Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom hunt. A horrific anti
Speaker 1: Semitic shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh over the weekend,
Speaker 1: and no surprise, the media is blaming Trump for what
Speaker 1: they say is the rise and hate. This comes after
Speaker 1: they blamed him last week for a series of mail
Speaker 1: bombings from a supposed Trump supporter. We'll talk about that
Speaker 1: at Also perhaps five thousand US troops heading to the
Speaker 1: border to deal with the incoming caravan. That and more
Speaker 1: coming up on The buck Sexton Show. This is the
Speaker 1: buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Magnorma stake America.
Speaker 1: You're a great American Again, the buck Sexton Show begins. Analysts, Now,
Speaker 1: anti Semitism and the widespread persecution of Jews represents one
Speaker 1: of the ugliest and darkest features of human history. The vile,
Speaker 1: hate filled poison of anti Semitism must be condemned and
Speaker 1: confronted everywhere and anywhere it appears. There must be no
Speaker 1: tolerance for anti Semitism in America, or for any form
Speaker 1: of religious or racial hatred or prejudice. You know that,
Speaker 1: you know that very well. Welcome to the Box Exton show,
Speaker 1: the nation is in mourning after eleven people were murdered
Speaker 1: and uh about a half dozen more gunned down in
Speaker 1: or rather shot wounded in a in a synagogue in Pittsburgh,
Speaker 1: and the president they're spoken away that I I think
Speaker 1: we would all expect the presidency under the circumstances. The
Speaker 1: shooter was a hateful, bigoted anti semi whose life, ironically
Speaker 1: in a sense, was was saved by the very Jewish
Speaker 1: people that he was espousing so much hate of. He
Speaker 1: was saved I see here according to Fox, by Jewish
Speaker 1: doctors and nurses after he was confronted by police. But
Speaker 1: this man went into the synagogue, he had an a
Speaker 1: r rifle and I believe a couple of pistols on
Speaker 1: him as well, and he brutally murdered eleven eleven people
Speaker 1: at prayer um. And it was it was a difficult weekend.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's one of those stories where you read
Speaker 1: it and it just makes your heart sink. It just
Speaker 1: makes you feel like there's so much evil in this
Speaker 1: world and we all, we all have to do everything
Speaker 1: we can every day to fight against it, to do
Speaker 1: what we can to make sure that evil cannot thrive
Speaker 1: in this country or in this world. Everything we can
Speaker 1: we can do to fight against it. And I think
Speaker 1: that the President spoke about this in a heartful fashion.
Speaker 1: I think that Sarah Huckaby Sanders, when she gave her
Speaker 1: press conference today, was also in earnest when she when
Speaker 1: she claimed that where she stated rather that the President
Speaker 1: um cannot more strongly condemned this kind of bigotry than
Speaker 1: he does, and that his heart is broken for the
Speaker 1: Jewish people. And as Americans, this should be a moment.
Speaker 1: This should be one of those moments when we all
Speaker 1: come together we say, hold on a second. There are
Speaker 1: some things that we can all agree are hateful and
Speaker 1: evil and wrong. There's some things we will all stand
Speaker 1: with each other to fight against. There are some lines
Speaker 1: that we will all defend together as the American people.
Speaker 1: And any time that you have this kind of bigotry
Speaker 1: or or hate tried on display, it should be one
Speaker 1: of those instances. As an American, I know those of
Speaker 1: you listen to this al that we have people listening
Speaker 1: all over the world, including Team Buck Israel, Hey guys,
Speaker 1: how you doing, and gals um. But as an American
Speaker 1: listening to this, I know that you feel the same
Speaker 1: way that any of us would do anything in our
Speaker 1: power to prevent this kind of a masker from happening,
Speaker 1: to help anyone who was caught in such a horrific
Speaker 1: circumstance as this. And now we do what we can
Speaker 1: with in some cases direct aid and assistance, but also
Speaker 1: just just prayer and uh and words of support and
Speaker 1: everything else that we can do for the Jewish community
Speaker 1: in this country. And yet it immediately turns into a
Speaker 1: political issue, and without a moment self reflection, without taking
Speaker 1: just a beat to let the American people mourn, they
Speaker 1: make this about Trump. These people who do this every day,
Speaker 1: on every issue, at all times, are are sick. They
Speaker 1: have a problem, they really do. They are no longer
Speaker 1: capable of being objective. You know, last week we were
Speaker 1: told that there was a bomber who Trump is responsible
Speaker 1: for because this guy whould already called it a bomb threat,
Speaker 1: you know, over a decade before Trump's presidential run and
Speaker 1: had a career criminal clearly you know, psychological problems. But
Speaker 1: Trump's responsible because he criticizes people in the political arena,
Speaker 1: and those are the people that were being targeted. They
Speaker 1: can't point to Trump ever, ever, inciting or calling for
Speaker 1: violence against any of those individuals. But they say that
Speaker 1: Trump is basically responsible that they use these kind of
Speaker 1: weasel words. They'll say, oh, well he's he bears some
Speaker 1: share of the blame, and you know, because he They
Speaker 1: know that Trump didn't pack the bombs himself. They know
Speaker 1: Trump wasn't wasn't crushing up has to use the shrapnel
Speaker 1: for They're not that crazy, I suppose they're not that stupid.
Speaker 1: But they'll say that Trump was the reason for this
Speaker 1: in some way. And what they'll point to is, well,
Speaker 1: he had his van. This guy had this van, sayok,
Speaker 1: covered in Trump stickers, covered in all this pro maga paraphernalia.
Speaker 1: And so we had to deal with this last week
Speaker 1: we talked about on the show. Now Here we are
Speaker 1: over the weekend, there's this terrible shooting on on Saturday
Speaker 1: on the Jewish Stabbath, and we are told that even
Speaker 1: though this shooter, it is clear, did not like Trump
Speaker 1: because specifically Trump was too friendly and too favorable and
Speaker 1: too much of a friend to the Jews, it's still
Speaker 1: Trump's fault. Now, if we take this theory at face value,
Speaker 1: this theory that Trump has just raised hate in America,
Speaker 1: Let's be clear that that means that now Trump is
Speaker 1: respond honstable no matter who engages that they hate crime
Speaker 1: against anyone else. You know, if there is an anti
Speaker 1: Christian and anti Catholic, you know, hate crime in this country,
Speaker 1: let's say, you know, or you know, if there's if
Speaker 1: there's an Islamist extremist. Let's just put it this. If
Speaker 1: a je hottest kills a bunch of people, is that
Speaker 1: Trump's fault. I want to know where the lines are
Speaker 1: drawn here, and I think the answer, by the way,
Speaker 1: is they would claim it's Trump's fault because you see,
Speaker 1: somebody from the Islamic community, if they were to radicalize,
Speaker 1: it would be because of Trump's anti Muslim rhetoric. So
Speaker 1: he would bear some of the share of responsibility for
Speaker 1: that too. If a you know, neo nazi white nationalist
Speaker 1: kills somebody somewhere, it's Trump's fault because he has implicitly
Speaker 1: encouraged them. They'll say if a anti Semite who is
Speaker 1: anti Trump, I mean, you know you got on this list.
Speaker 1: Doesn't matter who it is, Trump is always responsible no
Speaker 1: matter what the situation was like, if it's a terrible circumstance,
Speaker 1: if there's violence and bloodshed here in America, and there's
Speaker 1: there's hate, and there's venom, and there's nastiness at its
Speaker 1: At the root of it all, it is Trump's fault.
Speaker 1: They say, this is delusional and it's really destructive too.
Speaker 1: How can you have a conversation with somebody about Trump's
Speaker 1: policies when they really believe that he's dog whistling to
Speaker 1: white supremacists all the time in ways that I can't
Speaker 1: even begin to fathom. I'm paying attention to politics all day.
Speaker 1: I'm here in the swamp. I this is I live, eat,
Speaker 1: and breathe politics and national security. And I have no
Speaker 1: idea what some of these other pundits and and anchors
Speaker 1: and such you're talking about. Sometimes no, I'm like, what
Speaker 1: are they what? It will play someone for you later
Speaker 1: you'll hear say, what does that even mean? Who are
Speaker 1: these idiots who's paying this so much? To be so
Speaker 1: stupid on TV all the time? And so they talk
Speaker 1: about division as they are creating divisions. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is how you know that the left cannot be taken
Speaker 1: seriously on this. They will try to escalate rhetoric while
Speaker 1: saying that rest rhetoric needs to be de escalated. They'll say,
Speaker 1: the reason we have terrorism and hate in this country
Speaker 1: is because of Donald Trump. So Donald Trump needs to
Speaker 1: stop saying that the other side is bad. Oh that
Speaker 1: seems like a brilliant idea for Trump. Why not just
Speaker 1: caved your political opponents. Let them beat you into submission,
Speaker 1: bludging you into silence on issues that mattered to you.
Speaker 1: By attaching all these issues, all these problems, all this violence,
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with it. They're calling President Trump
Speaker 1: and ety somebody. I mean, President Trump grew up in
Speaker 1: New York City. He's so as did I, which is
Speaker 1: a city that has I believe, the largest Jewish population
Speaker 1: anywhere outside of Israel in the world. Trump is has
Speaker 1: had countless friends who are Jewish. His personal lawyer, Michael Cohen,
Speaker 1: I know they've had a falling out, but you know
Speaker 1: he was Jewish, His son as Jewish, Ivanka converted Judaism,
Speaker 1: as grandkids are. Just Trump is not an anti Semit,
Speaker 1: not even a little bit, not even close. But they
Speaker 1: say this, the media says this. They pat themselves in
Speaker 1: the back. Oh that's right, Yeah, we're speaking truth the power. No,
Speaker 1: you're a bunch of destructive little imbeciles that are saying this.
Speaker 1: It's immoral to make these claims. It's immoral to call
Speaker 1: someone an anti Semite who has blood on his hands
Speaker 1: because somebody else who hates the President, who despises his
Speaker 1: position towards Jews, decides to be violent, engages in this,
Speaker 1: in this horrific hate crime. I mean, he's now facing
Speaker 1: the death penalty, and good this guy should get the
Speaker 1: death penalty for what he did in that synagogue. Trying
Speaker 1: to try attach Trump to this though, it's just so
Speaker 1: intellectually dishonest, it's so unfair, and it just goes to
Speaker 1: show you that there is there's no for it, good faith,
Speaker 1: There's no Let's have a real you know, last week
Speaker 1: was all okay, let's let's tone things down. Let's have
Speaker 1: a different, a different kind of conversation going for Let's
Speaker 1: talk about policy. Let's come together as Americans, all right.
Speaker 1: You know, the press is under assault at the type
Speaker 1: the press drives. I I agree with Trump and that
Speaker 1: the press does drive a lot of this because the
Speaker 1: press is full of a bunch of preening, self obsessed,
Speaker 1: self righteous jerks, not all of them obviously, And I
Speaker 1: know this book. You're in the media. I'm telling you
Speaker 1: what n of the media is like, they are not
Speaker 1: good people, they're not honest, they're not ethical. It's all
Speaker 1: about the self, it's all about the agenda. They are
Speaker 1: activists posing as truth tellers. It is destroying this country
Speaker 1: from the inside. They're the ones undermining institutions, they're the
Speaker 1: ones undermining public trust. And they turn around and accuse
Speaker 1: everybody else of exactly that. They tell you that Trump
Speaker 1: won't take responsibility. They take responsibility for nothing. Wrong story
Speaker 1: after wrong story, all critical of Trump. Oh, that's just
Speaker 1: a coincidence, As if we're idiots, we're really supposed to
Speaker 1: believe that. Yeah, sure, it's just a coincidence. They are
Speaker 1: disgraceful and they are tearing this country apart. And I
Speaker 1: have to say it is very frustrating as well, because
Speaker 1: if if we were able to focus on what's really
Speaker 1: happening in America and then in the direction of the
Speaker 1: country right now and how we're all doing, this country
Speaker 1: is doing very well. This country is on the right path.
Speaker 1: But the left can't make a fair argument about why
Speaker 1: it's not. So what do they do? They make it
Speaker 1: about emotion. They make it about anger and viciousness and
Speaker 1: destructive politics and lies and that's what they're doing. That's
Speaker 1: what they're doing with the president. We're going to continue
Speaker 1: to see this unfortunate or we're gonna talk by the way,
Speaker 1: without the caravan coming up. Got some big updates on
Speaker 1: that for you as well as um, some more following
Speaker 1: to last week with the bomber, and we we got
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of show planned teams. So stay right there.
Speaker 1: I'll be right back. So let me just say that,
Speaker 1: you know, I I was able to give some thoughts
Speaker 1: on Friday on Fox News right after it had become
Speaker 1: clear what well we we found that the bomber was found.
Speaker 1: Um and uh uh, you know, the bomber was found,
Speaker 1: and we had to have this discussion about well, should
Speaker 1: we have civility now? Is that really what the left wants?
Speaker 1: And I was on this panel with Shannon Bream, who
Speaker 1: I think is whom I think is great and uh
Speaker 1: and you know, Wan Williams to give the Democrat point
Speaker 1: of view. And I just wanted to share with you
Speaker 1: what I said Friday on Fox because when it comes
Speaker 1: to the bomber and the aftermath and now all this, oh,
Speaker 1: we need to be civil. We need to just take
Speaker 1: the temperature down. Here's what I really think about it.
Speaker 1: Play the clip, rationality, the demonization of Democrats. Sak is
Speaker 1: no wacko aberration. He is is the very face of Trump,
Speaker 1: buck Fair. They're over sixty million people voted for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: This is one guy who's clearly disturbed, and he's a
Speaker 1: career criminal, but he's far from a criminal mastermind. I
Speaker 1: think the calls for civility from the left are quite
Speaker 1: honestly un serious. They're unserious because of the record that
Speaker 1: they have where they didn't call for similar, similar civility
Speaker 1: when we had incidents that were even worse in terms
Speaker 1: of actual casualty suffered Steve Scalise, which the President himself
Speaker 1: has mentioned. And you can't call for a ceasefire while
Speaker 1: you're still firing, which is exactly what Democrats have been
Speaker 1: doing all week. And if President Trump were to heed
Speaker 1: these calls, I just want to know if we're really
Speaker 1: supposed to believe they would stop calling him a traitor,
Speaker 1: a sexist, a racist, crazy. I think we all know
Speaker 1: the answers to that, So why would he He has
Speaker 1: nothing to do with it. He bears no responsibility for
Speaker 1: this whatsoever. Well, there's also a political culture on the
Speaker 1: left right now that has for months embraced mob tactics
Speaker 1: in public. They've even tried to parse whether mob a
Speaker 1: term you can use for a massive people that are
Speaker 1: threatening individuals managing them in restaurants, which I think they
Speaker 1: lost that debate. But this isn't just something that a
Speaker 1: few people have done. We're seeing crowds of individuals acting
Speaker 1: out in a way that is full of rage, that
Speaker 1: is frightening, that is meant to intimidate, and then seeing
Speaker 1: multi millionaire TV pundits and anchors at different networks than
Speaker 1: this one saying that that behavior is okay. So it's
Speaker 1: a completely different universe from one obviously crazy individual living
Speaker 1: in a van covered with the comments section of some
Speaker 1: websites that he pulled together and deciding to take these
Speaker 1: incredibly vile actions. Everyone agrees with what this guy did
Speaker 1: was discussing the presidents that everyone has said it. There's
Speaker 1: something else going on though, on the left, where they
Speaker 1: seem to think that this kind of intimidation is warranted
Speaker 1: because they think that Trump is a fascist, because Trump
Speaker 1: is destroying the country, because Trump is undermining our institutions.
Speaker 1: That is the rhetoric that's coming from the top of
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party and the media apparatus rang against all
Speaker 1: the time. Yep, all of that is true. Stand by
Speaker 1: all of it. Reiterate all of it, repeating all of it.
Speaker 1: I mean it. It is what needs to be said
Speaker 1: here in this moment of Oh, we all need to
Speaker 1: come together, really need to come together. Here's like what
Speaker 1: Here's what they put on TV over at MSNBC. The
Speaker 1: politics editor there, here's what he has to say about
Speaker 1: Trump when we're all supposed to come together. Now play
Speaker 1: twenty four. As much as I may have criticisms of
Speaker 1: how law enforcement operates in this country, they are still
Speaker 1: our line of defense against maniacs and terrorists out there.
Speaker 1: But but I have to say, Nicole, and this has
Speaker 1: always been a problem with this president. He has always
Speaker 1: shown a sympathy or a dismissiveness towards terrorism. Uh. He
Speaker 1: is a He is a terrorist sympathizer. I mean, given
Speaker 1: the way that he responded what happened in Charlesville, given
Speaker 1: how he responded to cause Shog, given the fact that
Speaker 1: he he puts what's happened today and through this week,
Speaker 1: and the context of how it affects the midterm elections,
Speaker 1: we don't have leadership in this country. When it comes
Speaker 1: to domestic terrorism, this president foments it as much as
Speaker 1: he is occasionally forced to speak against it. A terrorist sympathizer.
Speaker 1: The MSNBC pot Etceterator calls the President of the United States,
Speaker 1: how much more stupidity do we have to really be
Speaker 1: subjected to before we just say, you know, I just
Speaker 1: don't want to hear from these from these idiots anymore.
Speaker 1: I just can't. I can't handle I can't even pretend
Speaker 1: to engage and hear their arguments. I I feel this
Speaker 1: from friends of mine. They say, I'm just sick of it,
Speaker 1: and I understand the feelings sometimes, you know. And I
Speaker 1: spent a lot of time talking a lot of leftists,
Speaker 1: and it is it is no easy task these days.
Speaker 1: You know what this really comes down to, And this
Speaker 1: is what they don't want to tell you. They know
Speaker 1: that they are not going to win the Senate, and
Speaker 1: they know that the House is going to be tight.
Speaker 1: And the left is aware somewhere deep down that if
Speaker 1: Trump was anywhere near this monster, this caricature that they've
Speaker 1: been saying for all this time, then Trump should get
Speaker 1: blown out, his party should get blown out. In the
Speaker 1: mid terms, right, it should be a wipeout in favor
Speaker 1: of the Democrats. What does it say that, almost two
Speaker 1: years into the Trump press and see who they say
Speaker 1: is a traitor and a fascist and a bigot and
Speaker 1: a rapist and all these horrible things. What does it
Speaker 1: say that the party that is led by that guy
Speaker 1: is going to gain Senate seats and almost even though
Speaker 1: it's an off your election to hold on to the
Speaker 1: House of Representatives. How much more out of touch and
Speaker 1: deluded can the Democrat Party be? That's the question they
Speaker 1: don't want to have to do. It's just so much
Speaker 1: easier for them, so much more satisfying to say that
Speaker 1: it's just all about how Trump is a racist and
Speaker 1: a terror sympathizer. It's just not true. And that's what
Speaker 1: the rhetoric is doing. It is giving people a license uh,
Speaker 1: certainly unbalanced people, certainly people on the fringes of American life.
Speaker 1: But it is telling them that what you're doing is okay.
Speaker 1: And that's why, Yes, there have always been anti Semitic
Speaker 1: incidents in American history. Nationalism goes hand in hand with
Speaker 1: the anti semitism. The entire d have anti semitism is
Speaker 1: to put choose outside the body politics outside the definition
Speaker 1: of us. And that's what Donald Trump does, that's his theme,
Speaker 1: that's what his party is now committed to doing, eliminationist rhetoric.
Speaker 1: And the president has not been dabbling in eliminationist rhetoric.
Speaker 1: At some points, he doesn't dog whistle. He uses megaphones
Speaker 1: to tell these tribes that they belong to him. And
Speaker 1: this is leading to violence, directly, directly leading to violence.
Speaker 1: They say it is not somewhat or partially Trump's fault.
Speaker 1: I mean, I saw a a an editorial about this
Speaker 1: over the weekend in the Washington Post, no less, saying
Speaker 1: that it is directly somewhat You know that they'll always
Speaker 1: put in this qualifier it's Trump's fault to an extent,
Speaker 1: you know, or you know, Trump should hold some some
Speaker 1: level of of the blame here. Uh, this is is,
Speaker 1: this is disgusting, It's disgraceful. But when you have the
Speaker 1: individuals in the media who have taken Trump's entire presidency
Speaker 1: so personally and as an affront to their greatness and
Speaker 1: their values and how wonderful they are, Uh, there are
Speaker 1: no limits really on the bile that they will throw
Speaker 1: at this present There are no uh, there's no good faith,
Speaker 1: there's no decency whatsoever that they will extend to him
Speaker 1: and and to his supporters, to all of us. Remember,
Speaker 1: it's not just about Trump. Underneath all of this, there's
Speaker 1: always this seething hatred of the Trump voter too. That's
Speaker 1: a part of the anti Trump movement. They they despise
Speaker 1: the voter. They don't because they don't think that, really,
Speaker 1: we've been fooled. They have figured out enough now. I
Speaker 1: believe the leftists in the media and the Democrat Party
Speaker 1: have figured out that we've made this bargain and we're
Speaker 1: good with it. We're like, yeah, I like Trump. I
Speaker 1: know he's not perfect, I know he makes mistakes, but
Speaker 1: I think Trump is actually the right choice for America
Speaker 1: right now. So they hate us because of all of that,
Speaker 1: and that's why they feel completely justified in saying just
Speaker 1: the most despicable, disgusting things. I mean, here's here's another
Speaker 1: Washington Post person over at MSNBC play three. There's always
Speaker 1: been the old Right or its equivalent. The difference is
Speaker 1: it was always on the fringe and the mainstream elements
Speaker 1: of the party, and certainly the president never validated that.
Speaker 1: What's happening what's so extremely dangerous about this is you
Speaker 1: now have the man with the largest megaphone in the
Speaker 1: world giving a nod and a wink, sometimes outright praise
Speaker 1: to the folks who are carrying on these conspiracy theories,
Speaker 1: and it is telling them, these people that it's okay
Speaker 1: that they're getting a blessing to do this. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's interesting that that he can go on TV
Speaker 1: that that's Dana Millbang's Washington Post and say that Trunk
Speaker 1: gives them a blessing right after he is explicitly, openly,
Speaker 1: repeatedly condemned this. But you see, this is one of
Speaker 1: the games that they play. They'll say, why doesn't Trump did,
Speaker 1: Why doesn't Trump condemn white nationalists? And people will say, okay,
Speaker 1: well he did, he just condemned them a couple of
Speaker 1: days ago. Well, well he hasn't denounced it enough. And
Speaker 1: then people will do little Google searching and I'll say,
Speaker 1: we hold on a second. Trump has called white nationalist losers.
Speaker 1: He said there's no place in America for hate. He
Speaker 1: said this many many times, and they'll say, well, then
Speaker 1: why does Trump talk about white nationalists so much? He
Speaker 1: can't win folks. You know this there's nothing he can
Speaker 1: do that will make them stop calling him a racist,
Speaker 1: stop calling him a white nationalist. They they do not
Speaker 1: extend the most basic level of good faith to him
Speaker 1: in any of these discussions, and they love to try
Speaker 1: out these these fake conservatives. I mean, he's fake Republicans
Speaker 1: like Jennifer Rueman, who's she is the queen of fake Republicans.
Speaker 1: The Washington Post still lists here as a Republican when
Speaker 1: she writes things, which is just amazing. But you know,
Speaker 1: she she blames not just for what happened over the weekend,
Speaker 1: what happened last week, but for the overall increase in
Speaker 1: hate in America. She says, for I'm not going to
Speaker 1: plumb the depths or the shallow side of Donald Trump's mind,
Speaker 1: but I will say this, We've had a fifty seven
Speaker 1: percent uptick in the last year in anti Semitic hate crimes.
Speaker 1: The biggest sort of theme and anti semitism is that
Speaker 1: Jews are outsiders, they are aliens. That you define a
Speaker 1: nation by Christianity, by whiteness, and if you can believe
Speaker 1: that they do not believe that Jews are white um
Speaker 1: and that everyone else's alien, everyone else is a threat
Speaker 1: that true America is not all men are created equal.
Speaker 1: It's not an ideal, it's not a credle nation. It
Speaker 1: is blood and soil. The entire idea of anti Semitism
Speaker 1: is to put Jews outside the body politics. And that's
Speaker 1: what Donald Trump does. That's what he does by having
Speaker 1: a a Jewish daughter and a Jewish son in law
Speaker 1: and numerous Jewish grandchildren. That's what he does by having
Speaker 1: senior Jewish advisors in the White House, by being a
Speaker 1: better friend to Israel by leaps and bounds than Obama
Speaker 1: ever was for for a president who's probably the most
Speaker 1: popular American president in Israel, the state of the Jewish people,
Speaker 1: For a president of that stature to be called an
Speaker 1: anti semi just goes to show you how desperate the
Speaker 1: left really is to try to make this stick. And
Speaker 1: I know that there is a fight within the Jewish
Speaker 1: community right now about well he's actually spoke to a
Speaker 1: rabbi about it today on my other show. Uh you know, well,
Speaker 1: he's good on Israel, but they don't like some of
Speaker 1: his domestic policies. But they do like some of his
Speaker 1: other domestic policies, but they don't like his uh, you know,
Speaker 1: his tweeting and his coarseness, and you know, and that's great.
Speaker 1: The Jewish community is vibrant with political disagreements like like
Speaker 1: any you know, vibrant community would over politics. It's not
Speaker 1: a monolith in any sense. But there's not this overwhelming
Speaker 1: belief at all that he's an anti Semit. That's just
Speaker 1: that's fantasy land stuff. That's just not true. It's not reality.
Speaker 1: And they're so desperate to try to make this what
Speaker 1: people believe, what they think, and what you're seeing here
Speaker 1: in this last couple of weeks before the midterm election
Speaker 1: is that the Democrats, really all they have is that
Speaker 1: Trump is hateful. Trump is terrible. They hate Trump, and
Speaker 1: so they want people to vote against Trump. They think
Speaker 1: that Trump is disgusting and disgraceful and all the rest
Speaker 1: of it. And so their plan is to just keep
Speaker 1: hitting that, keep reiterating that point, keep pushing that as
Speaker 1: though it will somehow make the lives better of the
Speaker 1: people in this country who would then be subjected to
Speaker 1: Democrats with all their redistribution and all their nonsense about
Speaker 1: how we're gonna have you know, there's just basically a
Speaker 1: money ferry who's gonna give money for everything we need
Speaker 1: and no one's gonna have to really worry about paying
Speaker 1: for because the rich will pay, because the rich are
Speaker 1: going to take care of it all. And then you
Speaker 1: have people like April Ryan who who just are are
Speaker 1: explicitly blaming Trump for all this, and she's a White
Speaker 1: House correspondent. Play twenty also been told that the President
Speaker 1: is laying low because he's hearing those calls. But at
Speaker 1: the same time, how do you marry this situation with
Speaker 1: the president? Last week says he's a nationalist. All he
Speaker 1: had to do is say white nationalist to that. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, we've seen this just before what happened with
Speaker 1: the bombs. We saw the Kroger in Kentucky, a white
Speaker 1: man shoot and kill two black people, and then he
Speaker 1: got to the white person. White people don't kill white people. Okay,
Speaker 1: I wanna I want to jump in on her point
Speaker 1: about nationalism really quickly. Um that what she just did
Speaker 1: adding a word to another word to make it seem
Speaker 1: really bad. Guess what you can do that with socialism too?
Speaker 1: Ms Ryan, Right, Bernie Sanders democratic socialist. Oh maybe he's
Speaker 1: a nash a socialist instead. Oh that's a terrible slander. Book.
Speaker 1: How could you say that, Well, I just changed the words, right,
Speaker 1: That's why you don't change the words. You know, Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren she is a socialist. Now I think she's actually
Speaker 1: a national socialist. Oh wow, that's a Nazi. That's terrible, right,
Speaker 1: because that's a change term. To say that. When Trump
Speaker 1: says nationalist he means white nationalists. Is just to make
Speaker 1: up what he is saying into something else. But that's
Speaker 1: how desperate they are on all this. They'll just do that.
Speaker 1: You know, Trump said yes, but what he really means
Speaker 1: is no. They think that's analysis. Recently in some places
Speaker 1: in the nation, there's been a disturbing reoccurrence of bigotry
Speaker 1: and violence. If I'm a from the platform of this
Speaker 1: organization known for its tolerance, I would like to address
Speaker 1: a few remarks to those groups who still adhere to
Speaker 1: senseless racism and religious prejudice, to those individuals will persist
Speaker 1: in such hateful behavior. If I were speaking to them
Speaker 1: instead of to you, I would say to them, you
Speaker 1: are the ones who are out of step with our society.
Speaker 1: You are the ones who willfully violate the meaning of
Speaker 1: the dream that is America and this country because it
Speaker 1: sude what it stands for will not stand for your conduct.
Speaker 1: The greatest president of my lifetime, with the possible exception
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump. We'll see how it how it goes.
Speaker 1: We'll see how many years in office he has, hopefully eight,
Speaker 1: and we'll see what the full measure of his accomplishments
Speaker 1: look at. Reagan defeated the Soviet Union and probably saved
Speaker 1: the planet from annihilation. So that's a tough that's a
Speaker 1: tough one too. That's a tough one to be That's
Speaker 1: a tough record to compare against. But Trump so far
Speaker 1: is doing a pretty remarkable job in his own way.
Speaker 1: But I play that for you just because I think
Speaker 1: that it is helpful for all of us. In fact,
Speaker 1: I would argue that it is necessary for all of
Speaker 1: us to remind each other, those of those who are conservatives,
Speaker 1: that our movement and our ideology, our belief system, our
Speaker 1: principles are rooted in uh respect for the individual, individual rights,
Speaker 1: human dignity, human life, liberty. That's that is the foundation
Speaker 1: of our of our belief system. That's where it all starts.
Speaker 1: And so true anti semitism and true racism. And I
Speaker 1: say that with the qualifier of true because we know
Speaker 1: the left calls everything anti semitic, calls everything racist. I
Speaker 1: mean there they use it as a political cudgel. But
Speaker 1: true anti semitism and racism and uh and and bigotry
Speaker 1: is not just nonconservative, it is antithetical to conservatism. Because
Speaker 1: if we are not all God's creation, endowed by our
Speaker 1: creator with inalienable rights, and if we are not all
Speaker 1: equal in the eyes of God and in the eyes
Speaker 1: of the law, then there is no such thing really
Speaker 1: as conservatism, and conservatism as we know it in this
Speaker 1: country does not exist. It is not possible to be
Speaker 1: a conservative and believe that a white person, or and
Speaker 1: a and a black person, or a black person and
Speaker 1: a Hispanic person and a white person, that that they
Speaker 1: do not all have equal dignity, equal rights, equal worth
Speaker 1: as human beings and as citizens of this great nation.
Speaker 1: So when the left try so hard to create this
Speaker 1: perception that people who are conservative, I can't speak to
Speaker 1: the right, I mean the right, meaning all of it.
Speaker 1: I have a second, speak the right in general terms,
Speaker 1: but you know there are some fringe elements of the
Speaker 1: right that you that that they consider themselves on the right.
Speaker 1: And you'd say, well, hold on a second, in what
Speaker 1: meaningful way. Are they conservative though? You know, this is
Speaker 1: where you start to really get into what is right
Speaker 1: wing and left wing even mean. You know, if you
Speaker 1: are more in favor of individual rights, if you are
Speaker 1: about the individual instead of the collective. Right, the left
Speaker 1: in this country is all about the collective, and they're
Speaker 1: about collective guilt, collective identity, collective economics. They are collectivists.
Speaker 1: They believe in groups. They believe in the common good
Speaker 1: as defined by a core of elites that all speak
Speaker 1: in the language of equality and commonality, but live as
Speaker 1: elites and separate from the masses, but use the envy
Speaker 1: and antagonisms of the masses in order to beat the
Speaker 1: other side politically, which would be us. We are the individualists,
Speaker 1: we are the individual rights. We are all God's creation,
Speaker 1: We are all human beings in this struggle together and
Speaker 1: should help each other and respect each other and each
Speaker 1: other's rights and dignity and life. And that is an
Speaker 1: obligation on all of us. Um When they when they
Speaker 1: try to make this case that racism and anti Semitism
Speaker 1: and these different isms and bigotries exist on the right,
Speaker 1: I just I have a a real feeling of of
Speaker 1: outrage at that because it's so untrue and so unfair,
Speaker 1: and I think that the reason they push it. So
Speaker 1: it's not just because it works. It's dirty politics, but
Speaker 1: it is useful for them. It is a shame that
Speaker 1: so many of the classes that the Democrats view as victims,
Speaker 1: whether it's just the working poor, or African Americans or
Speaker 1: or Hispanics, Latinos, women, whatever the group. Maybe it's a
Speaker 1: shame that so many of them have been propagandized to
Speaker 1: such that they really believe, and I know this from
Speaker 1: talking to them, they really believe that conservatives are racist.
Speaker 1: They believe that and you and I said here knowing
Speaker 1: that that is a lie. That's not true. We're not racist.
Speaker 1: In fact, we're the ones that are always advocating for
Speaker 1: people of all races to be treated equally under the law.
Speaker 1: It is the left that advocates for disparate treatment in
Speaker 1: the eyes of the law, based upon race, based upon
Speaker 1: skin color, based upon not even real but perceived gender.
Speaker 1: They're the ones that want these differentiations. And then they
Speaker 1: turn around and say that we're the ones who are
Speaker 1: obsessed with with race and gender and these other differences
Speaker 1: among among human beings. When at the end of the day.
Speaker 1: I think it couldn't be any more clear that our side,
Speaker 1: the side of conservatives and constitutionalists, are the ones that
Speaker 1: advocate for individual rights in the dignity of all people.
Speaker 1: And there has always been this effort to rewrite the
Speaker 1: histories of the two ideologies of the two parties. This
Speaker 1: is why Democrats you get so dare I say, triggered
Speaker 1: when it has brought up that they are the part
Speaker 1: of the Democrats are the party party of slavery, segregation,
Speaker 1: Jim Crow, just go down the list. It was, it
Speaker 1: was historically always the Democrats. Democrats have been and are
Speaker 1: the party of the mob, mob mentality, the mob feeling.
Speaker 1: How does the mass feel? How do the masses view
Speaker 1: an issue? What do they demand? What do they shout?
Speaker 1: What where is their rage directed? That has been the
Speaker 1: id that has been at the core of the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: There's always been an intellectual strain and conservatism that has
Speaker 1: been first and foremost about the American founding in the
Speaker 1: Constitution and the rights of each and every individual and
Speaker 1: the natural law that underpins all of this. That it's
Speaker 1: not really just about what the founding father said. Is
Speaker 1: that the founding fathers were able to harness, a sense
Speaker 1: of what is a universal and eternal truth about human beings,
Speaker 1: what is always true about people, what is always good
Speaker 1: for a society to promote, and what is always necessary
Speaker 1: for a society to try and prevent and to condemn.
Speaker 1: You know, those universal truths are at the heart of conservatism,
Speaker 1: and so it's just it is the exact opposite of
Speaker 1: a true conservative to believe that a person is less
Speaker 1: than because of skin color, to believe that person is
Speaker 1: less than because of gender, less than because of religion.
Speaker 1: That is not who we are. And I know that
Speaker 1: you know that, and I know that, but I do
Speaker 1: think that it is worth sometimes taking a step back
Speaker 1: and just verbalizing exactly why that is the truth. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of fakes and frauds out there, and a
Speaker 1: lot of very easy and clever ways for people to
Speaker 1: try and falsify their records and who they are. That's
Speaker 1: why if you're hiring or you're renting out your property,
Speaker 1: you want the experts at Global Verification Network to have
Speaker 1: your back. So many people that have used Global Verification
Speaker 1: heard about them on their show are realizing that they
Speaker 1: made the right choice because they got the customer service
Speaker 1: and the expertise that they needed, and Global Verification Network
Speaker 1: is the only dual certified veteran owned background investigation and
Speaker 1: vetting company. They'll work with companies of any size, folks,
Speaker 1: So whether you're just a startup or all the way
Speaker 1: up to a fortune one, if you're doing this yourself
Speaker 1: or you've got an HR department, call them. They should
Speaker 1: be the ones doing your background checks. Eight seven seven
Speaker 1: six nine five eleven seventy nine. That's eight seven seven
Speaker 1: six nine five nine my GVN dot com Again, that's
Speaker 1: my GVN dot com. Suddenly it's this group of folks.
Speaker 1: We don't even know where they are. They're way down there.
Speaker 1: That's the biggest thing. And you know, as serves the
Speaker 1: elections over, everybody'll be like, what what what what? What happened?
Speaker 1: We were being in Vadas? Where to go? Oh? President
Speaker 1: Obama still thinks he's on the campaign trail for Obama.
Speaker 1: I think hasn't yet really understood that there are plenty
Speaker 1: of us who don't really want to hear from him,
Speaker 1: and uh, former presidents have done that courtesy to the
Speaker 1: American people, not to pretend to kind of be the
Speaker 1: president in exile. Nonetheless, he's talking about what's going on
Speaker 1: with this caravan as it is called. Now, what is
Speaker 1: really going on? To fill in the blanks here, we
Speaker 1: have our man Raheem Kassam up in this piece. He is,
Speaker 1: of course the fellow of Rahim Kasam dot com. He
Speaker 1: has worked and senior strategy role for government in the UK.
Speaker 1: He's also formerly of bright Bart The man himself author
Speaker 1: of no go Zones. Mr Raheem, good to have you back. Hey,
Speaker 1: great to be here, but thanks for having me. So
Speaker 1: what is the latest with this caravan? By the way,
Speaker 1: I say Obama, he's still campaigning for Obama, remember, I mean,
Speaker 1: he's campaigning on the fact that his legacy is being
Speaker 1: torn down. Um, so this is this is this is
Speaker 1: him campaigning on on on his ego rather than an office.
Speaker 1: And when he comes out and talks about the migrant caravan,
Speaker 1: you know, it doesn't surprise me that he's so desperate
Speaker 1: to try and make light of it and make it
Speaker 1: seem like not a great deal, because actually the caravan
Speaker 1: not just only increased in size over the years that
Speaker 1: he was president, this is a sort of annual now
Speaker 1: bi annual march through Central America up to the US border.
Speaker 1: But it's also, as I've sort of dictated in my
Speaker 1: last couple of articles that I've written, one for the
Speaker 1: Daily Caller, one for the American Media Institute. UM, it's
Speaker 1: it's actually funded historically by Democrats, UM, by people who
Speaker 1: have worked in and around the U. S. Government, specifically
Speaker 1: in the U S. A I. D. Field, you know
Speaker 1: that the foreign aid sphere. So it's no wonder he's
Speaker 1: trying to deflect from it, because really what this caravan
Speaker 1: embodies is deck aids of anti border, anti national sovereignty
Speaker 1: agitating from within the annals of the US government historically
Speaker 1: and from within the Democratic Party left and I and
Speaker 1: I really do mean with both money and significant time
Speaker 1: investment in this. Now we have gotten a lot of
Speaker 1: pushback already from people in the media saying, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: it's so crazy to suggest that there's anyone organizing this,
Speaker 1: as though they want us to think that this is spontaneous,
Speaker 1: and oh, by the way, they're really gonna walk the
Speaker 1: whole way, what can you tell us about the organization?
Speaker 1: And also have we started to see folks hopping on
Speaker 1: buses and trains for at least part of the way,
Speaker 1: because I think that's a pretty predictable move. Yeah, buses
Speaker 1: and flatbed trucks we've seen now pushing people through Mexico
Speaker 1: to get to get to the US border even faster
Speaker 1: because apparently there's some elections coming up, and and you know,
Speaker 1: much as these people really loathe foreign intervention and foreign collusion,
Speaker 1: this is literally, uh, you know, up to ten thousand foreigners.
Speaker 1: Latest estimates are around seven thousand, but you know, it
Speaker 1: could be up to ten thousand foreigners who are being
Speaker 1: bussed to the US border to to impact an election cycle.
Speaker 1: So to make of that what you will. But the
Speaker 1: groups are in question here. I mean the media does
Speaker 1: sort of try to make out like it's some sort
Speaker 1: of grassroots think. It's very strange because then they quote
Speaker 1: in their articles and you can see them on CNN
Speaker 1: and ABC and NBC. Organizer Rodrigo of Ajor told ABC
Speaker 1: this will hold on either it is organized or it
Speaker 1: isn't organized. Um. And then when you go back and
Speaker 1: you actually do the sort of investigative journalistic work which
Speaker 1: I'm you know, I hate to say that nobody's really
Speaker 1: done on the U S side of things, you start
Speaker 1: to get a picture of who these people are. Mr.
Speaker 1: Major runs a group called Pueblos in Front Terrorist the leader,
Speaker 1: the co leader of which was arrested last week for
Speaker 1: organizing and taking part in this criminal activity. UM. You
Speaker 1: have him linked to another group which operates UM in
Speaker 1: California and in New York. Openly they are anti uh
Speaker 1: you know, US law advocates. Effectively, they cut the tracking
Speaker 1: devices from illegal immigrants tags on their ankles. They do
Speaker 1: all this, it's called APPO FAN and they're in turn
Speaker 1: funded by big corporates both in the United States and
Speaker 1: and from within Mexico as well, and aided by Mexican diplomats.
Speaker 1: Again U, S, A I. D. Folks. And when you
Speaker 1: really start to pull this whole thing together, it starts
Speaker 1: to look like one of those sort of crazy conspiracy theories.
Speaker 1: But these same people sit on conference calls and are
Speaker 1: in email chains UM with you know, the Socialist Party
Speaker 1: of America activists who James O'Keeffe Project Veritas recently rumbled
Speaker 1: inside US government departments trying to stop the Trump administration's
Speaker 1: policies going through. So this actually goes really far and
Speaker 1: really deep, and I'm still doing a lot of investigative
Speaker 1: work around it to see actually what federal funds or
Speaker 1: what state level funds have been sent to these groups
Speaker 1: over the past couple of decades, because they're not new,
Speaker 1: by the way, Some of these groups have existed since
Speaker 1: the late nineteen thirties, by the way, and the caravans
Speaker 1: at the time, and and and since then have been
Speaker 1: small and have really sort of picked up numbers over
Speaker 1: the course of time. But now we're seeing, you know,
Speaker 1: four thousand at the start of this one, seven thousand currently.
Speaker 1: And if this one reaches and it conveys a pull
Speaker 1: factor into the United States, that is to say that
Speaker 1: the US does allow even some of those people in
Speaker 1: the next one you're going to see it will be
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand, and the one after that will be twenty
Speaker 1: five thousand. And this is the same thing we saw
Speaker 1: in Europe in the migrant crisis truly started years before that,
Speaker 1: and in it was over a million people trekking through Europe.
Speaker 1: Don't forget right here. What is the Democrats play here?
Speaker 1: Is it for the mid terms or is it bigger
Speaker 1: than that, or is it both? Well, it's been bigger
Speaker 1: than that for some time. I mean, this is just
Speaker 1: a political opportunity that they're taking. I mean, the the
Speaker 1: broader philosophical thing that they've been hammering on for years,
Speaker 1: and actually a lot of them have either written thesis
Speaker 1: about this for the American University or been funding halfway
Speaker 1: houses in Mexico to help people through um when when
Speaker 1: they've been doing this historically. The big play is this.
Speaker 1: It comes down to what the United States is? Is
Speaker 1: it a nation with borders or is it sort of
Speaker 1: an amorphous you know, you often here America is an idea?
Speaker 1: Is it an idea that they can twist and manipulate
Speaker 1: and contort and shift the demographics of and and and
Speaker 1: therefore shift the voting patterns of and therefore shift you know,
Speaker 1: the broader philosophical direction of I mean I often say this.
Speaker 1: You know, our civilization, Western civilization is still fighting the
Speaker 1: Spanish Civil War. It's still litigating, you know, the authoritarian
Speaker 1: left versus the authoritarian right. The difference is the media
Speaker 1: jumps on the authoritarian right and exposes them for exactly
Speaker 1: where where they are, who they are, where their money
Speaker 1: comes from, so on and so forth. Nothing of the
Speaker 1: sort ever happens to the hardline socialistic authoritarian left. And
Speaker 1: I don't mean, by the way, the maxied waters left.
Speaker 1: I mean the real hardline socialists left and this is
Speaker 1: where all of this traces its roots back to. These
Speaker 1: are true sort of Bolavarian socialists that are organizing these caravans,
Speaker 1: um And And I'll tell you this. I mean, I'm
Speaker 1: starting from a position of looking into the federal funding
Speaker 1: and state level funding of this. Now, I would be
Speaker 1: remarkably surprised, um if if at the end of my
Speaker 1: investigation it doesn't turn out that not only has there
Speaker 1: been money from the US government going to some of
Speaker 1: these organizations, but actually if it's not been hit a
Speaker 1: lot historically, um And and very well utilized because there
Speaker 1: are it's not just one group doing this, there is
Speaker 1: a whole network behind this, some of them based out
Speaker 1: of Los Angeles who have openly professed their support for this,
Speaker 1: which are funded in turn by Amazon Smile charity program
Speaker 1: and Ralph's charity program, the Big California Supermarket. There is
Speaker 1: a lot of money at play here. Ran come back
Speaker 1: when you have your your final assessment on laws. All right,
Speaker 1: we want to hear what what the dispensation of all
Speaker 1: this funding and everything else really turns out to be
Speaker 1: absolutely or disposition rather. Thank you so much, Raheim Raheem
Speaker 1: dot com, Raheem Kasam dot com, everybody author of no
Speaker 1: go Zones Rahem, thanks so much for joining. Thank you
Speaker 1: for having TAM. We got more. Stay with me. Security
Speaker 1: breaches happen all the time. I can't even keep up
Speaker 1: with all the news stories about the mass hackings of
Speaker 1: enormous institutions, government, corporations, individuals, you name it. It's hard
Speaker 1: not to worry about where my data is. I'm constantly
Speaker 1: concerned about it. As somebody who has had world class
Speaker 1: security training, I'm still worried. But you know, that's why
Speaker 1: I turned to the security experts at Express VPN VPNs
Speaker 1: of Virtual Private Network. What that means is that it
Speaker 1: protects what you're doing online and Express VPN has easy
Speaker 1: to use apps that run the background of my computer, phone,
Speaker 1: and tablet, and the protection from Express VPN takes only
Speaker 1: one click. Make sure that the bad guys can't steal
Speaker 1: my history, can't steal my data, information and sell it
Speaker 1: or miss you use it. Protect your online activity today.
Speaker 1: Find out how you can get three months free at
Speaker 1: Express vpn dot com slash buck. That's Express vpn dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck for three months free with a one
Speaker 1: year package. Express vpn dot com slash Buck. I think
Speaker 1: then they're gonna handle logistics for the border show. They're
Speaker 1: gonna they're gonna monitor central traffic intelligence, they're gonna be
Speaker 1: moving food, water supplies for the border show. And what
Speaker 1: that does is that releases the border religens who are
Speaker 1: currently doing those types of jobs to be on the
Speaker 1: front line as law enforcement officers defending their nations. So
Speaker 1: I think it's a good move. Also thinking to see
Speaker 1: a lot more d d ASS deployed, I would I
Speaker 1: would think the president was sent up to five thousand
Speaker 1: troops down there, and uh, and what's who happens but
Speaker 1: the border. Having the military on the border is a
Speaker 1: great idea. That's right, five thousand they're saying, now US
Speaker 1: military maybe heading to the southern border, and this is
Speaker 1: all about auxiliary functions to assist border patrol, and and
Speaker 1: that at that level, I have to say that there's
Speaker 1: nothing about this that I find surprising or or really strange.
Speaker 1: I the previous administrations have done this. You could say, Buck,
Speaker 1: why so many? Well, why not why not put as
Speaker 1: many border patrol officers as possible out in the field
Speaker 1: to police the border instead of having to do back
Speaker 1: back office logistics and other other things that US military
Speaker 1: are very well suited to assist within this purpose. And
Speaker 1: and isn't our southern border. Isn't that part of our
Speaker 1: national security? You know? We we have been trained by
Speaker 1: the left and by all these immigration activists not to
Speaker 1: think of immigration as a national security issue, when in
Speaker 1: fact it is one of the purest national security issues
Speaker 1: that exists. In fact, short of a foreign invasion, I
Speaker 1: think you could argue immigration is at the very top
Speaker 1: of the list of now sational security concerns that we have.
Speaker 1: If you cannot enforced borders, you cannot protect resources, you
Speaker 1: cannot effectively uh, tax and and assess your population. I
Speaker 1: mean that there's a whole bunch of stuff that comes
Speaker 1: into You need to have control of your borders, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, if somebody can just come and go from
Speaker 1: this country as they please, for example, why would they
Speaker 1: ever why come here and not pay taxes and leave
Speaker 1: and come back when they want? You know, you have
Speaker 1: to worry about anything. There's a whole political structure here
Speaker 1: that's in place because the people that are citizens have
Speaker 1: an obligation to the state, and the state has an
Speaker 1: obligation to its citizens. So this should not be such
Speaker 1: a surprise. But you'll notice that for a lot of
Speaker 1: a lot of Democrats, just the idea that five thousand
Speaker 1: US troops are gonna be deployed to the border, to
Speaker 1: the US Mexico border, Um, to deal with this migrant caravan.
Speaker 1: They're gonna say that it's a political stunt. And sure,
Speaker 1: I mean, there are optics here, there's no question about it.
Speaker 1: And there are clearly reasons of making a point that
Speaker 1: the president is sending people down to the border in
Speaker 1: this way. Um, But there's a lot there's a lot
Speaker 1: more at sake than just making a point, and and
Speaker 1: that is that if this caravan gets through, it's very
Speaker 1: understandable people would think that future caravans would get through,
Speaker 1: that there would be other things, other groups rather, Uh,
Speaker 1: that would be even larger. And that starts to turn
Speaker 1: into well do we even really have a contrary? I mean,
Speaker 1: at what point is it just an open border? We don't.
Speaker 1: We don't call it that. But DHS Secretary Nielsen had
Speaker 1: some interesting things to say about this play clip H eight. Please, Uh,
Speaker 1: this caravan is not getting in. Uh. There's a legal
Speaker 1: way to enter this country. Uh. Those who choose to
Speaker 1: enter illegal be stopped. We are working with our partners
Speaker 1: in Mexico. They have taken unprecedented firsts within their territory
Speaker 1: to ensure an orderly flow and that those who have
Speaker 1: no legal right to be there are removed. We intend
Speaker 1: to do the same. But my general message to this
Speaker 1: caravan is do not come. You will not be allowed in.
Speaker 1: There is a right way to emigrate to the United States,
Speaker 1: and this is not it. I appreciate the Secretary's messaging here,
Speaker 1: but I'm not sure she's right on the merits. I
Speaker 1: think they will be allowed in. I think that unless
Speaker 1: there's a change to the laws on asylum right now,
Speaker 1: it is very likely that this group will get into
Speaker 1: the United States. And that then brings me to the
Speaker 1: possibility that that I had raised last week, and I'm
Speaker 1: hearing more and more say this now. Maybe Trump decides,
Speaker 1: you know, with the deployment of these troops to the border,
Speaker 1: and there's clearly a flexing of commander in chief national
Speaker 1: security muscle that's going on here, maybe Trump decides that
Speaker 1: under his authority, as I've described it to you, as
Speaker 1: commander in chief, he can decide that any class of
Speaker 1: of of alien doesn't have to be illegal alien. Just
Speaker 1: any class of alien can be barred, can be prohibited
Speaker 1: entry into the United States based on the judgment of
Speaker 1: the commander in chief. Uh and the Supreme Court has
Speaker 1: affirmed this even recently over the whole Muslim ban. Maybe
Speaker 1: that's Trump's plan here. He's gonna say this migrant caravan
Speaker 1: does not qualify for asylum. There are ms their team
Speaker 1: members in this group. They are a security concern for
Speaker 1: the United States. They will not be let in. Now
Speaker 1: you can imagine the Left will completely freak out if
Speaker 1: he does this, But I think he does have the
Speaker 1: authority to do it, and I'm starting to think that
Speaker 1: that may be where he's heading here, that he's that
Speaker 1: they're trying to tell them. Now, I mean Secretary Nielsen
Speaker 1: saying you're not going to be let in, And what
Speaker 1: she's trying to do is prevent them from showing up,
Speaker 1: because if they show up, it's not going to be
Speaker 1: the asylum process. It's going to be the President United States,
Speaker 1: under his authority as the chief executive of the United
Speaker 1: States government telling them they can't come in. And maybe
Speaker 1: a court will try and you know, and you know
Speaker 1: that it might make its way all of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: But guess what what's up course at your Cavanaugh. I
Speaker 1: have a feeling Trump because it is in his authority,
Speaker 1: statutory authority to do so. I have a feeling good
Speaker 1: he will be upheld then. But that's where this showdown
Speaker 1: could be heading. Here's what Nielsen said, by the way,
Speaker 1: about about the caravan and whether it we'll get in place. Seven.
Speaker 1: We have a crisis at the border right now. We
Speaker 1: are stopping between fifteen hundred and seventred people a day.
Speaker 1: If you seek asylum, do so in the first safe country.
Speaker 1: Mexico has offered you refuge. If you want a job,
Speaker 1: that is not asylum. If you want to be reunited
Speaker 1: with your family, that is not asylum. If you want
Speaker 1: to just come live in the United States, that is
Speaker 1: not asylum. There are legal ways to do that, but
Speaker 1: this is about the rule of law. We stopped three
Speaker 1: thousand people a year who have travel travel patterns similar
Speaker 1: to terrorists from attempting to come in the South a supporter,
Speaker 1: and as you know, in general, we stopped across the
Speaker 1: United States ten owners suspected terrorists a day from getting
Speaker 1: into the United States. She's saying it's not asylum. Everyone
Speaker 1: needs a stop with this. Oh it's a sound if.
Speaker 1: If it's a silent to come from Honduras because you
Speaker 1: don't like your job there and you want to make
Speaker 1: more money, then every country in the third world has
Speaker 1: to have essentially an open immigration policy the United States
Speaker 1: because anyone can claim that they need asylum. Honduras is
Speaker 1: not in the middle of an ethnic cleansing. Honduras is
Speaker 1: not in the middle of a natural disaster where there's
Speaker 1: no potable water anywhere and everyone's dying. Honduras is just
Speaker 1: a country that is not doing well. It's because primarily
Speaker 1: of crime and corruption. But that can't always be our problem.
Speaker 1: And I don't just mean America's foreign policy problem. I
Speaker 1: mean your problem and my problem, our tax dollars having
Speaker 1: to support people that come from that community, and our
Speaker 1: community is having to shelter and dissimilate people from that
Speaker 1: community if they have not come in through the legal process.
Speaker 1: And redefining asylum is a perversion of the asylum process.
Speaker 1: I mean redefining asylum to mean domestic abuse. So now
Speaker 1: anyone who gets who's you know, domestic abuse is horrible.
Speaker 1: We all know this that anyone who's a subject of
Speaker 1: domestic abuse. Anyone in the world can stroll up an
Speaker 1: Americans say, well, I've been domestical abused. How could you
Speaker 1: disprove that? If someone tells a convincing enough story, then
Speaker 1: they get to stay. This is increasingly not just a
Speaker 1: porous border situation, but starts to feel like a de
Speaker 1: facto open border situation. Remember there's no such thing as
Speaker 1: an open border state, so what does that even mean?
Speaker 1: But we're getting closer to it than anybody else. It's
Speaker 1: time we draw a line here, and it's time we
Speaker 1: hold the line. Nobody knows exactly what took place yet,
Speaker 1: it's too soon. But this is a case where if
Speaker 1: they had an armed guard inside, they might have been
Speaker 1: able to stop him immediately. So this would be a
Speaker 1: case for if there was an armed guard inside the temple,
Speaker 1: they would have been able to stop him. Maybe there
Speaker 1: would have been nobody killed except for him. Frankly, so
Speaker 1: it's a very very uh very difficult situation. You think
Speaker 1: that all churches and synagogues should have armed guard I
Speaker 1: hate to think of it that way. I will say
Speaker 1: that I hate to think of it that way. So
Speaker 1: we'll see you with them. It's certainly an option President
Speaker 1: Trump saying maybe an armed guard would have been able
Speaker 1: to save lives in that horrible shooting at the synagogue
Speaker 1: in Pittsburgh. We've got somebody who's got strong opinions on
Speaker 1: the matter of having somebody who is armed and trained
Speaker 1: on premises as a general matter. Jesse Kelly is with
Speaker 1: us now. He is, of course the host of the
Speaker 1: Jesse Kelly Show. He is a fan favorite here in
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hunt. You can hear him on our I
Speaker 1: Heart uh Sister station of nin k PRC down in
Speaker 1: Houston every night. Mr Jesse Kelly. Great to have you on,
Speaker 1: Great to be here, Black happy to do it. Brother.
Speaker 1: So you know, I'm always a little frustrated because I'm
Speaker 1: not surprised. Surprised is not the right works. I know
Speaker 1: that after a terrible shooting incident, wherever it is, there
Speaker 1: there's always this suggestion of, oh, why do you bring
Speaker 1: up armed guards, as though that's some crazy idea. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I've I've seen plenty of armed guards and
Speaker 1: or armed police at major religious sites where I grew
Speaker 1: up in New York City. I just don't know, Jesse,
Speaker 1: why this gets dismissed by the well, I guess I
Speaker 1: do know, but it frustrates me that the left just
Speaker 1: dismisses this out of hand. We really do just want
Speaker 1: to save lives. Yes, boy, it gets dismissed for a
Speaker 1: simple reason. That's because it's the truth. It's just's like
Speaker 1: the left must dismiss all things that are the truth.
Speaker 1: It is a simple, obvious solution that would obviously solve
Speaker 1: the problem, and therefore the left is forced to hate
Speaker 1: it because they have to live in a world of
Speaker 1: make believe. We have armed guards everywhere we truly care about.
Speaker 1: Everywhere you truly want to protect. The place that's a
Speaker 1: target or a potential target has an armed guard inside
Speaker 1: of it. That's called security. That's the norm. That's the
Speaker 1: real world. But even bringing up an actual solution is
Speaker 1: just going to get you reactions of horror from the left,
Speaker 1: who they think the only solution is disarming every lawbine exhibisen.
Speaker 1: I just can't imagine the circumstances where I'm in a
Speaker 1: place that generally speaking, a lot of people do not
Speaker 1: you know, you're you're you're not expecting necessarily, it depends
Speaker 1: where you are, right. I don't know what it was
Speaker 1: like in this Pittsburgh synagogue I'm guessing probably none of
Speaker 1: the you know, none of the parishioners are are are
Speaker 1: ever armed. Uh. And I don't know none of the congregants,
Speaker 1: I should say, are ever armed. But I know there's
Speaker 1: some churches in the South where some people are on right.
Speaker 1: I mean, it depends on where you are. But the
Speaker 1: the idea that this is automatically a bad idea, I
Speaker 1: just think it just goes to show how ideological a
Speaker 1: lot of the reaction to this is. Because if I'm
Speaker 1: sitting there and I see somebody who's got a side arm,
Speaker 1: and you know that's that's either a law biding gun
Speaker 1: owner showing their side arm, or is trained security or
Speaker 1: or a bit perhaps off duty law enforcement. The last
Speaker 1: thought that ever goes through my mind is oh, well,
Speaker 1: I'm less safe now, Jesse. I mean this seems very basic. Well,
Speaker 1: it seems basic to you, Buck, because you were c
Speaker 1: I A and you have common sense and that you
Speaker 1: you acknowledge the way the world really is. But one
Speaker 1: thing I have come to grips with is how frightening
Speaker 1: guns of any kind are for those who have never
Speaker 1: experienced them, never held them, never shot one, never been
Speaker 1: taught the basic safety about them. It really is a
Speaker 1: terrifying thing for people who don't know. They look at
Speaker 1: it and honestly, it sounds crazy. They think the thing's
Speaker 1: just gonna start shooting. No, I think you make a
Speaker 1: really good point. And you know, I know you're not
Speaker 1: just a Texan, but also we're a marine, so you've
Speaker 1: got double firearms familiarity baked in there. But you know,
Speaker 1: you you look at at the cultural differences in the very,
Speaker 1: very blue areas versus a lot of the rest of
Speaker 1: the con tree. When I tell people that I went
Speaker 1: to a a camp as an eleven year old where
Speaker 1: we were firing rifles, they look at me like I'm nuts.
Speaker 1: I mean, they think this is crazy sounding. But it
Speaker 1: just goes to show that part of the political and
Speaker 1: cultural divide we have now in this country is exactly
Speaker 1: what you said. It's not just that people don't have
Speaker 1: familiarity with guns. Well, that's a big part of it.
Speaker 1: They've also been raised to think, or they've they've been
Speaker 1: led to believe by their peers and was around them,
Speaker 1: that guns, except in the hands of the state, are
Speaker 1: always a bad thing. Really, I mean, that's really the belief.
Speaker 1: And also, by the way Jesse the people who aren't
Speaker 1: part of the state apparatus, meaning there aren't police or
Speaker 1: military who want to have guns are at best suspect
Speaker 1: and at worse a threat. Yeah, my kids are eating nine.
Speaker 1: They've both shot firings before, real guns, not just baby guns.
Speaker 1: They've shotguns. They're familiar with them. They have had guns
Speaker 1: safety drilled into their heads. They know where the weapons
Speaker 1: are in our home. They know they're never allowed to
Speaker 1: touch them unless I'm around. That's life. And guess what,
Speaker 1: They're safe with them. But but what what really funny?
Speaker 1: As you mentioned a cultural issue, and I understand having
Speaker 1: lived in the Northeast that lived all over how people
Speaker 1: view it differently. But here in Texas and other places
Speaker 1: that I've lived, it is the norm for people to
Speaker 1: carry in church. I put up a tweet the other day,
Speaker 1: I think you are insane if you are licensed, if
Speaker 1: you are trained to do so, to not have your
Speaker 1: weapon on you in a place of worship. You have
Speaker 1: mass amounts of people that are prime targets for evil
Speaker 1: sitting there with their backs to the door. Stop living
Speaker 1: in this rosy world of make believe and acknowledge the
Speaker 1: world as it is. Sick Monsters like this scumbag who
Speaker 1: shot up a synagogue exists, is not the last one
Speaker 1: on earth, I promise you. So do you do you
Speaker 1: carry in church? Absolutely? I carry in church. Everything was Sunday,
Speaker 1: you swell in general if you see me, I'm off.
Speaker 1: But in church a d percent of the time I'm
Speaker 1: carrying loaded on my hip. Yes, and there are texes.
Speaker 1: That's really funny. You would love this. We have these
Speaker 1: things called Now this is not the church I go to.
Speaker 1: We have these cowboy churches where people just show up
Speaker 1: in boots in jeans, and I'm not kidding. They ride
Speaker 1: horses to church. They will open carry firearms in church.
Speaker 1: The one my buddy goes to, he has a Copenhagen
Speaker 1: in his lip as he gives these sermons. The pastor
Speaker 1: does in a pistol arms him. Now you can make
Speaker 1: fun of that, and people will as some absurd rednet caricature.
Speaker 1: But the bottom line is that's the safest church on
Speaker 1: the planet. Ain't nobody's shooting that place up? I would think, So.
Speaker 1: I think that's I think it's a fair point. So
Speaker 1: I just again, if we're gonna talk about solutions, real
Speaker 1: solutions should be treatedly or at least real uh, you know,
Speaker 1: attempts at risk mitigation. I mean, solution might be do
Speaker 1: strong words at least be taken seriously. But you know,
Speaker 1: the left when it comes to guns, it's it's all
Speaker 1: really just a cultural a cultural divide issue for them,
Speaker 1: and the virtue signally of guns bad and people with
Speaker 1: is about. This is what I always say, Jesse. It's
Speaker 1: more than just the left opposes firearms. It really is
Speaker 1: a dividing line between the kind of people that the
Speaker 1: left likes and the kind of people that left doesn't.
Speaker 1: I mean, guns are right up there with being pro
Speaker 1: choice or pro life in terms of what separates out
Speaker 1: the two sides of America. Now you're right, you're right.
Speaker 1: And when it comes to guns, I'll say what I say,
Speaker 1: after all these gun grabbing leftists start coming for them
Speaker 1: after a mass shooting. If the guns are the problem,
Speaker 1: where is the mass shooting at the gun show? Where
Speaker 1: does it happen in American history? There are guns everywhere,
Speaker 1: everyone has up on their hips, there on the counters,
Speaker 1: everybody's buying them, everybody's selling them. There's guns ammunition. If
Speaker 1: guns are the problem, why has there not been a
Speaker 1: mass shooting at a gun show. Yeah, and why are
Speaker 1: there so many mass shootings in so called gun free zones?
Speaker 1: As we know, but people don't want to learn this
Speaker 1: lesson unfortunately, and they don't want to take the problem
Speaker 1: as as an issue of fact. They want to deal
Speaker 1: with it emotionally. But Jesse Kelly, everybody KPRC Houston on
Speaker 1: what time? Jesse seven to eight Central time? Seven to
Speaker 1: eight Central time. There we go seven to eight Central time.
Speaker 1: That Jesse Kelly show. Also follow a man himself on
Speaker 1: Twitter and yeah, he'll be back here in the hot soon,
Speaker 1: Mr Jesse Kelly. Always a pleasure, sir, come back soon.
Speaker 1: Appreciate your brother team will be right back. Well, I'd
Speaker 1: like to be president. Okay. Look, I think hopefully when
Speaker 1: we have a Democrat in the Oval office in January,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be so much work to be done. I mean,
Speaker 1: we have confused everybody in the world, including ourselves, and
Speaker 1: we have confused our friends and our enemies. They have
Speaker 1: no idea what the United States stands for, what we're
Speaker 1: likely to do, what we think is important. Uh So
Speaker 1: the work would be work that I feel very well
Speaker 1: prepared for, having done in the Senate for eight years,
Speaker 1: having been a diplomat in the State Department, and it's
Speaker 1: just gonna be a lot of heavy lifting. So are
Speaker 1: you going to be doing any of that lifting? Do
Speaker 1: you feeling? Oh? I have no idea care, but I'm
Speaker 1: I'm going to you know, I'm not going to even
Speaker 1: think about until we get through this November six heavy lifting, folks.
Speaker 1: That's what she says. That's right. How long she thinks
Speaker 1: she's coming back. I've been't and you know, I've been
Speaker 1: saying it all along. And you could tell there that
Speaker 1: she knows she's not supposed to let that out right now.
Speaker 1: She knows she's supposed to hold back a little more.
Speaker 1: It's not supposed to go there, not supposed to be,
Speaker 1: you know, obviously pushing for her own future in the
Speaker 1: White House at this stage of the game, because she
Speaker 1: comes from a damaged political brand. Uh, But she can't
Speaker 1: help herself. Hillary Clinton, as I have said, has a
Speaker 1: hole in her soul. The only thing that will fill
Speaker 1: it in her mind is the ultimate power of the presidency.
Speaker 1: And there's nothing else that she could ever have ab
Speaker 1: or could ever do that would make what she has
Speaker 1: been through. Because I'm sure she views herself as a
Speaker 1: kind of victim and a and a martyr for the
Speaker 1: left wing progressive cause. Politically speaking, you know, she stood
Speaker 1: beside Bill, she allowed so many people to bash her
Speaker 1: all these years. I mean, I'm saying this is in her,
Speaker 1: in her mind, the only thing that is just the
Speaker 1: only way that justice is done is if she becomes
Speaker 1: president United States. And I I've been saying it, and
Speaker 1: i just want to make sure that I'm very clear,
Speaker 1: very on the record here. What happens is that the Democrats,
Speaker 1: if they take the House, marches right into fights over impeachment.
Speaker 1: That becomes the whole discussion. We're just going to be
Speaker 1: fighting over impeachment really for the next eighteen months. And
Speaker 1: then the narrative is that the only way to set
Speaker 1: right what they could not get because they will not
Speaker 1: have two thirds of the Senate, so they can't remove Hillary.
Speaker 1: But the only the way to set it right would
Speaker 1: be to make Hillary president finally, to break that deeling
Speaker 1: and finally put her in a position where she gets
Speaker 1: to be the president of the United States. Um, I'm
Speaker 1: not the only one who's thinking this. Hillary yourself. You
Speaker 1: could tell it's like, well, i mean, I'm not saying
Speaker 1: I'm running, I'm just saying that I really want the
Speaker 1: job still, and nobody is more qualified than I am.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is the kind of stuff
Speaker 1: you say when you want something that you know you're
Speaker 1: not supposed to want and or at least you're not
Speaker 1: supposed to say you want it. But that's where we
Speaker 1: are with this. You know, she she has not given
Speaker 1: up one bit. She still thinks that this is the
Speaker 1: way that's all gonna go. And and what a what
Speaker 1: a a crazy story. In her mind, it's got to
Speaker 1: be for running against Barack Obama and losing, running against
Speaker 1: Trump and losing. And in the end though, in her mind,
Speaker 1: justice prevails and she sets right the waror old and
Speaker 1: you can tell that she said, oh, you know, there's
Speaker 1: so much work to do and everything. You know, her mindset,
Speaker 1: her attitude is all right, America. You know, I'm the
Speaker 1: one that's got to fix fix the mess that that
Speaker 1: Trump created. And oh, by the way, you owe this
Speaker 1: to me, you owe me the presidency. That hasn't changed
Speaker 1: one bit. And she is very much still in that mindset.
Speaker 1: So I know it's a little early, but keep in
Speaker 1: mind that next Tues or this coming Tuesday way now, yeah,
Speaker 1: next Tuesday. Next Tuesday, the midterms will be over and
Speaker 1: the presidential election will begin. Next Tuesday is when we
Speaker 1: start to talk about who's really going to run the
Speaker 1: Democrats side. I think, by the way, you're gonna have
Speaker 1: a huge field of candidates on the Democrats side. I
Speaker 1: think you're gonna have a a massive field of all
Speaker 1: kinds of people, including some real characters. I'm not totally
Speaker 1: convinced that Havanati still thinks that or doesn't still think
Speaker 1: that he's gonna run. I'm not convinced. As crazy as
Speaker 1: that may really be to anybody who's living in the
Speaker 1: real world, I would not be surprised eyes if you did,
Speaker 1: in fact have an Avanadi candidacy, I could see, I
Speaker 1: could see that happening, and I think that you look
Speaker 1: at some of the others out there. Elizabeth Warren probably
Speaker 1: still gonna run again. Folk A Hunt is herself still
Speaker 1: going to run because she thinks that in the era
Speaker 1: of Trump, all that matters is that you deliver for
Speaker 1: your side, and no matter how humiliating her whole fake
Speaker 1: Native American ordeal may have been, she thinks that she
Speaker 1: can still deliver socialism for America. That's that is what
Speaker 1: the fight is going to be. Make no mistake about it.
Speaker 1: This is going to be about This election will be
Speaker 1: about socialism. The last election was about the crony, corrupt,
Speaker 1: kleptocratic Clinton's. That was quite an alliteration, but you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. The last election was about the progressive
Speaker 1: media elite establishment finally getting getting the uppercut that is
Speaker 1: so deserved after all these years. And the next election
Speaker 1: is going to be socialism, no doubt in my mind.
Speaker 1: It's going to be open. Forget about the kind of
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders cuddly I just want free school stuff. It's
Speaker 1: going to be open. Uh. Se tax rate, kind of
Speaker 1: redistribute the wealth, reparations for all kinds of historical wrongs. UH,
Speaker 1: massive government intervention the healthcare markets, open borders so that
Speaker 1: you can dilute whatever paying the productive citizens feel by
Speaker 1: just drowning out their votes with with new arrivals. Uh,
Speaker 1: that's gonna be with The next election is all about uh.
Speaker 1: And what's with that? In mind? By the way that
Speaker 1: I think of some of these some of these never
Speaker 1: trumpers are just getting crazier and crazier, you know. They
Speaker 1: They've gone from Russia collusion and now they have to
Speaker 1: find something else to justify their their hatred. And I mean,
Speaker 1: Max Boot, I feel weird even talking about him because
Speaker 1: he's such a weirdough and is so insignificant in terms
Speaker 1: of his influence and his thinking in the in the
Speaker 1: conservative movement. In fact, the only influence he had was
Speaker 1: to get us into wars that were, at least in
Speaker 1: one case, a very bad idea. Um. But you know,
Speaker 1: he'll just sland your Trump with stuff. Blake clipton Fox
Speaker 1: News and that crowd, Bright Bard and Info Wars and
Speaker 1: the Daily Caller and Republican Congressman, they have been vilifying
Speaker 1: George Sorrows for years, and basically because George Sorrows is
Speaker 1: a rich Jew, and so when they talk about Sorrows,
Speaker 1: they're talking about a rich Jew who is in control
Speaker 1: of everything. Or when they talk about globalist, which is
Speaker 1: the term that Trump refers when right wings. When when
Speaker 1: Trump says globalist, right wing extremist, here Jews. This is
Speaker 1: the repugnant dog whistling which has gone on. It's thought,
Speaker 1: and you're right, it's not just Trump, It's a lot
Speaker 1: of Republicans, It's a lot of folks at Fox News.
Speaker 1: They really everything that he says, by the way, everything
Speaker 1: people don't refer to anti semitism when there's criticism of
Speaker 1: Sheldon Addelson, who is a very wealthy Jewish Republican donor,
Speaker 1: that's apparently not anti Semitic. His notion that globalist is
Speaker 1: some kind of dog was a globalist is a term
Speaker 1: that's been used in international relations for decades and has
Speaker 1: nothing to do with someone being Jewish. You know, Jimmy
Speaker 1: Carter was a globalist. I mean, there there are lots
Speaker 1: of people that you could look at and refer to
Speaker 1: historically that were referred to then as globals. Have nothing
Speaker 1: to do with Judaism or certainly with anti semitism. Um.
Speaker 1: But Boot realizes that if you're gonna go to the
Speaker 1: other team, it's not enough to just say I don't
Speaker 1: like Trump. You have to say I despise Trump, I
Speaker 1: hate Trump. I'll do anything. I'll say anything. I will
Speaker 1: bend the knee and beg forgiveness from the left and
Speaker 1: be a turncoat and slander all my former friends and allies.
Speaker 1: I don't know how these people sleep at night. I
Speaker 1: can't imagine turning on all the people that I respect
Speaker 1: and work with, and no now and am ideologically in
Speaker 1: line with and later just turned around because it was
Speaker 1: convenient for me and call them all racists. What a
Speaker 1: cretan this Max Boutin is. It's disgusting because right now
Speaker 1: the only constitutional check against this sort of abhorrent behavior. Again,
Speaker 1: the guy really a guy who was sending a message
Speaker 1: by time and time again tweeting about baseball or talking
Speaker 1: about his bad hair day. There that was done intentionally
Speaker 1: to send a message to white nationalists. His tweeting about
Speaker 1: Basebaul bullpen strategy the very same day of the synagogue slaughter,
Speaker 1: as if to send a message, as you said, Joe,
Speaker 1: to his adoring white nationalist fans, that the murdering of
Speaker 1: these worshippers was not even a concern. That's the message.
Speaker 1: It sends. To be clear, what the heck are Mika
Speaker 1: and Joe talking about? I really mean that maybe I
Speaker 1: should ask what the heck are they smoking? What producer, Mike,
Speaker 1: can you even explain? I really mean, what are they
Speaker 1: talking about? This makes no sense to me at all.
Speaker 1: The tweets about baseball are now signals to white nationalists.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is the equip valun of
Speaker 1: the woman at the Kavanaugh hearing who like, you know,
Speaker 1: stretched her arm for a second was doing a white
Speaker 1: nationalist gesture, which only morons believed. But there are a
Speaker 1: lot of them in the media. What are they even
Speaker 1: talking about here? Yeah? That was crazy. And I when
Speaker 1: I first was listening to it, I thought they were
Speaker 1: sort of like joking, but then I realized I was
Speaker 1: Joe Meek in I having their sense of humor. So,
Speaker 1: but they were talking about the World Series and uh,
Speaker 1: there was an actual huge play or or a big
Speaker 1: controversial move that took place in a particular game that
Speaker 1: Trump was tweeting about, and they equated that to uh,
Speaker 1: that being a code of message to white nationalists. So
Speaker 1: I think, you know, it says a lot about what
Speaker 1: Joe meek in their psychological state at the time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: a coded message. Do we think they can interpret the
Speaker 1: code like? Because because I'm not aware of what this,
Speaker 1: you know, it's not like a dog whistle where you go, Okay,
Speaker 1: I guess I know what they're getting at here. Whether
Speaker 1: I agree with it, I didn't even it's coded, So
Speaker 1: I guess they're like cryptographers or whatever. They must know
Speaker 1: stuff that we don't. Yeah, And one would wonder if
Speaker 1: the even are paying attention to the World Series of
Speaker 1: basic because this was legitimate, like news like this in
Speaker 1: a sports world. This was a big deal and it
Speaker 1: was very It was talked about all over the place
Speaker 1: the next day. And what did happen? By the way,
Speaker 1: one of my friends who came over for a drink
Speaker 1: ol Buddy Mot on Saturday. He's a big Boston guy,
Speaker 1: he said he was up until three am or something.
Speaker 1: I don't even I don't watch sports because I'm barely
Speaker 1: an American in some ways what happened here? So Game
Speaker 1: three on Friday night, yeah, went, was the longest World
Speaker 1: Series game in the history of baseball, when eighteen innings,
Speaker 1: uh probably ended around two or three in the morning. Um.
Speaker 1: Dodgers were down two games the nine, so they had
Speaker 1: to win, and they did. They wanted to walk off
Speaker 1: home run, which was great for them. So the controversy
Speaker 1: took place the next day, which was on the Saturday night. UM,
Speaker 1: the Dodgers were winning again going into like the eighth
Speaker 1: or ninth inning and their picture was cruising along and
Speaker 1: the Dodgers manager took out the starting pitcher with a
Speaker 1: four run lead and he wound up blowing the game
Speaker 1: and losing it and then eventually lost the World Series.
Speaker 1: So the big all the news was, I did the
Speaker 1: Dodger take out the starting picture while I was creezing along,
Speaker 1: And that's what Trump commented on. And then well that's
Speaker 1: clearly but that's clearly a signal of the white nash clearly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, you pull out your best picture. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's that's that's essentially you know, you might as well
Speaker 1: have a swastick armband on or something exactly. Yeah, stretch
Speaker 1: are nuts, dude, But who are you rooting for in
Speaker 1: that whole baseball situation? You know? I I was actually
Speaker 1: rooting for Boston. I know, it's a little it's some
Speaker 1: heresy coming out of that. Now, it's all right, I
Speaker 1: know how it is with you Philly guys. You in
Speaker 1: Boston gang up on New York. I don't know. I
Speaker 1: am not. I'm not. Well, we we have a history
Speaker 1: with l A and Philly. We've beat them, they've beat us.
Speaker 1: So I was not a big l A fan, So
Speaker 1: I was gone with the Boston for the series. Alright,
Speaker 1: fair enough, all right, but pretty so, Mike, I'm glad
Speaker 1: one of us know something about sports, because I remember
Speaker 1: when I when I heard that before the show, when
Speaker 1: I heard that sound, but I was like, i'n have
Speaker 1: to have Mike explained this one. Because Mike, Mike, and Joe.
Speaker 1: I think that they've decided that their brand is that
Speaker 1: they're going to be the most shrill anti Trump lunatics
Speaker 1: on TV. And that's a very crowded space right now.
Speaker 1: You know, that's not an easy thing to be number
Speaker 1: one in the drama they bring to the table. I mean,
Speaker 1: they the angst, I mean, madd they look so miserable.
Speaker 1: They even noticed that when they're on air, how miserable
Speaker 1: and unhappy they look. Yeah, well, you know, generally like
Speaker 1: would go through life, buck, I'm sorry, generally being double
Speaker 1: home wreckers is a bad starter to things. I'm just
Speaker 1: just putting that out. I know, I know I try
Speaker 1: not to go to personal, but you know that's not good.
Speaker 1: That's not a good thing, not not what's the word,
Speaker 1: it's bad Karma's bad karma. So speaking of I have
Speaker 1: no good transition here. But you know, ce because I
Speaker 1: was like, wait, NBC, CBS, they're both networks other than that,
Speaker 1: and they're both full lives. But CBS had this, uh,
Speaker 1: this segment about hate speech and taking down hate speech.
Speaker 1: And this has been one of the issues that, as
Speaker 1: you know, I've been talking about for a long time
Speaker 1: here where you know, you have this chorus, particularly on
Speaker 1: the left, of oh, you've got to get rid of
Speaker 1: certain kinds of speech online. Um, and you're not doing
Speaker 1: a good enough job of it. And then we find oh, well,
Speaker 1: you mean it's gonna be abused, and that they're just
Speaker 1: gonna use this to shut down conservatives. That should shock
Speaker 1: no one, but that's what ends up. That's what ends
Speaker 1: up happening time and again. And so they can't get
Speaker 1: the true anti Semit's offline, they can't get ISIS and
Speaker 1: these other groups uh to be taken out of their
Speaker 1: their the cyberspace. But what they can do is is
Speaker 1: all of a sudden have second pro Second Amendment groups
Speaker 1: that find their Twitter accounts or their Facebook accounts deactivated.
Speaker 1: But here's part of this discussion, and I have a
Speaker 1: slightly different view of this in terms of what the
Speaker 1: actions of these platforms should be. Play clip thirteen, Jim,
Speaker 1: you can be radical online. Radicalized online has already been
Speaker 1: supported by our government. That's that's we believe that after
Speaker 1: nine eleven, when people at access to ISIS supporters and
Speaker 1: those who are trying to radicalize isolated individuals. We know
Speaker 1: now that Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube all have agreed with
Speaker 1: this and have worked with the government to take a
Speaker 1: lot of these videos down. Why not when it comes
Speaker 1: to right or left wing extremists online, Well, for one,
Speaker 1: it's very hard. It's hard to identify what is extremism.
Speaker 1: It's hard to identify what exactly is hate speech. Words
Speaker 1: are very complicated in different contexts. In a particular case
Speaker 1: of Bowers, yes, it's very easy to identify what he
Speaker 1: was doing. He should have been found, it should have
Speaker 1: been taken down. But as a general principle, it's very
Speaker 1: difficult to identify what has hates speech, what is not
Speaker 1: hates speech, and to set firm policies on that. It's difficult.
Speaker 1: And we know that if we give them any leeway
Speaker 1: on this issue, it will invariably be used to the
Speaker 1: detriment of conservatives. It will be a situation where conservatives
Speaker 1: are the ones who find themselves though the rules will
Speaker 1: certainly be much more strictly enforced against the right if
Speaker 1: they're enforced against the left at all. And here's you know,
Speaker 1: a very good example of exactly what I'm talking about
Speaker 1: is the fact that Louis Farrakon still has lots of
Speaker 1: social media, still is able to spew his hatred and intolerance.
Speaker 1: And this is also why I just find so much
Speaker 1: of the media's effort over the weekend to try and
Speaker 1: create this narrative of right wing extremism is responsible for
Speaker 1: all or almost all of the anti Semitism in this country,
Speaker 1: when that's just not the case. It's not the case
Speaker 1: at all. And you know, here are the kind of
Speaker 1: things that Farikon, who you know, gets deposed in photos
Speaker 1: with Barack Obama when he's running for the presidency. Remember that,
Speaker 1: Oh that's right. Journalists hid that from the public because
Speaker 1: they didn't want us to see what was really going
Speaker 1: on there. But Farrikon is still treated as somebody by
Speaker 1: the media who should have and does have a voice.
Speaker 1: He's not deep platformed, he's not pushed off of all
Speaker 1: the different social media outlets. But here's the kind of
Speaker 1: stuff that Minister farah Con says, Play fourteen. I wonder
Speaker 1: will you recognize Satan? I wonder will you see the
Speaker 1: Satanic jew and the Synagogue of Satan, which has many
Speaker 1: races in it, because Satan has deceived the whole world.
Speaker 1: Think about what they're gonna say when they have been
Speaker 1: so thoroughly and completely unmasked. Whenever you read that God
Speaker 1: has told the Jews to hear and obey, and they
Speaker 1: say I hear and I disobeyed, that's Satan openly disobeying God.
Speaker 1: Pretty gross, pretty clearly anti Semitic. The Satanic Jew far
Speaker 1: Akon says, and he's still somebody that prominent Democrats can
Speaker 1: hang out with in public, can can speak with, whether
Speaker 1: it's commentators or politicians. Uh, you'll notice that you don't
Speaker 1: have Democrat presidential contenders asked the way that the way
Speaker 1: that Republicans are asked about David Duke, a loser that
Speaker 1: nobody cares about, and nobody you know, gives it, you know,
Speaker 1: what to hear from. All Republicans have to be asked
Speaker 1: in every presidential cycle, Well, do you disavowed David Duke?
Speaker 1: Do you just about David Duke? Why isn't every Democrat
Speaker 1: asked do you disavow? Do you disavow Louis Farrakon? Why
Speaker 1: wasn't Barack Obama asked do you disavow Louis Farrakon? Why wasn't.
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton asked, do you disavow Farrakon? Oh, that's right.
Speaker 1: You mean the media is dishonest and their activists and
Speaker 1: they're so sensitive about it now because we now all
Speaker 1: are figuring out the truth. Yeah, that's right, that's what
Speaker 1: I thought. You know what's not smart? Just sort of
Speaker 1: posting stuff on the web when you've got a job
Speaker 1: opening and hoping that someone who's great sees it. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not smart spending a ton of time trying to
Speaker 1: track down all the different places online you've posted because
Speaker 1: you don't even remember because you don't know what the
Speaker 1: best one was. You know what is smart? Going to
Speaker 1: zip recruiter dot com slash buck to hire the right person.
Speaker 1: Zip Recruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you, It finds
Speaker 1: them for you. It's powerful matching technology scans thousands of resumes,
Speaker 1: identifies people with the right skills, education, and experience for
Speaker 1: your job, and invites them to apply so you get
Speaker 1: qualified candidates fast and right now. My listeners can try
Speaker 1: zip recruiter for free at this exclusive web address, zip
Speaker 1: recruiter dot com slash buck. That's zip recruiter dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck again. One more time to try it totally free,
Speaker 1: zip recruiter dot com slash buck because zip recruiter is
Speaker 1: the smartest way to hire. One thing to remember is
Speaker 1: that when Trump says that the only thing that would
Speaker 1: have been able, that would have been able to protect
Speaker 1: these people is arm guards. When when they say the
Speaker 1: only thing that can stop a bad guy with a
Speaker 1: gun is a good guy with a gun, what they're
Speaker 1: trying to do is sell you two guns. Uh. That's
Speaker 1: David Hogg, who is now an adult. I believe he's eighteen,
Speaker 1: so we can't play or he's just a kid thing anymore,
Speaker 1: which the left was doing for a while, and they
Speaker 1: really use this kid in order to try and destroy careers,
Speaker 1: and and he was having remarkable success by leading some boycotts.
Speaker 1: And you know, he's now a young pundit. I mean,
Speaker 1: and now we've we've reached this stage in the American
Speaker 1: commentary game where we we increasingly think that the the
Speaker 1: the the younger somebody is, the more exciting their opinions are.
Speaker 1: I've got to tell you that, you know, honestly, if
Speaker 1: if you're not yet thirty, I have a really hard
Speaker 1: time wanting to hear your political or policy analysis I'm
Speaker 1: not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying pretty much, don't
Speaker 1: care with with with very very few exceptions, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't need to hear from eighteen year olds about
Speaker 1: complex issues of policy like firearms in general. Now I'm
Speaker 1: open to my mind being changed by any individual on that.
Speaker 1: You know, there are people who are incredibly well informed
Speaker 1: it twenty but just I'm saying, as a general rule,
Speaker 1: I don't really want to hear from somebody who's twenty
Speaker 1: two about what the truth of the Constitution is. It's
Speaker 1: it's it's rare that they're going to have a perspective
Speaker 1: on that that I find particularly illuminating. And David Hogg
Speaker 1: just goes around spewing talking points and never really engages
Speaker 1: with the real argument on the other side. Uh, this,
Speaker 1: this is those thing that it's all about the n
Speaker 1: r A and blood money and they just want to
Speaker 1: sell you whatever they need to sell you in order
Speaker 1: to make more money in the n RA is just
Speaker 1: all about gun sales. This is distasteful at best. And
Speaker 1: and honestly Hogg was running around just straight up saying
Speaker 1: that people had blood on their hands and that they
Speaker 1: needed to a tone for being complicit in all these
Speaker 1: ask killings and these murders by adopting the left wing
Speaker 1: position on guns. You know, it's this issue of of firearms.
Speaker 1: Firearms is the only issue I see where ignorance on
Speaker 1: the left is really celebrated. You know. They they almost
Speaker 1: take a certain delight in calling things that are semi
Speaker 1: automatic fully automatic, in referring to a a magazine as
Speaker 1: a clip, and referring to a you know, a handgun
Speaker 1: as a submachine gun. I mean, all these different they
Speaker 1: make all these errors that that they don't view as
Speaker 1: credibility destroying, and I think it's really because they do
Speaker 1: it to stick their thumb in the eye. The other
Speaker 1: side say, it doesn't even all these guns are bad,
Speaker 1: don't you see, I don't have to know about them.
Speaker 1: I just know that guns are bad. That becomes the
Speaker 1: default position. You know. We had a member of a
Speaker 1: t F former member of a t F today on
Speaker 1: Rising and I've got to engage them a bit. I mean,
Speaker 1: he works for Gaddy Gifford's now as a lobbyist, so
Speaker 1: he's clear he's very anti gun. And I think it's
Speaker 1: interesting that people think because he worked for eight the
Speaker 1: a t F, he must be favorable to the Second Amendment. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: I turned around and I say, why do we have
Speaker 1: an agency? And I should have asked this question. I
Speaker 1: honestly just ran out of the time because I had
Speaker 1: to push back on a few other things, which I'll
Speaker 1: get to in a moment. But why is it that
Speaker 1: we even have a federal agency that's a law enforcement
Speaker 1: agency with its own squat, with its own you know,
Speaker 1: all these armed personnel whose job is the additional special
Speaker 1: regulation of legal and in one case, constitutionally protected items alcohol, legal, tobacco,
Speaker 1: legal firearms, constitutionally protected and explosives are which are you know,
Speaker 1: can be legal. It depends on the circumstances. But why
Speaker 1: do we even have that federal agency? But I think
Speaker 1: that's a better question. Why not just abolish the a
Speaker 1: t F. I don't think it should exist because I
Speaker 1: think that when you create a federal law enforcement agency
Speaker 1: that has as its mission arresting people for firearms violations,
Speaker 1: for example, and and and that that's a specific mission
Speaker 1: set that it has, it's gonna work really hard to
Speaker 1: try to find people to nab on firearms offenses. And
Speaker 1: there's a lot of complicated firearms rules across the country.
Speaker 1: You know, I have had a fair number of people
Speaker 1: over the years try to lecture me on how, oh buck,
Speaker 1: it's on you, as a legal gun owner to know
Speaker 1: the laws of the state you're in, And okay, true,
Speaker 1: but guess what. There are some states where even the
Speaker 1: police don't really know what's legal and what's illegal because
Speaker 1: it's not clear based on how the laws are written.
Speaker 1: Here's one for you in New York City, if you
Speaker 1: have a handgun permit, if you have a legal premise
Speaker 1: permit for a handgun and you want to take it
Speaker 1: out of the city in a New York state, does
Speaker 1: New York State have reciprocity? Depending on who you ask,
Speaker 1: I've got a totally different answers about that, um. And
Speaker 1: then when you add into it the practice that New
Speaker 1: York was engaged in for a while. I mean, I
Speaker 1: just know the gun laws are the best because I
Speaker 1: lived there for so long where people whose flights were
Speaker 1: div hear, did people whose flights were diverted to think
Speaker 1: about this. You're you're flying from you know, Chicago to
Speaker 1: uh Miami, Let's say, and oh, this would be a
Speaker 1: pretty bad route. You know, you know, you hit bad
Speaker 1: weather on the way to Miami, so they divert your
Speaker 1: flight to New York. And now you're there and you
Speaker 1: have a handgun that you checked legally, which in Chicago
Speaker 1: would be hard enough as it is, but let's just
Speaker 1: assume you checked it legally with the airline. You un
Speaker 1: check it because now you've gotta get another flight the
Speaker 1: next day when you go back to check in with
Speaker 1: your next flight. They've arrested people for that, for not
Speaker 1: having a premise permit for New York City and having
Speaker 1: a firearm in in New York, they've arrested and they
Speaker 1: know that's why, that's why they had the gun. So
Speaker 1: I'm just saying that they look to penalize people. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a an aggressive attitude about gun owners that some
Speaker 1: law enforcement agencies, and I think a t F is
Speaker 1: very high on that list that some law enforcement agencies
Speaker 1: adopt in a way that is I think puts them
Speaker 1: attention with the Constitution and and is really problematic. But anyway,
Speaker 1: but with a Hog and these others about the guns,
Speaker 1: it just gets so boring. After a while, they know
Speaker 1: that they're not really going to get this band on fires.
Speaker 1: The guy spoke through today from a t F, I
Speaker 1: remember his name doesn't really matter. He wants His solution
Speaker 1: to the gun problem is to have all semi automatic rifles,
Speaker 1: all semi automatic rifles, because, as he said, a rifle
Speaker 1: that can kill a deer can kill a human. So
Speaker 1: that's what he said. All semi autmatic rifles need to
Speaker 1: be licensed at the same level that a fully automatic
Speaker 1: rifle is. Right now, that's his new solutions, So you
Speaker 1: might be hearing that more and more. And I said, oh,
Speaker 1: do you really think that I could get a fully
Speaker 1: I live in d C. Do you think that I
Speaker 1: could even get a fully automatic weapon here, no matter
Speaker 1: what I tried to do, no matter what my background is.
Speaker 1: And he didn't know the answer, And I said, the
Speaker 1: answer is no, dude. I'm just kind of shocked. This
Speaker 1: guy worked the a t F for twenty five years
Speaker 1: and seems like he doesn't know the gun laws that well,
Speaker 1: which was surprising except for the fact that he's obviously
Speaker 1: an anti gun zellot. But that's the truth. And you know,
Speaker 1: this is what you're gonna see. People who are not
Speaker 1: particularly well versed and what's real and what's not with
Speaker 1: these issues aren't very strong on the second amend. But
Speaker 1: we'll pretend to be. They say, well, you know, I
Speaker 1: think you should be able to have a twelve gage shotgun,
Speaker 1: you know, Elmer Fudd style, maybe a side by side
Speaker 1: from way back in the day. And that's enough to
Speaker 1: you know with with twenty gage shotgun shells with bird shot.
Speaker 1: That's how you can protect yourself. Well, that's all well
Speaker 1: and doing. That's all well and good until somebody pulls
Speaker 1: out a you know, a glock nineteen with a full chamber,
Speaker 1: and you know you're a full magazine rather and you're
Speaker 1: trying to defend yourself against them, and you've got you've
Speaker 1: got two shots of twenty gauge bird shot. I I
Speaker 1: want the I want the bad guy part of that equation.
Speaker 1: I want to be on. I wanna be armed the
Speaker 1: way they're armed. I don't want to be armed with
Speaker 1: the legal twenty gage shotgun. Although some of your like Buck,
Speaker 1: I could take him out with a four ten. I know,
Speaker 1: I know you could, but you know I'm I like
Speaker 1: having a bigger spread. I prefer the twelve gage if
Speaker 1: I have to. Personally. Um, we have a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of more coming up, including the controversy over up who
Speaker 1: stay with me? Some special time. I get to stand
Speaker 1: around watching you self fatty poisons to overfeed Americans think
Speaker 1: that would deter me, but no, look please, can you
Speaker 1: just take the children home? The porno magazine buyers are
Speaker 1: too embarrassed to make them move. Look, come on, all right,
Speaker 1: So there you have a Pooh from The Simpsons. And
Speaker 1: this comes after the reports late last week. Now appose
Speaker 1: one of the more recognizable characters on that show, who
Speaker 1: is not Willie Willie the groundskeeper, um, but a Pooh,
Speaker 1: is you know, about to get written out of the show,
Speaker 1: according to reports from last week, because you can't have well,
Speaker 1: a couple of things, right, he's a an Indian uh
Speaker 1: Quickie mark owner and so he's an inconvenience store owner
Speaker 1: and you can have you know, Indians and seven eleven.
Speaker 1: You're you're not allowed to to have that stereotype anymore
Speaker 1: in pop culture and media. And we've talked about, you know,
Speaker 1: the war on a Pooh before, but now they finally
Speaker 1: decided that it's not just that there there were some
Speaker 1: concerns or some ideas out there that they were going
Speaker 1: to have somebody else voice a Pooh because Hank Azaria,
Speaker 1: who is the the guy who voices him as a
Speaker 1: white guy. He does a whole lot of voices. He's
Speaker 1: a voice actor, but he's a white guy voicing a
Speaker 1: brown guy, which is obviously on the for the social
Speaker 1: justice left, it's a big no no. But they're actually
Speaker 1: just going to at least the The latest supporting I
Speaker 1: saw is, yeah, that's right there writing him out of
Speaker 1: the show, saying that you know that that they're running
Speaker 1: out of the show. Now. Some people are pushing back
Speaker 1: on that, saying that it's not true that he's not
Speaker 1: being written out of the show. And I think they're
Speaker 1: responding to the backlash year because people were saying, really,
Speaker 1: this is where it is now now you you can't
Speaker 1: have this cartoon character has been around for twenty years,
Speaker 1: and I would note a pooh is, yes, he's a
Speaker 1: stereotype on this show. For sure, there's no question. Right,
Speaker 1: he's a stereotype. But he's also not you know, he's
Speaker 1: a family man, he's a successful business owner. I really
Speaker 1: mean that. I mean it's not he's not being put down.
Speaker 1: In fact, he's often used on the show to highlight
Speaker 1: the silliness, stupidity, and slavinliness of other people, whereas you know,
Speaker 1: he's actually kind of living the American dream. He's got
Speaker 1: a nice wife. You heard her on the when we
Speaker 1: came into the second there. He's got a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of kids. He's a business owner. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: there's what a lot of people aspire to in this
Speaker 1: country for themselves, and and he's not. You know, there's
Speaker 1: this big difference between laughing at and laughing with A
Speaker 1: Pooh is not. I've seen enough of the symptoms. I've
Speaker 1: seen many episodes, certainly not all of them. It's been
Speaker 1: on for twenty years. But A who is a laughed
Speaker 1: with character. You know, you're laughing with him. You find
Speaker 1: him funny. He does insightful political comm and terry. Yes
Speaker 1: he has an accent, and yes there's some stereotypes behind it,
Speaker 1: but it's all being used for the purpose of not
Speaker 1: just entertainment but also uh insight, And I just think
Speaker 1: that they're being really unfair to the character. But I
Speaker 1: would say this, you know, over the weekend, because the
Speaker 1: political correctness thing, everyone hates it, except for the of
Speaker 1: the country or so that are just social justice left maniacs.
Speaker 1: Everyone hates this cult of political correctness, this idea that
Speaker 1: we can't laugh at anything anymore. Nothing is allowed to
Speaker 1: be funny anymore. Everything has to be treated with this,
Speaker 1: you know, this deadly seriousness, and there's no way for
Speaker 1: us to just be normal people who can laugh at
Speaker 1: things that a normal person would find funny. We all
Speaker 1: reject this, but we find ourselves still stuck in this
Speaker 1: totalitarian psychological prison all the time of the politically correct
Speaker 1: speech and thought police. But I'm kind of happy though
Speaker 1: that they're not. I'd rather than get rid of a
Speaker 1: Pooh than just you know, do what they usually do,
Speaker 1: which is either take the character and remove any hint
Speaker 1: of humor from him. Right, So, now, all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: a Woho is gonna have like an English accent and
Speaker 1: be a Harvard professor and just make fun of like
Speaker 1: the stupid fat white people like the Simpsons character Homer
Speaker 1: all the time. You know. That's that's one way that
Speaker 1: they would go. That social justice the warriors would want
Speaker 1: this to go. Uh and and another way that they
Speaker 1: would go would be to use him to make social justice,
Speaker 1: you know, to make more social justice related points. You know, now,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, who is so I just I
Speaker 1: don't want any of that, you know, it's just part
Speaker 1: of me is happy they'd rather get rid of this
Speaker 1: character than destroy the character. I think that's a that's
Speaker 1: one maybe silver lining this whole thing, but it's just
Speaker 1: indicative of how I don't even know what what's allowed
Speaker 1: to be what's allowed to be funny anymore, because you
Speaker 1: know it's gonna change in a year, and not based
Speaker 1: on humor, but based on what is acceptable, based on
Speaker 1: where the left wing draws these boundaries in these lines,
Speaker 1: and something as as really honestly durable in the comedy world,
Speaker 1: as The Simpsons has been around for decades. There are
Speaker 1: college courses taught on the social commentary and the Simpsons,
Speaker 1: believe it or not, that's a real thing, and The
Speaker 1: Simpsons has really stood the test of time. When The
Speaker 1: Simpsons isn't safe anymore, then you know there's really nothing
Speaker 1: and there's so little out there that I find funny.
Speaker 1: It's so often the case that humor is now blended
Speaker 1: with political commentary because it's a it's a cheap and
Speaker 1: an easy way to try to build audience right away.
Speaker 1: What you do is you signal from the left that
Speaker 1: you hate the right people, and then they're more prone
Speaker 1: to pretend you're not funny. Jokes are funny, and this
Speaker 1: is what you have with Amy Schumer. She's not funny.
Speaker 1: She just plays the politics right, and people pretend like
Speaker 1: she's a comedian. She's not a comedian. She's a crappy
Speaker 1: political commentary. Uh, you know person, I mean, spokesperson or
Speaker 1: whatever you wanna call her, pundit who also makes jokes.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of that these days and not a
Speaker 1: lot of actual comedy. So you know, a Pooh looks
Speaker 1: like he's gone. That's the way this country is going
Speaker 1: these days. Team Bucket, it's time for roll call. All right,
Speaker 1: it is roll call time. You know what that means.
Speaker 1: Time to get this funky party started. All right, here
Speaker 1: we go. We have aries our buddy rights book. Why
Speaker 1: don't you organize a movement where Christian patriots across this
Speaker 1: country contact or local synagogues and offered provide security in
Speaker 1: order to protect the First Amendment. I don't know what
Speaker 1: the gun laws are in p A, but I think
Speaker 1: it'd be a very powerful message if you lead the
Speaker 1: way with over a thousand patriots standing by to protect
Speaker 1: our Jewish brothers and sisters. You may have to reach
Speaker 1: out to your contacts at Rush, Shawn and Glenn and
Speaker 1: Fake Tapper to garner enough support, maybe partner with Bongino.
Speaker 1: His audience is pretty active. They don't have to be armed.
Speaker 1: A bunch of unarmed dudes and magahats telling the world
Speaker 1: you got you gotta go through us first would send
Speaker 1: a powerful message to both sides, to the craziest, this
Speaker 1: is still America. This crap is not acceptable that they pulled. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know areas. I like your idea. I would just
Speaker 1: say that there's a lot of um because you know,
Speaker 1: I would stand in defense of any of our Jewish
Speaker 1: brothers and sisters at their places of worship or anywhere
Speaker 1: else in this country for that matter. Um. But whether
Speaker 1: people would really want there to be armed guards. You know,
Speaker 1: this gets into a philosophical discussion about how best to
Speaker 1: defend places of worship. I know that there are armed
Speaker 1: guards at the synagogue. There's a synagogue online block where
Speaker 1: I grew up in New York City, and there I've
Speaker 1: seen armed guards there. So it's not that unusual. And
Speaker 1: and in fact, there are other places around the world
Speaker 1: where they have to armed guards that don't get much
Speaker 1: in the way of religious houses of worship. I mean,
Speaker 1: for example, in Catholic churches in some parts of Nigeria
Speaker 1: they have to have armed security personnel because of safety concerns.
Speaker 1: So I would just note that I like the idea
Speaker 1: and I appreciate you reaching out, my friend. Always good
Speaker 1: to hear from you. Frank, right, I heard you talking
Speaker 1: about Peaky Blinders. My wife and I love the series,
Speaker 1: but I highly recommend putting on closed captioning helps with
Speaker 1: understanding some of the dialogue. Uh yeah, Frank, it's funny.
Speaker 1: My little sister told me the same thing, and you
Speaker 1: guys are right. I fancy myself pretty good at being
Speaker 1: able to catch bits of Anglo Irish dialect and think
Speaker 1: that I'm pretty savvy at it. But Peaky Blinders, man,
Speaker 1: there's stuff where all of a sudden you're in this
Speaker 1: really critical scene there Dosh you babe, d and you're like, wait,
Speaker 1: what was that? What? You have no idea? What was
Speaker 1: just said? So, especially in Bammingham, Bammingham, that's how they
Speaker 1: all say it, apparently not we say it in America. Birmingham.
Speaker 1: They're all Bammingham. So you gotta have that ready to go.
Speaker 1: You gotta you gotta be prepared for the differences in
Speaker 1: the dialect. Uh, Steven right, hold on a second. Oh,
Speaker 1: this is great, Stephen said in a photo of his
Speaker 1: family on with Halloween costumes. Here's heard you talking about
Speaker 1: Halloween costumes. Wanted to share my family and I did
Speaker 1: for trick or treat at church this weekend. Trunk entreat
Speaker 1: is like trick or treat, except you do it in
Speaker 1: a lot and contained parking lot instead of dark streets.
Speaker 1: We were the Ninja Turtles this year, Shields High. Well,
Speaker 1: it sounds like a nice idea about it, Nina. Turtles
Speaker 1: are great, the boys are serious and in true for Michelangelo.
Speaker 1: My wife is goofing off a friend ninto someent hats
Speaker 1: and we had turtle shells as well. Steven, you guys
Speaker 1: look great, man. I I love it. You know, a
Speaker 1: whole family in Ninja Turtle costumes. Teenage Ninja Turtles, I've
Speaker 1: I've always been a fan of and I really liked
Speaker 1: the cartoon growing up, and then also even the first
Speaker 1: Ninja Turtles movie. I saw that so many times. I
Speaker 1: really I really enjoyed it, but people thought it was
Speaker 1: of intense and violent at the time. If you go
Speaker 1: back and and check it out, you'll you'll see what
Speaker 1: I mean, but it was. It's a good movie. I
Speaker 1: really enjoyed it, and it's a really creative concept. Who
Speaker 1: would think that turtles in uh nuclear waste, named after
Speaker 1: Renaissance painters who have ninja skills would be a hit? Well,
Speaker 1: it was there you have it, Gary, Hey Buck, greetings
Speaker 1: from team Buck Hungary. I took your advice and started
Speaker 1: watching the first season of Peaky Blinders, um and last
Speaker 1: night it was awesome. I'm a hook thanks to the recommendation.
Speaker 1: I'm all for the next week and that is what
Speaker 1: I'll be doing in the evenings. Love what you do, brother,
Speaker 1: keep it up. Shields tie Gary, Well, Gary, shields tie
Speaker 1: to you. And I'm so glad you like Peaky Blinders.
Speaker 1: I really, I really do enjoy it. I think it's
Speaker 1: a very entertaining, very well done, very entertaining show. A
Speaker 1: little bleak for sure, but it's uh, it's well executed.
Speaker 1: The writing is good and and there's some very interesting
Speaker 1: us and turns in it. I started watching the third
Speaker 1: season of Daredevil over the weekend, which I would have
Speaker 1: to say, you know, the thing about Daredevil is that
Speaker 1: it's also a little bit dark, a little bleak. I
Speaker 1: think it's well executed for what it is. I just
Speaker 1: can't understand how they made Daredevil such a compelling show
Speaker 1: at Netflix and they made Iron Fist, which was just
Speaker 1: unwatchable garbage. I mean, Iron Fist was trash. It's also
Speaker 1: a superhero story, also set in New York, same you
Speaker 1: know platform with Netflix. You'd think they would have some
Speaker 1: idea how to do it. The Iron Fist got canceled,
Speaker 1: and thank heavens because it was such a piece of
Speaker 1: of waste and anyway, but I have to say I
Speaker 1: think that Daredevil three so far is it's a little
Speaker 1: slow and getting going, but so far it's it's pretty
Speaker 1: well done. I find the acting all very good. I
Speaker 1: enjoyed the performances. Even if you're not that into superhero stuff,
Speaker 1: I think you might like Daredevil. I think you might
Speaker 1: find Daredevil to be a pretty good show. Uh, Carla
Speaker 1: Shield tie Buck. Watch you on Brett Bear the other
Speaker 1: day with a B. Loved her comment about someone writing
Speaker 1: his comments about the bomber on teleprompter, like no one
Speaker 1: ever did that before. Love the show. Saw the pick
Speaker 1: of you and your parents in d C. Looks like
Speaker 1: your dad has the same swoop. Carla, thank you for
Speaker 1: the kind of comments about my appearance on Brett Bear.
Speaker 1: I I think that I was able to say exactly
Speaker 1: what I really wanted to under the circumstances, which is
Speaker 1: always which I think is very important for whenever you
Speaker 1: get one of those performances, whenever you're doing that. I
Speaker 1: also went on Shannon Show on Friday, as you guys know,
Speaker 1: so that was another chance for me to say what
Speaker 1: was really on my mind. Uh And as to my dad, yeah,
Speaker 1: my dad has great hair. It's true, great hair. He's
Speaker 1: got it. He's got a silver swoop now, in fact,
Speaker 1: that could probably be his call sign, silver Swoop. But
Speaker 1: it was so good to see my parents. Um, I've
Speaker 1: got the best parents in the world, so that's a
Speaker 1: big advantage that I've had in life. You know, I
Speaker 1: know you've probably got great parents too, but there your
Speaker 1: parents are probably the second best parents in the world,
Speaker 1: I think minor number one, but we can agree to
Speaker 1: disagree on that. Uh. So it was it was great
Speaker 1: to see them. We had a lot of fun and
Speaker 1: it's nice to get some visitors down here in the swamp.
Speaker 1: Man the swamp can feel a little a little lonely.
Speaker 1: Not enough Team Buck in the swamp. Gotta be honest
Speaker 1: with your team, Buck, You guys are spread out all
Speaker 1: around the country, and a lot of you are in
Speaker 1: states where you've got you've got fellow patriots all around.
Speaker 1: You're not like me deep behind enemy lines could be crazy. Uh,
Speaker 1: let's see, Misty Rights. What do those of us in
Speaker 1: liberal California do about the fact that we are surrounded
Speaker 1: by these crazies? Well, you know it's there's no easy answers. Um.
Speaker 1: I wish I could say that I had a straightforward
Speaker 1: do this to tell you, But you know, I think
Speaker 1: you engage where you can and that's it. You know,
Speaker 1: you don't where you think. It's a bad idea, It's
Speaker 1: not worth it sometimes, Jennifer rights, hey Buck. Yesterday I
Speaker 1: attended a lecture presentation by Arthur Sulzberger, chairman of the
Speaker 1: New York Times, called the Impact of Media and Truth
Speaker 1: on Democracy. I went with an open mind, as I
Speaker 1: always try to approach things in life this way, because
Speaker 1: many people have surprised me over the years. However, I
Speaker 1: found salzburger statements so cliche and uninteresting. He said, all
Speaker 1: the things you talked about recently on your show, Speaking
Speaker 1: Truth to Power, How we live in dangerous times, journalists
Speaker 1: are unsafe, etcetera, etcetera. I lost track of how many
Speaker 1: times he used the words danger or dangerous. However, he's
Speaker 1: definitely a capitalist. He bragged out of the New York
Speaker 1: Times successfully monetize their online media, and when asked a
Speaker 1: question from the audience about how The New York Times
Speaker 1: could be more accessible in the middle class, Salzburger said,
Speaker 1: the cost of paying for The New York Times is
Speaker 1: worth it in order to get the truth. When you
Speaker 1: find yourself a northern Califor and again, I could arrange
Speaker 1: to have you speak at our local university. We need
Speaker 1: to hear more conservative voices, especially on campuses in California.
Speaker 1: Keep fighting a good fight, shields high, Jennifer. Oh, thank
Speaker 1: you Jennifer for that interesting perspective and and telling me
Speaker 1: what's going on with that Sulzberger lecture. That's not surprising
Speaker 1: at all, by the way, and the New York Times
Speaker 1: is in many ways the most arrogant of all media
Speaker 1: out there, and and it's left wing. And I don't
Speaker 1: know how many of you saw this, but last week
Speaker 1: I asked their chief White House correspondent for The New
Speaker 1: York Times, are you a liberal paper, and he said no,
Speaker 1: and I just look at him like, dude, I understand that.
Speaker 1: You know, that's the that's the company line. But come on, man, really,
Speaker 1: we're gonna do this. We're really gonna do The New
Speaker 1: York Times is not liberal because oh, the editorial page
Speaker 1: is liberal, but the overall paper is is just a newspaper. No,
Speaker 1: that is not true. The New York Times is a
Speaker 1: liberal paper and they should just own it, you know that.
Speaker 1: They shouldn't beat around the bush and pretend there's something
Speaker 1: that they're not. I don't see this as really all
Speaker 1: that complicated. I really don't, but they they make it
Speaker 1: complicated because they like the pretense of being neutral. They
Speaker 1: think that neutrality and objectivity heightens the strength of their voice,
Speaker 1: whereas if they admitted to partisanship even though they're hyperpartisan,
Speaker 1: then they could not claim to just be the truth objectivity.
Speaker 1: They're clearly not that though. And we'll stop with We'll
Speaker 1: stop with this one buck. You missed the anniversary of
Speaker 1: the Battle of a Panto Brandon. You're right. I am
Speaker 1: so sorry. I forgot to tell you guys all about Lepanto.
Speaker 1: If you want to go to go to Google and
Speaker 1: type in the Buck Sexton Show and the Battle of Lepanto,
Speaker 1: and you can listen to the old le Panto Show
Speaker 1: for old time's sake. You're right, I did miss Lepanto
Speaker 1: Anniversary this year, though I'm I'm slipping in my old age,
Speaker 1: Tyler writes, love your show man, Shieldside, Tyler, you're the man.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm gonna end on that tonight because I
Speaker 1: like it. Shieldside to you two and to all of
Speaker 1: you at home. She time. You might have seen the
Speaker 1: headlines from the last week or so now they're starting
Speaker 1: to blame social media sites that don't do enough in
Speaker 1: order to get rid of content that they decide is violent.
Speaker 1: Who's they, Oh, that's right, the left wing media, the
Speaker 1: people that are trying to tell you that they're progressive.
Speaker 1: Ideology just so happens to constantly result in the censorship
Speaker 1: of conservatives. But you know, it's the algorithm and there's
Speaker 1: nothing really going on there, malarkey. You know it. You
Speaker 1: want a place where you can go and share your thoughts,
Speaker 1: that's snippy dot com. I've got a snippy dot com account,
Speaker 1: and I love being able to interact with folks there
Speaker 1: and read their postings and know that the post is
Speaker 1: the post. Okay, you get to have your opinion heard.
Speaker 1: You don't have to worry about any of the progressive
Speaker 1: censorship or nonsense from Facebook. Snippy dot com thousands of
Speaker 1: Team buck folks have already signed up and joined. You
Speaker 1: should check it out for yourself. S n I P
Speaker 1: p y dot com Again, that's snippy dot com.