Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt send an impeachment trial
Speaker 1: has dragged on all week. We'll have the ladies for you.
Speaker 1: Plus why you should feel some pride at what's going on.
Speaker 1: I'll have that for you. And also what happens when
Speaker 1: somebody who has actually paid off their student loan debt
Speaker 1: talks to Elizabeth Warren? And does Biden think that illegal
Speaker 1: aliens are more American than Americans? That and more coming up.
Speaker 1: This is the bus Sexton Show or the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with assionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show begins. He's a great guy. No, welcome
Speaker 1: to sex and show everybody. Man, It's Friday, Producer Market.
Speaker 1: It flew by this week. It flew by. You know.
Speaker 1: It was a quick I guess that's what happens when
Speaker 1: you only work four days in a week. It's like that, huh,
Speaker 1: that's all right? So what were you? Were you on
Speaker 1: honeymoon for like six months or something? Two weeks? It's
Speaker 1: what I thought. Yeah, yeah, So we got a lot
Speaker 1: to get to you today. For you folks here in
Speaker 1: the hut, I actually didn't even mention this at the
Speaker 1: top of the show, which you know, if we were
Speaker 1: doing a breakdown of the traditional radio skills, you're always
Speaker 1: supposed to tell people what you're going to talk about,
Speaker 1: and then that's a promise to the audience. My brain
Speaker 1: goes in a lot of different directions over the course
Speaker 1: of the show, so sometimes I forget things. Sometimes producer
Speaker 1: markets a little surly and we have to address that,
Speaker 1: and sometimes there's just other stuff that breaks during the show.
Speaker 1: But rarely do I leave off the for me, the
Speaker 1: top news item at the top of the show. So
Speaker 1: this is kind of like a fun, fun surprise, a
Speaker 1: thing that you wouldn't expect, and that is, we have
Speaker 1: new information that confirms what I've been telling you all along.
Speaker 1: This shouldn't be even a little bit surprising at this
Speaker 1: point because we were lied to by many, many, many
Speaker 1: people about what was really going on with the carter
Speaker 1: page of the FISA surveillance, right, and this this goes
Speaker 1: all the way back, And if I can, I'll take
Speaker 1: you a little trip this Friday down memory lane. In
Speaker 1: the early days of what was it? This the what
Speaker 1: was it? Twenty seventeen? Going into twenty eighteen, people are
Speaker 1: starting to think, Hold on a second, what really is
Speaker 1: going on here when it comes to the investigations of Russia.
Speaker 1: Was there spying on the Trump campaign in the In
Speaker 1: the early moments when that was raised as a possibility,
Speaker 1: there were all of these people who rushed out there,
Speaker 1: and you know, James Comey and McCabe and the the
Speaker 1: national security media industrial complex, all these people who are
Speaker 1: generally deeply unimpressive bureaucrats who would go on TV at CNN,
Speaker 1: MSNBC doing the work of parts while pretending to be
Speaker 1: non partisan experts. That's the best way. If you want
Speaker 1: to be a national security expert, the best way to
Speaker 1: do it is to pretend you have no partisan acts
Speaker 1: to grind, and when, of course you do, you're not
Speaker 1: gonna get on TV at CNN unless you're an expert,
Speaker 1: unless you're somebody who has a specific knowledge useful in
Speaker 1: the trashing and opposing of Donald Trump and all those
Speaker 1: who support him. But the idea that there was spying
Speaker 1: on the Trump campaign was ridiculed at first. We have
Speaker 1: to remembers it was ridiculed. Oh what a conspiracy theory,
Speaker 1: kind of like what they're saying now about Ukrainian government
Speaker 1: efforts to interfere in the US election. Oh, that's a
Speaker 1: conspiracy theory, or that Hunter Biden. Maybe there was something
Speaker 1: corrupt going on there. I mean, there was something corrupt,
Speaker 1: just a question whether it was criminal. Oh, but they
Speaker 1: call that a conspiracy theory as well. Okay, So we
Speaker 1: go back though to the first days, the first weeks
Speaker 1: and months of the consideration even of spying on the
Speaker 1: Trump campaign, and it was something that we were mocked
Speaker 1: initially for and then when it came out. Oh no,
Speaker 1: in fact, there there was a process investigation. But it
Speaker 1: was a good investigation. You see. That's what they told
Speaker 1: us because in Russia, Russia, Russia, Trump, Russia collusion, the Kremlin, prudence,
Speaker 1: puppet Trader, all this stuff. They threw all this stuff
Speaker 1: at you. And one of the great problems we have
Speaker 1: with holding the media and the left and the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party accountable for their lies is what I was called
Speaker 1: the slow roll technique, right, the slow roll technique. Politics
Speaker 1: has a momentum. People focus on something and then they
Speaker 1: focus on something else. Anybody who's ever worked in pr
Speaker 1: understands this quite well. Anyone who's ever had to do
Speaker 1: any public communications knows. And this is why if you're listen.
Speaker 1: Crisis communications. There are certain there's certain tools that one uses,
Speaker 1: including for very unsavory clients, but sometimes very savory ones
Speaker 1: need crisis communications to make sure that you minimize the
Speaker 1: perception impact against your client. And one of the most
Speaker 1: effective ways to do that is to extend anything, to
Speaker 1: extend out if you can. If it's going to come
Speaker 1: out right away, you get ahead of it. But if
Speaker 1: it's going to take a while, you slow role that
Speaker 1: you want it. Okay, well, let's let's drop this. It's
Speaker 1: another version of the timing that you see at work,
Speaker 1: from the government, from corporations, from individuals the Friday afternoon
Speaker 1: before a long weekend document dump. Right, that's another perfect
Speaker 1: example of us. These are ways that people are trying
Speaker 1: to manipulate and shape and direct perception. Now I'm talking
Speaker 1: to you about this because the entirety of the Russia
Speaker 1: collusion conspiracy theory, which is what it was, we now
Speaker 1: know that, based on all the facts, based on exhaustive investigation,
Speaker 1: a conspiracy theory that has destroyed, for anyone who is
Speaker 1: honest and serious, destroyed the pretense that the media has
Speaker 1: that they're not partisans, that they don't take a particular
Speaker 1: side of these political arguments. That's gone. I mean it
Speaker 1: has been gone for a long time if you've been
Speaker 1: made close attention. But after Russia collusion, we know that
Speaker 1: no longer exists. But we found out that there was spying, right,
Speaker 1: We found out that there was spying, and then they
Speaker 1: said the spying was duly predicated, it was acceptable, it
Speaker 1: was fine, it was necessary, in fact necessary to protect
Speaker 1: the republic. Spying on a presidential campaign, my friends, Attorney
Speaker 1: General Barr has said it. God bless him for standing
Speaker 1: behind that assessment of what is clear bold reality. Obama's
Speaker 1: top national security officials engage in spying on the Trump campaign,
Speaker 1: on an official connected to the Trump campaign, including all
Speaker 1: the communications of everybody that he was talking to, looking
Speaker 1: to see what was going on there for eight months,
Speaker 1: and they've told us all along, oh well, it was necessary,
Speaker 1: and then they said, okay, it was necessary, but there
Speaker 1: were there might have been some mistakes in the process.
Speaker 1: This is what came after the Inspector General port might
Speaker 1: have been some mistakes in the process, but ultimately it
Speaker 1: was all legitimate and there was no political bias, is
Speaker 1: what they tell us. No political bias. Turns out that's
Speaker 1: a little bit untrue. There was no problem with any
Speaker 1: of this, that this was duly predicated and legitimate investigation.
Speaker 1: Story up today, carter Page fis a warrant lacked probable cause.
Speaker 1: The DOJ has admitted in a declassified assessment at least
Speaker 1: two Remember there are four fizes on carter Page. Each
Speaker 1: one is two months long, half to be renewed. At
Speaker 1: least two of them. The Department of Justice has now
Speaker 1: had to come forward when they're doing this review internally
Speaker 1: of their fives or procedures were illegitimate. That means that
Speaker 1: they continued to spy on an American citizen tied into
Speaker 1: a presidential campaign, American citizen who has never not only
Speaker 1: have they never brought a charge against him, they've never
Speaker 1: even been able to insinuate as slimy as McCabe and
Speaker 1: Weissman and these other left wing hacks trying to take
Speaker 1: Trump down are. They've never even been able to produce
Speaker 1: the beginnings of evidence that carter Page was disloyal to
Speaker 1: his country or even considered being disloyal to his country.
Speaker 1: Carter Page is one of the most unfairly maligned people
Speaker 1: in America of the last decade. People were calling people
Speaker 1: still call him a trader. I was in the green
Speaker 1: room at Fox News a lot long ago with a
Speaker 1: female Democrat contributor who was still saying, Carter Page is
Speaker 1: a traitor. I don't care what the report says. Well,
Speaker 1: what are we going through all this for that? Well,
Speaker 1: this is where the Democrats are. Though they've they've constructed
Speaker 1: all these narratives. They believe them, They've tied their identity
Speaker 1: to it. They believe so strongly, and Trump as a
Speaker 1: traitor to his country and that other people around him
Speaker 1: worked with Russia to steal the election. That they'd rather
Speaker 1: continue to believe that than except that they were dupe
Speaker 1: and they're just not that smart, because they just aren't
Speaker 1: that smart. People never want to believe that. Much better
Speaker 1: to deny evidence than to accept the reality of just
Speaker 1: not nearly being as clever and bright as one had
Speaker 1: thought before. Humility is a beautiful thing. Humility is something
Speaker 1: that we should all embrace, especially when we need a
Speaker 1: little humility when we deserve it. Libs don't do that, though,
Speaker 1: better to double down, continue with an air of unearned
Speaker 1: intellectual superiority. All the virtue signaling they've done on this
Speaker 1: and so many other issues when the facts are clearly
Speaker 1: against them, just ignore the facts, get more angry, become
Speaker 1: more shrill, yell louder Carter Page as a trader. They say,
Speaker 1: based on what now, the Department of Justice, this just
Speaker 1: came out of last twenty four hours. Two of the
Speaker 1: four FISA warrants were not predicated properly. That means there
Speaker 1: was no justification for them. So now the person that
Speaker 1: they used among the most sensitive surveillance tools the federal
Speaker 1: government has. It's effectively a national security carve out to
Speaker 1: get around the Fourth Amendment. That is what FIS is,
Speaker 1: and it's all the self looking ice cream cone of
Speaker 1: the bureaucracy. They make sure that the only people that
Speaker 1: get to see this are the same people that get
Speaker 1: to make the decisions about whether or not it should
Speaker 1: be allowed. There's no real gatekeepers here. As we know,
Speaker 1: the FIES accord is a rubber stamp. But we always
Speaker 1: assumed on properly. As it turns out, we had been
Speaker 1: led to believe that they would only use this against
Speaker 1: terrorist terrorists and spies. Turns out they used it against
Speaker 1: the presidential campaign of Donald Trump. They were fishing. Now
Speaker 1: I had said this to you many times before. Part
Speaker 1: of the problem here, I think for these FBI officials
Speaker 1: is that they believed, they believed some of them the
Speaker 1: early stories about Russia collusion. They believe that there must
Speaker 1: be something there. And then they opened up this fize
Speaker 1: on carter page and then they renewed it and they
Speaker 1: got nothing. Well at that point, and they also, by
Speaker 1: the way, we had to deal with the reality of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump winning the election. So you look at this
Speaker 1: and you say, we'll hold on a minute. It's not
Speaker 1: what we've they had assumed going into Russia collusion. Going
Speaker 1: in the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, the assumption was Hillary
Speaker 1: Clinton's gonna win. That's what they thought. And that way,
Speaker 1: no matter what, they would just be considered, you know,
Speaker 1: great patriots going to pat on the head from from
Speaker 1: Hillary when she became the commander in chief, and maybe
Speaker 1: they even get a scalp or two of somebody from
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign which they then get to offer up
Speaker 1: and maybe that makes them director right. You can understand
Speaker 1: the motivations of some of the people, not just ideological
Speaker 1: motivations of those inside the FBI who were using this
Speaker 1: for their own purposes, But then why would they why
Speaker 1: would they double down. Why would they push for a
Speaker 1: Fizer renewal when they had no information to support that renewal.
Speaker 1: And as we know, even in the initial two phases
Speaker 1: of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on usage on Carter
Speaker 1: page that there were mistakes, lots and lots of mistakes,
Speaker 1: egregious mistakes withholding information everything else. But these last year
Speaker 1: they've said they weren't even they weren't even close to
Speaker 1: passing MUSTER. And we don't know yet if the first
Speaker 1: two past must they haven't. They haven't ruled on that yet.
Speaker 1: Now why am I so focused on this? Because this
Speaker 1: has been This is the biggest political scandal of my
Speaker 1: life time. There's no question, there's nothing else that even
Speaker 1: comes close. There were Democrat deep state operatives working under
Speaker 1: the Obama administration in collusion with the American liberal press
Speaker 1: that tried to thwart Trump from winning the election, and
Speaker 1: then after it tried to tear down his election. And
Speaker 1: we have a Senate trial going on this week where
Speaker 1: they're trying again to do that. But Russia Trump collusion
Speaker 1: was this was a saga for almost three years, a
Speaker 1: special Council, countless hours of news coverage devoted to this
Speaker 1: This became the way that dishonest leftists in the media
Speaker 1: built whole careers on this. Rachel matt out night after night,
Speaker 1: huge ratings while she did this whole kremlinology conspiracy. It
Speaker 1: might as well have been mystery science theater with people
Speaker 1: laughing at the screen. It's absurd what was going on.
Speaker 1: But when you look at how they've extended out the timeline,
Speaker 1: how long it takes for us to finally get the fact.
Speaker 1: Imagine being able to go back to the beginning of
Speaker 1: this debate, this national discussion about spying on the Trump campaign. Oh,
Speaker 1: it didn't happen, No, it happened, but it was really
Speaker 1: necessary because they're bad guys. Oh no, it happened. We
Speaker 1: made some mistakes, but it was still necessary to now.
Speaker 1: Oh no, this wasn't even justified under any circumstances. Spying
Speaker 1: on a presidential campaign wasn't justified under any circumstances. By
Speaker 1: the way, never forget they keep saying Carter Paige wasn't
Speaker 1: that important Carter Page. Well, their whole premise was Russia
Speaker 1: Trump collusion with Carter Paige for Trump to win the election,
Speaker 1: So they were he was being spied on in his
Speaker 1: capacity as a person connected to the Trump campaign. And
Speaker 1: when they say, oh, but he had left the Trump campaign,
Speaker 1: they thought they were going to uncover the efforts that
Speaker 1: they thought existed before he left the campaign to collude
Speaker 1: with Russia, as well as being able to suck up
Speaker 1: all of his old communications, because I know how this
Speaker 1: stuff works, they could suck up everything that was in
Speaker 1: his email, inbox, all of that, as well as look
Speaker 1: at who he was in communication with. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: like it's like having a bunch of FBI guys sitting
Speaker 1: in the room with you while you're typing everything on
Speaker 1: your computer. They see everything not even justified. Imagine Imagine
Speaker 1: the outcry that the American people, well, the honest ones
Speaker 1: who aren't just anti Trump zealots, which is unfortunately a
Speaker 1: big chunk of the country, but normal Americans. Imagine the
Speaker 1: outcry if we were able to say right away that
Speaker 1: the spying on the Trump campaign done by appointees and
Speaker 1: people that work for the Obama administration. There were the
Speaker 1: ones that are signing off on this. Those are the ones,
Speaker 1: you know, Comey and McCabe, Brannan and these people. Imagine
Speaker 1: we are able to say immediately that this is what
Speaker 1: happened that the spying was not was not just very
Speaker 1: duly predicated as just a fancy we have saying not justified,
Speaker 1: not legitimate, not legal. They falsified things, they omitted things,
Speaker 1: they lied about things. They wanted to double down because
Speaker 1: once they had already crossed that rubicon of spying on
Speaker 1: a presidential campaign, they might as well just keep fishing.
Speaker 1: Make it seem like there's something there are even when
Speaker 1: there's not. I think some people in the FBI I
Speaker 1: thought they would just get away with this and it
Speaker 1: would always remain secret because Hiller would be president. But
Speaker 1: there were others who probably figured, well, now we have
Speaker 1: to make something out of nothing. You have to make
Speaker 1: it look like there's something there or else. Oh my,
Speaker 1: what have we done. Just remember this because it's taken
Speaker 1: us now we're in year four of Trump's first term.
Speaker 1: It's taken us four years from Trump's election to get
Speaker 1: to this point where we can finally say that there
Speaker 1: were Democrat deep state operatives who spied illegally, unjustly on
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign. That happened on Obama's watch is the
Speaker 1: biggest political scandal of my lifetime, and the media pretends
Speaker 1: like it's nothing after lying to us and saying it
Speaker 1: was all justified the whole time. No it was not.
Speaker 1: So let's not let them use the slow roll to
Speaker 1: get out of what this really means. You're in the
Speaker 1: freedom heart. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. I'm glad.
Speaker 1: Our leader started by saying that the President has said
Speaker 1: that he is going to cut Social Security, and the
Speaker 1: reminded me of in the midnight hour on Tuesday, when
Speaker 1: Sippaloni got up and said that the President is a
Speaker 1: man of his word. I wrote on my notebook, what
Speaker 1: a whopper. It's not the only time the house managers
Speaker 1: definitely not here Aaron laughing. They're trying to destroy a presidency, folks.
Speaker 1: I'm glad it's also humorous, right, Chuck Schumer's there, She
Speaker 1: doesn't mean a hamburger, Maizie Arono the dumbest person in Congress.
Speaker 1: These are the Democrats put forward on this. What a scam.
Speaker 1: But I have good news for you. There is an
Speaker 1: upside to all this that I want to remind you of.
Speaker 1: There's something that we should all be mihall take some
Speaker 1: pride in. Actually this week, as we see this all
Speaker 1: play out, I'll tell you about it. Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to The bus Essen Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on
Speaker 1: Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. So we've all had to sit around and
Speaker 1: hear a lot. If you've been paying attention to the media,
Speaker 1: you've been watching what's going on. We've we've had all
Speaker 1: of these countless hours of lectures from Adam schaff about
Speaker 1: how much he loves the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, Thomas Payne,
Speaker 1: George Washington, Ukraine cares a lot about Ukraine. I mean,
Speaker 1: the ever seen Democrats care as much about a country
Speaker 1: as they do about Ukraine. All of a sudden, Wow,
Speaker 1: I would you know. They always do this thing where
Speaker 1: they ask people. They ask you know, average Americans to
Speaker 1: find something on a map. You'll find it Ron on
Speaker 1: a map. We talked about that recently, which again people
Speaker 1: are used to seeing things with names in a map.
Speaker 1: I get it, but you should know Iron is not.
Speaker 1: You know, there are people who thought it was in America.
Speaker 1: That's a little bit of a problem. I would love
Speaker 1: to see if you do the same thing, if you
Speaker 1: ran the same experiment, how many of these members of
Speaker 1: Congress without names on a map, If you just gave
Speaker 1: them the countries all on a blank map with the
Speaker 1: borders shown. How many of them could actually find Ukraine?
Speaker 1: Would I would bet money. I would bet money that
Speaker 1: Maisie Herono could not. I'm just telling you, I would
Speaker 1: bet you money that she would not be able to
Speaker 1: do it if someone just presented. And I think we
Speaker 1: should know if it's gonna be so funny to find
Speaker 1: out about how average Americans who have other things going
Speaker 1: on in their lives. You aren't sitting on the Center
Speaker 1: Foreign Relations Committee or aren't involved in all these discussions
Speaker 1: about Ukraine. It's all, oh, look people can't find this,
Speaker 1: and look, we should be better geography as a country
Speaker 1: than we are. That's that's true. But these members of
Speaker 1: Congress or imbeciles, a lot of them, not all of them,
Speaker 1: but a lot of them. And I think that it's
Speaker 1: what's good for the It's the second time I've used
Speaker 1: this phrase. A zoe it was good for the goose
Speaker 1: is good for the gander. I feel like that's kind
Speaker 1: of an old timey, old timey phrase. So it's a
Speaker 1: gaggle of geese, right, I think that's right. Yeah. A
Speaker 1: murder of crows is my favorite though you know that's
Speaker 1: what that's what a group of crows is called a
Speaker 1: murder of crows. You have some cool names for groups
Speaker 1: of animals out there, so it's a fun trivia effect.
Speaker 1: Next time you're at a cocktail party or you're on
Speaker 1: a date and you're run out of things to say,
Speaker 1: be like, have you downloaded the Buck Sexton show? He's amazing?
Speaker 1: Check him out on the iHeart app. And then once
Speaker 1: you've gotten past that, if that still doesn't start, if
Speaker 1: that doesn't get the party going, be like, do you
Speaker 1: know what you call a group of crows? Sir or madam?
Speaker 1: Sometimes I wonder why you're single? Now I don't. This
Speaker 1: is one of the moments I don't it's cold. Then
Speaker 1: I know that's cold. It's got a frosty here. I
Speaker 1: have to put all out a jacket because a producer mark,
Speaker 1: it's always cold here. That is true. It actually is
Speaker 1: a little bit little bit frigid. So anyway, um, why
Speaker 1: should we be taking a little bit of If not,
Speaker 1: maybe I said pride, you could say that there's certainly
Speaker 1: a feeling of there's a silver lining here, there's some
Speaker 1: solace you can say from this complete sham this week
Speaker 1: where they're arguing in an election year to remove Remember
Speaker 1: when not confirming a left wing approved judge in an
Speaker 1: Obama in the Clinton Trump election year, Remember when that
Speaker 1: was like some grave insult to the will of the people.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are, Oh, I know, we're all supposed to
Speaker 1: sit around like Merrick Garland. What happened with Merrick Garland?
Speaker 1: And who cares? But the Democrats acted like it was
Speaker 1: a huge affront to the constitution. Now we're going into
Speaker 1: election year and they don't really want to allow the
Speaker 1: American people to make the choice of who will be
Speaker 1: the president unit States for the next four years. That
Speaker 1: is happening and it's troubling to see. But we also
Speaker 1: have to remind ourselves of the following. In a way,
Speaker 1: all of this should have been expected. Of course, the left,
Speaker 1: which is increasingly insane, the Democratic Party which is increasingly socialist,
Speaker 1: the totalitarian Libs. Of course, they absolutely despise this president
Speaker 1: and are doing everything in their power and then some.
Speaker 1: They will break any rule, They will knock down any regulation.
Speaker 1: There are no guardrails that will keep them on any
Speaker 1: path when it comes to Trump. They anything that destroys
Speaker 1: Trump is all that is needed. That's all that they
Speaker 1: care about. But here's why there's there's a sense that
Speaker 1: we are at least we are reminded that this shows
Speaker 1: we've been right all along. Trump came into office without
Speaker 1: ever having held elected office before, not being a politician,
Speaker 1: saying he was going to drain the swamp, he was
Speaker 1: going to be a disruptive president, he was going to
Speaker 1: shake things up, he was going to upset the elites,
Speaker 1: he was going to upend the establishment. We heard all
Speaker 1: of that, and that's what's happening. So of course they
Speaker 1: are throwing everything at him. Of course they're flailing, and
Speaker 1: that desperation that I've been talking to you about it
Speaker 1: is all coming out now. We're seeing and we feel
Speaker 1: it because this is their worst nightmare. It is impossible
Speaker 1: to look at the last three years going into now
Speaker 1: the last year of his first term, and say that
Speaker 1: he's a bad you know, they say he's a terrible present.
Speaker 1: The country's in bad shape. You know, everyone should be
Speaker 1: upset about this. No reasonable person has that conclusion. Only
Speaker 1: ideologically driven people can have that conclusion, not fighting some
Speaker 1: horrible war. And I think about when I, you know,
Speaker 1: when I came out of college and there are two
Speaker 1: wars going on, and I joined the CIA, and you know,
Speaker 1: people are coming back and friends of mine are going
Speaker 1: to Walter Reed and people are getting limbs blown off,
Speaker 1: and there's PTSD and there's you know, we're what are
Speaker 1: we doing in these wars? Can we win these words?
Speaker 1: All these things that are going on. You know, economy
Speaker 1: drops like a rock at the end of Bush's second term.
Speaker 1: You know, Obama comes in, all this spending all you
Speaker 1: look at all these things. The country is doing better
Speaker 1: now than at any point in the last two presidencies.
Speaker 1: So it's not even just you know, it's such an
Speaker 1: easy thing in conservative media in particular. Oh, Obama's you know,
Speaker 1: a bad president, he was, but Trump is better than Bush.
Speaker 1: Trump is better than Clinton. I mean you to go back.
Speaker 1: I mean, how many presidencies. The only presidency in my
Speaker 1: lifetime that you'd say, okay, maybe this guy's achievements line
Speaker 1: up against Trump's are Reagan And some of you might
Speaker 1: even start to well, you know, you need to see
Speaker 1: what happens if Trump gets four more years and Reagan
Speaker 1: de feed of the Soviet Year Union. I mean, let's
Speaker 1: give let's give Dutch credit where it's due, But come on,
Speaker 1: that's the reality what's happening. So, you know, while we're
Speaker 1: seeing this play out, and it's so obvious and grotesque,
Speaker 1: and the Democrats will say anything, and you know, oh,
Speaker 1: they're complaining about the rules. It's not a fair trial
Speaker 1: in the center. But it wasn't a fair impeachment in
Speaker 1: the House. So why all of a sudden should we
Speaker 1: feel the need to give them what they want when
Speaker 1: they just shoved it on our f when they had
Speaker 1: the votes. You go through all of this, and the
Speaker 1: one piece of comfort that I like to give you,
Speaker 1: or the one piece of solace in this whole process,
Speaker 1: is they're doing this to Trump because he didn't sell out.
Speaker 1: They're doing this to this president because he is delivering
Speaker 1: on promises. He does not bend the knee to the media.
Speaker 1: He does not care what the establishment thinks about him.
Speaker 1: He has kept the faith with those of us who
Speaker 1: have voted for him. That is why they hate him
Speaker 1: so much. And so while we see the hatred playing out,
Speaker 1: we see the animosity, We see this fervent desire to
Speaker 1: tear this president down to just you know, rip his
Speaker 1: presidency to shreds. Remember, as much as we have to
Speaker 1: be vigilant and understand who the enemy is and take
Speaker 1: very seriously that they would remove him from office if
Speaker 1: they could, which fortunately doesn't look like they can. They
Speaker 1: absolutely will do everything they can to defeat him in
Speaker 1: the election coming up this fall. But this is all
Speaker 1: happening because they hate him so much for all the
Speaker 1: reasons we want them to hate him. They hate him
Speaker 1: because he tweets and fights back against the media. They
Speaker 1: hate him because he does not play the game the
Speaker 1: way they want. They hate him because today President Trump
Speaker 1: is speaking to the March for Life, something that previous presidents.
Speaker 1: Marchal Life has been going on for decades. Previous Republican
Speaker 1: presidents did not deign to put on their schedule, presidents
Speaker 1: who said that they were pro life. You've got one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand people who are going to be marching for
Speaker 1: the most clear eyed, morally righteous cause you could find.
Speaker 1: And it is this president, for all of his you know,
Speaker 1: personal shortcomings in his own life whatever, it is this
Speaker 1: president who will speak to the March for Life and
Speaker 1: bring them even further into the American consciousness and perhaps
Speaker 1: more into the mainstream. And the media is going to
Speaker 1: do everything they can to downplay this but this is
Speaker 1: a march of one hundred thousand people that happens every year.
Speaker 1: That's got a very straightforward message. Let's save babies lives,
Speaker 1: very straightforward. President Trump is the one who says I
Speaker 1: will stand with them publicly at their most important event.
Speaker 1: That's why they hate him. That's why Adam Schiff is
Speaker 1: going through all these histrionics. It's why Nancy Pelosi will
Speaker 1: use any trick in her book. It's why the media
Speaker 1: has debased itself. I mean, the mainstream media has gone
Speaker 1: to the ends of the earth already trying to tear
Speaker 1: this guy down because he has done all of the
Speaker 1: things that make them upset that we would want him
Speaker 1: to do. So just remember that this week, as we
Speaker 1: have this Senate trial and we're going through this impeachment process,
Speaker 1: they are impeaching Trump because he kept faith with you
Speaker 1: as a Trump voter. They are impeaching him because he
Speaker 1: didn't sell out and he didn't bend the knee. That
Speaker 1: should make you feel better going into this week, and
Speaker 1: that should make all of us who support what this
Speaker 1: president is doing, especially today as he is speaking to
Speaker 1: the March for Life, That should make us all feel
Speaker 1: a bit of pride and honestly a bit of thanks
Speaker 1: that this is where the country is right now. It
Speaker 1: won't always be this way. There are socialists all over
Speaker 1: the horizon, my friends. Things are going to get ugly,
Speaker 1: and things are going to get worse than they are now.
Speaker 1: It's just a question of when. But for right now,
Speaker 1: this president has kept his promises. He hasn't sold us out,
Speaker 1: and that is the most I've usually said. And I
Speaker 1: would modify perhaps this a little bit that what upsets
Speaker 1: the left the most about Trump or his successes. That
Speaker 1: is true, but it's his successes while doing what he
Speaker 1: promised the base he would do and keeping the faith
Speaker 1: with them, the people that fied conventional political wisdom and
Speaker 1: gave this brash billionaires everybody calls him, you know, three marriages,
Speaker 1: reality TV star, casino magnate, all this stuff you heard
Speaker 1: about him. Gave this guy a chance. He has been
Speaker 1: the fighter that he said he would be. He has
Speaker 1: pushed the policies he said he would push, and he
Speaker 1: has not given an inch to these lib totalitarians that
Speaker 1: want to control everything in your life and do so
Speaker 1: badly and expect you to say thank you, not this guy,
Speaker 1: not Trump, not on his watch. Remember that as they
Speaker 1: give their speeches during the Senate trial about how he
Speaker 1: should be removed. You're in the Freedom Hut. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show podcast. The fact that the president
Speaker 1: only wanted a public announcement and not the investigations to
Speaker 1: actually be conducted, demonstrates that his desire for investigations was
Speaker 1: simply and solely to boost his reelection efforts. There are
Speaker 1: many false premises, excuse me, many false premises that this
Speaker 1: president relies on. I'm sorry that this impeachment relies on
Speaker 1: many false things, including that the investigation, for example, the
Speaker 1: request for it is illegitimate. The request for it is
Speaker 1: not illegitimate. There's plenty of reason to believe that Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden was engaged in some sort of corrupt scheme. There
Speaker 1: are reports to that end. Asking to look into something
Speaker 1: is within the prerogative of the president United States when
Speaker 1: it affects an American interest in a country where we're
Speaker 1: giving money corruption. I'm sorry, it's legitimate. But notice how
Speaker 1: shift skips to this. There are all these conclusions that
Speaker 1: are force fed to the people, all these things that
Speaker 1: you have to buy into for their narrative about impeachment
Speaker 1: of this president to hold together at all. And one
Speaker 1: of them is that now we're being told he didn't
Speaker 1: want the investigations, just wanted an announcement of them, just
Speaker 1: an announcement of an investigation. Does anyone really think that
Speaker 1: that was a game changer for the Trump presidency. But
Speaker 1: let's be realistic for a second. Hillary Clinton was being
Speaker 1: investigated when she was running for president for committing a felony,
Speaker 1: which she did commit, and Democrats still all voted for her.
Speaker 1: Can we just apply some common sense, some reason, some
Speaker 1: understanding of history and preced into this. The big scheme
Speaker 1: here was just to get an announcement of an investigation
Speaker 1: into Hunter Biden. Wouldn't have changed a vote. It's not
Speaker 1: even This is what the Democrats keep doing, though. They
Speaker 1: come up with some elaborate conspiracy that they can't prove,
Speaker 1: whether it's Russia Trump collusion in the election or now
Speaker 1: this Ukraine investigation Hunter Biden thing. They come up with
Speaker 1: this elaborate scheme, they hyperventilate over how damaging it is,
Speaker 1: how dangerous it is, and then they never actually stop
Speaker 1: and think is this even a good plan from the
Speaker 1: perspective of the person putting it for Would it even work.
Speaker 1: I remember being in the Oval office with the President
Speaker 1: and asking him about this. He's like, it's not even
Speaker 1: it's not even a good idea. Russia Trump collusion. Think
Speaker 1: about this. You're gonna have Carter paid, try to do
Speaker 1: some release of DNC emails or Hillary's emails. You don't
Speaker 1: know what's in those emails. You're going to create an
Speaker 1: electronic trail that links you to I mean, if there
Speaker 1: had been collusion, that Trump would have got nailed. You
Speaker 1: have to be a moron to do this right. And
Speaker 1: now they're saying, oh, he only wanted an announcement of
Speaker 1: an investigation because we're not even sure. We're not even
Speaker 1: sure Joe Biden is going to be the nominee. First
Speaker 1: of all, he's going to this great length. They're assuming
Speaker 1: this is all done in bad faith. When what if
Speaker 1: he really thought that there was corruption going on with
Speaker 1: the former vice president and his son, which now there's
Speaker 1: more and more stories about this Biden and that Biden,
Speaker 1: different members of the family getting really rich. All of
Speaker 1: it just influenced pet. But look at the way that
Speaker 1: they covered for Hillary Clinton and her Clinton Foundation, which
Speaker 1: was a global influence peddling scheme done in plain view
Speaker 1: of the public. Yeah, a Russian state bank really paid
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton a half a million dollars for a speech
Speaker 1: because his speech was so good. Sure had nothing to
Speaker 1: do with his wife being Secretary of State. This is
Speaker 1: the center of the swamp. There are a lot of
Speaker 1: people in DC who like being on the boards of
Speaker 1: companies because of who their relatives are. They like, you know,
Speaker 1: because they know this person or that person. They get
Speaker 1: a big speaking engagement, you know, worth fifty or one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars, you know, more than the average average
Speaker 1: American makes in a year. They'll make in a thirty
Speaker 1: minute speech over lunch somewhere nobody remembers. There are a
Speaker 1: lot of people who like this to continue, who don't
Speaker 1: want to see this end. They also don't want anyone
Speaker 1: to start to look into what they have done. I'm
Speaker 1: talking about politicians. I'm talking about hangers on of politicians,
Speaker 1: family members of them. This is the center of the
Speaker 1: stinky swamp. And meanwhile, you have Adam Shift going around
Speaker 1: saying he didn't even want the investigations, he just wanted
Speaker 1: the announcement of them. Would that there's no way that
Speaker 1: that is true. And if that was the perception of
Speaker 1: something people around Trump it's just because they aren't very
Speaker 1: smart themselves, which is also possible because Trump does not
Speaker 1: always pick the best people. Unfortunately, I'm sorry, it's the truth,
Speaker 1: not even close to the best people. But of course
Speaker 1: he would want the investigations because he clearly thought there
Speaker 1: was something up here with Hunter Biden, his son. Because
Speaker 1: anybody would think there's something up with Joe Biden rather
Speaker 1: and his son Hunter. Anybody would think that. So why
Speaker 1: wouldn't Trump think that. Guys making a couple million dollars
Speaker 1: for you know, him and his partner at Seneca whatever
Speaker 1: it's called, the LLC, they had set up a couple
Speaker 1: million dollars to do nothing when they have no credibility
Speaker 1: or expertise whatsoever in the subject matter. Yeah, that looks dirty.
Speaker 1: This is how corruption cases starting all the time. By
Speaker 1: the way, the appearance of corruption is what often leads
Speaker 1: the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to begin an investigation.
Speaker 1: There's more than just the appearance of corruption. In this case,
Speaker 1: it's corrupts the question of is it illegal? But Shift
Speaker 1: says he just wanted the announcement. No, that makes no sense.
Speaker 1: And then you also have to get to even if
Speaker 1: the investigations had happened, Democrats weren't going to abandon Joe
Speaker 1: Biden because of that, and everyone knows it. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. Will Trump get the wall done before reelection?
Speaker 1: This is important. This is not a minor question. This
Speaker 1: is not something that we should just skate past. We
Speaker 1: should be We should remember that one of the primary
Speaker 1: chance heard at Trump rallies, those incredible rallies. Hopefully I'll
Speaker 1: get to one this year. You know, I've never been
Speaker 1: to a Trump rally. Producer Mark never been to one.
Speaker 1: I mean, I feel like I've watched dozens of them
Speaker 1: at this point, but I've never been to one, which
Speaker 1: maybe we should do. You want to go sit up
Speaker 1: and do one at some point. You want me to
Speaker 1: come to one with you? Yeah, of Core, you will
Speaker 1: go to rally if there's one of New York. Probably
Speaker 1: not have to go somewhere, go hang out, Go hang
Speaker 1: out where real Americans live. That sounds like fun instead
Speaker 1: of this this commy cement box his New York City. Somehow,
Speaker 1: I don't think he's going to Madison Square, Parker. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that will be fun, though it would be fun anyway.
Speaker 1: The build the Wall chant was one of the defining,
Speaker 1: one of the defining sounds of the Trump election campaign
Speaker 1: back in twenty sixteen, and if you look at what
Speaker 1: has happened there has been there's a lot of debate
Speaker 1: still over what the likelihood is the president's going to
Speaker 1: manage to get a lot of new wall up. Although
Speaker 1: upgraded wall, I can tell you I've seen it, I've
Speaker 1: been there. Upgraded wall is dramatically different from what is there.
Speaker 1: It does help, it does matter. The old fencing and
Speaker 1: a lot of parts of the border is six feet
Speaker 1: tall corrugated metal that you know you could get over,
Speaker 1: and it doesn't slow you down enough at all to
Speaker 1: allow for arrest. You move across it too quickly in
Speaker 1: too many places. The thirty foot tall fence that has
Speaker 1: been put up in place of that six foot fence,
Speaker 1: about one hundred miles without I think has been done.
Speaker 1: That matters a lot. That helps a lot, and it
Speaker 1: is assisting Border patrol with their with their job. Now
Speaker 1: we're supposed to get hundreds of miles of new wall, new,
Speaker 1: new meaning in areas has never been wall before. We'll
Speaker 1: have to see that's a court battle. There's an issue
Speaker 1: right now. I think there's a judge in Seattle who
Speaker 1: is looking at this right now. All it takes is
Speaker 1: one federal judge who decides that it's not acceptable anymore,
Speaker 1: that the Trump can't that the Trump presidency is doing
Speaker 1: everything that it can to build a wall, and you
Speaker 1: will have a big problem. They'll just put a universal
Speaker 1: injunction in place and you won't be able to do it.
Speaker 1: So I don't know. I don't know if it's going
Speaker 1: to happen or not, but I want to give you
Speaker 1: some updates in the wall. First of all, this got
Speaker 1: very little media coverage. A few When was it two
Speaker 1: days ago? You had an area of the Mexico Guatemalan border.
Speaker 1: Remember that it's a lot of Central American migrants who
Speaker 1: want to make their way through Mexico and then into
Speaker 1: the United States, and they've been claiming asylum and going
Speaker 1: this process. Now we've tightened up the asylum procedures a
Speaker 1: little bit, there's been a drop off as a result.
Speaker 1: But I do think as the weather gets more conducive
Speaker 1: to it, you will see more people in the months ahead,
Speaker 1: probably trying to cross illegally in the United States. But
Speaker 1: there was an area of the US I'm sorry of
Speaker 1: the Mexico Guatemalan border where migrants just overran the soldiers
Speaker 1: there and said, what are you gonna do? Shoot us
Speaker 1: and just we're running across a river that separates the
Speaker 1: two country. So be prepared for this to ramp up again,
Speaker 1: especially in the election year Democrats because of their kids
Speaker 1: in cages rhetoric, and as an aside from this, because
Speaker 1: I've already seen some of this today, Among the dumbest
Speaker 1: and most dishonest talking points you will ever hear is
Speaker 1: when people say Republicans don't care about being pro life
Speaker 1: because they're not pro life for the kids who are
Speaker 1: in cages at the southern border. The kids are being
Speaker 1: held in temporary detention facilities for like twenty four hours
Speaker 1: only a moron compares that to killing a baby in
Speaker 1: the womb. That baby's not gone for twenty four hours,
Speaker 1: gone forever. I don't know, but you'll hear this. This
Speaker 1: is also like the dodge you'll hear from some members
Speaker 1: of the clergy, including Catholic clergy, who I feel a
Speaker 1: particular animosity toward when they stray from the tenets of
Speaker 1: their own faith and try to give these you know,
Speaker 1: these socialist totalitarians at MSNBC and CNN, somebody in a
Speaker 1: Roman collar to give them some greater credibility for their
Speaker 1: schemes of state control and redistribution of wealth and oh yeah,
Speaker 1: and being pro choice and you know all these other things.
Speaker 1: You'll hear them say, well, I'm not just pro life
Speaker 1: in the womb. I'm you know, as a democrat. I'm
Speaker 1: pro life for all phases of life. The stupidest stuff.
Speaker 1: I mean, people are so gross with how they talk
Speaker 1: about this. There's nothing to do with anything. I mean,
Speaker 1: imagine if I was walking around saying, hey, guys, you
Speaker 1: need to raise money. We need to raise money for
Speaker 1: cancer research, and somebody shows up and goes, well, well
Speaker 1: what about this this you know, shelter for for kittens
Speaker 1: down the street? You know, don't they count two? Why
Speaker 1: do you hate kittens? No, I'm trying to what does
Speaker 1: that have to do with anything. I'm trying to raise
Speaker 1: money to save people's lives with cancer. You're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about something else? What does this mean? But it's just
Speaker 1: it's just a distraction because they can't. They again, they
Speaker 1: can't win the arguments. So what they do is all
Speaker 1: these externalities come into play, and you know you see
Speaker 1: this anyway. It is just remind you'll see this at
Speaker 1: the border when people because you have the March for
Speaker 1: Life going on right now, and I've already seen people
Speaker 1: on social media saying they don't really care about life.
Speaker 1: The only care about life in the womb. Yeah, why
Speaker 1: don't we start there. Let's not allow for the killing
Speaker 1: of life in the womb, and then we can also
Speaker 1: all have conversations about what being pro life for the
Speaker 1: rest of one's life means. It means that you get
Speaker 1: to just come to any country you want and take
Speaker 1: welfare benefits, break the law, break other laws. And does
Speaker 1: this mean the dissolution of the nation state as we
Speaker 1: know it because anyone can just show up and we
Speaker 1: don't have what does it really mean? Democrats on the
Speaker 1: issue of immigration have become an extreme party extreme. They
Speaker 1: are extremists in a few areas, abortion, climate change, immigration,
Speaker 1: increasingly on the issue of you know, the country's finances
Speaker 1: and the economy in general, but they're incremental there. They
Speaker 1: need to achieve more power before they can put in
Speaker 1: a more fully socialist scheme. That's the plan. This is
Speaker 1: really the choice between Biden and Sanders. Isn't a choice
Speaker 1: between a socialist and a free market capitalist. It's a
Speaker 1: choice between a slow socialist and a fast socialist. And
Speaker 1: I don't mean in like a foot race, obviously, but
Speaker 1: you know, somebody that will get us there very rapidly
Speaker 1: versus somebody that will continue the incremental drift towards socialism.
Speaker 1: And the Democratic Party has been engaged in for the
Speaker 1: last well for as long as it's been around the
Speaker 1: last hundred years as it is constituted today, so that
Speaker 1: brings me they know, what are some of the things
Speaker 1: that Democrats say? I mean they obviously they opposed the wall,
Speaker 1: even though everyone will tell you that a wall wall works.
Speaker 1: Rodney Scott I selling producer Mark Rodney Scotts, now they
Speaker 1: had a border patrol. Carla Provost had been had a
Speaker 1: border patrol. I'd done some interviews with Carlo when I
Speaker 1: was in DC. Rodney Scott's the guy who was very
Speaker 1: kind and hosted me when I went down to the
Speaker 1: US border at San Diego between the US and Mexico
Speaker 1: and spend a lot of time with me and walk
Speaker 1: me through all their processes. A great guy, and he's
Speaker 1: now the head of Border Patrol. So you know, Trump
Speaker 1: does get some very good people in some important places,
Speaker 1: and this is one of those. I mean, Rodney Scott's
Speaker 1: a plus guy and he's going to be trying to
Speaker 1: make sure that in this election year we enforce the
Speaker 1: law and that Border Patrol is doing its job and
Speaker 1: not going to have this hands off left wing open
Speaker 1: borders policy that's constantly being advocated. But to really get
Speaker 1: a sense of who these Democrats are on this, you
Speaker 1: can just hear what they say about immigration and about immigrants,
Speaker 1: and that tells you all you really need to know.
Speaker 1: Here is, for example, Joe Biden speaking about DACA recipients,
Speaker 1: play thirteenth place. These kids have come, they've done well.
Speaker 1: Most of these kids is over There's a lot of them.
Speaker 1: And they're not just Hispanic, they're Asian Pacific Islanders as well,
Speaker 1: and they in fact have done very very well. In
Speaker 1: many cases are more Americans than most Americans are because
Speaker 1: they had done well in school. They believe what the
Speaker 1: basic principles that we all share. I think they should
Speaker 1: be in fact fine put on a path to citizenship.
Speaker 1: A path to citizenship. Not even remember back in the
Speaker 1: Gang of Eight Days when he had Marco Rubio, and
Speaker 1: politically he never will he never recovered really for a
Speaker 1: bunch of reasons. But you know, back in the Gang
Speaker 1: of Eight Days, you had all these promises made about
Speaker 1: how amnesty would not lead to citizenship, which obviously also
Speaker 1: means voting for people that are here illegally. And now
Speaker 1: you got Democrats saying, oh, no, no no, no, it's citizenship
Speaker 1: for people DOCA. And if it's citizenship for people under DOCA,
Speaker 1: it'll be for their parents too, It'll be for their families.
Speaker 1: All of a sudden, you know, the one point seven
Speaker 1: million UNDERDCA becomes five million, becomes seven million, becomes it's
Speaker 1: a mass amnesty and they're all citizens. Goodbye, Republican Party.
Speaker 1: Every win another national election in your lifetime. By the way,
Speaker 1: do you think the Democrats aren't aware of that? I
Speaker 1: think they're not seeing this for what it is. Of course,
Speaker 1: look at the look at the scheming and the plotting
Speaker 1: of Pelosi and her and her co conspirators in this
Speaker 1: whole impeachment fiasco. You don't think they're aware of the
Speaker 1: long term demographic implications of a mass amnesty. Of course
Speaker 1: they are. That's what motivates them so much. That's why
Speaker 1: they get so excited about the prospect of this. But
Speaker 1: Joe Biden also says here that doctor recipients are in
Speaker 1: many cases more American than most Americans because they have
Speaker 1: done well in school. What the heck does that mean?
Speaker 1: First of all, can we stop with the like, everybody
Speaker 1: who's cover UNDERDACA is you know, winning like a Westinghouse
Speaker 1: Science Prize, and they're all geniuses and National Merit scholars
Speaker 1: in brilliant and amazing. I'm sure some of them are,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure a lot of them aren't. So I
Speaker 1: hate this game that the media will always do of like,
Speaker 1: look at the people who are here illegally. They're all
Speaker 1: amazing and doing amazing things. And then we say, okay, well,
Speaker 1: what about what about these people covered under DACA who
Speaker 1: are like members of MS thirteen who are literally cutting
Speaker 1: people's hearts out and like amputating limbs and stuff as
Speaker 1: part of their getting activity. Why are you being so
Speaker 1: that's so racist for you to bring that up. But
Speaker 1: there are people that come from other countries and cultures
Speaker 1: who are covered under DAKA, and then they're you know,
Speaker 1: involved in bad things. Well, why do we have we
Speaker 1: can hear about that there's something involved in good things.
Speaker 1: We can't hear about some involving bad things. If they're
Speaker 1: using that everybody in Dhaka is a valedictorian as a
Speaker 1: talking point, so that we would say, okay, fine, I
Speaker 1: guess they all got to be US citizens rewarding their
Speaker 1: parents for breaking the law and a legal activity. That's
Speaker 1: what that is. Right. If if your parents cheat on
Speaker 1: their taxes and your parents give you a new ferrari
Speaker 1: or a maserati, I'd probably go to the maserati if
Speaker 1: money was no object, but just because I think they
Speaker 1: look cool. I guess what when the taxman comes and
Speaker 1: that that maserati whatever, either one that you have, you
Speaker 1: don't get to say, oh no, no, but but my
Speaker 1: parents gave it to me and they cheated on their taxes,
Speaker 1: but it's mine now. No, they would take it from you.
Speaker 1: They would say sorry, ill gotten gains. That principle they're
Speaker 1: saying doesn't apply here. Now. Trump has been willing to
Speaker 1: negotiate about the fate of DACA recipients if there are
Speaker 1: other very important changes made on immigration. That's you know,
Speaker 1: politics is God, I was going to say, politics is
Speaker 1: the art of the possible. It's like, people don't come
Speaker 1: to this radio show to hear such a trite nonsense.
Speaker 1: But there is some negotiation involved in this. You have
Speaker 1: to work within the reality around you. But Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: attitude here, I mean, he's clearly trying to get the
Speaker 1: left wing base and particularly minority and Hispanic voters fired
Speaker 1: up for Joe Biden's candidacy. He can say, they'll say
Speaker 1: things like this, and in fact that the common refrain
Speaker 1: from a left for a long time has been that
Speaker 1: illegal aliens are better than Americans, like they're just better
Speaker 1: people based I mean, there's millions of them, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of Americans. Is a strange thing for American politician
Speaker 1: to say, but this has become culturally acceptable. This is
Speaker 1: a form of virtue signaling. If you say that we're
Speaker 1: lucky to have all the illegal aliens we do because
Speaker 1: they're more hard working, do the jobs Americans won't do,
Speaker 1: get in trouble less with the law. They have this
Speaker 1: all these statistics that they'll cite, which by the way,
Speaker 1: are also usually cherry picked and not true. But that's
Speaker 1: a whole other thing. They always will conflate legal and
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants to get to the conclusions they want about
Speaker 1: quote immigrants. But when you look at illegal aliens and
Speaker 1: you actually look at criminality tied to their illegal status,
Speaker 1: false documents, not paying taxes, etc. Etc. It's a lot
Speaker 1: of lawbreaking going on among the illegal alien community on
Speaker 1: a regular basis, things that would get you and I
Speaker 1: in trouble, but that don't get enforced against the illegal aliens. Also,
Speaker 1: just notice how I call them the legal aliens, because
Speaker 1: that's what it says in federal statute. That is the
Speaker 1: designation for people who are here illegally, it is not undocumented.
Speaker 1: That's an Orwellian, politically loaded attempt to change the way
Speaker 1: we think about a group of people who are in
Speaker 1: violations of the law. You don't want them in violation
Speaker 1: the law. Change the law and change the way they're
Speaker 1: describing the law. Don't expect me just because a bunch
Speaker 1: of morons at CNN will do whatever they're told by
Speaker 1: their social justice overlords. Don't expect me to just change
Speaker 1: the way I speak about it because that's what they do.
Speaker 1: I don't think. So you're in the freedom hunt. This
Speaker 1: is the buck Sexton show podcast, and since we're talking immigration,
Speaker 1: I'm also meant to get to this. There's a story
Speaker 1: earlier this week about the efforts of the administration to
Speaker 1: crack down on birth tourism. As I say, so, this
Speaker 1: is it's pretty straightforward, right. People come here, particularly these days,
Speaker 1: the largest numbers they're seeing people come from China. I
Speaker 1: think people also are coming from Russia, but it's most
Speaker 1: from East Asia. You're having large tens of thousands of
Speaker 1: people come to America explicitly so that they can give
Speaker 1: birth on US soil, which will be paid for, by
Speaker 1: the way, by taxpayers. Oh yeah, you get to pick
Speaker 1: the bill up for that. If you're an American and
Speaker 1: you show up at a hospital and you're gonna pay
Speaker 1: Friends of mine who have had babies, which I have
Speaker 1: not done yet, it's like, I think it costs like
Speaker 1: twenty grand on average. I mean, it's expensive to go
Speaker 1: through the whole process of having a baby if you're
Speaker 1: actually going to pay for the services yourself. So they
Speaker 1: come here and they get to just go to the
Speaker 1: hospital and obviously they don't turn away somebody who's in
Speaker 1: labor or pregnant, so you just get to have the
Speaker 1: baby and then go back to your home country. But oh,
Speaker 1: that's right because of or it's not because of the Constitution.
Speaker 1: Is because of an interpretation of a constitutional amendment that
Speaker 1: has never been tested in the courts about a natural
Speaker 1: about a natural born citizen and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
Speaker 1: right subject to the jury diction thereof is the key
Speaker 1: clause here. But they say that if you're born in
Speaker 1: this country, even if your parents are here illegal and
Speaker 1: you're only here temporarily, you're a US citizen. So people
Speaker 1: game the system. It's exactly what they're doing. They show
Speaker 1: up nine months pregnant, they go to a US hospital,
Speaker 1: they have the baby here, baby gets birth, birth sigarette
Speaker 1: leads to passport right. They then are US citizens, and
Speaker 1: then they'll go back to China, or they'll go back
Speaker 1: to Russia, or they'll go back to wherever. And so
Speaker 1: they live in the other culture, and there's no allegiance
Speaker 1: to America whatsoever. There's no effort whatsoever to be Americanized
Speaker 1: or American. They're foreigners who continue to live in a
Speaker 1: foreign country. But they've just gathered the nice little benefit
Speaker 1: of US citizenship and they get to hold on to
Speaker 1: and then when they want to go to an American school.
Speaker 1: Guess what, you want to go to university in California. Oh,
Speaker 1: you're a US citizen. You're good. Just move there, live
Speaker 1: in that state. All of a sudden, you can be
Speaker 1: somebody who's lived the first eighteen years of his or
Speaker 1: her life in Beijing, and you get to have the taxpayer,
Speaker 1: including federal taxes that goes to all the subsidies for
Speaker 1: not just student I mean all the federal taxpayer backing
Speaker 1: student loans, but then also all the subsidies to go
Speaker 1: directly to these universities, which there's a ton of taxpayer
Speaker 1: dollars that are being funneled into, especially state schools, but
Speaker 1: schools across the board. And you have this option. And
Speaker 1: the Trump administration has instructed under visa and the way
Speaker 1: that you get a visa, you gotta go, You sit down,
Speaker 1: you talk to a consular officer. I mean, I'm not
Speaker 1: I haven't gone through this process myself, so I've only
Speaker 1: read about it. But effectively they can now ask questions about, hey,
Speaker 1: are you just coming to America? Are you just getting
Speaker 1: a visa to go to America to have a baby,
Speaker 1: and can you pay for it? If that's what's going
Speaker 1: on to try to discourage this practice. And of course
Speaker 1: the left and the mainstream media are outraged, and anybody
Speaker 1: would try to discourage this. I mean, they're pretty open
Speaker 1: now about how they want America to get scammed. I mean,
Speaker 1: they want the United States to be scammed as long
Speaker 1: as it's being scammed by foreigners who are likely to
Speaker 1: return here and vote Democrat. That's it. No honest person
Speaker 1: says that we have a we have a sound immigration system.
Speaker 1: When somebody from China or any foreign country will show
Speaker 1: up here, get you know, for a couple of weeks,
Speaker 1: give birth here, have a taxpayer, pay for it, go
Speaker 1: back home, and just keep as a kind of option
Speaker 1: value citizenship, full citizenship for that child to be used
Speaker 1: at a later day whenever he or she decides that
Speaker 1: they want to use it. This is the system we have.
Speaker 1: Does anyone really think that's what the foundering fathers had
Speaker 1: in mind? Come here, have a baby, and then all
Speaker 1: they needed to come here as a US citizen. By
Speaker 1: the way, all the welfare metafans. You know that you're
Speaker 1: entitled to all the benefits of voting, all the benefits
Speaker 1: of citizenship. Perhaps never until you're an adult living a
Speaker 1: day in this country. That's the system we have in place.
Speaker 1: Maybe somebody should challenge that. Thanks for listening to The
Speaker 1: Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. I
Speaker 1: was listening to Ross Garber, who's one of our analysts
Speaker 1: at CNN, who has been a lawyer for many impeachment trials,
Speaker 1: and he was saying that there's too much focus on
Speaker 1: the facts and the evidence and not enough on the
Speaker 1: emotion and maybe even visual aids. The sound buys, for example,
Speaker 1: have been the most compelling, maybe things like maps of
Speaker 1: Ukraine to really hit home what they're talking about when
Speaker 1: it comes to the dire consequences potential consequences of what
Speaker 1: the president unintentionally sound analysis here from Donna Bash of CNN.
Speaker 1: At CNN has this whole this whole crew of like
Speaker 1: Democrats who kind of take the NPR. We're just going
Speaker 1: to be very mellow and our analysis all the time,
Speaker 1: so it seems like it has more gravity tossed than
Speaker 1: it does. But they're just all pushing the same off.
Speaker 1: They're all Democrats. They never say anything critically interesting. They're
Speaker 1: not particularly learned, but is where it is. But Donna
Speaker 1: bosh there actually stumbled onto some truth I think accidentally.
Speaker 1: First of all, that they're focused so much on the
Speaker 1: facts and not on emotion is laughable. So she's wrong
Speaker 1: on that. She's wrong on that because you had Adam Schiff.
Speaker 1: I mean, this guy, it's like he was auditioning for
Speaker 1: some really self important, pompous Aaron Sorkin movie. I mean
Speaker 1: you could just hear. The whole thing was like straight
Speaker 1: out of the that that TV show, The West Wing
Speaker 1: or The American President with Michael Douglas, you know, oh,
Speaker 1: all these I used to have to watch this stuff
Speaker 1: growing up, and I was like, why is the Democrats
Speaker 1: are always the good guys and there's always some bad guy,
Speaker 1: usually with a Southern action and who's like a Republican
Speaker 1: who's a bad man. And you know, you're like, why
Speaker 1: is this always the entertainment that we get? That's because libs.
Speaker 1: Libs dominate media, libs dominate Hollywood. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you saw this. It turns out that I think it's
Speaker 1: almost one hundred to one in terms of donations for
Speaker 1: professors college professors. I think the Campus Reform Group had
Speaker 1: that out this week. It's some crazy number. Basically, all
Speaker 1: college professors who donate to a political party donate to Democrats.
Speaker 1: I know that's not surprising, but when you see the numbers,
Speaker 1: it's staggering how politically not representative colleges, colleges and universities
Speaker 1: are anyway. So Dona Donna Basher is saying they're focused
Speaker 1: too much on the facts, not the emotion. This thing
Speaker 1: is all emotion for Madam Schiff. That's they're just this
Speaker 1: is all just anti Trump theater. But I do think
Speaker 1: that she's also reacting to the fact that it was
Speaker 1: She says, oh, we need more maps and things like
Speaker 1: such as the Iraqis don't have them, and the maps
Speaker 1: like such as the Iraq some of you will get that.
Speaker 1: And the truth is it's just so boring that they
Speaker 1: know they've law. I mean, every day the ratings are
Speaker 1: going down, less and less people are watching or no,
Speaker 1: fewer and fewer people are watching Boom because we can
Speaker 1: count the number of people. Uh they're they're not watching
Speaker 1: because there's nothing really to see. We already we know
Speaker 1: the argument. They can keep trying to make it a big,
Speaker 1: gaseous speech about how this is the fate of the
Speaker 1: Republic and Adam shifting and then you know, speaking of gashes,
Speaker 1: you know Jerry Nowdler comes up there. You know, the
Speaker 1: whole thing. It's just it's a total mess. When ultimately
Speaker 1: it just doesn't, it just doesn't. It's not gonna fly,
Speaker 1: it's not going to get it done the way they
Speaker 1: want to get it done. And there's some long term
Speaker 1: damage that is being done in this whole process. I mean,
Speaker 1: here's here's Lindsay Graham has been good on this. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, Lindsay Graham has been good on this
Speaker 1: particular topic. When Lindsay's over the target, he does a
Speaker 1: good job and he's over the targeting. This from playlib
Speaker 1: E Looven. Because I've been involved in two impeachment trials,
Speaker 1: this is a second one. I just want to make
Speaker 1: an observation here. What the House Managers were proposing yesterday
Speaker 1: is basically to destroy the institution of the presidents as
Speaker 1: we know it, make it naked when it comes to
Speaker 1: partisan impeachment, not have a venue to go to court
Speaker 1: and litigate privileges that have been exercised by prior presidents.
Speaker 1: When it comes to Donald Trump, they're willing to destroy
Speaker 1: the institution of the office in the name of getting him.
Speaker 1: So bottom line, the Clinton impeachment was conducted by outside council.
Speaker 1: There's none here. Ken Starr spent five years investigating the
Speaker 1: President before we took up the matter in the House.
Speaker 1: The President was allowed to cross examining ken Starr at
Speaker 1: the House Judiciary Committee. He recommended eleven browns for impeachment,
Speaker 1: and President Clinton utilized the course extensively on his behalf.
Speaker 1: He's right. They are attacking their undermining institutions while pretending
Speaker 1: to defend them. This has become a Democrat a Democrat
Speaker 1: recurring theme, and that's what we see happening here. It's
Speaker 1: stunning that they pretend that the best thing that could
Speaker 1: happen for this country right now would be the removal
Speaker 1: of the president. Think about that for a moment. I
Speaker 1: was telling you in the last hour about how one
Speaker 1: of the reasons they hate the president so much here
Speaker 1: is because he is successful and he has also kept
Speaker 1: faith with his base. But let's even think about what
Speaker 1: it would be like the day after the removal of
Speaker 1: President Trump. Thinking about what Trump voters, with the contempt,
Speaker 1: the rightful contempt that they would have for our elections
Speaker 1: for our institutions. A president has never, never, in what
Speaker 1: two hundred and thirty forty some odd years at this point,
Speaker 1: never been removed from office. Presidents have have started wars
Speaker 1: they shouldn't have started. Presidents have put people in internment camps,
Speaker 1: issue and presidents have you know, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: things that have gone on here, folks, president has never
Speaker 1: been removed. You're going to remove this guy for this?
Speaker 1: You think that this is impeachable? Jay Seclo actually in
Speaker 1: some of his better moments, I mean, he raised this
Speaker 1: issue too, But do you think that this is enough
Speaker 1: against this guy? Play clip five? Please? You know, we've
Speaker 1: got something very different than what you're hearing up here.
Speaker 1: You're hearing, you know, video clips of tessimony. We've got
Speaker 1: lawyers that are would be put forward when this when
Speaker 1: our side of the days goes. That represents multiple schools
Speaker 1: of thought on what is and is not in the
Speaker 1: peaceful pensive. They have one thing, encount that the accidents
Speaker 1: allege and the accles of the president do not reach
Speaker 1: that level no matter which school of stout are wanting.
Speaker 1: And we're not afraid to put out both of those
Speaker 1: schools of thought because Our position is you still have
Speaker 1: to meet basic fundamental constitutional obligations, and they have They
Speaker 1: certainly have not. They haven't won. I've not heard or
Speaker 1: seen a single Republican that I know who has been
Speaker 1: even the least swayed by any of this. Because anybody
Speaker 1: who is intelligent understands the politics that are driving all
Speaker 1: of this, and this is an entirely political exercise. They
Speaker 1: can dress it up as much as they want, pretend
Speaker 1: that it's something else, it is not something else, and
Speaker 1: then you just have the there's the institutional realities of this,
Speaker 1: what it does the institution of the president in town. Now,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, Trump does not have the same
Speaker 1: rights at presidents before him have had. But that's that's
Speaker 1: nothing new related right this is Democrats will change any
Speaker 1: rules they want as they go along. But then there's
Speaker 1: also the prospect of the removal of this president and
Speaker 1: what that would do. Given that we're in an election year,
Speaker 1: and I mean the election is not far off. It'll
Speaker 1: be here, We're gonna be sitting here talking to you, producer,
Speaker 1: Mark and I are going to be talking to you
Speaker 1: about the election in very short order as it's about
Speaker 1: to happen, and as it is happening. They really think
Speaker 1: that removing the president in this year, in this way
Speaker 1: is fair. Let's use that word. Let's use the F
Speaker 1: word here. Fair. They think that's fair, fair to the
Speaker 1: American people, fair to the people who voted for Trump,
Speaker 1: and fair to the people who are going to be
Speaker 1: voting in the future. I can't get over that this
Speaker 1: is just a desperation play by Democrats who recognize that
Speaker 1: their electoral prospects, given the field they've put forward, are
Speaker 1: not strong, and they'll do anything to try to rig
Speaker 1: the game in their favor. Lindsey Graham again, he gets it.
Speaker 1: Play clip producer Mark play clip one. I have said consistently,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to grant witness requests by the defense.
Speaker 1: They could have called all of these people if they'd
Speaker 1: wanted them in the House. They denied the president his
Speaker 1: day in court, and I'm not going to legitimize that.
Speaker 1: There are a bunch of people on my side. I
Speaker 1: want to call Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. I want
Speaker 1: to end this thing sooner rather than later. I don't
Speaker 1: want to turn it into a circus. I think Schumer
Speaker 1: said yesterday, we're not willing to trade Joe Biden for anybody,
Speaker 1: I think, I know why. I want the American people
Speaker 1: to pick the next president, not me, And so what
Speaker 1: I think is the best thing to happen is to
Speaker 1: have oversight of Ukrainian potential misconduct and move on to
Speaker 1: the election. I am not going to use my vote
Speaker 1: to extend the trouble. You know, I'm consistent on this
Speaker 1: one because after Benghazi, after Benghazi attack and the lies
Speaker 1: told by the White House under the Obama administration, by
Speaker 1: Susan Rice, by Barack Obama, CNN's efforts to help Obama,
Speaker 1: and the debate against Romney via Candy Crowley, with all
Speaker 1: that going on, I remember saying, and those of you
Speaker 1: who have been with me now for many years watching
Speaker 1: the show, listening to the show, that our chance for
Speaker 1: real accountability went away the day Obama got reelected. It
Speaker 1: was up to the voters to factor in Benghazi and
Speaker 1: the incompetence, the lies, the lack of response when our
Speaker 1: people downrange were in jeopardy. But I said, the moment
Speaker 1: and people who want to hear it, by the way,
Speaker 1: oh we're going to get him in the hearings, I said, no, No,
Speaker 1: with the not with Obama and his people in place
Speaker 1: in the executive branch. No, you're not. You know, we
Speaker 1: want to have the hearings to find out some more
Speaker 1: about what happened. All right, fine, but it was never
Speaker 1: it was never going to move the needle, my friends,
Speaker 1: once Obama got reelected. And that was why going back
Speaker 1: to slow roll, that was why it was so important
Speaker 1: that it wasn't thought of as a terrorist attack. On
Speaker 1: nine to eleven, right before the American people went to
Speaker 1: the voting voting booths, right had to kind of delay delay, Oh,
Speaker 1: we'll get the answers later. We'll get the answers later.
Speaker 1: Once Obama was reelected, there was never going to be
Speaker 1: any accountability for that. But I accepted that that was reality,
Speaker 1: you know, and they know, the left, the Democrats know
Speaker 1: that if Trump gets reelected, a lot of the schemes
Speaker 1: they've put in place won't have borne fruit, won't have
Speaker 1: been successful. But then this is where I get into
Speaker 1: I don't know if I've made this prediction yet on
Speaker 1: this show. I believe that the House of Representatives, if
Speaker 1: it is in Democrat hands, will refuse initially to certify
Speaker 1: the presidential election when Trump wins. I also believe and
Speaker 1: I tweeted this out that the Democrats will impeach Trump
Speaker 1: again in a second term. They'll find an excuse, they'll
Speaker 1: do it again. And this isn't entirely This isn't just
Speaker 1: a political thing that has it's a perception battle. There
Speaker 1: are consequences that are I think being forgotten here. One
Speaker 1: of them is with the Senate tied up. My understanding
Speaker 1: is with the Senate tied up as it is right
Speaker 1: now in this proceeding, you know they're not they're not
Speaker 1: putting judges through. And Trump has been to the best
Speaker 1: president of my lifetime, better than Reagan. Okay, let's be honest,
Speaker 1: better than Reagan on judges. Trump has been the best
Speaker 1: president of my lifetime, putting constitutionalists on the bench, all levels,
Speaker 1: Supreme Court on down. He's a McConnell, give him credit too, lean,
Speaker 1: mean judge, confirming machine, cocaine Mitch gets it done. But
Speaker 1: right now they're being tied up by this whole nonsense
Speaker 1: of the Senate trial. So there are consequences of this.
Speaker 1: But I do believe that the Democrats will refuse to
Speaker 1: certify the election results, and then we'll also impeach the
Speaker 1: president again. We'll be back here again. They they have
Speaker 1: a fever and the only prescription is more Trump impeachment.
Speaker 1: I mean, they can't help themselves. These people are nuts there.
Speaker 1: They've reacted to this whole Trump presidency in in deranged fashion.
Speaker 1: So don't expect that to stop anytime soon. That's going
Speaker 1: to continue. You're in the freedom hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sex and Show podcast. President said in an interview
Speaker 1: yesterday at Davos that he will take a look at
Speaker 1: cutting social Security and other entitlements after the twenty twenty election,
Speaker 1: and that it is, actually, he said, the easiest of
Speaker 1: all things. The President promised that, unlikes other Republicans, he
Speaker 1: wouldn't touch social Security and Medicare. He's already broken that
Speaker 1: promise and gone after Medicare. Now it looks like social
Speaker 1: Security is in the President's crosshairs as well. Even as
Speaker 1: this trial. Even as this important trial continues, Americans should
Speaker 1: hear that the President is casually talking about cutting their
Speaker 1: social security at a Swiss Ski resort with the global
Speaker 1: financial elite. Don't you just love the demagoguery here? You know,
Speaker 1: every president goes to Davos. I mean, I think the
Speaker 1: whole place is pretty much a joke. But you know,
Speaker 1: presidents go and maybe there's some worth while the discussions
Speaker 1: that happened there among world leaders whatever. But Chuck Schumer's
Speaker 1: you know, he wants to take yourselfials security. He's in
Speaker 1: Davos with the global elide. Also once with Chuck Schumer
Speaker 1: having wearing like reading glasses that are down around like
Speaker 1: his upper lip. I mean they're way like his glasses
Speaker 1: are falling off his face all the time. Is this
Speaker 1: like a look is he going for this? Is this
Speaker 1: a new style I'm not aware of. Not that I'm
Speaker 1: some style critic, as Bruce Mark will tell you, but
Speaker 1: I gotta say it just struck me as a little odd.
Speaker 1: But oh, the usual, the usual demagoguery from Democrats about
Speaker 1: dealing with entitlement programs. Look, this is where this is
Speaker 1: where we see if conservatives have the courage of their convictions.
Speaker 1: We are spending too much money as a country. No
Speaker 1: one likes to hear that. This is like boring. I
Speaker 1: feel like everyone just wants, oh, let's get back into
Speaker 1: the fights over Trump. We are structurally unsound in our
Speaker 1: finances as a country. We are twenty two trillion dollars
Speaker 1: in debt. The overwhelm whole. I mean, the overwhelming majority
Speaker 1: of the whole in our finances. Our deficit yearity year
Speaker 1: outcomes from Medicare and somewhat from Social Security. Social Security
Speaker 1: is not that hard to fix. It's going to run
Speaker 1: out of money in twenty thirty something, I think. But
Speaker 1: that's when the trust fund runs up, that's what they say.
Speaker 1: But you'd have to just do You'd have to raise
Speaker 1: the retirement age and do means testing. That's it. People
Speaker 1: don't want to hear that though. They don't want to
Speaker 1: hear that, and a lot of older people vote. As
Speaker 1: we know, so our Republicans are going to follow through
Speaker 1: on this that the answer is probably not. In the meantime,
Speaker 1: I think what you are going to see is a
Speaker 1: continued effort to just have people like Chuck Schumer go
Speaker 1: forward and just lie about this stuff, just be unwilling
Speaker 1: to be truthful with the American people about how problematic
Speaker 1: it is that we have the debt that we have,
Speaker 1: that we are spending this money in this way, and
Speaker 1: that we have to Politicians cannot continue to get votes
Speaker 1: for themselves by giving out benefits to people today that
Speaker 1: future generations have to pay for. That is all that
Speaker 1: is happening. Boomers don't like to hear that. Boomers, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: that is reality. There's a reason why a lot of millennials,
Speaker 1: a lot of people in their late twenties early thirties
Speaker 1: are walking around saying, so, I'm never going to get
Speaker 1: to own a house. It's really hard to build a
Speaker 1: family and get married under the under this circumstances of
Speaker 1: the economy. These days, you've got Obamacare that's already taking
Speaker 1: money from people in the individual market who are healthy
Speaker 1: and young to give to older people who are sicker.
Speaker 1: That's all that. It's just a redistribution scheme from young
Speaker 1: to old. That's what our entitlement system is right now.
Speaker 1: And people say, oh, but I've paid into my whole life. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but you're taking out twice what you put in. That
Speaker 1: doesn't work. That's what medicare is. It doesn't work. I mean,
Speaker 1: this would be you know, you get back from the bank.
Speaker 1: Would you put into the bank? You know, with interest,
Speaker 1: you don't get back from the bank twice, would you
Speaker 1: put in because somebody told you that that's what you're
Speaker 1: going to get, and that's the system that we have.
Speaker 1: So Schumer knows that this is very This is a
Speaker 1: highly effective plan to just attack Trump on this issue.
Speaker 1: But I think bad news for America. But good news
Speaker 1: for Trump is that he's not gonna do He's gonna
Speaker 1: back off with us. Nobody will touch entitlement's folks. I'm
Speaker 1: here to tell you no one's going to touch him
Speaker 1: until we all face a lot of economic pain. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to the bus seton show podcasts. Remember to
Speaker 1: subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. All right, it's our three here of
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton show Man If Friday is flying by,
Speaker 1: which is very exciting for me. What's also very exciting
Speaker 1: is that we can talk about Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren, Oh,
Speaker 1: she could walk in any moment, Buck, Why are you
Speaker 1: making fun of me on your show? I just want
Speaker 1: to help the people. I'm only worth about twelve million,
Speaker 1: so I want to make sure the rich pay more
Speaker 1: in taxes and pruson Mark likes to say that she
Speaker 1: just gives out free stuff. So if we ever do
Speaker 1: bring her in for an interview, how much you gonna
Speaker 1: ask you for a producer, Mark, do you think you
Speaker 1: can get from Lizeth warrens I'm not a greedy person,
Speaker 1: maybe like one hundred bucks something like that, Hunt, but
Speaker 1: I mean doesn't sure should have just carried barrels of
Speaker 1: cash around with her to give out. Andrew Yang wants
Speaker 1: to give everyone a thousand a month though, I like
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. But he would say, you only get one
Speaker 1: day's worth, probably, which is what's a what's one day
Speaker 1: of a thousand thirty bucks? Yeah, roughly take any free money.
Speaker 1: That's probably a good point. Yeah, I want that Yang.
Speaker 1: I want that Yang cash, that UBI Universal Basic Income
Speaker 1: Yank cash. He's worth a lot more than twelve million dollars.
Speaker 1: Oh he's rich, isn't he. I thought that was this
Speaker 1: Zilicon Valley guy. I actually know what he's worth. We
Speaker 1: should find that out. I know Lize Warren's worth six
Speaker 1: to twelve million, but you know he's not worth six
Speaker 1: or twelve million dollars. The guy who went up to
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren and said, hey, I got I got a
Speaker 1: question for you. Um So I really struggled and really
Speaker 1: worked hard and worked two jobs and did everything I
Speaker 1: couldn't pay off my daughter's student loans, and we're paid off.
Speaker 1: But you're telling me that I could have just like
Speaker 1: gone out and got a new car and done whatever
Speaker 1: I want, done whatever I wanted, And then you would
Speaker 1: just say, well, for the people that still have loans,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna buy your vote by having the taxpayer come
Speaker 1: in and give the money necessary for to pay off
Speaker 1: these owns. Producer Mark, would you please let's hear from
Speaker 1: this gentleman. Clip fourteen at questions my daughter money money,
Speaker 1: so you're gonna pay for feelings? Didn't say any money
Speaker 1: one knows of us did the right thing. My money
Speaker 1: had fun by hard little vacations. I see he made
Speaker 1: more than idea. But I worked in the double shield
Speaker 1: before he actually large, you're laughing. He tell those guys
Speaker 1: actually upset, and he clearly has personal, uh you know,
Speaker 1: as this personal experience of having worked very hard to
Speaker 1: pay off loans. And then turns around and then you know,
Speaker 1: he turns around and he's being told by Lizabeth Warren, Oh,
Speaker 1: you know, well, if you've got two loans, work so
Speaker 1: make them disappear or gonna make them go away, because
Speaker 1: that's the right thing because the millionaires and you know,
Speaker 1: she gets that higher register when she starts yelling and
Speaker 1: go oh my gosh, make it stop. Hello. It's not
Speaker 1: that it's not quite Hillary bad, but the millionaires and
Speaker 1: the billionaires gonna pay more in taxes. That's not gonna
Speaker 1: not gonna cut it. But yeah, you gotta over a
Speaker 1: trillion dollars or student loan debt, and she's gonna just
Speaker 1: make it a trillion trillion with a chief. Folks, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of money gonna wipe it away for everybody
Speaker 1: who makes less than fifty k a year. I think
Speaker 1: it is up to fifty k and debt if you
Speaker 1: make less than one hundred thousand a year or something
Speaker 1: like that. And it does raise a race of very
Speaker 1: interesting question. I know people who and I remember this.
Speaker 1: So I went to this Jesuit scholarship school in New
Speaker 1: York called Regis. It's a very good place, and you
Speaker 1: go for free. So I went to high school on
Speaker 1: a full ride, a full scholarship to a private school,
Speaker 1: but didn't pay a dollar to go. And there are
Speaker 1: a lot of kids who are my classmates who had
Speaker 1: to make the decision as to whether they would go.
Speaker 1: I remember one student in particularly, a friend of mine.
Speaker 1: It was he got into Harvard. He got into UVA
Speaker 1: UVA offered him a full ride Harvard. And this is
Speaker 1: before Harvard. Now, now Harvard is need blind, so you
Speaker 1: can actually go and if you qualify your your you
Speaker 1: don't pay. But this is before that. This is you know,
Speaker 1: I'm old. This was a long time ago, and Harvard
Speaker 1: was going to be roughly, you know, forty five fifty
Speaker 1: k a year. This is back in the late nineties.
Speaker 1: And the guy chose to go to Harvard and his family,
Speaker 1: you know, had to try to come up with a
Speaker 1: way to help him do that, and he took out
Speaker 1: loans and had to pay them off, and I think
Speaker 1: he's paid them all off. Now he went to work,
Speaker 1: and I think as an investment banker, no surprise there
Speaker 1: a point of her being. This was a decision that
Speaker 1: millions and millions of people have had to make. I
Speaker 1: just spoke to somebody recently who made the decision to
Speaker 1: go to a law school at a state school as
Speaker 1: opposed to go and to a considered a higher ranked
Speaker 1: a private institution for law school because of all the
Speaker 1: money that he got to go to that school. And
Speaker 1: you ask, okay, well, these are decisions people make based
Speaker 1: on the economic realities of the time. Now we're just
Speaker 1: gonna come along and just sweep away the debts of
Speaker 1: how is that fair for someone? There are people in
Speaker 1: this country right now who will have paid off their
Speaker 1: student loans this year. They'll be there. I don't know
Speaker 1: how many there are, but there'll be people that make
Speaker 1: their last payment this year. And someone will have been
Speaker 1: paying off loans for years and years, maybe decades, And
Speaker 1: if Elizabeth warrewins the presidency, other people are just gonna
Speaker 1: get fifty k wiped away, just boop, you don't have
Speaker 1: to pay it anymore. How is that fair? Do the
Speaker 1: Democrats have an answer for this? And I have a
Speaker 1: different question as well. Okay, maybe I didn't take out
Speaker 1: you know, maybe I didn't take out student loans, but
Speaker 1: maybe I ran up credit card debt because I paid
Speaker 1: I paid for my education, but I also then had
Speaker 1: to make different, you know, economic choices elsewhere in my life.
Speaker 1: So let's say I've got twenty thousand dollars of credit
Speaker 1: card debt, which is really scary, by the way, because
Speaker 1: a lot of credit card is the APR, and that
Speaker 1: it's going to be about twenty five thirty percent. I
Speaker 1: think I think the APR and my credit card if
Speaker 1: it goes along is like thirty almost. It's crazy. That's
Speaker 1: every year, just bloop. They're just taking money from you, right,
Speaker 1: so can I can then I apply and say, hey,
Speaker 1: well hold on, I don't have student loan debt. I
Speaker 1: have other debt. But I went to college and because
Speaker 1: I had to, you know, I didn't want to have
Speaker 1: non dischargeable student loan debt, so I had to make
Speaker 1: other Do you get those debts wiped away? Why not? People?
Speaker 1: Is it less? You know, is it less necessary to
Speaker 1: have gas in your car and food on your table
Speaker 1: than it is that you went to get a four
Speaker 1: year degree somewhere or in a graduate degree. Why does
Speaker 1: Elizath Warren get to do this? And remember she's not saying, oh,
Speaker 1: we're just going to go through the Congress. She's claiming
Speaker 1: that she's just gonna direct if she becomes president. This
Speaker 1: is just a giveaway, folks, and giveaway to millions of voters.
Speaker 1: It's a buying them off with taxpayer of dollars. She
Speaker 1: is claiming that she will just tell the Secretary of
Speaker 1: Education under her presidency to modify the loans so you
Speaker 1: don't have to pay them anymore. This is very similar
Speaker 1: in theory to what Democrats in the past have done,
Speaker 1: including Barack Obama, with using prosecutorial discretion as a means
Speaker 1: of getting around with law. Actually is so what they'll
Speaker 1: say is, oh, we're not enforcing a de facto amnesty
Speaker 1: on immigration, for example, We're just not going to deport
Speaker 1: people that fall into the following categories under our prosecutorial discretion.
Speaker 1: I am also somebody who has been and I'm truthful
Speaker 1: about this always. I'm always truthful with you. I've been
Speaker 1: favorable toward the legalization of marijuana in the past, but
Speaker 1: it should happen at the federal level. This state by
Speaker 1: state thing, this isn't really the way it's supposed to go.
Speaker 1: The federal government still has it on the books that
Speaker 1: it's illegal, and so by giving this wink and nod
Speaker 1: system to states to say, well, we're going to kind
Speaker 1: of let you do it in your state, even though
Speaker 1: that's not what the law says, that's lawlessness, folks. It's
Speaker 1: not good. The federal government or the federal legislature should
Speaker 1: take action and say, Okay, we're gonna we're going to
Speaker 1: leave this to the states and take marijuana off the
Speaker 1: Controlled Substance Act schedule one. I believe it is they
Speaker 1: should do that because that would be a more lawful
Speaker 1: approach to this instead of what they're doing. So Warren
Speaker 1: is just saying that she'll tell the Secretary of Education
Speaker 1: that these loans should go away. But you know she
Speaker 1: had no answer for this guy whatsoever. And because the
Speaker 1: real answer is political expediency. The student loan issue is
Speaker 1: just a it's a giveaway. It's just okay, we're gonna
Speaker 1: we're gonna pay off people who are going to vote
Speaker 1: for this platform. Notice, you know President Trump didn't come
Speaker 1: into office saying I'm gonna wipe away a trillion dollars
Speaker 1: of student loan debt just because this is a Democrat plan.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the equivalent of that person who
Speaker 1: runs for student council on high school and is like
Speaker 1: shown up with with cookies. By the way, speaking of which,
Speaker 1: producer Mark who showed up with a warm donut for
Speaker 1: you today, who showed up with a warm donut for
Speaker 1: producing you? You did? That's right, thank you? And was
Speaker 1: it was sinnamon and you enjoyed it. Yeah, it tasted
Speaker 1: like French coast. There we go. Yeah, that's actually is
Speaker 1: from my brothers company. Which is called Susie's so O
Speaker 1: o z y S. They have fantastic gluten free baked goods,
Speaker 1: muffins and donuts and soon to be bred and I
Speaker 1: eat one every morning, and so I wanted to bring
Speaker 1: one in from my friend, producer Mark today, and that's
Speaker 1: what I did. Yeah, if you didn't tell me it
Speaker 1: was gluten free, I wouldn't have known. I mean, you
Speaker 1: were eating it right, well, that would have been yeah,
Speaker 1: really away, that's really yolo stuff for me to just
Speaker 1: be like, I'm eating gluten today, that's not good. He's
Speaker 1: running running in and out during the show. Yeah, that
Speaker 1: would not be fun for anyone. But so you know,
Speaker 1: we brought in some sometime. I'm glad that you liked it.
Speaker 1: I could actually tell he actually ate it, folks. It
Speaker 1: was They're delicious. I mean, it's fantastic. But people sometimes
Speaker 1: have to try gluten free products to understand how good
Speaker 1: they can really be. U. But yeah, I know Susie's
Speaker 1: my brother's company. It's a great They do really good stuff.
Speaker 1: So I was thinking of warm. Oh but if I
Speaker 1: showed up with warm donuts for everybody in my student
Speaker 1: you know, a student council election, they might vote for me,
Speaker 1: but I'm kind of bribing them, right, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is essentially a taxpayer funded bribe va Elizabeth Warren to
Speaker 1: all of the people who will have their student loans
Speaker 1: modified so that she can she can be the next
Speaker 1: president the United States. This is not good. It's not
Speaker 1: the way it's supposed to go. I do not approve
Speaker 1: of this, my friends, And she does not have an
Speaker 1: answer for the question why is it that this is
Speaker 1: If this is an issue of fairness, why is it
Speaker 1: fair that the people who did the right thing and
Speaker 1: paid off their loans all of a sudden now that
Speaker 1: it was a really a wasted effort, that was money
Speaker 1: that should have been put toward other things in their lives.
Speaker 1: All it took was Elizabeth Warren to come forward and
Speaker 1: be become president. Well, I'm seeing a lot of people
Speaker 1: that I know think that it is going to be Warren.
Speaker 1: I've seen that this has been happened in the past,
Speaker 1: but I've seen a surge of people saying that, you know,
Speaker 1: this is the We're going to see this play out
Speaker 1: in Iowa, New Hampshire. But they really think that it's
Speaker 1: gonna end up being Warren. I know, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know. If I don't know, nobody really knows
Speaker 1: where this is going to go and how this is
Speaker 1: gonna shake out. But Warren is every bit on p
Speaker 1: Let's see, Warren is really every bit as bad as
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders. There's really not much of a difference between them.
Speaker 1: She's a socialist, folks, She's a socialist. She's just one
Speaker 1: that seems a little more polished and areudite than the
Speaker 1: kind of crazy crazy Bernie running around. But making no
Speaker 1: mistake about it, I mean, that would be a really
Speaker 1: really bad path for America to go down if she
Speaker 1: were to become the president United States. And I think
Speaker 1: that it's a very realistic possibility. And things like student
Speaker 1: loans and raising the minimum wage, these are areas where
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter how many studies we show, it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter if we win the argument. People like this stuff.
Speaker 1: They like the idea of debt, of student debt forgiveness.
Speaker 1: They like the idea of raising the national minimum wage
Speaker 1: so that it becomes fifteen dollars an hour. They like
Speaker 1: these things, and Warren is pretty pretty slick with all
Speaker 1: of it. And then I'm also just still in utter
Speaker 1: amazement that after her debacle of oh yeah, I'm Native American,
Speaker 1: I'm one one twenty fourth Native American. That she's even
Speaker 1: a serious contender after that, you almost have to respect
Speaker 1: how shameless she has been since that, but really how
Speaker 1: shameless she's been all along. I mean, it takes a
Speaker 1: certain determination and a certain junie qua to go through
Speaker 1: life as a fake, and you go through your professional
Speaker 1: life as an adult as a fake Native American. That's
Speaker 1: a that's a challenging thing to pull off, and she has.
Speaker 1: I mean, you got to be a little delusional, very dishonest,
Speaker 1: but she is those things and more. Friends, So don't
Speaker 1: count her out for the election, and we'll see what
Speaker 1: ends up happening with this student debt forgiveness situation. You're
Speaker 1: in the freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: All right. I really think that the Drudge Report is
Speaker 1: going overboard here to try to get her. Everybody really
Speaker 1: scared about coronavirus. Um, you know you've got now there's
Speaker 1: a case in Chicago. Drudge Report, I see says here,
Speaker 1: and you got all these different states on alert. I
Speaker 1: really don't think, um, I really don't think that this
Speaker 1: is going to be something that turns into a pandemic.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but I do know that we've had
Speaker 1: all these different scares in the past for you know,
Speaker 1: H one N one, you know, bird flu, swine, flew
Speaker 1: all these different flu strains, and as I said, the
Speaker 1: flu kills thousands of people every year. So the flu
Speaker 1: is I mean, I was gonna say, nothing to sneeze
Speaker 1: at that's terrible, but you know, sorry, that's the only
Speaker 1: that came to my mind. But I mean, the flu
Speaker 1: is a serious, serious business. Um, did you like that
Speaker 1: was something? It is something to sneeze at. Actually that's
Speaker 1: a that's a good point. But everyone needs a calm
Speaker 1: down a little bit. Is it's gonna be It's gonna
Speaker 1: be okay, I think will be all right. Um, there's
Speaker 1: quarantines in China, but you know, China quarantines people for
Speaker 1: a whole lot of things. And and I've got to say, um,
Speaker 1: the one thing about this that has gotten a lot
Speaker 1: of attention for me is did you see this prucer
Speaker 1: mark that they think that it may be a result
Speaker 1: of people eating bat soup. And there's a total of
Speaker 1: animals too. There's circulating that they're people in the world
Speaker 1: who will have a bat effectively in their soup like
Speaker 1: an action. You can see it's a bat as like
Speaker 1: part of the whole thing, and they eat the bat
Speaker 1: and the broth that is surrounding the bat. I will
Speaker 1: tell you. I hear that it tastes like rat, which
Speaker 1: taste like lizard, which tastes like chicken. You ever had rack, No,
Speaker 1: I'm totally making this up. I have no idea. That's
Speaker 1: a totally false tha. That was absolutely fake news. But
Speaker 1: I gotta say, if you're telling me about an animal
Speaker 1: that I have to eat, not including insects, an animal
Speaker 1: that I have to eat, and you have to have
Speaker 1: the whole animal in the thing that you're eating, that
Speaker 1: would be like top ten least Yeah, you know, top
Speaker 1: ten like least exciting things for me. Some weird things
Speaker 1: in Asian countries. I'm familiar. I know you've been there. No,
Speaker 1: but I mean, like I know that there's some there's
Speaker 1: some stuff that gets eaten. I mean I thought I
Speaker 1: was pretty badass because I ate crickets in Mexico, but
Speaker 1: that's not that's like like an American thing. It's becoming.
Speaker 1: I know, there's like crushed cricket pro seatle Mariners are
Speaker 1: famous for that. Now toasted crickets. And then that's one
Speaker 1: of the things they have in the ballpark. You're kidding,
Speaker 1: not kidding, they say, in an American Baseball stadium, they
Speaker 1: served toasts every year. They have like a Major League
Speaker 1: Baseball like food thing. They've view an NYC and that's
Speaker 1: the thing the Marinders send. That's great. I did not
Speaker 1: know that. Yeah, that's crazy. But how okay, Now this
Speaker 1: is the question. I'll ask you how much for bat soup?
Speaker 1: How much would I have? I mean cash on the barrel,
Speaker 1: wounds of money, and but you and you're taking a
Speaker 1: risk of getting coronavirus. There's no amount of money. I'm
Speaker 1: not risking my life for any amount of money. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but like I mean, come on, I'm sure a lot
Speaker 1: of people have bats soup and are just fine after,
Speaker 1: which is fine after Yeah, it seems like that it's
Speaker 1: a delicacy. Yeah. No, I have thanks to live for,
Speaker 1: you know, wife, eventually kids. Yeah, not happening. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: like the scene in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,
Speaker 1: which I think is the lesser of the three real
Speaker 1: Indiana Jones movies. You know, some people think it's the best.
Speaker 1: I think it's probably the worst. I think the first
Speaker 1: one is the best, and then the last crusade probably
Speaker 1: comes after that one. But when they see sees all them,
Speaker 1: she was such pretty birds, and he's like, they're vampire bats,
Speaker 1: and it's like, oh, vampire bats are kind of scary. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't go to eat them, that's for sure. Yeah,
Speaker 1: bats are among the creepy and there's a reason why Dracula.
Speaker 1: It's like bats, rats, wolves, wolves are cool, but like
Speaker 1: they can be scary. Obviously cool looking, Yeah you're looking.
Speaker 1: They're scared dogs. Yeah, you wouldn't want to get too
Speaker 1: close to one. But yeah, I know bats are like
Speaker 1: very They're just above tarantulas and snakes and scorpions for me.
Speaker 1: In the creepiness fact, there's a reason none of those
Speaker 1: animals heard us. Yeah, and it's interesting to me that
Speaker 1: this is what people are now saying, is how this
Speaker 1: outbreak may have started. I'm just I'm just gonna put
Speaker 1: this out there. Maybe we should think twice about bat
Speaker 1: soup as a thing. You think, yeah, yeah, but then again,
Speaker 1: there are also parts of the world. This is a
Speaker 1: thing that you know, in the in the global illegal
Speaker 1: global animal trade. There are people that will they want
Speaker 1: um rhinoceros horn for their soup because there are these
Speaker 1: stories that that'll make you it's just keratin, it's what
Speaker 1: your fingernails are made out of. But there's this belief
Speaker 1: in some indigenous cultures that that'll make you a particularly
Speaker 1: shall we say, a particularly manly man. And so that's
Speaker 1: been part of the rhinoceros horn trade. That's why they
Speaker 1: kill rhinos so they can use the horn for this
Speaker 1: like powder that they'll put in soups and things. They
Speaker 1: were they're very endangered. Yeah, they're not totally extinct, and
Speaker 1: I think the I forget if it's the white of
Speaker 1: the black rhinoceros is one of the most one of
Speaker 1: the most endangered animals. Is a very illegal thing, to
Speaker 1: be highly illegal thing, but people still really believe it's
Speaker 1: There's also they also take a part of it, which
Speaker 1: will not talk about it ever. They take a part
Speaker 1: of a tiger and use it for a soup, which
Speaker 1: they also believe is for virility. You know, people eat
Speaker 1: that same part of a bull like as a delicacy.
Speaker 1: I mean, have you ever had a Rocky Mountain oyster? No?
Speaker 1: But I will tell you that bulls, you know their food,
Speaker 1: Tiger is not food. We're tiger food. Bulls are you know,
Speaker 1: steer or food as far as I'm concerned. Okay, so
Speaker 1: you can need to By the way, that reminds me
Speaker 1: I have I have a little bit of bragging, a
Speaker 1: little bit of bragging to do about something which I
Speaker 1: want to share with with you and the rest of
Speaker 1: the team. Thanks for listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeart Radio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. So, Bruce and Mark,
Speaker 1: I have my family over for dinner, my parents and
Speaker 1: my sister, and they're adorable, very chubby French bulldog that
Speaker 1: I'm now not allowed to say looks like a baby seal.
Speaker 1: According to my mom she heard that, not allowed to
Speaker 1: say it, so it does not look like a fat
Speaker 1: white seal that just moves its blubber across the tundra. No,
Speaker 1: that is not what the French. I cannot say that. Um,
Speaker 1: but I made them a roast chicken dish. As I
Speaker 1: told you, I'm actually decent in the kitchen. Because of
Speaker 1: my celiac disease, I hard to learn. I did something
Speaker 1: that I've I've had done before, but it's been a
Speaker 1: long time. I did a reverse seer on an American
Speaker 1: Wagu style. I think it was a butcher steak. It's
Speaker 1: a Wagy style butcher steak is zeb I think it's
Speaker 1: called Zabony steak or something like that. I had some
Speaker 1: kind of funky name, but it's ways America expensive. It was,
Speaker 1: it was good, but I made one for myself because
Speaker 1: I wanted to test it out, and of course I
Speaker 1: wanted to be a little bougie with my red meat choice,
Speaker 1: and I did the reverse seer technique. You gotta try.
Speaker 1: This is a game changer. So here's here's all you
Speaker 1: need to know for the reverse seer. And by the way,
Speaker 1: this you will make a steak for yourself and for
Speaker 1: everyone listening. I'm gonna have to make a video of this.
Speaker 1: Someone could see me do it. You will make a
Speaker 1: steak for yourself that is restaurant quality at home without
Speaker 1: having a grill. You know, you know there are other
Speaker 1: things you can do where your steak is gonna be amazing.
Speaker 1: You know this is stovetop of and all you need
Speaker 1: the only things that you need to do this properly. Really,
Speaker 1: I mean, the only sort of additional tool kit cast iron.
Speaker 1: Gotta have a cast iron because that's you're not going
Speaker 1: to get the heat up enough on a and you
Speaker 1: know Lodge. But I would love to get Lodge as
Speaker 1: a sponsor because I have like four Lodge cast iron
Speaker 1: things at home. I got the whole Kid game changes.
Speaker 1: We'll get the sales team on Yeah, we gotta get
Speaker 1: the sales team on that, because Lodge is great. Um,
Speaker 1: but you gotta have a cast iron. And then here's
Speaker 1: what you do. You put the meat in the oven.
Speaker 1: And the thing that everyone skips is you gotta let
Speaker 1: that meat rest get to room temperature. Do not put
Speaker 1: cold red meat in the oven. You gotta get the
Speaker 1: meat to rest to room temperature. And you feel in
Speaker 1: touch it be like, okay, this meat is like it's
Speaker 1: been left out of the you know fridge. Now it's
Speaker 1: time to go in salted as soon as you take
Speaker 1: it out, so the salt will seep in salt and
Speaker 1: pepper liberally, because I remember, you're also going to cook
Speaker 1: some of that off, so you let them meet come
Speaker 1: to liberally. That's right. The only thing I do liberally
Speaker 1: season in my meat. Thank you, producer, Mark correct, And
Speaker 1: so then you put it in the oven two fifty
Speaker 1: and you leave it about depending on how thick. You know,
Speaker 1: this is the only part of it. You gotta sort
Speaker 1: of you know, got a game it out a little bit.
Speaker 1: I would say leave it for thirty minutes and then
Speaker 1: check every five minutes. But you have to have a
Speaker 1: thermometer because otherwise you're not gonna know because it looks terrible.
Speaker 1: When do you do this, Like it looks like your meat,
Speaker 1: Like the meat looks kind of almost like it's like
Speaker 1: a meat loaf. Yeah, exactly, it looks like a meat
Speaker 1: like it's like kind of gray red, like it's not
Speaker 1: really that that appetizing. You stick the thermometer in there.
Speaker 1: You want it for me medium rare, one twenty it's perfect.
Speaker 1: You can go to one twenty five if you're gonna
Speaker 1: be a little you know a little bit more on that,
Speaker 1: and if you go to one thirty year, a whimp.
Speaker 1: But that's okay. It's your choice. It's your meat. And
Speaker 1: then you take it out. You put that lodge cast iron.
Speaker 1: Don't use olive oil because olive oil we're burned. You
Speaker 1: use a higher heat oil. I actually used bacon fat
Speaker 1: that I saved for this purpose, which was amazing bacon
Speaker 1: fat in the lodge cast iron. Wait, I mean turn
Speaker 1: that heat up until you're you get you see smoke
Speaker 1: rising off the path. That's when you're good, and then
Speaker 1: you see her about one minute each side that steak.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you, man choir of angels singing reverse here,
Speaker 1: you will make a perfect if you do it right,
Speaker 1: and it's not hard, it's just you just gotta be
Speaker 1: in the process. Because here's the problem. If you don't
Speaker 1: do it this way. If you do it this way,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have an amazing steak and it's gonna taste
Speaker 1: like something you get at a steakhouse. And pay in
Speaker 1: New York seventy eighty dollars for my mistakes in New
Speaker 1: Yorker are crazy. That's why Jesse Kelly has to buy
Speaker 1: me a steak here because I was right about Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi and I want to make him pay. So steaks,
Speaker 1: you know, can be very expensive if you don't do
Speaker 1: the reverse here and you try to cook on the stove. Thought,
Speaker 1: the problem is you're always trying to guestimate the internal
Speaker 1: temperature of that meat as you're cooking, as you're cooking
Speaker 1: as you're cooking, and if you miss the window, you'll
Speaker 1: overcook it. And obviously if you take it out too soon,
Speaker 1: and you know, you get your stone cold in the center,
Speaker 1: that's gross. Now you've ruined your So it's just a
Speaker 1: lot easier to get the perfect internal temperature of that
Speaker 1: meat cooked to medium rare, which is what civilized people eat,
Speaker 1: the red meat at the biggest problem I have with Trump,
Speaker 1: biggest problem I have with Trump? An you a well
Speaker 1: done guy, well done with ketchup. I don't even know
Speaker 1: what to say about this. I did that when I
Speaker 1: was a kid. I know, well done with ketchup. I mean.
Speaker 1: Other than that, thank you President Trump for saving saving America.
Speaker 1: But we gotta get you started eating. Get your rare meat.
Speaker 1: This is just I mean medium. I would let it go,
Speaker 1: but just well done. It's crazy. So I know people
Speaker 1: their steaks black and blue. Check out. Yeah, I know
Speaker 1: that's a little much for me even but I would say,
Speaker 1: check out producer Mark. When you're gonna cook for missus,
Speaker 1: producer markin there's one problem with that. Well, she does
Speaker 1: not eat red meat. Kes her sick. She's chicken and
Speaker 1: pork and everything else. Okay, she's beef beef mixers. Wow. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: so the focus for yourself when she's gone, dude, go.
Speaker 1: The other thing is that I usually eat steak out.
Speaker 1: I've learned the cuts. This was an expensive cut up.
Speaker 1: But butcher steak, if you can get it somewhere, is
Speaker 1: a great, inexpensive cut usually. It's why they called the
Speaker 1: butcher's butcher steak because usually the butcher keeps it for himself.
Speaker 1: It's inexpensive but really really tasty. Butcher steak is great.
Speaker 1: Skirt steak um, I mean, Ribby is fantastic, But you
Speaker 1: get a dry age Ribby, you're spending you know, even
Speaker 1: for one steak. For one, you're spending twenty twenty five bucks.
Speaker 1: Try age better. I never know. People always say that,
Speaker 1: they say that the locks in more of the flavor,
Speaker 1: you know. I kind of go with it. If it's marketing,
Speaker 1: I don't care because I love red meat, so I
Speaker 1: kind of go for it. But it's more. It's more
Speaker 1: expensive for sure. If I've ever had one. Because it's
Speaker 1: so expensive, I'm like, I'm might as well get the
Speaker 1: regular Ribby. Yeah, I mean it's worth you should try
Speaker 1: and then and then you could compare but I'm telling you, man,
Speaker 1: when you're cooking for yourself, do the reverse here. I
Speaker 1: made it for myself last night. Oh to the M,
Speaker 1: to the G. I'm sure you can do that with
Speaker 1: other things of steak. Yeah, probably like a pork chopper.
Speaker 1: You can do with all all kinds of these things.
Speaker 1: So some good times, and with that, why don't we
Speaker 1: do some roll call if we would, sir. The show
Speaker 1: ain't over yet, folks, keeping every yell. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call, all right, Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: If you want to be in on the action here
Speaker 1: um and again, you can also send us a team Bucket,
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com, which is the company that we work for.
Speaker 1: So that should when that should be pretty easy to remember.
Speaker 1: Let's get to it, zach Uh, here we go, he writes, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: just want to let you know, let proucer Mark know
Speaker 1: that I too use roughly three stirring straws to drink
Speaker 1: my mixed drink. Look at you, you got you got
Speaker 1: a kindred spirit on your excessive straw usage, you environment bacher.
Speaker 1: It's not that abnormal. Yeah, I've never heard of this before.
Speaker 1: I'm learning something new here, So you go three straws.
Speaker 1: It gives you just more more more stirring capability, stirring capability,
Speaker 1: and you know, drinking your drink up to your stirring gauge.
Speaker 1: I just prefer strata, you know, especially with mixed drinks.
Speaker 1: A gilly I solo berate. Okay, all right, we'll check
Speaker 1: it out, fair enough, Adam, Hey Buck, So on the
Speaker 1: new logo, did Prucer Mark talk you into the full
Speaker 1: underwear model photo shoot? Shield? Si? I don't think it's
Speaker 1: producer Marks fall, non't even do. I don't even know
Speaker 1: you did a photo shoot until I saw the pictures. Yeah, yeah, no,
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, artistic rendering. What can I tell you?
Speaker 1: But it is there are some interesting posts you did.
Speaker 1: I mean hopefully they're not all up on the on
Speaker 1: the internet. No yet, No, no, I have them all.
Speaker 1: Oh man, yeah, I just did whatever they told me.
Speaker 1: They're like Buck put on a man, Kenny. I was like,
Speaker 1: let's go for it. Yah, just kidding. That's very awkward
Speaker 1: when a photographer is taking a photo shoot off you. Look,
Speaker 1: I did the wedding engagement photos. It's just like I
Speaker 1: don't want to I don't stand in these positions. Why
Speaker 1: am I yeah. I just also want to be like,
Speaker 1: excuse me, like I'm a model, and I just like
Speaker 1: I can't work on says this pressure because I'm very
Speaker 1: I'm sure you actually did voices very perfect and sensual,
Speaker 1: and I just want you to capture all of my essence. Yeah, yeah, No,
Speaker 1: I'm not the one thing, the one thing in media
Speaker 1: that I'm never particularly comfortable doing is the photo shoot stuff,
Speaker 1: just because I'm like, there's a reason, there's a reason
Speaker 1: that I do radio. So, Andrew, here we go, Hey Buck,
Speaker 1: newly commissioned Marine Corps officer here. I really enjoyed Ben
Speaker 1: wine Garden filling in for you. He's an excellent host,
Speaker 1: very smart and informative. I listened to your daily show
Speaker 1: and it helps passing on my downtime here in training.
Speaker 1: I'd love to hear any stories you might have about
Speaker 1: marines in particularly work with during your time in the CIA.
Speaker 1: Keep up the good work, love the show, Andrew, Andrew,
Speaker 1: thanks so much, man, and also thank you for your service, sir,
Speaker 1: and God bless and I hope all's going well in
Speaker 1: the Cores. I worked with a number of former Marines
Speaker 1: SO guys who were active duty, and some of them
Speaker 1: had been in combat roles, in infantry combat roles, and
Speaker 1: then joined what I was doing the CIA later on,
Speaker 1: And I'm the short version is I just love marines. Man,
Speaker 1: They're awesome. So there were always really fun guys to
Speaker 1: talk to, really good at their jobs. You could trust them,
Speaker 1: you knew they were all in for the mission. So
Speaker 1: nothing nothing but love and good things and good feelings
Speaker 1: about about the Marines that I worked with. You know,
Speaker 1: they always acquitted themselves incredibly well, both professionally and personally.
Speaker 1: I'm a big fan. I'll try to think if I
Speaker 1: have any any specific stories, but the stories I would
Speaker 1: have would be the Marines in doing stuff in CIA
Speaker 1: officer capacity, not as marines, so it'd be a little
Speaker 1: bit different. Be like, hey, man, like did you did
Speaker 1: you manage to change the filter on that coffee machine? Who? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Because with CIA analysts do a lot of coffee drinking. Uh.
Speaker 1: David shields hot whoes as a list is a long one, Shields, ye, buck,
Speaker 1: we need to beat them at their own game. And
Speaker 1: then David writes a lot more David, thank you. I
Speaker 1: can't get to that right now, but there we go.
Speaker 1: Hold on a second, Ruth, Hey, why do you have
Speaker 1: Bloomberg advertisements on your podcast? Producer, Mark, would you actually
Speaker 1: like to handle this one because you know the answer
Speaker 1: to this one. Why do we have Bloomberg advertisements on
Speaker 1: our podcast? So I don't know if it's directly with
Speaker 1: the law, but you can't you know, equal opportunities for
Speaker 1: both sides. So we have to give Bloomberg ads. We
Speaker 1: have to give Trump ads. Yep, it's not up to us, guys.
Speaker 1: The way it is the same thing with like your
Speaker 1: local TV station. They can't just run Republican ads. There's
Speaker 1: FCC stuff that yeah, FCCC and maybe FEC but yeah whatever, Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's there's regulations that come into play. So we if
Speaker 1: we're doing political advertisements on the show as we are,
Speaker 1: you know, pick campaigns can buy space. We got to
Speaker 1: sell the both sides. That's the way it is, and
Speaker 1: that's on the podcast too. I don't control those ads.
Speaker 1: Those are automatically put in. So yeah, I'm sorry, turn
Speaker 1: your radio down for thirty seconds if you really don't
Speaker 1: want to hear it. But they're gonna be there through
Speaker 1: the election. Yep. Um, all right, casey yo, Buck. Why
Speaker 1: do you guys have such difficulty getting your podcast up?
Speaker 1: On iHeart Radio. You guys have about a twenty five
Speaker 1: percent success right with uploading your podcast prior to six
Speaker 1: pm Pacific time? Come on, okay, specific time? Yeah, that
Speaker 1: means nine pm Eastern. No, So I did see this message.
Speaker 1: I was hoping you would read it on air. I
Speaker 1: don't want to automatically just say that's false. But it's
Speaker 1: got to be your phone because I'm all those tweet
Speaker 1: you see from at buck Sex and the Facebook messages
Speaker 1: those are me, and I'm taking the iHeart link an
Speaker 1: hour after I posted, and I'm tweeting it out. So
Speaker 1: if that's around two or three o'clock Eastern time, so
Speaker 1: there's no way it's not up six hours later. That's
Speaker 1: definitely on your phone. Yeah, I mean because I would.
Speaker 1: We also would have we would have thousands of these messages.
Speaker 1: Are not one if this was okay? So okay, Casey,
Speaker 1: it's I think it's my friend. I think it's a
Speaker 1: tech issue with you. But we do appreciate that you
Speaker 1: want the show up sooner, and thank you for that.
Speaker 1: And if you still have a problem, just address it
Speaker 1: to Grouchy Mark and he'll handle it. Julie, Hey Buck
Speaker 1: love the show. It's truly the best one. I just
Speaker 1: want to say that Bill Clinton's impeachment matters so little
Speaker 1: that Hillary Rodham Clinton was a legitimate presidential candidate twice
Speaker 1: and then no one seemed to legitimately care that he
Speaker 1: had a chance of being back in the White House
Speaker 1: in a position of power. Trump's impeachment doesn't matter now,
Speaker 1: and it won't matter to any side of history ever.
Speaker 1: This is all for nothing, And it's almost always appropriate
Speaker 1: to quote Wayne World. So keep it up, shields high, Julie. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you, Julie, We're not worthy. It is. In fact,
Speaker 1: I agree with you that this impeachment thing is gonna
Speaker 1: all be It's gonna be viewed as a whole lot
Speaker 1: of Remember when you said the government shutdowns, and there's
Speaker 1: a lot of theater around that all the government shutdowns,
Speaker 1: and then like it never really shuts down for long
Speaker 1: and then it always goes back to normal and no
Speaker 1: one really cares. This impeachment is not really all that
Speaker 1: much more momentous, I would say, than those government shutdowns.
Speaker 1: I don't think it really I don't think it's going
Speaker 1: to change anything, but it does show you how crazy
Speaker 1: Democrats are. So you gotta remember that the Democrats are
Speaker 1: absolutely nuts, Susan Buck. Is Nancy trying to help Joe
Speaker 1: Biden to the nomination with the delay of the articles
Speaker 1: of impeachment? Why would anyone think the Democratic nomination wouldn't
Speaker 1: be rigged. It's possible, maybe probable, that Biden has to
Speaker 1: win in their view, so that they keep the dark
Speaker 1: secrets and they will be kept in the dark. As Susan,
Speaker 1: I would think Nancy probably is a Biden you know,
Speaker 1: if she had to her pick, I think she probably
Speaker 1: would want Biden to be the nomineel. Though I don't
Speaker 1: know what what Pelosi and Warren's relationship is like. That
Speaker 1: would be interesting. I have no idea. I don't even
Speaker 1: think I've ever heard one talking about the other that
Speaker 1: I can remember in any meaningful way. I think Pelosi's
Speaker 1: probably a Biden supporter, and I don't think that she's
Speaker 1: trying to gain this out to help Biden specifically. I
Speaker 1: think the most important thing Nancy Pelosi is Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: and still being Speaker of the House if she can
Speaker 1: starting next year. At this time, she wants to keep
Speaker 1: her position. Tom Buck, first time writing, long time listener,
Speaker 1: love the show, veteran law enforcement and love the insight
Speaker 1: concerning the big issues Shield sign. Keep up the good work.
Speaker 1: Tom from Minnesota, Thank you, Tom, thank you for keeping
Speaker 1: her streets safe and thanks for writing in to tell
Speaker 1: us some nice things about the show. Producer Mark and I,
Speaker 1: who both work our respective butts off on this show,
Speaker 1: very much appreciate it. So thank you. Thank you for that,
Speaker 1: and let's see what we have here. Next. We have Gina.
Speaker 1: Thanks Buck for reading my comments. I never comment all
Speaker 1: the things I listened to you for I have total
Speaker 1: command of all that is happening. I listened to talk
Speaker 1: talk radio twelve hours a day, literally, so I keep
Speaker 1: it to the off side topics that I seem to
Speaker 1: know a little about myself, my family. Adore you. Keep
Speaker 1: doing what you do, and I'll be there to discuss
Speaker 1: powder wigs and Emo. Gina. Well, Gina, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: And yeah, we had some more notes about EMO. I
Speaker 1: think people said that some of them bands that we
Speaker 1: brought up as EMO were perhaps like pop. Was it pop?
Speaker 1: What was the thing that they called it? Pop punk?
Speaker 1: That's what I was trying to say. Yes, they've gotten
Speaker 1: more poppy over the years, Yes, yes, pop punk. What
Speaker 1: was the last live band producer Mark Saw Oh, it's
Speaker 1: been a while. Probably Coldplay. Really realistically, I like that
Speaker 1: you like cold Play so much because I could picture
Speaker 1: you as the kind of guy that would make fun
Speaker 1: of somebody for liking Coldplay. But you're all about it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you just dig into it. People I've seen the most
Speaker 1: are cold Play in the red Hot Chili Peppers on
Speaker 1: My Chili Peppers are great. What is the best cold
Speaker 1: Play song? I mean, only you only get one yellow yellow,
Speaker 1: all right, yeah, fair enough. Yeah, I have to say
Speaker 1: that that's from Parachutes or was that from the other album?
Speaker 1: You know it was Parachutes. That was early. It was
Speaker 1: like their first thing, that was their first big one. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I remember that. Yeah, look at that, Ryan Buck. Every
Speaker 1: want to hear some technical guests coming on the show
Speaker 1: to talk about the case for mammade climate change. I
Speaker 1: follow many. Some of them are actually the midst of
Speaker 1: a say we're in the midst of a cooling trend
Speaker 1: when the data fraud is accounting for If you're on
Speaker 1: board this, let me know. Send some suggestions, Ryan, please,
Speaker 1: I love getting suggestions. We don't do a lot of
Speaker 1: guests here on the show because I am I guard
Speaker 1: my time with Team Buck jealously. Um, you know, I
Speaker 1: have a lot that I want to say to you
Speaker 1: every day. We don't do a lot of guests as
Speaker 1: a result of that, but I'm happy to review any
Speaker 1: recommendations you have. I'm certainly up for learning new things
Speaker 1: and talking to you about what may work, and so
Speaker 1: by all means, you know, I don't have all the answers,
Speaker 1: just almost all of them, but I don't have all
Speaker 1: of them a lot of them. Please do. Speaking of answers,
Speaker 1: when someone asked a question, Hey, what should I do
Speaker 1: with my weekend? Listen to The Buck Sexton Show. Also
Speaker 1: watch us on Channel two forty eight Pluto TV, the
Speaker 1: first that's the channel that we are on. We have
Speaker 1: new exciting stuff. Dana Lash just joined the channel, which
Speaker 1: is great. We're so happy about that. We've got more
Speaker 1: awesome people coming on board as contributors, building a little
Speaker 1: conservative revolution Digital Baby check it out. Have a great weekend, everybody,
Speaker 1: Shield tie