Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. It's official, my friends,
Speaker 1: President Trump has launched his twenty twenty reelection campaign. We'll
Speaker 1: talk about the big themes, the important moments, and also
Speaker 1: hearing's on Capitol Hill today about reparations. What is the
Speaker 1: argument for and against? Will tackle that and the immigration
Speaker 1: debate gets heated as O'kazia, Quartz and company doubled down,
Speaker 1: triple down on their concentration camp lunacy. That are more
Speaker 1: coming up on The Buck Sexton Show. Bucks Sexton Remission,
Speaker 1: decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence mag
Speaker 1: no mistake, You're a great American again. This is the
Speaker 1: bucks Sexton Show. Activate CIA analysts. Remember an I can
Speaker 1: speak for three hours without a phone call. Try doing that. Sometimes.
Speaker 1: We're gonna keep it better than ever before. And that
Speaker 1: is why tonight I stand before you to officially launch
Speaker 1: my campaign for a second term as President of the
Speaker 1: United States. Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. Everybody was
Speaker 1: quite a night last night with the official launch of
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign twenty twenty. It was a reminder that
Speaker 1: he is the greatest, most talented public performer and campaigner
Speaker 1: of my lifetime. I mean, I can't. Maybe Reagan, but
Speaker 1: I was very very young when Reagan was doing his thing.
Speaker 1: But I've never seen anything. I don't think anyone's ever
Speaker 1: seen anything like what Trump pulls together on that stage
Speaker 1: night after night on the campaign trail, and the energy
Speaker 1: in the enthusiasm. I only regret is that I wasn't
Speaker 1: there for it. But I will be sure in this
Speaker 1: election cycle to try to get there and see some
Speaker 1: of the the MAGA squad in action. The president is
Speaker 1: going to be in very good shape, I think going
Speaker 1: into this reelection. Despite the fact that, wow, the media
Speaker 1: has learned nothing about any of this, they have not
Speaker 1: changed one bit. The mainstream media of view this not
Speaker 1: as an effort to meeting the twenty twenty election campaign,
Speaker 1: and this was clear from the way they did their
Speaker 1: commentary afterwards. Their intention is not to make any changes
Speaker 1: or amend their behavior in response to the debacle of
Speaker 1: what they showed us their true colors were in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: but to view Trump's reelection effort as the mainstream media's
Speaker 1: second attempt. They're back in chance at defeating Trump and
Speaker 1: reasserting or re establishing the dominance that they have in
Speaker 1: the creation of political narratives in this country. Essentially, they're
Speaker 1: back in power. That's what they think. If they can
Speaker 1: just defeat Trump, then they are the kingmakers again. There'll
Speaker 1: be a Democrat administration that they'll be super cozy with,
Speaker 1: super cozy with, whether it's Sanders or Buddha, Judge or
Speaker 1: Biden or Warren or you name it. The mainstream media
Speaker 1: will be will be snuggling up to whomever the Democrat
Speaker 1: is while simultaneously telling us, oh, we're just holding their
Speaker 1: feet to the fire, speaking truth to power. They won't
Speaker 1: be holding the Democrats feet to the fire. They'll be
Speaker 1: massaging the Democrats feet. We know this. That's what they
Speaker 1: did with Obama for eight years. It was an embarrassment.
Speaker 1: That's what they planned to do again. So they haven't
Speaker 1: learned anything. They have. If anything, they're actually more ferocious
Speaker 1: in their partisanship. They will be more ferocious this time around.
Speaker 1: So worth establishing that right away. But it's also so
Speaker 1: reassuring that the president really he knows, he knows this opposition,
Speaker 1: he knows this enemy, he knows what he's up against.
Speaker 1: And that's why I appreciate so much that he doesn't
Speaker 1: hold back. He throws punches we voted for a puncher
Speaker 1: to be president, and man, does he show up like
Speaker 1: Mike Tyson and his prime and just throw those haymakers
Speaker 1: play Clip seven. The Democrats don't care about Russia. They
Speaker 1: only care about their own political power. They went after
Speaker 1: my family, my business, my finance, it's my employees, almost
Speaker 1: everyone that I've ever known or worked with. But they
Speaker 1: are really going after you. That's what it's all about.
Speaker 1: That about us, It's about you. Our radical Democrat A
Speaker 1: parties are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage. They wanted
Speaker 1: to destroy you, and they want to destroy our country
Speaker 1: as we know it not acceptable. It's not going to happen.
Speaker 1: That's who we're up against. We're up against a Democrat
Speaker 1: machine that desperately wants to be back in power, that
Speaker 1: has no compunction, no hesitation whatsoever about trying to destroy
Speaker 1: those who disagree with them. We're up against the Democrat
Speaker 1: machine that wants the president still to be ruined, to
Speaker 1: be thrown in prison, wants his associates, his family members
Speaker 1: to be thrown in prison, has no sympathy, no feelings
Speaker 1: of remorse when they destroy somebody who's a Trump supporter.
Speaker 1: As an example to set for all the rest. They
Speaker 1: cheer as Manafort sits in solitary confinement, as though he's
Speaker 1: an axe murder or not a simple tax cheat who
Speaker 1: hasn't made an example of because of his Trump ties,
Speaker 1: not because of what he did to the United States
Speaker 1: Treasury Department. You know, That's one of the really unsettling
Speaker 1: realizations that I've come to is that I never hear libs.
Speaker 1: And I know a lot of them, and I talk
Speaker 1: to them, and there's a lot of libs in media
Speaker 1: that I am in contact with. I never hear libs
Speaker 1: feeling sorry for anyone on the right who is a
Speaker 1: casualty of Trump's arrangement syndrome. They express no sense of remorse,
Speaker 1: no common decency they have, They have no hesitation. They
Speaker 1: have no problem with what happens to Kavanaugh, what happens
Speaker 1: to the Covington kids, what happens to just people that
Speaker 1: are not even necessarily in Trump's inner circle, but who
Speaker 1: are generally associated with the right, and in this era
Speaker 1: of Trump, if you are on the right, you are
Speaker 1: tied to Trump. And they don't even privately express to
Speaker 1: me they're feelings of unease with what happens. I have
Speaker 1: had I've had libs. I've had libs in media tell
Speaker 1: me that they didn't even have a problem with the
Speaker 1: shouting down and shaming of Trump administration figures at restaurants
Speaker 1: and in public, that that was a necessary corrective to
Speaker 1: the excesses of the Trump administration. That they don't feel
Speaker 1: badly for Tucker Carlson's family when a bunch of lunatic
Speaker 1: protesters showed up outside their home in the middle of
Speaker 1: the night and started screaming and yelling over megaphones at them.
Speaker 1: Tucker wasn't even there. They don't feel badly about it.
Speaker 1: These people are sick. They've got a problem, and this
Speaker 1: is where wartime conservative mentality kicks in. I don't want
Speaker 1: to make deals with them. I don't want to try
Speaker 1: to reach an accommodation those who are so bereft of
Speaker 1: honor and decency that they can understand what is truly
Speaker 1: beyond the pale. All Right, the Trump Tower meeting is
Speaker 1: not truly beyond the pale. Showing up at someone's home
Speaker 1: because you don't like what they say on TV and
Speaker 1: creating a menacing environment for their wife and small children,
Speaker 1: that's beyond the pale. Having a bunch of obviously deranged
Speaker 1: liars show up and claim that a world class legal
Speaker 1: intellect and a family man of decades who's promoted women
Speaker 1: all his life, like Judge Kavanaugh, was actually some kind
Speaker 1: of secret rapist to smirk and smile behind closed doors,
Speaker 1: as I have seen them do, and suggest that even
Speaker 1: if that was playing dirty and unfair, it was worth it.
Speaker 1: Those are the Libs that we're up against. Now, that's
Speaker 1: the mentality, That's who they are. And so what do
Speaker 1: we want in response to that? Do you want somebody
Speaker 1: who takes the romneyesque mccainlike approach of how do I
Speaker 1: try to meet them in the middle somehow, Maybe I'll
Speaker 1: get one nice thing set about me on the New
Speaker 1: York Times editorial page for one day. Or do you say,
Speaker 1: let's mount up, let's fight. Let's see what we got
Speaker 1: last night was a reminder that Trump is the latter.
Speaker 1: Trump is the fighter, and he is not going to
Speaker 1: let the Libs off easier for what they've done for
Speaker 1: the last two years, because it has been a disgrace.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of areas of public policy and
Speaker 1: public life where I not only am okay with I
Speaker 1: mean I welcome good faith discussion and debate. I do
Speaker 1: think there are problems with the way that some aspects
Speaker 1: of our economic system are currently structured. So that, you know,
Speaker 1: the carried interest loophole is one thing that comes to
Speaker 1: mind for hedge fund managers. I mean, this is just
Speaker 1: a carve out to help really rich people get even richer.
Speaker 1: There are things out there that are real that are problems.
Speaker 1: You know, how do we why didn't we cover prexisting
Speaker 1: conditions before? How do we best do this? There are
Speaker 1: real discussions to be had, but I refuse to be
Speaker 1: pulled into a discussion with the left over the price
Speaker 1: of my most basic freedoms and the American society that
Speaker 1: all of us have enjoyed up to this point in
Speaker 1: our lives, because that's not negotiable. It's not negotiable. I
Speaker 1: don't want to live in a country where people activists
Speaker 1: can seek me out and then force me force me
Speaker 1: to defile my own deeply held religious or political beliefs
Speaker 1: on pain of public ridicule, economic destruction, perhaps even imprisonment.
Speaker 1: I don't want to live in that country. And the
Speaker 1: moderate oh, let's find a way to get along. Republican Party,
Speaker 1: they had their chance, they had their chance, and we
Speaker 1: got stomped on for eight years of Obama, and we
Speaker 1: had the gleeful, self indulgent, self loving media running rampant
Speaker 1: without anybody really other than some conservative media personalities and
Speaker 1: outlets fighting back against them. You know who is the
Speaker 1: great Republican defender during all those years? Who was really
Speaker 1: taking Yeah, I know people here and there showed up,
Speaker 1: and you know Ted Cruz would say something smart now
Speaker 1: and again and would say, well, at least Ted's smart,
Speaker 1: But who was really taking the fight to them? The
Speaker 1: answers nobody, not effectively, not like Trump ken, not like
Speaker 1: Trump does. That's why last night was so important and
Speaker 1: also super entertaining when he says that Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: just not impressive because it's true. It's funny, and it's
Speaker 1: important because it's true. Play ten to support crazy Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders socialist government takeover of healthcare. He seems not to
Speaker 1: be doing too well lately. Remember the statement from the
Speaker 1: previous administration, you need a magic wand to bring back
Speaker 1: manufactu You. Well, we'll tell sleepy Joe that we found
Speaker 1: the magic wand we found the magic wand my friends,
Speaker 1: you know, the truth is the magic wand is Trump.
Speaker 1: Let's hope that it's enough to get us through to
Speaker 1: four more years. I think that it will be some
Speaker 1: more important points from from the speech last night I
Speaker 1: wanted to dive into, and then we'll move on. I
Speaker 1: know you've had a chance that had to digest a
Speaker 1: lot of a lot of you probably watched it already,
Speaker 1: and so we're not going to spend too much of
Speaker 1: the show on this. We've got immigration fights to get into.
Speaker 1: A really interesting piece on flight MH three seventy, that
Speaker 1: Malaysia Airlines flight that disappeared five years ago. I'll talk
Speaker 1: to you about that, and African American gun rights and
Speaker 1: really freedom rights advocate in Philadelphia is going to join
Speaker 1: us later on the show, Madge Teray, really interesting guy.
Speaker 1: I think you'll want to hear from him and how
Speaker 1: he's trying to educate the black community in particular and
Speaker 1: especially in urban areas about the Second Amendment and how
Speaker 1: it is it is the the right of all Americans
Speaker 1: and it and all Black Americans to be able to
Speaker 1: defend themselves and enjoy their Second Amendment rights and not
Speaker 1: to believe the left wing nonsense about gun ownership. We've
Speaker 1: got a lot of oh, and we also have a
Speaker 1: discussion coming up about slavery reparations, because there was a
Speaker 1: capitalil hearing today about this. We'll get we'll get into that.
Speaker 1: And the short version, that's the bad idea. The long
Speaker 1: version is we're gonna have to keep talking about it
Speaker 1: because Democrats are using this as a as a way
Speaker 1: to to get the basse all riled up, the left
Speaker 1: wing bass. So that means we can entirely ignore it
Speaker 1: when we have a jam packed show, as we always do,
Speaker 1: so stay right there and as we fight to make
Speaker 1: life better for all Americans. The Democrat Party has become
Speaker 1: more radical, more dangerous, and more unhinged than at any
Speaker 1: point in the modern history of our country. Does anybody
Speaker 1: really disagree with that? Who's paying attention, who knows anything,
Speaker 1: and who's honest? The Democratic Party has gotten more radical.
Speaker 1: That's just that's just a fact. The Democratic Party has
Speaker 1: moved further to the left again, a fact. Democrats now
Speaker 1: embrace positions that ten years ago, five years ago, a
Speaker 1: majority of their party would have said, well, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, that that seems maybe a bit ext that
Speaker 1: seems a bit extreme, not extreme anymore, not in the
Speaker 1: era of AOC and talib and you know, Pelosi is
Speaker 1: just all about power. So you have to remember this,
Speaker 1: Pelosi isn't really a governor, a speed bump on the
Speaker 1: radical left. First of all, she's she's a progressive herself.
Speaker 1: She's not, but she's not radical in the sense that
Speaker 1: she wants to continue things as they are in so
Speaker 1: far as they benefit her, her power, her prestige. And
Speaker 1: you know that's that's the first consideration Nancy Pelosi has.
Speaker 1: What does this mean for Nancy Pelosi? And so that's
Speaker 1: why she doesn't want to up end the system quite yet,
Speaker 1: because she's third in line for the presidency and she
Speaker 1: likes things how they are. It's the younger lefty Democrats
Speaker 1: in the Congress that are the real They're they're the
Speaker 1: real Castro wannabes, as in Fidel not the guy who's
Speaker 1: running for president. Sorry, got gotta specify that one. At
Speaker 1: this point, about the radical, radical nature of the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: this is going to be very important for Trump to
Speaker 1: hit on repeatedly because the Democrats right now they're showing
Speaker 1: us who they are because they have to, because the
Speaker 1: base wants this. Trump's gonna go to prison and we
Speaker 1: have to impeach in and all this stuff that they
Speaker 1: say the base wants this. But when it comes time
Speaker 1: for the general election, you're gonna have Hey, here's my prediction.
Speaker 1: You're either going to have Biden running as the Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm just you know, just a guy man who wants
Speaker 1: to just bring us back to the way things were
Speaker 1: and it'll be great, like the Obama years all over again.
Speaker 1: Or if you have Bernie Sanders, they'll say, no, no no,
Speaker 1: I'm a cuddley socialist. I'm like a teddy bear socialist,
Speaker 1: not one of those scary ones who wants to take
Speaker 1: all your stuff, give it to other people and run
Speaker 1: the economy in the ground. No, I just I'm just
Speaker 1: the free stuff socialist, which isn't real, but that's what
Speaker 1: they will offer. That's the way they'll go. So very
Speaker 1: important to hit the radical nature of the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: which is the truth. And then there's the other part
Speaker 1: of this as well, which is the disparate system of
Speaker 1: not just justice, but the two sets of rules that
Speaker 1: we are always being forced to operate in or when
Speaker 1: it comes to Democrats and Republicans, whether it is the
Speaker 1: justice system or just public perception through the media. Here's
Speaker 1: what he said about for example, Hillary's emails. Let's compare
Speaker 1: how they came after us for three years versus the
Speaker 1: free pass they gave to Hillary at a rates after
Speaker 1: they set up an a legal server, the acid washed
Speaker 1: thirty three thousand emails. If I got a subpoena for emails,
Speaker 1: if I deleted one email like a love note to Milannia,
Speaker 1: it's the electric chair for Trump. Does anybody really deny
Speaker 1: that at this point that the the way that the media,
Speaker 1: the bureaucracy, the establishment treats Trump and the Republicans is
Speaker 1: different from how they treat Democrats. Does anyone really think
Speaker 1: that that's a particularly contentious point. I mean, the way
Speaker 1: that the laws were swept aside and law enforcement at
Speaker 1: the highest level was told to stand down to pave
Speaker 1: the way for and Hillary Hello, and what happened. The
Speaker 1: way that the law was then just one hundred and
Speaker 1: eighty degrees, you know, switched around and weaponized and used
Speaker 1: to try to stop Trump from becoming president and then
Speaker 1: to end his presidency is the most breathtaking, absurd and
Speaker 1: frightening political scandal in this country of my lifetime. And
Speaker 1: the so called journos skipped this thing entirely It's pretty
Speaker 1: stunning when you think about it. Visiting. Let's have a
Speaker 1: little talk about the reparations hearings today, Shall we happened
Speaker 1: on Capitol Hill? I have thoughts, many of them. That's
Speaker 1: coming up. He's holding the line for America. Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: is back. Thirty one percent of black children live in
Speaker 1: poverty compared to eleven percent of white children. The natural
Speaker 1: averages eighteen percent would suggest that the percentage of black
Speaker 1: children living in poverty is more than one hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty percent. The institution of slavery and subsequent discrimination directed
Speaker 1: against blacks is an injustice that must be formally acknowledged
Speaker 1: and addressed. I just simply ask why not and why
Speaker 1: not now? If not all of us, then who God
Speaker 1: bless us as we pursue the final justice for those
Speaker 1: who lived in slavery for two hundred and fifty years
Speaker 1: in the United States of America. So that's about reparations.
Speaker 1: There's a big hearing on Capitol Hill today. I got
Speaker 1: a lot of attention and some important questions are raised.
Speaker 1: Here's the My quick reaction to this is, how can
Speaker 1: you achieve justice for acts committed against people who are
Speaker 1: no longer living at anywhere, and that we're committed by
Speaker 1: people who are no longer living. How could you adjudicate
Speaker 1: that without doing major damage to your legal system and
Speaker 1: to the undergirding moral values of your society. No one
Speaker 1: seems to have any good answers for that. There were
Speaker 1: some very interesting stuff said that A Coleman Hughes of
Speaker 1: Quillette said some things. I mean Quilett's that, what do
Speaker 1: you call it as it's almost a contrarian ideas magazine,
Speaker 1: or just a magazine that's intellectually rigorous but unbounded by
Speaker 1: the dictates of political correctness. We've had Andy no On
Speaker 1: before who writes for Quilette, to some very interesting stuff
Speaker 1: on Antifa for them. Christina hoff Summers I believe is
Speaker 1: associated with Quilette. She's a woman who's an academic who
Speaker 1: is not cowtowing to feminism all the time. But here's
Speaker 1: what Coleman Hughes had to say about reparations today and
Speaker 1: whether this is a good idea played twenty. The question
Speaker 1: is not what America owes me by virtue of my ancestry.
Speaker 1: The question is what all Americans owe each other by
Speaker 1: virtue of being citizens of the same nation and the
Speaker 1: obligation of citizenship is not transactional, it's not contingent on ancestry,
Speaker 1: it never expires, and it can't be paid off. For
Speaker 1: all these reasons, Bill HR forty is a moral and
Speaker 1: political mistake. Thank you, thank you, mister Hughes. Chill, chill.
Speaker 1: He was presumptive, but he still has a right to speak. Oh,
Speaker 1: look at the Democrat there, Cohen Jrump coming at the end.
Speaker 1: He still has a right. He was presumptive, but he's
Speaker 1: a right to speak. He's yeah, sure, there are the
Speaker 1: people booing in the hearing room booing. What what what
Speaker 1: did you say to that so bad? What was so
Speaker 1: incorrect that he should be booted? And people are just
Speaker 1: so childish, Mike, you got something. Yeah, as let's say,
Speaker 1: Cohen's the clown that brought the chicken, remember him, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: he decided to chime in. Oh my gosh, I mean
Speaker 1: I interview that guy. I mean he kind of had
Speaker 1: like a little bit of like this kind of crazy
Speaker 1: like southern thing, but he's kind of just yelling all
Speaker 1: over the place, and he's just, you know, crazy. I
Speaker 1: got Cohen. He's off the wall sometimes. Oh wait, we
Speaker 1: got more. Coleman Hughes, though I liked it, I like
Speaker 1: what this guy head to say, played twenty one. In
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, the House of Representatives formally apologized
Speaker 1: for slavery and Jim Crow. In two thousand and nine,
Speaker 1: the Senate did the same. Black people don't need another apology.
Speaker 1: We need safer neighborhoods and better schools. We need a
Speaker 1: less punitive criminal justice system. We need affordable healthcare, and
Speaker 1: none of these things can be achieved through reparations for slavery.
Speaker 1: If we were to pay reparations today, we would only
Speaker 1: divide the country further, making it harder to build the
Speaker 1: political coalitions require to solve the problems facing black people today.
Speaker 1: We would insult many Black Americans by putting a price
Speaker 1: on the suffering of their ancestors. What would that price be?
Speaker 1: Let's assume him for a moment, and it's it is
Speaker 1: an assumption we should not make, but just for the
Speaker 1: sake of argument, that the American people are united in
Speaker 1: the idea of reparations, whereas in reality, over sixty percent
Speaker 1: of Americans oppose reparations. So is a It's a clear
Speaker 1: majority that are not in favor of this. What's enough
Speaker 1: what's enough reparations? A billion? No, of course, not ten billion,
Speaker 1: getting closer fifty billion. It seems like a lot of money,
Speaker 1: one hundred billion, a trillion? You know, you just you
Speaker 1: work your way up. When does it stop? How can
Speaker 1: you put a price on the centuries of enslavement and
Speaker 1: the suffering, and the murder and the well, the truth is,
Speaker 1: you can never put a price on that, and how
Speaker 1: could any society really put a price on that? All right,
Speaker 1: but let's assume that we figured out what the price is.
Speaker 1: Who gets the money? Where does it go? How is this?
Speaker 1: What is the mechanism for dealing with this pain and
Speaker 1: bringing us into a new future? Oh, let me guess.
Speaker 1: Is it to give a whole bunch of money to
Speaker 1: left wing organizations that agitate for certain public policies and
Speaker 1: create essentially a progressive left slush fund which will be
Speaker 1: I'm sure staff by many, many, many white liberals who
Speaker 1: will feel very, very virtuous for working at some institution
Speaker 1: that has something to do with you or has received
Speaker 1: some money from from reparations in order to right the
Speaker 1: wrongs of the past. But is slavery really the only
Speaker 1: wrong of the past? We are to write, where does
Speaker 1: this stop and start, how much further does it go?
Speaker 1: I would bring you to an essay written by Kevin Williamson,
Speaker 1: whom is a little more quiet these days than he
Speaker 1: used to be. He wrote on reparations back in twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: and here's here's what he had to say. Quote. The
Speaker 1: political interests of African Americans, like those of other Americans,
Speaker 1: are best served by equality under the law. The economic
Speaker 1: interests of African Americans, like those of other Americans, are
Speaker 1: best served by a dynamic and growing economy, preferably one
Speaker 1: in which the labor force is liberated from the dysfunctional,
Speaker 1: antique Prussian model of education that contributes so much to
Speaker 1: black poverty. The people to whom reparations are owed are
Speaker 1: long dead. Our duty is to the living and to
Speaker 1: generations yet to come, and their interests are best served
Speaker 1: by liberty and prosperity, not by moral theater. End quote.
Speaker 1: I think that's exactly right. That's what this turns into, folks,
Speaker 1: That's what this really is. Moral theater. This is an opportunity,
Speaker 1: especially for white liberals, to show how morally superior they
Speaker 1: are to those who don't support this idea. That's really
Speaker 1: what this all comes down to it, it's all for show.
Speaker 1: It goes nowhere. But that's what so much of the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party is these days, just for show. It's a
Speaker 1: branding exercise for people who can't tell the difference between
Speaker 1: politics and their own personal virtue. I don't think this
Speaker 1: is going to go any further, but we'll see Democrats
Speaker 1: are more tenacious on this than they've been in a while.
Speaker 1: We've got much more common stay with me. Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: says walls are immoral. Secretary Clinton said she wants a
Speaker 1: borderless hemisphere. Earl Blumenauer said abolished ice, and Stacy Abrams,
Speaker 1: who gave the response to the present's Day of the Union,
Speaker 1: Speed says she's okay with non citizens voting while the
Speaker 1: crisis goes on. The Democrats are radicals on immigration. That's
Speaker 1: not a surprise. I was talking on Tucker Show last
Speaker 1: night about this very issue. This is one of the
Speaker 1: areas of greatest radicalism you see on the left. Although
Speaker 1: they're now just open about how little they care for
Speaker 1: the lives of unborn children. I mean, they don't even
Speaker 1: they don't even pretend that it's a it's a moral
Speaker 1: question for them anymore. They're just completely fine with the
Speaker 1: eradication of tiny babies in the womb, but on immigration
Speaker 1: increasingly they have just turned to either lies or obfuscation.
Speaker 1: They never they never really grapple with the facts as
Speaker 1: they are. And here's a perfect, a perfect example of it.
Speaker 1: So Solidad O'Brien, who is I don't know where she
Speaker 1: works now. Where are Solidadd O'Brian working out? She used
Speaker 1: to be at CNN and had the worst morning show
Speaker 1: happs in the history of cable news. I mean it was.
Speaker 1: It was a terrible She was a shrill, nasty, dogmatic
Speaker 1: lib who brought nothing to the conversation other than being
Speaker 1: exactly that, the shrill, dogmatic, nasty lib who you know,
Speaker 1: wants to lecture people about racism and you know all
Speaker 1: that stuff. Great, you know, that's that's exactly what America
Speaker 1: wants first thing in the morning. My former colleague Will
Speaker 1: Caine at The Blaze was a panelist on Solidad O'Brian's show,
Speaker 1: and that was one of the hardest jobs I think
Speaker 1: that any conservative has ever had in media. I will
Speaker 1: tell you that. To sit there and be browbeaten by
Speaker 1: Solidad uh the the great Ignoramus O'Brien on a regular basis,
Speaker 1: would you. I'm not saying there's no amount of money
Speaker 1: you could pay me to do that. It would be
Speaker 1: a lot of money, a lot of money, like like
Speaker 1: Rush Limball kind of money. Like I had to be
Speaker 1: like like Lebron James kind of money. It'd be a
Speaker 1: lot of money from you. Okay, maybe not that kind
Speaker 1: of money. It would just be like, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't know CNN Morning anchor money, but just kidding. I
Speaker 1: would never. But Dan Crenshaw tweeted out the following, and
Speaker 1: this just gives you a sense of, you know how,
Speaker 1: the intellectual half of our side versus the intellectual deficit
Speaker 1: on the other side. Crenshaw, in response to Okazio Cortez
Speaker 1: running the following for the shrieking Republicans who don't know
Speaker 1: the difference. Concentration camps are not the same as death camps.
Speaker 1: Concentration camps are considered by many experts as the mass
Speaker 1: detention of civilians without trial. And that's that this administration
Speaker 1: is doing. She's she's just lying about what she was saying.
Speaker 1: I mean, we all know she said never again. This
Speaker 1: is not this is not up for debate. This is
Speaker 1: not hard. But in response to that, Dan Crenshaw, former
Speaker 1: Navy seal current member of Congress out of Texas, said, clearly,
Speaker 1: I need to explain that in concentration camps, people are
Speaker 1: our unjustly sought out and confined. This isn't what is
Speaker 1: happening at the border. Migrants are illegally crossing our border.
Speaker 1: Most are asylum seekers, thus pending trial. So your expert
Speaker 1: definition doesn't apply. Correct, Dan Crenshaw is correct. They are
Speaker 1: coming to us and they are breaking the law. We
Speaker 1: aren't going to Honduras or Guatemala and scoopings them up.
Speaker 1: They're coming here and they're breaking our laws. Now, this
Speaker 1: is where it gets even more interesting because Solidad O'Brien
Speaker 1: chimes in on Twitter to say this about Dan Crenshaw.
Speaker 1: This is a good indication that this congressman doesn't realize
Speaker 1: that it is not illegal to cross the border in
Speaker 1: search of asylum in America. He should also speak to
Speaker 1: a historian about historical roots of concentration camps because he's
Speaker 1: wrong on that too. Okay, let's just dispense with the
Speaker 1: second one first, shall we. She was referring to Nazi
Speaker 1: concentration camps. That's why she said never again. In the
Speaker 1: same sound bite this is this is not hard. All right,
Speaker 1: let's we're not rewriting history here, folks. We all know
Speaker 1: exactly what she was talking about. And you have some
Speaker 1: libs and we'll talk about this later on the show
Speaker 1: who were straight up saying no, no, no, yeah, it
Speaker 1: is like the Nazi concentration camps, or we're getting close
Speaker 1: to it at least. But solidad on the first point,
Speaker 1: and we shouldn't expect anymore from Remember this was somebody
Speaker 1: who at one point CNN was paying seven figures to
Speaker 1: go on TV and just be a little lib talking
Speaker 1: head with the usual dogmatic lib talking points. Never insightful,
Speaker 1: never gracious, just shrill, nasty. I'll tell you I actually
Speaker 1: saw the day that she got fired from CNN. I
Speaker 1: was a contributor and I was walking in the lobby
Speaker 1: as she was, I kid you, not storming out with
Speaker 1: her like box with her things and her little assistant
Speaker 1: sort of, you know, hurriedly trapsing behind her. And she
Speaker 1: had the scowl of all scowls on her face. You know,
Speaker 1: usually I'm very simple. I mean, anybody who I mean,
Speaker 1: she's a multi millionaire, She's married a super rich guy,
Speaker 1: you know, it's a job that somebody else actually needs
Speaker 1: and wone do well. So you know she'll be fine.
Speaker 1: But I decided to chime in with miss O'Brien here
Speaker 1: because she's wrong, and that was what I tweeted to her. Wrong, Solidad.
Speaker 1: It is in fact illegal to cross the border outside
Speaker 1: a port of entry, even if seeking asylum. That's what
Speaker 1: about nine of these migrants are doing. They are breaking
Speaker 1: the law. And then when they don't show up for
Speaker 1: their asylum hearing, they are breaking the law again. And
Speaker 1: then we get this from Solidad. Oh she wants to
Speaker 1: dig a No, she skips past that because I'm just right,
Speaker 1: she's just wrong. I'm right. Isn't that fun? It's illegal
Speaker 1: to cross the border, even if you're then going to
Speaker 1: claim a sylum. You can't just cross the border outside
Speaker 1: of port of entry. That's that is a that is
Speaker 1: a crime unto itself. And so every migrant who shows
Speaker 1: up outside of port of entry walks across and I've
Speaker 1: seen them doing this, walks across the board her and
Speaker 1: says I want to claim asylum, has committed a crime,
Speaker 1: every single one of them. Okay, she responds, though she
Speaker 1: doesn't even touch on that issue. She responds, estimates, this
Speaker 1: is solo dad O'Brien estimates from an asylum judge in Virginia.
Speaker 1: Ninety ninety five percent show up for their hearing. This
Speaker 1: is the process to being assessed and applying for asylum. Again. Wrong,
Speaker 1: So I responded to her. Wrong, Oh man, that's nice.
Speaker 1: Wrong Again, the Department of holand Security disagrees with the
Speaker 1: random judge that you pick to bolster the narrative you prefer,
Speaker 1: solo dad, ninety percent of these asylum seekers so far
Speaker 1: I have missed their court dates. And then I give
Speaker 1: her a nice little link to testimony from DHS Secretary
Speaker 1: Macalenan to that issue. So, I mean, I'm right, she's wrong,
Speaker 1: she's not, but she has a preferred narrative. Right. She
Speaker 1: wants her audience to constantly no, I love the illegals.
Speaker 1: I mean, she lives in a I would guess. I'm
Speaker 1: just gonna put this out there. I don't know, but
Speaker 1: I'm guessing she lives in a three to five million
Speaker 1: dollars apartment in New York City. That's right. I know
Speaker 1: these people, I know, I know what they're like, I
Speaker 1: know who they are, and she lives in probably a
Speaker 1: three to five million dollar apartment in New York City,
Speaker 1: and her only contact with illegals is either the people
Speaker 1: in fancy restaurants who are in the back of the
Speaker 1: kitchen washing dishes and busting tables and things, or cleaning
Speaker 1: up her home. That's her only no contact with illegals
Speaker 1: in a day to day basis beyond that. So to her,
Speaker 1: it's just all virtue signaling. It's all, oh, okay, well,
Speaker 1: this is fine, this is great. We're just gonna let
Speaker 1: in everybody. And I want my audience to know that.
Speaker 1: And so in service of that, she's lying because let's
Speaker 1: just understand this, folk. Why would I mean, she's wrong
Speaker 1: on the numbers, but why would ninety percent of asylum
Speaker 1: seekers show up for hearing where they know when it
Speaker 1: is clear from previous hearings that less than one and
Speaker 1: ten of them are actually going to get asylum. Why
Speaker 1: would they Why would they put themselves at risk of
Speaker 1: deportation that of course they're not going to do that,
Speaker 1: and everyone knows this. But you see, at each stage
Speaker 1: of this process of the crisis at our southern border,
Speaker 1: the Libs have been lying. They've been pretending that they
Speaker 1: care about the rule of law and the process when
Speaker 1: we all know that the rule of law in the
Speaker 1: process is being flagrantly and systematically violated, that there's a
Speaker 1: fraud going on here. And we were right over and
Speaker 1: over again, but they never changed their minds anyway. That's
Speaker 1: Solidad got buck slapped, which is an important thing sometimes
Speaker 1: that needs to happen. So I'm glad I was able
Speaker 1: to present her with the facts and she is somebody
Speaker 1: who was in need of a little assistance on the
Speaker 1: factual basis for my claims. Wow, but that's right. But
Speaker 1: we'll come back in just a moment, team with a
Speaker 1: whole lot more on. We got more on the Trump rally.
Speaker 1: What was This is what I really want to get into.
Speaker 1: What was the single greatest moment of the Trump rally
Speaker 1: last night? In your opinion? I want you to hold
Speaker 1: that thought, those of you that watch, those of you
Speaker 1: watch the campaign launch, I want you to hold that
Speaker 1: thought because when we come back, I'm going to play
Speaker 1: for you what I believe is the single greatest moment
Speaker 1: of that rally and maybe my favorite moment of Eddie
Speaker 1: Trump rally. Stay with me for it. Twenty sixteen was
Speaker 1: not merely another four year election. This was a defining
Speaker 1: moment in American history. Ask them right there, this was
Speaker 1: our chance to reclaim our government. All right, we've been
Speaker 1: watching the president kick off his reelection. All right, all right,
Speaker 1: they're chat d s at ed sucks at the rally
Speaker 1: and they're chatting really loud and this is c at ed.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna stop covering the rally because there are
Speaker 1: chat Diggs sea it ed sucks. I mean, come on, Mark,
Speaker 1: that's funny. It's funny. It's amazing. Producer, Mike, I know
Speaker 1: you think it's amazing too, of course it is, dude,
Speaker 1: this is this is phenomenal. I was watching that what
Speaker 1: had happened, and I wasn't like, sort of half paying attention,
Speaker 1: and then that got my full attention. I mean that
Speaker 1: was the highlight of the whole thing for me. That
Speaker 1: was amazing, just to have to watch at a excuse
Speaker 1: dam are that chat dig thought Wait, hold on a
Speaker 1: tecond is wolfed down on the floor. Wolf Look you
Speaker 1: tell us, Uh yeah, they're pretty sure that, you know, Burman,
Speaker 1: they're channing. Uh I'm not sure. I'm trying to make
Speaker 1: it out now, but I have a feeling, and I
Speaker 1: have a I think they're chanting CNN sucks. It's amazing
Speaker 1: because CNN does suck, and they should be told that
Speaker 1: loudly and clearly and repeatedly, over and over again. So
Speaker 1: good times for everyone. That was the best. That was
Speaker 1: the best thing. I don't think MSNBC carried any of
Speaker 1: this speech last night. They had more important things to do.
Speaker 1: So I did Tucker's Show, which was always fun, right
Speaker 1: before the speech. Those of who got to see that,
Speaker 1: I think we put it up on Facebook. It was
Speaker 1: pretty cool. But I did Tucker Show right before the speech,
Speaker 1: and then I went over to watch the speech because
Speaker 1: it's only about five minutes from the Fox studio at
Speaker 1: the Trump International Hotel, where I gathered with a coterie,
Speaker 1: a menagerie, a smorgess board of patriots and we all
Speaker 1: hung out. And that's where I first saw the Keep
Speaker 1: America Great merchandise and flags and things that were being
Speaker 1: waved around. But that was the real highlight. And Mike,
Speaker 1: I can tell you I was in a room with
Speaker 1: a probably a couple of hundred people where they had
Speaker 1: this breakout room where they were just watching the speech
Speaker 1: at the hotel, and that was the best part of
Speaker 1: the whole thing. Because I mean and I want. I
Speaker 1: need to be at a rally when they chant CNN sucks,
Speaker 1: because then life will be complete. Can we do a
Speaker 1: show live from a Trump rally? Please? Oh my god,
Speaker 1: I'd like to. We gotta figure out wait to do that.
Speaker 1: I'd be amazing. And I just want to have people
Speaker 1: come up and be like sure or false? Does CNN suck? Yeah,
Speaker 1: let's see what they have. It's amazing. He's it's this
Speaker 1: is one when people say, oh, the polls and this
Speaker 1: and that. I sit there, I say, guys, we know
Speaker 1: this is Trump. Okay, there's no one else that's even
Speaker 1: gonna be in the same universe as this guy in
Speaker 1: terms of his campaign skills, and the Democrats just don't
Speaker 1: have a very good pitch. Ultimately, there's just what what
Speaker 1: is the pitch? We're gonna stop all the good stuff
Speaker 1: that's happening and do bad things, but we're gonna do
Speaker 1: it in a way that uses more politically correct rhetoric
Speaker 1: and that that shouldn't be I mean, yeah, that's appealing
Speaker 1: if you're a smarmy left coast lib but for people
Speaker 1: that just care about results and want the best for
Speaker 1: the country, that's just not gonna do it. That's just
Speaker 1: not gonna do it. But yes, now CNN sucks. That
Speaker 1: made me. That made me very happy. Um. And there
Speaker 1: was also Don Lemon monsieur Don Lemo may wear Leo.
Speaker 1: I don't know when he became a kind of cage.
Speaker 1: Actually he's not. I mean he's is he from Louisiana.
Speaker 1: I think he's from Louisiana. He obviously has no cagn
Speaker 1: accent though there I did get to interview a congressman
Speaker 1: I forget what his name is and Mike. This would
Speaker 1: be uh kind of fun to pull up from the
Speaker 1: archives from the Hill TV days, but it was. It
Speaker 1: was on Hill TV. He's a Republican, He's from Louisiana.
Speaker 1: He's like, excuse me, madame madam, so excuse me. He
Speaker 1: had like this kind of cage in affect. He was
Speaker 1: this this uh this this a white dude from I
Speaker 1: think northern northern Louisiana. Um. Unlike see, there are some
Speaker 1: states where they want you to say the state the
Speaker 1: proper way, like Nevada. Thank you all Nevadens for taching me,
Speaker 1: and an Oregon instead of Oregon, which I'm telling you
Speaker 1: is still very popular on the East Coast people say
Speaker 1: Oregon U. But with Louisiana they just appreciate if you
Speaker 1: say the name and just don't try to get too fancy.
Speaker 1: Same thing with residents of of of Louisville, where there's
Speaker 1: a lot of different ways that people say it, and
Speaker 1: they just are like, just don't don't hurt yourself trying
Speaker 1: to say it. The same thing with Louisiana. But Mischigo
Speaker 1: Donment was on I don't know, just that's fun to
Speaker 1: say his name. He was on CNN last night. Of course,
Speaker 1: he's a host there. I used to do that. I
Speaker 1: used to do a show all the time until I
Speaker 1: realized that it was a dishonest trash bin and then
Speaker 1: I was like, I'm not doing this anymore. It got worse, though,
Speaker 1: in my defense, it got worse when I was there.
Speaker 1: It got crazier when I was there. It started out
Speaker 1: somewhat normal, but U or normal for CNN. But here's
Speaker 1: what Donement said about whether or not they should air
Speaker 1: the Trump rally in Orlando. Play play clip three. I
Speaker 1: think about the despicable people we've had in history. Okay,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna use an extreme example. Think about Hitler,
Speaker 1: Think about any of those people, would you say that
Speaker 1: that person is allowed or let's put it this way,
Speaker 1: if you could look back in history, would you say, well,
Speaker 1: I'm so glad that that person was allowed a platform
Speaker 1: so that they could spread their hate and propaganda in Liza.
Speaker 1: Would you say they probably wasn't the right thing to
Speaker 1: do to spread that because you knew in the moment
Speaker 1: that that was a bad person and they were doing
Speaker 1: bad things. Not only were they hurting people, they were
Speaker 1: killing people. So don Lemon is making a Trump rally
Speaker 1: to Hitler early days comparisons as if I mean, look
Speaker 1: this the media that they can't hide anymore. They can't
Speaker 1: help themselves. They're showing you who they are day in
Speaker 1: and day out with their tweets, with their commentary, with
Speaker 1: what they do. It can't we can't put a genie
Speaker 1: back in the bottle? Is that a micro aggression? By
Speaker 1: the way, we not allowed to mention genies. It's like
Speaker 1: a cultural appropriation of a cultural appropriation of the Middle East,
Speaker 1: don't We don't want to talk about that anymore? So,
Speaker 1: Ohrabian nights, remember that. I cannot believe they remade Aladdin
Speaker 1: with Will Smith live action. Why why do so many
Speaker 1: people in Hollywood insist on trying to ruin our childhoods
Speaker 1: by remaking movies that should never be remade, or and
Speaker 1: then just remaking them really badly. I don't have creativity
Speaker 1: come up with new ideas. You know. I'm gonna tell you,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna miss something. I watched something recently that was
Speaker 1: pretty I don't know, it's not good, but I watched it.
Speaker 1: An I was watching the Castlevania cartoon series on Netflix.
Speaker 1: Have you seen this? No? What is so? The only
Speaker 1: the only reason? So? It just I have so much
Speaker 1: nostalgia because the Konami video game from nineteen oh gosh,
Speaker 1: I can't remember the year, late nineteen eighties, maybe early
Speaker 1: nineteen nineties. Castlevania was awesome. Do you remember that game?
Speaker 1: I love that game. I thought Castlevania was a really
Speaker 1: cool game. It's loosely based on the on on Bram
Speaker 1: Stoker's Tracula. You know, they've done a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: other stuff with it. But they made a cartoon, an
Speaker 1: adult cartoon. There's a lot of like heads getting chopped off,
Speaker 1: and it's it's very anime like in the sense if
Speaker 1: there's uh, lots of sword fighting and dudes getting their
Speaker 1: heads chopped off. But it's not good, Mike. That's a
Speaker 1: long story short. I cannot. I cannot recommend this one.
Speaker 1: So it makes me sad, but I tried. It just
Speaker 1: was a little childhood nostalgia thing for me, though, where
Speaker 1: I'm like, oh, I remember Castlevania. I'll watch a little
Speaker 1: bit of this, But no, it's not terrible. I don't know, Mike,
Speaker 1: give it a shot and tell me what you think. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's like a good thing to kind of just like
Speaker 1: when you just want to totally zone out. It can
Speaker 1: be you know, when you watch The Office for the
Speaker 1: five hundredth time and you just don't want to watch
Speaker 1: Office in the background. All right, So all right, back
Speaker 1: back to center buck back in formation. Gosh Son is
Speaker 1: talking about we wouldn't have given Hitler a platform, so
Speaker 1: should we give the President of the United States, Donald
Speaker 1: Trump a platform? This is why CNN as a joke.
Speaker 1: This is this is un serious and stupid commentary from
Speaker 1: an un serious and ignorant person, and this should be
Speaker 1: remembered going forward when he wants to be home. Just
Speaker 1: a journalist. I'm a serious journalist. Yeah, sure you are, buddy,
Speaker 1: Sure you are. But CNN sucks. Was the the highlight
Speaker 1: of this whole thing for me. I loved every second
Speaker 1: of it. Um, that was great man last night seeing
Speaker 1: all these folks at the Trump. And for those of
Speaker 1: you who are a team balking to listen to the show,
Speaker 1: if you ever see me at the Trump or anywhere else,
Speaker 1: I always remutately do mean this. Don't ever be shy
Speaker 1: but coming up and say hi or whatever. I love
Speaker 1: seeing members of the team anywhere I am. It's never
Speaker 1: it's never a bother. It's never like you know, please,
Speaker 1: it's it's you honor me by saying hello. If you're
Speaker 1: somebody who listens to this show, so by all means,
Speaker 1: feel free to come up chat. You know, we can
Speaker 1: hang a little bit, drink some mescal if you're into
Speaker 1: that sort of thing. To sit back, relax and let
Speaker 1: the Trump save America. That's pretty much. It's pretty much
Speaker 1: how it was going last night. It was great, and
Speaker 1: it was a really good energy, even at the Trump
Speaker 1: Hotel where you have a collection of patriots gathered on
Speaker 1: a regular basis, but especially when there's a big Trump event.
Speaker 1: So yeah, all at all. A fantastic launch, my friends,
Speaker 1: A very strong launch from the Trumpster. It's completely inappropriate,
Speaker 1: it's reckless, it's irresponsible, it's misinformed, and it's flat out wrong.
Speaker 1: You go to these facilities, whether it's a border patrol facility,
Speaker 1: an HCS facility, or an ICE facility, that they will
Speaker 1: be safe and adequate conditions to detain individuals. Except for
Speaker 1: the one exception that I would make is the border
Speaker 1: patrol facilities. They're designed for adults. They're not designed for kids.
Speaker 1: So regardless of where you fall on the immigration issue,
Speaker 1: the law right now says, if you come here as
Speaker 1: an uncompanied kid, you're allowed in the United States. They
Speaker 1: should not be in border patrol facilities. That's why we
Speaker 1: need Congress in part to pass that supplemental bill to
Speaker 1: get those kids out of border patrol stations into more
Speaker 1: adequate facilities run by HSS, and Congresses set on their
Speaker 1: hands for weeks and have not done that. Let me
Speaker 1: tell you what's really happening here, my friends, is that
Speaker 1: the Left's Olynskiite overrunning of the border. And yes, they've
Speaker 1: been waving them in and finding, you know, representing illegals
Speaker 1: in the legal process and advocating for them, and the
Speaker 1: Democrats are holding up the funding and won't change the law.
Speaker 1: So yes, they are in fact waving them in. They
Speaker 1: are promoting this Olynskiite overwhelming of the system and then
Speaker 1: turning around and saying, how dare you allow the system
Speaker 1: to be overwhelmed? They are both the arsonists and the
Speaker 1: criticizer of the firefighter. We are the firefighters in this case.
Speaker 1: We're trying to stop this from happening. They don't want
Speaker 1: it to stop, They're making it happen, and then they say,
Speaker 1: why aren't you stopping it in a better way? Well,
Speaker 1: the acting ICE director there, Mark Morgan, whom I've interviewed
Speaker 1: a few times, a very sharp guy, and knows this
Speaker 1: issue backwards and forwards. He's first of all furious with
Speaker 1: the completely idiotic and reckless comparison of attention centers of
Speaker 1: concentration camps. I mean, do we really need to do
Speaker 1: we really need to sit down with a bunch of
Speaker 1: these moron democrats who have major platforms on TV, sit
Speaker 1: down with them and show them photos of what people
Speaker 1: in the Nazi concentration camps look like? Do we need
Speaker 1: to show them a photo of the thousands and thousands
Speaker 1: and thousands of children's shoes gathered together? In the Holocaust
Speaker 1: Museum here in DC, or the eyeglasses that were taken
Speaker 1: for people before their march off the gas chambers, and
Speaker 1: then show them a photo of fellow American border patrol
Speaker 1: officers who are tending to the needs, bringing food, war
Speaker 1: remaining up themselves, handing it to the migrants who are
Speaker 1: showing up in these facilities, knowing that they are breaking
Speaker 1: the law, by the way, not caring about that one bit.
Speaker 1: The border patrol officers who are not paid a lot
Speaker 1: of money, who are going into their own paycheck to
Speaker 1: buy extra blankets and pillows and toys for kids who
Speaker 1: are stuck in border patrol facilities. Because we don't have
Speaker 1: the facilities for this, we weren't built for this. They
Speaker 1: want to compare them to concentration camp guards. These people
Speaker 1: are disgrace the same Democrats. You know, this mentality has
Speaker 1: been around now, we've seen it before. Abolish Ice. That
Speaker 1: was their chant, Abolish ice. They probably want to abolish
Speaker 1: border patrol too. They just won't say X. You know,
Speaker 1: it's political suicide, but increasingly they're pretty open about it.
Speaker 1: If they had their way, that's what would happen. I mean,
Speaker 1: if we're operating concentration camps. Doesn't that make border patrol?
Speaker 1: The concentration camp guards are our border patrol officers going
Speaker 1: to be getting tracked down into the into their eighties,
Speaker 1: even their nineties as war criminals decade in decades to
Speaker 1: come by by psychopaths like o'casio Quartez. I don't know,
Speaker 1: she seems to think so. They just replace reason with
Speaker 1: emotion and wonder why they never get it right. The
Speaker 1: Left can't help itself. This is just who they are.
Speaker 1: They are unfair, unreasonable, and increasingly crazy. Here's MSNBC back
Speaker 1: in the day promoting this. The concentration camp thing is
Speaker 1: not new. I've been telling you. The former CIA director
Speaker 1: said it. I tweeted it. I should say this is
Speaker 1: not a new theme because they're just trying to what's
Speaker 1: the maximum outrage they can generate for political purposes. What
Speaker 1: can they say to get the most oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: show my gosh response from libs. That's what they're going
Speaker 1: to say. Here's MSNBC back last summer promoting this idea,
Speaker 1: the kids that migrant kids are being put in concentration
Speaker 1: camps play seventeen and this is an important fact check.
Speaker 1: It is not the law to separate parents and children
Speaker 1: at the border. That is not the law. It is
Speaker 1: their interpretation of the law. We are used to be
Speaker 1: America's greatest democracy. We can't find a solution to this
Speaker 1: problem without harming children, right, without putting them into concentration camps.
Speaker 1: It's not even an interpretation of the law. It is
Speaker 1: a policy, new policy. It is a policy that has
Speaker 1: been invoked by the President of the United States. I
Speaker 1: call this a concentration camp for kids because that's exactly
Speaker 1: what it is turning out to. When you give kids
Speaker 1: twenty two hours of lockup time and two hours of airtime,
Speaker 1: what else can it be? And if this is where
Speaker 1: this country is going, the American people need to wake
Speaker 1: up and pay attention because your kids could be right.
Speaker 1: See they were saying it a year ago on MSNBC.
Speaker 1: This isn't new. We're operating concentration camps. You know, if
Speaker 1: what libs say that we are on a path of fascism,
Speaker 1: that we're operating concentration camps in the border, if they
Speaker 1: believe these things, then we have to be deeply concerned.
Speaker 1: If the rhetoric that the left, that the Democrats routinely
Speaker 1: use in this country to describe the operations of the
Speaker 1: Trump administration to deride the character and intent of the
Speaker 1: Trump administration. If they believe these things they say over
Speaker 1: and over again, we should all be deeply concerned about
Speaker 1: what they're going to do the next time they're in power,
Speaker 1: Because what would you do if you thought that the
Speaker 1: opposition were Nazis? What would you do if you thought
Speaker 1: that the opposition leader was basically Hitler? You know, I
Speaker 1: thought Obama was overrated, not nearly as smart as a
Speaker 1: left pretended. He was, not as wise, not as amazing.
Speaker 1: But I never thought the guy was Hitler. I just
Speaker 1: thought he wasn't a great president, wasn't somebody that would
Speaker 1: have voted for. I never hated Obama. I actually never
Speaker 1: hated him. I just disagreed with him. The Left hates
Speaker 1: Trump in a way that is its own form of psychosis.
Speaker 1: But then I give you the alternative possibility, and maybe
Speaker 1: this is the more true one. I know a lot
Speaker 1: of you would say, Buck, both these things are true.
Speaker 1: They believe that Trump is Hitler, or they believe that
Speaker 1: Trump is a fascist and that the concentration camps at
Speaker 1: the border are real. But there's another option here, or
Speaker 1: another addition into this. They're willing to say anything, They're
Speaker 1: willing to go to any level of exaggeration, use any
Speaker 1: kind of overreach and insanity to make a point and
Speaker 1: to hurt their political rivals, which in its own way
Speaker 1: is also very disturbing. In its own way, is deeply
Speaker 1: unsettling because it means that these people have no moral
Speaker 1: compass at all, that they'll say anything at any time,
Speaker 1: no matter what it does to the morale and the
Speaker 1: functioning and the tranquility of this country. We'll be right back.
Speaker 1: The United States is running concentration camps on our southern border,
Speaker 1: and that is exactly what they are. The fact that
Speaker 1: concentration camps are now an institutionalized practice in the Home
Speaker 1: of the Free is extraordinarily disturbing. Wow, that is what
Speaker 1: AOC had to say about the whole situation at the border.
Speaker 1: One of the dumbest things I've heard in a long time. Indefensible, stupid, reckless, ignorant.
Speaker 1: This is not hard, folks, This is not a hard
Speaker 1: It's not a close call, not a difficult one. And
Speaker 1: I know that yesterday this god so much attention. But
Speaker 1: there's a lot here. There's a lot that's beneath the surface.
Speaker 1: There's a lot on the surface too. There's a lot
Speaker 1: that's beneath the surface that deals with why a Democrat
Speaker 1: would say this, and also why so many Democrats and
Speaker 1: lib media outlets and big, overpaid, pompous, teamy news anchors
Speaker 1: would try to find a way to defend these comments.
Speaker 1: To defend this, let's let's first work on the fact
Speaker 1: that AOC has now claimed that there is a consensus,
Speaker 1: a consensus that she was correct in comparing what happened
Speaker 1: at our southern or with the detention of families and
Speaker 1: migrants at our southern border too. It was Nazi concentration camps.
Speaker 1: We're not going to let her play this game. She
Speaker 1: said concentration camps and never forget, and she worked never
Speaker 1: forget into this, so we all knew exactly what she's
Speaker 1: talking about. But now she's claiming that her concentration camp
Speaker 1: comment that the smart people agree with her played thirteen
Speaker 1: very clear academic consensus on what constitutes a concentration camp,
Speaker 1: and that is the massed attention of a community of
Speaker 1: people without a trial or due process. I think it's
Speaker 1: pretty universally and non controversial to say that the administration
Speaker 1: is doing exactly that and meets the academic requirement for
Speaker 1: what a concentration campus. You're not comparing this to what
Speaker 1: happened in World War two, No no I. While concentration
Speaker 1: camps were employed during that time, concentration camps were also
Speaker 1: utilized in a wide in all over the world, including
Speaker 1: in the United States with a Japanese internment. Well, first
Speaker 1: of all, they call them, they tend to refer to
Speaker 1: them as internment camps when we're referring to the Japanese
Speaker 1: Americans in this country. But note how somebody who is
Speaker 1: by no stretch of the imagination and an academic or
Speaker 1: has an impressive academic pedigree in any way, and not
Speaker 1: that an impressive academic pedigree would even mean all that much,
Speaker 1: but she has none of these things. Invokes the academic
Speaker 1: consensus about what she said, as though, yeah, the academy
Speaker 1: is on my side. Oh you mean that the tenured
Speaker 1: commies that teach at schools across the country. That's really impressive. AOC,
Speaker 1: it's not impressive at all. But she got dragged yesterday.
Speaker 1: That's what they call it. When you say something or
Speaker 1: write something, particularly on Twitter that's really stupid and then
Speaker 1: everyone just piles on you and talks about what an
Speaker 1: imbecile you are. Call it getting dragged. It happens to people,
Speaker 1: sometimes fairly, sometimes unfairly. AOC was getting dragged and the
Speaker 1: left leapt to her defense. They really do have a
Speaker 1: particular defensiveness and a soft spot for backing up at
Speaker 1: all costs and any costs. Certain members of Congress. They
Speaker 1: do this for AOC, They do it for Ilhan Omar,
Speaker 1: they do it for Rashida to leave. They will go
Speaker 1: to the mat for these new members of Congress in
Speaker 1: the media, which tells you a lot, they will leave.
Speaker 1: Certain you know, Debbie Wasserman Schultz back in the day
Speaker 1: could get hammered by the media. I mean, will you
Speaker 1: just see it here and be like, you know, Robot,
Speaker 1: Debbie with their the tachic pots about the Democrats that
Speaker 1: have the Republicans are so bad and Republicans are terrible,
Speaker 1: and I've just said the same day, go over. You know,
Speaker 1: Debbie is just a little blabbering talking points. Robot and
Speaker 1: I could say that stuff and nobody was going to
Speaker 1: rush to Debbie Wasserman Schultz's defense the same way, at
Speaker 1: least the same way that they do with AOC and
Speaker 1: to leave. There's a real sensitivity here. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think it's one that these are that that the media
Speaker 1: is more left wing in their sense, in their sensibilities,
Speaker 1: and in their sympathies than they really want anyone to know.
Speaker 1: I mean the media. We have a hard left media
Speaker 1: in this country that presents, you know, slightly left center right.
Speaker 1: That's they try or at least consider themselves left center,
Speaker 1: but they're they're really pretty hard left at this point.
Speaker 1: I mean, they want the president in prison, they want
Speaker 1: his family imprisoned and ruined. They are willing to lie
Speaker 1: about things to get there. They're willing to abuse the process,
Speaker 1: excuse all kinds of misbehavior, and invoke insane double standards.
Speaker 1: I mean, the left now has radicalized. I've been saying
Speaker 1: it for a long time. The left is radicalized. But
Speaker 1: when you see radical members of the left all of
Speaker 1: a sudden getting dragged by conservative media on Twitter, by
Speaker 1: the radio hosts and TV shows, then you have this
Speaker 1: this what do they call it? They call it standing
Speaker 1: or just when you stand for someone, Producer, Mike, isn't
Speaker 1: this what the kids say now? Like when you sta
Speaker 1: n isn't that like you're standing up for somebody in
Speaker 1: a big way because they're like super fanning for them
Speaker 1: or something. I don't know. Yeah, it sounds right, right,
Speaker 1: like you stand for someone. It sounds like they're saying stand,
Speaker 1: but it's actually sta n It's a new word that
Speaker 1: the cool kids use now. So they will they will
Speaker 1: stand for AOC, and they will back her up when
Speaker 1: she is not back up a bull. Really and this
Speaker 1: is not a close call, but here is AOC decided
Speaker 1: to go after Liz Cheney on this issue. You know,
Speaker 1: she's just gonna she's gonna clap back even when she
Speaker 1: should just AOC, you should just take the l on
Speaker 1: this one. But she won't take the lum. She has
Speaker 1: been given way too much power. She has far too
Speaker 1: little knowledge for the power that she wields in the
Speaker 1: media and in our discourse. She is the Prince Joffrey
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party. And that's why she thinks it's
Speaker 1: okay to do things like this play clip twelve. She
Speaker 1: used the term extermination, which is co opting the language
Speaker 1: of that. You know that term implies that the people
Speaker 1: who died in the Holocaust. It doubles down on the
Speaker 1: rhetoric that justified it, and so I think it's I mean,
Speaker 1: I think she's the one that he's do her homework.
Speaker 1: She is a She is a dangerous moron, folks. I
Speaker 1: mean that. I mean that because she's just never No
Speaker 1: one has ever pulled her aside and really let her know,
Speaker 1: you're just not that smart. She looks and presents and
Speaker 1: has a story that the left loves. I mean, they
Speaker 1: like the packaging, they like the superficiality of Ocasio Cortez.
Speaker 1: The it's kind of like a female Chegavarre in American
Speaker 1: society in twenty nineteen. You know, it's going to lead
Speaker 1: us to the socialist heights of a great new future
Speaker 1: where there's, you know, an elimination of white privilege and
Speaker 1: there's the radical redistribution of wealth and all this stuff.
Speaker 1: They like all these aspects of her, but no one
Speaker 1: really has ever pulled her aside and said to her,
Speaker 1: you're really not You have a lot to learn, and
Speaker 1: you you would benefit tremendously from humility. She is completely
Speaker 1: lacking in humility. I mean the whole oh I was
Speaker 1: a bartender thing. This is a false humilator that she
Speaker 1: uses as part of her branding. She's gonna lecture Liz
Speaker 1: Cheney on this, and then this was this was a
Speaker 1: fascinating maneuver and Chris Cuomo, bro Cuomo, Yo, do you
Speaker 1: even lift? He responded to someone on Twitter. I saw
Speaker 1: this today with the same extermination is for pests, not
Speaker 1: for people. So what they're trying to do is to
Speaker 1: switch the conversation. They've lost on this. I mean, they're
Speaker 1: they're getting pounded and they know they're they're trying to
Speaker 1: fight back, but they're wrong. What she said was stupid.
Speaker 1: What she said was wrong. You know Mike Hayden, former
Speaker 1: CI director. I worked for Mike. I've talked to Mike.
Speaker 1: I know him not well, but talk to him if
Speaker 1: you briefed him a few times. Mike said something similar.
Speaker 1: And I can tell you that even people that I
Speaker 1: know in the Intel community, who are very senior, who
Speaker 1: are Trump Trump hating liberals, have said to me privately
Speaker 1: that Mike Hayden comparing what was going on at our
Speaker 1: southern border to concentration camps was was completely intellectually inexcusable. Inexcusable.
Speaker 1: They recognize that, like, you can't, you can't be doing that.
Speaker 1: That's just crazy. Just like people who when I've asked
Speaker 1: them even Remember I'm talking about Trump haters, folks, I'm
Speaker 1: talking about deep staters who want to get rid of Trump.
Speaker 1: The ones though, who are not complete buffoons, who have
Speaker 1: like five percent non buffoonery left in them. They will
Speaker 1: say that John Brennan calling what Trump has done treason,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's just also crazy, that's just that's nuts.
Speaker 1: But they will go nuts in their defensive AOC and
Speaker 1: what they've done, and this became the new talking point
Speaker 1: for today was to suggest that usage of the the
Speaker 1: quote extermination of six million Jews, that by using the
Speaker 1: word extermination you are in effect appropriating Nazi language and terminology.
Speaker 1: Therefore you're the problem. Therefore you are the problem. This
Speaker 1: is this is the new the latest wow moment, the
Speaker 1: latest wow moment from the liberal left in their efforts
Speaker 1: to do everything they can uh to just distract from
Speaker 1: what's really happened. I mean, they're they're a complete and
Speaker 1: utter disgrace. Yet here we are if you want to
Speaker 1: know how wrong they are and how broke Cuomo and
Speaker 1: the others who are now trying to lecture us on
Speaker 1: the usage of the word extermination in reference to what
Speaker 1: happened to the Jews and five million non Jews. I
Speaker 1: do think that that that's a part of the conversation too.
Speaker 1: This is just this is history, This is these are
Speaker 1: the facts. There were six million Jews and five million
Speaker 1: non Jews exterminated, murdered in the concentration camps, a million,
Speaker 1: a million Gypsies, two million plus polls, Catholic Poles mostly,
Speaker 1: and then six million Jews, which is this is all
Speaker 1: you can go. I mean, I live within walking distance
Speaker 1: to the Holocaust Museum here in DC, and that's the
Speaker 1: number that they have there as well. And you know,
Speaker 1: to understand, we should never minimize the full scope and
Speaker 1: the full degree of the atrocities of the Nazi regime.
Speaker 1: But Cuomo, in response to Liz Cheney, that's I was
Speaker 1: trying to find this for a second there, tweeted out
Speaker 1: today Broke Cuomo exterminated question mark, we use that for pest,
Speaker 1: not people. See he is on the this is now
Speaker 1: the new LIB talking point. Oh, you can't use exterminated,
Speaker 1: and that this is such a distraction, This is such
Speaker 1: an absurdity to even bring this up. But then, as
Speaker 1: many pointed out, like Phil Klein hat tipped him over
Speaker 1: at the Washington Examiner. Uh, you know, Phil Klein tweeted out,
Speaker 1: I confess I don't fully understand what Quomo was pretending
Speaker 1: to be outraged about. But the US Holocaust Museum and
Speaker 1: israel Yad Vashem both refer repeatedly to quote extermination camps.
Speaker 1: So they didn't even think this one through. But they're
Speaker 1: so desperate on the left to find something, some smokescreen
Speaker 1: to defend AOC's stupidity, or just take the heat offer
Speaker 1: for a moment that they would say outrageously stupid stuff,
Speaker 1: doubling down on stupid. I mean this from Cuomo, and
Speaker 1: you know, oh my gosh, the whole what's his name?
Speaker 1: Chris Hayes over at MSNBC, And I can't even keep
Speaker 1: track of all the libs, Julia Yaffi, all these people
Speaker 1: saying moronic stuff here to defend AOC. Why are they
Speaker 1: so willing to do this? Why not at least be
Speaker 1: if you want to be a little hypocritical on this
Speaker 1: and just play for your team, just be silent about it.
Speaker 1: Just wait, this will pass. Why gaslight us? Well, there's
Speaker 1: a real there's a real impulse here on the left
Speaker 1: to protect this new far left than guard of the
Speaker 1: Democrat Party. They're particularly sensitive about the far left, and
Speaker 1: I think there's real reason for that. This isn't just
Speaker 1: a byproduct, This isn't a bug, this is a feature.
Speaker 1: They are hoping that the AOC wing of the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party will in short order become the mainstream Democratic Party.
Speaker 1: And that's why they'll make total idiots of themselves to
Speaker 1: try to make Okazi Cortez look like less of an
Speaker 1: Idiotio Cortez is under fire again for some comments to
Speaker 1: make about concentration camps. I'm wondering if you've talked to
Speaker 1: some of the freshman members about the power of their words.
Speaker 1: These members of Congress are. They come and represent their
Speaker 1: district and their point of view, and they take responsibility
Speaker 1: for the statements that they make. The Republicans have no
Speaker 1: interest in holding the president accountable for his words. They
Speaker 1: will misrepresent anything that you say, just if you have
Speaker 1: one word in the sentence that they can exploit. Oh,
Speaker 1: now Pelosi goes with the classic At least give her
Speaker 1: credit for this. Pelosi goes with the classics here, folks,
Speaker 1: which is that, oh, they're misrepresenting what she said, They're
Speaker 1: misrepresenting it. How how exactly are they misrepresenting what? What
Speaker 1: AOC says she said it it was dumb, and we're
Speaker 1: saying it was dumb. This is just again that they
Speaker 1: words have no meaning to these people. The truth is nothing.
Speaker 1: This is why when they're lectures about Trump and you know,
Speaker 1: an exaggeration, here's some salesman talk. There a little bit
Speaker 1: of you know, coloring outside the lines when he speaks.
Speaker 1: I know Trump does it. I'm not oblivious, of course,
Speaker 1: but that's different than just up is down, down is up,
Speaker 1: and we're the guardians of truth while we're telling you that.
Speaker 1: But there's the defending AOC because of what she represents
Speaker 1: for the party. Then there's also the even more troubling
Speaker 1: component of this, and that is that there are some
Speaker 1: who really do think that there is any mortal comparison
Speaker 1: or some rough approximation of similarity between what goes on
Speaker 1: at the US Mexico border and what happened in the
Speaker 1: Nazi concentration camps of World War two. And now it's
Speaker 1: not possible, it's not possible to be so very very
Speaker 1: stupid and to think this unless there's emotion that's also involved.
Speaker 1: I mean, nobody really believes that these are the same things.
Speaker 1: But they have become so emotional about what's going on
Speaker 1: at the border that they put themselves in a position
Speaker 1: where they will say things that are just insane. You know,
Speaker 1: all this Trump has Hitler talk has finally got into
Speaker 1: their brains. Angela Rye Over at CNN is a very
Speaker 1: emotional person. To put her on CNN yell. She basically
Speaker 1: goes on TV and calls people racists. That's that's her job.
Speaker 1: Here's what she said about this whole holocaust comparison about
Speaker 1: our southern border to play fourteen in nineteen thirty, there
Speaker 1: were concentration camps. In nineteen forty one, they were death camps.
Speaker 1: And that is where we are going. If our consciences
Speaker 1: are not quickly pierced, it is a problem. Let me
Speaker 1: let me tell you how to laugh it off. We're
Speaker 1: heading to death camps, she says. She's doubling down. She's
Speaker 1: tripling down on this. Not only is it, oh, it's
Speaker 1: accurate to call what we have concentration camps. We are
Speaker 1: in fact, according to this paid CNN contributor who is
Speaker 1: presented in front of a national audience and treated with
Speaker 1: respect and treated like she's a star by most of CNN.
Speaker 1: By the way, she's saying that we are on we
Speaker 1: are on the same moral trajectory as Germany was in
Speaker 1: the nineteen thirties. That is a disgusting and abhorrent slap
Speaker 1: in the face to our men and women a border patrol,
Speaker 1: whom I know and who are good people, who are patriots,
Speaker 1: who are a third of her veterans. By the way,
Speaker 1: do you think CNN is gonna pull her off the air? No,
Speaker 1: of course not. She can say whatever stupid crap she wants.
Speaker 1: Why because she's defending Congress people in the protected class
Speaker 1: And that's all that really matters here to the left
Speaker 1: and to the Libs. And we know it, we know it,
Speaker 1: all right, team, I want to introduce you to somebody
Speaker 1: who came on my radar actually via my friend Tommy
Speaker 1: larn and she said, you've got to talk to this guy,
Speaker 1: Maj Torrey. I said, all right, let me look, let
Speaker 1: me look into this a little bit. Turns out masj
Speaker 1: is the founder of Black Guns Matter. He is running
Speaker 1: for city council in the great City of Philadelphia, producer
Speaker 1: Mike's favorite city because he's from there. And we decided
Speaker 1: to bring Madge on to tell us what he's up to.
Speaker 1: What Black Guns Matter is all about and what his
Speaker 1: politics are in the city council. Rays Madge, thanks so
Speaker 1: much for taking the time. Thanks for having me. Man.
Speaker 1: All right, let's start with Black Guns Matter. What is this?
Speaker 1: So we're a firearm safety and training organization that has
Speaker 1: a heavy focus in urban areas. So most of the
Speaker 1: areas where it is high crime, high violence, the usually
Speaker 1: those places are urban and they have a lot of
Speaker 1: gun control because you know, criminals love gun control. So um, Basically,
Speaker 1: we go to those areas. We're completely crowdsource. We go
Speaker 1: to those areas where those things are happening. And in essence,
Speaker 1: what we do is we give these free events or
Speaker 1: people pay pay it forward for these events for everyone
Speaker 1: to come learn, um, deal with conflict resolutions, conflict resolution,
Speaker 1: de escalation, so forth and so on and so um.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've been doing it since twenty fifteen. Us
Speaker 1: been it's been love. It's been a lot of people
Speaker 1: supporting and we just want to educate and make the
Speaker 1: hood grade again. Basically, do you come across a lot
Speaker 1: of hostility when when you're when you're talking to to
Speaker 1: folks in the black community in Philadelphia or anywhere else,
Speaker 1: were you doing these trainings. Do you do you just
Speaker 1: get the sense that the black community has been told
Speaker 1: by the Democratic Party, which as we know, as a
Speaker 1: majority of black voters supporting it, that that guns are
Speaker 1: somehow just even legal guns and legal gun ownership is
Speaker 1: bad or you know what, what's what's the perception that
Speaker 1: you're dealing with in the Black community of sec of
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment. So one, it is changing, so I'll
Speaker 1: leave with that, But there has been a concentrated effort
Speaker 1: body left. Um, and and again, I have tons of
Speaker 1: friends that's on the left, and I love them dearly,
Speaker 1: but they've been thoroughly misinformed. Um, there's a there's a
Speaker 1: common theme to make sure that urban America is not armed.
Speaker 1: All gun control is racist from the very beginning. And uh,
Speaker 1: you know a lot of the areas that happen to
Speaker 1: be populated by melanated beings happen to be urban centers,
Speaker 1: and those policies, you know, reflect let's lock them up
Speaker 1: for just the simple possession of a firearm. We're talking
Speaker 1: about guys. I've had scenarios with twenty five year old guys,
Speaker 1: work in a bank, regular job, living a rough part
Speaker 1: of itially, purchase a firearm lawfully, not knowing that he
Speaker 1: has to mind you Prinsylvania. Is the open charage stake,
Speaker 1: by the way, not knowing that he has to fill
Speaker 1: out paperwork, pay a fee, all of these other different things.
Speaker 1: He gets pulled over, it tells the officer he has
Speaker 1: the firearm located where it's located, and catches the felony.
Speaker 1: He loses his job, he loses his apartment. These are
Speaker 1: things not because again this isn't clearly, this isn't the
Speaker 1: John Dillinger guy. This is the person that's saying, I
Speaker 1: want to fire arms to protect my friends, my family,
Speaker 1: and myself and my neighborhood. It's need be and we're
Speaker 1: locking people up for it. So the misconception is based
Speaker 1: on years of you know, negative propaganda telling people, especially
Speaker 1: black people, that you know, if you got a gun,
Speaker 1: you out of the bad guy, or you better be
Speaker 1: the cops. And that's that's not the principles that America
Speaker 1: was built upon, but it's it's been a pervasive falsehood
Speaker 1: that the Left has thoroughly ingrained into urban America, especially
Speaker 1: black people. But we at Black Guns Matter are doing
Speaker 1: the work to change that tremendousness. What are you hoping
Speaker 1: to do going forward with Black Guns Matter, or do
Speaker 1: you have events planned in other cities outside of Philly
Speaker 1: and what can folks do or listen thing who want
Speaker 1: to get involved and perhaps want to help, what can
Speaker 1: they do. So we've been on the tour for the
Speaker 1: last two years. Our goal is to hit every major
Speaker 1: city in America, every state in America. You know, we've
Speaker 1: raised about We're only about eight thousand, five hundred and
Speaker 1: forty four dollars away from our goal for twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: which is fifty thousand dollars for the whole year. We
Speaker 1: ask anybody that knows that conflict resolution is important, de
Speaker 1: escalation is important, and people from the right that specifically
Speaker 1: want to make sure that those lessons of the Second
Speaker 1: Amendment is available for all Americans, especially Americans that have
Speaker 1: been tricked by the left. I mean, and I hate
Speaker 1: to say it in such a seemingly polarizing way, but
Speaker 1: the fact is the facts, you know. So if anybody
Speaker 1: wants to support that work these we make these classes
Speaker 1: available to everyone that comes out in registers for free
Speaker 1: by everyone paying it forward. They can hit our GoFundMe
Speaker 1: gofund me dot com forward slash Black Guns Matter if
Speaker 1: anybody wants to support. But really it's about again the
Speaker 1: conflict I don't want to overs shadowed is the conflict
Speaker 1: resolution is a primary part. The de escalation is a
Speaker 1: primary part. And becoming this year, we've added political education.
Speaker 1: It doesn't make sense to inform Urban America about you know,
Speaker 1: firearm safety and knowledge in the Second Amendment if we're
Speaker 1: not going to galvanize that that demographic you know, to
Speaker 1: vote in a way that is in support of their freedoms.
Speaker 1: This is all for nothing if we just continue to
Speaker 1: you know, have Urban America voting in the same people
Speaker 1: that are infringing and infringing and infringing, you know. So
Speaker 1: that's a major component of it as well. But everybody
Speaker 1: that pays it forward at that you know, our gofundi,
Speaker 1: gofunding dot com forward slash Black Guns Matter, that helps
Speaker 1: out tremendously. It removes that financial barrier to entry and
Speaker 1: we get people, get people's minds and hearts proper in
Speaker 1: regards to the Second Amendment. And match also want to
Speaker 1: ask you about your running for city council in Philadelphia.
Speaker 1: What are you going to do to try to help
Speaker 1: clean up that city? You know, I had a brother
Speaker 1: one to a university there, and he would tell these stories.
Speaker 1: And we grew up in New York City, so we're
Speaker 1: not kids that aren't used to a fair amount of
Speaker 1: crime and urban decay. But he said that Philly was
Speaker 1: a whole other level. So what are your plans if you,
Speaker 1: if you get elected to help clean up in Philly?
Speaker 1: And you know, obviously that could possibly be replicated in
Speaker 1: other cities that are still be set with the crime
Speaker 1: problems of a major city. So the three major platforms
Speaker 1: that we're running on they all tie into the same thing.
Speaker 1: But let me before I go to those three points. One,
Speaker 1: I gotta be very on city council. You gotta be
Speaker 1: very I want to see where all of the money going. Okay,
Speaker 1: we got forty million dollars that was earmarked towards anti
Speaker 1: violence prevention, but over the weekend we had thirty two shootings.
Speaker 1: I mean, in this whole stop the violence, put down
Speaker 1: the guns thing, We've been talking about this for decades,
Speaker 1: we been having this conversation forever, But where's that money going?
Speaker 1: And then we're talking about spaces where even outside of
Speaker 1: just firearms, we're talking about soda taxes that were supposed
Speaker 1: to be helping the schools, but the schools still got
Speaker 1: twelve million dollar budget. You know. So as a city councilman,
Speaker 1: the first thing that I want to do is, okay,
Speaker 1: we need to be accountable for all this paper. Now
Speaker 1: they can ignore me somewhat if I'm outside of the
Speaker 1: political sphere, but me being you know, on city council
Speaker 1: at large, now I'm want to appears. So that's one thing.
Speaker 1: The other three is getting civics back introduced into the
Speaker 1: schools K to twelve. As soon as they're able to read,
Speaker 1: they needs to be learning about civics. They need to
Speaker 1: know about the trisect that that is, the Declaration of Independence,
Speaker 1: the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Because when you
Speaker 1: want to you know, keep people feeling depressed and not
Speaker 1: feeling active or a part of a society, you don't
Speaker 1: tell them about their part in society. So that's one.
Speaker 1: The other thing is the decriminalization of you know, cannabis.
Speaker 1: Now I don't even smoke, but I smoke cigars, which means, okay,
Speaker 1: I'm fully aware as an adult what I'm doing. I'm
Speaker 1: making the choice. I don't think that we keep locking
Speaker 1: people up for things that you know, forty six percent
Speaker 1: of people in jail, that overcharging people right, overcharged, overcrowded,
Speaker 1: forty six percent of people are jelity if for minor
Speaker 1: cannabis possessions. So I want to deal with that as well,
Speaker 1: decriminalizing at least in Philadelphia. And the last thing is
Speaker 1: just making sure that our freedoms, you know, our urban centers,
Speaker 1: especially because a lot of times we leave that portion out,
Speaker 1: and making sure we're doing thorough representation of the people,
Speaker 1: all of the people that represent the city. And these
Speaker 1: are the things that I'm going to do as city councilperson.
Speaker 1: Madge tore everyone. Black Guns Matter is the organization. You
Speaker 1: can follow him on Twitter and manage. We appreciate you
Speaker 1: coming in and give us an up. They come back soon.
Speaker 1: We'll do. I appreciate you man. All right, you two,
Speaker 1: you take care the team. We'll be right back night.
Speaker 1: Malaysian authorities are urgently studying the captains at home flight
Speaker 1: simulator for clues. The simulator was reassembled at the police headquarters.
Speaker 1: Investigators want to know did the captain seen here on
Speaker 1: a widely circulated YouTube clip appearing to show him going
Speaker 1: through airport security practice them a new was that the
Speaker 1: flight made beforehand, and today we learned from Malaysian officials
Speaker 1: the potential critical importance of that last radio transmission from
Speaker 1: the plane to air traffic control. Remember the flight that
Speaker 1: was That was a little bit of just newsreel from
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago, early on in the investigation
Speaker 1: surrounding this Malaysian Airlines flight that disappeared, Right, we remember
Speaker 1: when this happened. MH is the designation for Malaysia Malaysia
Speaker 1: Airlines and this is I mean MH three seventy one
Speaker 1: of the great aviation mysteries of all time. This was
Speaker 1: a certainly a shock to many people that you could have.
Speaker 1: I meant, anytime a plane goes down and hundreds of
Speaker 1: people die, that's going to be a shock. But when
Speaker 1: a plane disappears and no bodies are found and no
Speaker 1: one knows where the plane is, that's going to have
Speaker 1: a profound impact on the public psyche. Right, people are
Speaker 1: going to say, what the heck is this? In an
Speaker 1: era of satellite communications and instantaneous transmission, How can hundreds
Speaker 1: of people effectively vanish into thin air at least as
Speaker 1: far as the authorities were supposed to track them, and
Speaker 1: protect them and know what's going on or concerned. Well,
Speaker 1: that is what happened effectively on the night of March
Speaker 1: eighteen March eighth, twenty fourteen. And you know, so it
Speaker 1: was five years ago that this issue first happened, and
Speaker 1: I remember, you know, and just all the networks, CNN
Speaker 1: in particular, though, we're doing a lot of coverage of
Speaker 1: this issue because nobody seemed to be able to come
Speaker 1: up with a real explanation for what happened. There were
Speaker 1: some really out there theories. People were talking about the
Speaker 1: plane being hijack landed in Iran. I mean, there were
Speaker 1: there were conspiracy theories that were way out there. Well, now,
Speaker 1: an article by William langevisha our Langa wish, I don't
Speaker 1: know how you say his name in the Atlantic, What
Speaker 1: really happened to Malaysia's missing airplane pulls together what I
Speaker 1: think is the most compelling version of events here. This
Speaker 1: pulls together, you know, what happened in a way that
Speaker 1: makes sense and is utterly horrifying. Here's what he says,
Speaker 1: he Here's what he takes us through is that this
Speaker 1: the pylon command Zahari Ahmed Shaw fifty three years old,
Speaker 1: was one of the most senior people in the entire
Speaker 1: Malaysia Airline's fleet. And he was a married guy. He
Speaker 1: had a few kids, lived in a gated development. He
Speaker 1: owned two houses, and he had a very elaborate Microsoft
Speaker 1: flight simulator installed in his home so that he could
Speaker 1: practice flying. And from looking at that, authorities have taken
Speaker 1: it as evidence that he was planning something like what
Speaker 1: happened here. There were two hundred and twenty seven passengers
Speaker 1: on Malaysia Airlines flight Malaysia Airlines Flight three seventy and
Speaker 1: what happened after about eleven minutes after it was crossing, sorry,
Speaker 1: eleven minutes after it reached its cruising level thirty five
Speaker 1: thousand feet, it disappeared from radar and then there were
Speaker 1: no more contacts and there was just no sense of
Speaker 1: where it went. Now they believe, and they've pulled together
Speaker 1: from satellite pangs of the plane and information that they've
Speaker 1: been able to gather of a technical nature, that the
Speaker 1: plane turned toward the southern Indian Ocean and just went
Speaker 1: on a six hour, six hour flight, and that six
Speaker 1: hour flight ended in catastrophe. That is believed that the
Speaker 1: plane broke up into many, many, many pieces essentially disintegrated
Speaker 1: on impact that had just completely crashed in the water
Speaker 1: in the Indian Ocean. It's hard to even imagine. It's
Speaker 1: hard to conceptualize how an airplane could the force of
Speaker 1: an airplane hitting the water could be so much that
Speaker 1: it disintegrates, But that is what is believed to have happened.
Speaker 1: How did it get to this point though, well, there
Speaker 1: was no emergency distress signal. It's quite clear from what
Speaker 1: happened based on this report in the Atlantic, and this
Speaker 1: has been thought for a while that Zahari, who was
Speaker 1: the pilot in charge. There was another pilot at a
Speaker 1: trainee of sorts. But it's believed that Zahari took control
Speaker 1: in the cockpit, locked the other pilot out, and then
Speaker 1: took the plant, switched off all the electronic transponders, all
Speaker 1: the means of communication and tracking for the flight, and
Speaker 1: that he then took the plane to a very very
Speaker 1: steep climb after depressurizing the cabin and took it up
Speaker 1: to perhaps forty thousand feet plus in the air and
Speaker 1: depressurized the cabin which would have very quickly incapacitated and
Speaker 1: then killed everybody on the plane. Whereas in the pilot's cockpit.
Speaker 1: There would have been oxygen tanks that he would have
Speaker 1: had access to with enough oxygen for hours. So it
Speaker 1: is believed that he engaged in what was effectively a
Speaker 1: mass murder at forty thousand feet in the air, so
Speaker 1: all the people were likely dead from this before any
Speaker 1: impact or anything else. He probably killed everybody on that
Speaker 1: plane by taking it to this forty thousand foot ceiling
Speaker 1: and turned off the pressurization in the cabin, turned off
Speaker 1: the transponder. He would have had to know a lot
Speaker 1: about the electronics and the communication systems of the plane
Speaker 1: to do this, and he is somebody who would have
Speaker 1: known who didn't know that, and then took it on
Speaker 1: this route out over the ocean for six hours at least,
Speaker 1: it is believed based on the pings from the satellites
Speaker 1: and the other technical analysis of this that they can do,
Speaker 1: and that from there. From there he likely just buried
Speaker 1: it in the ocean and the thing fell apart. There's
Speaker 1: another component of this story that is a reminder, and
Speaker 1: that is the Malaysian government, which is a famously corrupt
Speaker 1: government in Southeast Asia. If you want a little taste
Speaker 1: of how corrupt you can read The Billion Dollars Wail,
Speaker 1: a very good book about a massive financial fraud using
Speaker 1: the Sovereign Wealth Fund of Malia, with a guy named
Speaker 1: Joe Lowe at the head of it, who now is
Speaker 1: hiding out somewhere in China. I highly recommend that book
Speaker 1: if you're interested in international financial fraud and intrigue and
Speaker 1: the US firms that were complicit in that whole thing.
Speaker 1: But Malayia's very corrupt, and initially there were, as there
Speaker 1: always are in these cases, government concerns and government efforts
Speaker 1: about what information they share, what they want to tell
Speaker 1: the public, what the public should know. How that slows
Speaker 1: down the investigation. How there was always a concern that
Speaker 1: there would be some culpability found on the Malaysian government
Speaker 1: or Malaysia Airline side, and that initial desire to get
Speaker 1: the story right, that initial slowdown of the release of information,
Speaker 1: and the what should have been immediate calls for assistance
Speaker 1: to try to track down this wreckage that is delayed. Well,
Speaker 1: when a plane hits the water, the wreckage begins to
Speaker 1: disperse and sink, doesn't sink right away, but waiting many
Speaker 1: hours before you even know where to look for this
Speaker 1: thing is going to mean that you have a much
Speaker 1: harder time eventually finding it. I highly recommend for those
Speaker 1: of you that want, and you know, we'll put I'll
Speaker 1: put this up on Facebook, and I'll do it right now.
Speaker 1: So I know I tend to forget things sometimes when
Speaker 1: I say I'll put it on Facebook. But Facebook dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck Saxton if you want to see it.
Speaker 1: It's Uh, it's one of these things that I just
Speaker 1: think it's worth worth reading through because this was such
Speaker 1: a fascinating and really frightening case and now I think
Speaker 1: they've finally been able to pull together what happened, and
Speaker 1: this guy just it's it's it's almost like a a
Speaker 1: mass shooter who wants to go out in it and
Speaker 1: a blaze of of of infamy and in this case,
Speaker 1: it was a crash of a blazing crash of infamy,
Speaker 1: and um, you know, it's it's just it's a fascinating
Speaker 1: read and it's a little terrifying too, and just you know,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of a lot of what we deal
Speaker 1: with day to day is about trust. You know, do
Speaker 1: we trust each other in society? Do we trust the
Speaker 1: driver of the car, were in the pilot of the plane,
Speaker 1: we're in. In some cases it's rare, but in some
Speaker 1: cases the worst happens. And that's what it looks like. Mike.
Speaker 1: Mike just tweeting the eighty percent of airline crashes are
Speaker 1: due to pilots. Yep, it's not the equipment that fails.
Speaker 1: Oh Man, shots fired, shots fired from one well, a
Speaker 1: titan of media to a Liliputian of media. See this
Speaker 1: on Mediaite, The the great, the one and only Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity here putting mister Jim Acosta in his place. Now
Speaker 1: a Costa and CNN is as an organization, and the
Speaker 1: whole thing is now just is completely absurd. It's my favorite.
Speaker 1: As I've been saying, my favorite thing from the entire
Speaker 1: UH campaign launched last night was Soon sucks. Seon sucks
Speaker 1: and they turn it off. That's amazing. See, you know,
Speaker 1: I was like, oh, I got I gotta get off
Speaker 1: of this thing. This is bad, This is bad for business.
Speaker 1: And I guess it is probably bad for business. But
Speaker 1: Hannity on his blog and his you know, Sean is
Speaker 1: in many many markets across the country. The lead into
Speaker 1: this show, and I when I'm in New York, I
Speaker 1: generally do the show right next to Sean. He's a
Speaker 1: great guy. His staff is fantastic people, and I'm I'm
Speaker 1: Team Hannity all the way. So I always get a
Speaker 1: little excited when Sean it's you know, it's like it's
Speaker 1: kind of like when, uh, you know, in the Lion King,
Speaker 1: when when Mufassa has to like slap around some of
Speaker 1: the hyenas, You're like, ah, yes, the the big lion
Speaker 1: comes over and smacks him around. But here's what he
Speaker 1: says to uh, a little Jimmy Acosta quote, as I said,
Speaker 1: the little fake news Jimmy Acosta, you have not earned
Speaker 1: time on the number one show and all of cable news.
Speaker 1: You can tell all your reps to stop begging my staff.
Speaker 1: The answer is no. Unlike you, I don't pedal lies
Speaker 1: on the lowest rated cable network in America, nor I
Speaker 1: promote your lies on six and eighteen of the best
Speaker 1: talk radio stations in America. Nor has anyone ever provided
Speaker 1: me scripts or talking points another accost to lie For
Speaker 1: the record, I do not recall meeting you on a bus.
Speaker 1: Why did you miss your big chance to talk to me?
Speaker 1: Now I do have good news for you. I will
Speaker 1: gladly meet you privately in a mutual, agreeable schoolyard alone,
Speaker 1: as you requested. My only condition is this meeting will
Speaker 1: have nothing to do with your failing book, failing career,
Speaker 1: or failing network. I'm free the week of the fourth.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, oh man, I'm feeling little Jimmy A.
Speaker 1: Costa is not going to respond to this one. Acosta
Speaker 1: had claimed previously that Hannity had ducked him in Helsinki,
Speaker 1: and Hannity retaliated by saying a Costas and begging for
Speaker 1: a chance to come on his program. You know, one
Speaker 1: thing I'll tell you is that the conservative host who
Speaker 1: are who are big in this business are people that
Speaker 1: I know. I know them. I know almost all of
Speaker 1: them personally pretty well, or have talked to all of
Speaker 1: them at length. And some of them I know personally well.
Speaker 1: I don't know Rush the Great, the one and only.
Speaker 1: I've only filled in on his show. I don't know
Speaker 1: him personally. I've actually never met Rush, which is something
Speaker 1: that hopefully one day I'll remedy. But Sean I know well,
Speaker 1: and obviously I spent a lot of time on Tucker's show,
Speaker 1: and they're all good people. You know, They're all people
Speaker 1: that you would enjoy sitting down and talking to Rush
Speaker 1: Shaun Tucker. You know, i'd Shannon Bream show Alat. She's
Speaker 1: one of the nicest, smartest, best people you could ever meet.
Speaker 1: And so many of these lib hosts. I know, I'm
Speaker 1: just telling you the truth. I know this is gonna
Speaker 1: sound they're just awful. I'm just I'm just gonna tell
Speaker 1: they're they're snide, they're smarmie, they're arrogant, they're stupid, these
Speaker 1: left wing hosts. It's just true. I'm telling you the truth.
Speaker 1: Ain't no party. Look a Team Buck party, because a
Speaker 1: Team Buck party don't stop. Yeah, we got Bucks turned
Speaker 1: up to eleven. It's time for roll Call, Facebook dot
Speaker 1: com slash Buck Sexton for the roll call action. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I guess what team Today. I get to tell you
Speaker 1: some exciting news coming back to NYC, and we will
Speaker 1: be streaming this summer. We will start and I believe
Speaker 1: in August that's the plan. We're gonna start streaming the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show on video. We're gonna have a cool set,
Speaker 1: We're going to have all kinds of stuff, all kinds
Speaker 1: of great things going on for you starting the summer.
Speaker 1: And also the show. We're going to be putting out
Speaker 1: the podcast even earlier. Get excited about it. You'll be
Speaker 1: able to see the stream very early in the day.
Speaker 1: You'll be able to see the podcast early, and then
Speaker 1: if you want to listen live on the radio, you can.
Speaker 1: But it's gonna be it's gonna be a game changer
Speaker 1: because I keep having people come up me and they say, Buck,
Speaker 1: you know, I really love I don't have a station
Speaker 1: that carries me in your area. I want to listen
Speaker 1: to the show, But the show's not you know. It's
Speaker 1: comes out sometimes late in the evening and depends on
Speaker 1: how quickly the podcast uploads. Said, all right, the people
Speaker 1: have been heard, the podcast will be all of you
Speaker 1: listening will be able to will be able to hear
Speaker 1: the podcast. Starting in August of this summer, you'll be
Speaker 1: able to hear the podcast in drive time wherever you are.
Speaker 1: So I am psyched about that. And as for New
Speaker 1: York City, my family's there. Uh, that's that's where That's
Speaker 1: where the Buck is most buck like, and I'm excited
Speaker 1: about it. So you're gonna get Buck unfilled. No libs
Speaker 1: that I have to be cordial too as part of
Speaker 1: my job which is nice. I'm excited about that. I'll
Speaker 1: be in my hometown doing my thing, trying to make
Speaker 1: sure that freedom wins going into twenty twenty and here
Speaker 1: we go. Ummm, let's see we get it. Adam Rights, Buck,
Speaker 1: do you think you could do a burnie in a
Speaker 1: Hillary debate hosted by Commie Bear podcast? Short? Maybe and
Speaker 1: maybe it would go viral? I don't know. I mean,
Speaker 1: the Hillary voice is the only little snippets of it
Speaker 1: really work. But as for Commy Bear and all this,
Speaker 1: these are things that want now that I really bring
Speaker 1: the focus, the entire focus of what I'm doing back
Speaker 1: to this show A meaning that I don't have another serious,
Speaker 1: full time job I have to take care of. Then yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: then then in fact I will be able to do
Speaker 1: things like Commy Bear. So that's that's going to happen.
Speaker 1: Let's see here, Jeremy Rights, I was a never Trumper
Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen. I was not a fan of Trump's
Speaker 1: personal and business character. While I still don't like a
Speaker 1: lot of his personal quirks, I like what he's been
Speaker 1: doing as president, and we're voting for him in twenty twenty. Well, Jeremy,
Speaker 1: I approve of your decision making. My state is one
Speaker 1: that joined that state electoral compact, and I hope Trump
Speaker 1: loses the popular vote in my state but wins it
Speaker 1: nationwide and forces the Democrat powers in my state to
Speaker 1: give him the electoral votes as per their own law.
Speaker 1: Then we will see this state compact die. As always,
Speaker 1: She'll tie, all right, Jeremy, Well, you know, I totally
Speaker 1: respect that, and all along I've really thought that that
Speaker 1: it was the smart decision, or rather that the wise
Speaker 1: decision for conservatives. I get that there's stuff about Trump
Speaker 1: the people really don't like in his personal life, and
Speaker 1: I'm not going to sit here and tell you that
Speaker 1: being married three times, and I think what has admitted
Speaker 1: infidelity at least in some of the cases. I'm not
Speaker 1: talking about the Stormy Daniel stuff per se, but some
Speaker 1: of the earlier situations in Trump's life. But I also
Speaker 1: don't look to politicians as paragons of moral virtue, and
Speaker 1: I think that they serve a purpose beyond role models
Speaker 1: for the youth of America or whatever it may be.
Speaker 1: Because I've never thought the politicians and none of this
Speaker 1: is new either, And this is why, even talking about this,
Speaker 1: I feel a little bit like I'm playing into the
Speaker 1: left game here, because I mean, Bill Clinton was a
Speaker 1: was a morally repugnant human being. I can tell you this,
Speaker 1: and this is an important distinction. I do not believe
Speaker 1: and would I would say so if I felt otherwise.
Speaker 1: I do not believe for a second that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: ever tried to force himself on a woman, assaulted a woman.
Speaker 1: I know they say this thing about grab them by
Speaker 1: the by the bad word. That's they're misconstruing what he
Speaker 1: was the tone and the tenor of what he was saying,
Speaker 1: which was essentially that he can be very aggressive with
Speaker 1: women sexually and they like it because he's famous and
Speaker 1: he's a big deal. Now, you can not like that
Speaker 1: in what he said. But that's different than what Bill
Speaker 1: Clinton was credibly accused of many times over, which was
Speaker 1: forcing himself on women, sexually attacking women. And he was
Speaker 1: president for eight years and Democrats defended him to the HILP.
Speaker 1: There's a huge difference between somebody who is a sexual
Speaker 1: predator and somebody who is sexually a bit more free spirited.
Speaker 1: I'm not even sure what you would call it, as
Speaker 1: as you know, somebody who is a sexual predator versus
Speaker 1: somebody who is aggressive in his pursuit of beautiful women,
Speaker 1: which is I think what Donald Trump could could be
Speaker 1: said to be anyway. I can talk about this all day,
Speaker 1: but these are the These are adult decisions that we
Speaker 1: all have to make. Do you really want to hold out?
Speaker 1: Do you want to allow Democrats to say your candidate's
Speaker 1: not perfect? And then we have some psycho lib kami
Speaker 1: who is okay with murdering babies? Is that because someone
Speaker 1: that never Trump never answers that question? Is that really
Speaker 1: what we're supposed to have? Is that a better situation
Speaker 1: for America? Because that's the choice. We can pretend that
Speaker 1: there was some other choice, but that is the choice
Speaker 1: that we all had then. And it's even more clear
Speaker 1: now what the choice is, because not only are those
Speaker 1: dynamics in play, but we've also had four years of
Speaker 1: a president who hasn't gone to war with a country
Speaker 1: for no reason, hasn't escalated a war in a country
Speaker 1: we're already in for no reason, has presided over a
Speaker 1: booming economy, and isn't trying to tell you how to
Speaker 1: live your life every day. Isn't that refreshing? Isn't it
Speaker 1: nice not to have Obama talking down to you as
Speaker 1: though somehow he knows better about how you should pick
Speaker 1: your healthcare, about how you should you know whether you
Speaker 1: should be able to defend yourself. You know, I mean
Speaker 1: all you go through all these different aspects of obama
Speaker 1: Ism for eight years, and it was a lot of
Speaker 1: of condescension and lecturing. I I got sick of it.
Speaker 1: I don't need that anymore. I never needed it. I
Speaker 1: never wanted it. You can tell this got me a
Speaker 1: little anyway, Jeremy, I see, Jeremy. I think you're making
Speaker 1: an adult decision. I think you're making a wise choice
Speaker 1: by supporting Trump, even though you have your misgivings, and
Speaker 1: don't we all have our misgivings about politicians. It's not
Speaker 1: like I thought Mitt Romney was the greatest thing since
Speaker 1: sliced bread. He was the best option we had at
Speaker 1: the time. I think he would have been a competent
Speaker 1: commander in chief. I think he's been a little bit honestly,
Speaker 1: I think he's been a little sanctimonious in the era
Speaker 1: of Trump. I think he's lost the plot a little bit,
Speaker 1: but still better than Hillary or or Obama. TJ writes Buck.
Speaker 1: I've had this idea of floating around in my head
Speaker 1: for a little bit for the censorship by platforms, I
Speaker 1: would like to run it by you to see what
Speaker 1: your thoughts are like. To preface by saying that it'd
Speaker 1: be awesome to see one of the platforms adopt this idea, However,
Speaker 1: the more likely outcome would be that a new platform
Speaker 1: would have to do this. Here it goes imagine being
Speaker 1: able to toggle the speech on the platform to confer
Speaker 1: a conform to a certain country's laws. So in most
Speaker 1: free speech countries like the US, there'd be little to
Speaker 1: no restrictions. However, if you'd like to see the way
Speaker 1: some of the more restricted speech country's laws are, you
Speaker 1: would have that option to toggle that country's laws on.
Speaker 1: Along with this, the more restricted the speech is in
Speaker 1: the country you live in, the less options you would
Speaker 1: have to toggle on or off. Some of the USA
Speaker 1: would essentially be able to toggle on or off every
Speaker 1: other countrys speech laws, whereas someone in the Middle East
Speaker 1: or China may be very limited what they could toggle.
Speaker 1: A lot of usage to the word toggle here this
Speaker 1: it would be a very good way to give everyone
Speaker 1: across the global perspective of just how free we are. Yeah,
Speaker 1: all right? T j that's interesting. Thank you for the thought.
Speaker 1: Always appreciate you right in, and thank you for in
Speaker 1: a Shield's high T shirt in your avatar on Facebook.
Speaker 1: That's awesome. A bunch of people wrote in last night,
Speaker 1: no podcast uploaded, No podcast uploaded, Guys, I'm sorry man,
Speaker 1: you know we upload it. I don't know what to say,
Speaker 1: and we uploaded it. I gotta check this one out.
Speaker 1: Let's see what we got here, Taylor, what's up? Taylor?
Speaker 1: There were twice as many porta potties to support the
Speaker 1: crowd that waited two days to get into Trump's rally.
Speaker 1: Then there were actual people at creepy uncle Joe's rally.
Speaker 1: You lefties can keep your polls. Yeah man, that's right, Taylor.
Speaker 1: Don't want them to say all kinds of nonsense. Joey
Speaker 1: from Alabama, Right, you just said to message you and
Speaker 1: tell you something good. Well, I just returned to work
Speaker 1: today after falling and tearing my ACL MCL meniscus and
Speaker 1: fracture my leg, having surgery and back in a month
Speaker 1: and a half. Joey, that doesn't sound good man. Are
Speaker 1: you all right? Team? Send Joey some love, send him
Speaker 1: some prayers for his knee and his torn acl n MCL.
Speaker 1: But Joey, what you do? Man? Were you repelling repelling
Speaker 1: out of a black hawk over the weekend. You gotta
Speaker 1: make sure you eat that harness is on tight, my friend,
Speaker 1: be careful out there, good heavens Michelle Shield's high Buck. Sorry,
Speaker 1: I was just being silly with my message. Sometimes you
Speaker 1: get really silly with your imitations. Those that faithfully listen
Speaker 1: to you can get silly too. On a more important subject,
Speaker 1: I heard that other people in New England are having
Speaker 1: issues with your show where I live. You're not on
Speaker 1: sometimes for two nights in a row. I know it
Speaker 1: sounds crazy, but you know, see if you can speak
Speaker 1: faster to get the whole show and Shields hime Michelle, Michelle, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm working on it. I don't know what you
Speaker 1: know we got. There's all this people are trying out
Speaker 1: podcast now on different stations, and there's there's this whole
Speaker 1: change in the audio audio landscape that I'm trying to
Speaker 1: adapt to. So yeah, that is what I've got going on.
Speaker 1: Let's see here, Nikki hey Buck waiting for my food
Speaker 1: and listening to your show, heard about you, miss Molly.
Speaker 1: I had no idea I'm so sorry. Break up suck,
Speaker 1: but it's always better to know sooner then later. I'm
Speaker 1: sure you have the ladies lining up and take a number.
Speaker 1: Good luck, keep kicking ass and taking names. Well, Nicky,
Speaker 1: thank you very much. And you know you know it's
Speaker 1: a it's a tough sport out there, dating, finding the one,
Speaker 1: getting married and all that stuff. It's not an easy thing.
Speaker 1: I know a lot of you have managed to do it,
Speaker 1: and God bless and congrats. I'm still working on it.
Speaker 1: It's gonna happen. It's gonna happen. Marcella. Hey Buck, I
Speaker 1: heard you say yesterday you like opera, especially the genius
Speaker 1: of Mozart. You surprise me with that. It made me
Speaker 1: wonder if you've heard of the twenty five year old
Speaker 1: singer from Kazakhstan named Dimash Kudai Bergen. They'll classically trained
Speaker 1: and offered a position with the Astana Opera Company. He
Speaker 1: prefers the challenges that neo classical singing offered to his
Speaker 1: unique abilities. Since you like the magic flute aria, which
Speaker 1: I had to say, I actually heard this guy sing brilliantly,
Speaker 1: I think you might like this performance from him in
Speaker 1: a more pop style, Wow, Marcella, a Kazakh pop singer
Speaker 1: who opera we're really really stretching this a little bit
Speaker 1: into an interesting place. I actually I said, the marriage
Speaker 1: of Figure Oh, not the Magic Flute. The magic Flute's
Speaker 1: not really my jam, but the marriage of FIGUREA is
Speaker 1: pretty amazing. Marriage of Figure. If you listen to it
Speaker 1: should just put you in a good mood. So there
Speaker 1: you go. It's a great thing. I will say this.
Speaker 1: If you're looking for something to keep you company on,
Speaker 1: especially on a rainy night, if you're going to be
Speaker 1: in cooking or something, just put on one of the
Speaker 1: great operas and just have it in the background. I
Speaker 1: don't know, it's it creates an atmosphere that just just
Speaker 1: give it a shot. Team, give it a shot and
Speaker 1: let me know how how you think that went for
Speaker 1: I went for you. Um. Karen Wright's talking about crowded
Speaker 1: NYC is versus DC. Here's a true story. My husband
Speaker 1: had a business meeting with a with a guy from
Speaker 1: Calcutta in Manhattan. Out on a sidewalk, he asked my husband,
Speaker 1: where are all the people? Well, Karen, I think Calcutta
Speaker 1: probably is a little more crowded on the streets than Ahattan.
Speaker 1: But if you get into Manhattan in midtown, there are
Speaker 1: a lot of folks wore around. Where's in DC. They're
Speaker 1: empty streets all over the place. And this is a
Speaker 1: city and it's a swamp. You've got congressmen and congressional
Speaker 1: staffers and all these people running all over causing all
Speaker 1: kinds of problems, doing all kinds of things. Anyway, Karen,
Speaker 1: thank you for writing in good to hear from your team.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have an amazing show tomorrow because we have
Speaker 1: amazing shows every day. Thanks for being here, Thanks for listening.
Speaker 1: Get psyched for this summer where you're going to Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt two point zero status. Talk to you tomorrow, Shields
Speaker 1: High