Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Join the conversations
Speaker 1: and message Buck on Facebook, Instagram, or email Team Bucket
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com. He may read it on the show.
Speaker 1: It's amazing to continue to watch the left in power,
Speaker 1: whether it's the Biden administration, all the enablers, all the
Speaker 1: people around it, the puppeteers as I call them, and
Speaker 1: the people in the press who are just scrambling to
Speaker 1: find ways to make it seem like this guy who
Speaker 1: is the current commander in chief is in any way,
Speaker 1: shape or form really up to this job. But it's
Speaker 1: amazing to watch them not able to make sense of
Speaker 1: that which is so clear and so obvious. In fact,
Speaker 1: they often take the wrong conclusions or come to the
Speaker 1: wrong conclusions from the most clear and most important evidence
Speaker 1: that you could see. And I'll get into exactly what
Speaker 1: I mean here in just a moment. I also want
Speaker 1: to make sure that I'm doing everything that I can
Speaker 1: to help all small businesses out there, because when you're
Speaker 1: running a small business, HR issues are a huge problem.
Speaker 1: HR issues can kill you. Wrongful termination suits, minimum wage requirements,
Speaker 1: labor regulations, and HR manager salaries are not cheap. An
Speaker 1: average of seventy thousand dollars a year. Bambi spelled Bambee
Speaker 1: was created specifically for small business. You can get a
Speaker 1: dedicated HR manager, craft HR policy, and maintain your compliance
Speaker 1: all for just ninety nine dollars a month. With Bamby,
Speaker 1: you can change HR from your biggest liability to your
Speaker 1: biggest strength. Your dedicated HR manager is available by phone, email,
Speaker 1: or real time chat. From onboarding determinations. They customize your
Speaker 1: policies to fit your business and help you manage your
Speaker 1: employees day to day, all for just ninety nine dollars
Speaker 1: a month. Just go to Bambi dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: right now to schedule your totally free HR audit. That's
Speaker 1: Bambi dot com slash buck b ambee dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck critical for your business. Have Bamby take all the
Speaker 1: HR headaches away from you ninety nine dollars a month
Speaker 1: Bambi dot com slash Buck. Nobody really thinks that Benjamin
Speaker 1: don Yahoo is going to do what Joe Biden says. Right.
Speaker 1: We all understand that I know that there's a close
Speaker 1: relationship between Israel and the US and that they are
Speaker 1: a strong ally in the Middle East on so many issues,
Speaker 1: but It's as I've been saying all along. When someone
Speaker 1: threatens you with lethal force, you your family, your people.
Speaker 1: With lethal force, you do what you have to do
Speaker 1: to stop that threat. Everything else just starts to sound
Speaker 1: like noise. Everything outside of that is a second and
Speaker 1: dary consideration at best. And I do want there to
Speaker 1: be a ceasefire, and I understand that desire, but I
Speaker 1: also know that it will come when the Israelis no
Speaker 1: longer have concerns about an imminent threat from Hamas rockets
Speaker 1: and Hamas terrorist acts. That's just the way this is
Speaker 1: going to play out, so we have to keep focused
Speaker 1: on that. But the thing for me that's pretty fascinating
Speaker 1: to watch it play out is how the left in
Speaker 1: this country manages to show us so many of the
Speaker 1: philosophical dysfunctions that they bring to domestic political issues. You
Speaker 1: see in the context of Israel and the Palestinians, so
Speaker 1: many of the misconceptions, the moral relativism, the obsession with victimology,
Speaker 1: the view of everything through a racial and ethnic lens,
Speaker 1: so much of that as apparent, And in that way,
Speaker 1: I think that this can be instructive for all of us,
Speaker 1: because you see that the left approaches everything foreign policy,
Speaker 1: domestic policy, economic issues, national security issues, applying these same
Speaker 1: intellectually bankrupt, morally rotten approaches. They use relativism, victimology, Marxism,
Speaker 1: critical race theory, which is really just a cousin and
Speaker 1: an offshoot on the family tree of Marxism. But they
Speaker 1: apply those frameworks to it, and that's how they end
Speaker 1: up with absurd things. That's how they end up saying
Speaker 1: very very stupid things and not it seems as though
Speaker 1: they're not able to figure out the most basic concepts
Speaker 1: of foreign policy. Who are your friends? Who are your enemies?
Speaker 1: Do they know? The difference? Doesn't matter? That's just start
Speaker 1: with that approach whenever you're talking abou That's just a
Speaker 1: good framework for pretty much life. But it certainly works
Speaker 1: on the world stage. Who are your friends? Who are enemies?
Speaker 1: Do they know the difference? Does it matter? Does it matter?
Speaker 1: And it seems that there are a lot of people
Speaker 1: in this country who have a strange affinity for hamas
Speaker 1: a terrorist death cult that will execute people for any
Speaker 1: number of crimes, real or imagined, that will kill people
Speaker 1: who oppose the regime with impunity, that will kill homosexuals,
Speaker 1: that will kill people for a whole range of not
Speaker 1: actual crimes. But Hamas is a terrorist organization that will
Speaker 1: determine that there must be an extreme punishment. They will
Speaker 1: throw people off of buildings. It's a mafia state with
Speaker 1: some ge hottest flavor thrown in. That's what's really the
Speaker 1: essence of Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in
Speaker 1: its orgins. This should be quite clear any of you
Speaker 1: who have been to Israel as I have no It's
Speaker 1: a rule of law, well functioning state where people just
Speaker 1: want to live their lives in peace and want to
Speaker 1: pursue their own dreams and have their own freedoms. You know,
Speaker 1: you have Palestinian members of the Knesset. You have Palestinians
Speaker 1: who have senior posts in government, and they support the
Speaker 1: Israeli efforts to stop the rocket fire from coming down
Speaker 1: all over Israel. They agree with them. I mean, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you this right now. For all my criticism of
Speaker 1: the Biden administration, if China invaded tomorrow, I'd be talking
Speaker 1: about how I want to be shoulder to shoulder with
Speaker 1: good old Uncle Joe and all the crazy Libs repelling
Speaker 1: that invasion. You know, there are some things that really
Speaker 1: do bring people together. And when you're living in a
Speaker 1: small country it's like the size of New Jersey and
Speaker 1: you are getting hit with rockets all over the place.
Speaker 1: It is very understandable in those circumstances. It's very understandable
Speaker 1: that you're going to rally behind leadership and want your
Speaker 1: national government, wants your armed forces to do everything they
Speaker 1: can to keep you safe. And yet the idiots of
Speaker 1: the American left see a moral equivalency here in some ways,
Speaker 1: or they can't seem to compute all of this. They
Speaker 1: don't seem to understand, well, why is it that the
Speaker 1: Israelis end up killing more Palestinians then Hamas ends up
Speaker 1: killing Israelis Well, because they're in this for very different reasons,
Speaker 1: trying to achieve very different ends. Hamas also started it,
Speaker 1: which is another very important fact to keep in mind
Speaker 1: as we go through all this. But for me, more
Speaker 1: than anything else, this illuminates some of the core dysfunctions
Speaker 1: of left wing thinking. Shows you why not only do
Speaker 1: they get it wrong on Israel Palestine, they get it
Speaker 1: wrong on so many things in so many areas. There's
Speaker 1: a deficiency in their approach. Here's Chris Hayes of MSNBC,
Speaker 1: who it seems to be an increasingly radical leftist over
Speaker 1: the years. He used to just be a kind of
Speaker 1: you know, shrill Beta mail, but now he actually seems
Speaker 1: to want to pose as the revolutionary of sorts. But anyway,
Speaker 1: here he is. And by the way, before I play
Speaker 1: the audio here, I want to be clear. I don't
Speaker 1: want anyone dying in Israel or in Gaza. I wish
Speaker 1: there was no violence, and I certainly don't want innocent
Speaker 1: civilians to be killed. But Hamas forces a situation where
Speaker 1: that will happen. And in fact, and there's plenty of
Speaker 1: proof of this, because they do have a cult of martyrdom,
Speaker 1: so to call it a death cult is by no
Speaker 1: means an exaggeration. You can even see there are are
Speaker 1: mothers of suicide bombers that have been interviewed of Hamas
Speaker 1: and other jihadist anti Israel entities in the West Bank,
Speaker 1: the Gaza Strip. There are interviews with the parents, with
Speaker 1: mothers even of of young boys who have been suicide
Speaker 1: bombers in Israel, and they are considered shahid, they are martyrs,
Speaker 1: and they celebrate this. They think that this was a
Speaker 1: good thing, a good idea, to go in and strap.
Speaker 1: This is from years back when this was a constant
Speaker 1: threat against the Israelis. But they would send individuals with
Speaker 1: suicide vests into a crowded cafe in Tel Aviv or
Speaker 1: in Jerusalem and try to murder and maim as many
Speaker 1: people just who happen to be trying to get a drink,
Speaker 1: trying to see friends, see family. That's Hamas's version of
Speaker 1: their their glorious resistance. I mean true evil, really evil personified.
Speaker 1: And yet Chris Hayes sits here saying, why don't we
Speaker 1: get an iron dome for Gaza play nineteen. You know
Speaker 1: there's been these images I've seen of the Iron Dome system. Right,
Speaker 1: so this this missile defense system the US partly funded,
Speaker 1: that has been intercepting Hamasa rockets into Israel, and those
Speaker 1: rockets are being fired as a Palestinia Human rights layers
Speaker 1: had said on their show last night, indiscriminately civilians are
Speaker 1: war crime by definition. And the Iron Dome has worked
Speaker 1: quite well today. Some got through. I think two Thai
Speaker 1: nationals Hasraeli died as a result. But I look at
Speaker 1: those images, I think, well, good, that's good. I'm glad
Speaker 1: that those rockets are being intercepted. And also there's some
Speaker 1: part of me it's like, can we get an iron
Speaker 1: dome for Gaza? Can the American taxpayer foot the bill
Speaker 1: to protect innocent children in Gaza, where there's two million
Speaker 1: people in one of the most densely parted populated parts
Speaker 1: of the world, so that they don't have death rained
Speaker 1: down upon them. The iron dome in Gaza is for
Speaker 1: Hamas to stop firing rockets, then they'd have a de
Speaker 1: facto iron dome because Theseraelis don't want to bomb Gaza.
Speaker 1: How does a primetime host that MSNBC not understand this
Speaker 1: because it's yet another deficiency of left wing thinking, bringing
Speaker 1: moral relativism into this, as if the situations are the same,
Speaker 1: as if there's an equivalency here between Israeli air strikes
Speaker 1: on positions that are Hamas militants, where yes, there are
Speaker 1: and will be civilian casualties that are part of that too,
Speaker 1: and the Hamas approach, which is just kill anybody you can,
Speaker 1: as many as you can go for, do it as
Speaker 1: often as possible. If there was more parody among the
Speaker 1: military capabilities of Hamas and Israel, if we were anything
Speaker 1: near that, we would just have a bigger war. I
Speaker 1: think it was Ari Fleischer who put out on Twitter,
Speaker 1: and I don't know if heat coined this or if
Speaker 1: this is a quote from somebody else, but if Hamas disarmed,
Speaker 1: the violence would end tomorrow. If Israel disarmed, Hamas would
Speaker 1: end Israel. That's the truth. These are basic fundamental understandings
Speaker 1: of the situation. So why does the left get this
Speaker 1: stuff so wrong? Because they apply the frameworks of identity politics,
Speaker 1: racial Marxism, victimology, anti colonial indoctrination. They apply all of
Speaker 1: those to this conflict today instead of just looking at
Speaker 1: it with clear eyes and saying who's causing the violence
Speaker 1: and how do we stop the violence? I think it's
Speaker 1: the media itself is finally beginning to air both sides
Speaker 1: of the dispute. Social media is doing things that you
Speaker 1: all are not able or willing to do. The images
Speaker 1: that people are seeing on social media they cannot unsee.
Speaker 1: And I think that you have changes that are going on.
Speaker 1: Things like the Tulsa riots, things like Black Lives Matter
Speaker 1: are seen as connected by a very large number of people,
Speaker 1: not just in the Democratic Party, but partly particularly young
Speaker 1: people on campuses, young people all over the country. And
Speaker 1: I think this is something that's actually happening, not just
Speaker 1: in the United States. There's a lot of pushback, there
Speaker 1: will be even more pushback, but I think people are
Speaker 1: moving in the direction of understanding that much many of
Speaker 1: these bromides. Israel has a right to defend itself. Do
Speaker 1: Palestinians have a right to defend themselves? Israel's security? The
Speaker 1: most insecure people in Palestine and Israel are Palestinians. And
Speaker 1: we talk about Israel's security. If people are people and
Speaker 1: we believe in him rights, which the United States supposedly
Speaker 1: stands for, then the kinds of things that we expect
Speaker 1: for ourselves we should expect for people, not just in Israel,
Speaker 1: but also in Palestine. Always be wary of eloquent, sophomoric
Speaker 1: bullcrap like this the bromides. He says like Israel has
Speaker 1: a right to defend itself. Yes, that is true. This
Speaker 1: is as I've said. They can try to tell people
Speaker 1: as much as they want that Israel shouldn't do what
Speaker 1: it is doing right now in response to these Palestinian
Speaker 1: rocket attacks Hamas rocket effects. Remember Hamas is the government
Speaker 1: of Gaza. So it's not like there's some little, tiny
Speaker 1: fringe group that is firing some rockets that has nothing
Speaker 1: to do really with the mass of the Palestinian people
Speaker 1: in Gaza, and Israel is just wildly overreacting to it
Speaker 1: and using as an excuse to kick people out of
Speaker 1: their homes or take territory or whatever it may be.
Speaker 1: That's not happening right now. That's not the situation. But
Speaker 1: notice that the connection made here by that Rashid Khalidi
Speaker 1: guest on MSNBC. He refers to to Jim Crow, he
Speaker 1: refers to racial struggles in this country in the past.
Speaker 1: What does that have to do with Israel and Palestine. Well,
Speaker 1: I know that the left has all these different frameworks
Speaker 1: that they applied and they say, oh, but you know,
Speaker 1: Israel is an ethnonationalist state and it's a terrible place.
Speaker 1: And I sit here and to say, how many Islamic
Speaker 1: states are there in the region. Do we ever hear
Speaker 1: them referred to as ethno nationalist states. Yeah, show up
Speaker 1: in Saudi Arabia and be like, hey, I'm a I'm
Speaker 1: a white Christian or a I'm a white Jew, and
Speaker 1: I demand, you know, equal rights and equal treatment. See
Speaker 1: how that goes for you. But we we get distracted
Speaker 1: here from the core of what's really happening, that they
Speaker 1: want to always turn this into a a historical struggle,
Speaker 1: I'll say this, or a historical debate. It does remind
Speaker 1: me of when you're in something of a toxic relationship.
Speaker 1: Some of you have maybe been through this. I've been
Speaker 1: through this. Unfortunately in life, you're in a toxic relationship.
Speaker 1: What is a sign of a toxic relationship when you
Speaker 1: try to address a problem and the other party in
Speaker 1: that relationship does not want to address the problem and
Speaker 1: just wants to bring in other things that they disapprove
Speaker 1: of or don't don't like in order to go on
Speaker 1: offense against you and avoid or even nullify the problem
Speaker 1: that you have raised. This is very destructive, right, Hey,
Speaker 1: you know I invited you to this to be my
Speaker 1: my date to the wedding, and you were two hours late.
Speaker 1: And then it's well, you didn't you know, take me
Speaker 1: out to dinner on our anniversary and you said you would,
Speaker 1: and we just had, you know, a cupcake instead or something. Right,
Speaker 1: that's toxic. That's you. You have to deal with the
Speaker 1: issue you're talking about. You can always find a way
Speaker 1: to make it about something else, to bring up some
Speaker 1: other issue and focus in on that. Here you have,
Speaker 1: you know, people that are going to try all these
Speaker 1: different historical analogies and bring up all these things that
Speaker 1: are not really about the issue at hand, and it's
Speaker 1: because they don't want to deal with the fact that
Speaker 1: this is quite clear, this is a straightforward situation with
Speaker 1: the Israelis and Hamas right now. I'm talking about the fighting.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying they're overall circumstance in the region. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know a lot of history, a lot of enmity,
Speaker 1: a lot of bad blood, and all kinds of stuff.
Speaker 1: But you fire rockets of people, they're going to come
Speaker 1: back and hit you, and they're going to try to
Speaker 1: stop you from being able to fire rockets like that. Again,
Speaker 1: They're they're not going to wait and see if you're
Speaker 1: going to be nice the next time. Basic reality of life,
Speaker 1: and if you're in a weaker position than they are,
Speaker 1: you shouldn't have fired rockets unwise. But Representative Jayapile, for example,
Speaker 1: is trying to find a way to make this about
Speaker 1: blaming Israel Play seven. Well, we condemn Hamasa's firing of
Speaker 1: those rockets, but I think you have to look at
Speaker 1: what prompted even that behavior. I think there was, you know,
Speaker 1: the continuing annexation that Israel has been undertaking for years actually,
Speaker 1: and you know, Jake I was at Kanaalakmar several years
Speaker 1: ago when the bulldozers arrived to bulldoze that village. It
Speaker 1: was stopped by an injunction from the Supreme Court. But
Speaker 1: this has been a pattern of action from Israel that frankly,
Speaker 1: has taken away the idea even of a two state solution.
Speaker 1: Has led to increased hopelessness from the Palestinian people. And
Speaker 1: I think what Hamas has done is obviously we condemned that,
Speaker 1: but we have to look at the power of balance
Speaker 1: here or imbalance as it were, and we have to
Speaker 1: put more responsibility on Israel. We condemned that, but that's
Speaker 1: the construction that you'll hear all the time. That's the
Speaker 1: construct rather you'll hear all the time from leftists on this.
Speaker 1: We have to put more responsibility on Israel. You know
Speaker 1: what Israel was doing until a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: trying to get their people back to full free life
Speaker 1: after mass vaccination campaign, trying to reopen, trying to have
Speaker 1: companies create really valuable intellectual property and prosperity for their
Speaker 1: own people, and patents and things that will be useful
Speaker 1: all over the world. That's what Israel was doing. What
Speaker 1: were they doing in Gaza? Yes, there are people going
Speaker 1: about their lives. I understand that, feeding themselves, sending your
Speaker 1: children to school, But what was the regime doing in Gaza?
Speaker 1: Stockpiling missiles to fire at Israel. Again, they can try
Speaker 1: to make this much more complicated. We can allow the
Speaker 1: faculty lounge of left wing loons to frame this however
Speaker 1: they want. At the end of the day, this is
Speaker 1: not a situation that requires a particularly adept mind to understand.
Speaker 1: All you have to do is look at what is
Speaker 1: happening and understand that there are good people and there
Speaker 1: are bad people in this world. There are good decisions
Speaker 1: and bad decisions. There is right and wrong, and the
Speaker 1: moment you just start to think in those terms, instead
Speaker 1: of using a lot of jargon and bringing in all
Speaker 1: kinds of Marxism and intersectionality, you say, Israel is going
Speaker 1: to defend itself and the Palestinian people should find better
Speaker 1: leadership than Hamas. Joe Biden came in and in just
Speaker 1: four months he's frittered all of that away, he's undermined
Speaker 1: Israel and Prime Minister net and Yahoo. He's sent over
Speaker 1: one hundred million dollars to the Palestinian Authority with the PA,
Speaker 1: which is in bed with Hamas. Hamas the terrorists that
Speaker 1: are firing those rockets you're showing right now, they've fired
Speaker 1: over four thousand rockets into Israel, and every one of
Speaker 1: those rockets might as well have Joe Biden's name written
Speaker 1: on the side of it, because it is his weakness,
Speaker 1: his appeasement, his moral relativism and ambiguity, his lack of
Speaker 1: backbone to stand up and stand with Israel that is
Speaker 1: causing this war in the Middle East. Now, Biden is
Speaker 1: certainly out of his depth and is being tested in
Speaker 1: a variety of ways and found wanting already. But I
Speaker 1: do have to say that we like to sometimes push
Speaker 1: this a little a little more as as a Biden
Speaker 1: issue on the right than it is a lot of
Speaker 1: other factors too. Now, would the mess around and find
Speaker 1: out approach of Hamas have been the same under a
Speaker 1: Trump administration. I don't think so, But I don't I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's quite accurate for Ted Cruise to
Speaker 1: say the rockets fired might as well have Biden's name
Speaker 1: on it. Biden at our southern border. Yes, people are
Speaker 1: literally showing up with Biden t shirts on and saying
Speaker 1: I'm here because of Biden. That's that's real Biden rockets.
Speaker 1: There's a that's a that's a little Ted's bush. It
Speaker 1: a little far on that one. Because here's the other
Speaker 1: side of this. At the top level, administrations, both Democrat
Speaker 1: and Republican have largely the same approach to Israel. Now,
Speaker 1: that was a bit different during the Obama years, but
Speaker 1: there was no Obama administration ending of USA to Israel.
Speaker 1: There was no Obama administry. You know. Obama said things
Speaker 1: that showed Israelis that he had a particular soft spot
Speaker 1: for the Palestinian cause as a civil rights and human
Speaker 1: rights struggle, right, said things that definitely irked people inside
Speaker 1: of Israel's no question about that. But if you look
Speaker 1: at the actions, it wasn't that different. It wasn't that different.
Speaker 1: And this is where you see a lot of Democrats,
Speaker 1: far left democrats are upset. They're angry with their own
Speaker 1: side because they feel like at the top level, the Schumers,
Speaker 1: the Pelosis, they are pretty pro Israel in their statements
Speaker 1: you know, they'll call for a need to be even handed,
Speaker 1: and they'll call for a need to ceasepart, but it's
Speaker 1: it's not really going to do anything. They know that,
Speaker 1: they understand that they're just they're just posturing. There are
Speaker 1: some who go a little bit, a little bit further
Speaker 1: than this. I mean, they love to attack Net and Yahoo.
Speaker 1: They view net and yah who as an Israeli conservative right.
Speaker 1: They viewed Net and Yah who as if the GOP
Speaker 1: existed in Israel, Net and Yahoo would be the head
Speaker 1: of it. That's the mentality that democrats have. And so
Speaker 1: that you have people like Senator Dick Durbin here who
Speaker 1: knows that he's he's not going to oppose Israel that
Speaker 1: much openly. He's not gonna say that it's going to
Speaker 1: upset not just the Israelis but Jewish American voters who
Speaker 1: also pay close attention to a lot of this commentary.
Speaker 1: You know, even friends of mine like David Harsani, will
Speaker 1: will say repeatedly and openly that they don't view anti
Speaker 1: Israel sentiment as being different from anti Semitism. They don't
Speaker 1: view that as the great separation that others do. Here's
Speaker 1: Dick Durbin talking about the policies of net Yahoo though
Speaker 1: Who he is someone who is safe for the left
Speaker 1: to attack on this stuff play too. I couldn't disagree
Speaker 1: more with the policies of Bbing Netniah Who when he
Speaker 1: comes to the treatment of Palestinians and the establishment of settlements.
Speaker 1: I think the two state solution is the only realistic
Speaker 1: future in that part of the world, and the abandonment
Speaker 1: of that approach by not netnah Who and his followers
Speaker 1: I don't believe is constructive and I think is added
Speaker 1: to the tension and stress between Israel and the Palestinians.
Speaker 1: That's the reality, and I am certainly not going to endorse. Now.
Speaker 1: Let me add very quickly, I made a commitment early
Speaker 1: in my career that I'm standing by. I am going
Speaker 1: to support the survival of Israel. Those who want to
Speaker 1: cut back on the protective missiles and such that they need,
Speaker 1: I don't join in that they live in a very
Speaker 1: dangerous neighborhood. Although I wholeheartedly disagree with amtnia Who policy,
Speaker 1: I am going to stand by my commitments to the
Speaker 1: survival of Israel. So I am mad at nan Yahu,
Speaker 1: but I stand by Israel. This is a classic establishment
Speaker 1: Democrat politician approach. You got to find something to make
Speaker 1: the squad voters, and you know, to make the AOC
Speaker 1: wing of the party. You gotta give them something. But yeah,
Speaker 1: ultimately got to stay on the side of Israel on
Speaker 1: this as a Democrat too. So there's this frustration. You
Speaker 1: see this playing out especially among some of the younger
Speaker 1: the younger Democrats in Congress who are pushing racial Marxism.
Speaker 1: The squad comes to mind, among others. The people that
Speaker 1: are pushing those ideas, they view Israel Palestine through that lens,
Speaker 1: and so they see this as an opportunity to you know,
Speaker 1: to make gains if you will, in that regard, to
Speaker 1: make the case. Whereas Dick Durbin has been in the
Speaker 1: game a long time, and you know, he says, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna stand by Israel at the end, at the end
Speaker 1: of the day. I'm with Israel, He's saying. But you know,
Speaker 1: I don't like Yahoo. He's the bad guy here. Any
Speaker 1: Israeli prime minister would react to firing to Hamas, firing
Speaker 1: thousands of rockets in this way. Any Israeli prime minister,
Speaker 1: any of them, would do this, you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: if you had Bernie Sanders as the Prime Minister of Israel,
Speaker 1: he would fight. He would have the IDF going and
Speaker 1: hunting down hamas, firing rockets, because if you didn't, your
Speaker 1: own people, you're the citizens, the people who live in
Speaker 1: this date of Israel, would think you've lost your mind
Speaker 1: and they would oust you immediately. Right, this is what
Speaker 1: are you gonna sit there and just let the iron
Speaker 1: dome keep shooting down rockets, keep shooting down rockets, because
Speaker 1: remember that's not the only thing, that's not the only
Speaker 1: effort at terrorism that comes from the Palestinian Palestinian Hamas.
Speaker 1: That's not the only thing they're trying to do. So
Speaker 1: you have to take the fight to them once they've
Speaker 1: established these hostilities. You know, it's sort of like if
Speaker 1: somebody in a bar takes a swing at you with
Speaker 1: a bottle. Maybe you're not and you're able to knock
Speaker 1: the bottle out of their head, you're still going to
Speaker 1: punch them in the face because you know the next
Speaker 1: thing that they're gonna do is take a swing at you.
Speaker 1: As I've said, very straightforward, but Democrats make this all
Speaker 1: so much more complicated that it needs to be, because
Speaker 1: they bring the wrong ideas, the wrong framework in their
Speaker 1: approach to this. They just they don't accept that there
Speaker 1: can be In their minds, the way they see this
Speaker 1: is that the Palestinians are brown, oppressed Muslim and suffering
Speaker 1: from colonialism like a colonial project. That is the way
Speaker 1: the left views the problem of the Palestinians. The way
Speaker 1: people that understand the situation of Israel today and where
Speaker 1: the country is. You've got a place that has made
Speaker 1: numerous overtures at serious peace deals that have always been rebuffed,
Speaker 1: that lives next door to a terrorist group Hamas that
Speaker 1: is the government now of Gaza, and openly says and
Speaker 1: seeks the destruction of Israel, and wants to murder as
Speaker 1: many Israelis as possible, and celebrates the shedding of Israeli blood, men,
Speaker 1: women and children whenever it can openly celebrates it. Israel
Speaker 1: has civilian casualties and its military strikes and says this
Speaker 1: is terrible. We are sorry. We try to minimize us
Speaker 1: as much as possible. Hamas says, we wish we could
Speaker 1: kill all of you. This is not the same thing.
Speaker 1: They're not on the same moral playing field, and we
Speaker 1: need to be very clear about that. But Democrats, you see,
Speaker 1: their confusion about Israel and Palestinians is very much merror
Speaker 1: image of their confusion of issues in this country. Who's
Speaker 1: the cause of violence on American streets? Police? That's absurd,
Speaker 1: that's idiotic. But where is the focus, all of it
Speaker 1: from the left? All the focus from the establishment or
Speaker 1: the establishment of the left, is on anti cop rhetoric
Speaker 1: because of police violence, even at a time we have
Speaker 1: surging homicides in this country, because they have a framework.
Speaker 1: What's the framework in this country that there is a
Speaker 1: there's a disproportionate number of people from communities of color
Speaker 1: who are shot by law enforcement, and even though the
Speaker 1: overall number of people shot by law enforcement is actually
Speaker 1: quite small, that violence is far more important to focus
Speaker 1: on by a factor of a thousand than the actual
Speaker 1: thousands and thousands of people being killed in American cities
Speaker 1: and towns across the country year in and year out
Speaker 1: that have nothing to do with police, and in fact,
Speaker 1: larger numbers of people dying because of the Democrat narrative
Speaker 1: about police as the bad guys. You see, corrupt, illogical,
Speaker 1: immoral ideas have consequences, whether you're applying it to what's
Speaker 1: going on right now in the fight against hamas or
Speaker 1: you're applying it to so called police reform efforts in
Speaker 1: this country. We should we be worried about the variant.
Speaker 1: I think we would be remiss to say that we
Speaker 1: are out of the woods. This pandemic, this virus has
Speaker 1: sent us too many curveballs to say that we too
Speaker 1: early to declare victory. Certainly with virus circulating in other
Speaker 1: parts of the world that is and high degree, that
Speaker 1: gives the opportunity for more variants to emerge. So I
Speaker 1: still it's among the things that keeps me up at night.
Speaker 1: But right now the variants that we see here, and
Speaker 1: we're doing a lot of sequencing now. Not out of
Speaker 1: the woods. Not out of the woods. This is what
Speaker 1: we have to hear now because of the variants. You know,
Speaker 1: just let it go, CDC, leave us alone. Just stop
Speaker 1: stop being crazy. CDC stop. But they won't. I got
Speaker 1: Rachelle Wilenski. You know she'll change what she says next week.
Speaker 1: Remember you were not to question what the CDC tells you.
Speaker 1: But the CDC can change its mind whenever it wants. Okay,
Speaker 1: so it's written in stone. But they'll just bring out
Speaker 1: a new stone and chisel something else on it. I
Speaker 1: see how this goes. I get it. Now. There's a need,
Speaker 1: a very clear need to do everything we can hear
Speaker 1: to get people out of this lockdown COVID forever mindset,
Speaker 1: because as you're already seeing, I think people are quite
Speaker 1: aware of it. There as a whole there are a
Speaker 1: whole lot of folks out there who don't want to
Speaker 1: let this go. There are a lot of people whose
Speaker 1: attitude about all of this is they're going to keep
Speaker 1: masking up for at least months, if not years, and
Speaker 1: they still don't think it's safe. And you see this
Speaker 1: first and foremost with the desire to continue masking children,
Speaker 1: which is I think it's abuse. I mean there's different
Speaker 1: levels of child abuse, right. I mean people will argue,
Speaker 1: you know, some people would argue there taking a you know,
Speaker 1: a hairbrush and spanking your kid with it or something
Speaker 1: you know hard is child abuse. Other people would say, well,
Speaker 1: if you know, you touch a kid's hand, do like
Speaker 1: a hot ire, and that's you know, criminal child abuse
Speaker 1: and you should go to you should be arrested for that.
Speaker 1: But this is abuse. I mean strapping a mask on
Speaker 1: a kid and saying go go play outside with your friends,
Speaker 1: go play sports, go go do competitive athletic endeavors as
Speaker 1: a ten year old or twelve year old, and you
Speaker 1: got to wear a mask. This is absurd, and I
Speaker 1: find it very troubling that there are so many Americans
Speaker 1: who are willing to go along with this, who are
Speaker 1: willing to say that this is okay. Of course it's
Speaker 1: not okay. They should know that it is not okay.
Speaker 1: So why the confusion, Why the issue? Because they've been
Speaker 1: brainwashed by the CDC, because they're incapable of thinking for
Speaker 1: themselves on this one. Because we've had so much I mean,
Speaker 1: the mass media, and it's it's what's on your TV screens,
Speaker 1: but it's also it's your computer, it's your smartphone. It's
Speaker 1: just the constant inundation with fauciite propaganda has been enormously destructive.
Speaker 1: Oh then there's Pelosi who is running around saying that
Speaker 1: you still have to wear a mask on the floor
Speaker 1: of Congress. You still you have to do it. Plate
Speaker 1: twelve members are reminded that the announced policies of January fourth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, as updated on May eleventh, remain in
Speaker 1: effect respect to the wearing of masks. The Chair will
Speaker 1: reiterate that members and staff are currently required to wear
Speaker 1: masks at all times in the Hall of the House,
Speaker 1: except when a member has been recognized by the Chair
Speaker 1: or when a member acting as Chair is speaking. This
Speaker 1: is busybody hall monitor control on steroids. You know, you
Speaker 1: don't have to wear it in a lot of other
Speaker 1: places in the Congress, but when you're when you're actually
Speaker 1: on the floor of Congress, you've got it, you know what,
Speaker 1: the cameras there, and because Pelosi says so, because she
Speaker 1: has control there and she's going to wield that control.
Speaker 1: Many of us saw this coming along, So it's not
Speaker 1: even the least bit surprising. But to see how they
Speaker 1: don't even pretend it's about disease and epidemiology anymore. It's
Speaker 1: not it's because we say so. It's because our team,
Speaker 1: your team Democrats became team mask, double mask, even when
Speaker 1: outside alone and vaccinated, double mask, because we're Democrats and
Speaker 1: it's so important to us, and we're we've internalized all this.
Speaker 1: And then the other side was why are you being
Speaker 1: so crazy? You know? Yeah, maybe there were some people
Speaker 1: on the right who were a little bit less concerned,
Speaker 1: a little bit two lax about some of their exposure
Speaker 1: to possible COVID at different times. I'm sure that's a
Speaker 1: real thing, but by and large, the conservative position on
Speaker 1: this has just been don't be crazy, follow the actual
Speaker 1: data that you have, be reasonable about what works and
Speaker 1: what doesn't. And that has been a huge problem for
Speaker 1: the left. For the Democrats, they had to be on
Speaker 1: board for all this because the moment they started to
Speaker 1: allow this is why the reversal of the mask mandate
Speaker 1: is such a big deal to them, or at least
Speaker 1: the removal temporary. I believe removal of a mask mandated
Speaker 1: from from the CDC at the federal level is so important.
Speaker 1: The moment that they have to admit that one thing
Speaker 1: is stupid, it opened up a hundred other things they've
Speaker 1: made us done as being stupid. Right when the second
Speaker 1: that they can say it's anything other than because we
Speaker 1: say so, then we get to say, well, hold on
Speaker 1: a second. If you admit that vaccinated people, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: not perfect, but they're safe enough that they shouldn't have
Speaker 1: to wear masks, why did you say that we had
Speaker 1: to wear masks outside all this time? Again? Why did
Speaker 1: you say that we should have been doing this when
Speaker 1: we go into a restaurant, but not when we sit
Speaker 1: down at a restaurant. I mean, there's a huge list
Speaker 1: of things you can point to you say, well, this
Speaker 1: makes absolutely no sense, a huge list of things that
Speaker 1: is utterly bizarre, stupid, counterproductive, arbitrary, and now we can
Speaker 1: all see it for ourselves clear as day. But Pelosi still,
Speaker 1: but yeah, you have to maskus. I said, so, Memorial
Speaker 1: Day is coming up, and so's Independence Day. Worth of July.
Speaker 1: This is a time when people start to think about
Speaker 1: how much they love this country and how important it
Speaker 1: is to show it. These days, there are a lot
Speaker 1: of folks out there. There's a lot of different institutions
Speaker 1: and a lot of ideas that try to push down America,
Speaker 1: try to make you think that you shouldn't be proud
Speaker 1: of this country. You should show that that's nonsense. This
Speaker 1: is still the greatest country, the greatest beacon for freedom
Speaker 1: and hope that humanity has ever created. We're proud to
Speaker 1: live here, proud to be a part of it. And
Speaker 1: you can show that with a display of the American flag.
Speaker 1: I want you to get your flag right now from
Speaker 1: Allegiance Flag Supply. This is a company that's all about America.
Speaker 1: Their seamstresses are located here in the States, unlike a
Speaker 1: lot of other companies that have this work done overseas.
Speaker 1: And this is just a better quality flag. A lot
Speaker 1: of the ones you'll see out there get tangled, mildewed,
Speaker 1: torn and shredded after just a few months outside well,
Speaker 1: Allegiance Flag pulled together the most important different things that
Speaker 1: they could do to make sure that these are great flags,
Speaker 1: and that's why they're going to last longer, brighter colors,
Speaker 1: more durable, and also not get all tangled up. They
Speaker 1: will fly the way you need them to. The quality
Speaker 1: of the craftsmanship is unparalleled. Right now, you should go
Speaker 1: show your love for this country, your patriotism with a
Speaker 1: flag this Memorial Day. Get it at show allegiance dot com.
Speaker 1: Just go to this website show Allegiance dot Com and
Speaker 1: make sure you use the promo code buck when you
Speaker 1: get to check out for ten percent off your order.
Speaker 1: The best American flags you're going to get anywhere, they
Speaker 1: will last, they will look beautiful, and they'll show that
Speaker 1: this is a country that we still are proud of.
Speaker 1: Show Allegiance dot Com as the website. Get your flag today.
Speaker 1: Make sure you use promo code buck for ten percent
Speaker 1: off your order. House Democrats vote in favor of a
Speaker 1: January six commission, a nine to eleven style commission for
Speaker 1: the January sixth insurrection, also known as a riot, for
Speaker 1: which people have already begun to serve solitary confinement sentences
Speaker 1: for crimes including a vandalism and trespassing. Kurt Schlichter is
Speaker 1: with us now. He is a senior writer at townhall
Speaker 1: dot com. He's also a veteran and a lawyer and
Speaker 1: a guy who knows many things. Kurt, great to have you,
Speaker 1: great to be here. The January six commission is not
Speaker 1: going to be anything other than and extension really of
Speaker 1: what we've seen in the past and situations like this,
Speaker 1: whether it's the two impeachments against Trump or the Russia
Speaker 1: Special Council probe of Muller, where this is just going
Speaker 1: to be used for propaganda purposes or am I missing something? Kurt, No,
Speaker 1: You're not missing. This is a festival of Onanism. It'll
Speaker 1: do nothing but give transitory pleasure to the Democrats and
Speaker 1: allow them to distract from President Asterisk's unbroken track record
Speaker 1: of failure, gas lines, war in the Middle East, inflation.
Speaker 1: It's like Jimmy Carter's coming back without the competence. Amazing
Speaker 1: to see how quickly things have unraveled. And I would
Speaker 1: even note that the border for me is the one
Speaker 1: that's the most obvious and direct failure of the Biden administration,
Speaker 1: as in, he changed the approach, he changed the rules,
Speaker 1: and the floodgates were open. But you name all these
Speaker 1: other things too. I mean, the economy, the economy right
Speaker 1: now should be a rocket ship that everyone feels like
Speaker 1: they're just trying to get a piece of. And instead
Speaker 1: people are really concerned about inflation, really concerned that we
Speaker 1: may stall out or even sputter and start heading in
Speaker 1: the wrong direction. And it just goes to show you.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're reliving so many of the failures of
Speaker 1: the Obama years all over again because Democrats take the
Speaker 1: wrong lessons from the pain that we the American people
Speaker 1: have to go through. Well, Buck, I think you're missing
Speaker 1: the bigger point here and why we should be celebrating,
Speaker 1: which is no mean tweets. We don't have a guy
Speaker 1: in the White House being mean to celebrities and other
Speaker 1: politicians of both parties to the extent there are two parties.
Speaker 1: We have no mean tweets, and we should be I
Speaker 1: guess I guess that should be enough. Now it's not
Speaker 1: enough for you, or for me or for our listeners,
Speaker 1: but I guess that makes us bad people. It's stunning
Speaker 1: that the journals out there are still trying to push
Speaker 1: the storyline of an insurrection. I mean, this is the
Speaker 1: It's a term they use very intentionally, you know, and
Speaker 1: I see the propagandistic effect of it. Curt to the
Speaker 1: same way that they always talked about Russia collusion, which
Speaker 1: was always fascinating because collusion is not a crime unless
Speaker 1: you're colluding to fix prices or something as a company.
Speaker 1: But this Russia collusion, there was a federal statute that
Speaker 1: they could have referenced Russia conspiracy, but they always wanted
Speaker 1: to leave it open. You know, it was all about
Speaker 1: narrative creation. So even if they didn't find a crime,
Speaker 1: collusion was almost like a willingness to think about this
Speaker 1: other crime that Trump didn't actually do you see this
Speaker 1: now with the way they used the word insurrection to
Speaker 1: make it sound like there was a real serious effort
Speaker 1: to overthrow the United States government. I mean, if you
Speaker 1: would have had you know, how many people would it
Speaker 1: really take to deal with Qann Shaman? And if they
Speaker 1: went in there and they were using there was some
Speaker 1: lethal force used as we know against Ashley Babbitt, But
Speaker 1: if there was a broader usage of lethal force against
Speaker 1: those people, the reason it didn't happen is because they
Speaker 1: weren't using lethal force. Being the protesters inside the building.
Speaker 1: How can you have it? How can you have a
Speaker 1: bloodless coups, so to speak, well with the bloods on
Speaker 1: one side, as we know, when you have people who
Speaker 1: were unarmed and taking selfies inside the Capitol building, Well
Speaker 1: you can't and you don't. And I think this is
Speaker 1: just for liberals who watch CNN, MSNBCNN, you know, to
Speaker 1: essentially kill time and distract between Biden failures. Now, look,
Speaker 1: you were in a country torn by a civil war.
Speaker 1: I've spent time in a country's tone by a civil war,
Speaker 1: and I was in a real insurrection here in Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: egged on by Maxine Waters. I'm talking about the LA riots.
Speaker 1: I served in the army for three weeks on the streets.
Speaker 1: So to those of us who are you know, adults
Speaker 1: with experience outside of gender study seminars and the MSNBC
Speaker 1: Green Room. This is not only a joke, but it's
Speaker 1: a joke in bad taste. And I think that they're overstepping.
Speaker 1: I mean, normal people look at this and they start
Speaker 1: seeing the video footage which the federal government is attempting
Speaker 1: to suppress remarkably, and they're seeing these guys saying, yeah,
Speaker 1: we're gonna be peaceful and Cobs ain't come on in.
Speaker 1: As a lawyer, I love this and I can't. And
Speaker 1: have you noticed that the feds are doing everything they
Speaker 1: can to push off these trials. You have a right
Speaker 1: through the speedy trial. In certain circumstances, the government can
Speaker 1: ask for more time, and it has it's trying to
Speaker 1: push it out. If I was representing any of these guys,
Speaker 1: and I don't do criminal law, but if I was
Speaker 1: representing any of these guys, no, no waiver of time
Speaker 1: you take us to trial. Oh by the way, under Brady,
Speaker 1: I want every foot of film you took. I want
Speaker 1: every inch of video, every single one, to defend my client.
Speaker 1: It's amazing how they've used this, They've weaponized this. It's
Speaker 1: it's a club with which they bludgeon all political opponents,
Speaker 1: now all GOP, conservative Trump supporters, everybody the insurrection. We're
Speaker 1: speaking of k Yeah, we're speaking of Kirch Schlichtor. He's
Speaker 1: a veteran senior writer or Townhall dot com and and Kurt,
Speaker 1: you know, I actually wanted you to tell us a
Speaker 1: little bit about because you said you spend time in
Speaker 1: the military when you were deployed on the streets of
Speaker 1: Los Angeles during what really did feel like an insurrection.
Speaker 1: What was what was going on? I mean, you know
Speaker 1: that this does not get the attention in in our
Speaker 1: collective historical memory that it should. What was that like? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I compare it to Capitol Hill, which looked like,
Speaker 1: you know, except for an unknown federal officer murdering an
Speaker 1: unarmed trespasser. You know, that seemed like a fairly tamed
Speaker 1: frat party. Now in Los Angeles, stuff was on fire.
Speaker 1: People were getting shot. You know, your nostrils were filled
Speaker 1: with smoke. And in my hands I had a M
Speaker 1: sixteen A one because it was a National Guard and
Speaker 1: we still had the a one fully automatic real world
Speaker 1: assault rifle and a bunch of ammo. It was serious stuff.
Speaker 1: It was real and what happened on Capitol Hill was
Speaker 1: a joke, and we need to continue to trade it
Speaker 1: as a joke. And finally some Republicans are starting to
Speaker 1: come around and treat it with the lack of seriousness
Speaker 1: it deserves. What do you make of the thirty five
Speaker 1: GOP members who voted in the House along with this.
Speaker 1: I just Democrats don't have this. Democrats don't have elected
Speaker 1: official on key issues, on important moments, decide to spit
Speaker 1: in the face of their base, of their party, of
Speaker 1: their own side. It is a constant you know, It's
Speaker 1: like the Romneyite disease. It is a constant challenge for
Speaker 1: the GOP. Yes, well, there are less of them now,
Speaker 1: but remember that the left has an advantage to keep
Speaker 1: its people in line. It has the media and the
Speaker 1: culture and the institutions, and to try and force our
Speaker 1: people over it can tempt them with the media of
Speaker 1: the culture and the institutions. I mean Liz Cheney, who
Speaker 1: represents a fraction of a fraction of Republicans, who's got
Speaker 1: a pole rating in Wyoming, that's right down there with pedophiles,
Speaker 1: is getting shots on every single media alla and not
Speaker 1: just little hits, long in depth interviews. Of course, sure
Speaker 1: there's the contrapts. Oh, the Republican Party. Now. As fun
Speaker 1: as it is to see the Democrats tongue bathing a chainey,
Speaker 1: it's bizarre that anyone could take her seriously as anything
Speaker 1: else but a puppet and a willing one. She's essentially
Speaker 1: dancing for quarters. We're speaking of Kurt schlichtor, veteran Townhall
Speaker 1: dot Com senior writer and lawyer. And Kurt, do you
Speaker 1: think do you think that there's any chance that this
Speaker 1: commission actually goes through, that the Senate would allow this.
Speaker 1: I think that we will find forty one people to
Speaker 1: block it. I think when Mitch McConnell, who is no
Speaker 1: who was not happy with the president and I'm not
Speaker 1: happy what happened on Capitol Hill, I think he understands
Speaker 1: absolutely that this is designed to be the lead news
Speaker 1: item for the next year and a half as opposed
Speaker 1: to the disaster that is the Biden administration. And no
Speaker 1: one is more persuasive than the murder turtle. Now, we
Speaker 1: all have as hardcore concervatives, we all have some beats
Speaker 1: with McConnell, that's no secret. But you got to give
Speaker 1: him his due. He is the toughest, most ruthless, most
Speaker 1: effective Senate majority leader, probably of all time. He is
Speaker 1: unbelievably good at his job, and if he doesn't want
Speaker 1: this to happen, it will unhappen. And yet the media
Speaker 1: will continue to do their own version of the January
Speaker 1: sixth Commission day after day or fine ways to continue
Speaker 1: to bring this up. And I think it's interesting that
Speaker 1: there's been so little attention paid to the fact that,
Speaker 1: you know, there was the fact that there's a video,
Speaker 1: for example, that is out there and the people have
Speaker 1: seen where you have Capitol Hill police saying Okay, if
Speaker 1: you guys are going to be cool, you can come
Speaker 1: into the building now. You know. I can tell you
Speaker 1: that if I were you know, if I were here
Speaker 1: in New York City in City Hall and I was
Speaker 1: armed by the stage to protect the building, I would
Speaker 1: not allow an insurrectionist if I really thought that's what's
Speaker 1: going on, or just walk in and hang out and
Speaker 1: take selfies. Well, look, I don't think a lot of
Speaker 1: these are going to trial. I think they're trying to
Speaker 1: push it off as long as possible. I think one
Speaker 1: guy's pleading guilty and agreed to give evidence. He should
Speaker 1: be the only one that incoming President de Santis or
Speaker 1: whatever woke Republican replaces this desiccatle weirdo who's currently president
Speaker 1: when it comes in office and pardons every single one
Speaker 1: of them, not because anything they did was particularly right
Speaker 1: or okay, but because of simple fairness. BLM and anti
Speaker 1: FOSS scumbags don't get treated that way. They get their
Speaker 1: charges dismissed. Fair is fair, one set of rules, one
Speaker 1: set of laws. Yeah, there's people who are sitting in
Speaker 1: solitary confinement right now and the judges that I refuse
Speaker 1: to give them bail because they were there on January sixth.
Speaker 1: You know, they were riding on January six inside the
Speaker 1: Capitol building. KURTA. I don't know if you've seen this,
Speaker 1: but at least in one case a judges said we
Speaker 1: can't let you out because of the continued threat of insurrection.
Speaker 1: This is this is insane. I mean that is actually
Speaker 1: Soviet level absurdity and and real abuse of state power.
Speaker 1: It really is. And when you have judges who do
Speaker 1: not judge fairly or correctly, that destroyed that. It's not
Speaker 1: only wrong in itself, it destroys the faith in the system.
Speaker 1: And your faith in the system should be teetering on
Speaker 1: the precipice, right Now, the fact is there are two
Speaker 1: sets of laws. Buck, There's one set of law for
Speaker 1: people favored by the regime. There is another set of
Speaker 1: law for people like you and me and our listeners.
Speaker 1: That is intolerable. We've tolerated this long because we're not
Speaker 1: used to it. This is not normal, and people are
Speaker 1: resistant to accepting it. And you can see that with
Speaker 1: some Republicans. You see them a while ago, no no, no,
Speaker 1: trusts a system, and now they're going, yeah, I've just
Speaker 1: seen a little too much. Now I know there's a
Speaker 1: real problem. People are getting woke, conservative woke to what's
Speaker 1: really happening. And as people pull up to the gas
Speaker 1: pump and pull out their wallets and find their paying
Speaker 1: over five bucks a gallon for gas because President Asterisk
Speaker 1: wants to cater to the weather cultists, they're gonna start thinking,
Speaker 1: you know, Fannise keeps talking about the insurrection, but I'm
Speaker 1: running out of money to feed my family. Who's gonna
Speaker 1: stand up for me. That is the opportunity for us,
Speaker 1: That's the opportunity the GOP has. We will see if
Speaker 1: they take a Kurch look at everybodytownhall dot com for
Speaker 1: his latest pieces. Kurt always a pleasure man, talk to
Speaker 1: you soon. Thanks. Kamala Harris keeps a list of reporters
Speaker 1: who quote don't appreciate her lived experience and doesn't like
Speaker 1: words such as guarded being used to describe her. Oh
Speaker 1: wait a second, you mean Kamala is a really vain
Speaker 1: and petty person. Is this a surprise to anyone? Even
Speaker 1: Democrats recognize in the primary that this is not a
Speaker 1: person who is impressive. This is not a person who
Speaker 1: should be in a position of leadership. She does whatever
Speaker 1: she has to do to get ahead. She is conniving
Speaker 1: and ruthless and just happen to be in the right
Speaker 1: place at the right time for this Democrat party to
Speaker 1: get picked as Biden's VP. That is it? So I
Speaker 1: guess I would go on the list of people who
Speaker 1: don't quote fully understand her. Washington Post journalist Chelsea Jaynes,
Speaker 1: according to The Daily Mail Here, is believed to be
Speaker 1: on the list, and she covered a Harris event and
Speaker 1: said that she that her salute was screeching. Harris is
Speaker 1: known for being cagey and aloof around reporters. She got
Speaker 1: a new cell phone and old friends reportedly find it
Speaker 1: hard to reach her. Yeah, she's trying to, you know,
Speaker 1: take herself away from a lot of folks here, because
Speaker 1: the more you know about Kamala Harris, the less impressed,
Speaker 1: the less that the smoke and mirrors around her can
Speaker 1: actually work on you. But you'll also note that Democrats
Speaker 1: don't in any way view this as something that they
Speaker 1: have to show solidarity with this reporter on. No. No,
Speaker 1: of course not. They know that their job, the job
Speaker 1: of journalists at corporate outlets. We do not use the
Speaker 1: term I try very hard not to use the term
Speaker 1: mainstream here anymore, because why I give them that credit.
Speaker 1: The job of corp journalists is to do the bidding
Speaker 1: of the Democrat Party. That is their job. That's what
Speaker 1: they're constantly trying to do. And if that means that
Speaker 1: they have to throw some of their own under the bus,
Speaker 1: so be it. We've got no problem with that. This
Speaker 1: is from this Daily Mail piece. She particularly doesn't like
Speaker 1: the word cautious and aids look out for synonyms too careful, guarded,
Speaker 1: and hesitant don't go over well. But she continues to
Speaker 1: retreat behind talking points and platitudes in public, and declines
Speaker 1: many interview requests and opportunities to speak for herself, including
Speaker 1: this article The Dailymail says, at times, she comes off
Speaker 1: as so uninteresting that television producers have started to wonder
Speaker 1: whether spending thousands of dollars to send people on trips
Speaker 1: with her is worthwhile give and how little usable material
Speaker 1: they get out of it. Here you have the vice
Speaker 1: president of the United States who is such a mediocrity
Speaker 1: and so boring, just so utterly uninteresting, vapid and incapable
Speaker 1: of saying anything worthwhile. That people who are clearly on
Speaker 1: her team, that Democrat politicians who will do everything they
Speaker 1: can to assist her. They I'm sorry, Democrat journalists who
Speaker 1: do everything that can to assist her. They're like, we
Speaker 1: shouldn't even bother because this is such a waste of time.
Speaker 1: Which this is a perfect metaphor for the entirety of
Speaker 1: the of the Harris vice presidential phenomenon. Boring, not worth
Speaker 1: anyone's time. The whole thing is about optics, and they've
Speaker 1: got to protect the optics at all costs. Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: I mean I wouldn't. I wouldn't want you, Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: in charge of the leasing office in the building where
Speaker 1: I live. I wouldn't want Kamala Harris in charge of
Speaker 1: a preschool. She's the vice president. It's amazing that this
Speaker 1: is a situation we're in, but at least people realize
Speaker 1: she's really boring. Do you think you have free speech online? No,
Speaker 1: you know you don't. We see what big tech does.
Speaker 1: You also don't have privacy online. They're tracking you all
Speaker 1: the time. They use your IP address that identifies you
Speaker 1: on your computer, where you are, what you're doing all
Speaker 1: the time. So how about you restore some privacy and
Speaker 1: in the process revoke big text right to selling all
Speaker 1: your information about every website you click on. Everything you do,
Speaker 1: you need a virtual private network. The best one of
Speaker 1: the business is Express VPN. This is just an app.
Speaker 1: You download it to your phone, to your laptop. You'll
Speaker 1: have it on your devices and you will have protection.
Speaker 1: It hides your IP address from big tech spying eyes
Speaker 1: so that they can't sell your data and it makes
Speaker 1: it harder for them to track everything you're doing. So
Speaker 1: create privacy and security for yourself when you're using the internet.
Speaker 1: Revoke big text right to your data. Secure yourself with
Speaker 1: the VPN that I trust for online protection. Visit Express
Speaker 1: VPN dot com slash buck that's Express VPN dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck. You'll get three extra months free on a
Speaker 1: one year package with my exclusive link. Just go to
Speaker 1: this website now set it up Express vpn dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck. So where does this conflict between the IDF
Speaker 1: and Hamas go. We've got our friend David if fun
Speaker 1: with us now. He is the editor in chief of
Speaker 1: the Algaminer. David, great to have you back. Great to
Speaker 1: be with you, Buck. So we are seeing the headlines
Speaker 1: that the ceasefire de manned from the Biden administration, as
Speaker 1: if that's something that they can really do has not
Speaker 1: been met as at least as of me speaking to you. Now,
Speaker 1: what is going on? Why, why is the conflict continuing?
Speaker 1: What are the Israeli defense forces? And what's net and
Speaker 1: Yahoo's government trying to achieve? Well, I think it's simple
Speaker 1: to be frank and what Israel is facing and how
Speaker 1: is the responding. It's really no different to how any
Speaker 1: other democracy or a country, frankly would would behave. You know,
Speaker 1: you have a terror state the borders the southwestern part
Speaker 1: of Israel that's firing missiles into the country randomly targeting
Speaker 1: the civilian population. So Israel is one objective, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's it's to get these missiles to stop, and obviously
Speaker 1: to create an effective to terrance to ensure that they
Speaker 1: won't restart at any time in the future. So for
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, the President or anybody to come along and say, well,
Speaker 1: you should really wind this down, it's kind of ridiculous
Speaker 1: because you know, what do you mean you should wind
Speaker 1: this down? Do you mean that you should wind it down?
Speaker 1: If the rockets continue being fired, you should not respond.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's really the height of condescension and insults.
Speaker 1: And of course the Israeli responsibile be you know, thanks,
Speaker 1: but no thanks, President Biden. When it comes to stuff
Speaker 1: like this, we really couldn't care less what you have
Speaker 1: to say. You have people like Senator Dick Durbin, a Democrat,
Speaker 1: saying that he quote couldn't disagree more with the policies
Speaker 1: of NET and YAHOO when it comes to the treatment
Speaker 1: of Palestinians. I mean, what treatment specifically do our Democrats
Speaker 1: like Durban referring to here. I don't know what he's
Speaker 1: referring to specifically, but I can tell you one thing
Speaker 1: when it comes to UM, what what the Israeli government
Speaker 1: is doing to try and um you know, target missile
Speaker 1: and terrorist infrastructure in Gaza and still this rocket fire.
Speaker 1: This is not you know, some nitniah who government policy.
Speaker 1: This is the policy of everybody in Israel, including we
Speaker 1: had a piece yesterday. Israelis in the South who are
Speaker 1: under fire don't want this to stop because they understand
Speaker 1: that if it does, and if Israel folds to international pressure,
Speaker 1: that's a victory for Hamas. That is encouragement and a
Speaker 1: license for Hamas to continue and do this in the future.
Speaker 1: This is not Nita who government policies. This is Israel,
Speaker 1: all of Israel defending itself, and the country's pretty unified
Speaker 1: behind this action. And frankly, whoever the president would be,
Speaker 1: whoever the Prime minister would be, of any country, there's
Speaker 1: no other way that you can respond. So, you know,
Speaker 1: any suggestion otherwise really is obviously it's ridiculous, it's prejudicial,
Speaker 1: and obviously it's not going to be taken seriously because
Speaker 1: you know, you're saying to Israel that you should behave
Speaker 1: in a way that no other country should behave. You're
Speaker 1: holding Israel to a different standards, and that's that's obviously
Speaker 1: a prejudicial approach. David, There's also a line of analysis
Speaker 1: that I keep seeing popping up in different journalistic outlets,
Speaker 1: at least allegedly journalistic outlets, where they're saying this could
Speaker 1: save Benjamin net and Yahoo's political career or something along
Speaker 1: those lines. Can you can you tell us what the
Speaker 1: people who are making that claim, what are they really
Speaker 1: getting into? What are they saying because nen Yah, who's
Speaker 1: been under pressure, this will essentially bail him out because
Speaker 1: the country has to galvanize around him. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is this is a horrible accusation from people who
Speaker 1: think they're very clever but have no clue what they're
Speaker 1: talking about. To be frank, um, you know, obviously this
Speaker 1: is a war. Um. You know, war is a horrible thing, right,
Speaker 1: It's a horrible thing for populations on both sides. You know,
Speaker 1: you have Israelis, including a young Israeli child of five
Speaker 1: years old who was buried by his father in recent days,
Speaker 1: and obviously you have deaths on the other side as well.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that it is responsible for the vast
Speaker 1: majority of the civilian deaths, and there's been a great
Speaker 1: deal of horrendous misreporting on that front. We can discuss
Speaker 1: that in a second. But to say that a leader,
Speaker 1: government leader, or you know, would allow this to happen,
Speaker 1: you know, just to sort of further their own political means.
Speaker 1: Is really a libel, a blood libel, because you know,
Speaker 1: you're you're, you're accusing him a sort of responsibility for
Speaker 1: this kind of cost is the cost in human life,
Speaker 1: you know, to promote a cynical political agenda. You know,
Speaker 1: it's unclear at this stage where things are going to go.
Speaker 1: The most likely situate scenario right now is that Israel's
Speaker 1: going to go to elections again regardless of what's happening here.
Speaker 1: But I can say with absolute clarity now that the
Speaker 1: support for what Israel is doing comes from across the
Speaker 1: political spect missile, from all the way to the right
Speaker 1: to all the way to the left, including from from
Speaker 1: the Arab parties. So you know, this, this is this
Speaker 1: is a strange, um and completely misguided accusation, and frankly
Speaker 1: it comes from people, um, you know, who think they're
Speaker 1: being clever but really don't understand anything about the region
Speaker 1: or Israeli politics, or at least some geopolitics. We're speaking
Speaker 1: to David Affoon. He's the editor in chief of the
Speaker 1: Alga Miner. I go to Alga Miner dot com for
Speaker 1: Jewish and Israel news. David is looking like this may
Speaker 1: just be I mean, assuming that this comes to an
Speaker 1: end here soon imminently, that this might have just been
Speaker 1: even from the perspective of Hamas, which my friend David
Speaker 1: Harsani I think has rightly referred to as a death call, uh,
Speaker 1: that this was just a miscalculation from their end top
Speaker 1: to bottom. Well, I don't think it was. You know,
Speaker 1: from Hamas's perspective that there is an objective over here
Speaker 1: and to be frank, that they've been successful in achieving
Speaker 1: that objective. Um. You know, you have a situation under
Speaker 1: the Trump administration where support for Israel was unequivocal, where
Speaker 1: there was an understanding that progress could be achieved in
Speaker 1: the region despite you know, Palestinian rejectionism, and you know,
Speaker 1: with Biden coming to office, there's been a very significant
Speaker 1: walk back from that position, with the renewal of aid
Speaker 1: to the Palestinians, for example, with the renewal of the
Speaker 1: the the efforts to reach an agreement with Iran, and
Speaker 1: just you know, really the sort of I mean, they're
Speaker 1: verbally stayed in commitments to the Abraham Accords, but doing
Speaker 1: absolutely nothing to reinforce them or push them forward. And
Speaker 1: in fact, you know, it seems with every day they're
Speaker 1: becoming weakened. And you know that's created an opening. You know,
Speaker 1: Hamas has has seen an opening here to sort of
Speaker 1: push themselves back into the center of of foreign foreign
Speaker 1: policy and international agenda. And you know this this is
Speaker 1: how they do it. You know, it's it's a sort
Speaker 1: of um, you know, the function of a gangster state.
Speaker 1: You know, we see this obviously with with North Korea. UM,
Speaker 1: we see this with with you know, various states that
Speaker 1: that sort of want to shake down the West. Obviously,
Speaker 1: Iran behaves like this all the time. You know, they
Speaker 1: create damage and then they say to the West, well,
Speaker 1: you know, here's the cost um, you know, to make
Speaker 1: sure that your windows don't get broken again, you know. Um,
Speaker 1: so there sees the opportunity here. They've they've taken the
Speaker 1: pulse of of of of the climate in Washington. UM.
Speaker 1: And there's there's really no coincidence that this is happening
Speaker 1: now a couple of months into the Biden administration, and
Speaker 1: it seems just by the Biden administration's response, you know,
Speaker 1: they're sending more money and that they're starting to pressure Israel. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, pretty pretty aggressively. Um that that that the
Speaker 1: hamass it's getting what they want it out of this.
Speaker 1: You know, they know what they're doing. I know a
Speaker 1: lot of this, Davit is pushed by those who just
Speaker 1: are looking to take any shot they can at the
Speaker 1: former Trump administration or what was the Trump administration on
Speaker 1: behalf of the Biden administration. Now, but you've probably seen
Speaker 1: this too, people saying in a smarmy, smug fashion, looks
Speaker 1: like those Abraham Accords didn't do anything, as if the
Speaker 1: Abraham Accords were about Gaza and hamas well. What is
Speaker 1: your response to that, I mean, for people that are
Speaker 1: trying to discount what happened at the end of the
Speaker 1: Trump administration with those peace agreements, those normalization agreements that
Speaker 1: were signed with other Arab countries in the region in Israel,
Speaker 1: tell us about the importance of that and what you
Speaker 1: think of the criticism that's being made now that well,
Speaker 1: because there's a problem with Gaza, there must be an
Speaker 1: issue with the or rather it just nullifies the Abraham Accords. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, they've gone it exactly backwards. My good friend
Speaker 1: Shanny Moore as a great piece at Newsweek. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: Shanny is a person of the left who advised you know,
Speaker 1: left doing Israeli prime ministers. Brilliant, brilliant fellow. And you
Speaker 1: know he talks about you know, people you know under
Speaker 1: Jared Kushner when sort of he had this brief it
Speaker 1: was he he was the butt of all jokes, you
Speaker 1: know in polite Washington, the idea that you know, this
Speaker 1: novice could come with with his fresh set of ideas
Speaker 1: and make any changes. But the truth is, you know,
Speaker 1: the team there and you know I'm not speaking to
Speaker 1: the chi the wider political question. More was achieved in
Speaker 1: terms of Middle East progress under you know, the four
Speaker 1: years of his tenure than probably you know, decades and
Speaker 1: decades before that. Now you have supposedly the the adults
Speaker 1: back in charge, and you know, a couple of months
Speaker 1: into it, the region is in flames again. Nobody is
Speaker 1: learning the lessons, you know, very hard to concrete lessons, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, if you talk to the Israelis, they'll
Speaker 1: tell you that this is just not how it works
Speaker 1: over there. The previous administration had a far better understanding
Speaker 1: UM and policies that were effective. Now this business are saying, well, um,
Speaker 1: you know they they the three months in Um things
Speaker 1: are going to hell. And it must be because of
Speaker 1: the previous administration. Well, why didn't this happen when Trump
Speaker 1: moved the embassy? Why didn't this happen when he withdrew
Speaker 1: funding from from the Palestine. And the reason is because
Speaker 1: they you know, the region responds to strengths um in
Speaker 1: a way that is, you know, more balanced, and and
Speaker 1: and and the belligerent actors checked themselves. Um, and it
Speaker 1: responds to weakness in exactly the opposite fashion. You know,
Speaker 1: where it sees those opportunities, Um, they'll they'll they'll jump
Speaker 1: at it, and they they they use um, you know,
Speaker 1: they'll use actors like Hamas and the Iranians and as
Speaker 1: Baala and Islamic Jihad use violence as a two will
Speaker 1: for leverage when they sense that they'll get someone with it.
Speaker 1: Obviously they knew that under the Trump administration there was
Speaker 1: no chance of that. Now they're seeing an opening under
Speaker 1: the Biden administration. Dovit afun go to the Algaminer dot net.
Speaker 1: Dobbot and his team are doing great work there for
Speaker 1: Jewish and israel News. Algaminer dot com. Dovitt thanks so
Speaker 1: much great to be with you, but so many losers
Speaker 1: when you look at Democrats in Congress. I mean, these
Speaker 1: guys in particularly we're about to talk about are just losers.
Speaker 1: You got a Swallwell, the spy who shagged me, and
Speaker 1: you got this other guy, Tim Ryan, who honestly, the
Speaker 1: fact that anyone cast a vote for this clown makes
Speaker 1: me fear for the future of this country. Enough humanity.
Speaker 1: He's a charmless, brainless blob of platitudes and talking points.
Speaker 1: That's what Tim Ryan is. But just in the way
Speaker 1: they think that they can they can lecture Americans about
Speaker 1: the January sixth Commission and how they're really just concerned
Speaker 1: here with protecting or protecting or sacred democracy. That's what
Speaker 1: this is really about. Here's Swallowell taking a break from
Speaker 1: Chinese spies for a moment. Play three. A Republican told
Speaker 1: me last week at the house, Jim, He said, when
Speaker 1: did you guys become you know, the party that stands
Speaker 1: up for cops? Joy, and I think you are seeing
Speaker 1: that this is a choice between our constitution and chaos,
Speaker 1: and Republicans are standing with chaos. They're the Chaos party,
Speaker 1: and we are the ones who are backing the officers
Speaker 1: who put their lives on the line for us, who
Speaker 1: are in hand to hand combat for hours that day,
Speaker 1: who don't give a rip about politics, but want to
Speaker 1: make sure that their sacrifice has mattered. Three officers died,
Speaker 1: including the officer you just referenced, One lost an eye
Speaker 1: and another lost multiple fingers. They deserve to have a
Speaker 1: commission that looks at what happens, what happened that day,
Speaker 1: and to ensure that no officer and no democracy ever
Speaker 1: whether something like that again, it Swallowells is a vile
Speaker 1: little turd. But notice he says that three officers died.
Speaker 1: None of those officers were killed by protesters. Based on
Speaker 1: everything that we know as of today, that didn't happen.
Speaker 1: So the fact that officers had heart attacks or strokes
Speaker 1: in the days after this event, that's that's not a murderer,
Speaker 1: and they won't be able to claim it's a murder,
Speaker 1: and if they did, they'd end up being laughed out
Speaker 1: of court. I think I would assume it will, although
Speaker 1: we live in a crazy world a lot of bad
Speaker 1: judges these days. But notice that this is the only
Speaker 1: time Democrats seem to really respect and back the cops.
Speaker 1: What do they think it's like to be a member
Speaker 1: of law enforcement and have Antifa throwing bricks at your
Speaker 1: face and bottles of urine at you, Because that happens constantly.
Speaker 1: It happened last year hundreds thousands of times two officers
Speaker 1: across the country. Officers were temporarily blinded by lasers intentionally
Speaker 1: shine in their eyes. I'll tell you this. If somebody said, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm shooting a laser in your eyes and I'm gonna
Speaker 1: blind you with it, I would use lethal force against
Speaker 1: that person and not think twice about it if I
Speaker 1: really thought they could blind me. I'm not going blind
Speaker 1: because some psycho Biden voter has a laser in his hands.
Speaker 1: Not happening. If somebody said they're gonna throw bleach in
Speaker 1: your eyes and try to blind you, and you at
Speaker 1: a fire m aren't you would you use it? I would?
Speaker 1: But those cops, those federal officers, none of that matters
Speaker 1: to Democrats because those are Biden voters. We see the huge,
Speaker 1: disgusting double standard here. And then there's Tim Ryan, another
Speaker 1: one screaming about this. He's a moron. Play nine. I
Speaker 1: want to thank the gentlemen from New York and the
Speaker 1: other Republicans who are porting this and thank them for
Speaker 1: their bipartisanship to the other ninety percent of our friends
Speaker 1: on the other side of the aisle, Holy cow, incoherence,
Speaker 1: no idea what you're talking about, Ben Gods and you
Speaker 1: guys chase the former secretary of State all over the country,
Speaker 1: which spend millions of dollars. We have people scaling the capital,
Speaker 1: hitting the capitol. Police would lead pipes across the head.
Speaker 1: And we can't get bipartisanship. What else has to happen
Speaker 1: in this country? Cops, This is a slap in the
Speaker 1: face to every rank and file cop. Then the United States,
Speaker 1: if we're gonna take on China, if we're going to
Speaker 1: rebuild the country, if we're going to reverse climate change,
Speaker 1: we need two political parties in this country that are
Speaker 1: both living in reality, and you ain't one of them.
Speaker 1: We're gonna reverse quarter change. This guy ran for president.
Speaker 1: Give your sends out delusionally he was Ohio. You guys
Speaker 1: voted or not listening to the show, but Ohio's voted
Speaker 1: for this guy. It's embarrassing, really, is that I would
Speaker 1: be embarrassed to tell anybody that I voted for this
Speaker 1: total jerk. But this is who makes the most noise
Speaker 1: in the Democrats side about the January sixth Commission clowns
Speaker 1: Shawshank for January six detainees. The government argues the events
Speaker 1: of January six along with the defendant skepticism about the
Speaker 1: outcome of a twenty twenty election, are evidence the accused
Speaker 1: are a threat to society. That's the piece in American
Speaker 1: Greatness by Julie Kelly. We have our colleague, a senior
Speaker 1: writer at American Greatness, Pedro Gonzalez, with us now to
Speaker 1: discuss this issue a bit and what's talked about in
Speaker 1: this article. Pedro, great to have you back, Hey, thanks
Speaker 1: for having so. From what I understand, and I've checked
Speaker 1: this in a few different places, now you have a
Speaker 1: number of individuals from the riot on January sixth who
Speaker 1: are being held in solitary confine no bail and as
Speaker 1: part of the judges who have have denied them bail
Speaker 1: you know, which you do usually as somebody is a
Speaker 1: threat to society or or a flight risk. These people
Speaker 1: are neither in any reasonable A lot of them actually
Speaker 1: have no previous criminal record whatsoever. And I understand that
Speaker 1: these are people who very likely broke the law that
Speaker 1: day with either assault on a police officer, destruction or property.
Speaker 1: But they're holding them in solitary confinement. The judges are
Speaker 1: holding them under the premise that they are a continued
Speaker 1: threat of insurrection because they don't accept the January. They
Speaker 1: don't accept rather the twenty twenty election results. I mean, pedro.
Speaker 1: That sounds like political prisoner stuff, right, and all I
Speaker 1: can think about as we're discussing this is the fact that,
Speaker 1: if you will call on not long ago, we had
Speaker 1: some riots and looting, an anarchy that rose to the
Speaker 1: level of what some people would call an instruction. When
Speaker 1: you have mass movements across the country who are saying
Speaker 1: that the political system, the entire public sphere itself is
Speaker 1: racist and evil and needs to go. That was the
Speaker 1: thrust of the Black Lives Matter riots, and the people
Speaker 1: that were involved in riding often cases or oftentimes were
Speaker 1: actually just let loose. If you recall, there was a
Speaker 1: police commissioner or a former commissioner who speaking to Fox
Speaker 1: News I think, said that virtually every single person who
Speaker 1: is arrested in New York or riding would get a
Speaker 1: slap on the wrist and be out in no time,
Speaker 1: in part because they had eliminated cash bail and just
Speaker 1: because this is how this is how the system works
Speaker 1: down this is how political machines in parts of the
Speaker 1: country work. If it doesn't actually matter if you're an
Speaker 1: insurrectionist as much as it matters whose team you're on.
Speaker 1: And unfortunately for the people that shuffled into the Capitol
Speaker 1: Building on January sixth, and it seems like they did
Speaker 1: so with the approval of Capital po last department. By
Speaker 1: the way, Julie Kelly is also recently a team footage
Speaker 1: that shows Capitol police calmly talking to Trump supporters and saying,
Speaker 1: we're not going to stop you. Franchi being the building,
Speaker 1: just you know, remain peaceful. Well, their problem wasn't that
Speaker 1: their insurrectionists so much as they were on the wrong team.
Speaker 1: This is very distressing. I mean, in a country where
Speaker 1: we've seen that, we saw the weaponization of the deep
Speaker 1: state within the DOJ and the intelligence community against a
Speaker 1: duly elected Republican president for four years from twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: to twenty twenty, really before that actually from twenty from
Speaker 1: a well, from the early stages of twenty sixteen into
Speaker 1: the end of the Trump presidency. And we had no
Speaker 1: real consequences. I mean the Durham probe. Remember that, Remember
Speaker 1: the Durham investigation. We were being told though, you know,
Speaker 1: just wait, set your watch any moment now, big justice
Speaker 1: coming from the federal prosecutor Durham up in Connecticut, the
Speaker 1: US Attorney up in Connecticut that that led to. We've
Speaker 1: seen nothing from it so far, not even not a thing.
Speaker 1: And yet on the other side of this, you have
Speaker 1: people who are being held in solitary confinement treated like
Speaker 1: they are a clear and present danger with regard to
Speaker 1: the overthrow of the United States government because they I mean,
Speaker 1: the worst crimes that are actually accused of pedro They
Speaker 1: did not kill anyone, They did not use a deadly
Speaker 1: force against anyone. The worst crime is, as I understand it,
Speaker 1: that the people that are being held in attention from
Speaker 1: January six are accused of, is assault on a police officer,
Speaker 1: which is a crime, and they should be punished for that.
Speaker 1: And I'm very clear and habit very clear about that.
Speaker 1: But assault on police officers occurred so routinely that it's
Speaker 1: hard to even keep track of it in Portland, in
Speaker 1: New York, in Chicago, in Atlanta. For months during the
Speaker 1: BLM riots, and no one's being held you know, no
Speaker 1: one's being held in solitary confinement for this. Right again,
Speaker 1: it doesn't The issue is not assaulting a police officer,
Speaker 1: it's why you assault in that what political colors you're
Speaker 1: we That's the reality that we live in today. I
Speaker 1: think that there is a really pernicious argument or narrative
Speaker 1: in the mainstream that things like the deep state, this
Speaker 1: is a conspiracy. It's not. I mean, the deep state's
Speaker 1: kind of a it's it's it's an interesting term that
Speaker 1: I think kind of mystifies what we're really discussing. And
Speaker 1: really we're just talking about a gigantic political machine that
Speaker 1: tends to favor or one party has more control than
Speaker 1: the other. That's really all it is. I think there's
Speaker 1: there's a lot of other elements to this, but that's
Speaker 1: that's really what we're talking about when we talk about
Speaker 1: some like the deep state. It's what the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: has successfully aligned itself with a lot of the bureaucratic, corporate,
Speaker 1: and governmental levels of power, and they've got their hands
Speaker 1: on them, and they're just willing and able to pull
Speaker 1: them a lot harder on their enemies. That that's really
Speaker 1: what this boils down to. I think that this you
Speaker 1: see how persistent this, this kind of this dismissal of
Speaker 1: our position is when you consider that CNN and The
Speaker 1: New York Times have you even admitted that the only
Speaker 1: homicide case around January sixth has collapsed officers Signic. The
Speaker 1: New York Times was forced to issue an attraction a retraction,
Speaker 1: and CNN admitted that the prosecutors are having a really
Speaker 1: hard time making the Signic death into a homicide because
Speaker 1: it's not. And then again, you have more and more
Speaker 1: evidence of Capitol police officers who allowed this to happen.
Speaker 1: It's strange to frame it as an insurrection when the
Speaker 1: people who are supposed to stop it from being, who
Speaker 1: are supposed to stop the instruction, did not themselves see
Speaker 1: it as an insurrection. But again, all of these points
Speaker 1: are being dismissed. They're misleading. It's misinformation. Maybe the Russians
Speaker 1: are making us say these things, Buck, Maybe I'm taking
Speaker 1: money from Putin to be on your radio show. I'm
Speaker 1: just kidding, not but that. But that's how actually absurd
Speaker 1: and just out of this world. The narrative is that
Speaker 1: everything we say is somehow alive and Again, we're quick
Speaker 1: to call it a double standard, but I think it's
Speaker 1: more of like a hierarchy. They're just reminding you they're
Speaker 1: in charge and they actually get to be the ones
Speaker 1: who decide what is not true. Yeah, this is a
Speaker 1: critical point. By the way that the Republicans conservatives talk
Speaker 1: of double standards is fine. It does nothing because the
Speaker 1: other side is happy that they're in a position to
Speaker 1: enforce those double standards. They don't feel guilty about it.
Speaker 1: They don't feel like, oh, you're right, we're being unprincipled.
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll stop. It's what are you gonna do about it?
Speaker 1: And that's what conservatives need to understand is these are
Speaker 1: the rules of the game. Now. This is a big
Speaker 1: change from from our perception of even a few years ago.
Speaker 1: We're speaking to Pedro Gonzalez, who is a senior writer
Speaker 1: at American Greatness and related to that point, Pedro, there's
Speaker 1: been look a lot of focus on Liz Cheney recently
Speaker 1: and the leadership battles within the leadership battle within the
Speaker 1: Republican Party, in part because they just want to show
Speaker 1: dissent in the ranks of the GOP. Also because Liz
Speaker 1: Cheney is really a mouth piece for the hyperventilating. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's an insurrection point of view on all of this,
Speaker 1: and so that's just Democrats love that stuff. I mean,
Speaker 1: that is Scooby Snacks for Democrats. I mean, they can't
Speaker 1: get enough of it. But do you think that now
Speaker 1: that she has been at least somewhat reputated by some
Speaker 1: of her colleagues, are we in the process of seeing
Speaker 1: a GOP come together with a message that they're willing
Speaker 1: to fight because it doesn't They talk a lot about
Speaker 1: stopping socialism and I think people you know well who
Speaker 1: there's from, Mitch McConnell, others, people's eyes roll back in
Speaker 1: their heads, like what does that even really mean? Digging
Speaker 1: in on these issues like wokeness, like indoctrination in the military,
Speaker 1: indoctrination in schools, and trying to win power to change
Speaker 1: things and use power to change things. Are we moving
Speaker 1: in that direction or is that too optimistic? I think
Speaker 1: it's too optimistic, And I don't mean to say that
Speaker 1: you shouldn't be optimistic about the I am. Actually I
Speaker 1: think ultimately win in the long run, but I think
Speaker 1: it's important to remain extremely realistic in the short term
Speaker 1: and to look at what's happening with clear eyes in
Speaker 1: front of us. And I think the removal of Cheney
Speaker 1: is a good thing. I think, except there's the issue
Speaker 1: of Stephonic who's not actually better than Cheney. In some cases,
Speaker 1: she's actually much worse. She voted less consistently, which Trump
Speaker 1: and Cheney did. But I think maybe as a symbolic victory,
Speaker 1: Cheney's outstair is more. It provides the base with some
Speaker 1: morale right, which they need. But on the other hand,
Speaker 1: we should not interpret this as the GOP going in
Speaker 1: a fundamentally different direction. And the narratives around banning critical race,
Speaker 1: around the problems with cultural Marxism and institutions like the military,
Speaker 1: and and or even around the election itself, around the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty election, I think it's important to understand the
Speaker 1: GOP is not The GOP is not above at all
Speaker 1: all using these really hot button issues to basically just
Speaker 1: rile you up, get your attention, get your money, and
Speaker 1: get your votes so that you'll put them back in power.
Speaker 1: And what do they do when their back in power.
Speaker 1: They suddenly stopped being culture warriors. They drop all of
Speaker 1: these important issues and revert back to well, hold on,
Speaker 1: we can't use antitrust action against Google. That's crazy, That's
Speaker 1: that's socialism. You know, it doesn't matter. Sure Google spying
Speaker 1: on you. Amazon is putting their boot around your throat
Speaker 1: and profiting from the destruction of small businesses and all that.
Speaker 1: But look, let's let's not get carried away here. Let's
Speaker 1: let's compromise silicone value. And it's the same thing with
Speaker 1: critical race theory. They're passing legislation in places like Tennessee.
Speaker 1: But I think that this is this is the bigger
Speaker 1: picture that people on the right and you think about
Speaker 1: the issue of critical race theory goes beyond mere legislation.
Speaker 1: The basic narrative of critical race theory that America is
Speaker 1: fundamentally bad and evil. It pervades every tissue in the
Speaker 1: United States, social, cultural, even religious like this is everywhere
Speaker 1: around us. And even in Tennessee, where they passed laws
Speaker 1: against this, schools are ignoring the laws, and how do
Speaker 1: you enforce this? So I guess the issue is, is
Speaker 1: it on the one hand, we should encourage the GOP
Speaker 1: to change, but we should not interpret these kind of
Speaker 1: slight changes as indicative of a broader fundamental change, because
Speaker 1: if we do that we're going to sit back, hold
Speaker 1: our arms and start costing the plan again. How has
Speaker 1: that worked out for us? Not? Well? Yeah, trust trust
Speaker 1: the plan is something that people always said about things
Speaker 1: in recent years, when there was no plan and bad
Speaker 1: things follows. That's been very clear to me. Whenever I
Speaker 1: was hearing people say trust the plan, there was no plan.
Speaker 1: This is about a whole range of issues. You'd say, oh,
Speaker 1: this is related to the Trump four D chess. No,
Speaker 1: there was no four D or eight D chess or whatever.
Speaker 1: That that was not reality. So I do think it's
Speaker 1: importably of reality and part of that pedro to try
Speaker 1: to come back and to combat what the left is doing.
Speaker 1: I think it has to be a recognition that not
Speaker 1: only do they have control of the system, they understand
Speaker 1: some of these mechanisms and systems better and are more
Speaker 1: devoted to using them to their ends, such that even when,
Speaker 1: for example, Trump was in the White House, one thing
Speaker 1: that I know from some of his top advisors that
Speaker 1: I've talked to that frustrated him was that there were
Speaker 1: agencies of the federal government where they would just say, no,
Speaker 1: we're just not going to do that. Take us to court.
Speaker 1: You know, we're going to say that this is a
Speaker 1: violation of what's there was a bureaucratic they kept bringing
Speaker 1: this up. It's essentially you know, moving too quickly without
Speaker 1: proper authorization or notification or something it was, and they
Speaker 1: took they actually would take this to court sometimes that
Speaker 1: the system sometimes will have people who shut down even
Speaker 1: when we're in charge and won't do what they're told. Right. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think this is actually why the position of
Speaker 1: the GOP and the Conservative movement of course not talking
Speaker 1: about everyday people because I think every people have to
Speaker 1: have a good sense of things, unlike their elected officials. Uh.
Speaker 1: And what do you hear from the GP GOP Basically
Speaker 1: we want to get back to a position of civility.
Speaker 1: We want to get back to a neutral ground where
Speaker 1: we just get along on both sides. Grew to a
Speaker 1: play by the rules. That is a pipe dream. It's
Speaker 1: never going to happen. And even with and again I'm
Speaker 1: not criticizing Republican voters, I'm criticizing their elected officials who
Speaker 1: tell them that kind of are giving them an opinion
Speaker 1: instead of listening to them. And so what you're hearing
Speaker 1: from elected officials is that basically there's a deep state
Speaker 1: and there's a swamp and it's all right against us,
Speaker 1: and we need your money to fight it. But also
Speaker 1: if we work through the system, we can we can
Speaker 1: overturn the election of twenty twenty. Like you have to
Speaker 1: recognize the problem here. How are you going to overturn
Speaker 1: the election if at the same time you're claiming that
Speaker 1: that the deep state is a raid against you and
Speaker 1: also you're the way that you want to do this
Speaker 1: is by fighting by kind of Queensbury rules. You see,
Speaker 1: Like the problem here, it's like there's this huge task
Speaker 1: in front of us. Democrats are cheating, there's a deep
Speaker 1: state in front of us. But also if you just
Speaker 1: keep voting for us and give us your money, we
Speaker 1: will take a principal stand against all of us. Like
Speaker 1: you have to see that there's this violent contradiction. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and all of these different things. This is like what
Speaker 1: Chenney offers you, which is a built in loserism with
Speaker 1: lofty promises of the future. That's what we have to avoid,
Speaker 1: I think, at all costs. And we'll continue to talk
Speaker 1: about it here. Pedro Gonzalez, Everybody, American Greatness, AM Greatness
Speaker 1: dot com. Forerence latest piece Pedro always insightful. Thanks, my friends,
Speaker 1: I've made the decision to oppose the House Democrats slanted
Speaker 1: an unbalanced proposal for another commission to study the events
Speaker 1: of January the sixth, because everybody surely knows I repeatedly
Speaker 1: made my views about the events of January the six
Speaker 1: very clear. I spoke clearly and left no doubt about
Speaker 1: my conclusions. Federal law enforcement made at least four hundred
Speaker 1: and forty five arrest and counting relating to crimes committed
Speaker 1: that day. Hundreds of those people have in charge law enforcement.
Speaker 1: Investigations are ongoing, and federal authorities say they expect to
Speaker 1: arrest at least one hundred or so. More. Action is
Speaker 1: being taken. Accountability is happening for those who broke the law.
Speaker 1: And we already had an impeachment on this. Why would
Speaker 1: we have a commission if we already had impeachment? Right, So,
Speaker 1: what was the point of the impeachment if now we're
Speaker 1: going to have a commission In addition to the hearings
Speaker 1: that Congress had to rush through a second impeachment in
Speaker 1: one year. These people are nuts. These people are nuts.
Speaker 1: There's no fairness, there's no fair play, there's no we
Speaker 1: you know, we want to do this the right way. No,
Speaker 1: what can they get away with? That's what this is
Speaker 1: all about. That's the desire here right, what helps their power?
Speaker 1: That's it. Fair play is laughable to Democrats. I've written
Speaker 1: about this on bucksexton dot com today. By the way,
Speaker 1: go check it out about the January sixth Commission. I
Speaker 1: wrote an op ed today on it because that's just
Speaker 1: I got so I'm so fed up with the nonsense
Speaker 1: what the Democrats are saying with all this. I mean,
Speaker 1: here's where is he Schumer is talking about this too.
Speaker 1: The biggest attack, oh, the worst thing since the Civil
Speaker 1: War four What the Republicans are doing the House Republicans
Speaker 1: is beyond crazy to be so far under the thumb
Speaker 1: of Donald J. Trump, letting the most dishonest president in
Speaker 1: American history dictate the prerogatives of the Republican Party will
Speaker 1: be its demise, mark my words. Whatever that means for Democrats,
Speaker 1: it's bad for America. We know, we all know there
Speaker 1: needs to be a thorough and honest accounting of what
Speaker 1: took place on January sixth, greatest attempted insurrection since the
Speaker 1: Civil War. This is the get Democrats reelected or elected
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two commission. That's what it really is.
Speaker 1: And anybody who pays attention to American politics and has
Speaker 1: a keen eye can see it, including Schumer, he knows.
Speaker 1: They all know. The same way that they convinced half
Speaker 1: the country that Donald Trump was almost personally responsible for COVID,
Speaker 1: that he was denying the science and all this other idiocy.
Speaker 1: But it was effective costom reelection. They're now hoping while
Speaker 1: they have that utter buffoon Biden running around, that they
Speaker 1: can get away with the same situation here, the same
Speaker 1: circumstance here where they just lie about something. They just
Speaker 1: lie about it, and then we won't ignore rather rather
Speaker 1: than we will ignore that the person that they have
Speaker 1: was the president of the United States is an idiot.
Speaker 1: That's that's the plan. Create a narrative of fundamental chaos
Speaker 1: and threat to the Republic from the Republicans, and don't
Speaker 1: you know, don't pay any attention to the fact that
Speaker 1: people you're gonna put in charge our morons like Biden.
Speaker 1: That's the game plan. Unfortunately it works. Sometimes the show
Speaker 1: ain't over yet, folks. It's time for roll call Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com. Slashbuck Sexton Teambuck at iHeartMedia dot com. But
Speaker 1: before we get to that, you all might have heard that.
Speaker 1: Um I kind of I kind of said, of y'all there,
Speaker 1: you know, producer Mark. I think we have so many
Speaker 1: stations and so many wonderful listeners in parts of the
Speaker 1: country that are the South. I think that I think
Speaker 1: we're allowed to y'all in here now or whatever we're
Speaker 1: allowed to say y'all. I don't think so, because we're
Speaker 1: still Yankees to them. But I'm not a yank ye,
Speaker 1: but I feel like I'm an honorary y'all sayer at
Speaker 1: this point. It's okay, you know, Okay, I mean they
Speaker 1: can write in, hey to our Southern team. Buck, you
Speaker 1: can write in and either either grant or revoke y'all
Speaker 1: permission to me, because you know, it is very useful.
Speaker 1: I will say, it's a very useful term or useful phrase.
Speaker 1: Just don't say it in the middle of Manhattan. You
Speaker 1: might get hit upside the head. Yeah. Well that well,
Speaker 1: you can also just get hit upside the head for
Speaker 1: just walking down the street of Manhattan. Unfortunately, Thanks the Blasio,
Speaker 1: Thanks de Blasio. That's where we are, so okay, um,
Speaker 1: where are we now we have, oh wait, Ronald Reagan
Speaker 1: telling a joke at seventy seven, Joe Biden telling a
Speaker 1: joke at seventy. Yet I want to note that when
Speaker 1: Reagan told this joke, he was seventy seven. There were
Speaker 1: the media was constantly saying that Reagan was senile Biden's
Speaker 1: a year older at the start of his presidency. Right now,
Speaker 1: seventy eight, then Reagan was when he was telling this joke.
Speaker 1: And I want you to just hear Reagan's version of
Speaker 1: the joke, Biden's version of the joke. It really is
Speaker 1: a metaphor for these two commanders in chief play one.
Speaker 1: My Coastguard aids have been excellent. One of them taught
Speaker 1: me that, and I quote, the coastguard is that hard
Speaker 1: nucleus about which the Navy forms in time of war.
Speaker 1: I can only assume that you will enjoy educating your
Speaker 1: family about how the Coastguard is quote the hard nucleus
Speaker 1: around the Navy forms in times of war. You are white,
Speaker 1: You're a really dull class. You're here here here, You're
Speaker 1: a dull You're a dull class, you know, or you're
Speaker 1: er er bad kept scar reverse shooting stuffs. Oh Man
Speaker 1: isn't amazing amazing that this is the guy that they
Speaker 1: put forward. Um, you know, the fact that he's a president.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, it's embarrassing. Okay, it's embarrassing. It's embarrassing. You're
Speaker 1: a dull class, he says them. No, they're just like,
Speaker 1: what did you just mumble out, old man? What was
Speaker 1: kept curing? And yet president the United States? Everybody so
Speaker 1: much smarter than Trump? They tell you, Oh, sure, he's
Speaker 1: so much smarter than Trump. Yeah, yeah, does any does
Speaker 1: anybody really want to have that debate now? I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm sure there'll be people who would say he is,
Speaker 1: but they're out of their minds. Joe Biden's a dumbass.
Speaker 1: It really is. I mean, it really is. I never
Speaker 1: said that about Obama's not dumb. Obama's not dumb, wrong,
Speaker 1: but not dumb. Not a genius the way they said
Speaker 1: he was, but Obama was. He's a smart guy that
Speaker 1: you know. So I with it comes to Democrats, who
Speaker 1: comes to libs, I call it like it is. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's dumb. He really is. He's just been he's just
Speaker 1: been around forever and he's just there and he was
Speaker 1: useful to them. So they said, Okay, you're the guy.
Speaker 1: You know, he's a he's a puppet president. It couldn't
Speaker 1: be any more clear. All right, John, let's get into
Speaker 1: our roll call here, Block. I wanted you and Broducer
Speaker 1: Marked to know there are many flavors of Mountain Dew
Speaker 1: in regular production down south, and code read will be
Speaker 1: easy to find if you ever escape to Florida. RC
Speaker 1: Cole is still around too, but not exactly widespread. As
Speaker 1: for what this category of beverage is called, most people
Speaker 1: I know and have dealt with in the Southeast call
Speaker 1: all of them coke, not to be confused with Coca Cola.
Speaker 1: A normal beverage conversation would be, can you grab me
Speaker 1: a coke? Sure? What kind? Doctor pepper? This is apparently
Speaker 1: in fury eating to both the pop and soda teams.
Speaker 1: Always fun to hear the odd discussions outside of politics,
Speaker 1: She'll side, have you ever heard this, producer Mark, that
Speaker 1: people just refer to all soda as coke? I think
Speaker 1: this is propaganda from big Coca Cola. I feel like
Speaker 1: that's a Georgia thing, if I had to guess, because
Speaker 1: that's where coke originates from. And I know, like it's
Speaker 1: like blasphemy to drink a pepsi in Georgia. Yet I
Speaker 1: went to a hotel in Georgia once and they only
Speaker 1: serve pepsi. Have you ever done a blind taste test
Speaker 1: yourself to see if you could tell the difference you,
Speaker 1: I don't even it doesn't need to be blind. I
Speaker 1: can tell the difference. Really. Yeah. I haven't at soda
Speaker 1: in so long I've I have no idea. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying I'm a regular drinker of either regular
Speaker 1: coke or regular pepsi, but I still know the taste. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Also not true. And people say that if you put
Speaker 1: a rusty nail in a coke, it does not make
Speaker 1: it disappear. If there's all these wives tales about this thought.
Speaker 1: It is true if you put a mentos and a
Speaker 1: diet coke that it will explode. Really, you've never seen
Speaker 1: that on mine? No? Yeah, if you drop a meno,
Speaker 1: I think in a regular coke too, But I know
Speaker 1: for sure a diet coke because you drop amentos and
Speaker 1: to like a two leader bottle or any bottle, it'll
Speaker 1: just explode everywhere. It's actually quite funny to watch, you,
Speaker 1: don't I do. I think that and I do not
Speaker 1: encourage this because it is cruelty to animals, but I
Speaker 1: think it is true that if you feed alka seltzer
Speaker 1: to um seagulls, they will like basically implode it. Don't
Speaker 1: do that, don't I'm not I'm saying, don't do that,
Speaker 1: but pep. This is like a thing alkas because they
Speaker 1: can't burp and so it's like the gas just builds up.
Speaker 1: It they don't actually explode, but they just die. It's mean,
Speaker 1: it's like you're poisoning them. So I'm just I've been
Speaker 1: thinking of wives tales or real things. I think that's
Speaker 1: a that's a real thing. Turns out that's real. Um.
Speaker 1: I will say one safety tip for everybody out there,
Speaker 1: because I saw a lot of this in Austin where
Speaker 1: people had dogs that they were going on long jogs
Speaker 1: with along with them on a hot day. Dogs do
Speaker 1: not have sweat glands. Dogs can only exhale heat through
Speaker 1: their mouths, which means that it's actually very difficult for
Speaker 1: them to properly regulate body temperature while they're exerting themselves
Speaker 1: in high heat. So please public safety tip here. Make
Speaker 1: sure that you don't let your dog run when it
Speaker 1: wants to run. Don't make your dog run alongside you
Speaker 1: in really hot weather. They can overheat and that can
Speaker 1: be that can be disastrous. So just a little no
Speaker 1: doubt there. I saw people in Austin, in particularly when
Speaker 1: I was there, it was a hot day, and they're
Speaker 1: all doing these long jogs with dogs that, first of all,
Speaker 1: or not even what I would consider to be distance
Speaker 1: runner dogs to start with. And second of all, I
Speaker 1: was like, this is bad. You shouldn't do that. There
Speaker 1: were signs up that's also I thought it. There were
Speaker 1: signs in Austin saying please be careful with your dog
Speaker 1: running because I think people overheat their dogs. A dog
Speaker 1: is not a six mile run partner. A dog isn't
Speaker 1: even really you know, you don't want them running a
Speaker 1: mile in heat. You want your dog to let them
Speaker 1: run around the yard, in the field, whatever when they want,
Speaker 1: and then make sure they have shade and cool water,
Speaker 1: because it's much harder for them than for humans to
Speaker 1: regulate body amperature and to handle that. Josh, hey buck,
Speaker 1: I'm trying to represent the freedom Hut here. It's pretty
Speaker 1: hard being surrounded by a bunch of libs. I'm usually
Speaker 1: the only one unmasked. Everywhere I go, I make them
Speaker 1: ask me to put it on. Just the other day,
Speaker 1: I made a local store explain why that is, considering
Speaker 1: the new CDC recommendation. I stay peaceful and obey their requests,
Speaker 1: but they have what I want to buy. One last thing.
Speaker 1: The other day, I was unmasked and decided to wear
Speaker 1: my red Maga hat to pick up my kid from school.
Speaker 1: The looks were hilarious. I'm not looking for trouble. I'm
Speaker 1: just trying to represent a beacon of courage. People shouldn't
Speaker 1: be afraid to stand up for their individual freedom. I
Speaker 1: love my country. I love what you do, Buck Shields.
Speaker 1: I from California. Wow, now that Josh is telling me
Speaker 1: he's from California, I'm like, oh, I get it, buddy.
Speaker 1: We're in a Maga hat in California in most place.
Speaker 1: I know there are some reddish parts of California, but
Speaker 1: let's be real. If you're in California, you're pretty much
Speaker 1: surrounded by the opposition, and that can be a real
Speaker 1: challenge that can be an issue for you in your
Speaker 1: day to day lives. It can mean that you feel
Speaker 1: there's a certain hostility around you at all times. So, Josh,
Speaker 1: it's certainly something that I am aware of, and I
Speaker 1: feel you on that because I walk in and out
Speaker 1: of my building no mask on. I'm the only person
Speaker 1: that I've seen not wearing a mask in my building.
Speaker 1: Of hundreds, there are hundreds and hundreds of people who
Speaker 1: live in my I live in a very tall, large
Speaker 1: building in New York. Hundreds of people live here. The
Speaker 1: only one that I've seen walking out without a mask
Speaker 1: on is me, the only one. And the guidance has
Speaker 1: changed in New York. People are still wearing them. What
Speaker 1: are they doing? Well, they've been brainwashed. It's really it's
Speaker 1: very clear they have been brainwashed. Oh but Josh, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for trying to pass the buck. Tell
Speaker 1: people about the show. It really gues. It means so much.
Speaker 1: Every time you get a new listener to this show,
Speaker 1: you're just you're helping us out, You're helping us grow,
Speaker 1: making what we do more and more, you know, impactful.
Speaker 1: As I was telling you, and I just like to
Speaker 1: be very upfront up with you all about this. And
Speaker 1: we don't have some marketing budget. I don't spend you know,
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars a month on Facebook. So I get
Speaker 1: a lot of people downloading my show and clicking on
Speaker 1: my show all the time. Other people have that they
Speaker 1: do that. I don't have that. I just have all
Speaker 1: of you. I have the fact that this is the
Speaker 1: best conservative radio show slash podcast out there right now.
Speaker 1: That's what I rely on. That the quality of what
Speaker 1: we do here is so high. You know, I feel
Speaker 1: like we're making the best We're making the best dinner
Speaker 1: for you here. I don't have the biggest billboards, I
Speaker 1: don't have the most people standing on corners hanging out
Speaker 1: and handing out my menu, but we make the best
Speaker 1: food here, so it's on. It's really all of you
Speaker 1: telling people about this show. That's what makes it continue
Speaker 1: to be successful and grow. So we do it the
Speaker 1: old We do it the old fashioned way here. It look.
Speaker 1: I'd be nice if I had some you know, bill
Speaker 1: millionaire professional sugar daddy who was going to write checks
Speaker 1: for me to you know, go speak in places and
Speaker 1: spend a lot of money on social media to promote
Speaker 1: my stuff. But it's just me, producer Mark and this microphone.
Speaker 1: So that's how we and of course all of our
Speaker 1: affiliate stations across the country. But I'm saying in terms
Speaker 1: of promotion of selling this show to people through the
Speaker 1: different marketing mechanisms. You know, we're very grateful that we
Speaker 1: have the affiliates we do. And beyond that, it's word
Speaker 1: of mouth. It's word of mouth. Robert Bucking, producer Mark
Speaker 1: Love the podcast. It's my daily go to for great
Speaker 1: insight as to what's really going on in the political world.
Speaker 1: I have an eighth grade daughter who is not ready
Speaker 1: to have who I'm not ready to have vaccinated. Yet
Speaker 1: there's no long term studies available to see what this
Speaker 1: would do to our kids. The problem is I now.
Speaker 1: The problem I now have is that we all had
Speaker 1: as kids. The outsider problem is that my friends are
Speaker 1: getting the vaccine and I don't want to wear a
Speaker 1: mask to school. That's what the kids are saying. I
Speaker 1: live in Connecticut where it seems imminent than kids will
Speaker 1: have to wear masks in school if not vaccinated. Question is, Buck,
Speaker 1: do we move to a state with more sane rules
Speaker 1: or do we fight the fight for our kids and
Speaker 1: keep those shields high man, Robert, A great question and
Speaker 1: not one that I have an easy answer for you on.
Speaker 1: Do you want to live in a different state? Are
Speaker 1: you up for that can you can your job move
Speaker 1: or can you easily find a similar job somewhere else?
Speaker 1: You know, those are the questions you have to ask. Um,
Speaker 1: will you stand and fight on this one? That's another option,
Speaker 1: but you'll probably if you if you stand and fight
Speaker 1: the school board yourself, you will probably, at least in
Speaker 1: the early stages, lose. So are you prepared for that?
Speaker 1: And then you're going to have to abide by the
Speaker 1: guidance send and be the guy who's kid uh you
Speaker 1: know who you were, the guy who was fighting against
Speaker 1: getting your kids vaccinated? Right, That's what's going to happen, Robert.
Speaker 1: As you know, I'm a realist. I do order of
Speaker 1: battle in my head as it is not as I
Speaker 1: wish it were. So you would have to tell me,
Speaker 1: can you move to another state? Is that really disruptive
Speaker 1: to your family? If the answer is, you'd be happy
Speaker 1: to do it, man, go to Florida, Go to Tennessee,
Speaker 1: go to Texas. Go to a zero income tax state
Speaker 1: where you have red state government and greater freedom, greater protection,
Speaker 1: Second Amendment rights, lower cost of living. Connecticut's very expensive.
Speaker 1: So but if you got to stay, and this is
Speaker 1: important to you, you're gonna you know, you're gonna have
Speaker 1: that fight. But it's just it's like I try to
Speaker 1: tell people this, sometimes you got to stand up to
Speaker 1: the bully. Just know that you're probably not actually gonna
Speaker 1: get away with punching the bully once and winning the fight.
Speaker 1: You might get punched and you might lose even after
Speaker 1: you stand up to the bully. Just remember that doesn't
Speaker 1: mean you don't do it, just means you've got to
Speaker 1: be realistic about what you're facing. Roll call continuing here,
Speaker 1: Eric now xt up, we have well bucked the Libs
Speaker 1: have finally gone full, full grown and blown, full blown
Speaker 1: crazy here in Portland. I have finished reading a recent
Speaker 1: article from The Oregonian describing we will now need to
Speaker 1: provide proof of vaccination in order for go masks indoors.
Speaker 1: I wanted to spread the word about the disgraceful leadership
Speaker 1: being shown by the Demps here at Oregon. Also, what
Speaker 1: do you think about a RHN Descantis and Rand Paul
Speaker 1: duo for the twenty twenty four presidential race. I've been
Speaker 1: very impressed with Rand Paul's aggressiveness when taking on the
Speaker 1: LIBS side. No producer, Mark, you are much too young
Speaker 1: to sound this grumpy all the time. Shieldsaye. First, I'll
Speaker 1: let producer Mark respond me grumpy never exactly. As for
Speaker 1: the Oregonians describing in this article that you need to
Speaker 1: have proof of vaccination, here is a part of this
Speaker 1: that I don't think has gotten enough attention. If you
Speaker 1: have to provide proof of vaccination one time this time,
Speaker 1: won't you have to do that again when there are
Speaker 1: booster shots, which we're not talking about right now because
Speaker 1: everyone knows that that would be a real kick in
Speaker 1: the face and make us realize, oh wait, they think
Speaker 1: this is reality forever now. But they're probably going to
Speaker 1: bring that up and they're still You've got the CDC
Speaker 1: director talking about variance. You got Fauci out there to variance.
Speaker 1: You know what it is? That the other thing, the variance.
Speaker 1: So yeah, that's what's actually happening. That's what we see
Speaker 1: going on, and yet we don't talk about it because
Speaker 1: it would be politically costly for Democrats. It would be
Speaker 1: a politically costly situation for them right now to say
Speaker 1: that there's going to be booster shots. But if you
Speaker 1: have to prove it this time, you're gonna have to
Speaker 1: prove it next time, which means you get you get
Speaker 1: not only forever COVID restictions, but you get forever vaccine passports.
Speaker 1: You know, just just give it time. Remember vaccine passports.
Speaker 1: Liberals are in favor of voter ID. They somehow oppose
Speaker 1: voter ID is crazy. How dare you say we should
Speaker 1: have voter ID? That's racist? Vaccine passport? Oh, that's great,
Speaker 1: go for that. They are all about it. And then
Speaker 1: you also said a Rand Paul Eric Randi Santis ticket
Speaker 1: to Santis Paul. Look, I hope de Santis runs for
Speaker 1: president and wins in twenty twenty four. That's my belief.
Speaker 1: That's my hope right now. Who knows. That's a long
Speaker 1: ways away. Rand Paul. I really like his ideas. I
Speaker 1: like his consistency and his principle. He lacks retail political
Speaker 1: retail skills he does, so I don't know if that'll work,
Speaker 1: but I do like, I do like and respect his
Speaker 1: idea he is as a politician and what he does.
Speaker 1: So I got a lot of respect for Rand Paul.
Speaker 1: But he's just not a He's not a charismatic enough
Speaker 1: guy I think to be president. That's the truth. But
Speaker 1: maybe I'm wrong. Sometimes I am not Usually that's it
Speaker 1: for today, folks, thanks so much for being here. Back tomorrow,
Speaker 1: Shield tie