Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunch. It's Comrade Bernie versus
Speaker 1: Comrade Warren in the Democratic primary. There's a debate tonight.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about how that's going to play out. Is
Speaker 1: Bernie the front runner and Ken Warren actually just canceled
Speaker 1: student loans if she were to win? This whole thing?
Speaker 1: Plus Iran and Iranian journalists quit over lying to their countryman.
Speaker 1: Trump's trying to build the wall, mass extinction threatened by
Speaker 1: the media, and Jessica Biel's anti vax that's coming up.
Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence,
Speaker 1: make no mistakes, Great, You're great American Again the Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins, Remember the due Welcome to Buck Sex
Speaker 1: and show. Everybody, man, we have a debate coming up
Speaker 1: tonight that I feel like about five of you listening
Speaker 1: are probably going to watch, because only about fifteen people
Speaker 1: across the country really seem to care. I'm just kidding. Democrats,
Speaker 1: of course care. They'll be watching this thing. And there's
Speaker 1: one there's one storyline that's getting the attention. Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: and Elizabeth Warren. They had been very chummy with each other.
Speaker 1: They had been very friendly with each other in this
Speaker 1: contestacy who will be the Democrat, the Democrat winner of
Speaker 1: the primary until now. And that's because what the Iowa
Speaker 1: Coxes are just a few weeks away, and this field
Speaker 1: of Democrats is going to get winnowed down very quickly.
Speaker 1: You're going to have a fight over who is the
Speaker 1: most progressive candidate that plays out who is the true
Speaker 1: heir to the Democrats socialist throne in this country as
Speaker 1: it Elizabeth warners at Bernie Sanders, And that's how you
Speaker 1: have a particularly nasty little fight going on right now
Speaker 1: between these two. The basics of it are that there's
Speaker 1: a story that was running in a bunch of different
Speaker 1: news outlets. CNN picked it up in others that Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren claims that Bernie Sanders told her in twenty eighteen
Speaker 1: that a woman a woman couldn't win the presidency, which,
Speaker 1: of course is in a field where wokeness is your currency,
Speaker 1: where being the most woke candidate is considered among the
Speaker 1: very most important things. Sure enough, we find out that
Speaker 1: Bernie may have a wokeness issue. Never mind for a
Speaker 1: moment that the Oscars will have It seems a greater
Speaker 1: diversity on stage of directors who will win nominations, then
Speaker 1: there will be diversity of the Democrat candidates who are
Speaker 1: at the top of the field in this primary. In fact,
Speaker 1: you'd have to think long and hard who is still
Speaker 1: in it that would even qualify under the Democrat the
Speaker 1: Democrat definition of diversity. Buddha Judge is a member of
Speaker 1: the LGBTQ community. Okay, who else is still in the mix?
Speaker 1: Who else is still in this race? Elizabeth Warren, as
Speaker 1: we know, is a fake minority. But I don't think
Speaker 1: that's something they're going to be touting all that much
Speaker 1: as diversity for this Democrat field. But I had to
Speaker 1: I had to laugh, because you know, Warren, she is
Speaker 1: upset because of what Bernie campaign people had been going
Speaker 1: around and saying about her. She's upset because she says
Speaker 1: that there were unfair attacks leveling And now whether that's
Speaker 1: true or not, I don't really know. I will say this,
Speaker 1: it's fun to watch Democrats fight in this way. It
Speaker 1: is entertaining, there is no question about that. But this
Speaker 1: non aggression pack that had been in existence between Bernie
Speaker 1: and Warren has gone away. It'll be the single most
Speaker 1: interesting thing to play out tonight. I wonder if and
Speaker 1: I don't even know who's moderating producer marked, we know
Speaker 1: who's moderating the debate tonight? Which which left wing network
Speaker 1: that pretends to be Blitzer World? Oh, CNN, my favorite,
Speaker 1: my favorite CNN is don't you know, I don't know
Speaker 1: what they're gonna do here? Because CNN was completely and
Speaker 1: I was there, I was in the building, I was
Speaker 1: hearing all the discussions, talking to producers. They were completely
Speaker 1: in the tank for Hillary Clinton. There's no there's no
Speaker 1: question about that. They were absolutely positively doing everything they
Speaker 1: could to make sure that Hillary Clinton was going to
Speaker 1: be the next the next of the Democrat nominee and
Speaker 1: then of course the president beyond that. And so they're
Speaker 1: not really it's not really a Bernie building. It's not
Speaker 1: really a place that you could look to and say
Speaker 1: there's a lot of fondness for the outright socialism of
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders as opposed to the soft and incremental socialism
Speaker 1: of say, Hillary Clinton. Do they feel now at CNN
Speaker 1: like they have amends to make for this, that their
Speaker 1: unwillingness to go forth and give a fair shot to
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders to comrade Sanders, the Democrats socialists from the
Speaker 1: state of Vermont. Maybe now they make months. I think
Speaker 1: the answers, No, Warren is just culturally more in line
Speaker 1: with the Democrat elites. They look at her, she's a
Speaker 1: Harvard professor. Yeah, Bernie Sanders has been a senator for
Speaker 1: god knows how long. But then look at Warren and
Speaker 1: she seems to the Libs to be a bit more sophisticated.
Speaker 1: Perhaps she just appears that way, she comes across that way.
Speaker 1: It's a little bit less of a character. And journalists
Speaker 1: who spend a lot of time thinking about how they
Speaker 1: look and how they sound and how they are perceived,
Speaker 1: this really matters to them. So I think that they're
Speaker 1: still going to be a bit of favoritism against Sanders
Speaker 1: in favor of Warren, certainly from within the CNN building.
Speaker 1: And tonight in the debate, we'll up to see how
Speaker 1: it plays out. I don't know if I'm going to
Speaker 1: watch it tonight. I have a life too, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how much. Maybe I'll just I'll sign
Speaker 1: producer Mark to watch this one for us and take notes.
Speaker 1: That'll be a because he loves that. After he finishes
Speaker 1: his third job, by the way, where he's been working
Speaker 1: for fifteen straight hours, producer, Mark, Aren't you aren't there
Speaker 1: like wage laws that are being violated here by having
Speaker 1: you work like four days straight at a time. Isn't
Speaker 1: this an issue? I plead the fifth Okay, I'm just
Speaker 1: making sure you know, Heaven forbid the you know, New
Speaker 1: York Labor Relations Board finds out that this guy hasn't
Speaker 1: been able to get more than an hour of sleep
Speaker 1: in like a month whatever. You were on vacation for
Speaker 1: a bit, so I can't really work the week in December. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but he but he crossed, he'll he'll cross the one
Speaker 1: hundred hours threshold in a week. No, no problems. So anyway,
Speaker 1: I need I need my nap time. But here's what
Speaker 1: I want to say about tonight's debate. I think that
Speaker 1: there will be not a lot that's memorable because we
Speaker 1: already know what these Democrats are going to say. They're
Speaker 1: just going to fight it out. Now. The factionalism of
Speaker 1: the Democrats is going to come to the forefront. You're
Speaker 1: going to see people who have been playing nice with
Speaker 1: each other all of a sudden when there's the realistic
Speaker 1: possibility of knocking somebody off, you know, when you can
Speaker 1: vote somebody off the island when only certain people are
Speaker 1: getting a rose. Can neither confirm nor deny that I
Speaker 1: watched The Bachelor for the first time ever recently. I
Speaker 1: just was curious. It's a cultural phenomenon and I thought
Speaker 1: I thought I needed to watch it because you know,
Speaker 1: hashtag culture um. But the the war between Comrade Warren
Speaker 1: and Comrade Sanders stunt, it will be the single most
Speaker 1: interesting thing, assuming that it actually breaks out Warren's campaign.
Speaker 1: There are initially questions about whether Bernie really had said
Speaker 1: he didn't think a woman could win, which you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess for Democrats this is oh, you know,
Speaker 1: this is a horrible thing to say. How how could
Speaker 1: he say something so horrible? I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that Republicans would really get as upset
Speaker 1: about somebody expressing an opinion. I mean, it's not a
Speaker 1: not an opinion that people generally want to hear. But
Speaker 1: it could you know, it could be true. It could
Speaker 1: be true that it's more difficult for a certain person
Speaker 1: from a certain demographic, a certain group to win the
Speaker 1: presidency based on polls, based on data. I mean, you
Speaker 1: can look at this, right, what you know is an
Speaker 1: atheist likely to win the presidency. People might want to
Speaker 1: believe that that shouldn't matter, or maybe believe it matters
Speaker 1: a whole lot, but there's certainly data that would back
Speaker 1: that up one or the other. Is it harder for
Speaker 1: a woman to win the presidency? I would think no,
Speaker 1: But I'd have to look at the most recent data
Speaker 1: and see. And even then there's what people will tell polsters,
Speaker 1: and there's what the reality is. But you know, adults
Speaker 1: could have this kind of conversation, but Democrats are not adults.
Speaker 1: Democrats like to fling things at each other and get
Speaker 1: into fights and decide who the most woke is, which
Speaker 1: has really just become It's an excellent shorthand for the
Speaker 1: social justice obsession and the political correctness obsession that has
Speaker 1: completely overtaken the American left and the Democratic Party. But
Speaker 1: I thought this was great. There is a technique in
Speaker 1: and there are a couple of ways to say it
Speaker 1: so you don't have to, but the one that I like,
Speaker 1: I believe it's it's called predorizio, where you say, I'm
Speaker 1: not going to point out, you know, I'm not going
Speaker 1: to sit here and say that my opponent hasn't read
Speaker 1: a book in ten years, because that wouldn't be a
Speaker 1: nice thing, right, that's the pretense that you're not going
Speaker 1: to say something that you are saying the underhanded way
Speaker 1: of attacking somebody. Bernie Sanders apparently said this to Elizabeth Warren.
Speaker 1: And here's the back and forth between comrade Sanders and
Speaker 1: comrade Warren. Or rather, here is how comrade Warren says
Speaker 1: this actually went down. This is a statement that she
Speaker 1: put out because she loves Bernie so much. Quote. Burnie
Speaker 1: and I met for more than two hours in December
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen to discuss the twenty twenty election, our past
Speaker 1: working together on our shared goals, beating Donald Trump, etc, etc. Etc.
Speaker 1: Among the topics that came up was what would happen
Speaker 1: if Democrats nominated a female candidate. I thought a woman
Speaker 1: could win. He disagreed. I have no interest in discussing
Speaker 1: this private meeting any further because Bernie and I have
Speaker 1: far more in common than our differences on punditry. I'm
Speaker 1: in this race to talk about what's broken in this
Speaker 1: country and how to fix it. Blah blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: I have no interest in further elaborating on this meeting,
Speaker 1: now that I've elaborated on the single most incendiary charge.
Speaker 1: I'm not even sure this qualifies as Preteraitzio, but it
Speaker 1: feels kind of close. It's like she's it, and then
Speaker 1: she's pretending like she hasn't said it, or you know,
Speaker 1: she she's saying I don't want to elaborate, but I've
Speaker 1: already elaborated in a way that is going to do
Speaker 1: the maximum political damage to my opponent. You know, don't
Speaker 1: mess don't mess with Warren Man. You come at the
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren, you bet you best not miss Bernie. So
Speaker 1: we'll see how much of a difference is there really
Speaker 1: is there really between them? I would wonder if you
Speaker 1: could actually set up Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders supporters,
Speaker 1: and we will get into some of Bernie supporters in
Speaker 1: a moment. I wonder if you set them up side
Speaker 1: by side and ask them to identify differences on policy
Speaker 1: between these two, how many could actually tell you any
Speaker 1: in any significant way what their differences are. I would
Speaker 1: guess the answer, and I would love to run this experiment.
Speaker 1: Although I don't think a lot of Bernie and Warren
Speaker 1: supporters will talk to me. I would love to run
Speaker 1: these experiments because I would guess the number is very,
Speaker 1: very small. In fact, I think if you asked most
Speaker 1: political pundits, what is the difference really as a matter
Speaker 1: of policy between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, which you
Speaker 1: would hear is, well, you know, Warren's like a little
Speaker 1: more wonky or something a little more academic. That have
Speaker 1: some very vague generalized way of separating out these two candidates.
Speaker 1: Here's the single most important takeaway, my friends. You have
Speaker 1: right now a Democratic party, that is in which there
Speaker 1: are really only two options. The old school Democrat head
Speaker 1: fake Clinton Biden apparatus where they pretend to be centrists
Speaker 1: and technocrats when really they're just corrupt, self dealing go
Speaker 1: whichever way the wind blows, appease the left wing mob leftists, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's you've got that option, the politics as
Speaker 1: usual the Democratic Party. Or you have the movement far
Speaker 1: into socialism that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and even Pete
Speaker 1: Buddha Judge represent. This is the modern Democratic Party. It
Speaker 1: has now transitioned into a ready to go, turnkey socialist party.
Speaker 1: It's just a question of how the chips fall in
Speaker 1: the next few months. That's where we are, and that's
Speaker 1: what you should remember as we see these squabbles playing
Speaker 1: out about how everyone cares so much about the middle
Speaker 1: class and the rich are just the bad people. You're
Speaker 1: in the freedom und This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing about revolutionaries, when they come from the left,
Speaker 1: there's a pretty standard template. They create a lot of
Speaker 1: anger at what they view is the ruling class, the
Speaker 1: excesses of that ruling class, the elites, the rich, the aristocrats,
Speaker 1: the oligarchy. To borrow from Bertie Sanders, it's one of
Speaker 1: his favorite words, and the way you know, you really
Speaker 1: know it's Bernie send because the oligachus, I'll tell them
Speaker 1: what they do. I do think by Bernie Sanders sounds
Speaker 1: a bit too much like Yogi Bear, but it's close enough,
Speaker 1: it's close enough that you certainly know that's Bertie sent
Speaker 1: I did watch a lot of that cartoon back in
Speaker 1: the day. But revolutionaries come in promising that they will
Speaker 1: get rid of this oppression and that they will give
Speaker 1: nothing but benefits, sweetness, honey, and light to those who
Speaker 1: are part of the oppressed classes, the working class. In
Speaker 1: this country, we act like the middle classes an oppressed class,
Speaker 1: which I think is if you were to look at
Speaker 1: that a historic or global standards, is flatly and obviously ridiculous,
Speaker 1: But nonetheless it seems to work for some of these politicians.
Speaker 1: But you have to also remember that there's always an
Speaker 1: element when you're talking about people like Bernie Sanders who
Speaker 1: are calling for political revolution, there's an element of extremism
Speaker 1: that can become in few used into what they're really
Speaker 1: into the real ethos of the movement. There can be
Speaker 1: true believers who hide their real intentions and hide their
Speaker 1: real their real feelings about what's going on in the
Speaker 1: country in order to get enough support that they can
Speaker 1: then ram their plans down the throats of everybody else
Speaker 1: in the country. All right, So this is what I
Speaker 1: meant before a little bit about the head fake from
Speaker 1: the old Democrat Party. I mean the old Democrats, meaning
Speaker 1: the Clinton, Biden, Schumer Pelosi squad. That group tries to
Speaker 1: present themselves as just more care, more caring version of
Speaker 1: the generally capitalist, free market and constitutionally minded Republican Party, right,
Speaker 1: just a better more you know, more more caring about
Speaker 1: the oppressed, more caring about the poor and and better
Speaker 1: at governance. Although as we see from California to New
Speaker 1: York to every other major blue enclave, it's the policies
Speaker 1: that Democrats fight with Republicans on that are so clearly
Speaker 1: the worst policies, you know. It's the ones that we
Speaker 1: look at them, we say, hold on a second, why
Speaker 1: wouldn't you arrest people for shoplifting, for example, which we'll
Speaker 1: talk about later. Democrats view that as a tool of oppression.
Speaker 1: If there are any racial disparities in arrest rates in
Speaker 1: a city, that's clearly evidence of racism. I mean the
Speaker 1: areas where you have arguments between left and right in
Speaker 1: how to govern a city or how to governor state.
Speaker 1: This is where we tend to say, okay, look at
Speaker 1: how it works when we do it our way. Look
Speaker 1: at how it works when you do it your way.
Speaker 1: But that's the old approach of the Democrats. Now you
Speaker 1: have Bernie Sanders, you have this revolutionary I was going
Speaker 1: to say revolutionary guard, but that's giving everyone a bit
Speaker 1: of an arom tingle. I think revolutionary group inside the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party that just wants to be more open and
Speaker 1: honest about this. And you have to think, who are
Speaker 1: really the supporters of this group, Who are the people
Speaker 1: that are going to be influencing the thought processes of
Speaker 1: those in power. What is the Bernie bass really like? Well,
Speaker 1: I can tell you as someone that operates in the
Speaker 1: realm of media commentary on a regular basis. Bernie bros,
Speaker 1: I mean, the Bernie true believers are among the worst
Speaker 1: people you will come across on the Internet or anywhere else.
Speaker 1: They are horrifically nasty, often threatening, just incredibly fiercely, insanely
Speaker 1: defensive of Bernie Sanders. Now, I understand that they would
Speaker 1: turn and say, well, we'll look at Trump supporters, But
Speaker 1: of course I like Trump supporters, so I don't you know,
Speaker 1: And I understand that I come at this from a
Speaker 1: certain perspective, and I know plenty of Trump supporters who
Speaker 1: are super nice. Every Bernie Sanders supporter that I deal
Speaker 1: with or that I come across is either spewing just
Speaker 1: complete and utter nonsense. It's about how socialism is going
Speaker 1: to be this cure all for all the inequality in society,
Speaker 1: or their rabid partisans who are really kind of scary.
Speaker 1: It's not so much that they want to fix the
Speaker 1: problems in this country. They want payback against those who
Speaker 1: have made the problems in this country, and that includes
Speaker 1: Trump supporters. That includes those who have done well, people
Speaker 1: who are self made, who have become well off, or
Speaker 1: who are as Bernie Sanders calls it, the millionaires and
Speaker 1: the billionaires. Those people need to be punished. It's not
Speaker 1: just that they need to be Their so called greed
Speaker 1: needs to be constrained and government regulation needs to relieve
Speaker 1: them of their wealth. They need to be punished. They
Speaker 1: might even need to be ideologically cleansed. They need to
Speaker 1: be re educated in some way. I'll take you to
Speaker 1: this project Veritas situation in a second. Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to The bus In Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on
Speaker 1: Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. It looks like James O'Keefe has done it again. Oops,
Speaker 1: he did it again. He played with the libs, got
Speaker 1: lost in the I don't know how does the rest
Speaker 1: of it? You you were younger than oh, you actually
Speaker 1: were too young for Britney spears. You don't even know
Speaker 1: Britney spears. No, but like you weren't you were like
Speaker 1: in you were like an ambo when Britney spirits breaking
Speaker 1: onto the scene. She was like, yea, when I was
Speaker 1: in high school, Britney Spears, was it man? Yeah, so
Speaker 1: shouldn't you be able to know? It's? Oops? I did
Speaker 1: it again. I played with my heart and I lost
Speaker 1: it again. I lost it again. Yeah, yeah, okay, I'm
Speaker 1: not singing it. I'm not you right, of course you
Speaker 1: would not do that. Um. But yes, indeed there is
Speaker 1: a there's a new project very toss video that is
Speaker 1: at a circle and it's making the rounds the truth
Speaker 1: about twenty what we should have James has done. Here
Speaker 1: we go, Oh sorry, expose pardon me exposed twenty twenty
Speaker 1: dot com from James O'Keefe. Okay, And this is going
Speaker 1: to be particularly interesting to people because there's there's a
Speaker 1: real Bernie Sanders moment right now. I mean, the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party is in the process as I sit here talking
Speaker 1: to you, of deciding whether or not they are a
Speaker 1: socialist party. They can call themselves other things, that doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: They will be a party for socialism. Elizabeth Warren is
Speaker 1: running around talking about how it's just a matter of
Speaker 1: executive decision she would forgive student loans. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is just the president at that point. The preside United States.
Speaker 1: She could just walk around with a blank checkbook and say, hey,
Speaker 1: I like you, here's a billion dollars from the treasury
Speaker 1: because I like your smile. Kid, good luck. This is
Speaker 1: this is absurd, but that's what she's Well, we'll get
Speaker 1: into that a bit more later on. But the choice
Speaker 1: of whether or not we go down this road to socialism, which,
Speaker 1: if you want to borrow from Hyak, is also a
Speaker 1: road to serfdom for all of us. In a sense.
Speaker 1: It's a road to government control, to bureaucrats having a
Speaker 1: much greater say over your life, over your day to
Speaker 1: day affairs than they ever should. This will have ramifications
Speaker 1: that could stretch for who knows how long in this country,
Speaker 1: but also around the world too. Other places have looked
Speaker 1: at us, have mirrored our economic approach, have seen how
Speaker 1: much wealth and prosperity has been created by the American
Speaker 1: people for the American people, and say, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: we should get in on that. You know, we've run
Speaker 1: this experiment many times. You know, do you want to
Speaker 1: be South Korea or do you want to be Venezuela.
Speaker 1: Do you want to be Hong Kong, you want to
Speaker 1: be Singapore? Or do you want to be North Korea,
Speaker 1: free market, individual ingenuity, rewarded, rule of law, private property, freedom, liberty,
Speaker 1: things that are good that we like. Do you want
Speaker 1: those things or do you want people that think they
Speaker 1: know better than you making the determinations for you about
Speaker 1: what you should do, what you should have, and how
Speaker 1: and where you should be able to spend your time
Speaker 1: and your money. This is that these are very important
Speaker 1: questions for society. These are These are not little differences.
Speaker 1: This is not a you know, a coke versus pepsi
Speaker 1: and I was people always tell me they can I
Speaker 1: was never able to tell the difference, So maybe I
Speaker 1: have a weak palette or something. It's always been the
Speaker 1: same to me. But this is not a coke versus
Speaker 1: pepsi decision in this election at all. This is a
Speaker 1: socialism versus freedom decision. And you have people that understand
Speaker 1: also what the real difference in trajectory would be. People
Speaker 1: are beginning to see this, I think, because you have
Speaker 1: true believers on the Bernie Sanders side who are running
Speaker 1: around and letting everyone know they're kind of they're going
Speaker 1: off off script because Bernie Sanders is supposed to be
Speaker 1: like the cuddly you know socialist who just eats Ben
Speaker 1: and Jerry's lives up in Vermont, hangs out, just wants
Speaker 1: to give you free healthcare. Man. Remember this. What socialists
Speaker 1: don't tell you is all the amazing goodies that they're promising,
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Buddha Judge, all of them. What
Speaker 1: they won't tell you is that that all comes through
Speaker 1: government coercion. That if you don't want to do these things,
Speaker 1: you have no choice. If you don't want the government
Speaker 1: deciding what doctor you can see, when you can see
Speaker 1: that doctor. If you don't want the government telling you
Speaker 1: how much of your money you can keep, how much
Speaker 1: money is going to go to other people that should
Speaker 1: be yours. That is the result of Remember, people make
Speaker 1: money often paste on their time, not necessarily because they're
Speaker 1: all hourly employees, and that's certainly a part of it too,
Speaker 1: But you put your time into an endeavor and then
Speaker 1: you're rewarded for that. So when they're taking money from you,
Speaker 1: I mean they're taking hours. They are taking time from
Speaker 1: your life and giving it to other people. There is
Speaker 1: a rot at the center of this redistributive approach to governance,
Speaker 1: and it needs to be identified now we should all
Speaker 1: be very very clear on this. The Bernie bros who,
Speaker 1: as I said at Ore and even Democrats will often
Speaker 1: complain about them for being for I mean, first of
Speaker 1: these these people are delusional. I'm sorry Bernie Sanders. Does
Speaker 1: anyone really think Bernie Sanders knows how to run anything?
Speaker 1: Does anyone think Bernie Sanders would be good at running
Speaker 1: a business? That Bernie Sanders understands what really hard work is?
Speaker 1: Why because he has been representing and almost you know,
Speaker 1: a state that is a Democrat state with very little diversity,
Speaker 1: where he just gets to run around and promising you know,
Speaker 1: the sun, the moon and the stars to everybody, gives speeches,
Speaker 1: goes to the Senate. What legislation has he authored? What
Speaker 1: has he done? That's important? Guy, I was an independent
Speaker 1: coxing with Democrats for how long he wants to lecture
Speaker 1: you all on hard work? I love this. Ricky Gervais
Speaker 1: who had his phenomenal and we love the show that
Speaker 1: what was it a week ago had his phenomenal opening
Speaker 1: speech to the Golden Globes because it was it was
Speaker 1: funny and it was true, and watching the hangers on
Speaker 1: the toe of the entertainment media try to do what
Speaker 1: they could to protect the delicate feelings of people who
Speaker 1: are really lucky. I mean, if you're sending that audience
Speaker 1: at the Golden Globes and you're somebody who's either being
Speaker 1: honored or just invited to this thing, and you work
Speaker 1: in the entertainment industry, you're really lucky, and you should
Speaker 1: be thankful and grateful and humbled by your good fortune
Speaker 1: instead of thinking that it confers some extra special intelligence
Speaker 1: upon you as an actor or an actress to tell
Speaker 1: everyone else how to do the how to live their lives.
Speaker 1: Ricky Gervais is like, look, I used to be poor
Speaker 1: and it was terrible, and now because of a lot
Speaker 1: of people that like what I do, I become very,
Speaker 1: very rich, and my life is super comfortable and easy now.
Speaker 1: And I know that, so I don't tell other people
Speaker 1: what to do. I don't lecture them, and I don't
Speaker 1: hector them because I know it's tough for them. It's
Speaker 1: not tough for me. Thank you to those people for
Speaker 1: not making it tough for me anymore. All Right, This
Speaker 1: is what we all instinctually know is true. This is
Speaker 1: something that we all recognize as being the reality of
Speaker 1: having been in the struggle and having been in a
Speaker 1: better place financial than economically. And so Bernie Sanders going
Speaker 1: around always talking with the middle class. And I mean
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders hasn't had great healthcare and paid for by
Speaker 1: the taxpayer, I mean the federal federal government. The Senate
Speaker 1: has incredible healthcare and has been living on a really
Speaker 1: nice salary and doesn't really have to you know, doesn't
Speaker 1: have to sweat it that much. Folk. It hasn't been
Speaker 1: that bad for Bernie. But he wants to tell you
Speaker 1: all that. And by the way, he's got three houses.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the other party. He's a socialist
Speaker 1: with three houses? Why does he need three houses? He
Speaker 1: asks billionaires why they need billions? Why does Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: need three really only needs one house? All right? If
Speaker 1: you're going to take the socialist set their word, if
Speaker 1: you're gonna believe the rhetoric, why does he get away
Speaker 1: then with living large and in charge? I just wouldn't
Speaker 1: want someone that. Why's Elizabeth Warrenworth. I think they asked
Speaker 1: himate six to twelve million dollars her in her husband.
Speaker 1: That's a lot of money. It's a lot more money
Speaker 1: than I have. I would like to get to a million. Producer,
Speaker 1: Mark and I both of the same goal. We would
Speaker 1: like to get to a million. That sounds like fun.
Speaker 1: But Elizabeth Warren is also going around playing the oh,
Speaker 1: I care so much about the middle class and the
Speaker 1: struggle that people are in and everything else. She's had
Speaker 1: more of a building you know, she's had a more
Speaker 1: interesting resume building experience than Bernie Sanders, of course helped
Speaker 1: in no small part by being a fake Native American.
Speaker 1: But they they're playing this game of trying to present
Speaker 1: themselves as caring so much. Meanwhile, to bring us back
Speaker 1: to Project Very Toss and James O'Keefe and the Bernie Bros.
Speaker 1: This is again, this is exposed twenty twenty dot com
Speaker 1: James O'Keefe's projected Project Very Toss. This is a Bernie
Speaker 1: organizer who's talking about how he feels about what's going
Speaker 1: on here. And I think we've got it all bleeped
Speaker 1: and whatnot. But be prepared for that play it. Sixteen
Speaker 1: cities burning people could even be re educated. Maybe we
Speaker 1: gotta try. Maybe. Like so, like the Nazi Germany, after
Speaker 1: the fallow of the Nazi Party, there was a tone
Speaker 1: of the populace service in Nazi Germany had to spend
Speaker 1: billions of dollars re educating people. Should not be an asked,
Speaker 1: how are you gonna have to do the same thing here?
Speaker 1: And that's kind of what Bernie's like in Hey for
Speaker 1: education for everybody, because they're gonna have to teach you
Speaker 1: not to you Nazi. Now they're going to say what
Speaker 1: they always will in the circumstance, which is that this
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders Field organizer is not representative of broader sentiment
Speaker 1: among Bernie supporters. But let's ask ourselves the question, is
Speaker 1: that really the case? Do you think that there are
Speaker 1: a lot of Bernie supporters, people that want Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: the president of the United States, who believe the things
Speaker 1: that Bernie Sanders himself says about Donald Trump. That Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is a massive national security threat, that he's an authoritarian,
Speaker 1: that he's a traitor, that he's a Russian studge, that
Speaker 1: he's a Russian asset. I think a lot of them
Speaker 1: do believe that. And this is where I start to
Speaker 1: sound a little bit more ominous, perhaps than I usually do.
Speaker 1: But I'm willing to take crazy people at their word.
Speaker 1: I think that true believers should be listened to when
Speaker 1: they're telling you what they really think, you should say,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, maybe it's worth thinking some notes here.
Speaker 1: They have been claiming for years that Donald Trump was
Speaker 1: a threat to the most sacred institutions of our republic.
Speaker 1: And this isn't I don't think anyone would deny that
Speaker 1: that has been going on. They'll say Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: a white nationalist. They'll say that he is a racist.
Speaker 1: They'll say that he is a national security threat, that
Speaker 1: he could have war breakout with North Korea or thrown
Speaker 1: at any moment. They say all of these things, and
Speaker 1: let's not forget. And I don't want to. I don't
Speaker 1: want to unfairly paint the entire Bernie supporter because I
Speaker 1: have some friends who are Bernie supporters actually, and I
Speaker 1: liked them. There are very nice people who support Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 1: I'm not I'm not a crazy person. But there's also
Speaker 1: this faction within Bernie brow world that is nuts. And
Speaker 1: there are some of the most ardent Bernie believers. And
Speaker 1: it should not just pass unnoticed or unmentioned that, you know,
Speaker 1: while we're while we had the media lecturing us all
Speaker 1: the time about Trump, you know, saying throw that bum
Speaker 1: out of here or whatever at the at the different
Speaker 1: rallies he's had, and how Trump was inspiring violence. I
Speaker 1: heard that. I remember that story so many times during
Speaker 1: the general election in twenty sixteen. It's at CNN. I
Speaker 1: was on TV having to talk about this. I was like, guys,
Speaker 1: you know, he uses tough talk, He's not actually inspiring violence.
Speaker 1: It was a Bernie Sanders supporter, very clearly, openly, avowedly
Speaker 1: who for reasons of healthcare defense, tried a mass assassination
Speaker 1: of specifically conservative members of Congress, notably wounding and almost
Speaker 1: killing Steve Schoolies, trying to kill Senator Rand Paul among
Speaker 1: many others at that baseball field and Alexandria, Virginia, Virginia.
Speaker 1: It was an attempted mass assassination of members of Congress
Speaker 1: from a Bernie Sanders supporter. Now I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders supporters are all like this. Of course that's
Speaker 1: stupid and that's a strong man argument. But there are
Speaker 1: people who are Bernie supporters in positions of actual influence
Speaker 1: who really do think that Trump supporters perhaps need re
Speaker 1: education of some kind, who really think that they're all
Speaker 1: just stealth white nationalists, a danger to this country in
Speaker 1: ways that we have to deal with. I mean, I
Speaker 1: can promise you and I generally also have an issue
Speaker 1: with the hidden camera stuff when it's low level people
Speaker 1: who are blown off some steam who work at sea.
Speaker 1: I don't. When James O'Keefe, you know, hits a home run,
Speaker 1: I'm the first to say, great work, James. I think
Speaker 1: some of this stuff. For example, at CNN. You know,
Speaker 1: if someone asked me about any company that I'd worked
Speaker 1: for after hours, I think that I'm having a drink
Speaker 1: with a peer and I start mouthing off about things there.
Speaker 1: I think it's I question the wisdom of airing that
Speaker 1: stuff as a journey because it doesn't because they can
Speaker 1: always just deny that and say, oh, well that's someone
Speaker 1: did the higher ups say, that's just some disgruntled employee
Speaker 1: who doesn't know anything. Doesn't mean anything. You know you've
Speaker 1: got if you get someone high up and off the
Speaker 1: food chain. I think that matters in this case. Though.
Speaker 1: If you've been exposed to Bernie Brows, you know that
Speaker 1: there are a lot of them who really think that
Speaker 1: that when Bernie Sanders talks about a political revolution in
Speaker 1: this country, he means it, and that there will not
Speaker 1: be any sit down and compromise and halfway with say
Speaker 1: Trump supporters. There will not be any effort to try
Speaker 1: to reach some consensus position about what will be good
Speaker 1: governance benefiting the most people, or good government's rooted in principle,
Speaker 1: which is going to be an even trickier thing. It's one.
Speaker 1: It's one thing to try and be in a position
Speaker 1: to negotiate with your political opponents and find a little
Speaker 1: what you like and a little what they like. It's
Speaker 1: a whole other woman. You're saying, no, no, it's just
Speaker 1: about what's right, and try to convince them of that.
Speaker 1: In the realm of individual rights, collectivists are always going
Speaker 1: to give you tremendous pushback, and they will reject arguments
Speaker 1: that are rooted in individual rights, individual private property, and
Speaker 1: they'll always come at you with the collective good. So
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders should not be underestimated as a political force,
Speaker 1: not just in terms of his ability to win the
Speaker 1: Democratic nomination, which I think must be taken seriously. If
Speaker 1: he is able to knock Elizabeth Warren out of serious contention,
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden the pressure rises on Warren
Speaker 1: to get out Bernie Sanders picks up Warren supporters. He's
Speaker 1: the frontrunner, folks. This guy's the front or of the Democrats,
Speaker 1: someone that I and I really mean this. I would
Speaker 1: not trust Bernie Sanders to run my ten year old
Speaker 1: neighbor's lemonade. Stand. I mean, this is not someone you
Speaker 1: want to charge of anything. But if you point that out,
Speaker 1: Bernie bros. Are gonna come for you. And as you
Speaker 1: can hear from mister Oh, We're gonna put the Trump
Speaker 1: people in re education camps. Bernie Brows are crazy. You're
Speaker 1: in the freedom hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: I got something for you guys. It looks like Cardie
Speaker 1: B is learning the value of limited taxation. Brucer Mark,
Speaker 1: would you please? This is Cardie B on Texas. So
Speaker 1: you know the government is taking of my taxes and
Speaker 1: Uncle Sam, I want to know what you're doing with
Speaker 1: my food tax money because you know what I'm saying, Like,
Speaker 1: but you donate, like when you donate to a kid
Speaker 1: from a foreign country, they give you updates of what
Speaker 1: they're doing with you do nation. I want to know
Speaker 1: what to do with my FOD tax money because I'm
Speaker 1: from York and the streets is always dirty. Who was
Speaker 1: voted the dirtiest city in America. I mean, she's wrong
Speaker 1: about New York is the dirtiest city in America, but
Speaker 1: she is right that it would be nice to have
Speaker 1: a better sense of where all of our tax money's going.
Speaker 1: So and it also does it does kind of hurt.
Speaker 1: You get forty percent of your money getting taken away
Speaker 1: by the federal government. Close to it, I guess I
Speaker 1: think the top tax r it's thirty seven percent now
Speaker 1: in federal federal incompent might be it was thirty nine
Speaker 1: if memory serves. But Cardi Bell of a sudden's like,
Speaker 1: I want to keep my money. What is the government
Speaker 1: doing with all my money? Now? She's not an astute
Speaker 1: political observer, but I do like when people learn the
Speaker 1: lessons of real life. Guess what if Bernie Sanders wins
Speaker 1: the presidency, Cardi, he's gonna take a lot more of
Speaker 1: your money. Thant try more like sixty maybe seventy. That's
Speaker 1: what you're going to be paying as a top rate
Speaker 1: if Bernie Sanders gets his way and Congress goes along
Speaker 1: with it, or maybe they just go executive order route.
Speaker 1: Something else we've got to look at. Thanks for listening.
Speaker 1: To the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe on
Speaker 1: Apple Podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. All right now, some of you might say, Buck,
Speaker 1: they can't really go socialist, even if Warren or Sanders
Speaker 1: or Buddha Judge or whomever AOC if she were old
Speaker 1: enough to run for president, which she would be not
Speaker 1: for quite some time, or even for Senate I think
Speaker 1: for a little while, whoever it may be. In this
Speaker 1: current political environment, it would be either Warren or Sanders.
Speaker 1: But you have this understanding, we all have this understanding
Speaker 1: of how the system works. You'd say, but Buck, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: Look at the things that Obama wanted to do. There
Speaker 1: was really a three legged stool of socialism. One leg
Speaker 1: was healthcare. They got that one without a single Republican vote,
Speaker 1: or they couldn't go all the way on it, but
Speaker 1: they set it up. It was a major incremental stap
Speaker 1: to create further momentum into socialism. They did do that
Speaker 1: with Obamacare. That's why we're now already talking about Medicare
Speaker 1: for all, where we're talking about these more all in
Speaker 1: government socialist healthcare programs. They wanted to do environmentalism, green energy,
Speaker 1: stuff climate change hysteria, but they knew that that would
Speaker 1: come with a price tag that many of the Democrats
Speaker 1: at that point did not want to pay, not just
Speaker 1: a price tag that consumers don't necessarily want to pay
Speaker 1: and that politicians don't want to pay at the polls.
Speaker 1: So that was a problem. And then there was also immigration, right,
Speaker 1: there was immigration. There were these areas where the Obama
Speaker 1: presidency was trying to and that was get an amnesty,
Speaker 1: going get an amnesty from the whole the whole country.
Speaker 1: That has the California effect. You have all these new
Speaker 1: illegals that are then either raising people who are likely
Speaker 1: to be Democrats, growing up a Democrat households because of
Speaker 1: we all know that people who are recent immigrants of
Speaker 1: the country are more likely to vote Democrat, and people
Speaker 1: who are illegals, obviously are people that are related to
Speaker 1: illegals are more likely to want to support democratic causes
Speaker 1: or to vote Democrat. So that was another part of it,
Speaker 1: and they almost got that through with Republican help. Okay, fine,
Speaker 1: didn't happen though, because Republican voters said, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: this is just amnesty. You can call a comprehensive immigration reform.
Speaker 1: It's just amnesty though, and we all know that, all
Speaker 1: right now, all along, though, there's this trend, right the Democrats,
Speaker 1: the Democrats socialists want something and they can't really get
Speaker 1: it because of the political realities of the Congress, the
Speaker 1: legislative branch, and people in Congress who want to keep
Speaker 1: their jobs want to keep their positions their seats. So
Speaker 1: that means that there's a slowdown. That means that there
Speaker 1: is some bullwork, which a ward that has been ruined
Speaker 1: by the crappiest pseudo conservative public location in the entirety
Speaker 1: of the Internet. But there is supposed to be a break,
Speaker 1: a speed bump, if you will. There we go replace
Speaker 1: that with the replace will work with speed bump to
Speaker 1: prevent Democrats from just going all in on socialist plans. Well,
Speaker 1: here's the issue with that. What happens when Democrats decide
Speaker 1: that the president is just going to do it. Ah,
Speaker 1: You will recall that Obama, through the EPA, through regulation,
Speaker 1: was pushing for socialist green policies, right redistribution of wealth
Speaker 1: from the energy sector to green energy projects and activist groups.
Speaker 1: And although I mean this is there were ways that
Speaker 1: they try to use the executive branch to do exactly that.
Speaker 1: Obama took it even a step further, and when there
Speaker 1: was different action for childhood arrivals DOTA right dreamers, Oh,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to We're not going to prosecute them
Speaker 1: for any for illegal presence in the country, which is
Speaker 1: the law is that they camp in the country illegally.
Speaker 1: And then it was, oh, we're also not going to
Speaker 1: prosecute their parents, and oh, by the way, we're going
Speaker 1: to give them work permits and bring them into the
Speaker 1: system without any act of Congress whatsoever. And that was stopped,
Speaker 1: i believe by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and
Speaker 1: they had to actually stop put out an injunction because
Speaker 1: the Department of Homeland Security under Obama wanted to just
Speaker 1: give out these ID cards to illegals under the DAPPA
Speaker 1: program deferred action for the parents of childhood arrivals, and
Speaker 1: at that point they would have been so close to
Speaker 1: legal status that everyone knows that they would have had
Speaker 1: to have been. The idea was to get them as
Speaker 1: enmeshed in the system as possible, so then they would
Speaker 1: have to be part of a larger deal, and all
Speaker 1: of a sudden deferred action for child arrivals turns into
Speaker 1: five or six million people getting amnesty and in getting
Speaker 1: amnesty law largely through executive fiat. Now, why am I
Speaker 1: all wrapped up in this now? Because we've seen this
Speaker 1: play out in the past. We've seen how this is.
Speaker 1: The Congress is not going to save you from socialism,
Speaker 1: is what I really want you to take from this.
Speaker 1: Don't think that because cocaine, Mitch is putting judge after judge,
Speaker 1: great judges. Trump has gotten better judges in the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court all the way down to the circuit courts across
Speaker 1: the country than any president in my lifetime. So credit
Speaker 1: where it's due. And Mitch McConnell is just a lean,
Speaker 1: mean judge confirmation machine in the Senate. But what we're
Speaker 1: hearing now from candidates like Warren and Sanders is something
Speaker 1: you must keep in on. When I talk to you
Speaker 1: about how they want to implement some socialist scheme, you
Speaker 1: probably would think, well, hold on, buck, do they have
Speaker 1: the votes? Do they have what they have with Obamacare
Speaker 1: a philibuster proof sixty seat majority in the Senate as
Speaker 1: well as a House majority. I can they get it?
Speaker 1: Excuse me? Can they get it through the procedures? For
Speaker 1: the Congress such as they are, Well, what if the president,
Speaker 1: what if a socialist president Sanders? What if Comrade Sanders
Speaker 1: or Comrade Warren just comes along and says, no, we're
Speaker 1: just going to do this thing. This isn't really all
Speaker 1: that theoretical, because that's exactly what Elizabeth Warren and Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders are promising you do. On the issue of student
Speaker 1: loan debt. There is over one trillion dollars of outstanding
Speaker 1: student loan debt out there. Elizabeth Warren's idea, as she's
Speaker 1: just said this now, is for people making less than
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars a year, up to fifty thousand
Speaker 1: dollars of student loan debt would just be wiped away.
Speaker 1: Would just be wiped away. Okay, that's interesting. How would
Speaker 1: that happen? She'll just tell the Education Secretary to quote
Speaker 1: and modify their loans. This is this is just by
Speaker 1: waving one's hand as president over all of these tracks,
Speaker 1: all these financial obligations that people willingly entered into, it
Speaker 1: would just all of a sudden be money that is
Speaker 1: no longer owed. You see. Also, the Obama administration, by
Speaker 1: taking private sector lenders out of a student loan business. Yes,
Speaker 1: there was an efficiency savings there, but it also meant
Speaker 1: that guess what, you know who? You know who the
Speaker 1: lender is now for people that want to take out
Speaker 1: you know, twenty thirty fifty one hundred thousand dollars of
Speaker 1: student loans, you know, the lender is you. You are
Speaker 1: the lender. They say it's the federal government. But the
Speaker 1: federal government isn't the lender. You are the lender. It
Speaker 1: is your labor that funds the federal government. It is
Speaker 1: your labor that the federal government takes a piece of
Speaker 1: under threat of force, by the way, and redistributes it
Speaker 1: for a whole slew of government program some of which
Speaker 1: we think are reasonable, unnecessary, most of which are not.
Speaker 1: It's your money. Government doesn't have money, and government can. Only.
Speaker 1: The only reason the government's creation or printing of money
Speaker 1: has any value is because of the value that we,
Speaker 1: the American people, put into that by our labor. Otherwise,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, the government of any country could
Speaker 1: come along and just and governments have done this. We've
Speaker 1: seen this experiment played out. I mean, try to try
Speaker 1: to see how how much you can buy with a
Speaker 1: trillion Zimbabwe and I forget what the currency is in Zimbabwe,
Speaker 1: but you know, a trillion Zimbabwe and whatever it is
Speaker 1: over there, it's not going to get you very much.
Speaker 1: We have seen this experiment play out and has predictable results.
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren is effectively trying to socialize the debts that
Speaker 1: people have run up, overwhelmingly people who are middle to
Speaker 1: upper middle class to go to colleges that they paid.
Speaker 1: You know, they could have gone a community college, which
Speaker 1: is effectively free for most people in most places. They
Speaker 1: wanted to go to a state school or maybe a
Speaker 1: private school. They took out loans. I also have to
Speaker 1: wonder if democrats ever think about the implications of these
Speaker 1: things that feel good for them to say and that
Speaker 1: will get additional support for them. But if you are
Speaker 1: someone who just finished paying off your student loans after
Speaker 1: twenty or thirty years of sending in that check every month,
Speaker 1: and I'm sure it was painful and it was annoying,
Speaker 1: I sit here right now with producer Mark doing a
Speaker 1: radio show and not sitting in some cubicle working for
Speaker 1: some financial firm or something, largely because I didn't want
Speaker 1: to go to business school and incur a couple one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars a day, just didn't want to do it.
Speaker 1: I also loved doing media, but I didn't know if
Speaker 1: I'd be any good at it before I did it.
Speaker 1: But I figured it. Heck, you know, Yolo rolled the dice.
Speaker 1: Didn't want to take out loans. But if I had
Speaker 1: thought that I could take out two hundred grand and
Speaker 1: loans and have well, that's a lot of loans, but
Speaker 1: that's that's what going to the business schools that I was.
Speaker 1: By the time you actually pay them off, that's what
Speaker 1: it is. If you're taking out the whole because it's
Speaker 1: about sixty thousand intuition, twenty thousand living expenses, then when
Speaker 1: you add interest over the life of the loan cycles
Speaker 1: about two hundred and grand, that's what you're paying off.
Speaker 1: But if I thought I could go and even get
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars of that just wiped away, that would
Speaker 1: be nice. That's that's a pretty that's a pretty sweet deal,
Speaker 1: isn't it. But then you have to ask, will what
Speaker 1: about the people that have paid off their loans after
Speaker 1: twenty or thirty years. Don't they feel like there's some
Speaker 1: there is something inherently unfair. Of course, there is why
Speaker 1: or why do some people get the benefit of this
Speaker 1: timing and others don't just because Elizabeth Warren needs votes.
Speaker 1: And then think of some of the other downstream implications
Speaker 1: of this. Why would a college give out any financial
Speaker 1: aid anymore? Why would you know, university of whatever, university
Speaker 1: of left wing absurdity give people a ten to fifteen
Speaker 1: perhaps even a full ride scholarship to go to their
Speaker 1: school when they know that, Oh, just take out the
Speaker 1: loans and just you know, just let those loans ride awhile,
Speaker 1: and eventually we'll have another Democrat will come into office
Speaker 1: and just wipe it all away, don't. You don't really
Speaker 1: pay it down, just pay the interest on the loans,
Speaker 1: don't pay it on the principle, and you can just
Speaker 1: eventually it'll all be wiped away for you. There's been
Speaker 1: a huge transfer of wealth, by the way, from the
Speaker 1: American people to these bloated, ridiculous universities across the country.
Speaker 1: I mean, these places have billions and billions and billions
Speaker 1: of dollars in endowment at the very top end schools,
Speaker 1: and their tuitions are sixty thousand dollars a year now
Speaker 1: pretty regularly. That's that's really where it is, and they'll
Speaker 1: even tell you that that doesn't even cover the full
Speaker 1: cost of educating a student based upon the structure they
Speaker 1: have set up for these four year colleges. So you
Speaker 1: have to wonder why, I mean, are they are they
Speaker 1: education so much better now than they were thirty or
Speaker 1: forty years ago. Many of you probably have or some
Speaker 1: of you listening went through this yourselves. But those of
Speaker 1: you who around my age, you have parents who will
Speaker 1: tell stories about how they were, you know, pulling weeds
Speaker 1: out of the ground from someone's yard and you know,
Speaker 1: doing a little bit of roofing or working as a
Speaker 1: dock hand. Right, I don't know whatever? A store clerk?
Speaker 1: Ice cream scooperum, prison mark, what's the like, what's the
Speaker 1: most job job you've had? I mean, right now, you
Speaker 1: work in media, you're fancy, what was the most job job?
Speaker 1: You know? This is actually hilarious. Ice cream Scooper? Really? Yes,
Speaker 1: I was unaware of that. Yeah, yeah, Hershey ice cream shop?
Speaker 1: What was your favorite flavor of ice cream? I mean
Speaker 1: at a Hershey's ice cream shop? Obviously chop chocolate? Right, Okay,
Speaker 1: there's no better chocolate ice cream than hers Just making
Speaker 1: sure you didn't say strawberry, because it'd be like crossing
Speaker 1: the streams and you'd have total protonic reversal and you'd
Speaker 1: have to imagine every cell in your body exploding at
Speaker 1: the speed of light. That's what happens if you say
Speaker 1: strawberries your favorite. I didn't realize that's what happened. That's
Speaker 1: what has science. It's hashtag science. So it isn't true
Speaker 1: that it's actually really hard after a while to scoop
Speaker 1: the ice cream out, though I've been told that it
Speaker 1: gets you know, they don't just more challenging than you
Speaker 1: than people think it is. If they don't just wet
Speaker 1: the the scooper for no reason, by the way, right
Speaker 1: helps it. Yeah, See producer Mark had a job. Job.
Speaker 1: It used to be that you could have that job
Speaker 1: job and if you were going to you know, NYU
Speaker 1: or if you were going to GW and DC or wherever,
Speaker 1: you might be able to over the course of a summer,
Speaker 1: you know, payoff maybe a semester or a half a semester,
Speaker 1: that's school. If you're going to pay off a year
Speaker 1: at NYU or GW, now you better be making about
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty grand. And like after taxes, you'll
Speaker 1: have some money to pay off that. It's ridiculous. Why
Speaker 1: is it so much more expensive now, Well, in part
Speaker 1: it's so much more expensive because of people running around
Speaker 1: saying that what everyone should get a four year college education.
Speaker 1: You have to get a four year college education. They
Speaker 1: don't understand there's a supply and demand component of the workforce.
Speaker 1: It's not just everyone doesn't just get to be in
Speaker 1: the best richest, best, you know, highest paying jobs. We
Speaker 1: don't all get to be top you know, corporate lawyers
Speaker 1: or heart surgeons or you know whatever. I look. I
Speaker 1: wish I could have been a heart surgeon. But math
Speaker 1: hashtag no math for buck. But instead what you have
Speaker 1: are people saying, take out these loans and it will
Speaker 1: just be wiped away. Take out these loans, the taxpayers
Speaker 1: and the hook for it. Moral hazard doesn't matter here.
Speaker 1: You know, learning your lesson doesn't matter here. And there's
Speaker 1: the bigger, broader lesson that I want you all to
Speaker 1: take from this too, is what if a socialist socialist
Speaker 1: senders or socialist war and just says this, and the
Speaker 1: education department goes along as part of the executive you
Speaker 1: could say it's going to be maybe it'll be wrapped
Speaker 1: up in the courts or somebody who brings some kind
Speaker 1: of a challenge. But who knows if that'll even work
Speaker 1: depends on what judge you get and what the system,
Speaker 1: what the situation is the time. But beyond that, it's
Speaker 1: just like with amnesty. Once you tell people their debts
Speaker 1: are canceled by the government, they're gonna act like the
Speaker 1: debt is canceled and they're gonna have a and they're
Speaker 1: gonna have a strong case to be to make that
Speaker 1: that's the case. So now you have socialist Now you
Speaker 1: have socialist rhetoric about you know, socialist rhetoric about the
Speaker 1: reality of just having a president who wiped stuff away. Absurd, absurd,
Speaker 1: But that is where we are. Elizabeth Warren is saying,
Speaker 1: if I am president, I will effectively give you up
Speaker 1: to fifty thousand dollars if you are predominantly a you know,
Speaker 1: upwardly mobile young person who took out loans and they
Speaker 1: don't want to pay them off. This is a payoff.
Speaker 1: She's just taking money from you, the taxpayer, and given
Speaker 1: it to people that she thinks are going to vote
Speaker 1: for her. And if they'll do it with student loans,
Speaker 1: let me tell you something. Democrats, socialists will do it
Speaker 1: with whatever they want. What happens if a President Warren
Speaker 1: comes in and says, I'm declaring an amnesty and I'm
Speaker 1: telling the Department of Homeland Security to give people. Okay,
Speaker 1: maybe it gets challenged in corp. But what if they say, no,
Speaker 1: we don't care, We're gonna go ahead with us anyway.
Speaker 1: What are you gonna do? How are you going to
Speaker 1: stop them? It's the right thing to do. They'll say,
Speaker 1: that's what Obama used to say whenever he wanted his way,
Speaker 1: Gotta go around Congress. Congress isn't acting, so I will act.
Speaker 1: That was what Obama got away with saying. The press
Speaker 1: was like, oh yeah, that sounds right, that sounds constitutional.
Speaker 1: I don't underestimate the comrades They're coming for all of us.
Speaker 1: You're in the freedom Heart. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. She said that she wanted to see the
Speaker 1: rules of the road so that she could appoint appropriate
Speaker 1: managers to present the case to the Senate. She did
Speaker 1: not say, while I'm holding down until the mitchellcounell agrees
Speaker 1: to witnesses. So let's get back to what we really
Speaker 1: should be doing. Which is or focusing on, which is
Speaker 1: what kind of a trial are we going to happen
Speaker 1: and the Senate? Is it going to be a fair
Speaker 1: trial or is it going to be a rig trial? Alison,
Speaker 1: Just as the President tried to rig his reelection by
Speaker 1: by trying to get the Ukrainian president to go along
Speaker 1: with his political scheme, he's trying to, with the help
Speaker 1: of Mitchellcowna, rigged the Senate trial by not calling appropriate
Speaker 1: witnesses and producing documents. The President has been stonewalling this
Speaker 1: impeachment process the whole way, and now that he has
Speaker 1: an opportunity in the trial to present his case and
Speaker 1: presenting his case easy, but presenting facts and evidence, not
Speaker 1: saying this is a witch hunt, that is not evidence.
Speaker 1: That's just a rhetorical what I call rhetorical. It's nothing progress.
Speaker 1: I think Mazie Herono is the dumbest person in Congress.
Speaker 1: I really believe that. I actually don't even say it
Speaker 1: to be amusing. I actually think she's the dumbest person
Speaker 1: in Congress based on what she says publicly, in the
Speaker 1: way that she conducts herself as an elected official, and
Speaker 1: so in a sense she provides very you know, She
Speaker 1: plays a very necessary role because it makes, you know,
Speaker 1: former members of the Senate like Joe Biden look not
Speaker 1: quite so dumb by comparison. Joe Biden, I think, is
Speaker 1: also a bit of a dumb ass, even though he's
Speaker 1: been Vice president United States. Remember, they can call Republican
Speaker 1: president's vice president stupid all they want, and then we're
Speaker 1: supposed to always accept that. Right, George W. Bush was
Speaker 1: so dumb. George W. Bush is smarter than Al Gore,
Speaker 1: has always been smarter than Al Gore, and always will
Speaker 1: be smarter than Al Gore. Okay, so as much as
Speaker 1: the media can try to just brainwash everyone into thinking otherwise,
Speaker 1: you know, Maisie Arono here though, Well, we got to
Speaker 1: talk more then. Now we're getting to the impeachment, s
Speaker 1: off the articles, the transmission of the articles, blah blah,
Speaker 1: that's coming up. Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson
Speaker 1: Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. The Senate was never
Speaker 1: going to pre commit ourselves to redoing the prosecutors homework
Speaker 1: for them, and we were never going to allow the
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House to dictate Senate proceedings to Senators.
Speaker 1: House Democrats have already done enough damage to the President
Speaker 1: international unity. Mitch McConnell's going to hold the line here,
Speaker 1: I think, which is good. He understands who he's up
Speaker 1: against here with these Democrats. He knows that they have
Speaker 1: no honor or integrity whatsoever in this process, and so
Speaker 1: all of their scheming, in all of their insinuations, they're smears.
Speaker 1: All this stuff that they're doing right now about Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell is just desperation play But perhaps there's nothing really
Speaker 1: more desperate and disgraceful in this whole situation than what
Speaker 1: has just what has just come to light, and that
Speaker 1: is that they're now doing the Russia Russia playbook against
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell. This is from a CNN reporter, So not somebody,
Speaker 1: not someone on the ride who's trying to find some
Speaker 1: way to bash Nancy Pelosi. Which really, to bash Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi just let her speak publicly long enough and she'll
Speaker 1: say something really stupid or really dishonest, and then watch
Speaker 1: all the Democrats scrambled at her. Oh, Pelosi is a
Speaker 1: great strategist. Pelosi is a narcissistic loon. But anyway, here's
Speaker 1: what the CNN reporter shared this morning. Pelosi told her
Speaker 1: colleagues in private that Mitch McConnell is acting like a
Speaker 1: rogue Senate leader. As she said before, she mused that
Speaker 1: sometimes she wonders Mitch McConnell has Russian connections. As per
Speaker 1: attendees at the meeting. Oh yeah, that's right, folks, because
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell is not doing what Nancy Pelosi says he
Speaker 1: should do in the Senate. Remember, the Senate has the soul.
Speaker 1: This is the Senate's world. By the way, thank god
Speaker 1: that Republicans held the Senate in that last election, which
Speaker 1: was not which was not something that could be counted
Speaker 1: on upfront. I mean, you look at the Kavanaugh effect here,
Speaker 1: and it is I do believe that it's very likely
Speaker 1: that Kavanaugh and the Democrats shameful, shameful effort to destroy
Speaker 1: that man, That Kavanaugh's effort, I mean that Kavanaugh's effect
Speaker 1: on the Senate that kept it in Republican hands was
Speaker 1: in fact the difference maker here. Could you imagine if
Speaker 1: you had a Senate majority now, they wouldn't they wouldn't
Speaker 1: get to the two thirds vote. Even if you had
Speaker 1: had a couple of seats go the other way. But
Speaker 1: if you had Chuck Schumer running this thing and not
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell, oh my god, this should be a circus
Speaker 1: beyond circuses, should be like the craziest thing you've ever seen.
Speaker 1: I couldn't even think of something at the time, but
Speaker 1: you know, something to get to the biggest circus ever.
Speaker 1: I'm not really sure. Also, I feel like circuses have
Speaker 1: become they're a little out of fashion now, especially they're
Speaker 1: not allowed to have animals at circuses anymore. You know,
Speaker 1: people get very mad about like elephants being trained and
Speaker 1: lion tamers and all that stuff. That's pretty much all
Speaker 1: gone now. You can't really do that anymore. How times change.
Speaker 1: But fortunately Mitch McConnell's in charge. Mitch McConnell's in charge,
Speaker 1: and so he is not going to allow for the
Speaker 1: shenanigans some Democrats. But just remember this. While everyone was
Speaker 1: so aghast yesterday, oh my gosh, President Trump retweeted a
Speaker 1: photoshopped image of Nancy Pelosian Chuck Schumer in front of
Speaker 1: an Iranian flag with a turban and a headscarf, respectively,
Speaker 1: and people were saying, oh, this is so horrible, and
Speaker 1: now could he do this? And well, they call Trump
Speaker 1: a Russian trader all the time, and the evidence for
Speaker 1: that is still zero. There's no actual evidence that Trump
Speaker 1: is a Russian. I mean, not only can they not
Speaker 1: prove these a Russian trader, there's zero evidence for this.
Speaker 1: This is a without evidence claim. Oh, he says nice
Speaker 1: things about Pudin. Obama says nice said nice things about
Speaker 1: Cuba and the Castros all the time, you know, or
Speaker 1: things that were too nice about them. Oh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's too friendly to them, for sure. I guess he's
Speaker 1: a he's a Cuban asset. I mean, this is absurd,
Speaker 1: This is absurd. But they say whatever they have to
Speaker 1: say to get what they want at the time they
Speaker 1: want it, and that's that's all that really matters to them.
Speaker 1: Tomorrow is supposed to be the day that they will
Speaker 1: transmit the articles of impeachment. There'll be a vote to
Speaker 1: transmit them, and then Pelosi has told the Democrats, who
Speaker 1: you march in lockstep? I admire the Prussian precision of
Speaker 1: Democrats as a as a political party when they want something,
Speaker 1: there is there's none of this concern over principle, you know,
Speaker 1: that somehow the Democrats they don't they don't have you know,
Speaker 1: Amash's and Rand Paul's and these other characters who have
Speaker 1: big problems with their own party on this stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: every the Democratic Party's like, yeah, we'll do whatever Pelosi says,
Speaker 1: so they'll vote to transmit these articles of impeachment. I
Speaker 1: still very much believe that the correct, the correct approach
Speaker 1: here for the Senate is to just shut this whole
Speaker 1: thing down. Just shut it down, shut it down, say okay, great,
Speaker 1: thank you for these articles. This is a sham. Let's vote.
Speaker 1: Oh the president's innocent, see you later. I think that's it.
Speaker 1: All this stuff about, oh, we need to have witnesses
Speaker 1: and we need to know, we need to have whatever
Speaker 1: whatever Miss McConnell says we need, that's the reality of it.
Speaker 1: We saw what happened in the House. We saw the
Speaker 1: way Adam Schiff said, all the rules, where's the whistle blower?
Speaker 1: By the way, notice how there's all this concern over
Speaker 1: witnesses who will testify at the impeachment. Whatever happen the
Speaker 1: whistle blower, the single most important person in our republic
Speaker 1: at one point, Oh, he's going to bring down the
Speaker 1: President and tell us tales of corruption and all this
Speaker 1: other stuff. Meanwhile we turn out and say, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, we don't get to know who this guy.
Speaker 1: We can't have it confirmed by the press who the
Speaker 1: whistle blower really is. They have no interest in getting
Speaker 1: us the truth on that matter. And beyond that, we
Speaker 1: are not going to hear from the whistleblower. We're not
Speaker 1: going to hear from the whistle blower in this impeachment farce.
Speaker 1: Why why does he Oh, he's not the only one
Speaker 1: who thinks that he has or that he's not gonna
Speaker 1: have to test by and apparently not even Republicans are
Speaker 1: talking about this. I would also want to know why
Speaker 1: does Adam Shift think that he is not supposed to
Speaker 1: testify here? Why does Adam Shift think he can avoid
Speaker 1: this playlip playclif twelve. Look, I'm not a fact witness,
Speaker 1: so other than mollifying the president, I'm not sure why
Speaker 1: the Senate would call me or Nancy Pelosi as a witness.
Speaker 1: Is a fair trial though you could very well see
Speaker 1: the case where the bidens would have to be there. Yes,
Speaker 1: you think that is a good thing politically, You think
Speaker 1: that's a good thing for impeachment as a whole. I
Speaker 1: think what the senators would have to evaluate is do
Speaker 1: the Bidens have any relevant testimony? And I think the
Speaker 1: answer is that they don't. What is an issue here
Speaker 1: is whether the president withheld military aid, withheld official acts
Speaker 1: like a White House meeting in order to course a country,
Speaker 1: to announce investigations, not even conduct them, but just announce
Speaker 1: them to help smear's opponent. And there's not much light
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden or Hunter Biden can shed on the
Speaker 1: President's conduct. So Adam Shaffer is like, no, no, we
Speaker 1: don't need to hear from the Bidens, because I say so, No,
Speaker 1: he doesn't get he doesn't get to make that determination.
Speaker 1: That's not That's not how this is going to go.
Speaker 1: It is absolutely relevant that we hear from Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: in this if we're going to call witnesses at all, which,
Speaker 1: again I want to be very clear, I do not
Speaker 1: think that that is the proper I don't think that
Speaker 1: that's the right way to go. I think that it
Speaker 1: makes much more a much more sense under the circumstances
Speaker 1: to have the Republican majority just say thanks, this is
Speaker 1: this is crap. This impeachment is ridiculous and just throw
Speaker 1: it out, like the pizza you pull out of the fridge.
Speaker 1: It's been sitting there for a month that you thought
Speaker 1: was actually a week, and it smells and it has
Speaker 1: like green fuzz on it. You know when it goes
Speaker 1: When the pizza goes fuzzy, then you know it's really
Speaker 1: time to not eat it. By the way, producer Mark,
Speaker 1: did you see that the latest craze right now? Right
Speaker 1: before I get before I get to to nuts here?
Speaker 1: Are you a pro or anti pineapple topic on pizza? Guy?
Speaker 1: Absolutely against opposed? So you're a purist of course, why
Speaker 1: would you have a pineapple and pizza? That's disgusting? So
Speaker 1: I'm I've actually never had pineapple on pizza, so I
Speaker 1: cannot speak to whether or not it's a good thing.
Speaker 1: I haven't even It strikes me as a bit of
Speaker 1: culinary sacrilege. But now there's a new trend Kiwi the
Speaker 1: fruits get here. I don't even want to hear about it.
Speaker 1: On any fruit does not belong on pizza, anything sweet. Technically,
Speaker 1: a producer mark tomato as a fruit boom mine, Yeah,
Speaker 1: but you don't usually put its tactically vegetable as a
Speaker 1: cooking termament. It's a vegetable, but it's technically as a
Speaker 1: scientifically speaking, it's a fruit. I mean sure, but that's
Speaker 1: the sauce that's not You're not putting tomatoes on a piaman.
Speaker 1: You could, but yeah, well, I mean, you know those
Speaker 1: aren't sweet. I mean, I don't know what kind of
Speaker 1: timentez you use, but I use my son Marzano as
Speaker 1: they're delicious. Yeah, but you know so so kiwi on
Speaker 1: kiwi on pizza, No no bueno for you. You don't
Speaker 1: do that? All right? Well, I'm just saying, if you
Speaker 1: pull the pizza out of the fridges smell bad, you'd
Speaker 1: throw it across the room and say not for me. Right,
Speaker 1: That's what the Senate should do with these articles of
Speaker 1: impeachment as transmitted by the Democrats. They should just say
Speaker 1: this is ridiculous. We're done here. We're done here because
Speaker 1: you have you have these witnesses that come forward, and
Speaker 1: even if the Republicans get to get to decide who
Speaker 1: the witnesses will be in the Senate, there's always the
Speaker 1: possibility that something you know that the Democrats can seeze
Speaker 1: on something dishonestly if need be. But they'll see us
Speaker 1: on something to use against the Republicans and that whole proceeding,
Speaker 1: and why give them any more leeway? I think there's
Speaker 1: also a lesson we learned here. If Democrats play hardball,
Speaker 1: bare knuckle politics in the House, Republicans need to do
Speaker 1: the same in the Senate. If nothing else, haven't we
Speaker 1: learned as wartime conservatives, as I like to say, that
Speaker 1: we have to be willing to fight against our adversaries
Speaker 1: the way they fight against us, or else we just
Speaker 1: consign ourselves to losing, or else we just accept right
Speaker 1: up front that we can't win. We won't win because
Speaker 1: we're unwilling to do what is necessary. So I think
Speaker 1: that's I think shutting this down is absolutely the way
Speaker 1: to go. We shall see if I am I am correct.
Speaker 1: Oh we got a little more from from shifty Oh no, no, wait, no,
Speaker 1: forget that. We've heard enough of shifty Shift. Shifty Schumer
Speaker 1: though almost as shifty as Shifty Shift. This is one
Speaker 1: of those things that you could practice saying to work
Speaker 1: on diction. You remember that stuff seashell, She sells Seashells
Speaker 1: by the seashore, producer Mark says, says the radio host
Speaker 1: in real time on the show. I'm not having some
Speaker 1: kind of an episode over here. I'm just trying to
Speaker 1: take everybody back to you know how you learned diction?
Speaker 1: All right, play Chuck Schumer Clip nine. If he says
Speaker 1: everything's fine and he did nothing wrong, why is he's
Speaker 1: so afraid of Bolton and the other three witnesses we've
Speaker 1: asked for testified. If he did nothing wrong and he's
Speaker 1: not afraid, why he won't he let us get temporary
Speaker 1: document contemporaneous documents. If the president's so right, then all
Speaker 1: these witnesses and documents will corroborate his case. I think
Speaker 1: he's hiding something and that's why he's so afraid of
Speaker 1: witnesses and documents. Oh, isn't this so cute? This is
Speaker 1: like when Democrats conveniently momentarily forget that, say, pleading the
Speaker 1: fifth is not an admission of guilt. They'll only say
Speaker 1: that if they don't like the person, Oh, guilty. An
Speaker 1: innocent person doesn't plead the fifth. If they like the person,
Speaker 1: they say, no, you have a right to avoid self incrimination.
Speaker 1: You don't have to answer the questions the government, whatever
Speaker 1: it may be. And this is another instance where the
Speaker 1: Democrat position becomes because Trump will not go along with
Speaker 1: their attempts to destroy him. He's clearly guilty. Because Trump
Speaker 1: will not assist them in the annihilation of his own presidency,
Speaker 1: he must be guilty. This is what they say, that
Speaker 1: he fights back against this process is all you have
Speaker 1: to know. It's all you have to be told. Clearly,
Speaker 1: he must be a bad guy because he won't give them.
Speaker 1: He won't waive all executive privilege, give them all of
Speaker 1: his documents. Have everybody you know do what they say,
Speaker 1: or else you're guilty. This is this is the way
Speaker 1: that Democrats think fairness should work in this process. Absolutely
Speaker 1: absolutely observed. But they've got nothing, folks, They've got nothing.
Speaker 1: They've made a mistake. They got there, they got their base,
Speaker 1: they got the voters all fired up thinking maybe they
Speaker 1: were going to be able to finally take down Trump
Speaker 1: with this scam, with the sham of impeachment. Turns out's
Speaker 1: not gonna happen. By the way, Rand Paul here is
Speaker 1: saying that he might force a vote on Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: testimony at the gop UM. What if this is interesting?
Speaker 1: Why would he do this? Goop back impeachment witnesses. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so if the Goop says there's gonna be witnesses that
Speaker 1: that Rand Paul is going to force calling witnesses, including
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden. My colleagues can't have it both ways, calling
Speaker 1: for someone blocking other. If we're gonna give a platform
Speaker 1: to witnesses, the Democrats demand, I look forward to forcing
Speaker 1: votes to call Hunter Biden and many more. Yeah. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: I mean this is this isn't this is no leeway,
Speaker 1: no halfway situation. You shouldn't call it waited. He should
Speaker 1: shut it down, Shut it down. Listen to the Buckster
Speaker 1: on this one Buckster, the grand strategist from inside the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hut. I'm telling you, Mitch McConnell, I'm telling you Republicans,
Speaker 1: just just just slap it down. You know, it's like, hey,
Speaker 1: are you gonna try it? Are you gonna try to
Speaker 1: producer Mark? You know, in the big game and you're
Speaker 1: in the end zone. Do you try for the pick
Speaker 1: or do you try it? Or just wap it down?
Speaker 1: Just wap that ball down because you don't want the
Speaker 1: guy to get a touchdown. I'm not even sure you
Speaker 1: know what you just said. You know what I'm yeah,
Speaker 1: it's when they you're not gonna get it. You know,
Speaker 1: if you're own defense or defense and the balls coming
Speaker 1: into the receiver, you want to try to be fancy
Speaker 1: and catch that interception, or you want to just wap
Speaker 1: it down down. You wap it down, Sure, exact took
Speaker 1: a while to get there. Well, I'm trying to you know,
Speaker 1: I'm expanding. I'm spanning my verbal palette to include some
Speaker 1: sports and nowties great producer Marker and I did watch
Speaker 1: exactly and karate chops, buck slaps, Mitch McConnell. Listen to
Speaker 1: my man, don't call witnesses, don't withdraw all this, just
Speaker 1: as the great John Madden wouldn't say, just wap it down.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom Hut. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. You know, my son Adam is literally my
Speaker 1: policy advisor. I'm not joking. If you ever met him,
Speaker 1: I mean, my team everybody will tell you it's like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's Adam speaking. You know, he's a person and he's like,
Speaker 1: I'm so tired mom and people saying capitalism and socialism.
Speaker 1: Why not peopleism? You know? He one time I wasn't
Speaker 1: a meeting which Chairwoman Maxine Waters and two other colleagues
Speaker 1: about pushing this amendment to stop fossil fuel investment US
Speaker 1: the government stopped investing fossil fuels, and he whisp, it's
Speaker 1: to me, Mom, Can I have a piece of paper?
Speaker 1: And of course he doesn't know how to whisper, and
Speaker 1: I give him this piece of paper. You know, he
Speaker 1: sometimes likes to sketch, so I'm thinking he's drawing over there.
Speaker 1: Before that meeting ended, he handed me the piece of
Speaker 1: paper I had posted it, and he said, Mom, you
Speaker 1: gotta tell him this say is we only have until
Speaker 1: twenty thirty. Like he was giving me these talking points.
Speaker 1: And at the end of the meeting, I put it
Speaker 1: up and I shared to share me Chairwoman Waters in
Speaker 1: my colleagues, and she just smiled. And I thought to myself, God,
Speaker 1: if we could just clear the room and sometimes put
Speaker 1: kids in the room. Democrats really believe this. That's where
Speaker 1: she did to leave. They really think that children had
Speaker 1: more wisdom about policy than adults. Apparently, this is this
Speaker 1: is the Greta Thunberg situation. This is why so many
Speaker 1: blue check journos create these false these these false anecdotes
Speaker 1: about their own children. You know, Dotty, I just want
Speaker 1: to know, why is it that Medicare for all is
Speaker 1: being opposed by those who, because of chronyism and obsession
Speaker 1: with capitalist free markets, refuse to put people first. Said
Speaker 1: my five year old, Your five year old didn't say that.
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, Libs, I don't care what
Speaker 1: you're five, or your ten or your fifteen year old
Speaker 1: thinks about any policy matter whatsoever. And the fact that
Speaker 1: the Libs do care is in fact a data point
Speaker 1: about how little we should care what they think about anything,
Speaker 1: because they have very poor judgment and they are emotionally unstable.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. A quick bit of news trivia.
Speaker 1: If you're today a team, what is the number three
Speaker 1: trending topic on Twitter in America right now? You might
Speaker 1: think it was the big LSU Clemson game last night,
Speaker 1: which I know about because I love America and freedom,
Speaker 1: And even though I did not know that this game
Speaker 1: was happening until it was actually on the TV screens,
Speaker 1: I know that it was very fun for people to watch,
Speaker 1: and I enjoy the enjoyment that other people get from
Speaker 1: watching collegiate athletes playing the sport of football because I
Speaker 1: am I am a real American and a normal American
Speaker 1: that people can relate to. So go LSU Clemson stuff.
Speaker 1: What other? Do we know what the mascots are from them?
Speaker 1: By the way, they're literally the same mascot. Are you serious? Yes,
Speaker 1: they're both the Tigers. No, that's not possible. I swear
Speaker 1: to you they're both Tigers. Yeah, are you messing with me?
Speaker 1: They really are both the Tigers. That was a joke
Speaker 1: on Twitter all yesterday. Who's going to win the Tigers
Speaker 1: or the Tigers? This is like when Michael Malice try
Speaker 1: to convince me that that Aaron Paul the YouTuber was
Speaker 1: a relative of Rand Paul's, And I was just like, well,
Speaker 1: how do I know if, like I mean, it could
Speaker 1: be sound possible, right, He's like, oh no, it's real.
Speaker 1: And then as soon as I was like all right,
Speaker 1: I didn't know that, He's like, you eighty, that's not real.
Speaker 1: I'm like, wow, what I know? For the longest time,
Speaker 1: I didn't know Chuck Schumer and Amy Schumer were related.
Speaker 1: They are related, right, Yeah, I didn't know that for
Speaker 1: a long time. Interesting, um, do you find her funny?
Speaker 1: By the way, I find her. I think the movie
Speaker 1: certain thing. I saw a movie that she was in,
Speaker 1: and it was one of the worst things I've ever seen.
Speaker 1: I think it was some kind of a dating movie.
Speaker 1: I forget what it was called, the one with lebron In,
Speaker 1: and I think, yeah, that was one of the worst
Speaker 1: movies ever made. And she should be ashamed for all
Speaker 1: eternity as an as an artiste for being involved in
Speaker 1: that garbage. The check probably cleared, and probably Adam Sandlers
Speaker 1: made a lot of bad movies. But you're telling me
Speaker 1: to go see the what's the movie the Gems which
Speaker 1: got snubbed, not even combination. People are very angry about
Speaker 1: I love this this boy. I wasn't even thinking I
Speaker 1: was going to talk about movies today. But wait, don't
Speaker 1: go anywhere because because I got to ask you a
Speaker 1: thing about the game. Um, but someone who writes for GQ,
Speaker 1: like a sex advice collin for GQ Blue Check person
Speaker 1: was upset to the point of profanity about how there
Speaker 1: were no women in the movie nineteen seventeen and how
Speaker 1: like why do we about this? Yeah, why do we
Speaker 1: have to keep why do we have to keep watching
Speaker 1: like this thing about the World War One? Like oh,
Speaker 1: like World War One, like such a big deal. It's
Speaker 1: actually a pretty big deal, darling. It's actually a pretty
Speaker 1: it's actually a pretty important kind of shape the modern
Speaker 1: world and also cost europe An entire generation of young
Speaker 1: men because of government and bureaucrat's stupidity and really created
Speaker 1: also the groundwork that led to World War two. And
Speaker 1: uh yeah, it's it's so I think you can say
Speaker 1: a big deal, but but no, apparently apparently not. And
Speaker 1: it's really what you what you find is that trench
Speaker 1: warfare and World War One, as you know, is the patriarchy.
Speaker 1: That is the patriarchy. Just dudes, how do you expect
Speaker 1: to fake putting women in that battle? I mean not
Speaker 1: that were women in the army at that time? I
Speaker 1: don't think so. No, m no, there's nothing we can
Speaker 1: do about that now in twenty and twenty. No, But
Speaker 1: wokeness means not having to not having to bend the
Speaker 1: need of reality. Sure, they're really should there should have
Speaker 1: been a whole female battalions in nineteen seventeen. Who were
Speaker 1: you know, we're running with like you know, women's march
Speaker 1: t shirts on running across that field just for the
Speaker 1: artistic merit of it. That would have made it a
Speaker 1: much better, much better film. Yeah, I hate factually incorrect movies.
Speaker 1: I know, I get angry about that too. Oh wait,
Speaker 1: but so the LSU ding LSU Clemson game LSU one, right, yes,
Speaker 1: and do we like this? Is this? Is this good
Speaker 1: for us? Sure? Yeah? Is the freedom of pro LSU?
Speaker 1: Were pro pro Clemson? You get to decide. I guess
Speaker 1: that's you. It's all on your pro LSU. I don't know.
Speaker 1: We're probably pissed off half of Alabama there. Oh, I
Speaker 1: was Clemson in Alabama thing? Yeah? Where's Clemson in Alabama?
Speaker 1: Big rivals with Alabama? Yeah, this is a whole, This
Speaker 1: is a whole where LSU is right Louisia. Oh my god. Yes, okay,
Speaker 1: I thought I got that wrong. I was worried for
Speaker 1: a second. All right, no, no, yeah, but yes, their
Speaker 1: quarterback Joe Burrow will be the number one overall pick
Speaker 1: in the NFL Draft this year. He'll probably go to Cincinnati,
Speaker 1: which really stinks for him. But yeah, well, you know,
Speaker 1: at least he can hang out in Miami in the offseason.
Speaker 1: So this is the you might think, buck, aren't we
Speaker 1: talking about the LSU Clemson game? Because that's the number
Speaker 1: three trending topic. No, no, no, no no. The number
Speaker 1: three trending topic on Twitter has to do with the
Speaker 1: LSU Clemson game. But it is not actually, no, not
Speaker 1: actually the game at all. The only reason you know
Speaker 1: about this game isn't it. Yes, this is true. He
Speaker 1: just called me out, but it's accurate. Um. Vince Vaughan,
Speaker 1: who isn't an actor with a tremendous range that goes
Speaker 1: from movies where he plays Vince Vaughan to other movies
Speaker 1: where he plays slightly older Vince Vaughn. But I do
Speaker 1: like him. I mean I think I think he's made
Speaker 1: some great I think Old School's Great, Wedding Crashes is great.
Speaker 1: These are fun movies, no question. He was horrifically bad
Speaker 1: in the second season of True Detective, but I'll let
Speaker 1: that slide. Vince Vaughan at the LSU Clemson game went
Speaker 1: up to the President of the United States and his wife,
Speaker 1: shook hands, exchange pleasantries, and went about the rest of
Speaker 1: his life. And the Left is freaking out about it
Speaker 1: all over the social media. Avage Vaughn. Trump's our passion
Speaker 1: as people freaking out, I don't understand. They gotta get
Speaker 1: a grip they gotta get a grip. It's just not
Speaker 1: that big a deal. The guy was just saying, Hi,
Speaker 1: this is the same thing that happened with Ellen and George.
Speaker 1: W Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah she was. I give
Speaker 1: Ellen credit. She was like, I'm you know, he's a
Speaker 1: human being. I'm a human being. Sometimes human beings are
Speaker 1: nice to each other, you know. I was like, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, well when you're an Ellen also, it's like,
Speaker 1: come on, like they can't who doesn't, Like I was
Speaker 1: gonna say, it's like there's some people that even the left,
Speaker 1: even the left, no matter how how angry they get,
Speaker 1: like the wokeness, when overcome you know Ellen, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean Oprah, Ellen, they can pretty much do the thing
Speaker 1: that baby Yoda does where they like stop the you know,
Speaker 1: the bad guys from moving. They can just freeze them
Speaker 1: and their Twitter. Yeah, they can just stop Twitter. Oprah
Speaker 1: can just wave her hand and like Twitter will freeze.
Speaker 1: Same thing with Ellen Um included. You know, because they're
Speaker 1: on the they're like very powerful figures to the left
Speaker 1: and on the left anyway. So Vince Vaughan was pleasant
Speaker 1: to the sitting president United States of the commander in chief,
Speaker 1: and people are all freaked out about that. Um, that's
Speaker 1: a real thing that is going on right now, Vince Vaughan,
Speaker 1: they're saying should be canceled. I mean, Democrats are completely insane, folks.
Speaker 1: This is this is a real thing that is happening
Speaker 1: right now. That's how much they've been convinced that that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is a menace, is a danger, is a
Speaker 1: bad im It's not possible to have reasonable conversations with
Speaker 1: people who think that it is a transgression to shake
Speaker 1: hands just as an American, as any person, as an American,
Speaker 1: shake hands with the sitting president of the United States,
Speaker 1: a president who has done what's the terrible thing that
Speaker 1: he's done again, exactly what countries has he invaded and destroyed?
Speaker 1: What what you know internment camps? Is he set up
Speaker 1: for people and sent American citizens into What's the really
Speaker 1: horrific thing that Donald Trump has done? Always loved us. Oh,
Speaker 1: they misrepresent something that he said at a press conference
Speaker 1: a few years ago. That's what the thing that we're
Speaker 1: all supposed to be terrified about. These people are crazy.
Speaker 1: But that's also why when I saw this morning, you know,
Speaker 1: CNN was running some story on how the ocean is
Speaker 1: warming at the same rate as if we dropped five
Speaker 1: herosium as sized nuclear bombs in the ocean every day.
Speaker 1: I I mean, I know that's supposed to be released.
Speaker 1: That's like something it sounds to peep. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: that's so so scary. The ocean, I'm gonna let you
Speaker 1: in a little secret, is really really big. So even
Speaker 1: if it sounds like, oh my gosh, five nuclear bombs
Speaker 1: in the ocean a day, that's that's a real But
Speaker 1: it's a really big ocean, all right, So let's not
Speaker 1: get too worried about this. But they're trying to find
Speaker 1: the most viscerally disturbing imagery possible to describe what is
Speaker 1: a naturally occurring process that has always been occurring. Temperature
Speaker 1: of the ocean has always been going up, going down.
Speaker 1: That's just the reality of the planet we live in.
Speaker 1: But they want people to be terrified, and as part
Speaker 1: of that terror campaign, they come up with ways to
Speaker 1: play upon the fear that they've created. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is now the climate change stuff, you know. Look, it's
Speaker 1: you see this with the way that that Trump is
Speaker 1: treated as the worst person ever by the left, there's
Speaker 1: the exaggeration has gotten to the point now where there's
Speaker 1: no backing down from it. I mean, they've really convinced
Speaker 1: people that Donald Trump is the scariest, worst person ever,
Speaker 1: and so there's no they're not willing to they're not
Speaker 1: willing to try to scale that back at all. You
Speaker 1: also have this with climate change. If you want any
Speaker 1: attention for your climate change, cause what you end up
Speaker 1: having to do as a lib and as a media
Speaker 1: outlet now is just saying the most outrageous, frightening things possible,
Speaker 1: and and then and then people will click on it
Speaker 1: and they'll want to hear it. You know. Then you
Speaker 1: have to say the world's gonna end in twelve years
Speaker 1: and other world's gonna end in ten years, you know,
Speaker 1: not six seven you know that, not six minute apbs,
Speaker 1: seven minute abbs. That's that's where we are on this.
Speaker 1: It reminds me a little bit of the local news
Speaker 1: trick that you still see sometimes where it's like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, good evening, I'm so and so, and here's
Speaker 1: the you know, attractive female that appeals to the largest
Speaker 1: local demographic viewership we have here, Um, whatever that may be.
Speaker 1: And uh, you know, tonight we're going to talk to
Speaker 1: you about the mayor's race. And also the thing you
Speaker 1: have in your home that may kill you unless we
Speaker 1: tell you what it is coming up later. This is
Speaker 1: the This is a kind of a caricature of what
Speaker 1: but I mean that that really happened. I mean you
Speaker 1: look at local news, they'll do that. People go, oh,
Speaker 1: I better know or else this thing's gonna kill me.
Speaker 1: That's now. Look the climate change people, it's it's you know.
Speaker 1: Here we have another scientist who says, unless we take
Speaker 1: climate change seriously, we have six years left. Now, we
Speaker 1: have four years left, now, we have ten years left. No,
Speaker 1: we're all gonna die because when you set the bar
Speaker 1: at that level to get anyone's attention, you have to
Speaker 1: take you have to take the dial to eleven, you know,
Speaker 1: not ten eleven, not six seven. All Right, you see
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. You're in the freedom. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show podcast. This is very interesting and I
Speaker 1: didn't get a chance to address this earlier, but let
Speaker 1: me share with you. This just broke. This is a
Speaker 1: a piece in the New York Times Russians hacked Ukrainian
Speaker 1: gas company at the center of impeachment. Give you some
Speaker 1: of the details here, and I quote with President Trump
Speaker 1: facing an impeachment trial over his efforts to pressure Ukraine
Speaker 1: to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. And
Speaker 1: his son Hunter Biden, Russian military hackers have been boring
Speaker 1: into the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the affair.
Speaker 1: According to security experts, the hacking attempts against Barisma, the
Speaker 1: Ukrainian gas company on whose board Hunter Biden serve, began
Speaker 1: in early November, as talk of the Biden's Ukraine and
Speaker 1: impeachment was dominating the news in the United States. It
Speaker 1: is not yet clear what the hackers found or precisely
Speaker 1: what they were searching for, but the experts say the
Speaker 1: timing and scale of the attack suggest that the Russians
Speaker 1: could be searching for potentially embarrassing material on the Bidens,
Speaker 1: the same kind of information that mister Trump wanted from
Speaker 1: Ukraine when he pressured an investigation of the Bidens and Barisma,
Speaker 1: setting off a chain of events that led to his impeachment.
Speaker 1: Then then as now, the Russian hackers, from a military
Speaker 1: intelligence unit known formally as the GRU and to private
Speaker 1: researchers by the alias Fancy Bear, you so called phishing
Speaker 1: emails that designed that are designed to steal using names
Speaker 1: and passwords. According to a Silicon Valley security firm that
Speaker 1: detected the hacking called Area one. I guess we're putting
Speaker 1: a lot of faith incredibility in this Area one, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, this is blown up in the media's
Speaker 1: face before it did back with the Washington Post and
Speaker 1: their whole Russian fake news thing. They cited some security
Speaker 1: expert online cyber group that was a joke that was
Speaker 1: like nothing, didn't really exist, but the Washington Post ran
Speaker 1: with it because it was anti Rump. That was early
Speaker 1: in the Trump presidency. Let's unpack this for a minute.
Speaker 1: Ukrainian gas company at the center of impeachment, Barisma, is
Speaker 1: hacked by Russians. That's what they're saying. Why would we
Speaker 1: be Why would they tell us this, Why would they
Speaker 1: tell us this, Why would they be concerned about this too?
Speaker 1: There are a few things that could be going on here,
Speaker 1: and I'm not quite committed in my mind yet to
Speaker 1: which one I think is the most likely. So I'm
Speaker 1: just I'm working through some of the options here with you.
Speaker 1: As I see it, you could have an effort to
Speaker 1: just bring up Russia again right now in the whole
Speaker 1: impeachment situation, and oh, the Russians are trying to help Trump,
Speaker 1: and that's Anything that can be talked about as a
Speaker 1: Russia issue gets Democrats excited. Anything that is in the
Speaker 1: world of Russia stuff gets Democrats excited. Okay, that's possible.
Speaker 1: So it's just it's just a distraction from the excuse
Speaker 1: me whoa distraction from the impeachment situation, and it's something
Speaker 1: that we have to just move past as quickly as
Speaker 1: we can because it doesn't meaning. Here's another possibility, though,
Speaker 1: What if we're being told this by the New York Times.
Speaker 1: What if they're telling us this because there are concerns,
Speaker 1: There are concerns that maybe somewhere in the Barisma files,
Speaker 1: somewhere on the Barisma servers, there could be information that
Speaker 1: it doesn't even have to be criminal, remember that, it
Speaker 1: just has to look really bad, perhaps not even involving
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden directly, but about Hunter Biden in some way.
Speaker 1: All you need is one director of you know, a Barisma,
Speaker 1: or one CEO or you know, somebody's high up the
Speaker 1: food chain over there writing a colleague some email like
Speaker 1: all right, pay that pay that you know, idiot Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden fifty to eighty thousand dollars a month whatever you
Speaker 1: got to pay him, because that means that his dad
Speaker 1: will lay off us in this whole corruption thing a
Speaker 1: little bit, you know, just because of the appearance of it.
Speaker 1: All all you need is an email like that, and
Speaker 1: the Democrats' efforts to use this thing as a means
Speaker 1: of removing the President United States and preventing his reelection
Speaker 1: turns into a nightmare for them. That's all you need.
Speaker 1: And what I think it's so interesting is that there's
Speaker 1: also it's very clear from the way this is reported
Speaker 1: on that if if the Russians found and word this
Speaker 1: is the way that the left thinks. The left thinks
Speaker 1: about these issues is really on a loop. Right, it's Russia, right,
Speaker 1: They think about this stuff the same way all the time.
Speaker 1: If the Left found a or sorry, if the Russians
Speaker 1: found information that did in fact look bad for the
Speaker 1: Bidens in Ukraine on this Barisma stuff, you already know
Speaker 1: that the press would treat this like it was not.
Speaker 1: You know, when they get information from wiki leaks that
Speaker 1: hurts Bush, when they get information of any kind, when
Speaker 1: they get leaks about natural security that hurt a Republican,
Speaker 1: the press runs with it. The public has to know
Speaker 1: how we got it. Whether it was illegal or not,
Speaker 1: doesn't matter if and then, by the way, you saw
Speaker 1: this with the Bernie Sanders Hillary Clinton situation, with the
Speaker 1: DNC emails that were released, journalists were very like, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know, you know this is although that's a
Speaker 1: little different because they were they were still talking about
Speaker 1: democrats and democrats, right, So there were some different equities
Speaker 1: that got brought into play there. Do you think that
Speaker 1: they would accept information that was dumped by WikiLeaks or
Speaker 1: anyone else that looked bad for the Bidens as anything?
Speaker 1: They would say, it's Russian disinformation. I guarantee it, guarantee it.
Speaker 1: At this point, they would come up with whatever storyline
Speaker 1: they had to as reporters, as journalists who avoid tree
Speaker 1: that information like the incredibly newsworthy stuff it is. Look
Speaker 1: what they've done with the whistleblower. They have pretended for
Speaker 1: months now that the whistleblower is not his identity, is
Speaker 1: not a newsworthy item. That is a lie, that is
Speaker 1: a joke. That is ridiculous. If Russia found information on
Speaker 1: the Barisma servers that look bad for the Bidens, the
Speaker 1: journalists already want to make sure that or if anyone
Speaker 1: found that information about that's another important point here. You're
Speaker 1: here too. If someone in Ukraine comes forward a whistleblower,
Speaker 1: you could even say, with information about the Bidens in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: let's say it's a Russian operation. This is now that
Speaker 1: not only is this the weapon they use, this is
Speaker 1: the sword and the shield, this is the weapon they
Speaker 1: use against Republicans, and it's what they will say to
Speaker 1: defend the Bidens that they have to see. It was
Speaker 1: any information that comes out about the Bidens with regard
Speaker 1: to Burisma, doesn't matter who puts it out. There's a
Speaker 1: Russian intelligence operation on behalf of Trump. That's what they're
Speaker 1: doing here. Thanks for listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app before
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. The show ain't over yet, folks,
Speaker 1: keeping it rio. It's time for roll Call Facebook dot com,
Speaker 1: slash Buck Sexton for roll call purposes, also Teambuck at
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com and let's go. Yesterday, I got a
Speaker 1: little too a little too chatty with producer Marks we We.
Speaker 1: I trampled on your roll call time a little bit. Today,
Speaker 1: I wanted to give you a little more time for that.
Speaker 1: By the way, I also wanted a programming note that
Speaker 1: I'm going to be out in Los Angeles Thursday Friday
Speaker 1: meeting with some folks. Got some things gotta take care
Speaker 1: of on the West coast, the left coast, and I'll
Speaker 1: be back next week. But i'll be gone Thursday Friday.
Speaker 1: My man Ben Weingarten, it's going to be in on
Speaker 1: radio and on Pluto TV channel two forty eight, the
Speaker 1: first that's what's gonna what's up. Well, we have a
Speaker 1: show Monday too. Oh yeah, Monday, while I'm on Monday.
Speaker 1: But that's like a holiday. So I'm just letting the
Speaker 1: listeners in correct, thank you. So I'll be out for
Speaker 1: a few days. This is the last stretch of Buck
Speaker 1: out of the Hut that I think is going to
Speaker 1: happen for more than a day. You know. I'm not
Speaker 1: expecting to be out for more than a day between
Speaker 1: now in the election. Really, that's my That's what I'm thinking.
Speaker 1: It's going to be the case. So this is the
Speaker 1: last one. So yeah, I just let's see my man
Speaker 1: Ben Winegardne. We're doing a great job. Facebook dot Com
Speaker 1: slash Buck Sexton Joe. Joe writchen and he has the following,
Speaker 1: I will slay him. Oh ho ho die die die.
Speaker 1: I can't. Of course, he's writing to me in reference
Speaker 1: to the movie for Getting Sarah Marshall, where the protagonist
Speaker 1: played by the guy who's from How I Met Your Mother.
Speaker 1: I forget his real name. You don't talk. You know
Speaker 1: this guy Jason Segal or Siegel? If yeh, Jason Siegel.
Speaker 1: I think his name is, yeah, Jason Siegel where where
Speaker 1: he plays like a heartbroken boyfriend who goes to the
Speaker 1: Turtle Bay resort on the north side of Oahu, which
Speaker 1: is actually where it is, and yeah, and he has
Speaker 1: Kristen bell is there. And also I can't remember the
Speaker 1: little burnette actress's name. She's a Ukrainian of anyway. Whatever,
Speaker 1: it's a good movie. I've seen him many times. It's
Speaker 1: a little raunchy, certainly not for the kids to watch,
Speaker 1: but I have enjoyed that movie. And I like his
Speaker 1: whole Dracula theater thing because that reminds me of like
Speaker 1: I did the Dracula show here for Halloween, which I
Speaker 1: kind of want to return to and do an update
Speaker 1: of at some point. All Right, Dave writes book. Enjoyed
Speaker 1: the Michael Malice interview. Yeah, Dave, Michael and I are
Speaker 1: buddies and his show You're Welcome, and we had a
Speaker 1: long chat which chat for about an hour just about everything.
Speaker 1: So just go to I don't know how you even
Speaker 1: find it, but look on Michael Malie's Facebook or Twitter page.
Speaker 1: I'm sure he hasn't linked up there. I retweeted it
Speaker 1: on Twitter, but if you want to listen, by all means,
Speaker 1: we had a long, long chat TJ long time no speak.
Speaker 1: In regards to legalization of weed, I've been pondering whether
Speaker 1: raising the tobacco age to twenty one is a foreshadowing
Speaker 1: of what maybe coming down the pipe. Maybe they're planning
Speaker 1: on a federal legalization of weed, and to make it easy,
Speaker 1: they're setting the legal age of twenty one for everything.
Speaker 1: Just a thought. Also, it's the only way that I
Speaker 1: can just fire Republicans supporting more nanny state nonsense. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know when we're going to reach the conversation
Speaker 1: of the conversation changing to the legitimate federalization of weed,
Speaker 1: when that's really going to happen, I mean meaning it's
Speaker 1: it's no longer illegal marijuana, right, now anywhere in the
Speaker 1: United States is a legal inner law. It is. States
Speaker 1: can't change that. States have been allowed, with kind of
Speaker 1: winking a nod from the federal government, to decriminalize for
Speaker 1: their own purposes. I believe New York State is going
Speaker 1: to be following that. It's going to be following that
Speaker 1: path as well pretty soon. Here. I mean, I don't
Speaker 1: know about you, Producer Mark. I can't even walk. I
Speaker 1: feel like I can't walk more than five blocks without whoa,
Speaker 1: somebody's smoking some kind bud on the ste I noticed
Speaker 1: a lot more when we were in Midtown. Yeah, not
Speaker 1: as much down here, but yeah, we'll Tribecca. We're down
Speaker 1: and tribeccas were the show, a part of which is
Speaker 1: for the Triangle below Canal for Canal Street, part of Manhattan,
Speaker 1: which is fancy. Yeah, very boug very fancy. It down
Speaker 1: here we are not fancy. Now we're in a fancy
Speaker 1: Nor is the Freedom Hunt fancy, but we are in
Speaker 1: a fancy area. Yeah. I prefer it down here to
Speaker 1: the tourist trap that where our old studios were. Oh man,
Speaker 1: if you're talking about a place to go for a
Speaker 1: walk and hang out, it's way nicer around here. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's beautiful down around here. Yeah. I always tell people
Speaker 1: don't when you go to New York Man, don't hang out,
Speaker 1: don't hang out near Times Square, don't hang out in midtown.
Speaker 1: Don't do it. Don't do it. So let's see who
Speaker 1: we have here. Next up, Karen, regarding chocolate, I am
Speaker 1: very skinny and I eat lots of chocolate. I never
Speaker 1: eat anything less than eighty five percent pure chocolate. It's
Speaker 1: the sugar that makes one fat, not the chocolate. Okay, Karen,
Speaker 1: thank you for the update. I just like all of
Speaker 1: the chocolate. So there is that. Steve Buck, amazing show
Speaker 1: and analysis. Steve, amazing analysis of my amazing show and analysis.
Speaker 1: Keep up the great work you spend time and energy
Speaker 1: on mainstream media advocates and PR branch Ministry of Information
Speaker 1: for the Socialist Communist Democratic Party. True your audience or
Speaker 1: some percentage is already aware, yep, Steve, I know. But
Speaker 1: we're trying to do counternarrative building here. That's part of it,
Speaker 1: you know. It's it's we got to fight back against
Speaker 1: the lies that are told throughout the has become the
Speaker 1: only king of people here, Stephen. All this talk from
Speaker 1: Lee and Paul has me wondering when the Founders were
Speaker 1: still running the country and sent the navy and Marines
Speaker 1: after the Barbary pirates, did they wait for a declaration
Speaker 1: of war or did they use executive power to handle it?
Speaker 1: That strikes me as very similar. Yeah, well, this is
Speaker 1: this has been a a debate that does stretch back
Speaker 1: to the origins of the public and it's one that
Speaker 1: will always be with us, you know. Is what is
Speaker 1: in the purview of the commander of chief of the
Speaker 1: executive branch when it comes to the power to make
Speaker 1: war and what does the Congress maintain as its own
Speaker 1: authority under those circumstances. So, yes, indeed, Eric, this is
Speaker 1: very long. Eric, I gotta skip this for now. Derek,
Speaker 1: not to be confused with Eric Buck. I took a
Speaker 1: couple of psychology classes in college, and there has been
Speaker 1: surveys of women who like men with beards. Most women
Speaker 1: like two types of men. Whoever, that is dependent on
Speaker 1: other things. Buck, keep keep growing that beard, she'll tie, Okay, Derek,
Speaker 1: I don't know, speaking of of kind, Bud and relaxing,
Speaker 1: Maxi and relaxing, I don't really know what we're going
Speaker 1: for their dark but I appreciate it. Here we go. No,
Speaker 1: that's something else, roll call. A lot of weird links
Speaker 1: gonna send to be in a roll call today. Jeremy. Oh,
Speaker 1: you know, roll I always think of Jeremy, and then
Speaker 1: I think of Jeremy. Spoke, Jeremy, you spoke. And it
Speaker 1: turns out Pearl Jam is gonna be on tour soon.
Speaker 1: For those either like Pearl Jam, Eddie Vetter and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. I've been on a nineties music kick recently,
Speaker 1: so I've been enjoying that. Jeremy. I'm so sick of
Speaker 1: celebrities opening their mouths trying to stay in the limelight.
Speaker 1: Colin Kaepernick in particular, the only way he's going to
Speaker 1: get drafted as if there's World War three, even then,
Speaker 1: I don't want him on our team. It's also interesting
Speaker 1: how Lucie was rushing to get the impeachment vote, but
Speaker 1: now she's stallin. I see what you did there, Jeremy.
Speaker 1: Keep up the gray work shields high. Jeremy's playing word games.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Jeremy. I appreciate it. Man. Let's see we
Speaker 1: have more coming in on the role call Mark, Hi,
Speaker 1: Hi Buck. I hope this is a correct place for
Speaker 1: role call I put this together. I hope you like it.
Speaker 1: I don't always need to carry a shield, but when
Speaker 1: I do, it's shields high, Buck Sexton. Thank you Mark. Yeah, man,
Speaker 1: gotta keep that shield high so those bad people do bad,
Speaker 1: bad things. Yeah. Somebody who wrote in about this too.
Speaker 1: Thank you guys for pointing out. I know it does
Speaker 1: say on Google that I am married. This has come
Speaker 1: up a few times in the last year, both personally
Speaker 1: and professionally. People have been like, wait a second, you're married.
Speaker 1: I am not married. I have never been married. Um,
Speaker 1: I yes, that is so. I don't know what that's
Speaker 1: the way. I don't want to tell you, guys, other
Speaker 1: than there are some websites that say that I am married.
Speaker 1: We're hoping Producer Mark is rooting for me. He showed
Speaker 1: me how it's done, he got it done, so he's
Speaker 1: you know, he's trying to trying to blaze that trail.
Speaker 1: And I'm only ten years older than Mark, so you know,
Speaker 1: hopefully I'll get there. Do I have to start running
Speaker 1: your dating apps now too? I mean, producer Mark already
Speaker 1: is very good at social media. He'd probably be great
Speaker 1: at dating apps as well. That's how I met my wife.
Speaker 1: Really Yeah, Tinder really yeah. Oh wow, I'm a shocked too.
Speaker 1: Congrats you're like, that's like a real success story for
Speaker 1: the for you know. I'm just I know about this
Speaker 1: from that Tinder generally generally has a reputation for being
Speaker 1: a little bit more of a naughty app. Yes, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not the only I have heard of other people
Speaker 1: who have found legit love. Here's the thing about, it's
Speaker 1: the biggest all the dating apps. And so if you're
Speaker 1: just looking for volume, which you kind of are the
Speaker 1: dating world, right, you want the most options, the most possibility.
Speaker 1: It makes sense. But I've heard that there's some pretty
Speaker 1: some pretty wild stuff. Oh yeah, if you go I
Speaker 1: am not. I am not on Tinder, I can tell you,
Speaker 1: and I've heard there some pretty wild stuff. If you
Speaker 1: go through a female's Tinder app, hundreds of stuff, stuff
Speaker 1: people send them that is not necessarily just matches. Oh
Speaker 1: like me, I'm not that good looking. I would get
Speaker 1: like five and yet and the married the married man
Speaker 1: who's building a life or whatever figured out Tinder in
Speaker 1: a way that you know the rest of us have
Speaker 1: it yet, So good for you. But that's very cool.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm a statistic helmet. Did you did you see
Speaker 1: now you already married, you can tell anything. Did you
Speaker 1: know on the first date you're like, this is this?
Speaker 1: This is going well? I mean, look, I think it's
Speaker 1: too much to say. I know I'm gonna mary this.
Speaker 1: People always say that. I feel like you never know.
Speaker 1: As I said to her, I definitely knew I wanted
Speaker 1: to see more of her. I didn't know the first
Speaker 1: date that I was going to marry her. When did
Speaker 1: you start getting when you start getting a little bit
Speaker 1: like when the little voice start saying maybe this is
Speaker 1: the one in a couple of months. I think that's
Speaker 1: industry standard. I think it takes two months to get
Speaker 1: to like really know whether you're really interesting. Yes, I
Speaker 1: definitely knew. I didn't want to like dumper or anything
Speaker 1: right away. I knew I wanted to see where this went.
Speaker 1: And then well here we are. Where was the first date?
Speaker 1: Actually a green turtle? What is that? It's a chain
Speaker 1: like Applebee's type. Oh, we was near where we both
Speaker 1: went to school. Hafstra Nice so like local, local joint
Speaker 1: for you guys to go go hang out and stuff whatever. Nice,
Speaker 1: very nice. You're learning a lot of stuff, Yeah, learning
Speaker 1: a lot of the things when you go when you
Speaker 1: have to meet the parents. Ah, that was like four
Speaker 1: or five months in. That was awful. You know who
Speaker 1: else needs to meet the parents meet? I need to
Speaker 1: meet Producer Mark's parents because I have no idea who
Speaker 1: I am nor that I Yeah, I still think they
Speaker 1: probably don't know who I am. Yeah, even though I
Speaker 1: met I met marks mom and dad. I went to
Speaker 1: the wedding and I introduced myself and they're like, who
Speaker 1: are you? And I was like, look, that's cool. I
Speaker 1: don't expect you to know my work. I do spend
Speaker 1: about four or five hours a day in a room
Speaker 1: with your son, just the two of us. Did my
Speaker 1: in laws knew know who you were? Oh? Yeah they know? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: yeah they knew. My Wier's family was on the Weiss
Speaker 1: family was on was on the ball. Prucer Mark's family.
Speaker 1: His mom was like, who are you? Are you a waiter?
Speaker 1: What are you doing here? I mean you were dressling
Speaker 1: a waiter? All right, you that's enough of that. Um
Speaker 1: but yeah, man, So you know that the tinder can
Speaker 1: can result. Tinder can be a love match, Yes, I can.
Speaker 1: Tinder can be a love match. All right, good, good, times.
Speaker 1: Oh we got more role Call. You're in the Freedom Hunt.
Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. All right, we're
Speaker 1: gonna do for roll call. Now we're gonna geto some
Speaker 1: of the emails. I feel like sometimes I neglect those
Speaker 1: who send in the emails. I just go right to
Speaker 1: the Facebook, even though we should spend equal time on both.
Speaker 1: Um Lo right, hey Buck, I really love everything you're
Speaker 1: doing for the first and the podcast. Just at the
Speaker 1: we need a second amement alert for our phones. I
Speaker 1: signed up for the first email and enjoy the info
Speaker 1: from the first. Keep up the great app keep up
Speaker 1: the great job, lo Loo. Thank you so much, man,
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. Tim. This is just titled roll Call,
Speaker 1: very very effective, Tim. Hey Buck, have you seen Kurt
Speaker 1: Russell's very best underrated action classic Soldier. It's actually a
Speaker 1: prequel set early in the Blade Runner universe. It's totally awesome.
Speaker 1: Check it out Shields High. Tim. I haven't even I
Speaker 1: even heard of that movie. I didn't even know that
Speaker 1: was a movie, so I cannot say that I know
Speaker 1: anything about it. Maureen rights in the headline here and
Speaker 1: the email member Team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com. If you
Speaker 1: want to send us emails. Please do by the way,
Speaker 1: please do send Facebook message, even if it's a one liner.
Speaker 1: We'd like hearing from you, even if it's just a,
Speaker 1: you know, an email to say, hey, producer Mark is funny,
Speaker 1: or you know, congrats on his marriage. I'm glad he
Speaker 1: came back from Jamaica, didn't bail on the hut forever.
Speaker 1: You know, whatever it is you want to say, you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't have to be long, just send us, send
Speaker 1: us your thoughts. We we love hearing from you. Oh Buck,
Speaker 1: thank you for making me double over with laughter as
Speaker 1: you describe the heroics of recently retired Diego the tortoise
Speaker 1: and his amorous adventures. The vision of him just rolling
Speaker 1: over in utter exhaustion after finishing feet up in the
Speaker 1: air is just so funny. Thank you for that and
Speaker 1: for so much more. You're simply the best, which is
Speaker 1: why I've spent thirteen people to you. They all listen
Speaker 1: to your podcast now and watch you on Pluto TV.
Speaker 1: I'll be sending more along the way to Maureen in
Speaker 1: Newport Beach. Maureen, thank you so much, great email, and
Speaker 1: I really appreciate you sending more people to the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt at me. It makes a huge difference to us.
Speaker 1: It keeps Proucer, Mark and Me employed, which we really
Speaker 1: appreciate because the show, actually, you know these shows these days,
Speaker 1: you need to be growing. If you're not growing, you're dying.
Speaker 1: So the show needs to be constantly getting bigger, and
Speaker 1: that means I need you guys be telling people about it.
Speaker 1: As for Diego, I mean, I lost it yesterday. I
Speaker 1: will tell you that I crack up a few times
Speaker 1: even after the show because you have to see you
Speaker 1: have to read the whole story about Diego and how
Speaker 1: he saved his species by having a lot of sex
Speaker 1: as a whatever. He was a grand tortoise or something
Speaker 1: whatever they call it. But the video of him after
Speaker 1: he has done his business falling over with his little
Speaker 1: sort of fin like arms in the air is really
Speaker 1: it's really amazing. You really need to check it out
Speaker 1: because a lot of guys will watch it and be like, yep,
Speaker 1: I've been there. Uh let's see here, Jonathan, right. Your
Speaker 1: impersonations are amazing. It's what sets you apart from all
Speaker 1: the other people out there. Takes a special kind of
Speaker 1: intelligence to embody a person or personality through imitation, and
Speaker 1: your impersonation of Hillary Clinton sounds nothing like her, but
Speaker 1: him embodies her evil nagging wife persona. So well, this
Speaker 1: guy is smart. I like this. One of the main
Speaker 1: reasons why I want to go to Hell is because
Speaker 1: I would be married to Hillary Clinton have to put
Speaker 1: up with their horrible voice, with her fake Southern accent
Speaker 1: and her fake Northeastern speech accent, and her cottage industry
Speaker 1: of corruption. I will say, these politicians need marking on
Speaker 1: a daily basis. I truly believe that our politicians can
Speaker 1: be set on the right track. Thank you so much,
Speaker 1: Jonathan Man, Thank you. I'm glad you enjoined the impersonations
Speaker 1: will bring some of them back, especially in the debate season.
Speaker 1: We'll have that going for sure. Let's see here, William
Speaker 1: hey Buck, listening to your podcast recently, you mentioned the
Speaker 1: issues of public education. Here's a fix. It should be
Speaker 1: contemplated in a ruby red state. Since the public school
Speaker 1: system is established by state constitution, create a movement to
Speaker 1: a end the state, amend the state constitution to devolve
Speaker 1: the requirement of public schools the locality of city country.
Speaker 1: The locality would then decide whether to have a traditional
Speaker 1: public school system or have no system. An issue tax
Speaker 1: atchers attached productions for private schools. All right, cool, William.
Speaker 1: I don't know if that will work, but sounds like
Speaker 1: it might. So I like outside the box thinking, especially
Speaker 1: about the school system. That's our show today. Tomorrow's last
Speaker 1: for me this week. We'll have wine garter in Thursday
Speaker 1: and Friday, and I'll probably watch, maybe I'll live tweet
Speaker 1: some of the debate tonight. We'll see, we'll see how feel,
Speaker 1: We'll see if I have time to go to home depot.
Speaker 1: I don't know if I have enough time. We will
Speaker 1: be talking tomorrow though, friends in the hut, as we
Speaker 1: always do. Shields High