Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom hunt mutiny in the House.
Speaker 1: They have decided at least some Republicans to consider impeachment
Speaker 1: against Rod Rosenstein, the number two at the d o J.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about that. Plus Trump is winning my friends
Speaker 1: on the trade war and just wait till the GDP
Speaker 1: numbers come out tomorrow. He is in fact making America
Speaker 1: great again and that makes his critics hate him even more.
Speaker 1: We've got that. Plus how the liberal left wants to
Speaker 1: take masculinity out of even young boys lives. That and
Speaker 1: much more coming up on The Buck Sexton Show. This
Speaker 1: is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission
Speaker 1: is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake American, let me rank You're a great American again.
Speaker 1: The Bucks Exton Show begins, Ana, no, quite, frankly, Uh,
Speaker 1: It's either we hold them in contempt, or we get
Speaker 1: the documents, or we impeach them. And and the only
Speaker 1: thing that we have control over is the ability to
Speaker 1: bring impeachment straight to the floor. We care about doing
Speaker 1: the right thing. It might have been a hundred twenty
Speaker 1: years since someone's been in peace, but when was the
Speaker 1: last time you ever saw the FBI. Take a disproofing
Speaker 1: document with no no credibility, no validity, no corroboration, take
Speaker 1: it to a secret court. Not tell the court who
Speaker 1: paid for it. Not tell the court that the guy
Speaker 1: who wrote it had been leaking information to the press.
Speaker 1: Win of your and not just once, four stinking times,
Speaker 1: and the last one Rod Rosenstein signed. It is appropriate
Speaker 1: that we conduct oversight of the executive branch and then
Speaker 1: we get full compliance with the executive branch on what
Speaker 1: are very legitimate document requests. Uh. Do I support impeachment
Speaker 1: of Rob Rosenstein? No? I do not. I don't think
Speaker 1: we should be cavalier with this process or with this
Speaker 1: term number one, number two. I don't think that this
Speaker 1: rises the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. So it's
Speaker 1: really high standard. They would want to hurt Rosenstein so
Speaker 1: that they could hurt them all our investigation. But hopefully
Speaker 1: saner minds will prevail on the Republican side and they
Speaker 1: won't bring this up if they did welcome their voting
Speaker 1: on undermining our democracy. Welcome to the Fox Sex to
Speaker 1: show everybody. Notice that talking point there, Notice how that
Speaker 1: goes everything Democrats don't like now is is undermining our democracy.
Speaker 1: That's right, Producer Mike. If you use straws, you're undermining
Speaker 1: our democracy. You know what I will say. If you're
Speaker 1: somebody who leaves a little bing noise on your cell phone,
Speaker 1: you're definitely undermining our democracy. People need to stop doing
Speaker 1: that in public places. You know what, I like a
Speaker 1: little the little bell noise whenever you get a tax
Speaker 1: or an email. I don't want to hear it, folks,
Speaker 1: nobody wants to hear it. Okay, it's called vibrate. That
Speaker 1: the way it should be if you don't do it.
Speaker 1: As I said, undermining our democracy. But Pelosi is crazy there,
Speaker 1: so what a surprise. So here's what we got. Uh.
Speaker 1: There is a whole slew of whole slew of different
Speaker 1: things coming together here and and we had the I
Speaker 1: had the good fortune of sitting down with Devin Newness.
Speaker 1: So I'll tell you as I said, it's not noon Yez.
Speaker 1: It is not even Neunez. He has americanized it to Newness.
Speaker 1: I know this because he told me so. I talked
Speaker 1: to Newness about all this stuff with the Rod Rod
Speaker 1: Rosenstein and the d o J and what's going on there.
Speaker 1: But today they also put out that they're thinking about
Speaker 1: impeaching Roden scene. If you go back, they've impeached some people. Oh,
Speaker 1: let's run. Why do they impeach me? I just wanted
Speaker 1: to just you know, I just want to spread the
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton love. I just wanted to give hugs and
Speaker 1: smoochie smoochyr bouci, you know, just want to grab some ladies,
Speaker 1: say hi, what's up. They impeach Bill Clinton. As you know,
Speaker 1: they've impeached the number of If you go back in time,
Speaker 1: they impeached the number of federal judges too. And way
Speaker 1: back in the day, like the nineteenth century, they would
Speaker 1: they would impeach people for like drunkenness and slovenliness and
Speaker 1: to butchery. That's basically like ye shall be forthwith banished
Speaker 1: from the federal bench for acting like a fraternity brother.
Speaker 1: You know, they would basically kick people off that that's
Speaker 1: what the House used to do way back in the day.
Speaker 1: I bet that. I bet the House was a much
Speaker 1: more interesting place and like the you know, I don't
Speaker 1: know the twenties and it is now. So anyway, that's
Speaker 1: the that's the big fight. I talked to Newness about it.
Speaker 1: I'll give you something my perspective on this one, of course.
Speaker 1: And uh, there's there's two levels here. You've got to
Speaker 1: separate this out in your mind. There's are would they
Speaker 1: be justified in impeaching Rosenstein? And then is it wise
Speaker 1: to impeach Rosenstein? That's how you have to break this
Speaker 1: whole thing down. So let's start with the first one.
Speaker 1: Would they be justified? Because this is where I think
Speaker 1: the Trump case is, or you know, the administration and
Speaker 1: some members of the Freedom Caucus in the House, how
Speaker 1: the strongest case because the answer is what the dj
Speaker 1: has been doing is not. Okay, We've got to the
Speaker 1: point here we have to ask the question if Trump
Speaker 1: just said declassify the whole five as a document and
Speaker 1: d o J said no, what would happen? You know what?
Speaker 1: The answer is, nobody knows. Department of Justice is an
Speaker 1: executive branch agency, which means that it falls under the
Speaker 1: President's article to authority. But they if they refuse to
Speaker 1: do something, what are you gonna do? You're gonna have
Speaker 1: the Department of Agriculture arrest the Department of Justice. I mean,
Speaker 1: no one really knows what would happen that would be
Speaker 1: that would be unlikely. So no, one really knows where
Speaker 1: that would go. You have a you have a true
Speaker 1: constitutional crisis, So people of bringing that up a lot.
Speaker 1: I actually asked Devin Newnis, who as you know, is
Speaker 1: in the House Intelligence Committee and has been among the
Speaker 1: most stalwarts defenders of why not even defender, He's just
Speaker 1: seeking out the truth of what really happened here, this
Speaker 1: whole FISA situation, this FISA document. If you want to
Speaker 1: see that whole interview, by the way, it's on Hill
Speaker 1: dot TV slash Rising, I would it's worth it. We
Speaker 1: talked about the biggest national security threat. We discussed what's
Speaker 1: blacked out in that FISA, what's redacted in that FISA application?
Speaker 1: What could he tell us about it? He had some
Speaker 1: interesting stuff to say on that. There's a lot there.
Speaker 1: Uh So, ba's the Rosenstein impeachment situation. I would say
Speaker 1: that there's plenty of reason for them to remove Rosenstein,
Speaker 1: assuming a few things are true. One that he has
Speaker 1: been the one slow rolling information. It's very The part
Speaker 1: of the problem of the bureaucracy is that it is
Speaker 1: intentionally set up by the people who worked there so
Speaker 1: that everybody can evade a oountability. No one is really
Speaker 1: accountable at a massive federal bureaucracy. I know because I
Speaker 1: work at the CIA. Right, Like, we invade this country,
Speaker 1: we invade that country, who is really responsible? You know?
Speaker 1: It's not us, somebody else who made that corp somebody
Speaker 1: else's call. And that's why it's very hard to reform
Speaker 1: these enormous bureaucratic beemis. Right. So Rosenstein would probably say
Speaker 1: that the slow rolling of information, the slow walk of
Speaker 1: information on the Russia collusion delusion is somebody else's fault
Speaker 1: who we don't know, but not him, Right, it's the
Speaker 1: it's the office that handles redactions, or it's the office
Speaker 1: that handles liaison with the Congress, or it's the There's
Speaker 1: always something that they can point to. So it's tough
Speaker 1: to get him on that. I'm just trying to be
Speaker 1: honest and realistic about this. And then there's the other
Speaker 1: part of this as well. If Rod Rosenstein did, in
Speaker 1: fact threatened members of the House Intelligence Committee with investigation
Speaker 1: because of their oversight duties, that alone, for me, would
Speaker 1: in fact be grounds for impeachment from office. Remember, it's
Speaker 1: not they're not talking about criminally prosecuting, talking about removing
Speaker 1: him from office, Folks, so I completely disagree with Paul Ryan,
Speaker 1: and I would note that a lot of the Democrats
Speaker 1: mark my words, folks, Nancy Pelosi, who saying Anna man
Speaker 1: actor mac Nancy Pelosi, if in fact the Democrats heaven
Speaker 1: forbid take back the House this fall. I know, I
Speaker 1: know I'm crying on the inside too, But if that
Speaker 1: were to happen, then I think it would be obvious
Speaker 1: that their position on that, her position and many other
Speaker 1: Democrats right now on how you know this is crazy
Speaker 1: and you can only it's only very serious charges that
Speaker 1: you would ever consider bringing against somebody, or that bringing
Speaker 1: somebody with impeachment to remove them from office. That will change.
Speaker 1: They're gonna impeach Trump on whatever they want. They're just
Speaker 1: gonna make something up. It doesn't matter. Impeachment is not
Speaker 1: just about criminal offenses. As I said, go back and look.
Speaker 1: Drunkenness not a criminal offense. As far as I'm aware,
Speaker 1: drunkenness was grounds for removal from the federal bench. I
Speaker 1: guess if you showed up, hey he still is. She
Speaker 1: still has three horses. No, alright, case closed. I mean
Speaker 1: that's probably bad, right if you're on the federal bench
Speaker 1: and you know, yes, you drove in with a giant
Speaker 1: trunk full of marijuana. You say, no, okay, next, Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I can understand why they remove people for that.
Speaker 1: That's that's that's fair game. Nonetheless, Rosenstein is a problem,
Speaker 1: that's for sure. Rosenstein is a an institutionalist and a
Speaker 1: bureaucrat extraordinaire. He cares more about the d o J
Speaker 1: than he does about getting to the truth of what
Speaker 1: the d o J did here, because it's bad. There's
Speaker 1: no way around it. Docier. The dossier is unacceptable as
Speaker 1: a primary or even a a a component of any
Speaker 1: kind in my opinion of what went into that fives application.
Speaker 1: It wasn't all of it, but that doesn't matter. It
Speaker 1: was too much of it, just because you can see
Speaker 1: the way it was written into that released fines application
Speaker 1: over the weekend. So I would just note that there's
Speaker 1: there's clearly what we call and I can't think of
Speaker 1: a better way to say this. I had to talk
Speaker 1: to something about this on TV recent Listen. What's a
Speaker 1: better way of saying c y A than I actually
Speaker 1: say what it stands for? Right? Um, But that's what's
Speaker 1: going on here, c y B. Cover your butt. That's
Speaker 1: what they're that's what they're doing, and that's what's motivating.
Speaker 1: Much of the Department of Justice is slow rolling and
Speaker 1: slow walking and all these other things you see going on.
Speaker 1: So I think you need to keep all of that
Speaker 1: in mind. So that's only Did they have reason to
Speaker 1: do this? Is it fair for them to do this?
Speaker 1: And the answers, Yeah, they can remove rods and steam
Speaker 1: from office. He works in the executive branch. Congress has
Speaker 1: this oversight. They can do this. They have it for
Speaker 1: a reason. By the way, I think they should start
Speaker 1: impeaching some federal judges on the Ninth Circuit, for example. Yeah,
Speaker 1: give that one some thought. Judges are just making stuff
Speaker 1: up as they go along. Judges, you think they have
Speaker 1: the right to override presidential authority on a whim. That's
Speaker 1: a big problem. We talk about high crimes and misdemeanors.
Speaker 1: Notice misdemeanors minor stuff. There's minor stuff too, So I
Speaker 1: think that impeaching Rosenstein is something that is justified on
Speaker 1: the merits. Do I think it would be wise? Is
Speaker 1: this a good thing for the Republicans to do? Well?
Speaker 1: If you just me a moment, I will collect my
Speaker 1: thoughts on this one. I will come back and give
Speaker 1: you the full rundown, the fullest of rundowns. We'll also
Speaker 1: talk about how the crazy left wants to brainwash your
Speaker 1: young uh young sons into abandoning their masculinity because you know,
Speaker 1: it's toxic. Ob v L O L It's toxic. Let's
Speaker 1: talk about that, and also a bit on Trump and trade.
Speaker 1: Big week. I mean, this administration this week is it
Speaker 1: isn't amazing how resilient. I mean, that's of all of
Speaker 1: Trump's characteristics, the resiliency of this administration. Date they went,
Speaker 1: they went to def Con one with media freak out
Speaker 1: over the whole hell sinky thing. Didn't leave a scratch
Speaker 1: on Trump's administration. Really doesn't matter. And now here we
Speaker 1: are what a week. Wee can change later and great
Speaker 1: week for Trump, Great week for Trump. So four to
Speaker 1: eight to five eight four four Buck. Also, if you
Speaker 1: like Twitter, I doing this show live. You can tweet
Speaker 1: at me or whenever you want for that matter, at
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton. We'll be right back. It is the most
Speaker 1: short sighted and I have to say stupid thing I've
Speaker 1: heard in a long time. Here you have a president
Speaker 1: who the Democrats are trying to impeach. Can you impeach
Speaker 1: a president or anyone else when you don't charge him
Speaker 1: with specific crimes, just because you disagree with what he's done.
Speaker 1: And now you have the Republicans making the case for
Speaker 1: the Democrats who want to impeach the president by offering
Speaker 1: bills of impeachment against Rod Rosenstein that don't charge crimes.
Speaker 1: Both sides do this. They use criminal law to go
Speaker 1: after their enemies. They use impeachment to go after their enemies.
Speaker 1: The big victim is the American public. Impeachment is supposed
Speaker 1: to be there for serious crimes, treason, bribery, other high
Speaker 1: crimes and misdemeanors. If you don't like the way Rob
Speaker 1: Rod Rosenstein is responding to your subpoena charging him with
Speaker 1: contempt of court, bring him to court, but do not
Speaker 1: use impeachment. There's a dish the dirsh. You know, I've
Speaker 1: actually I've managed to also now dubbed Joe Concho my
Speaker 1: colleague here at the Hill of the Conch, and people
Speaker 1: that's caught on. People like it, like the conch she's in.
Speaker 1: Joe was great, um, But the dirsh, you know, sometimes
Speaker 1: he's really spot on. I think he's totally wrong here
Speaker 1: by the way, not all in that it's a bad
Speaker 1: I I agree that it's probably counterproductive to get rid
Speaker 1: of Rosenstein. Who's gonna replace Rosenstein? Do we know he's
Speaker 1: any better? The person that takes over for Rosenstein could
Speaker 1: be another Sally Yates. We don't know. It could be
Speaker 1: another Deep Staters. So I don't think that this has
Speaker 1: the intended effect necessarily. Remember the problem here is the
Speaker 1: d J bureaucracy. It's not just one person, it's the
Speaker 1: culture of these federal agencies that think that they're a
Speaker 1: law onto themselves. I also think dirsh wrong here. I
Speaker 1: think Dirtch is wrong on the issue of how Democrats
Speaker 1: will use this Rosenstein impeachment effort against Republicans later. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they will, but they'll do it anyway, meaning that they're
Speaker 1: gonna try to what the problem that he's citing is, Well,
Speaker 1: they're not pointing to crimes for why they should impeach Rosenstein.
Speaker 1: And I'm saying, well, that's they don't have to. But
Speaker 1: I'll get into that in a second. But the Democrats
Speaker 1: aren't going to necessarily point to crimes for why they're
Speaker 1: going to impeach Trump. In fact, we know they're just
Speaker 1: gonna point to whatever the heck they want. Come ons,
Speaker 1: you're better than that. I expect more from And for
Speaker 1: those who are wondering, I have a little thing called
Speaker 1: history on my side at this one. There's this whole
Speaker 1: thing about how it has to be for high crimes
Speaker 1: and misdemeanors. You mean, for stuff like drunkenness, which is
Speaker 1: why you had uh. The federal official known as Mark
Speaker 1: Delay Delay, Hey, our de la hay Delay, sorry, Mark
Speaker 1: de la hay back in eighteen seventy three, um perhaps
Speaker 1: graft and corruption with Milliam William Bell nap back in
Speaker 1: eighteen seventy six, abuse of power. A judge in Missouri
Speaker 1: named James peck Back in eighteen thirty one, drunkenness. There's
Speaker 1: my man, John Pickering removed March twelfth, eighteen o four.
Speaker 1: So you know, there's some things here that when you
Speaker 1: look at you go hold on a second, Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: abuse of power. There's all kinds of things in here
Speaker 1: that are not necessarily crime. Certainly not that anyone went
Speaker 1: to prison for that at the time. Failure to live
Speaker 1: in his district Charles swain Back in Florida in nineteen
Speaker 1: o four. People have been impeached for these things. So
Speaker 1: his thing about it, it's only things like treason. The
Speaker 1: dirsh is just unfortunately historically speaking incorrect. Um. Just like
Speaker 1: when he talks to me about guns. I wish I
Speaker 1: could find that seenun debate where he's like states with
Speaker 1: lacks gun laws have more crime. I'm like, you mean
Speaker 1: the wild West cauldron of violence known as Vermont, which
Speaker 1: has almost no crime and almost no gun laws. I
Speaker 1: mean as some gun laws, but I'm just saying it's
Speaker 1: very blacks by US standards. Um, great state, too great
Speaker 1: in the summer, I don't. I don't skie, so I'm
Speaker 1: not I'm not undoing the winter time. But anyway, so
Speaker 1: impeachment is uh, you know I And then now it's
Speaker 1: the is it why side of things. I don't think
Speaker 1: it's smart for the Republicans to do this, and I
Speaker 1: know some of you getting Mammy buck, hold them accountable,
Speaker 1: hold them responsible. It doesn't have the intended effect though,
Speaker 1: because you're not gonna get somebody. Because here's the real thing.
Speaker 1: Do you want to impeach Rosenstein because you want to
Speaker 1: get the documents? Or do you want to impeach Rosenstein
Speaker 1: because you think that whoever takes over for him with
Speaker 1: fire Muller, if if it's if it's door number two,
Speaker 1: we know that, and oh, by the way, there's door
Speaker 1: number three here. Or the third point I'm gonna add
Speaker 1: in I'm belaboring analogies and getting this all messed up.
Speaker 1: The third point I want to make here is I
Speaker 1: don't think we should. I don't Thinkmueller should be fired
Speaker 1: right now because he's got nothing. He's grasping at straws. Folks,
Speaker 1: this is this is a bridge to nowhere. He's gonna
Speaker 1: write some pathetic report about how you know he he
Speaker 1: believes that there might have been an obstructionist state of
Speaker 1: mind the president had when he fired Come here something
Speaker 1: it's not. It's not gonna amount to anything. Will be
Speaker 1: no charges against Trump, There'll be nothing, and then we'll
Speaker 1: we'll be able to sit around and have a big
Speaker 1: laugh session at CNN and all the rest. We're going,
Speaker 1: oh my god, it's Trump Brosure and collusion. Wrong. Um
Speaker 1: So I don't think he's I don't think firing him
Speaker 1: is a good idea, even though do I think Mueller
Speaker 1: could be would be justified and ending that probe sure,
Speaker 1: But remember, should you as different than Kenya he's the
Speaker 1: line for America, his back rough day for Facebook on
Speaker 1: on Drudge and on the stock market, neverwhere else. And
Speaker 1: the Drudge Report right now has up death to the algorithm.
Speaker 1: Facebook spiral stock down almost today, the largest, the largest
Speaker 1: single day loss of wealth I think in any stock
Speaker 1: in US history, right and I think Mark producer Mike
Speaker 1: is my unofficial financial advisor, so I always check in
Speaker 1: with him. He's running. Dude, you guys are this guy? Seriously?
Speaker 1: I never see how he gets to work. I think
Speaker 1: it's in a gold plated Rolls Royce because he's very
Speaker 1: knowledgeable about stocks, bonds, you know. But he just keeps
Speaker 1: it quiet. He keeps on the down low. He hangs
Speaker 1: out with hand of these people a lot too. Is
Speaker 1: you know, he's he knows, he knows all the good
Speaker 1: stuff he's got. He's got access to all the info,
Speaker 1: all the big CEOs and insiders. But producer Mike am
Speaker 1: I correct. This was the biggest one day, biggest one
Speaker 1: day drop in history for in terms of loss of
Speaker 1: wealth in one US stock billions and billions of dollars,
Speaker 1: Mark Zuckerberg wost sixteen billion. Personally. Yeah, you got hammered.
Speaker 1: There you go. Sa analysis you need he got hammered,
Speaker 1: got hammered. Don't invest with people who don't understand conservativism.
Speaker 1: That's another rule of mine. Well there you go. I
Speaker 1: like i'd say this. It's hard for me. I'm trying
Speaker 1: to be a conspiracy theorist here. It's hard for me though,
Speaker 1: not to feel like it's not just this week, because
Speaker 1: this week we remember shadow banning is a Twitter thing.
Speaker 1: I should by the way, Mike, can we check and
Speaker 1: see if I've ever been shadow banned? Because I feel
Speaker 1: like I could have been shadow band at some point.
Speaker 1: My name is Buck Sexton. I could be a Russian bot.
Speaker 1: Uh you know somebody one of the one of the
Speaker 1: lady national security analyst at CNN and tweeted at me
Speaker 1: not too long ago. Sound you sound like a Russian
Speaker 1: bot to me? I wanna be like, is that what
Speaker 1: we have asking me from my phone number? But well,
Speaker 1: according to Alex Jones, you know a very definition of
Speaker 1: the deep state, and then that is actually I have
Speaker 1: the definition of the deep state. If I were the
Speaker 1: definitely deep set, I feel like I'd have a bigger apartment.
Speaker 1: But you know, yeah, it's it's true. I here secure
Speaker 1: smoke satisfied. I mean, Dallas is a substation. I've seen it.
Speaker 1: I've seen it. Barbecue's family. Was he saying that all
Speaker 1: his family were like former spies or something. I don't know.
Speaker 1: It's such a weird what a weird guy. But here's
Speaker 1: the thing, folks, I know, I know, and I know
Speaker 1: some of you are Alex Jones list. I know some
Speaker 1: of you. I hear you. You you semi message, You're like,
Speaker 1: but buck like, come on, I mean something, I'm like,
Speaker 1: knock nup, knob, don't don't pull that. Don't pull that
Speaker 1: with me, that buck buck stuff. You listen to whoever
Speaker 1: you are, but don't try to convert me. Team. He said, No,
Speaker 1: he's really makes sense on the Chemp trails. No, no, no, no.
Speaker 1: You can listen to whoever you want. But I'm not
Speaker 1: saying he made fun of the hair. You come after
Speaker 1: the swoop, You've got to apologize. There's no there's no
Speaker 1: coming back from that, Jones. Alex Jones made fun of
Speaker 1: the swoop. I'm I do not forge yet. Uh So, anyway,
Speaker 1: with the with the whole shadow banning thing, which that
Speaker 1: sounds so scary, doesn't you've been shadow band It sounds
Speaker 1: like something could happened to people in the Gulag archipelago
Speaker 1: shadow band. Uh. It means that they down rank you
Speaker 1: and and I've been saying this for a long time
Speaker 1: because it's just I refuse to believe that these progressive
Speaker 1: companies were It's so easy to create algorithms that you know,
Speaker 1: down rank insert and search is a huge like Google
Speaker 1: is obviously best known for being a search engine, although
Speaker 1: it has all these other businesses now too. It's now
Speaker 1: called Alphabet. Don't even call I mean Alphabet is the
Speaker 1: parent company that owns Google. Uh. But when you do search,
Speaker 1: whatever pops up in the first page is basically what
Speaker 1: the world sees, and whatever is in the first few
Speaker 1: results is really all that anyone cares about. For the
Speaker 1: most part. It's like a huge percentage of the actual
Speaker 1: traffic is the first few results. So, for example, for
Speaker 1: a news organization, if you show up in top of
Speaker 1: search results when people look up you know, big fire
Speaker 1: California or something, whatever comes up is going to get
Speaker 1: a tremendous amount of traffic. Think of the power then
Speaker 1: that these search organizations or search engines have when it
Speaker 1: comes to supporting or not a media enterprise. Now that's
Speaker 1: true of Facebook, and it's true of Twitter. Facebook was
Speaker 1: and has been thought of as a better place for
Speaker 1: conservatives for a long time because it's so much about
Speaker 1: what the community shares with each other, and there's just
Speaker 1: we've just known this. I've sat down with all these
Speaker 1: different social media specialists and you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: you listening to the show right now. Of the of
Speaker 1: the people that listen to this radio show, for example,
Speaker 1: I think it's a fair estimate that about of you
Speaker 1: are at least on Facebook. Maybe you don't use it,
Speaker 1: but at least you have a Facebook account, and something
Speaker 1: more like five pc of you are probably on Twitter.
Speaker 1: It is way way smaller, and it might even be
Speaker 1: more like two or three percent. It's a very small
Speaker 1: amount of you listening to this show based on all
Speaker 1: the data that I've seen, are on Twitter. Facebook has
Speaker 1: been a stronghold for conservatives for a while. They get
Speaker 1: their thoughts out there, and it's also a way to
Speaker 1: go around the mainstream media platforms, which are still dominated
Speaker 1: by one corporations that often have CEOs and boards that
Speaker 1: that skew pretty left, you know places. You know. Ge
Speaker 1: was the for profit arm of the Obama administration. For example.
Speaker 1: I mean, when you look at the way that some
Speaker 1: of these companies not just are are are acting in
Speaker 1: the public sphere, but also their political connections, they can
Speaker 1: be very left wing. They could be very left wing indeed,
Speaker 1: and Facebook is no is no different. I mean, Mark
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg is very much a quality a quasi open borders guy.
Speaker 1: He's somebody who you know, the guys are liberal. Okay,
Speaker 1: so keep that in mind. But but this has been
Speaker 1: brewing for a while, and that there's this kind of
Speaker 1: perfect storm of the shadow banning thing on Twitter. We
Speaker 1: find out is real. It's real. They were doing it.
Speaker 1: Now they're saying, oh, sorry, we're just kind of like, sorry, conservatives,
Speaker 1: we're targeted with toads and accident. Sure it was, but
Speaker 1: so we know that that wasn't just something that we
Speaker 1: were imagining. It's real. And then beyond that, beyond that,
Speaker 1: you had this months of gathering criticism about Facebook for
Speaker 1: all the Russia collusion stuff, and people like, oh my gosh, Facebook,
Speaker 1: it needs to do more. It needs to do more
Speaker 1: to combat untrue stuff on social media. This is thank
Speaker 1: you about this. It's not Facebook's job to do fact checking,
Speaker 1: and any of you who have any uh, familiarity with
Speaker 1: a little thing called PolitiFact. It's nonsense what they put
Speaker 1: out a lot of the time. I don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know if it was CBS is fact Checker like
Speaker 1: CBS News or politifacts. Fact Checker recently said that it's
Speaker 1: not accurate to call the dossier a Clinton campaign document
Speaker 1: or a Clinton funded campaign document. Yeah, producer Mike is
Speaker 1: like throwing things at the wall over there. I know, dude,
Speaker 1: it's crazy. It's crazy. How how is that the case?
Speaker 1: How is it possible that you could come up with?
Speaker 1: But this is true on a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: whether it's the Washington Post with their you know there,
Speaker 1: I will say, I like their whole pants on fire thing, Right,
Speaker 1: isn't that no pinocchios not pants on fire? What am
Speaker 1: I saying? Now? That's not as cute? Would be better
Speaker 1: if they had like the pants on fire, you know,
Speaker 1: like you get three pants on fire, four pants on fire?
Speaker 1: Liar liar? Uh? You know, think of where this goes.
Speaker 1: We've already seen that they are turning against conservatives based
Speaker 1: on the algorithms. If you give them not just more leeway,
Speaker 1: but a a sense that they have some obligation if
Speaker 1: the social media networks, which are the dominant information platforms
Speaker 1: present and future, My friends, Okay, a lot of the
Speaker 1: channels you rely on right now, they're they're not going
Speaker 1: to be the big the cable news channel, they're not
Speaker 1: going to be the big players the future. It's all
Speaker 1: going digital. And if you're in a position to even
Speaker 1: make minor adjustments to what gets shared via Facebook and
Speaker 1: these other places, it look they've they've basically killed off
Speaker 1: news organizations already, and face by Facebook changing its algorithm,
Speaker 1: which it did a couple of years ago, largely said
Speaker 1: I could make more money, saying that, you know, you
Speaker 1: gotta pay us for this stuff. Now. Yeah, micro remembers that.
Speaker 1: What are you telling me now? That just reminded me
Speaker 1: the New York Daily News. Oh yeah, Daily News. It's
Speaker 1: just it's tough to feel. Look, I feel badly for
Speaker 1: anybody who loses their job just because it stinks, right,
Speaker 1: and you're a human being, you don't want to lose
Speaker 1: their job. But I just was the Daily News cover
Speaker 1: wasn't psychotic. You know, if if they weren't running psychotic
Speaker 1: front covers, I'd have a little more like, Okay, they're
Speaker 1: doing journalism. It was. It was pretty pretty tacky stuff
Speaker 1: that they're putting out. Um, I just I thought the
Speaker 1: daily news reporting and and a lot a lot of
Speaker 1: the editorial columns that they would print. We're just it
Speaker 1: just wasn't very good. Just honest, it wasn't a good paper.
Speaker 1: I don't know, So, you know, I feel badly for
Speaker 1: people there, except it's not a good It wasn't a
Speaker 1: good product. So does everybody get to this is this
Speaker 1: is something Mike, Mike has really I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: about this. Journalists are so much quicker to like play
Speaker 1: the world's smallest violin for other journalists getting getting fired
Speaker 1: unless they're conservatives, and then whatever they get, whatever, like
Speaker 1: scorn they can heap on them, they will. But journalists
Speaker 1: always break out the world's smallest violin for other journalists,
Speaker 1: but not for normal Americans. You know. So so when
Speaker 1: when you'll see that people you know at uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the New York Times, when they write about like massive
Speaker 1: layoffs in some town in South Carolina or something, they
Speaker 1: can do it with the sterility like we're just bringing
Speaker 1: the news on this. You know, this would happen ten
Speaker 1: thousand people, no more paycheck, no more healthcare, stings for them.
Speaker 1: But oh my gosh, the Daily News, like, you know,
Speaker 1: half the staff fire there. Look, I've folks, I'm the
Speaker 1: guy who has I had to get on the phone
Speaker 1: many times and calm people down after Uh, this has
Speaker 1: all been well publicized. Glenn talked about it too. When
Speaker 1: I was at the Blaze, there were some tough times
Speaker 1: there we had. We had lots of people that get
Speaker 1: laid off, and a lot of them would call me
Speaker 1: and say, you know, what's next and what can I do?
Speaker 1: And you know, how can you help me? So I'm
Speaker 1: very attached to the human side of all this. But yeah,
Speaker 1: the Daily News mm hmmm, I don't know. It's uh,
Speaker 1: it's going all digital. I think they're keeping forty people anyway.
Speaker 1: Facebook Facebook stock got crushed today, which thanks for buck.
Speaker 1: I hope Miss Molly likes rama noodles, you know, or
Speaker 1: maybe uh, we're gonna gon me up in my peanut butter.
Speaker 1: Count peanut butter if you're looking for calories in you know,
Speaker 1: if you're really just looking to I would go, I'm
Speaker 1: in butter. But that's a little fruitful. I'm about is expensive.
Speaker 1: You got like a good thing of almond butter. It's
Speaker 1: like fifteen bucks. You get a thing a Jiffy, get
Speaker 1: it a Walmart. It's like two dollars, you know. And
Speaker 1: then if you don't cast shoe butter yet, man, that's crazy.
Speaker 1: Cash butter is amazing. Look at you, your dude, producer,
Speaker 1: Mike so bougie. I can't even see John right now,
Speaker 1: but I know John's into the bougie nut butters too.
Speaker 1: I'm look I'm all about the buggie nut butters. Like occasionally,
Speaker 1: if I'm feeling really saucy, you'll have some brazil nut milk,
Speaker 1: which is delicious. I know it sounds. I know people
Speaker 1: are all these some of you are giggling. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I get it. But of the nut milks, brazil nut
Speaker 1: milk is is my favorite. Um a little. They tend
Speaker 1: to add the sugar to these things, though it's not
Speaker 1: pretty good for you. As we know, almond milk though
Speaker 1: these aren't milks, their juices. It's really it's really nut juice.
Speaker 1: We're gonna be clear about this because there's just they're
Speaker 1: squeezing nuts and making juice out of it. There's no
Speaker 1: there's really no milk. Milk comes from an animal side note,
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, man. So Facebook is uh, Facebook stock got
Speaker 1: crushed today. I think it's because Facebook is trying to
Speaker 1: straddle this line of being a public utility but also
Speaker 1: a vehicle for social for social enterprise and for you know,
Speaker 1: being in charge of what people can see, but also
Speaker 1: just being a platform of what they can post. And
Speaker 1: there was a meeting today and this is what I
Speaker 1: meant to get to, and I'm sorry Mike got me
Speaker 1: talking about nutmilk. There was a meeting today I blame
Speaker 1: Mike code Red where they had some senior Facebook executives
Speaker 1: and some journalists. And the journalists are like, well, what
Speaker 1: are you gonna do to stop fake news from being
Speaker 1: shared on I mean not fake news? What are you
Speaker 1: gonna do to stop Fox News with all of its
Speaker 1: fake news from being shared on Facebook? Like, you're gonna
Speaker 1: that's the most popular cable channel on cable TV. You're
Speaker 1: gonna you're gonna strip Fox News from Facebook. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is what so called journalists are asking. And then
Speaker 1: they threw in for wars in there too, which you know,
Speaker 1: we'll see. I'm not yet sold. Alex Jones is beard.
Speaker 1: I gotta see how he really grows it out, and
Speaker 1: then we'll have a full we'll have a more fulsome
Speaker 1: discussion on this one. But he I think he is.
Speaker 1: Do we know, Mike, is he banned from Facebook yet?
Speaker 1: We're not sure yet. He might be banned from Facebook.
Speaker 1: I think he's saying he is. This is the new warfare,
Speaker 1: This is the new mainstream media fight. It is not
Speaker 1: with the mainstream well, it's with the mainstre media, but
Speaker 1: it's the one of the future is going to be
Speaker 1: with the social media platforms because they are now the
Speaker 1: mainstream media. They're a part of it. They are the
Speaker 1: delivery mechanism for left wing narratives and for the suppression
Speaker 1: of conservative thought and for all the truth that comes
Speaker 1: with it. Eight four four nine to eight to five
Speaker 1: eight four four nine d buck. We will talk trade,
Speaker 1: because it's a great day for trade, great day for America.
Speaker 1: We'll get into some of that um and and all
Speaker 1: those fine we'll talk about farms. If anybody out there
Speaker 1: in farm country wants to call in people that work
Speaker 1: on farms also known as farmers, if you have any
Speaker 1: thoughts or ideas on this, let me know. I'm very
Speaker 1: curious see what you think. And uh, we got that
Speaker 1: much more so. Stare at their team. He should you're
Speaker 1: a real decent garbage and you look around and you
Speaker 1: see all these emptycats, and you realize, I'm eating in
Speaker 1: New York City. People will not call and pay money
Speaker 1: to hear you see it's a garden in your garbage. Person,
Speaker 1: you first secretary, Now you're lying in your book street
Speaker 1: don't call you a fire all right? You get the idea.
Speaker 1: So that's that's uh, that's some I rate liberal? Or
Speaker 1: do I repeat myself at a book event with Sean
Speaker 1: Spicer where he just stands up at a Barnes and
Speaker 1: Noble in Brooklyn, I gotta say, Sean Spicer from Brooklyn.
Speaker 1: Brooklyn is crazy Libs central for New York. Now Brooklyn
Speaker 1: is where the craziest of the Libs gather. And I
Speaker 1: am a lot surprised. But you know, there's such a
Speaker 1: such a lack of civility. Dare I say that? We
Speaker 1: see once again you got them going after Sean Spicer.
Speaker 1: Here you've got some other imbecile who took a pick
Speaker 1: axe to Trump's star on the Walk of Fame in Hollywood,
Speaker 1: which you know it's just vandalism, but why be such
Speaker 1: an idiot? Um? And then you had somebody else who
Speaker 1: loosed uh, what's your Betsy devas is forty million dollar
Speaker 1: yacht from its mooring and did ten thousand dollars of damage.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, who loosed the yacht from the mooring?
Speaker 1: Such savages? You know, I mean, you gotta. I'm pretty
Speaker 1: sure if you're gonna be on a forty million dollar yacht,
Speaker 1: you have to wear an ascot and a hat with
Speaker 1: an anchor on it. Like. I don't think you're allowed
Speaker 1: to step on it without that. I think that's the uniform.
Speaker 1: But yeah, she's, uh, she's upset too about that. She's
Speaker 1: she's upset, um, understandably so. But this is I cannot
Speaker 1: remember a single Obama administration official who faced any of this,
Speaker 1: any of this kind of nonsense, um, either while they
Speaker 1: were in office or or you know, while they were
Speaker 1: serving in government or afterwards. But this is I suppose
Speaker 1: we're we're supposed to accept this as conservatives. This is
Speaker 1: just the way that it's it's gonna be right, that's
Speaker 1: what they tell us. Um. Now, Spicy can handle it.
Speaker 1: I think the biggest favor that anyone did him in
Speaker 1: the meeting was actually lista McCarthy impersonating him because that
Speaker 1: actually made him kind of likable. But spicy is gonna
Speaker 1: be fine. It is just a trend though, right. I
Speaker 1: can think of all those off the top of my head.
Speaker 1: Maniac liberals acting like maniacs. There is no equivalent on
Speaker 1: the right. They can pretend like there is, but they're
Speaker 1: just isn't You and I both know that? So Hey,
Speaker 1: at least on the side of the normal same people,
Speaker 1: isn't that nice? Uh, we're gonna talk about Trump and
Speaker 1: trade and farms and China, oh my coming up. The
Speaker 1: economy is booming right now, and that means that if
Speaker 1: you're hiring, you are in a talent situation where you
Speaker 1: gotta get the best and you've got to get them
Speaker 1: through your hiring process quickly, right. You don't want any delays,
Speaker 1: and you certainly don't want to make a bad decision
Speaker 1: about who you hire. Global Verification Network is essential in
Speaker 1: that process for everybody listening to show out there. If
Speaker 1: you are in the HR department of a company large
Speaker 1: or small, or if you're a small business owner, you
Speaker 1: want to make sure that you're getting the right people
Speaker 1: for your business. If you happen to be the CEO
Speaker 1: of a massive company, that's great to Global Verification Network
Speaker 1: is the background investigation in vetting company you want to use.
Speaker 1: You go to my g VN dot com or call
Speaker 1: them at eight seven seven six nine five seven nine.
Speaker 1: That's eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine.
Speaker 1: They always pick up the phone when you call. They
Speaker 1: don't outsource any of your data. They're the only dual
Speaker 1: certified veteran owned background investigation and vetting company. Global Verification
Speaker 1: Network leave no stone unturned my g VN dot com.
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Mission, decoding the news and disseminating information. You
Speaker 1: have actionable intelligence. Make no mistake, American Great, You're a
Speaker 1: great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show. Analyst
Speaker 1: st No, even the politicians in Washington, nobody wanted me
Speaker 1: to be doing what I'm doing. The country was doing well,
Speaker 1: but ultimately it was gonna be a very bad thing
Speaker 1: for our country. So I did it, and I did
Speaker 1: it when we were the strongest. We're having the best
Speaker 1: economy we've ever had in the history of our country.
Speaker 1: This is the time to straighten out the worst trade
Speaker 1: deals ever made by any country on Earth ever in history.
Speaker 1: These deals were made by people I don't know if
Speaker 1: they didn't understand, or if they didn't care, or if
Speaker 1: they didn't frankly love our country, but we have the
Speaker 1: worst trade deals ever made in history. But now they're
Speaker 1: becoming good again. Every time this president is told by
Speaker 1: the critics and the naysayers and they know nothing, you
Speaker 1: can't do it, you shouldn't do it, no one's ever
Speaker 1: done it, he goes and does it. He pulls out
Speaker 1: of the Paris Accords, he moved the the embassies to Jerusalem.
Speaker 1: He get out of the Rand Deal, he got the
Speaker 1: corporate taxway from thirty on and on on, the deregulation,
Speaker 1: and now the trade And every time the naysayers and
Speaker 1: critics to it, they're just they're proving his point about
Speaker 1: being a man of action in the town's town to
Speaker 1: talk about getting rid of all these locknest monsters and
Speaker 1: other alligators here in the swamp. Why is it important.
Speaker 1: It's important because it goes beyond him just keeping a
Speaker 1: promise to the American worker and American interest to renegotiate
Speaker 1: these imbalanced, unfair, non reciprocal trade deals. He's actually putting
Speaker 1: America first. But by standing shoulder to shoulder with other leaders,
Speaker 1: in this case the EU welcome back, folks. Good to
Speaker 1: have you here on the Box Section show. I'm I'm
Speaker 1: watching this whole trade situation play out, and isn't it?
Speaker 1: Is it amazing to see how even when when things
Speaker 1: are starting to look up for Trump on this, the
Speaker 1: the the naysayers, it's Kelly and comedy. But there She's right.
Speaker 1: That's what they are, that the chorus of Oh Trump
Speaker 1: doesn't understandything, he doesn't know anything. They never think maybe
Speaker 1: maybe we were wrong, maybe we should hear him out,
Speaker 1: or even we should let this play out. They're still
Speaker 1: so set. There is a stubbornness that is a characteristic
Speaker 1: of the failure of previous elitist thinking on this issue.
Speaker 1: And that's what's really at risk here. The same way
Speaker 1: that Trump causes so many of our permanent governing class
Speaker 1: in both the government and the media and corporate America
Speaker 1: to question how special and how wonderful they really are.
Speaker 1: And they hate that. They absolutely hated the trade experts,
Speaker 1: the international economist, the you know, the I. M. F.
Speaker 1: Latte drinking set. They see what Trump is doing and
Speaker 1: it's supposed to be terribly disruptive and awful and crash
Speaker 1: the economy and and wait a second, what if he's right.
Speaker 1: That's the one thing they never factored into their considerations
Speaker 1: of this, one possibility that they never considered was what
Speaker 1: if Trump is right and these trade deals are in
Speaker 1: fact bad. CNBC's Sarah Eisen got to sit down with
Speaker 1: Jack lou who some of you may vaguely recall as
Speaker 1: Obama's Treasury secretary, and she wanted to push him a
Speaker 1: bit on uh, on this this trade deal that is
Speaker 1: looking like it's gonna happen with the EU, which would
Speaker 1: be a great thing for the American economy, which is
Speaker 1: not a deal that people thought he'd be able to
Speaker 1: get done, and they were saying it's just gonna result
Speaker 1: in trade war. Instead, it looks like it's gonna result
Speaker 1: in a better agreement. Oh, you mean a negotiation can
Speaker 1: involve some some sticks as well as carrots, some pushback,
Speaker 1: and not just getting pushed around. Isn't this a shock?
Speaker 1: Here is CNBC Sarah Eisen talking to the former Obama
Speaker 1: Treasury secretary about Trump's pending EU deal. Play it. I mean,
Speaker 1: we're creating part of the problem right now with our policy. Theoretically,
Speaker 1: this would avoid those auto tariffs, which I hope I
Speaker 1: certainly hope that's the case. I'm in a little bit
Speaker 1: of a bad position to respond, not knowing the full details.
Speaker 1: I do I think avoiding auto tariffs would be a
Speaker 1: very good thing. Auto traps would hurt the American economy
Speaker 1: and certainly the European economy as well. But I mean,
Speaker 1: if this is true, this would be certainly a win
Speaker 1: for the administration, and it would show the world that
Speaker 1: these tough trade tactics are working. This idea of short
Speaker 1: term pain for long term games certainly not the way
Speaker 1: you guys went about I kind of beg to differ
Speaker 1: on that. I think if you look at the role
Speaker 1: the United States has played in the world for the
Speaker 1: last seventy years, In the last few months, we've seen
Speaker 1: more damage to the U S leadership in the world
Speaker 1: that I could have imagined in a short period of time.
Speaker 1: What damage? Notice, how would just I was just waiting
Speaker 1: for him to go undermining our democracy? Right that collision?
Speaker 1: I mean, what damage? Damage to leadership? How? Where? Where?
Speaker 1: Where is this damage? They say these things, and all
Speaker 1: the numbers prove otherwise. All the numbers look great comparatively
Speaker 1: to what they were, and in some cases comparatively, what
Speaker 1: they've ever been, but they'll talk about the destruction. Notice
Speaker 1: it's these are all word games with them. It's all narrative.
Speaker 1: It's all story that they create, they fabricate. It's fiction.
Speaker 1: Dare I say it's fake news. That's the former Treasury secretary,
Speaker 1: and he can't even deal with the reality what that
Speaker 1: CNBC reporters putting in front of him, which is, you guys,
Speaker 1: didn't do this, but this looks like it's working. What
Speaker 1: do you think, Well, there's destroying a leadership in the
Speaker 1: whole world and stuff, and you know, destroying the leadership.
Speaker 1: And here's here's a here's a here's just a fun thought, folks.
Speaker 1: Obama doesn't know anything about the economy, or did not
Speaker 1: at all when he became president. Perhaps he learned a
Speaker 1: bit while he was president. I mean, he's the guy
Speaker 1: who said that it was a good idea to put
Speaker 1: coal out of coal plants, you know, the essentially mothball
Speaker 1: them and electricity prices skyrocketing. I mean, he had a
Speaker 1: rudimentary at best understanding of and where it's not just
Speaker 1: economics of how markets work, of how business works. Commerce,
Speaker 1: that's what matters so much more. It's one of the
Speaker 1: problems I have actually with our education system is that
Speaker 1: will teach these economic theories and economists can predict stuff,
Speaker 1: don't know nearly as much as they think they know,
Speaker 1: and have a terrible track record for being effectively useless.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying, it's true. Much better to learn about
Speaker 1: how does it how does a business work, how do
Speaker 1: markets work? How does the economy actually function, not how
Speaker 1: do you think it would function based on some things
Speaker 1: you write on a board. And Trump understands that because
Speaker 1: he's been doing it for a very long time. Obama
Speaker 1: had never run a business. Obama's only business was the
Speaker 1: business of obama Ism. But we were led to believe
Speaker 1: that he was. You know, he was a great steward
Speaker 1: to the economy. His greatest contribution was essentially saying that
Speaker 1: the rich aren't doing enough for the poor. You know,
Speaker 1: that the rich need to have more of their money
Speaker 1: taken away. In fact, when they mean rich, what they
Speaker 1: mean are people that are just beginning to hit their
Speaker 1: peak earning years. They need to give more of their
Speaker 1: money away to other people because they very rich don't
Speaker 1: care about taxes and redistribution. And the very rich are uh,
Speaker 1: there's there's plenty of them, as you know, we're Democrats, right,
Speaker 1: plenty of the super rich, and they'll rail on about
Speaker 1: taxes all the time. But Jack lu goes right back
Speaker 1: to the talking points. Well there when when confunded with
Speaker 1: what if what Trump is doing is working? And I
Speaker 1: just hope we can continue with this until the mid terms,
Speaker 1: because what if? What an amazing affirmation of Trump's success.
Speaker 1: It would be if, despite all the historical evidence that
Speaker 1: the partying power gets you know, gets crushed in a
Speaker 1: in mid term elections in the in the first term
Speaker 1: of presidency, despite all that stuff, if Trump is able
Speaker 1: to if the Republican Party and Trump are able to
Speaker 1: hold the House, it will send a really profound message
Speaker 1: to all the doubters and the haters, as Trump would say,
Speaker 1: And this is this is what leadership is. Leadership is
Speaker 1: not getting up giving a speech that some other people
Speaker 1: wrote for you that you know everybody that you want
Speaker 1: to impress is going to say is good. And that
Speaker 1: involves no new thinking or no new processing of information
Speaker 1: and requires no risks. Leadership must entail some risks. If
Speaker 1: your decision making is always consensus, you are not a leader.
Speaker 1: You are merely a vessel through which that consensus passes,
Speaker 1: which is what for liberalism and the left, Obama was
Speaker 1: wasn't really leading, especially on issues of the economy. So
Speaker 1: there you have it. There you have it. Um. It
Speaker 1: also means looking at the long term versus the short term,
Speaker 1: which Wilbur Ross becoming an increasingly visible part of this
Speaker 1: administration he managed. He made a very a point that
Speaker 1: I've been making here. Don't you love it when some
Speaker 1: of these very important, powerful government officials sound just like
Speaker 1: buck Sexton later on after he's been saying it. I
Speaker 1: think it's great. Here's the world. We're all said about
Speaker 1: the situation right now with Trede Plate twelve. If you
Speaker 1: have to get into a spat with someone, the right
Speaker 1: time to do it is when your own economy is
Speaker 1: booming as ours is. You've seen the record low unemployment,
Speaker 1: you've seen people coming back to the workforce. That's right,
Speaker 1: I gotta do it now. It feels a little bit
Speaker 1: like why rock the boat now? Why do this when
Speaker 1: things are going so well? Well? The point is a
Speaker 1: leader says, you know what, this is the time when
Speaker 1: I have the leeway to do what's necessary to perhaps
Speaker 1: protect our agricultural sector from intentional this is, by the way,
Speaker 1: it's it's foreign interference in our elections with the Chinese
Speaker 1: are doing. The Chinese are specifically targeting their economic policies
Speaker 1: to hurt Trump in the midterms. That's what they're doing.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that, oh well, it's the same as
Speaker 1: what Russia did. But people try to influence our elections
Speaker 1: in a million different ways. They always have and they
Speaker 1: always will. Outsiders, foreign governments, foreign corporations, and people are
Speaker 1: trying to do all kinds of things. Trump is showing
Speaker 1: some real, real backbone on this issue. And you know,
Speaker 1: steel is an area where also he's obviously been making
Speaker 1: a lot of inruns. Here's the president about that. Play
Speaker 1: a team, do we do? We have eighteen? My friend,
Speaker 1: Over the last two decades, nearly two thirds of American
Speaker 1: raw steel companies went out of business. More than one
Speaker 1: third of the steel jobs vanished. We need steel mills
Speaker 1: for national security. Remember that this is and just price.
Speaker 1: This isn't just gee. We could do it for a
Speaker 1: little bit less. We needed for national security. You know,
Speaker 1: there's there's a point here that I think often gets lost,
Speaker 1: which is that we always think about just and Trump
Speaker 1: is right to focus in on price. People say, well,
Speaker 1: look at Walmart, all this made in China stuff means
Speaker 1: you've got all this stuff. Let me tell you if
Speaker 1: somebody you just moved most of you listen to this,
Speaker 1: and you know this, folks, you know that you've got
Speaker 1: so much more crap in your house and your apartment
Speaker 1: or whatever then you need. I mean, we're just drowning
Speaker 1: in a lot of useless consumer goods these days. It
Speaker 1: was some of it's amazing and great. And you know
Speaker 1: you've got more computing power in your pocket if you
Speaker 1: have a smartphone that than the whole NATO Alliance had
Speaker 1: a nineteen fifty. Okay, so you you look at all
Speaker 1: this stuff, and it's worth keeping in mind that that
Speaker 1: price is not the only price is not the only
Speaker 1: thing that matters in an economy, and that matters to
Speaker 1: a country because we've lost this domestic industry, which also
Speaker 1: means we have to import a lot of this stuff
Speaker 1: ensure it's chee But you know what else would be
Speaker 1: cheap stuff that we're making here. You don't have to
Speaker 1: send it from overseas to us, right That that also
Speaker 1: is is another way of looking at this. Um. You know,
Speaker 1: when you don't have domestic industry. You're also more at
Speaker 1: the whim of of international market fluctuations, and you know
Speaker 1: there are tradeoffs here. I'm not saying that this is
Speaker 1: a this is all win win, but it's kind of
Speaker 1: like you know that liberals are lying on immigration when
Speaker 1: they tell you that illegal immigration only has upside. It's
Speaker 1: just not true. It's obviously untrue. You know that the
Speaker 1: Democrats are lying when or it's not just Democrats. I
Speaker 1: I retract that statement. You know that the anti Trump
Speaker 1: opposition on trade is lying because they make it sound
Speaker 1: like anything that Trump tries to do on trade is
Speaker 1: a bad idea. Anything he does in terms of fighting
Speaker 1: back against tariffs or trying to negotiate new deals is bad.
Speaker 1: NAFTA is over twenty years old. They didn't have the
Speaker 1: internet when NAPTA came into effect. But oh no, no,
Speaker 1: don't touch NAFTA. Don't touch NAFTA. You know, this is
Speaker 1: stale thinking from people that don't lead and don't want
Speaker 1: to take risks, and sometimes you take You need a
Speaker 1: billionaire who doesn't give a what about what people think
Speaker 1: about him to get things done, and that's what we're seeing.
Speaker 1: Will it work? I hope so not sure yet. But
Speaker 1: mark my words, if if these I'm hearing, because I
Speaker 1: now I'm swamp connected, my the vines from my swamp
Speaker 1: perch here extend far and wide all throughout the district
Speaker 1: of Columbia. Now, if those g d P numbers tomorrow
Speaker 1: are what I think they are, it is going to
Speaker 1: be a straight up buck slap to the Obama years
Speaker 1: with regard to the economy. Just just show we did
Speaker 1: not have to suffer through that anemic growth, We did
Speaker 1: not have to deal with such slow recovery from a
Speaker 1: cyclical recession. We didn't have to deal with all that stuff.
Speaker 1: It was bad policy, bad thinking, and poor leadership from
Speaker 1: the Democrats. And I think tomorrow will be one of
Speaker 1: the biggest data points in that once we see these
Speaker 1: d I mean, they're looking like it might be three
Speaker 1: three for the year, folks, So well, well we'll get
Speaker 1: there eight four four to eight to five, eight four
Speaker 1: or four nine. Buck. If you want to give me
Speaker 1: a ring, I will be right back. I was dragging
Speaker 1: today a little bit. You know what I decided to do.
Speaker 1: I wasn't gonna have my third cup of coffee in
Speaker 1: three hours because I probably was on coffee cup number
Speaker 1: four or five. When I got to this point, I
Speaker 1: needed something else, give me a little bit of a boost.
Speaker 1: I needed something to help me get some energy for
Speaker 1: the rest of the day. You know what I went
Speaker 1: with Strike Force Energy, Strikeforces Veteran owned and American made,
Speaker 1: my friends. It's so easy. It comes these little packets.
Speaker 1: What you do is you mix the liquid in the
Speaker 1: packet with water, with tea, lemonade, you can put it
Speaker 1: in some yogurt. You can even put in a beer
Speaker 1: if you want to. And it is full of all
Speaker 1: of that stuff that you need in order to get
Speaker 1: you fired up for the day. It'll fuel you through
Speaker 1: your toughest fights, whether it's going to the gym, getting
Speaker 1: through your working hours, or just making sure you've got
Speaker 1: energy at home. Also, for every packet you buy, they'll
Speaker 1: donate one to military service members overseas. Go to strike
Speaker 1: Force Energy dot com and our discount code bucket check out.
Speaker 1: That's strike Force Energy dot Com discount code buck at checkout.
Speaker 1: CNBC Wrap It Update, which is the medium of ten
Speaker 1: tracking forecast on the street running at four point two percent.
Speaker 1: That's a really strong number. You GDP four that are
Speaker 1: expecting tomorrow. That was CNBC just give me a little
Speaker 1: bit of audio on that one uh four over four percent.
Speaker 1: The best during all eight years of the Obama presidency
Speaker 1: was one quarter at five point two percent. That was
Speaker 1: over eight years and then included after a trillion dollar
Speaker 1: hours of spending and coming out of a recession. When
Speaker 1: you think that we would have, you know, an economy
Speaker 1: that was just roaring and ready to go, but you
Speaker 1: know you didn't build that is not inspiring for business
Speaker 1: owners and for American American ingenuity. You know you didn't
Speaker 1: build that. Right, pay your fair share. These were you
Speaker 1: want to talking about rhetoric and the way that rhetoric
Speaker 1: can affect things badly. I think that there's no question
Speaker 1: that Obama created a hostile climate for for business, especially
Speaker 1: for the new guy, for the upstart, for the people
Speaker 1: that were trying to get going, who wanted to better themselves,
Speaker 1: who wanted to be in a better position for themselves
Speaker 1: and their family. That's why all those stifling regulations were
Speaker 1: so so damaging. The regulations hold back people who have
Speaker 1: new ideas and who want to compete, but they don't
Speaker 1: have the ability because they don't have the balance sheets
Speaker 1: and the entrenched position in the marketplace. They don't have
Speaker 1: the incumbent advantage, so regulations can crowd them out, take
Speaker 1: them down. And then there's just what what Trump is
Speaker 1: doing on China, which old It's been more time on
Speaker 1: this one to play twenty one though. Last year they
Speaker 1: lost three hundred and seventy five billion dollars on trade
Speaker 1: with China, and that doesn't include the theft of intellectual property.
Speaker 1: Think of that seventy billion. It's crazy. I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: happen anymore. It's not gonna happen anymore. We're putting the
Speaker 1: world's trade cheaters unnoticed. No one rips off the United
Speaker 1: States of America, and nobody takes advantage of our workers
Speaker 1: or our companies anymore. They think that he is so
Speaker 1: bad at words, and yet you I keep playing all
Speaker 1: these different sound bites from the President United States on
Speaker 1: this show, and you must think yourself, that sounds pretty
Speaker 1: good to me. I'm a very stable genius, exactly, John,
Speaker 1: You know what, what what's the problem here? All this positivity,
Speaker 1: all this positive rhetoric, But no, no, they'd much rather
Speaker 1: get into the latest, you know, with with Michael Cohen.
Speaker 1: I do think I don't know why the president look
Speaker 1: I can't tell you why he would choose to have
Speaker 1: Cohen as his lawyer. And look, it doesn't make sense
Speaker 1: to me, but he is a complex figure, this president.
Speaker 1: I just care about what he's doing for the country.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't get too into any of the
Speaker 1: other stuff that's going on because it doesn't matter. It
Speaker 1: just does not matter. Uh, And I hope that the
Speaker 1: economy continues on with this, with this pace, because if
Speaker 1: it does, things will be very good. By the way,
Speaker 1: Amazon has huge earnings. Amazon did very well today, So
Speaker 1: on the other side of things, you know, maybe Amazon
Speaker 1: is gonna I feel like we're all going to be
Speaker 1: employees of Amazon at some point soon. But Facebook got
Speaker 1: crushed there, but Amazon did well. So for those of
Speaker 1: you who are tech investors, there's that Jeff Bezos. I
Speaker 1: remember when he was the nerd who wanted to sell
Speaker 1: you books, as people are saying. Now he's the richest
Speaker 1: man in the world who will sell you whatever the
Speaker 1: heck he wants to. So there's that. I want to
Speaker 1: talk to you about how feminists want to brainwash young boys,
Speaker 1: which is a bad thing, of course, and uh, that
Speaker 1: are more coming up. He's back with you now because
Speaker 1: when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck
Speaker 1: never stops. I actually didn't think that it was real today.
Speaker 1: When I first saw it, I thought there must be
Speaker 1: some kind of somebody thought the onion was real or something.
Speaker 1: But it turns out it is. In a New York
Speaker 1: Times piece, the claim has been made that Mueller is
Speaker 1: examining Trump's tweets in a wide ranging obstruction inquiry. That's right, folks.
Speaker 1: Trump has I don't know, forty fifty million Twitter followers.
Speaker 1: He's putting stuff out on Twitter, and the Special Counsel
Speaker 1: is coming up so empty handed with all this that
Speaker 1: now they're they're going through Trump Trump's tweets. Keep in mind,
Speaker 1: how could that possibly be obstruction unless he literally fired
Speaker 1: somebody in a tweet. But guess what he can do
Speaker 1: that if he wants to. So what difference does it make.
Speaker 1: I don't even know. I can't even think of a
Speaker 1: way in which it's obstruction. These are people who work
Speaker 1: for him. Obstruction. How he can fire them for any
Speaker 1: or no reason and saying that he doesn't like their
Speaker 1: job performance. If he can't do that, if he can't
Speaker 1: publicly state that he doesn't like the job performance of
Speaker 1: some employees, of the executive branch. Then Mueller thinks that
Speaker 1: he can override presidential power and authority because he says so,
Speaker 1: it's not the way that it works. I also find
Speaker 1: it's very frustrating because I at first thought that Trump's
Speaker 1: tweets were, you know, this uh, this vulnerability, and now
Speaker 1: they're saying, oh, they're big egal vulnerability. I don't think
Speaker 1: that's true. I have trumps tweets a vulnerability, but Pruce
Speaker 1: or Mike I actually have come to love the tweets.
Speaker 1: I think that they are I think they're generally like
Speaker 1: there have been so many born newsdays. We're like, yes,
Speaker 1: look at this Trump tweet. It's amazing. Do you have
Speaker 1: a favorite, by the way, of all the Trump tweets?
Speaker 1: When when whenever he talks about the liars and the haters,
Speaker 1: I get excited. It's gold. It's instant gold. The greatest
Speaker 1: Trump tweet of all time. That would be a that
Speaker 1: would be a tough one. And whenever he talks about
Speaker 1: CNN is the fake news. I I'm like, you know,
Speaker 1: any any doubts I ever had about this man, they
Speaker 1: are erased anew. Whenever he tweets about CNN as fake news,
Speaker 1: nothing nothing really amuses me more in part because it's true,
Speaker 1: and in part because he gets so upset about it.
Speaker 1: They get so angry. Meanwhile, Obama was very dismissive about
Speaker 1: Fox News all the time, and and and it, and
Speaker 1: on more than one occasion, suggested that Fox News was
Speaker 1: was basically hurting America, dividing America. He called out talk radio.
Speaker 1: I think he even called out some talk radio hosts
Speaker 1: by name as people that were being divisive. That was
Speaker 1: always Obomus thing, you're being divisive. His great rhetorical trick
Speaker 1: if you're not doing what I say, they're being divisive
Speaker 1: was whenever you wouldn't just take an Obama policy directive
Speaker 1: as an order, you were being divisive. It's it's quite
Speaker 1: an amazing it's que an amazing thing to do to somebody. Right,
Speaker 1: It's like, do what I say? No, why are you
Speaker 1: being so divisive? Now? Now there's a division between us,
Speaker 1: you won't do what I say, And if you don't
Speaker 1: pay attention to it, you're like, oh, wait a second,
Speaker 1: you're right, I guess I guess I am being divisive.
Speaker 1: Oh gosh, sure, look at that. So Mueller he's being
Speaker 1: divisive with his investigation to all this stuff. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: I I think that one part of this that gets
Speaker 1: overlooked is that Mueller is just like Rosenstein that he say,
Speaker 1: an institutionalist. He's somebody who really believes, I think, in
Speaker 1: the entity of the FBI as some thing, especially in
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, right, FBI is under the umbrella
Speaker 1: of the d J, as something that is special and
Speaker 1: and and should be preserved as de facto and independent
Speaker 1: wing of the government. That's really what's being an issue here.
Speaker 1: And that's what you see with the possible impeachment of Rosenstein,
Speaker 1: is that there there is a perception. They won't give
Speaker 1: full description of it, right they they won't just come
Speaker 1: out and say it, but there is a perception among
Speaker 1: a lot of these bureaucrat types that they would like
Speaker 1: to think of the d o J and the FBI
Speaker 1: as their own entity and kind of like the judiciary, right,
Speaker 1: its own branch of government. Well, there's also the fourth
Speaker 1: branch of government, if not the permanent bureaucracy overall, the
Speaker 1: fourth branch of government is in fact the d o
Speaker 1: J and the f B. I THEO you ask for
Speaker 1: a miracle, and I give you the f B. Any
Speaker 1: of you who get that action movie quote, I'll be
Speaker 1: very impressed. Do you know what this producer, Mike, No,
Speaker 1: don't say it. Don't ruin it. Gosh, Mike, don't ruin it. Producer,
Speaker 1: Mike's about to jump on that one. I know you.
Speaker 1: I can tell why the look on your face. You know, So, Okay, congrats,
Speaker 1: your action movie quote skills are pretty good. Joe Contra
Speaker 1: actually says he thinks he can go toe to toe
Speaker 1: with me on action movie quotes. Mike, we might have
Speaker 1: to do this. We might have to connect to you
Speaker 1: in New York and consci and I will be here
Speaker 1: in the swamp and we'll see who is the true
Speaker 1: action movie quote Ninja. That's a great idea. I'll read
Speaker 1: them off to you and you guys, yeah, exactly, And well,
Speaker 1: you know, we could even do we can we can
Speaker 1: have like a like a neutral third party send you
Speaker 1: action movie quotes, and so they'd have a copy of it,
Speaker 1: so you know, and they everyone and and and we
Speaker 1: could do it. They could do it at a certain
Speaker 1: time so I wouldn't be able to see them. Are
Speaker 1: awesome listeners? Can this? Tweet them at here or hitch
Speaker 1: up on Facebook and I'll just go there, read them
Speaker 1: off to you. There you go. We'll want to set
Speaker 1: this up. We're gonna have an action movie quote face
Speaker 1: off that'll that will be at some point in the future. Um,
Speaker 1: speaking of actually be quotes and other fun things with
Speaker 1: the podcast. Guys. Let me know what you think if
Speaker 1: you like the format we've been doing for the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt podcast of a of a guest who we're planning
Speaker 1: to have Jesse Kelly and Sean Parnell, just because I
Speaker 1: think they're both awesome guys who are a lot of
Speaker 1: fun to talk to. We're just gonna talk about some stuff.
Speaker 1: Should be a great podcast. We're talking a lot of things. Um,
Speaker 1: they're they're really fun guys to to chat with and
Speaker 1: I have a lot of respect for both of them.
Speaker 1: So that's been Originally I was thinking to do more
Speaker 1: kind of deep divy segments, and now I've gone more
Speaker 1: in the guest direction because I do so few guests.
Speaker 1: People always amazing. I tell them, like, how many guests
Speaker 1: today do you have on radio? I'm like, uh, point five,
Speaker 1: I'd say ish, maybe point to five, I'd say we.
Speaker 1: I'd say we have a guest every other day, our
Speaker 1: guest every three hours and radio. I have too much
Speaker 1: to say to all of you. I'm a little uh,
Speaker 1: I'm a little stingy with with sharing the audience of
Speaker 1: other people, and I don't I don't like to do that.
Speaker 1: This is the team. I don't get enough time with
Speaker 1: the team as it is. We'll also come back with
Speaker 1: the Facebook lives. By the way, I'm actually setting up
Speaker 1: a studio to do that so it won't look like
Speaker 1: I'm a a kid who escaped his high school social
Speaker 1: studies class and it's like, Hey, lets Facebook live. I
Speaker 1: would like you to watch me on Facebook. Please tell
Speaker 1: your friends so we'll make it look a little more professional,
Speaker 1: you know, like I'm x C I a guy who
Speaker 1: is doing media now something like that. We got big plans,
Speaker 1: but please give me the feedback. Facebook dot com, Slashbuck Saxon,
Speaker 1: what are you thinking about the Freedom Hut podcast? What
Speaker 1: would you like to hear? What would you like more of?
Speaker 1: And and be prepared I think for it will be
Speaker 1: a really fun show tomorrow if you haven't heard it
Speaker 1: yet before. iTunes were on Stitcher two, Mike, what are
Speaker 1: the platforms where people can it's Stitcher, iTunes? What else
Speaker 1: have we? Is there another one. I can't keep up
Speaker 1: with all that Art nineteen platform. Other people can go
Speaker 1: to art nineteen and look, yeah, you can google it there,
Speaker 1: but I would go to I mean, how can we
Speaker 1: get on the Android app? I will look into that.
Speaker 1: All right, look into that. Team, Let's talk about feminists
Speaker 1: and how they're destroying everything we come back. Feminists are
Speaker 1: among the worst of the celebrated contemporary thinkers in America.
Speaker 1: I really mean that celebrated feminists are among the most
Speaker 1: overrated intellectuals in American society. Dare I say I think
Speaker 1: that some of the feminist editorialists and columists I read lately,
Speaker 1: quite honestly, do not qualify as intellectuals of any kind.
Speaker 1: They are propagandists. At best. You might be able to
Speaker 1: say that they are polemicists. But they are not adding
Speaker 1: to the intellectual discourse. They're making it worse what feminists
Speaker 1: can do. Four boys. We fought for young women in
Speaker 1: the patriarchy first, but budding patriarchs could use some help
Speaker 1: to this by Jessica Valenti is the author of six
Speaker 1: books on feminism. Or in the New York Times here
Speaker 1: this piece is a a giant A A giant pustule
Speaker 1: on your brain when you read it. I'm telling you
Speaker 1: it is an abomination. It's terrible. But I want to
Speaker 1: discuss why. Let me give you some of the some
Speaker 1: of the I was gonna say the highlights, but they're
Speaker 1: definitely low lights. Quote. One of the many political ironies
Speaker 1: of our time is that feminism's most powerful cultural moment
Speaker 1: has coincided with the rise of extreme misogyny. While women protests,
Speaker 1: run for office, and embrace the movement for gender equality
Speaker 1: and record numbers, a generation of young, mostly white men,
Speaker 1: the white men or the enemy as we know, are
Speaker 1: being radicalized into believing that their problems stem from women's progress.
Speaker 1: Whether it's misogynists, tororism, the rash of young men feeling
Speaker 1: sexually entitled to women, or the persistent stereotype of real
Speaker 1: men as powerful and violent, it's never been been It's
Speaker 1: never been clearer that American boys are in desperate need
Speaker 1: of intervention and quote. Okay, to put in the same paragraph,
Speaker 1: never mind the same sentence, which is what she did here.
Speaker 1: That the idea of real men as powerful is in
Speaker 1: any way linked to misogynist terrorism is intellectually dishonest, to
Speaker 1: say the least. What you have going on here is
Speaker 1: a war on science and gender because of what a
Speaker 1: lot of people term cultural Marxism, which is really just
Speaker 1: another another way of saying radical collectivism, and it's all
Speaker 1: of its offshoots, which gives us this notion of intersectional
Speaker 1: society right, intersectional politics, which is a complicated way of saying,
Speaker 1: we're all broken up into these different groups, and all
Speaker 1: the groups are fighting each other for power, and white
Speaker 1: men are at the top of the hierarchy and they're
Speaker 1: the worst because they're the worst oppressors, and everyone's more
Speaker 1: or less oppressed than the other. We need to balance
Speaker 1: this out with the power of the state. You see.
Speaker 1: That's how we're all collective. That's why it's collective, is
Speaker 1: because we're all thought of in the collective. We're a group.
Speaker 1: You are not you. You are white, you are black,
Speaker 1: you are male, you are female, you are Asian, you
Speaker 1: are uh African, you're you know, you go good on
Speaker 1: all the different you'r lgbt Q, you are trans, you
Speaker 1: are all the different identity groups. That is your primary
Speaker 1: identifier in the cultural Marxist view of society, that's how
Speaker 1: people should think of you first and foremost, which is
Speaker 1: just one. It's it's intellectually uh flimsy and does not
Speaker 1: stand up to reason and logic. But even beyond that,
Speaker 1: it's deeply destructive to society and feminism, which is just
Speaker 1: another version of the intersection of intersectionality, one of the
Speaker 1: earlier ones you see play out. There's notion of like
Speaker 1: women as this oppressed class we have to fight back
Speaker 1: in the twentieth century has now reached a point where
Speaker 1: instead of trying for equality, which was a necessary fight
Speaker 1: under under law, on the suffering the suffer jets and
Speaker 1: it's now turned into no. Now it's a victimology movement,
Speaker 1: not an equality movement. And I just feel like contemporary
Speaker 1: feminism also doesn't do any real accounting of what it
Speaker 1: has done to women. Right now. Oh, I know this
Speaker 1: gets you in so much trouble. Right I'm about to
Speaker 1: step in it. Watch out, watch your foot buck here
Speaker 1: you go about to step in it. Here's the truth.
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of what feminism has told
Speaker 1: young women is uh, it's not true. I think uh.
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of what is out there
Speaker 1: about from the from the more radical what is third
Speaker 1: wave feminism? Who knows what what wave? It's on them
Speaker 1: is really damaging, and they have been responsible, I think
Speaker 1: for a lot of misery for young women. I I
Speaker 1: think I called the Sex in the City effect, and
Speaker 1: I've made converts that are plenty of women that I know.
Speaker 1: When I've talked about the show and my Sex and
Speaker 1: City is not about women being happy and achieving what
Speaker 1: they want in life. It's about women who are petty
Speaker 1: and narcissistic and superficial and miserable and obsessed with you know, shoes,
Speaker 1: meaningless sex and themselves. It's not good. It's not good.
Speaker 1: I know it's clever in the writing and everything else,
Speaker 1: but it's really sending very negative messages actually the same
Speaker 1: way that Entourage for men. I look, I'm not going
Speaker 1: to pretend Entourage, which I've watched all of which in
Speaker 1: some places and the movie is one of the worst
Speaker 1: pieces of garbage I've ever seen. In some places, Entourage
Speaker 1: the show is also complete trash. But this knows that
Speaker 1: you can kind of be like a loser and a
Speaker 1: slab and just have lots of beautiful women, you know,
Speaker 1: coming to your door and coming and going all hours
Speaker 1: of the night and everything. It's just a lie. This
Speaker 1: is not true, all right, I mean, you know you.
Speaker 1: So that's also not good for guys. The girl wasn't
Speaker 1: like a supermodel just gonna go out and date with me.
Speaker 1: It's like, well, why would a supermoto on a day
Speaker 1: with you, I mean be realistic? And why do you
Speaker 1: want to do a supermodel anyway? You know, you really
Speaker 1: have to think through these things anyway. Uh. This article, though,
Speaker 1: that go it just goes on and clearly she wants
Speaker 1: to take some shots at Jordan Peterson. UH. And in
Speaker 1: part it is because Jordan Peterson is one of the
Speaker 1: few guys out there who is willing to say that
Speaker 1: men and women are different, That men in the aggregate
Speaker 1: have some different skills than uh, and different tendencies than
Speaker 1: women do in the aggregate. That's not on an individual
Speaker 1: basis um, and we ignore these things that are peril.
Speaker 1: We ignore these things at society's peril. The fact though,
Speaker 1: that that this article also goes on to claim that
Speaker 1: there's no space for all like alternative versions of masculinity.
Speaker 1: I think that's also just a total lie. I mean,
Speaker 1: vox dot com is beta male central. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of places where they celebrate being a generally speaking,
Speaker 1: a skinny self righteous, skinny jean wearing left wing hipster.
Speaker 1: You know, there are lots of places, and in fact,
Speaker 1: hipster culture is is overwhelmingly left wing. So whether you're
Speaker 1: talking about Brooklyn or San Francisco or a lot of
Speaker 1: other places in between, there's plenty of space for guys
Speaker 1: for for you know, males to be males where there
Speaker 1: is not a focus on traditional traditional masculine virtues strength
Speaker 1: and courage and yeah, success and achievement and all that
Speaker 1: sort of stuff. You know, it's much more like, oh,
Speaker 1: I just you know? You do you? Is really the
Speaker 1: rallying cry of the beta male left. And I think
Speaker 1: that this effort to try and take the in cell movement,
Speaker 1: which he writes about in here, and tie that to
Speaker 1: people who want to have honest discussions about gender norms
Speaker 1: and what's going on in society today, it's just a smear.
Speaker 1: It's just lazy. And the the intellectual laziness of some
Speaker 1: of the most prominent prominent feminist writers is really it's
Speaker 1: really become their calling card. I'm honestly, it's it's amazing
Speaker 1: to see how in apt a lot of their analysis
Speaker 1: really is, and I just I hate to see the
Speaker 1: same way that I think feminists have been the cause
Speaker 1: of a lot of unhappiness for you, for young women,
Speaker 1: you know, in the last and the last twenty years.
Speaker 1: I think of in my lifetime, like the women I
Speaker 1: know who are like I wanna you know, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be just like the guys. I'm gonna be an investment banker,
Speaker 1: just like the guys, and I'm gonna work eighty hours
Speaker 1: a week, just like the guys. And then I'm gonna
Speaker 1: make a lot of money and like, you know, my
Speaker 1: I'm gonna Okay, some women, sure, I've had friends who
Speaker 1: have done that and that's who they are. But most
Speaker 1: women that's actually not what they want in life. Most
Speaker 1: that's not what they want in life, and it's okay,
Speaker 1: and we shouldn't try to reprogram them to be like men.
Speaker 1: And that's what a lot of contemporary feminism is doing.
Speaker 1: And it also then tries to shout down people like
Speaker 1: Jordan Peterson or even people like me who just pointed
Speaker 1: Jordan Peterson and say, the guy's got some worthwhile ideas
Speaker 1: hear them out. Don't try to compare them to a
Speaker 1: anti female terrorist or whatever. It's just crazy. And also,
Speaker 1: let's not take young boys and tell them, yeah, be
Speaker 1: a whim, don't be don't show any courage, John so
Speaker 1: any fortitude, you know, just be as much of a
Speaker 1: you know, a boring milk toast, condescending lib as possible.
Speaker 1: That's that's what masculinity is now. It's it's discouraging that
Speaker 1: people are actually latching onto this garbage, but you know,
Speaker 1: you're seeing more and more of it, and I just
Speaker 1: man contemporary feminism. It's it's just responsible for misery. I
Speaker 1: think that is that one day will be its epitaph.
Speaker 1: The FBI calls home title theft among the fastest growing
Speaker 1: crimes out there, and brace yourself because I know there
Speaker 1: a lot of your credit cards to that is absolutely
Speaker 1: nothing compared to the mess, the hell that you are
Speaker 1: in for once an identity thief decides to take control
Speaker 1: of your home's title, it's so easy, folks. I have
Speaker 1: been walked through by the folks at home title Lock
Speaker 1: exactly how the bad guys do this. They do it
Speaker 1: all online. It's so straightforward, and they just essentially use
Speaker 1: a simple forgery to steal your home's title online and
Speaker 1: then borrow against all the equity. You get stuck with
Speaker 1: the payments it's a nightmare. Don't allow yourself to fall
Speaker 1: into that trap. For just pennies a day, Home title
Speaker 1: Lock protects my most viable asset, my family's home. Registered
Speaker 1: now for a free analysis and discover if your home's
Speaker 1: title has been compromised. That is a sixty dollar value.
Speaker 1: Free visit home title lock dot com again, that's home
Speaker 1: title lock dot com. Buck Sextsi decoding the news and
Speaker 1: disseminating information to is actionable intelligence. Make no mistakes, you're
Speaker 1: a great American again, this is the Buck Sexton Show. Analysts. No,
Speaker 1: you are now entering the Freedom Tactical Operations Center. All
Speaker 1: sensitive programs must be kept strictly. Need to know Team
Speaker 1: Buck is cleared front of that and ready for the
Speaker 1: Buck brief? What is it that causes the president purposely,
Speaker 1: purposely create distrust in these institutions and what we're doing.
Speaker 1: I just disagree with most of what you just said there, Um,
Speaker 1: you somehow disconnect the administration's activities from the president's actions
Speaker 1: there there, they're the one and the same. And this
Speaker 1: is President Trump's administration MC no mistake. Who's fully in
Speaker 1: charge of this and who was directing each of these
Speaker 1: activities that has caused Vladimir Putting to be in a
Speaker 1: very difficult place today. I noticed that you are not
Speaker 1: responding to what I'm saying. I think I think I
Speaker 1: responded to everything that you It's the president's public statements
Speaker 1: that create concern amongst senators on both sides of the isle.
Speaker 1: This is one of the big problems we see, and
Speaker 1: and it's one that I really want to address now
Speaker 1: where they're they're creating this. Remember, one of the things
Speaker 1: we do here is both narrative creation and narrative deconstruction
Speaker 1: or destruction, depending on what is necessary. Here we create
Speaker 1: a narrative of truth, of liberty and and conservatism and constitutionalism,
Speaker 1: and we take chainsaws, hack saws, rubber mallets, whatever you
Speaker 1: want to call it, to narratives that are full of
Speaker 1: leftist agenda, collectivism, and lies. And one of the big
Speaker 1: ones that you see these days is that, well, okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: maybe Trump's form policy is good, but he really shouldn't
Speaker 1: get credit for it because it's good despite him or
Speaker 1: in spite of him. This is nonsense. This is not
Speaker 1: how it works. Pardon the phrase, but the buck stops
Speaker 1: with Trump. There's no other way for people to view
Speaker 1: this and I keep hearing this now because it's the
Speaker 1: single most effective refutation of the left wing media insanity.
Speaker 1: You come up with a come up against countless times
Speaker 1: now where they're saying, oh, you know, look what he
Speaker 1: said here, and can you defend this thing Trump said?
Speaker 1: And you and I just want to say, well, why
Speaker 1: does that matter? Because on that issue he's been great.
Speaker 1: There's the president's power, and then there's the perception of
Speaker 1: the president's words. They're always playing these games of the
Speaker 1: president's words. Oh he said this, he's an idiot because
Speaker 1: of this thing he said, or he's a racist, or
Speaker 1: he's a misogynist or whatever it is. It changes every
Speaker 1: day because they are trying to interpret Trump's words for
Speaker 1: you and to try to interpret Trump's overall meaning. And
Speaker 1: you don't need that help, and neither do I. But
Speaker 1: then after they've done that, once they've tried to construct
Speaker 1: this perception of Trump as a as a complete buffoon,
Speaker 1: doesn't understand foreign policy, and and they want to say
Speaker 1: he shouldn't get the credit for any of this, uh,
Speaker 1: because it's not happening because of him, And that's just insane.
Speaker 1: That's not that that doesn't hold water, right, that doesn't
Speaker 1: hold off to scrutiny. But I'm hearing it a lot
Speaker 1: from people because they can't handle the facts. And Pompeillo,
Speaker 1: I think that a very good job here saying that,
Speaker 1: you know, the it's it's not fair or honest to
Speaker 1: disconnect the administration's actions from the administration. Let me think
Speaker 1: about this, right. It would be like saying, you know, well,
Speaker 1: you know you're not you're really not carrying your weight
Speaker 1: at that at your job. And you'd say, well, I
Speaker 1: do everything I'm supposed to do perfectly, and I complete
Speaker 1: all of my task and have like yeah, but sometimes
Speaker 1: over by the water cooler, you know, you just don't
Speaker 1: sound as excited as as you should about about what
Speaker 1: you're doing. And you're like, well, I mean I disagree
Speaker 1: with that, and they say, and by the way, all
Speaker 1: those tasks you're completing, you're not really responsible for those,
Speaker 1: those are just happening in spite of you. You'd you'd
Speaker 1: flip out, right, that's a just a bizarre thing to say.
Speaker 1: Your record of action is a single most important thing.
Speaker 1: You know. Maybe a part of this because because they're
Speaker 1: so a president's speeches, it's just sound like he's really
Speaker 1: really smart and everything and it talks down constantly to conservatives,
Speaker 1: and it can rate off a prompter. And but he
Speaker 1: used to do this, Uh we do that, and you
Speaker 1: give you know, because they're used to Obama, who was
Speaker 1: all about the flowery words and the lack of action
Speaker 1: or action that's counterproductive. And they built that up into
Speaker 1: this into these Olympian heights of political megastart. Now they've
Speaker 1: got a president that, you know, just he just talks
Speaker 1: like a normal person and he reacts to things like
Speaker 1: a normal person. You know, I can tell you when
Speaker 1: I'm not on radio. You know, people come up and
Speaker 1: they say something about this or that. Yeah, like occasionally
Speaker 1: maybe I drop a little salty language in there, and
Speaker 1: you know, occasionally meaning a lot of the time. But
Speaker 1: you know, I speak to people in my day to
Speaker 1: day life in a in it just a normal fashion.
Speaker 1: I mean I try to speak on radio normal fashion too,
Speaker 1: but I just can't use salty language. But he talks
Speaker 1: the way we talk instead of this. You know. There
Speaker 1: there's kind of this old school approach to politics that's
Speaker 1: uh that that's exemplified by some of Trump's harsher Republican
Speaker 1: critics in particular. You know that George W. Bush. The
Speaker 1: Bush was really inarticulate. I'm just gonna say it. And
Speaker 1: the guy wasn't dumb, but he was couldn't really put
Speaker 1: a sentence together very well. It was It was shocking
Speaker 1: sometimes how much trouble he had with that. But you know,
Speaker 1: if he had been a great president, I wouldn't have cared.
Speaker 1: I think he loved the country. I think he did
Speaker 1: his best when we were under assault. I think the
Speaker 1: assault was much more um existential threat, and people realized that.
Speaker 1: You know now, we realized that at the time. They
Speaker 1: we realized now. But there are a lot of other
Speaker 1: things that Bush wasn't great on. Wasn't great on the border,
Speaker 1: wasn't great on spending, wasn't great on entitlement reform. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of stuff that Bush just either couldn't
Speaker 1: get through, it wasn't up with the task on. But
Speaker 1: you get the Rubio wing of the GOP now, and
Speaker 1: they always want to sound like they're giving some kind
Speaker 1: of declaration that high school students are gonna be memorizing
Speaker 1: and giving in ten years, and we just don't need
Speaker 1: that anymore. I think that's a facade I don't need.
Speaker 1: They look maybe at the shore. The State of the
Speaker 1: Union addresses. By the way, I think the State of
Speaker 1: the Union address could just be printed. I don't think
Speaker 1: we have to have this pageant treated. That's a whole
Speaker 1: other thing. But the actions of the single most important thing.
Speaker 1: And what you have now is a media effort. And
Speaker 1: this is what Pompeo was swatting aside. And I'm just
Speaker 1: I'm hearing this all over the place now because they
Speaker 1: can't argue that the wreck heard. They can't argue with
Speaker 1: Trump's record, it doesn't work. It's too strong, it's too
Speaker 1: strong in the economy, it's too strong on foreign policy.
Speaker 1: So now they're trying to create this looney tune situation
Speaker 1: of well, it's not Trump's foreign policy, isn't really his
Speaker 1: foreign policy. It actually does remind me a little bit
Speaker 1: of and some of you think know where I'm going
Speaker 1: in the Bush administration, it wasn't really This was a
Speaker 1: whisper campaign among the elite media, But it wasn't really
Speaker 1: Bush who was pulling the strings. It was always Cheney
Speaker 1: who was the one that was really in charge of
Speaker 1: all this, right, Cheney was the brains of the whole operation. Chaney,
Speaker 1: I knew people and I knew people well on Cheney staff.
Speaker 1: I spent time in the White House dealing with different
Speaker 1: people there, and uh, nobody was pulling the strings for
Speaker 1: Bush and that are pulling bushes strings in that White House. Okay,
Speaker 1: that was just there was no respute in whispering in bushes.
Speaker 1: Ear Ah. But they're trying this again. They're trying this
Speaker 1: with Trump where they're just making it up. They're making
Speaker 1: it up, and it's because they're desperate, as I've been
Speaker 1: saying to you. But by the way, speaking of the
Speaker 1: facts and and arguing with the reality here, Pompeo, who's
Speaker 1: who is a real, a real find for this administration,
Speaker 1: has been doing such a strong job. He took it
Speaker 1: to took cardon here on the whole Russia situation. He's like,
Speaker 1: can we stop with the Oh he loves Putin and
Speaker 1: just wants to hug him all the time. This is
Speaker 1: what he's done. Play clip six. Was there any agreements
Speaker 1: reached in regards to Ukraine? No center, that's it agree
Speaker 1: to disagree that that is the U S policy hasn't changed.
Speaker 1: And you can see that right, And a new hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars since the Health Sinky Summit provided to the Ukrainians.
Speaker 1: I think there was lots of concern that and I
Speaker 1: saw it. I could find you all's quotes if you'd
Speaker 1: like me to go drag them out. Concerns that President
Speaker 1: Trump would make a change in position with respect and
Speaker 1: there there there is none and it is it is
Speaker 1: a policy that the previous administration refused to undertake. And
Speaker 1: so I hear comparative. It's it's important, Senator, in comparison
Speaker 1: matters here because there's a narrative that has developed that
Speaker 1: somehow President Trump is weak on Russia, and it went
Speaker 1: in fact the coin. Let let me just through. I
Speaker 1: heard you talking brag about the number of sanctions that
Speaker 1: are these were just facts, just facts, notice the Senate
Speaker 1: Jugie Calkin, Bragg Pompey. I was like, no, these are facts,
Speaker 1: these are real things that have happened. I had the
Speaker 1: experience here on on Rising held dot TV slash Rising
Speaker 1: for those of you want to see. I had the
Speaker 1: experience of having a the guy who said he was
Speaker 1: the former NFC director for Ukraine under the Obama administration
Speaker 1: at the desk with me and I said, okay, so
Speaker 1: we're now sending along. I think he was surprised that
Speaker 1: I knew this much about it. But javelin anti tank
Speaker 1: missiles and sniper rifles to the Ukrainian government to fight
Speaker 1: against the Russians on the front lines in eastern Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Right Russian paramilitaries and Ukrainian UH separatists were backed by Russia.
Speaker 1: And he said, well, that won't make much of a difference. Come.
Speaker 1: I said, well, that's really cute. That's a nice talking
Speaker 1: point if it won't make much of a difference. One,
Speaker 1: why are why are these are the Ukrainians asking for them?
Speaker 1: Which they are? And two why did the Obama administration
Speaker 1: refuse to give them? And he goes, okay, well, maybe
Speaker 1: it would make I give the guy credit. He actually said,
Speaker 1: you know, actually I think that he had in his
Speaker 1: mind what the Obama administration line wants. But he said, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, like they didn't want to take the risk.
Speaker 1: Oh okay, So that's what It's not that it wouldn't
Speaker 1: be effective, it's that Obama didn't want to take the risk,
Speaker 1: take the risk of what everybody the risk of angering
Speaker 1: Vladimir Putin. Oh, that's right. When I win the election,
Speaker 1: I'll have more flexibility. Tell you know, LUNs, lad the mirror.
Speaker 1: You guys all remember it. They're completely rewriting Obama's history
Speaker 1: on Russia related issues. They're completely rewriting the way that
Speaker 1: he approached the issue of Ukraine and never mind Syria,
Speaker 1: and I mean, obama foreign policy was a disaster. A
Speaker 1: disaster because the bad guys knew they could get away
Speaker 1: with whatever they wanted to do on the ground with
Speaker 1: action and people suffering because of it, not because he
Speaker 1: didn't give the most flowery speech. You know that. That's
Speaker 1: where we are now. You can have obama Ism, which
Speaker 1: is speeches that make people go, oh, listen to the
Speaker 1: and a lot of us were like, first of all,
Speaker 1: he's not even writing this speech, so he's really just
Speaker 1: an actor delivering lines. Side note. But or you can
Speaker 1: have somebody who's like, you know, I kind of get
Speaker 1: the situation. Let's make something happen here, a doer instead
Speaker 1: of a sayer. That's what we have with Trump. Don't
Speaker 1: let them get in your head with this narrative of oh,
Speaker 1: it's us not he's not really running his own foreign
Speaker 1: policy whatever. That's how pathetic they are now that they
Speaker 1: know they can't beat him on the record, So they're
Speaker 1: saying it's not even Trump. Trump's foreign policy record isn't
Speaker 1: his record is what they're trying to tell you. Now,
Speaker 1: don't let him get away with it. I know you won't,
Speaker 1: but you'll see, now that we've talked about it, you'll
Speaker 1: hear it. You'll see more of it. You know. It's
Speaker 1: tough to put a price on peace of mind, but
Speaker 1: I can do it for you right now. Fifteen dollars
Speaker 1: a month, folks, that's all a cost for peace of mind.
Speaker 1: Fifteen dollars a month for twenty four seven monitoring with
Speaker 1: simply Safe home security. All right, this is a great deal.
Speaker 1: I've got a simply Safe system at home. I'm not
Speaker 1: very tech savvy, uh, and let me tell you. It's
Speaker 1: so easy to set up and so easy to use,
Speaker 1: and it covers you top to bottom. It gets everything
Speaker 1: that you need from a home security system without any
Speaker 1: of the drawbacks. The customer service is great. The sensors
Speaker 1: that you put in place make sure that everything from
Speaker 1: fire to somebody burglarizing to some all those things covered
Speaker 1: for you. And there's no long term contracts or nonsense.
Speaker 1: Protect your home today. Visit simply safe dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck that's simply Safe dot com, slash buck, simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck the only security system you're gonna need,
Speaker 1: and once you have it, it's the only security system
Speaker 1: you're ever gonna want. Go check it out at simply
Speaker 1: safe dot com, slash buck, and just remember what you're
Speaker 1: seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. For
Speaker 1: President the United States to tell people to stop believing
Speaker 1: what they see or what they read. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: what dictators, it's what authoritarian rulers say. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it's kind of unbelievable in the truest sense of the word. Um.
Speaker 1: It reminds me of you know, there was a quote
Speaker 1: from Orwell in said, the party told you to reject
Speaker 1: the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final,
Speaker 1: most essential command. This really sounds a lot like what
Speaker 1: the President is said. Be paused for one second, because
Speaker 1: I want to keep going. We've got more of this
Speaker 1: crazy media fear montage we pulled together, folks. But notice
Speaker 1: how that's Anderson Cooper being very smug, being very condescending
Speaker 1: to people saying, oh, well, because the President says, don't
Speaker 1: believe everything you read the media, they skip past. The
Speaker 1: media created this term of fake new news. The media
Speaker 1: are the ones who are out there saying, don't believe Fox, Foxes,
Speaker 1: State TV, it's propaganda. I mean the rest of the media, right,
Speaker 1: the mainstream media, the the left Democrat media. So they're
Speaker 1: saying there's all this fake stuff out there, all these lives.
Speaker 1: They're the ones that are saying that Facebook has to
Speaker 1: clamp down on all the fakery. And when Trump says
Speaker 1: don't believe everything you read, what do they do. He's
Speaker 1: a dictator? Do they have no? They have no principal
Speaker 1: organizing principles for their thoughts. They just have emotions and
Speaker 1: propaganda and agenda. Continue John from George Orwell's famous dystopian
Speaker 1: novel nine eight four, which cast partisan censorship of truth
Speaker 1: as the party told you to reject the evidence of
Speaker 1: your eyes and ears. Those comments that reminded some folks
Speaker 1: of John Pause, Lake Pause. You know who really won't
Speaker 1: wrote nineteen four was Brian Williams. He was there and
Speaker 1: kind Colonia with Orwell back in the thirties. I think
Speaker 1: it was thirty nine. On the front lines. Brian Williams
Speaker 1: took two rounds in the shoulder. Didn't stop. Ryan Williams.
Speaker 1: He then grabbed the nearest pale for digging ditches and
Speaker 1: took out seven Spanish fascists with just that It's another
Speaker 1: day in the books from Brian Williams continue King. Something
Speaker 1: President Trump said with George Orwell's dystopian novel nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 1: do not believe what you see or read, echoes a
Speaker 1: line from George or Wills nine eighty four. The party
Speaker 1: told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
Speaker 1: It was their final, most essential command. But how dangerous
Speaker 1: is his rhetoric. I mean, it's as though it was
Speaker 1: straight out of the book, because that language he used
Speaker 1: really closely mirrors language from Frankly, George or Critics are
Speaker 1: comparing that to a line from George Orwell's novel nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty four about a nightmarish authoritarian state. The party told
Speaker 1: you to reject the evidence of her eyes and ears.
Speaker 1: It was their final. Oh my gosh. Producer Mike hat
Speaker 1: tipped you, man, that was a great that's a great
Speaker 1: run we had that. That's great audience here. That was
Speaker 1: that all the last twenty four hours. Mike, Yes, that's unbelievable.
Speaker 1: It's these people have They really only have three literary
Speaker 1: references that they know how to make in the media.
Speaker 1: Harry Potter Handmaid's Tale at least eighty four is a
Speaker 1: great a great work of fiction in the English language.
Speaker 1: And the other two I don't know. I'll leave it
Speaker 1: to you to decide for yourselves. But those are the
Speaker 1: only ones that really that really get the left fired up.
Speaker 1: It's just so funny to me too. They don't understand that.
Speaker 1: I mean, Orwell, who was a socialist, essentially realized the
Speaker 1: pitfalls of socialism throughout the course of his life. And uh,
Speaker 1: I think this notion that, this notion that the Trump
Speaker 1: is a dictator is hilarious on many levels because not
Speaker 1: a lot of dictators have an entire, multibillion dollar media
Speaker 1: apparatus constantly not just undermining everything that they do, but
Speaker 1: trying to get them and their whole family thrown into
Speaker 1: prison every day and with no actual consequence. I mean,
Speaker 1: this whole media thing. Look, I like Caitlin Collins. She's
Speaker 1: a really nice girl, she's a friend, she's cool. I'm
Speaker 1: I don't I'm not. They shouldn't be banning people from events,
Speaker 1: but look, not my problem. I wasn't there This notion though,
Speaker 1: that DC based journalists, or oh my gosh, it's so terrible,
Speaker 1: look at the Trump error. What are we gonna do?
Speaker 1: They're fine, they're making more a lot of making more
Speaker 1: money than ever. Are you kidding? If you're an MSNBC,
Speaker 1: all this Trump stuff is great. You got hashtag resistance
Speaker 1: just boosting your numbers all the time. CNN sucks because
Speaker 1: it's so boring and dishonest. But at least ms they're like,
Speaker 1: we're crazy and we own it, and there, you know,
Speaker 1: riding this to ratings victory. So I'm glad that they're
Speaker 1: they're exercising their capitalist impulses over there at MSNBC. But
Speaker 1: this notion that that that we're in a tyranny or
Speaker 1: that journalists have to be afraid and this is just
Speaker 1: complete insanity. What are we gonna do? It's all gonna be.
Speaker 1: It's all gonna be fine, journals, It really is. It's
Speaker 1: there's nothing that you have to get so stressed out about.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be okay. No one's thrown you in prison.
Speaker 1: You know, I brought this up. Obama was the one
Speaker 1: who was actually thinking about indicting journalists. Obama was the
Speaker 1: one who was naming a Fox News journalist, a co
Speaker 1: conspirator and espionage complaint. And the press was like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: we'll excuse me, we have concerns about this. Excuse me,
Speaker 1: Mr Obama, we have concerns. Yeah, maybe they've got concerns,
Speaker 1: but you know what, they weren't calling for Obama to
Speaker 1: have a special prosecutor. They weren't calling for Obama and
Speaker 1: his family to be thrown in prison. They're doing that
Speaker 1: with Trump all the time. A dictator. You have the
Speaker 1: former intel directors of the previous regime. Maybe we should
Speaker 1: start using that word because the Obama administration was really
Speaker 1: a regime, as we've seen now, much more than it
Speaker 1: was an administration. And we've got them saying, you know,
Speaker 1: the Trump is a trader, and then they're not gonna
Speaker 1: be this is no. They might pull their clearances. Who cares,
Speaker 1: They don't even need their clearances. And they that's like saying, well,
Speaker 1: can the president fire somebody who calls him a trader? No? No,
Speaker 1: the first Amendment. And it's like, well, can you can
Speaker 1: work for somebody and call them a trader? I mean,
Speaker 1: oh man, they're so crazy, folks. I know we talked
Speaker 1: at a lot, but it's really they are so nuts O.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you could hang out with me, because at
Speaker 1: least I'm pretty normal. You right back, he's holding the
Speaker 1: line for America, buck sext in his back. So this
Speaker 1: week has been sharp feat and I haven't really spend
Speaker 1: much time on that because you know, that's not an
Speaker 1: area of particular expertise. Although for me, although I do
Speaker 1: know that the great white is actually in Latin the
Speaker 1: car Carroden carcarious, I learned from watching the movie Orca,
Speaker 1: which is actually about a killer whale that can kill
Speaker 1: great white sharks, which we now know is also true.
Speaker 1: Side note, but Shark Week has been declining in recent years.
Speaker 1: And let me tell you guys why in case you
Speaker 1: you know, you know, you don't know, or you haven't
Speaker 1: paid attention, or you could care less, which is probably
Speaker 1: a fair amount of you. Uh you're like, yeah, buck,
Speaker 1: we just want to see the great white shark eating
Speaker 1: stuff and looking scary. Everything else is kind of me.
Speaker 1: You know, they do all the scary music. They're like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: the bullshark is so aggressive and has super high testosterone
Speaker 1: level and probably and can go and fresh water and
Speaker 1: salt water. It's like bull shark. Yeah, Okay, if I
Speaker 1: get eaten by a bull shark, it's a bad day
Speaker 1: for me. If I can eat my great white, that
Speaker 1: is epically awful. You know, that is next level because
Speaker 1: the great white is super scary. So I feel like
Speaker 1: all of Shark Week is a bunch of people doing
Speaker 1: shows that are either about a great white shark or
Speaker 1: should be about great white sharks, because nobody cares about
Speaker 1: the other sharks. They always do this thing where they're like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're gonna just see the here's a little weird looking
Speaker 1: shark with big eyes we found in the deep, deep
Speaker 1: deep ocean. It's like, I don't care about your big eye,
Speaker 1: weirdo shark, Mike, and I right, am, I right? Nobody
Speaker 1: cares about the little weirdo sharks. They want to see
Speaker 1: the big scary shark that eats everything. Yeah, right, I
Speaker 1: mean the great white. Everything else is kind of it
Speaker 1: really should be Great White Shark Week, absolutely. I think.
Speaker 1: I think that's just the case because you get these
Speaker 1: other things out there and people say, oh, the tiger
Speaker 1: the other way, they called the big three, those that
Speaker 1: are wondering. The three worst for attacks are obviously the
Speaker 1: great white, the tiger shark, and the bull shark. Uh,
Speaker 1: And there's actually been some attacks recently, but you know
Speaker 1: that they I'll click on the headline and then it'll
Speaker 1: be like there was one I think it was a
Speaker 1: model who was trying to float. Did you see this?
Speaker 1: By the way, She's trying to float in shallow water,
Speaker 1: just surrounded by sharks, and one of them bit her hand.
Speaker 1: It's like, what are you doing? Exactly? Like what what
Speaker 1: do you think is going to happen? Even if they
Speaker 1: don't want to eat you, they're like, oh, yeah, there's
Speaker 1: a thing I'm gonna bite because I'm a shark. Did
Speaker 1: you see Shaquille O'Neil in the shark cage? This was funny.
Speaker 1: He when he was part of Shark Week and he uh,
Speaker 1: they put him in a cage and the shark got
Speaker 1: in the cage with him and he like freaked out
Speaker 1: and jumped out of the water. I mean that's totally legit. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't care how big you are, Like shack is
Speaker 1: obviously the largest human being ever, but I'd still be
Speaker 1: super scared of it. Was it a what kind of shark?
Speaker 1: Was it? Yeah? I don't know exactly what kind it was.
Speaker 1: You know, wanna I don't think it was a great white,
Speaker 1: but it was a smaller one that was able to
Speaker 1: maneuver through the opening of the cage and it just
Speaker 1: got in there super quick and like everybody started freaking
Speaker 1: out and shocked dumped out of the water. It was
Speaker 1: you know, it's comical that he's certainly nothing happened to him.
Speaker 1: He's pretty funny is that he could have. He could
Speaker 1: have gone all Shazam on that shark and been like, Wow,
Speaker 1: I do remember that Shack was. This is I'm really
Speaker 1: doing a throw back now. Shack had back in the
Speaker 1: old old school Nintendo days, if I recall, though it
Speaker 1: might have been old school Sega. He had a a
Speaker 1: a video game called Shack Foo where he I'm not dude,
Speaker 1: I'm not making this up. I'm googling it right now.
Speaker 1: Shock Foo video yup, you can check it out. A
Speaker 1: two D fighting game release for Genesis. That's what it
Speaker 1: was in. Did I just blow your mind? Mike? Do
Speaker 1: you just learn something new about I actually knew about that.
Speaker 1: You knew about Shack Food. I believe there's a Shock
Speaker 1: Food too as well food too. Yeah, I think I
Speaker 1: don't even know that was possible. This is a crazy.
Speaker 1: This is a crazy world we live in. But anyway,
Speaker 1: so you guys can all check that out. I still
Speaker 1: think one day I want to buy one of those
Speaker 1: old school those packets where you can get the old
Speaker 1: Nintendo games. Especially I want to get dut Com We're
Speaker 1: Just you know, and the Little Dog Runs. You know.
Speaker 1: I used to play that all the time. That was
Speaker 1: a great game. Um. Anyways, Shark Week, Mike saw Sama obviously,
Speaker 1: so it's not not anything to get that riled up about.
Speaker 1: But I will say this. I saw by people who
Speaker 1: were talking about how Shark Week they try to make
Speaker 1: it seem like shark It's acts so scary. This was
Speaker 1: a list that got circulated I don't know by some
Speaker 1: real journalists people killed annually by and then it has
Speaker 1: all the different lists of animals. Sharks ten people globally
Speaker 1: on average, Elephants a hundred. Don't make elephants angry, hippo's
Speaker 1: five hundred, Snails ten thousand, I don't know how that's possible.
Speaker 1: Dogs twenty five thousand, Yeah, they biting, They biting people
Speaker 1: and give them rabies. Uh. Snakes fifty thousand, okay, Mosquitoes
Speaker 1: seven hundred and twenty five thousands, and I need to
Speaker 1: figure out now before I go, how do snakes kill people?
Speaker 1: Snails kill people? Rather? Um? Oh the larvae from water?
Speaker 1: You gross? That's super gross. I didn't realize that ill
Speaker 1: snails are gross. I think of escal Girl, which is
Speaker 1: delist yours. All right, I gotta hit of break stay
Speaker 1: with me, Team Buck. It's time for roll call faces
Speaker 1: Book dot com, slash buck sex and that's all you
Speaker 1: need for roll call, folks, assuming Facebook still gonna be
Speaker 1: around in a few days. Oh, a bit of a
Speaker 1: rough ride today. Those those who on a little Facebook
Speaker 1: stock were like, ouch, you're hurting me Facebook. Why are
Speaker 1: you hurting me? Facebook? Go back to your hole? Dude?
Speaker 1: What's You're too good for your whole or your home?
Speaker 1: I forget what he says, and happy Gilmore. It's one
Speaker 1: or the other. John is at hole or home and
Speaker 1: happy Gilmore. Are you too good for your home? I
Speaker 1: think whole? I don't it's whole? Yeah, you too good
Speaker 1: for your whole? Because he's kind of put the ball
Speaker 1: of the eight whatever was of the eighteenth hole get
Speaker 1: it in all right, Facebook dot com, slash Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: and uh, that's what you do. And a lot of
Speaker 1: you did it, so let's get get into it. That's
Speaker 1: one thing I'll never be I may be able to
Speaker 1: borrow y'all from some of you, because we have so
Speaker 1: many fantastic listeners to this show who are from the South,
Speaker 1: from Texas, and they they say y'all and it's just
Speaker 1: it's so fluid, it just rolls off the tongue. But
Speaker 1: I don't think I'll ever be able to be one
Speaker 1: of these guys that can get away with saying get,
Speaker 1: you know, like the version of g ET that's more
Speaker 1: like g Y or g apostrophe y t or g
Speaker 1: y apostrophe. I don't think. I don't think I'll be
Speaker 1: able to pull that one off as a Yankee from
Speaker 1: New York. Or maybe I'll try one day. Alright. Joe
Speaker 1: is the first up here. He writes, this is kind
Speaker 1: of sad. America is dead buck the stato of liberty.
Speaker 1: Uh all the corruption and the d O J and
Speaker 1: C I A with very few politicians caring, the media
Speaker 1: supporting it, and Ron Rosenstein is as corrupt as the
Speaker 1: rest and there's no one to stop him once they
Speaker 1: get away with this. It is over Sessions coming out
Speaker 1: on loving Rosenstein with the fives, abuse and serious conflict
Speaker 1: of interest. No one looking into the Clintons and the
Speaker 1: organized that organized all this Russian propaganda stuff. It is
Speaker 1: all clear as day. No one will be held accountable.
Speaker 1: American Dead, the new United States of Banana Republic. From
Speaker 1: Joe also known as Mr Sunshine. Uh, you know what, Joe,
Speaker 1: I share your concerns, but I do not share your prognosis.
Speaker 1: And the country is gonna be fine. Just remember, my friend,
Speaker 1: we now have gone eighteen months and Trump is just
Speaker 1: crushing it, doing fantastic work. As I've been saying, the
Speaker 1: GDP numbers that are supposed to come out tomorrow are
Speaker 1: going to be going to be a real eye opener
Speaker 1: for the country. Oh you mean that We've just had
Speaker 1: the best year we've had economically in a decade. I
Speaker 1: wonder why that is. I wonder what the differential is
Speaker 1: between say now and two years ago, or three years
Speaker 1: ago or four years ago. What's different now? Everybody? Oh,
Speaker 1: I think we all know the answer to that. So
Speaker 1: there's some good things and you could have Hello, hell
Speaker 1: are Joe, America is amazing? Vote for me. We could
Speaker 1: have that, and we don't, Joe, So it's all gonna
Speaker 1: be okay, America is not dead. We're just we got
Speaker 1: some things to work out. And I will tell you
Speaker 1: that right now. If nothing else, food is better than
Speaker 1: it's ever been. So we've got that going for us,
Speaker 1: which is nice. It's true wherever you are now you
Speaker 1: can get really good food pretty much everywhere in this country,
Speaker 1: you can you can find, you know, with relatively little effort,
Speaker 1: really high quality food. That was not always the case. Man.
Speaker 1: I remember some family trips back in the day. You know,
Speaker 1: we'd pull off somewhere and it was like, yeah, there's
Speaker 1: some guy named Phil who has way too much chest
Speaker 1: hair and a really tight uh you know, undershirt all
Speaker 1: and who's cooking some burgers behind a trailer somewhere. Let's
Speaker 1: go see what he's got cooked up tonight, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. It wasn't it wasn't always great. Wasn't
Speaker 1: always great. Food now is amazing. So at least we
Speaker 1: we do have that to look forward to every day. Um.
Speaker 1: I'm obviously I'm hungry right now, which is why I'm
Speaker 1: thinking of this and wrote you just just heard you
Speaker 1: read this, YEA, regarding a mechanic a couple of years ago,
Speaker 1: my car's engine through a rod mm, because we are
Speaker 1: trying our best to live within our means and hate
Speaker 1: car payments. We bought an old Volvo with cash. Having
Speaker 1: a mechanic technician that works on nothing of Volvos took
Speaker 1: that car from piece of junk to almost a cream
Speaker 1: puff and for a lot less than the dealership would have.
Speaker 1: You need someone to trust with your vehicles. Oh no,
Speaker 1: and you're you're right. I'm just saying the mechanic thing
Speaker 1: is changing a little bit over time. If you've got
Speaker 1: a newer vehicle. Uh, there's so much in the way
Speaker 1: of electronics in it that it's not just something that
Speaker 1: somebody can work their way through. But look, I haven't
Speaker 1: owned a car in years now, um, and I don't
Speaker 1: miss it. I'll be honest with you. There's some things
Speaker 1: about me I should admit. There's some things about buck
Speaker 1: that are that are vaguely communists. Uh. And you know
Speaker 1: one of them is that I don't like baseball, And
Speaker 1: another one is that I don't put really love driving cars.
Speaker 1: I can drive. I've actually had advanced tactical driving. I mean,
Speaker 1: I've done some some things in vehicles. I've I've driven
Speaker 1: cars in countries where just not not dying in a
Speaker 1: vehicular accident is something of an accomplishment, you know, in
Speaker 1: the in the third world. But you know, I just
Speaker 1: I'm not somebody I find a car is something that
Speaker 1: you It serves a purpose for me. It's not a
Speaker 1: joy like the notion of joy riding. I don't really
Speaker 1: I'd rather be joy jogging or joy walking. I'd have
Speaker 1: no interest in joy riding. So again, I know a
Speaker 1: lot of you can yell at me, Buck, what are
Speaker 1: you You gotta remember people from Manhattan in particular, we
Speaker 1: you know, we we don't really we don't really count
Speaker 1: as part of the rest of the country. In some ways.
Speaker 1: We were a very strange, very strange group in Manhattan. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's it's such a little pocket of cosmopolitanism. We've got
Speaker 1: a lot of people that like soccer, for example. Don't
Speaker 1: even get me started, all right, Karen, I'm gonna bail
Speaker 1: out of this one, U Karen, type in National Review
Speaker 1: magazine into Google, and the third suggestion is bias type
Speaker 1: in Atlantic Monthly magazine and liberal or conservative is the
Speaker 1: eighth suggestion, No bias. I could play this all day, Karen,
Speaker 1: You're right. Uh. And then the question is becomes are
Speaker 1: these Internet you know, search giants and these platforms are
Speaker 1: are they? And I think I think the those of
Speaker 1: you listen to the show consistently would would would give
Speaker 1: me some credit for I've seen this all coming with
Speaker 1: how the politicization of the platforms and the search engines
Speaker 1: is now. This is now the new focus of the left,
Speaker 1: and it's it's gonna cause big problems. It's gonna be
Speaker 1: you know because because the old, the old media way
Speaker 1: of doing things, the old we're not We're just journalists
Speaker 1: going straight down the middle. Uh, that's that's for clowns
Speaker 1: who don't pay enough attention. It's just not true. So people,
Speaker 1: if they want to live in that delusion, that's their choice.
Speaker 1: But if they want to live in reality, we all
Speaker 1: know that it is inaccurate for people to think that
Speaker 1: CNN and these other networks are unbiased. Um, but if
Speaker 1: they can make the algorithms by so now they take
Speaker 1: the human component out of it. As I've been saying,
Speaker 1: is Google populating those search results Karen in that way
Speaker 1: because that's what most people type in? Or do we
Speaker 1: just have to take their word for it? And the
Speaker 1: answer is, oh yeah, we just have to take their
Speaker 1: word for it. We really don't know. We really don't
Speaker 1: have an answer as to what the what the truth
Speaker 1: of that is. So and it's proprietary and their private company.
Speaker 1: So what are we gonna do? What are we gonna do? Um?
Speaker 1: Let's see? Hold on what second? Here? Uh? I just
Speaker 1: lost It's okay, I just lost roll call. Here we go, Taylor,
Speaker 1: do me a favor when you have shown on the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hunt podcast. Let them know Outlaw Platoon was a
Speaker 1: great book. I've listened to four or five, four or
Speaker 1: five times since you had him on the show. Can't
Speaker 1: wait for his next one to come out. You both
Speaker 1: should come to Utah. Check out the Black Ruffle HQ.
Speaker 1: I'll bust out the cannon and the b b Q.
Speaker 1: Let's party to freedom. Taylor, My man, you're on. Next
Speaker 1: time I head out to Utah, I'll shoot you a message.
Speaker 1: We'll go shoot some cannons because I think you said
Speaker 1: you've got you've got your own you make your own cannons.
Speaker 1: If I remember, Taylor correctly told me a while ago
Speaker 1: that he actually cast his own cannons, which is which
Speaker 1: is pretty cool. I gotta say, jar right Buck. In
Speaker 1: regards to the we don't tip terrorists receipt story. My
Speaker 1: little thought was a little different than yours. My first
Speaker 1: thought was that it was employed to get money from
Speaker 1: people through donation in some sort of Go fund Me account.
Speaker 1: You know, Jar, You've got a good point there. These days,
Speaker 1: if you become the subject of some kind of a
Speaker 1: very emotional viral news story where people are all feeling
Speaker 1: like the social justice warrior and them has to come out, um,
Speaker 1: you can make a whole bunch of money. Uh, people
Speaker 1: don't it all kinds of money to you? So you
Speaker 1: were right, Um, that's a possibility. At least I don't
Speaker 1: think that happened in this case, but that at least
Speaker 1: could happen. Um. Hold on a second, Adam writes bad
Speaker 1: producer Mike podcast from s is missing from my Heart
Speaker 1: producer Mike. Adam is saying that you need a code read.
Speaker 1: I don't know, John telling me that's complete thickness, Mike.
Speaker 1: Mike's calling you out, Adam for fake news. I don't
Speaker 1: you know, you gentlemen can sell this on Facebook. I'm
Speaker 1: just I'm just the messenger. I'm just the messenger. That's right, Mike, Mike.
Speaker 1: My game played no games today. ED is next up. Here,
Speaker 1: Hey Buck, I still on the show after all these years.
Speaker 1: Thanks Ed. I've noticed for the past few weeks at
Speaker 1: the phrase Russian collusion has been dropped by the media
Speaker 1: in favor of the phrase Russian meddling. What is your
Speaker 1: take on that? Oss original Saturday Squad, Ed, And I
Speaker 1: think you are a very astute fellow, and I think
Speaker 1: that you are probably noticing I have not noticed that trend,
Speaker 1: but it would not surprise me if that trend was
Speaker 1: very real. Uh would not surprise me to find out
Speaker 1: that that was in fact the case. And so let
Speaker 1: me just say that I will look in this a
Speaker 1: little more and try to keep an eye out for
Speaker 1: it because Russia, remember, Russian meddling is whatever the Russians
Speaker 1: just did to us. Russian collusion would be whatever we
Speaker 1: did to assist the Russians in that or we mean,
Speaker 1: meaning Trump or his people, to assist the Russians in
Speaker 1: their meddling. So there that is an important distinction. It's
Speaker 1: a real distinction, don't I don't think that that's something
Speaker 1: that we should just ignore your I think you're picking
Speaker 1: something up there, my friend. Very astute, and thank you
Speaker 1: for an original Saturday Squad. You know, who else's Oss John?
Speaker 1: Producer John who was with me in the earliest days
Speaker 1: when people are like, you want to do radio, You've
Speaker 1: never even done radio? What do you know about radio?
Speaker 1: But John was always my friend. Thanks John. John used
Speaker 1: to on the board for me. They didn't think I
Speaker 1: was gonna laugh to look. I know, I know, I know.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying, dude, like they didn't think I was
Speaker 1: gonna lie. They're like, oh, you're a TV guy, radio
Speaker 1: is too hard for you. Blablah. Was like, please, I
Speaker 1: got me, I got producer, I got producer John, I'm GTG.
Speaker 1: Good to go. And then I actually became primarily a
Speaker 1: radio guy. So there you go. That's that's all life works. Uh,
Speaker 1: let's see what we get here. Um, Joe writes onto politics,
Speaker 1: Russia hacked the election. When I hear this, I think
Speaker 1: computers kind of votes were tampered with. But from what
Speaker 1: I understand, Russia tried to hack the Republican and Democrat
Speaker 1: party computers. Some Russians also put up a bunch of
Speaker 1: Facebook propaganda. I understand the first being a crime, but
Speaker 1: I don't understand the ladder. Uh. And I'm a lawyer, Joe,
Speaker 1: You're right, people are nuts. They only need to calm
Speaker 1: down this stuff. That's gonna be it for today. Tomorrow
Speaker 1: we have a fantastic Freedom Hut podcast plan, so please
Speaker 1: do download last week's and get ready for tomorrow's. Me
Speaker 1: and Sean Parnell and Jesse Kelly. It's gonna be a
Speaker 1: pro fessed extravaganza. Also, of course, we'll have a freestyle
Speaker 1: Friday here in the Freedom Hut itself. See you tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Shields high five am wake ups these days. That's what
Speaker 1: I got on the alarm clock every day. But you
Speaker 1: know what I look forward to no matter what, making
Speaker 1: sure that I fuel the fight of freedom in my
Speaker 1: day to day with Black Rifle coffee. My friends, it
Speaker 1: is delicious and unlike a lot of other coffees out there.
Speaker 1: This isn't some fancy French import. This isn't something that
Speaker 1: comes from a bunch of commies overseas somewhere else. This
Speaker 1: is an all American, made in America company owned and
Speaker 1: operated by veterans, including members of the elite Special Forces.
Speaker 1: You need to check them out for yourself. I drink
Speaker 1: Black Rifle every day. I get it delivered to my
Speaker 1: door every month. I don't buy coffe anymore. I just
Speaker 1: have Black Rifle sent to me. You should do the same.
Speaker 1: Visit Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck and receive
Speaker 1: fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. Do you only coffee should be
Speaker 1: drinking folks? And I know your coffee drinkers, So I
Speaker 1: want everyone listening to this to go check out Black
Speaker 1: Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck.