Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Hey everybody, we're gonna
Speaker 1: hit a freestyle Friday coming up here in just a moment.
Speaker 1: They have been telling us NonStop for twenty four hours,
Speaker 1: no bias, no bias in the Inspector General Report. Here's
Speaker 1: a problem. I've been reading through the support and all
Speaker 1: I see is biased, bias and more biased. So what
Speaker 1: is with this all out assault on the truth. How
Speaker 1: is it they can get the analysis so wrong? Oh,
Speaker 1: here's a hint. They are running scared and hoping to
Speaker 1: move on past the subject. We'll talk about that and
Speaker 1: everything else that we need to on today's news cycle.
Speaker 1: Coming up. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the
Speaker 1: mission or mission is to decode what really matters with
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American. Great, You're a great
Speaker 1: American Again, The Buck Sexton Show begins. No, Welcome to
Speaker 1: the Buck Sex and Show, everybody live from NYC on
Speaker 1: this Friday. It's been all time in the Big Apple. Wow,
Speaker 1: we have some things to discuss. You know, there were
Speaker 1: all these leaks going on before the Inspector General Report
Speaker 1: came out yesterday. They're saying no political bias, no political bias.
Speaker 1: I'm saying this this is there's so much uniformity in
Speaker 1: this response. It's almost like it's a strategy deployed to
Speaker 1: get people to think about it a certain way so
Speaker 1: that when they actually read the source document, they will
Speaker 1: already have a conclusion in mind, trying to prejudice the
Speaker 1: sense of any reader before they get a chance to
Speaker 1: actually read it. Let's see, it's quite trouming to me.
Speaker 1: And then you have just the general sense from folks.
Speaker 1: There was one actually, uh I won't name her, she
Speaker 1: does not deserve to be named on the show, but
Speaker 1: a legal analyst at CNN who wrote effectively on Twitter, Um,
Speaker 1: I'm already bored by the IG Report. The big story
Speaker 1: is really the lawsuit by the Attorney General of the
Speaker 1: State of New York against Trump's charity or something. I
Speaker 1: mean that really, that really sums it up pretty well.
Speaker 1: Over and over at CNN, uh, fake news Central. They
Speaker 1: they have people that are that are really just gonna
Speaker 1: take that stance. Yeah, this IG report nothing to see here.
Speaker 1: There's so much to see here that I'm gonna have
Speaker 1: to refrain from just doing like an hour a day
Speaker 1: for the next two weeks on the IG Report. I've
Speaker 1: been reading through it. I haven't finished it yet. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna finish it this weekend. See, I'll tell you the truth.
Speaker 1: I didn't get through all whatever. It's five pages, but
Speaker 1: I have been reading and reading and reading when I can,
Speaker 1: uh and and picking up more and more excerpts of it.
Speaker 1: And the more you spend, the more time you spend
Speaker 1: reading the Inspector General report, the more dysfunctional politicisize east
Speaker 1: and disgraceful. Do you find much of the conduct that
Speaker 1: was going on at the at the FBI with this cabal?
Speaker 1: Remember it's the cabal. There's a rotten layer of management
Speaker 1: of senior personnel. It's not you know, folks who are
Speaker 1: listening the FBI field office and you know Dallas, l A, Chicago, Charlottesville, wherever.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think I don't know where they
Speaker 1: even have all the field office. This point is not
Speaker 1: about you. It's not not about the folks whore out
Speaker 1: there doing the work day in and day out. This
Speaker 1: is about the DC leadership of the FBI and the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice under the Obama administration and holding them
Speaker 1: to account for their actions. And the dishonesty from the
Speaker 1: media about this is just appalling. It's appalling. They have
Speaker 1: been running around with hair on fire, telling these crazy
Speaker 1: fables about Russia collusion and and just breathlessly reporting on
Speaker 1: every aspect of the Mueller probe. You know, if Mueller's
Speaker 1: team decides to go out and buy additional copy paper
Speaker 1: or something, it's, oh my gosh, Mueller's team on the move.
Speaker 1: And then we get this report and it shows people
Speaker 1: who are in senior roles in the investigation of Hillary's email,
Speaker 1: who are unhinged in their hatred for Trump, unhinged, and
Speaker 1: we're supposed to just move past it. A lot of
Speaker 1: stuff like this. I expected a sledge hammer. We just
Speaker 1: got the same kind of hammer you used to nail
Speaker 1: in a painting on the wall. I was surprised at
Speaker 1: how mild it was. If you look at this assault
Speaker 1: on the FBI that has taken place over last year
Speaker 1: and a half, that has been the you know, the
Speaker 1: clarion call of some of the opposition saying that you know,
Speaker 1: these are crooks, they're corrupt, they tried to throw an election.
Speaker 1: This report does not say that. First and foremost, anyone
Speaker 1: who is hoping to use this report to undermine the
Speaker 1: Mueller probe or prove the existence of a deep state
Speaker 1: conspiracy against President Trump will be sorely disappointed. I think
Speaker 1: this an example where the system work provides no basis
Speaker 1: for the GOP to challenge the legitimacy of the mother investigation.
Speaker 1: It must continue unhindered. It's deeply disturbing that the Republicans
Speaker 1: remain obsessed with undermining or intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
Speaker 1: The decisions described in the report all helped Donald Trump
Speaker 1: win the election. No political bias influenced the decision making
Speaker 1: at either the FBI or the Department of Justice. All
Speaker 1: of that analysis, all those statements are laughable and deeply,
Speaker 1: deeply dishonest. The people saying it are either feeling compelled
Speaker 1: for reasons of you know, their audience and trying to
Speaker 1: keep their privileged purchase in the media to be untruthful,
Speaker 1: or they're idiots. You read through this report and you
Speaker 1: see time after time that bad conduct is cited, bad
Speaker 1: judgment is cited. The idea that there's no bias. Bias
Speaker 1: means a prejudice against a person or a thing, right,
Speaker 1: that that is what that is what biases. When you
Speaker 1: have people saying that they want to stop a president
Speaker 1: from winning an election, who are government officials involved in
Speaker 1: investigating his opponent. When you have people who are saying
Speaker 1: that they cry and they're terrified, they know what's gonna happen,
Speaker 1: that is bias. You know, crying because Trump won is
Speaker 1: the definition of bias. So we are now at a
Speaker 1: point where we are redefining words. You notice some of
Speaker 1: the strong men set up there for those who are
Speaker 1: This was in that SoundBite we played for those who
Speaker 1: thought that this was going to say that the deep
Speaker 1: state has destroyed America, Like it does not say that. Yeah, yeah, idiot,
Speaker 1: we know it doesn't say that. No one says that.
Speaker 1: It actually literally says that, But that's the impression you
Speaker 1: get from the actual report. That's what you see. If
Speaker 1: it's not a deep state to have senior government officials
Speaker 1: who think that they can overthrow and undermine and the
Speaker 1: will of the people in an election, well what is it?
Speaker 1: And as as I I put this out on Twitter
Speaker 1: two and then I saw some others following following suit.
Speaker 1: Maybe the others set it before me too. I'm just
Speaker 1: saying this is definitely out there now. Not a single
Speaker 1: instance of bias they can point to in favor of
Speaker 1: Trump that seems strange, doesn't it. Not one person who's
Speaker 1: like Hillary is a garbage person who should not be
Speaker 1: president and I'm gonna stop her from being president. Not
Speaker 1: one I would offer to you that if they found
Speaker 1: any of that, wouldn't they want to include that. Wouldn't
Speaker 1: that be somewhat exculpatory for the obvious politicization of the
Speaker 1: FBI that was ongoing during this whole thing? Right? If
Speaker 1: you could show people keep saying people who want to
Speaker 1: have opinions will out opinions. Okay, does everybody in the
Speaker 1: FBI have these crazy opinions where they want to use
Speaker 1: their position to try to influence the election? Show me
Speaker 1: it on both sides. They can only show me it
Speaker 1: on one side, and they they're there. I know there's
Speaker 1: been referrals, and that's another part of the tooth saying, oh, well,
Speaker 1: we don't know. Yeah, we don't know about the other
Speaker 1: five FBI agents who have been referred. What the extent
Speaker 1: was of their bad back actions and activity. How bad
Speaker 1: was this problem identified in the report of FBI agents
Speaker 1: taking gifts from members of the press for confidential information. Folks,
Speaker 1: that's like spy tactics stuff, you know, giving people stuff
Speaker 1: to get information they're not supposed to have. That is highly,
Speaker 1: highly unethical for FBI agents. And by the way, if
Speaker 1: it involves any classfied information, it's illegal. And I also
Speaker 1: think it calls into question the ethics of journalists too.
Speaker 1: You're gonna pay for classified now, that's if that we
Speaker 1: we don't know if they paid for class but they're
Speaker 1: gonna look into this. But if that happened, now you're
Speaker 1: talking about stuff that feels more like a conspiracy in
Speaker 1: a criminal sense right now. Now you're going beyond just
Speaker 1: I'm trying to gather facts. You're you're gonna pay for
Speaker 1: classified information. That's what like Russian spies used to do.
Speaker 1: So it strikes me as we need to look at
Speaker 1: this a lot closer than we have been, and we're
Speaker 1: gonna have many more inswers. But I am I am
Speaker 1: sitting around here. It's it's like it is like I'm
Speaker 1: just in some alternate universe where people are going on.
Speaker 1: You know that guy who said, you know, I thought
Speaker 1: it'd be a sledge hammer, but it was it was
Speaker 1: a little hammer for the whatever thumbtack? Are you kidding me?
Speaker 1: It says that Comey was way out A line was insubordinate.
Speaker 1: McCabe should have been fired. McCabe was you know McCabe's align.
Speaker 1: I mean, all the things that we know now. And
Speaker 1: then these text mess sage exchanges that show these FBI
Speaker 1: agents just on on FBI devices were not even talking
Speaker 1: about their private communications folks on their own devices. We're
Speaker 1: talking about FBI devices. Anybody who says that an FBI
Speaker 1: agent involved in the investigation of Hillary Clinton during the
Speaker 1: campaign for her to be president in the United States,
Speaker 1: that that FBI agent saying to somebody else, don't worry,
Speaker 1: we'll stop it. That that is not a huge deal.
Speaker 1: Is a more honor a liar, There is no third
Speaker 1: option and there This is what I realized though. Now
Speaker 1: they're just you know that they complain so much about
Speaker 1: you know, a little exaggeration here or there from the president.
Speaker 1: Oh he's lying. Oh he's so terrible. This is the
Speaker 1: kind of line that matters. That this report doesn't show
Speaker 1: any bias. I'm sitting here like it's just biased, one
Speaker 1: instance of bias after another. Here's one thing from CNS
Speaker 1: News that we picked up one of the four FBI
Speaker 1: case agents working on the Hillary Clinton email investigation, who
Speaker 1: was also one of the two FBI agents who interviewed
Speaker 1: her at the conclusion of that investigation, triumphantly referred to
Speaker 1: Clinton as the president four days after the interview, four
Speaker 1: months before the election. Later on election Day, in an
Speaker 1: instant message exchange with another FBI agent who had also
Speaker 1: worked on Clinton FBI on the Clinton investigation, this FBI
Speaker 1: adn't declared screw you Trump, the other agent said in
Speaker 1: the same instant message exchange, you should know that I'm
Speaker 1: with her, as in the Hillary phrase of the campaign. Olks,
Speaker 1: this is way beyond what would be acceptable for any
Speaker 1: government employee, never mind people who are worked who are
Speaker 1: investigating these people. I look at this and I say,
Speaker 1: how does anyone, How does anyone come to a conclusion
Speaker 1: that this is not a huge deal. You've got FBI
Speaker 1: agents writing viva raises stance or viv la raisi stance. Sorry,
Speaker 1: kind of mixed Spanish and French there. But these people
Speaker 1: are saying there was no bias at the FBI, no bias,
Speaker 1: no evidence of bias. That's a talking point from a left.
Speaker 1: That's a lie too. There's bias all over the place.
Speaker 1: All they're saying is we they were not able to
Speaker 1: uncover political bias that led to specific actions in violation
Speaker 1: of FBI protocols and policy. That doesn't mean there's no bias, period.
Speaker 1: There's bias all over the place. I sit here and
Speaker 1: just it is appalling. It's appalling, it really is. And
Speaker 1: you know, you look at this and that the disdain
Speaker 1: that some of these FBI agents have for Frump voters. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, but this always brings me to conservatives. People
Speaker 1: on the right, we just we keep you know. And
Speaker 1: I think it's because our religion is not our politics.
Speaker 1: For the left, politics is is religion, and religionous politics.
Speaker 1: It's that they they've that part of the mind and
Speaker 1: and the soul that we we fill with uh a
Speaker 1: spiritual connection to God or whatever, you know, Buddha, whatever
Speaker 1: is you believe in. The left replaces that all with
Speaker 1: with politics and the state. And that's just the way
Speaker 1: their ideology works, that's the way that it goes. And
Speaker 1: so they are unable to step back from these things
Speaker 1: and say, you know what, they are more important things.
Speaker 1: There's there's other things at stake here. I don't have
Speaker 1: to change everything about myself to try to bring a
Speaker 1: certain political outcome here, you know, I don't have to
Speaker 1: throw away my career, throw away my integrity. That's what
Speaker 1: we see going on here. Anyway. I want to hear
Speaker 1: from all of you about this report. I'm I'm in
Speaker 1: shock today at just how dishonest here we go. Breaking
Speaker 1: news CNN Cohen signals openness to cooperate with Feds. They
Speaker 1: just keep running that story. They've been running that story
Speaker 1: every day this week. There's nothing, there's nothing new, it's
Speaker 1: not breaking news. They just want to talk about Cohen. Oh,
Speaker 1: he's gonna get prosecuted. He's gonna get prosecuted. Not a
Speaker 1: lot of text message exchanges popping up on the screen
Speaker 1: for CNN between these different FBI agents. They don't want
Speaker 1: to focus on that. I don't want to focus on
Speaker 1: the IG report, man, I am. It is a crazy
Speaker 1: world we live in right now, with with the way
Speaker 1: that this stuff is presented and what they're trying to hide.
Speaker 1: I want to hear from all you what do you
Speaker 1: think about the IG report. It's also Friday, so we
Speaker 1: can talk about whatever you want. Eight four four to
Speaker 1: eight to five buck freedom hunt from NYC, my friends
Speaker 1: continues in just a few now. We have through the
Speaker 1: looking glass here people, white is black and Black Is
Speaker 1: White from the movie JFK courtesy of John Right there, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we are through the looking glass right now. Nothing is
Speaker 1: nothing is making sense. It's people just lying about everything. Uh.
Speaker 1: Tree Goudy understands what's happening here though. Right now, just
Speaker 1: what a dark day it is for the FBI and
Speaker 1: the d o J to institutions our country desperately needs.
Speaker 1: We desperately have to be able to have confidence in them,
Speaker 1: and this level of bias and animous. Not only did
Speaker 1: he want to stop the Trump campaign, he wanted to
Speaker 1: stop the Trump presidency. Chris Ray, I'm sorry, you're wrong, Chris.
Speaker 1: There are consequences. The consequences are that your fellow citizens
Speaker 1: question whether or not they can't have confidence in the
Speaker 1: world's premier law enforcement agency. And that's coming from somebody
Speaker 1: who's defended him a lot throughout his career. This was
Speaker 1: a bitterly disappointing report. There's a Tray Gaudy that I like,
Speaker 1: Like it's like Tray, It's like Trays back all of
Speaker 1: a sudden. It's like he wandered off for a little while.
Speaker 1: You know, he was doing some experimental band, but now
Speaker 1: he's back to playing the hits. You know right, that's
Speaker 1: what that's the tride guy I like to see. I'm
Speaker 1: I'm sitting here and I'm thinking to myself, so, now
Speaker 1: are we really going to readefine? What the word bias
Speaker 1: means is that where we are is biased. No longer
Speaker 1: something that is an objective thing that is or is
Speaker 1: not or or at least the definition of it has
Speaker 1: it just disappeared no longer around you cannot read the
Speaker 1: support and think that it had no bias. By the way,
Speaker 1: I spoke to Rudy Giuliani this morning on Rising, my
Speaker 1: new show, which is that a d C as you know,
Speaker 1: Hill dot TV slash Rising. You want to check out
Speaker 1: the clips of it. Um. But Giuliani's running around telling
Speaker 1: everybody that that struck should be fired. I just want
Speaker 1: to notice, does any even think that he shouldn't be fired?
Speaker 1: We now have an investigation that, in the words of
Speaker 1: President Donald Trump, has been a fixed, a frame up,
Speaker 1: and a witch hunt. Every FBI agent should demand and
Speaker 1: that that man be fired. And tomorrow Mueller should suspend
Speaker 1: his investigation and he should go see Rod Rosenstein who
Speaker 1: created him, and the Deputy Attorney General and Attorney General Sessions,
Speaker 1: who who should now step up big time to save
Speaker 1: his department. Should suspend that investigation, throw out all the
Speaker 1: people that have been involved in the phony Trump investigation,
Speaker 1: and bring in honest FBI agents, all those FBI agents
Speaker 1: who took gifts. Gifts. That's called bribery where I come from.
Speaker 1: You know, I actually said this to Julian earlier today.
Speaker 1: When I was the NYPD, we were told you can't
Speaker 1: even take you can't even take a free soda from
Speaker 1: a business owner. You can't do eat nothing, You cannot
Speaker 1: take gifts when you're on duty. They told us they
Speaker 1: were very strict about it. In fact, we had to
Speaker 1: find out if it was. We had to get an
Speaker 1: ethics check on whether because where are office was, we
Speaker 1: got like a ten percent just be based on where
Speaker 1: the office was. It was kind of like for the neighborhood,
Speaker 1: you get a tempercent discount. At this one, Jim, we
Speaker 1: had to get an ethics check on whether even though
Speaker 1: we just happened to be in the area that got
Speaker 1: that qualified for the discount. We were allowed to take
Speaker 1: the discount because it wasn't allowed to be an unfair
Speaker 1: you know, building favoritism with the m y p D.
Speaker 1: That's how seriously they take ethics. You've got FBI guys
Speaker 1: with access to classified in d C taking like ball
Speaker 1: game tickets. Folks, I don't think that this isn't that
Speaker 1: this is gonna stop. People are gonna go to prison.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you, I think people are actually gonna go
Speaker 1: to jail over this one, and they probably should. I mean,
Speaker 1: when we look at the facts, we'll see I've got
Speaker 1: a lot of lines. Lebil, take some calls after the break,
Speaker 1: eight four, eight to five, buck, light him up. We'll
Speaker 1: be right back. He's back with you now, because when
Speaker 1: it comes said of fight for truth, the fuck never stops.
Speaker 1: They were plotting against my election. Probably has never happened
Speaker 1: like that in terms of intelligence, in terms of anything else.
Speaker 1: But they were actually plotting against my election. The headline
Speaker 1: right now, I'm actually proud because I beat Clinton dynasty
Speaker 1: and beat Bush dynasty, and now I guess hopefully I'm
Speaker 1: in the process of beating very dishonest intelligence. The end
Speaker 1: result was wrong. I mean, there was total bias. I mean,
Speaker 1: when you look at Peter Struck and what he said
Speaker 1: about me, when you look at Comola's moves, so I
Speaker 1: guess you know it's interesting it was a pretty good report.
Speaker 1: And then I say that the I g blew it
Speaker 1: at the very end of that statement, I agree there
Speaker 1: was biased. You can't show bias and then say there
Speaker 1: was no bias. That then people really don't trust your analysis, right,
Speaker 1: And they showed plenty of bias in the report, no,
Speaker 1: no question about it, all over the place. But I want,
Speaker 1: I want to hear from you on this uh And
Speaker 1: we've got a lot the lines. Remember, as we take calls,
Speaker 1: because I know producer Mike in there is like he's
Speaker 1: like a human octopus trying to take all the different
Speaker 1: numbers down and multiple phones going everything else. But as
Speaker 1: we take calls, sponsible open up and we'll try to
Speaker 1: just rack and stacks. It's a Friday, I'm in New York.
Speaker 1: I'm in a good mood. I want to hear from you.
Speaker 1: Let's take some calls. Let's go to Everyboddy Felix in Pennsylvania. Felix,
Speaker 1: the tried and true caller. How are you, sir, I'm good,
Speaker 1: buck shields tied shield time. I want I want to
Speaker 1: make a comment. I believe that guys like General Michael Flynn,
Speaker 1: and I believe Lieutenant Clint Law rants. We should we
Speaker 1: should really list them as POWs of a deep state,
Speaker 1: because what's been done in these situations is just incredible,
Speaker 1: you know, by an unpatriotic deep state. And I really
Speaker 1: would like to implore President Trump the police look at
Speaker 1: the plight of some of our service members like Clint
Speaker 1: law Rance, who in the course of their duty has
Speaker 1: wind up being charged and prosecuted and put in prison
Speaker 1: and unjustly, and in his particular case, the evidence is
Speaker 1: there to exonerate him anyway. I look, I think that
Speaker 1: this is why the prest Do we have audio him
Speaker 1: saying that he's gonna he might pardon some people? But
Speaker 1: oh no, we don't. He sorry, we've got a statement
Speaker 1: of of Trump saying that he's thinking about I think
Speaker 1: Giuliani said he might. That's right, it was Giuliani who
Speaker 1: said Trump may pardon some of the folks that are
Speaker 1: getting jammed up by this. I like it. I like it.
Speaker 1: It's hey, if nothing else, I'm sorry, Can I come on,
Speaker 1: Eric Trump? Uh? Was this other thing that they've been
Speaker 1: putting out about the Trump Foundation? Anyone who was familiar
Speaker 1: with Elvis Durran show. For years, Eric Trump has been
Speaker 1: doing charity for St. Jude's, and I believe that of
Speaker 1: the money went to St. Jude's, and he paid most
Speaker 1: of the administrative costs out of his own pocket. You know.
Speaker 1: So this other thing that they're trying to do to
Speaker 1: the Trumps, it's just, uh, it makes my blood boil.
Speaker 1: I haven't. I have an old friend who does a
Speaker 1: lot of charity, really good charity work your New York City,
Speaker 1: and she's told me that Eric has always been uh,
Speaker 1: incredibly helpful in in that community by doing uh with
Speaker 1: charitable foundations and and and it's also a really good guy.
Speaker 1: I don't know Eric. I actually know Donny a little
Speaker 1: bit from when we were kids. But yeah, I gotta
Speaker 1: look into what they're saying about Erica. They're just trying
Speaker 1: to trash everybody, though. It's it's such a shame. Felix though,
Speaker 1: good to talk to you, and thank you very much
Speaker 1: for calling in. We've got some of our stalwarts here
Speaker 1: on the lines. Dr Rick in Maryland wants to drop
Speaker 1: some some m D knowledge. What up? Rick? Well, Hey, Buckshield, tie,
Speaker 1: you know, we need your voice, We need the voices
Speaker 1: all the conservatives shouting loud, all the evidence in the
Speaker 1: IG report that clearly shows bias because you know, I
Speaker 1: I travel in some circles with some you know, really
Speaker 1: kind of high powered i Q left leaning in allectuals,
Speaker 1: and you know, I can't believe how utterly deluded they
Speaker 1: are and and just believe that mainstream media and what
Speaker 1: they're saying. So when I try to even talk about
Speaker 1: what you and others are saying, they look as if
Speaker 1: I am the moron. I swear, they look like I'm
Speaker 1: coming from Mars. So we we just gotta keep repeating
Speaker 1: the message over and over, no, I know, and you
Speaker 1: get you get shouted down, and people say really nasty things,
Speaker 1: and you feel like you're taking even social risks just
Speaker 1: by saying obvious, obvious things. You know. Look on on
Speaker 1: my show Rising earlier today, I started out by talking
Speaker 1: to Julia. I said, look, it seems like a lot
Speaker 1: of bias to me, and I got some pushback from
Speaker 1: some people watching saying but there was no bias, and
Speaker 1: I'm like, no, no, no no, no, no, no, I don't
Speaker 1: that is an analytic judgment. There there is bias that
Speaker 1: has shown in the report in their analysis. They just
Speaker 1: say that they don't think it is biased, But that's
Speaker 1: not how that works, Like, I don't have to you.
Speaker 1: You can't present me with evidence and say, but it
Speaker 1: doesn't actually mean that the evidence is what it says,
Speaker 1: which is what they did. And I've even heard that
Speaker 1: the the the view that the ultimate conclusion was zoice
Speaker 1: specific conclusion. Did we lose Dr Rick? Did he just
Speaker 1: d did he go? Oh? Dr Rick? We lost? You know,
Speaker 1: I've gotta send in reinforcements. Get Dr Rick. They got him.
Speaker 1: The enemy got him, Dr Ricks send up a flair?
Speaker 1: Are you okay? Buddy? Where are you man? Calling in
Speaker 1: from deep behind progressive lines? Dude? You know he's in Maryland.
Speaker 1: Maryland's crazy. God, it's blue. You know, it's just like
Speaker 1: it's like New York with better crabs. That's it's politics, John.
Speaker 1: That I meant the kind that she that crawl around
Speaker 1: and that she eats. Just kidding, Oh gosh, get your
Speaker 1: at your mind on right there, John, All right, let's
Speaker 1: get Sandy in Troy, Michigan. Hey, what's up, Sandy? Hey
Speaker 1: box still type and listening since day one? Oh thank
Speaker 1: you so much? Now, hey, thank you? Um, you know
Speaker 1: I believe just like call me that uh this I
Speaker 1: g put that phrase in his I g report that
Speaker 1: there was no political bias, just so it could be
Speaker 1: a headline and so that our got awful media could
Speaker 1: run with that rather than the details. And I think
Speaker 1: since day one, I mean since a year and a
Speaker 1: half ago, everything has been so obvious what they do
Speaker 1: on the left. I just and and I got some
Speaker 1: Lefts in my family. UM so I don't repost to
Speaker 1: that because you know, they're they're child in America end.
Speaker 1: And I can't believe they're left because they're very Catholic.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know how somebody can be
Speaker 1: a devout Catholic and be a progressive in this. I
Speaker 1: don't understand. And I know that it happened. I don't understand,
Speaker 1: I really, you know. I mean, you're you're with a
Speaker 1: political party that is more united on the issue of
Speaker 1: abortion on all nine months of a pregnancy up to
Speaker 1: the moment of birth than any other issue. Like the
Speaker 1: single most unifying issue of the Democrat Party is abortion
Speaker 1: at any moment, for any reason, at any time, uh
Speaker 1: and up to what is obviously infanticide. And yet Catholics
Speaker 1: people think that they're Catholics in there. I don't know,
Speaker 1: I don't get it, And I know throughout the campaign,
Speaker 1: I was reposting and texting stuff to some of my
Speaker 1: Kaeldean cousins, and I could not believe how they were
Speaker 1: supportive of Hillary in so degrading of Trump, Like you're
Speaker 1: just blinded on it site. Yeah, I know, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's difficult, but you know what, you always get to
Speaker 1: hang out with us here in the huts. You're you're
Speaker 1: with friends, all right, Shield said, he thank you so
Speaker 1: much for calling in Dave in Arizona. Yes, sir, good
Speaker 1: to talk to you. Shields back feel tie. You know, Uh,
Speaker 1: one of the things I always enjoy listening. He's getting
Speaker 1: that perspective that you have from an insider view, and
Speaker 1: I just want to give a law enforcement perspective as uh,
Speaker 1: a state and local officer. Over my career, my wife
Speaker 1: was twenty nine years city cop. We're trained all over
Speaker 1: the country. And I gotta tell you what that that
Speaker 1: that Inspector General's report, what a show since then, just bias.
Speaker 1: So it shows the hubris of the FBI and the
Speaker 1: same thing that Ray demonstrated in his little comments last night.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you're you're pointing all this out because It's
Speaker 1: very frustrating to those of us who have done the
Speaker 1: job and have our scars, and they constantly here this,
Speaker 1: this constant drumbeat about the quality of the FBI. The
Speaker 1: FBI is quality in a narrow purview, but to make
Speaker 1: them the nation's gold standard is wrong. Expand on that
Speaker 1: a little bit, Dave, what do you mean? I'm curious,
Speaker 1: you know what. I'm sorry, but no, you go ahead.
Speaker 1: I want to hear from you, right, okay, Just my
Speaker 1: perspective is this that you know over the decades. For instance,
Speaker 1: I was at Waco as a reporting for a police
Speaker 1: training network. Uh you know, I was with the A T.
Speaker 1: F agents who are coming back from being shot up.
Speaker 1: The FBI arrives, throws everyone off the scene, and then
Speaker 1: the fifty days later burns up the compound and blames
Speaker 1: everybody but themselves. That was that's supposed to be a
Speaker 1: hostage rescue action. Where is the where's the rescue attempt?
Speaker 1: Same thing in Ruby Ridge. They break all the laws
Speaker 1: of confrontation and put a green light on all it.
Speaker 1: Doults with a firearm and they go up there. And
Speaker 1: this is the thing is they've they've they've always acted
Speaker 1: with the shoe brists, and they get no feedback. Law
Speaker 1: enforcement knows that these are the guys who will come
Speaker 1: and judge you for the Justice Department over the last
Speaker 1: eight years oppressively, and now when they have to do
Speaker 1: some mall reflection, rate comes and says, yeah, what we'll
Speaker 1: do is we'll do a quick four hour block on
Speaker 1: bias training to teach our people to be professional after
Speaker 1: all these decades. Dave, I got I got a question.
Speaker 1: I got a question for you, Dave, because and again
Speaker 1: it's great to have somebody with your your perspective background.
Speaker 1: Is why would the entire FBI need bias training if
Speaker 1: there was no bias in the i G Report. I'm
Speaker 1: just wondering if you could answer that one for me,
Speaker 1: because I'm sitting around having a tough time with it.
Speaker 1: You know, this is what I mean by hubris. This
Speaker 1: is that ability to just deny reality. It's just incredible
Speaker 1: and at the same time, to keep this this constant
Speaker 1: drumbeat we're the best, we're the best. We don't really
Speaker 1: need to learn from our mistakes. We'll just do a
Speaker 1: quick four hour block and what I don't know how
Speaker 1: they missed that class in the academy about being objective investigators.
Speaker 1: This just makes me crazy now, Dave, thanks for keeping
Speaker 1: our streets safe and thanks for your perspective. This one
Speaker 1: man shields high. I do appreciate the call team. We're
Speaker 1: gonna come back to this in just a moment. We
Speaker 1: got a lot more. Next hour, we're talking about immigration.
Speaker 1: We'll discuss uh discrimination against Asians and one of the
Speaker 1: most elite institutions in the country. They will do a
Speaker 1: big roll call, rundown all kinds of all kinds of
Speaker 1: good things, good things coming, good things, be right back.
Speaker 1: We're gonna train every single FBI employee, both new hires
Speaker 1: and veterans alike, on what went wrong so these mistakes
Speaker 1: will never be repeated. Third, we're gonna make sure that
Speaker 1: we have the policies, the procedures, and the training that
Speaker 1: are needed for everyone to understand and remember what is
Speaker 1: expected of all of ours. That includes drilling home the
Speaker 1: importance of objectivity, of avoiding even the appearance of personal
Speaker 1: conflicts or political bias in our work. Why would they
Speaker 1: need biased training if they had no bias, Folks, It's
Speaker 1: pretty obvious question. But the obvious questions are the ones
Speaker 1: we need to ask right now. Well, What's what why
Speaker 1: is that if they found no bias, what's with making
Speaker 1: everybody go through biasedrame? Why are you even talking about bias?
Speaker 1: Because they clearly did find it, but they don't want
Speaker 1: to say it because if they say it, then they
Speaker 1: can't avoid the fact that people would lose faith in
Speaker 1: the FBI's ability to be politically impartial. Remember, this is
Speaker 1: about politically sensitive investigations. Most of what the FBI does is,
Speaker 1: you know, stopping major drug transactions, white collar crime, credit
Speaker 1: card fraud, kidnapping, you know, cartels, all that kind of stuff. Right. No,
Speaker 1: that is not No one's saying the FBI can't do that,
Speaker 1: can't be trusted to do that, or any of that.
Speaker 1: We're just saying when there's a political sensitivity, there is
Speaker 1: a clear tendency for it to go in favor of
Speaker 1: the Democrat and against the Republican on any issue, on
Speaker 1: any issue. Uh. And and that's where I think we
Speaker 1: have probably by the way, one thing I thought was
Speaker 1: really interesting today was Giuliani who spoke with me this
Speaker 1: morning on on Rising. He he said, and this was
Speaker 1: just he said, in front of a bunch of people.
Speaker 1: So this wasn't a just anything. It was kind of
Speaker 1: an off camera moment, but he told me that he
Speaker 1: hired Comy. I didn't know this. He hired Comey, and
Speaker 1: Comey worked for him as an assistant U S attorney
Speaker 1: for UH for four years. And he said that he
Speaker 1: knew that he had a problem with Comy. And this
Speaker 1: was really interesting to me, with the Martha Stewart thing
Speaker 1: because that and and now that he just said that
Speaker 1: he didn't get into details, but I said, yeah, that's right,
Speaker 1: because that's when Comy realized that the power to prosecute
Speaker 1: is a fearsome thing and can be used for person
Speaker 1: for tremendous personal political advancement. And going after Martha Stewart
Speaker 1: in that way, well is meant to make a name
Speaker 1: for Comey, because they were they were they were harsh
Speaker 1: with Martha Stewart under the circumstances. And I know people
Speaker 1: that were involved peripherally on that case, and they said that, man,
Speaker 1: it was it was rough what he did there. And
Speaker 1: Trump is being rough on Comey as I think he
Speaker 1: should be. I have the greatest supporters in the world,
Speaker 1: by the way, they're the smartest, that the hardest working,
Speaker 1: they pay taxes, they're incredible, by the way, I have
Speaker 1: the FBI. You go into the FBI and take a
Speaker 1: poll of the real FBI, not the scum on top.
Speaker 1: Not call me in that group of people that total things.
Speaker 1: If you look at what happened and don't forget all
Speaker 1: of these people like Struck, what he did was criminal
Speaker 1: Struck and so many others, McCabe, they all worked for
Speaker 1: coming and come me knew everything that was going. Then
Speaker 1: you think McCabe didn't tell him everything. I think Comey
Speaker 1: was the ringleader of this whole den of thieves. It
Speaker 1: was a den of thieves. Yep, that's right. See he
Speaker 1: gets it that that's the dynamic here. Also, when I
Speaker 1: was talking to Juliane to day, I was like, you know,
Speaker 1: I've been saying for a long time, people have just stop.
Speaker 1: Combe is not an FBI guy. He was made the
Speaker 1: director of the f BEHIND. That's different. He's a d
Speaker 1: O J lawyer. He's a lawyer, and I very self
Speaker 1: righteous and sanctimonious one at that. Comey's never you know,
Speaker 1: gone into a drug house and had to you know,
Speaker 1: kick in the door and and worry about whether someone's
Speaker 1: gonna come at him with a sharp object or a
Speaker 1: gun or that's that's so, you know, let's let's keep
Speaker 1: that out of the conversation because that's not what Comy is.
Speaker 1: And he people are saying, oh, you can never trust
Speaker 1: anybody who pretends that he is the institution, and that's
Speaker 1: what Comby was doing with the FBI. Oh, they all
Speaker 1: love him so much. I haven't heard from a single
Speaker 1: I've been a I was a d J earler this week.
Speaker 1: I've been speaking to friends of mine who work at
Speaker 1: the d J. One of the great things about me
Speaker 1: being in the swamp now is the tentacles of the
Speaker 1: Freedom hund are extending deep into the swamp, which is
Speaker 1: great in the sense that I'm I've got all I'm
Speaker 1: running my little, my little freedom Hut Spy network now. Man,
Speaker 1: I'm finding out all kinds of good stuff and then
Speaker 1: I get to bring it onto the show and tell
Speaker 1: you about what's really going on behind the scenes. So
Speaker 1: that's the good part of it. The bad part is
Speaker 1: that the food is like a you know, like a
Speaker 1: B minus compared to New York. But that's all right.
Speaker 1: The things I put up with team to bring you
Speaker 1: the best show possible includes a a dearth of acceptable
Speaker 1: gluten free options in the restaurant scene. You know, really
Speaker 1: uh Italian food that's like, you know, it's like the
Speaker 1: Italian food that you would expect in Sweden or something.
Speaker 1: You know, it's like they have really no idea what's
Speaker 1: going on. And I'm being a little harsh on the
Speaker 1: swamp right now. DC is it's you know, it's it's
Speaker 1: a little groans up. Now it's getting a little better.
Speaker 1: But I do get to talk to people that are
Speaker 1: involved in the mix and and it's just a lot easier.
Speaker 1: One thing is I can see them in person, which
Speaker 1: for some of these conversations you really need to do
Speaker 1: because they they definitely they don't want to pull a
Speaker 1: struck and start texting stuff that, you know, even if
Speaker 1: it's okay for them to say it legally, they don't
Speaker 1: want to get jammed up, uh for not being a
Speaker 1: member of the you know, team Hillary squad publicly. Anyway. Uh,
Speaker 1: we got some more on this. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: immigration coming up in the next hour, and many other things,
Speaker 1: many many things, teams, So stay right there. Ninline Apparel
Speaker 1: is a veteran owned and operated patriotic lifestyle brand. Look,
Speaker 1: the guys who run this company are incredible. Their patriots.
Speaker 1: They love liberty and they've built an all American brand,
Speaker 1: and they're also people that really do a lot of
Speaker 1: outreach the veterans community. They employ a lot of veterans
Speaker 1: and they also are supporting their ideals with the designs
Speaker 1: that their gear has. Almost check them out for yourself.
Speaker 1: You'll see their T shirts, their hoodies, They've got Second
Speaker 1: Amendment specific designs, they have veteran support designs. It's an
Speaker 1: apparel company that I know is really going to resonate
Speaker 1: with all of you. I love their gear. Check it
Speaker 1: out nine line apparel dot com. Go to the website
Speaker 1: nine line apparel dot com. Use the coupon code buck
Speaker 1: twenty to save twenty percent off. That's nine line apparel
Speaker 1: dot com coupon code buck twenty for a great savings
Speaker 1: of twenty percent off. And let the guys know you
Speaker 1: heard about him here on the Buck Sexton Show. Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Permission decoding the news and disseminating information. Who is
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American again.
Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show. Activity Analyst, No, Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the Buck Sexton Show. You have so many
Speaker 1: things to discuss here We had a very very astute,
Speaker 1: very interesting observation in the break from producer Mike that
Speaker 1: I wanted to share with you because I'm talking about
Speaker 1: the the cabal, the deep state, and you know, I've
Speaker 1: always had a feeling You're gonna find out that there
Speaker 1: was more Sally Yates involved in some of this stuff
Speaker 1: than we've heard so far. I could be wrong on that, though,
Speaker 1: we know she's clearly a hashtag resistance person. But struck
Speaker 1: and struck and comb he got hammered in the size
Speaker 1: of your report. But there's somebody that I've left out
Speaker 1: of the analysis thus far that Mike brought into it. Mike,
Speaker 1: who what do you? What do you think about about
Speaker 1: who's at the top of this anti Trump pyramid? Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: the last clip we played on President Obama said he
Speaker 1: said Tom he was the ringleader. And I said to you,
Speaker 1: I rarely disagree with our president Trump. President Trump said that,
Speaker 1: and I rarely disagree with the president and and I
Speaker 1: believe that Obama is the ring leader. I don't think
Speaker 1: it's comedy. I think it's Obama. And as the as
Speaker 1: the IG report mentioned last night, it stated that President
Speaker 1: Obama was one of thirteen individuals who Clinton had direct
Speaker 1: contact with using her Clinton email dot com account. Play
Speaker 1: that John, play that clip about Obama lying lying about
Speaker 1: the president. When did you first learn that Hillary use
Speaker 1: an email system outside the US government for official business
Speaker 1: while she was Secretary of State at the same time
Speaker 1: everybody else learned it through news reports. That's a lie.
Speaker 1: That's a lie. I don't care who you are. If
Speaker 1: if you are used to getting emails some people on
Speaker 1: a on a dot of email address and you start
Speaker 1: getting something from like Clinton Clinton email or whatever, you
Speaker 1: you would notice that, especially, I mean the report about
Speaker 1: about Hillary's when when you look at what it said
Speaker 1: about her, they said she had special access program data
Speaker 1: that she that was getting center. I mean, that's this
Speaker 1: is a really sensitive, really classified stuff. Comey said that
Speaker 1: in this press conference special access program to a highly
Speaker 1: highly classified information reserve, and and they just let it go.
Speaker 1: You see, folks, you can come up with a reason
Speaker 1: to never enforce the law. Really, you know, if you
Speaker 1: can always find some either through prosecureal discretion or nullification,
Speaker 1: or you have to have the will to enforce the
Speaker 1: law as it is, and you can't pretend to lossess
Speaker 1: something other than it is. Democrats are all about lawlessness
Speaker 1: in the pursuit of power. They don't care. But Obama,
Speaker 1: and this, this point that Mike brought back into the
Speaker 1: conversation is really important. Obama is much more involved in
Speaker 1: all this than anyone wants to to really ever wants
Speaker 1: to talk about right now, all these officials that we're
Speaker 1: talking about here, comy and you all arrest them, they
Speaker 1: would have had to keep Obama in the loop about
Speaker 1: what's going on. Probably you'll never get access to that
Speaker 1: information because they'll just say it's it's under executive privilege.
Speaker 1: You get fought in the courts forever. And at one
Speaker 1: important point, and by the way, Giuliani was like, that's
Speaker 1: gave me credit as various stute comment that I'm when
Speaker 1: I interviewed them this morning, and I said, we're just
Speaker 1: seeing the stuff they were writing down. You can't imagine
Speaker 1: the stuff because we all know, those of us who
Speaker 1: have ever worked in intel of the law enforcing community,
Speaker 1: that anything you're gonna say, or anything that you're gonna communicate,
Speaker 1: that's like maybe a little borderline, and you know, in
Speaker 1: the political realm or what ever, over the phone this way,
Speaker 1: because unless somebody has an active tap on you. It's
Speaker 1: like it never happened. Anything you write exists forever on servers,
Speaker 1: It exists always. They can always get it right. So
Speaker 1: when you see what's being written down, folks, when you
Speaker 1: see what they're writing to each other, just think about
Speaker 1: what they were saying to each other about all this stuff.
Speaker 1: And then add to that what was being said to
Speaker 1: Obama in the Oval office about the Hillary email investigation,
Speaker 1: about Trump and Russia collusion. And you know, I understand
Speaker 1: we're making an inference here, but we have a lot
Speaker 1: there's a lot of a lot of reason to believe
Speaker 1: that Obama was brought up to speed on this stuff.
Speaker 1: He was much more involved in it than we've we've
Speaker 1: been told. And think the lengths that they went to
Speaker 1: to help Hillary win the election, I would offer to
Speaker 1: you probably pale in comparison to what a lot of
Speaker 1: these government employees would have been willing to do to
Speaker 1: protect Obama's legacy. I mean, if you really look, Hillary
Speaker 1: was always a half hearted effort. You know, Yeah, they
Speaker 1: wanted to be president, yeah, you know, better than Trump.
Speaker 1: But Obama they truly loved and adored. And if if
Speaker 1: he is receiving information from Hillary, you know, we never
Speaker 1: really got clarity in this who had the classified that
Speaker 1: was getting sent around and Obama lying about this. By
Speaker 1: the way, you know, they never will say things like
Speaker 1: Obama's a liar. Let's say Trump's a liar all the time,
Speaker 1: even though we know Obama lied about some very important
Speaker 1: thinks policy issues, and he lied to sell policy ideas,
Speaker 1: most notably if you like your healthcare plan, you can
Speaker 1: keep it. That was a huge lie. Now, that was
Speaker 1: the biggest political lie of you know, of of the
Speaker 1: last ten years that I can think of the media.
Speaker 1: But but if you say, is Obama liar or no
Speaker 1: scandal scandal free administration, they're telling you now completely rewriting history,
Speaker 1: scandal free administration totally we wret history. So anyway, I'm
Speaker 1: just flabbergasted, flabbergasted. Yes, there was in fact special treatment
Speaker 1: here for Hillary as we know, there was special treatment.
Speaker 1: Bob Goodlad brought this up. This report shows that there
Speaker 1: was special treatment given to Hillary Clinton in the investigation
Speaker 1: of her case. There are there is not UH standard
Speaker 1: procedures followed in investigating her uh and there was special
Speaker 1: treatment given. There's no doubt that this was not a
Speaker 1: proper process. And the report shows time and time again
Speaker 1: how director call Me and others made mistakes Hereors and
Speaker 1: judgment or deliberate people can draw their own conclusions, but
Speaker 1: it was improperly handled. Improperly handled, to say the least.
Speaker 1: You know, one thing I've been warning about here on
Speaker 1: the show for a long time, and we'll continue to
Speaker 1: warn about, is that they are hoping that they are
Speaker 1: hoping to stall install not just because they're afraid of
Speaker 1: the truth coming up, because they think that they'll get
Speaker 1: to a point when they can finally just cover up
Speaker 1: the information. And Devin Noonez spoke to that issue. Um,
Speaker 1: there was information that we got today at eleven o'clock,
Speaker 1: twelve o'clock that actually Sherman Goudy had to call and
Speaker 1: tell me what it was. Text messages that we had
Speaker 1: been asking for since late last year. Now, these are
Speaker 1: text messages that clearly were pertinent to our investigation and
Speaker 1: too fis abuse and the Russia investigation, whether or not
Speaker 1: there was collusion. These are emails or text messages that
Speaker 1: somebody held from us. So every day that goes by,
Speaker 1: there is a new example of obstruction of a congressional investigation.
Speaker 1: The same people in charge today still believe they can
Speaker 1: run the clock out, and they're trying to run the
Speaker 1: clock out for the rest of this Congress so we
Speaker 1: can't finish our investigations. That is what they are trying
Speaker 1: to do. There is an urgency here for to get
Speaker 1: the truth out, to get the information we need now,
Speaker 1: because they will hide it from us the moment that
Speaker 1: they have the opportunity, and they will turn this all
Speaker 1: into one big political circus with an impeachment effort against
Speaker 1: the president. I want to tell you some things that
Speaker 1: matter that you're not hearing about from the rest of
Speaker 1: the media, like how good things are the economy right now,
Speaker 1: how strong the chances are that Republicans are actually gonna
Speaker 1: stay in power. I believe I'm not gonna focus on
Speaker 1: a judge remanding uh Manafort to custody, because who cares.
Speaker 1: We got more stay with me. The FBI calls home
Speaker 1: title theft one of the fastest growing crimes out there.
Speaker 1: Brace yourself, because having your credit card stolen is nothing
Speaker 1: compared to the hell you're in for once an identity
Speaker 1: thief takes control of your home's title. Look did they
Speaker 1: take your title? They replace it with an alias. It's
Speaker 1: not hard for the bad guys to do this. And
Speaker 1: once you know how easy it is, you're really gonna
Speaker 1: want a way to protect yourself. Okay, and your current insurance,
Speaker 1: your current protection that you think is in place, does
Speaker 1: not do it. That's why you need home title Lock.
Speaker 1: It forms a virtual perimeter around your home's title. The
Speaker 1: instant someone tampers with it, there on it, and they'll
Speaker 1: help shut it down. For just pennies a day. Home
Speaker 1: title Lock protects my most valuable asset, my family home.
Speaker 1: Register now for a free analysis and discover if your
Speaker 1: home's title has been compromised. That's a sixty dollar value.
Speaker 1: Free Visit home title lock dot com again home title
Speaker 1: lock dot com for a free analysis. When I got elected,
Speaker 1: I took this thing off. It was one point too,
Speaker 1: and each point is three trillion dollars and ten million jobs.
Speaker 1: You know a point people will sit home. Oh it's
Speaker 1: a point. What difference does it make? Well, it was
Speaker 1: one point too and it was going down. You probably,
Speaker 1: so this morning I put out they would have raised
Speaker 1: your taxes instead of cut your Texas and they were
Speaker 1: gonna put on more regulations. The last thing we need
Speaker 1: is regulations. I actually think my regulation cutting had more
Speaker 1: of an impact on the economy than the text cuts.
Speaker 1: When you were running, you said for every regulation we enact,
Speaker 1: I will cut two. But you didn't cut two. You're
Speaker 1: cutting a much bigger number, twenty two. It turned at
Speaker 1: twenty two President Trump was talking about one. According to
Speaker 1: the Atlanta FE you know, they modeled this stuff and
Speaker 1: they try to guess this current quarter ran Now they
Speaker 1: think we're going at four point eight percent. That's mine
Speaker 1: bogging has only been above that number one since two
Speaker 1: thousand and six. Economy is booming, my friends. Important for
Speaker 1: us all to remember that, because you'll notice not a
Speaker 1: lot of focus on that, much more, much more focused
Speaker 1: on trashing what the president says about North Korea or
Speaker 1: saying that he's way too you know, he's way too
Speaker 1: cozy with it. You know that they want to talk
Speaker 1: about Trump saluting a North Korean Yeah, yeah, they want
Speaker 1: to talk about that. They don't want to tell you, though,
Speaker 1: that the economy not only is booming, folks, but it
Speaker 1: looks like it's going to continue booming. We we've been told,
Speaker 1: oh do we do we have them? What? What? What
Speaker 1: we have them? Talking about? The no no, no, hold
Speaker 1: on a second, Yeah, I thought we had that clup.
Speaker 1: Maybe we do, maybe we don't. Point is, the economy
Speaker 1: is really strong. There are no stories in the mainstream
Speaker 1: media about this. They do not talk. It affects you
Speaker 1: so much more. There are no stories about entrepreneurs that
Speaker 1: are crushing it now and and employers who are hiring.
Speaker 1: And you know that they're not telling you these good
Speaker 1: news stories. They are so focused in on minutia. It's dishonest,
Speaker 1: it's crap. One interesting side note that the North Korean
Speaker 1: uh president, not president, North Korean general who Trump saluted
Speaker 1: And I said, people were just trashing the president for this,
Speaker 1: And I'm like, look, I'll be honest with you. If
Speaker 1: a guy in a military uniform saluted me, um, you know,
Speaker 1: if if you did play play twenty eight for a second,
Speaker 1: what did you mean just now when you stop here,
Speaker 1: understand sir? Wait, wait, you're the worst. They are the worst.
Speaker 1: They are the worst. They have really become, uh the
Speaker 1: enemy of truth CNN. That should be the slogan, uh,
Speaker 1: the enemy of truth. Wow, that's actually really good. I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna lie. I might. I think we're gonna stay
Speaker 1: with that for a while. They're not the enemy, right,
Speaker 1: I got I have friends over at CNN, but they
Speaker 1: are the enemy of truth as an organization. That is
Speaker 1: a fair thing to say. I think we should. We
Speaker 1: gotta like get that out there. Other people have got
Speaker 1: to pick up on that one. You know. We gotta
Speaker 1: get like l rush bow from like from the giant
Speaker 1: megaphone and start hitting that one out there. That'd be fun.
Speaker 1: We gotta pass along the word. Maybe maybe we get
Speaker 1: Shawn to tap into it too. Uh. Anyway, you know,
Speaker 1: notice that that they're so focused on the North Korea thing,
Speaker 1: and Trump's just like guys. You know, obviously Trump doesn't
Speaker 1: think that North Korea is a cool place to live.
Speaker 1: Obviously Trump knows that these guys are the people running
Speaker 1: the country or dictators and their savage to their own
Speaker 1: people and everything else. He's trying to save the North
Speaker 1: Korean people from the regime. That's the whole point of this.
Speaker 1: But you'll also see there's all this focus on what's
Speaker 1: going on in North Korea. They care so much about
Speaker 1: North Korea. You know what, I actually care more about
Speaker 1: what's happening here in this country. And what they're not
Speaker 1: telling you is that things are really good. The economy
Speaker 1: is crushing it right now. Removing all these insane government
Speaker 1: regulations is a good thing. It is making us wealthier
Speaker 1: and freer as a people. And Trump gets no credit
Speaker 1: for this stuff. Instead, they're all into the saluting. And
Speaker 1: you know that was about his comment about you know,
Speaker 1: he wants people to sit up or you know, stand
Speaker 1: up the way Kim Jong. He's just kind of speaking
Speaker 1: about stuff. But they'll call him a liar for that.
Speaker 1: You know this what they do now, see then the
Speaker 1: enemy of truth and they pervert the notion of truth
Speaker 1: and lies by saying, oh, you know, you said that
Speaker 1: everybody knows something, were not everybody knows. Yeah, it's a
Speaker 1: figure of speech, your imbeciles. But they're just doing it
Speaker 1: all in bad faith. And I look, that's why I
Speaker 1: love when Trump calls him out and says that there
Speaker 1: says that they're clowns. You know, even even even Lindsay Graham. Hello, Lindsay.
Speaker 1: Lindsay got a little ficy today about Trump stuff too.
Speaker 1: So if you don't like me working with President Trump
Speaker 1: to make the world a better place, I don't give it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Lindsay spicy, I like it. I don't give it. Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham series all of a sudden, I'm pictured Lindsay like
Speaker 1: you know, with some with like some chewing tobacco in
Speaker 1: his mouth and like you know, a double barrel over
Speaker 1: his shoulder, and he's like, bring its son, let's you know,
Speaker 1: let's make America better. I'm like, that's the Lindsay Graham.
Speaker 1: I want to see Lindsay served the Navy. You know,
Speaker 1: he can, he can crack some skulls. I don't like this.
Speaker 1: Lindsay's just like, well, I'll just like the foreign policy.
Speaker 1: It's gonna no, I don't know, Lindsay, get into get
Speaker 1: in the fight. Lindsay. I like to see that. I
Speaker 1: thought that was that was encouraging it. He said that
Speaker 1: on CNN to you. By the way, you'll notice CNN
Speaker 1: is suffering from a respect deficit right now, as it should.
Speaker 1: People are just like, you know what, screw this place,
Speaker 1: forget about it, forget about it. I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: I think it's a great thing. It really is. The
Speaker 1: day when when they finally decide that, when when they
Speaker 1: are finally willing two uh, you know, be honest about
Speaker 1: what they do and who they are, then that's fine.
Speaker 1: You know, I hate them a lot more than MSNBC.
Speaker 1: It's not it's not actually anything about my time there
Speaker 1: or that I think that it's I saw from the inside.
Speaker 1: I saw into the hood and it's disgusting. Although that's
Speaker 1: all true, it's just because MSNBC we can have an
Speaker 1: ideological argument on the you know, we can, we can
Speaker 1: enter the battlefield of ideas. And you know, I'm wearing
Speaker 1: my uniform. They're wearing their uniform CNN. They're the guys
Speaker 1: to run around switching uniforms. You know, they're out of uniform.
Speaker 1: They're not covered by the by the political Punda, Geneva
Speaker 1: Convention rules. You know, they're basically cheating. Seeing ends, seeing
Speaker 1: end of the combatants that hide behind women and children.
Speaker 1: Then they're like, you're such a you're so evil. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: maybe you should actually fight for real and not do
Speaker 1: it this way. We're just objective journalists, were just down
Speaker 1: the center. We're just being honest. Yeah, right, please, all
Speaker 1: all kinds of garbage. I love it when Trump goes
Speaker 1: after them. I love it when he puts them in
Speaker 1: their place. People thought we were probably going to war
Speaker 1: with North Korea. Quiet if we did, millions of people
Speaker 1: would have been killed. Put them in there, but quiet.
Speaker 1: That's right enough. No more grand standing Acosta stuff. No
Speaker 1: more of this nonsense. We we've all, we've all had
Speaker 1: it up to hear. Look at this, they're they are
Speaker 1: pointing at what's going on the other side of the world.
Speaker 1: We don't have any We we don't know if North Korea,
Speaker 1: if the North Korea reaches worked or not. But we
Speaker 1: sure as heck don't need people trying to undermine the
Speaker 1: president all the time. One interesting thing about the salute,
Speaker 1: and I was gonna say this before, is look, I
Speaker 1: understand it makes people uncomfortable for for anyone to salute
Speaker 1: North Korean general. I think it was just a gut
Speaker 1: reaction from Trump, who when anybody in the military uniform
Speaker 1: salutes and me salutes back. Right. He doesn't have a
Speaker 1: military background. He respects and and I believe reveres our
Speaker 1: military and everyone I speak to in the military. By
Speaker 1: the way, who's a door kicker. I can't speak for
Speaker 1: the rest of the folks, you know. I mostly talked
Speaker 1: to door kickers about this. I haven't spoken to people
Speaker 1: that are in other parts of the the military quite as
Speaker 1: much because I just don't come across them as much.
Speaker 1: Because of the nature of the work that I do
Speaker 1: now usually have people who are you know, in combat,
Speaker 1: who are going on TV analyzing these things. Uh, they
Speaker 1: all think Trump is great, so that I you know,
Speaker 1: so there's that as well. But I think that he
Speaker 1: I think that he saluted there as a just a
Speaker 1: in reaction. But it's interesting in the North Korean general
Speaker 1: saluted the commander chief the United States Army, I mean
Speaker 1: the United States military, pardon me, saluted our commander in chief,
Speaker 1: and that was broadcast on North Korean TV. If you
Speaker 1: understand North Korean propaganda, you actually know that they portray
Speaker 1: Trump as a as an evil war criminal. You know,
Speaker 1: anybody from anyone in America who's involved the military is
Speaker 1: supposed to be a you know, a terrible actually a
Speaker 1: baby murdering savage. That's how they're presented. Americans are presented.
Speaker 1: Our military is presented as being you know, rapacious barbarians.
Speaker 1: It's interesting that you have a h North Korean general.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's like a b all I know,
Speaker 1: but the North Korean general saluting our commander in chief.
Speaker 1: This is a data point that got lost in I
Speaker 1: think the shuffle of people just being all upset about
Speaker 1: this um anyway. Point is, you'll notice they'll they'll knitpick
Speaker 1: everything they can about the North Korea deal, about what
Speaker 1: Trump says about everything else, he just shuts them down.
Speaker 1: He's like this, it's all a waste, folks, It's all
Speaker 1: just a shiny object game that they're playing. When what
Speaker 1: really matters to you the border, which we're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about in a few minutes here, the economy which is
Speaker 1: incredibly strong, repealing regulations which has been just magic in
Speaker 1: terms of what it has done for businesses and for
Speaker 1: all of us who are investors, who are who are
Speaker 1: working for companies, who are trying to start our own
Speaker 1: small businesses. They won't talk about that because they are wrong.
Speaker 1: Trump has been right on issue after issue. We're seeing
Speaker 1: the results of it, and they're wrong, and they can't
Speaker 1: handle it because they think they're in the business of
Speaker 1: being right all the time, and they think that being
Speaker 1: right all the time he's being a progressive Democrat. So
Speaker 1: I'm here to give you more perspective. I'm here to
Speaker 1: tell you what I believe to be the truth about
Speaker 1: all of this, and to also tell you who the
Speaker 1: enemies of truth are. And that's an important thing for
Speaker 1: us all to keep in mind, I do want to
Speaker 1: talk to you about the situation of the border, so
Speaker 1: we have more on that. Really unfair. Are outrageous comments
Speaker 1: coming from the left on this one. We'll get into that.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. Children being taken away, you know, I
Speaker 1: hate it. I hate the children being taken away. The
Speaker 1: Democrats have to change their law. That's their law. Quieter,
Speaker 1: that's the Democrats law. We can change it tonight. We
Speaker 1: can change it right now. I will leave here. You
Speaker 1: need their votes, you need their votes, the Democrats. All
Speaker 1: they have to do. The Democrats issues me by one vote.
Speaker 1: We don't need it. You need sixty votes. We have
Speaker 1: a one vote. Excuse me, we need a one vote.
Speaker 1: We have a one vote edge. We need sixty, so
Speaker 1: we need ten votes. We can't get it from the Democrats.
Speaker 1: You know, they're just they're doing this because one. Democrats
Speaker 1: just love to make the issue of immigration not about
Speaker 1: the law, but about every individual tear jerker of a
Speaker 1: case they possibly can, which I would say you could
Speaker 1: do with any violations of law. Right anytime somebody has
Speaker 1: broken the law and it is going to be processed.
Speaker 1: They are separated from their children, some of them putting
Speaker 1: out No one's crying big tears for for menaphor. They say, oh,
Speaker 1: he did all these terrible things. He didn't pay the
Speaker 1: government money that he made overseas or something. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that's okay, but you know it's also
Speaker 1: not gonna affect you or me, my friends, that that's
Speaker 1: not he's not an AX murderer. But they're they're just
Speaker 1: running with this as much as possible. And it's because
Speaker 1: one they want people to skip beyond, as I've been
Speaker 1: saying for this whole show, they just want to move
Speaker 1: beyond this i g report. They threw up such a
Speaker 1: smoke screen, so many lies on this one. And you know,
Speaker 1: you've got some Republicans that are also looking for cover
Speaker 1: coming up here on on immigration because they want to
Speaker 1: go back to their districts and seem very pro DOCA
Speaker 1: and very pro honestly pro illegal and it's it's troubling
Speaker 1: to me. This is not this is not what we
Speaker 1: who've voted for Republican candidates, and certainly those have voted
Speaker 1: for Trump. It's not what we signed up for. It isn't.
Speaker 1: It just isn't, And that we're even talking about an
Speaker 1: amnesty and talking about changing changing laws to make it
Speaker 1: more favorable for those who are crossing the border illegally
Speaker 1: or those who have already crossed the border illegally without
Speaker 1: a wall, without e verify what happened all these immigration
Speaker 1: policies we were promised, Uh, they were. I feel like
Speaker 1: it was made very clear to us that we were
Speaker 1: supposed to get certain things because we had the House,
Speaker 1: we had the Senate, We have the Senate and the presidency,
Speaker 1: and it's not happening meanwhile. I mean, Democrats are just
Speaker 1: demogoguing the crap out of this issue of parents and
Speaker 1: children at the border. Keep them on that they What
Speaker 1: they won't tell you about are the parents who, because
Speaker 1: they think they'll be able to stay, are bringing their
Speaker 1: children into incredibly dangerous circumstances in advance of getting to
Speaker 1: the border, who are paying coyotes, whose children are being abused.
Speaker 1: Heaven knows what's even I mean, you know, my god,
Speaker 1: we don't want to think about some of the stuff
Speaker 1: that's going on, right, and it's very dangerous. You're there
Speaker 1: are bodies that get found in the desert. And this
Speaker 1: was all because there was an incentive that was put
Speaker 1: in place by the Obama administration. Obama administration policy became
Speaker 1: show up at the border with the kid claim asylum.
Speaker 1: You all could just just wave your right through. So
Speaker 1: children get used as a a tool of loophole for
Speaker 1: those who want to be in the country illegally. And
Speaker 1: like I said, okay, they're led into the country, but
Speaker 1: then they're not supposed to stay, so then they become illegal. Right.
Speaker 1: This is the the semantics games that's going on. The
Speaker 1: Democrat Party has become an open border party. They won't
Speaker 1: say it, and they'll fight and they'll say no, we've
Speaker 1: got this militarized border and everything. They will not make
Speaker 1: the case that anyone who's in the country should have
Speaker 1: to leave unless they kill somebody, and even then, even
Speaker 1: if they're a serious criminal, even if they are a
Speaker 1: serious threat of public safety. Yeah, they get a little
Speaker 1: weak on this stuff, but they're not having a serious
Speaker 1: conversation about it. And I I see Republicans the midterms
Speaker 1: are looming and they get weak on this, and I'm
Speaker 1: saying they won being strong on the border. They won
Speaker 1: going along with Trump on this one. That's why we
Speaker 1: had this election. We had in you know, MSNBC and
Speaker 1: others are are, like I said, demagoguing the issue. Here's
Speaker 1: the kind of stuff that they're saying. We can't find
Speaker 1: a solution to this problem without harming children, without putting
Speaker 1: them into concentration camps. And I would even say stepping
Speaker 1: in to that point. It's not even an interpretation of
Speaker 1: the law. It is a policy. It is a policy
Speaker 1: that has been invoked by the President of the United
Speaker 1: States and dictated to his Attorney general, who goes out
Speaker 1: and quotes the Bible, by the way, a passage that
Speaker 1: was used to justify slavery in this country, to to
Speaker 1: justify in camping children. I call this a concentration camp
Speaker 1: for kids because that's exactly what is turning out to.
Speaker 1: When you give kids twenty two hours of lock up
Speaker 1: time and two hours of air time, what else can
Speaker 1: it be. And if this is where this country is going,
Speaker 1: the American people need to wake up and pay attention
Speaker 1: because your kids could be next. Yeah, I mean, that
Speaker 1: is just an outrage. The whole thing is just wow.
Speaker 1: And Mika, they're like, yeah, yeah, Mika, who you know,
Speaker 1: it's just going back and forth from like Palm Beach
Speaker 1: to Nantucket. You know, the mansion in Georgetown she really
Speaker 1: cares about you know, Oh yeah, it's really keeping her
Speaker 1: up at night. Give me a break. M okay, let's
Speaker 1: let's let's take this apart. Now, let's actually pull away
Speaker 1: the nonsense. I spoke to the Attorney General about this
Speaker 1: issue this week. It is it is a lie to
Speaker 1: say that they have changed anything other than this is
Speaker 1: what the law says. What the Obama administration did was
Speaker 1: we will not enforce the law on the books. That
Speaker 1: is a form of nullification by one political party in power.
Speaker 1: Right when you just say we're just not enforcing this law,
Speaker 1: that isn't actually a change in the law. That is lawlessness.
Speaker 1: So it is not true. Republicans have not passed any
Speaker 1: new law. They've They've just said what Obama was doing
Speaker 1: was lawless. We're not doing that anymore. Now you also
Speaker 1: look at what do they expect to happen here? Is
Speaker 1: it now US government immigration? Is it supposed to be
Speaker 1: immigration policy that if you show up with a child
Speaker 1: at the border, you don't have to go through any
Speaker 1: you just get to show you just get to come
Speaker 1: into the country. People are saying that there's a you
Speaker 1: know that there's a separation. The separation lasts for a
Speaker 1: period of hours while the person and this is where
Speaker 1: they're also not telling you the truth about what's happening.
Speaker 1: It is hours while the parent is processed. You've seen
Speaker 1: the facilities the kids are held in, and you know, yes,
Speaker 1: it is not a rich Carlton they're putting these kids
Speaker 1: up at the border. But we're also not supposed to
Speaker 1: be having taxpayer funded rich Carlton's for whoever wants to
Speaker 1: come into the country at our border. That's not what
Speaker 1: I mean, That's not what I'm paying taxes for. It's
Speaker 1: not what you're paying taxes for. Kids are cared for,
Speaker 1: they are safe, they are they are given food and facilities,
Speaker 1: and by the way, all courtesy of of Uncle Sam.
Speaker 1: No other country in the world does this, not a
Speaker 1: single one. No other country in the world says, show
Speaker 1: up with a child and we'll pay for everything and
Speaker 1: you can just stay. So when and when he starts
Speaker 1: invoking concentration camps, that means a very specific thing to me, folks,
Speaker 1: And that you've got MSNBC engaged in just such reckless
Speaker 1: demagoguery is indicative of how just underhanded they are in
Speaker 1: the entire discussion. They're lying about the the reality of
Speaker 1: the laws, the Obamba. The photos that were being circulated
Speaker 1: with all this stuff were Obama administration era photos. You
Speaker 1: notice how that got pushed aside. That doesn't really get
Speaker 1: brought up very much. And they don't have any answers
Speaker 1: here for what's really supposed to happen. Is it now
Speaker 1: a is it now a criminal act to show up
Speaker 1: at the border or not? Is it illegal to come
Speaker 1: to the border If it's not illegal for anybody with kids.
Speaker 1: I need to know how we're supposed to enforce that one,
Speaker 1: because I promise you have a whole lot of people,
Speaker 1: more than you already have had, who are going to say,
Speaker 1: you know what, all I need to do is just
Speaker 1: bring someone's kids with me, say the kid is mine,
Speaker 1: and now I get to stay in America. Yeah, it doesn't,
Speaker 1: doesn't do. I feel badly sure. I've also been in
Speaker 1: refugee camps in Syria with children who have watched family
Speaker 1: members get executed. I've been in refugee camps where kids
Speaker 1: that have been through horrific atrocities are gathered together by
Speaker 1: the hundreds of thousands, and none of their you know,
Speaker 1: none of their neighbors are taking them in and none
Speaker 1: of the you know, no countries in the region are saying, yeah,
Speaker 1: you just get to be a citizen of our country.
Speaker 1: And we don't hear about how those countries are so
Speaker 1: racist all the time and so terrible. So, you know this,
Speaker 1: it's such an easy it's so easy, and this is
Speaker 1: a classic problem, a classic fallacy of liberalism. It's so
Speaker 1: easy to be generous with other people's resources, other people's time,
Speaker 1: and and feel like this won't affect you. And you know,
Speaker 1: the the Trump movement, the Trump folks need to hammer
Speaker 1: this point because this is what led to the way
Speaker 1: we saw in sen You have these defeat elitist liberals
Speaker 1: that don't care what the law is. They just want
Speaker 1: to feel righteous. They want to be self righteous, and
Speaker 1: they want to pretend that they can make the laws
Speaker 1: up about immigration as they go along. And you know,
Speaker 1: their kids aren't going to schools full of illegals that
Speaker 1: don't speak English, that require English as a second language,
Speaker 1: that have bring all kinds of problems trauma from their backgrounds.
Speaker 1: You know, we've got enough problems in this country with
Speaker 1: the kids we've already got in public school, right, we
Speaker 1: we have limited resources. This is not or They can
Speaker 1: just say we want to be open borders, but they
Speaker 1: can't have it both ways. They can't say they're about
Speaker 1: rule of law, but they'll never enforce the law against
Speaker 1: anyone because they're so nice. That's not all right. That's
Speaker 1: that that cannot be allowed to stand anymore. And I
Speaker 1: think we're seeing a point in time here where you
Speaker 1: need real pushback from Republicans. But I'm sensing there some
Speaker 1: weakness on this. I want to talk to you about
Speaker 1: the the claim that I saw here about these movies
Speaker 1: that they're making. So we're gonna switch gears here because
Speaker 1: now it's a Friday and I don't want to just
Speaker 1: be all intense and serious for too much of the show.
Speaker 1: There's a claim out there about critics being unfair, unfair
Speaker 1: to movies that are remake of classics with an all
Speaker 1: female cast. I'll I will dig into this a bit
Speaker 1: more in just a moment. You'll see what I mean.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. The female Ghostbusters remake was a a
Speaker 1: two hour long visual atrocity. It was one of the
Speaker 1: worst things I've ever seen on film on screen anywhere.
Speaker 1: I mean, I would I would really consider uh sitting
Speaker 1: along the side of a Highway in the dark and
Speaker 1: staring at the Median for two hours before going back
Speaker 1: and trying to watch the female remake of of Ghostbusters
Speaker 1: because it was actually that bad. And I know people
Speaker 1: might say, Bob, come on, you're being you're being no, no,
Speaker 1: I might be too nice to it. Actually it was.
Speaker 1: It was. It was appalling, and it almost I hesitate
Speaker 1: to even say, this almost ruined the original Ghostbusters for me,
Speaker 1: which is one of the greatest, most timeless comedy classics ever.
Speaker 1: You know, the original Ghostbusters. I can quote lines from
Speaker 1: it like the back of my hand, and where I
Speaker 1: guess I know it like I just mixed metaphors. I
Speaker 1: don't think I can quote the back of my hand.
Speaker 1: That would be quite a skill. But you know what
Speaker 1: I mean, it's late. Everybody leave me alone. Uh no, no.
Speaker 1: But seriously, it was one of the It was a
Speaker 1: terrible movie, and it was just funny because you had
Speaker 1: this backlash of people saying, oh and I think even Um,
Speaker 1: one of the original writers of Ghostbusters, was like, it's
Speaker 1: just all the all the trump. He was really disappointing.
Speaker 1: I think it was Dan Ackroyd actually who said all
Speaker 1: the you know, the like inbred Trump idiots don't like
Speaker 1: the movie or something, and that's the problem. It's like, okay,
Speaker 1: well what about the what about the half of the
Speaker 1: country that like worships Hillary and Obama? They didn't see
Speaker 1: it either, buddy. Everybody thought the movie stunk because it did.
Speaker 1: It was just a bad movie. We have the same
Speaker 1: thing here where Mindy Kaling who just keeps getting pushed along.
Speaker 1: Everyone said, oh, she's so funny, and the Mindy products
Speaker 1: He's not funny. Okay, she's not funny. And I know
Speaker 1: there's a lot of everyone's trying to say, oh, she's
Speaker 1: so great, and we're you know, I'm I'm not trying
Speaker 1: to sound like some kind of you know, closet misogynists
Speaker 1: they or something, but you know, they're their differences between
Speaker 1: men and women. And I just note that you have
Speaker 1: some really unfunny women that keep being put forward. Is
Speaker 1: like the thing, what's who is the one from the
Speaker 1: HBO show Girls, which I did watch a couple of
Speaker 1: episodes of just for cultural as like a cultural touchdown reference.
Speaker 1: You know, Lena Dunham, Who's who's really like a yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's like, I don't know, some kind of goblin
Speaker 1: from hell like over over overtook some of the HBO
Speaker 1: staff and made them think something crazy. It was just terrible.
Speaker 1: It was awful. It was a really depressing show. She
Speaker 1: is gross. It's not funny. They keep doing this, but
Speaker 1: so Mindy Kaling is blaming the bad reviews for Oceans
Speaker 1: eight on quote white male critics. You know, do we
Speaker 1: have to be the punching bag for everything? Now? Like?
Speaker 1: Is this really everything? Oh? White privilege? You know, I'm
Speaker 1: sure I haven't seen the movie. To be fair, I
Speaker 1: guarantee it sucks. I guarantee it sucks. A movie that's based,
Speaker 1: you know, a movie that is a remake of all
Speaker 1: women doing what all guys are doing in the movie
Speaker 1: is not necessarily a good idea. It was not good
Speaker 1: in Ghostbusters. I'm sure this movie is total trash. Men
Speaker 1: and women tend to have different kinds of relationships with
Speaker 1: each other. Patterning a movie that's like a bro comedy essentially,
Speaker 1: which is not what Oceans eleven is, but patterning movie
Speaker 1: that's all about you know, guys being slick doing it
Speaker 1: with women. It's just it's not a good concept. Um
Speaker 1: and uh, you know it has a sixty percent of
Speaker 1: Rotten Tomatoes and that's with the social justice bounce, because
Speaker 1: you know, social justice stuff will get your you know,
Speaker 1: people will love your movie. And and that's why you
Speaker 1: saw stuff in the movie with the woman who has
Speaker 1: who has sex with the aquarium pet, which one best
Speaker 1: picture what's it called? Shape of Water? Really just horrifyingly
Speaker 1: bad movie, not not interesting, not good, super weird. And
Speaker 1: the guy who's the main bad guy, who's like this
Speaker 1: square jawed government guy might as well have just had
Speaker 1: a a maga had on the whole time, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, look, he was trying to this The thing
Speaker 1: is like a giant seriously, it's like the creature from
Speaker 1: the Blue Lagoon, but it looks like a giant mutant
Speaker 1: frog and a swamp rat had some kind of you know,
Speaker 1: cross genetic and it's like can eat people. It's got
Speaker 1: sharp claws. Who what do you want to take that
Speaker 1: thing out? It's scary. But he's the bad guy, you know,
Speaker 1: he's just there with this red maga hat on. Basically,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't like this sea monster. I don't
Speaker 1: like sea monsters either, dude, sea monsters are scary. So
Speaker 1: the Oceans eight, Oceans eight is I'm sure garbage and
Speaker 1: I will not watch it because I know that it
Speaker 1: is garbage. And then you could say that's a stubborn
Speaker 1: and pig headed thing to say. But I am a guy,
Speaker 1: and sometimes we're stubborn and pig headed. Sometimes that happens. See,
Speaker 1: I accept that. I accept that there's some male traits
Speaker 1: that are common to all of us. I will try
Speaker 1: to watch John. Have you seen Cobra Kai? Did you
Speaker 1: see it too? Mike? What's give me the we got?
Speaker 1: We got like a thirty second window here for a
Speaker 1: Cobra Kai review. I thought it was really good. Actually, yeah,
Speaker 1: I like the way they did uh they tied it
Speaker 1: in with the old one and did some flashbacks. Thought
Speaker 1: two episodes in and it works so far. I'm excited.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna check it out this weekend. Alright, Cobra Kai
Speaker 1: on top of the I know I've been saying for while,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna watch it, but I don't have it. I
Speaker 1: don't have a TV and I didn't even have internet
Speaker 1: access in d C in my home, so I really
Speaker 1: have no time. And I'm working like fifteen hours a
Speaker 1: day like some sort of I'm like one of these
Speaker 1: people that was, you know, making shoelaces fifteen hours a
Speaker 1: day util their fingers turned like bloody and numb, except
Speaker 1: I'm doing it with digital radio and video content. I know,
Speaker 1: woe is me? Right Uh? Third hour, third hour coming
Speaker 1: up there, right there. Information is power, And if you
Speaker 1: want the best information on prospective hires, on somebody that
Speaker 1: might be leasing a property from you, a new tenant,
Speaker 1: or a business partner in a major transaction, you need
Speaker 1: the best in background investigations and vetting. That's where Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network comes in. They are federally certified as a
Speaker 1: veteran owned small business. They're headquartered in Chicago. They don't
Speaker 1: send your stuff overseas. A lot of the big players
Speaker 1: in this space, folks, they say that they've got this
Speaker 1: big name behind it, but it gets the information and
Speaker 1: the case work is done by people who aren't even
Speaker 1: US based. Do you think that if there's a if
Speaker 1: there's an intrusion into their server, or if there's some
Speaker 1: problem with the case, you're gonna be able to reach
Speaker 1: them quickly. You're gonna be able to notify quickly. I
Speaker 1: don't think so. Go to Global Verification Network. Just check
Speaker 1: them out. Call them eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: one one seven nine again eight seven seven six one
Speaker 1: seven nine or my g v N. That's my g
Speaker 1: VN dot com. Well, we're here at our three my
Speaker 1: friends before we kick off the weekend. We've got some
Speaker 1: things to discuss. For example, progressivism isn't coherent. It's loud,
Speaker 1: it's angry. It wants to impose itself on all of us.
Speaker 1: But it doesn't actually make sense. It's not defensible if
Speaker 1: you apply reason and logic to it. And we see
Speaker 1: this in a whole bunch of different things going on
Speaker 1: right now. One of them, and I've been saying that
Speaker 1: for a while this was just gonna become more and
Speaker 1: more common. Is that? Uh? The two so so so
Speaker 1: producer Mike, I've got I've got a question for you,
Speaker 1: sir um. The Connecticut High School Interscholastic Athletic Conference allows
Speaker 1: now transgender athletes, and so you are allowed to now
Speaker 1: be a a biological which I even object to these
Speaker 1: terms of biological male who competes against females. So there
Speaker 1: are two biological males that compete in track and field
Speaker 1: in different different, different track events in the state of
Speaker 1: Connecticut right now, who do you think won the state
Speaker 1: championship by a very wide margin this year. I know
Speaker 1: this is an easy question, but I just I just
Speaker 1: want to get producer Bike involved. Who who do you
Speaker 1: think one? Yes, so the men had to win by
Speaker 1: like a little or a lot, by a lot because
Speaker 1: dudes are faster than ladies, right, we all know this.
Speaker 1: Why do people pretend like this is in any way
Speaker 1: not something that we already know? And how is this fair?
Speaker 1: If if I put on a wig and said that
Speaker 1: I felt female and were to compete at the D
Speaker 1: three level, I would have been an animal on the
Speaker 1: sports field. Okay, I actually used to play in because
Speaker 1: we used to in the off season. We would play
Speaker 1: like mixed games of of you know, male and female
Speaker 1: basketball with girls from the team male female soccer with
Speaker 1: and like the guys took it easy, I mean, and
Speaker 1: we weren't even on the team necessarily, like you know,
Speaker 1: some of us were on the team, some of them
Speaker 1: were on the basketball teams on the ward and like,
Speaker 1: this is just crazy, It doesn't make any sense. We're
Speaker 1: gonna pretend that there's not a huge advantage of having
Speaker 1: x Y chromosome at every cell in your body with
Speaker 1: that to have testosterone versus higher levels of estrogen, all
Speaker 1: this stuff. It it's crazy, but here we are. I mean,
Speaker 1: could you imagine, like imagine you had a daughter that
Speaker 1: was training all the time for high school track championship
Speaker 1: and a a a biological no, I forgot a male
Speaker 1: gott you know, got up next door, and then you'll
Speaker 1: have to clap and cheer for this. This is what's happening.
Speaker 1: It's absolutely insane, and we all we all know that
Speaker 1: this is where it's all going, and we're supposed to
Speaker 1: like celebrate this. I mean, I I always point this out.
Speaker 1: They I used to use as the example that what
Speaker 1: happens when we want to have somebody who's a a
Speaker 1: male m m A fighter who wants to compete as
Speaker 1: a female, and that actually happened and it was super
Speaker 1: dangerous for those women, Like these are biological realities, and
Speaker 1: we keep running into this, uh ah, we keep running
Speaker 1: into this nonsense from the left on it. And what
Speaker 1: we used to use as the extreme examples to show
Speaker 1: how crazy they are, they now embraces Oh no, that's okay, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we'll do that. Let's let's have men. Let's have men
Speaker 1: fighting women because they think they're women, which is what's
Speaker 1: going on here. And I will note that they are
Speaker 1: not saying that there's any biological deture. So it's not
Speaker 1: about you know, oh, I have a higher level of
Speaker 1: estrogen or I was born with you know, both sets
Speaker 1: of equipment, so to speak, because families show it's not
Speaker 1: that this is just deciding that you're you're and you know.
Speaker 1: So now that the number one and number two high
Speaker 1: school track champions in the state of Connecticut are biological
Speaker 1: males running against females. I think that's also one of
Speaker 1: the things with progressivism that we as conservatives sometimes laugh at,
Speaker 1: is that when I remember when first hearing about this
Speaker 1: and thinking like that will never never happen exactly we're
Speaker 1: now would never happen territory all the time, And now
Speaker 1: it's happening. It's happening all the time another place. So
Speaker 1: that that's just one and I saw this and I
Speaker 1: just had to stop and think to myself, poof, you know, when,
Speaker 1: when when do we get to put a stop to this?
Speaker 1: When do we get to say, CNN apples and bananas, right,
Speaker 1: that's their whole thing, apples and bananas. They had a
Speaker 1: which and I love the President called them out and
Speaker 1: said CNN is a total fraud. This president is amazing.
Speaker 1: He really is. You know, I I any any hesitation
Speaker 1: or critique I really ever had about the guy, I
Speaker 1: I I formally retract. Okay, he's he's completely freaking amazing.
Speaker 1: Uh he yeah. He he points out that they're that
Speaker 1: they're complete frauds and and CNN is full of frauds. Oh,
Speaker 1: here it is. This is a CNN headline from today.
Speaker 1: He gave birth, he breastfed. Now he wants his son
Speaker 1: to see him as a man. No, these are lies CNN.
Speaker 1: He did not give birth. He did not breastfeed because
Speaker 1: he can't do that because he is a woman. And
Speaker 1: you know, it's one thing if we want to say
Speaker 1: for the for the purposes of politeness, this was a
Speaker 1: headline from today. I'm not I'm not like going into
Speaker 1: the archives here apples and bananas. CNN not good at
Speaker 1: separating it, separating out apples from bananas. It's funny that
Speaker 1: that's their mantra um. And they've also I think that
Speaker 1: there's a recognition over there. You know, it's so funny.
Speaker 1: I saw today, Uh you know, here in the city
Speaker 1: a a Fox News bus or not not a bus
Speaker 1: for Fox News, but on on a bus a Fox
Speaker 1: News banner and it said news and opinion, like news
Speaker 1: on one side, and you had Brett bar and a
Speaker 1: few other people you know, Uh, I think, um, chef,
Speaker 1: and then you had opinion on the other. That's just
Speaker 1: being honest, Okay. These guys are really trying to present
Speaker 1: just a newscast with other people presenting opinions on it
Speaker 1: versus people who are straight up opinion. CNN doesn't believe
Speaker 1: that any of their hosts are opinion hosts, which is
Speaker 1: a lie, right, Jake Tapper lying, Anderson Cooper lying, they're lying.
Speaker 1: They are opinion hosts who are also doing news, right,
Speaker 1: So why don't they just be honest about it instead
Speaker 1: of this? But then you see it filters down all
Speaker 1: the way through all the rest of of their their
Speaker 1: website and everything else. He gave birth, he breastfed. No, No,
Speaker 1: these are not true things. These are these are lies.
Speaker 1: And I just can't help but notice that the the
Speaker 1: the lies are becoming more mendacious, uh, and they're getting
Speaker 1: more aggressive. Um. And so that's why I just I
Speaker 1: point out the the incoherence of their positions because it's
Speaker 1: it's it's indefensible the things that they say that the
Speaker 1: positions they're taking in defensible, and yet they they will
Speaker 1: try and and defend them and actually go on the attack.
Speaker 1: If you were to say to anybody at CNN that
Speaker 1: he did not breastfeed, he did not give birth, that
Speaker 1: is literally biologically impossible, they'd say, why are you so insensitive?
Speaker 1: Why are you so mean? Why are you such a
Speaker 1: bad person. I'm like, can we just live in reality
Speaker 1: here for a second, But no, that they won't let
Speaker 1: us live in reality. They would rather go through this, uh,
Speaker 1: this pretense. And they are deluding their audience too. They
Speaker 1: are not presenting them with facts. When you were saying that,
Speaker 1: you know, men should be able to run against women
Speaker 1: and pretend that they're women in attract meat, that is
Speaker 1: not factual. That is not an honest position. Uh, And
Speaker 1: and not understand that there's a massive biological advantage for
Speaker 1: those competitors. And when you say that a female who
Speaker 1: had a baby is a male and therefore like this
Speaker 1: is not the way it works, folks, As you all know,
Speaker 1: this is the most basic stuff. But while they're trying
Speaker 1: to lecture us about Trump and and you know, a
Speaker 1: fib here or an exaggeration there, they skip over. These
Speaker 1: are big lies. That there's no difference between men and
Speaker 1: women really is a big lie. Then in fact, they
Speaker 1: try to negate the very real differences as a matter
Speaker 1: of policy, as a matter of science. These are the
Speaker 1: kind of lies that are scary because it's an inversion
Speaker 1: of some of the most basic truths in our society,
Speaker 1: and a subversion of them really, and that becomes dangerous
Speaker 1: after a while. This is not opinion stuff, this is
Speaker 1: fact stuff, and they are in no position the mainstream,
Speaker 1: it is in no position to lecture the rest of
Speaker 1: us on facts. When they literally, when they actually try
Speaker 1: not to use the word literally too much, they actually
Speaker 1: will not separate male from female. Honestly, that's a big problem.
Speaker 1: But also racism. Racism is something that the left likes
Speaker 1: to talk about. Racism is a constant topic of discussion
Speaker 1: for them. But you know what, the only place that
Speaker 1: I'm aware of right now that is a revered institution
Speaker 1: that has tremendous not just national but global respect that
Speaker 1: is engaged in racism is Harvard University. Overt racism at Harvard.
Speaker 1: How I'll tell you about it in just a moment.
Speaker 1: I'm making converts down in d C I'm getting people
Speaker 1: to ditch the Comi coffee and join the coffee freedom
Speaker 1: revolution with Black Rifle Coffee. These guys are awesome and
Speaker 1: their coffee is delicious. You should check it out for yourself.
Speaker 1: Go to Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck. When
Speaker 1: you go, you'll see for yourself that they have a
Speaker 1: Freedom Blend Coffee rounds option. They've got really nice, high
Speaker 1: quality t shirts to rep the brand. They've got Freedom
Speaker 1: Blend Coffee. You can buy ground, you can buy whole being,
Speaker 1: all kinds of different hats and mugs and gear. Black
Speaker 1: Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck. Make sure you type
Speaker 1: in the coupon code Buck fifteen at checkout for fifteen
Speaker 1: percent off. It also gives a little high five to
Speaker 1: my friends of Black Rifle, lets them know the team
Speaker 1: Buck is supporting this brand and supporting this coffee. These
Speaker 1: guys have been with me from the earliest days. I
Speaker 1: really appreciate that they are a real partner. They've got
Speaker 1: amazing coffee. I drink it every day. You should to
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee dot com, slash buck. Harvard is racist.
Speaker 1: The true statement, Mike, the true statement. Let me tell
Speaker 1: you why UM and By the way, I'm sure amerst
Speaker 1: is racist too. I mean, I'm not. I'm not just
Speaker 1: picking on Harvard. I mean my my school was. It
Speaker 1: presents itself as this very academically serious, preppy enclave in
Speaker 1: in the center of Massachusetts, but in reality it's just
Speaker 1: been come completely overrun by crazy progressives, more open Marxists
Speaker 1: on the Amorst College faculty than they're working than there
Speaker 1: were Republicans. Let's think about that Marxist buddy. I'm not
Speaker 1: talking like, oh, you know, Bernie Sanders, democrats, socialism, like
Speaker 1: straight up Marxist class struggle revolutionaries on the faculty espousing
Speaker 1: that crap to students. Anyway, here's this piece and and
Speaker 1: it's making us way through the court. So remember the
Speaker 1: press was saying, oh, we're talking about this, Yeah, but
Speaker 1: they have to report on it because it is news.
Speaker 1: But they don't take the necessary next step of continuing
Speaker 1: to follow up on this and inundate the coverage because
Speaker 1: there's a big story. This is not a little thing.
Speaker 1: This is from the New York Times today. Harvard consistently
Speaker 1: rated Asian American applicants lower than others on traits like
Speaker 1: positive personality, likability, courage, kindness and being widely respected. According
Speaker 1: to an analysis of more than a hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: thousand student records filed by a group representing Asian American
Speaker 1: students in a lawsuit against the university, Asian Americans scored
Speaker 1: higher than applicants of any other racial or ethnic group
Speaker 1: on admissions measures like test scores, grades, and extracurriculars, according
Speaker 1: to the analysis, but the students personal ratings significantly dragged
Speaker 1: down their chances of being admitted. This is that's the
Speaker 1: end of the quote. This is incredible. So, Mike, what
Speaker 1: they're doing here, what Harvard does now, is they because
Speaker 1: they have this quote holistic because they can't have quotas.
Speaker 1: That's actually not that's actually against the law. The Supreme
Speaker 1: Court and Grutter, I think it was Grutter v. Bollinger
Speaker 1: was the case said you can't use quotas. We're not
Speaker 1: okay with that, but you can take a holistic approach. Well,
Speaker 1: the problem with the holistic approach is that looking at
Speaker 1: the applicants applicant pool, based on the observable metrics grades,
Speaker 1: s A T scores, extracurriculars, Asians dramatically outperform as a group.
Speaker 1: The rest of the ethnices. Asians dramatically outperform white students
Speaker 1: as a group of applicants, particularly on SA T S
Speaker 1: and and the most objective metrics that we have. So
Speaker 1: what do they do? The admissions committee at Harvard is
Speaker 1: straight up saying Asians are boring and don't have leadership skills,
Speaker 1: so we're going to take other people in place of
Speaker 1: them under our holistic metrics. You know what makes us
Speaker 1: even more interesting. They're doing that without meeting the Asian
Speaker 1: students and a vast majority of the cases, so Harvard uses, hey,
Speaker 1: the Asian students are boring and don't show leadership qualities
Speaker 1: as an excuse to take black, Hispanic, and white students
Speaker 1: instead of them. If if that is not racism, I
Speaker 1: don't know what is racism. If that doesn't qualify this
Speaker 1: since because they had to find a way to do
Speaker 1: this internally and try to make it seem of course,
Speaker 1: Harvard denies this, they said, it's not true whatever. But
Speaker 1: I can tell you this right now. I've had a
Speaker 1: couple of friends all in the admissions committees of very
Speaker 1: selective places. It is true. This is exactly what they do.
Speaker 1: And you see this even in all their instances you
Speaker 1: see this here in New York City. I've been telling
Speaker 1: you all listening about this case. You've the really the
Speaker 1: most elite in terms of s A T scores, which
Speaker 1: is not I know, a measure of everything, but the
Speaker 1: most elite high school in the country by s A
Speaker 1: T s is called Stubs in high school. It is
Speaker 1: seventy plus Asian. New York City public schools are not
Speaker 1: even close to seventy percent Asian. They're like fifteen percent
Speaker 1: or ten percent Asian. It's not even close, maybe, but
Speaker 1: it's like way, way, way lower than the seventy percent
Speaker 1: they represented. And they keep on trying to come up
Speaker 1: with some rationalization. But what are they gonna You're you're
Speaker 1: gonna have a holistic review process for a public school.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's just gonna You're gonna run into all
Speaker 1: kinds of lawsuits and favorite is um. Here's the problem
Speaker 1: the left has. They've created a narrative that white people
Speaker 1: unfairly benefit from American society and have gotten away with
Speaker 1: this for a long time. So they've been engaged in
Speaker 1: what a lot of people would call reverse discrimination. But
Speaker 1: they get away with it because people feel like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, white people have it pretty easy, white privilege,
Speaker 1: all that stuff. But now average Asian household household income
Speaker 1: higher than average a average white household income. And the
Speaker 1: the group that is most overrepresented as a percentage of
Speaker 1: population at the most elite schools is Asians. It's not whites.
Speaker 1: So they haven't And this is what I meant, This
Speaker 1: is what I'm talking about, the incoherence of progressive is um.
Speaker 1: They don't have an answer or an excuse for this
Speaker 1: unless they're just gonna fully embrace quotas. But if they're
Speaker 1: going to embrace quotas, then they're eliminating merit, and then
Speaker 1: they're admitting that there's not actually merit in this process,
Speaker 1: and that changes the whole dynamic of what these elite
Speaker 1: schools really are all about, you know, because then you
Speaker 1: can look and say, well, you know where you you know,
Speaker 1: are you here because we needed more of X? Or
Speaker 1: you here because you're actually special? Right now, they tell
Speaker 1: everybody they're there because they're special. The reality is they're
Speaker 1: stacking the deck and doing stealth quotas. And the way
Speaker 1: they're doing stealth quotas is to straight up say, yeah,
Speaker 1: we think these Asian kids are boring. That's the Harvard
Speaker 1: University admissions process right now, they're boring without talking to
Speaker 1: them or meeting them. How they come And you'd say, well, buck,
Speaker 1: how could they do that? Well, you know they're doing
Speaker 1: it behind closed doors. They've been fighting tooth and nail
Speaker 1: to keep this data away from the public's eyes. By
Speaker 1: the way, if this were like, you know, if this
Speaker 1: were some kind of if they were a company and
Speaker 1: people found out, they'd be in all kinds of how
Speaker 1: we give such leeway to these campuses at Harvard has
Speaker 1: like a twenty some odd billion dollars endownmond. These are
Speaker 1: massive institutions, folks with a tremend this amount of influence
Speaker 1: in government, in private sector and every you know, especially
Speaker 1: a place like Harvard, but it's true of Yale and
Speaker 1: Stanford and all these different schools. They are gatekeepers, you know,
Speaker 1: they have They have a lot of sway in society,
Speaker 1: and for them to be engaged in this just goes
Speaker 1: to show you how deep the ideological rot of progressivism
Speaker 1: has gone. They're saying Asians are boring. Uh, it is
Speaker 1: a real wake up call for the rest of us
Speaker 1: that they're willing to be so blatantly discriminatory. And then
Speaker 1: trying to hide it. These this Asian American advocacy group
Speaker 1: that's suit Harvard. They're gonna win. They're gonna win. And
Speaker 1: this is how I think affirmative action finally comes tumbling down.
Speaker 1: This is how everyone realizes that you don't get to
Speaker 1: play the you know, historical grievances game and try to
Speaker 1: engage in this balancing of who's been the most oppressed
Speaker 1: and when were they oppressed and who gets you know,
Speaker 1: a leg up on somebody else because of skin color.
Speaker 1: That all has to go away. We've lived with it
Speaker 1: for too long as it is. The Supreme Court even
Speaker 1: set in the Grutter vy. Bollinger case, and it was
Speaker 1: Sandra Day O'Connor was like, at some point, we need
Speaker 1: to get rid of this. It just goes to show
Speaker 1: you what a weak, uh, what weak jurorsprudence is behind this.
Speaker 1: Think of another law that you're like, yeah, this is
Speaker 1: not really a good thing in the long term, but
Speaker 1: for right now, we're just gonna go with it. You
Speaker 1: think of some laws that are really bad, right do
Speaker 1: you think of No, I don't know, I gotta suspend
Speaker 1: Habeas corpus for a little while now, just because but
Speaker 1: I promise you we'll bring it back. The history of
Speaker 1: temporary the history of temporary law is a scary thing.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's always wrong, but I am saying
Speaker 1: it's not something we want to get too far into.
Speaker 1: I think that we're going to see this. I want
Speaker 1: the Trump administration to put more focus on the two
Speaker 1: and I want a lot of folks to know more
Speaker 1: about the fact that the discrimination against Asian Americans that's
Speaker 1: going on is what finally brings the spoiled, the racial
Speaker 1: spoil system, as Justice Scalia called it, This is what
Speaker 1: finally brings it tumbling down because they have no answer,
Speaker 1: they have no excuse, and what now there's Asian privilege?
Speaker 1: I don't think. So. We got a big roll call
Speaker 1: session coming up, team, So stay right there, team, It's
Speaker 1: time for roll call. Al Right, everybody, I'm up here
Speaker 1: in n Why See very much. Enjoying being back in
Speaker 1: my hometown. Gotta tell you, there's something something very special
Speaker 1: about this place, something very comforting. I walked out of
Speaker 1: Penn Station as producer Mike pointed out the right Penn
Speaker 1: station this time, not the one in Newark, which was
Speaker 1: quite a as a native New Yorker to get out
Speaker 1: in New Jersey by accident. That's just that's just wrong. Man.
Speaker 1: But I'll walk out and there's just this hustle and
Speaker 1: bustle of people in the streets and the honking cars
Speaker 1: and people yelling profanity out the window at each other
Speaker 1: and all all that stuff, and it just feels like home, John.
Speaker 1: It just feels like, oh man, I'm like, oh yes,
Speaker 1: I'm here. I smell that fumes of cars and pret
Speaker 1: souls and stale urine, you know, like that's that's my hometown. Baby.
Speaker 1: That's how we do it, all right, roll call time
Speaker 1: not just buck talking crazy talk time. Although I will
Speaker 1: say that we will um do a double roll call
Speaker 1: this week. That's always the not this week today. Sorry,
Speaker 1: that's always the plan. Bill is our first, our first
Speaker 1: victim in this roll call session. He writes, when you
Speaker 1: do Hillary's voice, it cracks me up. I think for
Speaker 1: about fifteen minutes a night, you can maybe pretend she
Speaker 1: is there and have a conversation with their Hi, bark,
Speaker 1: do you miss me? Um? I could probably people would
Speaker 1: think I've really lost it though I started walking around
Speaker 1: having a fake Hillary conversation myself. I think they would
Speaker 1: think that I lost it. I don't know, maybe, but
Speaker 1: I'm glad. I'm glad you like the Hillary wood. That's
Speaker 1: kind of a favorite among folks. You know. The Hillary
Speaker 1: voice is definitely something that people seem to be very, uh,
Speaker 1: very fond of, which I like. I think it's uh
Speaker 1: it captures the essence of Hills that that's true. Did
Speaker 1: you see by the way she wrote this tweet like
Speaker 1: but by emails after the i G Report came out
Speaker 1: and everyone just piled on, I'm like, why are you
Speaker 1: gonna go drink some chardonnay, hang out and go for
Speaker 1: walks in the woods, do some yoga. Don't get in,
Speaker 1: don't get into the scrum. It's a bad idea, all right?
Speaker 1: Next up here, Rachel, She writes, Hey, Buck, my husband
Speaker 1: told me about your show recently, and now I listened
Speaker 1: via podcast. We have a one year old daughter, Adeline,
Speaker 1: and since I have the privilege of being a stay
Speaker 1: at home mom, I listened to your show with her
Speaker 1: during the day. Whenever I laugh at something funny, you say,
Speaker 1: she laughs too. Oh, that's so cute. We are raising
Speaker 1: the next generation of conservatives, So thank you for your
Speaker 1: commitment to speak truth about the media and political matters. Also,
Speaker 1: during your pre recorded introduction on the podcast, it says
Speaker 1: you decode the news with actionable intelligence. I think that's
Speaker 1: what it says, but when I first heard it, I
Speaker 1: thought it said actual intelligence. We should probably switch it
Speaker 1: to that, which is still appropriate since the other media
Speaker 1: outlets just bashed the president and uh, don't bring anything
Speaker 1: near the table shields Hie Rachel from Southern Callie. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you, Rachel. I'm glad I can keep you company.
Speaker 1: And uh you know that that that the baby laughs
Speaker 1: when you laugh is great, you know, I'm I'm very
Speaker 1: happy to hear that. That sounds like a lot of fun.
Speaker 1: Uh Dan with a little helpful bit here. The Brits
Speaker 1: called the toilet the Donney. I don't know if that's true.
Speaker 1: He could be treating me like the foreign exchange student
Speaker 1: that you lie to about words mean. You know, I
Speaker 1: am a sex machine, remember from a you know as
Speaker 1: I can't hardly wait, I am a sex a machine.
Speaker 1: That's what the guy they they teach the foreign exchange
Speaker 1: students to say that, you know, did the Jennifer love
Speaker 1: hum A movie? You know what I'm talking about? Cheat.
Speaker 1: He starts that he like because he likes the the
Speaker 1: you know the cheetah anyway, Um, I've never heard of
Speaker 1: the duney before. But Daniels, I'll take your word for it.
Speaker 1: I will say that someone pointed out and it might
Speaker 1: even come up later in this roll CLO because I
Speaker 1: saw it. I saw it earlier. Uh that ducks in
Speaker 1: a Row has nothing to do with the shooting gallery, John,
Speaker 1: Ducks in a Row is for ducks following the mama
Speaker 1: duck in a row. Why did my mind go to
Speaker 1: shoot it shooting the ducks right away? That's that's on me.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I just figured that it was. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. Duck Hunt, the game was awesome. I used
Speaker 1: to you know, I used to play duck Hunt so much,
Speaker 1: and now I realize, Um, I don't like hunting ducks.
Speaker 1: It's just not It's just not for me. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm okay. Actually, I'm okay with birds and fish. I
Speaker 1: can take out birds and fish. But if it's furry,
Speaker 1: and if I feel like it could be a furry
Speaker 1: friend of mine, I don't know. I get a little
Speaker 1: like a little wimpy about about that. Next up here
Speaker 1: is Donna. She writes, WHOA, it's longer Buck, because of
Speaker 1: our shared love of soccer. I thought i'd share this information.
Speaker 1: And then she goes in a long thing about soccer. Uh, Donna,
Speaker 1: I will read Donna. Rather, I'll read this on my own.
Speaker 1: Thank you for writing, Sean, He writes, Hey, Buck, do
Speaker 1: you even lift? Bro? I say that because I drive
Speaker 1: for lift l y f t oh a word Smith
Speaker 1: here a play on words from Sean. I drive for
Speaker 1: a lift here in Utah today, I had some ladies
Speaker 1: from California chatting about the homeless issue there. I thought
Speaker 1: the conversation would go lefty, but I was wrong. Do
Speaker 1: you think with all the progressiveness killing the state, can
Speaker 1: Republicans there take back the government? Well, you know, Sean,
Speaker 1: there's this story out there about how California, I think
Speaker 1: it's on the ballot now, could be split into three
Speaker 1: d you've seen into three states. I just want the
Speaker 1: one that has Orange County. That would be the one
Speaker 1: that I would Whichever California gets Orange County is the
Speaker 1: one that I would move to. I think northern California
Speaker 1: is not my jam. You have all the bad politics
Speaker 1: of southern California, but it's a little cold, a little wet,
Speaker 1: and I remember being in San Francisco and it was
Speaker 1: supposed to be warm that time of year, and I
Speaker 1: was just it was just raining and freezing all the time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: not not a huge fan. Uh but yeah. So I
Speaker 1: don't I don't know if it's possible, my friend, based
Speaker 1: on the demographic sean, I think that California is probably
Speaker 1: lost to the left for the foreseeable But I could
Speaker 1: be I could be wrong. And this ballot initiative about
Speaker 1: breaking the state up into three, I don't even know
Speaker 1: what the process is for breaking a state up or
Speaker 1: or how that would work, but I'll I will look
Speaker 1: into it, and uh, we'll see. I would just want
Speaker 1: to live in the O C. That would be my
Speaker 1: That will be my choice if I could. So Amy
Speaker 1: is next here. Please allow me a nerd out for
Speaker 1: a moment. In reference to your commentary on boiling water.
Speaker 1: The temperature at which water boils does change depending on elevation.
Speaker 1: Why elevation because atmospheric pressure. Why atmospheric pressure Because of
Speaker 1: the ideal gas law PV equals n RT. This is
Speaker 1: why foods have high altitude cooking instructions. At sea level,
Speaker 1: water boils at two twelve degrees fahrenheit with each five
Speaker 1: foot increase in elevation, the boiling point of water is
Speaker 1: lowered by just under one degree fahrenheit. Go women of science.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, shields high Amy. That was some impressive nerdiness.
Speaker 1: That was. That was like legit, put on a lab
Speaker 1: coat because you are nerd ing out. So yeah, there,
Speaker 1: there you have it. Um, let's see what we have here.
Speaker 1: In next Oh yes, Dan, Dan right, Buck, love your
Speaker 1: show sure beats blowing a paycheck, drowning sorrows. Sorrows just
Speaker 1: get pushed aside. T G. I f I love how
Speaker 1: some places enjoy employing lots of employees who do not
Speaker 1: care if the business succeeds or fails. I have lots
Speaker 1: of junk I would not put in writing Love your
Speaker 1: show from Dan Well, Dan, thank you, uh love that
Speaker 1: you listen to the show very much. Appreciate it, buddy,
Speaker 1: don Next up in roll call cell Phone Apocalypse. Love
Speaker 1: the show, Buck, keep up the good work. There's a
Speaker 1: movie called cell with Samuel L. Jackson and John Cusack
Speaker 1: where people cell phones turn them into zombies. So bad
Speaker 1: it's good. I don't know down that sounds so bad
Speaker 1: it's bad. I think there's also a movie with Colin
Speaker 1: Farrell who ruins all movies and people go, book, what
Speaker 1: about in Bruges. I'm like, okay, fine, who saw in Bruges?
Speaker 1: Like five people saw in Bruges? And he's basically playing
Speaker 1: himself in that movie. It's like some Irish thug or something.
Speaker 1: You know. That doesn't make anything. It doesn't make it better.
Speaker 1: The rest of the movies that he's in, you're like, Wow,
Speaker 1: why is Colin Farrell so bad? And why is this
Speaker 1: movie so terrible? I don't know how he was able
Speaker 1: to get the roles that he did for as long
Speaker 1: as he did. His performance in Miami Vice, which is
Speaker 1: based on a hit TV show the movie was was
Speaker 1: made by Michael Mann, is a really bad movie. I've happened.
Speaker 1: I've seen it many times because it's on HBO, and
Speaker 1: I don't know. It's one of those movies. Do you
Speaker 1: have those movies gen where you're you're like, I don't
Speaker 1: really like this movie, but I'll watch it anyway. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's on, so I'll watch it. I never seek
Speaker 1: it out, But Miami Vice has been on of those
Speaker 1: movies seen so many times. But he plays Crockett and
Speaker 1: he has like a blonde mullet. It's Colin Farrell, and
Speaker 1: he has some of the worst lines, like I'm a
Speaker 1: fiend for Mohitos. I'm like, who says I'm a fiend
Speaker 1: for mohitos? You know, who's supposed to be like a
Speaker 1: tough guy. That's like saying, you know, I'm a freak
Speaker 1: for Apple Teeny's or something like. I mean, that's I
Speaker 1: don't know, it's like, yeah, John knows that I'm talking about.
Speaker 1: That's just weird. That doesn't make sense. But there's a movie.
Speaker 1: I bring it up because there's a movie where he's
Speaker 1: on the phone the whole time, like he's in a
Speaker 1: phone booth. It might even be called Oh no, it's
Speaker 1: called cellular. I think he's is it what's it called?
Speaker 1: Things called pay phone or phone booth? And I like
Speaker 1: that movie? You saw it? I never saw it. He's
Speaker 1: on the phone the whole time. How could it be
Speaker 1: a good movie? I found it to be very interesting.
Speaker 1: I like, I don't know, John, I'll take your work.
Speaker 1: I'll take your word for it on this one. I
Speaker 1: think he's a good actor. I just movies are not
Speaker 1: that great. God, But I do like that one movie.
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding. It's like a it's like a freedom
Speaker 1: hunt ambush right now. I couldn't have seen this one coming.
Speaker 1: John John likes John likes that movie. That's a surprise
Speaker 1: to me. All Right, Um, we gotta go to uh
Speaker 1: we gotta take a quick pause here, we'll come back
Speaker 1: finishing out the roll call thoughts for the weekend. It's
Speaker 1: going to be amazing. Stay right there. The show ain't
Speaker 1: over yet, folks. Here's where you take over. Yeah. It's
Speaker 1: got kind of a Miami bike five a little day,
Speaker 1: keeping it real, keeping it real. I love our announcing
Speaker 1: It's awesome, team Buck. It's time for roll calls. Time
Speaker 1: for roll call. You know why I love our announcers
Speaker 1: so much, Andy, because to me, he kind of sounds
Speaker 1: like Optimist Prime Autobots Unite. Remember that. That's right, a
Speaker 1: young optimist Prime, exactly like optimists before. You know, had
Speaker 1: a lot of mileage on him, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: early optimists. All right, roll call your thoughts, not my well,
Speaker 1: my thoughts too, because come on, it's a it's a
Speaker 1: team effort here. Uh. I'm so excited to be up
Speaker 1: here for the weekend. I'm just gonna there's gonna be
Speaker 1: so much Netflix and Thai food. And I really did
Speaker 1: make a mistake for a while when I was saying
Speaker 1: Netflix and chill all the time, I actually thought it
Speaker 1: meant to watch Netflix and to hang out. But Netflix
Speaker 1: and chill, as some of the younger listeners had to
Speaker 1: tell me, is in fact, you know when I say
Speaker 1: ms Molly and I are gonna Netflix and chill, that's
Speaker 1: not what I meant. Like watching Netflix and spending time together,
Speaker 1: you know, with food involved or something. Gosh, where does
Speaker 1: it get their minds out of the gutter? All right,
Speaker 1: Eric writes Buck, Um, you read my message and I
Speaker 1: feel make Porter money came across wrong. I meant I
Speaker 1: hope you earned Porter amounts of money. A word of
Speaker 1: that poorly. You deserve an increase in the pay for
Speaker 1: the work you do. Sorry about that, shields Hie. Uh Eric, Um, no,
Speaker 1: it's all good man. Porter is awesome. What. Porter's a
Speaker 1: friend and a mentor. Um and uh he wants he
Speaker 1: wants the Buck to earn to earn cash too, So indeed, uh,
Speaker 1: there you have that. Um let's get to By the way,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have Porter as a guest on the show soon.
Speaker 1: T J next up here, um book. I also I
Speaker 1: noticed Crystal was so this is about Rising, the new
Speaker 1: show on mom which if you haven't seen it, you
Speaker 1: go to uh hill dot TV slash Rising. That's Hill
Speaker 1: dot TV slash Rising. I noticed Crystal was able to
Speaker 1: sit in on the Giuliana Giuliani interview, but you weren't
Speaker 1: able to sit in on the Podesta interview. Is this
Speaker 1: at the requests of the guests or what perhaps Podesta
Speaker 1: couldn't handle a hard question from the buckster uh t J.
Speaker 1: We're trying to see what the best format is for
Speaker 1: our because we're doing this show that no one does right,
Speaker 1: and it's both sides of the story as our mantra.
Speaker 1: So we're trying to get people both perspectives without showing
Speaker 1: one side just get pummeled like pal pal but like
Speaker 1: like getting you know, ripped apart on TV. AH. So
Speaker 1: it's difficult. It's a difficult balance. We're trying to strike it.
Speaker 1: You know, sometimes it'll just be me, sometimes it'll just
Speaker 1: be her, and I think sometimes it'll be both. Uh
Speaker 1: And with Juliana to day, we went long on that
Speaker 1: interview because it's so much we want to talk to
Speaker 1: him about and he's obviously a really interesting, compelling guy.
Speaker 1: But I'll just say t J that we're still working
Speaker 1: on format and it's Look, this is an experiment. You know.
Speaker 1: This isn't just standard you know, cable TV commentary show.
Speaker 1: This is a digital political conversation, and we're hoping that
Speaker 1: folks enjoy it and and get something good out of it.
Speaker 1: Um Will writes uh hold on what is? Will write
Speaker 1: uh for Roll Call regarding the Hill dot TV slash Rising.
Speaker 1: Are there plans to have a channel creator for Roku?
Speaker 1: I have recently cut the chord in NYC and enjoy
Speaker 1: not having to pay time Warner Cable for mainstream media
Speaker 1: and leftist cable tv. However, I would happily pay for
Speaker 1: a monthly subscription for Rising through Roku, Apple TV, or
Speaker 1: other web TV subscription platforms. Will Um, let me say
Speaker 1: that you are very savvy. Your mind is in the
Speaker 1: right place on this one, and the answer is yes,
Speaker 1: I think, and I think I'll be able to give
Speaker 1: you a definitive answer on which one of those soon
Speaker 1: for Rising, but I don't have it yet, so stay tuned.
Speaker 1: Is what I got on that one, Um, And that's
Speaker 1: what I can say on that one. Also, you wrote,
Speaker 1: great to see Joe Conscha on the show this morning.
Speaker 1: Joe is the man. Absolutely. I'm a big Joe contra fan.
Speaker 1: Very very smart guy, very nice guy, humble guy, and
Speaker 1: a and a helpful guy, which in this business of
Speaker 1: which is just overrun with eaglemaniacal uh newsreader, you know, wackos,
Speaker 1: people that really aren't nice people in person or or
Speaker 1: on TV. It's great to have Joe around. He's he's
Speaker 1: just he's just good. He's good energy and good analysis.
Speaker 1: He really is. I can't say enough positive things about
Speaker 1: Joe conscho Uh. Adam. Adam also has this idea Buck
Speaker 1: Advisor higher ups at the Hill to get a Roku
Speaker 1: channel started. Do that and I'll pull a Democrat and
Speaker 1: have you up on four TVs every day and vote
Speaker 1: quadruple for your new show. All right, Adam, John, do
Speaker 1: you know do you have a Roku TV or something?
Speaker 1: We you know, we had Roku at the Blaze TV
Speaker 1: at gb TV very early on, and you know that
Speaker 1: that didn't really we didn't really get much viewing on Roku.
Speaker 1: But that was so early, that was like eight years ago.
Speaker 1: I wonder if Roku now has become a bigger thing.
Speaker 1: I don't know enough about it. I don't know if
Speaker 1: about it, Like, I gotta look into it a little
Speaker 1: bit um, But thank you guys. You know what, I'll
Speaker 1: it up with my team. We'll see. Maybe I've gotten
Speaker 1: so many brilliant, brilliant ideas from from this audience that
Speaker 1: I'm always happy to I'm always happy team to borrow
Speaker 1: your brilliance and presented to people like, hey, I had
Speaker 1: this idea about how we can build our platform. I
Speaker 1: give you credit. I'm like it came from the team. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: so there's that. One more here, David, Right, Hey Buck.
Speaker 1: The reason boys math scores are higher than girls is
Speaker 1: their exposure to sports. Boys learn statistics from baseball, football, etcetera.
Speaker 1: Girls tend to participate in gymnastics and soccer, which is
Speaker 1: more subjective. It's also why boys are more adept at geography,
Speaker 1: because they learn where the teams are located. Keep up
Speaker 1: the great work, Dave. Uh, Dave. I don't think that's correct,
Speaker 1: but but I gotta give you like some credit for creativity.
Speaker 1: But I don't think that's entirely accurate. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that's that's true. Oh wait, one more here, carry rights?
Speaker 1: Who has better hair Tucker Carlson, uh, you know, or
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton. She writes no, no, no carry Sorry, Buck
Speaker 1: has the best hair. Disagreeing with carry here she takes
Speaker 1: Tucker's side in the argument. Sorry, the Buck swoop is
Speaker 1: the best swoop. I'm gonna leave you with that for
Speaker 1: the weekend. Everybody have a great one. Shields High sponsor.
Speaker 1: This half hour is the novel Anubis. The enigmatic US
Speaker 1: president is dead. ISIS is attacking on multiple fronts, and
Speaker 1: the U S Special Forces call on a mercenary cyber
Speaker 1: warrior to stop the crisis. This is a Nubis. An
Speaker 1: aging marine sergeant and battle warren Army major face an
Speaker 1: enemy that turns the Internet into a terrorist weapon and
Speaker 1: makes our existing concepts of security archaic. A catastrophe of
Speaker 1: biblical proportions is about to unfold. The new president is
Speaker 1: facing a ruthless, relentless caliphate, and our military and elected
Speaker 1: leaders have no means to stop it. The only real
Speaker 1: questions are when and where? This is Anubis. Today's headline
Speaker 1: show us what is happening in the Middle East. Author
Speaker 1: Eric Anderson reveals the frightening possibilities that remain in a Nubis.
Speaker 1: Eric Anderson is a former undercover US intelligence agent. Check
Speaker 1: out his new book available on Amazon dot com or
Speaker 1: visit done books dot com and just type a n
Speaker 1: u b I S in the search field. That's a Nubis.
Speaker 1: A n u b i s