Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Islamic terrorists murdered hundreds
Speaker 1: with attacks on Easter Sunday. We will give you the
Speaker 1: latest updates about this atrocity and what could be coming next. Also,
Speaker 1: the left has not yet decided that they're going to
Speaker 1: move past trying to use the Mulla Report against President Trump,
Speaker 1: even maybe for impeachment. Will break that down and much
Speaker 1: more coming up on The Buck Sexton Show. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is
Speaker 1: to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Mag no
Speaker 1: mistake American. Ready, you're a great American Again, The Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins. He's a great guy. Now. What was
Speaker 1: supposed to be a joyful Easter Sunday was marred by
Speaker 1: a horrific wave of Islamic radical terror bloodshed. Heartbreaking that
Speaker 1: the country, which it strives hard for peace in recent years,
Speaker 1: has been targeted by these terrorists. We warned the loved
Speaker 1: ones of the victims, some of whom we can confirm
Speaker 1: were indeed US citizens. This is America's fight too. Today,
Speaker 1: our nation grieves with the people of Sri Lanka and
Speaker 1: we stand committed, resolved to confront terrorism together welcome to
Speaker 1: the buck section. Show everybody, I trust and hope that
Speaker 1: you had a joyous Easter weekend with your family and
Speaker 1: joyous Passover feast. But the weekend was marred by what
Speaker 1: happened yesterday where you had multiple attacks in Sri Lanka,
Speaker 1: a large island off the southern tip of India, multiple
Speaker 1: tacks that killed so far two hundred and ninety people,
Speaker 1: injured at least five hundred more people, and specifically went
Speaker 1: after Catholic churches Catholic congregations in Sri Lanka on the
Speaker 1: holiest day of the Christian year, the day of Jesus's Resurrection.
Speaker 1: This is an atrocity that is a reminder of some
Speaker 1: of the darkest days of the war on Terror. It
Speaker 1: is an unfortunate reminder of the fact that Islamic jihadism
Speaker 1: is the single greatest destabilizing violent force on the planet today,
Speaker 1: continues to be the greatest threat to international stability and
Speaker 1: the primary reason for terrorism around the globe. And it
Speaker 1: is not even close. Despite what you will hear from
Speaker 1: many on the left, the world is not in the
Speaker 1: grips of some white nationalist terror surge. Entire countries do
Speaker 1: not stand on the brink of collapse. Are not approaching
Speaker 1: genocide or not in the midst of sectarian bloodshed flooding
Speaker 1: the streets because of white nationalism. Despite what MSNBC and
Speaker 1: CNN and The New York Times and others, what have
Speaker 1: you think, Islamic jihadism is still the greatest threat to
Speaker 1: peace and stability and decent lives for people around the
Speaker 1: world of any ideology that inspires violence. And it's still
Speaker 1: not even close. It's still not even close. Here's just
Speaker 1: some background in case you're wondering why. Why is Sri
Speaker 1: Lanka a country that has had more than its share
Speaker 1: of violence already. Sri Lanka is a mix of different
Speaker 1: religious and ethnic backgrounds and has been in the midst
Speaker 1: of a civil war for decades. It just ended a
Speaker 1: few years ago. The Sinhalis, who are a majority Buddhist,
Speaker 1: felt that the Tamils, who are a majority Hindu, were
Speaker 1: always unfairly favored by the British colonial lords of Sri Lanka. Remember,
Speaker 1: during the British occupation of India, Sri Lanka was also occupied.
Speaker 1: And then when the British left and Sri Lanka became independent,
Speaker 1: you had the sinhalize because they're a majority Buddhist majority,
Speaker 1: they were in charge, and there was all of this
Speaker 1: sectarian jockeying for power and oppression and all these dynamics
Speaker 1: of the anger and resentment of that bread. And then
Speaker 1: you also beneath that have a sizable Muslim minority and
Speaker 1: a sizable Catholic Christian minority. The Liberation Tigers of tamil
Speaker 1: Illam Ltte were a militant group fighting against the Sri
Speaker 1: Lankan government for many, many years. And that's the war
Speaker 1: that just ended recently, just a few years ago. And
Speaker 1: that's one of the very few cases where you had
Speaker 1: non Islamic suicide bombers deployed. Which is why Sri Lanka
Speaker 1: something that I even studied when I was at the
Speaker 1: CIA and before that when I was doing my academic
Speaker 1: putting in my academic time on terrorism and jihadism. Sri
Speaker 1: Lanka is studied because it's where you had suicide bombers
Speaker 1: who were Hindu, suicide bombers who in some cases were Christian,
Speaker 1: because they were fighting a war based on more national
Speaker 1: identity and linguistic and cultural background than on religious identity.
Speaker 1: That also use suicide bombers who were female in Sri Lanka,
Speaker 1: which was a kind of tactical innovation at when it
Speaker 1: was deployed. So there's been a lot of violence in
Speaker 1: Sri Lanka for a long time and it's finally quieted
Speaker 1: down and now you have this horrific mass casualty event.
Speaker 1: This incident clearly obviously on Easter Sunday for maximum psychological
Speaker 1: damage and impact, as well as the prevalence of soft targets.
Speaker 1: A lot of people were gathered together in churches, in hotels.
Speaker 1: There were churches and luxury hotels attacked in what is
Speaker 1: a classic Gee Hottest target set. Now there is a
Speaker 1: Gee Hottest entity in Sri Lanka, but it's considered to
Speaker 1: be small. It's considered to be not one that people
Speaker 1: know about, including even those who are generally up to
Speaker 1: speed on national security issues. This National Taoist Jama is
Speaker 1: the group that has been singled out. And there was
Speaker 1: intelligence that was shared among the Sri Lankan government about
Speaker 1: ten days ago of suicide bombers targeting churches, so that
Speaker 1: somebody clearly knew something and precautions, sufficient precautions. We're not
Speaker 1: taken here, we may have already. Now the head of
Speaker 1: the head of this group has been established. People are
Speaker 1: talking about how we're going to look for links to
Speaker 1: the Islamic state, which I think is a very likely
Speaker 1: scenario here. And you have this dynamic where a jihad
Speaker 1: can pop up anywhere at any time, anywhere where there's
Speaker 1: a radicalized Muslim population in the world. All that you
Speaker 1: need is one group of hardline radicals who decide that
Speaker 1: they're going to engage in something like this and hope
Speaker 1: it they'll be reprisal attacks and that the sectarian divide
Speaker 1: will grow larger and there'll be greater distrust within the
Speaker 1: society and you could have the start of a sectarian
Speaker 1: war and that's all that's all you need. And then
Speaker 1: the jihad is put out all this propaganda for how
Speaker 1: the Muslims are oppressed and it's everything's terrible is happening
Speaker 1: to them. And they didn't they had you know, they
Speaker 1: were completely innocent until this, and people will believe that
Speaker 1: and they'll be all these videos. You'll have Mujahadeen showing up.
Speaker 1: It's all it takes. It's all it takes. Whether the
Speaker 1: cases in Nigeria or Syria, or Eastern Europe and Bosnia,
Speaker 1: you name it. This narrative of you have to come
Speaker 1: aid in a fight, a jihad where your Muslim brothers
Speaker 1: and sisters are under siege. It's not a hard story
Speaker 1: to tell if you're willing to engage in a lot
Speaker 1: of bloodshed and violence to get there. And if there
Speaker 1: is in fact an Islamic state tie here, maybe they've
Speaker 1: decided to expand out the the Dar al Harbor, which
Speaker 1: is the land of war, and include Sri Lanka into
Speaker 1: that fight. Maybe maybe this is a one off that
Speaker 1: does not lead to a whole lot more. But this
Speaker 1: is the kind of attack that would require a large
Speaker 1: scale planning effort, the sophistication of it. Many of the
Speaker 1: bombs went off within very close proximity. The bombs were
Speaker 1: obviously devastating in their efficacy. You did not have a
Speaker 1: lot of suicide bombers who's vested in work or who
Speaker 1: bailed last minute because they did not want to become shahid,
Speaker 1: they did not want to become martyrs. There have been
Speaker 1: some other there have been detonators and other IDs found
Speaker 1: in Sri Lanka that that did not go off. But
Speaker 1: obviously this is a devast dating, mass casualty attack. But
Speaker 1: there's one component of this that I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: to you a little bit about beyond just giving you
Speaker 1: the basics of the national security situation, which given my
Speaker 1: background as a former CIA counter Terrorism Officer CTC, I
Speaker 1: thought that would be worthwhile for this. The media reaction
Speaker 1: to this on Easter Sunday was illuminating. It showed us
Speaker 1: a phenomenon that you and I are aware of, but
Speaker 1: that every time it comes up, it's still very much
Speaker 1: rubs me the wrong way, and that is the way
Speaker 1: that some of the most powerful Democrats in the country.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about an attack that targets Christians versus attacks
Speaker 1: that target non Christians, or rather attacks specifically that target
Speaker 1: Muslims of this kind terrorist attacks, versus a situation like
Speaker 1: this where it was very explicitly and clearly meant to
Speaker 1: kill as many Catholics as many Christians as possible. There
Speaker 1: is a difference, a difference in the word choice, a
Speaker 1: difference in the degree of outrage, a difference in the
Speaker 1: focus that the media has on it. I want to
Speaker 1: break some of that down for you coming up. We
Speaker 1: also have some new information in the ongoing what Next
Speaker 1: post Muller report, so we'll have some of that for you.
Speaker 1: A very high level player has already been subpoenaed by
Speaker 1: the House. So now after two years of the Muller probe,
Speaker 1: it looks like we're going to head into two years
Speaker 1: of redo of the Muller probe by the Democrats in Congress.
Speaker 1: I hope that the Republicans in the Congress are prepared
Speaker 1: for the fist fight that lays ahead. We have a
Speaker 1: lot of show my friends, a lot to get to today,
Speaker 1: so stay tuned, they'll be right back. So the way
Speaker 1: that the Democrats, some of the biggest Democrats out there,
Speaker 1: referred to these horrific terrorist attacks that I have all
Speaker 1: the hallmarks of Jehadas strike, and clearly we're targeting Catholics
Speaker 1: on Easter, as well as some international hotels and places
Speaker 1: where there would be Westerners and Christians. But the attack
Speaker 1: at the churches, which was the primary attacks and killed
Speaker 1: the most people, those are specifically to kill Catholics, they
Speaker 1: kill Christians. And you had tweets from people like Barack
Speaker 1: Obama that's at the following quote. The attacks on tourists
Speaker 1: and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity,
Speaker 1: on a data voted to love, redemption and renewal. We
Speaker 1: pray for the victims who stand with the people of
Speaker 1: Sri Lanka. I mean, look, the end, the end part
Speaker 1: of that is boiler played. And I don't think that
Speaker 1: Barack Obama is bereft of sympathy for the people that
Speaker 1: you know. I'm not taking that opinion or that position,
Speaker 1: but I do think it's a strange thing for him
Speaker 1: to say the attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers and
Speaker 1: the attacks on Catholic churches, Former President Obama, that's what
Speaker 1: this was. This was an attack on Christian churches in
Speaker 1: Sri Lanka by jihadas psychopaths who we can all say
Speaker 1: they don't represent the true Islama or whatever, but they
Speaker 1: are Muslims and they attack these churches. I'm sure it's
Speaker 1: just a matter of time before we hear that the
Speaker 1: real threat in Sri Lanka is Islamophobia. Someone will say it,
Speaker 1: you watch, give it a few days, someone will say,
Speaker 1: the real problem is the Islamophobia that's going to happen.
Speaker 1: But Easter worshipper is a strange thing for Obama to
Speaker 1: say or right, because no, they're Jesus worshippers. They're not
Speaker 1: Easter worshippers. Very strange, and Barack Obama's not somebody who
Speaker 1: does things like put out a tweet after a terrorist
Speaker 1: act like this without thinking it through. Hillary Clinton, on
Speaker 1: this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united
Speaker 1: against hatred and violence. I'm praying for everyone affected by
Speaker 1: today's horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.
Speaker 1: What is this with the Easter worshippers? Why is Hillary
Speaker 1: Clinton also going with the East? How about Christians? Why
Speaker 1: can't we hear why can't we hear Christians? Is that
Speaker 1: is that triggering? Is that upsetting to people? I think
Speaker 1: we owe that to the victims to at least refer
Speaker 1: to them. They were targeted, they were martyred for their faith.
Speaker 1: They were killed in a church celebrating the resurrection of Christ.
Speaker 1: Can we refer to them as Christians? Or no again,
Speaker 1: Hilary Clinton, this Easter worshippers. Have you ever have you
Speaker 1: ever referred to somebody that way? I mean, I was
Speaker 1: at church yesterday. Was I in Easter? I was worshiping
Speaker 1: on Easter? But I don't worship Easter. It's very strange.
Speaker 1: It's almost like there's a messaging effort here. Nancy see
Speaker 1: today's heartbreaking attacks and Sri Lanka come as the country
Speaker 1: has worked hard to build a common future after years
Speaker 1: of war. Our thoughts are with the injured and the
Speaker 1: families of those killed in today's Easter Sunday attacks. No
Speaker 1: mention of Christian Catholic Church, nothing, nothing. Is that an
Speaker 1: accident too? Are we? Are we supposed to believe it?
Speaker 1: That's here's how Hillary Clinton. If you want to compare
Speaker 1: how she responded on her official Twitter account after the
Speaker 1: attack on the mosque in New Zealand. Quote, my heart
Speaker 1: breaks for New Zealand and the global Muslim community. We
Speaker 1: must fight against the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and
Speaker 1: racism in all forms. White supremacist terrorists must be condemned
Speaker 1: by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped. Very
Speaker 1: specific in who was targeted. You know, who are who
Speaker 1: are the victor here? And who are the bad guys?
Speaker 1: Hillary will name them when it's a white supremacist psychopath
Speaker 1: in New Zealand killing Muslims. And fine, right, that's that's
Speaker 1: all true, And she's she's right about you know, white
Speaker 1: supremacist terrorists. Dirt eggs must be fought and destroyed and
Speaker 1: in every way at all times. But I just want
Speaker 1: to know why that same standard doesn't apply when it's
Speaker 1: chieh hottest psychopaths who are blowing up churches on Easter
Speaker 1: full of men, women and children. Mean, there were little
Speaker 1: babies in these churches, There were old people in these churches.
Speaker 1: There were men and women you know who we're looking
Speaker 1: forward to spending the rest of the day with their family,
Speaker 1: with their loved ones. Their lives are taken away, lives
Speaker 1: are ruined when you're talking about an attack like this.
Speaker 1: The hundreds that are wounded, a lot of them aren't
Speaker 1: wounded like they are going to be out of the
Speaker 1: hospital a couple of days. They're wounded like they're missing
Speaker 1: an arm. They might be blind, they might have been
Speaker 1: burned over or you know, thirty or forty percent of
Speaker 1: their body with second or third or third degree burns,
Speaker 1: horrific wounds, life altering wounds. And that's on top of
Speaker 1: the almost three hundred dead. I can't help but read
Speaker 1: through the Democrat politician response to a mass murder of
Speaker 1: Christians by jihadists in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday and
Speaker 1: not feel like there's a little bit of a sterility
Speaker 1: to it. It's you know, yes, this is sad. Violence
Speaker 1: is bad. Violence bad. Okay, thanks Hiller, we know violence bad.
Speaker 1: But why is it that the New Zealand attack it
Speaker 1: was we must stand and fight against the evildoers of
Speaker 1: white supremacy and stand with our Muslim brothers and sisters
Speaker 1: always in solidarity. I'm cool with that. I'm with that.
Speaker 1: I just want to know why that also doesn't apply
Speaker 1: to the other side too. You know what, where where's
Speaker 1: the sense of outrage on behalf of where's this sense
Speaker 1: of solidarity, shoulder to shoulder, shields high with our fellow
Speaker 1: Christians all over the world. Why is it that the
Speaker 1: Democrats have such ease condemning the one and such difficulty
Speaker 1: naming and shaming jihadism? You know, they probably want to
Speaker 1: refer to it as a you know, a radical non
Speaker 1: Islamic faith tradition that sounds Islamic and has Muslims that
Speaker 1: are in it, but they don't really count for some reason.
Speaker 1: They say, what doesn't make It's all babbel, isn't it.
Speaker 1: And there's a reason for this. I've got a little
Speaker 1: more on this, actually, and then we'll switch up topics
Speaker 1: to go to the latest and the Muller probe. So
Speaker 1: stick around team, He's holding the line for America. Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton his back. Here's a taste of the reaction you
Speaker 1: get from democrats from the left in this country after
Speaker 1: a mass casualty attack, after a mass assassination of Christians
Speaker 1: at prayer on Easter Sunday, gathered together in churches in
Speaker 1: Sri Lanka, the Washington Post puts this out not as
Speaker 1: an op ed, but as an as news analysis. So
Speaker 1: with the imprimater impremature of the Washington Post newsroom, and
Speaker 1: what they have here is Sri Lanka church bombings stoke
Speaker 1: far right anger in the West. Oh, isn't this fascinating? So?
Speaker 1: You mean almost three hundred Catholic Christians murdered on the
Speaker 1: holiest day of the year for them, And the Post
Speaker 1: wants people to know that the real problem here, you see,
Speaker 1: is that far right anger in the West now has
Speaker 1: been stirred up by this. Shouldn't everyone be angry about this?
Speaker 1: Shouldn't everyone view this as an outrage against humanity as
Speaker 1: as the most grotesque persecution imaginable of Christians. Two five
Speaker 1: hundred injured. This is what the Washington Post writes, quote
Speaker 1: to some, it was further proof that Christians and many
Speaker 1: parts of the world are under attack. Several churches were
Speaker 1: targeted in Sunday's bombings, along with hotels and a banquet hall.
Speaker 1: At one Catholic church in Nigambo, more than one hundred
Speaker 1: people were killed. The attack took place on Easter, one
Speaker 1: of the most important dates on the Christian calendar. Can
Speaker 1: I just repeat how that paragraph started? To some, it
Speaker 1: was proved that Christians in many parts the world are
Speaker 1: under attack. Is there anyone who is not a complete
Speaker 1: and utter moron who thinks that this is not proof
Speaker 1: that Christians in parts the world they're under attack? Is there?
Speaker 1: You know? One of the dumbest political analysts, actually not
Speaker 1: even at a cable news network, but at a one
Speaker 1: of the other three letter you know, big old school
Speaker 1: news networks and I had a testy exchange once on Twitter.
Speaker 1: He actually ended up blocking me because he thought it
Speaker 1: was laughable when people brought up that Christians in the
Speaker 1: Middle East are persecuted. He thought that was just that
Speaker 1: was foolish, and that the real threat is in the
Speaker 1: Middle East is always to Muslims. I said, well, you're
Speaker 1: you sir, and I won't name him because he's not
Speaker 1: worth being named. Are a moron, and he is. He
Speaker 1: runs political coverage or a political coverage. He's the chief
Speaker 1: political analyst at ABC News. A very stupid and nasty
Speaker 1: person and doesn't know what the heck he's talking about.
Speaker 1: And he got schooled, so he blocked me, as one
Speaker 1: tends to when they come up against me on some
Speaker 1: of these issues. And that's a pretty common elite position
Speaker 1: though that there's no real threat to Christians around the world.
Speaker 1: The only real persecution, possible religious persecution, according to the left,
Speaker 1: involves Islam. Right. That is, the Islamic faith is the
Speaker 1: one that we have to be always protecting. It's the
Speaker 1: second largest faith tradition in the world. Meanwhile, it's not
Speaker 1: really much of a minority faith. It's going to be
Speaker 1: larger than Christianity very soon. But we have to always
Speaker 1: be worried about being too harsh or too mean or
Speaker 1: two Islamophobic or whatever the case may be. And Christians
Speaker 1: can't really be under siege because look at how wealthy
Speaker 1: and dominant the West is, which is the seat of
Speaker 1: Christian civilization. But as we all know, Christianity in the
Speaker 1: West is in decline, We are increasing living in secular societies,
Speaker 1: and Christianity outside the West is in many places under
Speaker 1: constant assault. Christians in Pakistan, Christians in Iraq, Christians in Syria,
Speaker 1: Christians in Nigeria, Christians and go down the list murdered
Speaker 1: for their faith on a fairly regular basis and grotesque
Speaker 1: and graphic fashion. They've had child suicide bombers, Islamic suicide
Speaker 1: bombers in Nigeria deployed and oftentimes young girls to walk
Speaker 1: into crowded Christian churches in Nigeria. How often do you
Speaker 1: see that covered in the news media here? And how
Speaker 1: often do you see the people that are at the
Speaker 1: top of the media and political pyramid on the left
Speaker 1: make a lot of noise about Christian persecution. Why is
Speaker 1: it that when I bring up Christian persecution in the
Speaker 1: Middle East, a lot of people that seem to think
Speaker 1: they know about the Middle East say, well, that's not
Speaker 1: really a problem. Yes it is. There are many people
Speaker 1: that talk about these issues that I think either don't
Speaker 1: know or just quickly forget that Christianity started out as
Speaker 1: a religion of the Near East, that the oldest Christian
Speaker 1: faith traditions, that exist. The oldest churches, the oldest gatherings
Speaker 1: of Christians were in places like Syria and Iraq and
Speaker 1: Turkey and North Africa. But our media elites the same
Speaker 1: ones that know nothing about guns or God. It's amazing
Speaker 1: when they try to write about these things. They don't
Speaker 1: have any of that background, it seems. And if anything,
Speaker 1: there's a kind of sneering contempt for people who say
Speaker 1: that Christianity is under assault, because it is. It's culturally
Speaker 1: under assault in this country, but it is physically and
Speaker 1: from a security, from a life and limb standpoint, under assault.
Speaker 1: And much of the rest of the world. Christians are
Speaker 1: not treated well in China. Christians are obviously not allowed
Speaker 1: in North Korea. I mean, you go down the list
Speaker 1: a lot of countries. And the Washington Post, though, wants
Speaker 1: you to know that there are some people in in
Speaker 1: the West, on the far right, who are angry about
Speaker 1: what happened in Sri Lanka. So that's what we really
Speaker 1: have to worry about. You know, maybe the Post should
Speaker 1: be more concerned about a possible Isis franchise getting its
Speaker 1: start in Sri Lanka and turning that country into a
Speaker 1: hell hole for the next twenty years, because it will
Speaker 1: draw recruits from all over the world, who will think
Speaker 1: that they are fighting for the embattled Muslim minority there,
Speaker 1: just as they do in other countries and in other
Speaker 1: jihads all over the place. I think there are bigger concerns.
Speaker 1: What about just the rise of isis once again as
Speaker 1: an ideology doesn't have to be in Syria. All it
Speaker 1: takes is one country to lose control over a piece
Speaker 1: of its territory and something akin to the Islamic state
Speaker 1: in Syria popping up again. And if it seizes enough
Speaker 1: territory draws enough recruits, we could have quite a problem
Speaker 1: on our hands. The world could have quite a problem
Speaker 1: on its hands. But you see the real problem is Islamophobia.
Speaker 1: The real problem are the right wing extremists who will
Speaker 1: react badly to this jeehottest mass murder of Christians on Easter.
Speaker 1: This is how the left sees the world. I wish
Speaker 1: I could tell you that it was going to change.
Speaker 1: I wish I could claim that they would be more
Speaker 1: rational and more reasonable going forward, more even handed and
Speaker 1: how they approach all this. But ultimately, the left thinks
Speaker 1: of Islam as a non white religion of minorities, predominantly
Speaker 1: non white religion of minorities that must be elevated and protected.
Speaker 1: It is a bulwark against traditional Christianity and the American
Speaker 1: right in this country. They view it as a counterweight,
Speaker 1: to counterbalance to believing conservative Christians, and they think of
Speaker 1: it as a minority religion that therefore falls into the
Speaker 1: same kind of left wing intersectional identity politics of this country. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Islam is the majority of religion in dozens of countries.
Speaker 1: It is the oppressor and not the oppress e in
Speaker 1: many more countries. Then the Democrats like Hillary Clinton seem
Speaker 1: to understand or care to understand. But it's never possible
Speaker 1: for Christianity to be really under assault because look at
Speaker 1: how successful it has been in the West for many people.
Speaker 1: What happened and Notre Dame wasn't just the destruction of
Speaker 1: a blessed symbol and an incredible architectural feed It was
Speaker 1: also a metaphor. I mean, I believe that it wasn't
Speaker 1: an accident, but it was a metaphor for what's happening
Speaker 1: right now in the Western Christian world, that we are
Speaker 1: abandoning something that is central to not just how we
Speaker 1: conduct ourselves day to day, and our culture and our
Speaker 1: sense of ethics and morality, but is central to our
Speaker 1: spiritual health, central to our sense of ourselves as a civilization.
Speaker 1: We are abandoning it. Other faith traditions are not They
Speaker 1: are growing. They are growing in their ambitions as well
Speaker 1: as in their size. Maybe the left should take another
Speaker 1: look at a lot of these countries and see who's
Speaker 1: doing the oppressing. And then then they can come back
Speaker 1: to me and tell me that we should be really
Speaker 1: worried about what a few right wing idiots say on
Speaker 1: Twitter or Facebook here in the West. We'll be right back.
Speaker 1: There was a clear intent to collude with the Russians.
Speaker 1: There was a willingness to receive Russian help. The president
Speaker 1: himself called on the Russians to assist his campaign by
Speaker 1: hacking Hillary Clinton's emails. And if you look at pages
Speaker 1: one eighty to one ninety that discussed that Trump Tower meeting,
Speaker 1: it wasn't that they found a lack of evidence of
Speaker 1: all the things that I talked about. In fact, the
Speaker 1: meeting did take place. In fact, they did offer dirty
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton. In fact, the president's son did say you
Speaker 1: would love to have it. In fact, the president's son
Speaker 1: lied about In fact, there was involved in dictating that lie.
Speaker 1: All the facts I set out are proven, and yet
Speaker 1: nothing was criminal. And also Ship is a liar and
Speaker 1: he's highly highly unethical, dirty player. He ignores the fact
Speaker 1: that the foundational theory of the Muller probe was a lie,
Speaker 1: that President Trump did not in fact conspire with the
Speaker 1: Russians to cheat in the twenty sixteen election. He just
Speaker 1: sort of skips past that. Yet, of all the conclusions
Speaker 1: that one could draw from the reason they released report
Speaker 1: of Robert Muller, the absence of so called Russia collusion
Speaker 1: between Trump, his campaign and the Russian Federation is by far,
Speaker 1: without question, the most important revelation. Although to you and me,
Speaker 1: it's not a revelation. It's just confirmation of what we
Speaker 1: already knew. It is time for reckoning here, my friends.
Speaker 1: Now they've moved on to well, perhaps he did not obstruct,
Speaker 1: but he showed a willingness too obstruct. What does that
Speaker 1: mean if it's in my power to do something? You know,
Speaker 1: if I am standing in a room and I'm going
Speaker 1: to turn the light switch off, I either do or
Speaker 1: I don't. And if I don't try to do it,
Speaker 1: if I merely talk about doing it. You can't get
Speaker 1: me for attempting to do it because I did not
Speaker 1: attempt to do it. The president could have fired Komey.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I could have fired Mueller. He did fire
Speaker 1: Komy at any time. It did not happen. There was
Speaker 1: no obstruction and there was no underlying crime. Democrats are
Speaker 1: desperate and they are disgraceful in this whole process. But
Speaker 1: we can't expect Adam Shift to be any better than this.
Speaker 1: In fact, the media and Shift, instead of taking this
Speaker 1: as a learning experience as a cautionary tale, now we
Speaker 1: see the anti Trump opposition has just shifted, shifted the
Speaker 1: outrage narrative. It's not collusion that worries them now now
Speaker 1: it's obstruction. While Special Counsel Mueller didn't establish that a
Speaker 1: crime of obstruction was committed to his report, he also
Speaker 1: could not exonerate the president. They say Mueller's obvious political
Speaker 1: positioning here is a total slap in the face to
Speaker 1: prosecutorial ethics. Now they're jumping on this bandwagon of obstruction
Speaker 1: in place of collusion. This is because they're changing the rules.
Speaker 1: They're in fact moving the goalposts as they play the game.
Speaker 1: There never would have even been an investigation to obstruct
Speaker 1: if it were not for the initial conspiracy theory about
Speaker 1: Russia collusion and no actual obstruction occurred. This whole theory
Speaker 1: also rests on the idea that Trump told people to
Speaker 1: do things and they and meant for them to actually
Speaker 1: do it. Wasn't just blowing off steam. You know, I
Speaker 1: think that we all have heard enough trumping bluster that
Speaker 1: we understand that sometimes the guys being a salesman, sometimes
Speaker 1: he's you know, just sort of talking the way people talk.
Speaker 1: And Trump says that this story that's out there that well,
Speaker 1: that's in the Mula report, and that's being getting a
Speaker 1: lot of focus now that no one that that people
Speaker 1: wouldn't do what he told them to do. Trump takes
Speaker 1: issue with his play fifteen. If you could hear that
Speaker 1: or not the audience A great nobody disobeys my orders,
Speaker 1: the president says, nobody disobeys my orders. So that would mean,
Speaker 1: if that's true, that someone along the line is either
Speaker 1: misinterpreting what they were told by the president or they're
Speaker 1: lying to the Special Council. It's tough to know which
Speaker 1: it is. Now for those who say buck but come on,
Speaker 1: and we're talking about a battle of who to trust,
Speaker 1: if it's Trump versus some of these fine public servants
Speaker 1: or his own employees in the White House. Let's remember
Speaker 1: that Rod Rosenstein claimed that it was a joke that
Speaker 1: he wanted to wear a wire in meetings with the President,
Speaker 1: and then later it came out that no, it was
Speaker 1: not in fact a joke, which would mean that Rod
Speaker 1: Rosenstein was lying when he later claimed it was a joke.
Speaker 1: But these are the nuances that are very real, that
Speaker 1: are very important when it comes to recollections of conversations
Speaker 1: that could well have influenced what was in these Special
Speaker 1: Council's reports, specifically about the issues of a willingness to obstruct.
Speaker 1: I mean, they keep stretching out what the standard is here,
Speaker 1: that they make the standard even easier to violate, They
Speaker 1: make it even more transparent, more obvious that the purpose
Speaker 1: of all of this is just to find a way
Speaker 1: to get Trump. Nothing else matters to them. They don't care,
Speaker 1: They do not care. And then there's the Dershowitz, and
Speaker 1: we'll talk about the dirshmore later on. In this the
Speaker 1: Dershowitz position is that Mueller doesn't even know what the
Speaker 1: heck he's talking about. He's just wrong on the basic
Speaker 1: concepts of obstruction, that the president can fire whoever he
Speaker 1: wants to fire, who works for him play cliff seven.
Speaker 1: Mulla got the law completely wrong on obstruction of justice.
Speaker 1: And I lay out what the law in obstruction is.
Speaker 1: You cannot be charged with obstruction if you're the president
Speaker 1: and you simply exercise your constitutional authority to fire Comey
Speaker 1: or anyone else. I lay that out carefully, and the
Speaker 1: best precedent for that is George H. W. Bush, who
Speaker 1: pardoned cast for Weinberger and five other people on the
Speaker 1: eve of the trial. The special prosecutor said he obstructed justice,
Speaker 1: but he couldn't be charged with it. And they never
Speaker 1: mentioned the Bush case in the Muller report. Mueller was
Speaker 1: in the Bush administration, Barr was in the Bush administration,
Speaker 1: and they deliberately omit the Bush case as the leading president,
Speaker 1: which would preclude a president from being charged with obstruction
Speaker 1: for simply exercising his constitutional authorities. Put simply, as Professor
Speaker 1: Emeritus Alan Dershwitz of Harvard University is telling us all here,
Speaker 1: if the president does what the Constitution says the president
Speaker 1: can do, that act cannot be obstruction. This is even
Speaker 1: a whole other This is a whole other part of
Speaker 1: the argument. This just goes to show you how many
Speaker 1: layers and levels and how much tortured logic and how
Speaker 1: much dishonesty had to be piled the top dishonesty for
Speaker 1: Muller and his little team of angry Democrats to come
Speaker 1: up with this smear job. That is the part two
Speaker 1: of the Muller report. That's just meant to take down Trump.
Speaker 1: It just meant to make him look bad and humiliate
Speaker 1: him and humiliate his people. It's not rooted in the law.
Speaker 1: Mueller is a partisan hack. This was a disgrace, an
Speaker 1: absolute disgrace. Got more on this and also free College
Speaker 1: that's coming on. Back in February, Leadership Institute organizer Hayden
Speaker 1: Williams was out in the field. He was trying to
Speaker 1: help some conservative students recruit for a group at UC Berkeley,
Speaker 1: and he was punched square in the face by a
Speaker 1: radical leftist thug. Sucker punched at that. President Trump understands
Speaker 1: that this is unacceptable and he's taken action. He signed
Speaker 1: an executive order to protect conservative students free speech on campus.
Speaker 1: But more action is needed, and you can be a
Speaker 1: part of this fight, support the Leadership Institute and defend
Speaker 1: conservative students on campus. All you to who's going to
Speaker 1: take back the campus dot org? The Leadership Institutes the
Speaker 1: premier organization for educating and training conservative college students. With
Speaker 1: your gift of as little as five dollars a month,
Speaker 1: you can help conservative college students stand up to intimidation
Speaker 1: and physical attacks. Can also help them win the future
Speaker 1: for this country. Please make your urgent gift to the
Speaker 1: Leadership Institute today. Go to take back the campus dot
Speaker 1: org again, take back the candidat. No country builds a
Speaker 1: future by crushing the dreams and hopes of its young people.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm calling for universal free college and the
Speaker 1: cancelation of student loan debt of up to fifty thousand
Speaker 1: dollars for forty two million Americans. My plan will wipe
Speaker 1: out student loan debt entirely for about seventy five percent
Speaker 1: of those with debt. It will help close the racial
Speaker 1: wealth gap, and it will provide an enormous economic boost
Speaker 1: to America's middle class. The cost of my universal college
Speaker 1: and debt cancelation plan can be covered entirely by my
Speaker 1: ultra million and airs wealth tax. That's a two percent
Speaker 1: tax on the richest seventy five thousand fortunes in this country,
Speaker 1: those with more than fifty million dollars in assets. Just
Speaker 1: two percent, and we can do this. This is the
Speaker 1: kind of big structural change that expands opportunity to everyone. There.
Speaker 1: It is wipe away a trillion dollars in student loan debt, folks,
Speaker 1: And by white boy, I mean socialize it so that
Speaker 1: the American taxpayer is on the hook for at all,
Speaker 1: because that's what this is. This is removing individual responsibility.
Speaker 1: This is removing the process of picking and paying for
Speaker 1: your college and putting it in the public's hands in
Speaker 1: a sense, or rather, at least the bill goes to
Speaker 1: the public. You still get to make the decision if
Speaker 1: you want to go to one of these schools. I
Speaker 1: would also want to know, does this only apply to
Speaker 1: people that have run up those debts? What happens to
Speaker 1: those who run up debts going forward? Oh, we know
Speaker 1: what will happen. They'll insist that they shouldn't have to
Speaker 1: pay either. No one should have to pay, you see,
Speaker 1: because it's always someone else's fault. Class warfare is a
Speaker 1: very powerful and very dangerous thing. Because it appeals to people.
Speaker 1: At first, it appeals to our sense of fairness, perhaps
Speaker 1: our sense of envy. Life is unfair. Therefore, there's always
Speaker 1: unfair things that you can point to and say, well,
Speaker 1: I want to solve that, or I want to help
Speaker 1: you with that. I'm from the government. I see what's unfair.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna make things more fair. Is that really true?
Speaker 1: Will it really work? Who knows? Worth a try? Maybe
Speaker 1: that's the pitch, that's what they'll tell you. And she
Speaker 1: says she's smart enough here to say in Ultra Millionaire
Speaker 1: tacks two percent tax the estimated seventy five thousand families
Speaker 1: with fifty million dollars or more in wealth. That's a
Speaker 1: very small subset of the American population, that granted has
Speaker 1: a tremendous amount of obviously wealth to throw around, so
Speaker 1: they have disproportionate political influence. But is anyone going to
Speaker 1: cry any tears for them to do this? So you
Speaker 1: start to see you can just fight yourself. You say, oh,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, buck, I mean, how how bad
Speaker 1: is it really? This would allow students to have fifty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars in debt or less to be canceled for
Speaker 1: everyone with a household income over under one hundred thousand
Speaker 1: dollars whoa those who make up to two hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty thousand would also get some debt cancelation. If you
Speaker 1: make over two hundred fifty grand, you don't get any
Speaker 1: debt relief whatsoever. This this plan, I'm telling you, this
Speaker 1: is going to get support from people. This might revive
Speaker 1: you know, Warren was at something like seventeen percent in
Speaker 1: the polls this summer and has just plummeted. I mean
Speaker 1: she's in a single digit somewhere because her whole you know,
Speaker 1: foka Hanus one one twenty fourth Native American thing was
Speaker 1: just a disaster. A disaster no way around it. I Mean,
Speaker 1: there was no way that she could try to spin
Speaker 1: that as anything other than a total and complete mess.
Speaker 1: That's what it was. But now she's trying to come
Speaker 1: up with the big ideas. One idea is that she
Speaker 1: wants to impeach the president, she said that over the weekend,
Speaker 1: and the other ideas that she's going to give a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of money from the public, right from you,
Speaker 1: from your pocket, from your your taxes that you pay
Speaker 1: to pay off the debts of people that wanted to
Speaker 1: go to college and didn't really think through what the
Speaker 1: expenses were going to be and how difficult it be
Speaker 1: to pay off. You know, there's there's so much in
Speaker 1: this discussion that will not get the attention it deserves.
Speaker 1: And one part of it, just off the top of
Speaker 1: my head, for example, is that we need to rethink,
Speaker 1: dramatically rethink what it is that we're trying to accomplish
Speaker 1: with the colleges and universities that we currently have in
Speaker 1: this country. If everybody goes to get an undergraduate degree,
Speaker 1: the truth is that the undergraduate degree becomes more like
Speaker 1: high school was thirty years ago, which is just a
Speaker 1: bare minimum standard for a lot of jobs out there,
Speaker 1: and then you'll just have the arms race for well,
Speaker 1: now I have to get an advanced degree, and that's
Speaker 1: going to be even more expensive. Most colleges and most
Speaker 1: universities are credentialing programs. They are not truly institutions devoted
Speaker 1: to education that is useful for the purposes of employment.
Speaker 1: And I know that this a lot of professors, a
Speaker 1: lot of people would yell, oh no, that's not true.
Speaker 1: It is true, right, People that get into especially in
Speaker 1: the elite schools, there there's a when I say elite,
Speaker 1: I mean if you if you go to a top
Speaker 1: three hundred school in this country, you know, certainly a
Speaker 1: top one hundred school. The reason you're there is the
Speaker 1: name brand value of the school. That is why you
Speaker 1: are there. You can get just as good of an
Speaker 1: education in the Internet era at any number of state
Speaker 1: and even community college. State college is even community colleges
Speaker 1: as you do at these schools that have enormous endowments
Speaker 1: and very very fancy aspirations for what they're trying to
Speaker 1: do with their student body, you know, create the next
Speaker 1: generation of I mean, they're all trying to create the
Speaker 1: next generation of leaders. But these are credentialing programs. They
Speaker 1: are not first and foremost about educating people in a
Speaker 1: way that is useful to them. Maybe educating them about
Speaker 1: some things. And certainly there's a social education that goes
Speaker 1: into these these college experiences these days. But I'm talking
Speaker 1: about a system that is mostly used so that people
Speaker 1: can get jobs based upon the brand value of where
Speaker 1: they go. But that even gets a little deeper in
Speaker 1: the weeds that we need to hear. I mean, ultimately
Speaker 1: this is just about Elizabeth Warren wants to soak the
Speaker 1: rich to give money to people that have run up debts.
Speaker 1: Why stop with college education? What about people that have
Speaker 1: subprime auto loans? It's a trillion dollars of those, by
Speaker 1: the way outstanding right now. What are people under underwater
Speaker 1: their mortgages? They work hard, they try their underwater their mortgages.
Speaker 1: Why shouldn't you pay for all the problems other people
Speaker 1: have based on their financial decisions. I don't know if
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren has an answer for that other than the
Speaker 1: because it don't be nice, it's not good enough. The
Speaker 1: only dual certified veteran owned background investigation and vetting company
Speaker 1: out there is Global Verification Network. Whatever business you're in
Speaker 1: across the country, whatever industry you're in, you're gonna need
Speaker 1: background checks. That's just the way it gets done. But
Speaker 1: if you want them done properly, if you want to
Speaker 1: make sure that when you call, you get somebody on
Speaker 1: the phone that can answer any question and handle each
Speaker 1: case efficiently, please give my friends a Global Verification Network
Speaker 1: a call. Their risk mitigation experts can handle your caseload
Speaker 1: and develop a program that fits your company's need specifically, So,
Speaker 1: whether you're in the HR department, yourself or you're a
Speaker 1: CEO or somebody who's starting a small business, whatever size
Speaker 1: your company, whatever industry. For background checks, call Global Verification
Speaker 1: Network eight seven seven six nine five one one seven
Speaker 1: nine again eight seven seven six nine five one one
Speaker 1: seven nine, or go to my GVN dot com. We're
Speaker 1: actually making the Green New Deal come alive here in
Speaker 1: New York City, so we have our own Green New Deal.
Speaker 1: It's three very basic ideas. One the biggest source of
Speaker 1: emissions in New York City is buildings. We're putting clear,
Speaker 1: strong mandates in the first of any major city on
Speaker 1: the Earth to say to building owners, you gotta clean
Speaker 1: up your act, you gotta retrofit, you gotta save energy.
Speaker 1: If you don't do it by twenty thirty, there will
Speaker 1: be serious fines as high as a million dollars or
Speaker 1: more for the biggest buildings. And this mandate is going
Speaker 1: to guarantee that we reduce emissions. We're going to ban
Speaker 1: for the classic glass and steel skyscrapers, which are incredibly inefficient.
Speaker 1: If someone wants to build one of those things, they
Speaker 1: can take a whole lot of steps to make an
Speaker 1: energy efficient but we're not going to allow what we
Speaker 1: used to see in the past and the City of
Speaker 1: New York to government, which is is about as much
Speaker 1: energy in a year as do the people and the
Speaker 1: businesses of the state of Vermont. We are going to
Speaker 1: get all of our energy from renewable sources in the
Speaker 1: next five years. Build a Blasio aka Kavilhelm because his
Speaker 1: name is foreign Villehelm. It he's not build a Blasio.
Speaker 1: He changed his name. Yeah, he run to the sea. Relatable,
Speaker 1: So he run from build Blasio to Kaiseevihem or rather
Speaker 1: vern Wilhelm to build Blasio. Yeah, but the guy's an imbecile,
Speaker 1: and that he's the mayor of the biggest city in America,
Speaker 1: the wealthiest largest city in the United States, one of
Speaker 1: the most important cities from an economic and cultural perspective
Speaker 1: in the world, is really off putting to me. I
Speaker 1: think that up to this point he's not I really
Speaker 1: believe that de Blasio is too lazy to do that
Speaker 1: much damage up to now. That's really the problem. He's
Speaker 1: much more concerned about taking oh that's right, his suv
Speaker 1: an hour every day each way so he can go
Speaker 1: work out at the Jim he likes in Brooklyn. He
Speaker 1: lives in Gracie mansion, which is in Manhattan, takes an
Speaker 1: hour ride out to Brooklyn to go to his gym
Speaker 1: where he, you know, does a lot of ankle stretches,
Speaker 1: and then comes back an hour two hours of his
Speaker 1: day spending an seuv going back and forth. I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: you think that the mayor might have better things to
Speaker 1: do with his time. I mean, the guy's not exactly,
Speaker 1: you know, training for a you know, a beach bikini
Speaker 1: shoot or something. I don't I don't know what what
Speaker 1: he thinks he's doing. But the guy's an imbecile. And
Speaker 1: you know, I know he went to Yell, but that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean anything. People go to all these schools, and
Speaker 1: a lot of them are complete jackasses. But he's going
Speaker 1: to try to destroy New York City. And now that
Speaker 1: he's managed to entrench himself deeply enough, I think he's
Speaker 1: got some really horrible ideas for New York and one
Speaker 1: of them is this, this municipal version of o'callagio Cortez
Speaker 1: is Green New Deal. I mean, the Green New Deal
Speaker 1: is too stupid for any serious person to take seriously.
Speaker 1: But build a Blasio thinks that it's something that New
Speaker 1: York City should go off and do essentially on its
Speaker 1: own build a. Blasio thinks that the Green New Deal
Speaker 1: is a place where New York City should lead the way,
Speaker 1: and sorry, New York City should be leading the way.
Speaker 1: Here here, here's what the plan says. The Climate Mobilization
Speaker 1: Act will reduce the city's planet warming emissions by setting
Speaker 1: caps for a variety of building types, with the goal
Speaker 1: of achieving a forty percent decrease in greenhouse gas emissions
Speaker 1: by twenty thirty. They'll be huge fines, as to Blasio said,
Speaker 1: They're up to a million dollars of eliment. It's an
Speaker 1: enormous fine if you don't do this. The most dramatic
Speaker 1: measure would require buildings of more than twenty five thousand
Speaker 1: square feet, which are responsible for thirty percent of the
Speaker 1: city's carbon emissions, to conduct retrofits such as new windows
Speaker 1: and insulations to make those buildings more energy efficient. The
Speaker 1: aggressive bill is a crucial step toward the city's vulnerable
Speaker 1: coastal communities, said the Queen's Council member who spearheaded the legislation.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is just straight up more on stuff here. Quote.
Speaker 1: No single handed policy can completely reverse the effects of
Speaker 1: climate change, but This policy, when enacted, will be the
Speaker 1: largest emissions reduction policy in the history of New York City.
Speaker 1: This is taking an eye dropper full of cold water
Speaker 1: and putting in the ocean and telling me that you're
Speaker 1: changing the temperature. This is stupidity on steroids. They aren't
Speaker 1: really going to do anything here. Even if you believe
Speaker 1: that climate change is real, which I well, this is
Speaker 1: where I'd say, yes, the climate is changing. Do I
Speaker 1: think that human emissions are creating a catastrophic warming effect
Speaker 1: that will destroy the world as we know it unless
Speaker 1: we take traumatic action that will have tremendous financial const No.
Speaker 1: In fact, I am sure of it. I am as
Speaker 1: sure of the wrongness of the climate change alarmists as
Speaker 1: I am that the sun will set tonight and rise
Speaker 1: tomorrow morning. I mean, I'm as sure as I can
Speaker 1: be of anything. But we're going to speak later on
Speaker 1: about the mental health effects of the Trump era. On
Speaker 1: the left, climate change is a faith based tradition. They
Speaker 1: think it's and they won't agree to that. They won't
Speaker 1: say that it's faith based. They believe it's science based,
Speaker 1: but it's actually faith faith based. It has to do
Speaker 1: with the elevation of the physical earth and the state
Speaker 1: in charge of that earth in place of God. The
Speaker 1: people that do not believe that there is an all
Speaker 1: knowing deity or you know, whatever your sense of God is.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to get too theological here. But they replace
Speaker 1: that need that the human mind has with climate change alarmism.
Speaker 1: And now in the city of New York, they're going
Speaker 1: to try to make massive developers, you know, the biggest
Speaker 1: buildings in the city, much more costly. They're going to
Speaker 1: run their costs way up, and they're gonna create a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of oh that's right construction, which is why
Speaker 1: these people are all excited about this, I'm sure in
Speaker 1: some of the city councils, because you're going to create
Speaker 1: a boom in retrofitting construction. But that's just attacks on
Speaker 1: these businesses because that doesn't make their you know, it's
Speaker 1: one thing to build an addition to your business, right
Speaker 1: if you if you build a an extra bay for cars,
Speaker 1: if that's what they call it where they do their work,
Speaker 1: an extra an extra garage slot, we'll call it that
Speaker 1: for a car. If you work in an auto mechanic place,
Speaker 1: now you can take more vehicles, you can do more
Speaker 1: work you have greater efficiency. There's a business purpose. If
Speaker 1: I walked into your mechanic shop and said, I need
Speaker 1: you to install brand new windows in here, and I
Speaker 1: need you to have only solar panels on your roof,
Speaker 1: and I need to that doesn't make you more efficient.
Speaker 1: That runs up your costs and it doesn't improve your
Speaker 1: business at all. And it's not market based. It's just
Speaker 1: a mandate. It's just a regulatory cost. Kaisa de Blasio
Speaker 1: wants to institute these costs for buildings across New York
Speaker 1: City because he thinks that this is going to set
Speaker 1: some example for the rest of the world. I mean,
Speaker 1: is he so stupid that he thinks that in Mumbai,
Speaker 1: or in Shanghai, or in name another megacity around the world,
Speaker 1: they give a crap what Deblasio thinks about climate change?
Speaker 1: I mean, is he that delusional? And when I say
Speaker 1: that they care about it, I mean that, yeah, they
Speaker 1: might notice it, some of them might even say, oh,
Speaker 1: that's nice, but that they're going to change their behavior.
Speaker 1: This is fundamentally unserious stuff. But the Left is that
Speaker 1: all they have to do is be normal and rational,
Speaker 1: and I think that they'd have a chance to maintain
Speaker 1: the House and maybe even take the Senate. That they're crazy,
Speaker 1: and that's why I don't think they can win the
Speaker 1: presidents either. I mean, they're just crazy. What they say
Speaker 1: doesn't make any sense. No human being is going to
Speaker 1: surround and convince me that New York creating a man.
Speaker 1: Don't think that this isn't gonna come to your hometown, folks,
Speaker 1: or your city. Some of you're like, oh, buck, but
Speaker 1: I live in a red state. Yeah, just wait, may
Speaker 1: Or Pete comes from a red state a lot of ways,
Speaker 1: and even if you live in a red state, the
Speaker 1: federal government's gonna try to do this to you if
Speaker 1: the Democrats are in charge. They've said the Green New
Speaker 1: Deal is gonna be a federal program, so it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter where you are, it doesn't matter how good your
Speaker 1: state or local government is. Okazy of Cortez said they're
Speaker 1: gonna have to rebuild all the buildings, and we all
Speaker 1: laugh and said that's crazy, because it is. But just
Speaker 1: because it's crazy doesn't mean they don't want to do it.
Speaker 1: In fact, when it comes to the Green New Deal,
Speaker 1: the crazier it sounds, the more into it they are.
Speaker 1: Better O'Rourke is around talking about World War two level
Speaker 1: sacrifice to tackle climate change. Sixty million people died in
Speaker 1: World War Two, so he's talking about that level of sacrifice.
Speaker 1: I mean, I know, maybe he's just going for the
Speaker 1: rhetorical flourish, But you know, I don't think anybody should
Speaker 1: compare the long line they had to wait in at
Speaker 1: lunch to get their you know, poke a bowl to
Speaker 1: storming the beaches of Normandy. I don't think that's a
Speaker 1: rational comparison. That's what Beto's doing on the Green New Deal.
Speaker 1: Now we've got this happen in New York City. This
Speaker 1: is if they can get this done in New York,
Speaker 1: they're going to be pushing for this in cities and
Speaker 1: blue states across the country. And not only that, they're
Speaker 1: gonna then try to kick this up as soon as
Speaker 1: they have the power to do it in DC. They're
Speaker 1: gonna make this a federal issue. I don't even want
Speaker 1: to I can't even imagine what the costs are going
Speaker 1: to be of retrofitting all these major buildings. Remember, so
Speaker 1: that they reduce their carbon emissions. This is a non problem.
Speaker 1: This is a problem that we should not have to
Speaker 1: solve because it's a non problem. But the costs of
Speaker 1: solving this non problem are going to be tremendous, absolutely enormous,
Speaker 1: and they're all on board for because remember Beto saying
Speaker 1: World War two levels sacrifice. They're not going to back
Speaker 1: off of this. I thought the Democrats would have to
Speaker 1: walk away from this going into the election, but maybe
Speaker 1: they are just this crazy. Maybe the Green New Deal
Speaker 1: is something that they're signed on for and won't walk
Speaker 1: away from. The media basically accused the president of treason
Speaker 1: for two and a half years with no proof and
Speaker 1: no evidence. They lied about this man. And when we
Speaker 1: actually went through all of the process, the thirty five
Speaker 1: million dollars, they spent, more than a million documents, two thousand,
Speaker 1: eight hundred subpoenas, witnesses and warrants and wire tap and
Speaker 1: the whole thing. No collusion, no obstruction, a total exoneration
Speaker 1: for this president. And look, there's no doubt that there's
Speaker 1: some level of excitement and a cloud being lifted, but
Speaker 1: there's also some righteous indignation and anger here going. Why
Speaker 1: did this all start in the first place. It's just
Speaker 1: completely wasted the American people's time and money, that's right.
Speaker 1: Why did it all start in the first place? When
Speaker 1: do we get that answer. I want that answer. I
Speaker 1: want to know how, because what they've told us so
Speaker 1: far as a lie. They're lying to you right now.
Speaker 1: The FBI is lying to you. The federal government is
Speaker 1: lying to us about how the Mueller probe, Russia Origin investigation,
Speaker 1: all that stuff, how all that began? Because you can't
Speaker 1: have a Muller probe without a Russia conspiracy theory. Well,
Speaker 1: how do we get to the Russia conspiracy theory? Papadopolis
Speaker 1: and Carter Page. No way, that's not it. That's not enough.
Speaker 1: That is not enough. There must have been more. You've
Speaker 1: got to go back and look at some of the
Speaker 1: threads that we haven't been able to fully chase down yet,
Speaker 1: things like the unprecedented unmasking requests. People say, oh, buck,
Speaker 1: they unmasked. No, no, no, they were. There were people
Speaker 1: asking for unmasking in the Obama administration. Who would It
Speaker 1: would be very unusual for them to do that, and
Speaker 1: they were doing it with increasing speed, with increasing frequency.
Speaker 1: Toward the end of the Obama administration went oh, that's right,
Speaker 1: there was a presidential election going on, right, That's something
Speaker 1: else that you need to be aware of as we
Speaker 1: go here. There were some concerns early on, not just
Speaker 1: about the unmasking, but also the leaks of classified information.
Speaker 1: The leak that got General Flynn jammed up. We need
Speaker 1: answers about who did that. That's a crime. Someone hated
Speaker 1: Trump and hated Flynn so much that he or she
Speaker 1: was willing to risk felony prosecution and prison time just
Speaker 1: to make sure that Flynn couldn't be the National Security
Speaker 1: Advisor anymore. That's a degree of Trump' arrangement syndrome that
Speaker 1: should concern all of us. That's a person who certainly
Speaker 1: should not have any role whatsoever in the administration or
Speaker 1: the execution of federal laws. Because I think it's somebody.
Speaker 1: I do think it's somebody at the DOJ. I have
Speaker 1: all along. I can't tell you who. I've got my suspicions.
Speaker 1: I don't know. But this Muller report isn't just something
Speaker 1: where we should and to the point that was being
Speaker 1: made there by Hogan Gidley, the White House Deputy Press secretary,
Speaker 1: It's not just oh man who Trump got passes, it's
Speaker 1: what was that all about? Man? Why are we put
Speaker 1: through this in the first place? And there are also
Speaker 1: questions about the veracity of some of the things in
Speaker 1: the report. None of this was challenged in a court.
Speaker 1: A lot of people said, oh, buck, it was all
Speaker 1: sworn testimony. Oh, sworn testimony. You mean like what Michael
Speaker 1: Cohen gave And now I was going to prison for
Speaker 1: people lie in sworn testimony all that. Just because it's
Speaker 1: sworn testimony doesn't mean it's true. But that's what we're
Speaker 1: being told now because so much of the testimony that
Speaker 1: is included in the Muller report, which I have now
Speaker 1: read and which you know, yeay, and so how I
Speaker 1: spent some on my weekend, that just all at it
Speaker 1: all adds together in a very negative anti Trump fashion.
Speaker 1: That's what it's meant to do. John Dawd, who's a
Speaker 1: former Trump attorney, he is unimpressed by much of this.
Speaker 1: And well, actually wait before we get into that. Remember
Speaker 1: this is the media reporting on how Trump was about
Speaker 1: to fire Robert Mueller. Play clip nine. President Trump ordered
Speaker 1: the firing of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Last und to
Speaker 1: fire Muller is attempt to fire Why he moved to
Speaker 1: fire Robert Muller? That the President sought to have Muller
Speaker 1: dismissed In June trying to stop Robert Mueller from doing
Speaker 1: his job. Stop Muller from doing his job, you mean
Speaker 1: from conducting a fake investigation for two years, or rather
Speaker 1: an investigation of a fake premise. Robert Muller was chasing
Speaker 1: Bigfoot for two years, that's what he was doing. There
Speaker 1: was no Russia collusion. President Trump was interfering with Robert
Speaker 1: Muller's Bigfoot quest. Why is Bigfoot of the mind? You'll
Speaker 1: see in the next hour. I've got a special surprise
Speaker 1: for you all. It's pretty funny story actually, so you'll
Speaker 1: have to stay around for that. That's right. That's what
Speaker 1: we call a teaser in the business. But you know,
Speaker 1: Robert Mueller spent tens of millions of dollars looking for
Speaker 1: the Locknest Monster, and now that he didn't find it,
Speaker 1: they want to tell us, well, you know, Trump tried
Speaker 1: to stop him from finding the Locknest Monster. Guess what,
Speaker 1: there was no monster, and he didn't stop him. But
Speaker 1: now they're saying that he thought about or are talked about,
Speaker 1: stopping him, and that's a crime. That's there's a solid
Speaker 1: case he made that. The president's constitutional authority allows him
Speaker 1: to fire Muller for any or no reason. John Dawd,
Speaker 1: president Trump's former attorney, he certainly has some thoughts on
Speaker 1: this play ten. That was a signed to deal with Muller.
Speaker 1: At no time did the President ever say, you know, John,
Speaker 1: I'm going to get rid of him. John is not
Speaker 1: going to do it. It's just the opposite. Here's the
Speaker 1: message the President had for Bob Muller to me to
Speaker 1: carry one, you tell him I respect what he's doing.
Speaker 1: Number two, you tell him he's got my full cooperation.
Speaker 1: Number three, get it done as quickly as possible. And
Speaker 1: number at number four, whatever else you need, Yeah, let
Speaker 1: me know. So that was always the message. And that's
Speaker 1: exactly what we did. And as you know, we produced
Speaker 1: everything without a document. Miss ain't sure about a lie.
Speaker 1: Can you imagine it, Washington? Somebody without a lie. Not
Speaker 1: only did President Trump not obstruct this investigation, the cooperation
Speaker 1: that he gave was far and above what I would
Speaker 1: have honestly probably advised him to give. I mean to
Speaker 1: not claim executive privilege, which would he would have been
Speaker 1: well within his rights to do and would have probably
Speaker 1: saved a lot of the you know, it's sort of
Speaker 1: embarrassing behind the scenes conversations and They're only embarrassing because
Speaker 1: the president is expressing his outrage at being set up
Speaker 1: at what was a frame job, and so he's trying
Speaker 1: to So I'm not even sure it is embarrassing. It's
Speaker 1: just that the media says, oh, well, in order to
Speaker 1: try to, you know, beat the news cycle that day,
Speaker 1: he misled them on this issue or that issue. Oh
Speaker 1: Trumps such a liar? Where was her? Trump? Such a liar?
Speaker 1: And the people that obviously Trump such a liar, you know,
Speaker 1: they're the ones that we're trying to get Hillary Clinton
Speaker 1: to be the next president United States. I haven't forgotten
Speaker 1: about that. Hillary who, you know, wiped her server what
Speaker 1: with a cloth? Hillary who said that she landed under
Speaker 1: sniper fire in Bosnia. Hillary who said there was nothing
Speaker 1: mark classified in her email. Hillary who said that she
Speaker 1: didn't know what the sea marking meant confidential meaning for
Speaker 1: classification in her email. Hillary who claimed that she turned
Speaker 1: a thousand dollars into a hundred thousand dollars trading cattle
Speaker 1: futures by reading about it in the Wall Street Journal,
Speaker 1: when the Royal Street Journals pages of that time had
Speaker 1: no cattle futures coverage. There were other reasons how she
Speaker 1: made that money had to do with her connections in
Speaker 1: the state of Arkansas. But joined to sit here. I mean,
Speaker 1: Christopher Hitchins wrote a book. If any of you are curious,
Speaker 1: it's short, but man, it is good. No one left
Speaker 1: to lie to about the Clintons. The Clintons lied as
Speaker 1: much as anybody on planet Earth could ever lie. And
Speaker 1: not only did Bill Clinton do that for eight years,
Speaker 1: including lying under oath, which she was not charge for,
Speaker 1: but then Hillary built an entire political career olines and
Speaker 1: they wanted her to be the president. They want to
Speaker 1: tell us a little time, How could you support Trump?
Speaker 1: He lies? Oh? Yeah, like the Clintons aren't lying all
Speaker 1: the time. Let's say, buck, two wrongs don't make it right. Okay.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying what Trump does is right when he lies.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying guy fights fire with fire, and I'd
Speaker 1: rather my side wind. It's a pretty straightforward calculation for me.
Speaker 1: But they're saying, oh, he tried to fire Muller. He
Speaker 1: doesn't try to fire Muller. If the president wanted to
Speaker 1: fire Muller, you know what you could do. You call
Speaker 1: over to the Department of Justice to say I'm the
Speaker 1: president of the United States. I'm the leader of the
Speaker 1: free world. Hey Mueller, you're fired. He didn't do that.
Speaker 1: So this is all just grasping at straws. This is
Speaker 1: this is nonsense from the Libs. But libs are full
Speaker 1: of nonsense on a scale of one to ten. When
Speaker 1: you look at the Muller Report, where you give it, oh,
Speaker 1: that's enough, complete enough, how used to have a strike
Speaker 1: for US? I ran cases just like this poorly done.
Speaker 1: Are things are missing? There are parts of its just
Speaker 1: aren't right, And I would say they have a junior
Speaker 1: writer from the New York Times to it. It's very poor.
Speaker 1: A lot of political gamesmanship in the Mulla Report, no
Speaker 1: question about that. A lot of stuff that when you
Speaker 1: read it and you try to apply the why would
Speaker 1: they include this if they're really being non partisan prosecutors,
Speaker 1: you can't come up with any good answers. But that's
Speaker 1: because Trump arrangement syndrome has spread far and why it
Speaker 1: even spread into the authors of the Mulla Report. There's
Speaker 1: a real problem that the anti Trump left has handling reality.
Speaker 1: You know, I am occasionally wanted to talk about very
Speaker 1: gern very gergen schniction for Reagan. He spoke about how
Speaker 1: he's worried about how millennials will be able to process
Speaker 1: the fact that Trump was not taken down Watergate style,
Speaker 1: that Trump was not destroyed by the media. This is
Speaker 1: this is a concern now that the Libs have, but
Speaker 1: they've essentially out outpaced expectations that they are under performing
Speaker 1: after over promising on how they're going to the media
Speaker 1: is going to be able to end the Trump presidency
Speaker 1: one way or another. Here's Ers Gergen himself over at
Speaker 1: CNN Play seventeen. There's a poll that's been done by
Speaker 1: the Insissuit of Politics here at Harvard and it finds
Speaker 1: that the millennials and Generation Z mar expressing a high
Speaker 1: degree of anxiety are about life and for the first time,
Speaker 1: politics seem to be disturbing their mental health. This whole
Speaker 1: notion that politics are beginning to disturb becoming a problem
Speaker 1: for the mental health of the young, new or mental
Speaker 1: health or young CNN doesn't understand the culpability that they
Speaker 1: have in this, and I also think that they're diagnosing
Speaker 1: others without understanding where they would fall on the anti
Speaker 1: Trump spectrum here really and the Trump and the Trump
Speaker 1: Arrangement syndrome spectrum CNN is like Stage four. CNN is
Speaker 1: no longer a serious news organization because of Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: But the mental health aspects of a Trump presidency just
Speaker 1: go to how emotionalize this has become for the left.
Speaker 1: You know, you'd see these stories in the weeks leading
Speaker 1: up to the Maula Report. I almost couldn't believe some
Speaker 1: of these stories about how people who were in their
Speaker 1: last months of life were concerned that they would not
Speaker 1: live to see the Maula Report because they wanted, they
Speaker 1: needed to know that America would endure, and that justice
Speaker 1: would be done, and that Trump would be prosecuted and
Speaker 1: run out of office. These were news stories, folks, that
Speaker 1: people were running. These were things that we were being told.
Speaker 1: And my initial reaction to that was always what a
Speaker 1: sad state of affairs? I mean that any that any
Speaker 1: human being, and I really mean that any human being
Speaker 1: would be more concerned with what with whether they could
Speaker 1: see the end of the Muller Report than how much
Speaker 1: time they were able to spend with loved ones or
Speaker 1: and I mean this just you know, reading a book
Speaker 1: with the sun shining on their face somewhere. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, my friends, this stuff is not as important
Speaker 1: as a lot of people left have made it out
Speaker 1: to be. It's just not It does not matter as
Speaker 1: much to their lives. It should not matter to their
Speaker 1: sense of well being and identity. But there you had
Speaker 1: the most revered political analyst at CNN, probably gurgling gurgen.
Speaker 1: There you had him talking about how young people's mental
Speaker 1: health is affected by this. But it's not just young people,
Speaker 1: it's democrats of all ages, you know. I see this
Speaker 1: now more and more in DC, where people will tell
Speaker 1: me that, you know, they'll they'll be on a on
Speaker 1: a date, you know, people that are my age or
Speaker 1: little younger, they'll be on a date. And if the
Speaker 1: person finds out that there are Trump support or the
Speaker 1: date's over, that's it. That's bogging. I can't imagine having
Speaker 1: such a closed mind about my fellow human beings. I mean,
Speaker 1: I can't imagine being out with someone in flesh and
Speaker 1: blood and spending time with them and just automatically thinking, well, oh,
Speaker 1: because they voted, out of two options for the presidency,
Speaker 1: they voted for one that I don't like, so I
Speaker 1: guess technically it's three options. Did anybody listening to the
Speaker 1: show vote for McMullen aka McMuffin aka what was the
Speaker 1: guy's name from super Bad? What was his name on
Speaker 1: the fake ID? You know, I'm talking about mclovin aka mclovin.
Speaker 1: But of those two choices, if you voted for the
Speaker 1: wrong one, there are people who think that they should
Speaker 1: not talk to you anymore, that you can no longer
Speaker 1: be friends, that there's nothing really to discuss. That's that's sad.
Speaker 1: That is very sad. But I also think that it
Speaker 1: has become commonplace. I think that for Democrats having a
Speaker 1: such a strong feeling about Trump, that it affects your
Speaker 1: overall sense of well being and your relationships with people
Speaker 1: and your willingness to engage with them and to to
Speaker 1: you know, make new friends. And this is just this
Speaker 1: is just nuts. Producer, Mike, do you have a story
Speaker 1: to share? Come on and share your story, dude, Come
Speaker 1: on this having them all it's pretty funny. There we go. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I got a you know, it's a mutual friend. We
Speaker 1: went out. She's you know, a friend of mine said
Speaker 1: you should go out with this girls many years ago,
Speaker 1: not many, twenty sixteen, um. And we're sitting there and
Speaker 1: she starts talking about politics. I'm like, I don't really
Speaker 1: want to get down on this road, but I'll indulge.
Speaker 1: So I was listening and as she's talking, the bartender
Speaker 1: where we were like listens to her and he was
Speaker 1: a huge Trump supporter, which you don't find in New York.
Speaker 1: And he's like just railing on her about Trump's great,
Speaker 1: Trump's this, and she starts losing her mind and I'm
Speaker 1: like giving the guy like the wink. I'm like, yeah, buddy,
Speaker 1: keep going. And she turns to me and she's like,
Speaker 1: do you believe this guy? I'm like yeah, I'm like
Speaker 1: he's absolutely I do. She looks at me like what
Speaker 1: and I'm like yeah, I'm like he's gonna win, like
Speaker 1: it or not. I mean, you hear this all the time.
Speaker 1: I hear this from from friends of Mountain DC that
Speaker 1: you know, if you voted for Trump, swipe left or
Speaker 1: whatever has become this is like a social media and
Speaker 1: online dating phrase. Now that you're here where they're like,
Speaker 1: if you if you vote for Trump's swipe left. This
Speaker 1: is not normal. Yeah, this is not normal. They want
Speaker 1: to you know she I mean it was over in
Speaker 1: less than five minutes. She's like all right, I gotta go.
Speaker 1: I'm like Okay, see it. I guess I guess there
Speaker 1: was no second date. How producer Mike, there was not
Speaker 1: a love match. No, there was not, m You know,
Speaker 1: I always got to be aware of these things, my friends.
Speaker 1: The hot crazy scale is applicable to politics as well.
Speaker 1: For Mike, everybody wasn't She wasn't hot enough to be
Speaker 1: that crazy either, So I'll tell you that. Oh well,
Speaker 1: then then there's that Mike. There was gonna be there's
Speaker 1: gonna be a note day too, regardless. Bucks. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: guys with Hey, thank you producer Mike for bringing it
Speaker 1: a little bit of realism towards today on the Bucks
Speaker 1: Extit show. Oh Man, Yeah, but the mental health man
Speaker 1: Gurgan's worried about the next generation mental health. Meanwhile, they're
Speaker 1: the ones that have been fear mongering about how the
Speaker 1: President of the United States is basically a Russian spy.
Speaker 1: But our concerned REX generation millennials shod or. I don't
Speaker 1: know if they have enough sheby de Oil to calm
Speaker 1: them down. But I don't know why anyone listen to
Speaker 1: that guy. It's a jokester. Hiring can be tough, no question.
Speaker 1: You know that if you've had to shift through all
Speaker 1: the resumes and try to make sure you're most in
Speaker 1: the right places. Takes up a lot of time and
Speaker 1: there's no guarantee you get the right people unless you
Speaker 1: do what I did because I used zip recruiter and
Speaker 1: I've got fantastic colleagues that I work with now every day.
Speaker 1: Because zip recruiter dot com slash buck is free to
Speaker 1: use and lets you post the job that you want
Speaker 1: to hire for. In fact, zip recruiter sends your job
Speaker 1: to over one one hundred of the web's leading job boards.
Speaker 1: They don't stop there. With their powerful matching technology, zipp
Speaker 1: recruiter scans thousands of resumes to find people at the
Speaker 1: right experience and invites them to apply to your job.
Speaker 1: So as applications come in, zip Recruiter analyze each one
Speaker 1: and spotlightstop candidates. You will never miss a great match.
Speaker 1: Right now, my listeners can try zip recruiter for free
Speaker 1: at this exclusive web address zipp recruiter dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's zip recruiter dot com slash buck one more time,
Speaker 1: zip recruiter dot com slash buck. Zip recruiter is the
Speaker 1: smartest way to hire. Follow the river back up to
Speaker 1: the road. Flack someone down easy, guys, there's an accent
Speaker 1: on the road. Does anybody have a cell phone? But
Speaker 1: we're just trying to get back. There's there's something in
Speaker 1: the woods. Indeed, it's Bigfoot. Everybody, not to spoil a surprise.
Speaker 1: That's from the movie Primal Rage, which I mentioned to
Speaker 1: you recently on the show. Somebody asked you had the
Speaker 1: best big Foot movie, and I had late one night recently,
Speaker 1: just decided I want to watch a big Foot movie,
Speaker 1: and I went searching for it and I found it
Speaker 1: and it was this movie, Primal Rage. But then I
Speaker 1: did have some comments about, for example, the lead the
Speaker 1: lead actor protagonist in this I think could use a
Speaker 1: little more time in acting school. And I had a
Speaker 1: few remarks as radio hosts do well, folks. It turns
Speaker 1: out that one of the lead actors from the film
Speaker 1: is a member of Team Buck. He listens to this
Speaker 1: radio show and he read out to me directly from
Speaker 1: his verified account and said, hey, man, that's my movie.
Speaker 1: And I said, you know what, this is amazing. We're
Speaker 1: going to talk about your movie. Marshall Hilton joins us. Now.
Speaker 1: He plays the kind of leader of the bad guy
Speaker 1: Rednecks in the movie primal rage, but he actually does
Speaker 1: a very good job in his role. Marshall, great to
Speaker 1: have you on the show. Thank you very much for
Speaker 1: having me. I am honored to be in the Freedom Hunt. Yeah, man, great,
Speaker 1: great to have you. So just you know, I have
Speaker 1: told a few people about this movie, and it's so funny.
Speaker 1: As you pointed out, you never know who's listening. Man,
Speaker 1: here I am talking about a movie that just came
Speaker 1: out what was it in twenty eighteen? But you know,
Speaker 1: tell me a little about this. I mean, how was it?
Speaker 1: Where do you guys film and how was it making?
Speaker 1: What I would have to say is the best big
Speaker 1: Foot movie I've ever seen. Oh well, you can need
Speaker 1: to put that on a clip so I can send
Speaker 1: that to the director. Okay, we have to forget a
Speaker 1: copy of what you just said. It was a pretty
Speaker 1: amazing ride. We actually shot it in twenty fifty. It
Speaker 1: was shot in two separate sequences, as we did about
Speaker 1: a month in twenty fifteen, and then we wrapped and
Speaker 1: then we came down here and looked at the footage,
Speaker 1: did whatever we did, and went back up the exact
Speaker 1: same time. Touriod in twenty sixteen, so the lighting would
Speaker 1: match for cinematography, and we shot it for another three weeks.
Speaker 1: We shot it up in Oregon and California. We stayed
Speaker 1: in Crescent City, so we were on a private reserve
Speaker 1: of about twelve hundred acres of first growth redwood forest.
Speaker 1: And in the scenery, I will say, and the cinematography
Speaker 1: in the scenery is right what you would expect for
Speaker 1: a big for a big Foot movie. I mean, you're
Speaker 1: in this really deep, dense dark woods to the Pacific Northwest,
Speaker 1: so that really comes across. There's also some stuff in
Speaker 1: the movie where it seems like they dug a little
Speaker 1: bit into the lure of Bigfoot. I mean, what can
Speaker 1: you tell me about did you work at all with
Speaker 1: the writers or have any input into how they're going
Speaker 1: to depict I mean, also, your Bigfoot is not the
Speaker 1: Saint Harry and the Henderson folks. He's not a cuddly guy. No,
Speaker 1: he is not. He is. The best description I think
Speaker 1: I could give it is it's very predator. Like Patrick
Speaker 1: McGee be doing pre production on the movie for almost
Speaker 1: twelve years, and it was it was it was just
Speaker 1: an amazing process to be up in the mountains filming
Speaker 1: that thing. Um, what was first for your question, you're
Speaker 1: getting to my question, which is just you know, the
Speaker 1: backstory of how you pull this thing together, because I've
Speaker 1: always been surprised. I mean, I think that Bigfoot. You
Speaker 1: think of all the Dracula movies, and you think of
Speaker 1: monster and horror movies, big franchises, and whether it's Sasquatch, Abominable, Snowman,
Speaker 1: big Foot. Not a lot done on this, and it
Speaker 1: lends itself so easily to especially to the kind of
Speaker 1: you know Blair, which horror authenticity genre, and you guys
Speaker 1: did capture some of that in this film, along with
Speaker 1: some really violent stuff. So there's that. Yeah, yeah, there
Speaker 1: was some very violent stuff. As far as the Native
Speaker 1: American slant up in that region, the Native American Indians
Speaker 1: called Bigfoot Omah, and the original title is Primal raised
Speaker 1: a legend of Omah. But right, yeah, that's what I mean.
Speaker 1: You got into the backstory a bit, right, right, right,
Speaker 1: And so he was more of a legend, a mythical legend.
Speaker 1: Bigfoot's been around forever. I mean, you know, he's called
Speaker 1: he Haddie and Russia. He's called all kinds of different
Speaker 1: things all around the world. It is a kind of
Speaker 1: a fable, so you know, they called him Omah. Distributor
Speaker 1: didn't think that the title was all that sexy, so
Speaker 1: they wanted to get rid of the Omah, but they
Speaker 1: left all that Native American lare and that's where that
Speaker 1: came from. I don't think anybody's ever done that with
Speaker 1: a Bigfoot film. And most of the Bigfoot films you
Speaker 1: see is you know, you see a shadow of something
Speaker 1: behind a tree, and that's obviously a guy in a
Speaker 1: rubber suit. You know, they're not done really well. This
Speaker 1: suit was six years in the making, three fully animatronic heads.
Speaker 1: All that hair was done by hands, single hair stuff
Speaker 1: and was cast. The director of the movie is actually
Speaker 1: in the big Foot suit, Patrick McGee six ten um.
Speaker 1: And he's a big, tall guy. So you know, we
Speaker 1: were getting directed by big Foot in some of these scenes,
Speaker 1: which is a completely different, hilarious story in and of itself. Um.
Speaker 1: And you know it was his baby, and you know
Speaker 1: I wasn't. I was invited to his studio. I went
Speaker 1: and saw his his his production stuff. He showed me
Speaker 1: the suit and I just turned to him. I said,
Speaker 1: I'm in dude. He goes wondered my script and said
Speaker 1: no I'm in. It's a very look. It's it's very
Speaker 1: watchable and I've got a few people in my office
Speaker 1: to check it out. How did I didn't get a
Speaker 1: chance to check this and I probably shoot it before
Speaker 1: he brought you an air? Did it? What was the
Speaker 1: reception like? Did it? Do? You know? In the bigfoot genre?
Speaker 1: Were people? Were people least happy? There was something that
Speaker 1: got added into the mix that was that was entertaining. Well,
Speaker 1: you know how purists are, right. We had some purists
Speaker 1: that are you know, very fanatically into it that kind
Speaker 1: of pooped on the movie. They didn't like it because
Speaker 1: it was too intense. You know, it was a completely
Speaker 1: different presentation. You know, we just kind of blew up
Speaker 1: the mythical you know, free beings. It's hiding from people.
Speaker 1: This guy actually goes after him. He you know, he
Speaker 1: does his business. U And then other people have said
Speaker 1: it's one of the most amazing things I've ever seen.
Speaker 1: I know it's done a Europe runs. I know it's
Speaker 1: done you know, Asia, China, Tokyo. I don't really know
Speaker 1: how it does over there because you know, I can't
Speaker 1: read their writing. I have no clue what they're doing.
Speaker 1: It seems to be doing. Okay, you know there are
Speaker 1: people nibbling on Patrick, can maybe do another one? I
Speaker 1: don't know. I was gonna ask because there're gonna be
Speaker 1: a sequel. Yeah. Well, you you brought up the abominable
Speaker 1: Snowman thing, and that would be pretty dope if I
Speaker 1: really were to think about it. But it would be
Speaker 1: cold as hell shooting that thing. Yeah, I never think.
Speaker 1: We know that the audience never thinks of that, and
Speaker 1: we figured that you pampered after types, you just deal
Speaker 1: with it. You know, you got to bring up the experience,
Speaker 1: my friend. I'm not pampered, dude by any stretching the event.
Speaker 1: You know, I get down and dirty, and you know,
Speaker 1: I got to do what I gotta do. Um. You know. Unfortunately, unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I've had an opportunity to work on some really big
Speaker 1: movies and some really small ones. Just was a small one,
Speaker 1: but the heart was gigantic. It was so pure that way,
Speaker 1: and I think, you know, it's probably one of the
Speaker 1: most enjoyable shoots I've ever worked on. It was cool, man,
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. It definitely served its purpose. When I
Speaker 1: was like, I just want to watch a movie where
Speaker 1: I can lose myself and whatever the heck's going on,
Speaker 1: And I was just glad that I didn't have that big,
Speaker 1: that that big scary Bigfoot on my trail because he
Speaker 1: was he was not a cuddly fellow. Marshall, do us
Speaker 1: a favorite. Well, next time you've got one coming out,
Speaker 1: whether it's about Bigfoot or not, reach out to producer
Speaker 1: Mike and we'll get you on. Let's let's get you.
Speaker 1: It's nice to have a member of the team who's
Speaker 1: out there doing the Hollywood thing. Well, I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: you know, I was just listening to your show, eating
Speaker 1: my dinner like I usually do around six o'clock when
Speaker 1: i'm when I'm not preempted by some sports thing which
Speaker 1: happens out here on the West Coast with your show
Speaker 1: a lot. And when you mentioned that, I literally spit
Speaker 1: my noodles across the table. What the hell? You know,
Speaker 1: what's going on? I'm in that movie? And then you
Speaker 1: know you took your shot at the bad acting, so
Speaker 1: you know I had to come back. No, of course,
Speaker 1: your acting was good. I'm a fair man and I
Speaker 1: speak the truth. Your acting was good. The lead guy
Speaker 1: good abs bad acting. That's what I would say. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: you know, anybody that put the star tattoo in the
Speaker 1: middle of their back is questionable. It was an interesting choice.
Speaker 1: I don't know if that's real or not. But whoever,
Speaker 1: whoever decided to get that was real. That was absolutely real.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you a very quick story about that guy,
Speaker 1: which we almost didn't finish the movie. When we wrapped
Speaker 1: the first December. About three weeks after we got back,
Speaker 1: that guy got in an accident on his motorcycle and
Speaker 1: lost his leg. Oh my gosh. Really And then I yes,
Speaker 1: and I got a call from the director. Patrick Is says, dude,
Speaker 1: I don't know if we're going to be able to
Speaker 1: finish our movie. I go on, what's happening? He goes,
Speaker 1: you know, Aj, he got in an accident and they
Speaker 1: had to amputate his leg. What oh man, Well, now
Speaker 1: I feel badly for criticizing the guy's acting. I had
Speaker 1: no idea for the record, everybody, but I hope he's okay.
Speaker 1: If you have to act with your leg here in
Speaker 1: the wrong profession anyway. So anyway, it turns out they
Speaker 1: were going to put him in shorts during the first
Speaker 1: part of the movie, and they chose to put him
Speaker 1: in jeans if they were to put him in shorts.
Speaker 1: The movie's done and we're not finishing it. But this
Speaker 1: guy is a gymnast and he's incredibly gifted with his
Speaker 1: body's very in tune with this physique. He was up
Speaker 1: and running on a prosthetic titanium thing. And so a
Speaker 1: year goes by, he gets back up there and he
Speaker 1: filmed the back half of the movie in his pants,
Speaker 1: and they redid some of those fight scenes with a
Speaker 1: titanium leg and a plastic foot. Wow. Good for him,
Speaker 1: all right, So I got a I got a whole
Speaker 1: new respect for that guy too. We gotta get him
Speaker 1: on the show now. You tell him, we'll have him
Speaker 1: come and talk to us about his next project. But
Speaker 1: Marshall Hilton, everybody you can, you can follow him on
Speaker 1: Instagram And are you on Twitter? I am on Twitter?
Speaker 1: I don't really I'm not a big Twitter play. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't have strike, you know, breaking news all the time. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: we'll follow you on Instagram for the cool movies for sure,
Speaker 1: But Marshall halt him in Primal Rage is the movie.
Speaker 1: Marshall is the actor. Great to have you as part
Speaker 1: of team back my friend. Thanks so much for giving
Speaker 1: us your time. I am very thankful you had me,
Speaker 1: and you've got a fan. All right, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Here you too, you too, great job. Talk to you soon.
Speaker 1: Chill tie, yeah, all right, everybody, we'll be right back.
Speaker 1: Don't you love it when you find a hundred dollar
Speaker 1: bill that's just waiting for you inside of a jacket
Speaker 1: that's been gathering dust in the closet for a long time.
Speaker 1: It's an amazing feeling. Right Well, imagine finding hundreds, maybe
Speaker 1: even thousands of dollars that are sitting in your filing
Speaker 1: cabinet or in boxes that are up in your attic.
Speaker 1: You know it's from that old four oh one k
Speaker 1: the paperwork that you forgot about because it was the
Speaker 1: job before last. Well, that money is just sitting there
Speaker 1: doing nothing. It could be working a lot harder for
Speaker 1: you in a precious metals IRA. My friends at Noble
Speaker 1: Gold can see if you qualify, they'll do all the
Speaker 1: heavy lifting for you. It could make you thousands, cost
Speaker 1: you nothing. Give Noble Gold the call at eight seven
Speaker 1: seven six four six five three four seven or text
Speaker 1: my name Buck to five eleven five eleven and received
Speaker 1: their free Investors Guide plus for all qualified iras above
Speaker 1: twenty thousand dollars. They'll also include a complimentary rare graded
Speaker 1: Morgan silver dollar valued at one hundred and fifty dollars.
Speaker 1: So please text Buck to five eleven, five eleven or
Speaker 1: call eight seven seven six four six five three four
Speaker 1: seven today. Individual results may vary invest wise, standard text
Speaker 1: rates may apply. So the truth is what's in the report,
Speaker 1: and Don Juniors exonerate, Hopix, Don Senior is exonerated, and
Speaker 1: you're just going to have to move on and start
Speaker 1: covering issues. And Americans are telling you in your own
Speaker 1: polling is important to them, healthcare, which we work on here, education,
Speaker 1: the economy, foreign policy, to denuclearized North Korea. Like, we
Speaker 1: have a lot to solve in this country. I said
Speaker 1: to you two and a half years ago when the
Speaker 1: president was elected, I said that we have we're going
Speaker 1: to have joint custody this country for the next four
Speaker 1: to eight years. We got six to go, five and
Speaker 1: a half to go. We got to find a way
Speaker 1: to manage actually custody. This country's got to be honest
Speaker 1: with American people jin that there's no collusion. Oh wait
Speaker 1: a second, you mean there's stuff to talk about other
Speaker 1: than Mulla Report, Kelly and Conway blowing minds over at
Speaker 1: CNN with that whole monologue. There's other stuff than Russia
Speaker 1: collusion that American people would like to hear about. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, how is that even possible? How can I
Speaker 1: even think such a thing. We know that they're not
Speaker 1: going to move on. I mean, they will cover other
Speaker 1: things as well, but they will stay on this because
Speaker 1: all along it has just been an opportunity for the
Speaker 1: media to defame, undermine, and they tried to destroy the
Speaker 1: Trump administration. And now that this OPO research exercise of
Speaker 1: hundreds of pages worth of information that has no criminal
Speaker 1: prosecution value whatsoever. No criminal charges resulted from the Muller
Speaker 1: Report as it was released, right There were charges beforehand
Speaker 1: against people who in a variety of ways got caught
Speaker 1: up in the machinery of this pro but they were
Speaker 1: not in any way colluding with Russia, as we as
Speaker 1: we well know. But the media is now pretending like
Speaker 1: they were just great. You know, the media is kind
Speaker 1: of like the kid that shows up to class and
Speaker 1: hasn't done any of the homework and answers the questions
Speaker 1: and the teacher entirely wrong. But then walks out of
Speaker 1: the classroom and thinks that they're brilliant. That's that's the
Speaker 1: mainstream media in this country. They will still say that, well,
Speaker 1: maybe they couldn't prove collusion now, but there still was
Speaker 1: some kind of collusion. You know, maybe maybe that doesn't
Speaker 1: rise to a criminal charge. But there's something else there.
Speaker 1: There's something that we all need to focus in on.
Speaker 1: And I would just like to see the Democrats make
Speaker 1: a case to the American people about what it is
Speaker 1: that they think that they can do better. What will
Speaker 1: they improve on as compared to the Trump administration, What
Speaker 1: will they do better than the Trump administration? And there
Speaker 1: are some things that Democrats with it's all healthcare and everything,
Speaker 1: but okay, make that case of make that argument. Instead,
Speaker 1: what they want to do is just continue to drill
Speaker 1: down into this, continue to fixate on all things Trump
Speaker 1: Russia collusion. Continue to insist that just because Muller couldn't
Speaker 1: find it with all the resources and the subpoenas and
Speaker 1: the powers that were at his disposal, there must be more.
Speaker 1: There must be more to it than that. But if
Speaker 1: you want a sense of how dishonest the media really
Speaker 1: is on this whole issue, this was this was great. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I tell you a lot about how CNN
Speaker 1: is a has become a bad place, and it wasn't
Speaker 1: always a bad place. Keep in mind that for years
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson how to show at CNN. There I've been
Speaker 1: periods where you could be a real conservative. You know,
Speaker 1: my former colleague Dana lash was a CNN contributor. Or.
Speaker 1: Eric Ericsson has been a CNN contributor. I think at
Speaker 1: one point. I don't know if Rush Limball was a
Speaker 1: CNN contributor, but I know he's appeared on CNN many times, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, real conservatives, you used to be
Speaker 1: able to go on CNN. Not really anymore. Trump has
Speaker 1: broken them. And I've said that to you, and I
Speaker 1: really mean that there's been a kind of a psychological
Speaker 1: collapse that the entire institution has suffered because they really
Speaker 1: convinced themselves while trying to convince the general public that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is some existential threat to America and it's
Speaker 1: obviously not the case. But I think a lot of
Speaker 1: them have taken that propaganda. Whether they believed it in
Speaker 1: the beginning or not, I can't tell you, but I
Speaker 1: do think that they've taken it on board, and there
Speaker 1: are many people, it's not just me, who will tell
Speaker 1: you that CNB became a really hostile place for conservatives. Well,
Speaker 1: now CNN's not just a hostile place for conservatives, and
Speaker 1: this is i think, still considered the gold standard cable
Speaker 1: news network. I mean, the ratings are way down, but
Speaker 1: it still makes a ton of money because CNN is
Speaker 1: a brand, and it's a globally recognized brand, So they
Speaker 1: make all this money off of CNN International and CNN
Speaker 1: dot Com and so you know, the ratings aren't great,
Speaker 1: but it's still a monster media operations, huge and still
Speaker 1: very very profitable. Unfortunately, but it's not just conservatives. They
Speaker 1: aren't welcome over there anymore. Now Now people who are
Speaker 1: just not on board with the anti Trump Russia collusion narrative,
Speaker 1: they can get in trouble. Here's Alan Dershowitz explaining how he,
Speaker 1: like me, is persona non grata over at CNN. Play six. CNN,
Speaker 1: which used to have me on all the time, they
Speaker 1: didn't want was a centrist liberal who went against their
Speaker 1: narrow So here do you know you've said that the
Speaker 1: CNI president Jeff Zucker essentially, or did you banned after
Speaker 1: you took these positions. But do you know that for
Speaker 1: a factor? Is that a sub position? No? I do
Speaker 1: know that for a fact. I've been told that by
Speaker 1: several people within CNN. They had a choice of a
Speaker 1: Harvard law professor for fifty years who's been getting it right,
Speaker 1: who's a centrist liberal and who has credibility, or Michael Evanati,
Speaker 1: and they picked Michael Avanati. In fact, one night, I
Speaker 1: remember getting a call from CNN saying, oh, we have
Speaker 1: to cancel you. We have Avanati. He's coming on tonight.
Speaker 1: And he became their go to guy, and every one
Speaker 1: of his predictions turned out to be false. What else
Speaker 1: do you have to know? My friends, Michael Avanati versus
Speaker 1: Alan Dershowitz for Legal analysis and CNN, Okay, you got
Speaker 1: two liberals there. It's not like they're talking about a
Speaker 1: conservative versus liberally. Got two liberals CINN though in its
Speaker 1: current incarnation, CNN today chooses Avenatio over the Dirsh, and
Speaker 1: I don't agree. I've debated the Dirsh on things before.
Speaker 1: I think he's I think he's very wrong on guns
Speaker 1: of their issues where he's not particularly well versed. And
Speaker 1: holl on TV and talk about them, but when it
Speaker 1: comes to the law and jurisprudence, he knows what he's
Speaker 1: talking about. And they went with that scummy ambulance chasing
Speaker 1: dirt bag Avenati instead of instead of Dershowitz. What else
Speaker 1: do you really have to know about that network? And
Speaker 1: that same mentality, that same lack of sound decision making
Speaker 1: has been apparent in the whole organization. It's been apparent
Speaker 1: in all their coverage on Trump related issues. That's trumped
Speaker 1: arrangement syndrome. To pick Avenati over Dershowitz. When your TV
Speaker 1: producers Democrats, but TV producers, that is a symptom of
Speaker 1: trumped arrangement syndrome. And no one's going to convince me
Speaker 1: otherwise because I'm right. We'll be right back. Is that
Speaker 1: you're finished, sir? Why didn't you make a recommendation to
Speaker 1: Congress one way or the other? Are you going on
Speaker 1: vacation only somewhere the Attorney General will accurately characterize your
Speaker 1: positions on conspiracy and obstruction service. That's MSNBC reporter Mike
Speaker 1: Vickiera who ambushed Special Counsel Muller outside of an Easter
Speaker 1: church service to try and get him to say something
Speaker 1: for the record, although you know this is journalists do
Speaker 1: this a lot. He wasn't really trying to get him
Speaker 1: to say anything. He knows Mueller's not really going to
Speaker 1: say anything. The chance of Robert Muller saying, yeah, I'd
Speaker 1: like to have a really in depth conversation with you
Speaker 1: about the report that just dropped that is the single
Speaker 1: biggest news story in the country right now, I'd like
Speaker 1: to really have that discuss I mean, there's there's no
Speaker 1: real or realistic chance that that was going to happen,
Speaker 1: which then brings me to this. You know, journalists often
Speaker 1: act like punks. It's a profession full of very slimy,
Speaker 1: unethical people. Unfortunately, I wish it weren't the case, and
Speaker 1: it's also very clubby and journalists tend to protect one
Speaker 1: another as long as they're on the left. As long
Speaker 1: as you're a Democrat, mainstream media journalist, then you tend
Speaker 1: to get people that will just automatically give you the
Speaker 1: benefit of the doubt. They'll defend you, they'll protect you
Speaker 1: because you're part of the crew. I am not part
Speaker 1: of the crew, and I am not somebody that feels
Speaker 1: the need to defend journalists who act like idiots, and
Speaker 1: this is just that. I mean, this is somebody whoever
Speaker 1: it's Easter Sunday folks. You know Robert Mueller as much
Speaker 1: as I think that he engaged in partisan hackery in
Speaker 1: the report, and I think that he allowed his hatred
Speaker 1: for Donald Trump as an institutionalist, right, Mueller's an institutionalist,
Speaker 1: believes very much in institutions like the FBI, and I
Speaker 1: think that that clouded his judgment, or at least influenced
Speaker 1: his judgment, and it shouldn't have. But Robert Muller is
Speaker 1: a human being and he's you know, a family man,
Speaker 1: and he's a former marine, I believe, and you know,
Speaker 1: the guy wants to go to Easter Sunday service should
Speaker 1: be left alone. I mean, this was a this was
Speaker 1: a low brow move. This was a low blow kind
Speaker 1: of thing to do. Now, I'm not saying it's some
Speaker 1: huge deal. Robert Mueller could handle it. He's not going
Speaker 1: to go off the corner and cry. But it does
Speaker 1: just indicate that the media when it comes to all
Speaker 1: things Trump, Muller, Russia collusion, Special Counsel related, when it
Speaker 1: comes to all these issues, they really just don't have
Speaker 1: any any governor. I mean, they don't have any sense
Speaker 1: of what the boundaries are or should be. But this
Speaker 1: MSNBC report thought it was a great idea. I thought
Speaker 1: it was an opportunity to making a name. Look, I've
Speaker 1: never heard of Mike Vickara before, so in that sense
Speaker 1: it worked. But this is where the incentives in journalism
Speaker 1: often run against common sense and decency. There are some
Speaker 1: things that you just should know not to do, and
Speaker 1: I think that this is very squarely in that category.
Speaker 1: You know, I was going to say, is nothing sacred
Speaker 1: to the media, Well, obviously Easter Sunday is not sacred
Speaker 1: to them. And there was that story and I didn't
Speaker 1: get to it last week. It's a great story about
Speaker 1: how the New York Times, when referring to some of
Speaker 1: the heroic acts of a priest, you try to pull
Speaker 1: important items and artifacts out of the burning cathedral of
Speaker 1: Notre Dame. They thought that a statue. This is the
Speaker 1: New York Times. This isn't some random paper a statue
Speaker 1: of Jesus had been removed. It wasn't a statue. It
Speaker 1: was the Eucharist, my friends, which Catholics believe is the
Speaker 1: body and blood of Christ through transubstantiation. The actual body
Speaker 1: and blood of Jesus Christ, and that is the miracle
Speaker 1: that has performed at every church service, and the priests
Speaker 1: removed the body and blood of Christ. The New York
Speaker 1: Times reinterpreted that to be Oh, it must have been
Speaker 1: a statue of Jesus that they took out the body
Speaker 1: of Christ. These are the media elites, my friends. That
Speaker 1: are the ones that are supposed to inform all the
Speaker 1: rest of us of what's going on in the country
Speaker 1: and around the world. This is this is supposedly the
Speaker 1: best of the best. Buck. It's time for roll call,
Speaker 1: Jazzy roll call everybody. That's right. It's all the reflexes.
Speaker 1: So may the wings of liberty never lose a feather.
Speaker 1: Let's get to it. Chadwick, Chadwick von chadwin Stein. Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: love your show and have been following you for years,
Speaker 1: and I just want to ask, did I detect an
Speaker 1: unofficial Romney buck slap on the Friday Show as somebody
Speaker 1: who enthusiastically endorsed Romney in twenty twelve and thought he
Speaker 1: would have been a fine president. I'm now officially done
Speaker 1: with him. Romney's piety and self righteous droning on about
Speaker 1: the personal morality of Trump rings extremely hollow. The fact
Speaker 1: is that while Romney is an exemplary moral man in
Speaker 1: his individual life, he is extremely lacking in judgment of
Speaker 1: moral clarity when it comes to realizing the political stakes
Speaker 1: involved in what is now trench warfare for the heart
Speaker 1: and soul of America. Romney's unwillingness to get tough with
Speaker 1: Obama in twenty twelve cost this country dearly as we
Speaker 1: experienced a continuation of the morally costly lurch to the left.
Speaker 1: There is more than one's character than the sum of
Speaker 1: your personal morality. For politicians, they're judged by their loyalty,
Speaker 1: rolling up their sleeves and fighting for they know to
Speaker 1: be right despite the criticism, and falling through on their promises.
Speaker 1: In these ways, Trump is miles above Romney and character.
Speaker 1: Trump takes a sling arrows because he loves the country.
Speaker 1: Romney has shown himself to be run of the mill
Speaker 1: political animal who only cares about his image with the MSM.
Speaker 1: That being said, I fully endorsed you giving him a
Speaker 1: full fledged buck slap rather than the half slap you
Speaker 1: gave him on Friday. Chadwick well put, That's why I
Speaker 1: read your whole message here. I would agree with you
Speaker 1: that Romney doesn't really understand the political moment we're in,
Speaker 1: and I'm I'm very uh. You know, I admire his
Speaker 1: personal probity and decency, and I mean that, I'm not
Speaker 1: that's not some snide or backhanded compliment. I think that
Speaker 1: that individual decency and ethical behavior are always something to
Speaker 1: be applauded. But in the case of Romney, once you
Speaker 1: get beyond that into his public life. You know, he
Speaker 1: was the governor of Massachusetts, and if memory serves, he
Speaker 1: was the you know, pro life I'm sorry, pro choice
Speaker 1: governor of Massachusetts for a while, and I think he's
Speaker 1: been willing to make policy adjustments to his moral compass,
Speaker 1: which to me is in many ways if you're talking
Speaker 1: about a politician, much more problematic than somebody who makes
Speaker 1: personal judgments to their moral compass in the case of
Speaker 1: someone like a Donald Trump. So I'm with you, Adam
Speaker 1: writes buck Jack quotes Jack Burton from Big Trouble and
Speaker 1: Little China, and you skipped right over it. Come on, man,
Speaker 1: shields high. Well, Adam, I don't even I don't even
Speaker 1: catch that one. I can tell you that I did
Speaker 1: watch Big Trouble and Little China last night, and it
Speaker 1: was fantastic. It's such an underrated movie, you know, such
Speaker 1: an underrated classic. I do think that you could do
Speaker 1: a really cool remake of it, because the production value
Speaker 1: is not great, a little cheesy. Some people say that
Speaker 1: that adds to the charm of the movie. I think
Speaker 1: you can make that case. But I personally would like
Speaker 1: to see a much spruced up version of Big Trouble
Speaker 1: Little China. Although if you try to make that movie today,
Speaker 1: you may run into some folks who think that that
Speaker 1: is not okay. You know, they would probably find some
Speaker 1: aspects of Big Trouble, Little China to be cultural appropriation,
Speaker 1: to be inappropriate for one reason or another. So we
Speaker 1: shall see. Richard writes, happy Easter, this was yesterday, obviously, Well, Richard,
Speaker 1: happy Easter to you two. I hope it was a
Speaker 1: joyous day for you. He is risen. I mean Jesus Christ,
Speaker 1: our Lord and Savior, not Richard. Although Richard, we will
Speaker 1: all be risen because of Jesus Christ. So that's the
Speaker 1: good news. Let's see. Dueane right, A little snippet from
Speaker 1: an article regarding Scandinavian eating abbots. I was trying to
Speaker 1: learn about their die because I've been told so often
Speaker 1: there's so much healthier than Americans. There is a high
Speaker 1: prevalence of cardiovascular disease in this area, mainly due to
Speaker 1: the high intake of saturated fats in sodium. Stomach cancer
Speaker 1: is also very common due to the high intake of
Speaker 1: salt and salt cured foods. Obesity is on the rise. Well, Duade,
Speaker 1: I don't know much about the Scandinavian diet or Scandinavian health.
Speaker 1: I just know that generally speaking, there's a how do
Speaker 1: I put this, at least a perception that these Scandinavians
Speaker 1: live longer, have fewer health problems than we do. But
Speaker 1: ultimately it's all about balance and eating whole foods. Not
Speaker 1: the place going to whole foods, but eating real food
Speaker 1: instead of processed, processed crap. Kenneth right saw you on
Speaker 1: Fox Media Buzz. Keep the whiskers groom to about one.
Speaker 1: The look suits you. Thank you, Kenneth. Kenneth knows what
Speaker 1: the frequency is. Thank you, Kenneth. I think that the
Speaker 1: beard look I've I've grown, I've grown accustomed to it now.
Speaker 1: I think that so far it is, it's staying. Will
Speaker 1: it make it through the summer months when it gets
Speaker 1: really hot. I can't speak to that, but I do
Speaker 1: enjoy the beard for now. It also gives me something
Speaker 1: to stroke other than my ego. Ron Right, it's good
Speaker 1: job on media buzz today. Easter blessings to you and
Speaker 1: your family. Well, Easter blessings to you and your family, Ron,
Speaker 1: and thank you for watching me on media buzz. I
Speaker 1: would post the clip, but we couldn't get the clip
Speaker 1: because producer Mike had this whole oh spending the holiest
Speaker 1: Christian day of the year with his family thing, so
Speaker 1: he wasn't able to get the clip. I'm just kidding.
Speaker 1: Of course, that's way more important, but I'd like to
Speaker 1: give him a hard time sometimes. Jennifer Buck on the
Speaker 1: topic of beautiful buildings, I wanted to point out that
Speaker 1: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints Mormons
Speaker 1: still builds beautiful temples. Perhaps you've seen our temple in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. The Salt Lake City Temple is stunning and
Speaker 1: took forty years to complete. In fact, it we'll close
Speaker 1: on December in December for a four year renovation, after
Speaker 1: which it will open to the public to tour prior
Speaker 1: to its reddication. Anyway, they're over a HU fifty operating
Speaker 1: temples worldwide and each is beautiful and inspiring. The Rome,
Speaker 1: Italy Temple was just recently dedicated and many photographs are
Speaker 1: available online. Google it beautiful shield tie, Jen. Well, thank you, Jen.
Speaker 1: I have to speak honestly about this, I don't know
Speaker 1: much at all about the Mormon temples that exist in
Speaker 1: terms of their architecture and what. Yeah, I have no
Speaker 1: familiarity with that. So I was speaking in very general
Speaker 1: terms about about really just architectural trends, religious buildings included,
Speaker 1: but but more broadly speaking, just that there's a there
Speaker 1: was certainly a period in the seventies where everything that
Speaker 1: was being build was just hideous and disgusting. Do you
Speaker 1: see all these municipal buildings from the seventies, and especially
Speaker 1: in this country, these public high schools from the seventies
Speaker 1: that just they look like they look like everybody was
Speaker 1: supposed to study in like an insane asylum or something.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just very former Soviet block. Uh. You know,
Speaker 1: a lot of geometry over esthetic, you know, just a
Speaker 1: lot of squares and rectangles, and it's just it's just ugly.
Speaker 1: I can't evenly describe it. The the hideousness of the
Speaker 1: architecture of the of the seventies period, but it was
Speaker 1: really bad. I'm kind of anti seventies as a general rule.
Speaker 1: I know, people say, oh, book the great rock and roll. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't like the fashion I don't like I'm I
Speaker 1: don't like that period in American history very much. I
Speaker 1: am not a seventies guy. I gotta tell you, I
Speaker 1: do not like disco. Um, it's not it's not my thing.
Speaker 1: Let's see here, Troy, all right, Buck, has anyone mentioned
Speaker 1: to you that your Beto impression sounds exactly like Keanu
Speaker 1: Reeves and point break always makes me laugh? But like, yeah, dude, um, Troy,
Speaker 1: no one has said that specifically, but that is a
Speaker 1: very apt comparison. I must say you are on the
Speaker 1: right track. My friend. Area is definitely a Keyanu slash
Speaker 1: Beto vibe. Betto is kind of like a cross between
Speaker 1: Keyanu and Napoleon Dynamite. I'm just like running for president
Speaker 1: because like, I just want all Americans to just just
Speaker 1: you know, open their hearts. He is all about the
Speaker 1: flowery rhetoric without any substance beneath it. But may Or
Speaker 1: Pete came along and was like, oh, look at that
Speaker 1: tuna sandwich you got there, yink, it's mine. Stole Beto's
Speaker 1: lunch right out from under him. Ray right, you lamented
Speaker 1: in a recent radio broadcast the lack of about how
Speaker 1: modern architecture served as portals to the divine or relax
Speaker 1: being portals to the vine and the wake from the dam.
Speaker 1: I share with you sadness would have lost this beloved monument.
Speaker 1: As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Speaker 1: Latter day Saints, may I suggest you take a look
Speaker 1: at the two hundred temples built by our faith. Wow, Okay,
Speaker 1: more more from them? All right, guys, I get it
Speaker 1: the Mormons. The Mormons are flexing on this one. They're like, hey,
Speaker 1: you want beautiful temples. We got beautiful temples. I got
Speaker 1: them right here. I want to check them out. I'll
Speaker 1: show you some beautiful temples. Hey, guys and gals, I
Speaker 1: defer to your superior wisdom on the subject. Let me
Speaker 1: take a peek. It's some I've never been to a
Speaker 1: I've never been to a Mormon temple, and I can't
Speaker 1: even think off the top of my head of what
Speaker 1: one particularly looks like I've been to obviously countless Catholic churches,
Speaker 1: because I'm a Catholic and I've been to a lot
Speaker 1: of I wouldn't say a lot of. I've been in
Speaker 1: probably dozens of Episcopalian churches over the years for a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of different reasons, but I have never been
Speaker 1: I've never even been inside a Mormon temple. I'm just realized.
Speaker 1: I've been inside many mosques, many mosques, and a few
Speaker 1: Jewish synagogues, but I have gosh, I just realized I've
Speaker 1: probably been in more mosques than anything except for Catholic churches.
Speaker 1: That's a whole that's a whole other conversation. But I'll
Speaker 1: have to check out the temples of the Church of
Speaker 1: Jesus Christ allowed to saints. I'm very curious to see
Speaker 1: how they have brought about a new, beautiful twentieth century aesthetic.
Speaker 1: So obviously there are people that feel this way. David Rites, Hello,
Speaker 1: Buck Love the reports. I'm new to the area. Have
Speaker 1: you ever sneezed on camera? David, I have not sneezed
Speaker 1: on camera in memory. I have started sweating profusely on
Speaker 1: camera because the studio was too hot, which is really
Speaker 1: not fun because when you look like a sweaty mess
Speaker 1: on TV, no one cares what you have to say.
Speaker 1: But no, I have not. I have not sneezed. I
Speaker 1: did once knock over a huge a cup of like
Speaker 1: a venti size Starbucks coffee all over Glenn Beck's radio
Speaker 1: studio equipment right before I was about to fill in
Speaker 1: for Glenn on radio and had had a heart attack
Speaker 1: basically at when that happened. But no, I've never never sneezed.
Speaker 1: I think on camera. Let's see here, Matt hey buck
Speaker 1: back to being an ex pat and your podcast is
Speaker 1: my link to the craziness going on at home. Random
Speaker 1: thought I wanted to throw out there for you. I
Speaker 1: think AOC is being groomed to be Democrats candidate for
Speaker 1: president in twenty twenty four. She's twenty nine now, making
Speaker 1: her thirty five winter term is up in the next election.
Speaker 1: She gets massive media coverage, has been made into the
Speaker 1: darling of the party. I tend to believe people are
Speaker 1: too shortsighted to plan long term regimes, but she has
Speaker 1: everything they want planned or not. I bet she'll be
Speaker 1: on the ticket in twenty twenty four. Matt I assuming
Speaker 1: the ages you have here are correct. Yeah, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: be surprised at AOC rand. I wouldn't be surprised at all.
Speaker 1: In fact, I think if they run Bernie and Bernie
Speaker 1: loses to Trump, the built in excuses that it's just
Speaker 1: because he's too old, and so they'll be this huge
Speaker 1: push among the Democrat left to the socialist krat left
Speaker 1: to go with a really, really young Canada. The next
Speaker 1: time around, Victor rides Bucker. Kenny G impression sounds like
Speaker 1: sweetish chef doing Kenny G. Love it well, Victor, I
Speaker 1: don't even know what my Kenny G impression is, but
Speaker 1: I'm glad you love it so thank you. That's gonna
Speaker 1: be the show for today. Team back in the saddle
Speaker 1: every day this week. I will talk to you then
Speaker 1: Shield's high. You know how the left calls the Green
Speaker 1: New Deal bold, or how they'll boldly defend an anti
Speaker 1: semi and the Democrat controlled House. I think they don't
Speaker 1: really know what bold means. I define bold of something else,
Speaker 1: like the taste of freedom I get every morning with
Speaker 1: my black Rifle coffee. This is how I start everyday,
Speaker 1: friends with a delicious cup of black rifle coffee. In fact,
Speaker 1: now I'm making it in big batches that I can
Speaker 1: leave some in the fridge for ice coffee. I don't
Speaker 1: care whether you like it hot or coal. The best
Speaker 1: coffee you'll get anywhere is Black Rifle Coffee, and they'll
Speaker 1: deliver it right to your door. So please just join
Speaker 1: their coffee club. It's hassle free. For a bold cop
Speaker 1: of America's best coffee, visit Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck and get twenty percent off your first purchase. That's
Speaker 1: Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash buck. For twenty percent off
Speaker 1: Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck. No more lines are
Speaker 1: running out, Just incredible tasting coffee brought right to your
Speaker 1: door by freedom loving all American veterans. Black Riflecoffee dot com,
Speaker 1: slash buck,