Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Left wing journalists are
Speaker 1: all upset about the controversy surrounding Elizabeth Warren. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about that, and also why is it that the left
Speaker 1: is all of a sudden so bellicos when it comes
Speaker 1: to Saudi Arabia? Is this really about security or is
Speaker 1: this something else? That and more coming up on The
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where
Speaker 1: the mission or mission is to decode what really matters
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American.
Speaker 1: Again The Buck Sexton Show begins. Analysts, No, welcome to
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Everybody live from the Swamp Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Actually got to spend all time over at
Speaker 1: the Trump Hotel today. That was That's always fun. It's
Speaker 1: amazing to be in a place where you walk around
Speaker 1: and people like, hey, Buck, keep up the good workman,
Speaker 1: love the show. I'm like, oh wow, in d C,
Speaker 1: in the swamp, no less, there are good There are
Speaker 1: good hearted and and stout patriots amongst us. Indeed there
Speaker 1: are I've got to tell you. The possibility of the
Speaker 1: Republicans not just keeping the Senate but also the House,
Speaker 1: I think is getting bigger and bigger with every passing day,
Speaker 1: and I think that it has the left completely freaked out.
Speaker 1: I think that they're grasping at this point. Although there's
Speaker 1: a part of me, given their tactics in the past,
Speaker 1: given the way that we know they play the game,
Speaker 1: there's a part of me that has to think they
Speaker 1: must have something else up their sleeve. They must have
Speaker 1: a plan that we have not yet seen but may
Speaker 1: Maybe it's just more of the same. Maybe it's just
Speaker 1: more dishonesty, more grasping, more puffed up nonsense about Russia
Speaker 1: collusion or uh these attacks on Kavanaugh and the Republicans
Speaker 1: being being rape apologists they say, although maybe they're learning
Speaker 1: their lesson, maybe they are realizing that this in fact
Speaker 1: did not work out well for them. I see something
Speaker 1: happening right now that I it's not yet clear. I'm
Speaker 1: sure a lot of other folks that this is really
Speaker 1: what's going on, but I see the early stages of this.
Speaker 1: I think that they are trying right now. The left
Speaker 1: wing media is hoping to find a way to make
Speaker 1: Trump make a mistake when it comes to his dealings
Speaker 1: with Saudi Arabia. I think that they're willing to push
Speaker 1: as much as they can to get a misstep from
Speaker 1: the president, even if it means a problem that will
Speaker 1: haunt our Midi's foreign policy for a long time to come.
Speaker 1: All of a sudden, they are rushing out with all
Speaker 1: the usual talking points. Right there, they're saying, Oh, Trump,
Speaker 1: Trump is too cozy with dictators, the same people that
Speaker 1: say that we're praising Obama's foreign policy. While Obama sat
Speaker 1: on his hands and not only did nothing, in fact
Speaker 1: made Syria worse, made a civil war that killed over
Speaker 1: five hundred thousand people worse. It was one thing to
Speaker 1: say that he did nothing, but no, we had a
Speaker 1: training program for the so called Free Syrian Army that
Speaker 1: was a disaster. We had a red line over the
Speaker 1: usage of chemical weapons that was a disaster because Obama
Speaker 1: didn't enforce that red line. So in dead we had
Speaker 1: years and years of carnage. And that carnage, I would note,
Speaker 1: stretch far beyond serious borders and in fact led to
Speaker 1: mass casualty terror attacks in Europe and yes here in
Speaker 1: the United States, inspired by an Islamic state that was
Speaker 1: able to run wild because Obama didn't have the decision
Speaker 1: making capability, didn't have the strength of his convictions or
Speaker 1: character to do something anything, the right thing. And now
Speaker 1: those same people want to lecture us all about how
Speaker 1: Trump is making a terrible mistake here with Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: He hasn't even he hasn't even taken an action yet,
Speaker 1: hasn't even had the chance to fully review all the
Speaker 1: facts of the case. But with the left and with
Speaker 1: the media united together in this effort to take down
Speaker 1: the President United States, it does not really matter to
Speaker 1: them that they will rush well ahead of facts. It
Speaker 1: doesn't matter that they may be creating a kind of
Speaker 1: pressure around the decision making of the commander in chief
Speaker 1: intended to get him to mess up. They're looking for
Speaker 1: reasons to criticize him and undermine him. There is nothing
Speaker 1: I can tell you this right now. If Trump sat
Speaker 1: down with the editorial board of the New York Times
Speaker 1: and the Washington Post, sat down with all the big name, overpaid,
Speaker 1: pompous hosts at CNN and MSNBC, and said, okay, everyone,
Speaker 1: what do you think I should do about Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: If he went and then did what that thing? Were
Speaker 1: those things? I assure you, I promise you, within forty
Speaker 1: eight hours, they would be saying, oh my gosh, look
Speaker 1: what Trump has done again. Look at how he has
Speaker 1: made a made a mess of things. They have no
Speaker 1: interest in promoting US foreign policy and our strength abroad.
Speaker 1: Their interest is in undermining the commander in chief in
Speaker 1: whatever way they can get there. Here's a perfect example.
Speaker 1: You've got Joe Scarborough. How this guy is still considered
Speaker 1: a Republican anywhere. He's a question that I would like
Speaker 1: an answer to these days. He feels about his Republican
Speaker 1: or sounds about his Republican as Jennifer Rubin of the
Speaker 1: Washington Post. But here's what he has to say about
Speaker 1: Trump and how all this goes play too. He is
Speaker 1: showing extreme naivete on the world stage. It hurts America
Speaker 1: and it certainly makes him look like a week later
Speaker 1: not just look he does look so weak and its sphetic.
Speaker 1: It just like he did in Helsinki. Here's a guy
Speaker 1: who just bumbling idiot. You have a guy who is
Speaker 1: scared of KGB agents, not man enough to stand up
Speaker 1: to former KGB agents, and not man enough to stand
Speaker 1: up to Sawty sheiks. I mean, that's what we have
Speaker 1: in a president. Whatever they have on him better be
Speaker 1: worth it. Because he looks like a bumbling idiot. It's
Speaker 1: just money, I guess though, I mean, is this what
Speaker 1: Donald Trump promised people he was gonna I thought he
Speaker 1: was going to be a strong leader. Instead he's cow
Speaker 1: tell and let letting these people, letting these autocrats, letting
Speaker 1: these tyrants kill journalists in the light of day. All
Speaker 1: the sanctimony and blather, complete blather from these two pompous, overpaid,
Speaker 1: overcloft clowns at MSNBC. They don't know a damn thing
Speaker 1: about what they're talking about. Oh what, because Mika's dad
Speaker 1: was Secretary of State, I'm supposed to listen to what
Speaker 1: she has to say. I don't think so. It wasn't
Speaker 1: a good secretary of state for what that's worth. Was
Speaker 1: actually pretty terrible at it. But discussion for another time.
Speaker 1: And Joe, when I say whose team is yawn, I
Speaker 1: know the answer. He's on Joe's team. It's Oh, it's
Speaker 1: all about Joe. It's all about Scarborough himself. He doesn't
Speaker 1: represent any ideology, he doesn't represent any set of principles.
Speaker 1: He doesn't even represent being a journalist. He's just there
Speaker 1: to spout off and make sure his hair is swooped
Speaker 1: up as high as possible, you know, calm down with
Speaker 1: the swoop and the rock band Joe. It's a little weird,
Speaker 1: and you can tell they're trying to make this personal.
Speaker 1: They're trying to They're trying to personally goad the president
Speaker 1: of the United States on this issue. What is he
Speaker 1: really going to do, folks? What what message is he
Speaker 1: going to send the Saudis on this one that would
Speaker 1: so that would so dramatically change their minds, that would
Speaker 1: all of a sudden mean they would never do this again,
Speaker 1: or they would think twice about doing this again. What
Speaker 1: are we really gonna do? This is not a US citizen,
Speaker 1: This was not done on US soil. The Saudis. Let's
Speaker 1: break this down to what it is. The Saudi's killed
Speaker 1: the guy on the soil of another country in a consulate.
Speaker 1: Is it disgusting? And Barbara, yes, do the Saudis do disgusting,
Speaker 1: barbaric things all the time? Absolutely? That is nothing new.
Speaker 1: Why is this our problem? I keep hearing about how, what, what?
Speaker 1: What is Trump going to do? What is Trump going
Speaker 1: to do? What could he do? And why is it
Speaker 1: on him? Shouldn't this be don't we have a United
Speaker 1: Nations for exactly this purpose. Don't we have this international
Speaker 1: community that I hear so much about all the time,
Speaker 1: so there can be multilateral and concerted action. So oh buck,
Speaker 1: But they won't do anything. Yeah, exactly, they won't do anything,
Speaker 1: will they? But when they when they don't like what
Speaker 1: the US is doing, it's, oh, why don't you wait
Speaker 1: for the international community, It's it's better if it comes
Speaker 1: from from all nations united together. Well what about this issue?
Speaker 1: Well no, let's not wait for the United Community of
Speaker 1: nations to come together. Let's let's have the US do
Speaker 1: what I have to say. The the frenzy, the frenzy
Speaker 1: that the media is engaged in right now to make
Speaker 1: this the biggest story in the country, and to skip
Speaker 1: over what's going on with US troops, for example, in Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: a place we're still at which we're still in war. Um,
Speaker 1: we don't hear about it, do we. We don't hear
Speaker 1: about the fact that we're in the process of slowly
Speaker 1: losing that war. They don't want to. They don't talk
Speaker 1: about that anymore. Uh. They want to focus on this issue.
Speaker 1: And I would say it's not just because they do
Speaker 1: feel journalists do feel a special affinity for other journalists, right,
Speaker 1: this hits home for them. Not so much during the
Speaker 1: Obama years when Obama was pulling the phone records of
Speaker 1: journalists and listing on d o J charging sheets unindicted
Speaker 1: co conspirators as you know, journalists. But you know that
Speaker 1: was Obama. Oh that's right, you know, tough guy. Tapper
Speaker 1: would say, you know, Obama, do you think that that
Speaker 1: you're really the best This administration is the best messenger
Speaker 1: on that issue? Yeah, that's oooh tough talk. Tough talk
Speaker 1: to the Obama administration, which used the Espionage Act more
Speaker 1: than every other administration combined. Not a lot of talk
Speaker 1: about how they were destroying the First Amendment though, right,
Speaker 1: Not not much of that. You hear that about Trump
Speaker 1: all the time because he tweets, because he tweets this
Speaker 1: this journalist, Koshogi. What happened to him? We still don't
Speaker 1: really know, and we should not lose sight of that.
Speaker 1: We don't know what happened to Kashogi. We have not
Speaker 1: been told what the facts are of this case. They're
Speaker 1: still trying to figure it out. But everyone wants Trump
Speaker 1: to take action. They want to push the President United States,
Speaker 1: the leader of the free world to do something that
Speaker 1: could upset the balance of power in the Middle East,
Speaker 1: that could have long term ramifications, and they don't care
Speaker 1: about any of that. What they really just want is
Speaker 1: the opportunity to criticize the president for inaction and then
Speaker 1: dump all over him for whatever action he takes. These
Speaker 1: people are disgusting, their disgrace. None other than chief National
Speaker 1: security propagandists for the Obama administration Ben Rhodes takes this
Speaker 1: to the next level, and you know, it's once again,
Speaker 1: it's always about Trump. It's all Trump's fault. Somehow, everything
Speaker 1: that the left doesn't like is Trump's fault. Place sixteen.
Speaker 1: And the message of President Trump is sending is that
Speaker 1: there's no consequences. And what you have to realize is
Speaker 1: there's nobody else who can play the role of the
Speaker 1: United States to hold people like this to account. We
Speaker 1: are the world's oldest and most significant democracy, and if
Speaker 1: we're not a democracy, if we're not sending up for this,
Speaker 1: there's not somebody else who's going to do that. And
Speaker 1: the consequences of that are journalists everywhere are less safe.
Speaker 1: And let's face it, we have a president who says journals,
Speaker 1: so the enemy of the state. So values like freedom
Speaker 1: of speech and dissent suddenly are very endangered around the world.
Speaker 1: And that's a tread line that I think is getting
Speaker 1: much worse. That is a giant pile of crap, A
Speaker 1: giant pile of crap from Obama's chief national security propagandist,
Speaker 1: a guy who laughed about creating an echo chamber of
Speaker 1: idiot almost entirely Democrat journalists during the Obama years to
Speaker 1: sell the irandal, laughed at their ignorance and their stupidity,
Speaker 1: at least on that he was right. They do have
Speaker 1: a lot of idiot journalists at these media outlets, especially
Speaker 1: the young ones who are right out of college, who
Speaker 1: have just bought into this leftist nonsense hook line and sinker,
Speaker 1: but no notice how far this goes. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is Trump arrangement syndrome on the world stage. A Saudi
Speaker 1: hit team kills a Saudi journalist in a consulate in Turkey,
Speaker 1: and it's on It's on Trump to make this right.
Speaker 1: It's on us to make this right. Let me tell
Speaker 1: you something, as someone who has spent more time than
Speaker 1: he ever thought he would in war zones alongside men
Speaker 1: and women who were wearing the uniform him to defend
Speaker 1: this country and to essentially rebuild other people's countries for them.
Speaker 1: I don't think we have to make everyone else's problems
Speaker 1: are problems all the time. You know, Saudi Arabia is
Speaker 1: a terrible, tyrannical kingdom that we have to deal with
Speaker 1: because of the realities of the world we live in.
Speaker 1: It's a terrible place, by the way, in large part
Speaker 1: because of the prevailing ideology, which is fundamentalist Islam. That's
Speaker 1: why it's so bad and repressive and intolerant. That doesn't
Speaker 1: get talked about. You'll notice that's left out of the
Speaker 1: conversation entirely. And the criticism here is much stronger against
Speaker 1: Trump himself than against this the leader of Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 1: the de facto ruler, Mohammed been Solomon. That's right, someone
Speaker 1: somewhere gets killed by someone else, and it's Trump's fault.
Speaker 1: You see, He's the one that we should all be
Speaker 1: angry at. These people are delusional, and what's worse, giving
Speaker 1: the length they're willing to go to here to try
Speaker 1: and push for presidential action, they're dangerous. Don't forget that.
Speaker 1: We've got more on this. And also, obviously the Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren Debuckle, which is amusing and also insane. Uh. And
Speaker 1: then just some issues some of the latest on the
Speaker 1: polling for the mid terms, where this is all heading
Speaker 1: how the economies look in We got a jam pack
Speaker 1: show because that's how we roll. I'll be right back team,
Speaker 1: And so the implications are really really significant. Uh, because
Speaker 1: we've talked from the beginning of this presidency, Joe about
Speaker 1: the potential impact on human rights worldwide. Well, that begins
Speaker 1: with journalists. I remember vividly a train trip up on
Speaker 1: the Ascella when I talked to a group for International
Speaker 1: and International Group to Protect Journalists who told me it
Speaker 1: was within months of Trump taking office that they saw
Speaker 1: of worldwide threats to journalists going up. And this is
Speaker 1: kind of the in the extreme, what is happening now
Speaker 1: in terms of human rights not only two journalists, but
Speaker 1: in several hot spots around the world. That's all bull
Speaker 1: That woman has no idea, that MSNBC analysts has no
Speaker 1: idea what she's she's talking about. I bring you to
Speaker 1: a piece written by yours truly in the age of Trump,
Speaker 1: that the press can't stop playing the victim. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: actually looked at the numbers, you know that from the
Speaker 1: Committity to Protect Journalists and all that stuff. Who wants
Speaker 1: to guess how many journalists have been killed in America
Speaker 1: since eleven eleven? How many people in this country since
Speaker 1: two alright, stretching back now for all you know, going
Speaker 1: on three decades. Let's just what is it, eight eight, eighteen,
Speaker 1: twenty six years, for almost thirty years, how many people
Speaker 1: have been killed in this country who are journalists? And
Speaker 1: they wanted to guess? Three? Three people have been killed
Speaker 1: for journalism in America in thirty years, and not by
Speaker 1: the state, but just by people that didn't like that
Speaker 1: the journalists were doing stories on them. And when you
Speaker 1: look at the numbers abroad, I'm not saying there aren't
Speaker 1: bad states and there aren't utalitarian regimes, but they've been
Speaker 1: bad all along. They've been bad all along. By way
Speaker 1: of comparison, we've had three journalists killed in twenty six
Speaker 1: years in this country. You know how many cab drivers
Speaker 1: were killed last year? Sixty? You don't see cab drivers
Speaker 1: are going, oh my gosh, we can't do our jobs.
Speaker 1: All all journalists this journalist line that I hear about, Oh,
Speaker 1: Trump has made it harder for journalists. How the entire
Speaker 1: journalist apparatus in this countries against against him, and their
Speaker 1: ratings are going up and they're more famous than ever,
Speaker 1: They're making more money. There's no action being taken against them.
Speaker 1: What because Trump makes fun of them, He hurts their feelings.
Speaker 1: Because Trump calls out Jim Acosta for being the clown
Speaker 1: that he is. Any time anything anywhere happens to a
Speaker 1: journalist in the entire world, it's Trump's fault. I mean,
Speaker 1: these are the same people that believe that Elizabeth Warren
Speaker 1: is actually a Native American, even after she showed her
Speaker 1: date DNA results which showed she is not a Native American.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I have a tough time our journalist delusional?
Speaker 1: Are they just not very smart? I'm not sure which one.
Speaker 1: As the President said, we're gonna get to the bottom
Speaker 1: other it's important that the world know the truth. If
Speaker 1: in fact, h Mr Kashogi was murder, we need to
Speaker 1: know who was responsible. We need to hold those responsible.
Speaker 1: Uh and uh, it's just it's it's even more important
Speaker 1: that that he was a member of a free and
Speaker 1: independent rest. Any loss of life is grievance, Any act
Speaker 1: of violence that claims the life is to be condemned.
Speaker 1: But uh, this was also an assault on a free
Speaker 1: and independent press. So um, we're gonna demand answers. The
Speaker 1: world deserves answers, and the President and I and our
Speaker 1: administration are going to continue to call for answers to
Speaker 1: see that those are responsible are held to account. Now
Speaker 1: that's the vice president who's saying pretty much all the
Speaker 1: things you would expect him to say. I think he's
Speaker 1: saying the right things here on this issue. Uh, But
Speaker 1: the leftist critics of the regime of the administration, Sorry,
Speaker 1: that happens sometimes. They're not placated by this at all.
Speaker 1: They're not okay. They don't say all right, you know
Speaker 1: because Penn says, we just need the facts and we'll
Speaker 1: hold them accountable. They're not. They're not slowing down all.
Speaker 1: They want to jump all over them. That's their plan.
Speaker 1: They want to jump all over the president and the
Speaker 1: vice president on this issue as much as they can.
Speaker 1: And they're not waiting for anything. They don't wanta wait
Speaker 1: for the facts. They don't wait to see what action
Speaker 1: he takes. They just prefer this notion that yeah, Trump
Speaker 1: is a bad guy. That helps them sleep a night it. Well,
Speaker 1: one other thing, though, I would disagree with Vice President
Speaker 1: Pence on on one matter, or the notion that this
Speaker 1: is an attack on an independent press. Okay, well he
Speaker 1: would write for the Washington Post. But Saudi Arabia doesn't
Speaker 1: have an independent press at all, not not even a
Speaker 1: little bit. Okay, there, there is not an independent president Sudi.
Speaker 1: People say, oh, book, it's been getting a little better,
Speaker 1: and yeah, whatever. Turkey doesn't have an independent press. In fact,
Speaker 1: the country where Kaushogi was from what we see, from
Speaker 1: what we believe murdered, is one of the worst in
Speaker 1: the world when it comes to press freedom. Not Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: Turkey bad when it comes to press your freedom. So
Speaker 1: when we say it's an attack on a free press, yeah,
Speaker 1: we live in a world where the free press is
Speaker 1: the exception, not the rule. A lot of countries have
Speaker 1: all kinds of constraints on what can be printed, what
Speaker 1: can be said, what can be shared. Lots of countries
Speaker 1: and even countries that you think of as having a
Speaker 1: free press, maybe some of the Western European states, for example,
Speaker 1: they have restrictions based on you know, hate crime legislation
Speaker 1: and all all kinds of stuff. In Britain, there's no
Speaker 1: oh you can print. You can print national security secrets
Speaker 1: because you're the press. They have the Official Secrets Act.
Speaker 1: They'll lock your butt up. They don't care if it's
Speaker 1: a matter of public importance, they'll just lock you up.
Speaker 1: So I just think everyone needs to take a deep
Speaker 1: breath and understand that, yes, this is bad. Yes the U.
Speaker 1: S Should send a strong message, but it's not the
Speaker 1: worst thing that's ever happened in the history of mankind.
Speaker 1: We need to take a step back here and understand
Speaker 1: that people die all of the world under terrible circumstances
Speaker 1: every day. Doesn't mean you ignore at all, but it
Speaker 1: just means that you need perspective here. And what we're
Speaker 1: going to do, even if we find out that the
Speaker 1: saudiast are as culpable as is as has been alleged
Speaker 1: from the very beginning, meaning all the way up to
Speaker 1: the top, maybe we'll not sell them some munitions we
Speaker 1: said we're gonna sell them. Maybe we'll send them a
Speaker 1: strong reprimand under. We have no legal authority to do
Speaker 1: anything about this. We are not signatories. The United States
Speaker 1: is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court, so
Speaker 1: we can't go there. And we're not a signatory for
Speaker 1: a good reason, which is that the notion of an
Speaker 1: international criminal law it doesn't really exist. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: there's war crimes, I guess, but try and forcing those
Speaker 1: unless you've already beaten the country and brought them to
Speaker 1: submission that you want to punish people in because of
Speaker 1: their work crimes. Right. It's just it's really easy to
Speaker 1: to bang the tough guy drum on this issue. It's
Speaker 1: it's a lot harder to sit back and actually come
Speaker 1: up with constructive ways to deal with all this. You know,
Speaker 1: It's really easy to say, oh, you know, I'm I'm
Speaker 1: all about a free press and Trump isn't doing enough?
Speaker 1: All right, what should we do? I'm not just saying, oh,
Speaker 1: we can't bring a Showgi back because we can't. But
Speaker 1: he's not he's not an American. Why why does it
Speaker 1: fall on us? Why does it fall on us? I'm
Speaker 1: just wondering, you know, I'm wondering why that is. And
Speaker 1: I think it's because they see, they view this ultimately,
Speaker 1: this is just another opportunity to bash the president. That's
Speaker 1: that's what really gets them motivated. That's what gets them
Speaker 1: really excited about all this. Um I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: to you a bit about what's going on it comes
Speaker 1: to immigration. Right now in this country. We have another
Speaker 1: caravan heading toward our southern border. I've had a chance
Speaker 1: to I I interviewed a Democrat congressman today on this issue,
Speaker 1: and I have many, many thoughts to share on this.
Speaker 1: We we will get a bit deeper into the Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren thing because she won't stop. She's already in a
Speaker 1: very deep hole, and she keeps digging and digging, and
Speaker 1: people are like, Okay, you really need to stop digging,
Speaker 1: or else you're gonna come out the other side of
Speaker 1: the globe or something. You know, you really need to stop,
Speaker 1: and she won't stop. I'm not gonna stop. Keep just
Speaker 1: gonna keep digging, all right. So if that's her choice,
Speaker 1: we will discuss what it means. I think it does
Speaker 1: have some ramifications for the Democrats. Um, so we've got
Speaker 1: a lot to a lot to digest here together, my friend,
Speaker 1: let's talk immigration in just a moment. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: That's the same as the Obama law. You know, Obama
Speaker 1: had the same thing. It was on the books, but
Speaker 1: he didn't enforce it. You enforced it, You launched that
Speaker 1: zero tolerance policy to deter families with children. But then
Speaker 1: everybody decided and the courts don't want separation. And frankly,
Speaker 1: when you don't do separate, when you allow the pair
Speaker 1: to stay together. Okay, when you allow that, then what
Speaker 1: happens is people are going to pour into our country.
Speaker 1: Are you gonna go back to them subsequences leslie for
Speaker 1: coming into our country illegally? That's right, There have to
Speaker 1: be consequences or else we're just going to have more
Speaker 1: and more of this. Of course, the damns, the left,
Speaker 1: the Libs, they know that. They pretend that that's not
Speaker 1: really what they want, but it certainly is. It is
Speaker 1: what they want. It is what the Libs are hoping
Speaker 1: we get more of. And I think that Republicans need
Speaker 1: to start pushing back whenever they're asked this question about
Speaker 1: Trump and the border and set family separation and say, okay,
Speaker 1: what what immigration laws are we allowed to enforce? Who
Speaker 1: doesn't get to stay? And say, oh, well not everyone
Speaker 1: can say all right, who tell me who does not
Speaker 1: get to stay? Those who are in the interior of
Speaker 1: the United States, according to left, legally alien they get
Speaker 1: to stay. Those who try to sneak into the country,
Speaker 1: are then caught and say they want to claim asylum
Speaker 1: that they get to stay. Who doesn't get to say, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry violent felons, and even those Democrats have a
Speaker 1: soft spot for even those. It's not clear that Democrats
Speaker 1: don't think that they should stay in this country because
Speaker 1: you know, the prison conditions and other countries are so harsh,
Speaker 1: so we should probably incarce rate them here, Thank you
Speaker 1: very much, taxpayers. Right now, as I speak to you,
Speaker 1: there is another migrant caravan, as they call it, and
Speaker 1: this is just essentially a a large swarm of soon
Speaker 1: to be illegals making their way from Honduras up through Guatemala,
Speaker 1: through Mexico and all the way to the interior of
Speaker 1: the United States. It has over a thousand people in it.
Speaker 1: Some estimates go as high as three thousand, and it
Speaker 1: is a group of people who are marching to the
Speaker 1: border to get into America. They're going to walk all
Speaker 1: the way, and there are shelters that are set up
Speaker 1: along the way. Now, this has become a process that
Speaker 1: these other countries are, if not encouraging, certainly turning a
Speaker 1: blind eye. I mean, I think you could argue they're
Speaker 1: encouraging it. Why well, because it means that they have
Speaker 1: a means of exporting there, in many cases poorest and
Speaker 1: least educated to this country. It also means that there
Speaker 1: will be remittance dollars, huge source of currency in Mexico.
Speaker 1: Remittances will be sent back, So we are subsidizing those economies.
Speaker 1: And who wants to guess at what rate those remittances
Speaker 1: are being taxed, that's right, Probably not being taxed at all,
Speaker 1: are they. So there's this caravan that's making its way
Speaker 1: up into the country, and the Libs are gonna do
Speaker 1: what they always do. They're gonna respond to this issue emotionally.
Speaker 1: They're gonna say, oh my gosh, what about the poem
Speaker 1: on the base of the Statue of Liberty? What about
Speaker 1: Ellis Island? What about giving me your tire your week?
Speaker 1: And blab all right, So does any massive people that
Speaker 1: shows up at the border now get to come in
Speaker 1: to the United States? Why do we even have immigration laws?
Speaker 1: Why do we have a border patrol? What is the
Speaker 1: purpose of all this? If libs are just gonna grandstand
Speaker 1: every time and act like anyone who has any questions
Speaker 1: about just bringing it whoever wants to come to this country,
Speaker 1: can say, you see, ultimately, here's the problem that the
Speaker 1: leftist project the really the socialist uh the Democrats socialist
Speaker 1: project in Western Europe and in America, because there are
Speaker 1: Democrats socialists here as we know Berni Santis and others.
Speaker 1: They're Elizabeth Warren, but she's got other problems right now.
Speaker 1: The problem that the Democrats socialist project has to face
Speaker 1: is that they believe in open borders, but they also
Speaker 1: believe in a welfare state, a massive welfare state that
Speaker 1: doesn't work. The math doesn't add up. And also people
Speaker 1: are willing to help the less fortunate from within their
Speaker 1: own community, from within their polity, right their political union.
Speaker 1: There is still a sense of nationhood, of nationalism. Should
Speaker 1: I say where you want to know? I want to
Speaker 1: help Americans. First, If we're gonna have a welfare state
Speaker 1: in this country, it should be to help those who
Speaker 1: are Americans, all racist creeds and colors, help them if
Speaker 1: they're down on their luck and we're gonna have a
Speaker 1: welfare state, that should be. But if if we have
Speaker 1: a policy of essentially anybody who shows up and has
Speaker 1: a sab a sob story about how their country has
Speaker 1: not I'm not talking about people necessarily that are facing
Speaker 1: any imminent violence. They just say, oh, the jobs here
Speaker 1: are better. Well, guess what if I show up in
Speaker 1: Switzerland and say, hey that I like this place better,
Speaker 1: it's cleaner, it's more civilized. I demand citizenship, They're gonna
Speaker 1: put my butt on a plane and kick me out
Speaker 1: of the country and never let me back, and no
Speaker 1: one's gonna feel sorry for me. There is an order
Speaker 1: that countries try to maintain. Other countries are allowed to
Speaker 1: have borders. Not only that, other countries are not expected
Speaker 1: to take in millions and millions and tens of millions
Speaker 1: of people from a different culture, who speak a different language,
Speaker 1: and who, once they come to this country, increasingly claimed
Speaker 1: that this country is not fair to them because we
Speaker 1: don't do enough for them. I was on the impression
Speaker 1: that became the America. You're supposed to feel grateful and
Speaker 1: legal immigrants, by the way, all of your listening, high five,
Speaker 1: thank you, welcome to being part of the American family.
Speaker 1: Legal immigrants overwhelmingly do. But I do see a trend
Speaker 1: among illegal immigrants where they think that we owe them something.
Speaker 1: We owe them not just citizenship, not just permanent residency,
Speaker 1: but also all the goodies that the state could offer,
Speaker 1: free healthcare, free school, free housing, free everything. Even America
Speaker 1: with our incredible economy and our economic dynamism. And thank
Speaker 1: you Trump for showing us that growth growth under Obama
Speaker 1: for all the people who sing Obama coonomy so great.
Speaker 1: Growth under Obama in his last year in office was
Speaker 1: like one point something per cent growth under Trump's second
Speaker 1: year in office g d P over four the single
Speaker 1: best measure we have of economic activity and what's going
Speaker 1: on in this country. So all the people gonna go
Speaker 1: to Obama economy, we please, Yes, there was a natural
Speaker 1: economic reset that occurred. Obama made it slower and more
Speaker 1: painful and less powerful than it would have been had
Speaker 1: he not gotten in the way. But he was ignorance
Speaker 1: of economics. I mean, Obama is just not somebody who
Speaker 1: understand business, not somebody who ever had a you know,
Speaker 1: look at a balance sheet for any length of time,
Speaker 1: not somebody who had to run a business of any kind.
Speaker 1: You know, he was in the business of Obama. It's different.
Speaker 1: But the facts facts cannot be allowed to get in
Speaker 1: the way of the leftist narrative. With all this stuff,
Speaker 1: this group is going to come to the border, and
Speaker 1: they are going to be in a position where we
Speaker 1: can either let them in or not. And you know what,
Speaker 1: the liberals are going to say, let them in, and
Speaker 1: we're going to turn around and say, hold on a second.
Speaker 1: But if if their claims of asylum allow them entrying
Speaker 1: into this country, what we're really saying is that anyone
Speaker 1: can come and stay as long as they want. Anyone
Speaker 1: is allowed to show up in this country, and we
Speaker 1: effectively have an open border because all that all that's
Speaker 1: required for asylum is to say the right is now,
Speaker 1: the word is out now, we know what the loopholes
Speaker 1: are right now. The people in these communities that are
Speaker 1: coming into this country know that all I have to
Speaker 1: say is I fear violence in my home country. I
Speaker 1: fear violence. I mean violence can happen in anyone's country.
Speaker 1: There's asylum. It's supposed to for people that are fleeing
Speaker 1: either a horrific natural disaster, and by the way, they're
Speaker 1: supposed to go back. Usually we give them temporary status
Speaker 1: for natural disasters because we're we look, we're a caring country,
Speaker 1: but we're not supposed to be chumps. We're not supposed
Speaker 1: to just be you know, the the the fat cow
Speaker 1: to be milked by the rest of the world. And
Speaker 1: that's what's happening. The Democrats have no way of turning
Speaker 1: this back. By the way they understand, Uh, they understand that,
Speaker 1: quite honestly, there is no way that they can explain
Speaker 1: to the American people what it is that they really want.
Speaker 1: If they told the truth to Americans and we'd have
Speaker 1: a we'd have a lot of folks would say, A
Speaker 1: hold on a second, I don't think that's gonna work.
Speaker 1: I don't think you can just bring in endless amounts
Speaker 1: of foreigners, not through the legal process, not go through
Speaker 1: the normal channels of assimilation that have been in this
Speaker 1: country for centuries. Now, UH joined this community that now
Speaker 1: liberals speak to, specifically the illegal immigrants in this country
Speaker 1: the quote undocumented, joined the ranks of the aggrieved undocumented,
Speaker 1: and try to get them access to the public treasury
Speaker 1: as fast as possible. We are twenty one trillion dollars
Speaker 1: in debt. I'll talk to you more about that later
Speaker 1: on in the show. Bringing in people without a high
Speaker 1: school level education and without English language skills by the
Speaker 1: millions is not actually making our economy stronger. That is
Speaker 1: a lie. It's an obvious lie. If if Americans are
Speaker 1: not balancing the budget at the end of the year,
Speaker 1: for the American people aren't actually paying as they go
Speaker 1: when it comes to government spending. We really think that
Speaker 1: bringing lot of foreigners who don't have skills, who aren't
Speaker 1: going through the member. I'm talking about illegal foreigners, they're
Speaker 1: going to be the ones that set the economy, right,
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I know you know this too,
Speaker 1: but man, is it frustrating. It is frustrating that you're
Speaker 1: gonna hear so much. It's just gonna turn into one
Speaker 1: big media sob story too. Oh who would turn these people?
Speaker 1: Who would turn these people away? How could you so heartless?
Speaker 1: You know, the Republicans with your your top hats in
Speaker 1: your monocles, stepping over poor people on the way to work.
Speaker 1: It's crazy. We will talk about Elizabeth Warren Folcahunta says
Speaker 1: she is called by our president. That's coming up. Background
Speaker 1: checks are essential no matter what size business you're in,
Speaker 1: you're gonna make sure that you've got people coming in
Speaker 1: who have represented themselves properly to you, don't have any
Speaker 1: criminal issues in their background, don't have any major financial issues,
Speaker 1: and lawsuits against them. That's where backgrounds are essential, and
Speaker 1: that's why you need Global Verification Network to be your
Speaker 1: background investigation and vetting company. They have risk mitigation experts
Speaker 1: headquartered in Chicago, and they have offices throughout the country.
Speaker 1: All employees are located here in the United States, and
Speaker 1: Global Verification is a veteran owned and operated company, a
Speaker 1: veteran owned small business folks, So support them any company,
Speaker 1: any size. This is who you should have do in
Speaker 1: your background checks. Just call them. They'll set you up
Speaker 1: with a plan. You'll love the service. They know what
Speaker 1: they're doing. My g VN dot com again, my g
Speaker 1: v N m y g v N dot com or
Speaker 1: eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine.
Speaker 1: It is emphatically not the duty of the courts to
Speaker 1: manage the United States government to pass judgment on every
Speaker 1: policy action that the executive branch takes. To make matters worse,
Speaker 1: the idea that any district judge can demand to see
Speaker 1: the deliberations of the ecutive branch will also inevitably have
Speaker 1: a chilling effect subjecting the executive branch. So this kind
Speaker 1: of discovery is not acceptable. It's just not and we
Speaker 1: intend to fight it. And we intend to win journey
Speaker 1: General Jeff Sessions. That's right. Hearing from Jeff a little bit.
Speaker 1: It's always nice to hear from the man. You know.
Speaker 1: I think that he understands and has understood all along,
Speaker 1: that the judiciary is unfortunately a hotbed of hashtag resistance,
Speaker 1: and that you have all they have a lot of
Speaker 1: judges who for whatever reason, have taken it upon themselves
Speaker 1: that they need to stand athwart Trump and the executive
Speaker 1: power that he clearly has and do everything that they
Speaker 1: can to stop him. They view themselves as a check
Speaker 1: and not a check based upon constitutional interpretation. No, they
Speaker 1: just don't like what Trump does. And these activist judges
Speaker 1: need to stop and this effort to try and get
Speaker 1: around executive privilege. You know, you saw this with the
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh hearings where they're saying, oh, they don't have enough documents,
Speaker 1: enough documents. Uh, they don't get to see everything that
Speaker 1: was ever done in the Bush White House just because
Speaker 1: they want to find something to try and slime Kavanaugh with.
Speaker 1: And you know that all they really had to do
Speaker 1: is wait around until their nonsense assault allegations could be leveled.
Speaker 1: That was the whole point. That was the game they
Speaker 1: were playing, so why pretend like there was something else
Speaker 1: going on. Of course, as we know, they have no honor,
Speaker 1: so they have no honor to protect, and that gives
Speaker 1: you a lot of latitude with these matters. But the
Speaker 1: whole issue of judges and activist judges is a reminder
Speaker 1: of both what was done to this country before by
Speaker 1: the Obama administration and what is at stake in the
Speaker 1: midterms in just a few weeks. President Obama was responsible
Speaker 1: in his eight years for stacking the federal courts with
Speaker 1: about thirty percent of federal judges became Obama points, a
Speaker 1: huge number, and those are appointments that will be around
Speaker 1: for decades. So Obama left, and we see that mark
Speaker 1: on the courts now because they are standing in front
Speaker 1: of Trump's agenda and making ridiculous I mean, the Ninth Circuit.
Speaker 1: I'm surprised they're not gonna overturn whatever court told Stormy
Speaker 1: Daniels that her defamation suit with Avanadi wasn't going forward
Speaker 1: and actually Stormy Daniels might have to pay the legal
Speaker 1: fees incurred by Trump. That's quite a loss in the
Speaker 1: world of a defamation case. That is quite a SmackDown.
Speaker 1: But judges matter. They matter even more to the left
Speaker 1: and they matter to us because we just hope the
Speaker 1: judges will keep things even unfair. They hope that judges
Speaker 1: will hand them what they could never get through the
Speaker 1: legislative process. So judges are essential to the leftist project.
Speaker 1: And that's why the more judges that we can get
Speaker 1: that are constitutional conservatives, the less they can put up
Speaker 1: there who are leftist legislators in black robes, and it
Speaker 1: obviously really agitates them. That is which is fun. It
Speaker 1: is fun, you know, on the lib sometimes it's something
Speaker 1: you gotta do. It's fun. I am absolutely in favor
Speaker 1: of putting as many constitutional conservatives as possible in the
Speaker 1: court as fast as possible. And miss McConnell has been
Speaker 1: doing that, by the way, even more judges, I mean,
Speaker 1: they're just Mitch McConnell is a lean, mean judge confirmation machine.
Speaker 1: It's right arm and he's doing whatever he can to
Speaker 1: get that done. And that's his legacy as a conservative.
Speaker 1: He knows it. You know, you say what you will
Speaker 1: about Mitch and the swamp and all that stuff. He
Speaker 1: has been a warrior for conservative judges getting on the bench,
Speaker 1: getting the highest courts as we know with Kavanaugh and
Speaker 1: elsewhere that's at stake though here, if the Democrats were
Speaker 1: to take control of the Senate, you could say goodbye
Speaker 1: againting any good judges through. If the Democrats take control
Speaker 1: of the Senate, it's going to be a complete stoppage
Speaker 1: on federal judges unless you put forward Americ Garland type
Speaker 1: and anyone who you think might be kind of a
Speaker 1: centrist according to the way the media describes them. Trust me,
Speaker 1: that judge is a leftist. So you might get somebody
Speaker 1: like America Garland to come through it, but overall they'll
Speaker 1: they'll bring it to a screeching halt. So so at
Speaker 1: some level there's there's a judge issue at stake here,
Speaker 1: or the judges are at stake. With the mid terms,
Speaker 1: I think we're good on the on the Senate side,
Speaker 1: but then you go to the House side of the equation,
Speaker 1: you realize that we will be subjected to a stoppage
Speaker 1: of Trump's most important policy agenda items. If the Democrats
Speaker 1: take the House, it'll be over. You know, maybe they'll
Speaker 1: play a little play a little foot see with our
Speaker 1: side when it comes to an infrastructure bill, but it's
Speaker 1: it's over in terms of getting a wall immigration reform,
Speaker 1: all that that's not gonna happen, and we are going
Speaker 1: to be in a two year long grinding battle where
Speaker 1: all the media is gonna want to do is try
Speaker 1: to exact revenge on Trump and all his supporters for
Speaker 1: the humiliations that they've endured that the media has endured
Speaker 1: for the last couple of years. You'll be treated to
Speaker 1: the most politicized and nonsensical investigations imaginable, and you will
Speaker 1: see sure enough that yeah, they're gonna make this about
Speaker 1: about impeachment. Even if they know they can't remove the president,
Speaker 1: they want to impeach him just to put a stain
Speaker 1: on his presidency that they can venue to try to run.
Speaker 1: So now, the good news for us is that the
Speaker 1: Democrats so far have nobody realistic that they can run
Speaker 1: against Trump in I mean, it's this list that that
Speaker 1: I saw earlier this week that CNN had the polling
Speaker 1: on on who could be who could be up against Tromp.
Speaker 1: I mean, you had at the top of list Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: Come on, guys, Biden, that's the best you can do.
Speaker 1: Below Biden, you had Warren. I don't think she's exactly
Speaker 1: gonna be a threat. I don't think. I don't think
Speaker 1: Warren's got it. You had some other names on there,
Speaker 1: you know, Kamala Harris. Why because she checked some boxes
Speaker 1: that the left likes. There's not nothing that you've ever
Speaker 1: seen her do legislatively or otherwise. That was impressive. And
Speaker 1: I've heard from people that it was someone on her staff.
Speaker 1: I don't know this, but the rumor that I'm reporting
Speaker 1: on a rumor right now. You can yell at me later.
Speaker 1: The rumor I he was that was someone on her staff,
Speaker 1: not fin Stein's staff, that actually lead that information. I
Speaker 1: don't have proof of that. I'm not naming anybody obviously
Speaker 1: because I don't have proof of it, but that was
Speaker 1: what I heard, and I wouldn't surprise me. We had
Speaker 1: that other staffer, a congressional staffer who was leaking the
Speaker 1: personal information of Republican senators, dosing them straight up doc
Speaker 1: and he's facing real time in prison and he should go.
Speaker 1: But I hope the GOP has had a wake up
Speaker 1: call here, and that's really what I'm focusing on. I
Speaker 1: hope that Republicans, that every person who voted for Trump
Speaker 1: understands that all the good things that are happening, come
Speaker 1: to effectively come to a if not a halt. Let's
Speaker 1: say they continue at half power at best. Sure there'll
Speaker 1: still be some executive orders still, they'll they'll be deregulatory stuff.
Speaker 1: But we lose the House, you're gonna see that the
Speaker 1: resistance will dig in and all of the craziness that
Speaker 1: we've seen them engage in in the last years, all
Speaker 1: that anti Trump psychosis will be directed into the House
Speaker 1: of Representatives waging a campaign of just attrition against the
Speaker 1: Trumpet ministration, just just trying to tire them out in
Speaker 1: exhausted with subpoenas and all the grandstanding and all the
Speaker 1: media parents and they're like, oh, what's their agenda? Gonna be, Oh,
Speaker 1: you know stuff, Russia collusion stuff. It's just gonna be crap.
Speaker 1: So America is really going to suffer. So this election,
Speaker 1: mat Mike says, the most important election of our lifetime,
Speaker 1: and I ever always says that that's garbage. It's an
Speaker 1: important election, though, And if you really think that Trump
Speaker 1: is part of a political revolution and what he's doing
Speaker 1: is as I really do believe, it's benefiting this country tremendously.
Speaker 1: We gotta go to the barricades on this one. We
Speaker 1: gotta fight. Politically speaking, we got much more coming off teams.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. Every day starts the same way from me,
Speaker 1: my friends, with a cup of black black Rifle coffee.
Speaker 1: That's right, I'm drinking a black these days because it
Speaker 1: is delicious roast. To order small batch coffee that you're
Speaker 1: going to want to really taste. You're not gonna want
Speaker 1: to pour a bunch of creamer in this. Okay, you're
Speaker 1: not in the former so union you have to drown
Speaker 1: out the taste of the crappy beans you're drinking. Drink
Speaker 1: Patriot approved coffee, Black Rifle Coffee. Go to Black Rifle
Speaker 1: Coffee dot com, slash buck and you'll see you can
Speaker 1: get fift per cent off your order there. Okay, Black
Speaker 1: Rifle Coffee dot com, slash buck, fifteen percent off your
Speaker 1: first order, have it delivered to you. Never have to
Speaker 1: think about buying coffee again. What brand are you buying
Speaker 1: right now? I'm really asking you that Black Rifle tastes
Speaker 1: better than it and it's owned and operated by veterans
Speaker 1: who love this country and share your ideals and your values.
Speaker 1: Take action. Black Rifle Coffee dot Com slash buck, you'll
Speaker 1: get fifteen percent off your first order. In New York's
Speaker 1: eleventh district voted for Trump by a huge margin. It
Speaker 1: includes all of Staten Island, and it feels nothing like
Speaker 1: where we came from this morning, especially here in New
Speaker 1: dorth Or. Republican Congressman Dan Donovan asked us to meet him.
Speaker 1: Probably you want to meet a shop, right, Well, this
Speaker 1: is where you find out what was really on people's minds.
Speaker 1: What did it say that stand for the flag? For us? Absolutely?
Speaker 1: And if you don't like it, go to Venezuela. The
Speaker 1: congressional elections, all right, well, and what will be the
Speaker 1: things that are on your mind? The most voting president
Speaker 1: supporting your president? Same thing. I love Donald Trump. He's great.
Speaker 1: A lot of Democrats out here feel the same way
Speaker 1: you do, especially after the Kavanaugh thing. So many women
Speaker 1: that work Kia, what outreach try that? Yes, the way
Speaker 1: he was treated, just just the treatment. What do you
Speaker 1: want from your congress? My god it. I would love
Speaker 1: to see a wall builds. I would love to see
Speaker 1: his agenda move forward. I love these ladies. Great stuff here.
Speaker 1: That was an NBC reporter. First of all, I love ladies,
Speaker 1: like if you don't like it, go to Venezuela. She
Speaker 1: sounds like she's lives in in the New York area,
Speaker 1: so she reminds me a home. If you don't like it,
Speaker 1: you go to Venezuela. Uh, which you know that that
Speaker 1: should be a fun that should be a sign and
Speaker 1: a lot of Trump rallies. You know. If you don't,
Speaker 1: if you don't wanna maga, go to Venezuela. That John,
Speaker 1: I think we could sell that T shirt? What do
Speaker 1: you think? It's a little long though, but it's catchy.
Speaker 1: But you you noticed that there was that woman in
Speaker 1: that in that montage. We need a montage who said
Speaker 1: that women were outraged by Kavanaugh. You don't hear that
Speaker 1: from the media, do you? You really never hear that.
Speaker 1: You never hear that women were outraged by Kavanaugh, meaning
Speaker 1: outraged by the attacks on Kavanaugh. They were outraged at
Speaker 1: him being treated so badly, treated so poorly, and so
Speaker 1: unfairly by the Democrats and by the media. This is
Speaker 1: this is one of the the biggest miscalculations the Democrats
Speaker 1: have made since they all assumed that It probably is,
Speaker 1: in fact, the biggest miscalculation that the left has made
Speaker 1: since they assumed Hilary was gonna be Trump, which they did.
Speaker 1: They assumed that that was happening. The biggest miscalculation that
Speaker 1: they've made is that going absolutely scorched earth to try
Speaker 1: to to try to carpet bomb Kavanaugh during those hearings,
Speaker 1: that that wouldn't have any backlash, or that at least
Speaker 1: if Kavanaugh got through and they put up the fight
Speaker 1: in that way, they would be rewarded by their base,
Speaker 1: but not punished by the average American. That's not the case.
Speaker 1: They are being punished by the average American voter. People
Speaker 1: are not okay with what has happened here. They do
Speaker 1: not think it is acceptable that all this has happened,
Speaker 1: and and that's why you know they're they're having to
Speaker 1: deal with the reality of Hold on a second, maybe
Speaker 1: maybe this isn't gonna work out the way we thought.
Speaker 1: John Plakelip fourteen. I didn't accept the theory that there
Speaker 1: was a blue way, and I'm still of that opinion.
Speaker 1: We were in better shape had we not gone through
Speaker 1: the horror of the Kavanaugh activities. We lost on that issue,
Speaker 1: were united the Republican Party. They are no longer asleep.
Speaker 1: They are energized. That's right, you know what it was,
Speaker 1: and this was powerful. It was more powerful than really
Speaker 1: any slogan the Republicans under the circumstances could have come
Speaker 1: up with the assault on Kavanaugh, which I am very
Speaker 1: proud of all the support that I got from all
Speaker 1: of you, all of you listening to this, because I
Speaker 1: took heat for that. We had a We had a
Speaker 1: show and producer, Mike, you can correct me what it was.
Speaker 1: I think it was two or three days into the allegations.
Speaker 1: We had a show. They're lying about Kavanaugh was the
Speaker 1: title of it. That wasn't after the gang rape allegations.
Speaker 1: That wasn't after the Avanati clown show came into town.
Speaker 1: That was on just the Blasi four allegations. She wasn't.
Speaker 1: She was not telling the truth. She might have thought
Speaker 1: she was telling the truth, but what she was saying
Speaker 1: was not the truth. I did not believe her, and
Speaker 1: a lot of you came came to came to my
Speaker 1: side there because I'm telling you I got I had
Speaker 1: people from other networks reaching out to me. You're gonna
Speaker 1: you're destroying your career. Don't do this, You're making you know,
Speaker 1: how dare you say you don't believe her. You know,
Speaker 1: I had people that were really, oh, I never mind.
Speaker 1: Also people oh, you know, you're you're an apologist for
Speaker 1: rapists and all this time terrible stuff. But I knew,
Speaker 1: I knew what they were trying to pull, and I
Speaker 1: knew it was bogus. And you knew it too, And
Speaker 1: you listened to this show. You wore a part of
Speaker 1: team Buck made sure that I knew that you had
Speaker 1: my back through this whole thing, and that whatever you know,
Speaker 1: consequences I may have faced professionally, you were gonna be
Speaker 1: with me for doing the right thing, for standing up.
Speaker 1: And man, we made a lot of noise because I
Speaker 1: also had people. Look, I had people in the White
Speaker 1: House say, really appreciate that you're you're willing to say
Speaker 1: what needs to be said about Kavanaugh. That's the truth.
Speaker 1: People in the White House, we're reaching out at that
Speaker 1: same time and letting me know that they noticed, and
Speaker 1: they were, like I said, there were a few of
Speaker 1: us on this one. But man, that was that was
Speaker 1: a dark time in this country's history. It was the
Speaker 1: most disgusting, most obvious smear effort anybody could have ever imagined.
Speaker 1: And they almost they I keep wanting to tell everybody.
Speaker 1: You know, yes, we should be happy that he got through,
Speaker 1: but they almost got away with it. They almost stopped him,
Speaker 1: and we need to remember that too. We need to
Speaker 1: keep it in mind. And you know, they're not done
Speaker 1: with this either. They haven't decided to let this go.
Speaker 1: So while right now they're a little they're a little
Speaker 1: bit caught flat footed because of what this is doing
Speaker 1: for their electoral prospects right there, there's a there's some
Speaker 1: I'm an understanding on the left that oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: we we overplayed our hand. We we made mistakes here.
Speaker 1: We shouldn't have done this the way we did. Uh.
Speaker 1: That's that's real. That sentiment is real. Um. They also
Speaker 1: haven't given up on the notion that maybe they'll maybe
Speaker 1: they will still find a way to get rid of
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh somehow. I mean, the most looney left lawmakers, as
Speaker 1: a funneliteration, the most looney left lawmakers are still out
Speaker 1: there talking about this. And you know what I'm talking
Speaker 1: about looney and the left. It's very possible that Maxine
Speaker 1: Waters is going to enter the discussion played twelve never stop,
Speaker 1: and that is what we have to do with what
Speaker 1: happened with Kavanaugh and this confirmation process. It was heartbreaking,
Speaker 1: But I think women are not going to recede. Women
Speaker 1: are going to continue to confront what took place in
Speaker 1: that confirmation and him and he won't rest easy in
Speaker 1: his guide. He won't rest easy in his job. What
Speaker 1: is that supposed to mean? You know, the Left is
Speaker 1: willing to go to these extremes whenever they don't get
Speaker 1: their way. They don't like what happens with the Senate.
Speaker 1: Maybe we shouldn't have a Senate. They don't like what
Speaker 1: happens in the Supreme Court. Maybe we shouldn't have a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. They don't like that it's a five four court.
Speaker 1: Maybe we should have eleven people on the court. I mean,
Speaker 1: whatever it is. They have no respect for the system
Speaker 1: whatsoever unless the system gives them what they want. They
Speaker 1: don't view the system as a necessary mechanism for managing
Speaker 1: our disputes and conflicts in a civil fashion. They don't
Speaker 1: seem to understand that the Constitution, other than yes, creating
Speaker 1: the basic construct for our government. And when it comes
Speaker 1: to the Bill of Rights, is really just about processes
Speaker 1: and things that the government can't do to you. It
Speaker 1: doesn't just say the government has to be amazing. Government
Speaker 1: has to be wonderful, because what does that mean? Says
Speaker 1: the government cannot do the following, The government must respect
Speaker 1: the following, because we're trying to create a systematic approach
Speaker 1: to every individual system that the citizen rather that the
Speaker 1: government must follow. But you see, the left, because they
Speaker 1: are both petty tortalitarians and statuss are willing to reform
Speaker 1: the system however they see fit, whenever they see fit,
Speaker 1: and they have no shame about this. They have no
Speaker 1: sense of their own hypocrisy because they only do this
Speaker 1: when they don't get their way. They only do this
Speaker 1: when they don't have the power that they think they deserve.
Speaker 1: And I would just note that this is problematic to
Speaker 1: say the least. We'll get into more of this coming up.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. In China, the government is engaged in
Speaker 1: the persecution of religious and ethnic minorities. At least a
Speaker 1: million Weakers and other Muslim minorities have been imprisoned and
Speaker 1: so called re education camps. These detentions are being conducted
Speaker 1: under the guise of neutralizing extremist groups. Prisoners are tortured.
Speaker 1: They are forced to renounce their religion and to pledge
Speaker 1: allegiance to the Communist Party. China is an authoritarian state. Now,
Speaker 1: I point this out not just as a reminder and
Speaker 1: also as a moment, taking a moment here to say
Speaker 1: that if we are concerned about national security threats, if
Speaker 1: we really want to talk about who we need to
Speaker 1: keep an eye on, China is far and away based
Speaker 1: on population size, based on economy, based on its military,
Speaker 1: based on its aggressive acts to try and steal our
Speaker 1: intellectual property in our government and military secrets. China is
Speaker 1: our only near peer competitor period. Russia is not even
Speaker 1: the same ball game. Okay, Russia isn't even worth talking
Speaker 1: about in the same way. Russian GDP is one trillion
Speaker 1: dollars folks. Okay, it's one trillion. Chinese GDP as of
Speaker 1: sixteen was eleven point two trillion dollars. Okay it is.
Speaker 1: It's over ten times the size of the Russian economy,
Speaker 1: ten x. That that's not a gap that the that the
Speaker 1: the Russians are going to be able to make up
Speaker 1: for any time soon. So the Chinese are the real concern.
Speaker 1: Why am I bringing this up? Well, as we've been
Speaker 1: discussing here on the show, there's a tremendous amount of
Speaker 1: concern about Kashogi and the Saudias, and I've I've told
Speaker 1: you why this is all of a sudden everyone's oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, so are you so brutal and so terrible?
Speaker 1: Oh gosh. And I'm not saying what they did wasn't
Speaker 1: brutal and terrible. It was, but the Saudi has been
Speaker 1: brutal and terrible for a long time. They are, meaning
Speaker 1: the media, using this as an opportunity, not just to
Speaker 1: raise the issue because it's considered one of their own,
Speaker 1: so to speak, as a journalist, but also as a
Speaker 1: means of hitting Trump. What I think is so interesting
Speaker 1: is that if the standard is really that Americans need
Speaker 1: to be willing to take risks two risk their own
Speaker 1: foreign policy interests and everything else based on humanitarian concerns
Speaker 1: in other countries, what do we do about China? Well,
Speaker 1: why is it that now we're hearing, oh, we need
Speaker 1: to take this really strong line against Saudi Arabia because
Speaker 1: of what it did here. China's one child policy is
Speaker 1: more barbaric. I know they've changed it, but China has
Speaker 1: engaged in worse humanitarian repression than really any other country
Speaker 1: in the world except for North Korea and that's not
Speaker 1: something you're hearing much in the press right now, because
Speaker 1: no serious person is really going to say, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: let's let's go after China on this issue, and let's
Speaker 1: punish our own economy on a human chary. It's one
Speaker 1: thing to do it for trade, one thing to do
Speaker 1: it for our interests. But you know, the idea of
Speaker 1: America first means that we're concerned with our own stuff
Speaker 1: first and foremost. We're not playing World police anymore. America Buck. Yeah,
Speaker 1: see Buck like my name. That makes a better song. Um,
Speaker 1: But we're really not supposed to be running around telling
Speaker 1: everybody what what's the one thing? We can tell them
Speaker 1: whatever we want, but but trying to force them to
Speaker 1: act in a certain way, because that's all we'll be doing,
Speaker 1: and we will lose a lot in the process, and
Speaker 1: we probably won't even get what we want in the
Speaker 1: long run. And here here's an example of what I mean.
Speaker 1: You have Google Massive, its own alphabet is the parent
Speaker 1: company of Google. Now. Google is a massive company, right,
Speaker 1: Google is huge. I mean we're talking it's a trillion
Speaker 1: dollar company now basically, and it recently refused to continue
Speaker 1: to work with the Pentagon. All right, The us UM
Speaker 1: the US project, US government projects with the Pentagon involved. Uh,
Speaker 1: they won't do that anymore, they they refused. So Google
Speaker 1: has a has a moral issue with working with the
Speaker 1: United States government, the Pentagon, even for technology that just
Speaker 1: is applicable to that. And so Google said, oh, no,
Speaker 1: we can't do that. We're gonna step away from that. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: this is this was in the Washington Post earlier today. Quote.
Speaker 1: Google finally confirmed a secretive project that's been fueling an
Speaker 1: employee led backlash for weeks at the company, an effort
Speaker 1: to build a version of its search engine that complies
Speaker 1: with China's online censorship regime. The project, code named Dragonfly,
Speaker 1: is not only real, but it is already performing to
Speaker 1: the satisfaction of top Google executives, and it could pave
Speaker 1: the way for Google to re enter China's online search
Speaker 1: market after nearly a decade. If Google were to operate
Speaker 1: in China, what would it look like? What queries will
Speaker 1: we be able to serve? Chief executive Sundar pitch I
Speaker 1: said during an event hosted by wire on Monday night.
Speaker 1: It turns out we'll be able to serve well over
Speaker 1: of the queries. The announcement could prompt more questions from
Speaker 1: US policymakers, some of whom have accused Google of being
Speaker 1: evasive about Project Dragonfly. Meanwhile, Google and its peers in
Speaker 1: the tech industry are facing intense scrutiny over its approach
Speaker 1: to use your privacy and data, with some lawmakers talking
Speaker 1: about blah blah blah blah. Okay, well there's that, But
Speaker 1: the bigger backlash, as far as I'm concerned, has to
Speaker 1: do with Google and this this Pentagon project and why
Speaker 1: they won't They don't feel any any obligation whatsoever as
Speaker 1: a US company, UH to keep working on this out
Speaker 1: of out of patriotism. Um, here's here's the New York
Speaker 1: Times piece back in back in early June of this year.
Speaker 1: Quote Google, hoping to head offer rebellion. My employees, upset
Speaker 1: that the technology they were working on could could be
Speaker 1: used for lethal purposes, will not renew a contract with
Speaker 1: the Pentagon for artificial intelligence work when a current deal
Speaker 1: expires next year. This is a perfect example of the
Speaker 1: deluded pie in the sky liberalism that defines the modern
Speaker 1: left today. You know, the the super elites at Google
Speaker 1: with you know, near unlimited funds and a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of power and reach. They have a big problem when
Speaker 1: it comes to working with United States government for technology
Speaker 1: that could have I mean, no one's saying Google has
Speaker 1: to build bombs, but they won't let them use AI
Speaker 1: because the AI maybe will help guide missiles or you know, No,
Speaker 1: they won't work with the Pentagon. No sense of patriotism,
Speaker 1: no sense of duty to country for people at Google. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Google couldn't have existed anywhere else. I mean, it couldn't
Speaker 1: have been built anywhere else in the the world. Couldn't exist
Speaker 1: they where else in the world the way that does
Speaker 1: the United States. Alright, so it has benefited dramatically from
Speaker 1: being a US company and they don't feel any obligation whatsoever,
Speaker 1: which I think is really shameful. Meanwhile, meanwhile, they're perfectly
Speaker 1: willing to work on a project that is, oh, that
Speaker 1: is absolutely a part of Chinese censorship efforts, that is
Speaker 1: meant to be a part of China's enormous surveillance apparatus. There,
Speaker 1: so that's okay, right, that they will work within They
Speaker 1: will work within the censored realm of China and say, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: well tailor this so that it doesn't offend your your
Speaker 1: Chinese censorship sensibilities, but they won't work with the United
Speaker 1: States government. Let's let that sink in for a moment
Speaker 1: and understand that this is not a one off. This
Speaker 1: mentality of acting like the United States government is the
Speaker 1: bad guy, and any foreign government, because it's not America,
Speaker 1: should get at least different treatment, you know, should get
Speaker 1: a pass on some of this stuff. This is not
Speaker 1: limited to this one case. This is prominent on the
Speaker 1: left and there's so much that you will see with
Speaker 1: the moral relativists because liberalism is based today and the
Speaker 1: libs left all about moral relativism. You know, what's true
Speaker 1: for one person is not true for another. What's good
Speaker 1: for you is not good for this other person. Right,
Speaker 1: there's white privilege, and there's intersectionality, and there's all this
Speaker 1: different stuff, and they're really just making it up as
Speaker 1: they go along. But the moral relativism also extends into
Speaker 1: international relations, and it means that they're willing, for example,
Speaker 1: right now, to call out Saudi Arabia because it hurts Trump. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: they won't talk about what's going on with Islam in
Speaker 1: that country, that Saudi Arabia is the heartland of Islam.
Speaker 1: They want that that never gets brought in the discussion
Speaker 1: because that's not what the point they want to make.
Speaker 1: And they also won't in forced this new tough guy.
Speaker 1: Oh gosh, we can't allow human rights abuses mentality against China.
Speaker 1: They'll only do it against Saudi Arabia only right now
Speaker 1: because it allows them to hit Trump. These people have
Speaker 1: no scruples, and honestly a lot of them have no
Speaker 1: patriotism either. We should just say that because it's true.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna take a d n a tist all of
Speaker 1: you have. I've been told that my grandmother was part
Speaker 1: Cherokee and Indian. It may all be just talk, but
Speaker 1: you're gonna find out in a couple of weeks because
Speaker 1: I'm gonna take this. You're gonna take it. I'm taking it,
Speaker 1: and the result is gonna be revealed here. This is
Speaker 1: my Trump moment. This is reality TV. I just I'm
Speaker 1: dying to know because I'm dying. You know, I didn't
Speaker 1: really think much about it. But she's less than one
Speaker 1: tenth to one percent. I think I can beat her.
Speaker 1: I think I can beat her. Right, And if you
Speaker 1: do beat her, will you ask for a million dollars
Speaker 1: from the President to no I want a casino enemy,
Speaker 1: but come back in a couple of weeks in a
Speaker 1: like terrible. They have great people, just bad leaders. Bad leaders.
Speaker 1: So I like everything that Lindsay Graham was saying there
Speaker 1: until the very end. I don't like he was He
Speaker 1: didn't mean it the way that it sounded. I could
Speaker 1: say that I he just misspoke. Uh, you know, he
Speaker 1: didn't mean that. He just meant Iran is a bad country.
Speaker 1: Iran is not bad people. In fact, Iranians. I've had
Speaker 1: many Iranian friends throughout my life, and uh, it would
Speaker 1: be a great day to have the Iranian people in
Speaker 1: Iran able to have the same some of the same
Speaker 1: freedoms as the wonderful Ranians that live in this country.
Speaker 1: We've had a whole diaspora of Iranians here. Anyway, I
Speaker 1: love the other stuff he was saying. Thought I always
Speaker 1: gonna take a DNA test. I mean, Lindsey Graham is
Speaker 1: now he's very much, very much a man struck by
Speaker 1: a kind of new swagger because I think that he
Speaker 1: really understands, uh, he really understands that you gotta be
Speaker 1: willing to fight the other side, you gotta be willing
Speaker 1: to go to the mat. I mean, Lindsay, in his
Speaker 1: sense kind of mirrors my own feelings last few weeks,
Speaker 1: where I've just said in the last few months, you
Speaker 1: know what, as much as as much as I always
Speaker 1: want to leave the door open for the other side,
Speaker 1: and I want I want people on the left to
Speaker 1: listen to this show. I want, you know, honest good
Speaker 1: Democrats to listen to this show as much as they're
Speaker 1: willing to uh in terms of their of the ideas,
Speaker 1: we can't just oppose them. We we gotta crush the ideas.
Speaker 1: I don't crush people, but I want to crush ideas,
Speaker 1: and that means sometimes, yes, as the kids say, we
Speaker 1: might have to own the Libs a little bit. So
Speaker 1: Lindsey Grahama, I like that he's been He's had a
Speaker 1: little more swaggers I've been saying. And I also think that,
Speaker 1: you know, on immigration, he has some interesting things to say.
Speaker 1: I gotta get him. I gotta get him a little
Speaker 1: more hard line on this stuff. Folks. Here here's what
Speaker 1: he said, play clip eight. There are eleven mainion a
Speaker 1: legal prints here that came from Brittany poor countries. What
Speaker 1: do we do with them? I want a merit based
Speaker 1: immigration system. You gotta get Democrats some Republicans working together,
Speaker 1: build the wall, control who gets a job, more legal immigration,
Speaker 1: move to merit based immigration. You can't ignore the eleven million.
Speaker 1: They'll never be a deal with the Democratic Party that
Speaker 1: doesn't uh deal with the eleven million her non felons
Speaker 1: who've been here for twenty and thirty years. Once you
Speaker 1: get them in a good spot, you can have a
Speaker 1: new immigration system. You know, I don't think he gets
Speaker 1: it on this. When you have folks, I think that Lindsay,
Speaker 1: he's a little a little too squishy on this issue.
Speaker 1: As I've been saying, thank you Yale University math nerds
Speaker 1: for backing me up on this. It's not eleven million,
Speaker 1: it's twenty million. It's twenty to zero at least. I
Speaker 1: don't know what we have to do to get people
Speaker 1: to understand this. It is not eleven It is twenty
Speaker 1: million at a minimum, which is a vast number of
Speaker 1: people from a generally speaking, from one country from Mexico.
Speaker 1: I mean the vast majority number from Mexico, which also
Speaker 1: happens to be a neighbor of ours geographically with a
Speaker 1: with an enormous border, and you know, it poses its
Speaker 1: own issues for political unity in this country really does.
Speaker 1: I know, people are not allowed. National security analysts will
Speaker 1: tell you that when you have a population that has
Speaker 1: that has moved across a border, that has fought wars
Speaker 1: over that border, we don't often think about that, but
Speaker 1: we fought a war with Mexico over that border. And
Speaker 1: then you have a population that maintains a tremendous and
Speaker 1: continuum tremendously you know, powerful and continuing tie to the
Speaker 1: the what's considered still the homeland of the mother country. Uh,
Speaker 1: you have a recipe for destabilization, you really do. I mean, politically,
Speaker 1: at a minimum destabilization. And that's you know, that's something
Speaker 1: that I think is uh, you know, it needs to
Speaker 1: be remembered here. I think Lindsay Graham is might look.
Speaker 1: I I give Lindsey a lot of credit for the
Speaker 1: whole capital thing, But as much as I'd like to
Speaker 1: just look at that and say it's all fine, now,
Speaker 1: they're gonna get fooled an immigration again. They're talking about
Speaker 1: doing this deal, and the deal is gonna be amnesty,
Speaker 1: and then we'll see what happens for your security. We'll
Speaker 1: see what happens with this request for a wall. And
Speaker 1: that's not good enough, that's not acceptable. Lindsey talked a
Speaker 1: little bit more about this deal that he thinks is
Speaker 1: gonna happen. Place seven the houses have been and a
Speaker 1: half for the wall. I mean, excuse me, five being
Speaker 1: in the Senate has a being a half will close
Speaker 1: the gap DOCCA. Remember that six hundred kids brought here
Speaker 1: on the average age of six, no place else to go.
Speaker 1: Trump's gonna win in court. He can repeal DOCA the
Speaker 1: day he wins in court. What do we do with
Speaker 1: these uh young people? So I'd like to do a deal,
Speaker 1: full wall funding for DOCCA, full wall funding for DOCTA.
Speaker 1: That that I I think, I think you could sell
Speaker 1: that to the Republic, the gop BA. If it was
Speaker 1: full wall funding, you get that five billion, and it's
Speaker 1: just deferred actions. Still all right, it's not a but
Speaker 1: you know it can't be. It can't be citizenship, and
Speaker 1: it can't be permanent. It's just okay, Well, we're gonna
Speaker 1: have a we're gonna see how this goes. And because
Speaker 1: you can't discuss what you're gonna do with the not eleven,
Speaker 1: but twenty million illegals in this country until you have
Speaker 1: a reasonable assurance that you're not going to be dealing
Speaker 1: with another twenty million in ten years. And if you
Speaker 1: by the way, I understand that the political sway that
Speaker 1: the Latino Democrat community in this country will have for
Speaker 1: even more unrestricted immigration, particularly from from south of the border. Uh,
Speaker 1: that will skew the entire debate into discussion going forward.
Speaker 1: And all Democrats will see is that they will be
Speaker 1: importing masses of new voters who will essentially make the
Speaker 1: Republican Party a you know, a an afterthought, and they
Speaker 1: will they will be able to turn America into a
Speaker 1: one party state. That's the game the Democrats are playing.
Speaker 1: And Republicans keep thinking about this like, well, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe we can deal with them. The Democrats are looking
Speaker 1: at the immigration issue is how do we make the
Speaker 1: Republican Party extinct? Republicans are all, you know, maybe there's
Speaker 1: a little here and there. We no no bad idea,
Speaker 1: very bad idea. Um, we've got much more coming up. Team, Uh,
Speaker 1: stay right there, stay with me. With all the recent
Speaker 1: news about online security breaches, it's hard not to worry
Speaker 1: about where my data goes. Making an online purchase or
Speaker 1: simply accessing your email could put your private information at risk.
Speaker 1: You're being tracked online by social media's, it's marketing companies
Speaker 1: and your mobile or internet provider. Not only can they
Speaker 1: record your browsing history, but they often sell it to
Speaker 1: other corporations who want to profit from your information. That's
Speaker 1: why I decided to take my privacy back by using
Speaker 1: Express VPN. Express vpn has easy to use apps that
Speaker 1: run steamlessly in the background of my computer, phone, and tablet.
Speaker 1: Turning on Express VPN takes only one click and cost
Speaker 1: less than seven dollars a month. It is the number
Speaker 1: one VPN service by tech Radar. Comes with a thirty
Speaker 1: day money back guarantee. Protect your online activity today and
Speaker 1: found out find out how you can get three months
Speaker 1: free at Express vpn dot com slash buck. That's Express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slash buck for three months free with
Speaker 1: a one year package Express vpn dot com slash Buck.
Speaker 1: As a kid, I never asked my mom for documentation
Speaker 1: when she talked about our Native American heritage. What kid would,
Speaker 1: But I knew my father's family didn't like that she
Speaker 1: was part Cherokee and part Delaware, so my parents had
Speaker 1: to elope. Let me be clear, I never asked for
Speaker 1: never got any benefit because of my heritage. The people
Speaker 1: who hired me have all said they didn't even know
Speaker 1: about it. She is such a fraud. I mean, she's
Speaker 1: such a fraud that she can only keep digging in
Speaker 1: deeper and make the fraud even worse. Elizabeth Warren, You,
Speaker 1: oh man, She's given us the most entertaining twenty four
Speaker 1: hours in the news cycle of of anything I have
Speaker 1: seen in a in a long time. She just keeps
Speaker 1: digging in. I have other there's other audio too, of
Speaker 1: of how we heard this this story from her where
Speaker 1: she kept talking about how there was a a problem
Speaker 1: with her parents, right, a problem where her parents weren't
Speaker 1: supposed to be dating because their parents are wait a
Speaker 1: one set of parents thought that they were too Native Americans,
Speaker 1: So were they just mistaken all that time? The whole thing,
Speaker 1: it's just, you know, it really reminds me of It
Speaker 1: reminds me of the kind of narrative creation that Obama
Speaker 1: had about his life. I'm not saying that it was false,
Speaker 1: but there definitely was. Although I'm not saying it wasn't
Speaker 1: there wasn't some false stuff in there. There's definitely a
Speaker 1: sense of Obama was making an autobiography that was a construct,
Speaker 1: and Warren, I think, tried the same thing here with Oh,
Speaker 1: you know, she had to deal with racism herself, you know,
Speaker 1: in her own family. And she is she is as
Speaker 1: white as white gets. She's the whitest white lady you'll
Speaker 1: ever find anywhere. And we all know this. Let me
Speaker 1: tell you something, speaking from a white dude's perspective, I
Speaker 1: know a white dude or white gal when I see one,
Speaker 1: and lizz Is Warren is white. So this whole game
Speaker 1: she's playing is completely and utterly ridiculous. But she just
Speaker 1: keeps digging down. She keeps digging down, and and it
Speaker 1: just gives our president an incredible opportunity to just lay
Speaker 1: lay her campaign out and destroy it even before it happens.
Speaker 1: For of all of the presidential tweet storms, and there
Speaker 1: have been a lot of them, this is among my
Speaker 1: very favorite. Earlier this morning, President Trump writes the following quote, Pocahuntas,
Speaker 1: the bad version, sometimes referred to as Elizabeth Warren is
Speaker 1: getting slammed. She took a bogus DNA test and it
Speaker 1: showed that she maybe one one thousand and twenty four,
Speaker 1: far less than the average American. Now the Cherokee Nation
Speaker 1: denies her quote DNA test is useless, even they don't
Speaker 1: want her phony. So what he's referring to is that
Speaker 1: a representative of the Cherokee Nation went on TV on
Speaker 1: CNN and said that this was a disgrace essentially and
Speaker 1: that the DNA test doesn't mean anything, and that Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren should not be stealing their heritage of Native people's
Speaker 1: for her own purposes. That that's not something that should
Speaker 1: be happening. Uh And yet it did. But Trump was
Speaker 1: not done with her. He also tweeted, now that her
Speaker 1: claims of being Indian heritage have turned out to be
Speaker 1: a scam and a lie, Elizabeth Warren should apologize for perpetua,
Speaker 1: for perpetrating or perpetuating this fraud against the American public.
Speaker 1: Harvard called her a person of color, amazing Cohn and
Speaker 1: would not have taken her otherwise. This is the only
Speaker 1: place where there seems to be some some really you know,
Speaker 1: some good faith or not even good No, not good faith.
Speaker 1: Strike that from the record, some not laughable argument. I mean,
Speaker 1: the notion that Elizabeth Warren is a Cherokee or could
Speaker 1: consider herself a Native American is is laughable. To any
Speaker 1: serious human laughable. I mean, you should laugh about it.
Speaker 1: As the Wall Street Journal said, if she is a
Speaker 1: person of color, then words have no meaning. She is
Speaker 1: as far from a person of color as anyone could
Speaker 1: possibly be. And yet she's still kind of she's she
Speaker 1: still clings to it. But then there's this point of, well,
Speaker 1: did she receive any benefit? My friends, there is so
Speaker 1: much circumstantial evidence that she received a benefit that it
Speaker 1: is also laughable to suggest that that she did not
Speaker 1: um that she did not have the and I'm not
Speaker 1: somebody who's a school snob, but she did not have
Speaker 1: the academic pedigree for her law school to then go
Speaker 1: on to be a professor at the University of Pennsylvania
Speaker 1: and Ivy League School and Harvard considered to be the
Speaker 1: number one school and really the number one law school
Speaker 1: in the United States. No way that happens unless the
Speaker 1: hiring committees think that they can quo. They can. It's
Speaker 1: very important them. But they put out these reports, very
Speaker 1: important that they have a Native American on the faculty.
Speaker 1: That's a big big deal for them. They have their pick,
Speaker 1: they can have anyone they want. And that's why. Also,
Speaker 1: why would Elizabeth warrenant list her self as such unless
Speaker 1: it gave her some benefit. It's a bizarre thing to
Speaker 1: do unless you were gaming the system. The only reason
Speaker 1: you would do that if you were Elizabeth Warren, and
Speaker 1: clearly not a person of color, would be to gain
Speaker 1: the system. So it just defies belief. It's completely ridiculous.
Speaker 1: I can tell you that I spoke to because I
Speaker 1: have access to a lot of Democrats at the Hill. Uh.
Speaker 1: And I spoke to Democrats today who are colleagues, and
Speaker 1: I gotta say they were all they were all saying
Speaker 1: it too. They're like, this is just there's no excuse.
Speaker 1: There's nothing you can say about it. That she thought
Speaker 1: that this proved her case was completely insane. Uh. Donald
Speaker 1: Trump also we had one more tweet on this. He wrote,
Speaker 1: thank you to the Cherokee Nation for revealing that Elizabeth Warren,
Speaker 1: sometimes referred to as Pocahontas, is a completed total from
Speaker 1: sometimes referred to as Pocahontas. He has defeated really the
Speaker 1: progressive front runner for before she was even able to
Speaker 1: get into the race officially, and he defeated her by
Speaker 1: getting inside her head and forcing her to make one
Speaker 1: of the great unforced political errors of all time. I
Speaker 1: have never seen anything quite like this. This, this is
Speaker 1: truly truly astonishing. But then the president had this thing
Speaker 1: today later on, and I gotta say, I don't know
Speaker 1: what's going on here. I want the president focused on
Speaker 1: what matters, and I want the president on policy and
Speaker 1: look fighting back absolutely, But what is this thing about?
Speaker 1: What is this thing about? Oh? Horse oh yes, here's
Speaker 1: what he wrote. Federal judge throws out Stormy Daniel's lawsuit
Speaker 1: versus Trump. Trump is entitled to legal fees. Great Now
Speaker 1: I can go after a horse face and her third
Speaker 1: rate lawyer in the great state of tech. Sis. She
Speaker 1: will confirm the letter she signed. She knows nothing about me,
Speaker 1: a total con. You know, it's interesting Trump really holds
Speaker 1: out here that that this is a lie start to finish.
Speaker 1: And I have thought that that that there's no way
Speaker 1: that she's lying about Trump just because of the detail.
Speaker 1: And they look, they do know each other, they have
Speaker 1: had contact. It's not like the Kavanaugh allegation. And one
Speaker 1: it's nothing. There's nothing criminal about anything that's even alleged
Speaker 1: about Trump with Jommy Daniels, or I should say about
Speaker 1: his contact with her people are saying, it's oh, the
Speaker 1: campaign finance, that's just pathetic. The no no shot, no chance. Um.
Speaker 1: But I gotta say, now, I'm thinking, you know, is it?
Speaker 1: Is it? Why? Why do people jump at the conclusion
Speaker 1: that Trump actually had had this affair with her? Um?
Speaker 1: When I said, well, I shouldn't say jumped to the conclusion,
Speaker 1: I think that's obvious. But why are we so sure?
Speaker 1: A lot of people I know seemed very very sure
Speaker 1: about it. I'm I'm just keep I'm keeping an open mind.
Speaker 1: There's no there's never been any proof offered that I'm
Speaker 1: aware of, meaning she's never been able to show text
Speaker 1: messages or emails or anything that you know that that
Speaker 1: that relates to the affair. She just gave this description
Speaker 1: of him, and you know, there's another part of this,
Speaker 1: And I'm just thinking through this, her whole description of
Speaker 1: Trump in her book. It's like she wrote the description
Speaker 1: based on what she knew the media would want her
Speaker 1: to say, which would just be really, uh, lascivious and
Speaker 1: degrading and nasty toward towards the president. So I'm you know,
Speaker 1: I had thought that the president, this is before he
Speaker 1: was the president. I had thought that maybe he you know,
Speaker 1: had strayed from his marital vow here, and I was
Speaker 1: willing to say, Look, I care about what he's doing
Speaker 1: as president and the political movement he represents. I'm not
Speaker 1: I'm not sitting around trying to judge all politicians by
Speaker 1: every every action in their lives. Um especially because as
Speaker 1: you know, they'll only do that. They'll only enforce that
Speaker 1: against Republicans. They want enforce it against Democrats. But there's
Speaker 1: all this part of me that thinks, well, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe there's something else here. It's just I'm thinking about it, right,
Speaker 1: I'm thinking about it. I'm not totally sold one way
Speaker 1: or the other. But now they they they are all
Speaker 1: focused on the present, referring to a woman has horse face.
Speaker 1: You know, this is where I say Trump was winning
Speaker 1: and winning and winning this week, and this feels a
Speaker 1: little bit like it feels a little bit like an
Speaker 1: unnecessary distraction and and not something that I would really
Speaker 1: want the president to say. But that said, maybe when
Speaker 1: you're when you're this, when you're this potus, when you're
Speaker 1: in his position and you're fighting against everybody and it's
Speaker 1: all an uphill battle, maybe there's just gonna be these
Speaker 1: you know, he's it's not They're not all gonna be hits, right,
Speaker 1: They're not all gonna be great. So that's a part
Speaker 1: of it too. And maybe he's human, which we all
Speaker 1: know he is. Maybe he's in per ficked, which we
Speaker 1: all know he is. Uh. And I think that we
Speaker 1: should be able to have that talk among those of
Speaker 1: us who really support the president and his agenda, which
Speaker 1: I clearly do and still be going to say, Okay,
Speaker 1: I kind of wish he hadn't called some woman horse
Speaker 1: face on Twitter. I just I think that that's, you know,
Speaker 1: that's a little that's a little bit beneath where where
Speaker 1: our president should be. That said, he's been crushing everything
Speaker 1: else all week and been amazing, so you know, so
Speaker 1: he's not perfect. He's pretty darn good though, so you know,
Speaker 1: I'll give it to him on that. And that's I
Speaker 1: think that's an okay standard to have for politicians. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not perfect, it's pretty darn good. He really is,
Speaker 1: um And I've seen recently some some conservatives, I think,
Speaker 1: start to come around to this notion of why do
Speaker 1: we have to why do we have to pretend like
Speaker 1: any politicians perfect? Why do we have to pretend like
Speaker 1: anyone is beyond or not just pretend, but hold them
Speaker 1: up to this standard of of moral probity that isn't
Speaker 1: there for anybody else really in public life. Look at
Speaker 1: big Trump has made more mistakes than a lot of
Speaker 1: other folks in that area. But he's also clearly got
Speaker 1: a gift for politics, for entertainment, and he is he
Speaker 1: is the man for this era. Elizabeth Warren, Let's let
Speaker 1: me tell you why I said. Let me tell you
Speaker 1: why I say that. Instead of just stating an hour,
Speaker 1: let me break that down a little bit. Why. Here's
Speaker 1: a perfect example of why I give Trump a lot
Speaker 1: of leeway. Why I cut this president a lot of
Speaker 1: slack on some of the tweets or some of the
Speaker 1: stuff he says about you know people here or there
Speaker 1: that I feel like, maybe or it's going a little far.
Speaker 1: Here's why. If it weren't for someone like Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: if we had a Mitt Romney instead of Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and Elizabeth Warren was gonna be candidate, it would just
Speaker 1: be him getting attacked all the time, our guy getting
Speaker 1: attacked not fighting back, and Elizabeth Warren getting away with
Speaker 1: being a huge fraud who advocates for all kinds of
Speaker 1: class warfare. While she's making hundreds of thousands of dollars
Speaker 1: a year as a she was as a tenured professor
Speaker 1: at Harvard Law School. I think a quarter of a
Speaker 1: million dollars a year. He's making plenty of money. She's
Speaker 1: got plenty of money, um, and and all of that falseness,
Speaker 1: all that falsehood that she's out there peddling to people,
Speaker 1: would really go unchallenged in a meaningful way. And then,
Speaker 1: worst of all, if she were to win the presidency
Speaker 1: against a Romney like figure, you and I would have
Speaker 1: a harder time putting food on the table, paying our
Speaker 1: mortgages or in my case rent, you know, paying our bills,
Speaker 1: taking care of family, taking care of medical bills. It
Speaker 1: would all be harder because of Elizabeth Warren, because she
Speaker 1: has wrong ideas, because she's self involved, because she doesn't
Speaker 1: understand the way the world really works, and because she's
Speaker 1: benefited from this system, the system in place that the
Speaker 1: left holds up at all costs of some people, you know,
Speaker 1: get get special privileges. Some people will get pushed through
Speaker 1: now and on. Others are told, will you have some
Speaker 1: form of privilege? So you have to just suffer in silence.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Trump has saved us from yet another progressive
Speaker 1: destruction machine, this case would have been Elizabeth Warren's. While
Speaker 1: I'm laughing about the whole thing, he's also done the
Speaker 1: nation a great service by making sure that Elizabeth Warren
Speaker 1: folk A hunt Is does not become president. What's going
Speaker 1: on with the debt, it's very disserving, and it's it's
Speaker 1: driven by the three big entitlement programs that are very popular, Medicare,
Speaker 1: so Security, and Medicaid. That's se what we spent every year.
Speaker 1: The subject we were just discussing, the funding of the government,
Speaker 1: is about of what we've spent. There's been a bipartisan
Speaker 1: reluctance to tackle entitlement changes because of the popularity of
Speaker 1: those programs. Hopefully, at some point here we'll get serious
Speaker 1: about this. We haven't been yet. Merchant McConnell warned for look,
Speaker 1: I say it with love because Mitch Mitch is a boss.
Speaker 1: Mitch got it done. Mitch held the line for Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: There are some people now that you know. I will
Speaker 1: always have a soft spot for uh And because of
Speaker 1: that Kavanaugh fight, which was one of the nastiest political
Speaker 1: fights of my lifetime, okay. And Mitch McConnell, God bless man.
Speaker 1: When it counted, you were there when it counted, your
Speaker 1: shield was high. You know, there's a Lindsey Graham. I
Speaker 1: wasn't a huge Lindsay fan of the past, But first
Speaker 1: of all, Lindsay Graham has got a little saucy lately too.
Speaker 1: He's really letting the left have it. I like Lindsay unleashed.
Speaker 1: You know, he's doing his thing. But another one who's
Speaker 1: in that category, and and I take a much a
Speaker 1: much softer tone on Jeff Flake to he he could
Speaker 1: have ingratiated him safe in himself to the uh MSNBC crowd,
Speaker 1: but instead he did the right thing and in the
Speaker 1: end he made a mistake. He could have cost us
Speaker 1: the whole thing. So I'm not saying he's not in
Speaker 1: the same category as McConnell and Graham for the the
Speaker 1: special special folks, for this anyway. I just wanted to say,
Speaker 1: the deficit is the highest it's been in six years, folks.
Speaker 1: And I came into this business of conservative media right
Speaker 1: at the height of the Tea Party's power in this country,
Speaker 1: the Tea Party as a movement, and I went to
Speaker 1: work for Glenn Beck, and Glenn was very tied in
Speaker 1: with the Tea Party, and you know, I saw this
Speaker 1: this wave of uh, just the restoration of concern, the
Speaker 1: restoration of concern for our financial future for just so many,
Speaker 1: um so many things that all of a sudden, we're
Speaker 1: at the top of the list, right, and and also
Speaker 1: a restoration of the the American Founding as a topic
Speaker 1: of conversation at I'm just saying, we're not We have
Speaker 1: not done anything about this yet, and we've had a
Speaker 1: Republican House and Republican Congress, I'm sorry, Publican Senate and
Speaker 1: White House now for almost two years and we haven't
Speaker 1: taken action. And I worry that we're not going to
Speaker 1: take act, and I worry that this is soon going
Speaker 1: to become one of these issues where, uh, we all
Speaker 1: talk a big game, we all talked, talked tough on this,
Speaker 1: but at the end of the day, nobody wants to
Speaker 1: be the one that says that we got to spend less.
Speaker 1: Republicans will talk about, Okay, we can't tax more fun,
Speaker 1: but the truth is we've got to spend less, and
Speaker 1: that means we've got to spend less on Social Security
Speaker 1: and Medica Medicare and Medicaid. That's what it means. That
Speaker 1: is what it means, or else it has no meaning.
Speaker 1: And Republicans don't want to hear that. And I know
Speaker 1: a lot of the folks listen to this tonight have
Speaker 1: a tough time with that. They feel like they paid
Speaker 1: in and so it's not an entitlement. It's the government
Speaker 1: making amends for taking money from them for all those
Speaker 1: years social Security. That's pretty much true. We just need
Speaker 1: to change the structure of a long term with Medicare.
Speaker 1: It's not true with Medicare. Your kids if you're listening
Speaker 1: to this, really actually your grand kids, if you're of
Speaker 1: Medicare age, they're the ones and your great grandkids are
Speaker 1: gonna be paying the financial price for the care that
Speaker 1: people are take it out of the system today. It's
Speaker 1: not right. It's intergenerational fifth and I know people don't
Speaker 1: want to hear it, but that's just the truth. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: the Feds collected record income taxes in eighteen So you know,
Speaker 1: we're always told, oh, there's not enough, there's not enough. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, revenue, there's not revenue, it's there's too much.
Speaker 1: There's more than a revenue. There's too much spending. Government
Speaker 1: has got to rein it in and unless we're you know,
Speaker 1: we're either going to have a serious national conversation about
Speaker 1: this and take action, or we're gonna suffer some really
Speaker 1: horrific economic consequences. And by the time the consequences are obvious,
Speaker 1: it's gonna be tough to turn it around. And that's
Speaker 1: just the truth. So anyway, Look, we'll continue to talk
Speaker 1: about this issue because it matters, but I won't harp
Speaker 1: on it too much. Talk to Ron Paul today for
Speaker 1: a little bit. That was interesting. He's certainly is a
Speaker 1: big believer in this, and we'll be right back. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, one of my daughters is twelve, so she's
Speaker 1: very aware of what's going on. Um and my other
Speaker 1: daughter six, so it's different kinds of conversations. My daughter,
Speaker 1: my twelve year old, is an activist, she's activated, she's
Speaker 1: a feminist. She ran into somebody recently who a little
Speaker 1: girl her age, whom who said she wasn't a feminist,
Speaker 1: and my daughter was astonished. It was hard to imagine,
Speaker 1: you know, And and you know, she came home and
Speaker 1: cried to me about it. This is a specifically liberal problem,
Speaker 1: and I don't ever like to be mean, even to
Speaker 1: silly libs, And I don't like to mock anyone's family,
Speaker 1: And I certainly would never mock a twelve year old
Speaker 1: girl or twelve year old boy, twel year old anybody. Um,
Speaker 1: that's not cool, that's not nice, it's not fair, and
Speaker 1: it's unbecoming. So I'm not commenting on a twelve year
Speaker 1: old as somebody with strong opinions and who goes home
Speaker 1: from school and cries about them. That's that's not of
Speaker 1: any interest to me whatsoever. What is of interest to
Speaker 1: me is that that was a clip of Maggie Gillenhall,
Speaker 1: the actress on the View, and she seems to think
Speaker 1: that it is not just normal but expected for a
Speaker 1: twelve year old to be quote an active ast. Kids
Speaker 1: should be allowed to be kids. And the only way
Speaker 1: that a a normal child would feel the need to
Speaker 1: come home and cry because that young girl met another
Speaker 1: girl who did not self describe as a feminist is
Speaker 1: because the parents are engaging in a really relentless propaganda
Speaker 1: campaign towards their own children. Now, parents can raise kids
Speaker 1: with whatever believes they want, but I would just note
Speaker 1: that I think that they're doing a disservice. I think
Speaker 1: that anyone does a disservice to a very young person
Speaker 1: by really instilling in them a radical leftist belief and
Speaker 1: not letting them keep an open mind and develop their
Speaker 1: their own beliefs. But I also think that increasingly parents
Speaker 1: these days, and just adults in general in America who
Speaker 1: are libs, who are liberals, have absolutely no perspective on
Speaker 1: these issues. They have no ability to stand back and
Speaker 1: try to be a little objective for the purpose of
Speaker 1: their kids and you know, letting their kids come to
Speaker 1: their own beliefs and not feel familial pressure to take
Speaker 1: certain positions. Because even as an adult, you should always
Speaker 1: be testing and re testing your assumptions. I mean, if
Speaker 1: you're someone who's going to be politically active, it's essential
Speaker 1: to think, have I changed my mind? What? What evidence
Speaker 1: could be shown that would lead me to change my mind?
Speaker 1: Why do I not agree with the other side? Is
Speaker 1: there anything that could change that would make me agree
Speaker 1: with the other side? Am I sure I'm right about
Speaker 1: what I think and believe on every issue? Should constantly
Speaker 1: be doing that I think gets necessary for the intellectual
Speaker 1: life of the mind. And I think it's it's a
Speaker 1: really a precondition for being a true and full conservative. Honestly,
Speaker 1: you have to always say, why do I think these things?
Speaker 1: Why do I think that the way that it has
Speaker 1: been or the way that I have thought it has
Speaker 1: been is the best way? What am I trying to
Speaker 1: conserve lives? On the other hand, love to do this
Speaker 1: thing of you know, my eight year old was like
Speaker 1: asking me about, like, why is it that intersectional politics
Speaker 1: have not been adopted by the mainstream media complex and
Speaker 1: quite the way that I would expect. And they do this,
Speaker 1: lots of live journalists do this, and we know that
Speaker 1: that's not true, but they do seem to think that
Speaker 1: there's a kind of moral blackmail inherent in putting children
Speaker 1: into political debates, which is why they became so fond
Speaker 1: of using the park Land kids for political purposes. Right.
Speaker 1: That's why there were some very politically active Parkland teenagers
Speaker 1: who are all of a sudden being sent not just
Speaker 1: to make a case, but on search and destroy missions
Speaker 1: in terms of politics against conservatives. That was what they
Speaker 1: were trying to do. That was what their their mission was.
Speaker 1: And the whole point was that they were victims and
Speaker 1: therefore could not be truly challenged on any of these issues.
Speaker 1: So you know, this is this is a very real
Speaker 1: tendency on the left to politicize children and then use
Speaker 1: children as political pawns in a way that I think
Speaker 1: it's just really gross. And you know, it's just funny
Speaker 1: that they could say, yeah, like my twelve, you're all
Speaker 1: this like an activist, and like, how can anyone else
Speaker 1: not be a feminist? Your daughter's twelve, Maggie, all right,
Speaker 1: Far be it from me to tell you what to
Speaker 1: do as a pair, because I'm not even a parent,
Speaker 1: but I do know something about politics. Let your daughter
Speaker 1: be a kid. Let her wait a little bit before
Speaker 1: she has really deeply ingrained beliefs that come directly from
Speaker 1: mommy about politics. I think that would be a more
Speaker 1: intellectually fair place to start. Roll call is next rock
Speaker 1: and roll. Fellow patriots, we made ours go up to eleven.
Speaker 1: It's time for roll call. Roll call, everybody. You know
Speaker 1: what that means. Time to get into that roll call action. Man.
Speaker 1: I got I finally got some energy today. I managed
Speaker 1: to catch a I'd call it a cat nap, but
Speaker 1: I guess it's more of a buck nap. This afternoon,
Speaker 1: I am all about naps. I used to call it
Speaker 1: siesta in college, and I used to justify to myself that, well,
Speaker 1: Winston Churchill took siesta's, so why can't I take siesta?
Speaker 1: But then I thought more as an adult about countries
Speaker 1: where siesta is a part of the daily routine and
Speaker 1: realized that their GDP tends to reflect Yeah, that's right,
Speaker 1: I said, it tends to reflect that reality. I also
Speaker 1: like those naps though, when you wake up and you
Speaker 1: kind of have a moment of like, like where am I?
Speaker 1: You don't really know, and you have that that kind
Speaker 1: of dry mouth drool thing going on. Some of you
Speaker 1: were making Yeah, I know, Mike, you're making fun of
Speaker 1: me right now. That's fine. That's fine. You guys can
Speaker 1: make fun of me. But you know it's true. You
Speaker 1: know you've been there too, all right, you get to
Speaker 1: that place we're just you know, you wake up and
Speaker 1: you're like, oh man, but you feel so refreshed. So
Speaker 1: I managed to get a little bit of a nap
Speaker 1: in today. I recommend naps for all of you. Now
Speaker 1: I sound like Arianna Huffington's you have to do naps
Speaker 1: and take the yoga and the stretching and the naps
Speaker 1: very important to get all the sleep and the nap
Speaker 1: trop a day. Yeah, that's right, Arianna. I would take
Speaker 1: a lot more naps if I were a multi multi millionaire.
Speaker 1: Here we go, Chris writes book Love the Show, Chris
Speaker 1: Love the note, Ali Bucks, Since Democrats hold a few
Speaker 1: seats since nineteen and have been in a downslide for years,
Speaker 1: why didn't we get much done in Congress? And report
Speaker 1: report totals of votes in sixteen came out three million
Speaker 1: higher votes than we have human bodies in the country. Um,
Speaker 1: I think your numbers are off, Ali. Where is it? Ali?
Speaker 1: I don't know. Get tough to tell. And as to
Speaker 1: why we haven't gotten more done in Congress, it's because
Speaker 1: there are a lot of Republicans who don't want to
Speaker 1: do more in Congress. There are a lot of Republicans
Speaker 1: who are happy with the status quo. So that's a problem.
Speaker 1: And you see this in these these states where you
Speaker 1: have people like Susan Collins or the Susan Collins give
Speaker 1: her credits. You did the right thing on the Kavanaugh nomination,
Speaker 1: but you know you have these well dare I say,
Speaker 1: Rhino politicians and they don't want to necessarily push hard
Speaker 1: for a conservative agenda. And you also because of the
Speaker 1: struck sure of the Senate, now you need really a
Speaker 1: supermajority to get anything done. I love these think pieces
Speaker 1: of mead now about how the Senate is wrong and
Speaker 1: mean and bad. The Senate has been so just just
Speaker 1: structured in a way that it thwarts the world of
Speaker 1: the people. The same left wing beta male writers who
Speaker 1: are putting that stuff together at vox dot com and
Speaker 1: elsewhere weren't saying the Senate was some big problem or
Speaker 1: some anachronism. They weren't saying that, you know, ten years ago.
Speaker 1: They weren't saying when the Democrats had a supermajority in
Speaker 1: the Senate. But consistency and principle is not for Democrats
Speaker 1: as a general rule. Ian writes, here's an idea. Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren has less Native American DNA than the average American,
Speaker 1: and they say the DNA test proved she is Native American,
Speaker 1: which means that anyone with a higher percentage than her
Speaker 1: would be Native American. Does that mean that the argument
Speaker 1: all Americans are legal immigrance is over because we are
Speaker 1: all essentially Native Americans. Um, well, you're You're get into
Speaker 1: a lot of stuff here. Uh, you. I see what
Speaker 1: you're saying. And yes, by by war in logic, we
Speaker 1: are all Native Americans, which means that in essence, none
Speaker 1: of us are Native Americans. So there you go. Um.
Speaker 1: And it was nonsense, And it was such a such
Speaker 1: an incredible thing to see people in the media saying, no,
Speaker 1: she proved it me and she proved her case like
Speaker 1: she just you know, you know, she's one one millionth
Speaker 1: of a Native American, which means a Native American. It
Speaker 1: was really an astonishing attempt to justify what was one
Speaker 1: of the dumbest political moves I've I've ever seen in
Speaker 1: my entire life. You know, yeah, she's she's one one
Speaker 1: thousand and twenty four Native American, So yes, she's part
Speaker 1: Native American. This is this is this is actually taken
Speaker 1: straight out of the Dumb and Dumber playbook. You guys,
Speaker 1: remember that, what do you think the chances are of
Speaker 1: guy like you and a girl like me ending up together?
Speaker 1: Not good? You mean not good? Like one out of
Speaker 1: I'd say more like one out of a million. So
Speaker 1: you're telling me there's a chance. That's one of my favorite,
Speaker 1: one of my favorite little sequences in Dumb and Dummer,
Speaker 1: which is a movie that at the time I did
Speaker 1: think was hilarious. I'm not sure it stands up quite
Speaker 1: as well now that I'm a little bit older and wiser,
Speaker 1: but but nonetheless I did enjoy it in its day.
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren, that's right. So you're telling me there's some
Speaker 1: Native American in there. Yeah, like one in a million.
Speaker 1: There you go, Brandon, Right, the woobee is a poncho liner.
Speaker 1: It is every infantryman's best friend and or security blanket
Speaker 1: Airborne all the way. Brandon, thanks for writing in man.
Speaker 1: I did not know what a woobee was, and now
Speaker 1: I feel educated on the subject, So thank you so
Speaker 1: much for that. It is very, very appreciated. Caleb. Right,
Speaker 1: there's got to be a way to get the don
Speaker 1: to take a DNA test. I bet he's more Indian
Speaker 1: than folk a hantas well, Caleb, considering that Poke, I mean, sorry,
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren, a k A. Pocahontas is less Native American
Speaker 1: than the average American. Based on genetic testing that we
Speaker 1: know of. It would not be surprising, I think, to
Speaker 1: anyone to find out that she is in fact less
Speaker 1: Native American than President Trump, and that would be amusing
Speaker 1: but I think she's been thoroughly owned, as the kids
Speaker 1: say on this subject, I think she's been shown to
Speaker 1: be a political phony and a nube, and so there's
Speaker 1: no need for Trump to continue to uh dance on
Speaker 1: her burial ground, so to speak. Let's see what we
Speaker 1: have next year, Aaron wrote to just calm first glimpse
Speaker 1: of rising on the Hill. It was incredibly refreshing to
Speaker 1: see you and Crystal speak intelligently without raising your voices.
Speaker 1: It gives me a small glimmer of a hope that
Speaker 1: maybe the only insane people on the left are the
Speaker 1: minority with the loudest voices. Tell Crystal she's doing a
Speaker 1: great job. Keep up the good work. Shields high well, Aaron,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. Man. You know what, I'll pass
Speaker 1: them alongnder Crystal. I'm sure she'll appreciate that too. What
Speaker 1: we do very few people even attempt to do, which
Speaker 1: is have a conversation between a liberal and a conservative
Speaker 1: where the whole point is not for one side or
Speaker 1: the other to be made to feel bad or dumb
Speaker 1: or anything like that. We really are just sharing our
Speaker 1: opinions on this stuff. And I know I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: win the argument She's not gonna win the argument because
Speaker 1: we don't have the time, and we also aren't taking
Speaker 1: this to the mat. We have to do a whole
Speaker 1: show together every day. Like I said, if you want
Speaker 1: to see the Libs get owned, uh, listen to this show.
Speaker 1: Or I guess if you want to hear the libs own,
Speaker 1: listen to this show. If you want to see how
Speaker 1: I wire act of bipartisan discussion, then I think you
Speaker 1: may actually enjoy Hill dot TV slash risings. You can
Speaker 1: all check it out whenever you like. It's the fun
Speaker 1: thing about doing Internet TV is it's up there. It's free.
Speaker 1: If you have an Internet connection, you can see it
Speaker 1: whenever you like. Aries writes here we go Buck. I
Speaker 1: could care less that the Saudi's blundered and killed Jamal Kashogi.
Speaker 1: He should be killed anyway for making me type out
Speaker 1: this long ass weird name. There are a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of reasons not to like the Saudias, but I don't
Speaker 1: think we should lose a strategic asset all because the
Speaker 1: Saudi is screwed up and killed an American hating uh
Speaker 1: blankety blank. While the political class is panicking. This dude
Speaker 1: was a journalist and are willing to blow a strategic
Speaker 1: asset against Duran. I only wish they had as much
Speaker 1: hootspa when regular people get beheaded, imprisoned, or killed. I
Speaker 1: guess American college boy Ottumn warm Beer's life isn't any
Speaker 1: near as valuable as this Jihada sympathizing journalist. So while
Speaker 1: our spineless, brainless politicians, to include Republicans, are going crazy
Speaker 1: to try and go to bad for this guy, a
Speaker 1: guy like this would have been happy every time Western
Speaker 1: infidel got beheaded. Um, there we go. A guy like
Speaker 1: this would have cheered on nine eleven, and only disappointment
Speaker 1: would have been for him that Americans, more Americans did
Speaker 1: not die. Blank him all right, Aris, Aris, you don't
Speaker 1: you don't pull any punches man, and always good to
Speaker 1: hear from you. Thank you for writing in. Adam writes Buck.
Speaker 1: Do you think that Donald could bribe a Senate sound
Speaker 1: engineer to add the sound bite Cherokee people, Cherokee tribe
Speaker 1: from the song at Funny Times whenever Folcohanna speaks in
Speaker 1: the Senate shields high Adam, Uh, you are an entertaining fellow,
Speaker 1: but I do not think that that is likely anything
Speaker 1: that President Trump is going to be able to pull
Speaker 1: off any time soon. Uh. Next up here we have Michael,
Speaker 1: who writes, Buck, I never had any want to talk
Speaker 1: about what the polls look like before the red wave
Speaker 1: that put a lot of Tea Party candidates in Congress.
Speaker 1: What were the predictions back then? Um, Michael, that's a um,
Speaker 1: that's a good question. I don't know. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'll have to check it out. I'm not really sure
Speaker 1: what their exact predictions were. That's that's a very good point. Um.
Speaker 1: Here we go. Michael writes, been out of pocket this week,
Speaker 1: had a heart attack Friday night. Won't go home till Tuesday,
Speaker 1: some time after I get fitted for a life vest.
Speaker 1: Feeling pretty good, but I was certainly drain in the ambulance.
Speaker 1: I'm grateful to God not to be dead. Michael. We're
Speaker 1: all grateful. You're okay, too, big guy. You hang in there,
Speaker 1: you stay tough, alright. I appreciate that you are such
Speaker 1: a stalwart member of the team Buck tribe, and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, just honestly, you know, man to man, I
Speaker 1: just I'm hoping you're okay, praying for you, and you
Speaker 1: just you stay in this strong, You stay in the fight,
Speaker 1: all right. You got a wife and a and a
Speaker 1: family that that relies on you to stay, stay in
Speaker 1: this game, so to speak, this this life that we
Speaker 1: all lead as long as you can. You got a
Speaker 1: man with a beard like that, Michael has got a
Speaker 1: lot of time left. That that much I can tell you.
Speaker 1: So you're you're you're gonna be in good shape. Just
Speaker 1: stay strong, glad you're okay, and we'll all say a
Speaker 1: prayer for you. Everyone say a prayer for Michael. He's
Speaker 1: one of our Team Buck originals. And you know he's
Speaker 1: just been through a rough war. Deal sounds like he's
Speaker 1: gonna be all right, but he needs all the help
Speaker 1: he can get from the big guy upstairs, Rob Rights, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: the media are circling their wagons around Warren. Good show
Speaker 1: tonight from Rob rob Man. Good to hear from you
Speaker 1: as always, thank you for writing in And yeah, the
Speaker 1: media did circle their wagons around Warren. It was a disgrace,
Speaker 1: but that's what they did. Gonna close up shop in
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hut tonight. Team excited to be with you
Speaker 1: every day this week, every day every week pretty much
Speaker 1: excepting when I gotta take a day off. But until tomorrow,
Speaker 1: one request, Tell one friend to download the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast on Apple Podcasts, and then shield tie. Don't
Speaker 1: feel like you have to use one of these social
Speaker 1: media sites that you know is infected with all kinds
Speaker 1: of left wing bias, where they have all this conversational
Speaker 1: health nonsense going on and they are constantly trying to
Speaker 1: find ways to tilt the table toward the left. Go
Speaker 1: to a place where your opinion is valued and where
Speaker 1: you don't have to worry about shadow banning or any
Speaker 1: of the other nonsense that's been going on because of
Speaker 1: the left wing dominance of our social media platforms. That's
Speaker 1: why you should check out Snippy. I've got a snippy
Speaker 1: dot com account. I was just posting on it today.
Speaker 1: Snippy dot com is a super user friendly, fun and
Speaker 1: easy going place where you can share your thoughts and opinions,
Speaker 1: post photos, do whatever you want. S n I p
Speaker 1: p y dot com totally free to join, totally free
Speaker 1: to use s n I p p y. That's snippy
Speaker 1: dot com. Set up an account, give it a shot
Speaker 1: and I'll see you there. Friends, Let's get the conversation
Speaker 1: going