Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Well, it may not
Speaker 1: be a witch hunt, but a lot of people the
Speaker 1: FBI are getting fired for witch hunting, aren't they. Peter
Speaker 1: Struck the latest to be ousted. We'll talk about what
Speaker 1: he's doing and how he's becoming a part of hashtag resistance. Also,
Speaker 1: the protests over the weekend. I was there, my friends,
Speaker 1: I saw it. The media doesn't want to tell you
Speaker 1: what happened. They don't want to tell you about what
Speaker 1: those protesters were saying. I'll tell you what they said.
Speaker 1: I've got audio for you, and I'll break down why
Speaker 1: the media is lying about it. That plus a little
Speaker 1: bit of Omar Rose to talking a whole lot more
Speaker 1: coming up on The Buck Sexton Show. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence, Make no mistakes
Speaker 1: America Great, You're a great American Again the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show begins. Analysts, remember no, it's about time. I mean,
Speaker 1: the American people deserve an FBI that's not biased. They
Speaker 1: deserve an FBI that's going to focus on the truth. Obviously,
Speaker 1: Peter Struck wasn't that individual. And I think it's important
Speaker 1: to understand. He just wasn't any old agent at the FBI.
Speaker 1: He was deputy head of counter intelligence. More importantly, he
Speaker 1: was the lead agent on both the Clinton investigation and
Speaker 1: on the Trump Russia investigation. So you now have at
Speaker 1: the FBI needs something I've never seen in any federal agency. James,
Speaker 1: call me fire. Deputy Director McCabe fired, Jim Ribicki, former
Speaker 1: chief of staff, has left the FBI. Jim Baker, Chief
Speaker 1: Council the FBI was demoted then fired. Lisa Page FBI Council, demoted,
Speaker 1: then left. And then of course you now have Peter
Speaker 1: Struck who was demoted and now fired. Today. These are
Speaker 1: the six key key people at the top of the
Speaker 1: FBI who ran the Clinton investigation and who launched and
Speaker 1: ran the Trump Russia investigation. I've never seen anything like
Speaker 1: that in any other federal agency. Hooray for an agency
Speaker 1: that finally did something right, which is recognized. There's no
Speaker 1: place in the FBI for somebody who's bias, whose conduct,
Speaker 1: whose statements showed that they were not willing to be fair,
Speaker 1: and that in fact they compromised the very integrity or
Speaker 1: bring into question the integrator of the FBI welcome to
Speaker 1: the buck Sex and show everybody a lot of big
Speaker 1: breaking news today, and we're going to go on a
Speaker 1: deep dive together into what really happened at the so
Speaker 1: called anti fascism rally this weekend. All the violence, all
Speaker 1: the bad stuff on the streets that the police had
Speaker 1: to deal with, surprisingly enough, had nothing to do with
Speaker 1: the white nationalists who were there, because they were like
Speaker 1: five of them. I mean, actually there were twenty or so.
Speaker 1: I'm not exagerly there are about towny of them. All
Speaker 1: the smoke bombs that were thrown, the punchers thrown, the pushing,
Speaker 1: the violent it came from the anti fascism protesters. We
Speaker 1: will get their media move Wait, they blew past that
Speaker 1: story so fast they don't want to touch it. We'll
Speaker 1: do all of that and more, but first this uh,
Speaker 1: this firing of FBI agent Peter Struck. There's a a
Speaker 1: meme that you'll see out there. It gets shared a
Speaker 1: lot where well, they'll show all of the different people
Speaker 1: that the Mother Probe has either brought charges against or
Speaker 1: have gotten a conviction against, and they'll just list them
Speaker 1: all out and they'll put like, you know, seventeen Russians,
Speaker 1: I mean they're not really, and that's a counterintelligence problem,
Speaker 1: not a pure criminal problem. But they know they're ever.
Speaker 1: But then they're just trying to pad the stats there,
Speaker 1: So seventeen Russians and then it's Manafort tax fraud, and
Speaker 1: then Flynn Papadopolis, van Vander whatever his name is, the
Speaker 1: Dutch guy lawyer who got basically a few people lying
Speaker 1: under this very aggressive prob and but they list this
Speaker 1: out and say, where do you think this is a
Speaker 1: witch hunt? Doesn't look like a witch hunt to me. Okay,
Speaker 1: so that's the game they want to play. Someone explained
Speaker 1: to me what the heck is going on at the
Speaker 1: FBI when Comy McKay, Paige struck Rebecca If you heard
Speaker 1: all those names fired or demoted, ignominiously ended careers, folks.
Speaker 1: And we're not talking about a few people in the
Speaker 1: FBI with its tens of thousands of employees who just
Speaker 1: happened to get into some trouble. We're talking about the
Speaker 1: most powerful people in the FBI, all of whom were
Speaker 1: directly involved in what seems to now be clearly a
Speaker 1: concerted effort to stop Trump from winning the presidency by
Speaker 1: our own law enforcement and intelligence agencies. That's what we're
Speaker 1: talking about here. Yeah, Jim Jordan, who started off the show.
Speaker 1: They're talking all these names. He left off some important names.
Speaker 1: By the way, What about Sally it's fired. She's a
Speaker 1: hashtag resistance person. Brennan, if he were still the CIA director,
Speaker 1: I promise you would have been fired. He's a hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance mainstay. Clapper would have been fired if he had
Speaker 1: tried to stay on her, if he had stayed on
Speaker 1: his director of National Intelligence. So what's going on to
Speaker 1: your folks? Why is it that the FBI is finding
Speaker 1: cause for termination, perhaps even in the case of McCabe
Speaker 1: and Comy, caused for criminal charges against people who are
Speaker 1: just do they were just doing their jobs. If you're
Speaker 1: Peter Struck, he Kina was up there talking like this
Speaker 1: when he's giving his testimony and here never did anything wrong.
Speaker 1: He just wants you to know that he was trying
Speaker 1: to defend the country. Actually sounds a lot like Peter Struck.
Speaker 1: If you go back and listen to his testimony, you
Speaker 1: know there's something going on here, folks. It's obviously rotten.
Speaker 1: When you talk about the swamp, and I know I
Speaker 1: joke around about the swamp, but there was a virus
Speaker 1: that had infected the upper reaches of the federal bureaucracy,
Speaker 1: law enforcement, and intelligence agencies under Obama. That they really
Speaker 1: thought that they were doing a public service. And I
Speaker 1: almost feel sorry for them because I think that they
Speaker 1: believed this. They believe that trying to throw an election
Speaker 1: and trying to overrule the will of the American people
Speaker 1: and picked their president for them. I think that struck
Speaker 1: and Page and others, they thought they were doing a
Speaker 1: public service. And we see this from there their text messages,
Speaker 1: we see this from the information that's already come out.
Speaker 1: And there's no other explanation for their actions. There's no
Speaker 1: other way to look at what they've done and come
Speaker 1: away and have some understanding of it other than they
Speaker 1: must have really believed that was a clear and present,
Speaker 1: clear and present danger to the United States, and therefore
Speaker 1: they were justified in extraordinary, extra legal measures to stop
Speaker 1: him from being president. And then once it had happened,
Speaker 1: once the unthinkable had occurred, well then they had to
Speaker 1: find something to justify all the stuff that they had done. Right,
Speaker 1: once they had already crossed over to the dark side,
Speaker 1: there's no going back, so they might as well try
Speaker 1: to justify why they've done it. And that's what happened
Speaker 1: after Trump's election with the Mueller probe and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. Yeah, that's right, Struck fired. Yates was fired.
Speaker 1: She hasn't got as much attention I've been telling you along.
Speaker 1: She just strikes me as as a a central figure
Speaker 1: in the hashtag resistance effort from the federal government, always
Speaker 1: has her grandstanding on what was Remember now, folks, the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court said, yeah, actually the president does have the
Speaker 1: right to do this so called Muslim band. So you know,
Speaker 1: you're the attorney general, you're gonna refuse acting attorney general,
Speaker 1: you're Yates, You're gonna refuse to carry out the the
Speaker 1: policy of the president because you don't like it. Because
Speaker 1: that's what she did. It wasn't unconstitutional, it wasn't unethical.
Speaker 1: She just didn't like it. She didn't like it, so
Speaker 1: she she refused to do it, and she insisted on
Speaker 1: being terminated from it, an act of pure grandstanding from
Speaker 1: a lifelong snide bureaucrat. And then there's one other name
Speaker 1: that has not yet gotten nearly the attention that I
Speaker 1: think it should in this now that's Struck has been fired,
Speaker 1: which she should have been a long time ago. Now
Speaker 1: we have to look at or Bruce Or bruce Or
Speaker 1: is less known to us because he doesn't do public interviews.
Speaker 1: We haven't really seen him in in fiery testimony or
Speaker 1: anything before Congress. He's been keeping a relatively low profile.
Speaker 1: His name comes up though time and again. In fact,
Speaker 1: my colleague here at the Hill, John Solomon, wrote a
Speaker 1: piece just last week about how Bruce Or, the number
Speaker 1: four person in the entire Department of Justice, an incredibly
Speaker 1: senior and powerful bureaucrat, was a true believer and Christopher
Speaker 1: Steele and Christopher Steele's mission of stopping Donald Trump, Or
Speaker 1: was having meetings with him, Or was bringing him in
Speaker 1: front of d o J, and then after he was
Speaker 1: fired by the FBI, Or wanted to bring him back.
Speaker 1: This just came out in the last week. I wanted
Speaker 1: to bring him back into the investigation, use his services again. Oh,
Speaker 1: come on, no one's got no, one's got sources like
Speaker 1: Chris Steele. Does you notice that they've stopped folks with
Speaker 1: the whole Oh, the Trump Tower thing was illegal. The
Speaker 1: Trump Tower they was illegal. You know why they've stopped
Speaker 1: with that because there's no way to make the Trump
Speaker 1: Tower meeting illegal without making Hillary's Christopher Steel Fusion GPS
Speaker 1: Russian fishing expedition also illegal, and while Hillary got to
Speaker 1: live by a separate set of rules on the emails.
Speaker 1: I don't think they'd get away with indicting Trump for
Speaker 1: taking a thing of value from foreigners, or wanting to
Speaker 1: take a thing which is not even a crime in
Speaker 1: and of it, that wouldn't even last constitutional scrutiny, and
Speaker 1: not then go after Hillary for doing the same thing
Speaker 1: from foreigners. Oh, but she paid them. For usually paying
Speaker 1: people to do things for you, that's illegal, is worse, right,
Speaker 1: But no, No, with Hillary, she paid for it hollow
Speaker 1: and paid it was expensive. So she's got all that
Speaker 1: going on. You're gonna see more of Bruce Or's name.
Speaker 1: I think he's the next one. I think he's gonna
Speaker 1: get fired. That's right. I think Bruce Or is getting
Speaker 1: get fired. His wife, Nellie Or, was a Fusion GPS employee. Right,
Speaker 1: these are not co incidences. We see the connections here,
Speaker 1: as I like to say, we see the connective tissue.
Speaker 1: It's very obvious that there was this cabal and they
Speaker 1: were working within the dj at FBI against Trump completely
Speaker 1: abusing their prosecutorial discretion, completely abusing their investigative authorities. And
Speaker 1: once you start to add on to this the State
Speaker 1: Department piece, and this is where I think we're gonna
Speaker 1: need a lot more answers. This is where I don't
Speaker 1: think we've seeing even a fraction of what really went on.
Speaker 1: Then you're gonna see what the what the full extent
Speaker 1: of this anti Trump collusion from within our own government
Speaker 1: really was. Hillary Clinton was allowed to run the State
Speaker 1: Department under Obama as as her own fiefdom. She brought
Speaker 1: in her own people, she you know, the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: President Obama himself was pretty hands off. He really gave
Speaker 1: not just US foreign policy to Hillary, which is part
Speaker 1: of why it's a disaster, but also gave the ability
Speaker 1: to really mold and shape the State Department as she
Speaker 1: saw fit. It was her place, it was her prerogative.
Speaker 1: And there's all this stuff. Now you're just seeing the
Speaker 1: early stages of it as well. Christopher Steele, he had
Speaker 1: connections to the State Department. Well you know who else
Speaker 1: was pushing stuff there. Don't believe. I do not believe
Speaker 1: for a second that Hillary Clinton, with all of her connections,
Speaker 1: all of her cronies and leave behind at State who
Speaker 1: were crying when she lost the election, who have been crying.
Speaker 1: These are adults, folks that show up to do a
Speaker 1: job for the United States, for the American people, and
Speaker 1: they cry at their desks. This has been reported because
Speaker 1: there's a thought about Trump because like it's such a
Speaker 1: bull here, like Trump's stuffs like may mean thing. Even
Speaker 1: I'm just like like why, like just he's just orange
Speaker 1: and THO mean, I hate it. Those kinds of people
Speaker 1: at the State Department would have had access to classified information,
Speaker 1: would have had contacts abroad, and would have had a
Speaker 1: very clear vested interest in doing everything they could just
Speaker 1: stopped Frump. So I think that's the and that's part
Speaker 1: of the urgency for the Democrats to take the House. Yes,
Speaker 1: I know they just want the House because they want
Speaker 1: to be back in power, but there's also a sense
Speaker 1: of that they need to get to this stuff. They
Speaker 1: need to get this done now, because I think that
Speaker 1: you're gonna find out a lot of the rocks that
Speaker 1: was at FBI and d o J also extended to
Speaker 1: the State Department. And that's why you've had think of
Speaker 1: all the defections you've had doesn't make sense, folks. These
Speaker 1: are bureaucrats. They're generally pretty you know, a lot of lethargic,
Speaker 1: punch in, punch out, folks, and you can get mad
Speaker 1: at me. I don't care. It's true. I spent a
Speaker 1: lot of time with people's State Department. I heard from
Speaker 1: a from a former ambassador who became a mentor of mine,
Speaker 1: very senior invassad the United's government. He said, if State
Speaker 1: Department employees spend as much time complaining about who was
Speaker 1: paying for their home different home expenses as they did
Speaker 1: on you know, if they spend as much time worried
Speaker 1: about that as as they would worry about U s
Speaker 1: Foreign policy, we would solve all of our problems in
Speaker 1: a heartbeat. A lot of naval gazing and a lot
Speaker 1: of self looking ice cream cone stuff going onto the
Speaker 1: State Department. Those people who have been in for you know,
Speaker 1: in some cases twenty year, they're all gonna leave because
Speaker 1: they can't handle Trump. It's not like Trump is calling
Speaker 1: all the shots at the embassies abroad. What what's the
Speaker 1: what's the problem. I think some of them left because
Speaker 1: they had to get out of government. It would be
Speaker 1: easier to keep a low profile, keep their heads down
Speaker 1: and hopefully stay out of the spotlight if information comes
Speaker 1: out that the State Department was actually also trying to
Speaker 1: push this narrative to reporters from Christopher Steele and and
Speaker 1: working to undermine President Trump. I think that there were
Speaker 1: aspects of State that we're also You've seen some reporting
Speaker 1: on this, but I think it goes a lot deeper.
Speaker 1: I really do. Oh what do you think you think
Speaker 1: the the CIA director is like a hashtag resistance lunatic? Okay,
Speaker 1: formercy I director Brennan, do you think that there was
Speaker 1: nobody at State who was like that? Come on, they
Speaker 1: live for this stuff, picking up foreign rumors about the
Speaker 1: incoming Republican president that they could use to trash him.
Speaker 1: Keep an eye on that one. We've got to get
Speaker 1: into this um this protest from over the weekend. I've
Speaker 1: got a lot to share you on this because I
Speaker 1: was there and there was so much dishonesty and the
Speaker 1: reporting over this. There's so much, Uh, I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't what do you call it when somebody only gives
Speaker 1: you a part of a story. Is that fake news?
Speaker 1: Is it? Is it just dishonest news? Because they were
Speaker 1: very clearly editorializing with what they showed you and what
Speaker 1: they didn't from this protest over the weekend, And and
Speaker 1: it is worth asking how it is that a protest
Speaker 1: with twenty people scheduled becomes a national media event with
Speaker 1: five different police agencies coordinating to get those twenty people
Speaker 1: into Washington, d C. With every news organization I can
Speaker 1: think of sending reporters to cover it. Hm hm hm hmm.
Speaker 1: Maybe we should look into this some more, and we
Speaker 1: will eight four or four to eight to five, eight
Speaker 1: four four, nine hundred buck teams. Stay with me. We'll
Speaker 1: be right back. I wanted to move on from the
Speaker 1: Struck firing, but I just I got a note here
Speaker 1: for your friends that he's already got an anti Trump
Speaker 1: Twitter account going. This is Peter Struck now formerly of
Speaker 1: the FBI before they kicked his butt out the door,
Speaker 1: and he's gotta go fund me page seeking a hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty geeze grand because he says he's legal bills.
Speaker 1: You know, Andy McCabe set up a go fund me page,
Speaker 1: got a half million dollars. You see, folks, being hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance does pay the bills. What have I always told
Speaker 1: you about the left? They're they're smartest policy. They're like
Speaker 1: the the Democrats are like the Lanisters. You can hate them,
Speaker 1: you know, you can't trust them, but they always pay
Speaker 1: their debts, not the national debt, but they always pay
Speaker 1: their their debts. Two people. Uh, And that's a very
Speaker 1: powerful thing. If you go down on the field of
Speaker 1: ideological battle in service of the Democrat Party, you will
Speaker 1: be taken care of. If you are a Republican or
Speaker 1: a conservative and you go down, whether they destroy your business,
Speaker 1: they destroy your reputation, or they throw you in prison
Speaker 1: for some trumped up nonsense. It's kind of like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, maybe he did something wrong. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I mean, Conservatives, we are we need to
Speaker 1: call each other out on this. We are whimps over
Speaker 1: this one. We do not protect our own Ca've got
Speaker 1: a half a million dollars after lying multiple times a
Speaker 1: getting fired from the FBI. People just gave him money
Speaker 1: because they love him so much. Why because they know
Speaker 1: that he hates Trump. They know he's an anti Trumpster.
Speaker 1: Same thing with Struck. But I wonder how long it
Speaker 1: gonna before Struck producer, Mike, you want to give me
Speaker 1: odds on this? How long before Struck is on either
Speaker 1: c or MSNBC, like, I was just doing the best
Speaker 1: icon to stop Trump. What do you think about twenty minutes? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think yeah, maybe tonight, maybe by the time we
Speaker 1: finished this broadcast struggle or to be the hundreds mold
Speaker 1: my countries. We're trying to throw in loction. Um, we've
Speaker 1: got to talk about this Antifa stuff from yesterday. I
Speaker 1: saw it, folks. Here here's a short version. The media
Speaker 1: is lying to you about what really happened there, because
Speaker 1: I saw it. He's holding the line for America, buck Sexton,
Speaker 1: his back. The phone is without that bad you have
Speaker 1: to have without that. That's just a little bit of
Speaker 1: what was going on at that so called anti fascism
Speaker 1: protests or anti hate that's really what they like to
Speaker 1: call an anti hate protest. I went over there because
Speaker 1: I live in the swamp. Now I'm technically a swamp creature,
Speaker 1: so I wanted to spend some time and see what's
Speaker 1: really going on. And wow, my friends, it was a remarkable,
Speaker 1: a remarkable example of just how deep the media bias goes.
Speaker 1: How they are pushing narratives not based in the facts
Speaker 1: or what's going on, but based on what they want
Speaker 1: and what they want the facts to be and it
Speaker 1: was so preposterous reading because I was there and I
Speaker 1: was seeing the media coverage a lot of love Trump's
Speaker 1: hate and no fascism, and we just want to come together,
Speaker 1: And you know, I went through. Originally was thirty four
Speaker 1: and then a forty three photo array that the Washington
Speaker 1: Post had put together that was kind of its official
Speaker 1: slide show of the protest. Forty three photos, folks, Not
Speaker 1: a single not a single photo that in that array
Speaker 1: dealt dealt with the signs that were all over the place,
Speaker 1: calling for revolution, calling for overthrowing the system in the
Speaker 1: American government, saying that America was never great, saying that
Speaker 1: all cops are racist. By the way, that's a chance.
Speaker 1: Producer might grabbed that one. I want to I've got
Speaker 1: We've got more chance all cops are racist. That was
Speaker 1: a chance. That was a chance in Charlottesville as well
Speaker 1: as in Washington, d C. Over the weekend. So that
Speaker 1: was clearly planned. And this was thousands and thousands of
Speaker 1: people versus a little tiny group of twenty white nationalist losers.
Speaker 1: That's what they are there, losers. They want attention. This
Speaker 1: is the equivalent, folks of the media holding a massive
Speaker 1: uh counter you know, being covering a massive counter rally
Speaker 1: and being there there were there were a hundred to
Speaker 1: one reporters to white nationalists yesterday. I'm not even exaggerating.
Speaker 1: I mean there are reporters everywhere. See them all at
Speaker 1: their own mic phones and everything else. Imagine. I mean
Speaker 1: you could do this with any number of groups. You
Speaker 1: could do this with with the Westboro Baptist Church and
Speaker 1: just give them blanket flood the zone media coverage and say,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, look at this Christian sect that's overtaking America,
Speaker 1: that that is saying that, you know, troops are dying
Speaker 1: because of of homosexuality in this country. They could do that,
Speaker 1: but that would be editorial malpractice because the Westboro Baptist
Speaker 1: Church is a bunch of idiotic losers and they're not important,
Speaker 1: and they're not powerful, and they should not be given
Speaker 1: a bigger platform in the media than the news warrants. Right.
Speaker 1: And there's there was another. I think they're called the
Speaker 1: real Israelites. I used to see them in New York
Speaker 1: sometimes they were They were black guys who would stand
Speaker 1: on the street and read from read from the Bible
Speaker 1: and yell about uh, you know, the white man is
Speaker 1: the devil and all this stuff, and that they had
Speaker 1: they had a show for a while, I think on
Speaker 1: public access idiots clowns, not to be taken seriously. But
Speaker 1: there were a few dozen of them, and they were
Speaker 1: pretty well known in New York City. But you you
Speaker 1: wouldn't act like there were some national scourge, like we're
Speaker 1: we're about to fall into the anarchy of the real
Speaker 1: Jews are Black Movement or whatever I think they're called
Speaker 1: the true Israelites. Mike, do you know what I'm talking about?
Speaker 1: You ever see these guys? Yeah? Right that, Yeah, they're
Speaker 1: they're they're a thing that people know about. I wouldn't
Speaker 1: do that. And yet what happened yesterday was you had
Speaker 1: all of this talk about, oh, the we have to
Speaker 1: commemorate the anniversary of Charlottesville, in the rise of the
Speaker 1: alt right and white nationalism and all this stuff, and
Speaker 1: you got a handful of moron show up. No one
Speaker 1: knows what that, No one cares what they're saying, No
Speaker 1: one even really knows what they're saying. I had a
Speaker 1: hard time finding just so I could see what they're doing,
Speaker 1: the white nationalist pen because they were penned in uh
Speaker 1: and with with huge police presence around them, and you
Speaker 1: just think, you know, what is this, What is the
Speaker 1: psychology of the press, what is their their political bias
Speaker 1: such that they think this is so worthy of massive
Speaker 1: media coverage, that the that the white nationalists were so
Speaker 1: worthy of massive media coverage. And I would just add
Speaker 1: into this keep in mind is you know they do
Speaker 1: this with David Duke too every election cycle. That one
Speaker 1: of the favorite gotcha games that Democrats like to play
Speaker 1: is asking a Republican do you denounce David Duke? You don't.
Speaker 1: You never see David Duke, and otherwise you never hear
Speaker 1: about this guy. You know, he's just a racist clown
Speaker 1: and a loser. But they'll they'll try him back out.
Speaker 1: And even if you say, yeah, I denounced him, Well,
Speaker 1: why do you have to denounce David Duke? That seems
Speaker 1: kind of weird. Why are we even talking about him
Speaker 1: on my show? That's what? Why do you wow David Duke? Huh?
Speaker 1: So you're denouncing David Duke? You Republican Canada. You see
Speaker 1: they try to they try to do are do you
Speaker 1: up with that? If you're a Republican. It's a it's
Speaker 1: just such a smear tactic. But unfortunately with a lot
Speaker 1: of idiot libs, it works the same thing with white nationalism.
Speaker 1: They all right, I've been warning for a long time,
Speaker 1: and they were there trying to create a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of fear around the alt right and then beyond that, uh,
Speaker 1: to create this perception of the alt right as what
Speaker 1: all conservative media is turning into. And it's just fearmongering.
Speaker 1: It's fearmongering because otherwise they can't win the argument from
Speaker 1: the American people. Otherwise that you know, the Democrats will
Speaker 1: have to actually come up with policies and solutions, and
Speaker 1: they don't have that. So what do they offer you, Well,
Speaker 1: there's a a terrible, terrible thing happening in this country
Speaker 1: called the rise of the alt right. And who gets
Speaker 1: to determine what is all right? Who is all right? Oh?
Speaker 1: The media? Isn't that? Isn't that clever? Isn't that useful
Speaker 1: for them? So, as I was saying, there were no
Speaker 1: there were no media outlets that were showing the signs
Speaker 1: that were anti cop, viciously anti cop. Will get into
Speaker 1: the anti cop computing this in a moment. No signs
Speaker 1: about the revolution, and you know, what's the solution revolution?
Speaker 1: What do we do with the system? Overthrow it? Although
Speaker 1: that second one I am paraphrasing because there's was catchier
Speaker 1: than that. But I heard them saying this. I have
Speaker 1: audio them saying um and and I want to also
Speaker 1: note that you know this, this whole storyline, there's so
Speaker 1: much going on here. You know, Antifa hates cops and
Speaker 1: not just the Antifa guys wearing all the black and everything,
Speaker 1: because they were there and they threw some smoke bombs
Speaker 1: and they and they hit people. But the whole protest
Speaker 1: yesterday was supposed to be opposing white national supposing Nazis
Speaker 1: and fascism, so really it was a counter protest, but
Speaker 1: it was an Antifa protest. Were with some of the
Speaker 1: street paramilitaries of Antifa there, and they're a little black
Speaker 1: get ups, you know, with the masks and the head
Speaker 1: to toe gear and everything. They were all black hand
Speaker 1: to toe. Makes it harder that they think it makes
Speaker 1: them look cool, but also makes them harder to identify
Speaker 1: when they engage in vandalism and destroy property. But you know,
Speaker 1: journalists have been talking so much recently about how one,
Speaker 1: of course they're indispensable, right, I mean they're the you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: sure we we need like the Navy and the Marines
Speaker 1: and the army, but like we really need CNN. How
Speaker 1: else will we survive as a republic, sir without CNN.
Speaker 1: I think we'll be okay, thanks though. Um. But they
Speaker 1: they've been talking about Trump's rhetoric and saying that it inspired,
Speaker 1: that it makes them fearful, it makes them afraid. And
Speaker 1: what I would just want to point out here is
Speaker 1: that there were journalists, just like in Portland a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks ago, there were journalists who were attacked physically brutalized,
Speaker 1: their cameras ripped out of their hands, their gear destroyed
Speaker 1: in Charlottesville and in ec by left wing so called
Speaker 1: anti fascist protesters, anti hate protesters no less, and journalists
Speaker 1: just pretend like it didn't happen. For the most part,
Speaker 1: no coverage of it at all. Not not. I mean
Speaker 1: that the Washington Post, as I said, their photo array
Speaker 1: was so dishonest, and I'm not guessing I saw, okay,
Speaker 1: they were picking out the signs that were specifically anti
Speaker 1: Trump and seemed a little more hippie ish and you know,
Speaker 1: anti hate, and forgetting all the signs of radical progressive, authoritarian,
Speaker 1: violence inducing craziness. Because there was a lot of that stuff, folks.
Speaker 1: You did not have to look very far for it. It
Speaker 1: It was all over the place. And they just don't
Speaker 1: want to talk about it. They just didn't want the
Speaker 1: American people to see what was really going on there
Speaker 1: because they liked to play this game of the crazies
Speaker 1: are on the right. The real crazies are all on
Speaker 1: the right. It's just not true. And it's not fair
Speaker 1: that they take this approach. It's not fair that they
Speaker 1: present the news narrative in this way. Um they attack reporters.
Speaker 1: In fact, here we have audio of of one of these.
Speaker 1: Remember all the violence all came from the left wing
Speaker 1: over the over this past weekend, The arrests all came
Speaker 1: from the all involved left wing activists, the really nasty
Speaker 1: cursing and screaming and left wing activists. Based on what
Speaker 1: I saw and what's been reported, I haven't seen anything otherwise.
Speaker 1: Is that the sense you got from you know, they
Speaker 1: kept saying, oh, it kind of fizzled, fizzle, let's just
Speaker 1: move on. Oh no, No, I don't want to just
Speaker 1: move on, because we saw what the left really is
Speaker 1: this past weekend. We saw who they really are. Was
Speaker 1: there a lot of support where there were there thousands
Speaker 1: of of white nationalists gathered together and getting a lot
Speaker 1: of you know, getting a lot of play from conservative
Speaker 1: media and everything else about all. Look, no, twenty or
Speaker 1: so idiots at most, you can get twenty idiots who
Speaker 1: believe anything, who want to go protests somewhere. This is
Speaker 1: completely insignificant. But thousands and thousands of people proclaiming that
Speaker 1: they are against hate, who are screaming in in police
Speaker 1: officers faces, calling them racists and murderers, who were spinning
Speaker 1: on police officers, who were attacking people they disagree with
Speaker 1: and attacking journalists. And I thought journalists like Jim Accostas
Speaker 1: don't worried like I was at a Trump rally and
Speaker 1: I felt unsafe. It's like, oh my gosh, there was
Speaker 1: like a woman in her sixties with a maga hat on,
Speaker 1: and she was so scary, and we're all supposed to go,
Speaker 1: oh no, the first amendments under a thought, what are
Speaker 1: we gonna do? You know what is really under assault
Speaker 1: journalists when they get too close to anti fascist protesters.
Speaker 1: They're really undressolved. Here's some audio of it played fourteen
Speaker 1: what's that? That's right? Attack that that you kind of
Speaker 1: got the sense they attacked a camera, attacked the journalists,
Speaker 1: called them snitches, you see, because they don't really want
Speaker 1: the country to know about their left wing heroics, their
Speaker 1: left wing self styled activism, because the people, the American people,
Speaker 1: would reject it because it's it's it's moronic, it's grotesque.
Speaker 1: This is the modern Democratic Party. Though, folks, they believe
Speaker 1: this stuff. They believe that a political revolution is necessary,
Speaker 1: if not an all out revolution. They believe that the
Speaker 1: cops are racist who murder black men for sport. They
Speaker 1: believe that Trump is actually part of a uh Aryan
Speaker 1: nation Russian conspiracy to take over the country. I mean,
Speaker 1: they have mainstreamed this crazy and they wonder why we
Speaker 1: don't get into all, oh my gosh, Trump lied about
Speaker 1: what he had for breakfast yesterday. What are we gonna do?
Speaker 1: But I really want to dig into I wrote about
Speaker 1: this today on the Hill dot com Why do the
Speaker 1: anti fascist protesters hate the cops so much? Or I
Speaker 1: should have said, really, a better title would have been
Speaker 1: out to think about? Why do the anti hate protesters
Speaker 1: hate the cops so much? That would have been a
Speaker 1: better title. I just realized that now, damn it, buck uh,
Speaker 1: and I have some answers for you on that when
Speaker 1: we come back, stay with me, you whatever. That was
Speaker 1: all directed at cops, folks, the police who were at
Speaker 1: the protest ensuring the First Amendment rights of all people there.
Speaker 1: That was all directed at them. I saw a woman
Speaker 1: walk up to a line of police officers. Uh, but
Speaker 1: not that it matters, but a diverse group of police
Speaker 1: officers and just yell fu fu fu in their faces.
Speaker 1: What's that all about, folks? What does that have to
Speaker 1: do with being against hate in Charlottesville? What does that
Speaker 1: have to do with being against Confederate monuments or against
Speaker 1: the altread or whatever it may be. And I asked
Speaker 1: the question in a piece today, why do the anti
Speaker 1: fascist protesters hate the police so much? And it's because
Speaker 1: this is the truth of the left. They are violent,
Speaker 1: they are deranged. They cannot handle the world as it is,
Speaker 1: and they cannot deal with a successful Trump president presidency,
Speaker 1: which is what is going on right now. They just
Speaker 1: can't deal with it. They just can't deal with it.
Speaker 1: I saw it, and it was a prominent part of
Speaker 1: the protest group yesterday. They're marching around with anti police signs,
Speaker 1: anti police banners, And why didn't that Kennedy coverage? All
Speaker 1: cops are racist? That's what the marchis saying. You know,
Speaker 1: my uncle's a cop lifelong now retired. I worked with cops.
Speaker 1: I know a lot of law enforce and listen to
Speaker 1: this program. Why should you all have to sit around
Speaker 1: and just listen to that in silence? I don't mean
Speaker 1: the ones who were there, they were just doing their jobs. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they have to take it, Okay, they at the first Amendment.
Speaker 1: I get it. But all the rest of us have
Speaker 1: to pretend that the the only bad guys. This is
Speaker 1: what they want you to believe. The only bad guys
Speaker 1: were the twenty people who were in that protected Penden
Speaker 1: Square yesterday. Who were the white nationalists? What about the
Speaker 1: guys who were wearing black and headed toe who are
Speaker 1: attacking reporters? What about the people that were marching screaming
Speaker 1: all cops are racists and the racist murders are they?
Speaker 1: Is that a positive message? Is that good? Is that fair?
Speaker 1: Where was the media coverage? I saw it, I have photos,
Speaker 1: I have audio. Did you see that covered in the
Speaker 1: New York Times? Did you see that cover in the
Speaker 1: Washington Post was CNN spending. Oh no, no, those are fizzle.
Speaker 1: It didn't really, not really happen yesterday. It was a
Speaker 1: peaceful protest. Auntie, Hey, let's move on. They're liars, folks,
Speaker 1: They're liars. They're trying to pander to their own audiences
Speaker 1: and also pander to their sense of progressive, left wing superiority,
Speaker 1: and so they just do a little bit of editing.
Speaker 1: You know. They didn't want to give you the protest
Speaker 1: as it was. They wanted to give you the protests
Speaker 1: as they would like to pretend it was. But I
Speaker 1: was there, so I know what was going on. And
Speaker 1: people were making a mockery of themselves, thousands of them
Speaker 1: making a mockery of themselves. And yeah, they were a
Speaker 1: bunch of idiot white nationalists too, but there weren't thousands
Speaker 1: of them. Buck Sextonssion decoding the news and disseminating information
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistakes, American, You're a great
Speaker 1: American again. This is the Buck Sexton shown no. Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the show, my friends. Great to have you
Speaker 1: here with me in the Freedom Hut. So I wasn't
Speaker 1: the only conservative who was running around yesterday trying to
Speaker 1: figure out what was going on at this rally. Our
Speaker 1: buddy from last week's Freedom Hunt podcast, Benny Johnson, was
Speaker 1: also out there. I want to we we got Benny
Speaker 1: actually joining us via phone in the second, But first
Speaker 1: I want to play for you some of the interview
Speaker 1: that he was able to do. Some of the interviews
Speaker 1: he was able to do with some of these. Remember
Speaker 1: these are quote anti hate protesters, folks. That's how they
Speaker 1: were being described by all the mainstream media, all the
Speaker 1: big j serious fancy journos. This is what, this is what.
Speaker 1: That's what they were saying. And this is what Benny
Speaker 1: was able to pick up. Play clip ten, would you do?
Speaker 1: I dun't Trump shout up at the crop, hurd him,
Speaker 1: murder him for the people. Oh he's America's Caesar except Ted,
Speaker 1: So you gotta take him down Trump. True, it came
Speaker 1: down to it, and it was a group effort. You'd
Speaker 1: have to do him like a duct and you come up.
Speaker 1: Let's do that? Was that? I get a tatoo, come up?
Speaker 1: I would come up. You wouldn't. Yeah, I will select
Speaker 1: the show him Son that like proof. Yeah, if the
Speaker 1: president shot up this march, what will you do? Sir,
Speaker 1: but that on his legs down here, I would tell
Speaker 1: his wife could go home and for him to get
Speaker 1: on his ja get yeah, and Anti Hate March. You
Speaker 1: got people there that have said some stuff I think
Speaker 1: also might cross some legal lines, folks. And we've got
Speaker 1: Bennie Johnson of The Daily Caller with us. Now. It's
Speaker 1: been like Benny pelluting the Freedom Hunt lately. Benny. Good
Speaker 1: to have you back. Thank you. Yeah, man, So I
Speaker 1: was telling the folks before, I just took some video
Speaker 1: and some photos. I did not interview folks because I
Speaker 1: don't really know how to do that on my iPhone.
Speaker 1: You've got to show me some of these uh these
Speaker 1: uh these ninja skills that you have. Um, but what
Speaker 1: was it like for you? I mean, what was the
Speaker 1: craziest stuff that you saw that you were told that
Speaker 1: you picked up? And and why do you think the
Speaker 1: Washington Post only showed people with like garlands of flowers
Speaker 1: around their necks or whatever with anti hate signs? Right?
Speaker 1: You would you would think that, well, you gotta speak
Speaker 1: up into your phone, buddy. We can't hear you. Sorry
Speaker 1: about that, Yeah, now we can hear you. Go ahead, buddy, Okay.
Speaker 1: So you would think that if you read you would
Speaker 1: think that this was like the Beatles needing the Maha
Speaker 1: Rishi of a march. If you were to actually read
Speaker 1: the headlines of CNN and Washington Post, no seemed to
Speaker 1: understand the fact that there was a paramilitary force that
Speaker 1: was embedded within these progressive protesters, and this paramilitary force
Speaker 1: was armed. They were members of Black Block Antifa, they
Speaker 1: are members of anarchist groups. But ultimately they were dangerous.
Speaker 1: They wanted to commit violent acts. They did commit violent
Speaker 1: acts against police. They were arrested by the dozen And
Speaker 1: what I wanted to reveal was how they would have
Speaker 1: treated the president where the President to have shown his
Speaker 1: face at this march. Of course, you and I both
Speaker 1: know that's not something that was going to happen. However,
Speaker 1: what would they do if they met President Trump? And
Speaker 1: volunteering to me, Buck, I'm not tricking them into saying,
Speaker 1: do you want to kill the President? I had nothing
Speaker 1: to do with the sort they volunteered to me Buck
Speaker 1: that they wanted to murder President Trump. Not just murder him,
Speaker 1: they wanted to kill him like Gaddafi was killed. Uh,
Speaker 1: when the Libyan leader was taken out and and beaten
Speaker 1: and torture and then killed in the streets. Uh So
Speaker 1: what I chose to reveal here, what I attempted to reveal,
Speaker 1: and they gave it to me on a silver platter,
Speaker 1: was the true extremist and violent, ultra violent element within
Speaker 1: these quote unquote peaceful anti hate protests. Now, I saw
Speaker 1: signs that were anti cop. I saw signs about revolution.
Speaker 1: I heard chance that were all cops A, racists overthrow
Speaker 1: the country, all this stuff, and Benny very little of actually,
Speaker 1: none of that made it into the photo arrays s
Speaker 1: on the New York Times, a photo arrays picked for
Speaker 1: the Washington Post. It's almost like they were sanitizing the
Speaker 1: left wing loons who didn't turn up in twenty and
Speaker 1: numbers like twenty or thirty like the white nationalist morons did.
Speaker 1: There were leftist loons in the hundreds, probably more like
Speaker 1: in the low thousands at that rally. Yes, correct, Yes,
Speaker 1: And how do they get away with this? I mean,
Speaker 1: how do they feel, you know, the Washington Post in
Speaker 1: these places that they think that we're not there, they
Speaker 1: think that we can't see what's really going on. Well,
Speaker 1: such a confirmation bias. So if you're if you're protesting
Speaker 1: Nazis that means you must be good, right, But historically
Speaker 1: that's not even historically accurate. That many people who protested
Speaker 1: Nazism or national socialism in Germany were communists and they
Speaker 1: were violent. They are cautlitarian, they're fascist. Fascists use violence
Speaker 1: and political intimidation to get their to to get ends,
Speaker 1: to silence speech, to compel speech of their political opponents,
Speaker 1: and to intimidate them. And and then both groups use
Speaker 1: that it's not both, and it's either or. The antifa
Speaker 1: leftist progressives that are ultra violent there scum and the
Speaker 1: white supremacists are equally scum. And it's okay to say
Speaker 1: they're both scum because they both used similar tactics, they've
Speaker 1: both proven capable of violence, and they both have a
Speaker 1: worldview that is not American now. But did anyone, by
Speaker 1: the way, threaten you or were you ever feeling like
Speaker 1: this might go south for you? Yeah? So Daily Caller,
Speaker 1: so other people on my team, other Daily Caller reporters
Speaker 1: were uh, were found out to be to be. No
Speaker 1: one was doing this subversively, right, but sometimes they asked
Speaker 1: outlet you're with And if people are familiar with the
Speaker 1: Daily Caller, they know it was founded by Tucker Carlson.
Speaker 1: They need they associate Tucker Carlson Fox News. That's all
Speaker 1: you need to do. And so members of our team
Speaker 1: were hits, had their cameras pushed away. Uh, we're surrounded
Speaker 1: by groups. Uh. In the piece that I did, one
Speaker 1: of the men who said he wanted to f up
Speaker 1: President Trump had a large knife, a large switchblade down
Speaker 1: the front of his plant pants easily visible. There were
Speaker 1: bats with these masked Antifa members. They're wearing black masks
Speaker 1: over their face. There again a para military force. They
Speaker 1: have military grade equipment. They have helmets, metal helmets on um,
Speaker 1: black pants, black military boots. These I mean, it's it's
Speaker 1: a it's a it's a scary thing to be uh
Speaker 1: encircled by a group of people like this. Benny has
Speaker 1: a Secret Service, as a secret service got involved because
Speaker 1: you have people on video who are standing there and
Speaker 1: saying that they want to they want to there, they
Speaker 1: want to assassinate the presidents. What I seem to hear
Speaker 1: them say, am I missing something? The Secret Service was
Speaker 1: on the phone with me for approximately fifteen minutes today
Speaker 1: asking about any details that I have on the people,
Speaker 1: saying they want to assassinate the president, and the Secret
Speaker 1: Services also confirmed to me that they are aware of
Speaker 1: these threats and that they are opening a Secret Service
Speaker 1: investigation into these threats. Do you feel like, Benny, they
Speaker 1: the decision was made very quickly yesterday, not just to
Speaker 1: sanitize the coverage of the looney left at the protest
Speaker 1: and the dangerous left at the protest, but also just
Speaker 1: how quickly we've moved on from this. I mean, the
Speaker 1: the Amrosa book is not nearly as interesting as I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people are pretending it is today
Speaker 1: because that's the only other story that the Democrats have
Speaker 1: to run with to try to block this one out right,
Speaker 1: So buck you so you've got we got a minute
Speaker 1: before we got to run and run a break, Benny,
Speaker 1: go ahead, yep. So So here's because because the only
Speaker 1: person who would look bad if this was fairly covered
Speaker 1: is the left, you're gonna have mute. The mainstream media
Speaker 1: is gonna be mute. They're not gonna say anything, they're
Speaker 1: not gonna cover it. They're gonna just pass along. Bryan's
Speaker 1: Delker had a hilarious tween last night calling them anti
Speaker 1: hate groups. Well, these anti hate groups were attacking journalists,
Speaker 1: they were attacking us, they were saying they wanted to
Speaker 1: murder their present, and now the anti hate groups are
Speaker 1: being investigated by the Secret Service. Those are the facts,
Speaker 1: and it's incredible how quickly the mainstream media moved along.
Speaker 1: You and I both remember the tea party. All it
Speaker 1: takes is one one imbecile with a silly sign at
Speaker 1: a party rally, and that's that for months. That's right.
Speaker 1: And then, by the way, this is the real bias.
Speaker 1: It's not that they don't cover things, it's how they
Speaker 1: it's how CNN covers things. It's how mussy Coms MSMBC
Speaker 1: covers things. Benny, great work man, Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Appreciate you setting around that audio for me and others
Speaker 1: to use. Benny Caller the Daily Caller a Penny Johnson
Speaker 1: or Benny Caller Benny Johnson of the Daily call everybody,
Speaker 1: Betty my friend. Good to talk to you. Team. We'll
Speaker 1: be right back. Whether you have a small business or
Speaker 1: you're involved with a huge company. Maybe you're in the
Speaker 1: HR department, maybe you're the CEO. You know that the
Speaker 1: people you bring in your human capital are essential to
Speaker 1: your success. But you've got to know if these people
Speaker 1: are who they say they are and how they represent
Speaker 1: themselves is accurate. Right. You need somebody who can do
Speaker 1: that work for you quickly because that's gonna be essential
Speaker 1: for your future as a company. And that's where Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network comes in. Global Verification Network is the only
Speaker 1: dual certified and veteran owned background investigation and vetting company.
Speaker 1: They're here in Chicago, folks. I know the CEO, Mark Buckman, personally.
Speaker 1: He's a great guy. He cares very much about what
Speaker 1: he's doing and about showing the utmost integrity and professionalism
Speaker 1: with every case that they handle. Call them and tell
Speaker 1: them the buck sex and sent you eight seven seven
Speaker 1: six nine five seven nine. That's eight seven seven six
Speaker 1: nine five one one seven nine. Or go to my
Speaker 1: g VN dot com. That's my g VN dot com.
Speaker 1: That's what needs to happen to the Party of Trump.
Speaker 1: Leased to burn to the ground is a total and
Speaker 1: complete violation of their oaths of office to defend the
Speaker 1: Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.
Speaker 1: You see the Republican Party now sadly a portion of
Speaker 1: its base moving closer and closer to Russia. Left to
Speaker 1: their own devices. They would just let Russia run wild
Speaker 1: throughout our democracy and throughout the democracies of our allies.
Speaker 1: Should Congressman Nonez be removed from his chairmanship of the
Speaker 1: House Intelligence Committee, Absolutely, he should have been removed a
Speaker 1: year ago when it was very clear that he was
Speaker 1: not working in the interest of Congress. If you look
Speaker 1: at Devin Noon, as you look at some members of
Speaker 1: the Freedom Caucus, they remind me of the people that
Speaker 1: we conservatives used to call useful idiots. So much bad
Speaker 1: analysis when it comes to Russia, folks, it's really almost
Speaker 1: hard to keep up with it. The Republicans are now
Speaker 1: the party of Russia. You know what would have been
Speaker 1: just as easy to say for a long time that
Speaker 1: the Democrats were the party of al Qaeda, because they
Speaker 1: were doing a lot of things that made al Qaeda
Speaker 1: feel a lot better about themselves, including bashing books during
Speaker 1: a time of war, including uh making a huge deal
Speaker 1: out of every misstep in the war, whether it was
Speaker 1: Abu grab or water boarding or all this stuff. The
Speaker 1: Democrats were very useful to al Qaeda for a long time.
Speaker 1: And oh, before people start running around saying, but Obama
Speaker 1: took out Osama Uh, that was only possible because of
Speaker 1: programs put in place long before Obama came into office.
Speaker 1: Part one, Part two. Do you know that they did
Speaker 1: everything that they could to make it seem like the
Speaker 1: information which has been released, by the way, a lot
Speaker 1: of it has been released from the Osama bin Laden raid.
Speaker 1: They really lied to the public about it. And I
Speaker 1: don't just mean the media, I mean the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: They were misleading the public to make it seem like,
Speaker 1: you know, Osama was this uh was this figure that
Speaker 1: was you know, irrelevant and no idea what was going on.
Speaker 1: It wasn't true. It wasn't true. Uh. They a didn't
Speaker 1: want people to realize. I think just how much gee
Speaker 1: hottest activity was really going on and the role that
Speaker 1: Osama had in pushing strategies around the world with our
Speaker 1: g hottest enemies. But yeah, you could have very just
Speaker 1: if they're going to say the Republicans of the Party
Speaker 1: of Russia, we could very easily say that the Democrats
Speaker 1: were the party of ISIS and al Qaeda. And when
Speaker 1: you look at the actual policies that are in place
Speaker 1: now on Russia, as I've been saying, and I know
Speaker 1: I don't like repeating myself on the show, I don't
Speaker 1: want to waste any of your time ever. Um, that's
Speaker 1: a mandate that I feel that I make the best
Speaker 1: use of every minute that you give me of your
Speaker 1: time every day on this show. But they keep saying
Speaker 1: this on Russia because they're hoping that the repetition itself
Speaker 1: will overcome the reality and that people will start to
Speaker 1: believe this, that if they chant and bleat and yell
Speaker 1: and cry enough that republic Akins are the party of Russia, um,
Speaker 1: that people will start to really believe it. And I
Speaker 1: think that has been happening. Meanwhile, in what way is
Speaker 1: that the case? What are we doing that Russia likes?
Speaker 1: Were sanctioning Russians more than ever. We've expelled Russians, We've
Speaker 1: shut down Russian consulates in this country, We've shut down
Speaker 1: Russian facilities. We've blown up hundreds of Russian paramilitaries in
Speaker 1: Syria and didn't think twice about it. We've sent sniper
Speaker 1: rifles and anti tank missiles to the Ukrainian military to
Speaker 1: fight against Russian paramilitaries in eastern Ukraine where exactly okay,
Speaker 1: because Trump won't just lay down and take it on.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, Russia through the election, which is a preposterous,
Speaker 1: a ridiculous assertion for which there there's this tiny, little,
Speaker 1: little little grain of possibility in the sense that you know, if,
Speaker 1: as I keep telling you, if there's one fraudulent vote
Speaker 1: cast in an election, was their voter fraud in that
Speaker 1: present noential election? The answers, yes, do you have to
Speaker 1: say every time you say who won that election? Well,
Speaker 1: there was voter fart in that election. There was voter
Speaker 1: fart in that election. It's a propaganda trick that they're
Speaker 1: engaged in with Russia. And the interference, well there was interference,
Speaker 1: very little, and it didn't do anything. And it's really
Speaker 1: a slight against the American people that the Democrats are
Speaker 1: so willing to believe that we were fooled, that the
Speaker 1: Trump voters were fooled. I wasn't fooled by anything. The
Speaker 1: options were Trump or Hillary. I don't care what the
Speaker 1: Russians are putting on Facebook. I'm on team Trump. Amazing,
Speaker 1: go to see all this happening. You know, that's they
Speaker 1: they speak about Trump and they say he's a useful
Speaker 1: idiot or other people to supporting him on Russia, useful
Speaker 1: idiots and Joe Scarborough's really one of the worst TV
Speaker 1: analysts around right now. I'm sorry. You don't get to
Speaker 1: go from being Trump's brunch buddy to being hashtag resistance
Speaker 1: hero in a year when it's clearly just a function
Speaker 1: of professional self interest. That that's why Scarborough switched switched teams,
Speaker 1: and have anybody take you seriously at least on an
Speaker 1: ethical level, on on a level of of intellectual honesty.
Speaker 1: And the guy's a clown. But they're saying all of this. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: this is what this is what Trump is up to
Speaker 1: play a ten and nineteen. But if conflict is forced
Speaker 1: upon us, we will fight and we will win. Betta
Speaker 1: believe in generals the other guys. We're powered by the
Speaker 1: unstoppable force of the United States Army. Very special. We
Speaker 1: will replace aging tanks, aging planes, and ships with the
Speaker 1: most advanced and lethal technology ever developed, and hopefully will
Speaker 1: be so strong we'll never have to use it. But
Speaker 1: if we ever did, nobody has a chance. After years
Speaker 1: of devastating cuts, we're now rebuilding our military like we
Speaker 1: never have before ever because we know that too survive
Speaker 1: and having that survival of our freedom, it depends upon
Speaker 1: the might of our military, and no enemy on Earth
Speaker 1: can match the strength, courage, and skill of the American
Speaker 1: Army and the American Armed forces. Nobody's even close. They
Speaker 1: never will be. You know, a president who speaks that
Speaker 1: way doesn't strike normal Americans who are just listening to
Speaker 1: and paying attention to what's going on as somebody who
Speaker 1: is favorable to or or helping Russia. A president that
Speaker 1: speaks about his country that way and does it without
Speaker 1: feeling like it's forced. I mean, you know that Trump
Speaker 1: does respect the military. You know that Trump really believes
Speaker 1: in US power abroad, Yes, to protect us and also
Speaker 1: to pursue US interests and and not you know, the
Speaker 1: US as some humanitarian police force running all over the
Speaker 1: world all the time. Serious strikes, separate issue fulfilling. Obama's
Speaker 1: red line is different. I had Obama's national security advisor
Speaker 1: sit down with me, as former national security advisor or
Speaker 1: its former president Obama, and he admitted that the red
Speaker 1: line thing in Syria was a complete debacle, a complete
Speaker 1: and utter debacle. And you know, Obama just didn't have
Speaker 1: the stomach for tough national security decisions, didn't have it
Speaker 1: and clearly took a view of America as often times
Speaker 1: damaging in the world, and and not a country that
Speaker 1: you can look to and and expect leadership from needs
Speaker 1: to need there needs to be a multilateral, collaborative collective
Speaker 1: if you will, effort at global leadership from all these
Speaker 1: different countries. That that was always the Obama approach and
Speaker 1: it failed. But I just I can't imagine why these
Speaker 1: liberals who keep banging the Russia drum don't get that
Speaker 1: we see Trump building up the military, his support for
Speaker 1: the military, he's his belief in American strength across the board.
Speaker 1: And this is a guy who just exudes I mean,
Speaker 1: he's just he's just got patriotism, uh written all over
Speaker 1: everything he says. I mean, he's he's so pro America.
Speaker 1: And they're telling us that he's actually pro Russia. It
Speaker 1: just doesn't work. We're not gonna buy because it's not true.
Speaker 1: But they stay on this because it makes them feel good,
Speaker 1: and they know it's a it's a snide, childish, nasty,
Speaker 1: little schoolgirl tactic to say, oh, he's he's doing all
Speaker 1: this stuff for Russia. It's such bad analysis. And people
Speaker 1: who say it honestly at this point that they're they're posers.
Speaker 1: There are people that don't know anything about geopolitics or
Speaker 1: the way the world actually works, but they know that
Speaker 1: their friends will think they're smart if they talk about
Speaker 1: Trump and Russia in the same sentence. It's pretty pathetic.
Speaker 1: He's back with you now, because when it comes to
Speaker 1: the fight for truth, the buck never stops. I had
Speaker 1: to protect myself and I have no regret about it.
Speaker 1: Let's listen to the recording. I think it's important to
Speaker 1: understand that if we make this a friendly departure, um,
Speaker 1: we can all be you know, you can look at
Speaker 1: look at your time here in the White House is
Speaker 1: a year of service to the nation. Uh, and then
Speaker 1: you can go on without any type of difficulty in
Speaker 1: the future relative to your reputation. How did you take
Speaker 1: that comment about your reputation? It's very obvious threat. He
Speaker 1: goes on to say that things can get ugly for you,
Speaker 1: the chief of Staff of the United States, under the
Speaker 1: direction of the President United States, threatening me. Alma Rosa, folks,
Speaker 1: the Alma Rosa show is into down man. She is
Speaker 1: all over the place, all the different shows. She's got
Speaker 1: a book coming out. You know, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: stuff where I could say, I get why the presidents
Speaker 1: in this position, or or you know, you gotta give him,
Speaker 1: you gotta gi him a little slack he's dealing with
Speaker 1: this or the other. The omar Rosa though, I mean,
Speaker 1: my producer, Mike, am I being too hard on him here?
Speaker 1: I just this one. To me, It's not a big deal.
Speaker 1: She doesn't have anything because there's nothing to have all
Speaker 1: this stuff. You know, this is just like fire and fury.
Speaker 1: She wants I think that guy made twenty million dollars,
Speaker 1: by the way, she wants something like that out of this.
Speaker 1: And producer Mike, I feel like, you know, this is
Speaker 1: just not this is just not a decision that I
Speaker 1: would have made. Is that fair to say? Very fair? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean omar Rosa really all right, she's she's not
Speaker 1: just a reality TV show star. She's like the she's
Speaker 1: the villain of a reality TV show. Anyway. It's it's
Speaker 1: just disappointing to see that this White House has to
Speaker 1: deal with this. But okay, so let's let's get into
Speaker 1: a little see. You know, I didn't start the show
Speaker 1: with this today. I know people are all, my gosh,
Speaker 1: omar Rosa, they're getting all all fired off ball excited
Speaker 1: about it. I don't see this as anywhere near as
Speaker 1: interesting as a lot of other people do. I think
Speaker 1: that everyone's gotten way way too intrigued by the omar
Speaker 1: Rosa scenario. Um, and it's anything that bashes Trump. You
Speaker 1: see this now, right if you show up, if you're
Speaker 1: walking from the street and you're like, I've got a
Speaker 1: videotape of Trump, you know, doing crazy, weird sex stuff
Speaker 1: with a bunch of green Martians and outer Space, they're gonna,
Speaker 1: you know, the producers from these shows are gonna sit
Speaker 1: down at least talk to you. You know, they're gonna say, well,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe you know, I mean Trump does like Martians.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's possible there. There's there's nothing that they
Speaker 1: would put beyond the president, and there's nothing that they're
Speaker 1: not willing to pretend at least is believable about this
Speaker 1: president as long as it's negative. And you see a
Speaker 1: lot of with with the Omar Rose recordings. But her
Speaker 1: whole thing here is like he's he's threatening me. Oh,
Speaker 1: he's threatening me with this. That sounds like every person
Speaker 1: that I've ever heard of anywhere getting fired. That's how
Speaker 1: it goes, right the Hey, you know, look, you can
Speaker 1: leave you can resign and we all kind of part
Speaker 1: on relatively, uh, if not positive terms, at least they
Speaker 1: were giving her an opportunity to save face. That's what
Speaker 1: they were doing. That's what John Kelly was doing, who
Speaker 1: is a no bs kind of guy, right, So he's saying, look,
Speaker 1: if you leave now, we can we can all just
Speaker 1: kind of move past this and you get to claim
Speaker 1: this year you had in the White House as a victory.
Speaker 1: If you have dragged this out and you fight us,
Speaker 1: then things are gonna be rough for you. That's not
Speaker 1: a threat. That's a statement of fact, and that's not
Speaker 1: unusual for the water she goes. You know, well, there
Speaker 1: he is in the White House saying these terrible things
Speaker 1: to me in the situation room. This is the woman
Speaker 1: who brings a recording device into the situation room. And
Speaker 1: can everybody stop saying, oh, she might go to prison. Guys,
Speaker 1: It's not illegal to bring a recording device into the
Speaker 1: situation room. Okay, it's not illegal to bring a recording
Speaker 1: device period into a skiff. It's a security violation. And
Speaker 1: if you record classified onto an unclassified device, that could
Speaker 1: be a crime. Certainly, if you transmitted it could be
Speaker 1: a crime. But just to be in there. I mean,
Speaker 1: if that were the case, every person that's ever walked
Speaker 1: into a secure facility with a cell phone on, which
Speaker 1: is pretty much everybody who's ever had a clearance, I
Speaker 1: think for what, I know, if you're if you're in
Speaker 1: the you know, if you're in the organizations of national
Speaker 1: security long enough, you would have committed a crime. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's it's not a crime to have it on you.
Speaker 1: It's just incredibly uh disrespectful, irresponsible, and you know usually
Speaker 1: people do it accidentally. Obviously, to do it intentionally and
Speaker 1: then to record in there, it's just requas, but keep
Speaker 1: in one. Um Omar Rossa, Mike, I hear both ways.
Speaker 1: It's Omar Rossa amar Rosa. Right, yeah, I right. I
Speaker 1: feel like she would correct you. It's my roast. With
Speaker 1: that air of entitlement she speaks with, I've never heard
Speaker 1: somebody so affected in her When she's sitting up there
Speaker 1: giving the interview, I'm like, is this is somebody teacher
Speaker 1: to present herself as as almost like, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: a a bond villain? Is this really the way that
Speaker 1: she did? Do you ever notice in her interviews? You know,
Speaker 1: how as you conduct interviews there's a back and forth,
Speaker 1: and she'll say when she's not quite done speaking and
Speaker 1: the other person just starts to talk, she excuse me,
Speaker 1: I'm almost done. Oh yeah, oh yeah, No, she's very
Speaker 1: That's my favorite when she does that. She reminds me
Speaker 1: of my friend who who worked at Sienao told me
Speaker 1: that once he called Christian, I'm Christian, called her Christine,
Speaker 1: I'm on poor. She's like, excuse me, excuse me, it's Christians.
Speaker 1: Just like that. I feel like christ and Oh Maroussa
Speaker 1: would get along very well. If I ever miss miss,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna put meat. Miss I'm a poor, I'm definitely
Speaker 1: on or Christine, and I got definitely call her Christie,
Speaker 1: call her Christie. She loves that. Hey, Chrissie, what's up anyway?
Speaker 1: So yeah, man, this this Omerosa thing, that the whole
Speaker 1: making the big deal out of Kelly firing her. Uh,
Speaker 1: of course she should have gotten fired. You know, I
Speaker 1: think Trump one of his weaknesses. I'm gonna say it,
Speaker 1: folks after I take a simp of water, because that
Speaker 1: can be necessary. One of his weaknesses is except I
Speaker 1: think he wants to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Speaker 1: And I've known other people like this. He really does
Speaker 1: like to give people a second chance, and he likes
Speaker 1: to be in a position to help people who have
Speaker 1: come to him who have said, you know, maya culpa,
Speaker 1: I'd like to do better in the future. Now, you
Speaker 1: might say, Buck, that's not a weakness as a as
Speaker 1: a human being, but it can be a weakness in business,
Speaker 1: and certainly, and you're dealing at the high stakes of
Speaker 1: government here, at the high end of government, um, that
Speaker 1: can be that can be a problem. Um. But people
Speaker 1: have been asking some questions of omar Rosa, like, Hey,
Speaker 1: you're saying all this stuff and you're claiming the president
Speaker 1: to use racial slurs, which, by the way, I do
Speaker 1: not believe for a second. I don't believe it. I
Speaker 1: just don't believe it. I also, having grown up in
Speaker 1: New York, known the Trump's when I was a little
Speaker 1: kid and been around that family, there is nothing bigoted
Speaker 1: about the Trumps. Trump is not a bigot. He's a
Speaker 1: New York guy. He takes people for who they are,
Speaker 1: for what they are. It doesn't care about any of
Speaker 1: that stuff. That's just not He's not a This is
Speaker 1: this thing they try to make him out to be,
Speaker 1: which is a person that is always judging people by
Speaker 1: skin color. Anything, that's just a lie. Um omar rosha
Speaker 1: though was was Well, let me deal with this first.
Speaker 1: She talks about the possibility of Trump saying racist things.
Speaker 1: Play clip four. Because you said, um that the betrayal,
Speaker 1: the idea that he might have used this word, Um
Speaker 1: that it would be this betrayal because you thought it
Speaker 1: would men mean that he might have used it about you.
Speaker 1: You believe he used it about you, possibly because Donald
Speaker 1: Trump talks about everyone behind their backs. You either Rod Chuck.
Speaker 1: He has a nickname probably you. He is a nickname
Speaker 1: for everyone in his administration and in his circle. So
Speaker 1: I am pretty certain that he's probably had some very
Speaker 1: derogatory things about me. In fact, yesterday, on this moment
Speaker 1: before Charlottesville, the anniversary of Charlottesville, instead of talking about
Speaker 1: how to unify the nation, he actually insulted me by
Speaker 1: calling me a low life. That is, a man who
Speaker 1: is inclined to start racially charged engagement and used race
Speaker 1: to kind of stir up his pace. Wow, look at
Speaker 1: all of the dishonest and really underhanded stuff. U marussa
Speaker 1: man just to get in there first of all, saying
Speaker 1: that somebody possibly called your racial slur is? Uh, this
Speaker 1: is the defamation equivalent of who are three people who
Speaker 1: have never been in my kitchen? I mean, yeah, anybody
Speaker 1: could have possibly said anything. So what you know? This
Speaker 1: is worse than when did you stop beating your wife? Sir?
Speaker 1: This is is it possible that at some point in
Speaker 1: the future you may beat your wife? Well, anything is possible,
Speaker 1: so yeah, I mean I guess that's possible. Right, you
Speaker 1: have to answer theoretically, yeah, did Trump call your racial slurve? Well,
Speaker 1: I think it's possible. And then the other part of
Speaker 1: this too is that she ties herself into the national
Speaker 1: conversation around Trump and Charlottesville and the the white nationalists
Speaker 1: and all the red eve and she she she thinks
Speaker 1: that somehow that's you know, the Trump calling her a
Speaker 1: low life is related to or should be in the
Speaker 1: same conversations and the same breath of air as the
Speaker 1: Charlotte'sville anniversary. I mean, she is utterly and completely shameless.
Speaker 1: And the media was willing to say that a while ago,
Speaker 1: and they certainly criticized her as people criticize her for
Speaker 1: being inauthentic when she joined the Trump administration. That criticized
Speaker 1: her for being a social climber, I guess in a
Speaker 1: sense of government climber. But uh, and now they're all
Speaker 1: let's let's have olmrossa on to discuss all of this. Um.
Speaker 1: I've got a little more here because I think there's something,
Speaker 1: there's something bigger at work with the media narratives around
Speaker 1: all of this, and I want to spend some time
Speaker 1: on that with you, So we'll do some omrose step
Speaker 1: part two coming up on this phone conversation. I was
Speaker 1: told exactly what Donald Trump said, Yes, the in word
Speaker 1: and others in a classic Trump goes nuclear around, but
Speaker 1: that's not what she said in her interview with Morning Edition.
Speaker 1: And once I heard it, you heard you have heard this,
Speaker 1: heard this tape. You heard the president of the United States,
Speaker 1: President of the United States use not only the in word, but,
Speaker 1: as Bill Pruitt described during that interview, other horrible things
Speaker 1: during the Protection of the Apprentice. You don't mention that
Speaker 1: in the book that you've actually heard the tape. Is
Speaker 1: this new? Oh no, it's mentioned in the book. Forgive me, though.
Speaker 1: That sounds like you just heard his account of the tape.
Speaker 1: Did you actually hear the tape? I did? Did you
Speaker 1: miss this hope, But girl, did you read my book?
Speaker 1: She did read the book, so did I. It's not there.
Speaker 1: So there's a little bit of a discrepancy here with
Speaker 1: what Omar Rossa said and what's in the book apparently,
Speaker 1: and of course, the the allegation here that Trump used
Speaker 1: the N word. I mean, this is supposed to be
Speaker 1: something that the media is going to push as much
Speaker 1: as they can until it's discredited because they know they'll
Speaker 1: be lasting damage just from the allegation. This is meant
Speaker 1: to be smirched the present of the United States, and
Speaker 1: they don't care that it will never be corroborated, that
Speaker 1: Trump can't disprove this. And you really got a sense
Speaker 1: of what's going on here with mo Rosa saying he
Speaker 1: possibly said it. Well, no, she said here and that
Speaker 1: and that. Remember that was the audio book, right, I
Speaker 1: guess that was the audiobook that was being read there
Speaker 1: that she heard him say it. Well, if if someone
Speaker 1: heard you say something and then was asked, did this
Speaker 1: person say that, the answer is not possibly, it's yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what happened. But that was not the way that
Speaker 1: Omar Rosha handled the situation. That was not the way
Speaker 1: that she decided to go forward. I mean, I think
Speaker 1: there's a pretty obvious degree of of dishonesty with her.
Speaker 1: We all know that. Um, but she's useful for Trump
Speaker 1: bashing now and so she will be given. She already
Speaker 1: has been the biggest platforms and all kinds. But this
Speaker 1: brings you back. There's also the whole the fact that
Speaker 1: the recording so far are pretty mundane, and I have
Speaker 1: to I have to say, this woman's going to go
Speaker 1: in the situation with John Kelley and record him. The
Speaker 1: best she could do is what we've heard so far.
Speaker 1: Here's she recorded Trump, Here's what Here's what he said
Speaker 1: about her firing, and what was known about a place
Speaker 1: clip six. Tom BROSSA, what's going on? Just so on
Speaker 1: the news that you're thinking about leaving? What happened General Kelly?
Speaker 1: General Kelly came to me and said that you guys
Speaker 1: wanted me to leave. No nobody even told me about it.
Speaker 1: You know, I think that's Trump trying to be like, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, it's not my hello idea. He knew. But
Speaker 1: this goes into that category of being You can call
Speaker 1: it a lie if you want. The media will certainly
Speaker 1: say he's lying, although they can't prove what he knew
Speaker 1: when he knew it. But there's also a degree of
Speaker 1: lying that is necessary for being polite. Trump is trying
Speaker 1: to be polite here. He's he's not, in fact, uh
Speaker 1: you know, being nasty. He's not trying to be evasive
Speaker 1: or or unfair to Omar Rossa. I think he's just
Speaker 1: trying to say, like, yeah, you know, I guess we
Speaker 1: can still be friends, because I didn't know about that.
Speaker 1: And then there's also the Omar Rossa's role in this
Speaker 1: whole thing and how she comes out now, and it
Speaker 1: just seems so self involved and so uh so self
Speaker 1: interested to be this anti Trump hashtag resistance figure now
Speaker 1: that she has a book out, if I know, do
Speaker 1: you hear him act? You're like, I've had several books, Yeah,
Speaker 1: all those true literary masterpieces, you know, Omar Rossa by
Speaker 1: Omar Rossa. But you know she's she's Cashian obviously, and
Speaker 1: and it raises some questions about, well, what was what
Speaker 1: are really her motivations here? She's so shady. The whole
Speaker 1: thing is so shady. Play clip seven place being used
Speaker 1: by Donald Trump for so long. I was like the
Speaker 1: frog and the hot water. You don't know that you're
Speaker 1: in that situation until it just keeps bubbling and bubbling.
Speaker 1: It's clear in hindsight, because hindsight, of course is but
Speaker 1: as I talked about and unhinged, you get to see
Speaker 1: from two thousand and three when I first met Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: the evolution of a very unique relationship between him. I
Speaker 1: and I talked very, very intimately about the things that
Speaker 1: he said that his has pledged to do more for
Speaker 1: the community, his as I said, investment in my own career.
Speaker 1: But what I know now I didn't have the benefit
Speaker 1: of in two thousand and three or two thousand and
Speaker 1: four or two thousand and ten, and so yes, it
Speaker 1: is hindsight. But I will say this to you, I
Speaker 1: was complicit with this White House deceiving this nation. They
Speaker 1: continue to deceive this nation by how mentally declined he is,
Speaker 1: how difficult it is it is for him to process
Speaker 1: complex information, how he is not engaged in some of
Speaker 1: the most important decisions that impacts our country. I was complicit,
Speaker 1: and for that I regret. This is like when that
Speaker 1: guy Richard Clark, who was like the counter terror some
Speaker 1: Zark comes out and was apologizing to America for nine
Speaker 1: eleven when he was writing books critical of the Bush administration. Well,
Speaker 1: isn't that convenient? You're not really apologizing, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: she doesn't really think she's complicit. She just has to
Speaker 1: say the things that she believes is required of her
Speaker 1: by the media to get on the platform she wants
Speaker 1: to sell her book. And you'll notice also, oh, yes,
Speaker 1: Trump's mental decline. Trump says racial slurs. It's like she
Speaker 1: wrote a book, folks, And this is really what I'm
Speaker 1: trying to draw all of us to here. It's like
Speaker 1: she wrote a book that was just whatever allegations and
Speaker 1: accusations she would know that the anti Trump media would
Speaker 1: jump at and wanted to just tick them off one
Speaker 1: by one and then throw it together in some book
Speaker 1: that there will be no verification of these claims. There
Speaker 1: will be no backs, backstories, or backstopping of this information.
Speaker 1: It will just be well, Omar Rossa said this by
Speaker 1: the book, and it hurts Trump. So the media goes along.
Speaker 1: And this, my friends, is yet another chapter in our
Speaker 1: book of why we don't trust the media. One oh one.
Speaker 1: Do you think that anybody could have written a book
Speaker 1: bashing Obama and gotten on the Sunday shows as Omar
Speaker 1: Rosa has with Trump. We all know the answer to that.
Speaker 1: The bias is very very real. Are We have a
Speaker 1: big third hour coming up, including the possibility of Facebook
Speaker 1: giving information on you to your banks and the bank's
Speaker 1: doing the same. Sounds pretty big brother. That's coming up.
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton permission, decoding the news and disseminating information with
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Make no mistakes, American, You're a great American. Again,
Speaker 1: this is the Buck Sexton Show analyst. Their businesses surveillance,
Speaker 1: They capture everything. And what's particularly galling about this issue
Speaker 1: with the banks is it's not like they're going to
Speaker 1: offer a new service. As a as a consumer to bank,
Speaker 1: you have access to web services to allow you to
Speaker 1: get all the stuff you want. But Facebook wants to
Speaker 1: get that data because with that data, they're going to
Speaker 1: know a lot more about you, and they're going to
Speaker 1: be able to manipulate your attention to their economic benefit,
Speaker 1: and they're going to be able to use that data
Speaker 1: with third parties to get paid as well. And so
Speaker 1: my advice to everyone is if by some reason your
Speaker 1: bank used to go on is do not do this.
Speaker 1: This is just a really, really bad idea. My simple
Speaker 1: point to everybody is that the days of trust and
Speaker 1: tech companies to do the right thing are in the
Speaker 1: past now, and we all have to approach the stuff
Speaker 1: with skepticism. You know, folks, I've been saying for a
Speaker 1: long time that the Internet is the greatest surveillance tool
Speaker 1: ever devised ever even a mad gend, because we are
Speaker 1: doing the surveillance really ourselves in a sense, we are
Speaker 1: we are offering up all of the information that these
Speaker 1: companies could ever want on us, the profile of what
Speaker 1: you like and don't like, what you do, your habits,
Speaker 1: your day to day rhythm that Facebook and these other
Speaker 1: companies have. This this is beyond anything that marketing and
Speaker 1: advertising companies and even government surveillance would have thought was
Speaker 1: possible forty or fifty years ago, maybe even twenty or
Speaker 1: thirty years ago. This is changing so rapidly. I mean
Speaker 1: now that that that SoundBite we just played for you,
Speaker 1: it was about Facebook trying to partner with Wall Streets
Speaker 1: biggest banks. This is a piece of in Barrens quote,
Speaker 1: the social media giants asked large US banks to share
Speaker 1: share detailed financial information about their customers, including card transactions
Speaker 1: and checking account balances, as part of an effort to
Speaker 1: offer new services two users. Um. And this is the
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal also reporting on this. Uh, folks, this
Speaker 1: is this is something that we need to be very
Speaker 1: prepared for because I think it's gonna happen. So Facebook
Speaker 1: is telling the banks, if you give us your data,
Speaker 1: will give you our our users. And because because here's
Speaker 1: the thing when Facebook that they know what you like
Speaker 1: to click on, They know what you like to like,
Speaker 1: what you share, what you do different things with But
Speaker 1: the most valuable information they can really have is what
Speaker 1: do you buy, what do you spend money on, how
Speaker 1: much money do you have in the bank, and what
Speaker 1: kind of investments or other activities you do financially. You know,
Speaker 1: you really have to wonder that at what point do
Speaker 1: they have access to everything? What point do you come
Speaker 1: to recognize I think that Facebook is going to be
Speaker 1: able to come up with a profile of each and
Speaker 1: every one of us in time that would be more
Speaker 1: than most of our close friends know about us, maybe
Speaker 1: even a sense more than you know about yourself. Because
Speaker 1: it's gonna be analyzing, it's gonna be using algorithms to
Speaker 1: go through everything that you do. And as I've been saying,
Speaker 1: we've had an awakening recently, because now we have an
Speaker 1: understanding that Facebook is going to use its power not
Speaker 1: for good, but for and not even just for capitalism,
Speaker 1: which that that I can kind of handle. Capitalism is
Speaker 1: rational trying to make money, there are certain certain barriers,
Speaker 1: certain boundaries that are in place. You know, if you
Speaker 1: completely screw over excuse me, it's been along, if you
Speaker 1: completely mess up your customer base, you're gonna have problems.
Speaker 1: So it's not like you can get away doing absolutely anything.
Speaker 1: But if you are pushing a point of view, if
Speaker 1: you believe that your purpose is not so much just
Speaker 1: to make money, because you've already made so much money,
Speaker 1: Facebook is a highly capital efficient business. It is essentially
Speaker 1: a giant a t M. At this point, they could
Speaker 1: always just you know, issue more shares and you but
Speaker 1: the stock out there and everything else. They can raise
Speaker 1: whatever money they want to raise. I mean, they got
Speaker 1: as much money as any company could ever need for
Speaker 1: any reason. What happens when some of these companies decide
Speaker 1: that their purpose is really social justice or and I
Speaker 1: think this is more of what's been going on. What
Speaker 1: happens when we start to see these companies just telling
Speaker 1: us that they're operating more or less as utilities. But
Speaker 1: behind you know, so that so that that's just whatever
Speaker 1: gets posted and all that. It's a free for all
Speaker 1: for the most part, within the general guide posts of
Speaker 1: their terms of service. What happens when they start changing
Speaker 1: this information, when they start changing what they're doing behind
Speaker 1: the scenes, we have no idea, You have no transparency
Speaker 1: into this, no way of knowing or even understanding quite honestly,
Speaker 1: these algorithms, and that Facebook has has gotten in trouble
Speaker 1: for all this privacy stuff. You know, I know that
Speaker 1: for some of the folks listening in the in the
Speaker 1: in the generation that grew up without the Internet, and
Speaker 1: that also probably sees a lot of social media still
Speaker 1: it's just a fun way for people to waste some
Speaker 1: time and maybe now buy some stuff if you really
Speaker 1: want to. This is media in the future. This is
Speaker 1: going it's all going to be digital. It's all going
Speaker 1: to be online and connected. There's gonna be the Internet
Speaker 1: of things, and there's gonna be the Internet of people.
Speaker 1: And the Internet of things is all of our interconnected devices. Right,
Speaker 1: So your smartphone connects to the knee bone, the knee
Speaker 1: bone connects to the leg bone. No, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean that the smartphone connects to the thermostat, which
Speaker 1: connects to the front door, which connects to the TV,
Speaker 1: which but you also have all of us the people,
Speaker 1: the Internet of of of people, and and identity t
Speaker 1: and your online presence and your online um, you know,
Speaker 1: your online footprint. These are going to become very important
Speaker 1: going forward. This is going to be how people, by
Speaker 1: the way, get already more more than it is already happening.
Speaker 1: Now people are gonna be getting jobs based on how
Speaker 1: they present online because you're just gonna have so much competition.
Speaker 1: Maybe you'll still get a face to face interview. Sure,
Speaker 1: I get if people want to meet, but there's not
Speaker 1: going to be such a focus I think on oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know what, what what were your grades like? And
Speaker 1: where do you go to school. They're gonna look at
Speaker 1: you know, who you are online, what your social media
Speaker 1: has been, what you're saying, what you're doing, and the
Speaker 1: possibilities for political manipulation with all this are vast, are vast.
Speaker 1: And now that you've got Facebook saying you know, we
Speaker 1: we just want to we want some financial data. And
Speaker 1: by the way, they're going to give the banks as
Speaker 1: an exchange all the stuff they know about you, which
Speaker 1: will be very useful for banks purposes in terms of
Speaker 1: marking and maybe partnering with other companies and corporations. So
Speaker 1: so we need to figure out what the reality is here.
Speaker 1: Here's what I think. I think most folks have decided
Speaker 1: that privacy is dead, that everything you do online is
Speaker 1: essentially public in one way or another, because somebody's transferring it,
Speaker 1: somebody's in charge of it, and somebody can sell it,
Speaker 1: they can collect it and then use it for their
Speaker 1: own purposes. I think that a lot of Americans have
Speaker 1: just taken the position that, you know what, this isn't
Speaker 1: gonna change, so we might as well just lean into
Speaker 1: it a little bit and make as much money off
Speaker 1: of it as as we can, and get as much
Speaker 1: utility out of it, get as much use out of it.
Speaker 1: For a lot, I mean, it depends. Some of us
Speaker 1: operate businesses online. Some of us are just engaging with
Speaker 1: these platforms. But this raises very instant questions. You know.
Speaker 1: It also I think changes a lot of human behavior.
Speaker 1: I think it changes the way that we view each other.
Speaker 1: I think it's been terribly damaging for a political discourse,
Speaker 1: and it's only gonna get worse in my opinion, but
Speaker 1: we lc Facebook teaming up with the big banks though,
Speaker 1: talk about too big to fail, my friends. I talked
Speaker 1: about simply Safe home security a lot on this show
Speaker 1: because it's a fantastic security system. It's really easy to use,
Speaker 1: and I've got one at home. I can tell you
Speaker 1: it is so straightforward. It comes out of the box.
Speaker 1: You'll have it set up connected to your WiFi in minutes.
Speaker 1: And I'm not the only one who thinks it's a
Speaker 1: great company, because simply Safe is now valued at a
Speaker 1: billion dollars. I've known the simply Safe guys for a
Speaker 1: long time. They really understand what the core of their businesses.
Speaker 1: They're trying to protect people protect their homes and do
Speaker 1: so in away with great customer service, no long term contracts,
Speaker 1: and cover you top to bottom eight z. You get
Speaker 1: protection against intruders, fires, leaks, burst pipes, everything, and you're
Speaker 1: in control. You can even download an app as I have,
Speaker 1: and see what's going on with your home while you're
Speaker 1: away from home on the simply Safe app. So check
Speaker 1: it out. Order your simply Safe system now. My listeners
Speaker 1: get free shipping and free returns. Visit simply safe dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck. That's simply safe dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: to protect your home with simply safe today, simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck bootle talk and hello everybody, it's
Speaker 1: time for an update from Zakaiser of New York City
Speaker 1: Mayor Willhelm di Blasio. How many of you even know
Speaker 1: that build the Blasio, the mayor of New York formerly
Speaker 1: close confidant of Hillary and Bill Clinton. At one point
Speaker 1: somebody who would have thought he could run for national
Speaker 1: elected office, but I think everyone realized that's crazy. Blasio's
Speaker 1: name was Warren Wilhelm until his twenties, but he did
Speaker 1: not sink it would be easy to win the elected
Speaker 1: office when's your name is varrenville Helm. And so he
Speaker 1: decided to do his time for him to change her
Speaker 1: name to Billy A. Di Blasio. But anyway, Billy di Blasio, Hey,
Speaker 1: Billy de Blasio from Bronx. He's out there and he
Speaker 1: is making the case. At a time when we are
Speaker 1: hearing so much about the need to defend press freedom,
Speaker 1: the need to defend our our free press, Bill de
Speaker 1: Blasio is out there arguing openly for a political mono
Speaker 1: culture in the press. That's right, going after the only
Speaker 1: cable news outlet that can punch back and that can
Speaker 1: represent the views of oh about fifty of the American
Speaker 1: people Fox News. Here's what he said. Mayor Bill de
Speaker 1: Blasio joins me now here on set. Mary, thanks for
Speaker 1: coming over. Thank you. Brian. What is your critique of Murdoch.
Speaker 1: You were quote recently by the Guardians saying, imagine the country.
Speaker 1: If Murdoch had never had papers or networks here, we
Speaker 1: would be a more unified country. There would be less
Speaker 1: overt hate, and there would be less appeal to racial division.
Speaker 1: I guarantee it, because what Murdoch did, through Fox News,
Speaker 1: the New York Post, among others, is to create a
Speaker 1: dynamic where that stuff could come out in the open.
Speaker 1: We saw it in New York City for years and years,
Speaker 1: where race was infused into the dialogue in a very
Speaker 1: negative way, and it was a sort of an apocalyptic
Speaker 1: vision was created of the notion of going back to
Speaker 1: a time of crime and decay and always putting that
Speaker 1: through a lens of people of color as the villains
Speaker 1: when you're talking about Central Park five or so many
Speaker 1: other instances. Certainly, you saw that around the election of
Speaker 1: David Dinkins in New York the way he was vilified
Speaker 1: by the Post throughout his mayorality. Let me just jump
Speaker 1: in here to say that I, as a native New Yorker,
Speaker 1: remember the Dinkins era, and I do not remember any
Speaker 1: of the racial animus toward the mayor of New York
Speaker 1: that Kaiservillehelm de Blasio is mentioning here. I remember a
Speaker 1: city that had far too many homicides. I remember city
Speaker 1: that was being uh run rough shot over by criminals
Speaker 1: and was completely out of control, and police did not
Speaker 1: feel like the city had their back. And you know,
Speaker 1: I remember going home from school and having to be
Speaker 1: really concerned about getting mugged. And I wasn't paranoid. The
Speaker 1: school was telling us to be concerned. We were told
Speaker 1: when I was a kid to take off because I
Speaker 1: went to a Catholic school. We were told to take
Speaker 1: off our jackets and our ties on our way home
Speaker 1: so we were less likely to be mugged. Let me
Speaker 1: tell you something that did not have any prevented preventative effect,
Speaker 1: but that's what they said. We had to station a
Speaker 1: security guard on our block so that we wouldn't have
Speaker 1: kids getting uh mugged, beat up, attacked, have their stuff
Speaker 1: stolen from them as soon as they walked out of
Speaker 1: the school building. And that was in a nice neighborhood
Speaker 1: of New York City. I mean, this was New York
Speaker 1: in the early nineties, folks. It was a wild place
Speaker 1: in all the worst ways. Dinkins was the mayor, is
Speaker 1: he not supposed to be blamed for the city being
Speaker 1: in terrible disarray? Giuliani came in and things got a
Speaker 1: lot better. Juliani came in all of a sudden, the
Speaker 1: crime wave receded. And now de Blasio is in a
Speaker 1: position where, thanks to Bloomberg before him, the city is
Speaker 1: so relatively speaking, well run and safe that even an
Speaker 1: idiot like de Blasio couldn't ruin it. But of course
Speaker 1: he immediately, in his little pretense as a social justice warrior,
Speaker 1: the mayor of New York blames Fox News while he's
Speaker 1: on CNN no less for inciting racial division. It's like,
Speaker 1: does he realize that there were race riots under the
Speaker 1: previous presidency, by the way, and CNN was covering those
Speaker 1: race riots with with just no integrity or journalistic responsibility whatsoever.
Speaker 1: In my humble opinion, feeling that Deblasio doesn't not much
Speaker 1: to say about that, but he he says more farther
Speaker 1: than that, they put race front and center, and they
Speaker 1: try and stir the most negative impulses in this country.
Speaker 1: There is no Donald Trump without news corps. I firmly
Speaker 1: the leave that he never gets to the presidency because
Speaker 1: he would never have been elevated the way he was
Speaker 1: consistently for years and years. So I believe in a free,
Speaker 1: strong media with diverse views. I'll defend it with all
Speaker 1: I got, but we have to be able to call
Speaker 1: out when a particular company, as a corporate agenda, has
Speaker 1: a political agenda and has very effectively changed the American discourse.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, that's right, folks. Kasa ville Ham believes in
Speaker 1: a bit of censorship. Yah. He believes in a free
Speaker 1: and diverse and open press except for the one news
Speaker 1: outlet that's effective in counter messaging on TV, except for
Speaker 1: the one place whereas a conservative you can turn on
Speaker 1: the news and not be constantly propagandized too, and not
Speaker 1: be forced to sit there and have a bunch of
Speaker 1: people sneer at half of the country act like they
Speaker 1: know so much more than you, and present this bizarre
Speaker 1: fun house mirror version of the America that you know,
Speaker 1: they just can't get over at Fox News is one channel.
Speaker 1: ABC is liberal, CNN is liberal, CBS is liberal, NBC
Speaker 1: is liberal, MSNBC is liberal, PBS is liberal. I mean,
Speaker 1: do I have to go through all of them liberal, liberal,
Speaker 1: liberal all over the place. There's one channel, and there
Speaker 1: will be more channels, by the way, except that the
Speaker 1: politics of the different cable companies and the the content
Speaker 1: providers is such that they won't allow there to be
Speaker 1: additional channels. Oh that's right, people say, oh, Buck, but
Speaker 1: what about One America and what about news Max? They're
Speaker 1: they're in a fraction of the homes that all cable
Speaker 1: news channels, that all the other cable news channels have
Speaker 1: access to. Never mind ABC, CBS, n NBC having the
Speaker 1: vast built in advantage of being at the very top
Speaker 1: of the you know, the cable lineup, and they are
Speaker 1: dominated by liberals. Let's stop allowing them to get away
Speaker 1: with the lies here about how oh the press is balanced?
Speaker 1: The press is even of the press is democrat, and
Speaker 1: of that's democrat a big portion or activists more than
Speaker 1: their journalists. I mean, you got a media pretty Brad
Speaker 1: Stouter had Brad Stoles and I have a show and say, lad,
Speaker 1: I like to walk around all the time and a
Speaker 1: bunch of old bad sneakers because I think it's cool.
Speaker 1: He's one of the few guys that he walks around
Speaker 1: in the suit with sneakers all all oversea, and I
Speaker 1: always thought that was so It's like, really, man, I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm all for comfortable footwear, but yeah, I like the
Speaker 1: way the sneakers and I do the show out Sundays.
Speaker 1: I have never once I tried to add bush Buck
Speaker 1: on terrorism, but he's really smart and I don't know
Speaker 1: anything about it, and so it cut the segment and
Speaker 1: didn't even have the days that stay to Telhead. Anyways,
Speaker 1: I'm a Midia reporter and I have in front of
Speaker 1: me build about the other mayor of New Yarks today
Speaker 1: and I'm just not gonna ask. I mean, it's the
Speaker 1: whole thing, man, It's just drives me nuts. They're they're
Speaker 1: trashing Fox News while trying to pretend that they're for
Speaker 1: an open press. What I mean, I would want a
Speaker 1: real media reporter would ask with the Blasia, well, if
Speaker 1: you were, if you were a Republican, what channel could
Speaker 1: you watch now and not feel not only that that
Speaker 1: there was a lot of bias, but that you are
Speaker 1: essentially actively being insulted on a regular basis if you're
Speaker 1: a Republican right now, what cable news channel is not
Speaker 1: insulting you constantly with its editorial line, with its uh
Speaker 1: you know, the analyst that puts on TV, the anchors
Speaker 1: that puts on TV. The answer is the only one
Speaker 1: that doesn't insult you was Fox. The others are just
Speaker 1: constantly insulting you. CNN is a joke, it's a laughing stock.
Speaker 1: So how about that as a question, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: that's worth asking. That's what I said here at Bass
Speaker 1: Facts is because I had facts. Is the CNN has
Speaker 1: reporters whose full time jobs, folks right now, I know them,
Speaker 1: is to try and tear down Fox hosts, try to
Speaker 1: find dirt on them, try to get anything they can
Speaker 1: on them. They think that's journalism, that's just character assassination.
Speaker 1: And they're they're looking and load or try to find anything.
Speaker 1: Because I can't compete in the ratings, that can't compete
Speaker 1: in the messaging. Not for a free and open press.
Speaker 1: These people are going straight out of the totalitarian media
Speaker 1: playbook all the time and claiming that they are for
Speaker 1: a free press. They want to shut down all powerful
Speaker 1: voices of opposition in the media while saying that they're
Speaker 1: all about opposition voices in the media. They're clowns, they're jerks.
Speaker 1: It's completely ridiculous, and we should not let them get
Speaker 1: away with this pretense and Build A Blasio, who is
Speaker 1: a straight up an income poop, by the way, it
Speaker 1: really is, has no business weighing in on Fox for
Speaker 1: anything else. The fact that Build A. Blasio is the
Speaker 1: mayor of New York City and the city has not
Speaker 1: just caught on fire and burned to the ground yet
Speaker 1: entirely is a testament to the durability of the New
Speaker 1: York City left to him by Juliani and Bloomberg. And
Speaker 1: the fact that really anybody could be the mayor of
Speaker 1: New York now it is so prosperous. But the subway
Speaker 1: is in disrepair. There's some bad stuff going on too.
Speaker 1: But but to Blasio wants to get rid of Fox
Speaker 1: and wants to pretend that in getting rid of Fox
Speaker 1: he's not engaging in censorship. Folks, these people do not
Speaker 1: want a debate. They don't want a battle of ideas.
Speaker 1: They want control and they want power, and that is
Speaker 1: what the left is obsessed with. Everything else is a
Speaker 1: lie of pretense or just another opportunity for hippocrisy. He's
Speaker 1: holding the line for America, buck sex in his back.
Speaker 1: I saw this amazing chart over the weekend and it's
Speaker 1: from a professor of sociology at cal State cal State
Speaker 1: Los Angeles, Bradley Campbell, and he shares this chart and
Speaker 1: under the following headline this is all. This is from Twitter.
Speaker 1: If you've read all the Vox explainers but are still
Speaker 1: having trouble distinguishing racist microaggressions from woke social justice talk,
Speaker 1: this cheat sheet might help. And it is this fascinating
Speaker 1: little chart of statements and then in social justice world
Speaker 1: what these things really mean or what they're supposed to mean.
Speaker 1: So the first one, for example, the statement is where
Speaker 1: are So it has a statement, and then it tells
Speaker 1: you microaggression, microaggression or social justice talk good or bad?
Speaker 1: And then true meaning. So it breaks down different columns
Speaker 1: into these categories. First statement, where are you from? Microaggression?
Speaker 1: Bad because the true meaning of this is you are
Speaker 1: not a true American. So, according to the s JWS,
Speaker 1: where are you from? It is not something you're allowed
Speaker 1: to ask people because you're you're suggesting that they're not American.
Speaker 1: Of course, maybe they're not American, but you're not allowed
Speaker 1: to ask. The next statement quote kill all men microaggression. No,
Speaker 1: this is social justice talk, good or bad. It is
Speaker 1: good and the reason is because the true meaning is
Speaker 1: it would be nice if the world sucked less for women.
Speaker 1: M hm. So you can say kill all men, and
Speaker 1: that is not a microaggression. Where are you from? According
Speaker 1: to the social justice warriors, is a microaggression. Next one here,
Speaker 1: I believe the most qualified person should get the job.
Speaker 1: Bad microaggression. People of color are given unfair benefits because
Speaker 1: of their race, is what the true meaning of that
Speaker 1: phrase is. Um. So there you have that. One. Another one,
Speaker 1: cancel white people good social justice talk. Challenge the dominant
Speaker 1: power structure and culture, it says. So you can say
Speaker 1: that canceling white people is good, killing all men is good,
Speaker 1: but you cannot say that you believe the most qualified
Speaker 1: person should get the job. According to this chart from
Speaker 1: professor Bradley Campbell, who's making fun of this. By the way,
Speaker 1: he wrote a book, The Rise of Victimhood Culture, but
Speaker 1: he gets it right here on these I mean, these
Speaker 1: are these are all situations. He actually has footnotes under them.
Speaker 1: These are situations where uh, the social justice left has
Speaker 1: weighed in on them. So he's not just coming up
Speaker 1: with this out of nowhere. Uh quote, when I look
Speaker 1: at you, I don't see color, bad microaggression. What you're
Speaker 1: saying is assimilate to the dominant culture. So you can't
Speaker 1: say you are color blond under social justice talk. That's
Speaker 1: not allowed. You See, you can't say that you don't
Speaker 1: see color because that's just telling people, oh, you have
Speaker 1: to be like the rest of us. White men are
Speaker 1: bull social justice talk good because a power structure that
Speaker 1: favors white men continues to exist. You got another one here,
Speaker 1: Why are you so quiet? Bad microaggression? Because that's really
Speaker 1: saying assimilate to the dominant culture. See. I don't even
Speaker 1: know how that. I don't even know how that one
Speaker 1: they get to. Really, they're just assuming what what if?
Speaker 1: What if someone is so quiet because they're depressed or
Speaker 1: there's something really wrong with them. I just don't see
Speaker 1: how how that's about. Well, I'm not a social justice
Speaker 1: word obviously, which is why like I totally need, I
Speaker 1: total they need this chart looking like, tell me, like
Speaker 1: what the social justice wires, like think about this stuff,
Speaker 1: so then I can't think the same things, and I
Speaker 1: can think the smart things and be like totally smart
Speaker 1: and how and go to the mall and I'll be amazing.
Speaker 1: And then another quote here, dumbass white people marking up
Speaker 1: the Internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.
Speaker 1: That is actually a quote from the newly installed and
Speaker 1: defended editor of Technology at the New York Times. So
Speaker 1: this is considered good and social justice talk because quote,
Speaker 1: non white voices often don't appear or get drowned out
Speaker 1: in social media discourse. See, folks, what you notice in
Speaker 1: all this, and I know it's a little tongue in cheek,
Speaker 1: what you notice is that there's really no basic decency
Speaker 1: or basic standards that's being enforced here. It's just a
Speaker 1: leftist culture of victimology that is then weaponized into a
Speaker 1: hypocritical into a hypocritical means of of policing speech for
Speaker 1: the purposes of transferring power from one group to another,
Speaker 1: for the purposes of the consolidation of power on the left.
Speaker 1: But you can say nasty, racist things to white people
Speaker 1: and that's considered social justice talk. You can in fact,
Speaker 1: ask very innocuous questions and be engage ging in a microaggression,
Speaker 1: even if you have no intention of doing so, because
Speaker 1: the social justice left says so, and you are not
Speaker 1: allowed to suggest that we are all just people who
Speaker 1: are equal in God's eyes, and therefore race is irrelevant
Speaker 1: to your thinking. Because if race is irrelevant to your thinking,
Speaker 1: why does the left have a justification for making race
Speaker 1: so relevant to theirs. So there you have it, a
Speaker 1: little bit of a social justice warrior terminology cheat sheet
Speaker 1: for all of you. And with that we now go
Speaker 1: to roll call. Hey, team Buck, it's time for roll call.
Speaker 1: Time for the role call. Oh yes, indeed, I had
Speaker 1: to say. I had a great weekend in d C.
Speaker 1: I have both of my brothers, my my fantastic brothers,
Speaker 1: older and younger, come down own spend the weekend with me.
Speaker 1: We had some great meals, we went on a little
Speaker 1: tour of the of the monuments in d C. And
Speaker 1: we just had a lot of fun. And you know, family, man,
Speaker 1: it's it's family is a wonderful thing. But the Sexton brothers,
Speaker 1: the three of us united in in the swamp for
Speaker 1: the first time. My little brother went to Georgetown when
Speaker 1: I was at the CIA, so we used to hang
Speaker 1: out all the time, but older Bro came down for
Speaker 1: this one. We had a lot of fun. All right,
Speaker 1: Let's get to your thoughts. Facebook dot com slash Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton if you want to be in on this action.
Speaker 1: First up, we have Daniel hey Buck love your show
Speaker 1: heard you on the Friday podcast mentioned the terrorists training
Speaker 1: camp for school shootings in New Mexico. You asked where
Speaker 1: we have heard this story except from you and Fox News.
Speaker 1: I read about it on Thursday on Jihadwatch, who's founder,
Speaker 1: Robert Spencer, was a guest on your show not long ago.
Speaker 1: There are some other sources on the internet as well
Speaker 1: as Pamela Geller's site and many more who also had
Speaker 1: the story. Like one is that these sources are available
Speaker 1: as well as your excellent show and Fox News, and
Speaker 1: I hope more conservative seek out these places. We can
Speaker 1: counter the left. We will work a little find more
Speaker 1: allies like you, and they are out there. Keep up
Speaker 1: the fantastic work and shields high. Daniel. Well, Daniel, thank you, Daniel,
Speaker 1: thank you very much for the kind note. Very much
Speaker 1: appreciated and great to hear from you. Aaron Rights, hey
Speaker 1: Buck I hope you're doing well. A huge fan of
Speaker 1: your show. I wanted to get in contact with you
Speaker 1: about having a special guest interview with award winning speaker
Speaker 1: and author of a Call for Courage, Michael Anthony. I
Speaker 1: think he'd be a great guest for your program. I
Speaker 1: can send you a full background here. Uh okay, Aaron,
Speaker 1: let me look up who this gentleman is. I've never
Speaker 1: heard from him, and UM, I'll let you know if
Speaker 1: that's something we can do here. But thank you. I
Speaker 1: like recommendations. I like when people give me thoughts for guests,
Speaker 1: So feel free anytime Peter writes buck, please start pronouncing
Speaker 1: minards correctly. The accident is on the second syllable, not
Speaker 1: the first. I know, guys, you're Peter. You're right. Everyone's
Speaker 1: been on me for this one. You know, once you
Speaker 1: get it in your in your head the wrong way,
Speaker 1: it's so hard to get it right. So I know
Speaker 1: that it's Minard's, but I keep saying Menards, Minard's Minards.
Speaker 1: There we go. I think I've got it now, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna try really hard to get it right. I didn't
Speaker 1: know what minards was until recently, so I learned something
Speaker 1: new Evan Rights hey Buck, I heard the Roll Call
Speaker 1: comment about the movie Range fifteen. Not only is a
Speaker 1: guy from Black Rifle in the movie, it's actually created
Speaker 1: by Matt Best and the Article fifteen crew. Matt Best
Speaker 1: is Evan Hayfer's business partner in Black Rifle Article fifteen.
Speaker 1: UH teamed up with Black Rifle. The reason they created
Speaker 1: the movie Range fifteen is because of how wrong Hollywood
Speaker 1: gets military attire and most military related material. They created
Speaker 1: it so that a real movie, real military movie, by
Speaker 1: actual modern vets would be out there for the public.
Speaker 1: It's really a military zombie apocalypse style movie, super vulgar
Speaker 1: and full of gore. Cool to see Iraq and Afghan
Speaker 1: vets get to play a role in the film. Definitely
Speaker 1: recommend you see it. Thanks Brother Shields High Well, Evan,
Speaker 1: thank you uh for bringing this to my attention. I
Speaker 1: did not know about this movie, Uh, Range fifteen. I
Speaker 1: will have to check it out. I know Matt Best
Speaker 1: and Evan Heyfer pretty well. They're fantastic guys, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: really just really really good dudes. And also they've got
Speaker 1: a great company, Black Rifle, one of our wonderful sponsors,
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee, Dot com slash Buck folks, don't forget
Speaker 1: that should be for all of you. The coffee that
Speaker 1: you are drinking. Do not drink comy coffee. Drink black
Speaker 1: rifle coffee. We have now um Alex, who writes very
Speaker 1: inspirational to hear that you had a speech impediment and
Speaker 1: now make a live talking James Earl Jones also had
Speaker 1: a speech impediment, and look how successful he's been too.
Speaker 1: Keep up the great work from Alex. Well, Alex, thank you,
Speaker 1: and yes I did, in fact, I have a speech impediment.
Speaker 1: When I was a kid. I spent a couple of
Speaker 1: years in speech therapy learning how to pronounce things properly.
Speaker 1: And now here I am a syndicated radio host filling
Speaker 1: for Rush and you know all the rest. And yeah,
Speaker 1: so always always always stay in the fight, right or
Speaker 1: if you're gonna talk to kids about it, tell him
Speaker 1: never ever, ever ever give up when you really want something,
Speaker 1: when you really want to achieve something. Aarin writes, Hey
Speaker 1: Buck shields high. I haven't seen anyone talking about the
Speaker 1: failure of movie pass and how it illustrates why socialism
Speaker 1: generally and single pale single payer healthcare specifically are designed
Speaker 1: to fail. At first, a flat monthly fee got you
Speaker 1: into unlimited movies, but unexpectedly that led to dramatic for
Speaker 1: use in the system collapsed. Now movie Pass is rashing
Speaker 1: the number of free movies to which your flat monthly
Speaker 1: fee entitled you. It amazes me how people fail to
Speaker 1: understand the basic realities of economics and scarcity of goods
Speaker 1: and services. Keep up the good work. From Aaron in Chicago. Aaron,
Speaker 1: I know nothing about movie Pass except what you've told
Speaker 1: me here in this note, So thank you for bringing
Speaker 1: this to my attention, and I appreciate you using opportunity
Speaker 1: to tell us a bit about movie Pass. Brittany. Right,
Speaker 1: thanks Buck. You mentioned a pistol chainsaw bayonet, and now
Speaker 1: my boyfriend wants one. He wants a picture of yours.
Speaker 1: If you have one, I'm dying over here, Brittany. Um
Speaker 1: in Brittany, you know, a pistol chainsaw bayonet sounds awesome
Speaker 1: because think about it, there is such a thing, a
Speaker 1: modification for I believe, for a R the a R
Speaker 1: rail system a chainsaw bayonet. And it became famous after
Speaker 1: someone at USA Today put a chainsaw bay in that
Speaker 1: as a modification. In a national news story that people
Speaker 1: people use for assault rifles. But now think about this,
Speaker 1: you could have a mini chainsaw bayonet for your your
Speaker 1: side arm, which pretty much would be useful, I think
Speaker 1: for being a can opener, you know. So maybe I
Speaker 1: actually would be something that's pretty good. Uh And yes, indeed, um,
Speaker 1: thank you Brittany for writing. Sorry if I cause a
Speaker 1: little bit of a tumult there, Alex writes, Occasio Cortez
Speaker 1: is so dumb, Alex. I don't think I have anything
Speaker 1: to add to what you've written. I'm just letting you
Speaker 1: have your say. Rachel writes, Hey buck Shields High. My
Speaker 1: husband had a question that I'm going to relay since
Speaker 1: he doesn't have a Facebook account. He was wondering why
Speaker 1: no one has called out the liberals and the fact
Speaker 1: that abortion, which they wholeheartedly advocate, is worse than separating
Speaker 1: children at the border. We all know the progressives are hypocrites,
Speaker 1: but why has no one brought this up to them before. Also,
Speaker 1: my husband and one year old daughter and I drink
Speaker 1: raw home milk every single day. Since it hasn't been pasteurized,
Speaker 1: all the nutrients and enzymes are still intact. However, since
Speaker 1: you do not normally drink it all of the alive nutrients,
Speaker 1: and it may have caused your stomach to hurt because
Speaker 1: it was cleaning out all the bad bacteria in your gut.
Speaker 1: I would encourage you to try it again, but in
Speaker 1: a smaller quantity and slowly built up to drinking more.
Speaker 1: The nutritional benefits of raw milk are phenomenal, especially since
Speaker 1: you have Celiac disease. Keep up the great work on
Speaker 1: rising and with the upcoming Shield Hide podcast, Rachel and Jesse. Rachel,
Speaker 1: such a such a kind and thoughtful note here, really appreciated.
Speaker 1: As to raw milk. I don't know if I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be making that making that happen again anytime soon. Buck
Speaker 1: Buck's tummy was a little rum blue rumblot, Tommy. Uh.
Speaker 1: It was rough, rough couple of days. And you know,
Speaker 1: when you're doing a morning TV show real early in
Speaker 1: the morning, and you're doing it with a very nice
Speaker 1: lady sitting next to at the table, you need you
Speaker 1: need your bowels to be behaved. That's all I can say. Folks.
Speaker 1: You need to make sure that you keep it all
Speaker 1: together up there. Yep, uh, here we go. Um Hold
Speaker 1: on a second, I'm I'm trying to find the next
Speaker 1: the next note here, William writes, once again, thanks for
Speaker 1: reading my note. Uh I played it for my wife
Speaker 1: and kids. You made me feel important. Thanks bucking God,
Speaker 1: blessed well William. Thank you for writing to me. You
Speaker 1: make me feel important and you're the only reason I
Speaker 1: do this show every day. You and everybody else listening
Speaker 1: the only reason I have a show. So thank you
Speaker 1: for for all that you do for me. Cat writes,
Speaker 1: buck love the show. Heard you talk about checking out
Speaker 1: the series Battle Star Galactica. Highly recommend it, but make
Speaker 1: a promise to yourself to watch at least five episodes.
Speaker 1: The series is dark, deep thought provoking at a time's
Speaker 1: hard to follow, but very addictive. You will find yourself
Speaker 1: hooked and when you get to the serious conclusion, you
Speaker 1: will be left wanting more shields high Kathy. You know, Cathy,
Speaker 1: I've got a friend that I trust. I think he's
Speaker 1: got good taste, and he tells me that Battlestar Galactica
Speaker 1: is the best TV show of all time, which seems
Speaker 1: like a crazy statement to me. I mean, really, Battlestar Galactica.
Speaker 1: But because he is so high on it, I am
Speaker 1: certainly willing to give it a shot. I don't really
Speaker 1: know where to watch it how I can get it
Speaker 1: on my TV. I'll probably have to figure that out too, James.
Speaker 1: Next up, Hey Buck, I tune in late today and
Speaker 1: heard the guy from Texas saying something about you and
Speaker 1: Ostrich skin boots. Back in the nineties, when I was
Speaker 1: stationed around d C, I went through an urban cowboy
Speaker 1: phase and bought an eight hundred dollar pair of Ostrich
Speaker 1: skin boots. I know I was single and stupid. I
Speaker 1: supersized myself over the years, and now they don't fit.
Speaker 1: I think they are nine point five or ten size.
Speaker 1: If you would, if it will fit you, I will
Speaker 1: send them to you. I don't have the heart to
Speaker 1: give them a goodwill. They're in great shape, shields high, James. James,
Speaker 1: you are very and for offering your Ostrich boots, but
Speaker 1: I'm sure I think you'll find a better, better pair
Speaker 1: of feed for them than mine. I am not a
Speaker 1: I am a very very particular about what I put
Speaker 1: on my feet that have to be super comfortable. If
Speaker 1: I could get away with walking around all day barefooter
Speaker 1: or in socks, I would. Unfortunately, because you know I'm
Speaker 1: in d C. In their streets. I have to actually
Speaker 1: wear some form of actual shoe. That's gonna be it
Speaker 1: for the Freedom Hunt today, my friends, thank you as
Speaker 1: always for joining me here. I'm looking forward to a
Speaker 1: very robust week of shows. Don't forget Benny Johnson joined
Speaker 1: me for the Freedom Hunt podcast last week. You can
Speaker 1: listen on iTunes or stitcher dot com or the I
Speaker 1: Heart app. Please do give it a listen. It's definitely
Speaker 1: worth the worth the thirty or so minutes and until tomorrow,
Speaker 1: my friends, Shields Hig