Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Join the conversation
Speaker 1: and message Buck on Facebook, Instagram, or email Team Bucket
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com. He may read it on the show.
Speaker 1: I've told you all along you cannot trust these bureaucracies.
Speaker 1: You cannot trust institutions in this country anymore because so
Speaker 1: many of them have been overtaken by left wing idealogues.
Speaker 1: That's the case when you talk about the news media
Speaker 1: has been for a long time. It's also now very
Speaker 1: apparent when you look at the major bureaucracies out there,
Speaker 1: you look at what's going on with institutions like the
Speaker 1: CDC right, So it's gone beyond just the private sector wokeness.
Speaker 1: It's gone beyond college campuses and universities that have Marxist
Speaker 1: running all over the place. Now what should be nonpartisan
Speaker 1: government federal government institutions are provinces of the left effectively
Speaker 1: and are working for progressive and woke ideology in whatever
Speaker 1: way they can. This is a major challenge. This is
Speaker 1: a threat to our freedoms and liberty. It's when we
Speaker 1: have to take very seriously. But you also have to
Speaker 1: focus on what's going on online these days, and as
Speaker 1: you know, the internet never forgets. And there's never been
Speaker 1: a more important time to protect your Internet activity than
Speaker 1: right now, given all the politicization and all the ways
Speaker 1: that big tech are punishing people. That's why I urge
Speaker 1: you to get Express VPN. Everything you search for, a watch,
Speaker 1: or click online can be tracked by big tech companies.
Speaker 1: They can match your activity to your true identity using
Speaker 1: your devices unique IP address. When I switch on Express VPN,
Speaker 1: my computer, my phone, whatever it is I'm using has
Speaker 1: a masked IP address. Makes it a lot harder for
Speaker 1: websites to identify me. Use Express VPN and up to
Speaker 1: five devices simultaneously. It's so easy to use. You download
Speaker 1: the app, you'll have it set up in a minute.
Speaker 1: Stop handing over your data to big tech companies. Go
Speaker 1: with the VPN I trust for online protection. Is it
Speaker 1: Express vpn dot com slash buck to get three months
Speaker 1: free on a one year package. That's Express vpn dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck to get three extra months free Express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slash buck right now to learn more.
Speaker 1: I've been warning you all along that the CDC was
Speaker 1: going to get addicted to all the power and influence
Speaker 1: that it's had. This is an institution, This is an
Speaker 1: organization of the federal government that has been largely resigned
Speaker 1: to putting out flu advisory notices. You know, once in
Speaker 1: a while, they'll they'll be an ebola scare, or they'll
Speaker 1: be a haunt of virus outbreak somewhere, and they'll they'll
Speaker 1: call someone of the CDC for comment on the news.
Speaker 1: But generally speaking, the CDC was something that you mostly
Speaker 1: knew about because in zombie apocalypse movies or in some
Speaker 1: you know, some some sci fi thriller, the CDC would
Speaker 1: make an appearance right the show The Strain, for example,
Speaker 1: and the hero as a CDC scientist. It's actually a
Speaker 1: good show. I think it holds up pretty well for
Speaker 1: what it is. But now we see that, just like
Speaker 1: all the other federal bureaucracies, the CDC is involved in
Speaker 1: not just partisan politics, but in progressive politics, in Marxist
Speaker 1: identity politics, and it doesn't want to step away. As
Speaker 1: the COVID pandemic slowly fades, it's going to be a long,
Speaker 1: painful extrication from the overlords that we have now at
Speaker 1: the CDC telling us what we can do, where we
Speaker 1: can shop, whether we can go and breathe fresh air
Speaker 1: outside without some smelly rag across our face. Right, that's
Speaker 1: not going to be an easy process in and of itself,
Speaker 1: But the CDC wants to be involved in the national conversation.
Speaker 1: That's why they have Rachelle will Lenski is the director. Now,
Speaker 1: this is somebody who is a progressive and a left
Speaker 1: I mean she is, I assure you, entirely in line
Speaker 1: with all of the political positions of a prime time
Speaker 1: MSNBC host. And if you were to sit down, Robin
Speaker 1: will Lenski of the CDC, I'm sorry, Rochelle will Lenski
Speaker 1: of the CDC is somebody who would believe and of
Speaker 1: course a woman's right to choose, meaning terminate a pregnancy
Speaker 1: for all nine months. She believes, I'm sure in all
Speaker 1: of the whole panoply of transgender rights, even the ones
Speaker 1: that are being created as I'm still sitting here speaking
Speaker 1: to you, I'm sure she believes in giving puberty blocking
Speaker 1: drugs to ten year olds who think that they're a
Speaker 1: different gender than they are. Whatever it may be, find
Speaker 1: a left wing issue, and the head of the CDC,
Speaker 1: and I'm sure all the people around her too, because
Speaker 1: these are science bureaucrats. Who do you think goes to
Speaker 1: work for the CDC, people that are really going to
Speaker 1: cure cancer, or people who want to be working in
Speaker 1: the government. You went to med school for four years
Speaker 1: and then did your residency, or you have a PhD
Speaker 1: in microbiology and you want to go work at this
Speaker 1: at the CDC so you can do what exactly if
Speaker 1: you're really good generally speaking, aren't you going to go
Speaker 1: to big pharma. Aren't you gonna actually work at a
Speaker 1: place where they're coming up with new drugs that save
Speaker 1: people's lives, sup pointing the South folks as we all
Speaker 1: sit around worshiping Saint fauci As that this guy knows anything.
Speaker 1: But here they are weighing in today, we're still in
Speaker 1: the midst of this COVID pandemic. It's fading out, but
Speaker 1: there are a lot of cases still, and people are
Speaker 1: dying every day, and you've had a real spike in
Speaker 1: cases in places like New York in Michigan, which we'll
Speaker 1: talk about more later. Yet they're immediately shifting focus because
Speaker 1: they don't want to lose the ability to be front
Speaker 1: and center in the public conversation. They're shifting focus here
Speaker 1: to racism as an urgent public health threat. Now, there
Speaker 1: are a lot of ways that we could tackle this conversation.
Speaker 1: You can get into this, but let me just give
Speaker 1: you a sense of This is the statement from Rachelle Wilenski, MDMPH,
Speaker 1: director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Here's
Speaker 1: what she writes. The COVID nineteen pandemic has resulted in
Speaker 1: the depth of over five hundred thousand Americans. Tens of
Speaker 1: millions have been infected, and across the country people are suffering. Importantly,
Speaker 1: these painful, etc. Etc. Okay, the disparities seen over the
Speaker 1: past year were not a result of COVID nineteen. Instead,
Speaker 1: the pandemic illuminated inequities that have existed for generations and
Speaker 1: revealed for all of America, unknown but often unaddressed epidemic
Speaker 1: affecting impacting public health racism. Wow, the real public health epidemic,
Speaker 1: I guess is in COVID, the one that we're gonna
Speaker 1: have to struggle with for generations. The real public health
Speaker 1: epidemic is racism. Think about this, How is racism a
Speaker 1: public health epidemic? Where can we can we isolate racism
Speaker 1: in a Petrie dish? Can we actually do a test
Speaker 1: for you? Know, antibiotic resistance when it comes to racism,
Speaker 1: and what are we really talking about here. No, this
Speaker 1: is the transference of a supposed institution of science which
Speaker 1: is really just a massive government bureaucracy that's a tremendous
Speaker 1: amount of sloth, waste, and abuse, and it's been catastrophically
Speaker 1: inept during the COVID pandemic. Let's remind ourselves of that.
Speaker 1: Remember when in the early days messed up all the testing,
Speaker 1: The CDC messed up the testing. And also, who is
Speaker 1: telling you at the beginning, guys, testing for this disease
Speaker 1: is just one of a hundred steps to try to
Speaker 1: deal with this. But there was such a focus on
Speaker 1: it because it was it turned into it was Trump's
Speaker 1: fault that the tests in the early days weren't coming
Speaker 1: out and the numbers that they needed them to, meaning
Speaker 1: they weren't producing enough of these tests. Anyway, the CDC
Speaker 1: has been an abject failure. They were they didn't have
Speaker 1: the backbone, the institutional backbone to say, sorry, lazy teachers, unions,
Speaker 1: the schools should be open, all of them always. There
Speaker 1: was no reason to shut down K through twelve education. Ever,
Speaker 1: in this country, the data never supported it. It was
Speaker 1: never reasonable. CDC too cowardly to do that, because did
Speaker 1: you think that if you took a poll of CDC employees,
Speaker 1: what ninety five percent of them voted for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: That's what I would guess about ninety five percent. And
Speaker 1: if you wonder where I get these statistics from, if
Speaker 1: you look at the federal government and federal government bureaucrat
Speaker 1: donations in the Hillary Trump campaign, guess what, over ninety
Speaker 1: percent went to Hillary Clinton. So you've got a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of CNN watching leftists working at the CDC, and
Speaker 1: now they want to get in on the next big challenge,
Speaker 1: race as a public health threat. And you know they
Speaker 1: cite for they cite in this health data about life expectancy,
Speaker 1: they cite that white Americans live longer than black, black,
Speaker 1: and Hispanic Americans on average. And so this is racism.
Speaker 1: It has to be racism, they say, Right, what's so
Speaker 1: fascinating is do you think that white Americans have the
Speaker 1: longest life expectancy because you know, white supremacy. When they
Speaker 1: talk about racism, the only racism they're fighting against. It's
Speaker 1: not Black on Asian racism, it's not Hispanic on black
Speaker 1: racism or or anything else. It's white supremacy. We all
Speaker 1: know that that's the only racism that concerns the left
Speaker 1: in this country. There is no other racism as far
Speaker 1: as they're concerned, even racism among other races. They will
Speaker 1: tell you, and you know this is true, is the
Speaker 1: result of white supremacy. So white people are the are
Speaker 1: the reason for all racism all over the world in fact,
Speaker 1: which is insane, but that's what the left believes. Somehow,
Speaker 1: Asian American have a considerably higher life expectancy I believe
Speaker 1: it's over eighty than white Americans do. Which is interesting,
Speaker 1: isn't it, Because Asian Americans also have higher average household
Speaker 1: income than white Americans do. But but the system of
Speaker 1: white supremacy cannot be We can't say that this is
Speaker 1: an exaggerated construct of the left. No, no, we all
Speaker 1: have to bow before the terrors of the white supremacist
Speaker 1: system that exists all over our country. Look, there's a
Speaker 1: tremendous amount uh, there's a there's there's a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of misinformation out there about all of this. Right, there's
Speaker 1: a tremendous amount of people who are sitting around saying,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, maybe the CDC has actually got
Speaker 1: this right, and they and they and then as I said,
Speaker 1: they have to they have to bow down to this
Speaker 1: notion that white supremacy is influencing all of our institutions.
Speaker 1: It's it's in everything, it's everywhere, it's all over the place.
Speaker 1: Maybe can we can we have a conversation as to
Speaker 1: whether that's actually exaggerated and that's harmful and that separates
Speaker 1: us and that that pulls us apart? Right? Can can
Speaker 1: we have a conversation about that? Or were not allowed to? No,
Speaker 1: we're just supposed to accept their premise. We're supposed to
Speaker 1: accept their premise that even the health disparities from COVID
Speaker 1: are a function of white supremacy and racism. Structure, structural racism,
Speaker 1: white supremacy, these are the same things. They're used interchangeably now.
Speaker 1: They didn't used to be white supremacy. Used to be
Speaker 1: guys with you know, neo Nazi tattoos and shaved heads
Speaker 1: who were you know, really bad people. Now white supremacy
Speaker 1: as well. There's disparate representation in the you know, MIT
Speaker 1: electrical engineering program among different ethnic groups, so that looks
Speaker 1: like white supremacy to me. I mean, it's it's abused
Speaker 1: all the time. It's abused all the time as a
Speaker 1: as just a concept now to silence people. And then
Speaker 1: that brings me to the CDC. I've been worried all
Speaker 1: along that the left has seen something here. The left
Speaker 1: has seen that if you can terrify people based upon
Speaker 1: their health, or if you can go for something what's
Speaker 1: really perhaps the most personal thing for all of us,
Speaker 1: our health, our ability to enjoy our day to day lives,
Speaker 1: and to stay alive, and this is a really effective
Speaker 1: means of control. This is a really effective means of
Speaker 1: getting people to do whatever you want them to do.
Speaker 1: We've seen this during the pandemic. I've said, they're going
Speaker 1: to go from the public health emergency to the climate
Speaker 1: change emergency, They're going to go from the They're going
Speaker 1: to go from the public health emergency to the gun
Speaker 1: violence emergency, which they've already done. And in fact, as
Speaker 1: you know, the CDC always wants to study gun violence
Speaker 1: as that the CDC has a role in this, but
Speaker 1: it's using a large federal bureaucracy under the guise of
Speaker 1: health to control you. And they say that this is
Speaker 1: now all about racism because then all these equity challenges
Speaker 1: all across the country. It turns into listen to the science.
Speaker 1: That's what they'll say, listen to the science. And as
Speaker 1: we all know, that hasn't been true about their approach
Speaker 1: to COVID, it's definitely not going to be true about
Speaker 1: their approach to what they call now white supremacy, which
Speaker 1: is it's almost hard, it's hard to define. It's whatever
Speaker 1: the left decides it is, and now it's whatever the CDC,
Speaker 1: the Centers for Disease Control decides it is. Perhaps we
Speaker 1: should call it the Centers for Racism Control. Now you
Speaker 1: got in this CDC statement put out by the director Wilenski,
Speaker 1: very political obviously if she's going to get that job
Speaker 1: in the bidenm and we will continue. Sorry, here you go.
Speaker 1: As the nation's leading public health agency, CDC has a
Speaker 1: critical role to play to address the impact of racism
Speaker 1: on public health. To say that there's racism in public
Speaker 1: health that they never will say who's committing the public
Speaker 1: health racism. That's what I want to know. I want
Speaker 1: to know who's actually doing the racism in public health. Now,
Speaker 1: if they want to argue that there is an economic
Speaker 1: disparity for health outcomes. That's absolutely true, and we should
Speaker 1: look at how that happens, why that happens, where that is.
Speaker 1: But if they're going to say that the racism requires
Speaker 1: action by individuals, that is immoral. That's what racism has
Speaker 1: to be premised on. That's what racism has to be
Speaker 1: based on. So who's doing it? Are doctors not treating
Speaker 1: minority patients because they're racist? Whose fault is it? If
Speaker 1: one community drinks more sugary soda, for example, and more
Speaker 1: foods that are likely to tribute to type two diabetes
Speaker 1: than another, do all ethnic groups in this country actually
Speaker 1: have the same risks from different diseases? And actually turns
Speaker 1: out if you look at the numbers, there are some
Speaker 1: diseases that all of the world disparately affect certain populations
Speaker 1: based on ethnicity. That's just a genetic reality. Some people,
Speaker 1: some groups, ethnic groups, national groups are more susceptible to
Speaker 1: certain diseases. I mean, one that comes to mind is
Speaker 1: sickle cell anemia, for example. So there actually are some
Speaker 1: health disparities that are just there that aren't the result
Speaker 1: of racism. It's worth noting that. But how do they
Speaker 1: expect how's the CDC going to say that we should
Speaker 1: tackle this. Well, you see an example of it in Vermont.
Speaker 1: This is from Scientific American Vermont to give minority residence
Speaker 1: priority for COVID vaccines. This was just just recently. States
Speaker 1: have tribe with limited success to get vaccines to people
Speaker 1: of color who have been disproportionately killed and hospitalized by
Speaker 1: the virus. Starting Thursday, Vermont explicitly gave black adults and
Speaker 1: people from other minority communities priority status for vaccinations. It
Speaker 1: follows Montana, which in January announced that Native Americans other
Speaker 1: people of color, because they're at higher risk of complications
Speaker 1: from COVID nineteen, would be allowed to receive the vaccine.
Speaker 1: All Black, Indigenous residents and other people of color who
Speaker 1: are permanent Vermont residence and sixteen or older are eligible
Speaker 1: for the vaccine. Okay, so we're actually now prioritizing people
Speaker 1: for life saving for what we all understand as a
Speaker 1: life saving vaccine based upon skin color. That is happening
Speaker 1: in America today. You think that this is the beginning
Speaker 1: of this, or you think that this is just a
Speaker 1: one off. You think that they're going to do more
Speaker 1: of this, or they're going to do less of this
Speaker 1: going forward, Right, this. When I say this, I mean
Speaker 1: using race as a means of making distinctions about health
Speaker 1: that really matter, distinctions about public health authorities and states,
Speaker 1: sources and ways that really matter. You know, what, would
Speaker 1: it have been fair? I mean I had to help
Speaker 1: my family members. I had to help my parents get vaccinated.
Speaker 1: They're both seniors or my mom's close to being a senior.
Speaker 1: I had to help them get appointments and figure out
Speaker 1: and it was not easy for them at all. Would
Speaker 1: I resent the idea that people who are younger than
Speaker 1: my parents but are of a of a preferred by
Speaker 1: the CDC racial category would go ahead of them, even
Speaker 1: though the risk, as we know, is first and foremost
Speaker 1: determined by age. Yeah, I think that that's a problem.
Speaker 1: I think that's racism. But that's not the way that
Speaker 1: the left sees this at all. They are pulling us apart.
Speaker 1: They are Marxist identity politics obsessed. That's what's happening now
Speaker 1: across the country, and that's what's happening with the CDC's
Speaker 1: involvement in all of this. And you know they're they're
Speaker 1: they're doing things at CDC like here's here's how they're
Speaker 1: tackling this, right, let's ask about what are they really doing.
Speaker 1: We're expand ending our internal agency efforts to foster greater
Speaker 1: diversity and create an inclusive and affirming environment that's going
Speaker 1: to save a lot of lives. Yeah, I'm sure the
Speaker 1: CDC is going to be really successful in that we're
Speaker 1: launching a new web portal Racism and Health as part
Speaker 1: of our ongoing commitment to serve as a catalyst for
Speaker 1: public and scientific discourse around racism and health and to
Speaker 1: be accountable for our progress. Oh, I'm sure they're going
Speaker 1: to be really accountable. Here's how they finish off this statement.
Speaker 1: Confronting the impact of racism will not be easy. I
Speaker 1: know we can meet this challenge. I know we can
Speaker 1: create an America where all people have the opportunity to
Speaker 1: live a healthy lifestyle when we each take responsibility and
Speaker 1: work together. I am committed to this work. I certainly
Speaker 1: helpe you will lean in and join me. This is
Speaker 1: all just, this is all just the same stuff that
Speaker 1: you see, the kind of you know, Marxist equity babble
Speaker 1: that you see from college and university admissions offices. I mean,
Speaker 1: they're really pushing very hard on this notion that I'm
Speaker 1: America is this really evil, racist country, and that there
Speaker 1: is no in fact equal protection under the law. The
Speaker 1: law has to be making constant distinctions between people based
Speaker 1: upon race. This is an enormous moral regression. This is
Speaker 1: absolutely wrong. This is absolutely going in the wrong direction.
Speaker 1: And it started with smaller things like, oh, a little
Speaker 1: bit of affirmative action in school is a little bit
Speaker 1: of firmative action and hiring. Now you've got states that
Speaker 1: are saying, oh, you're black or Latino, you get priority
Speaker 1: access to a vaccine over other people, including other people
Speaker 1: who are at higher risk because of their age and comorbidities,
Speaker 1: because equity. It's actually happening in this country right now
Speaker 1: in America. The Biden administrations, of course pushing all this
Speaker 1: stuff as much as they possibly can. That's right, rich
Speaker 1: old white guy Joe Biden is trying to convince America
Speaker 1: he's so concerned with equity. Sure he is. It's a fraud, friends,
Speaker 1: but unfortunately it's when we're going to have to fight
Speaker 1: back against because this is just the beginning. The CDC
Speaker 1: as a woke agency is a reality. You really got
Speaker 1: to fight to get to the truth. These days, the
Speaker 1: media is lying to you all the time, more than ever,
Speaker 1: but it is worse. I just want to say that
Speaker 1: it's worse than it's ever been. And also, people are
Speaker 1: more politically locked into their beliefs and they've ever been before.
Speaker 1: People are more certain that whatever whatever they're saying is
Speaker 1: the only proper way of and I'm talking about even
Speaker 1: the words they use, but just their positions as well.
Speaker 1: We are in a polarized and ossified political environment unlike
Speaker 1: anything that's ever been before in my lifetime. It's existed
Speaker 1: in the past, but it's gotten worse. It keeps getting worse.
Speaker 1: And you see this even over the gun control issue,
Speaker 1: in the way that Joe Biden is talking about gun
Speaker 1: control and you say, hold on a second, why is
Speaker 1: he coming up with this? And he's had so much
Speaker 1: time with all these different advisors and people that are
Speaker 1: actually writing these speeches and the legislation in Congress, and
Speaker 1: he lies about stuff, and we're supposed to think that
Speaker 1: that's not a big problem, Like it's not an issue
Speaker 1: that when it comes to a constitutionally protected right, you
Speaker 1: have the President of the United States saying things that
Speaker 1: are just not true, and then if you bring that up,
Speaker 1: people yell at you like you're a bad person. The
Speaker 1: truth will get you in trouble. Well, the good news
Speaker 1: is there are other people out there like you who
Speaker 1: share your beliefs and you know this. But if you
Speaker 1: try to share your political opinions on social media lately,
Speaker 1: it's hard to have a civil conversation. Luckily, there's Caucus
Speaker 1: Room dot coms, a social media network exclusively for conservatives.
Speaker 1: Caucus Room is an online community for conservatives to gather
Speaker 1: and engage locally. Only real people who are verified conservatives
Speaker 1: can become Caucus remembers. But Caucus Room will never share
Speaker 1: your information with anyone ever. Sign up process ensure as
Speaker 1: you're communicating with real conservatives in your neighborhood, no bots
Speaker 1: or trolls. It's a great way to get engaged on
Speaker 1: issues where you can make the biggest difference locally. At
Speaker 1: Caucus Room, you can participate in live virtual meetings that
Speaker 1: are so secure. The platform plate host over a dozen
Speaker 1: virtual Republican Party conventions over the past year. Caucus Room
Speaker 1: is made by conservatives for conservatives to get organized and
Speaker 1: make a difference. Join the Buck Sexton Listeners group on
Speaker 1: caucus room dot com. That c Aucus Room dot com
Speaker 1: to interact with other listeners just like you again. Caucus
Speaker 1: room dot com, c au cus r oom, Caucus room
Speaker 1: dot com. Join the buck Sexton Listeners group and interact
Speaker 1: with others just like you. Most people don't know. And
Speaker 1: you walk into a store and you buy a gun,
Speaker 1: you have a background check, but you go to a
Speaker 1: gun show, you can buy whatever you want, no background check.
Speaker 1: Not true? Does anybody care anymore when things are not
Speaker 1: true when Joe Biden says them, or when a Democrat
Speaker 1: says them, or oh, I know, we can apply that
Speaker 1: Don Lemon standard, which is well Trump lied so much
Speaker 1: that no lies matter anymore. Now I don't I don't
Speaker 1: agree with that. I don't agree with any of that,
Speaker 1: but that's the standard they're trying to apply now to
Speaker 1: cover up for Amtrak. Joe. You know, here, I am them.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna you know, I'm just gonna say the stuff.
Speaker 1: And you know, I'm no joke, friends, you know, just
Speaker 1: kind of little breathy, a little a little bit of
Speaker 1: stop and start listen to me, because I'm so earnest,
Speaker 1: such a such a straight shooter, not like a gun shooter,
Speaker 1: like a different kind of shooter. It's not true that
Speaker 1: you can go to a gun show and buy a
Speaker 1: gun without a background check. As a matter of policy,
Speaker 1: that's not the case. If you're a federally licensed firearms
Speaker 1: dealer at a gun show, you will run a background check.
Speaker 1: So when Joeiden says that you can just go to
Speaker 1: a gun show and buy one, that's not true. There
Speaker 1: are some wiggle room in the law for hobbyists and
Speaker 1: enthusiasts who aren't engaged in selling guns as a as
Speaker 1: their business who are at a gun show, But the
Speaker 1: overwhelming majority, it turns out, of people that go to
Speaker 1: gun shows and buy a gun will actually have to
Speaker 1: pass a background check. There's a whole other part of
Speaker 1: this argument too that I think is worth noting, and
Speaker 1: that's a lot of really bad people can pass background checks.
Speaker 1: If somebody has a criminal background, they're gonna know that,
Speaker 1: and they're very likely to ignore whatever the gun laws
Speaker 1: are if they want to get a gun. But a
Speaker 1: lot of other people, including people that have severe mental
Speaker 1: illness or are going to go on some kind of
Speaker 1: a shooting spree, they when you look at it, they
Speaker 1: would pass. They do pass background checks a lot of
Speaker 1: the time. So I understand that there are a lot
Speaker 1: of security measures. I'm not one of these people that's
Speaker 1: going to pret and that there's no need for things
Speaker 1: that aren't one hundred percent effective, right, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is what the left does with vaccines. Now, well it's
Speaker 1: not one hundred percent, so you still have to mask
Speaker 1: up what that's crazy? Sorry, not one hundred percent? All right,
Speaker 1: they're playing games here. Yes, vaccines are incredibly effective at
Speaker 1: preventing the virus from being spread as well as individuals
Speaker 1: from getting it. It's not perfect. I understand that you
Speaker 1: can make a case that background checks are are going
Speaker 1: to work sometimes, and they do work sometimes in stopping
Speaker 1: people from getting farms. But let's also not overstate the
Speaker 1: fact that a lot of mass shooters pass background checks.
Speaker 1: So you know, you're you're throwing a bunch of things
Speaker 1: at this in the hopes that it's going to reduce
Speaker 1: violence in a meaningful way. And what you really get
Speaker 1: with the background check stuff, for the most part, is
Speaker 1: going to be the if it saves just one life mentality,
Speaker 1: which is not how we make policy. If it saves
Speaker 1: one life is the basis for a truly irannical government.
Speaker 1: Because think of all the ways anyone who's going to
Speaker 1: argue with me on this one. The speed limits should
Speaker 1: be ten miles an hour. We would save tens of
Speaker 1: thousands of lives a year. It's true, ten mile an hour.
Speaker 1: What you have to go so fast? What your business
Speaker 1: wouldn't function anymore? Too bad, it'll save lives. We don't
Speaker 1: do that, do we, Although I worry these days that
Speaker 1: the mentality in the era of COVID has changed so
Speaker 1: much that people would say, yeah, actually, you know, we
Speaker 1: probably should have a ten mile a ten mile per
Speaker 1: hour speed limit. You know, I think we actually should
Speaker 1: have that. So the gun show thing is not true.
Speaker 1: But more importantly, you get to the underlying philosophy of
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and his underlying philosophy of the Constitution. Here's
Speaker 1: what he says, play too their phony arguments suggesting that
Speaker 1: these are Second Amendment rights at stake for what we're
Speaker 1: talking about. But no amendment, no amendment to the Constitution
Speaker 1: is absolute. Isn't that so interesting? Because the only amendment
Speaker 1: to the Constitution, and this is just obvious, the only
Speaker 1: amendment of the Constitution that Democrats believe is absolute is
Speaker 1: the right to an abortion, which is not in an amendment,
Speaker 1: nor is it in the Constitution. But there can be
Speaker 1: no restrictions on it whatsoever, no limitations whatsoever. They will
Speaker 1: fight any number of things that have come forward that
Speaker 1: including making abortion centers have doctors with admitting privileges at
Speaker 1: a hospital. Democrats, they left, will fight against that like crazy,
Speaker 1: including saying that you need to have a surgical grade
Speaker 1: medical center to be performing abortions. Democrats will fight against that.
Speaker 1: So even what we would call safety measures for abortions,
Speaker 1: never mind stopping of abortions, they will do everything they
Speaker 1: can to stop. They'll do everything they can to shut
Speaker 1: that down, and unfortunately they're very successful in it. They
Speaker 1: are abortion absolutists. That is true of Democrats, that is
Speaker 1: true of the left. So that's one thing they do
Speaker 1: believe in. And it's just ironic that the only amendment
Speaker 1: that they believe is absolute is the one that doesn't exist,
Speaker 1: or the only constitutional right, which is the right to
Speaker 1: an abortion, which does not exist. And they can continue
Speaker 1: with this lie as long as they want, but it's absurd.
Speaker 1: And then you have something else that I thought about,
Speaker 1: where Biden pulled the fire in a crowded theater line.
Speaker 1: It's remarkable Democrats keep doing this. I mean a lot
Speaker 1: of politicians and Republicans will do this too. Sometimes fire
Speaker 1: in a crowded theater comes from a Supreme Court decision
Speaker 1: Shank v. United States, where the Supreme Court wrongly held
Speaker 1: that a person passing out flyers, a socialist pacifist who
Speaker 1: was opposed to the First World War, passing out flyers
Speaker 1: against the draft and against Woodrow Wilson, who was a tyrant,
Speaker 1: by the way, against Woodrow Wilson's desire to enter the
Speaker 1: US in the First World War, clearly protected political speech
Speaker 1: that that was quote, the equivalent of yelling fire in
Speaker 1: a crowded theater. So Democrats think this is clever. Biden
Speaker 1: thinks this is clever to say, well, there are limitations
Speaker 1: on rights like yelling fire in a crowded theater, and
Speaker 1: he actually cites a a pseudo intellectual justification for the
Speaker 1: tyrannical shutdown of speech, because that's what that actually refers to.
Speaker 1: But you just never you never expect democrats when they speak,
Speaker 1: when they speak about the Constitution. I will just say this,
Speaker 1: it's a little bit like when Democrat politicians speak about
Speaker 1: the Bible. You can they're always they're always a little uncomfortable.
Speaker 1: There's always a little bit, you know, you know, a
Speaker 1: little blue collar joe here. I'm just you know, doing
Speaker 1: my thing, and you know, I get kind of folks here,
Speaker 1: and you know what, get little breath here, and you
Speaker 1: know something, you know, four score and on the seventh day,
Speaker 1: and the thing, you know, they just kind of mutter
Speaker 1: off into nonsense because ultimately Democrats believe that the Constitution
Speaker 1: is a question of utility. They actually don't think that.
Speaker 1: They're that, you know, they don't think that there are
Speaker 1: universal truths that the founding fathers saw in those documents
Speaker 1: and in the document the Constitution, and in the Bill
Speaker 1: of Rights that are more important than whatever the Democrat
Speaker 1: agenda of the moment may be. Shared principle doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: Look at how we've switched from a country that wants
Speaker 1: equality to a country that now wants equity, which is
Speaker 1: just this is just a pathway to Marxism. If this
Speaker 1: means the same ends, you get what the state says,
Speaker 1: you can have as much as possible. Make that true.
Speaker 1: Not the state will treat you and another person equally
Speaker 1: under the law. You have the same recourse to the law,
Speaker 1: you will have the same protections under law. And then
Speaker 1: it's let the best man win. We have a great
Speaker 1: society because we are willing to have an unequal society.
Speaker 1: We are not equal in terms of talents, we are
Speaker 1: not equal in terms of hard work, of intelligence, of
Speaker 1: you know, beauty, of health, of all kinds of things.
Speaker 1: It's not fair. Life is never going to be fair.
Speaker 1: But a government that tries to create a utopian society
Speaker 1: by having absolute control, we see what this does, and
Speaker 1: it results in misery. It results in in the shared
Speaker 1: shared misery. As a Churchill and it there's always a
Speaker 1: Churchill quote. There's always a Churchill quote when you need one.
Speaker 1: Capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings, and socialism is
Speaker 1: the unequal sharing of misery, or rather the equal sharing
Speaker 1: of misery. You can't mess up your Churchill quote. That's
Speaker 1: not good. But here we have one of these times
Speaker 1: where you see very clearly the Democrat agenda, lady before you,
Speaker 1: and on guns, on health, on all of these things.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter what argument we make. They've decided they
Speaker 1: want these things. They have an emotional impulse to get it,
Speaker 1: to get it done. And that's why you just you
Speaker 1: see that it all all the facts and figures that
Speaker 1: you can put forward it falls on deaf ears, doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: It's already decided in their minds. So it's very, very
Speaker 1: challenging to see this as anything other than a power
Speaker 1: grab when you actually get into the facts and figures
Speaker 1: with Democrats on gun control, and it's not going to
Speaker 1: save us, meaning it's not going to save a lot
Speaker 1: of lives, it's not going to deal with the enormous
Speaker 1: gun violence surge last year. The gun violence surge was
Speaker 1: the result of undermining law enforcement and emboldening criminals, which
Speaker 1: was all part of a left wing narrative that America
Speaker 1: is a racist place and the cops are racist, and
Speaker 1: that there's a justification for the destruction of businesses and
Speaker 1: rioting in neighborhoods because of that, that's what led to
Speaker 1: the worst murder rates we've seen in this country in
Speaker 1: over twenty years. But no, instead, we're going to talk
Speaker 1: about ghost guns. We're going to talk about how we
Speaker 1: can have some change made to to guns at gun shows.
Speaker 1: I mean, all this stuff. Oh, we've got a new
Speaker 1: ATF director who doesn't like the Second Amendment. Okay, that's
Speaker 1: really going to help, right, This is garbage thinking. But
Speaker 1: the Biden administration as you've seen there's a lot of
Speaker 1: not just bad policy approaches, but bad faith in the
Speaker 1: way they talk about this and the way they view
Speaker 1: the other side. This all began with the disdainful narrative
Speaker 1: of everyone who voted for Donald Trump was somehow a
Speaker 1: part of the January six insurrection, which wasn't an insurrection.
Speaker 1: And the more we found out about it, the more
Speaker 1: we realized it was. You know, it was a mob
Speaker 1: that got out of control, didn't actually kill any cops,
Speaker 1: and is being treated like it was some kind of
Speaker 1: militia effort to overthrow the United States government when it
Speaker 1: was really a bunch of misled losers who did something
Speaker 1: very very stupid and very foolish. But that was the
Speaker 1: beginning narrative, you see, because the Democrats now they view
Speaker 1: you and me through that lens. So they're not gonna
Speaker 1: listen to us on guns, they're not gonna listen to
Speaker 1: us on COVID, not listen to us on anything. We
Speaker 1: just get pushed aside, swept away one of those January
Speaker 1: six insurrection supporters. Even though we've been condemning that thing
Speaker 1: the whole pot, it doesn't matter. They don't care. Said
Speaker 1: a moment ago quote, you go to a gun show,
Speaker 1: you can buy whatever, or you want no background check?
Speaker 1: Is there a special exemption in federal law he's referring to,
Speaker 1: or just do FLA dealers not have to do background
Speaker 1: checks when our got a gun show? All right? Are
Speaker 1: you asking me if he was referring it's okay. Were
Speaker 1: you asking me if he was referring to like a
Speaker 1: specific circumstance or I'm sorry to tell me a little
Speaker 1: bit more about your question. I mean, is it the
Speaker 1: president's belief that you do not have to undergo a
Speaker 1: background check when you are a gun show? No, it's
Speaker 1: not his belief. He believes that gun that background checks
Speaker 1: should be universal. Right, he says no background check. Well,
Speaker 1: we know what his position is, right, so let me
Speaker 1: reiterate that, which is that the gut background checks or
Speaker 1: something that should be universal. They're supported by more than
Speaker 1: eighty percent of the public. He's supported legislation, advocated for that,
Speaker 1: and advocated against loopholes as well. So that's his position,
Speaker 1: and I appreciate you asking for the clarification. Yeah, well
Speaker 1: that's really interesting, Jen Saki, another sake bomb dropped here
Speaker 1: because he said very clearly we all heard Joe Biden
Speaker 1: before he said that you can go to a back
Speaker 1: you can go to a gun show, no background check.
Speaker 1: That was no background check, that was the quote. Not
Speaker 1: pretty much always a background check, but maybe under some
Speaker 1: circumstances you might be able to get a farm without
Speaker 1: a background check. That's not what he said. So when
Speaker 1: she says, we know his position, okay, but what he
Speaker 1: said isn't true, and it should matter what the President
Speaker 1: of the United States says on a policy issue like this,
Speaker 1: where the facts are really what we are talking about.
Speaker 1: The facts are really what's at issue here. Vice President
Speaker 1: Harris is also out there on the push for gun control.
Speaker 1: Here she is playing nine. Over the course of my career,
Speaker 1: I have seen gun violence up close. I've looked at
Speaker 1: autopsy photographs. I've seen with my own two eyes what
Speaker 1: a bullet can do to the human body. I've held
Speaker 1: hands with the hand of parents who have lost a child.
Speaker 1: I have seen children who are traumatized by the loss
Speaker 1: of a parent or sibling. And I have fought my
Speaker 1: entire career to end this violence and to pass reasonable
Speaker 1: gun safety laws. Time and again, as progress has stalled,
Speaker 1: we've all asked, what are we waiting for because we
Speaker 1: aren't waiting for a tragedy. I know that we've had
Speaker 1: more tragedy than we can bear. We aren't waiting for
Speaker 1: solutions either, because the solutions exist, They already exist. People
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle want action. Real people
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle want action. Okay, what
Speaker 1: action do we supposedly want? The panning of ghost guns?
Speaker 1: Is the banning of ghost guns? I remember, I'm just
Speaker 1: wondering if we went down this list. Let's let's take
Speaker 1: a look at a city like oh Chicago, which had
Speaker 1: a massive increase in shootings last year, and it's already
Speaker 1: far too violent as a city. With the banning of
Speaker 1: ghost guns, or the background check provision changes that they want,
Speaker 1: or anything that Biden's talking about, classifying modifications to a pistol,
Speaker 1: so that'll be a short barrel rifle and you'll have
Speaker 1: to register it under the National Firearms Act. Would any
Speaker 1: of that stop a single one of the shootings in
Speaker 1: Chicago last year? Let's just take that as a as
Speaker 1: as one point here. Would any of them do that?
Speaker 1: I don't have the answer. I bet the answer is
Speaker 1: less than one percent of those shootings would have been
Speaker 1: affected by those things. But this is the action we
Speaker 1: have to take. This is what we have to do.
Speaker 1: It's about so much more than that. There's a fundamental
Speaker 1: philosophical difference between the left and the right on the
Speaker 1: issue of guns. They think that guns are a little
Speaker 1: private rebellion in the hands of individual American citizens and
Speaker 1: they cannot abide it. And we think that that little
Speaker 1: private rebellion that each one of us has by essentially
Speaker 1: having the opportunity to tell the state there is a
Speaker 1: line that you shall not cross. There is a break
Speaker 1: against tyranny. There's a bulwark against tyranny that has an
Speaker 1: individual hands, which is the right to bear arms. That's
Speaker 1: very important to this country. You know, advanced sophisticated democracies
Speaker 1: in the past, with a high standard of living and
Speaker 1: have gone fully tyrannical. They did not have an armed population.
Speaker 1: We have an armed population, and we wanted to stay
Speaker 1: that way. Democrats want to create registries and harass lawful
Speaker 1: gun owners in every way they can change the culture,
Speaker 1: change everything about the gun ownership reality in this country
Speaker 1: so that they put it on a glide path to eradication.
Speaker 1: That's what's really separating the two sides. Sarsani time friend
Speaker 1: David Harsani from National Review dot Com is joining us
Speaker 1: right now to talk about guns and maybe even some
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden stuff if we've got the time. David, great
Speaker 1: to have you. Let's jump right to this man. This
Speaker 1: seems to me like it is absolutely as predictable as
Speaker 1: anything could be the Biden administration. We're a few months
Speaker 1: in and we're having it's the same gun control debate
Speaker 1: we had under the Obama administration. Time and again. They
Speaker 1: never give up. I'll give them credit for that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I was thinking about that about that the other day,
Speaker 1: about how I'm constantly I feel like I'm writing the
Speaker 1: same thing over and over again. But it's really not
Speaker 1: my fault because they keep coming back with the same
Speaker 1: exact arguments, the same exact policy proposals. Actually they're getting
Speaker 1: a little worse. Like Biden said a lot of particulous
Speaker 1: things the other day that are completely false. I mean,
Speaker 1: their lies about gun shows, you know, not having to
Speaker 1: have a background check when you buy guns at gun shows,
Speaker 1: about are fifteens about everything. So I'm not sure exactly
Speaker 1: why they're doing this because it seems unlikely the legislation
Speaker 1: will pass, but it definitely will rile up gun owners
Speaker 1: will probably see another huge spiking gun owner you know,
Speaker 1: people buying guns. If the manufacturers can keep up with it,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure. And what do you think they really
Speaker 1: hope to accomplish by this? I mean, if we were
Speaker 1: we were able to sit in in a meeting in
Speaker 1: the Oval, let's say, with Kamala and Joe and you
Speaker 1: know the Ron Klaine. Is this to drive up the
Speaker 1: Democrat bases enthusiasm for this administration and just to drive
Speaker 1: up donations or do you think that they really believe
Speaker 1: that they're going to because I mean my thing is,
Speaker 1: even if they got these things, no one who understands
Speaker 1: the numbers and the statistics thinks that a change in
Speaker 1: ghost guns is going to bring down the violence rate
Speaker 1: or you'd be able to show how this is actually
Speaker 1: saving lives. So what do they think they accomplish with this? Well?
Speaker 1: I think it's two things. First of all, I think
Speaker 1: there's a lot of pressure from left wing groups to
Speaker 1: do some things, so they decide to, you know, pretend
Speaker 1: they're doing something ghost guns. You know, when you're when
Speaker 1: you're going the executive order route, there's only someone you
Speaker 1: can do. It's unconstitutional to limit people, you know, AAR
Speaker 1: fifteens or whatever. So they're trying to sort of nibble
Speaker 1: at the edges to allow people to get excited about
Speaker 1: them doing something. The second part is if they do something,
Speaker 1: if they somehow get something through the point, you know,
Speaker 1: AAR fifteens are used in only a small fraction of
Speaker 1: murders in the United States. But if they get something through,
Speaker 1: it's incrementalism and they want to take your guns. I
Speaker 1: have zero doubt about that. And they're just trying to
Speaker 1: figure out ways in which they can move forward, constantly,
Speaker 1: move forward. I am you know, I'm against any like
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter what I'm forward, but I'm against any
Speaker 1: legislation that moves forward more gun control. We have forty
Speaker 1: thousand gun laws on the books. We don't need anymore.
Speaker 1: We need enforcement of gun laws we have. We need
Speaker 1: someone to investigate Hunter Biden, see why you had a weapon,
Speaker 1: and why he led on his background check form, and
Speaker 1: why a gun was stored out in a garbage your school,
Speaker 1: for instance. Well, can you, David, we dive into that
Speaker 1: because I actually haven't covered that yet on the show,
Speaker 1: and so I want this audience to know exactly what
Speaker 1: you're going and we're going to talk about Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: in general and all the stuff that's come out. But
Speaker 1: tell everybody what happened with a Hunter Biden gun situation. Well,
Speaker 1: he you know, when you buy a gun, you signed
Speaker 1: a background check. A lot of people don't know that
Speaker 1: because Democrats always lie about it, but you know, eight
Speaker 1: ninety nine percent of people buy guns have to go
Speaker 1: through a background check. Every gun has gone through a
Speaker 1: background check, and Hunter Biden has a I believe it
Speaker 1: was just some kind of semi automatic gun that he
Speaker 1: bought at a gun shop, but he lied on his
Speaker 1: background check form because he said that he wasn't I
Speaker 1: don't know how it's phrased, but it's doing drugs, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: using drugs that he wasn't doing crack so um and
Speaker 1: he was, which is fine, I mean not fine. But
Speaker 1: maybe he's getting over it, maybe he's in rehab. I
Speaker 1: don't know what he is. But he lied on his form,
Speaker 1: which is I believe it might I think it's a felony.
Speaker 1: So he's lying to the FBI. So a lot of
Speaker 1: people lie on those forms and there are very few prosecutions.
Speaker 1: Let's go after people lying on those forums. Let's go
Speaker 1: after let's tighten up the system. Like in Charleston, the
Speaker 1: local police hadn't informed the FBI that there was criminality.
Speaker 1: You know that shooter had done drugs as well. So
Speaker 1: um anyway, so I think you know, there are plenty
Speaker 1: laws in the books. We need to tighten those up.
Speaker 1: I'm all for, you know, going after people who lie
Speaker 1: on background checks, but we don't need any more laws.
Speaker 1: And what was the disposing of the gun hunter Biden
Speaker 1: near a school or something? What's that? I don't know
Speaker 1: the particulars exactly, but something like I think it feels
Speaker 1: like this is just how it feels like after reading
Speaker 1: it to me. Or what seems like is that his girlfriend,
Speaker 1: I guess it is, felt that he was a danger
Speaker 1: to himself or a danger to others and took the
Speaker 1: gun and just threw it out in a nearby garbage
Speaker 1: which happened to be across the street from a school,
Speaker 1: which is and you can it's it's I'm not sure
Speaker 1: in Delaware what the laws are, but you're not supposed
Speaker 1: to throw out guns in in that way, and I
Speaker 1: supposed to dispose of that's that's not a safe I mean,
Speaker 1: if you're not supposed to dispose if you're any biotics
Speaker 1: in the trash, you know, or or any prescripture. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure it's supposed to throw a glock in the
Speaker 1: trash and just hope that nobody finds it. But um,
Speaker 1: I'm speaking of David Harsani of National View here and
Speaker 1: David on the Hunter Biden stuff. So so here's my thing,
Speaker 1: and I think you will you alluded to this, this
Speaker 1: feeling or just a couple of moments ago. Yeah, addiction
Speaker 1: is a very very serious crippling thing, and it ruins families,
Speaker 1: and it is quite sad. I think it's perfectly fine out.
Speaker 1: I think it's actually just being fair minded to say that, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden is an addict, and that's something that we
Speaker 1: can sympathize with. Hunter Biden is also a really narcissistic, spoiled,
Speaker 1: destructive scumbag. And and if if he were Donald Trump's son,
Speaker 1: or even any Republican son for that matter, he wouldn't
Speaker 1: be going on a book tour right now. Jimmy Kimmel
Speaker 1: is basically giving him a BackRub on TV. Yeah. I mean,
Speaker 1: I never or very rarely were write about stories that
Speaker 1: have to do with like infidelity or drug use of
Speaker 1: politicians like I just don't do it because we don't
Speaker 1: really know what the situation is all usually, but here's
Speaker 1: the thing. This is the This is now the president's son,
Speaker 1: the vice president son who only made a you know
Speaker 1: who made fifty k for a Ukrainian energy firm because
Speaker 1: of his last name. And we're not allowed to talk
Speaker 1: about this sort of thing because it makes the president
Speaker 1: look bad and it's just insane. I mean, if, like
Speaker 1: you said, if this was Don Junior or any of
Speaker 1: Trump's kids, it would be all over the front pages
Speaker 1: of every newspaper. He's a bad guy. I'm sorry. You know,
Speaker 1: the things he's done are immoral. It's not just the
Speaker 1: drug use that I know addicts and I know that
Speaker 1: people make mistakes and etc. But that's not the case here.
Speaker 1: He doesn't seem to have any much remorse about him.
Speaker 1: But moreover, he is benefiting from it still. Now he
Speaker 1: has a book and he's and he's playing himself as
Speaker 1: the victim where you know, a major media institutions aren't
Speaker 1: investigating what he was up to in China, in Ukraine
Speaker 1: and et cetera. They would just not be the same
Speaker 1: for any other president's son. I mean, any at least
Speaker 1: any Republicans. It's remarkable as well, David, to see Chris Hayes,
Speaker 1: for example, over at MSNBC. Who he's He's I guess
Speaker 1: if you're like a Brooklyn Liberal, you know he's your.
Speaker 1: He is your your, your great champion of progressive causes.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I've never understood how this guy is
Speaker 1: someone that people listen to about anything but that's me. Uh.
Speaker 1: He had some tweet about you know, maybe maybe is
Speaker 1: it possible that Hunter Biden's laptop was actually real? And
Speaker 1: I look at that and I honestly can't come to
Speaker 1: a conclusion. I can't analyze with certainty in my own head.
Speaker 1: Is he just really not smart and so he he
Speaker 1: doesn't believe that the laptop was it's clearly real. There's
Speaker 1: more information that's come out about it. It's obviously Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden's laptop. If it wasn't, they would have been able
Speaker 1: to bunk it right away. Or is this now kind
Speaker 1: of a game? I mean, is gas lighting on something
Speaker 1: like this for people who have large platforms and the
Speaker 1: media on the left part of the fun I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think that many times people convinced themselves of things
Speaker 1: like the Russians are you know, the Russians planted Hunter's
Speaker 1: laptop with the New York Post. I mean, I still
Speaker 1: see people say stuff like that. It's just in saying
Speaker 1: that story. Those stories had far more journalistic integrity and
Speaker 1: the people who did them at far more journalistic integrity
Speaker 1: the most stories you see on MSNBC about Russia or
Speaker 1: whatever else. So I don't I don't know what the
Speaker 1: answer to that is, but it's it's increasingly clear now
Speaker 1: we you and I knew this, and we talked about
Speaker 1: it at the time, that those stories were censored on
Speaker 1: purpose to help one, you know, one candidate when the presidency.
Speaker 1: It's corrupt, the media's corrupt. I refuse to say things
Speaker 1: as a matter of course, even if it will benefit
Speaker 1: my my you know, I'm a registered Republican, even will
Speaker 1: benefit the Republican Party, it'll I refuse to say things
Speaker 1: that make me feel like I'm a moron. And I
Speaker 1: don't see that among very prominent people on the left.
Speaker 1: I mean, I went on on a tario recently because
Speaker 1: on Joe Scarborough Show on MSNBC in the morning, he
Speaker 1: went on this whole thing about how you know, vaccine
Speaker 1: denialism is for moron Trump supporters and like they're a
Speaker 1: bunch of you know, toothless rubes who are drinking their
Speaker 1: you know, Budweiser at Nascar. I mean it is just
Speaker 1: he clearly makes us about anybody who was a question
Speaker 1: about or vaccine hesitancy is some idiot Trump supporter when
Speaker 1: I mean, in reality, the biggest vaccine hesitancy bulge in
Speaker 1: the demographics is among minorities. But you know, it's like
Speaker 1: he's not embarrassed to say something that's just so very
Speaker 1: stupid because it serves the purpose in the moment. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it depends. So I think that a lot
Speaker 1: of people on the left who are smart, you know,
Speaker 1: as far as their IQ goes, or will do anything
Speaker 1: because they feel like Republicans are evil and anything is
Speaker 1: fine to say as long as it, you know, helps
Speaker 1: them achieve the goals that they want. I think there
Speaker 1: are other people like Joe Scarborough, who is just not
Speaker 1: very bright to begin with, but also it will say
Speaker 1: anything for ratings and will say anything that people want
Speaker 1: to hear wherever he is. I mean, when he was
Speaker 1: running in Florida, you know, he pretended to be this
Speaker 1: one type of person and now he's up in wherever
Speaker 1: what is it in New Jersey or wherever ms MSNBC films.
Speaker 1: He pretends to be whatever is good there. When Trump,
Speaker 1: when Trump was bringing him ratings, he said whatever Trump
Speaker 1: wanted to hear. And now that you know, Trump was unpopularly,
Speaker 1: so he'll say whatever he wants. But so it depends
Speaker 1: where you're talking about. But I think there's a lot
Speaker 1: of ends justify the means stuff there, and people sort
Speaker 1: of are in bubbles and they repeat things and they
Speaker 1: start to believe them, or if they don't, they just
Speaker 1: want you know, it's propaganda. It's basically a propaganda, or
Speaker 1: keep repeating it. And you know, I can't bore into
Speaker 1: the souls of some of these people to know if
Speaker 1: they actually believe what they're saying. I'm embarrassed for them.
Speaker 1: Quite often, like Jennifer Rubins of the World, I just
Speaker 1: think it's a sort of emotionally driven hatred of certain
Speaker 1: kind of people. Or Tom Nichols at The Atlantic, I
Speaker 1: think he just hates the aesthetic of people who wear
Speaker 1: America shirts or are too flag wavy, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean, or people who live in places that he
Speaker 1: doesn't visit, so I think that's a problem too. So
Speaker 1: I think it's a bunch of different sorts of sort
Speaker 1: of you know, they're different sorts of trends going on.
Speaker 1: Is this Biden administration at this stage more left wing
Speaker 1: even than what we saw in the first year of
Speaker 1: the Obama administration in two thousand and nine. First, Buck,
Speaker 1: I just want to say, I love that you let
Speaker 1: you team me up to go after my least favorite
Speaker 1: people in the media. So I just wanted to quickly
Speaker 1: say I appreciate that. But moving forward, let's to displace
Speaker 1: my anger on this show. So the second thing, Yes,
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously I think the party, the policy wise,
Speaker 1: they're far left. I mean they're they're far left of
Speaker 1: of Obama. And this is just accelerated in ways that
Speaker 1: are incredible. So today I saw Joe Biden is going
Speaker 1: to have a study group to look into packing the courts.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, why would he do that. It's
Speaker 1: not popular among the normal people. It's not probably even
Speaker 1: popular among most Democrats. It's popular on the far left.
Speaker 1: Because the far left is the loudest, the most activist,
Speaker 1: the most you know, the people who raise the money,
Speaker 1: the people are out there marching and he has to
Speaker 1: placate them. So I think that I think Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: not left or right. I think Joe Biden is wherever
Speaker 1: he thinks the Democratic Party is. It's been that way
Speaker 1: his whole life, in from nineteen seventy three when he
Speaker 1: was posing up to segregationist to now. But I think
Speaker 1: that yeah, I mean, policy wise, it's it's it's incredible
Speaker 1: the language they use, the racial identitarian sort of things
Speaker 1: that he says, the anti gun rhetoric. You know, it's
Speaker 1: just all far, far to the left. So I don't
Speaker 1: know how that's going to work out for them in
Speaker 1: the elections. But I mean, like this gun thing, what
Speaker 1: was the point of that, just to rile upright wingers
Speaker 1: and make yourself look even farther to the left. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I don't know what they're doing. David Arsani,
Speaker 1: everybody Nashalview dot com go check out his peace there
Speaker 1: and David always a pleasure. Thank you, Buck. I think
Speaker 1: that's right show, and I think that's part of what
Speaker 1: is driving both the overwhelming bipartisan support in the country,
Speaker 1: not Washington, and in the country for the COVID relief measures.
Speaker 1: And for this infrastructure bill that the administration is trying
Speaker 1: to push forward. So that's a big thing. A paradigm
Speaker 1: kind of shipped. Maybe. I know you we've been talked
Speaker 1: about this for several weeks here, you know, the Roosevelt
Speaker 1: era to the Reagan era. Are we on the verge
Speaker 1: of a new activist, progressive era? Lad in an unlikely
Speaker 1: way by Joe Biden. I think that's not impossible. But
Speaker 1: here's the problem with it when it comes to guns
Speaker 1: is the guns have become largely a cultural issue and
Speaker 1: not so much an issue about economics. Guns are definitely
Speaker 1: a cultural issue, and it's that the left has convinced
Speaker 1: it's adherents that gun owners are bad people. They really
Speaker 1: believe that. I mean, they actually have disdain for people,
Speaker 1: the kind of people who own guns or the wrong
Speaker 1: people you see in their minds. And I think that
Speaker 1: we all need to remember that there's a there's a
Speaker 1: sense of the gun owners of America, according to Democrats,
Speaker 1: are the red you know, the red flyover state, people
Speaker 1: who have who listen to the wrong kind of music,
Speaker 1: eat the wrong kind of food, go to the wrong
Speaker 1: kind of schools, and vote the wrong politicians and that's
Speaker 1: it all gets wrapped in together here. But the talk
Speaker 1: about Biden as a very progressive candidate now or progressive
Speaker 1: president rather, is something that we shouldn't ignore. It's very real,
Speaker 1: and we do have what's going on right now with
Speaker 1: the Biden administration unveiling before us a commission, a commission
Speaker 1: to take a look at court packing. Folks, if you're
Speaker 1: wondering how extreme they're willing to be, this is the
Speaker 1: New York Times. Biden creating commission to study expanding the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. They're really doing this, They're really going to
Speaker 1: try to push this. The commission will also examine other
Speaker 1: potential changes, such as term limits for justices. Progressives are
Speaker 1: pushing President Biden to add seats to balance the court's
Speaker 1: conservative majority. President Biden on Friday will order a one
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty days study of adding seats to the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, making good on a campaign year promise to
Speaker 1: establish a bipartisan commission to examine the potentially explosive subjects
Speaker 1: of expanding the court or setting term limits for justices.
Speaker 1: As according to the White House and written in The
Speaker 1: New York Times today, the President acted under pressure from
Speaker 1: activists pushing for more seats to alter the ideological balance
Speaker 1: of the court. After President Donald Trump appointed three justices,
Speaker 1: including one to a seat that Republicans had blocked his predecessor,
Speaker 1: Barack Obama from filing for filling rather for almost a year.
Speaker 1: This is a reminder of something that is always true
Speaker 1: about Democrats. When Democrats are out of power, anything in
Speaker 1: the system that stops Republicans is sacred and must be protected.
Speaker 1: When Democrats are in power, anything in the system that
Speaker 1: stops them is racist or obstructionist and must be destroyed.
Speaker 1: If you remember that, you'll understand so much of the
Speaker 1: propaganda and demagoguery that comes out of the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: on a regular basis. If you can just keep that
Speaker 1: in mind, so much else will make sense. There's no
Speaker 1: principle here, There's no shared value that we're looking at
Speaker 1: when it comes to the Supreme Court. No, No, they
Speaker 1: want an outcome. They don't respect process that does not
Speaker 1: give them the outcome they demand, always and at all times.
Speaker 1: You see this with everything, with elections, with the DOJ,
Speaker 1: with the court system, everything. Democrats don't get the political
Speaker 1: outcome they want, they trash the system and minded they
Speaker 1: get the political outcome they want. It is sacred, it
Speaker 1: is not to be touched. And anyone who who even
Speaker 1: brings up criticism of the way the institution is functioning
Speaker 1: is undermining our institutions at our democracy, That's what they say.
Speaker 1: Very difficult to argue with people who have no principles,
Speaker 1: but that's what we're constantly forced to do with the
Speaker 1: progressive left in America today all the time. It's very
Speaker 1: hard to have a conversation with people who have no
Speaker 1: moral core about moral issues, obviously is very important these days.
Speaker 1: Taking care of your tech really matters. We all see
Speaker 1: this now with the whole hundred Biden laptop situation, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, what you're doing online and what exists on
Speaker 1: your devices that can really come back to bite you.
Speaker 1: And that's if obviously you're somebody who's doing all kinds
Speaker 1: of crazy illegal stuff like Hunter Biden was, but also
Speaker 1: for the rest of us, your politics becomes a problem.
Speaker 1: That's what everyone's seeing now. I think I think everyone's
Speaker 1: becoming more aware of the fact that if you're a conservative,
Speaker 1: you simply cannot trust big tech. You know. They took
Speaker 1: down a Ron DeSantis YouTube video where he had a
Speaker 1: round table of top health experts talking about how lockdowns
Speaker 1: have failed. YouTube just took it down. They said, not
Speaker 1: in line with the consensus on mask wearing in lockdowns.
Speaker 1: Not in line with the consensus. Oh I'm sorry, So
Speaker 1: now the YouTube standards folks are health experts. Really, something
Speaker 1: else is going on here and they've shut me down too.
Speaker 1: They come after me in the past, as you know.
Speaker 1: But you can take action to protect your privacy online.
Speaker 1: You can anonymize your internet connection, surf the web freely
Speaker 1: without wondering who's going to get a hold of your
Speaker 1: search history or viewing habits or what they'll do with
Speaker 1: that information. I mean, do you really want the government
Speaker 1: or big tech to be reading over your shoulder everything
Speaker 1: you do online? Exactly. There's never been a more important
Speaker 1: time than now to protect your Internet activity. That's why
Speaker 1: I urge you to get Express VPN. When I use
Speaker 1: Express VPN, the big tech company he's can't see my
Speaker 1: IP address at all, my identity. My identity is anonymized
Speaker 1: by a secure VPN server and my data is encrypted
Speaker 1: for maximum protection. Stop handing over your data to big
Speaker 1: tech companies now and to the government. Defend your rights
Speaker 1: with the VPN I trust for online protection. Is it
Speaker 1: express vpn dot com slash buck. That's Express vpn dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck. To get three extra months free, go
Speaker 1: to Express vpn dot com slash buck right now to
Speaker 1: learn more. Does it make you crazy when you hear
Speaker 1: someone like Donald Trump Junior saying that the only reason
Speaker 1: he does is because he's a Biden and because of
Speaker 1: his last name, And how just wildly comical that is?
Speaker 1: I mean, because it is wildly comical? Is that that's
Speaker 1: putting it lightly? I think? But but you know, I
Speaker 1: really what I've learned is this is that I don't
Speaker 1: spend too much time thinking about I do. I think
Speaker 1: about it all the time. I'll think about it for you. Well,
Speaker 1: maybe that's why, because I have other people to think
Speaker 1: about it for about it? Do you know Donald Trump Junior? No,
Speaker 1: you've never met him now, not that I know of,
Speaker 1: Not that I know you say that. I know, pretty
Speaker 1: pretty rough place. Yeah. Um, so here we go, here
Speaker 1: we go. Now, now we're gonna have the media saying
Speaker 1: that Hunter Biden is not that you know it. Look,
Speaker 1: Jimmy Kimmel, isn't this amazing? You get you get these comedians,
Speaker 1: You get these guys who are supposed to be making
Speaker 1: people laugh. But what you really see is that they're
Speaker 1: political actors who also make some jokes. What you see
Speaker 1: is that they're they're serving to to aid the propaganda
Speaker 1: purposes of the Democrat Party. That's what Jimmy Kimmel does.
Speaker 1: And that's why when you have Hunter Biden in this way,
Speaker 1: you have Hunter Biden, uh getting you know, he's laughing
Speaker 1: and he's fine. If you see the stuff that is
Speaker 1: out from the laptop now, I mean Andrew Biden, it's
Speaker 1: really disturbing. I mean, he's he's got multiple prostitutes. He's
Speaker 1: making videos with prostitutes. They're you know, on top of
Speaker 1: him naked. I mean it's like, you know, this is
Speaker 1: not stuff for anybody, you know, any of anyone under
Speaker 1: eighteen to be seeing that. They're blurring it out in
Speaker 1: the media outlets, but you know, uh, this is just crazy,
Speaker 1: right when you see what's going on with him, you
Speaker 1: see what a bad guy he actually is and the
Speaker 1: things he's doing. I mean, it's just all gross and
Speaker 1: it's degrading and it's wrong. And then of course there's
Speaker 1: also the stuff where you just get him. I think
Speaker 1: he's a he's in a feathered boa in one photo
Speaker 1: in Tidy Whitey's. You know he's in He's in a
Speaker 1: very scale I look, I I'm just reading the news, folks.
Speaker 1: This is what's out there. This guy's taking these photos.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's like fifty years old. What is he doing.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's got alimony payments he's gotta make and
Speaker 1: and he's going to compare himself to Don Trump Junior,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump Junior. Is it a whole different category of
Speaker 1: responsible human being compared Hunter Biden? But oh yeah, they're
Speaker 1: gonna make jokes about that. Oh nepotism or whatever. Yeah, Look,
Speaker 1: there is nepotism in the Trump family. There's no question
Speaker 1: about that. I don't live in some delusion, but there's
Speaker 1: nepotism in the Trump family where you have you know,
Speaker 1: Don Junior and Ivanka and you know, graduating from Ivy
Speaker 1: League schools and presenting well and speaking well and working
Speaker 1: in companies that, yes that they work for their father's company,
Speaker 1: but they can at least talk to talk, walk the walk.
Speaker 1: I mean, Don Junior gives a good speech, he's good
Speaker 1: on his feet, you know. And I hate nepotism and
Speaker 1: politics money, but nepotism in the private sector is just
Speaker 1: a reality. You know, somebody who starts a company is
Speaker 1: gonna want to give it to his children. That that's
Speaker 1: just the way it works. It's property, that's how it happens.
Speaker 1: But to compare this with a Hunter Biden, but hundred
Speaker 1: Biden was getting a fifty thousand dollars a month, fifty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars a month to be on the board of Barisma,
Speaker 1: And now we see these photos. I wouldn't pay this
Speaker 1: guy five dollars a year to advise me on a
Speaker 1: hot dog stand. The only reason he was getting that
Speaker 1: money was because of his of his dad, and we
Speaker 1: all know it. His dad was the vice president too.
Speaker 1: So it's it's something that affects all of us in
Speaker 1: the sense that he's a a public official, a powerful
Speaker 1: public official at the time, and here he is talking
Speaker 1: about how you know he's actually he was qualified. You know, Oh,
Speaker 1: I know A hundred Biden went to Yale, right. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is the truth when you're when you're a Democrat politician.
Speaker 1: Because I did say before they went to everything schools. Look,
Speaker 1: I knew Ivanka growing up a little bit. She was
Speaker 1: a good student, she was smart. Everybody knew. It wasn't
Speaker 1: a great student. I mean, like I was a better student, obviously,
Speaker 1: but I'm just saying she was. She was a fair
Speaker 1: a B plus kind of student. She's a pretty good
Speaker 1: student at good schools. And h you know Andrew Biden,
Speaker 1: his guys clearly just a total, a total waste roll.
Speaker 1: But he says, oh no, he got his board spot.
Speaker 1: Here's why I play five. You wrote in the book,
Speaker 1: use I do want to talk about this, you know,
Speaker 1: the Ukraine and or Ukraine and and it became some
Speaker 1: an issue, it became something. It gave Donald Trump something
Speaker 1: to grab onto. He almost got well, he did get
Speaker 1: impeached as a result of it. But you wrote, did
Speaker 1: I make a mistake by taking a seat on the
Speaker 1: board of the Ukrainian Gas Company? No? Did I display
Speaker 1: a lack of judgment? No? Would I do it again? No? Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I met what I said. I meant. What I
Speaker 1: wrote is that, uh, you know, go to the beginning.
Speaker 1: Is that you know I went to Yale Law School. Um.
Speaker 1: I served on at least a dozen boards before Breezema.
Speaker 1: I was a vice chamber of the board of Amtrak.
Speaker 1: I was a chairman of the board of a World
Speaker 1: Food Program, US largest supporting the largest humanitarian organization in
Speaker 1: the world. I had an expertise in corporate governance. I
Speaker 1: was asked to serve on the board for corporate governance,
Speaker 1: and I was a lawyer at boy Schiller and Flexner,
Speaker 1: which was how I was first approached. However, what I
Speaker 1: didn't take into account was the way in which they
Speaker 1: would use the perception against my dad, and for that
Speaker 1: I wouldn't do it again. For that reason. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: the only reason. It's because the perception thing, not because
Speaker 1: the whole thing is so absurd, not because it's so
Speaker 1: clear that this was the worst kind of nepotism, right.
Speaker 1: Nepotism that involves private companies and corporations is one thing.
Speaker 1: A nepotism that involves leveraging your familial ties to somebody
Speaker 1: in a high public office is a different thing when
Speaker 1: it involves a country like Ukraine, When it involves foreign
Speaker 1: countries and interests, I mean, this is a whole different level.
Speaker 1: But again, look at how dishonest the media is. Look
Speaker 1: look at what they're willing to do here to make
Speaker 1: it seem as though, oh yeah, it's all the same,
Speaker 1: you all. Hunter Biden is such a such a sympathetic guy.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe maybe we should just give him a break. Actually,
Speaker 1: he's kind of a likable guy. He's a good guy.
Speaker 1: This is somebody who impregnated as stripper and now says
Speaker 1: he doesn't even remember meeting her. This is somebody who's
Speaker 1: got photos of his meth mouth and photos of him
Speaker 1: with multiple prostitutes that he's paying to sleep with it.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just disgusting. This is Joe Biden's son,
Speaker 1: the President's son, and the media makes him into a
Speaker 1: likable figure. I mean, it's one thing if he was
Speaker 1: going to go off and get treatment and you know,
Speaker 1: live a private life whatever. He's going on the talk
Speaker 1: show circuit. He's putting himself out there. I mean, it's unbelievable, unbelievable,
Speaker 1: but I guess it is believable. This is the way
Speaker 1: it happens. This is the the double standard of the
Speaker 1: left on display. And they just and the left wing
Speaker 1: media nothing, no truth matters to them. You know, he's
Speaker 1: on the team. He's on the team. Biden is their
Speaker 1: guy now, and anybody that's affiliated with Biden is on
Speaker 1: the team, and they'll protect them and they'll do all
Speaker 1: that kind of stuff. So it's a really stunning situation,
Speaker 1: isn't it. Yeah, Hunter Biden, anyone who says the laptop
Speaker 1: is not real is either a liar or a moron.
Speaker 1: You know, the laptop wasn't Hunter Biden's, I should say,
Speaker 1: any any who claims that it's laughable. And yet many
Speaker 1: big voices in the media have been saying that all along,
Speaker 1: They've they've been making that a part of this. They've
Speaker 1: been acting like maybe, maybe, just maybe it is in
Speaker 1: fact the case that this was Russian disinformation. In fact,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm still upset about how former intelligence officers very
Speaker 1: much debased themselves. And I'm talking about big names in
Speaker 1: the intel community Clapper and Brannan and I think Hayden
Speaker 1: and Panetta, they all signed that letter right before the
Speaker 1: election about how it was Russian disinformation. It absolutely was
Speaker 1: not Russian disinformation. That was a lie. So these people
Speaker 1: are either liars or they're idiots. I mean, it's gone
Speaker 1: to the point I've been saying this where for me
Speaker 1: being you know, XCIA myself, although only for a few years.
Speaker 1: I look, I joined the CIA to help find bin
Speaker 1: Laden and some of his some of his co conspirators,
Speaker 1: some of the bad guys and I realized what the
Speaker 1: federal government was really like after about four or five
Speaker 1: years and decided that, you know, I want to go
Speaker 1: to other things. Quite honestly, that was what ended up happening.
Speaker 1: So I'm not some CIA careerist, but it's gone to
Speaker 1: the point now where I feel like we're having worked
Speaker 1: in the intelligence community. The CIA is now like somebody
Speaker 1: having worked at Enron in the mid tooth thousands, you know,
Speaker 1: early two thousands, where yeah, I don't I don't think
Speaker 1: you want to want to brag about that one, you know, Oh,
Speaker 1: CIA guy, I don't know. The brand is very damage.
Speaker 1: I mean, yeah, I learned a lot of stuff there.
Speaker 1: I know things that are useful, particularly no things about
Speaker 1: the truth of the intelligence community. But man, the brand,
Speaker 1: it's just like people I know work the FBI. James Coomy,
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, the FBI is never gonna be the
Speaker 1: same at least for a generation or two. Now people
Speaker 1: are going to realize, oh, it can be run by
Speaker 1: partisan hacks who do injustice in the name of justice
Speaker 1: and who are really just hatchetmen for the Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: and they can run the FBI as James Comey did.
Speaker 1: This is this is the country we're living in now.
Speaker 1: It's it's concerning, but this is where we are and
Speaker 1: this is what we are continuing to deal with. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the Russian disinformation. Think about how elaborate that plot would
Speaker 1: have to be. I mean, that's really the best the
Speaker 1: Jus could do. First of all, the Russia conspiracy theories
Speaker 1: from the Trump era used against Trump are so outlandish
Speaker 1: that now it's really hard. It's really challenging to think
Speaker 1: of something that's too crazy or stupid for Democrats to believe. Right,
Speaker 1: what is beyond the pale for them? What's it? And
Speaker 1: we see it with the return of this Russia mindset,
Speaker 1: Russia with the laptop which was clearly Hunter Biden's. And
Speaker 1: if you see the photos, you see what's going on.
Speaker 1: Like I said, you know, what is to say about
Speaker 1: Joe Biden's parenting skills? Are we allowed to ask that question?
Speaker 1: Is that not? Now? I know he's the president, he's
Speaker 1: not the parent in chief, but he kind of poses
Speaker 1: like he's America's grandpa. And what a mess this guy
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden is. And I'm not just talking about the
Speaker 1: drug abuse and a lot of people can get caught
Speaker 1: up in drugs and it's a sickness and it's it's
Speaker 1: you know, I do have a lot of sympathy for that.
Speaker 1: But there's a difference in being a drug addict and
Speaker 1: being a drug addict who flaunts it and makes money
Speaker 1: off of your affiliation with your family in ways that
Speaker 1: are corrupt and gross and is paying off prostitutes too.
Speaker 1: What a time and making videos of it and taking
Speaker 1: photos of yourself basically naked and smoking crack. I mean,
Speaker 1: what a just what a disaster this guy's but yeah
Speaker 1: on Jimmy Kimmel Show. Hahaha. It's also funny. They're all
Speaker 1: such good buddies and friends and everything else. Sure, you know,
Speaker 1: because must be good to be a democrat. This is
Speaker 1: something that you know. It does cross my mind. It
Speaker 1: must must be a really special, privileged thing to be
Speaker 1: able to be a democrat who can always always count
Speaker 1: on the media to catch your back, always always be
Speaker 1: there to take care of you in one way or another,
Speaker 1: as long as you're as long as you're important to
Speaker 1: the cause. Think about walking around with that kind of protection,
Speaker 1: no matter how much of a scumbag you are. It
Speaker 1: must be a remarkable thing to be a famous democrat
Speaker 1: in America today, we have this under control. And what
Speaker 1: the Biden administration has done is very deliberate. So we're
Speaker 1: all ringing our hands because Kamala won't go down to
Speaker 1: the border. Well let's say she does. Let's say my
Speaker 1: orchist does. So what they don't want to change this?
Speaker 1: This is very deliberate. They took very willful steps to
Speaker 1: reverse Trump administration policies or remain in Mexico policy, to
Speaker 1: silent cooperation agreements, stopped building the wall, and maybe more
Speaker 1: importantly than all about send a signal to people that
Speaker 1: they're welcome here. This is important for everyone to know
Speaker 1: because because Crenshaw actually gets what's happening, he understands this
Speaker 1: dynamic too. The Democrats weep, we keep assuming, or there's
Speaker 1: this mindset of, oh, the crisis at the border is
Speaker 1: that we have so many people coming into the country illegally.
Speaker 1: That's not what Democrats think the crisis at the border is.
Speaker 1: They view it as a problem of whether or not
Speaker 1: the people can be processed quickly and efficiently enough and
Speaker 1: be kept comfortable as they're led into the country. What
Speaker 1: do we think Kamala is going to do if she
Speaker 1: does go down to the border. I mean, we know,
Speaker 1: of course very little. But I mean, just what do
Speaker 1: they think. They're going to talk about more resources. They're
Speaker 1: going to talk about more people down there to process
Speaker 1: the intake of those who cross illegally into the country.
Speaker 1: But think about this for a moment. That just means
Speaker 1: then more people will want to come. They're actually we're
Speaker 1: working at cross purposes with the Democrats on this, or
Speaker 1: rather we're thinking about this atros cross purposes with the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Their view of all of this is that they would
Speaker 1: like a better, more efficient entry process for the hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of mostly Central American migrants who cross illegally
Speaker 1: and then want to stay here. They want that process
Speaker 1: to be smoother. We want this to stop, but for
Speaker 1: it to stop, there has to be a change in
Speaker 1: the incentive structure. And they're not going to change the
Speaker 1: incentive structure because that would mean turning people away. In fact,
Speaker 1: as I've said, they're making this easier. They're making it
Speaker 1: more likely for people, more likely for people to want
Speaker 1: to come, because they'll say, oh, well, now I know
Speaker 1: that if if I send my children to cross the border,
Speaker 1: if I send my kid to cross the border illegally,
Speaker 1: he or she will be well taken care of in
Speaker 1: a very nice facility and allowed to stay for sure
Speaker 1: and get schooling and healthcare and everything and be placed.
Speaker 1: And why are more people going to come? Why isn't
Speaker 1: that going to result in even more illegal crossing? This
Speaker 1: is why the problem is only going to get only
Speaker 1: going to get worse. And as I'm getting ready myself
Speaker 1: to head down to the border, you know now there
Speaker 1: are people who are making videos of them. Members of
Speaker 1: Congress have made videos where they're just standing there and
Speaker 1: there's just just people walking. And this happens particularly at nighttime,
Speaker 1: just walking across the border in large numbers, large numbers
Speaker 1: of them. But don't call it an open border, they say, oh,
Speaker 1: it's not open. Yeah, it's so secure that hundreds of
Speaker 1: people at a time, in different places all over the
Speaker 1: US Mexico border are just going to walk into the country.
Speaker 1: That is. That's where we are right now, That's where
Speaker 1: this is. And I just I gotta tell you, it's
Speaker 1: it's amazing to see how the Democrats have no way
Speaker 1: of explaining this to people other than to just focus
Speaker 1: on the humanitarian and emotional impulses around the issue while
Speaker 1: not dealing with the fundamental fact that as long as
Speaker 1: people can come into the United States illegally and are
Speaker 1: likely to stay under comfortable in the whole process, they're
Speaker 1: going to keep doing this. It's not going to stop,
Speaker 1: and in fact, it's going to escalate. They'll be even
Speaker 1: more of this. So I don't know where there goes.
Speaker 1: I mean, it'll drop down a bit in the summer
Speaker 1: because it gets so hot that it becomes dangerous and
Speaker 1: just uncomfortable for people to try to cross into America
Speaker 1: illegally on foot. But I don't know what happens beyond that,
Speaker 1: other than I think it's likely to continue and you'll
Speaker 1: have you'll have this going on for the first two
Speaker 1: years of the Biden administration. The only way this stops
Speaker 1: is if Democrats feel like it's a true crisis for
Speaker 1: their poll numbers, then they might have to do something.
Speaker 1: We talk a lot about online censorship these days. We
Speaker 1: have these discussions on this show about how people like
Speaker 1: me are being suppressed, being shut down. What can we
Speaker 1: actually do about this? We have to fight back effectively
Speaker 1: in the war against big tech suppression and censorship of
Speaker 1: conservative ideas. We've got somebody who knows very well exactly
Speaker 1: how we can do that now with us. Matt Needler,
Speaker 1: he is the CEO of Caucus Room dot Com. Caucus
Speaker 1: from dot Com is somebody that I work with as
Speaker 1: a sponsor. Or. We're very pleased to have hi, Matt On. Matt,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. Thanks for thanks for having me
Speaker 1: and thanks for supporting us. So tell me what we
Speaker 1: have heard recently from Supreme Court Justice Thomas that seems
Speaker 1: to be be sticking with people as as a beginning
Speaker 1: point for the conversation of how we can start to
Speaker 1: get rid of the big tech monopoly by treating it
Speaker 1: like monopoly. What do you see and tell us about
Speaker 1: what what Thomas says and how you see this moving forward. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean Justice Thomas really, uh, you know, kind of
Speaker 1: put a shot across the bow to the real big
Speaker 1: tech platforms, especially I think the app stores and Amazon,
Speaker 1: the folks that that took down Parlors. We know. A
Speaker 1: few months ago, he pointed out in an opinion he
Speaker 1: wrote around the Overcort's decision about President Trump blocking people
Speaker 1: on Twitter. They actually just ruled that opinion as moot
Speaker 1: because he's not president anymore. But but in the he
Speaker 1: put in an opinion associated with that that said, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, Okay, so maybe President Trump shouldn't have blocked
Speaker 1: these folks on Twitter, but Twitter blocked President Trump. And
Speaker 1: like the power of Twitter to do that is pretty extraordinary,
Speaker 1: and we need to be looking at not only that,
Speaker 1: but but how these app stores and others are treated
Speaker 1: in terms of whether or not they are offering a
Speaker 1: public accommodation kind of the way, like a hotel can't
Speaker 1: turn someone away because of you know, some arbitrary reason,
Speaker 1: but you know, if they if that person is violating
Speaker 1: the rules of the hotel, they can. So he was
Speaker 1: likening it to a public accommodation and then also usibly
Speaker 1: as a common carrier kind of the way like a
Speaker 1: train company can't refuse one kind of product but to
Speaker 1: accept another, you know, competitor's product or something like that.
Speaker 1: So so he pointed to those two things and it
Speaker 1: was basically just an invitation for someone to bring a
Speaker 1: case to the court. And um, so we were watching
Speaker 1: that with a lot of interest here at Caucus Room. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, as you know, Caucus Room is a social
Speaker 1: network for conservatives. Um. And so we've we're always pretty
Speaker 1: wary of you know, legislative and you know, uh, legislators
Speaker 1: getting um in the mix because they'll probably screw it up.
Speaker 1: And you know, we don't exactly you know, whatever the
Speaker 1: court decisions are is usually kind of an up or
Speaker 1: down or or nuanced decision with some specific issue like
Speaker 1: that Twitter case that you know probably doesn't relate to
Speaker 1: the way Caucus Room works. But but we watched it
Speaker 1: with a lot of interest. You know, we certainly had
Speaker 1: our own issues with the app stores and are still
Speaker 1: trying to get onto the app stores. So we've learned
Speaker 1: a lot. But it was a really important decision and
Speaker 1: one that we're still kind of chewing on this week.
Speaker 1: So so tell us of a year, and we're speaking
Speaker 1: to Matt Needler, who's a CEO of caucus Room dot com,
Speaker 1: which is a social media site for conservatives and one
Speaker 1: that I've partnered with as a sponsor. And I want
Speaker 1: to know, Matt, uh, why can't you get in the
Speaker 1: app store? For example, what's the reason that Apple, one
Speaker 1: of the most powerful companies in the world, gives for
Speaker 1: why you can't actually have an app? Just like you know,
Speaker 1: it seems like there are millions of them these days. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, it's uh so there's a lot of answers
Speaker 1: to that. I mean, the first few times we were
Speaker 1: rejected were perfectly reasonable. You know, we had bugs, we
Speaker 1: had didn't load properly, or it was missing a couple
Speaker 1: of basic you know, security features that that Apple wanted
Speaker 1: to see or something like that. And so we've addressed
Speaker 1: all of those. We're going to be resubmitting really soon. UM.
Speaker 1: But one of the things that that UH is there's
Speaker 1: kind of a key term which is called user generated content,
Speaker 1: and that's the official jargon for what a social network
Speaker 1: is UM. And when you think about user generated content
Speaker 1: like that could be anything. Could be the pictures people
Speaker 1: put up on Instagram, it could be UM, a text
Speaker 1: that someone puts in onto Twitter. UM. And you know,
Speaker 1: anybody's ability to preemptively moderate that is virtually impossible. There
Speaker 1: are some screening things and whatnot that Apple requires, you know,
Speaker 1: in terms of like like we don't want you know,
Speaker 1: pornography on on Caucus Room. Caucus Room is a place
Speaker 1: for conservatives to caucus We It's a lot like uh,
Speaker 1: sort of nextdoor dot com, where it's you know, oriented
Speaker 1: at first and foremost around your neighborhood, but you can
Speaker 1: join larger groups. In factors that there's a great buck
Speaker 1: Sexton group getting started this week. Um, it's a buck
Speaker 1: Sexton club that because we have clubs, newsrooms, and causes anyway,
Speaker 1: so when people join Caucus Room, keep an eye out
Speaker 1: for that. But the point is user user generated content
Speaker 1: is something that the app stores have extra requirements for.
Speaker 1: So if you're uploading a game like a Tetris kind
Speaker 1: of game or something, they've got one level of screening.
Speaker 1: But if you have user generated content, they've got a
Speaker 1: whole another level of screening. And so we have been
Speaker 1: working for you know, the better part of nine months too,
Speaker 1: and it kind of feels like sometimes the goalposts are
Speaker 1: shifting on us. But uh, you know, the latest thing
Speaker 1: that they had was, you know that we because we
Speaker 1: screen people who want to join Caucus Room and participate
Speaker 1: in our you know, the discussions, post content, create a
Speaker 1: group or something, you have to be a real person
Speaker 1: and we got to know that you, you know, you
Speaker 1: share the same generally share the same conservative values that
Speaker 1: the other members share on the site. And so we
Speaker 1: have a little screening process. So Matt tell me this,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is a different thing that you're doing
Speaker 1: with Caucus Room. How do you verify conservatives? Yeah, so
Speaker 1: we do a few different uh, we have a few
Speaker 1: different methods. We've got a few you know, commercial data
Speaker 1: things that we can run against. So u you know,
Speaker 1: one of the things that we've that's very clear is
Speaker 1: that liberals hate it when conservatives talk online, right, and
Speaker 1: so there were you know, one of the problems that
Speaker 1: Parlor fell into was that, you know, there were a
Speaker 1: lot of people joining it just to sabotage the conversations
Speaker 1: and to sabotage the site from the left. And uh,
Speaker 1: you know that is that's always a concern they you know,
Speaker 1: poll after poll shows that the only people who feel
Speaker 1: totally comfortable talking online are are the most liberal. And
Speaker 1: so when we built Caucus Room, we wanted to at
Speaker 1: least do some kind of a screening system to keep
Speaker 1: those liberal trolls out and um, and you know, for
Speaker 1: the most part, I think we've been we've done a
Speaker 1: really really good job that as we've been growing. But
Speaker 1: the you know, so, so you we use some commercial databases,
Speaker 1: and we also allow you to to vouch for a friend.
Speaker 1: So if you've got a friend that you you know,
Speaker 1: it's sort of on you if they join Caucus Room
Speaker 1: and misbehave. But the point is like we were trying
Speaker 1: to set up a system where you know, we are
Speaker 1: here to caucus as conservatives to have some you know, conversations,
Speaker 1: you know, who's the city council candidate we like in
Speaker 1: our neighborhood, who's the UM you know, what sort of
Speaker 1: slate of school board candidates do we want to support,
Speaker 1: and then all the way up to the national level
Speaker 1: talking about national conservative issues as well. But we don't
Speaker 1: feel like people will be able to comfortably have those
Speaker 1: conversations unless we kind of clear the room of um,
Speaker 1: you know, the troublemakers first. So so that's our that's
Speaker 1: our goal. But UM. You know that said, you can
Speaker 1: now join and at least look around a little bit
Speaker 1: without a screening process, So we have a limited access
Speaker 1: before we screen you if you'd like to see what
Speaker 1: it is. There's so there's one level of people can
Speaker 1: to sort of see what's going on if they go
Speaker 1: to Caucus room dot com and then to get more
Speaker 1: involved than to be posting and things. That's where this
Speaker 1: verification comes in, UM, and just give us a sense
Speaker 1: of what are some of your plans downline as this
Speaker 1: grows and expands. Yeah, you know, we UM I'll put
Speaker 1: it this way. Our verification system is so closely mirrored
Speaker 1: to to the way we're based here in Colorados. We
Speaker 1: launched in Colorado, and it's so close to Colorado's caucus system.
Speaker 1: You know, when you go to the caucuses, you actually
Speaker 1: have to show your ID and you have to show
Speaker 1: that you're a registered Republican in our in this case,
Speaker 1: in order to participate in your Republican caucus. And it's
Speaker 1: great because then you meet your local neighbors who are Republicans,
Speaker 1: and you talk about the local issues, and you nominate,
Speaker 1: and you know, you work your way up the chain
Speaker 1: to nominate people at the various assemblies for state legislator,
Speaker 1: county commissioner, and then you know, all the way up
Speaker 1: to governor and president. And so that's how you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of the caucus states worked. And I found
Speaker 1: a great value in that. I'm a former state legislator.
Speaker 1: I didn't have I was very young when I ran.
Speaker 1: I didn't have a Christmas card list. But the caucus
Speaker 1: system gives you sort of an instant support network of
Speaker 1: neighbors who are you know, share your values and want
Speaker 1: to help people like you get elected. So going through
Speaker 1: the caucus process is great for you know, a young
Speaker 1: local candidate just getting started, and we felt like we
Speaker 1: should see that online. So it's open to not just Republicans.
Speaker 1: As long as you're you just share conservative values, you
Speaker 1: can join. But that was the inspiration for the site.
Speaker 1: It wasn't We didn't want to be like some other
Speaker 1: social network. We wanted to be an organizing tool for conservatives,
Speaker 1: both locally and nationally. So that's where we're that's where
Speaker 1: we're headed. We're in almost every county in the US,
Speaker 1: most major cities. We've got hundreds or if not thousands
Speaker 1: of members already. UM and with your help and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, and and a bunch of other folks, we're
Speaker 1: growing really really fast. And so we're um, you know,
Speaker 1: we're just getting started. That's great. And so here in
Speaker 1: New York I can find other people who are like
Speaker 1: minded through caucusroom dot com. Right, that's right, yep, yep.
Speaker 1: You'll find them in your county. You can find them
Speaker 1: in your state. Uh, you can. You can start a
Speaker 1: group if I was a you know, if I'm a
Speaker 1: if I'm thinking about running for office, um, especially like
Speaker 1: state legislative level. You know, we've had some people already,
Speaker 1: you know, announcing for Congress, et cetera. And they're they're
Speaker 1: setting up caucus room groups so that they can find
Speaker 1: a local support network of verified conservatives to kind of
Speaker 1: help them get started. Fantastic one. All right, every everyone
Speaker 1: should definitely go check out the Buck Sexton group at
Speaker 1: caucus room dot com. Matt and Leedler, CEO of caucusom
Speaker 1: dot com. Matt, thank you so much, man. We really
Speaker 1: appreciate it. Hey, thanks for having me. Thanks Buck. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there has been a change, and I think a lot
Speaker 1: of Americans, especially hard working, poor middle class Americans circinis,
Speaker 1: start behaving differently. You're going to start voting with their feet,
Speaker 1: going to start looking with a little bit more of
Speaker 1: a suspect I toward what's happening in Washington, DC and
Speaker 1: within the Democratic Party, because look, these policies are not sustainable.
Speaker 1: The spending levels are out of control, and these are
Speaker 1: all going to lead to economic catastrophe. The Senator want
Speaker 1: to double back and on topic we were discussing here
Speaker 1: in New York. If you yeah, the spending levels are
Speaker 1: not sustainable. I know that we didn't talk about this,
Speaker 1: and I used to bring it up occasionally and I
Speaker 1: would say, you remember if you've listened to the show
Speaker 1: for years now, which some of you have been listening
Speaker 1: to the show almost ten years. But I would say, hey,
Speaker 1: the situation here of spending, even though the Trump administration
Speaker 1: is not good, folks are spending too much money. I know,
Speaker 1: no one wants to hear it, you know, Maga, You know,
Speaker 1: no one wants to hear anything other than how awesome
Speaker 1: everything is. But we're spending too much money. And it
Speaker 1: was true. Now we're spending way too much money. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is crazy, and it's like we're putting our currency
Speaker 1: through a stress test to see if we could just
Speaker 1: break the whole thing. We're trying to see if we
Speaker 1: can find a way to create inflation. Almost that's what
Speaker 1: it feels like. And eventually this is going to be
Speaker 1: a big problem. And I don't mean in ten years,
Speaker 1: I mean in this first Biden term. And inflation is
Speaker 1: so damaging because what ends up happening is that you
Speaker 1: have people with assets, who own assets, they can raise
Speaker 1: those prices or those assets will be inflated, particularly in
Speaker 1: the stock market, which has already been happening at some level.
Speaker 1: But you know, if you are somebody that owns property
Speaker 1: and you rent it out, well you'll you'll raise prices
Speaker 1: in order to keep up with inflation. But if you're
Speaker 1: somebody who relies on wages, it's more difficult. And if
Speaker 1: you're somebody who has savings, your savings will purchase less.
Speaker 1: Your savings are worthless. You are eating away at people's
Speaker 1: savings with this process. Uh. You know, every every action
Speaker 1: has an equal in opposite reaction, and the most basic
Speaker 1: truths of of economics and of objective reality are being
Speaker 1: forgotten in this whole process. And I understand it's it's
Speaker 1: not politically appealing to people to hear that there's not
Speaker 1: some magic money tree that's going to make everything so
Speaker 1: much better. I understand that. But at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, we have to be honest about this, and
Speaker 1: that means confronting the fact that while nobody wants to
Speaker 1: be the one who's telling everybody how bad things are
Speaker 1: right now, well maybe a little bit because Biden's the president.
Speaker 1: I get that, but you know, I don't want to
Speaker 1: be a downer, folks, But this is going to get
Speaker 1: out of control. And the problem with inflation is that
Speaker 1: when you figure out that it's happening it's often too
Speaker 1: late to do very much about it. I mean, well
Speaker 1: you can do things about it, but you've already got
Speaker 1: a problem. That's a better way of putting it. And
Speaker 1: here's you know, Claire McCaskill is saying that the GOP
Speaker 1: is the party of grievance and negativity, darkness and doom. Now,
Speaker 1: I I was just talking about some negativity. But you know,
Speaker 1: sometimes negativity is something you need to talk about. But
Speaker 1: I think the Democrats are really the ones who well,
Speaker 1: they're the ones that that view America negatively. I just
Speaker 1: I just view this as a function of math. Anyway,
Speaker 1: here's Claire McCaskill Place sixteen. Yeah, it's kind of weird.
Speaker 1: I mean, what is the Republican Party for right now?
Speaker 1: I thought it was really interesting yesterday that that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden led so strongly with the message bring us your ideas.
Speaker 1: I mean, the Republican Party has become the party of grievance, negativity,
Speaker 1: darkness and doom. This is so far from the profile
Speaker 1: of Ronald Reagan. It would give you whiplash to look
Speaker 1: at the two different models. They just are against everything. No,
Speaker 1: we're just against what Democrats are doing because they're doing
Speaker 1: dumb things that are hurtful to the country. Overall, it
Speaker 1: might help some people, but overall they're bad and that's
Speaker 1: how we feel. And it's just so funny, isn't it.
Speaker 1: We're the party of negativity. For four years, Democrats while
Speaker 1: Trump was president, spent spent all their time trying to
Speaker 1: explain to us how Trump was basically a fascist and
Speaker 1: how they were ruining They were we were ruining the
Speaker 1: country by having somebody who was a Hitler like figure
Speaker 1: almost as president. But oh and there was a Russian
Speaker 1: plot to steal the election and he wasn't even really
Speaker 1: the president, and the country is so racist and there's
Speaker 1: white supremacy everywhere, and all these things that they say,
Speaker 1: and then now they turn around when they're in charge,
Speaker 1: it's like, why are you guys, so you know, why
Speaker 1: are you so negative about the country? Oh? Okay? The
Speaker 1: entire Democrat agenda for four years under Trump wasn't to
Speaker 1: convince everybody that the country was basically spiraling into the
Speaker 1: seventh circle of hell im And I think we can
Speaker 1: all see exactly what was happening, and I remember it.
Speaker 1: But I do have to say that on the question
Speaker 1: of or on the issue of massive government spending and
Speaker 1: trillions and trillions of dollars. We have to look at
Speaker 1: this and understand that, yeah, they're spending too much money,
Speaker 1: and this is going to have really negative ramifications for people.
Speaker 1: This is going to affect you, it's going to affect me.
Speaker 1: And by the time it's clear that it's a problem,
Speaker 1: you know what they're gonna do. They're not gonna say, wow,
Speaker 1: you guys were right. They're gonna say it was Trump's fault,
Speaker 1: It's the Republican's fault, it's the rich not paying enough
Speaker 1: taxes fault. It's something like that. They'll have some excuse
Speaker 1: even though we can all see this train of inflation
Speaker 1: is coming down, coming down the tracks, and it's it's
Speaker 1: gonna get ugly. Friends, rock and roll, fellow Patriots, It's
Speaker 1: time for roll com for Aducer Mark. What was it
Speaker 1: like going to opening day of the New York Baseball Mets?
Speaker 1: How was it incredible? It was so nice to be
Speaker 1: back at City Field after a very long time, beautiful day.
Speaker 1: It was in the mid sixties, high early low seventies,
Speaker 1: and it was sunny, got to eat some hot dogs,
Speaker 1: have some beers, watch a baseball game. It felt like
Speaker 1: normalcy again. Yeah, it was a little weird. It wasn't
Speaker 1: a full park, but it was as close to normal
Speaker 1: as I personally have gotten in a long time. So
Speaker 1: it felt good. Very nice buddy who ended up winning
Speaker 1: the game? The Mets one. What was the score? It
Speaker 1: was a three to two They walked off, walked off
Speaker 1: hit by pitch? What does that mean? That means the
Speaker 1: batter got hit by the pitch and the basses were loaded,
Speaker 1: so he gets to go to first base. So that
Speaker 1: means the runner from third scored. Is that I mean,
Speaker 1: it's gonna ask. Is that a little anti clubactic? It's
Speaker 1: like completely It was actually a very weird situation. Nobody
Speaker 1: in the ballpark knew that it hit him because the
Speaker 1: umpires signaled shrike three. So me and a lot of
Speaker 1: fans started booing because the guy at the plate had
Speaker 1: grounded into a double play with the bases loaded. He'd
Speaker 1: been bad all game, so we started booing. Then all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, the umpires signaled that it hit him
Speaker 1: and the Mets won the game. So it was very weird.
Speaker 1: It was the strangest ending to a game I've ever
Speaker 1: been to, that's for sure. But the Mets won. That's
Speaker 1: all the matters. There we go, What was your what
Speaker 1: was your ballpark food of choice? I didn't go with
Speaker 1: anything crazy. A lot of stuff wasn't open because of
Speaker 1: the it wasn't full capacity. So I just went with
Speaker 1: the staples and with the hot dog when with some beers.
Speaker 1: You know, nothing crazy. See, I will say when I
Speaker 1: used to be able to eat the gluten, the hot
Speaker 1: dog with the bun is was. There was something pretty
Speaker 1: nice about it. I was always though. When I was
Speaker 1: a kid, I was a ketchup guy. Then I got older,
Speaker 1: I became a mustard guy. Oh no, I definitely go
Speaker 1: ketch up. I don't like mustard. M Yeah, you like
Speaker 1: all that sugar, don't you. I mean, I'm not worried
Speaker 1: about the sugar on a little bit of ketchup. I'm
Speaker 1: telling you, I'm sure, of course there is, but you
Speaker 1: know it's delicious. It's not like I'm looking. I'm I'm
Speaker 1: a weirdo though. I I go, and I have no
Speaker 1: shame about this. I just I think that mayonnaise with
Speaker 1: French fries is amazing. And I know that people I
Speaker 1: know like a total savage mayonnaise and French fries I
Speaker 1: love it. I love it. The smell of mayonnaise makes
Speaker 1: me want to vomit. Yeah, wow, really hate man is
Speaker 1: a great condom. So many, so many of my red
Speaker 1: blooded American team buck listening across the America right hours
Speaker 1: saying producer Mark Mayo is them. I've said this before.
Speaker 1: If you like Mayo, great, I just don't like it.
Speaker 1: You know, Aoli is just Mayo with with oil in it,
Speaker 1: you know, a little extra oil and flavor. Fancy aolis?
Speaker 1: All right, let's get to it. Facebook dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck sexty. When I said, it's a Facebook message, somebody
Speaker 1: send me, by the way, they they send me a
Speaker 1: message on Instagram and said, Buck, how do I I
Speaker 1: want to text a couple of friends your show, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, that's a huge, huge favor and we
Speaker 1: thank you so much for anybody who could do that.
Speaker 1: But how They said how because it wasn't that easy
Speaker 1: to do In the iHeart app, I'll just tell you
Speaker 1: you can go to buck Sexton dot com slash podcast
Speaker 1: and just cut and paste that UURL. Just just do
Speaker 1: a copy paste rather that UURL send somebody that link
Speaker 1: buck Sexton dot com slash podcast and it goes right
Speaker 1: there and you press them, just click the play button
Speaker 1: and you're listening to the Buck Sexton Show. So please,
Speaker 1: that's a that's a really easy way to do it.
Speaker 1: If somebody's not that familiar with the iHeart Radio app
Speaker 1: or with Apple Podcast pretty smart. Can you can you
Speaker 1: text people Apple from the Apple podcast story? Can you
Speaker 1: can you text links? Can we do that? Yeah? Can
Speaker 1: you can go and search for the Buck Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: you believe. You click on the show page and there
Speaker 1: should be like the three little dots that you used
Speaker 1: to share things. You can either share an episode or
Speaker 1: the full show and it will give you a link. Really,
Speaker 1: I think you can do that on the IHRBH more thing. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, Mark, the snow Princess came back from from
Speaker 1: Buffalo yesterday and I got to see her. It was
Speaker 1: so exciting, so happy because I had COVID for two weeks,
Speaker 1: couldn't see her then. Then she had to go home
Speaker 1: to Buffalo where she's from, so I didn't see her then,
Speaker 1: and so I hadn't seen her in like three weeks,
Speaker 1: and so we saw last night. We had a great,
Speaker 1: great you know, catchup time or union all that, but
Speaker 1: we were just it was kind of late. We want
Speaker 1: to watch some kind of a movie, some kind of
Speaker 1: a show. We put on the number one the number
Speaker 1: one thing on Netflix. Just you're like, all right, we'll
Speaker 1: just give this a shot. I knew nothing about it.
Speaker 1: We got about thirty minutes into it maybe, And I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure it's about a guy who's having a relationship
Speaker 1: with a woman and the daughter of the woman is
Speaker 1: figuring out that the boyfriend is a human lamb prey,
Speaker 1: which is like a fish that grabs onto another fish
Speaker 1: and sucks its insides out. Pretty sure that's what this
Speaker 1: movie's turning into. And it just makes me want to
Speaker 1: because we watched this one. We had another Netflix movie
Speaker 1: recently about like the crazy babysitter, who's like sexy but
Speaker 1: crazy kind of a thing. You know, this is who
Speaker 1: is writing this crap? Mark? Like, who comes up? They have?
Speaker 1: They have such deep pockets at Netflix and Amazon and Hulu.
Speaker 1: Can't they just make good shows? Why do they make
Speaker 1: such trash shows? Yeah? But I don't have a clue
Speaker 1: why Netflix makes this trash but people are obviously watching it.
Speaker 1: I mean, why else would they be making it and
Speaker 1: spending the money if people aren't watching it. I think
Speaker 1: they're very hit hit or miss. But that's the point.
Speaker 1: People like some stuff, some people don't like other stuff.
Speaker 1: I guess it just reminds me a little bit of
Speaker 1: how I remember I grew up in my family. We
Speaker 1: were I was fortunate, I guess in the sense and
Speaker 1: that we had my dad likes My dad likes to
Speaker 1: watch stev He's a big reader, but he also likes
Speaker 1: to watch TV. And and we had like all the
Speaker 1: different HBO channels. And if you're watching all the different
Speaker 1: HBO channels, like like I was, occasionally something would come
Speaker 1: on late at night and in the movie would be
Speaker 1: it would be so bad. I mean, it would honestly
Speaker 1: be such trash that the thought process even as like
Speaker 1: a teenage as teenager watching this stuff, I think, who
Speaker 1: thought this was a good idea? I mean who who?
Speaker 1: Because they spent money they made this movie, you know
Speaker 1: who thought that making? And the one that always comes
Speaker 1: to mind that I brought up before the show was
Speaker 1: LEPrecon five. Remember producer Mark, do you even know the
Speaker 1: leprac am the Leprica? Do you have the LEPrecon movies?
Speaker 1: You know what I'm talking about? No? And based on
Speaker 1: how you're describing them. I don't want to. I'm the
Speaker 1: Leprica coming lady. You know, he I'll eat your face
Speaker 1: if you'll try to take me put gold. You know,
Speaker 1: there was this little guy. He was actually it was
Speaker 1: a it was a little person. He actually was a
Speaker 1: little person um named Warwick Davis, who was an actor
Speaker 1: who played the lead character in the movie Willow, which
Speaker 1: was a Disney movie that it's kind of a Dungeons
Speaker 1: and Dragons fantasy genre movie. And so he's a little person.
Speaker 1: But then he went on to make a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of these movies called the LEPrecon. And you know, I
Speaker 1: always think of Leprecons as the guy from the cereal box,
Speaker 1: the frosted lucky chart arms that are magically delicious. You know,
Speaker 1: do you remember that I'm going of course, yeah, he's
Speaker 1: a nice little LEPrecon. You know, he wants to hand
Speaker 1: you little marshmallows that are different charms, and the whole
Speaker 1: thing and lucky charms. I used to eat it. I
Speaker 1: thought they pretty it's pretty yummy. It would turn the
Speaker 1: cereal milk weird colors. Anyway, the lucky jibs and and
Speaker 1: I see that's a the Warwick Davis. LEPrecon character is
Speaker 1: a mean LEPrecon who like like kills people. He's very
Speaker 1: bad LEPrecon. They made LEPrecon in Space, LEPrecon in the Hood.
Speaker 1: True story. Uh, they made so many of these movies,
Speaker 1: and he just watch and he like bites people and
Speaker 1: rips their faces off and all this stuff, and it's
Speaker 1: pretty violent sometimes. And I just remember thinking to myself, like,
Speaker 1: who is the screenwriter for this? Who makes these trash movies?
Speaker 1: But then I guess I'm sitting here talking about them,
Speaker 1: but I kind of watch some of them, So I
Speaker 1: guess some people will watch stuff even but it's garbage.
Speaker 1: But Netflix is this is all my way of saying,
Speaker 1: Netflix producer Mark is making, is making some pretty trash
Speaker 1: stuff these days. They're either going to either win Oscars
Speaker 1: or some sort of award or they make tresh. It's
Speaker 1: there's no in between. There's not a lot in between.
Speaker 1: They don't do a lot of gentleman's b. Plus you know,
Speaker 1: it's either an A or A or a D. There's
Speaker 1: not a lot of mid mid range stuff. And the
Speaker 1: shows over the So anyway, I guess the sostance we
Speaker 1: might finish this. I don't even know if this is finishable,
Speaker 1: Like we got through the the you know, sexy college
Speaker 1: student nanny who you know, I can't even explain it.
Speaker 1: That was number one on nept We got through that,
Speaker 1: which was absurd. I mean, it's so bad. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm looking for something good to watch this week, and
Speaker 1: if any of you have recommendations for me, I'll never forget.
Speaker 1: It was this audience that told me about the masterpiece
Speaker 1: theater show Poll Dark, which is available on Amazon, which
Speaker 1: is a great show. What you can watch you with
Speaker 1: the whole family. It's a great show, really well done.
Speaker 1: You know. I I recommended recently for one of my
Speaker 1: family members Outlander, which have you watched that? One? Producer
Speaker 1: more Yeah, a long time ago. Yeah, I enjoyed Outlander.
Speaker 1: But I will say it's really leave violent, and there's
Speaker 1: a lot of sexy, sexy, sexy, naughty time stuff going
Speaker 1: on in that show and special fun fun time exactly.
Speaker 1: That's that that thing, and and it's uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's a little too much, a little too much of that.
Speaker 1: Uh So I I couldn't I have it able to
Speaker 1: finish shoutlet. So I'm looking I'm looking for a new
Speaker 1: show anyway, that's that's I've told you about ted Lasso
Speaker 1: about one hundred times and you still haven't watched it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think i'll do it. Where is is it on?
Speaker 1: Is it on Apple TV? Oh? See, that's why I
Speaker 1: don't have Apple TV. Just download the app and get
Speaker 1: a free trial. Okay, maybe I'll do that. Then is
Speaker 1: Have you seen the Superstore show? Yes? Fantastic? Someone else
Speaker 1: said that, so I might check that. Where is that Hulu?
Speaker 1: That's on Hulu? Yeah, okay, I'm gonna give that. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna give that a shot. Have you seen Brooklyn nine nine?
Speaker 1: That's also Snow Snow Princess. We're gonna check out Superstore? Okay,
Speaker 1: she she's hearing me. Uh and uh Brooklyn nine nine. Yes,
Speaker 1: that's the Andy Sandberg. It's a cop comedy. Is that one? Good? Hilarious?
Speaker 1: Love it? Okay? All right, So I got a couple
Speaker 1: to add into the mix here, let's get to your
Speaker 1: thoughts team. We got John up here. Hey, but a
Speaker 1: quick question. Did the number of deaths in the US
Speaker 1: go up last year? Not taking into account how I
Speaker 1: wonder if the rate was redistributed to COVID, if there
Speaker 1: was a significant rise, I'm also curious if it changes
Speaker 1: if we adjust for the rise in suicide and murder.
Speaker 1: I know COVID is real. I want the actual impact things. John,
Speaker 1: I have not independently dove into, dived into dove into
Speaker 1: these numbers. I have not done that yet. I will
Speaker 1: tell you that my understanding is that there is excess mortality,
Speaker 1: substantial excess mortality in the era in the COVID year,
Speaker 1: So a lot of people did die from COVID. Who
Speaker 1: you know when you look at so expected mortality is
Speaker 1: in any given year in the US, how many people die,
Speaker 1: and excess mortality is a clear separation from I guess
Speaker 1: a standard deviation at least above that and or a
Speaker 1: deviation from it. We could just put it that way,
Speaker 1: and there were a few hundred there were there were
Speaker 1: hundreds of thousands of additional deaths from COVID. Vast majority
Speaker 1: of those deaths are people over seventy So you start
Speaker 1: to get into well, there are more people dying that
Speaker 1: from COVID. But there's also a high percentage if you're
Speaker 1: looking at just the excess mortality questions the function of numbers,
Speaker 1: there's a high percentage of people who died who were
Speaker 1: near near life expectancy in the US anyway. But yes,
Speaker 1: the answer question John, is that a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of people did die. Hundreds of thousands of people
Speaker 1: did die from COVID based on everything that I've seen,
Speaker 1: Burke rights, you sound like a an elitist snob when
Speaker 1: you denigrate states with less population. Density isn't necessarily a
Speaker 1: good thing most people. We don't want to live right
Speaker 1: on top of one another. And frankly, leadership is leadership.
Speaker 1: Population size has nothing to do with it. If you
Speaker 1: can lead, it doesn't matter if you're governing Florida or Montana.
Speaker 1: Christy Noome is disqualified not because she's in a small state,
Speaker 1: but because she caved to wokeness over the issue of
Speaker 1: biological sex. Okay, Burke, well, let's actually so, I appreciate
Speaker 1: you writing and taking the time, let's actually address what
Speaker 1: you're saying here. I didn't say that density was good
Speaker 1: or bad, so I don't know why you're thinking that
Speaker 1: that's what I was saying. I was pointing out that
Speaker 1: comparing the leadership shown by Ron de Santis in Florida
Speaker 1: with a population of twenty one million and a lot
Speaker 1: of density during COVID and comparing Christy Noome in South Dakota,
Speaker 1: with a population of about two million and a population
Speaker 1: density similar to the South Pacific. As I've said, islands
Speaker 1: in the South Pacific is not an apt comparison because
Speaker 1: COVID density translates directly to more cases and higher mortality,
Speaker 1: and so it's not as impressive as a leader to
Speaker 1: be in charge of a state that is much smaller
Speaker 1: with much lesser density, because those things factor so much.
Speaker 1: This is like saying, why aren't we New Zealand, Burke,
Speaker 1: Why does New Zealand have such a better COVID response
Speaker 1: than we do? It would be intellectually dishonest to suggest
Speaker 1: that you could compare those two things. New Zealand has
Speaker 1: a much smaller population and much less density than the
Speaker 1: United States does overall. So I mean, you can call
Speaker 1: me whatever you want to call me, but listen to
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. Don't get angry based on what you're
Speaker 1: interpreting or your interpretation rather of what I'm saying. I
Speaker 1: have no I'm trying to move to a less dense
Speaker 1: place myself. I don't know what. I don't know why
Speaker 1: you think I like density? Density stinks? Too many people
Speaker 1: is too expensive and obviously in a pandemic and density
Speaker 1: is a real challenge. So Burke always free to write
Speaker 1: into criticize. But on this one, my friend, I think,
Speaker 1: listen more closely to what I'm saying. Let's come back
Speaker 1: in a second with more roll call. Coming back here
Speaker 1: with rollcall. Remember Facebook dot com, slashbuck sexon, or you
Speaker 1: can email us Team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com. Richard Buck,
Speaker 1: I'm very glad you survived the rona. We should all
Speaker 1: take inspiration from our Bostonian patriot ancestors and have a
Speaker 1: coke party. I mean assume he means the soda producer Mark.
Speaker 1: We should record dumping out coke products and setting them
Speaker 1: to coke and coke CEO. I'm tired of these lib crazies,
Speaker 1: and these companies need to feel some kind of pain.
Speaker 1: Major League baseball is just as bad, but I don't
Speaker 1: have any baseball stuff to burn. Let's have a coke
Speaker 1: party while keep it our shield hide. Not like a
Speaker 1: like a hundred Biden coke party. He means like the
Speaker 1: caffeinated sugary beverage. So just to be clear, but yeah, Richard,
Speaker 1: thanks for writing in, and thank you for being glad
Speaker 1: that I survived the RONA. I certainly am too, Dave. Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: listen to the podcast late night as usual. Our VP
Speaker 1: literally just said, strengthening up our economy over water policy.
Speaker 1: Are you kidding me? I'm looking forward to you in
Speaker 1: producer marks strengthening up your podcast to make sure water
Speaker 1: is managed properly, no pressure. What the hell are these
Speaker 1: people talking about? David? That is a great question. What
Speaker 1: the hell are the Democrats talking about when it comes
Speaker 1: to things like infrastructure, and as we've said, anything they
Speaker 1: want to make infrastructures infrastructure, Well, that's not how that's
Speaker 1: not how words work. That doesn't make any sense. But yes,
Speaker 1: we see it for what it is, and we will
Speaker 1: continue to focus in on what is true and what
Speaker 1: is real. Dam I want you all have a great weekend.
Speaker 1: Thanks as always for being here with me. Please do
Speaker 1: tell one person texts them a link to bucksexon dot
Speaker 1: com slash podcasts say hey, listen to this guy. It's
Speaker 1: the best conservative podcast out there. Talk to you all Monday,
Speaker 1: Shields High