say, well, buck,
Speaker 1: that's a lot more. Here's the difference. In the early
Speaker 1: two thousands along the border, what you had were people
Speaker 1: who are primarily single mail mex Sican national illegal crossers.
Speaker 1: Now what you have are families. Right, if you're a
Speaker 1: single male Mexican crosser and you are caught by border patrol,
Speaker 1: you would be immediately turned around and deported and the
Speaker 1: process was very rapid. You'd be put back in Mexico.
Speaker 1: And in fact, there are plenty of border patrol guys
Speaker 1: that I've talked to you today and at other times
Speaker 1: will tell you that they would in the same shift
Speaker 1: sometimes catch people right, so you know, within a twelve
Speaker 1: hour period they'd have somebody that was deported back into
Speaker 1: Mexico and then would try to come back into the
Speaker 1: States again. There was catch and release, but the catch,
Speaker 1: I mean the release part of it was very rapid
Speaker 1: and it was right back across the border. Now what
Speaker 1: you have are family units. I saw them today. It
Speaker 1: is startling what's going on here. You have of women
Speaker 1: who are showing up four or five children with them,
Speaker 1: you have yesterday. There were hundreds of women in a
Speaker 1: processing center that I went to today that is just
Speaker 1: the underpass of a bridge with some concertina wire and
Speaker 1: some some fencing. There were space blankets, you know, those
Speaker 1: metallic looking blankets that they give out that they're just
Speaker 1: strewn all over all over the dirt floor. Women with
Speaker 1: their children coming into the country in large numbers because
Speaker 1: they know that if you come with your with a
Speaker 1: child accompanying you, even if you are initially detained for
Speaker 1: an illegal crossing, you cannot be separated, you cannot be
Speaker 1: processed criminally, and you will immediately be processed into the
Speaker 1: asylum system, which means that right now, if you are
Speaker 1: a woman who shows up at the border from Honduras.
Speaker 1: From what we have a few from Guatemala today, and
Speaker 1: you say that you have a credible fear, you want
Speaker 1: to claim of SA you have children with you within
Speaker 1: forty eight hours, they're telling me now. Because the system
Speaker 1: is completely overwhelmed, they don't have the space to hold people,
Speaker 1: to verify what they're saying, to check. They've got fake
Speaker 1: documents all over the place, people lying about who are
Speaker 1: their family members, and border patrols thing, look, we're just
Speaker 1: trying to make sure that no one dies in our
Speaker 1: custody because they have to segregate them out by communicable disease.
Speaker 1: They wouldn't show me, they wouldn't let me into those
Speaker 1: facilities for obvious reasons. But they have an area for
Speaker 1: people with measles, an area for people with scabies, and
Speaker 1: area people with lives, and area for people with influenza,
Speaker 1: people with you know, H one N one or H
Speaker 1: one and two or whatever I mean. They're they're separating
Speaker 1: people out by disease now as they come across the border,
Speaker 1: and border patrol is not an emergency room. But you
Speaker 1: have a lot of people that show up. They're not
Speaker 1: dressed for the journey. They don't understand the risks inherent
Speaker 1: and bringing particularly small children through the desert. The coyotes,
Speaker 1: the human smugglers that are employees of the cartel, which
Speaker 1: is very important for you to remember because the cartels
Speaker 1: that effectively run Mexico are making hundreds of millions of
Speaker 1: dollars off this process. Women now show up with a child,
Speaker 1: they're incentivized to show up with a child, and they're
Speaker 1: going to be led into the interior of the United
Speaker 1: States within forty eight hours. So yes, the austere conditions
Speaker 1: I saw that they're held in. Initially, it is it's rough.
Speaker 1: I mean, you have women with small children. They're basically
Speaker 1: sitting in the dirt waiting to get processed, and they're
Speaker 1: surrounded with fencing and concertina wire. But there are no
Speaker 1: other facilities. There's there's no processing center for them because
Speaker 1: nothing was set up for this. They're not used to
Speaker 1: hundreds of people. They've had hundreds that as many as
Speaker 1: three or were one hundred people at one time just
Speaker 1: show up in a big mass and say we are
Speaker 1: here to claim asylum. Then they have to get processed
Speaker 1: through the system. And oh, by the way, while that's happening,
Speaker 1: because all of them have to be taken in, made
Speaker 1: sure they're safe, made sure you know, our our border patrol. Folks.
Speaker 1: By the way, you know one part of this that
Speaker 1: is a story that you don't hear. I mean, these
Speaker 1: these men and women, they're not making a lot of money.
Speaker 1: I mean quite the opposite. They're they're underpaid if anything.
Speaker 1: And there I looked at it, I said, you know
Speaker 1: what about I see some some blankets and some toys
Speaker 1: you know they have, they have DVDs and some of
Speaker 1: the facilities now with with children's movies on them, And
Speaker 1: think where's that all coming from. Members of the Border
Speaker 1: Patrol are taking money out of their own pocket because
Speaker 1: they know what it's like to you know, have have
Speaker 1: kids who are crying, and you know they don't they
Speaker 1: don't want they don't want anyone to unduly suffer. They're
Speaker 1: going out of their way to make sure everyone that's
Speaker 1: showing up is safe and and and they're trying to
Speaker 1: give them their due process. And their hands are tied. Folks,
Speaker 1: by the way, for those of you are saying, buck,
Speaker 1: they should just turn them around. That's not what the
Speaker 1: law says. Right now, are asylum laws as interpreted by
Speaker 1: the courts and therefore, as instituted by the executive branch,
Speaker 1: are that if you show up and claim a credible
Speaker 1: fear standard, you get your due process in court. The
Speaker 1: courts are so overwhelmed by this that it's it's going
Speaker 1: to be three, four or five years minimum for a
Speaker 1: lot of these claims to be heard. Does anyone think
Speaker 1: by the time that they are heard there will be
Speaker 1: immigration judges who will say, oh, you're you're a woman
Speaker 1: and a mother of four who is now living with
Speaker 1: her husband in the United States. You're you're going to
Speaker 1: deport you in your whole family. Of course not. They
Speaker 1: are skipping the entire immigration system this. I understand why
Speaker 1: they're doing it. Right, if I were coming from a
Speaker 1: desperate circumstance in a desperately poor country, you know, I
Speaker 1: might be willing to roll the dice on this too.
Speaker 1: I'm not no one saying that they're bad people, but
Speaker 1: what they're doing is wrong, and it's illegal, and it's
Speaker 1: a violation of our laws. And I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: Congress doesn't seem to care very much at all about this.
Speaker 1: We do not have the attention on this issue that
Speaker 1: it should get. Not even close. People were channing, build
Speaker 1: the wall. I keep saying, no, first deal with this
Speaker 1: because all the wall that we have, and they're building
Speaker 1: new wall here in El Paso. I've replacing the old
Speaker 1: wall with new wall. And I know there's a billion
Speaker 1: dollars of funding now that's being diverted for wall building.
Speaker 1: The wall is essentially a beacon that says come surrender here.
Speaker 1: The wall is like a lighthouse for people to skip
Speaker 1: past the system. They show up, they oh, there's the wall.
Speaker 1: That's where I go. That's where the nice border patrol
Speaker 1: men show up. I wave to them. They bring me
Speaker 1: food and blankets and within forty eight hours. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: the conditions are not good that they're being helping because
Speaker 1: there's not supposed to be this number of people that
Speaker 1: are being processed into the system. But it's only two days.
Speaker 1: If you show up with the kids, it's days. Huge
Speaker 1: incentive to bring children, which also is endangering these kids,
Speaker 1: putting them in a situation where they're being exposed to
Speaker 1: the elements, they're dehydrated, they're malnourished. There you know, all
Speaker 1: this stuff is happening. Where is the focus on this?
Speaker 1: Why aren't people shouting at Congress to change the law
Speaker 1: so that if you want to claim asylum, you have
Speaker 1: to do it from the nearest safe country, which means
Speaker 1: either Canada or Mexico. We need an agreement with those
Speaker 1: countries to do that, or we need to move infrastructure
Speaker 1: down to the border such that the immigration courts are
Speaker 1: right here. We've got them. They are set up for this,
Speaker 1: and that's going to be a massive investment. And then
Speaker 1: we also need clarity on if you can't prove a real,
Speaker 1: credible fear of persecution. Remember, they're not just skip the
Speaker 1: immigration line. They're skipping past people who are legitimate asylum seekers.
Speaker 1: There are people who if they go I've been to
Speaker 1: the refugee camps in Syria. I know what it is
Speaker 1: to look into the eyes of families who if they
Speaker 1: return home, they will be massacred. They've had men show
Speaker 1: up to their doors and say the government is going
Speaker 1: to kill you if you're here tomorrow. Those are asylum seekers.
Speaker 1: Most of the people that are coming across the border
Speaker 1: now have been coached to say we fear you know,
Speaker 1: I fear violence in my own country. When they really
Speaker 1: want is I want better wages and welfare benefits in America.
Speaker 1: That's not asylum one hundred thousand a month. Folks, This
Speaker 1: cannot be ignored anymore. It's going to get worse. There
Speaker 1: are caravans now coming from Guatemala from Honduras. As words
Speaker 1: spreads further south, anybody within driving or trained distance is
Speaker 1: going to start showing up at the border. Why is
Speaker 1: there not greater focus on this? I can't even begin
Speaker 1: to tell you. This is a massive failure, and it
Speaker 1: is happening on the Trump administration's watch. I am sorry
Speaker 1: to say where we were at over twenty million illegals
Speaker 1: in the country before, We're going to start adding a
Speaker 1: million illegals a year until we deal with this problem.
Speaker 1: I mean, how long is that sustainable? All Right? I'm
Speaker 1: live from El Passos. If you want to call in
Speaker 1: and talk to me about this, eight four to four
Speaker 1: nine two eight two five eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: buck will kick the lines open. I got more for
Speaker 1: you on this. I mean, I'm I'm just shocked that
Speaker 1: you know, where, where are the conservatives who are chanting
Speaker 1: build the wall, saying shut down the asylum scam. That's
Speaker 1: what needs to happen. We'll be right back. It wasn't
Speaker 1: just Central Americans that I saw today getting arrested at
Speaker 1: the US Mexico border here in El Paso, Texas, where
Speaker 1: I'm coming to you from. Live as we speak. I
Speaker 1: saw two men make a run for it, and then
Speaker 1: when they realized border patrol was onto them, in part
Speaker 1: because national Guard. Remember where we was told that all
Speaker 1: the national Guard, they can't help. Oh, actually they do help.
Speaker 1: National Guard surveillance vehicle caught them making a run for it.
Speaker 1: Then I was in the border patrol vehicle. We had
Speaker 1: to pack up our gear real fast and hop in
Speaker 1: and got hit the accelerator. We tracked down the two
Speaker 1: illegal crossers and they both wearing bright red T shirts
Speaker 1: with American flags on them. And they were young men,
Speaker 1: maybe in their early twenties, from Cuba. So now you
Speaker 1: have to understand that there are people coming from as
Speaker 1: far away as Cuba. This is a long way for
Speaker 1: those who don't happen to have a map or globe
Speaker 1: in for them. We're a long way from Quba, We're
Speaker 1: we're a long way from Central America too, but you
Speaker 1: gotta cross a whole lot of water from Cuba to
Speaker 1: get here. But there's an understanding that if you show
Speaker 1: up at the border, the word has gotten out. There
Speaker 1: are NGOs I would know that are telling people about
Speaker 1: this process that are spreading the word, and it's spreading
Speaker 1: online too, in social media, and they're handing out pamphlets
Speaker 1: and papers to people in different places that cartels are
Speaker 1: actively recruiting, saying come to America. It's easy, and they're right,
Speaker 1: it is easy. Right now. Forty eight all if thors
Speaker 1: have a kid with you, forty eight hours, you're in America,
Speaker 1: scott free. You're good to go. Two days, folks, that's
Speaker 1: all I have to spend in custody. Two days. I
Speaker 1: know people that have spent years waiting in line for
Speaker 1: immigration to come through for them into this country legally
Speaker 1: years and thousands and thousands of dollars. Or you can
Speaker 1: show up at the southern border with a kid, say
Speaker 1: it's your kid, don't have any paperwork, they don't really know,
Speaker 1: and they'll let you in the United States. That is
Speaker 1: the system. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not skipping. That's what
Speaker 1: is going on here right now. That's why you have
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand people who have done it this past month.
Speaker 1: Hundred thousand. It's a good sized US city each month.
Speaker 1: Will you start to ask the question, what's too much?
Speaker 1: What's and they're all staying. Ninety percent of them, you
Speaker 1: can assume are going to stay in the country. There's
Speaker 1: no interior enforcement. Nobody wants to deport people that are
Speaker 1: in the country illegally, who don't commit Hainous crimes. And
Speaker 1: in some cases they don't even want to deport the
Speaker 1: ones that commit Haines's crimes. But we'll talk about the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Later saw another woman today who was detained, was arrested,
Speaker 1: couldn't have been older than twenty four to twenty five
Speaker 1: years old, must have been seven or eight months pregnant,
Speaker 1: and it looked like the baby could Honestly, I mean
Speaker 1: I didn't I didn't get to ask her. None of
Speaker 1: them wanted to talk to me. We asked the reboard
Speaker 1: a patrol if some of them wanted to do they
Speaker 1: want to talk? No, do they want to talk even
Speaker 1: with no cameras, no nothing, I just want to hear
Speaker 1: their stories. No that they did not want to talk
Speaker 1: to me. Some of them were shy or I look,
Speaker 1: I understand that, and I of course I respect that.
Speaker 1: And you know, we respect people's privacy who who are
Speaker 1: private citizens, even if they've been arrested. We're not gonna
Speaker 1: disrespect that, but it felt like they've been told not
Speaker 1: to talk, only speak to border pat That was my sense.
Speaker 1: That's just my sense. But this woman was in her
Speaker 1: mid twenties and she must have been third trimester pregnant.
Speaker 1: You can imagine making this journey. Came all the way
Speaker 1: from Guatemala, third trimester of pregnant, and was processing. It
Speaker 1: was gonna be processed. She'll be out probably less than
Speaker 1: forty eight hours, probably twenty four. Very very because she's
Speaker 1: a high priority for them because she's a pregnant woman.
Speaker 1: And border patrols very humane and they want to do
Speaker 1: everything that they can to make sure everybody's okay. They
Speaker 1: want to enforce the law, but make sure everybody was okay.
Speaker 1: It's hard when you have what is effectively a migrant
Speaker 1: invasion going on. That's what's happening. If you don't like
Speaker 1: the word invasion, it's a migrant invasion. It is a
Speaker 1: mass movement of people. But that one woman that I
Speaker 1: saw all day, here's an example of what it's going
Speaker 1: to be happening. She's gonna be releasing this year the
Speaker 1: United States. She's going to have her child in the US,
Speaker 1: all paid for by the taxpayer, of course, and he'll
Speaker 1: be a US citizen or she'll be a US citizen.
Speaker 1: There is no realistic universe where she will ever be deported.
Speaker 1: She has managed to skip past the entire immigration line
Speaker 1: in less than twenty four hours of actual processing. And
Speaker 1: that's all she wrote. Folks. That is the story of
Speaker 1: your southern border right now. Please please pay attention to
Speaker 1: this and let's make some noise about it. Live in
Speaker 1: El Paso, Texas today, my friends, quite a day down
Speaker 1: here on your southern border. Not encouraging from the perspective
Speaker 1: of border security, but customers and border patrol is doing
Speaker 1: all they can. We got some calls, we've got some
Speaker 1: lines late, let's get to it. Kenny in Austin. Good
Speaker 1: to talk to you, sir, mister Saxton. First of all,
Speaker 1: welcome to the great state of Texas. I hope they're
Speaker 1: treating you very nicely down there. Thank you. It is
Speaker 1: a great state. Indeed, everyone here is so nice. I
Speaker 1: mean the mayor in El Paso today, I interview with
Speaker 1: him this morning. I'm like, this guy's very friendly. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm glad you're enjoying your time here. Listen, I'm so
Speaker 1: glad you're covering this illegal immigration story. I just I
Speaker 1: want to let you know, first of all, I've been
Speaker 1: in Texas since nineteen eighty. Illegal immigrants have always been
Speaker 1: part of the fabric of Texas. It's been not just welcomed,
Speaker 1: it's appreciated. We understand that they are very much needed
Speaker 1: in Texas. The problem you're finding, and what you're going
Speaker 1: to learn here, is that the Democrats changed the rules
Speaker 1: of immigration when they've created these sanctuary cities. So the
Speaker 1: border protection the people that were coming in, the values
Speaker 1: that they held have changed. It's no longer the people
Speaker 1: coming from nineteen eighty and ninety and two thousand and on.
Speaker 1: The rules changed, and so that that's the need for
Speaker 1: our improvement on our border security. And you know, I've
Speaker 1: said this argument for money, So Kenny, I have I
Speaker 1: have some questions, Okay, can ask you some questions for
Speaker 1: when you say you say that if you should legal
Speaker 1: immigrants are part of the fabric of Texas, that said, yeah,
Speaker 1: of course, why are illegal immigrants part of the fabric
Speaker 1: of Texas or any state for that matter. I mean,
Speaker 1: why should people be able to violate the law with impunity? Well,
Speaker 1: I don't agree with it at all. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm in Austin. I'm hours and hours and
Speaker 1: hours away from you. I'm I'm literally in Central Texas.
Speaker 1: Texas is a very, very big state. At Christmas time,
Speaker 1: I went to Walmart and I never heard English. I mean,
Speaker 1: I am smack bab in the middle of one of
Speaker 1: the biggest states in the Union. And it's just the
Speaker 1: rules have changed and the well, you know, because no, Kennedy,
Speaker 1: I think you raise something. And this is what I've
Speaker 1: started to talk to more and more Democrat members of
Speaker 1: Congress and different members of the of the Democrat media,
Speaker 1: and what I've been asking them is do you think
Speaker 1: illegal immigration is a problem, because I think the answer
Speaker 1: from the Democrat Party or they won't usually say it.
Speaker 1: I asked Jay Johnson, this Obama's former DHS secretary, earlier
Speaker 1: this week, and he kind of said, well, but at
Speaker 1: the end he goes, yes, no, people should obey our laws.
Speaker 1: You know, they don't really mean it though. I mean,
Speaker 1: because when you say, well, why why is illegal immigration bad?
Speaker 1: They just say, well, because it's against the law. But
Speaker 1: why is it against the law? And that's where it
Speaker 1: starts to break down from them there they don't agree
Speaker 1: with or don't know why it's a problem. And that's
Speaker 1: where someone like me would come along and say, well,
Speaker 1: first of all, you have the theft of resources that occurs,
Speaker 1: right because we're all as American citizens paying into a system,
Speaker 1: or people that are in this country legally, including you know,
Speaker 1: green card holds. We're paying into this system that government
Speaker 1: has resources, it disperses those resources to people, whether in
Speaker 1: schools or in hospitals and all kinds of things. And
Speaker 1: if you are present in the country illegally, you're accessing
Speaker 1: you're just de facto accessing those benefits without the legal
Speaker 1: right to do so. And then you get into if
Speaker 1: we don't have control over our border, how do we
Speaker 1: even have sovereignty? How are we not subject to foreign
Speaker 1: influence and forces? Do you see what I'm saying? How
Speaker 1: is that? How is that the case? I absolutely see
Speaker 1: what you're saying. And there's a reason why Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: still has a wall on her southern border in California
Speaker 1: because the illegal immigration is a problem. And I will
Speaker 1: quit asking and demanding for our protection in Texas when
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi pulls her walls down. I mean it just
Speaker 1: it behooves me. The fact that Nancy Pelosi is the
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House. She represents every single person in America,
Speaker 1: and she will not afford the protection for Texas that
Speaker 1: she gives her own state. Yeah. No, I'm not a
Speaker 1: Pelosi fan obviously, But anyway, Kenny, I think, thank you.
Speaker 1: I thank you for calling in from Austin. I want
Speaker 1: to get some of her other callers. Brent in New Mexico, Brent,
Speaker 1: good to have you on, Hey, Buck, shield side, shield side, Brent,
Speaker 1: what's up? Well, No, I'm in eastern New Mexico, which
Speaker 1: is where you're at. It's about one hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: miles from me. But to get to my point, it's
Speaker 1: so sparsely populated where I'm at that that's the nearest
Speaker 1: place I can catch an airport from. So I mean,
Speaker 1: this is the most metropolitan place within driving distance to me.
Speaker 1: And you're mentioning how one hundred thousand of these people
Speaker 1: are being processed and released within forty eight hours, and
Speaker 1: I started instantly thinking where did they go? And on
Speaker 1: the interior side, where I'm at one hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: miles away, which is deserted, like what you're looking at
Speaker 1: there's a real article, Buck, I mean googled Dexter, New
Speaker 1: Mexico the illegal immigrant bus. And last month there were
Speaker 1: seventy Guatemalans fifteen minutes from my house that they found
Speaker 1: in a twenty by twelve shed with no air conditioner, nothing,
Speaker 1: and the coyote that was taken was Waltermalan. So there's
Speaker 1: something going on on this side to push them wherever
Speaker 1: they go once they're relieve, because I know these all
Speaker 1: these people don't have you know, airplane tickets once a
Speaker 1: gee here, do you know what I'm saying? Oh No,
Speaker 1: there's there's a whole system in place, Kenny. In fact,
Speaker 1: there's an NGO here that operates. Um, I'm trying to
Speaker 1: go see it myself tomorrow and I'm seeing I'm trying
Speaker 1: to figure out if they will they're willing to talk
Speaker 1: to me, because what they do is the ICE. You
Speaker 1: initially get process with customs and Border Patrol and then
Speaker 1: they hand over to ICE for just some final processing.
Speaker 1: ICE does not have the ability to hold family units,
Speaker 1: so they just process some paperwork and then you get
Speaker 1: handed over to the NGO. The NGO provides food, clothing,
Speaker 1: and assistance with travel with bus fare or maybe plane
Speaker 1: fare or whatever it is to get you to your sponsor.
Speaker 1: So people, you know, this is the thing. I'm in
Speaker 1: el Paso. I talked to the mayor of El Paso
Speaker 1: this morning, Mayor Margot, and the illegal immigrant problem in
Speaker 1: al Paso is not particularly acutely acutely felt because they
Speaker 1: go all over the country. I mean they're not It's
Speaker 1: not like they just come into al Paso and they
Speaker 1: stay here because this is the first place on US soil.
Speaker 1: They usually already have a destination in mind, whether it's
Speaker 1: Chicago or Philadelphia or somewhere in California or wherever, and
Speaker 1: so all they have to do is get into the
Speaker 1: country and then they have assistance to get to that
Speaker 1: next step. And look, if people want to argue that
Speaker 1: all this is fine and good, if Democrats want to
Speaker 1: make that case, they should make that case. What they
Speaker 1: shouldn't do is pretend that they're for border, border security
Speaker 1: and rule of law. And the border is porous at best.
Speaker 1: Right now, it's really de facto open border and rule
Speaker 1: of law is a joke. I mean, people are scamming
Speaker 1: the system left and right. Tens of thousands of them
Speaker 1: are pretending that they're asylum seekers when they're not. They're
Speaker 1: not asylum. Asylum is a specific thing. They're just saying
Speaker 1: things that they've been told because we don't have the
Speaker 1: resources to check out their claims initially, the credible fear
Speaker 1: standard is very low, and they show up and then
Speaker 1: they get to go to the rest of the country. So,
Speaker 1: you know, all, if you want to come into this country,
Speaker 1: and unless you have a criminal record and that comes up,
Speaker 1: I will say that will bar you from entry. But
Speaker 1: if you want to come into the country otherwise, all
Speaker 1: if you to show up the southern borders, say that
Speaker 1: you're scared and you're not from Mexico or Canada, and
Speaker 1: you're good to go. That's all it takes, my friend,
Speaker 1: that's all it is. And there's a whole system in place.
Speaker 1: The cartels are making hundreds of millions of dollars. You
Speaker 1: know this, this is you're you're watching the erosion of
Speaker 1: national sovereignty in real time right now. And it is
Speaker 1: a huge amount of people. I mean, this is a
Speaker 1: mass migration that we're talking about a million people. That
Speaker 1: is a lot of people. I mean a million people
Speaker 1: migrated into Germany at Angola Merkel from you know from
Speaker 1: the Middle East at Angola Merkel's invitation, and you know,
Speaker 1: it caused a lot of political upheaval in Germany because
Speaker 1: people realize when you when you change the demographics so
Speaker 1: rapidly in any country, there's going to be political upheaval
Speaker 1: and and and all kinds of issues that come up
Speaker 1: with the state and the administration of services. And you know,
Speaker 1: we're supposed to a country is really just an idea, Brent.
Speaker 1: And if you have people that show up and their
Speaker 1: very first action on US soil is to violate a
Speaker 1: federal law under that under that idea of a country,
Speaker 1: I think that's a bad start to the relationship. Well, anyway,
Speaker 1: obviously you can tell them fired up about this stuff
Speaker 1: happens that they don't have a sponsor, buck they get released.
Speaker 1: They just get released. That's what ends up happening. The system.
Speaker 1: People have been saying, the immigration system is broke. Yeah,
Speaker 1: have nowhere to go. Yeah, well we're gonna see Kenny.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sorry, Brent. Rather I think that it's uh,
Speaker 1: thanks for calling in, Brent from New Mexico not far
Speaker 1: from where I am. You know that this is not
Speaker 1: this is not fixable by a wall it's not fixable
Speaker 1: by demagoguery. We really have to decide as a country
Speaker 1: do we care who comes into the country or not?
Speaker 1: Is it? Does this matter? If it doesn't matter, then
Speaker 1: we need to accept that. But then if it doesn't matter, also,
Speaker 1: I don't want to pay federal income taxes. How about that?
Speaker 1: If anyone can come and go as they please, if
Speaker 1: it doesn't really make any difference, then well how about
Speaker 1: you know, I'll come and go as I please to America,
Speaker 1: and I don't want to pay taxes anymore, because what
Speaker 1: is the value of my citizenship if anybody can have it?
Speaker 1: It's a fair question, isn't it. Or rather, what is
Speaker 1: the value of my living gear if anybody can show
Speaker 1: up and stay for as long as they want and
Speaker 1: leave it, by the way, not pay taxes, not file
Speaker 1: for taxes, be here illegally. We have a whole separate
Speaker 1: set of laws for illegal aliens in this country. That's
Speaker 1: not thought of that way, but that's what really happens.
Speaker 1: They don't get charged with document fraud, they don't get
Speaker 1: charged with lyne to government authorities, which is a felony,
Speaker 1: which they do all the time. They don't get charged
Speaker 1: with failing to register, for failure to file taxes. They
Speaker 1: don't get charged for welfare fraud when they do access
Speaker 1: benefits or not in tight they just don't. And it's
Speaker 1: not because they're not breaking the law. You ask any
Speaker 1: USA assistant US attorney down here, they'd say, that's all
Speaker 1: we would do is process immigration related crimes. That's all
Speaker 1: we would do. We have time for nothing else. I
Speaker 1: asked border patrol that I said, how much is coming
Speaker 1: across the border right now in this sect in the
Speaker 1: way of the drugs. They said, when we have one
Speaker 1: hundred people surrender at once, our visibility and ability to
Speaker 1: track down anybody that tries drops down to you know why,
Speaker 1: basically wide open. We don't know what's coming. And people
Speaker 1: that say, oh, it all comes to the ports of entry, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's because we don't know what's coming. Not at the
Speaker 1: ports of entry, at least the ports of entry. You
Speaker 1: have to have them staff, they're people, they're looking. It's
Speaker 1: very easy now if you get all a border patrol
Speaker 1: tied down in one part of one sector trying to
Speaker 1: deal with little kids who are scared and terrified and
Speaker 1: hungry and need to be taken care of, and you
Speaker 1: know there is a humanitarian mission here too, that's what
Speaker 1: border patrol has to embrace. But who knows what the
Speaker 1: cartels are doing when when one hand is busy with this,
Speaker 1: the other hand's doing something else. Anyway, this is this
Speaker 1: is what I'm seeing down here, folks. It's it's very
Speaker 1: bad news. I'm gonna come back to DC and make
Speaker 1: more noise about it. But because the problem is, Congress
Speaker 1: has to fix this. Who thinks Congress is going to
Speaker 1: come together and do something sensible on this. I don't
Speaker 1: think anyone does. So that's why this is going to
Speaker 1: continue for all of this year, and it's going to
Speaker 1: continue into next year, into the election year. And what
Speaker 1: are we going to do about this? It requires a
Speaker 1: fix of legislation. Trump could try to do something v
Speaker 1: executive order, but it would just get jammed up in
Speaker 1: the courts right away. Maybe maybe people want to start
Speaker 1: making the case that violating US immigration laws no big deal.
Speaker 1: But then you need to start making that case because
Speaker 1: what's going on right now is just a free for all.
Speaker 1: It is legal anarchy down here at the border for
Speaker 1: all intents and purposes. So dozens hundreds of people were
Speaker 1: arrested today when I was down here, hundreds of them.
Speaker 1: They can't they can't even bring the buses fast enough.
Speaker 1: Just breaking the law left and right, arst ar rest,
Speaker 1: arrest all over the place. You sing this and is not.
Speaker 1: I know, it's fun, and we're about to do some
Speaker 1: drop kicks against the liberal media too, for the continuation
Speaker 1: of the victory lap over Russia collusion. But you know
Speaker 1: this is an imminent probleming that we won at least
Speaker 1: for now on that. We're not winning on this one.
Speaker 1: You know, I know people have been saying this week, well, Trump,
Speaker 1: are we tired of winning? Yet? I'm not tired of
Speaker 1: winning on this because we are losing at the border.
Speaker 1: The rule of law is losing. I hope you know
Speaker 1: some of the people I know in DC you're listening.
Speaker 1: I'm going to try to get them word too. This
Speaker 1: has to be dealt with. The President has to focus
Speaker 1: on this. It's only gonna get bigger and worse than
Speaker 1: down the line. We're just gonna have as a mass amnesty.
Speaker 1: Say goodbye Republican Party. If that happens, You're done. We're done.
Speaker 1: We become some out of power cute political anachronism. Conservatism.
Speaker 1: Bye bye, you're finished. That's that's what's at stakes. So
Speaker 1: I just I hope people understand that we'll be right back.
Speaker 1: Shift is a bad guy because he knew he was lying.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's not a dummy head. He knew he
Speaker 1: was lying, and for a year and a half he'd
Speaker 1: go on and just lie and lie and leak and
Speaker 1: call up CNN and others. He should be forced out
Speaker 1: of office. He is a disgrace to our country. If
Speaker 1: Schiff isn't gonna step down, who would step down from
Speaker 1: their Intel role? I mean, if Adam shifts shifty behavior
Speaker 1: is not egregious enough that he should not hold the
Speaker 1: post on the Intelligence Oversight Committee in the House. Is
Speaker 1: it possible for anybody, anybody do it to warrant that?
Speaker 1: Are there really going to be no consequences for any
Speaker 1: politician or member of the media for this massive hoax,
Speaker 1: for this attempted coup against the president of the United States? Nothing?
Speaker 1: I'd like to think that that's not the Meanwhile, Shifty
Speaker 1: Shift is out there saying that other people they're the
Speaker 1: naughty ones, they're bad play fifteen. You might say that's
Speaker 1: all okay. You might say that's just what you need
Speaker 1: to do to win. But I don't think it's okay.
Speaker 1: I think it's im moral. I think it's unethical. I
Speaker 1: think it's unpatriotic. Who you know, he doesn't like when
Speaker 1: other people do oppo research. Apparently that's that's a problem
Speaker 1: for him. I was one of the ones saying, you'll
Speaker 1: remember this, those of you who've been listening to me
Speaker 1: for long enough, say, the big crown jewel of the
Speaker 1: collusion theorist for a while was the whole meeting in
Speaker 1: Trump Tower. People say, oh, I would have called the
Speaker 1: FBI right away. No, you wouldn't. If you're in a
Speaker 1: political campaign and you're up against the Hillary machine and
Speaker 1: all of her Democrat allies in the media, and someone
Speaker 1: says they've got damaging info and Hillary, you're gonna hear
Speaker 1: them out. That's that's what oppo researches. Just think of
Speaker 1: what's what's managed. What the left has managed to do here, okay,
Speaker 1: is to hire a an opo research firm through a
Speaker 1: cutout that hires a foreigner, Christopher Steele, to pay a
Speaker 1: bunch of other foreign subsources that he has no way
Speaker 1: of assessing the credibility of to pull together a document
Speaker 1: that we now know was totally bogus and then shop
Speaker 1: that around to both the media and the intelligence community
Speaker 1: the FBI at the same time. That is ethical according
Speaker 1: to the Shifts of the world. But somebody wants to
Speaker 1: have him they have bad info on Hillary. Um, that's unethical.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. There's no standard there, there's just nonsense. Shift
Speaker 1: got mad today though, play fourteen, and that is the
Speaker 1: subject of our hearing today. Mister ambassadors, recognized for your
Speaker 1: open I will not yield, mister ambassador, all of us
Speaker 1: that I will say, we think you want to allow
Speaker 1: us to speak of what we can use your five
Speaker 1: minutes to speak. You attacked me in your opening statement
Speaker 1: and everything. I have not had an optunite to respond
Speaker 1: at all, especially to your statements of what we think,
Speaker 1: because no one over here thinks that. No one over here, Mistorney,
Speaker 1: you are not recognized. You're you're a non writer. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Shift in the on the hot seat. But what do
Speaker 1: we find out about Nellie or and the dossier research today?
Speaker 1: Some very interesting stuff they're coming up. Plus Jesse Smill,
Speaker 1: I think Brennan's a sick person. I really do. I
Speaker 1: believe there's something wrong with him. And I watched for
Speaker 1: him to come out of the CIA and act that
Speaker 1: way was so disrespectful to the country and to the
Speaker 1: CIA and to the position he held. And he was
Speaker 1: not considered good at what he did when you look
Speaker 1: at what happened and when it happened, and the money
Speaker 1: that was spent, the millions and millions on the phony dossier,
Speaker 1: and then they used the dossier to start things and
Speaker 1: there was no truth whatsoever. Was a fraud and paid
Speaker 1: for by Hill or Clintman, paid for by the Democrats
Speaker 1: and the DNC. It's hard to believe if you wrote
Speaker 1: this as a novel, nobody would buy it. Trump is right,
Speaker 1: It's hard, isn't it. But I'm not done with the
Speaker 1: victory lap over the obliteration of the Russia collusion delusion.
Speaker 1: I'm not done with the victory lap and I think
Speaker 1: that we can't be done until we achieve justice. And
Speaker 1: the only way to achieve justice is going to be
Speaker 1: to find answers and to create some accountability somewhere along
Speaker 1: the line here. There must be accountability for what was
Speaker 1: done in the media government figures. My friend Sean Davis
Speaker 1: over at The Federalist has done a very interesting breakdown
Speaker 1: of some of the newly released documents from a deposition
Speaker 1: involving Nellie Or with which you testify beyond closed doors
Speaker 1: to Congress. Now now we have some of this has
Speaker 1: been released, and here are some of the most in
Speaker 1: Remember Nellie Or is the wife of Bruce Or. Bruce
Speaker 1: Or is a senior DJ official involved in handling Christopher
Speaker 1: Steele as a source at DOJ and obviously pushing the
Speaker 1: collusion theory through the very top wrong of Theirpartment of Justice,
Speaker 1: which is really the most frightening apparatus in the entire
Speaker 1: federal government, right, the one that abuse should be stamped
Speaker 1: out most vigorously is the DOJ. The only thing that
Speaker 1: comes close, maybe is the IRS, which has also been
Speaker 1: weaponized against conservatives. You will remember that under the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: But they pretended like that was no big deal too.
Speaker 1: Of course, just so happened to deny the approvals for
Speaker 1: nonprofit organization in an election year, by the way, when
Speaker 1: Obama is trying to get re elected, Just just so
Speaker 1: happened to deny people with patriot remember all that patriot conservative,
Speaker 1: Those are bad words. Can't can't give tax exempts to
Speaker 1: those people. I need to investigate them and intimidate them
Speaker 1: and frighten them. That's what the That's what the Obama
Speaker 1: irs did, and it was the Obama DOJ his appointees
Speaker 1: at CIA, at the Department of Justice, at the FBI,
Speaker 1: they were the ones that we're trying to take Trump down.
Speaker 1: Sean Davis writes this of Nellie Or. Nellie Or describes
Speaker 1: how information the dossier matched her own research, which she
Speaker 1: gave to Bruce, who gave it to the FBI, even
Speaker 1: though her specific wording wasn't in the dossier. Did the
Speaker 1: FBI DOJ use her info in the Carter Page visa application?
Speaker 1: Or also admits in these documents Nellie Or, wife of
Speaker 1: Bruce Ort, she did do research on Carter Page on
Speaker 1: behalf of Fusion. GPS recall that huge chunks of the
Speaker 1: dossier were about Page and that dj FBI included allegations
Speaker 1: from the dossier in the FISA warrant application for Page.
Speaker 1: Sean goes on here quote Nellie Or also admits in
Speaker 1: testimony before House judiciary that GPS told her to dig
Speaker 1: up dirt on Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort, but not
Speaker 1: George Papadopoulos. Or says she was also instructed to dig
Speaker 1: up dirt on Milani at Trump and Donald Trump Junior.
Speaker 1: This is oppo research of a scorched earth nature by
Speaker 1: the wife of a senior DJ employee. She's a left
Speaker 1: wing partisan folks, and her husband at the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice used his access to launder her completely bull salacious
Speaker 1: nonsense all the way up through the intelligence community, and
Speaker 1: he get a FISA warrnt off of this. I mean,
Speaker 1: I was joe around the here with my friend Jesse
Speaker 1: Kelly on Twitter that I'm gonna have to scratch out
Speaker 1: that part of my resume that says CIA, and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna replace it with personal growth, with some international travel,
Speaker 1: you know, two thousand and five, at two thousand and eleven,
Speaker 1: No no more CIA. After what's happened here, it's not
Speaker 1: nearly as impressive sounding to some people as it used
Speaker 1: to be. Hinder, I understand why, oh Buck, is nellie
Speaker 1: Or really a partisan? Are you just assuming that I
Speaker 1: Have I ever been wrong about that? By the let's
Speaker 1: be honest him, Have I ever been wrong about that?
Speaker 1: Of course not. Here's what Sean writes. This is all
Speaker 1: from the testimony. Nellie Or testified that if she had
Speaker 1: been asked, she would not have done research against Hillary
Speaker 1: Clinton that was similar to her research against Trump because
Speaker 1: she wanted Clinton twin and wanted Trump to lose. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean, how much more do we have to know
Speaker 1: about the way this went down before people realized that
Speaker 1: this was all corrupt, It was all rotten, was all
Speaker 1: a disgusting fever swamp dream of people that couldn't handle
Speaker 1: that Hillary Clinton wasn't going to be the next president.
Speaker 1: They just couldn't handle it, or they couldn't handle the
Speaker 1: prospect of her not being the next president, the thought
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump winning, which, by the way, is America
Speaker 1: in some terrible circumstance right now because Trump wont know
Speaker 1: h The economy is good, things are fine, haven't started
Speaker 1: any unnecessary wars, economy is strong. Border is not in
Speaker 1: good shape right now. But I will say that Trump
Speaker 1: I should give him credit for this. I just saw this.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've been at the border all day to day,
Speaker 1: and the President tweeted out the following This is just
Speaker 1: a few hours ago, right before I came on air.
Speaker 1: We have a national emergency at our southern border. The
Speaker 1: Dems refuse to do what they know is necessary amend
Speaker 1: our immigration laws. Would immediately solve the problem. Mexico, at
Speaker 1: the strongest immigration laws in the world, refuses to help
Speaker 1: with illegal immigration and drugs. So Trump knows, I'm not
Speaker 1: saying he's not aware of the problem. He just has
Speaker 1: to keep the pressure on because Congress needs to start
Speaker 1: forcing Democrats. You know, at least in the Senate, Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell has that forced them to take some votes on this.
Speaker 1: But Senate Republicans kind of week on immigration now. I
Speaker 1: don't want to get back on the Immigration Is Show.
Speaker 1: I know we talked about that a lot the first hour.
Speaker 1: If you miss that, please go back and listen on
Speaker 1: the podcast, the Buck Sexton Show, which you can listen
Speaker 1: to on iTunes or the iHeart app. I haven't plugged
Speaker 1: that in a while. So, yeah, we know the Fusion GPS,
Speaker 1: bad things happened there. We know that the dossier was fake.
Speaker 1: We know it was used, although hopefully we'll find the
Speaker 1: full extent of how much it was used in the
Speaker 1: FIES application, which is an enormous abusive power, abusive discretion
Speaker 1: by people who should know better, who should have known better,
Speaker 1: and abuse their authority. Trump is now saying, and I
Speaker 1: hope it's true. He told me this months ago. He said, Buck,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna release at information. I'm going to release defies application,
Speaker 1: I'm going to release this stuff that we need to
Speaker 1: get to the bottom of. When it comes to the
Speaker 1: origins of the Russia clusion investigation, I certainly want to
Speaker 1: see that happen, but I don't think that that can
Speaker 1: be all of it. I think that there's got to
Speaker 1: be more here. Newt Nut had some thoughts on this
Speaker 1: about what the investigation should be play clip eleven. Look,
Speaker 1: I think that there are three big investigations coming out
Speaker 1: of this. One is the deep state effort to really
Speaker 1: have a coup data. I mean you had from Obama
Speaker 1: all the way down. The second investigation is since it's
Speaker 1: exactly the same people what happened in the effort to
Speaker 1: protect Hillary. And the third, frankly, I've been urging the
Speaker 1: news media to create their own special commission because under
Speaker 1: freedom of the press, I don't think it's a government function.
Speaker 1: But I think the New York Times the Washington Post
Speaker 1: should return their Pulitzer prizes. We ought to have newspeople
Speaker 1: look at how but how did it get to be
Speaker 1: this sick? I think Nude's right, but that's never gonna happen.
Speaker 1: It's never gonna happen. In fact, they're they're still doubling
Speaker 1: down on all this. The people who were wrong, they
Speaker 1: don't accept yet that they were wrong. They're not willing
Speaker 1: to move on there. They have not decided that they're
Speaker 1: gonna give up on this one entire there's some dead
Speaker 1: enders on this issue, not just Adam Schiff. Who else
Speaker 1: do we have on at the top of the Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right, Eric Swalwell, another person, I mean, his career
Speaker 1: unless he can change the narrative here shift Swalwell. Their
Speaker 1: political careers. I don't know if they ever fully recover,
Speaker 1: because while they were useful to the left, they're entirely replaceable.
Speaker 1: They're not media stars. They don't generate tens of millions
Speaker 1: of dollars of advertising for you know, far left brands.
Speaker 1: They don't do that. So their position here is a
Speaker 1: little shakier. Swollwell is still saying stuff like Trump is
Speaker 1: a Russian agent? Play nine And do you believe the
Speaker 1: president right now has been an agent of the Russians? Yes,
Speaker 1: I think there's more evidence, yes, And I think all
Speaker 1: the arrows point in that direction. I haven't seen a
Speaker 1: single piece of evidence that he's not. So do you
Speaker 1: still believe that the president is a Russian agent? I
Speaker 1: think he acts on Russia's behalf, and he puts Russia's
Speaker 1: interests ahead too often of America's interests. Notice how we
Speaker 1: won't even say at this point, no, he's not a
Speaker 1: Russian agent. He'll say he acts on Russia's behalf, to
Speaker 1: suggest that, yeah, maybe he is still a Russian agent.
Speaker 1: That's all he's doing. We heard today that the Muller
Speaker 1: report is about three hundred or so pages, and everyone's saying,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, three hundred pages. They're drawing all these
Speaker 1: conclusions from that. What did they expect it to be
Speaker 1: five pages? This investigation has gone on for two years.
Speaker 1: Three hundred pages, it's not that much. I think the
Speaker 1: nine eleven Commission report it was more like five hundred pages.
Speaker 1: Three hundred pages is not that much. They're saying Barr
Speaker 1: didn't have time to read it. No, he's a lawyer
Speaker 1: and he's got a staff, and he had plenty of
Speaker 1: time to read it. And he also knew the underlying findings.
Speaker 1: This theory out there that Bar and this coming straight
Speaker 1: from the collusion dead enders that Barr could misrepresent what's
Speaker 1: in that report and get away with that somehow. That
Speaker 1: is really nuts, because does anyone think that that Bob
Speaker 1: Muller if the report was being unfairly portrayed, or if
Speaker 1: the if the key findings were changed, does anybody think
Speaker 1: that Bob Muller would be silent on this one? I
Speaker 1: don't ridiculous point of view, Absolutely ridiculous. James Comey is
Speaker 1: a person who has done more damage to the reputation.
Speaker 1: I don't know who's done more damage to their respective
Speaker 1: institution Comey at the FBI or Brennan at the CIA,
Speaker 1: but both of them have really harmed the organizations that
Speaker 1: they served for a very long time. They have really
Speaker 1: really done damage. Komey apparently thinks that he doesn't understand
Speaker 1: what's going on here. He can't even really process his
Speaker 1: playclip one jump. Yeah, I sat down with President Trump,
Speaker 1: he says, when I decided to just do it talking
Speaker 1: about firing you, I said to myself, I said, you know,
Speaker 1: this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made
Speaker 1: up story. What did you think when you heard that?
Speaker 1: I thought that's potentially obstruction of justice, and I hope
Speaker 1: somebody is going to look at that Again, the president
Speaker 1: appears to be saying. What he appears to be saying
Speaker 1: is I got rid of this guy to shut down
Speaker 1: an investigation that threatened me. But it didn't shut down
Speaker 1: the investigation, did it. Komey didn't shut it down at all?
Speaker 1: So how is that obstruct And oh, by the way,
Speaker 1: the investigation, you jerk, was of a lie. It was
Speaker 1: an investigation that never should have happened in the first place.
Speaker 1: I mean, this really is the Soviet approach do investigations
Speaker 1: here in America by law enforcement. We're gonna concoct some
Speaker 1: cockamami scheme. We're gonna then throw all of our resources
Speaker 1: at you. And if you object, if you say this
Speaker 1: isn't fair, then you're guilty because you're obstructing our crazy investigation.
Speaker 1: That's what you're dealing with with these people. No honor,
Speaker 1: no integrity, no decency. Here's the piece on I call
Speaker 1: it for the wrong on John, play too, because here's
Speaker 1: the piece on Komey's confusion over how this whole process
Speaker 1: is supposed to work. Play too. But will you convince
Speaker 1: in your mind that there was a strong possibility that
Speaker 1: this campaign, this presidential candidate at the time was colluding
Speaker 1: with Russia. I really didn't know there was smoke, and
Speaker 1: enough smoke to justify investigating. What are your questions? But
Speaker 1: the obstruction piece confuses me. The purpose of a special
Speaker 1: counsel is to make sure that the politicals in this case,
Speaker 1: the attorney general doesn't make the ultimate call. But Mueller
Speaker 1: didn't make the call to bring charges. So what is
Speaker 1: he talking about? Mother, We're going to prosecute. So if
Speaker 1: you don't prosecute, that's not prosecuting comy. You know, these
Speaker 1: people were all rooting against Trump. They were all dishonest
Speaker 1: in this process, all right, So I want to get
Speaker 1: the Jesse Smallllett thing. I don't know how. I don't
Speaker 1: know how this has gotten even crazier. I had to
Speaker 1: read through a few times today the latest on the
Speaker 1: Jesse Smalllett fiasco, because I was like, I must this
Speaker 1: can't be sourced proper, This can't be right. He's not
Speaker 1: really telling us that he may be thought that the
Speaker 1: two Nigerian brothers that beat him up were actually this
Speaker 1: is this is in the reporting. I'm just telling you
Speaker 1: it's in the reporting. Don't blame me. He couldn't have
Speaker 1: actually thought that they were white guys wearing maga hats.
Speaker 1: That's not possible, right, He didn't really say that. I mean,
Speaker 1: we know it's not actually possible, But he didn't make
Speaker 1: that claim, did he. Oh? Yes, his lawyers, his lawyer
Speaker 1: claim on his behalf. We we will get into that
Speaker 1: and more coming up. We have had to make tough
Speaker 1: calls on cases throughout my entire tenure. It is fair
Speaker 1: to say that the police Department is not happy on
Speaker 1: every decision that we make. I talked to Superintendent Johnson
Speaker 1: this morning. He understand and appreciates that this was a
Speaker 1: Class four felony and that although we deal with this
Speaker 1: every day, the surrounding narrative around it is different than
Speaker 1: how we treat any other case. She can try as
Speaker 1: much as she wants. That's Kim Fox, the prosecutor that
Speaker 1: made the Jesse Smollett hoax, and any penalty for it
Speaker 1: just evaporate into thin hair. She can try as much
Speaker 1: as she wants to justify this, but she's now under investigation,
Speaker 1: herself going to be under investigation shortly. That's going to happen.
Speaker 1: What she did is unbelievably unethical. Obviously a case of
Speaker 1: connections and political bias. Intruding on prosecutorial judgment, and it's
Speaker 1: it's truly shameful. She now has had to admit that
Speaker 1: she did not recuse herself actually, but has had her
Speaker 1: office say that she colloquially recused herself, which is not
Speaker 1: a thing, Miss Fox. You either recuse or you don't recuse.
Speaker 1: It is go or no go. There is not some
Speaker 1: other option by giving the case to somebody else in
Speaker 1: her office but still maintaining the ability to make decisions
Speaker 1: about the case. All that means is that when she's
Speaker 1: at the watercooler and she sees, you know, Maggots, who's
Speaker 1: the guy who actually made the call, she says, you
Speaker 1: know what, we gotta make this go away for Jessie,
Speaker 1: And no one knows. Oh, but Maggots made the or
Speaker 1: Magots or however you say his name, miss Magots, I
Speaker 1: don't know. Maybe that's I don't know how you say
Speaker 1: his name. But she said she recused herself, and she didn't.
Speaker 1: She lied. I mean, I don't even know if she's
Speaker 1: going to keep her law license at the end of this,
Speaker 1: I just want to say I think she's and she
Speaker 1: should be in a whole lot of trouble because not
Speaker 1: only did Jess escape Jesse, who was very tied in
Speaker 1: with elite Chicago democrats. I mean, this guy is connected folks,
Speaker 1: connected with Michelle Obama, connected with a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: people at the very top of the power pyramid. And
Speaker 1: not only did he escape justice, but he is now
Speaker 1: going around acting like he is the aggrieved party, talking
Speaker 1: about maybe even suing the city. City Chicago's demanding one
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty thousand dollars from him to pay for
Speaker 1: the cost of the investigation into his hoax. At a minimum,
Speaker 1: he should be made to do that if he's not
Speaker 1: going to face any real criminal penalties. But he's taken
Speaker 1: it to a whole, a whole next level. This is
Speaker 1: one of these stories that I had to read a
Speaker 1: few times to make sure that I wasn't I wasn't
Speaker 1: missing something. But this is the headline. Smallett's lawyers say
Speaker 1: Nigerian brothers may have worn white face during during attack.
Speaker 1: That's right, Jesse Smallett now wants to to make his
Speaker 1: story sound not quite as crazy. He is saying that
Speaker 1: two Nigerian brothers that he is friends with wore white
Speaker 1: face when they attacked him, and that's why he didn't
Speaker 1: know who they were. This is completely insane. Was Jesse
Speaker 1: Smallott guilty? Jesse's my life had not been found guilty
Speaker 1: by a court of law. We believe that the facts
Speaker 1: were sufficient to charge and try us to Smalllett for
Speaker 1: the crimes. Do you consider him guilty? He had not
Speaker 1: had his He chose this alternative prosecution method. His court
Speaker 1: has not found him guilty. I believe, based on the
Speaker 1: facts and the evidence that was presented in the charging
Speaker 1: decision made by this office, this office believed that they
Speaker 1: could prove him guilty. Do you think that he's culpable
Speaker 1: of falsifying a police report? I think this office, based
Speaker 1: on those charging decisions, believe that he is culpable of
Speaker 1: doing that. I mean, like, what, what? What is she
Speaker 1: even talking about? He chose his alternative prosecution? Can I
Speaker 1: you know, if I ever get a legal troubles, I
Speaker 1: got to say, held on a second, I'm I'm gonna
Speaker 1: choose the alternative of the grand jury charges just go
Speaker 1: away magically and no one gets to see what the
Speaker 1: evidence was, or what happened or anything. That sounds great.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's a normal alternative. Oh man, this
Speaker 1: is not how this works. This is not how this works.
Speaker 1: You do not, as a prosecutor, allows somebody who is
Speaker 1: as guilty as a person could ever possibly be, based
Speaker 1: on everything that we know, to walk away self righteously
Speaker 1: from your mercy. Oh keep in mind, folks, a prosecutor
Speaker 1: could say if they do, if they want to defer prosecution,
Speaker 1: or if they just want to not bring charges, they
Speaker 1: can change their minds. So why doesn't miss Fox here
Speaker 1: change her mind and actually bring those charges. Charges are dropped,
Speaker 1: That doesn't there's no double jeopardy here. She could bring
Speaker 1: them back up again. She's boxed herself in here. There's
Speaker 1: no real explanation for this, although, my friend, I mean,
Speaker 1: we know what the explanation is. Jesse Smallet's connected. And
Speaker 1: there are people that you know on the Democrat left
Speaker 1: that really just don't want to see someone like Jesse
Speaker 1: suffer more. They think it's mean that Jesse has to
Speaker 1: suffer more. The same people I would note who have
Speaker 1: no problem with ruining General Flynn's career putting a felony
Speaker 1: on his record for an in the moment perjury trap
Speaker 1: that I'm not even sure was really perjury based on
Speaker 1: all the facts we know, there the people that think that,
Speaker 1: you know, Roger Stone should rot in prison for a
Speaker 1: few years because he lied about trivialities at worst to
Speaker 1: the Special Council. Those people think that Jesse Smollet's entire
Speaker 1: hoax in Chicago that cost over one hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: to the city basically stole one hundred thousand dollars from
Speaker 1: the taxpayers in the city of Chicago or the state
Speaker 1: of Illinois. They want, they want to say that this
Speaker 1: whole thing they're telling us, this means nothing. Jesse Smollet's
Speaker 1: lawyers claiming that two Nigerian brothers that he worked with
Speaker 1: wore white face and that's why he didn't know who
Speaker 1: they were when he attacked them, that he maybe really
Speaker 1: thought they were white. How stupid are they going to
Speaker 1: pretend they think all of us are. I don't think
Speaker 1: there's any limit to it. I don't think there's any
Speaker 1: point at which they go no, no, no. That is,
Speaker 1: in fact too dumb for us to present as a
Speaker 1: possible option. Here. Here, here's Martin Pribe, who is you know,
Speaker 1: he's speaking for the people's Chicago or Playcliff twenty two.
Speaker 1: It seems to be something very, very dark and suspicious
Speaker 1: that they would go to this length to just drop
Speaker 1: a case and endure all this national outrage over it.
Speaker 1: The police treated him as a victim, long after a
Speaker 1: lot of media outlets were describing the glaring holes in
Speaker 1: his narrative. They put their entire they look. He claimed
Speaker 1: he was a victim of a hate crime. The police
Speaker 1: did their their part and they investigated it as a
Speaker 1: hate crime, as the police should. Hate crimes are outrageous.
Speaker 1: They put superb investigators who painstakingly looked at every single
Speaker 1: detail of evidence that they could find, and they presented
Speaker 1: their case based upon the evidence. And to make us
Speaker 1: statements like that is totally outrageous. Eternal order of police
Speaker 1: wants or investig wants Fox investigated for this. The charges
Speaker 1: should be brought against Trusty Small. I mean, look, I
Speaker 1: think that the federal prosecutor should step in and just say,
Speaker 1: all right, look, we got you on mail fraud. You're
Speaker 1: gonna say, you know, we can either prosecute this or
Speaker 1: you can just take a plea. But you're going on
Speaker 1: the record for being a liar. You're going on the
Speaker 1: record for being a fraud and a hoaxter and a fake.
Speaker 1: You're you're not gonna use this to benefit your career.
Speaker 1: I just saw today. I think this can't be. Let
Speaker 1: me make sure this is true before I tell you
Speaker 1: this one, because I saw this and I should have
Speaker 1: checked it out right away. Wow, it's true. Jesse Small
Speaker 1: Today was nominated for an NAACP Award. I mean, come on,
Speaker 1: come on, really nominated for an NAACP award. That can't be.
Speaker 1: It's that's USA Today reported this just hours ago. I can't,
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't even know what to say. Why
Speaker 1: is this? Is this like a version of the left
Speaker 1: with its obsession with intersectional politics and minorities and the
Speaker 1: oppression of minorities and the impression of the LGBTQ community.
Speaker 1: Is this is this supposed to be a kind of
Speaker 1: gas lighting of America, Like we're gonna back this guy
Speaker 1: even though he's completely in the wrong, just because just
Speaker 1: because we like Jesse, we support Jesse no matter what,
Speaker 1: no matter what. I guess I can't even begin to explain.
Speaker 1: You know, I have a particular interest in this because
Speaker 1: I was one the people on this show very early
Speaker 1: on who was saying this guy's a liar and he is,
Speaker 1: and he and some journalists when they initially drop the
Speaker 1: charges were so stupid that they actually came at me like, see,
Speaker 1: you were wrong. All people are so dumb in the media.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, I would say, learn to code, but
Speaker 1: they'll never be able to learn to code because they're
Speaker 1: not even smart enough to learn to think. And here
Speaker 1: we are, Oh, this is this is the situation with
Speaker 1: Jesse Smollett man. He is he is shameless at a
Speaker 1: level that I was gonna say, you know, I can't
Speaker 1: respect it, but there's a part of you that wants
Speaker 1: to almost say, Wow, this guy is indefatigable in his dishonesty.
Speaker 1: I mean, he will not stop, no apologies, never apologize.
Speaker 1: He's got Kim Fox catching his back. She should look
Speaker 1: she should be sparred. I really believe that. I mean
Speaker 1: that that would be. She should be disbarred and he
Speaker 1: should be prosecutor. That's what should happen here now. No
Speaker 1: Jesse Smallen, in case you didn't think he was enough
Speaker 1: of a dirt bag, enough of a bad guy, um
Speaker 1: you know he is. Uh. He is now claiming that
Speaker 1: the Nigerian Brothers, that the Nigerian Brothers should be like
Speaker 1: looked at more in prosecutor he's throwing them under the bus.
Speaker 1: The guys that he paid to, I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, if they he paid them to, like fake
Speaker 1: beat him up, I don't know why if that's a crime.
Speaker 1: I mean, maybe you could say they're part of the conspiracy.
Speaker 1: But he's trying to get people. He's trying to get
Speaker 1: them in trouble. Yeah, look at those guys, they're the
Speaker 1: real problem this guy is. Oh, he's such a disgrace.
Speaker 1: All right, So we were updated on Jesse Small, but
Speaker 1: this is not This isn't going away, folks. We're gonna
Speaker 1: have to keep keep fighting on this one because they
Speaker 1: there needs to be accountability on this. There needs to
Speaker 1: be a reckoning for just see, he needs he needs
Speaker 1: to be forced to say on the record that he
Speaker 1: is a he is a liar, that this was all
Speaker 1: a faith this is all a hoax, and that you know,
Speaker 1: a hoax. Hate crimes need to be prosecuted. Laws to
Speaker 1: the lies rather to the authorities that are in violation
Speaker 1: of law need to be prosecuted. You know, the thing
Speaker 1: that makes people lose faith in the justice system the
Speaker 1: fastest is double standards. When when you cannot trust that
Speaker 1: the law is going to be applied equally to all people.
Speaker 1: Then then then it's no longer about justice. Then it's
Speaker 1: just a system for political power to be wielded against
Speaker 1: some for some at the expense of the other. That's
Speaker 1: all it is. And we've been seeing that time and again.
Speaker 1: Show me the prominent Republican who's gotten some great, you know,
Speaker 1: sweetheart deal recently because of his position in their Republican party.
Speaker 1: I cannot. I can think of the opposite happening all
Speaker 1: the time. And show me Democrats, plenty of Democrats, Hilary Clinton, hello,
Speaker 1: best example of it, who know that they are effectively
Speaker 1: above the law. This is this is egregious. This needs
Speaker 1: to stop. It is wrong in so many ways, on
Speaker 1: so many levels. I certainly hope we can get some
Speaker 1: some justice here, somehow, some way. All right, team we uh,
Speaker 1: we're gonna talk about Democrat candidates coming up here, Corey Booker,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, some more thoughts from down here. I almost
Speaker 1: said the landown under that's a that's a different that's
Speaker 1: a different place, that's not out passo down by the borders.
Speaker 1: I'm not not the landown under. I have not seen
Speaker 1: any koalas by the border that has not happened, although
Speaker 1: that would be I mean, would it meant that somebody
Speaker 1: slips some slips some payote instead of mescal and my margarita,
Speaker 1: which wouldn't be a good thing. Do you smoke payote?
Speaker 1: I don't think you'd drink it. You know you drink it,
Speaker 1: you smoke it. I don't know. I'm a good boy.
Speaker 1: I don't do any drugs. We'll be right back if
Speaker 1: I am your president. We are going to bring the
Speaker 1: fight to the NRA who wants to represent corporate gun owners,
Speaker 1: corporate gun corporations, manufacturers, more than they want to represent
Speaker 1: the people. Because this is what they're doing to Americans.
Speaker 1: They are defending loopholes like that loophole that if a
Speaker 1: man is convicted of beating his wife, he can find
Speaker 1: a loophole to go out and buy a gun and
Speaker 1: murder her. They are defending not their membership, but loopholes
Speaker 1: like the loophole that says that someone on the terrorists
Speaker 1: no fly list in our country can still go to
Speaker 1: a gun show and buy weapons, or that somebody that's
Speaker 1: convicted of a violent crime can still find a loophole
Speaker 1: to go and buy a weapon. Everything that Corey Booker,
Speaker 1: Democrat presidential aspirant, right, one of the Democrats vying for
Speaker 1: the nomination. Everything Corey Booker said there is not true. Basically,
Speaker 1: I think I think you could actually break down every
Speaker 1: statement he made. All of it is is a factual falsehood.
Speaker 1: Lie lie, lie lie. On CNN of course, not that
Speaker 1: they really care. They're like, yeah, he hates guns, he's
Speaker 1: one of the good people. Everything he says is not true.
Speaker 1: Where are the fact checkers? Where are the scathing editorials
Speaker 1: in the front page the Washington Post or the or
Speaker 1: you know, forget the editorials. Where are the fact checkers
Speaker 1: in the wine and where the pinocchios for Corey Booker
Speaker 1: on the lies about what the laws are when it
Speaker 1: comes to guns in this country? Does anybody care? Is
Speaker 1: Corey Booker allowed to just say whatever he wants about anything?
Speaker 1: I mean, that stuff is entirely false, not even close
Speaker 1: to true. But everyone there in that audience, yeah, really
Speaker 1: wants to get rid of guns. It's just virtue signaling, folks.
Speaker 1: It's it's not possible that the Democrats are as dumb
Speaker 1: as they pretend to be on some of these issues,
Speaker 1: whether it's guns or climate change or any any number
Speaker 1: of major policy initiatives that they discussed but never want
Speaker 1: to enact. You know, we want to talk about guns
Speaker 1: and we want to stop guns, and okay, do you
Speaker 1: do you want to ban Do you're gonna ban assault rifles?
Speaker 1: You want to do that? Can you get all the
Speaker 1: Democrats on board for that in the House too, everybody's
Speaker 1: on board for this, send it to yeah. No, oh oh,
Speaker 1: you mean you have Democrats in some states where they won't.
Speaker 1: But I thought this is all about saving saving the
Speaker 1: lives of children. The only way the Democrats want to
Speaker 1: save the lives of children apparently is to ban guns,
Speaker 1: which will save almost no children's lives. But they don't
Speaker 1: want to save lives by defunding planned parent It isn't
Speaker 1: that interesting. No interest in actually taking any action there.
Speaker 1: But Corey Booker is in a very privileged position. He
Speaker 1: has a Democrat who is in serious contention for the
Speaker 1: Democratic nomination, which means that he is going to receive
Speaker 1: special treatment. They are going to make sure that his
Speaker 1: path is not strewn with any particularly onerous challenges along
Speaker 1: the way. They want to make sure that, you know,
Speaker 1: they do everything in their power to hold him up,
Speaker 1: and they want to prevent there from being any particular
Speaker 1: stumbling on policy or anything else until they know who
Speaker 1: they're because they're not sure. You see, last time it
Speaker 1: was Hillary. Last time, they knew that anything that was
Speaker 1: pro Hillary was good, anything including Bernie. What do you
Speaker 1: mean to throw me on a bus? Not again including Bernie?
Speaker 1: That was bad, right, Bernie for the media was bad
Speaker 1: because they were so sure about Hillary. This time around,
Speaker 1: the Democrats aren't really united behind a single candidate, which
Speaker 1: means that they have to kind of spread around their
Speaker 1: propaganda efforts. They got to share the Democrat love a
Speaker 1: little bit here, you know, make sure that they kind
Speaker 1: of create these different narrators. You know, I'm down here
Speaker 1: in in Beto country and right here in El Paso, Texas,
Speaker 1: and he's very he's a very well known guide out here. Obviously.
Speaker 1: I still think that Buddha Jedge, I hope I'm saying
Speaker 1: it right. I still think that Budda Jedge, though, has
Speaker 1: a real lane to kind of be the the better bedo,
Speaker 1: the better, the better bedo. I like that that. I
Speaker 1: think that could happen because it's just not enough Beto Rourke. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's got the celebrity and he's got the flash and
Speaker 1: the sizzle and all that stuff. But oh, I don't know,
Speaker 1: do you do you need any substance to be Democrat
Speaker 1: running for office? Now, look at Ocazio Cortez says the
Speaker 1: craziest and what the crazier things that she says, the
Speaker 1: more angry she gets when people call it, you know, crazy, right,
Speaker 1: and then she says something even wackier. You know, give
Speaker 1: it a few days. This isn't even wackier. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm the boss. You're not the boss. I'm the boss.
Speaker 1: That was my favorite. No, No, you're a freshman member
Speaker 1: of Congress. There's hundreds of you. You're not actually the
Speaker 1: boss that Democrats are so lacking in charisma and new
Speaker 1: ideas and solutions that the American people would sign on for.
Speaker 1: You know, I know they're gonna talk about medicare. Medicare
Speaker 1: for all is great. So is free chocolate cake that
Speaker 1: you can eat endless amounts of that never disappears. There's
Speaker 1: enough for everybody and won't make you fat. That's awesome too.
Speaker 1: It doesn't exist Medicare for all. That wouldn't destroy the budget,
Speaker 1: that wouldn't result in a fifty percent increase maybe more
Speaker 1: in your taxes. That sounds great, that's not reality. But
Speaker 1: if you point out that it's not reality, she just
Speaker 1: gets more angry and the press runs cover for her.
Speaker 1: If you point out to Corey Booker that everything that
Speaker 1: he said in his little gun speech there was just
Speaker 1: emotionally laiden nonsense which just factual falsehood, untrue. Why are
Speaker 1: you why don't you want to do more to save
Speaker 1: the children? You know, everyone gets all upset. Why aren't
Speaker 1: you being nicer to Spartacus? Because I think that people
Speaker 1: should be held to account. And look look at what
Speaker 1: they put Trump throwing his way to the nomination. They
Speaker 1: weren't just seeking always remember this, they were not just
Speaker 1: seeking to defeat Trump at the polls. They wanted him destroyed.
Speaker 1: They wanted his life ruined. They were investigating his family,
Speaker 1: they were digging up dirt on his wife. I mean,
Speaker 1: they were doing everything that they could. And it wasn't
Speaker 1: just for political purposes. It was to destroy his businesses,
Speaker 1: to destroy his livelihood. That's what we're up against with
Speaker 1: the opposition. Folks, do not forget it for a second,
Speaker 1: which brings made a Biden who was out there speaking
Speaker 1: of saying nonsense and stupid things always room for a
Speaker 1: Biden conversation when that's on the menu. We will get
Speaker 1: into all of that coming up here in just a
Speaker 1: couple of minutes. Team, stay with me. A really notable woman,
Speaker 1: Anita Hill, Professor, showed the courage of a lifetime talking
Speaker 1: about her experience being her ass by Clarence Thomas. But
Speaker 1: she paid a terrible price. She was abused through the
Speaker 1: hearing she's taking advantage of. But I also realized there
Speaker 1: was a real and perceived problem the committee faced. There
Speaker 1: are a bunch of white guys, no I mean sincerely,
Speaker 1: a bunch of white guys hearing hearing this testimony and
Speaker 1: the Senate you just shared committee. So when Anita Hill,
Speaker 1: when Anita Hill came to testify, she faced a committee
Speaker 1: that didn't fully understand what the hell is all about.
Speaker 1: To this day, I regret I couldn't come up with
Speaker 1: a way to get her a kind of hearing she deserved,
Speaker 1: given the courage she showed by reaching out to us.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is an intellectually bankrupt fraud. I want I
Speaker 1: want us to all be very clear about that. That
Speaker 1: is my pauson. Joe Biden does not have any principles.
Speaker 1: He is the classic slimy, change your position, say what
Speaker 1: you have to say in the moment, only aginist politician.
Speaker 1: He is v prototype when people think of a politician
Speaker 1: in this country, someone who just you know, has the
Speaker 1: big grin, shakes the hands, kisses the babies, smiles and
Speaker 1: says what he have whatever he has to say at
Speaker 1: any moment. That's that's Joe Biden. And I think that
Speaker 1: this latest stuff you're hearing from Biden, who is not
Speaker 1: yet running, but he's still considered and most pulling the
Speaker 1: front runner among the Democrats, which should just shock everybody.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's Joe Biden. That's your answer. This is
Speaker 1: this is gonna give us a fresh look at America.
Speaker 1: This is somebody who Guy couldn't get one percent of
Speaker 1: the vote when he ran before, but because he was
Speaker 1: Obama's VP, now he should be president. Guy didn't do anything.
Speaker 1: He played this is true. He played more golf than
Speaker 1: Obama did when he was vice president. And I know
Speaker 1: people that spent a lot of time around Biden during
Speaker 1: those years and they were none too fond of him
Speaker 1: and did not find him president. I will say, just
Speaker 1: because I'm a fair minded person, the people that I
Speaker 1: know that's a lot of time around. Biden said that
Speaker 1: his wife, Doctor Biden, is lovely and very nice. So
Speaker 1: at least he did well there. But Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: exactly what you're hearing in this in this sound bite.
Speaker 1: You know, now he's trying to do the whole Oh
Speaker 1: you know, I I should have done more. You know.
Speaker 1: Now he's Joe Biden, the social justice warrior in retrospect
Speaker 1: for Anita Hill. Now I have to ask, what is
Speaker 1: he really trying to say here? You know, what do
Speaker 1: you mean, Joe Biden, when when he says that, you know,
Speaker 1: it was a bunch of white guys that we're questioning
Speaker 1: Anita Hill during those Supreme Court nominee hearings, what would
Speaker 1: be the you know, let me just take his premise
Speaker 1: seriously that we don't just live in a society where
Speaker 1: adults speak to adults and situations like that irrespective of
Speaker 1: their skin color or their gender, right which which that's
Speaker 1: what I believe, that you just speak to people as
Speaker 1: fellow adults, human beings, Americans, US citizens, that we just
Speaker 1: speak to each other. It's not well, my skin color
Speaker 1: is this, Your skin color is that? So that should
Speaker 1: factor into whether I get to ask questions or you
Speaker 1: get to answer them. But let's just put that aside.
Speaker 1: Let's take Joe Biden's premise here seriously, which is that
Speaker 1: there's something inherently wrong, because that's what he's suggesting with
Speaker 1: Anita Hill, who, by the way, was accusing a black man,
Speaker 1: not a white guy, a black man of sexual harassment,
Speaker 1: even though she followed him around and wanted to work
Speaker 1: with them for years and years, accusing him sexual harassment.
Speaker 1: And he says that she was abused during the hearings.
Speaker 1: I don't know how by people asking her questions about
Speaker 1: her allegations is cross examining now of a witness to
Speaker 1: be abused. Because if that's the case, our whole criminal
Speaker 1: justice system falls apart. If you're not allowed to have
Speaker 1: people ask you questions to test the veracity of claims,
Speaker 1: then anyone can make any claims they want under and
Speaker 1: weaponize them without any hope of a real defense for
Speaker 1: the accused. But let's go back to Biden's basic premise
Speaker 1: here that because there were white Remember this is back
Speaker 1: during the Justice Clarence Thomas hearings for whether he'd be
Speaker 1: on the Supreme Court. It was very contentious. People will
Speaker 1: say that, oh, you know, she had nothing to gain.
Speaker 1: Do you hear this about Blasi for too? That's a lie,
Speaker 1: all right. They've had movies and they cast the most
Speaker 1: you know, the most illustrious and appealing woman in Hollywood
Speaker 1: possible to play, Anita Hill. And you know she's she's
Speaker 1: institutes and speeches, and you know, she says, she's a
Speaker 1: beloved figure, treated like a hero on the left for
Speaker 1: trying to take down a guy for making essentially some
Speaker 1: inappropriate jokes and asking her out a few times, according
Speaker 1: to her so and then of course she followed him
Speaker 1: around and everything else, I mean, followed him around in
Speaker 1: terms of her career. She didn't seem to want to
Speaker 1: get away from this guy, despite her saying that he
Speaker 1: was sexually harassing her. And Biden then says, well, she
Speaker 1: had white guy's question. So what's the answer, though, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is why I say Biden is intellectually bankrupt. What's
Speaker 1: supposed to happen? Would one black senator on the committee
Speaker 1: have been sufficient? Or would that be a form of tokenism?
Speaker 1: Would that be just for appearance's sake window dressing on
Speaker 1: that committee? Would it be only would it be only
Speaker 1: black members of the Senate. Who would be allowed to
Speaker 1: question her? Should they bring in somebody like they did
Speaker 1: with Blasi Ford who is of African American background in
Speaker 1: order to question and would it have to be an
Speaker 1: African American female? I mean, I really, you know, what
Speaker 1: would be acceptable? He's bashing the optics of that hearing
Speaker 1: because there were white members of the United States Senate
Speaker 1: who were men asking need to hill questions. So what
Speaker 1: should have been the case? What would have been fair?
Speaker 1: No one gets to ask her question? I mean, do
Speaker 1: they have an answer to this? I would wonder, Oh,
Speaker 1: they'd say, oh, well, Buck, But that's because we don't
Speaker 1: have enough diversity in the Senate. Okay, But if we
Speaker 1: didn't have enough diversity in the Senate, then we still
Speaker 1: had Senate proceedings going on. What are we supposed to do?
Speaker 1: Not have the hearings? But you see that Biden is
Speaker 1: just trying to what is essentially an emotional appeal to
Speaker 1: seem like he's woke Biden. Here, he's social justice Biden.
Speaker 1: He gets it, man, he's you know, understands the cause.
Speaker 1: Now he signed him up for like huff Post, he
Speaker 1: could live in Brooklyn and tweet about how intersectional he
Speaker 1: is and all this stuff because Biden knows that he's old,
Speaker 1: he's out of touch, he's out of date, and not
Speaker 1: exactly exciting as a candidate. But then he also got
Speaker 1: into a little more about this. I didn't even know
Speaker 1: what this was. Playclip five. The Court of common law
Speaker 1: decided they had to do something about the extent of
Speaker 1: the death. So you know what they said, no man
Speaker 1: has a right to chastise his woman with a rod
Speaker 1: thicker than the circumference of his thumb. This is English,
Speaker 1: Jurish financial culture, a white man's culture that's got to change.
Speaker 1: It's got to change. Notice how Joe Biden, who I
Speaker 1: will say this is every bit as white as any
Speaker 1: other white guy of ever. He might be the most
Speaker 1: white white guy you could ever find. I mean he
Speaker 1: is at he is at a white guy level speaking
Speaker 1: as a white guy. That I think is you know,
Speaker 1: right right at the top of the list. Right. There's
Speaker 1: nothing particularly non white about Joe Biden, And here he
Speaker 1: is talking about the white man's culture and how it
Speaker 1: has to change. First of all, his rule of thumb
Speaker 1: story is not even true. So but you know this
Speaker 1: is this is like when you have people who bash
Speaker 1: this is like Corey Booker bashing gun laws, just making
Speaker 1: stuff up, just just fabricating stuff wholesale, just making it
Speaker 1: up as he goes along. And it doesn't matter though,
Speaker 1: because it's for the cause. Joe Biden making up this
Speaker 1: this rule of thumb story, it's it's all I know. This,
Speaker 1: This is a this is an apocryphal that it's about
Speaker 1: the you know, the the the width of the thumb
Speaker 1: for the rod to beat women with um. But that
Speaker 1: the white man's culture is holding us back. What are
Speaker 1: people to make of that statement? I mean, it's a
Speaker 1: moronic thing to say. It's a moronic thing to say
Speaker 1: because it's so breaft of any thought at all. What
Speaker 1: does that mean a white man, white man's culture is
Speaker 1: holding us back? How what is white man's culture? And
Speaker 1: what does he think people when he uses that phrase
Speaker 1: are taking away from it. It's just such a stupid
Speaker 1: thing to say. But Joe Biden has been propped up
Speaker 1: by people for so long because he's just the consummate
Speaker 1: politician who says he after whatever he has to say
Speaker 1: in the moment, they cover up for his kind of dumb,
Speaker 1: you know, off script comments. It's like, oh, it's just
Speaker 1: Joe being Joe. No, and the guy's at buffoon, a
Speaker 1: buffoon who's been wrong, by the way, on every major
Speaker 1: foreign policy issue it's supposed to be his area. He's
Speaker 1: been wrong on every major foreign policy issue stretching back
Speaker 1: into the early nineties. Biden is wrong, wrong, wrong, and
Speaker 1: now he's trying to be something he's not. And it's
Speaker 1: just unseemly and kind of pathetic. And this is the
Speaker 1: best the Democrats have to offer. This is their number
Speaker 1: one contender. Kyle talks about getting rid of white man culture.
Speaker 1: Who's the whitest white man you could ever find. Makes
Speaker 1: no sense, and it puts healthcare for millions of Americans
Speaker 1: in some level of uncertainty and also jeopardy. What would happen,
Speaker 1: I mean, what would happen? What would millions of Americans lose?
Speaker 1: So it's just to be clear, Republicans do not have
Speaker 1: a plan to replace about mccare. The fate of healthcare
Speaker 1: for more than twenty million Americans insured through Obamacare and
Speaker 1: Medicaid expansion hangs in the balance. As of this moment,
Speaker 1: Republicans have not offered a single new alternative to Obamacare.
Speaker 1: Some people characterizing this as a gift to Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: going into this next twenty twenty election. We get rid
Speaker 1: of Obamacare, says the Trump administration. Okay, so what's the
Speaker 1: plan to replace it? We don't know, says the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: Simply repealing Obamacare without Republicans coalascing behind an alternative would
Speaker 1: throw the healthcare system into chaos. That is laughable. You
Speaker 1: read my mind. I wanted to get your respondent to
Speaker 1: the president saying that that we will have a plan laughable,
Speaker 1: noted ha CNN. Oh, there's such serious journals over at CNN,
Speaker 1: aren't they After perpetuating a fraud for two years? Collusion
Speaker 1: with Russia? Oh the collusion. Please, after all of that
Speaker 1: nonsense for two years now, they can't keep that one
Speaker 1: going at least in the meantime. And so what they've
Speaker 1: done is there they go from trashing Trump on collusion
Speaker 1: that didn't exist, that was the main state, and now
Speaker 1: all they're trashing amount of healthcare. Let's just start with this.
Speaker 1: They've got a false premise going, my friends. And the
Speaker 1: premise is this that you have to come up with
Speaker 1: an alternative to Obamacare, when what most people would say
Speaker 1: is how about just get rid of how about the
Speaker 1: healthcare system before Obamacare came along. Obamacare didn't make things better.
Speaker 1: It did not improve the healthcare system. It has made
Speaker 1: it more expensive. It has for some people been worse.
Speaker 1: For some people, it is better. That is true in
Speaker 1: the individual exchange for some people that are affected by
Speaker 1: previousing conditions, which true preexisting conditions that would price you
Speaker 1: out of the healthcare market are that's a very small
Speaker 1: percentage of the population. Should have been dealt with by Republicans.
Speaker 1: That is on them. That is a miss. But the
Speaker 1: way that they present this issue, the way that CNN
Speaker 1: and the various Libs, the Democrats, the way that they
Speaker 1: try to they try to make it sound like, oh,
Speaker 1: Obamacare is this thing that you have to come up
Speaker 1: with just a better version of Obamacare, when no, there
Speaker 1: could have just been fixes to the healthcare system made
Speaker 1: without trying to put us on a pathway to socialized medicine,
Speaker 1: which is what Obamacare is. Right, It goes Obamacare to
Speaker 1: Medicare for all, to single payer, which will also then
Speaker 1: lead to socialized medicine. That's the pathway, that's the transition.
Speaker 1: Those are the stages we've already gone into Obamacare. Now
Speaker 1: we're going to Medicare for all, which is not really
Speaker 1: a single payer program, right, But then then we'll get
Speaker 1: to single payer because medicare has cost sharing. Medicare it
Speaker 1: doesn't cover everything, and it has cost sharing mechanism, so
Speaker 1: you do have to pay some for Medicare. But then
Speaker 1: they're gonna say, well, that's not enough. Then we need
Speaker 1: single payer, which just means the government pays for everything.
Speaker 1: And then when they do that, they're going to say
Speaker 1: the only way to have the necessary efficiencies in the
Speaker 1: system will be if there is a government control of
Speaker 1: the healthcare market overall of the healthcare delivery system, I
Speaker 1: mean overall, So that that's where this is all heading,
Speaker 1: and I think we should at least we should be
Speaker 1: clear about this. But I meanwhile, you know, the left
Speaker 1: likes to just be snide and act like they've got
Speaker 1: this all figured out. They leave behind in this conversation
Speaker 1: that Obamacare was not nearly the success that they pretended
Speaker 1: it would be. In fact, it dramatically underperformed by their
Speaker 1: own metrics, And it's really just a vast expansion of Medicaid.
Speaker 1: That's what Obamacare has become. It is an expansion of
Speaker 1: the Medicaid program, and then it has these in the
Speaker 1: individual markets, these call sharing mechanisms. The reason it didn't
Speaker 1: go into the employer provided market is because that is
Speaker 1: popular enough enough people like that that they knew that
Speaker 1: politically that was a non starter. Remember they were going
Speaker 1: to tax Cadillac plans and there was all this stuff
Speaker 1: that was supposed to happen to the Obamacare law, and
Speaker 1: they said, no, we're not going to do that. And
Speaker 1: yet bro Cuomo and Monsieur Don Lament, Bonjean, Monsieur Don Lament,
Speaker 1: you do not know very much, but you sound like
Speaker 1: Monsieur Don Lament. So that's all. Also known as Don Lemon.
Speaker 1: I just like saying his name, and people make fun
Speaker 1: of my name. All In fact, Don Lemon has made
Speaker 1: fun of my name. If you want to know Don
Speaker 1: Lemon first time I ever did the show Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: porn star name. That's what he said. I said, Don,
Speaker 1: you are every bit as clever as I thought you
Speaker 1: were before I sat down on your set. So there
Speaker 1: we have it. Play clip four. Our president said today
Speaker 1: that the GOP will be known as the Party of Healthcare,
Speaker 1: but it seems to me he left out a word
Speaker 1: based on his administration's latest move with the ACA, the
Speaker 1: President will make his party about removing healthcare. This president
Speaker 1: and party have no plan to provide care to tens
Speaker 1: of millions if the ACA is gone. Why why? Why?
Speaker 1: Welcome to the new normal? The President says the GOP
Speaker 1: is going to be the party of healthcare. Then why
Speaker 1: is his Justice Department saying the Affordable Care Act should
Speaker 1: be struck down? The President has said again and again
Speaker 1: that he wanted to protect pre existing conditions. Is this
Speaker 1: another yet another lie from the President? Does bro Cuomo
Speaker 1: want to know if they're going to cover a weight? Gaina?
Speaker 1: And like, you know, my latest creatine formula, I don't know.
Speaker 1: We'd have to ask bro Cuomo about that one. They're
Speaker 1: condemning him on healthcare without even knowing what he's going
Speaker 1: to say. Should Obviously, Obamacare is not going to get
Speaker 1: repealed tomorrow. We all know this, so there's no imminent
Speaker 1: danger of an Obamacare repeal. But he's trying to start
Speaker 1: to make the public case, and what they're doing is
Speaker 1: criticizing him without even knowing what the case is the
Speaker 1: President Trump plans to make. This is just pure propaganda, folks.
Speaker 1: This is just my team good your team, bad stuff
Speaker 1: from CNN, which I don't expect anything more from them
Speaker 1: than that. I mean, come on, these are the same
Speaker 1: people that brought you Russia collusion for two years. But
Speaker 1: we should at least call it for what it is.
Speaker 1: We should know that that's what's going on. They're criticizing
Speaker 1: something before. They're saying that Trump's cooking isn't isn't good
Speaker 1: and he hasn't even left the kitchen yet. You know,
Speaker 1: he hasn't even brought it out. Oh but his food
Speaker 1: isn't good. There's there's so much here to pull apart.
Speaker 1: And I just I know that what we're going to
Speaker 1: be in the midst of going into this election, which
Speaker 1: is going to church right now, is the lull, especially
Speaker 1: because Liberals are running, not running scared, but they're they're
Speaker 1: laying a little low this week. Most of them, they
Speaker 1: know that Russia collusion was an embarrassment for any for
Speaker 1: anybody who has principles or any decency in the media,
Speaker 1: what they've done for the last two years is an
Speaker 1: utter and complete embarrassment. But most of them don't have principles.
Speaker 1: Most of them don't really care. They would rather just
Speaker 1: pull the mat out and get the benefit of the
Speaker 1: upside of doing that, get the benefit of big ratings
Speaker 1: for two years, and then just you know, hope their
Speaker 1: audience forgets because ultimately it was all for the cause.
Speaker 1: Man connect the coast to have a few laughs. It
Speaker 1: was all for the cause. So that was what they
Speaker 1: decided to do. But bro Cuomo donement. They already had
Speaker 1: their marching orders here. Slam Trump on healthcare. Doesn't matter
Speaker 1: what he wants to do, doesn't matter what he suggests,
Speaker 1: what he recommends. Slam Trump on healthcare. We'll be right back.
Speaker 1: Let's not I be the one who cast the first
Speaker 1: stone about getting irritable on an airplane. But this story,
Speaker 1: this one, this one caught my eye today. You have
Speaker 1: a woman who is being referred to on Fox as
Speaker 1: the worst airline passenger as a meltdown over not being
Speaker 1: served pepsi? Do they try to serve her a coke instead?
Speaker 1: A drunk woman on board a tap flight just really
Speaker 1: wanted a pepsi? According to Fox, here the unidentified Spanish
Speaker 1: woman became belligerent. It's a great word. I love that word.
Speaker 1: You know that after boarding the Malaga bound flight in Portugal.
Speaker 1: According to the outlet, Shortly after the woman board of
Speaker 1: the hour and a half flight, she began taking shots
Speaker 1: from a hip flask while demanding cruiser of her a pepsi.
Speaker 1: When attendance informed her they would only be serving fruit
Speaker 1: juice on the flight, she became outraged and began and
Speaker 1: began screaming at the crew in Spanish. She got out
Speaker 1: of the seat. Her face was bright red, her hands
Speaker 1: turned into claws. She looked like a demon. El Diablo.
Speaker 1: She was the worst passenger I've ever seen on an airline,
Speaker 1: and I fly quite a lot. According to the Daily Mail,
Speaker 1: oh Man, then she was apparently very inebriated. This lady
Speaker 1: was out of control. She was drunk, she was aggressive,
Speaker 1: she was chucking food. Oh man. She was yelling and
Speaker 1: yelling in Spanish apparently. Okay, well, I just bring this
Speaker 1: up because yesterday on my flight down here to El Paso,
Speaker 1: we sat on the tarmac for about forty minutes, and
Speaker 1: then we were told that it was because of a
Speaker 1: paperwork delay. Now, I understand that sometimes there's safety checks
Speaker 1: and procedures, and there's weather, and you know, there are
Speaker 1: things that, while frustrating, you have to just kind of accept.
Speaker 1: Are you know, as the price of flying, right, there
Speaker 1: are some things that you just have to say to yourself,
Speaker 1: you know what. I understand that that can happen, right,
Speaker 1: the airlines can't control the weather, and if there's a
Speaker 1: real mechanical failure and they've got a dominiance, I get that.
Speaker 1: I want to say flight just like everybody else. But
Speaker 1: when you have a couple of hundred people who are
Speaker 1: sitting in uncomfortable chairs, except for the fancy first class people,
Speaker 1: when I fly for a business eye fly coach my friends,
Speaker 1: that tells you all you need to know. But we're
Speaker 1: sitting there for a couple of hours, or sorry for
Speaker 1: forty minutes, rather not a couple hours waiting for It
Speaker 1: would have been a better story if it was a
Speaker 1: couple hours. But then they have to touch back to
Speaker 1: the gate. But if it's a paperwork failure, I feel
Speaker 1: like that's unacceptable. And I always like to remind everybody
Speaker 1: that if you ever want a feeling of what it
Speaker 1: would be like to live in a totalitarian state, all
Speaker 1: you really have to do, all you really have to
Speaker 1: figure out is you know, what's it like to be
Speaker 1: on an airplane where you are being held effectively against
Speaker 1: your will? Right? I mean, you can't just get up
Speaker 1: and say I'm out of here, I'm done. It's uncomfortable.
Speaker 1: Nobody will explain anything to you. Nobody feels the need
Speaker 1: to really make you feel better. You're just supposed to
Speaker 1: sit there, shut up and deal with their incompetence because
Speaker 1: airlines do a lot of incompetent stuff. That's just what
Speaker 1: happens there. They're unfortunately all these regulations and it's all
Speaker 1: very geared toward the airline. Somehow we can't figure out this.
Speaker 1: I can. I have more computing power in my hand
Speaker 1: as I do this show than all of the advanced
Speaker 1: countries of the world, did you know, sixty or seventy
Speaker 1: years ago put together. But we haven't been able to
Speaker 1: figure out how to put people on an airplane and
Speaker 1: not treat them like they're getting a special exam from
Speaker 1: the Stazi. You know, I think we could do better
Speaker 1: as a country. I don't know. People, I know you're
Speaker 1: gonna say, Buck, maybe you can fly private. Now, this
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that you can turn your hands into claws
Speaker 1: and turn into El Diablo and start throwing start throwing
Speaker 1: things at people and completely freaking out. You know, the demon,
Speaker 1: the demon style outrage or or or just freak out
Speaker 1: that we apparently missed on this the Spanish airline's flight.
Speaker 1: But you know, it does mean that sometimes it feels
Speaker 1: like when you have no recourse and your subject endless
Speaker 1: amounts of frustration. That's what it would be like to
Speaker 1: live in a country that's not capitalist, where there is
Speaker 1: no penalty for the bureaucracy and the people around you
Speaker 1: failing you all the time, where your suffering does not matter.
Speaker 1: In fact, you're supposed to suffer in silence. So in
Speaker 1: that sense, I feel like airlines are very instructive. It
Speaker 1: is your little window into a totalitarian or at least
Speaker 1: authoritarian society. Excuse excuse you this connect it up to
Speaker 1: go to the bathroom. No, because there's a one in
Speaker 1: a billion chance that while the plane is actually on
Speaker 1: the tarmac that maybe a comet will strike the tarmac
Speaker 1: and will flip the plane over and you will survive
Speaker 1: only because this really very worn out seatbelt that's you know,
Speaker 1: way too big for you is going to be around.
Speaker 1: I mean, please, but this is the kind of stuff
Speaker 1: you deal with. This is really just my anxiety I'm
Speaker 1: sharing with you about having to fly again tomorrow. Connecting
Speaker 1: flight too. That's always fun. Oh gosh, so airline travel folks.
Speaker 1: Whoever figures it out and makes it better, whoever makes
Speaker 1: airlines accountable and stop stinking so much, they would be
Speaker 1: I think my favorite person, maybe only second to robocall ending.
Speaker 1: Whoever ends the robocallers, that would be amazing. Apparently FCC,
Speaker 1: by the way, has created huge finds that they never
Speaker 1: end up collecting, so that's not acceptable. Maybe that's a
Speaker 1: story we'll have to hit for another time. But now
Speaker 1: I've got I've got a roll call coming to you
Speaker 1: up next, So stick around team like soft butter on
Speaker 1: warm toast. Time to spread some freedom coast to coast.
Speaker 1: It's time for roll call. Indeed, roll call time, everybody
Speaker 1: from El Paso, Texas down here at the iHeart station
Speaker 1: in El Paso, which is a whole bunch of fun.
Speaker 1: Very much enjoy being down here. Al Paso is nice
Speaker 1: and warm today. And apparently I have been told that
Speaker 1: next door Warez, which is also known for some other stuff,
Speaker 1: but next Door Warez is allegedly the home of the
Speaker 1: original home of the Margharita, So there is that. I
Speaker 1: will tell you that I recognize that a margharita is
Speaker 1: calorically and metabolically probably not the greatest thing to be
Speaker 1: fond of. But man, a really good smokey mescal margarita
Speaker 1: with some salt on the rim. I could taste it
Speaker 1: right now, and I'm gonna tell you that's where I'm
Speaker 1: going as soon as this show is done. You could
Speaker 1: say I'm going to Margaritaville, except on the US side
Speaker 1: of the border. I don't think I'm going to wander
Speaker 1: into the RS side today. I don't think I'm gonna
Speaker 1: do that. It did not bring my passport, so I
Speaker 1: think this time around I'm gonna have to pass on that.
Speaker 1: But it has been a fascinating day down here, and
Speaker 1: I'm always glad to get some time with the men
Speaker 1: and women a border patrol and to get some ground
Speaker 1: truth on what's going on here. All right, First up
Speaker 1: on Roll Call Patrick, remember Facebook dot com slash buck Sex,
Speaker 1: then if you want to be a part of Roll
Speaker 1: Call Buck, Greetings from the Buckmobile and the great state
Speaker 1: of Connecticut. Just to touch on your recent comments about racism,
Speaker 1: I was a defense contractor in Kuwait for three tours.
Speaker 1: Never have I witnessed such blatant racism toward TCNs and
Speaker 1: ex pats at the hands of the kuwaitis they didn't
Speaker 1: have to fake a hate crime like Jussie because it
Speaker 1: happened on a daily basis. But I digress. You should
Speaker 1: get together with Shapiro and do a show completely with
Speaker 1: your imitation. He does the best Bernie Sanders impression i've heard.
Speaker 1: Keep up the solid work. You're doing great, oss Selly.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think my Bernie's better. I'll be
Speaker 1: honest with you if we're really just gonna go there,
Speaker 1: But I've heard Ben's Bernie. Look, Ben's Bernie is solid.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm not saying it's not a very solid Bernie impersonation.
Speaker 1: It is, but I prefer my own Bernie. What I
Speaker 1: really want to know is, does Shapiro have a Betto impersonation,
Speaker 1: like where everyone is just so earnest and they just
Speaker 1: want to hold hands and talk about like how they're
Speaker 1: gonna make the future so much better. Um. I want
Speaker 1: to know if he's got a Betto. But now, Ben's
Speaker 1: Burnie is solid, no, no doubt about it. My Bernie's better,
Speaker 1: but Ben is Ben is good, no question. Um, let's
Speaker 1: see we have uh oh, this one is a link
Speaker 1: that I can't read on Eric, I can't open it
Speaker 1: right now. Peter, hey Buck, it's well past time that
Speaker 1: President Trunk invokes Did I say Trunk? President Trump invokes
Speaker 1: i NA Section two one to F and declares asylum
Speaker 1: seekers and illegal immigrants inadmissible. The text of twenty twelve
Speaker 1: F states, whenever the President finds that the entry of
Speaker 1: an alien or any class of aliens in the United
Speaker 1: States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States,
Speaker 1: he may buy proclamation and for such period as he
Speaker 1: deems necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any
Speaker 1: class of aliens as immigrants or non immigrants, or impose
Speaker 1: on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem appropriate.
Speaker 1: Shields High Pete up in Michigan. Well, Pete, this is
Speaker 1: what was initially cited for the so called Muslim band,
Speaker 1: you will recall, and that resulted in a battle that
Speaker 1: went all the way up to the Supreme Court. The
Speaker 1: Trump administration did win that battle, which I think is
Speaker 1: important for everyone to know and remember and keep in mind.
Speaker 1: We were told by so many legal experts, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: Trump is so lawless. Until the Supreme Court got to
Speaker 1: look at it, and they said no, no, he in
Speaker 1: fact does have the authority to do this. He does
Speaker 1: have the authority, and he did, And so there was
Speaker 1: that it'll go to the courts if Trump tries anything
Speaker 1: to stop what is currently an unsustainable If you believe
Speaker 1: that we should have a secure border, what's going on
Speaker 1: right now is unsustainable. And I don't even mean a
Speaker 1: secure border that's perfectly secure. I mean even a little
Speaker 1: bit secure. If you're going to just try to have
Speaker 1: border security. We are almost at the point where it's
Speaker 1: no longer no longer feasible to make the case that
Speaker 1: we have a secure border. All right, Anthony Rights, Hey, brother,
Speaker 1: call me. I'm from El Paso. I'd like to show
Speaker 1: you around out here. Well, Anthony, I'm traveling with my crew,
Speaker 1: but we will try to reach out as we are
Speaker 1: getting some drinks out here in El Paso, so I will.
Speaker 1: I'll pass this along to Hill TV producer Jess and
Speaker 1: you'd probably rather talk to her than me anyway, which
Speaker 1: would make sense. She's she's cool. She's the one that
Speaker 1: makes sure that I also know where I'm going and
Speaker 1: what I'm doing when we're out in the field. Brent
Speaker 1: Shield's eye. You're down in my neck of the woods,
Speaker 1: down in El Paso. I hope it is informative for
Speaker 1: your listeners. I'm pretty close to your age. I remember
Speaker 1: in college the big thing was for all his kids
Speaker 1: to cross the bridge into Warez and hit the flea
Speaker 1: markets and party at the big spots down there. Was
Speaker 1: a really big moneymaker for local economy at that time.
Speaker 1: Not that I'm advocating for what we did as college kids,
Speaker 1: but it's very sad to see how far that city
Speaker 1: has to teriorate in just the last seventeen years. Hope
Speaker 1: you enjoy your visit, Brent. Yeah, Brent. Everyone down here
Speaker 1: is very aware of just what it's like in Warez
Speaker 1: and how things have been going there. They tell me
Speaker 1: now that it's a lot safer than it was. But
Speaker 1: there was a just last night, an assassination, I mean
Speaker 1: a cartel hit in some restaurant where they just went
Speaker 1: in and wasted a couple of people. So that happens
Speaker 1: just across. When I say across the border, it really
Speaker 1: feels like it's the same city as in it's a
Speaker 1: contiguous metro area. There's no it's not like there's a
Speaker 1: border and then there's you know, a few miles of desert,
Speaker 1: and then you get to another city. It's like if
Speaker 1: you're in if you were in one city and you
Speaker 1: made a fence that went through the city, that's the
Speaker 1: separation between El Paso and Warez, although the fence is
Speaker 1: not entirely complete, which is one of the things they
Speaker 1: have to get going here. Brittany rights, Hey, Buck, I
Speaker 1: want to run a theory by you. Is there a
Speaker 1: chance Manafort asked to be in solitary confinement so he
Speaker 1: doesn't have to mix with the prisoners in the general
Speaker 1: population of the prison. If I went to prison, I'd
Speaker 1: probably ask from books in solitary I can't hang, Brittany,
Speaker 1: I don't think so. What you're talking about is more
Speaker 1: along the lines of what, for example, law enforcement will
Speaker 1: sometimes be placed in if they are convicted of a crime.
Speaker 1: Law enforcement officers will go into what I believe is
Speaker 1: called administrative segregation or at ad seg I believe is
Speaker 1: what they call it, and that's where you're not a
Speaker 1: part of the general population, because if you're a cop
Speaker 1: and you're in prison, you're obviously a major target and
Speaker 1: you still have all the privileges of the rest of
Speaker 1: the prisoner population. But you're not in the yard at
Speaker 1: the same time as them, I think, and their meals
Speaker 1: might be separate, washtime may be separate. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm not a Bureau of Prisons guy, but what
Speaker 1: I believe Manaford is in is straight up solitary confinement,
Speaker 1: which is a different situation and a very very psychologically
Speaker 1: trying one. I mean, he's on lockdown for twenty three
Speaker 1: hours a day by himself, twenty three hours a days
Speaker 1: in a cell by himself, that some people have argued
Speaker 1: is a form of psycological torture. And remember, Manaford is
Speaker 1: a threat to no human being. There is no one
Speaker 1: who thinks Manaford is a threat. In fact, you would
Speaker 1: be hard pressed to find anyone who feels victimized by
Speaker 1: Paul Manaford. The only person that is victimized is the
Speaker 1: federal government and the Treasury Department, which he has paid
Speaker 1: back in full and then some. I'm not excusing what
Speaker 1: Manaphort did. I just think that we need to have
Speaker 1: punishments that fit the crime. And seven years in federal
Speaker 1: prison and a twenty five million dollars fine on top
Speaker 1: of that, that seems excessive. And it is only happening
Speaker 1: because Manaford is tied to Trump. As we know, Jeremy,
Speaker 1: the way I've learned to say. Mayor Pete's last name
Speaker 1: is Buddha Judge as someone who lives in the Greater
Speaker 1: South Bend area. Mayor Pete is an interesting candidate politically.
Speaker 1: As mayor of a small blue city surrounded by a
Speaker 1: sea of red rural Indiana, he attempts to govern more
Speaker 1: toward the center. Since Democrats are needles in a haystack
Speaker 1: in Indiana's republican supermajority House and Senate, his only upward
Speaker 1: political direction is the jump to president. It will be
Speaker 1: interesting to see how the DNC receives him, but he
Speaker 1: is definitely a better candidate in Beto. Just some opposition
Speaker 1: research shields high. Jeremy, Yeah, Jeremy, I I think that,
Speaker 1: you know, you gotta look at Mayor Pete's background and
Speaker 1: his his pedigree of service to the country and his
Speaker 1: pedigree of um, you know, an academic background that's that's
Speaker 1: obviously exceptional, and think that he's a more serious candidate
Speaker 1: than Beto. Though the word I've spoke to some folks
Speaker 1: that spoke in pardon me, I spoke looking I'm down
Speaker 1: in Texas. I spoke people in Texas is like, fuck,
Speaker 1: that's not what we say either. Um. I've spoken to
Speaker 1: some people down here who have told me that Mayor
Speaker 1: I mean that Beto was considered a pretty centrist guy
Speaker 1: when he was a com we're spending for El Paso,
Speaker 1: this district, and had been usually a pretty moderate individual.
Speaker 1: But now that he's trying to run as a Democrat,
Speaker 1: because the Democrats are crazy, he's had to be pretty
Speaker 1: crazy too. So that's a different circumstance than what I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people were expecting. But that's where
Speaker 1: we are. Team. That's gonna be the show. From here
Speaker 1: in El Paso. You can find me at you know,
Speaker 1: somewhere downtown whatever the most famous places for Mexican food
Speaker 1: here in El Paso. That is where I will be tonight,
Speaker 1: if from the El Paso area, whatever the most well
Speaker 1: known is. So I'll be drinking. Marguerite is there with
Speaker 1: my team, with my crew, so feel free to swoop
Speaker 1: on buy and say hi. I will be traveling tomorrow.
Speaker 1: The Godfather, Michael Pelko will be in so we'll talk Monday.
Speaker 1: Until then, my friends, you know what's up. You know
Speaker 1: what time it is, shields high,