Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Will we strike at
Speaker 1: Assad in Syria? Also the Mueller probe looking for information
Speaker 1: tied to the Access Hollywood tape. It's getting crazier and crazier.
Speaker 1: Plus Paul Ryan and not running for re election. The
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House is Dawn after this term. We've
Speaker 1: got that plus a whole lot more coming up. This
Speaker 1: is the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission
Speaker 1: is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake American, You're a great American. Again, The buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins. No, Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everyone.
Speaker 1: Great to have you here with me. I wanted to
Speaker 1: lead off with Syria today. I there's a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of other stuff that we've got to get to. The
Speaker 1: the Comy World media tour that's gonna be both a
Speaker 1: subject of a lot of discussion and mockery on the
Speaker 1: show and and a source of some some headaches for me.
Speaker 1: I'm sure, because, oh, comey, I understand Colly. That's the thing.
Speaker 1: I know. I know the the cloth from which he comes.
Speaker 1: If you will, I I understand that kind of sanctimonious bureaucrat.
Speaker 1: Having worked with some very sanctimonious bureaucrats in my day.
Speaker 1: But that will have to wait for just a little bit.
Speaker 1: Plus some stuff coming out of the Mueller probe that
Speaker 1: you know here here the breaking news on CNN. I
Speaker 1: can always turn the the anti Trump resistance as presented
Speaker 1: by the anti Drum resistance sponsored by CNN sources. FBI
Speaker 1: raid sought Trump's communications with his lawyer Michael Cohen regarding
Speaker 1: the Access Hollywood tape. You know, I see happening here.
Speaker 1: There's an effort underway to now look into UH politics
Speaker 1: as a criminal matter. I don't mean that they're trying
Speaker 1: to criminalize political differences. That's what the whole Muller probe
Speaker 1: is all about. But this is about looking at the
Speaker 1: ins and outs of what people do in politics and
Speaker 1: try to find a way to put it into a
Speaker 1: statute or or find a statute that applies that they
Speaker 1: can bring criminal charges. But as I said, that will
Speaker 1: have to wait. That will have to wait a little bit. Um.
Speaker 1: I'm pretty frustrated on the serious situation. Frustrated for a
Speaker 1: number of reasons. The first is that there's a lot
Speaker 1: that demands our attention more so then than what's going
Speaker 1: on in Syria in any given day. It's just the truth.
Speaker 1: And this has been the case for years now. I
Speaker 1: so rarely see any worthwhile discussion or analysis of Syria,
Speaker 1: especially on TV. You just have everyone doing a lot
Speaker 1: of moral preening and posturing over you know, yeah, a
Speaker 1: shot so bad and he's just terrible guy. We we
Speaker 1: know that, or this is not it's not an additive statement.
Speaker 1: It's not helpful the conversation r It's like it's like
Speaker 1: people who go on TV and they want to talk
Speaker 1: about how Putin is a thug or it's all everyone says,
Speaker 1: Putin is a thug. Okay, well what does that? What
Speaker 1: do we do about that? What does that mean? What
Speaker 1: are the next steps? If the US was to have
Speaker 1: a more productive relationship with Russia, then we should do
Speaker 1: what the following? What is the following serious? I feel
Speaker 1: like we haven't somehow as a country. And it's at
Speaker 1: least in the leadership class. It's a it's a bipartisan
Speaker 1: failing right now. Actually, the leadership class, I mean the
Speaker 1: people that are elected representatives. They seem to have this
Speaker 1: impulse to flex US military might abroad and make a
Speaker 1: statement in a part of the world where this is
Speaker 1: just it's for show. It's not going to be meaningful.
Speaker 1: And then I also have some questions about all the
Speaker 1: all the statements and the and the news reports that
Speaker 1: we accept as fact. But have we not learned the
Speaker 1: problems of trying to rebuild someone else's country for them,
Speaker 1: or trying to hold it together, or trying to stop
Speaker 1: it from descending into civil war? My generation now and
Speaker 1: and the generation above me, but my generation has been
Speaker 1: engaged in active combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan now
Speaker 1: for over a decade, in the case of Afghanistan, going
Speaker 1: on two decades now, right, I mean, this is going
Speaker 1: on for a very long time. We are not about
Speaker 1: to fix Afghanistan. In fact, Afghanistan is getting worse. Another
Speaker 1: thing that's not very much reported on, in part because
Speaker 1: nobody wants to hear it. I think really nobody. If
Speaker 1: the media can find a way to make it Trump's fault,
Speaker 1: they will. But Afghanistan is deteriorating and is getting worse.
Speaker 1: And we we don't even want to know how much
Speaker 1: Iranian and Russian and other influence there is in Afghanistan
Speaker 1: assisting the Taliban. It's a nightmare, Okay, Iraq right now
Speaker 1: is quiet down a bit. They've managed to avoid the
Speaker 1: descent into hell that would come from a an open
Speaker 1: sectarian conflict between the Sunny Shia and kurd three primary
Speaker 1: ethno sectarian factions inside of Iraq, so that we've we've
Speaker 1: calmed that down. The Islamic state is suppressed. They're they're
Speaker 1: not completely eradicated, they're suppressed. And now we've got Syria
Speaker 1: where no one has a plan that's even worth listening to.
Speaker 1: Right now, no one really knows anything other than, you
Speaker 1: know what, the Assad regime is better than the alternative,
Speaker 1: but no one wants to say it. They don't want
Speaker 1: to say it. They don't want that to be It
Speaker 1: just feels wrong because I saw it such a bad guy,
Speaker 1: because Asad is a is a genocidal dictator or murderer,
Speaker 1: all this stuff, which is all all true. But what
Speaker 1: do we really think is going to be accomplished by
Speaker 1: firing a bunch of missiles into a country with which
Speaker 1: we are not at war that we don't even know
Speaker 1: who we want to to win the war? Right now?
Speaker 1: In Syria, we really don't. We don't have a faction
Speaker 1: that we think could run the country, and we also
Speaker 1: have a nuclear power Russia in this case that has
Speaker 1: troops there, and we have U S troops in harm's way.
Speaker 1: All of that together there and in response to a
Speaker 1: chemical weapons attack that killed for over forty people, made
Speaker 1: five hundred six was the latest I saw today. We're
Speaker 1: gonna do what exactly, We're bombs some air fields. Why
Speaker 1: because we we have to draw a line at at
Speaker 1: the usage of chemical weapons. Uh, there have been plenty
Speaker 1: of times in our recent past. Word, by the way,
Speaker 1: we did not enforce that. And the last time we
Speaker 1: did this, this is quite obvious, it did not have
Speaker 1: the intended effect. As in, if you believe that Asad
Speaker 1: use chemical weapons a year ago, somehow, almost exactly a
Speaker 1: year to the day, he's using chemical weapons now, I
Speaker 1: also would want to know what the motivation would be
Speaker 1: for the dictator of Damascus to do this. The regime has,
Speaker 1: despite all odds, managed to hold on, hold power and
Speaker 1: hold back the advance of what is primarily a g
Speaker 1: Hottest uprising against him. Now. I know there was a
Speaker 1: time when it was protest movements and the Free Syrian Army,
Speaker 1: and but the reality is that right now the g
Speaker 1: hottests are the primary anti Assad coalition, And I'm not
Speaker 1: just and that by that, I don't just mean the
Speaker 1: Islamic State. There are all these other factions that are
Speaker 1: hard line Islamists, and the people of Syria that are
Speaker 1: still in a side controlled areas do not want those
Speaker 1: rebels to take over. They do not want them to
Speaker 1: be in charge. So our firing off missiles is based
Speaker 1: upon an emotional response. I think it was a year
Speaker 1: ago that the president, the reports were at least that
Speaker 1: the president was swayed by by his daughter, by Ivanka,
Speaker 1: to to enforce the red line that Obama had not enforced.
Speaker 1: And I can understand the symbolism at the time of
Speaker 1: doing it, and I will not pretend I will not
Speaker 1: rewrite history. I thought that it was the right move
Speaker 1: at the time, under the circumstances. But we did it.
Speaker 1: We drew a line, we enforced the line. Now we
Speaker 1: started asking the question, Okay, well, it clearly didn't deter
Speaker 1: future be future bad behavior. So the only way that
Speaker 1: you could even make a case that in what now
Speaker 1: it's been reported as I'm on air an imminent missile strike,
Speaker 1: the United States firing off probably a bunch of Tomahawk missiles,
Speaker 1: and you know, annihilating some air fields, maybe some other
Speaker 1: military depots of the Assad regime. The only way you
Speaker 1: could justify it as a military maneuver would be if
Speaker 1: you went bigger, right, if you went for more here,
Speaker 1: if this was not just a show of force and
Speaker 1: a show of accountability against the Assad regime. But you're
Speaker 1: you're gonna really make it hurt you. You're gonna really
Speaker 1: hamper Assad capability, which means this means escalation. This means
Speaker 1: something a lot bigger. And we don't have enough of
Speaker 1: a read on what the aftermath of that would look
Speaker 1: like in Syria. We don't know what would come two
Speaker 1: with the Assad regime, with the rebels if we were
Speaker 1: to go hard and heavy after Assad. And that's why
Speaker 1: when I heard Lindsay Graham said a um that Assan
Speaker 1: should be a target, I slop that down. I think
Speaker 1: that that's I think it's a bad idea. I think
Speaker 1: it's honestly reckless. I think Lindsay Graham has never been
Speaker 1: impressive to me. I just don't think he's an impressive guy.
Speaker 1: Maybe he's a really nice guy, I don't know. I
Speaker 1: think his analysis is pretty crappy most of the time. UM,
Speaker 1: and I think that at some key points as well,
Speaker 1: he all of a sudden stops being particularly conservative. He's
Speaker 1: back out there though he really wants, he wants us
Speaker 1: to blow some stuff up. He needs to go big
Speaker 1: because the side has divided the president, and he has
Speaker 1: divided the international communities, divide human decency, and now is
Speaker 1: the time for this guy to pay a heavy, heavy price.
Speaker 1: And anything short of that, I think will embolden him
Speaker 1: and others, anything short of going big after a son, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, isn't what Graham's on the Senate Form Relations
Speaker 1: Committee or the Senate which which committee's you don't even know.
Speaker 1: Let me know if you think he's on one of them.
Speaker 1: He fancies himself a foreign policy savant, go big. Anything
Speaker 1: less than that would embolden him. Okay, so so proportional
Speaker 1: response to what happened there, which is what they tried
Speaker 1: the last time again almost exactly a year ago, that
Speaker 1: would make things worse. I don't know what world Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham is living on. I don't know what recent US
Speaker 1: history is informing his decision making, but I think that's
Speaker 1: a terrible idea. I think it's a terrible idea. Look,
Speaker 1: people will point to this, and I know they will
Speaker 1: General Maddis and they'll say, well, if you know Maddis,
Speaker 1: who's very well respected and like, I have a lot
Speaker 1: of respect for the guy too, but his job is
Speaker 1: to execute the orders given to him by the commander
Speaker 1: in chief, President Trump, who is I think still being
Speaker 1: swayed by people one way the other on this issue. Mean,
Speaker 1: here's what Mattis said about this earlier today. We're still
Speaker 1: affesting the intelligence, ourselves and our allies were still working
Speaker 1: on this an we stand ready to provide military option
Speaker 1: tof they're appropriate, as the President determined. Yeah, it's up
Speaker 1: to the president. I hope that Trump just this time around,
Speaker 1: decides that they will condemn it in a statement. But
Speaker 1: it's just not worth the risk. Here. We've got it.
Speaker 1: We've had a larger U. S. Troop presence than we
Speaker 1: did a year ago. The ground truth has changed from
Speaker 1: what it was a year ago. And we did this once,
Speaker 1: we enforced the red line. Once it didn't stop them.
Speaker 1: I know there are also people who will say, and
Speaker 1: I I am open to the argument, why would a
Speaker 1: sad even do this? Why would have sat to use
Speaker 1: chemical weapons? He's he's winning in this part of Eastern
Speaker 1: it's really the suburb east of Damascus. He's winning in
Speaker 1: this area, So why use chemical weapons at this point?
Speaker 1: And and had the international community that had essential really decided,
Speaker 1: you know what, we're gonna let us Ode do his
Speaker 1: thing and he's better than the alternative. It's so reckless
Speaker 1: and so dumb for us odd to do this that
Speaker 1: it makes me think maybe we're missing something here. And
Speaker 1: you know me, I don't do conspiracies, although a lot
Speaker 1: of folks find conspiracy very interesting. But if there were
Speaker 1: an opportunity for a false flag op, or rather if
Speaker 1: you were looking to do a false flag op, this
Speaker 1: would be a a compelling one to pull off, get
Speaker 1: the whole international community focus to get on Syria. And
Speaker 1: I mean, if you're the jihadest, or you're any of
Speaker 1: these Islamist militias. By the way, people, don't you see
Speaker 1: all these punts that they have no idea, they don't
Speaker 1: understand when insertaincies, like they haven't been near this. A
Speaker 1: lot of these senators, honestly, they just read about this
Speaker 1: stuff in books. They show up like once a year
Speaker 1: in the green zone in the rock and they're like,
Speaker 1: look at me, I'm tough. I wore a flak jacket
Speaker 1: for five minutes. The truth here is that you have
Speaker 1: people that are actually gonna define that have been defecting
Speaker 1: continuously from Assan's forces to the other side. You've had
Speaker 1: a lot of of of attrition both ways. So who
Speaker 1: knows who's got what? We have no idea. People say, oh, buck,
Speaker 1: we have great intelligence in the ground, what's going on
Speaker 1: in Syria? No, we don't. I can tell you that too.
Speaker 1: It's a lot that we don't know. So we're gonna
Speaker 1: do what. We're gonna fire off a bunch of missiles
Speaker 1: and calls the whole storm there. What if Russia said
Speaker 1: they're gonna shoo him down by the way, Now, we're
Speaker 1: gonna get into that. We're gonna get into a test
Speaker 1: of wills with Russia over Syria. Here's another truth that
Speaker 1: no one wants to tell you. We care a lot
Speaker 1: less about what's going on in Syria than Russia does.
Speaker 1: That's just what's going on there. We don't like to
Speaker 1: say it, we don't like to hear it, but that's
Speaker 1: that's truth. Once again, I don't understand. We've had such
Speaker 1: a rough go of trying to put together a couple
Speaker 1: of Muslim majority of countries. I'm not even should Libya
Speaker 1: to right Libya rock Afghanistan. We've been going through this
Speaker 1: and going through this and asking our our best fellow
Speaker 1: Americans to do all this actual work to put their
Speaker 1: lives online and suffer casualties and and PTSD, and we're
Speaker 1: gonna even tempt fate on this again for Syria. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: we're too late for Syria. We are, and we shouldn't
Speaker 1: pretend we're not. And we shouldn't put our men and
Speaker 1: women in uniform in a position where they can't win
Speaker 1: this fight. It's not their fight and they shouldn't be
Speaker 1: there in the first place. Now, I'm not talking about
Speaker 1: the special forces we already have there. Now, they're assistant
Speaker 1: ground forces that are are aligned with our objective, which
Speaker 1: was to destroy Isis. I'm talking about we're gonna get
Speaker 1: rid of a SAD if that's still the plan to
Speaker 1: get rid of ASAD. Now you're talking full scale invasion.
Speaker 1: Now you're talking about a big military force there. The
Speaker 1: terrible idea. It is a nightmare. We need to learn lessons,
Speaker 1: and we need to elect people in this country who
Speaker 1: understand what the heck they're talking about. And we'll look
Speaker 1: at recent history and draw important conclusions about our national
Speaker 1: security from it. Do not get us dragged into Syria.
Speaker 1: All right, hit a quick break. Your team will be
Speaker 1: back with much more. I hope that the United States
Speaker 1: is going to move sufficient forces into the region that
Speaker 1: the Russians won't do anything fullish. The fact is, if
Speaker 1: we mass our power, they can't possibly compete with us
Speaker 1: in the region. And we need to communicate very clearly
Speaker 1: the Putent that if the President has made the decision,
Speaker 1: if his British and French allies have made a decision
Speaker 1: to go along with him, uh, that we are not
Speaker 1: going to tolerate any Russian interference, and that we have
Speaker 1: far more power in that area than they do, and that,
Speaker 1: if necessary, will use it. I don't think we should
Speaker 1: allow Putin to have any illusion about trying to bluff us.
Speaker 1: I think we, we Americans have got to get back
Speaker 1: to a habit that we're prepared to defend our civilization
Speaker 1: and defend our country. And that means if you come
Speaker 1: up against some dictator trained by the case GB and
Speaker 1: he thinks he can blush you, you want. I gotta
Speaker 1: say that a lot of TV tough guy talked there
Speaker 1: from Newton, whom I is a very smart guy and
Speaker 1: I respect, but he's wrong on this one. Move forces
Speaker 1: into the region over Syria. Russia has been there for years.
Speaker 1: Russia has spet SNAs in place, Russia has intel officers
Speaker 1: in place in large numbers, my friends. And it's not
Speaker 1: just Russia. The Iranians are there too, Iranni and i
Speaker 1: r g C, the Revolutionary Guard Corps, they're they're they're working,
Speaker 1: they are embedded with and working with Assad's forces. What
Speaker 1: does he mean We're going to show them that, you know,
Speaker 1: we're in charge and Syria we're not, and we're not
Speaker 1: going to be. We are nowhere near as invested as
Speaker 1: the Russians or the Iranians are and what's going on
Speaker 1: in Syria? Move sufficient forces into the region, I mean
Speaker 1: to do what exactly? This is what I mean. I
Speaker 1: you know, NW just fell into it. I'm sure that
Speaker 1: was probably a Fox News segment, I'm guessing, and it
Speaker 1: sounds good on Fox News. You know, forces in the region,
Speaker 1: confront Russia, show putin who's boss? What do you think
Speaker 1: has been going on in Syria for the last oh
Speaker 1: six years? They've been there? Right? We decided We're gonna
Speaker 1: go after ICE's, but we're gonna leave us sod alone.
Speaker 1: That has been the policy. That is, that is the
Speaker 1: truth of what has happened. Uh, we're not about to
Speaker 1: decide that that's not the that's a terrible, terrible idea.
Speaker 1: And we do not want to get into some kind
Speaker 1: of you know, squaring off with squaring off with the
Speaker 1: Russians at Syria. We really don't. Um. They will play
Speaker 1: very dirty, and we just it's just not our fight.
Speaker 1: He's holding the line for America is back. I've got
Speaker 1: to talk to you about the latest on the uh
Speaker 1: Mueller probe. It's just just it's outrageous stuff. Um swamp
Speaker 1: is thick and smelly and stanky and bad. It's it
Speaker 1: keeps getting worse. I came into this. I know the swamp.
Speaker 1: I lived in d C. I worked for the federal government.
Speaker 1: I got all kinds of friends and colleagues and politics.
Speaker 1: I know people on both sides of the aisle, and man,
Speaker 1: the swamp is bad news. But it's even it's even
Speaker 1: messier and deeper and worse than I thought. That's what
Speaker 1: we're fine, especially on the government side. The deep state
Speaker 1: is h is a real thing that we have to
Speaker 1: contemt with. But before I move on all that, we
Speaker 1: got some calls coming. I want to take them because
Speaker 1: they want to discuss Syria. Uh So I wanted to
Speaker 1: hear from them. And we'll move on to the next
Speaker 1: stuff We've got to first. Kent in Greensboro, North Carolina. Hey, hey, Ken,
Speaker 1: how are you doing doing good? Buck? Thanks for taking call.
Speaker 1: Bad it's a bad day in uh in North Carolina.
Speaker 1: Apparently we're gonna lose you on the local radio station
Speaker 1: down here sometime in May. I believe that's a shame.
Speaker 1: That's a shame. Uh an unwise decision, But folks are
Speaker 1: allowed to make their own decisions. What can I tell you?
Speaker 1: But anyway, go ahead, Kent. Yeah, I'm going about this
Speaker 1: whole Syrian thing. And as you were, you were discussing
Speaker 1: earlier that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for Assad
Speaker 1: to use chemical weapons when he's basically won the war,
Speaker 1: and and Trump recently stated that we're gonna be pulling
Speaker 1: our forces out of Syria. It's not logical in any way.
Speaker 1: And even if that guy is an evil dictator or
Speaker 1: what have you, he's not a dumb man. He's an
Speaker 1: a surgeon who speaks multiple language and has been groomed
Speaker 1: to run a country. He's not an idiot. And I
Speaker 1: read a report today I'm a lunch break from from
Speaker 1: zero Hedge, and while the source it came from a
Speaker 1: public statements made by some made by the Russians, and
Speaker 1: they had basically stated that they send inspectors in and
Speaker 1: they couldn't find anything. And they were basically claiming, I mean,
Speaker 1: it's a conspiratorial and put it into context as is
Speaker 1: coming from the Russians, so you know that needs to
Speaker 1: be taken into account. But but they were basically claiming
Speaker 1: that some international uh like health organization, some some I
Speaker 1: can't remember exactly. They referred to him as white helmets,
Speaker 1: but people who do internet. There's actually a documentary on them. Well, anyway,
Speaker 1: they were saying they were basically creating the conspiracy that uh,
Speaker 1: these people basically staged the whole thing to create basically
Speaker 1: the propaganda to keep uh, the United States involved. And well,
Speaker 1: I don't like to get too conspiratorial at times. That
Speaker 1: does make more sense than Assad doing a chemical weapons
Speaker 1: attack when everything's going in his favor. And a second
Speaker 1: point I would like to make is I read uh,
Speaker 1: more of a mainstream news article. I went and tried
Speaker 1: to find some mainstream news articles see what they were
Speaker 1: talking about. And there was an individual from one of
Speaker 1: these organizations who was quoted as saying that he smelled
Speaker 1: colorine after some barrel bombs were dropped. And and two
Speaker 1: quick points about that couring gas. Whenever it was used
Speaker 1: in World War One, it was it was a It
Speaker 1: was a by product that the Germans had from the
Speaker 1: from I believe it was a die industry. Don't quote
Speaker 1: me on that, but basically they did not use it
Speaker 1: in explosives. They kept it in canisters, waited for the
Speaker 1: wind to be blowing in the right direction, they opened
Speaker 1: up these canisters and then there was this big green
Speaker 1: cloud that came in the trenches of the enemy. And
Speaker 1: I recall one time I spent some time in the
Speaker 1: military and I was talking with an E. O. D
Speaker 1: guy who they know a thing or two about explosives,
Speaker 1: and he was saying that colorine cannot be used effectively
Speaker 1: in the explosives. But and it had something to do
Speaker 1: with the heat. Yeah, a lot of it burns off.
Speaker 1: I mean, some of the bad guys in the rock
Speaker 1: and and Syria have been trying to use chlorine bombs
Speaker 1: for a while. They did it an Anbar province years
Speaker 1: and years ago. I remember the first time. But but
Speaker 1: basically the entire thing it smells extremely fishy. And while
Speaker 1: you know, I want to be headstant to believe, you know,
Speaker 1: a conspiracy that is created by some some guy from Russia,
Speaker 1: you know, part of the Russian government, it is more
Speaker 1: logical than what our media is saying. And I don't know,
Speaker 1: I'd just like to yeah, well, I'm trying to touch
Speaker 1: on a lot of the subject matter that that you're
Speaker 1: bringing to the forefront here, can't. I would just say
Speaker 1: that the timing is very suspicious, very strange that there's
Speaker 1: been a pretty much an acceptance of a if not
Speaker 1: a US withdrawal entirely from Seraman. The president himself was like, yeah,
Speaker 1: we gotta get out of Syria. He's right on that,
Speaker 1: you know, we we we can't get pulled deeper into Syria.
Speaker 1: It's it's gonna go nowhere good, and we're gonna lose
Speaker 1: our people. It's a very it's gonna be very very
Speaker 1: messy for years to come. And and the notion that
Speaker 1: a SAB would use why would a Sad use chemical
Speaker 1: weapons to kill forty people. Why would he do it?
Speaker 1: It doesn't make any sense. He can kill people with
Speaker 1: barrel bombs, artillery. He's got his Shabbiha militia going in
Speaker 1: there killing people all the time. I mean, why do that?
Speaker 1: It's just for the fear factor. It creates much bigger
Speaker 1: this struke. Assuming Assad's people did this, Using that chemical
Speaker 1: weapon is militarily is counter productive, even from the perspective
Speaker 1: of a homicidal maniac who doesn't care about killing children,
Speaker 1: right Like, it doesn't matter whether Assad is the most
Speaker 1: immoral guy on the planet or not. Using those chemical
Speaker 1: weapons now puts him in the crosshairs of the only
Speaker 1: global superpower, which is US, So it seems very odd.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying he didn't. I'm just saying it's worth
Speaker 1: it is worth questioning this um and especially because he
Speaker 1: did it last time we hit him, so now they're
Speaker 1: gonna do it again. Now, why would they do that?
Speaker 1: You know? I'm I'm all in favor of of of
Speaker 1: you know, accepting how and thank you for calling and
Speaker 1: Kent accepting as evil as the enemy is based on
Speaker 1: their own statements, I don't think that we should try
Speaker 1: to explain away their evil or find some way to
Speaker 1: think they're less evil. But I also don't think that
Speaker 1: they're completely um idiotic and self defeating at all their actions.
Speaker 1: They've managed to hang on people forget now. In twelve
Speaker 1: there were there were suicide bombings that were directly targeted
Speaker 1: Asad himself. They almost took him out. They had penetrated
Speaker 1: his inner circle. Uh, it was real close to all.
Speaker 1: It was close to lights out for the Assad regime.
Speaker 1: It really was. And everyone thought, oh my gosh, the
Speaker 1: rebels and the ISIS and the rising. Nope, they hung on.
Speaker 1: Never lost control of Damascus. Uh, never lost control the
Speaker 1: coastal areas. And they've managed it. They've done it through
Speaker 1: sheer brutality and and viciousness, but they know what they're doing.
Speaker 1: They also did it because of an enormous influx of
Speaker 1: help from Russia and in Iran. But the time you see,
Speaker 1: this is what And now this just sounds like I'm
Speaker 1: criticizing Obama, but this is true. The time to take
Speaker 1: a bigger role in Syria was five years ago if
Speaker 1: we wanted to do that. But now, all right, this
Speaker 1: is showing up. You know, this should be like showing
Speaker 1: up at the at the end of a of a
Speaker 1: surgery where someone's you know, fighting for for his life
Speaker 1: and saying, yeah, well, you know, I'm a trained surgeon.
Speaker 1: Let me see if I can do something. When the
Speaker 1: person is already flatlined and they've been they've been operating
Speaker 1: for ten hours. Maybe you can come in and and
Speaker 1: revive them and save them anything else. But the surgical
Speaker 1: team that's been there has been running things for hours
Speaker 1: and the patient's already flatlining. That's what we're dealing with
Speaker 1: in Syria. It is too little, too late. And what
Speaker 1: I'm worried about is that the Lindsay Graham's The World
Speaker 1: are out there make it sound like, well, maybe too late,
Speaker 1: but it won't be too little if we do a lot,
Speaker 1: if we go big. No, let's not go big. You know,
Speaker 1: I do not want you know, those I know we've
Speaker 1: got a lot of military families listen to this show,
Speaker 1: a lot of active and former military listening to the show.
Speaker 1: I don't want any of you having to go over
Speaker 1: there on orders and try to piece back together Syria.
Speaker 1: We've done enough of this, we really have. Um it's
Speaker 1: and and I would also note that I don't forget
Speaker 1: that in the in the post nine eleven era, you
Speaker 1: know that the world, particularly the Muslim world, is very
Speaker 1: much taken an attitude of you know, look what America
Speaker 1: has done in a raw Look what it's not in Afghanistan.
Speaker 1: Not a lot, not a lot of gratitude. Not let's
Speaker 1: just be honest about it. Not a lot of gratitude
Speaker 1: from uh, the Muslim world in the Middle East for
Speaker 1: getting rid of dictators, fighting back the Taliban. Nope, a
Speaker 1: lot of Oh it's neo colonialism, it's imperialism. So all right,
Speaker 1: let's let's let other you know, let's let's let countries
Speaker 1: figure out their own affairs as much as we can.
Speaker 1: And we're already doing stuff in Syria. And I don't
Speaker 1: I don't disagree with of our actions in Syria with
Speaker 1: regard to the air strikes against but ISIS was a
Speaker 1: threat to us. I ISIS had cells set up specifically
Speaker 1: to come after US. Okay, when people in Syria are
Speaker 1: training operatives to come to my hometown or your hometown,
Speaker 1: but they definitely were trying to come after New York
Speaker 1: City and blow up the subways or run us over
Speaker 1: with cars or whatever it was. It's now, it's now
Speaker 1: it is our problem. I gotta deal with it. Right,
Speaker 1: We dealt with that. ASSAD is not trying to send
Speaker 1: operatives into New York City to blow up the subway,
Speaker 1: to to kill as many of our people as possible. So,
Speaker 1: you know what, not our problem. We've tried this. We're
Speaker 1: gonna you know, or they'll be a flowering of democracy
Speaker 1: and nope. Now what ends up happening is the Islamists takeover.
Speaker 1: We look like the big bad meanings because we're trying
Speaker 1: to you know, get the lights on and clean up
Speaker 1: the sewage on the streets. And you know, we're we're
Speaker 1: the terrible occupier that is America. And we've had the
Speaker 1: ability of the United States military that has been shown
Speaker 1: both to defeat the enemy and to adapt and do
Speaker 1: incredible things that are well outside the what you think
Speaker 1: of is the standard war fighter, uh tool, kid, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, building schools, building sewage, but doing all these
Speaker 1: things these countries, and it's just enough. I wouldn't look.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't go over there, and so I wouldn't ask
Speaker 1: anyone else to go over there. And I've been over
Speaker 1: to rocket Afghanistan, as you know, I wouldn't I wouldn't
Speaker 1: want to go over to Syria right now and try
Speaker 1: to rebuild it. Right. It's different if I were high
Speaker 1: speed SF guy or something. I was working with the Kurds.
Speaker 1: That's cool, and they're doing a great job. But I'm
Speaker 1: not about to show up over there, So I'm not
Speaker 1: about to say that everyone else should go over there
Speaker 1: and try to piece that place back together. We got
Speaker 1: our own problems here, we got our own things to
Speaker 1: worry about. Uh. Let's take Tim in Tuscarawas, Ohio. Did
Speaker 1: I get that right, Tim? Yeah? I bet I've been
Speaker 1: on there before. You know it. Listen. Number one, I
Speaker 1: hope the president understands that when Lindsey Graham and the
Speaker 1: golp eel cons who hate the President, along with the
Speaker 1: Dems and the mainstream media all are urging him take action,
Speaker 1: they're just maybe a problem with that, right, Okay, that's
Speaker 1: number one. Point Number two, I'm glad Ken brought up
Speaker 1: those white helmets because I'll tell you what we've seen
Speaker 1: before where those guys have staged uh terrible events and
Speaker 1: then at the end when the victims are all standing up, hugging,
Speaker 1: having picks with the rescuers, there's something wrong with that. Also,
Speaker 1: they're helping these radicals, okay, who want to overthrow a
Speaker 1: sad And we know that they have taken over control
Speaker 1: of some of the warehouses that Syrian uh military head
Speaker 1: excuse me, And they've taken over some of their warehouses
Speaker 1: and sock holds of also chemical weapons. So if there
Speaker 1: are we don't know that they ain't just releasing them
Speaker 1: to show that there's events there, but not that a
Speaker 1: Sade used them like you said it would be. He's
Speaker 1: stupid on his part. But you know, the President said,
Speaker 1: We're not going in there and fights Syria. We're going
Speaker 1: in there to fight ISIS, and we sending our special forces.
Speaker 1: They hook up with the Curds and uh, they're just
Speaker 1: about done with Isis. We don't need this war with
Speaker 1: with Sharia and Russia. We needed to help the Kurds.
Speaker 1: They've taken in Jews in the area. They've taken in
Speaker 1: the oldest group of Christians, the Coptics, who in turn
Speaker 1: are helping them fight against the radicals in the area.
Speaker 1: We should support the courage. But I'll tell you what.
Speaker 1: The President I think knows this, but he has got
Speaker 1: to understand. Man, when you've got all your enemies urging
Speaker 1: you on to do this. It's a big setup. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there there are some red flags here, Tim. I appreciate
Speaker 1: the call and thank you for the ring. There. There
Speaker 1: are big there are some big issues here. But I
Speaker 1: also like that our caller brought off the Curds because
Speaker 1: I've been coming on this show saying, guys, the Curds
Speaker 1: are getting they're getting shell they're getting attacked by the Turks,
Speaker 1: supposedly our allies. The Turks are just lying their faces
Speaker 1: off about how they're all terror They're not all terrorists
Speaker 1: and not all p KK. That's that's malarkey. But you know,
Speaker 1: we don't want to deal with the oh and now
Speaker 1: we've got a crisis with the Turks and how we
Speaker 1: gotta handle it. The Turks has been very unhelpful, by
Speaker 1: the way, we wouldn't be dealing with an ISIS if
Speaker 1: it wasn't for Turkey saying yeah, we'll just open our
Speaker 1: southern border and let all the crazies run across it,
Speaker 1: which is what happened. Turkey was the gateway for all
Speaker 1: the foreign fighters to get into Syria. They could have
Speaker 1: done a lot more to stop that. So Turkey has
Speaker 1: been a problem and the Kurds deserve a lot more
Speaker 1: of our attention and support than they have been getting.
Speaker 1: They have been honorable allies of the United States in
Speaker 1: Iraq and in Syria, and we owe them a lot
Speaker 1: more than we've been given them recently. I can tell
Speaker 1: you that, and it is troubling. It's upsetting. H I
Speaker 1: do need to talk to you about the Muller probe.
Speaker 1: I thought we had a coomy SoundBite we could play
Speaker 1: from his interview, but what is that with with the
Speaker 1: with with you know, the you know, the guy who
Speaker 1: can't ride the amusement park rides because he's what's this Stephanopolis?
Speaker 1: Do you mean? I'm just kidding. I saw him once.
Speaker 1: He's petite. He's petite. It's okay. You know he's got
Speaker 1: big hair. I respect the hair. But he does a
Speaker 1: he does an interview with with Comey. But it comes
Speaker 1: out when when producer Mike, do we know, I believe
Speaker 1: it's Sunday night, Oh song, we gotta wait till Sunday
Speaker 1: for sanctimonious comy. Darn it? Alright, A four or four
Speaker 1: to five Mueller probe and much more coming up. Stay
Speaker 1: with me. I worry about a world where when you
Speaker 1: go from violent groups to hate speech in a hurry.
Speaker 1: In one of your responses to one of the opening questions, UM,
Speaker 1: you may decide or Facebook may decide it needs to
Speaker 1: police a whole bunch of speech. Um that I think
Speaker 1: America might be better off not having policed by one
Speaker 1: company that has a really big and powerful platform. Can
Speaker 1: you define hate speech? Senator? I think that this is
Speaker 1: a really hard question, and I think it's one of
Speaker 1: the reasons why we struggle with it. There are certain
Speaker 1: definitions that that we that we have around um, you know,
Speaker 1: calling for for violence or UM, let's just agree on that.
Speaker 1: There are some really passionately held views about the abortion
Speaker 1: issue on this panel today. Can you imagine a world
Speaker 1: where you might decide that pro lifers are prohibited from
Speaker 1: speaking about their abortion views on your content on your platform.
Speaker 1: I certainly would not want that to be the case,
Speaker 1: but it might really be unsettling to people who have
Speaker 1: had an abortion to have an open debate about that,
Speaker 1: wouldn't it? It might be, but I don't think that
Speaker 1: that would ye would fit any of the definitions of
Speaker 1: of of what we have very important questions getting asked,
Speaker 1: and that was Senator Ben sass posing to CEO of
Speaker 1: Facebook or love Facebook if you are in France? Uh,
Speaker 1: what is hate speech? And sure enough it doesn't really know.
Speaker 1: They want to ban it, they want to make sure
Speaker 1: it doesn't get on their platform, But what is hate speech?
Speaker 1: I don't know that the Facebook is taking a different
Speaker 1: position than some of the other social media giants here
Speaker 1: because Facebook is essentially saying that they are taking some
Speaker 1: responsibility or the content that goes up on their website,
Speaker 1: and Twitter and others are like, well, we'll take stuff down,
Speaker 1: but we can't stop people, right, we can't do it.
Speaker 1: It's not like a pre What was the movie with
Speaker 1: pre crime? I never even saw it. Maybe is it
Speaker 1: worth seeing the Tom Cruise where they do the you
Speaker 1: know what I'm talking about, they stop the crimes before
Speaker 1: they happen. I forget what that was? What was it?
Speaker 1: Come on, guys, we're all live radio. What's it called?
Speaker 1: The thing? People are all across the country right now?
Speaker 1: What minority report? Thank you for those of you who
Speaker 1: are yelling in your car wherever you are. I'm sorry
Speaker 1: that took us a moment there um. But the truth
Speaker 1: is they don't know what hate speeches, but they're gonna
Speaker 1: try and I got news for you. If you have
Speaker 1: a pro life Facebook group that's a little too honest
Speaker 1: about what really goes on and planned parenthood and abortion clinics, Uh,
Speaker 1: you might just all of a sudden find yourself either
Speaker 1: shadow band or just outright band. That's what government regulation
Speaker 1: is going to allow. He's back with you now, because
Speaker 1: when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck
Speaker 1: never stops. Mueller and the FBI and the d O
Speaker 1: j uh, they don't care about probable cars and they
Speaker 1: can always find a judge to give them a warrant.
Speaker 1: This is all about trying to get something on Cohen
Speaker 1: so they can say you're looking alive for a thousand years.
Speaker 1: I've seen them do it before. And you just to
Speaker 1: tell us true or not that Trump did something some crime,
Speaker 1: and then you won't be looking at an ending prison system.
Speaker 1: They will do it. Mueller is corrupt enough, and people
Speaker 1: have got to come to the to the realization Mueller
Speaker 1: is not an honest, honorable man, that he is out
Speaker 1: to get his people that he doesn't like, and he
Speaker 1: will do anything to bring him down. So let's ask
Speaker 1: the President certainly has been clear that he has a
Speaker 1: very deep concern about the direction that the Special Council
Speaker 1: and other investigations have taken. UH. This investigation started off
Speaker 1: as rush of collusion, of which there was none. UH.
Speaker 1: That has been very clear that nothing has come up
Speaker 1: over the last year, and the President has spoken at
Speaker 1: length on this topic. While the media continues to focus
Speaker 1: on this despite the fact that there's been no evidence
Speaker 1: after a year, We're going to continue to stay focused
Speaker 1: on the issue. Peter Strock and Lisa Page our enemies
Speaker 1: of President Trump. They were spending time at work trying
Speaker 1: to figure out how to keep him from being president,
Speaker 1: and if you were president, trying to have some sort
Speaker 1: of insurance policy too, I guess, prevent him from acting
Speaker 1: as president. And so we asked the question of the
Speaker 1: FBI director, do they still have top secret of clearance?
Speaker 1: Can they search databases unrestricted without a warrant? And the
Speaker 1: answer we got was sort of a non answer, But
Speaker 1: it's an interesting non answer because they said all FBI
Speaker 1: agents have top secret clearance and must keep that. So
Speaker 1: if they're still FBI agents, which apparently they are, he
Speaker 1: means the non answer specifically really is an answer. It
Speaker 1: says that they can search our databases. And our point
Speaker 1: is a broader one. Here we're concerned whether you don't
Speaker 1: like Trump or you don't like the Democrats. If you
Speaker 1: work for the FBI, you should have the oversight of
Speaker 1: a judge, so you can't willy nearly search, you know,
Speaker 1: an enemies list that you might have at work, this
Speaker 1: special counsel and welcome to our two of the buck
Speaker 1: sex and show my friends a special counsel situation. The
Speaker 1: whole thing is an embarrassment. It's a farce, although it's
Speaker 1: also very destructive and dangerous things, so we can't just
Speaker 1: laugh about it. But it's gone way beyond, way beyond
Speaker 1: what any reasonable person could think under the circumstances was ethical,
Speaker 1: allowable necessary. Uh, this is completely out of control. And
Speaker 1: as I've been saying to you, the Democrats that I
Speaker 1: Democrats I know, are like, yeah, it's it's unfair, it's terrible,
Speaker 1: but you know it's hurting Trump, so they're okay with it.
Speaker 1: It's always so disappointing to see how quickly the left
Speaker 1: will not just abandoned principles but admit didn't even have
Speaker 1: any principles. Just about power. It's about any anything to win,
Speaker 1: anything to be able to bend the other side to
Speaker 1: your will into the will of the state. But there's
Speaker 1: some very important points come up recently about all this,
Speaker 1: So the Cohen seizure, we'll talk about that in just
Speaker 1: a moment, but here is the latest. And I we're
Speaker 1: gonna chew on this one together for a moment because
Speaker 1: most of the time I read something emmic odd, it's
Speaker 1: just I'm getting lashes of what I want to tell
Speaker 1: you and what I think that is what's important. This
Speaker 1: one we're just gonna kind of marinate in together for
Speaker 1: a moment, all right. Courtesy of the hashtag Resistance Center,
Speaker 1: that is CNN, right, this is their p their their
Speaker 1: main story right now. FBI sought Trump's communications with his
Speaker 1: personal lawyer regarding Russia collusion investigation. Oh no, just kidding,
Speaker 1: that's not what it says. It says FBI sought Trump's
Speaker 1: communications with his personal lawyer regarding access Hollywood. I kid
Speaker 1: you not this time. That's real. That's real. That is
Speaker 1: what the f So let's so let's just step back.
Speaker 1: The FBI went into they made attorney client privilege a joke.
Speaker 1: Remember we had any maccarthier yesterday, who's he calls balls
Speaker 1: and strikes. He's very fair minded. He's fair minded to Muller.
Speaker 1: He knows some of these guys, He knows Komy, so
Speaker 1: he tends to be a little nicer to them than
Speaker 1: I am, because he likes them as people, or knows
Speaker 1: them as people at least, whereas I'm just like these
Speaker 1: guys are these guys are dangerous clowns. Ah. But I asked, remember,
Speaker 1: I said, well, you know, it reminds me of how
Speaker 1: there's a First Amendment that protects journalists just like obtects
Speaker 1: all citizens. And you could, whenever there's a leak, just
Speaker 1: pull all the phones of all the journalists and you'd
Speaker 1: find out really fast where the leak is. But that's
Speaker 1: you don't do that because there's attention there. He said, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's right. That's true. It's the same thing with
Speaker 1: attorney client privilege. You can override it, but you better
Speaker 1: have a darn good reason to do that. He's better,
Speaker 1: and I'm telling you right now, they don't have one
Speaker 1: for this. I don't know if I brought this up
Speaker 1: with you, but technically, you know, technically the president can
Speaker 1: just drone somebody without trial, according to the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: at least, so are U S citizen without trial. So
Speaker 1: you know, there's really no such thing as legal protections
Speaker 1: underserved and circumstances. The government is just gonna do what
Speaker 1: it's gonna do. If you take that point of view,
Speaker 1: you know, there's always some extreme circumstance that will allow
Speaker 1: them to trample on whatever right. So if we're not
Speaker 1: going to protect these rights, they're meaningless. And if we're
Speaker 1: not gonna say, hold on a second, attorney client privilege
Speaker 1: has to be considered meaningful and has to be protected,
Speaker 1: then uh we we we are fundamentally damaging the justice
Speaker 1: system in this country and in a way that we
Speaker 1: will not be able to undo once it happens. So
Speaker 1: but so here's the CNNPS. Okay, I told you this
Speaker 1: is about FBI wanted communications between Cohen and Trump that
Speaker 1: had to do with the Access Hollywood tape. Quote. FBI aids,
Speaker 1: who rated the home office and hotel of Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: personal lawyer, sought communications that Trump had with attorney Michael
Speaker 1: Cohen and others regarding the infamous Access Hollywood tape that
Speaker 1: captured Trump making lewd re marks about women a month
Speaker 1: for the election. According to sources familiar with the matter,
Speaker 1: the warrants. Specific reference to Trump is the first known
Speaker 1: direct mention of the President in the search Ward, and
Speaker 1: sources said it appeared in connection with Access Hollywood. This
Speaker 1: is the part that I said, we're gonna have to
Speaker 1: just team Bucks, gonna have to crowdsource this one for
Speaker 1: a second. Here, what the heck do they need anything?
Speaker 1: I mean of the Access Hollywood tape. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: I can fill in the blanks too, right, let's do
Speaker 1: this together for a moment. Okay, So maybe Cohen try,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe Cohen made an effort to suppress the tape.
Speaker 1: Maybe he reached out and said, hey, you know NBC
Speaker 1: or the Washington Post, the ones that actually are originally
Speaker 1: ram with it. Maybe he said, hey, you know, you guys,
Speaker 1: please don't do that, or you don't whatever it may be, right,
Speaker 1: we went through some efforts. Worst case basis, although I
Speaker 1: can't imagine Cohen saying this to the Washington Post, But
Speaker 1: you know, how much, hey, how much no no Access
Speaker 1: Hollywood tape? How much that's not some huge crime against
Speaker 1: the state. Maybe they're gonna say it's a a federal
Speaker 1: election committee violation or commission violation. But the warrant is
Speaker 1: the first indication your cornery seeing an investigators suspect there
Speaker 1: was any effort to suppress the tape. Can we just
Speaker 1: all all the sake of moment here? What a joke
Speaker 1: this whole thing has turned into. Do you have a
Speaker 1: special counsel who is looking into communications surrounding a tape
Speaker 1: where Trump was talking about how he likes to be
Speaker 1: sexually aggressive towards women and you know, a little bit
Speaker 1: of locker room talking or not the stuff you'd want
Speaker 1: to say in front of your in front of your
Speaker 1: mom or your daughter. But you know, that's what this
Speaker 1: is all about. Now the Access Hollywood tape has become
Speaker 1: a part of the Special Council. We have a multimillion
Speaker 1: dollar crack team of ferocious prosecutors and they're looking for
Speaker 1: information about a what was really just an October surprise
Speaker 1: that you know that that the media was hoping would
Speaker 1: cost Trump the election. And I would also note they
Speaker 1: had no problem just just Deep six and Billy Bush's
Speaker 1: career over that one too. You know, sorry, I gotta
Speaker 1: gotta ruin your life. But if it hurts Trump, that's
Speaker 1: the out of fude. But everything though, if it shreads
Speaker 1: the constitution, but it hurts Trump. It's fine if it
Speaker 1: destroys due process, but it hurts Trump. It's fine if
Speaker 1: it shows that we have no morals, no ethics, no
Speaker 1: sense of fair player good faith, but it hurts Trump.
Speaker 1: You know, you can fill in the blank. This is
Speaker 1: where we are now. At least the dirsh is out
Speaker 1: there making the case and trying to tell folks that
Speaker 1: this is not this is not okay, it's not the
Speaker 1: way it's it's supposed to be. What we're seeing is
Speaker 1: a bifurcation of the investigation. I think Mueller has now
Speaker 1: acknowledged that he doesn't have the authority to look into
Speaker 1: uh Mr Donald Trump's pre presidential activities, and so he's
Speaker 1: filtered that off and given that to the Southern District
Speaker 1: of New York, which is now going to investigate those
Speaker 1: aspects because apparently they couldn't find anything substantial. When it
Speaker 1: comes to the president's exercise of his article to authority,
Speaker 1: the president had the right to fire a COMI, he
Speaker 1: had the right to determine what was to be investigated.
Speaker 1: He would have the right to pardon, though I don't
Speaker 1: think it would be a wise thing to do at
Speaker 1: this time. But they're now moving some of the case
Speaker 1: over to the Southern District to look into some other
Speaker 1: matters regarding his lawyer, his private activities, uh, some negotiated settlements.
Speaker 1: That seems like a subterfuge by which Mueller uh doesn't
Speaker 1: have the authority, so he gives it to somebody else,
Speaker 1: gives them the information. It's like laundering information to another
Speaker 1: prosecutor authority. Laundering information to prosecutorial authority. Professor jersh Wood
Speaker 1: says there, why would any special council do that unless
Speaker 1: they had a vendetta against the person who's a subject investigation.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, and I do think this is this
Speaker 1: needs to be brought up. The special counsel's authority and
Speaker 1: a special council's basis is not to investigate Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: I feel like we've just been uh the media has
Speaker 1: been trying to brainwash us or just create a climate
Speaker 1: where we all accept that this has just turned into
Speaker 1: an endless investigation of the sitting president by federal prosecutors.
Speaker 1: That's actually not what they were authorized to do. They're
Speaker 1: authorized to look into Russian interference in the election. That
Speaker 1: is their authorization. It is not just to investigate Trump
Speaker 1: and anyone who's ever talked to him. I would also
Speaker 1: note that, you know, you you take this to the
Speaker 1: absurd lengths of what is possible, and then you understand
Speaker 1: better why people like me get so angry about these orguments, Like, well,
Speaker 1: they're allowed to do this. Well, yeah, you know, technically
Speaker 1: a a prosecutor could keep coming up with theory after
Speaker 1: theory of why they have to keep investigating you once
Speaker 1: they've opened a case. Right, well, we have to look
Speaker 1: at this, We have to look at that, we have
Speaker 1: to look at They can drag this out for really
Speaker 1: as long as they want, even easier. Why aren't people
Speaker 1: more upset by the way about Tax Week producer Mike,
Speaker 1: I don't understand. I'm ready to take boxes of of
Speaker 1: t that I haven't paid the proper you know, excise
Speaker 1: taxes on or whatever, and throw them into the harbor.
Speaker 1: I do it in Philly, I do it in Boston.
Speaker 1: I do it here in New York. I'm very upset
Speaker 1: about this whole tax situation. People don't get upset about
Speaker 1: it though, now, Like, yeah, we're all just like bleating
Speaker 1: sheep walking around paying our taxes, paying our taxes. I
Speaker 1: had I had a discussion with a friend recently I said,
Speaker 1: you know she's all and she's like, oh, I'm back
Speaker 1: my refund. No, you want to talk about Nancy Pelosi's
Speaker 1: crumbs your refund, My friends, those are the crumbs because
Speaker 1: it was your cake that they've already taken. They're just
Speaker 1: giving you back the crumbs. Where's Pelosi when we need
Speaker 1: her busy making cake somewhere else? Ah, people should be
Speaker 1: much more upset about the tax situation there. But the
Speaker 1: I r S could basically investigate you forever. I know,
Speaker 1: I could probably have an I r S former I
Speaker 1: R S person call in or whatever and say, no, no, Buck,
Speaker 1: we can't I I I know stories they basically can. Okay,
Speaker 1: they can just keep it going. I need to see
Speaker 1: this year's receipts in that year, and this year and
Speaker 1: that year. They go back for seven years. How long
Speaker 1: do you think that'll take if they wanted to. These
Speaker 1: people were saying, oh, well, Mueller has the authority to
Speaker 1: do this. You know, if you have someone who's a
Speaker 1: who's acting in bad faith and using the power that's
Speaker 1: given them by the state in bad faith, your protections
Speaker 1: are a lot flimsier than you think they are. It's
Speaker 1: not that hard to get to get warrants for all
Speaker 1: kinds of stuff, and to look at it and then
Speaker 1: to look, we're talking about a world in which an
Speaker 1: opposition document that you or I could have written basically
Speaker 1: ended up being the basis for a fize a warrant
Speaker 1: against a presidential campaign during a U S election. This
Speaker 1: is the world that we live in now. But they're all, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, we're gonna let's look at what the communications
Speaker 1: with Stormy Daniels were, Like we're now the Access Hollywood tape.
Speaker 1: Like I said, there's really no middle ground. You're either
Speaker 1: in the bunker with Trump. You're either in the in
Speaker 1: the Trump trench, or you're part of the hashtag resistance
Speaker 1: at this point, or you can just be completely you
Speaker 1: don't care about it and you know you live off
Speaker 1: the grid and whatever. But there's not a middle ground
Speaker 1: in this political debate right now because people are just
Speaker 1: absolutely positively dedicated to ending this presidency anyway that they can.
Speaker 1: And it's it's really a shame. You know that there's
Speaker 1: a list of people that if I ever got the
Speaker 1: opportunity in a public forum, I would really verbally obviously,
Speaker 1: but I'd really go after them. Uh and and there
Speaker 1: are a bunch of a bunch of them are prosecutors.
Speaker 1: I'll be honest with you, A bunch of them are
Speaker 1: high profile prosecutors because I think they I think that
Speaker 1: prosecutors who are politicized, particularly federal, but any prosecutors politicized
Speaker 1: and acting unethically are the single most dangerous government official
Speaker 1: to any American. So that's why, you know, Patrick Fitzgerald
Speaker 1: and Comey and Muller and and I'd like to have
Speaker 1: a real, a real robust public exchange of thoughts with
Speaker 1: some of these folks about how they ruin lives. And
Speaker 1: they do so with a smile on their face because
Speaker 1: they're just partisan hitman. That's what they're doing, taking people out,
Speaker 1: taking them off the part, off the political field of battle.
Speaker 1: And that's what's motivating all this stuff with' from I mean,
Speaker 1: come on, everyone, the Access Hollywood tape, this is just
Speaker 1: a complete joke, SAP. It's not funny. We've got a
Speaker 1: lot more coming up. I will tell you about it
Speaker 1: after this break. So, oh, we all have our Paul Ryan.
Speaker 1: Paul Ryan is gonna become a P nine d X instructor.
Speaker 1: Do you hear that? I just made that up? But
Speaker 1: that's actually a great rumor. I think we should go
Speaker 1: with that. He's not gonna be Speaker of the House
Speaker 1: after this fall, though, so maybe he will earn this
Speaker 1: isn't that? Isn't that p ninet x. We wear the
Speaker 1: T shirt that's like I earned this because you're like ripped.
Speaker 1: I've never earned it, So I don't know what I'm
Speaker 1: talking about, but I pretty you know what you guys
Speaker 1: you watch infomercials. Don't make me be the weird one.
Speaker 1: I'll see We'll see who has a sham wow in here.
Speaker 1: Oh we're gonna run into a break. I gotta go
Speaker 1: be back first, though, Global Verification Network, my friends need
Speaker 1: to have the best information possible for your business, and
Speaker 1: that's where Global Verification comes in. There a background investigation
Speaker 1: and vetting company that is federally certified as a veteran
Speaker 1: owned small business. Their headquarters are here in Chicago, but
Speaker 1: they can work with you whether you're a startup or
Speaker 1: a fortune one country. They will tailor their work to
Speaker 1: your needs. No data or client information is ever off
Speaker 1: short and all employees located throughout the United States go
Speaker 1: to my g VN dot com. That's my g VN
Speaker 1: dot com or call eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: seven nine. That's eight seven seven six nine five one
Speaker 1: one seven nine my g VN dot com and tell
Speaker 1: him you heard about him on the buck Section show. Uh.
Speaker 1: The CEO, Mark Buckman is a great guy. His whole
Speaker 1: team is first class talking about my g VN dot com.
Speaker 1: The President Clari has the constitutional power to fairing. I
Speaker 1: think it would be an enormous mistake. I think he's
Speaker 1: far better off to let Mueller continue to be frustrated.
Speaker 1: The truth is, Mueller has produced nothing about President Trump
Speaker 1: and Russia. If you just look at what his original
Speaker 1: assignment was, it is a bust. It's an absurdity. And
Speaker 1: instead they've gone off trying to find ways to create noise.
Speaker 1: But in terms of what he was originally hasked to
Speaker 1: look into, Uh, Robert Mueller has come up with a
Speaker 1: big trapp zero Uh. And we ought to be honest
Speaker 1: about that. The president a relaxed focus on being president. Uh.
Speaker 1: Don't worry about Mueller. He's gonna go away. Uh. And
Speaker 1: in the end, this is gonna turn out to be
Speaker 1: a great deal of noise about nothing. So I disagree
Speaker 1: with new before I told you, But here I am
Speaker 1: actually bringing new back on in sound bite for him
Speaker 1: to agree with him. Yeah, fort House, I think he's right.
Speaker 1: I think that the sacking. I know sometimes I get
Speaker 1: a little antsy about this when I'm like, you know what,
Speaker 1: it would be too much fun to bathe in liberal tears,
Speaker 1: fire him, fire Muller. But uh, fire Muller, fire Rosenstein.
Speaker 1: It's probably not a good idea at this point. I know,
Speaker 1: I know you could yell at me, throw some tomatoes
Speaker 1: at me. I I don't think that it's the right
Speaker 1: move at this at this juncture, at this stage, Uh,
Speaker 1: maybe me can be persuaded on Rosenstein, but not on
Speaker 1: not on Mueller. And I also have to note, isn't
Speaker 1: fascinating of people who are think of themselves as constitutional
Speaker 1: scholars and lawyers and they know this stuff disagree on
Speaker 1: Can the president fire Muller? You'll read different analysis of this, right,
Speaker 1: have you've seen right people say oh he can't? These
Speaker 1: people say oh he can. Isn't this kind of a
Speaker 1: go no go thing? Shouldn't we be aware of whether
Speaker 1: or not Mueller is fireable by the President of the
Speaker 1: United States? How can this be sort of Hey, and
Speaker 1: I'm not really sure, but then again, can the president
Speaker 1: fight a war in Syria without asking Congress? Or can
Speaker 1: he blow up everything in serious asking Congress? People say yes,
Speaker 1: people say no. I guess there's a lot of uncertainty.
Speaker 1: Doesn't really doesn't really inspire a lot of confidence in
Speaker 1: our our system these days, does it? So? Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: I've got to get to the Paul Ryan stuff coming
Speaker 1: up here? Are we even here? Were real quick? Today?
Speaker 1: I'm announcing that this year will be my last one
Speaker 1: as a member of the House. To be clear, I
Speaker 1: am not resigning. I intend to fool my serve term
Speaker 1: as I was elected. You get it. We're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about this coming up here. What does that mean? Paul
Speaker 1: Ryan not not going for for another round? We'll talk
Speaker 1: about it. I want to be clear, I'm not done yet.
Speaker 1: I intend to run through the tape to finish the year.
Speaker 1: Some of you wonder why I can't just do the
Speaker 1: normal politician thing, and which is to run and then
Speaker 1: retire after the election. That is what I'm told is
Speaker 1: the politically shrewd thing to do. I considered that, but
Speaker 1: just as my conscience is what got me to take
Speaker 1: this job in the first place, my conscience could not
Speaker 1: handle going out that way, I pledged to serve the
Speaker 1: people of Wisconsin the first District honorably. In order to
Speaker 1: serve the people on my district honorably, I have to
Speaker 1: show them honestly. And for me to ask them to
Speaker 1: vote to re elect me knowing that I wasn't gonna
Speaker 1: stay is not being honest. So I simply we cannot
Speaker 1: do that. So that Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan,
Speaker 1: you may have caught this from earlier today, but jump
Speaker 1: into it together, my friends, Paul Ryan saying he's not
Speaker 1: going to run for your life, Speak of the House,
Speaker 1: just siding, just gonna You're gonna hit the fifty dollars,
Speaker 1: maybe a hundred thousand dollars, No more than that, though,
Speaker 1: because he's not Hillary Clinton selling access. But he's gonna
Speaker 1: hit the fifty dollar speech lecture circuit. Probably. Uh, I'm
Speaker 1: guessing either the chancellor of a right leaning university or
Speaker 1: the president of a major and very well funded think tank.
Speaker 1: That's what's in Paul Ryan's future. With probably some board
Speaker 1: seats at some companies, he's gonna be just fine. He's
Speaker 1: gonna be lighting his cigars with a hundred dollar bills
Speaker 1: pretty soon. Here, I think, but he's he's leaving, and
Speaker 1: people are asking a whole lot of questions. They're saying,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, to speak of the House, right,
Speaker 1: we got the whole Trump wave, the Trump agenda. You're
Speaker 1: gonna leave now, You're you're gonna leave it. You've got
Speaker 1: a Republican president, You've got a Republican House and Senate.
Speaker 1: You I want to be a part of the second
Speaker 1: half of the first term of the Trump administration. I
Speaker 1: think that strikes some people as a little m hmm. Now,
Speaker 1: I know there are a lot of people out there
Speaker 1: who are big Trump supporters who are overjoyed and and
Speaker 1: quite relieved at the notion that Paul Ryan is not
Speaker 1: going to be run anymore. Look, you know, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you this. I've heard from people who know who know
Speaker 1: Congressman Ryan. Well these there was a very nice guy,
Speaker 1: a little uptight, but very nice guy. So I'm sure
Speaker 1: he's a good dude. And yeah, I can imagine that
Speaker 1: after a while being away from your family the way
Speaker 1: that he has been, being a weekend only dad, if
Speaker 1: you had the option not to be gets tiresome. I'm
Speaker 1: with all that, but it is public service, and you
Speaker 1: are the Speaker of the House. Right, You're you're not
Speaker 1: like deputy under Assistant Secretaries assistant of Deputy under at
Speaker 1: the Commerce Department. Right, I mean this is this is
Speaker 1: kind of a big deal sort of matters. And you
Speaker 1: get Paul Ryan. Now, so we we've heard the reason, right,
Speaker 1: he's oh, I've got to be uh, I've got to
Speaker 1: be close to my family and all that stuff. Okay,
Speaker 1: what do we really think is happening here? Right? Well?
Speaker 1: What are the other what are the unspoken reason? And
Speaker 1: Trump has been very in the press conference that I
Speaker 1: know Sara Huckabee Sanders very favorable towards uh, towards Speaker Ryan,
Speaker 1: very willing to you know, to say that he's a
Speaker 1: good guy and all that other stuff, which is which
Speaker 1: I've heard is true. Um, what else is going on here? Well,
Speaker 1: let's take a little look. Let's take a gander at
Speaker 1: what has happened, and then we can get a better
Speaker 1: since maybe of what might happen or what he thought
Speaker 1: would happen, and how that would affect the decision making
Speaker 1: process here. For Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, here's
Speaker 1: what he said about his accomplishments. When I took this
Speaker 1: job one of my conditions was that we aim high,
Speaker 1: that we do big things, that we fashion agenda, uh,
Speaker 1: that we run on that agenda, that we win an election,
Speaker 1: and then we execute that agenda. I am so proud
Speaker 1: that that is exactly what we have done and what
Speaker 1: we are doing right now. We've accomplished so much since then.
Speaker 1: Probably the two biggest achievements for me our first the
Speaker 1: major reform of our tax code for the first time
Speaker 1: in thirty six years. Second is to rebuild our nation's military,
Speaker 1: and after tax reform, addressing our military readiness crisis. That
Speaker 1: was a top priority that we got done last month
Speaker 1: as well. These I see as lasting victories that will
Speaker 1: make this country more prosperous and more secure for decades
Speaker 1: to come. Yeah about that. Few thinks here. The tax
Speaker 1: cut mostly so far still right, people have gotten their
Speaker 1: bonus and stuff. But tax cuts gonna take a little
Speaker 1: while before we see what the full economic growth that
Speaker 1: comes from it is. But it's a good But that's
Speaker 1: about his mainstream down the center gops. You're gonna get
Speaker 1: on anything if the GOP has the House to center
Speaker 1: and the White House and they don't pass a tax cut. Uh, really,
Speaker 1: what are we doing? Here folks. Right, so it's tough
Speaker 1: for me to get too excited about that. Yeah, it's good,
Speaker 1: but you kind of expect that, right. You know if
Speaker 1: if you invite someone over to uh to cook a
Speaker 1: meal in your house, you know, it's it's nice if
Speaker 1: they like, pour you a glass of wine first, but
Speaker 1: you're also hoping there's gonna be food, right, It's it's
Speaker 1: not just there's gonna be a little more to it
Speaker 1: than that first step. And I think that the tax guns,
Speaker 1: while they're good, it's easy to say that's great. Um.
Speaker 1: And then the whole thing about the military readiness crisis? Uh,
Speaker 1: how do you say this without people starting to yell
Speaker 1: at you. I do get the sense that there it's
Speaker 1: military spending for some folks is never enough. Whatever it
Speaker 1: is not enough. There is a point in which it's
Speaker 1: more than we should be spending. Are we there? Are
Speaker 1: we close? We're probably close? But okay, Republicans also spend
Speaker 1: more in the military. Republicans are spending more in general.
Speaker 1: What did Paul Ryan not tackle though, let's let's get
Speaker 1: on that, or what did the Republican Party, Because really,
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House, and he's supposed to be you know,
Speaker 1: hand in glove with Trump on the Trump agenda, what
Speaker 1: do they not really get done? Well, I mean, as
Speaker 1: was making the rounds today, they passed Obamacare repealing in place,
Speaker 1: didn't become law though, they passed Kate Kate's Law, and
Speaker 1: they went after sanctuary cities, but that's also still being
Speaker 1: adjudicated in the courts, and didn't really do all that much. Um,
Speaker 1: school choice for d C. That's nice, but just DC
Speaker 1: not a lot of monumental legislative achievements in this term
Speaker 1: or you know, in the last eighteen months or so,
Speaker 1: when you finally had unified Republican government. I think it's
Speaker 1: get a little bit. I think it's a little too
Speaker 1: simplistic for Paul Ryan to walk off and say, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's been great. I already hit a couple of homers. No,
Speaker 1: you got on base. You got on base a couple
Speaker 1: of times, which is nice, but that's not really why
Speaker 1: he's you know, it's not like he's done enough that
Speaker 1: now it's all over and everything's gonna be fine. Then
Speaker 1: you get into some of the other things, Um, well,
Speaker 1: you know here fine, before I get into the other
Speaker 1: side of this, there the more and some of you
Speaker 1: who are not Paul. My problem with Paul Ryan is
Speaker 1: on immigration. He's terrible, folks. If you don't know this,
Speaker 1: he's awful. He's like, yeah, I guess like, let's just
Speaker 1: bring in the and as many guest workers as humanly possible.
Speaker 1: Let them stay here, work here, take jobs, because they're
Speaker 1: not gonna just like stay and have kids and then
Speaker 1: get benefits and they're just gonna come in, do work
Speaker 1: and leave, right. I mean, the Chamber of Commerce was
Speaker 1: pulling the strings with Paul Ryan for a long time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what was going on, whether it was directly through
Speaker 1: them or they just shared in ideology him and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, Dollar was king for a lot of the
Speaker 1: decision making about immigration. Not much I can tell you everybody.
Speaker 1: Here's here's Newt, another former speaker. I'll just I'll let
Speaker 1: him have his say about Ryan before I take the
Speaker 1: It's like the contrarian view here for the Republicans, We've
Speaker 1: got lots of talent. I think either Scalie or McCarthy
Speaker 1: would be a very good speaker. Obviously, Paul is a
Speaker 1: unique person. He's a great policy person, but he's gotten
Speaker 1: the regulation. He has now gotten welfare reformed with the
Speaker 1: President statements this week. He helped pass the big tax
Speaker 1: cut he always wanted to help pass. I think from
Speaker 1: his perspective, he's gotten a lot of things done he
Speaker 1: believes in. I think we'll find somebody who will be
Speaker 1: a good speaker in our job thenal be to beat
Speaker 1: the Democrats and make sure we have a majority. Okay,
Speaker 1: you know knew it was knew it was being generous there,
Speaker 1: which you should be when someone's now. Keep mind, it's
Speaker 1: not like he retired today or he's he's still gonna
Speaker 1: be speaking of the House until until the fall um
Speaker 1: or until early next year. But you notice there's a
Speaker 1: little bit of like, yeah, everybody's ducking out. We got
Speaker 1: other great people out. Don't worry, we got other great people.
Speaker 1: Why would Paul Ryan be ducking out here? Here's here's
Speaker 1: one version. Ryan was gonna be the guy who got
Speaker 1: blamed when I'm just gonna say it, and this is
Speaker 1: not the happy talk moment, this is not we are
Speaker 1: all gonna love this. No something. You may not like
Speaker 1: to hear this, but I keep it real. I keep
Speaker 1: it one d in the freedom hud and I if
Speaker 1: the Republicans lose the House, which is a possibility, my
Speaker 1: friends could actually happen. Uh, then you'd have a Then
Speaker 1: he'd be in the minority. And a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of those who think that the Trump agenda has stalled,
Speaker 1: they're not gonna blame Trump for that. They would blame
Speaker 1: Paul Ryan. They would blame the establishment. And there are
Speaker 1: no there are no better emblems of the of the
Speaker 1: Republican establishment than Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. They are
Speaker 1: as establishment as it gets, right. So I think Ryan
Speaker 1: is like, you know what, I'm gonna get out while
Speaker 1: things are good. Uh. And I'm sure all this stuff
Speaker 1: he said about the family is true. I don't think
Speaker 1: he was making any of that up or anything. But
Speaker 1: I just there's other things going on here too that
Speaker 1: we should pay attention to, not just because you know
Speaker 1: the speaker of the House. He's gonna be now his
Speaker 1: seat is up. By the way, I think only Paul
Speaker 1: Nilan am I right about this, is set to run
Speaker 1: for because Naylan was gonna run who from this, just
Speaker 1: from the stuff I've seen on Twitter, that guy is crazy.
Speaker 1: Naylan was gonna run against Ryan, and without any support
Speaker 1: from the GOP for when I said it all this
Speaker 1: guy is like, whoa, he's way out there. Now, They've
Speaker 1: got to put it in another candidate. And I think
Speaker 1: they're actually gonna amount to pretty serious Democrat, uh contender
Speaker 1: for that seat to make a statement against whoever the
Speaker 1: actual or it's not gonna now and whoever the actual
Speaker 1: Republican is that they that they put in there. But
Speaker 1: I think that Ryan realizes that, you know what better
Speaker 1: to remember when Michael Jordan's like left and he was
Speaker 1: at the top of his he was at the top
Speaker 1: of his game, right, and he's just like Michael Jordan's
Speaker 1: basic he was the sports equivalent of a superhero. In fact,
Speaker 1: he was even in a cartoon, a Saturday Morning cartoon
Speaker 1: that I remember with Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, you know
Speaker 1: what I'm talking about and Bo Jackson. That's right, Brandon.
Speaker 1: Uh what was it called the All Stars or something
Speaker 1: or it was the All Stars. Yeah, we're like they
Speaker 1: were I didn't even were they fighting crime or so,
Speaker 1: I don't know, but you know, basketball hockey stick and
Speaker 1: Bo Jackson in the baseball bat and they're just like
Speaker 1: being awesome. And Michael Jordan was basically a superhero. And
Speaker 1: then he decided to come back to the NBA after
Speaker 1: going to the and he was he was still still
Speaker 1: a superhero. But then he started playing for the Wizards
Speaker 1: that it was kind of like, oh, like he's has
Speaker 1: one does he's getting older and everything. It's like he's
Speaker 1: not a superhero anymore. I'm not saying that Paul Ryan's superhero.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying he doesn't want to be the guy
Speaker 1: who was at the kind of the top of the
Speaker 1: game and then all of a sudden is like coming
Speaker 1: off the bench in the fourth quarter for five minutes
Speaker 1: at a game that nobody cares about, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean, Like, he doesn't want to be that guy.
Speaker 1: And I think this is his avoidance of that possibility
Speaker 1: that we see going. I think that's the primary reason
Speaker 1: that Paul Ryan decided, you know what, I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: out of here, because he doesn't want to be the
Speaker 1: establishment fall guy if the midterms go badly, and you
Speaker 1: know what, I think that would have happened if they had.
Speaker 1: So that's my that's my assessment of it. And all
Speaker 1: of you who are like boo, Paul Ryan, I know,
Speaker 1: I know, I get it. I get he's a nice guy,
Speaker 1: but I get it terrible on immigration, as I said,
Speaker 1: I mean among the worst Republicans on it. I mean
Speaker 1: he's like, he's almost like fundamentalist open borders libertarian bad
Speaker 1: on immigration, because there's some fundamentalist libertarians and on immigration
Speaker 1: who are just wacko. Anyway, So that's my pol Those
Speaker 1: are my Paul Ryan thoughts. We'll be right back with
Speaker 1: all of his term oil, particularly this last week. Tests
Speaker 1: the President at any time about stepping down before or now? No,
Speaker 1: And I think that's an absolutely ridiculous questions. So that's
Speaker 1: an April Ryan. Who is with NPR. Who's April Ryan with?
Speaker 1: I think she's with Let me sit here, let me
Speaker 1: check as as on on air, I need to make
Speaker 1: sure April Ryan is with? Uh who is she with?
Speaker 1: I don't even know. She's a journalist, well known. I'm
Speaker 1: just forgetting who exactly she whatever, doesn't matter, Okay. So
Speaker 1: she's a journalist for one of the big outlets, and
Speaker 1: and she asked at a press conference is the President
Speaker 1: thinking about stepping down? Which I can tell you the
Speaker 1: answer is no. President is not thinking about stepping down.
Speaker 1: And I do think that there's a point at which
Speaker 1: the the questions from the media it's fair to ask, like,
Speaker 1: is this just blatantly disrespectful? You know, has this crossed
Speaker 1: over from asking tough questions to asking questions that are
Speaker 1: the equivalent of, you know, when did you stop eating
Speaker 1: your wife? I mean, that's a question, but it's not
Speaker 1: something that posed in the West wing of the White
Speaker 1: House you would expect, right that that or that you
Speaker 1: would accept, I would think, But it is indicative I
Speaker 1: think of the Trump dearrangement syndrome in its total reach,
Speaker 1: that the the Overton window, you know, the Overton window
Speaker 1: is what is considered acceptable to discuss what the realm
Speaker 1: of acceptable discussion is at any point in time. The
Speaker 1: Overton window on Trump is is constantly shifting and and
Speaker 1: it's always shifting negatively against Trump though, right, So, sometimes
Speaker 1: you can get away with a whole lot more Trump
Speaker 1: bashing in certain areas, but you can always essentially bash
Speaker 1: Trump all in all the time. And that's what you
Speaker 1: saw that Now. I would note that Ryan has gotten
Speaker 1: a lot of of pushback from this, and and even
Speaker 1: some worse stuff too. The reason why I asked the
Speaker 1: question was not about Democratic Republican It was not a
Speaker 1: partisan thing. It was a reporter asking the question. But
Speaker 1: people have gone into their tribes and some are saying
Speaker 1: that was a great question. Mostly people who do not
Speaker 1: support this president, and those who supporting this president are outraged,
Speaker 1: are angry. I've been getting death threats and we've been
Speaker 1: calling the FBI. Now, yeah, I gotta I got a
Speaker 1: couple of things to say on this, all right. First
Speaker 1: of all, anyone who ever threatens any journalist over what
Speaker 1: they say or their question is is an imbecile and
Speaker 1: and and should be a report of the authorities. But
Speaker 1: you don't make death threats against people, period, right, So
Speaker 1: I don't need to say that, but I just you know,
Speaker 1: in case media Matters is listening, let me see that.
Speaker 1: But then I also want to say this, Uh, I
Speaker 1: don't know many people who work in media who haven't
Speaker 1: gotten terrible threats. I've gotten terrible threats. All my friends
Speaker 1: have gotten terrible death threats, threats of violence. I mean,
Speaker 1: really really bad stuff. I know plenty of people in
Speaker 1: media who have had threats against their families as well.
Speaker 1: I mean, don't you get me started. I used to
Speaker 1: work I was a colleague of Dana Lashes at the Blaze.
Speaker 1: What do you think that was like for Dana of
Speaker 1: and I can talk about a whole bunch of other
Speaker 1: people in the same category of of of threats and
Speaker 1: they just thinks. I think it's a little you know,
Speaker 1: it's a little bit like, oh, I'm getting threats. And now, look,
Speaker 1: she asked a very it was a very dumb question.
Speaker 1: It was a very dumb question. Um. That doesn't make
Speaker 1: her a bad person, It doesn't mean that anyone should
Speaker 1: be mean to her, but it's a dumb question. I
Speaker 1: think it's indicative of the press cores, lack of of um,
Speaker 1: you know, underpinnings, lack of a framework for what is
Speaker 1: reasonable and rational with Trump, right, So that's no one
Speaker 1: ever would asked Obama that question or or Bush that
Speaker 1: question before him, no matter what we're talking about, no
Speaker 1: matter what period. But also you always gotta be a
Speaker 1: little when journalists start to do the whole Oh you know,
Speaker 1: I've been getting death threats. Death threats terrible, nobody should
Speaker 1: get them, but we all we all get that threats. Okay,
Speaker 1: So in this day of Twitter and Facebook, I can't
Speaker 1: even tell you know, oh my gosh, the stuff that's
Speaker 1: out there that if you're going to be in the
Speaker 1: public eye, you deal with so that that part of
Speaker 1: it I felt a little bit like, yeah, a report
Speaker 1: of the FBI, but it's not really germane to the
Speaker 1: discussion of why would you ask the president that? And
Speaker 1: the answer is because the press believe that that's a
Speaker 1: legitimate question, which tells us a lot more about the
Speaker 1: press than it does about the President. I want to
Speaker 1: talk to you about parenting, schools and elitism and also
Speaker 1: many bats amazing lineup coming up for the next hour.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. Now, I am not a parent, so
Speaker 1: I have no expertise in this matter, but I do
Speaker 1: like to pretend to know about these things. Maybe because
Speaker 1: I had very good parents, um, also just because I
Speaker 1: find the whole the battles over parenting are fascinating to
Speaker 1: analyze as an outsider. So so maybe in a sense,
Speaker 1: even though I have no firsthand experience, I'm an objective
Speaker 1: observer of how people parent their kids. Like for example, today,
Speaker 1: I may have, in my losing battle against dad bod
Speaker 1: gone to the gym and there was a woman there
Speaker 1: who this is not no, no no, it's not like that
Speaker 1: kind of a story. It's not like, hey, I haven't
Speaker 1: seen you the gym in a while. No, no, it's not.
Speaker 1: It's not a fun gym story like that. She was,
Speaker 1: you know, clearly a mom with her baby. And uh,
Speaker 1: I will say that I could tell from hearing her
Speaker 1: speak that she was also foreign but irrelevant from where
Speaker 1: but mom with a baby in a foreign accent and
Speaker 1: brings the baby into a gym where people are doing
Speaker 1: like kettle bell swings and lifting bar bells with serious
Speaker 1: weight on them, you know, a gym, Jim. And this
Speaker 1: woman had just decided to I don't know why she
Speaker 1: wanted it. And she's like putting the baby on the treadmill.
Speaker 1: I mean a baby like a toddler. Well maybe that's
Speaker 1: not a baby, but you know two years old, like
Speaker 1: has unsteady legs and needs to be kind of help,
Speaker 1: puts her on the te readmill. Like, and I'm sitting
Speaker 1: and watching this. They're like, whoa, I mean, technically there's
Speaker 1: an eighteen and over policy for the gym that I
Speaker 1: happened to be it. And the mom comes over and
Speaker 1: she's turning on the baby on the treadmill. Hold, I'm like, no, no,
Speaker 1: treadmill not a toy. No, no, this is not and
Speaker 1: I but I'll tell you I was held back because
Speaker 1: I'm like, you know what, it's not my place, it's
Speaker 1: not my baby. I'm not a parent. You know, people
Speaker 1: will say I'm being curmudgeonly, which is always a daily
Speaker 1: struggle for me. So I'm just gonna let it go.
Speaker 1: And sure, after a little while, you know, she she's
Speaker 1: scurried out of there, and everything was fine, The baby
Speaker 1: was fine. But I remember thinking to myself, like, this
Speaker 1: is not smart, right, Like this is dare I say,
Speaker 1: even as a non parent, it is bad parenting to
Speaker 1: bring your tiny toddler into a gym environment, let the
Speaker 1: tiny toddler walk around when people are swinging literally swinging
Speaker 1: heavy weights, Like I just think that's a bad move, right,
Speaker 1: I think so, and I think we can all agree
Speaker 1: on that. But people can very sensitive about criticism of parents,
Speaker 1: particularly criticism of parents from people entrusted with the children
Speaker 1: of other parents, like teachers, for example. And that's why
Speaker 1: this particular post. I guess this is continuing. You know,
Speaker 1: I like to talk about education on the show higher
Speaker 1: education college stuff or fermtive action college admissions. Well here
Speaker 1: I'm talking to you about like kids that do fingerpainting
Speaker 1: and stuff like that. Those kinds of kids and their
Speaker 1: teachers in Bastrop, Texas, which I'll admit i'd never heard
Speaker 1: of before today. Are you, gentlemen, familiar with Bastrop. It's
Speaker 1: lovely this time of year, you know, you know what
Speaker 1: a good thing about Texas is just be like, they're
Speaker 1: really into their football there. And you know what, even
Speaker 1: if it's not true, you haven't offended anybody. And there's
Speaker 1: like a chance they're like, damn right, let's see. I've
Speaker 1: learned the tricks. I know things. So in Basstrop, Texas,
Speaker 1: there's a teacher. Oh it's a So it's suburban Dallas. Okay,
Speaker 1: So it's a suburb of Dallas. I thought it was
Speaker 1: its own town. That doesn't count. That's like a neighborhood. Um.
Speaker 1: She expressed her frustration, and and this has been shared
Speaker 1: more than four hundred thousand times on Facebook, so this
Speaker 1: has gone viral. This is a teacher named Julie, Julie Marburger.
Speaker 1: She writes, I left work early today after an incident
Speaker 1: with a parent left me unable emotionally to continue for
Speaker 1: the day. I've already made the decision to leave teaching
Speaker 1: at the end of this year, and today I don't
Speaker 1: know if I will even make it that long. Parents
Speaker 1: have become far too disrespectful and their children are even worse.
Speaker 1: Administration always seems to air on the side of keeping
Speaker 1: the parent happy, which leaves me with no way to
Speaker 1: do the job I was hired to do teach kids.
Speaker 1: I am including photos that I took in my classroom
Speaker 1: over the past two days. This is how my classroom
Speaker 1: regularly looks after students spend the day there. Heap in
Speaker 1: mind that many of the items damaged or destroyed by
Speaker 1: my students are my personal possessions or I purchased myself
Speaker 1: because I have no classroom budget. Uh. Report, she goes
Speaker 1: by the way, this goes on at length, so I
Speaker 1: won't read the whole thing. Report cards come out later
Speaker 1: this week, and I'm nearly half of my students failing
Speaker 1: due to multiple missing assignments. I guess these aren't I
Speaker 1: guess they're not doing finger painting. Whoops, Wait a second,
Speaker 1: how old are these kids? Because the classroom is trashed.
Speaker 1: I gotta find out how old I assumed based on
Speaker 1: because I looked at the photos and it looks like
Speaker 1: a pack of wild animals are running around in there,
Speaker 1: and I'm trying to see Uh, I guess they're they're
Speaker 1: gotta be old enough to have homework, which means that
Speaker 1: they're not toddlers. They're not finger painting level. Um. Although
Speaker 1: I know there's some colleges now where I think you
Speaker 1: can major in finger painting. I've never heard of a
Speaker 1: profession back to her viral post here where people put
Speaker 1: so much of their heart and soul into their job. Okay,
Speaker 1: teachers are amazing, right, I get it. We all agree,
Speaker 1: fun Um. It has been a dream of mine for
Speaker 1: as long as I can remember, to have a classroom
Speaker 1: of my own. People. Absolutely, here's where we go. Here's
Speaker 1: back into the parenting stuff. Absolutely have to stop coddling
Speaker 1: and enabling their children. It's a problem that's going to
Speaker 1: spread through our society like wildfire. It's not fair to society,
Speaker 1: and more importantly, it's not fair to the cheach to
Speaker 1: the children to teach them. It's okay, it will not
Speaker 1: serve them towards a successful and happy life. All right.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you this as an out from an
Speaker 1: outsider's perspective as a nonparent hoping to be a parent
Speaker 1: in the next couple of years. But as a nonparent,
Speaker 1: I feel like kids are Bratti or now? I feel like, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, Brandon and Michael look at me, They're like
Speaker 1: absolutely kids are Bratti or now? They just are. Something
Speaker 1: has changed in our society. You know, things do change.
Speaker 1: It used to. You know, your technology changes, social more
Speaker 1: raise change. Things do change over time. And you know,
Speaker 1: when I'm in restaurants now it has become that's right,
Speaker 1: there's a little bit of get off my lawn coming
Speaker 1: your way here. When I'm in restaurants now, it is
Speaker 1: it is now almost normal for a kid to be
Speaker 1: kept quiet with an iPad, that they have the volume
Speaker 1: on at a at a restaurant, at a place of
Speaker 1: of relaxation and culinary enjoyment. Right, I don't care if
Speaker 1: it's Le cirque or if it's low Wendy's kids should
Speaker 1: be able to sit there, enjoy their food, and if
Speaker 1: they're not older to engage in conversation, at least be quiet.
Speaker 1: I'm okay with the I got a little coloring book
Speaker 1: or something because that doesn't bother me. Right, I'm not
Speaker 1: I'm not a monster, right, I'm not the demon from Frankenstein.
Speaker 1: I mean, I understand, but you can't have the noisies
Speaker 1: you can't have an iPad playing a movie SpongeBob spadrop.
Speaker 1: I'm like, I'm I'm on a date over here. Kid.
Speaker 1: You know, I know you're five or in some cases fifteen.
Speaker 1: I mean, some of these kids, no rules, no manners whatsoever.
Speaker 1: It's just too much. And I think it starts very young.
Speaker 1: And I think it's because there's a culture now of
Speaker 1: you know, you do you when it comes to parenting. No. No,
Speaker 1: there are the grumpy single people out there like me
Speaker 1: who are not parents, who I think have a duty.
Speaker 1: I think we have an obligation when parenting is not
Speaker 1: is not up to up to par in in the
Speaker 1: public square to say, you know what, take you know,
Speaker 1: little little fauntal Roy over here. You know, by the way,
Speaker 1: they all they've all got their all name like Casper.
Speaker 1: Now you know, they all have these like these literary names.
Speaker 1: It's just you know, Bartholomew Casper. You know, it's like,
Speaker 1: you know, what whatever happened? Like Mike and and Brandon
Speaker 1: and John and Tom. You know. Now all these kids
Speaker 1: have these names. It sounds like they pulled them out
Speaker 1: of a Harry Potter book, which they probably did, now
Speaker 1: that I'm saying it, out loud that that's probably how
Speaker 1: they got the name. But I think it will be
Speaker 1: better if we just all understood that it's a It
Speaker 1: is everyone's business when a kid is misbehaving in public.
Speaker 1: And to those of you who have really well behaved kids,
Speaker 1: which I know is a vast majority, it's of the
Speaker 1: people who listen to this show have very well behaved kids.
Speaker 1: Those who are parents, congrats and thank you for what
Speaker 1: you were doing, because you're really contributing to civilization and
Speaker 1: you're really keeping the tour of civilization going by having
Speaker 1: kids that don't act like little screaming monsters who think
Speaker 1: that they can throw their French fries across the room
Speaker 1: and yell and you know the whole thing. Yeah, I remember.
Speaker 1: I remember even when I was I was walking Ms.
Speaker 1: Molly's family dog, which is basically a pit bull, and
Speaker 1: like a parent came over and was like he is
Speaker 1: it friendly? And I was like, nah, I wouldn't, and
Speaker 1: like the kids were just like we're going in anyway.
Speaker 1: I was like, guys, it's not gonna end. Well, okay,
Speaker 1: I tell you. The dog is not, you know, great
Speaker 1: with adults, but it's had experiences with kids who come
Speaker 1: in like poke you in the eyeballs, like that's not good.
Speaker 1: Dogs don't like that, right. Some dogs know they see
Speaker 1: somebody who's sub three ft five and they're like, back
Speaker 1: off because they know you're over. You know, you're over
Speaker 1: five feet or so. They the dog knows you're gonna
Speaker 1: They see the little people come over who are like
Speaker 1: eight six for something like that. You know, they get
Speaker 1: a little growl and the parents go, and I'm like,
Speaker 1: I told you, don't bring the kids too close to
Speaker 1: stuff I deal with, right, you know, it's just I
Speaker 1: want to bring it back down the sun and bring
Speaker 1: it back down a neutral. Cool the jets for a
Speaker 1: second here, um, and we're gonna I'm sorry. The kid
Speaker 1: in the gym today was just too much. I couldn't
Speaker 1: believe it. I couldn't believe it. And so I'm with
Speaker 1: this teacher who's freaking out. And you know, is she
Speaker 1: a drama queen? I don't know. I don't know her personally,
Speaker 1: but I like her post where she's just like people
Speaker 1: spoil their kids, don't spoil your kids. That's the you know.
Speaker 1: And this is a this is a group effort, folks. There,
Speaker 1: I say, it takes a village like a Remember she
Speaker 1: wrote that book a long time. It takes a village.
Speaker 1: Takes a village to keep your kids from acting like
Speaker 1: little monsters. All right, we'll be back. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: I want to take on school eliteism here for a second.
Speaker 1: I mean at the college and and graduate level. So
Speaker 1: there's a story out there about Michael Cohen, who who's
Speaker 1: pulse your poles? Who's poles? That guy? Because his office
Speaker 1: got rated by the FBI, And I think this whole
Speaker 1: thing is an absolute sham. I think it's a disgrace.
Speaker 1: He knows he listened to the show. No, I am very,
Speaker 1: very fired up about it. But people have been poking
Speaker 1: around more to find out more about this Cohen fellow
Speaker 1: and Red State, which is a site um that is
Speaker 1: owned I believe, or was I think it was owned
Speaker 1: by Eric Ericson, who I know from from work stuff.
Speaker 1: Red State had a piece up that Trump lawyer Michael
Speaker 1: Cohen got his law degree from literally the worst law
Speaker 1: school in the country or the worst law school in
Speaker 1: the country is what was written here. And now I
Speaker 1: understand that people are going to look at this. There's
Speaker 1: a little bit of a ha ha because he didn't
Speaker 1: get it from not a fancy school. They're not saying
Speaker 1: he didn't go to Harvard or Yale or you Michigated.
Speaker 1: There are some state schools that are phenomenal law schools, right,
Speaker 1: but you no, no, no, this is apparently the worst
Speaker 1: of the worst in terms of accredited law schools. Uh.
Speaker 1: And we're supposed to take from this. There's a little
Speaker 1: bit of just uh, you know, isn't this kind of funny?
Speaker 1: The president's top lawyer is not exactly an intellectual heavyweight.
Speaker 1: But but I wanted to push back on this a
Speaker 1: little bit. And I'm getting actually a little help, uh
Speaker 1: to that degree, because I say this all the time.
Speaker 1: I came from a background where I went to a
Speaker 1: high school on a full scholarship. It's called Regious High
Speaker 1: School here in New York City, and it's a really
Speaker 1: amazing place. Everyone goes for free. It's a completely private school.
Speaker 1: Everyone goes for free. They have their own test, standardized
Speaker 1: tests that they administer. It's their test, and then they
Speaker 1: have an interview portion as well, um, and and they
Speaker 1: just make their own decisions. It's run by an endowment
Speaker 1: and by people who give money who went there. That's
Speaker 1: it doesn't get any other funding, and it's a really
Speaker 1: interesting place in a lot of ways. But one of
Speaker 1: the things that I saw there and came to know
Speaker 1: is that unlike some of the New York kids that
Speaker 1: I grew up around who had parents who went to
Speaker 1: fancy schools, because legacy is a very big thing even still,
Speaker 1: especially at these Ivy League schools and equivalents, but a
Speaker 1: lot of the kids that I knew were just a
Speaker 1: lot of my friends, my classmates, most of them, almost
Speaker 1: all of them in high school. We're middle to what
Speaker 1: you'd call working class, middle to working class in terms
Speaker 1: of their their household income and all that. And they
Speaker 1: were brilliant kids, and they were really hard working, and
Speaker 1: they would go wherever they could get the most money
Speaker 1: to go. So I knew kids who were like on
Speaker 1: the same level as someone who could go to UH.
Speaker 1: I don't know, a swath More Cornell, which as we know,
Speaker 1: is like the fake IVY. But that's a whole other discussion.
Speaker 1: That's right, Cornell. People at me, come at me. But
Speaker 1: you know, people could have gone to a schools of
Speaker 1: those caliber in terms of the admissions rate, but they
Speaker 1: went to UH State school instead, or they went to
Speaker 1: a Catholic university where they where they could get more money,
Speaker 1: where they had more tuition helps. It was a financial decision,
Speaker 1: but they're every bit as smart and capable, and I
Speaker 1: think you could argue a lot of them probably got
Speaker 1: better educations at the state schools they went to, and
Speaker 1: they would have if they had paid forty thou dollars
Speaker 1: forty five thousand dollars year to go to school. So
Speaker 1: I had that experience of seeing because I knew who
Speaker 1: in my class was really smart and who was kind
Speaker 1: of just And some of the super smart kids went
Speaker 1: to the not the fanciest schools. Some kids who went
Speaker 1: to the schools you'd be so impressed with weren't really
Speaker 1: that impressive, but they were like the world's best tuba
Speaker 1: player or something. Fun. Fact, my college roommate my first
Speaker 1: year was actually a tuba player, which that's that's something
Speaker 1: that you gotta lived with. So this pushback on Michael
Speaker 1: Cohen as a lawyer, Look, I'm not some big Cohen defender,
Speaker 1: but I saw something really interesting from Twitter account Thomas Crown.
Speaker 1: He's a lawyer. I don't know his background, don't know
Speaker 1: the guys falling on Twitter, And here's here's the thread
Speaker 1: that he wrote on Twitter about this, and I think
Speaker 1: this is important. I think it's applicable way beyond uh
Speaker 1: just the case of Michael Cohen, right, or law school.
Speaker 1: I think there is applicable in general. I think everyone
Speaker 1: should know this, he writes. As Rump shaker Sarah Rum,
Speaker 1: who wrote the piece on on Michael Cohen, notes Thomas Cooley,
Speaker 1: that's the law school is considered the worst of the
Speaker 1: worst with honors, sir, and it has been for decades.
Speaker 1: It accepts almost everyone has an eighty six percent exepence right,
Speaker 1: which for a law school is basically everyone. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you're not a convicted felon, you can pretty much go.
Speaker 1: It means entry scores are miserable. All the indicators of
Speaker 1: success and the practice of law are not required to enter.
Speaker 1: This is all from Thomas Crown. Now quote law students
Speaker 1: and lawyers from other schools tend to mock it, and
Speaker 1: rightly so. For a few years I litigated against a
Speaker 1: guy who graduated towards the bottom of his class. There. Uh,
Speaker 1: he failed multiple times, and then he says he was unique.
Speaker 1: But Thomas Cooley has or had when I cared to look,
Speaker 1: a brutal failure and dropout rate. This is largely driven
Speaker 1: by the skills and so much else brought by those
Speaker 1: who get in there, but it's driven by other things too,
Speaker 1: and one of them is or was, an academically brutal environment.
Speaker 1: Unlike many of the many, if not most, top tier
Speaker 1: law schools, exams are not open book. There is no
Speaker 1: curve at Thomas Cooley, and the school knows at churns
Speaker 1: and burns students. If you got an A in real
Speaker 1: property in my law at law school, this guy went
Speaker 1: to a fancy one. You had a working grasp of
Speaker 1: a lot of theory and a well marked up book.
Speaker 1: If you've got an A and real property at Thomas Cooley,
Speaker 1: you not merely knew the rule against perapetuities. You could
Speaker 1: not merely apply it. You could generate a law school
Speaker 1: question about it and write the rubric for it. A
Speaker 1: friend was top of his class at the end of
Speaker 1: his first year law school and promptly transferred to a
Speaker 1: top twenty five where he finished at the top of
Speaker 1: his class, from Thomas Cooley because he said, this is
Speaker 1: so much easier, uh, he said, and then he goes on.
Speaker 1: An old lawyer are sometimes meant who passed away a
Speaker 1: decade ago. Usually give all the polished, bright things at
Speaker 1: a m law A hundred firms headaches with this joke.
Speaker 1: What's the difference to a trial lawyer and a litigator?
Speaker 1: A trial lawyer tries cases. A litigator has so much
Speaker 1: paper he can't get it up into the courtroom, so
Speaker 1: he has to settle on the courthouse steps. Point here
Speaker 1: is at the top of their class. Kids at Thomas
Speaker 1: Cooley are scrappers. They tend to be harder on neglive
Speaker 1: from school, not as polished, but much much more compelling
Speaker 1: on their feet in a courtroom. This guy is saying
Speaker 1: is that the crucible, my friends, matters. Skills matter, great determination,
Speaker 1: that all matters a heck of a lot for professional success.
Speaker 1: And yes, it matters in your academic environment too. We
Speaker 1: have been put up, We've been putting this culture where
Speaker 1: all the obsession, the obsession with degrees and the fancy
Speaker 1: school and all did you get into this school? You're
Speaker 1: into that school? Where do you go to school? It's
Speaker 1: I think we're finally moving away from it as we
Speaker 1: should some of and I mean this, and I am
Speaker 1: I am not in any way trying to you know,
Speaker 1: play play along here play game. Some of the smartest
Speaker 1: people I have ever worked with, uh in media, never
Speaker 1: graduated from college or even went to college. And some
Speaker 1: I mean I worked for Glenn Beck. Glenn never went
Speaker 1: to college. Guys, you know, practically was his own country
Speaker 1: for a while in terms of you know, his influence
Speaker 1: and how much money he's making everything else. I mean
Speaker 1: Glenn's grade, right, never went to college. I go down
Speaker 1: a whole list of people and I never went to
Speaker 1: college and incredibly successful. And then I look at other people.
Speaker 1: I know, people I worked with in government, some of
Speaker 1: the smartest analysts I came across state school. But you
Speaker 1: know what, they had to make it in state school.
Speaker 1: They had to study hard, they had to get the grades.
Speaker 1: Couldn't just rely on mumsian daddy to make it all
Speaker 1: happen for them. So I just don't you know, And
Speaker 1: I know where everyone's having a laugh at Cohen going
Speaker 1: to a crappy law school. But don't forget it that
Speaker 1: the school doesn't matter. You matter, and what you do
Speaker 1: there and what you learn, that's what really makes the difference.
Speaker 1: All Right, We'll be right back, team, stay with me. Look,
Speaker 1: I'm all in favor of enabling people to defend themselves. Obviously,
Speaker 1: I'm a big advocate of and defender of the Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: and I just believe that that we all have an
Speaker 1: inherent right to self defense and that the government should
Speaker 1: never just take that away from us because it feels
Speaker 1: like it or on some kind of whim. But there
Speaker 1: are some things that are just not gonna cut it.
Speaker 1: There are some things that just aren't gonna aren't gonna
Speaker 1: make it uh worth worth your while to try. We've
Speaker 1: seen recently when people have been talking about ways that
Speaker 1: we can have teachers prepared to defend their students. You
Speaker 1: had a few weeks ago buckets of rocks distributed, right,
Speaker 1: which you know you're you're counting on a lot there.
Speaker 1: First of all, uh, somebody having good aim with the
Speaker 1: rock that they're throwing, a good arm, and and also
Speaker 1: being able to get to those rocks. I mean, unless
Speaker 1: you've got Nolan Ryan in his heyday as a teacher,
Speaker 1: I don't think the bucket of rocks option is all
Speaker 1: that useful a way to go. I think that's pretty
Speaker 1: clear right in fact that I think there's a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of things you could think of that would be
Speaker 1: much more effective than a bucket of rocks. But that's
Speaker 1: not even the dumbest. We should We could almost give
Speaker 1: out awards for this. That's not the dumbest idea of
Speaker 1: school district has had um short of doing drills where
Speaker 1: they have the teacher throw their stapler. I mean you
Speaker 1: could do that, right, stapler's nine string nine stapler. Only
Speaker 1: some people will catch that reference. But you know what,
Speaker 1: the people who do, they're the real heroes. Heroes. Staper
Speaker 1: took me Staper. Yeah, I'm gonna have to anyway. Some
Speaker 1: people will catch it, and those are my Those are
Speaker 1: my brothers and sisters for life. And the rest of
Speaker 1: you who don't catch it, you're also our brothers and
Speaker 1: sisters for life. But the worst idea of all, I think,
Speaker 1: and this is worse than rocks. Many baseball bats. They're
Speaker 1: getting out many baseball bats to teachers in Mill Creek
Speaker 1: Township in Pennsylvania. And they actually Fox News actually got
Speaker 1: the the superintendent to go. I was like, well, it's
Speaker 1: a last resort and it's a dangerous world we lived.
Speaker 1: But sure enough, it's like, okay, can we break this down?
Speaker 1: There are several levels of wow here. Uh. First of all,
Speaker 1: the thing that strikes me is not is not just
Speaker 1: that this is idiotic, but also there's a specific idiocy
Speaker 1: with why not just a baseball bat? Why a mini
Speaker 1: baseball bat? And when I thought about this, because by
Speaker 1: the way, who has it? Do you have a mini
Speaker 1: baseball bat? He Actually, you're like a Phillies fan. Probably
Speaker 1: you probably have a collection of them. You and your
Speaker 1: Phillies friend weirdos probably have like a whole room with
Speaker 1: just many Phillies bats. And with the Flyers, you probably
Speaker 1: got those like sticks from the Flyers. That's what they
Speaker 1: call it, right, a hockey stick. I never watched hockey.
Speaker 1: I've learned my lesson, though I don't talk smack about
Speaker 1: hockey on radio. I've gotten because we have the real
Speaker 1: big baseball bats and the real big hockey there you go.
Speaker 1: Don't do many, Yeah, they don't do many in Philly.
Speaker 1: They don't go miny in Philly. What do you think
Speaker 1: this is? It is crazy? Right? Gosh not, they didn't many.
Speaker 1: They didn't many baseball bats. And like Quebec, you know
Speaker 1: that's something else, that's some foreign stuff. So in Philly
Speaker 1: they get the full bat. Plus they also put some
Speaker 1: nails into it. And you know, they spruce it up
Speaker 1: a little bit. That's a whole other discussion. But they
Speaker 1: don't even go with real baseball bats. They think it's
Speaker 1: a better idea to armed teachers with many baseball bats,
Speaker 1: which unless they're gonna do a special training where they
Speaker 1: get like one bat in each hand, and then it
Speaker 1: kind of turns into the what is it the Filipino
Speaker 1: stick fighting. I believe it's called collie. I watched a
Speaker 1: lot of martial arts movies in my day. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. You guys have no you don't even talk
Speaker 1: to yea. Yeah, it's Filipino martial arts, two sticks, same time.
Speaker 1: It's actually pretty cool, and you see people doing it.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna get an email from somebody guarantee guaranteed any
Speaker 1: martial art that I give a call out to on
Speaker 1: this show. As long as I've been doing the show,
Speaker 1: someone's like, well, like, I'm a I'm a ninth degree
Speaker 1: black belt in Savat, the French art of kickboxing that
Speaker 1: combines ballet leg moves with Western style boxing. It's a
Speaker 1: real thing. They've even made a couple of bad martial
Speaker 1: arts movies about it, which is why I know about it,
Speaker 1: because I saw there's a whole other there's a whole
Speaker 1: other genre folks will have to explore together, which is
Speaker 1: eighties circle early nineties, but really eighties action movies. Like
Speaker 1: if you want to talk about Jeff Speakman in The
Speaker 1: Perfect Weapon, I've seen that movie many times. Like that
Speaker 1: was one all of a sudden, all these kenpo karate
Speaker 1: schools or over together. It's like, it's not just karate,
Speaker 1: it's kempo karate. It's like, oh, well, in that case,
Speaker 1: the spin kick is gonna work anyway. Mini bats not
Speaker 1: not a good not an effective tactic, not an effective technique. Uh.
Speaker 1: This funniest thing is they're not even giving him full bats.
Speaker 1: I mean a bat. Yeah, that'll work. You gotta get
Speaker 1: really close to somebody, at least a bat. You got
Speaker 1: a shot a mini bat. It's like ding stop it.
Speaker 1: Mini bad is for when somebody's like being naughty in detention.
Speaker 1: All right, we got roll call coming up? Stay with me.
Speaker 1: What the heck happened with Connor McGregor. By the way,
Speaker 1: I saw the headline a few days ago and and
Speaker 1: now today I actually he was like, you know, what,
Speaker 1: what did this guy do? I figured that it must
Speaker 1: be some kind of UFC stunt, But no, he actually
Speaker 1: just like freaked out and threw a metal trolley or
Speaker 1: dolly dolly trolley would be really hard. That would be
Speaker 1: the hulk to do that, right, because that's a large
Speaker 1: it's like a train car. A dolly is what you
Speaker 1: carry luggage. And he threw a metal dolly through the
Speaker 1: window of a van actually hurt some people, uh, injured
Speaker 1: a UFC fighter. Brandon did he was the guy able
Speaker 1: to fight the next day or not? He was not? Oh,
Speaker 1: you don't know. Okay, we're not sure. I should have
Speaker 1: found that out for went on air. But whatever, the
Speaker 1: point is, guys obviously got a bit of a bit
Speaker 1: of a screw loose. And on top of that, he
Speaker 1: does remind me the most, though, of the Brad Pitt
Speaker 1: character from Snatch. It's almost like that character was made
Speaker 1: real with Connor McGregor. You know, I thank you fire,
Speaker 1: you know, like and you don't really understand what he's saying.
Speaker 1: I thought they made all that stuff up for the
Speaker 1: movie Snatch, by the way, where he's got this weird
Speaker 1: like Irish uh what do they call it? The traveler
Speaker 1: used to be called gypsy. They don't like that Irish
Speaker 1: traveler language. Uh, when in fact that is what they said.
Speaker 1: They do sound like that. I've since seen documentaries where
Speaker 1: they speak that way and and underground boxing is a
Speaker 1: big thing for them. Connor McGregor though not exactly doing
Speaker 1: underground boxing because I think he's worth like a hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars now after his rather disappointing fight with Floyd Mayweather.
Speaker 1: So I just was surprised. I watched the video today,
Speaker 1: I was like, what is this guy doing? Why? Why
Speaker 1: do that? That doesn't make sense. I remember many years ago,
Speaker 1: I knew I knew a guy who knew a guy
Speaker 1: who got a little mouthfie in a bar with someone
Speaker 1: and there was some kind of a scrap and he
Speaker 1: uh hit. I wasn't there, but as the stories told me,
Speaker 1: he hit somebody in the side of the head with
Speaker 1: the Heineken bottle and actually the bottle partially shattered and
Speaker 1: a piece of glass got in the guy's eye that
Speaker 1: he hit. He went to Rikers Island for eighteen months
Speaker 1: for that, which is a very notorious prison here in
Speaker 1: New York City. So anytime you're because because that's what
Speaker 1: the dolly got thrown through the window and the glass
Speaker 1: shattered and actually hit this cut up this UFC fighter
Speaker 1: who's sitting there. Anytime you're assaulting someone and there's broken
Speaker 1: glass involved, very very bad idea. Also just a bad
Speaker 1: idea to assault people. Important safety tip with that, let's
Speaker 1: get into some rock call. It's time for roll call.
Speaker 1: Spring carts now swing swing dancing, isn't that with the
Speaker 1: right What was zoot suit riot? That was a thing, Brandon,
Speaker 1: you're DJs. You know about these guys they Big Dad
Speaker 1: Voodo Daddy. But also what what was the one were
Speaker 1: they that be who was remember for a while like
Speaker 1: swing dancing, the movie Swingers that had swing dancing. There
Speaker 1: was one band was it was that? The one that
Speaker 1: was really popular for like six months in a It
Speaker 1: was them y Big Bad Voda Daddy. Yeah. Yeah, all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, everybody who was wearing uh, you know,
Speaker 1: wearing the fedoras and zoot suits and there zoot suit right,
Speaker 1: that's right, that's right. So anyway, yeah, man, we could
Speaker 1: bring it back. Yeah, groovy tunes. Listen to my groovy tunes. Man,
Speaker 1: all right, into the Facebook box here speaking of important things.
Speaker 1: Terrible transition, Buck, but it's late in the show. Uh oh,
Speaker 1: I want to get to the emails first, I would
Speaker 1: I would like to note that if you want to
Speaker 1: be a part of roll Call, all you have to
Speaker 1: do is send us an email, and you can do
Speaker 1: so rather easily by writ into official team Buck at
Speaker 1: gmail dot com. That is Official Team Buck at g
Speaker 1: mail dot com. Next up here or first up here?
Speaker 1: Rather we have uh Rain, cool name who writes, Hi Buck.
Speaker 1: I love the show and I tell everyone to check
Speaker 1: it out at I heart Live or via your podcast
Speaker 1: on iTunes. Well, thank you, Rain, You're very kind and
Speaker 1: that is very much appreciated. You mentioned you just finished
Speaker 1: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and you were wondering why the creatures
Speaker 1: always depicted as a mumbling monster in the movies that
Speaker 1: you picture him reciting Shakespeare and holding conversations. And a
Speaker 1: show that depicted the monster beautifully, where he recited the
Speaker 1: great works and poetry, appreciated art and beauty, and engaged
Speaker 1: in conversation. Is Penny dreadful? The actor truly brings such
Speaker 1: depth and emotion to what has previously been a flat
Speaker 1: roll shields high Rain. Uh, well, Rain, let me say yes,
Speaker 1: I agree. I saw that Penny Dreadful and I thought
Speaker 1: it was excellent and also although the last season that
Speaker 1: kind of got off the rail. But I do remember
Speaker 1: the character of the Frankenstein Monster, the demon as Dr
Speaker 1: Frankenstein calls him, is very eloquent and thoughtful and interesting
Speaker 1: and not you know, that's right, I mean Brandon. When
Speaker 1: you think of Frankenstein, it's a lot of like and
Speaker 1: he moves kind of slow, and he's got the bolts
Speaker 1: in the neck and that's just a somehow. What is
Speaker 1: Some people consider Mary Shelley's Frankenstein one of the greatest
Speaker 1: novels of all time. I'm not in that category, but
Speaker 1: I have read that on those lists on the internet.
Speaker 1: Uh but what was a novel with with really beautiful writing,
Speaker 1: and it was early on in what would become the
Speaker 1: sci fi genre? Got you know, basically they made a
Speaker 1: bad movie adaptation of it. This would be saying, uh,
Speaker 1: you should go read the book. I'm trying to think
Speaker 1: of bad What is? What is the worst adaptation of
Speaker 1: a book that you liked into a movie. I like
Speaker 1: the book Bonfire the Vanities because it captured a certain
Speaker 1: period here in New York City. They made a movie
Speaker 1: with Tom Hanks and Melanie Griffith that is unwatchable garbage
Speaker 1: from a best selling book, they made an unwatchably garbage movie.
Speaker 1: I'm sure if we thought about this, we could come
Speaker 1: up with a whole number of this is not an
Speaker 1: unusual thing to happen, But maybe I'll come up with that.
Speaker 1: If you have any good if you have any great ones,
Speaker 1: and by that I mean terrible ones times when the
Speaker 1: the movie uh did not live up to the book
Speaker 1: at all, you can sell that to me on Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck Sexton. Oh buck Sexton's doing the
Speaker 1: row call. I like that. Other people start calling dershow
Speaker 1: it's the dirsh. By the way, I've seen that minon
Speaker 1: box a few times now. I'm like the dirsh. Hey, yeah,
Speaker 1: you're in a scrape. You're in a scrap. You need
Speaker 1: a little help. You know, the fuzz is coming after you.
Speaker 1: The five oh called the call. It sounds like he'd
Speaker 1: have like a billboards, you know by the highway, you know,
Speaker 1: accident whiplash called a dirsh. I'm sure Professor Dorsh Wos,
Speaker 1: tenured professor of law at Harvard would not not not
Speaker 1: approve of such billboards, but nonetheless back into the email
Speaker 1: box Official Team Bucket, Gmail dot com if you want
Speaker 1: to send it to us. Buck, you are exactly correct
Speaker 1: on bands. For all those who think that crazy people
Speaker 1: should be forbidden guns. Remember in the Soviet Union, if
Speaker 1: you disagreed with the government, you were considered crazy. Only
Speaker 1: a crazy person would not see the value of the commune.
Speaker 1: Nuts is in the definition, not in the head or
Speaker 1: the heart. Chuck from Grand Rapids. Uh, well, Chuck, I agree,
Speaker 1: good sir, that bands tend not to work the way
Speaker 1: they are advertised to work. So I am with you
Speaker 1: on that, and I think that I think that any
Speaker 1: time people think they're going to solve a problem by
Speaker 1: just outlawing it, they have to think a lot harder
Speaker 1: about what the real implications will be. Um. Next up,
Speaker 1: we've got John who rides Hey Buck, big fan of
Speaker 1: your show, especially the wit and sense of humor. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you, my good man. That you combine so well
Speaker 1: with your expertise on history, geopolitics, national security, culture and
Speaker 1: the mess that is our current government. It is great listening. Well, you, sir,
Speaker 1: have fantastic taste. I'm also finished with a manuscript called
Speaker 1: Joe Citizens Letter to Speaker Banter, which gives a Joe
Speaker 1: Citizens take on all the liberal insanity and the refusal
Speaker 1: of the Republican leaders to do anything about it. Being
Speaker 1: from Los Angeles, I get the overload of leftist utopianism
Speaker 1: every single day, and it burns me that the so
Speaker 1: called conservative leaders don't do enough to fight this plague
Speaker 1: we are seeing now. California sets the trends, however, insane
Speaker 1: and the rest of the loose states follow. But I
Speaker 1: dig deep into all the real nuttiness that goes on
Speaker 1: in California, and it's even worse than whatever you might
Speaker 1: read about. This is an exerpt. Oh he sent me
Speaker 1: an exerpt. Okay, well, I can't read the whole excerpt
Speaker 1: on Artis's long but thank you John for sending me this.
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. And let's get whoops, I just I
Speaker 1: just lost my inbox? He lost it? Fuel are fuel Er,
Speaker 1: I'm finding I'm fine. There, give me one second? Where
Speaker 1: did it go? One more? Here? This one from Cindy.
Speaker 1: She writes, I'm with you about cruise ships. Well, of course,
Speaker 1: and you're also a person of exquisite taste and understand
Speaker 1: that cruise ships are generally not a good idea in
Speaker 1: my opinion. Look, it's an opinion thing. Some people like picnics.
Speaker 1: I say, why do you want to eat on the
Speaker 1: ground and not have access to refrigeration? You know I'm
Speaker 1: not I'm not down with picnics whatever. I think very overrated. Right,
Speaker 1: you carry all your food? What happens you forgot? Oh
Speaker 1: you forgot the mayo? Tough, no mayo for you. You're
Speaker 1: on a picnic. You walked all the wayut in the
Speaker 1: middle of that field, right, Not a picnic person. Not
Speaker 1: a cruise ship person. You're not a tent person either.
Speaker 1: I what do you mean like sleep in a tent? Oh?
Speaker 1: I grew up doing camping. Don't even get me started
Speaker 1: on camping makes makes no sense to me. Makes not
Speaker 1: glamping I'm all about and yeah, you could say this
Speaker 1: is fru fruit buck coming out, but I don't care.
Speaker 1: Glamping I can get right. You go out staying in
Speaker 1: a cabin, log cabin, the woods. I love nature. I
Speaker 1: just don't like the feeling of waking up after sleeping
Speaker 1: on the ground and having had like a rock in
Speaker 1: the center of my back, because you know, that's just nature. Man,
Speaker 1: I don't like that part of it. So I'm no,
Speaker 1: that does not excite me. By the way, last night.
Speaker 1: I was actually hanging out with Miss Molly and sitting
Speaker 1: on the couch, and all of a sudden, my knee
Speaker 1: just started to hurt for no reason, and out of nowhere,
Speaker 1: I'm just like, ah, my knee hurts. And we just
Speaker 1: looked at each other same time, and I was like, oh, man,
Speaker 1: I needed not I need to not let that just
Speaker 1: become a thing. My knee hurts, my back hurts, I
Speaker 1: follow it in my knee. You just care like me,
Speaker 1: all right? Um. Cindy wrote that about cruise ships. She
Speaker 1: goes into some more details. She writes, as a conservative,
Speaker 1: it may seemed backwards to me, but we need the government,
Speaker 1: this government to investigate Twitter, Facebook, and Google about the
Speaker 1: algorithms and censorship and a knackt legislation to stop at Cindy,
Speaker 1: I appreciate the sentiment, but I gotta tell you, I
Speaker 1: think that almost always the government. It's gonna make the
Speaker 1: government's gonna make the problem worse. You can think it's
Speaker 1: gonna be better, but they're really gonna make it worse.
Speaker 1: That's my opinion. So we will see. And he said,
Speaker 1: thank you for all you do. You thank you, Cindy
Speaker 1: for rutting me this kind note I greatly appreciated, So
Speaker 1: that's gonna be it. From the Freedom Hut Archives of
Speaker 1: a roll call today, thank you so much for hanging out,
Speaker 1: for being with me here in the Hut. All kinds
Speaker 1: of exciting programs, plans, fiestas. We've got things coming up,
Speaker 1: so I'll bring you up to speed on them in
Speaker 1: good time. In the meantime, you are the evangelists for
Speaker 1: this show. You are the people like count on. Please
Speaker 1: tell your friends, please spread the words, say download this
Speaker 1: guy's podcast. It's on iTunes, The Buck Sexton Show. With that,
Speaker 1: we close up shields high