Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Fallout from the momentous
Speaker 1: op ed written anonymously in the pages of The New
Speaker 1: York Times that claims a deep state is alive and well,
Speaker 1: though they call it a steady state. We'll talk about
Speaker 1: who we think maybe behind this, and also how the
Speaker 1: media clearly overplayed its hand and made a strategic error
Speaker 1: at this, Plus the latest on the looning left and
Speaker 1: their Democrat senators at the Kavanaugh hearings. That and more
Speaker 1: coming up on The buck Sexton Show. This is the
Speaker 1: buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American Again. The buck Sexton Show begins
Speaker 1: sectimics analysts in a stunning new off ed in The
Speaker 1: New York Times, I named top Trump administration official, excoriates
Speaker 1: the president and reveals a resistance block within the Trump
Speaker 1: team trying to protect the country from the commander in chief.
Speaker 1: It is an extraordinary piece in The New York Times
Speaker 1: that really backs up Bob Whitford's book. A column in
Speaker 1: The New York Times is extraordinary. I've never seen anything
Speaker 1: like this in modern president presidential history. This is incredibly unusual,
Speaker 1: almost unprecedented, incredibly incredibly Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Everybody media running wild with the whole New York Times
Speaker 1: op ed yesterday as we knew they would. And here's
Speaker 1: what's fun. Though they've made an error. They have made
Speaker 1: a mistake, a tactical oh a whoop see, because this
Speaker 1: isn't going to result in what they want, which is
Speaker 1: a new uh ferocity of anti Trumpism that could turn
Speaker 1: to a and we'll get into the whole twenty ft
Speaker 1: the m and things shortly, but that that's what they're
Speaker 1: hoping to do. Now, it's a problem because they have
Speaker 1: now affirmed really, or rather it has been affirmed via
Speaker 1: the New York Times his own hand in a sense,
Speaker 1: or at least in your Times has given the platform
Speaker 1: to show us all what's going on. But there is
Speaker 1: a deep state. This is real. There are people inside
Speaker 1: of the government, including those who are I would assume
Speaker 1: Republicans who view their role as undermining the President of
Speaker 1: the United States, and that somebody could be in a
Speaker 1: position of authority in the government working for the president.
Speaker 1: A senior administration official act be so lacking in self
Speaker 1: awareness as to think that the proper way to do
Speaker 1: this is to anonymously publish it. Why anonymously? You know
Speaker 1: this this is all let's let's just take a step
Speaker 1: back for a moon. Does anybody really think that the
Speaker 1: person who wrote this, if they attached their name to it,
Speaker 1: would not immediately be in a position to be on
Speaker 1: every TV show with a large every new show with
Speaker 1: a large audience in the country, get a book deal
Speaker 1: right away, probably sign up for a hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: a speech on the speaking circuit right away, and be
Speaker 1: heralded by the left as some kind of resistance hero.
Speaker 1: I don't know how anybody can think that what I'm
Speaker 1: saying is not true. What is really the risk? Okay, Yeah,
Speaker 1: if you said there'll be some Trump there'll be some
Speaker 1: Trump supporters that say terrible things, and I'm sure there'll
Speaker 1: be some threats. And but people get threats in this
Speaker 1: business in the media all the time. It threats is
Speaker 1: that's not new, that's not unusual. And if you're going
Speaker 1: to take this step where now you could be out
Speaker 1: and I have to wonder if the source will in
Speaker 1: fact be outed, why not do so in such a
Speaker 1: way that it could actually mean something all it has done, folks,
Speaker 1: is confirmed what we've thought all along, which is that
Speaker 1: there are people in the government who think that they
Speaker 1: can work in an undemocratic, unelected fashion to undermine the
Speaker 1: votes of over sixty million Americans, and that they would
Speaker 1: do so while keeping their their job is cowardice. And
Speaker 1: I have to tell you a few things that come
Speaker 1: to mind about this. What is I do not believe
Speaker 1: I've seen some of the names that are out there.
Speaker 1: I do not believe this is anybody who is and
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, level person in the White House, I
Speaker 1: do not believe it. And there's already been a whole
Speaker 1: slew of people them, you know, Pompeo and uh could
Speaker 1: Low and I mean, I can't even think there's a
Speaker 1: whole bunch. There's like a dozen or so of them
Speaker 1: that have come out and said not me, uh Coats,
Speaker 1: uh Mad is um Kelly. They're all saying it's not that,
Speaker 1: and I believe them. Okay, So so it is not
Speaker 1: those individuals, and and it's you know, it's one thing
Speaker 1: to not say anythink it's another thing to actively lie
Speaker 1: about it so that those people are off the list.
Speaker 1: I think that this is somebody who the New York
Speaker 1: Times when pushed. This is why they might keep it
Speaker 1: secret actually because when pushed on the issue, they could say,
Speaker 1: if it did ever come out, well, yeah, this person
Speaker 1: is like involved in you know, is that the NSC
Speaker 1: or is that, I don't know, the Economic Council or something,
Speaker 1: so you know, technically a senior White House person, but
Speaker 1: not anyone with any real power sway. And if it
Speaker 1: does turn out that this is a mid level political
Speaker 1: appointee in the New York Times and that gets out,
Speaker 1: the New York Times will have just made an utter
Speaker 1: mockery of itself, a complete mockery of itself. Um. And
Speaker 1: you know that the White House people say reporting on
Speaker 1: this as being in disarray, and what do they expect?
Speaker 1: I mean, how would anyone else feel if they were
Speaker 1: trying to run the government and they found out that
Speaker 1: there are people that not only are subverting them, but
Speaker 1: then taking a kind of victory lap by subverting them
Speaker 1: publicly without attaching their name to it. The whole thing.
Speaker 1: It's just stinks, It absolutely stinks. Here is the senior
Speaker 1: counsel of the President, Kelly and Colmay, talking about play
Speaker 1: for sure it matters. There are op eds like that
Speaker 1: in the New York Times every day. It's just a
Speaker 1: different byline, or I guess the non byline here. Presidents
Speaker 1: aren't judged by the noise or even the silence that's
Speaker 1: occurring at any one moment or anyone weak by the
Speaker 1: usual critics, and they says the judged by the metrics.
Speaker 1: And when I hear people on cabal news say words
Speaker 1: like historic, unprecedented, stunning, that's exactly the way we describe
Speaker 1: the economy. It's exactly why we describe the way he's
Speaker 1: chopped down all the overburdened him duplicate, duplicative and unnecessary regulations.
Speaker 1: This is historically an historic and unprecedented economic boon time.
Speaker 1: And the Democrats would take that away. The results as
Speaker 1: evidenced in the article are irrefutable by the way, the
Speaker 1: president is doing a great job as president. But then
Speaker 1: they take this little extra step which I find particularly annoying,
Speaker 1: of saying the president should not get credit for the
Speaker 1: good things that are happening while he's the president because
Speaker 1: it's happening in spite of him. Come on, come on,
Speaker 1: that's just that's just that's un serious. It is an
Speaker 1: unserious approach to this. As vice President Pence more initially
Speaker 1: spending the rumor, and the rumors were flying last night.
Speaker 1: I had people telling me all kinds of stuff. I
Speaker 1: have people reaching out to me, Oh it's this person,
Speaker 1: Oh it's that person. Rumors are flying all over the place.
Speaker 1: But Vice President Pence was a name that was bandied
Speaker 1: about for a short while, and he made it as
Speaker 1: clear as he could that he's got no part of
Speaker 1: this play. Well, I think it's a disgrace. The anonymous
Speaker 1: editorial publishing the New York Times represents a new low
Speaker 1: in American journalism, and I think the New York Times
Speaker 1: should be ashamed, And I think whoever wrote this anonymous
Speaker 1: editorial should also be ashamed as well. Anyone who would
Speaker 1: write an anonymous editorial, uh snaring this president, who has
Speaker 1: provided extraordinary leadership of this country, should not be working
Speaker 1: for this administration. They ought to do the honorable thing,
Speaker 1: and they ought to resign. Yeah, they had to resign
Speaker 1: and come forward and speak publicly. Nothing that they've said, folks,
Speaker 1: has not already really been said by somebody else, which
Speaker 1: also makes me question the veracity of the editorial in
Speaker 1: the first place. This is like a collection of the
Speaker 1: rumors that somebody has heard that. They probably think the
Speaker 1: New York Times editorial board wanted them to write. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's like collecting all the juicy gossip tidbits, putting
Speaker 1: them together and saying, oh, yeah, I heard all that stuff.
Speaker 1: Here you go. It also shows you that there is
Speaker 1: collusion going on, collusion among the media. They're supposed to
Speaker 1: speak truth to power. That's a laugh, that's a lie.
Speaker 1: They don't do that. But the timing of this is
Speaker 1: not a coincidence. That the Bob Woodword book is out
Speaker 1: and excerpts of it are flying around this week, and
Speaker 1: now you have this. This was all coordinated. It was
Speaker 1: coordinated for maximum uh commercial effect for Woodward and the
Speaker 1: other news outlets involved at the Times. But it's also
Speaker 1: maximum impact against the president, just like NBC News holding
Speaker 1: the Access Hollywood tape until right before the election. Right
Speaker 1: that this is what they do, and they expect us
Speaker 1: to forget about the obvious bias that's at work here,
Speaker 1: that there are a bunch of leftist hacks doing the
Speaker 1: work of the d n C, acting like they're doing
Speaker 1: the work of the First Amendment in the American people.
Speaker 1: We're all sick of it. I'm sick of it. I
Speaker 1: know you are too, So the timing years is clearly
Speaker 1: not a coincidence. And just one more note on the
Speaker 1: New York Times. You know, I've actually been a New
Speaker 1: York Times subscriber for a long time. I've been reading
Speaker 1: a New York Times since back when I was in college,
Speaker 1: and I still read it, although not as thoroughly as
Speaker 1: I used to because I gotta read so many other
Speaker 1: news sources for this show every day. But I skinned
Speaker 1: New York Times pretty much every day. I mean, their
Speaker 1: editorial pages are largely garbage, but sometimes I'll find something
Speaker 1: now that I think is interesting. Don't forget, folks, that
Speaker 1: the same New York Times that's now saying, oh you
Speaker 1: can trust us. We wouldn't overstate this source was also
Speaker 1: part of that whole media week of worship of John McCain,
Speaker 1: largely because it was a mechanism for bashing Trump. But
Speaker 1: The New York Times published a unsourced, anonymous front page
Speaker 1: hit piece on John McCain claiming he had an affair
Speaker 1: back when he was running against Barack Obama. Don't forget that.
Speaker 1: Don't allow that to just sort of skip. A front
Speaker 1: page hit piece on John McCain claiming he had an
Speaker 1: affair as a news story with no named sources. Al Right,
Speaker 1: that's how much the New York Times respected John McCain's
Speaker 1: military service. That's how much the big journals running around
Speaker 1: last week acting like they're so patriotic really cared about
Speaker 1: John McCain. Tried to ruin the man's reputation, his family life,
Speaker 1: his marital life because they needed Barack Obama to win
Speaker 1: so badly. Don't forget that. I don't even get me
Speaker 1: started on the lies for years about the motivation behind
Speaker 1: Gaddy Gifford shooting, which that they were just using that
Speaker 1: as a as a club to beat the n r
Speaker 1: A and and the Second Amendment with and just lies
Speaker 1: and and event eventually New York Times I said, yeah,
Speaker 1: we were wrong about that, but they lied about it
Speaker 1: for years. So don't you know, I don't want to
Speaker 1: hear from them that we have to trust them and
Speaker 1: that they're honest and honorable and they're just journalists doing
Speaker 1: their jobs, because no, they are activists. They are activists.
Speaker 1: And then that brings me to what action that they want?
Speaker 1: What action would they like to see here? And they've
Speaker 1: made that quite clear. Um, they want to remove this
Speaker 1: president from office. I want to talk to you about
Speaker 1: what I think. Let's just say that process for some
Speaker 1: reason did start. What would that look like, How would
Speaker 1: that affect our national political conversation? What would go on
Speaker 1: as a result of this. We'll get into that a
Speaker 1: much more eight four four to eight to five, eight
Speaker 1: four four buck Team. We've got a jam pack show
Speaker 1: a lot coming up on the Kavanaugh hearing. That will
Speaker 1: be a bit later. Uh. And then I will also
Speaker 1: talk to you later on the show about transgender desistation um,
Speaker 1: which is something that I'll have to explain to you,
Speaker 1: but I think you'll find particularly interesting. Uh. That will
Speaker 1: be worth our time to be sure. Eight four five.
Speaker 1: You want to call in, we will be right. Oh,
Speaker 1: dessistance not desistation. Pardon me, I thought I got that
Speaker 1: We're wrong. Trans transgender dessistance. That's coming up. We'll be
Speaker 1: right back. It lays out the path for removal of
Speaker 1: the president and cases of quote inability, and that's a
Speaker 1: term that has never been defined or tested. The idea
Speaker 1: that the Amendment would ever be used is really hard
Speaker 1: to contemplate that we're at that point. Why won't Paul
Speaker 1: Ryan and miss McConnell to day Convenea hearing on the
Speaker 1: But I would haul up political pointees from every agency
Speaker 1: and ask who talked about invoking them? And what did
Speaker 1: you see the twenty five amendment? Folks? Isn't that so quaint?
Speaker 1: We're back to that discussion all of a sudden. We've
Speaker 1: heard it before, and now we are to believe that
Speaker 1: this is just because these people have the best interests
Speaker 1: of the nation at heart. There's nothing there's nothing political
Speaker 1: about this. It's not bitterness because of Hillary's loss. No,
Speaker 1: they really think that the cabinet and the vice president
Speaker 1: are going to just remove Trump from office based upon
Speaker 1: what exactly? What is the basis for this that somebody
Speaker 1: wrote an anonymous editorial saying that the president has some
Speaker 1: weird impulses and he doesn't like his decision making. You know,
Speaker 1: if they were saying that the president thought that pink
Speaker 1: elephants were flying around the Oval office and he was
Speaker 1: talking to what he thought was Jar Jar Binks, but
Speaker 1: it was really just a a potted plant in the
Speaker 1: in the corner of the room, then I would say,
Speaker 1: maybe we gotta have a conversation about the twenty amendment.
Speaker 1: They're just saying that they don't like this guy, and
Speaker 1: they don't like his policy. They think he's erratic. That's
Speaker 1: not grounds for removing the office, because of moving the
Speaker 1: president from office because he's unfit. Uh, this is supposed
Speaker 1: to be for somebody who's mentally infirm or or has
Speaker 1: a you know, has a stroke, or you know, is
Speaker 1: deeply ill or has has real mental illness. Not you know,
Speaker 1: he watches a lot of TV and and likes McDonald's
Speaker 1: cheeseburgers and doesn't give a you know what what the
Speaker 1: media says about him. That that's not what the amendment
Speaker 1: is for. But you know, you can always turn to
Speaker 1: the ladies of the view. They give you a sense
Speaker 1: of what what Those who are not spending a whole
Speaker 1: lot of time reading think about the situation Play twelve.
Speaker 1: I think, uh, it certainly is a very subversive act.
Speaker 1: I think this person is a patriot. I think this
Speaker 1: person is certainly putting our country first. And I think
Speaker 1: this person it sounds like someone who is very thoughtful,
Speaker 1: someone who is well versed in our country's politics. The
Speaker 1: person talks about Senator McCain, um, it sounds like a
Speaker 1: military person to me. Um having discussed this with a
Speaker 1: lot of military people that I have in my family. Um,
Speaker 1: but I also think that this person is probably saving
Speaker 1: our country, saving our country. Just remember this, when people say, oh,
Speaker 1: you can't come out and can't tell us who he
Speaker 1: or she is because of all the backlash backlash, there
Speaker 1: would be adulation, which makes me think that there's really
Speaker 1: that this has all been a miscalculation. This will end up,
Speaker 1: mark my words, this will end up um helping Trump
Speaker 1: more than it hurts him in the long run. Because
Speaker 1: it now now I don't want to hear from anybody, Oh,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, there's not a deep state. There's a steady state,
Speaker 1: and give me a break, right, I don't want to
Speaker 1: hear that nonsense anymore. You know, I I caught a
Speaker 1: lot of heat. I've been saying all along that there's
Speaker 1: a early on there's a deep state. You know, I've
Speaker 1: talked to you about the Turkish Darren Devlett and the
Speaker 1: the origins of the deep state in the in the
Speaker 1: Turkish context, and you know, we've discussed is it fair,
Speaker 1: is it just a cabal or is there really something
Speaker 1: a little bit a little bit more? And um, you know,
Speaker 1: now you have a really a deep state manifesto that's
Speaker 1: been put out there of what they're trying to do.
Speaker 1: And it's not the only one. I mean, even without
Speaker 1: this op ed, I would say, look at what's going
Speaker 1: on at the f Beyond the d o J. There
Speaker 1: is clearly a concerted effort by some very powerful senior
Speaker 1: government figures to undermine and in fact destroy the Trump
Speaker 1: administration and to use the positions of their office to
Speaker 1: do it. And this is this is people talking about
Speaker 1: unprecedented when it's not. You know, I've been I've been
Speaker 1: hammering that this past week. But this is unprecedented, at
Speaker 1: least in my lifetime. I've never seen anything like this.
Speaker 1: People say, oh, what about the T Party or all.
Speaker 1: I'm not talking about a citizen movement in opposition to
Speaker 1: the president's policies. This is people who are paid by
Speaker 1: the federal government, who are in the chain of command.
Speaker 1: This is essentially the civil service equivalent of a mutiny
Speaker 1: that we are talking about here, and this were the military,
Speaker 1: it would be a mutiny. And people are cheering this on.
Speaker 1: They think this is a good idea. Uh, it's not
Speaker 1: a good idea. It's disgraceful what's being done here. And
Speaker 1: it's also really destabilized. I'm talking about undermining institutions. The
Speaker 1: president can't trust senior White House officials to enact his
Speaker 1: policies and to obey his orders. That's a big problem.
Speaker 1: There's also word for that, it's insubordination, and you can
Speaker 1: get fired for it, and you should. He is holding
Speaker 1: the line for America buck sex in his back. This
Speaker 1: is a genuine constitutional crisis. This is a moment where, uh,
Speaker 1: it's a crisis of conscience for people in the United
Speaker 1: States Senate on the other side of the aisle, where
Speaker 1: they have been willing to be more protective of their chairmanships,
Speaker 1: of their party, of their president than they have of
Speaker 1: the Constitution and the institutions themselves. Oh yeah, he's running.
Speaker 1: Everybody remember him, John Kerry, a guy who miraculously married,
Speaker 1: very wealthy twice fund his political career. It's it's amazing
Speaker 1: how that happens. But he is gonna run again. I
Speaker 1: think he's in there now. When I said gonna run again,
Speaker 1: he's trying to position himself for a run. But when
Speaker 1: I think it's fashion is he calls us a constitutional
Speaker 1: crisis because that sounds momentous. Right to call it a
Speaker 1: constitutional crisis is to put a lot of wom behind
Speaker 1: this thing, right, it's to make it seem like it's
Speaker 1: just full of gravity and gravitas and seriousness. Darn it.
Speaker 1: But it's a constitutional crisis in a way that John
Speaker 1: Kerry does not either want to admit or understand, and
Speaker 1: that is that the President of the United States is
Speaker 1: being undermined by his own government because they say so,
Speaker 1: and they're doing it surreptitiously and quietly. That's not democratic,
Speaker 1: that's not constitutional. That subversion And as much as they
Speaker 1: claim that they're doing it in the best interests of
Speaker 1: the American people, the American people have not empowered them
Speaker 1: to make that decision. They are assuming that they are
Speaker 1: senior White House officials were talking about here in a
Speaker 1: role to help the president and help his agenda. He
Speaker 1: is the one who is given authority under the Constitution
Speaker 1: because of the votes of the American people. They do
Speaker 1: not You know that this doesn't doesn't transfer over to them.
Speaker 1: You know that this is what maybe they need a
Speaker 1: little refresher course in basic civics. They're not a part
Speaker 1: of this as well. They're supposed to be helpful. I
Speaker 1: don't want to know what they're discretion they think should
Speaker 1: lead them to do. I just want them to execute
Speaker 1: or leave. I'm not saying they have to do it, folks.
Speaker 1: And this is what people say, Oh, well, what if
Speaker 1: Trump was you know, he was ordering us to an
Speaker 1: attack of country and you know martial law, and yeah,
Speaker 1: then you resign, you come forward, you say that the
Speaker 1: president Trump is is uh out a line needs to
Speaker 1: be removed from office. Here's why. That's the mechanism. There
Speaker 1: are things in place. You see. What you keep having
Speaker 1: is democrats abandoning the city. They talk about how the
Speaker 1: system is being undermined, and then the moment that the
Speaker 1: system doesn't work in their favor, they're willing to abandon it,
Speaker 1: destroy it, undermine it themselves. It's all about expedients. It's
Speaker 1: all about what gives them what they want in the
Speaker 1: moment that they wanted. There's no principle for them. There's
Speaker 1: just a pursuit of power. And that's why I find
Speaker 1: this whole situation with the op edge so frustrating, kind
Speaker 1: of amusing in a way, but also disheartening. But John
Speaker 1: Carry continues on Place seventeen. It's really serious. It's uh,
Speaker 1: it's foreboding in so many different ways, because it really
Speaker 1: means I mean, have you have somebody stealing something off
Speaker 1: the president's desk in order to prevent him from making decision.
Speaker 1: You have him ordering generals to do something, and within
Speaker 1: a moment of them being ordered, they turned to their
Speaker 1: fellow Jessey, we're not doing that. What it really means
Speaker 1: is we we don't have a president, and we have
Speaker 1: a president who's there, but he is not capable of
Speaker 1: doing the job or living up to the responsibilities. We
Speaker 1: don't have a president. Obama's former secretary of State says,
Speaker 1: I think that's de gross. I think that undermines the
Speaker 1: commander in chief, don't you. That's reckless. That goes way
Speaker 1: beyond disagreeing on policy or expressing one's First Amendment rights
Speaker 1: as a citizen. To criticize government actions or decisions, that's
Speaker 1: something else, folks. That's really meant to destabilize, to delegitimize.
Speaker 1: That's the primary purpose, to find a way to give
Speaker 1: some justification to the thought process that I remember from
Speaker 1: the chance, from the marches, from the screaming, yelling, banshee
Speaker 1: like howls on the streets of Manhattan at the very
Speaker 1: beginning of the Trump presidency from the hashtag resistance yelling
Speaker 1: not my president, not my president. I remember that, and
Speaker 1: now they think they can make that a reality. And
Speaker 1: John Kerry is giving the some degree of intellectual cover
Speaker 1: they think by also saying, we don't have a president
Speaker 1: right now. No, we do have a president. It's just
Speaker 1: one that they don't like. It's one that they disapprove of.
Speaker 1: You know, I did not think that Barack Obama was
Speaker 1: good at his job. I did not think he was
Speaker 1: anywhere near as qualified or as impressive as any of
Speaker 1: the Democrats that I knew. But I never thought he
Speaker 1: wasn't actually the president. I just learned to live in
Speaker 1: the reality of, yeah, he's the president. Let's see how
Speaker 1: the next election goes. That's the normal adult response to this.
Speaker 1: I can't help but look at how here we are again,
Speaker 1: the second Republican president of my adult life. And also
Speaker 1: we're being told he's not really the president. He's a
Speaker 1: legitimate Just like with Bush, he wasn't really the president either.
Speaker 1: The other Supreme Court gave him the election. They made
Speaker 1: whole movies, lots of fiction thrown in about how Bush
Speaker 1: didn't really win Florida. Uh, and it was stolen in
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, and I was you know, he wasn't
Speaker 1: really legitimate. Oh and the popular vote by the day
Speaker 1: they trot that one out. This is like saying, um, well,
Speaker 1: you know we're running a mile race. Well I beat
Speaker 1: you that I'm faster than you for the first hundred yards,
Speaker 1: so I'm faster than you. Well that's not the race
Speaker 1: we're running. This is this is an idiocy that keeps
Speaker 1: coming back up all the popular vote. The popular vote.
Speaker 1: They do not run campaigns based on the popular vote.
Speaker 1: If they did, Trump would have been a lot more
Speaker 1: time focused on New York and California. Okay, they don't
Speaker 1: run campaigns that way. That matters. It would change the dynamic.
Speaker 1: People like me who live in New York, who are
Speaker 1: or lived in New York, who are Conservatives would come
Speaker 1: out and vote in much larger numbers if we thought
Speaker 1: it mattered because it was all about the overall vote total. Instead,
Speaker 1: I vote because I feel like I have to be
Speaker 1: some political analyst and I have to do that and
Speaker 1: blah blah and all that. But a lot of people
Speaker 1: in New Ork conservats like, what am I gonna vote
Speaker 1: New York for? It's a joke. My vote means nothing,
Speaker 1: and realistically they're correct, so it's completely So that's why
Speaker 1: this whole popular vot think it's a it's a it's
Speaker 1: a canard, it's a red herring, it's b s. And
Speaker 1: that's why I just get tired of it, you know,
Speaker 1: engage on the real issues. Notice how folks were weeks
Speaker 1: away from the mid terms. We're not talking about health care,
Speaker 1: although I do we talked about healthcare, but I mean
Speaker 1: the country right now. I'm not discussing health care. Really,
Speaker 1: not a lot of talk about immigration. They definitely don't
Speaker 1: want to talk about the economy. Why this economy is
Speaker 1: amazing right now? Very little interest though in addressing that.
Speaker 1: I don't want to get anywhere near there right So,
Speaker 1: why what are we supposed to be deciding on? How
Speaker 1: are the political narrative shaping up? You're seeing it? It's
Speaker 1: just this this media storytelling and this obsession with Trump
Speaker 1: as as not just bad, but Trump as evil. And
Speaker 1: I think that Trump is in good company because they
Speaker 1: think this about all conservatives. They don't think that we're wrong.
Speaker 1: They think that we're bad people, and they've allowed themselves
Speaker 1: to have that mindset fester for far too long and
Speaker 1: it's long pastime when we should allow that to be,
Speaker 1: you know, a state of affairs that persists. I think
Speaker 1: it's time. By the way, I just saw us Burt Reynolds.
Speaker 1: Burt Reynolds passed away. Huh, legendary star of Smoky the Bandit,
Speaker 1: director and producer dead at eighty two. Man, I didn't
Speaker 1: realize that, you know, John, do you? I never really
Speaker 1: saw Yeah, I just saw that now. I didn't see
Speaker 1: that before. I know it happened earlier. I'm seeing now
Speaker 1: when it went up on the site. Burt Reynolds. Huh. Interesting,
Speaker 1: you know, I never really I think I never really
Speaker 1: saw him. I never saw Smoking the band It. Maybe
Speaker 1: I'll have to Maybe I'll check it out this weekend.
Speaker 1: Although I've got that Jack Ryan Amazon. I needed to
Speaker 1: catch up on that and give because a lot of
Speaker 1: folks are ask me what I think of it. So
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to check that one out. I'm hearing
Speaker 1: good things. We are going to talk a bit about um,
Speaker 1: the way that the media cares about international opinion about
Speaker 1: this opped coming up in a second, and then the
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh hearings. Uh, Corey Booker doesn't realize that the papers
Speaker 1: he's going to share, have been cleared for being shared,
Speaker 1: but he thinks he's being tough about it. We'll get
Speaker 1: to that. Stay with me. The fallout from the so
Speaker 1: called resistance opped about President Trump in the New York
Speaker 1: Times has gone international, and the overwhelming reaction from US
Speaker 1: allies in Europe seems to be less than a surprise.
Speaker 1: In fact, a German weekly has now replaced its coverage
Speaker 1: of the op ed with an eyebrow raising poll on
Speaker 1: the things Germans right now fear most coming at a
Speaker 1: number one with look at this President Trump. He beats
Speaker 1: out fear of refugees, over running Germany, at and terrorism,
Speaker 1: which got fifty nine percent actual. Yeah, we're most scout
Speaker 1: of the President Trump. How trumpics so frightening? Oh no,
Speaker 1: what would you do? Somebody please save me from the
Speaker 1: trump ing? Oh Trump, e Trump the Germans. I think
Speaker 1: it's hilarious that the media thinks that we're all supposed
Speaker 1: to care what European papers say about our political squabbles.
Speaker 1: Here's a little here's a little news flash for them.
Speaker 1: We don't care, or at least normal people do not care.
Speaker 1: Media loves this, though they always feel like the because
Speaker 1: the the extension of the elites in Europe. Is you
Speaker 1: know that they they think of elites in Europe as
Speaker 1: an extension of themselves and their own opinions. So they
Speaker 1: love to do this thing of the Europeans or anything.
Speaker 1: Think of how stupid that is. They're more concerned about Trump?
Speaker 1: How and what way? Are they more concerned about Trump
Speaker 1: than about the refugee problem that they've got, which is
Speaker 1: big more about terrorism? I mean, what normal human being
Speaker 1: in Germany is worried about Donald Trump? I mean this,
Speaker 1: this is it's a fashion. It's a fad. Anti trump is.
Speaker 1: Um is something that simple minded people think about themselves
Speaker 1: so they can pretend to be sophisticated and informed. It's
Speaker 1: like climate change, folks. It's much more about fashion than
Speaker 1: it is about belief or knowledge. Um. So you know
Speaker 1: that's that's why. But I just love the Germans terrified
Speaker 1: of Trumpets, like, oh no, what will we do? Trump
Speaker 1: is going to come and inved Us and steal all
Speaker 1: of all Hamburgers and Frankfurt and Venish Nitzel's. Uh it's man,
Speaker 1: it makes me want to call him freedom Fries again.
Speaker 1: And uh, I know that's French. But I was also
Speaker 1: thinking about we come up with a new name for
Speaker 1: hamburgers called freedom Burgers. You know, there you go, freedom burgers.
Speaker 1: I guess the burger. I think actually it's German too.
Speaker 1: It's just a stupid pole, the whole thing. It's it's
Speaker 1: just ridiculous. But why they're even telling us about this
Speaker 1: on CNN. I think it's a fun wind, a window
Speaker 1: into their mindset and how they think. Oh, there's a globe,
Speaker 1: there's global fallout from this op ed in the New
Speaker 1: York Times about Trump not really, everything's fine. Everybody woke
Speaker 1: up today all over the world and their life was
Speaker 1: basically the same as it was the day before, regardless
Speaker 1: of that op ed. You know, this is I'm here
Speaker 1: to tell you it's all. It's all gonna be okay.
Speaker 1: I'm here. I'm here to let you know it's gonna
Speaker 1: be fine, folks. I'm not saying we don't have problems,
Speaker 1: and they aren't bad things, they aren't bad guys, and
Speaker 1: but I'm been in terms of the of the uh,
Speaker 1: the consequences to any of us. You me of this
Speaker 1: op ed? Yeah, people really really need to chill out
Speaker 1: quite a bit. It's got to the point now where
Speaker 1: they need to seek help. Trump arrangement syndrome is is not.
Speaker 1: It's not just a clever thing we've come up with
Speaker 1: to troll and own the lives. Like, yes, I talked
Speaker 1: about Trump arrangement syndrome to own the hibs, but I
Speaker 1: also really do think that there are people who have
Speaker 1: become somewhat deranged by their anti Trump hatred and and
Speaker 1: it's a it's a problem, it's something to something to
Speaker 1: worry about. I want to transition. You know, next hour,
Speaker 1: we're gonna talk quite a bit more about the the
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh hearings today, the whole Cavanaugh situation, and you know,
Speaker 1: we'll get it. They had the usually an they're coming
Speaker 1: at them with this, and it's just it's exactly what
Speaker 1: I thought. A lot of hyperbole, a lot of really
Speaker 1: second and third tier legal minds, which is unfortunately what
Speaker 1: a lot of Democrats senators are. Um, so you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of them trying to come at Kavanaugh in
Speaker 1: a particularly pathetic fashion. But there was some other stuff
Speaker 1: that happened that I think was First of all, we're
Speaker 1: gonna get to Corey Booker's I Am Spartacus moment, which
Speaker 1: you're not. You gotta hear that it's amazing, referred to
Speaker 1: himself as Spartacus. Corey Booker is trying so hard. Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, it is. It is kind of painful to watch.
Speaker 1: He's really making a mockery of himself doing a great favor.
Speaker 1: I think for Kamala Harris, who's also trying way too
Speaker 1: hard on these issues, I mean, really going above and
Speaker 1: beyond what a normal person would expect a senator to
Speaker 1: do with the circumstances, because you know she she's also
Speaker 1: trying to really make an impression and start getting the
Speaker 1: whole twenty thing going. This is all about the election, folks,
Speaker 1: all about who's gonna step up and be the leader
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party. So those are the stakes. But
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris pushed Kavanaugh on So Mark Casuits is the
Speaker 1: lawyer for President Trump right now, he's President Trump's personal
Speaker 1: lawyer on the whole Russia probe thing. And she kept
Speaker 1: pushing him on this point. And when you hear the exchange, people,
Speaker 1: you know people, normal people here to say, what is
Speaker 1: she badgering him about? I mean, he's obviously doesn't really
Speaker 1: know what she's talking about. But play the clip, John,
Speaker 1: have you discussed Malla or his investigation with anyone at Cassewitz,
Speaker 1: Benson and Torres, the law firm founded by Mark Cassewitz,
Speaker 1: President Trump's personal lawyer. All right, be sure about your answer, sir, um, Well,
Speaker 1: I'm not remembering, but if you have something you wanna,
Speaker 1: are you certain you've not had a conversation with anyone
Speaker 1: at that law firm. That's not what he said. Casswitz,
Speaker 1: Benson and Torres, which is the law firm founded by
Speaker 1: Mark Cassewitz, who is President Trump's personal lawyer. Are you
Speaker 1: have you had any conversation about Robert Muller or his
Speaker 1: investigation with anyone at that firm? Yes? Or no? Well,
Speaker 1: is there a person you're talking I'm asking you a
Speaker 1: very direct question, yes or no. I need to know that.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure I know everyone who works with that
Speaker 1: law firm. I don't think you need to. I think
Speaker 1: you need to know who you talk with, who'd you
Speaker 1: talk to? I don't think I'm not remembering, but I'm
Speaker 1: happy to be refreshed. I mean, he doesn't know everybody
Speaker 1: that works at that law firm. What the heck is
Speaker 1: she talking about? It is a big law firm. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know he doesn't know everybody how how so so
Speaker 1: you see, this is why And we'll return to this
Speaker 1: because as Bluementhal kind of does the same thing. There's
Speaker 1: no good faith in these in these just in these hearings, folks,
Speaker 1: they want to try to get him on some little
Speaker 1: point of minutia and then try to crush him for
Speaker 1: being a liar. And he's just like, look, I don't remember,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I can't give you an answer because
Speaker 1: I don't really know. And and she's just trying to
Speaker 1: make such a big deal of it. You know what's
Speaker 1: the really fun part of this, folks. The law firm
Speaker 1: today just decide to step in and they're like, nobody
Speaker 1: from our firm ever talked to Kavanaugh about any of
Speaker 1: this stuff. Nobody. Okay, so what the heck is Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris talking about? Yeah, who knows, But that was just
Speaker 1: so funny people that, yeah, she's taking it to him. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's like, why does why did they get so much
Speaker 1: joy out of Well, it's because they don't like his politics, right,
Speaker 1: we all know the answer, but it's so it's just
Speaker 1: so gross this guy having as a good guy, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, and look, the history of Republicans appointing judges.
Speaker 1: Is that even when they think they're getting a conservative
Speaker 1: constitutionals on the bench, about half of ours go bad
Speaker 1: once they get past the process. So who knows. But anyway,
Speaker 1: the Democrats are making asses of themselves. We'll get into
Speaker 1: that coming up. Global Verification Network the only dual certified
Speaker 1: veteran owned background investigation and vetting company. Folks, when you're
Speaker 1: hiring or you have a property that you're trying to
Speaker 1: lease out to somebody, you're looking at tenants, you're looking
Speaker 1: at possible employees. You need somebody that you can trust
Speaker 1: who's efficient, discreet and gets the job done. That's Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network. I know the CEO, Mark Buckman personally. He's
Speaker 1: a totally squared away guy, a Navy vet, and he
Speaker 1: really cares about the work that he and his team
Speaker 1: are doing every day. Are headquartered in Chicago, and their
Speaker 1: risk mitigation experts will work with startups all the way
Speaker 1: up to Fortune one D companies. No data or client
Speaker 1: information is ever off short. You know that's different. A
Speaker 1: lot of the other guys send stuff overseas. You're paying
Speaker 1: somebody so they can pay somebody else in a foreign
Speaker 1: country to do this work for you you don't want that,
Speaker 1: go with Global Verification call eight seven seven six nine
Speaker 1: eleven seventy nine, or go to my g VN dot
Speaker 1: com and tell them buck Sexton SENTI buck Sexton Mission
Speaker 1: decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake, American rank, You're a great American Again. This
Speaker 1: is the buck Sexton Show. Activita Analysts. No, I knowingly
Speaker 1: violated the rules that were put forth, and I'm told
Speaker 1: that the committee confidential rules have knowing consequences. And so, sir,
Speaker 1: I come from a long line as all of us
Speaker 1: do as Americans, and understand what that kind of civil disobediences.
Speaker 1: And I understand the consequences. So I am right now
Speaker 1: before your before your process is finished, I'm going to
Speaker 1: release the email about racial profiling. And I understand that
Speaker 1: that the penalty comes with potential outsting from the Senate.
Speaker 1: And if Senator Cornin believes that I violated Senate rules,
Speaker 1: I openly invite and accept the consequences of my team
Speaker 1: releasing that email right now. I'm releasing it to expose
Speaker 1: that Number one, the emails are being withheld from the
Speaker 1: public have nothing to do with national security. What I'm
Speaker 1: releasing this document right now to show, sir, is that
Speaker 1: we have a process here for a person the highest
Speaker 1: office in the land for a lifetime appointment. We're rushing
Speaker 1: through this before me and my colleagues can even read
Speaker 1: and digest the information. Corey Booker, everybody looking for his
Speaker 1: big moment today, Corey Booker, who clearly has some twenty
Speaker 1: twenty action in his sights, although I just don't think
Speaker 1: he's got it. There's something a little j V about
Speaker 1: Corey Booker. I'm I'm just calling it like I see,
Speaker 1: it just just doesn't have it. You know, I think
Speaker 1: there are other people that they are gonna be. I
Speaker 1: think that you get. I think Biden, Hillary, Heck, I
Speaker 1: think Bernie goes ahead of Corey in the line for
Speaker 1: the Democrats. I really do. He's just and it's there's
Speaker 1: something a little desperate about his whole you know, I'm
Speaker 1: just America and that's the highest office in the land,
Speaker 1: and I'm just so upset about all this what's going on.
Speaker 1: It's just kind of hysterical. This whole thing in the
Speaker 1: hearing today was all it was a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: just just calm down, Corey it's it's all gonna be okay,
Speaker 1: you know, but he but he the big thing here
Speaker 1: is that he he got some documents and he said,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm gonna release them even though not supposed to.
Speaker 1: So he says, I'm gonna violate Senate rules. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: forget Senate rules. I'm just gonna go for it. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna violate them because that's how important this is. And
Speaker 1: then it just brings you back to see Democrats don't
Speaker 1: really believe in rules. They don't really believe in this stuff.
Speaker 1: They they talk about rules and rule of law and all,
Speaker 1: but but at the end of the day, they just
Speaker 1: want to do what they want to do. And you know,
Speaker 1: they use the rules when it benefits them. They ignore
Speaker 1: the rules when it when it benefits them to ignore them.
Speaker 1: And so you know, he says this, and he's got
Speaker 1: his big moment of you know, I understand the penalty
Speaker 1: comes with the potential outstick from the Senate and he
Speaker 1: gets into it a little bit with the Senator corn
Speaker 1: In on this one. Senator cordings like, let's go, let's
Speaker 1: let's let's throw down play clip eight. There is no
Speaker 1: Senate rule that that I violated because there's no Sentate
Speaker 1: rule that accounts for this process. I read the Senate
Speaker 1: Rule twenty nine five, the Standing Rules of the Senate
Speaker 1: for the benefit of all Senators. Any Senator, officer or
Speaker 1: employee the Senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential
Speaker 1: business or proceedings of the Senate, including the business and
Speaker 1: proceedings of the Committees, subcommittees, and offices of the Senate,
Speaker 1: shall be liable if a Senator to suffer expulsion from
Speaker 1: the body, and if an officer or employee to dismissal
Speaker 1: from the service of the Senate, and the punishment ring
Speaker 1: or contempt. So I would bring a I would correct
Speaker 1: the senator's statement. There is no rule. There is clearly
Speaker 1: a rule that applies in a final rum, and bring
Speaker 1: the charges, bring it, Bring it. Corey Booker, Man, he's tough.
Speaker 1: We mean Alex Jones shall be the Cory Booker. He's tough.
Speaker 1: He's a tough guy. Oh, yamage tough guy. Uh it
Speaker 1: was pretty bring it okay, Corey Booker. He goes even further, folks.
Speaker 1: I mean Booker was really men at theatrics today. He
Speaker 1: was he was really trying to get some love from
Speaker 1: that camera. Pay attention to me, Pay attention to me.
Speaker 1: That's what the senator from New Jersey was doing today.
Speaker 1: And you can't make this stuff up. Stuff up, folks.
Speaker 1: Here here's where he went next, play nine. I think
Speaker 1: this is about the closest I'll probably ever have in
Speaker 1: my life to an I am Spartacus moment. Uh. My colleagues,
Speaker 1: numerous them said that they too accept the responsibility. There
Speaker 1: are very seriousness charges that were made against me by
Speaker 1: my colleague from Texas. I don't know if they were
Speaker 1: a political bluster or sincere feelings. If what he said
Speaker 1: was sincere, there actually are Senate rules governing the behavior
Speaker 1: of senators. If he feels that I and now my
Speaker 1: fellow colleagues who are with me have violated those rules.
Speaker 1: If he's not a tempest in a teapot, but sincerely
Speaker 1: believes that, then bring the charges. Go through the Senate
Speaker 1: process to take on somebody that you said is unbecoming
Speaker 1: to be a senator. Let's go through that process. Corey
Speaker 1: Booker is not Spartacus, everybody, I am Spartacus moment. Nope,
Speaker 1: it is not. It is not a Spartacus moment. It
Speaker 1: is a you really want Rachel Matt out to play
Speaker 1: a good long clip of you on MSNBC to Night moment,
Speaker 1: which I'm sure she I'm sure she's probably doing it. Well,
Speaker 1: not right now because he's not on Well, it depends
Speaker 1: on when you're listening to this, but she probably did
Speaker 1: it at some point tonight. Look, he's Booker wants to
Speaker 1: get to the front of the hashtag resistance line. I
Speaker 1: get it, folks, you get it too. I like gout
Speaker 1: Chuck Grassley, who's unfortunately Chuck grassle impersonation sounds a little
Speaker 1: bit like my Senator lah impersonation, which is Erber. But
Speaker 1: grass Lely pointed out that you don't. Booker just keeps
Speaker 1: you know, Yeah, yesterday he was saying this thing about,
Speaker 1: you know, I wouldn't accept an intern with nine percent
Speaker 1: of the application. And as I said, you know, Senator Booker,
Speaker 1: if an intern sent you four d and pages of
Speaker 1: an application, you'd call the Capitol police. It's just a
Speaker 1: dumb thing from to keep repeating over and over again.
Speaker 1: Gradually also called onto the fact that Booker just seems
Speaker 1: to he just he just thinks he's on a loop here,
Speaker 1: just gotta keep repeating and repeating and repeating play ten.
Speaker 1: No sentate rule accounts for Bill Burke's parts in review
Speaker 1: of the documents. There is no centate rule that that
Speaker 1: I violated, because there's no center rule that accounts for
Speaker 1: this process. No centate rule. And I'm told that the
Speaker 1: committee confidential rules have knowing consequences, and I understand the
Speaker 1: consequences and accept the consequences. I'm going to release the
Speaker 1: email about racial profiling of my team, releasing that email
Speaker 1: right now. What I'm releasing this document right now to
Speaker 1: show and I'm releasing it. Can I ask you? And
Speaker 1: I don't ask you. Can I ask you how long
Speaker 1: you're going to say the same thing three or four times? No, sir,
Speaker 1: I want I'm saying I'm nolingly violating the rules album
Speaker 1: for it. May I say, I'm saying right now that
Speaker 1: I'm releasing I'm releasing Committee Competentist. How many times? How
Speaker 1: many times grass at more like grassle Um, how many
Speaker 1: times he's right? Booker won't stop saying the same darn
Speaker 1: thing over and over again? And it's just tedious, man like,
Speaker 1: get a grip, get a grip, this whole thing. I
Speaker 1: I would have loved it if they just said you know,
Speaker 1: we're gonna we're gonna bag it. We're gonna bag it.
Speaker 1: We're gonna just get out of this and uh, we're
Speaker 1: gonna find a We're just gonna have a vote. And
Speaker 1: that's it. We're done. It's been real, everybody, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's been fun at all. But we don't need to
Speaker 1: have another another full week here of of total and
Speaker 1: absolute grandstanding. Um, what we need are just more more
Speaker 1: leftist showing up on TV to remind us why we
Speaker 1: shouldn't vote for them. Play eighteen, A new technology was
Speaker 1: an invasion of your property and and and therefore was
Speaker 1: something that violated them. So and whole streets are streets occupies.
Speaker 1: Stand it. Hearing people are the worst, the worst, But
Speaker 1: you know, the vote Democrats, so the media goes easy
Speaker 1: on them. You'll notice that the really bad behavior comes
Speaker 1: from the left and all these things because they don't
Speaker 1: like making arguments. They like people just tell them they're right.
Speaker 1: Oh well it is what it is, my friends. Um,
Speaker 1: we have a whole lot more coming up, a bit
Speaker 1: more on the some of the back and forth today.
Speaker 1: What does a perjury trap sound like? Folks? I want
Speaker 1: to get to that and uh, also, is McCabe going
Speaker 1: to prison for perjury? Remember the acting FBI director that's
Speaker 1: coming up. If you've ever found yourself wincing at the
Speaker 1: week taste of coffee from one of those left leaning
Speaker 1: corporate COMI brands, you probably thought, I wish they spent
Speaker 1: less time on meaningless bias training, bathroom policy reform and
Speaker 1: other things at the five common sense, and more time
Speaker 1: on their coffee. That's why, my friends, you need yourself
Speaker 1: some Black Rifle coffee. I drink Black Rifle every day.
Speaker 1: I'm in fact in their coffee club. I get it
Speaker 1: delivered to me at the beginning of every month. I
Speaker 1: get my cake cups, Silence or Smooth Freedom Blend, you
Speaker 1: name it, I got it, and every in my office
Speaker 1: who tries it loves it. They are all switching to
Speaker 1: Black Rifle coffee. They're ditching that comy stuff and buying
Speaker 1: coffee from a bunch of patriots, veterans and people who
Speaker 1: love this country and love some delicious joe. So check
Speaker 1: it out for yourself. Visit Black Rifle Coffee dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck and receive fifteen percent off your order again
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee dot Com slash buck for fifteen percent
Speaker 1: off Black Rifle Coffee dot Com slash buck also check
Speaker 1: out the gear they've got on the side off. Have
Speaker 1: you ever talked to anybody in the White House about
Speaker 1: the Special Council investigation? I've had no discussions with people
Speaker 1: in the White House about the No one. I have
Speaker 1: had no issues where I've discussed my views on any matters, issues, cases,
Speaker 1: no hints, previews, forecasts. But have you ever talked about
Speaker 1: the Special Council investigation with Don McGann, who is behind
Speaker 1: you or anyone else in the White House. That's a
Speaker 1: simple yes or no that I'm not about. I'm not
Speaker 1: remembering any discussions like that, of course, and preparing for
Speaker 1: this hearing, I've prepared prepared for questions like the one
Speaker 1: you're asking, Well, what discussions have you had about the
Speaker 1: Special Council with people in the White tim have not
Speaker 1: had discussions. It's pretty simple English. Have you talked about
Speaker 1: the Special Counsel with anyone in the White House? That
Speaker 1: was anybody who works for the President United States? Right?
Speaker 1: You just rephrased the question though, and that was about
Speaker 1: Mr Muller this time and previously, is about the investigation
Speaker 1: because you haven't talked to anyone in the White House
Speaker 1: about Robert Mueller or the Special Counsel investigation. So you
Speaker 1: change the question again, center. You know, it's like Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: is a legal super nerd made from the parts of
Speaker 1: lesser legal nerds, and all these wannabes in the Senate
Speaker 1: are just trying to trying to jump on him, and
Speaker 1: he's swapping them away time and time again. I mean,
Speaker 1: but folks, that was an instructive little little clip there,
Speaker 1: because when when people say things that just tell the truth,
Speaker 1: just tell the truth. What is the truth when you're
Speaker 1: being asked a question six different ways and the question changing,
Speaker 1: but the person asking it thinks they're asking the same question.
Speaker 1: You know. Blumenthal, by the way, it reminds me of
Speaker 1: you know, he could play like the creepy, weird you know,
Speaker 1: funeral home guy that like no one knows what he's
Speaker 1: doing when the doors are closed and everybody leaves at night.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's a weirdo. I mean, he just there's
Speaker 1: something very whoever's voting for that guy, he just everything
Speaker 1: about him is is is creepy. What else to say?
Speaker 1: But he says that five you know, he asked him
Speaker 1: five different times about talking to Special Council. Think about
Speaker 1: this though, And you also had this with uh Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: where you know, she's saying, did you ever speak to
Speaker 1: somebody who well, you know, he doesn't know everybody who
Speaker 1: works at that law firms? How can he answer that question?
Speaker 1: And don't think for a second you already know this.
Speaker 1: Remember what they did to Jeff Sessions, right, Jeff Sessions
Speaker 1: was asked about Russia context and he's like, no, I
Speaker 1: didn't have any like campaign Russia context, and like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: well here you met the ambassador in a public event
Speaker 1: with you know, five people there and shook his hand.
Speaker 1: Liar And he's like, he's like a lady anyway, He's like,
Speaker 1: what do you what do you mean? You know, that's
Speaker 1: not what you were really, that's not what you were
Speaker 1: asking about. And you know, he can't really be expected
Speaker 1: to remember that, Kenny, And they said, oh, he's a liar,
Speaker 1: they were saying, Jeff Sesson. So so you can't expect
Speaker 1: these people to have any good faith or goodwill. And
Speaker 1: with with with these questions, they're specifically trying to get
Speaker 1: him on something where they can say that he lied,
Speaker 1: and that then becomes that it doesn't matter how small
Speaker 1: it is. Folks. Oh, you mean like this is how
Speaker 1: the Special Counsel would do things. To say Papadopoulos and
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn and others, just keep asking questions, get somebody
Speaker 1: to get something that is technically not true, even if
Speaker 1: they're not trying to tell you something that is not true,
Speaker 1: and then hammer them for being a liar, hammer them
Speaker 1: for perjury. This is a perjury trap. It's a real thing.
Speaker 1: It goes to the bad faith of the cross examining party,
Speaker 1: the prosecutor in this case, the Senator Bloomenthal is the
Speaker 1: ultimate in bad faith. Oh, I mentioned the Casuwits law
Speaker 1: firm thing. Bloomenthal went down that road with with Kabin
Speaker 1: on to night Play. Have you had conversations about the
Speaker 1: Special Council Investigation with anyone at the Casswitz, Benson and
Speaker 1: Tourists firm. No, I don't remember anything like that. Are
Speaker 1: you acquainted with anyone at that firm? I know Ed
Speaker 1: McNally used to work at the White House Council's office,
Speaker 1: and I now I understand that he works at that
Speaker 1: law firm. Have you ever talked to him about the
Speaker 1: Special Council investigation? Now? Are you acquainted with Mark casswith
Speaker 1: I'm not Are you acquainted with uh anyone else at
Speaker 1: the Casswits law firm. I don't believe so, But as
Speaker 1: I discussed with Senator Harris last night, I didn't know.
Speaker 1: For example, Senator Lieberman worked at that firm and he
Speaker 1: spoke to the judges a couple of years ago before this.
Speaker 1: But that's the kind of thing I was worried about
Speaker 1: when I was talking with Senator Harris last night. Has
Speaker 1: said it. I don't have the full roster, but I'm
Speaker 1: pretty confident the answer is no. Okay. I mean, this
Speaker 1: whole thing is really a joke in a way. Right,
Speaker 1: There's nothing that they're not trying to get any underlying
Speaker 1: truth here. This isn't about understanding his judicial philosophy. This
Speaker 1: is about senators who are doing one of two things,
Speaker 1: grandstanding for their own purposes Democrats that is, grand standing
Speaker 1: for their own purposes, or trying to jam up Kavanaugh,
Speaker 1: who is as good a legal mind as exists from
Speaker 1: everything that we know about him, as good a legal
Speaker 1: mind as there is out there. But you know what
Speaker 1: really summarizes this for Let's let's take us let's step
Speaker 1: away from Senators for a second. And here Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker 1: who really summarizes what the left wing Democrat point of
Speaker 1: view is on this guy without the documents that they
Speaker 1: say they don't have. Without, you know, Pelosi is at
Speaker 1: least telling you what they really think. Play the team.
Speaker 1: This week, the nation has witnessed the confirmation hearing from
Speaker 1: the most radical anti healthcare, anti choice Supreme Court nominees
Speaker 1: in recent history, a nominee who thinks the President Trump
Speaker 1: is above the law. If Judge Covnaugh is confirmed, Roby Wade,
Speaker 1: affordable healthcare, voting rights, common sense, gun violence, prepension, the
Speaker 1: freedoms of LGBTQ Americans, communities of colors, and immigrants are
Speaker 1: all on the chopping luck, just to name a few.
Speaker 1: And if he doesn't believe in star disasters, that established law,
Speaker 1: everything is on the table. Began voting rights, civil rights,
Speaker 1: Brown versus the Board of Education, voting rights and civil
Speaker 1: rights on the chopping block. If this Yale educated d C.
Speaker 1: Circuit Court you, almost unanimously approved by the Senate judge,
Speaker 1: gets on the Supreme Court, you know, I have no
Speaker 1: sympathy for liberals on this at all. They have they
Speaker 1: we're way too reliant on the Supreme Court for way
Speaker 1: too long as their super legislature. So I have no
Speaker 1: sympathy for them at all. But but Pelosi here, I
Speaker 1: would say she's I would say she's an imbecile, and
Speaker 1: I wouldn't be wrong, but it's it's really actually just shameless.
Speaker 1: You know, she is doing what she can two stir
Speaker 1: up her base, and she'll say anything. And you know,
Speaker 1: I gotta say something, folks. We have the left and
Speaker 1: and this has been a recurring theme this week. The
Speaker 1: left talks about how we need to have, you know,
Speaker 1: better decorum, and you know Trump is, you know, he's
Speaker 1: so rough around the edges. And then i't like this
Speaker 1: and not about him, but but the truth is this, Uh,
Speaker 1: we shouldn't allow ourselves to normalize what the Democrats are
Speaker 1: doing this week, either the Senators or somebody like Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker 1: which is to malign a good man. You know, Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi is part of a machine here that is saying
Speaker 1: horrible and untrue thing about an American who's a good guy,
Speaker 1: a brilliant man, a family man, and who has been
Speaker 1: honorable based on everything we know his entire life. Alright,
Speaker 1: his biggest sin was spending a little too much money
Speaker 1: on baseball tickets for like himself and his family. And
Speaker 1: it's not a sin, even though I think baseball sometimes
Speaker 1: goes on a little too long. So we shouldn't just say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's politics. No, it's not politics. What Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi is doing is dishonorable. That that statement she made
Speaker 1: their on Kavanaugh is disgraceful, all right, She's not just
Speaker 1: it's one thing to say I don't like him on row,
Speaker 1: I don't like him on these things, to say that
Speaker 1: voting rights are on the chopping block, civil rights are
Speaker 1: on the line, to call him radical an anti healthcare?
Speaker 1: Does she I mean, does she realize how stupid that sounds? Now?
Speaker 1: The answer is yeah, she does. She doesn't care though,
Speaker 1: because she's trying to. She's really preaching to a choir
Speaker 1: of left wing idiots, and they don't care how stupid
Speaker 1: it sounds. They like the way it sounds, and so Pelosi,
Speaker 1: in that respect, is giving them exactly what they want.
Speaker 1: It's it's pathetic, it's kind of sad, and we shouldn't
Speaker 1: let it go. He's back with you now, because when
Speaker 1: it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck never stops.
Speaker 1: We cannot blindly follow this president and his incompetency, which
Speaker 1: is a theme throughout this book, and his recklessness and
Speaker 1: his disconcern for the national interest uh in favor of
Speaker 1: his own interest. It is time for the Republicans to
Speaker 1: say the Trump presidency is a national emergency, and it
Speaker 1: is up to us both parties to treat the Trump
Speaker 1: presidency as a national emergency. It would seem to me
Speaker 1: that General Kelly Uh in the interest of the country
Speaker 1: needs to resign and with its statement that says the
Speaker 1: presidency can no longer be entrusted to this man, wind
Speaker 1: Bag Woodward on the march, folks. He's got his book
Speaker 1: coming out. We're gonna I'm trying to get him on
Speaker 1: trying to get him on Rise and Look, I'll try
Speaker 1: to get him on radio two. I mean, I'll do
Speaker 1: what I can get him to to tune in and
Speaker 1: uh and check us out. But uh, this, this notion
Speaker 1: of Trump is a national emergency. I I really I
Speaker 1: want to pull this apart a little bit because we
Speaker 1: have had such a week here with the non op
Speaker 1: ed and and now you've got more people to talking aboutment.
Speaker 1: You'll notice I'm I'm correct on this one, folks. It
Speaker 1: all happens right after uh, it becomes clear that they're
Speaker 1: not going to get the perjury trap option with the
Speaker 1: mother probe against Trump. Now, all of a sudden, we're
Speaker 1: back to amendment. You know that that he can be
Speaker 1: removed to be removed via the amendment. And and that's
Speaker 1: what I think, you know, the timing of this is
Speaker 1: is all very suspect to me. Um, It's all very
Speaker 1: clear in my view that what's going on here is, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, you have a situation where they're just moving
Speaker 1: to the next thing. Um, They're they're moving to the
Speaker 1: next version of how it is that they don't have
Speaker 1: to have that how it is that Trump is no
Speaker 1: longer president anymore. Here here is the tent. By the way,
Speaker 1: in case of the removal of the president from office,
Speaker 1: or of his death or resignation, the president of the
Speaker 1: vice president rather shall become president. Whenever there is a
Speaker 1: vacancy in the office of the vice president, the President
Speaker 1: shall uh nominate a vice president who shall take office
Speaker 1: upon a confirmation by a majority vote of both houses
Speaker 1: of Congress um. And then whenever the vice president and
Speaker 1: a majority of other principal officers or the of the
Speaker 1: Executive Departments, or of such other body as Congress may
Speaker 1: provide by law, transmit to the President pro Temporary of
Speaker 1: the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives
Speaker 1: their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge
Speaker 1: the powers and duties of his office. The Vice President
Speaker 1: shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office
Speaker 1: as acting president. So that's the that's what they're going
Speaker 1: for now, oh, twenty fifth Amendment. All the time they
Speaker 1: think that John Kelly is really going to resign and
Speaker 1: make a statement that the president shouldn't be the president anymore.
Speaker 1: I I can't help but feel like, what are we?
Speaker 1: What is? What do they want us to make of
Speaker 1: the following? Let's turn to the facts for a moment. Here.
Speaker 1: We were told by the same media, and I don't
Speaker 1: mean the same media in general terms, I mean the
Speaker 1: same people in the media, the same outlets, the same individuals,
Speaker 1: the same editorial boards. We were told that Barack Obama
Speaker 1: was an almost godlike super genius who was going to
Speaker 1: slow the rise of the seas and heal the planet
Speaker 1: and make everything wonderful and perfect. You know, there'd be
Speaker 1: unicorns and bunnies and you know, streams of candy corn
Speaker 1: or you know whatever. Right, if it's just gonna be amazing,
Speaker 1: it was gonna be fantasy land for us. I'm only
Speaker 1: slightly exaggerating. You know that it was said that he
Speaker 1: was gonna heal the planet. He said he was gonna
Speaker 1: heal the planet, and he's gonna slow the rise of
Speaker 1: the season. What we had with Obama was, no matter
Speaker 1: who you are, I think very disappointing. The economy was
Speaker 1: growing at a snail like pace. We had race riots,
Speaker 1: so the whole racial healing component of the Obama administration
Speaker 1: was certainly not as as originally advertised. Uh, you know
Speaker 1: they Obamacare is the only law that people have ever
Speaker 1: tried actively the people writing the law to make sure
Speaker 1: doesn't in any way apply to them or anybody that
Speaker 1: they can make sure it's not something that can be
Speaker 1: of avoid being subject to it. Didn't get anything done
Speaker 1: on immigration with Congress, didn't get anything done on the
Speaker 1: environment despite all the big bluster and talk about it,
Speaker 1: and just it wasn't a particularly good time for the country.
Speaker 1: A lot of terrorism, the rise of ices, major terrorist
Speaker 1: attacks on US soil, going on, major terrorist tax against
Speaker 1: our allies and it just it just didn't work out, folks.
Speaker 1: So that's the reality of the Obama administration. Now I
Speaker 1: need someone to explain to me if Trump is this
Speaker 1: bumbling buffoon, if he's like a an evil Mr. Magoo,
Speaker 1: which is kind of you know, with with bad taste
Speaker 1: and gaudy gold fixtures. They got to explain to me.
Speaker 1: What do we make of the fact that Trump is
Speaker 1: doing a great job. What do we make of the
Speaker 1: fact that Trump is presiding over an economy that's the
Speaker 1: best economy we've seen in decades. In some ways, people say,
Speaker 1: given you know the position of America right now, and
Speaker 1: that's probably the best economy, might be the best economy
Speaker 1: the country has ever had, you can make that argument.
Speaker 1: And we're not invading countries that we shouldn't. We're not
Speaker 1: in the midst of a of a nasty war where
Speaker 1: we're losing soldiers every day. We are losing some still
Speaker 1: in a Rock and Afghanistan, but the numbers are considerably smaller,
Speaker 1: still too many, but smaller than what we would have
Speaker 1: seen under the Busher Obama administrations. So we're not starting
Speaker 1: some big war. The country is doing great. You know,
Speaker 1: We've got some issues. We're trying to handle them. Maybe
Speaker 1: they'll still be some infrastructure bill for those of you
Speaker 1: who want that. Maybe they'll still be a wall, although
Speaker 1: I'm starting to get pretty doubtful. But overall things are good.
Speaker 1: So Bernstein running around saying he's a national emergency, what
Speaker 1: do they expect, really, you and me to take away
Speaker 1: from that? It's an emergency that I'm seeing a lot
Speaker 1: of people that are finally feeling, especially from my generation,
Speaker 1: like we're getting our economic legs under us. You know,
Speaker 1: we got a little bit of optimism about our future.
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll buy a house, maybe start a family. Because
Speaker 1: there's a big problem with millennials with that. We're supposed
Speaker 1: to be angry at Trump. Because of this, businesses across
Speaker 1: the board are saying it's a better business environment than
Speaker 1: they've seen in years and years. Maybe, ever, is that
Speaker 1: is the national emergency that Trump is so successful despite
Speaker 1: all the things that they told us would happen if
Speaker 1: he became president. Because if that's the national emergency, you
Speaker 1: know what, I'm okay with it. I think we're all
Speaker 1: gonna be just fine. But remember what happened to the
Speaker 1: Conservatives when they were shadow band First Twitter said they
Speaker 1: did not do it. Now Jack admitted that it did
Speaker 1: happen with their algorithm, and it happened not based upon
Speaker 1: what those individuals were doing on Twitter, but who followed them,
Speaker 1: and they never even explained it. They're too strong to
Speaker 1: call it censorship. I don't think so, because look at it.
Speaker 1: Just take a perspective here. If you googled the California
Speaker 1: Republican Party two weeks before the primary election, it's said
Speaker 1: our ideology was Nazism. We've had senior engineers and Facebook
Speaker 1: who are conservative actually bring a group together because they
Speaker 1: feel it's mob mentality where they're being intimidated because of
Speaker 1: their own personal views. It's just a real problem. It
Speaker 1: is a real problem, folks. We got some big I'm
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna foreshadow here a little bit. You have
Speaker 1: to stay with me because I want to I want
Speaker 1: to change the topics real quickly. But we're gonna have
Speaker 1: some big news for you coming up at the top
Speaker 1: of the next hour on the social media shadow banning
Speaker 1: side of things. One that's going to get a lot
Speaker 1: of attention to bring this issue to the forefront. So
Speaker 1: that's just consider that a little preview that we're putting
Speaker 1: in year before we get to it. But the next
Speaker 1: hour we will talk about what's happening here with with
Speaker 1: social media sites banning people and who's that what's the
Speaker 1: next shoe to drop? But I want to just take
Speaker 1: a moment here to remind everyone that well we constantly
Speaker 1: and next hour I'll talk to us about Papa Papa
Speaker 1: do Polis and how he's going to give his first
Speaker 1: TV interview. But while we're always reminded that there are
Speaker 1: these people associated with Trump who have been prosecuted and
Speaker 1: they've either been found guilty in the case of somebody
Speaker 1: like a Maniford, or they have pleaded guilty ahead of
Speaker 1: time and trying to get a reduced sentence. That there's
Speaker 1: somebody else who's on the hot seat here, and he's
Speaker 1: a big fish, folks. McCabe, former FBI Deputy director, the
Speaker 1: number two at the fb I, who was neck deep
Speaker 1: in the Russia collusion investigation and all the stuff going
Speaker 1: on there. Who's obvious, guys, he's obviously a Democrat. Okay,
Speaker 1: his wife's a big Democrats. Obviously a Democrat. The the
Speaker 1: the high level bureaucrats tend to be leftists. The rank,
Speaker 1: the rank, and file in law enforcement, and to some
Speaker 1: it's a little more mixed and intelligence. But the rank
Speaker 1: and file and law enforcement tend to be, if not
Speaker 1: GOP conservatives, at least a little traditionalist in their point
Speaker 1: of view, you know, because I have to deal with
Speaker 1: the real world and law and order and good guys
Speaker 1: and bad guys. But the you know, the the guys
Speaker 1: that thrive in bureaucracies tend to be bureaucratic creatures, and
Speaker 1: those people tend to be leftists, progressives. So, Andy McCabe,
Speaker 1: here's what's going on, and it's not getting a fraction
Speaker 1: of the coverage it would if we were changing around
Speaker 1: some of the political dynamics. Here, here's the latest from
Speaker 1: the Washington Post. Federal prosecutors have for months been using
Speaker 1: a grand jury to investigate former FBI Director Andrew McCabe,
Speaker 1: an indication the probe and whether he misled officials exploring
Speaker 1: his role in a controversial media disclosure, has intensified, two
Speaker 1: people familiar with the matter said. The grand jury has
Speaker 1: summoned more than one witness, the people said, and the
Speaker 1: case is ongoing. The presence of the grand jury shows
Speaker 1: prosecutors are treating the matter seriously, locking in the accounts
Speaker 1: of witnesses who might later have to testify at a trial,
Speaker 1: but such panels are sometimes used only as investigative tools,
Speaker 1: and it remains unclear if Mr McCabe will ultimately be charged.
Speaker 1: A spokesman for the U. S. Attorney's Office in d C,
Speaker 1: which has been handling the probe, declined to comment, as
Speaker 1: did a spokeswoman for McCabe. Okay, guys, the former deputy
Speaker 1: director of the FBI might be going to prison. That's
Speaker 1: what you really need to take away that. That's what
Speaker 1: you need to have in mind here, all right, You're
Speaker 1: not getting nearly enough of a focus on the fact
Speaker 1: that think about that, folks, When was the last time
Speaker 1: he was the acting director for a while? When was
Speaker 1: the last time the number two at the Federal Bureau
Speaker 1: of Investigation was in serious, credible threat of going to prison?
Speaker 1: By the way, I think he I think he is
Speaker 1: going to end up taking a police bargain. I think
Speaker 1: I think they're going to charge him because they have
Speaker 1: to charge him. And see this is you know, there's
Speaker 1: that there's that phrase. I don't know where it comes from.
Speaker 1: Those who live by the sword died by the sword.
Speaker 1: Producer Mike, where does that come from? I've always said that.
Speaker 1: You know, it's a phrase I've known for a long time.
Speaker 1: Is it biblical? I mean, it sounds biblical. But I
Speaker 1: didn't want to be that media ignoramus that claims something's
Speaker 1: in the Bible when it's actually, you know, Shakespeare or
Speaker 1: something that doesn't sound Shakespeare. You know what I mean? Um,
Speaker 1: his producer, Mike even is he is he out with
Speaker 1: the with the you know, the ladies from the front
Speaker 1: office of the finance thing downstairs. Yeah, he's okay, he's
Speaker 1: he's not on a coffee break with a bunch of ladies.
Speaker 1: We'll see, we'll see about that. We got eyes on you, producer, Mike,
Speaker 1: don't don't, don't try anythings. Don't try anything too smooth.
Speaker 1: So look there, your reality here is You've got this
Speaker 1: guy who has for a long time put people away
Speaker 1: for lying under growth FBI agents. I look, I get
Speaker 1: this right, and I don't mean to you. Gotta be
Speaker 1: fair to law enforcement, used to the tools that they
Speaker 1: have to get people. I don't like the notion of
Speaker 1: law enforcement approaching investigations or prosecutions like they have to
Speaker 1: get scalps. I don't like that that's not the way
Speaker 1: it should be. But they're also going to use the
Speaker 1: tools they have to go after people when they think
Speaker 1: they're supposed to go after people. And that's why one
Speaker 1: the United States Criminal Code about lying to federal federal
Speaker 1: officers is show it's look, it's very useful for them,
Speaker 1: but it's got to be a two way street, folks,
Speaker 1: meaning or not even a two way street. It's gotta
Speaker 1: be everybody on the same on the same playing field.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, the FBI can lie to you, So
Speaker 1: you sit down and talk to the FBI. They can
Speaker 1: lie to you as much as they want. They can
Speaker 1: say that your wife has sold you out already already,
Speaker 1: you know, told them everything they've got you, and this
Speaker 1: is your last chance to save yourself whatever. And meanwhile,
Speaker 1: they haven't even talked to your wife. They can't even
Speaker 1: find her. They can lie to you all they want.
Speaker 1: You cannot lie to that. Well, that seems a bit.
Speaker 1: That's quite a power and balance, isn't. That's why I
Speaker 1: always telling you, don't ever, ever, ever, ever, ever ever
Speaker 1: talked to the FBI. You know, this is bucks one
Speaker 1: of my rules for life were comfortable shoes and never
Speaker 1: talked to the FBI. If nothing else, if you take
Speaker 1: those two things from the Buck Sexton Show, it will
Speaker 1: all of the time you've spent with me, folks will
Speaker 1: be well well worth it. But McCabe lied more than once.
Speaker 1: It's already it's already been adjudicated in the sense that
Speaker 1: his you know, the internal investigators at the FBI have said, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right, he lied. So we already know that he
Speaker 1: lied under oath, how do they get how does he
Speaker 1: get out of this now? Or they said he was
Speaker 1: like just now now, pump up, I gotta very careful.
Speaker 1: I think they said he was less than truthful. And
Speaker 1: what you're gonna see, what you're gonna see them try
Speaker 1: to do. Um, what they're gonna try to do is
Speaker 1: essentially a version of what they did for Hillary, where
Speaker 1: they're gonna use weasel words and they're gonna, you know,
Speaker 1: they're gonna try to create a circumstance where he didn't lie,
Speaker 1: but he was less than truthful. You know that they're
Speaker 1: just gonna create some little gray area to give him
Speaker 1: a get out of jail free card. Um. But look,
Speaker 1: Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe alright, twenty four hours
Speaker 1: before he was set to retire and so cost him
Speaker 1: a lot of his and going out look, going after
Speaker 1: someone's pension, folks, for public servants, that's that is a
Speaker 1: big deal for them, and that's considered as very The
Speaker 1: only punishment more severe than that, and for somebody at
Speaker 1: that stage of their career is prison. I mean, that's it.
Speaker 1: If they go after your pension, they're really making a
Speaker 1: statement about it. And I just want to know, I mean,
Speaker 1: basically ahead of the FBI for all intents and purposes,
Speaker 1: because he was acting director for a while. The former
Speaker 1: had of FBI is probably going to prison folks over
Speaker 1: this Trump situation. And everyone likes to on the left
Speaker 1: likes to act like this was all done the up
Speaker 1: and up, it's not a witch on. Well, why do
Speaker 1: we have people, top level people the FBI who are
Speaker 1: probably gonna go to prison? And you say, well, Buck,
Speaker 1: why would McCabe lie four times three of them under
Speaker 1: oath about his contacts with the media on this thing,
Speaker 1: unless unless he was trying to cover something up or
Speaker 1: was dirty. And here's where we're gonna here's where we're
Speaker 1: gonna have a real problem. The FBI cannot cannot continue
Speaker 1: to testify in in criminal proceedings against normal everyday Americans
Speaker 1: and have their word be taken seriously and testify on
Speaker 1: issues like lying under oath and send you and me
Speaker 1: to prison for that. When FBI officers aren't held, aren't
Speaker 1: held to account for it, it cannot happen. So I
Speaker 1: think McCabe is a big trouble, folks. That would be
Speaker 1: the big that would be the first member of the
Speaker 1: hashtag resistance and the deep state to go to prison.
Speaker 1: I think that's gonna happen. So that's that news report
Speaker 1: today was significant. Let's talk about the bomb shell news
Speaker 1: about social media. It's just to just break in here.
Speaker 1: I'm just seeing it. Bombshell news about a social media
Speaker 1: platform that we have to share with you. It's gonna
Speaker 1: spur a lot of conversation tomorrow. And I'm telling you, folks,
Speaker 1: we are we are in the early stages of a
Speaker 1: media war for platforms and the ability to get the
Speaker 1: truth out that's coming up in just a moment. I
Speaker 1: talked about simply save home security a lot on the show.
Speaker 1: It's a great security system, fantastic protection, very easy to us. Well,
Speaker 1: I've got exciting news for you, folks, simply Safe, which
Speaker 1: is the system I have at home. Is valued it
Speaker 1: over a billion dollars now, and that's gonna. Simply Safe
Speaker 1: protects over two million people, gives them comprehensive protection for
Speaker 1: their home with round the clock, professional monitoring and police dispatch,
Speaker 1: simple as a protects you against intruders, fires, leaks, and
Speaker 1: burst pipes, and it keeps working even during power outages,
Speaker 1: down WiFi, you name it, even if a burglar smashes
Speaker 1: your keypad. The system is easy to use, very intuitive,
Speaker 1: takes just minutes to set up, seven monitoring only fourteen
Speaker 1: month folks. It's a great deal. It's a great system.
Speaker 1: I can't recommend it more highly than I do. Order
Speaker 1: your simply Safe system now. My listeners get free shipping
Speaker 1: and free returns. It's simply Safe dot Com slash buck
Speaker 1: that's simply Safe. S I m p l I Safe
Speaker 1: dot Com slash buck buck sextmission decoding the news and
Speaker 1: disseminating information who is actionable until make no mistake, American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show. Analysts, No,
Speaker 1: oh wow, this just broke today just a little bit,
Speaker 1: just a little bit before I'm I went on the air.
Speaker 1: I see here that Twitter has permanently banned Alex Joneses
Speaker 1: and info Wars accounts. He said the accounts violated the
Speaker 1: company's abusive behavior policies. The band comes weeks after Jones
Speaker 1: was banned or suspended by other major tech companies like Apple, Facebook,
Speaker 1: and YouTube. Wow, Jones has now been deep platform from
Speaker 1: all three the big three social media social media companies
Speaker 1: Apple and Tunes, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Well, I guess four.
Speaker 1: Then it depends on how we want to talk about it.
Speaker 1: But yeah, the tech giants, the biggest tech companies in
Speaker 1: in the Internet world are are tossing Jones out entirely.
Speaker 1: And this, folks, you know, this is the problem I
Speaker 1: have with it, Okay, because I know, look, I'm not somebody.
Speaker 1: I'm not somebody who has any fondness at all for
Speaker 1: Alex Jones. As you're all well aware, he's like buck
Speaker 1: sex and I've seen that that smoke, look that's satisfied.
Speaker 1: Look he's like he's one of those coward like guys.
Speaker 1: It comes to barbecue. When I was back in Dallas,
Speaker 1: and you know, it's a blah blah blah, and I
Speaker 1: was just like, dude, you know, honestly, I've got I've
Speaker 1: got about five inches and a lot a lot more,
Speaker 1: a lot more trading than Marco Rubio. So I check
Speaker 1: yourself before you wreck yourself, Mr Jones. But this is
Speaker 1: a problem, folks. It's not a problem for me that
Speaker 1: Alex Jones is banned. It's that there's a precedent being
Speaker 1: set here that people will be banned from these platforms
Speaker 1: based upon political ideology. If you think, and I don't,
Speaker 1: I don't think any of you do. But anybody who
Speaker 1: believes that the left will be content to stop at
Speaker 1: Alex Jones is fooling themselves. There is absolutely no way
Speaker 1: that it will just be Alex Jones here. It's just
Speaker 1: not it's just not. I mean, i'd say it's not possible.
Speaker 1: But they're going to use this now and and continue
Speaker 1: to push. And what's going to happen is that these
Speaker 1: these online activist types, including Sleeping Giants and others who
Speaker 1: make their that their reason for existence is to try
Speaker 1: to to put online pressure campaigns against conservatives. I mean
Speaker 1: Sleeping Giants, which is this progressive you know hit organization
Speaker 1: um mostly on Twitter, but does it using other social
Speaker 1: media platforms too. I believe they they go after people
Speaker 1: and they try to bring maximum pressure against sponsors very quickly,
Speaker 1: and people get scared. Right. All you need is the
Speaker 1: executive suite at some company to say, you know what,
Speaker 1: we don't want this problem, let's just cave, let's just
Speaker 1: give in, and and that they've been able to do
Speaker 1: this with with Twitter. Remember Twitter was the hold out folks.
Speaker 1: Twitter was the one company that was saying, you know,
Speaker 1: I really think that we should at least, you know,
Speaker 1: hold off on banning people. And Dorsey was somebody that
Speaker 1: seemed like he really believed in free speech and the
Speaker 1: freak exchange of ideas. You know, as far as I
Speaker 1: understand it, as far as I understand it, Alex Jones
Speaker 1: has And now I could be wrong, so don't don't
Speaker 1: don't bet on this one. But to my knowledge, Alex
Speaker 1: Jones has not uh threatened to kill anybody. He has
Speaker 1: not called for the rape and or murder of of anybody. Um,
Speaker 1: he said terrible things. Don't get me wrong, but there's
Speaker 1: a difference between actionable speech that's calling for violence or
Speaker 1: or harm to somebody and just speech that's really gross. Uh.
Speaker 1: And you have to ask the question, Okay, why is
Speaker 1: Louis farakon still on Twitter if it's just speech that
Speaker 1: is really odious. You know why is Media Matters for
Speaker 1: America allowed to stay on Twitter pretending to be a
Speaker 1: public a public education foundation or whatever it calls itself.
Speaker 1: It's a five oh one C three, it's it's a
Speaker 1: it's a taxpayer boondoggle of of left wing attack ideology
Speaker 1: that that's all Media Matters is. It's a really uh
Speaker 1: it's It's one of the few organizations I'll tell you
Speaker 1: that when I've had to come across Media Matters people,
Speaker 1: I I actively dislike them because I think that they're
Speaker 1: trying to really harm people, destroy people's livelihoods, and they're
Speaker 1: not judicious about it at all. They just want to
Speaker 1: They just want to ruin people. They're a bit like Gawker,
Speaker 1: which was a website that Peter Thielman people have. He's
Speaker 1: done a lot of great stuff in the business world.
Speaker 1: I don't think anything he's done is as great as
Speaker 1: take the takedown of of Gawker, which was a site
Speaker 1: dedicated to the destruction of human beings, reputations, and lives,
Speaker 1: and it was just it was the worst. It was
Speaker 1: a sewer um. Anyways, look, Jones is really he's really
Speaker 1: bad stuff. He's come after me a couple of times.
Speaker 1: I find him to be both laughable as in pathetic
Speaker 1: and laughable as in somewhat entertaining sometimes because he's he's
Speaker 1: unintentionally uh quite you know, quite amusing at times. But
Speaker 1: this is not going to stop with Jones. It's not
Speaker 1: going to be the end of it. Next they're gonna
Speaker 1: go after and they're gonna build. They're smart about this, folks.
Speaker 1: Next they're gonna go after Bannon, you know. Next, they're
Speaker 1: gonna go after somebody that they say has some ties
Speaker 1: to white nationalists or something. And you know, I can
Speaker 1: tell you that this has come up with a few
Speaker 1: of my liberal colleagues recently, where they've said, you know,
Speaker 1: I heard that so and so has ties to white nationalists.
Speaker 1: You know, can you really are you really okay with
Speaker 1: having that person say on your radio show or on
Speaker 1: your I say, what does that mean? Ties to white
Speaker 1: name is the personal white nationalists? Does the person actively
Speaker 1: associate with white nationalists? If the answers to those questions
Speaker 1: are no, what are we really talking about here? Um?
Speaker 1: Once you start to see these stories and you already
Speaker 1: know about the double standard, right, But the stories about
Speaker 1: how they want people fired, The left wants conservatives fired
Speaker 1: for attending things where somebody else attended. You know that
Speaker 1: that is a bad person basically. I mean the the
Speaker 1: guilt by association that they're doing now and really diving
Speaker 1: into people's social media history and everything. You know, they
Speaker 1: are in a takedown campaign. They can't win the battle
Speaker 1: of ideas, folks. They got nothing. Socialism fails, all right,
Speaker 1: it's it fails that Americans. Actually, when Americans know what
Speaker 1: it is, they don't want it. So they want to
Speaker 1: control the distribution of information because they can't win in
Speaker 1: a battle over information. And that's why the Alex Jones
Speaker 1: Twitter Twitter was the last holdout, and now they've banned him.
Speaker 1: It's troubling because I know, and you know, this is
Speaker 1: not the end of it. This is not oh okay,
Speaker 1: it's just gonna be Alex Jones. You know, they had folks.
Speaker 1: I mean, I I have tremendous respect for uh Jordan Peterson,
Speaker 1: Ben Shapiro, um, other people too who I can't think
Speaker 1: of off the top of my head. But but those
Speaker 1: two for example, and you know they their names will
Speaker 1: appear in uh you know oh, you know, as part
Speaker 1: of the intellectual dark web. I mean, there there was
Speaker 1: a New Yorker piece I think it was, or maybe
Speaker 1: it was New York Magazine where they talked about a
Speaker 1: straight up white nationalist, and then Ben Shapiro and then
Speaker 1: I think it was Jordan Peterson. It's like those people
Speaker 1: do not belong together at all, you know, there's not
Speaker 1: there's no similarity. It's just smear. That's what they're doing.
Speaker 1: They're trying to smear people. They're going to continue to
Speaker 1: do it. And and there This is a this is
Speaker 1: a movement, folks. This is something that's it's growing, it's current,
Speaker 1: it's it's happening right now, and they're trying to rack
Speaker 1: up as many winds as they possibly can and to
Speaker 1: create more momentum so they can get because once you're
Speaker 1: a d platform, you know, then you gotta kind of
Speaker 1: try to scratch your way back into relevance and into
Speaker 1: the conversation. This is why I've been saying for a
Speaker 1: long time, and I don't like to be like I've
Speaker 1: been serrying I've been, but you know, it's true that
Speaker 1: these Silicon Valley giants, this is how they this is
Speaker 1: how the left starts to win the national conversation. Again,
Speaker 1: that's once you understand those are the stakes. And by
Speaker 1: the way, I would love for more of you to
Speaker 1: be on Twitter. It's one thing that if you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not a Twitter pitchman, I'm not trying to you know,
Speaker 1: get their numbers, get their numbers up. But it's a
Speaker 1: great way for all of us to communicate with each other.
Speaker 1: It really is, and it's a really good way once
Speaker 1: you develop a facility with it for in very rapid fashion,
Speaker 1: seeing what's going on and seeing what people are saying
Speaker 1: about something. And Conservatives, folks, we are not on Twitter,
Speaker 1: in in in big numbers. We are not. We are
Speaker 1: you know. I think I think when I was at
Speaker 1: the Blaze and we did some audience testing to get
Speaker 1: a sense of what the social media presence was, all
Speaker 1: the people listening to this radio show, over of you
Speaker 1: are on Facebook, um and now some are very active,
Speaker 1: some are not that active. And that's across also, and
Speaker 1: I've got I've got twenty year olds, I've got people
Speaker 1: actually think we're even you know, fourteen fifteen sixty to
Speaker 1: listen to this show. Based on some of the call
Speaker 1: ins and emails we've gotten and I got people going
Speaker 1: all the way up probably into triple digits, you know,
Speaker 1: and we we we cover the whole range. And about plus,
Speaker 1: if you're on Facebook, less than five percent of you,
Speaker 1: I think it's even more like less than two percent
Speaker 1: of you listening to this broadcast or on Twitter, and
Speaker 1: I understand. Look, it doesn't mean that you need to
Speaker 1: be sharing your thoughts. I know it's a liability for people,
Speaker 1: but it's a great You don't have to even put
Speaker 1: up a photo of yourself. You just use it as
Speaker 1: a means of sorting through news and commentary. And also
Speaker 1: in Buck does something on TV or whatever, you can
Speaker 1: be like, hey Buck, I saw you. That was good,
Speaker 1: which will cancel out the mean liberals who were like,
Speaker 1: won't you go shut your face? Because your face? And
Speaker 1: I'm like, but I just wanted to talk about tax policy.
Speaker 1: Why can't we be friends? Shut up your face. I
Speaker 1: guess life says your face, and you win the argument.
Speaker 1: So the Twitter Twitter band Alex Jones, Folks, there's more
Speaker 1: of this, Come and keep an eye on it. This
Speaker 1: is gonna be a battle, and it does it does
Speaker 1: really matter. The implications here are our major uh and
Speaker 1: there's a lot of um, a lot at Steak, including
Speaker 1: really who's going to be in power in this country
Speaker 1: going forward? So we'll be back just a moment. Stay
Speaker 1: with me. Hiring is challenging, but there's one place you
Speaker 1: can go where hiring a simple, fast and smart, a
Speaker 1: place where growing businesses connect to qualified candidates. That place
Speaker 1: is zip recruiter dot com, slash buck. Zip recruiter sends
Speaker 1: your job to over a hundred of the webs leading
Speaker 1: job boards. They don't stop there, though. What they're powerful
Speaker 1: matching technology. Zipp Recruiter scans thousands of resumes to find
Speaker 1: people at the right experience and invite them to apply
Speaker 1: to your job. Zip recruiters so effective that eight percent
Speaker 1: of employers who post on zip recruiter get a qualified
Speaker 1: candidate through the site within the first day. Folks, I've
Speaker 1: used zip recruiter for hiring and I've got some great
Speaker 1: colleagues now that we found through this site. I can
Speaker 1: attest to it myself from personal experience. It works. You'll
Speaker 1: get the best people for whatever your job posting is.
Speaker 1: With results like that, it's no wonder the zip recruiter
Speaker 1: is the highest rated hiring site in America. Right now,
Speaker 1: you can try zip recruiter for free. That's right free
Speaker 1: at zip recruiter dot com, slash buck that's zip recruiter
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. M Papa Dadopoulos turns out gonna
Speaker 1: be giving his first televised interview tomorrow for those who
Speaker 1: just need a quick refresher. George papais It is a
Speaker 1: fun name to say. He is the former Trump foreign
Speaker 1: policy advisor who is facing some prison time because he
Speaker 1: apparently lied to the Special Counsel Robert Mueller. My understandings
Speaker 1: he lied about a very trivial thing. Um, But this
Speaker 1: is gonna be his first on air interview tomorrow where
Speaker 1: Papadopolis will deal with the fact that he's been charged
Speaker 1: with lying to investigators. I'll let me say a few
Speaker 1: things about this. First of all, he's going on Jake
Speaker 1: Tapper Show. I am not a I'm not a Jake
Speaker 1: Tapper fan, as those you listen this broadcast. No, I
Speaker 1: think that he's an enormous fraud and incredibly smug and
Speaker 1: sanctimonious and loves to He spends an inordinate amount of
Speaker 1: time talking about how much he he loves the troops.
Speaker 1: I'm like, why don't you just it shouldn't feel like
Speaker 1: a brand building exercise. Jake. You know, let's we we
Speaker 1: all love the troops. Calm calm down. But he's going
Speaker 1: to be doing this interview with Papadopolis. I have to assume.
Speaker 1: I have to assume that it is because Papadopoulos wants
Speaker 1: a little bit of sympathy from the establishment, because see
Speaker 1: an end has been the pinnacle of Trump resistance really
Speaker 1: in the media. I mean, that's why I talked about
Speaker 1: seeing as much I do on the show, because they
Speaker 1: are the most aggressively anti Trump while still clinging to
Speaker 1: this fiction that they are not partisan, which is jue,
Speaker 1: It's an it's an insult. That's you know, Wolf Blitzer
Speaker 1: and Anderson Cooper and Jake Tapper and and the rest
Speaker 1: of the crew over there pretending that they do not
Speaker 1: have an agenda, which is an anti Trump agenda is offensive.
Speaker 1: And the fact that they're so smug about it still
Speaker 1: And second, we're just doing journalism. I mean, Jim Acosta
Speaker 1: thinks he's still a journalist. This is offensive. But I
Speaker 1: understand why Papadopolis would go on Top or show. It's
Speaker 1: because this is and this is the equivalent of the
Speaker 1: Michael Cohen interview with I think it was um, not Papadopolis,
Speaker 1: but Stephanopolis. Uh, that he was making essentially an act
Speaker 1: of contrition to the establishment to say, hey, guys, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm not with Trump anymore. You know, please go
Speaker 1: easy on me. I'm you know, please give me a
Speaker 1: little bit of give me some leeway here. Let's let's
Speaker 1: try to be friends sometime in the future or something. Right,
Speaker 1: He's essentially begging for forgiveness because, by the way, you know,
Speaker 1: he the reason that that he was um, the reason
Speaker 1: that they that he got nailed was a Papadopolis, they say,
Speaker 1: admitted to lying about his contact with Joseph miff Sued.
Speaker 1: I'm seeing here, uh. And so miff Sued was the
Speaker 1: guy who it looks like was run as a an
Speaker 1: information gatherer, a source against the Trump campaign. So the
Speaker 1: fact that the FBI may have nailed Papadopoulos for lying
Speaker 1: about his contact with somebody that he only had contact with,
Speaker 1: because the FBI egregiously and in politicized fashion, ran this
Speaker 1: guy as a source against the Trump campaign just goes
Speaker 1: to show you how messed up this whole thing is.
Speaker 1: I mean, folks, the whole mularpro First, I've really come
Speaker 1: to believe that most people outside of the Beltway and
Speaker 1: you know, the sort of coastal media people and those
Speaker 1: who are really into the political fight day in and
Speaker 1: day out, I think most people just don't really care.
Speaker 1: They just don't care that much about this anymore. They're
Speaker 1: they're sick of it. I'll be honestly, I'm kind of
Speaker 1: sick of it. The only reason I stay on it
Speaker 1: is because one, I know, they're still hoping to use
Speaker 1: this against the president, right, They're still hoping to leverage
Speaker 1: this whole situation to damage President Trump, and too, I
Speaker 1: want to know what really happened here. I mean, I
Speaker 1: I tweeted at President Trump today and I can tell
Speaker 1: you that, you know, while Trump doesn't necessarily interact with me,
Speaker 1: I I can reach members of the Trump family and
Speaker 1: people in the White House very easily, and and do
Speaker 1: when I when I choose to um with you know,
Speaker 1: I'm judicious about it obviously. Look, I mean there are
Speaker 1: people the Trump White House. You've got people that are
Speaker 1: talking to folks at Fox News like every day, right,
Speaker 1: I Mean, there's there's a lot of connectivity with with
Speaker 1: the media. But I tweeted at Trump today, I said,
Speaker 1: look man, excuse me, I tweeted, Mr Presidents not look man,
Speaker 1: he's the President United States, Mr President, release the FISA, dux.
Speaker 1: I want to see what really happened here at the
Speaker 1: Carter page warrant and with anything involving Papadopoulos. We all,
Speaker 1: we all deserve to see the truth here. Nobody in
Speaker 1: the UK is gonna No one's life is in danger
Speaker 1: if their name appears. That's the stuff. That's a lie,
Speaker 1: that's just bunk. It's a big pile of crap. So
Speaker 1: you know, I'm wondering what Papadopolis is gonna say. I
Speaker 1: am probably gonna have to watch some of Camper Jake Camper, Uh,
Speaker 1: so I'll have to watch some of of his interview,
Speaker 1: which does not throw me, but nonetheless I'll need to
Speaker 1: know what what Papadoppolis has to say. But this whole
Speaker 1: thing is just ridiculous, it really is. I mean, anyone
Speaker 1: who I had, I'll tell you I had a big fight,
Speaker 1: uh recently with a friend of mine who also, like me,
Speaker 1: comes to the national security communities now on the outside,
Speaker 1: and she was she was all, oh, you know, don't
Speaker 1: don't you think don't you trust them buck, meaning the
Speaker 1: essentially the deep state, but the d o J, the FBI.
Speaker 1: Don't you trust them to know if Carter Page is
Speaker 1: a threat. And I'm like, no, I was in the
Speaker 1: CIA's a rock office. I don't trust them to just
Speaker 1: get it right because they say so. No, I do not,
Speaker 1: And especially when you see some of these individal jewels
Speaker 1: who are are getting in trouble. I mean some of
Speaker 1: the people. I mean I mentioned before, you know McKay,
Speaker 1: then what's gonna happen there? There's been real misconduct at
Speaker 1: the d o J, n FBI. Mean, there have been
Speaker 1: people who have really stepped out a line and are
Speaker 1: now facing consequences because of it. And we should you know,
Speaker 1: we should not forget about that. We shouldn't just brush
Speaker 1: that aside and act like it hasn't happened. It has happened.
Speaker 1: It's real, and it's because they hate Trump so much
Speaker 1: it so, you know, please do let me know by
Speaker 1: the way, you know, if you want, because some people
Speaker 1: all they do is covered this issue. And I and
Speaker 1: some people that I like in the media, but this
Speaker 1: is all they do. They cover Russia Gate. Uh, I
Speaker 1: try to do a more varied program here. But if
Speaker 1: you want more Russia Gate, more of my thoughts as
Speaker 1: somebody who had a t S clearance worked with confidential
Speaker 1: well we didn't call them that. We call them other things,
Speaker 1: but work with you know, agents of the of the
Speaker 1: federal government. And if you if you want me to
Speaker 1: to really drill into this more every day, but I
Speaker 1: just feel like we're in this world of of unreality
Speaker 1: in a sense, we're No matter how much it's shown
Speaker 1: that this Russia investigation is garbage, people still cling to
Speaker 1: it because they want to believe it because they're just
Speaker 1: not handling Hillary's loss. Well, they have not been handling it. Well, uh,
Speaker 1: they take people take it personally that Hillary didn't win
Speaker 1: the election millions and millions of because liberals have replaced
Speaker 1: Here you go, I want to drop a little bomb
Speaker 1: at the end here, Liberals have replaced God with their politics.
Speaker 1: They have you know, the progressive left. I guess it's
Speaker 1: kind of reply repetitive, but the left has replaced God
Speaker 1: with politics. That's why they can't handle these discussions. He's
Speaker 1: holding the line for America, buck Sexton his back as
Speaker 1: we try to evaluate what to do about the skewed
Speaker 1: social media platforms, the deep platforming movement among liberals, efforts
Speaker 1: to shut down speech that they don't like. We have
Speaker 1: to deal with, uh, something that is in addition to
Speaker 1: the trend towards considering conservative ideology hate speech, right, which
Speaker 1: is you're going to see more of that, and trying
Speaker 1: to tie mainstream conservatives to people who are actually hateful,
Speaker 1: which you've already seen with a lot of efforts to say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: somebody who's a conservative was once at a meeting where
Speaker 1: there was once a person who once was at another
Speaker 1: meeting where there was a white nationalist present, right, and
Speaker 1: then oh my gosh, this person can never be talked
Speaker 1: to ever again. You're like, wait, but they didn't, they
Speaker 1: didn't do anything. Um. There's also the problem of science,
Speaker 1: scientific study, and science becoming a form of of hate
Speaker 1: speech according to the left. You know, I spoke to
Speaker 1: you recently about this study at at Brown University that
Speaker 1: was repudiated by Brown by the after it was published,
Speaker 1: Brown pulled it and repudiated it because that has to
Speaker 1: do with what I called what is called rather rapid
Speaker 1: onset gender dysphori Essentially, if a teenager who had it
Speaker 1: is usually the same sex the same sex attracted has
Speaker 1: a bunch of friends around him or her who come
Speaker 1: out as transgender, that person is much more likely to
Speaker 1: also come out as transgender. That's damaging and problematic to
Speaker 1: the ideology of transgenderism and transgender rights. But it turns
Speaker 1: out there was an even bigger, uh, an even bigger
Speaker 1: issue in this. I was doing a little bit of
Speaker 1: research on this little bit of reading, and it was
Speaker 1: about something called trans dissistance, which was also which is
Speaker 1: also being studied by some scholars. And transdssistance is when
Speaker 1: somebody uh ceases to view themselves as transgender. And in fact,
Speaker 1: when you study this, what you find is that, particularly
Speaker 1: among teenagers who identify as transgender at one point, the
Speaker 1: trans desistence numbers essentially not feeling transgender anymore is particularly
Speaker 1: is is noteworthy. I'll at least say that the numbers
Speaker 1: that they'll say it needs more study, but it's it's
Speaker 1: very real and it's there, um and I have to
Speaker 1: say it's it's astonishing how nasty and vitriolic people get
Speaker 1: over this issue. But it's because this has become part
Speaker 1: of a of a social justice movement on the left.
Speaker 1: They've invested a lot of their political capital into this.
Speaker 1: And here's what happens if you if there's a recognition
Speaker 1: of rapid onset gender dysphoria or of transgender desistence. Essentially,
Speaker 1: people can just kind of decide because of their peer
Speaker 1: group to be transgender, and people can no longer feel transgender,
Speaker 1: especially teenagers over a period of time. You know what
Speaker 1: that means, folks, that it is a psychological condition and
Speaker 1: that there is a component of time, sensitivity and choice
Speaker 1: involved with it. What that would indicate is that people
Speaker 1: are not It is not a fundamental, unchangeable part of
Speaker 1: somebody's critical identity that must be respected and cherished and
Speaker 1: and you know, held up for all to h to
Speaker 1: proclaim as some kind of actualization. No, it's it's it
Speaker 1: may not be that, um And this is why, you know,
Speaker 1: and there's real medical reasoning behind this to be concerned
Speaker 1: at puberty blockers and hormone treatments can lead to permanent sterilization,
Speaker 1: So teenagers who think that they're a different gender, uh
Speaker 1: can put themselves at serious health risk. There's been very
Speaker 1: little study on this, and doctors are now becoming complicit
Speaker 1: in it because they don't want the research to be
Speaker 1: done because anybody who does the research is called a hater,
Speaker 1: a bigott, hate speech. So once science is being called hate,
Speaker 1: we have entered into a very dark period, and you're
Speaker 1: seeing it with this transgender rights issue. It's been going
Speaker 1: on for a while, but it's not becoming more clear
Speaker 1: because the science is not on the side of transgenderism
Speaker 1: as an innate and immovable characteristic of identity. It is
Speaker 1: much much more clear that it's a psychological condition, and
Speaker 1: the left doesn't want to hear that. So whenever someone
Speaker 1: says it, I'm gonna call them a hater, a bigot,
Speaker 1: a transphobe. And there was also a news story just
Speaker 1: earlier this week that in the UK teachers are now
Speaker 1: being trained to identify transgender students at an early age.
Speaker 1: Why oh, of course, so that they can um, you know,
Speaker 1: be supportive of this concept. They can be supportive of
Speaker 1: transgenderism and transgender rights and on all the rest of it,
Speaker 1: that that gender dysphoria should really be nursed and and
Speaker 1: uh be assisted along. There's a reason, folks that there's
Speaker 1: been recently a what is it a two thirty six
Speaker 1: surge in kids wanting sex changes in the past three
Speaker 1: years in the UK. It's because this has become a
Speaker 1: fad that is being forced on not just people in general,
Speaker 1: but on children. I think we should at least look
Speaker 1: at the science that's involved here before we come to
Speaker 1: all these judgments. We got roll call coming up. Stay
Speaker 1: with me, rock and roll, fellow patriots, we made ours
Speaker 1: go up to eleven. It's time for roll Call. Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck Sex. And also you'll notice I'm
Speaker 1: posting more stuff. They're including a short video series we've
Speaker 1: started on Hill TV called buck Wild. I wanted to
Speaker 1: call it buck Shot, but there were some sensitivities about that,
Speaker 1: so it had to be called buck Wild. But buck
Speaker 1: Wild is pretty good. You should check it out Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck Sex, and please like and share, folks.
Speaker 1: Let me just tell you there's some progressives out there
Speaker 1: who I work with, who are also posting videos. Who
Speaker 1: do you want to get more views? Because we tally
Speaker 1: them up every week. It's a left versus right battle
Speaker 1: to the finish. Uh. So you you guys are my
Speaker 1: my ace up to sleeve on this one, Team buck.
Speaker 1: I got a little special, little special legion to call
Speaker 1: upon here. Uh, Julie Rights, Hi, buck Love the show
Speaker 1: well Julie, you understand great radio, and you're a wonderful person,
Speaker 1: a fantastic taste. I'm just wondering a couple of things.
Speaker 1: Isn't this anonymous op ed author complicit now in the
Speaker 1: tyranny of the Trump era? Is there a flow chart
Speaker 1: or maybe a family tree of people involved in the
Speaker 1: whole Russia thing. I think it would be a good
Speaker 1: idea for Senator Newz to put a new ness new
Speaker 1: ness I was corrected by him to put a PowerPoint
Speaker 1: presentation together to explain all the connections before the midterms.
Speaker 1: Your previous observation about my baby being adorable is correct.
Speaker 1: She has a photo here of herself and her baby. Uh.
Speaker 1: He is the cutest baby ever. You had said. He
Speaker 1: looks like the Gerber baby. And actually his middle name
Speaker 1: is for my uncle who was an actual Gerber baby
Speaker 1: in the early nineteen forties. Thanks for the great analysis,
Speaker 1: Shields High, Julie. Uh well, Julie, he does he could
Speaker 1: be Your baby could sell out of baby food. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna keep it real with you, tell it
Speaker 1: to you like it is, so you know, you might
Speaker 1: have you might have a little adorable little gold mine
Speaker 1: there with your baby that could sell baby food. Uh,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for writing in as to the
Speaker 1: float chart of all the people involved. Yeah, I've actually
Speaker 1: been thinking about that. There's a part of me that
Speaker 1: kind of wants to go a beautiful mind on this
Speaker 1: whole thing and start without minus the crazy part, and
Speaker 1: create a big chart on the on the wall and
Speaker 1: and kind of connected all together and and show what's
Speaker 1: been going on here and and just how how crazy
Speaker 1: this whole thing is. I mean, when when you start
Speaker 1: digging into it, the fact that we've spent as much
Speaker 1: time as we have and that the government spent the
Speaker 1: resources that it did to investigate Papadopoulis and Carter Page,
Speaker 1: they should be they should be ashamed. I mean, they
Speaker 1: should be embarrassed. Carter Page is a nice guy, but
Speaker 1: is a threat to nobody and a threat to no
Speaker 1: one and and is and is actually a guy who
Speaker 1: speaks in glowing terms on people say oh buck, of
Speaker 1: course he will, but about America and went to the
Speaker 1: Naval Academy. Guy says he's a patriot. He just thinks
Speaker 1: that our policy toward Russia is not very smart. And
Speaker 1: there's a real used to be made about that, you know,
Speaker 1: this is not it's not about oh Trump and the
Speaker 1: dossier and all that other Uh so, yeah, it would
Speaker 1: be helpful, Juliet. I wish I'd add that to the
Speaker 1: list of all the things I would do if I
Speaker 1: I had a little more time and a little more
Speaker 1: sanity these days. But the buck is is busy. Um.
Speaker 1: But thank you for reading, and Amy writes, read on
Speaker 1: air at your own risk. Oh okay, well I guess Amy,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm taking the risk because we're in real time here. Uh.
Speaker 1: Reporter in Utah thinks that John Huntsman wrote the New
Speaker 1: York Times hit piece Possible Motive twenty twenty presidential run
Speaker 1: via a Utah reporter on Glenn Beck Live, not the show.
Speaker 1: The reporter used language analysis and Google found phrases in
Speaker 1: the piece most closely resemble John Huntsman. Um. Amy, I
Speaker 1: can tell you that I did see that earlier and
Speaker 1: Abby Huntsman, who was currently with the view. So there's that.
Speaker 1: Abbie Huntsman has said definitively was not her father. And
Speaker 1: I know, I'll be a little bit. She's a sweetheart, actually,
Speaker 1: very nice lady. I don't think she would lie about that.
Speaker 1: You know, It's one thing if she were silent, but
Speaker 1: to come out and lie about it would strike me
Speaker 1: as a little unusual, um and and not smart. So
Speaker 1: that said, I don't know. You know, we're in a
Speaker 1: crazy world, folks. People that uh come at you with
Speaker 1: certainty on all these matters are certainly full of it.
Speaker 1: So just remember that, Jen rights love you Buck, I
Speaker 1: love you to. Jen been cut. Catching up on episodes
Speaker 1: and the beginning of the August thirtie episode with all
Speaker 1: the monkey around comments have me dined with laughter. You
Speaker 1: should tweet that out about the Florida race. You know,
Speaker 1: I think it's gotten Glenn Glenn. Your Jen, not Glenn
Speaker 1: Glenmon's my former boss. Jen, you are among many who
Speaker 1: feel like the monkeying around thing I just needed to
Speaker 1: be screamed from the rooftops because it was such a
Speaker 1: It was really just a step removed from what we
Speaker 1: saw earlier this week with Zena Bash, who was said
Speaker 1: to have a a white power hand signal that she
Speaker 1: had flashed, when really she just was resting her hand.
Speaker 1: I mean, can you imagine you show up? You spent
Speaker 1: your whole life being a and honest and and uh
Speaker 1: and really first class professional in law. You're an advisor
Speaker 1: to Kavanaugh. You know you, You've got a husband, you've
Speaker 1: got children, You've never done anything, you know, anything to
Speaker 1: be ashamed of to anybody that anyone's aware of. And
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, you have Blue check reporters right
Speaker 1: around saying that you're flashing a secret white nationalist sign
Speaker 1: on TV. And your grandparents are Holocaust survivors from Poland
Speaker 1: you're half Jewish and half Mexican. By the way, Miss
Speaker 1: Molly is half Jewish and half Mexican. Fun little side note, Um,
Speaker 1: could you but just think about how that would affect you?
Speaker 1: I mean, you went. I can imagine that Mrs bash
Speaker 1: went home to her kids that night, and and I
Speaker 1: had to hug him close and be like, what a
Speaker 1: crazy world we live in? Um? Adam writes, quote was
Speaker 1: from a few good Men shields. H Yes, Adam, you're correct.
Speaker 1: Your action movie quote skills, although if you give men
Speaker 1: is not an action movie, it's a It's either a
Speaker 1: drama or a thriller, depending on which old school video
Speaker 1: rental story you're in, because they used to kind of
Speaker 1: mix those categories together. Um, but yes, you're correct. I
Speaker 1: did throw in a few good Men reference. Uh, Dan
Speaker 1: Buck love your show. Haven't heard an episode in at
Speaker 1: least a month. Whomp, whomp. Why please accept my apology.
Speaker 1: I'm not near a radio where I can listen privately.
Speaker 1: How Laman excuses that, looking forward to some podcasts, maybe
Speaker 1: even today. Um, much of the time I get on
Speaker 1: public computers and get all nostalgic with the eighties and
Speaker 1: nineties supergroups and super talents as well as old sci fi.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Buck, I'm not having thoughts for litter to
Speaker 1: your show. Um. Maybe a sign that nothing major is happening. Uh,
Speaker 1: touch off for now, Dan, Well, Dan, welcome back to
Speaker 1: the fold, my friend, and I appreciate you can spend
Speaker 1: time with this, or you spend time this when you can,
Speaker 1: as you can. Our buddy t J, who is a
Speaker 1: special place in our freedom hut heart because he has
Speaker 1: a shields high T shirt in his photo on Facebook, Folks,
Speaker 1: that's dedication to the team. T J writes Buck. After
Speaker 1: watching you read a Trump tweet on Rising this morning,
Speaker 1: I've decided to make an executive decision for both Rising
Speaker 1: and your show podcast about Trump tweets. Officially, from now on,
Speaker 1: all Trump tweets must be read in Trump's voice. I
Speaker 1: demand it. Also, if you could throw in a few
Speaker 1: hand gesters, that'd be nice. That is all shields high
Speaker 1: t j I. I gotta be honest with you. I
Speaker 1: gotta come clean on this one. I have not really
Speaker 1: developed a Trump impersonation, remember right, Obama store Obama on
Speaker 1: the shore something like us, because this was one of
Speaker 1: restoring Hey, we're talking on this cadence it was. And
Speaker 1: then when he was all that was when he was
Speaker 1: kind of in his rhythm. Then sometimes you do the
Speaker 1: but and he you know, he had a very almost
Speaker 1: a tick in the way that he would speak, and
Speaker 1: and he would always do this this end thing. Um.
Speaker 1: I do not have a of course, they've got burning
Speaker 1: pretty soon. This is right here, and we have Governor
Speaker 1: Cuomo who is always up here. So you know, you've
Speaker 1: got some of these different characters. I don't have a
Speaker 1: Trump yet. And Trump is like a Trump for me
Speaker 1: is the political impersonation equivalent of a Scottish accent or
Speaker 1: or Australian accent, where people think they can do it
Speaker 1: because they've heard it, but then when they try it,
Speaker 1: they just sound like they're having some kind of a stroke,
Speaker 1: you know, like I put a shrimp on the Bobby Ors.
Speaker 1: You know, they don't they don't know. Huh. I'm I'm Scottish.
Speaker 1: That's the only thing that most people could do with
Speaker 1: this guy. I'm Scottish. All right, Well, you gotta be
Speaker 1: able to say more than that. I Laddie, ay, laddie,
Speaker 1: I'm Scottish. That's about it. Yeah, this is like when
Speaker 1: I ask somebody, you know, when I start speaking Arabic,
Speaker 1: I can get a few sentences out and then I
Speaker 1: pretty much have to tap out. Uh. Yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: have a trump yet. I know it's a it's a deficiency.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. I feel like I've let some of you
Speaker 1: down with that. Um. I he's hard man. He's a
Speaker 1: very rich character. But his he you know, he doesn't
Speaker 1: really have an accent. He has a way of speaking,
Speaker 1: his word choice and hand gestures. I will say that, really,
Speaker 1: Alec Baldwin is one of the better trumpet personators i've seen.
Speaker 1: Alec Baldwin's very talented actor. He is, I mean, his
Speaker 1: politics are terrible, he's very talented actor. Um all right,
Speaker 1: next up here, ease Bob right listening to the last
Speaker 1: night's podcast. Quote was from a few good men. Bob,
Speaker 1: you are correct my friend, you savor the flavor because
Speaker 1: well that's actually part of a quote. See if you
Speaker 1: get that one. Uh, Steady State versus Deep State. This
Speaker 1: is from Gregor. Hm hmm, sounds a bit familiar. Steady
Speaker 1: State is committed to continuing the struggle to liberate the
Speaker 1: parent land from the hands of the Trump drained the
Speaker 1: swamp aggressors Deep State. If you want to join the
Speaker 1: you've got to really hate Trump. Uh. Dedicated to continue
Speaker 1: the struggle. I don't know, Gregor, you kind of lost
Speaker 1: me here man, but thank you, thank you anyway for
Speaker 1: stending in your note. I appreciate I couldn't real understand
Speaker 1: what's going on here. Um, that's gonna be a for
Speaker 1: today team. We gotta show Tomorrow we'll do a double
Speaker 1: role called the Boss. We're getting some of the ones
Speaker 1: that we had to skip over today. Prepare for early
Speaker 1: podcast next week. I really I'm gonna ask you all
Speaker 1: for this one. All right, next week, all of you
Speaker 1: who listened to this radio show, even if you're gonna
Speaker 1: listen to Radio Live, subscribe to that podcast just so
Speaker 1: you have it, just so it's there and we can
Speaker 1: show that you know, we have the full digital reach
Speaker 1: of the team when we need it. I'm gonna drop
Speaker 1: the first one Monday before lunchtime. It's it's gonna be
Speaker 1: think of it like a preview of the evening show,
Speaker 1: but you're getting it early, will get a full hour
Speaker 1: preview before we do the three hour radio show at night.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna podcast podcast first, if you will, and
Speaker 1: then three hours of the Freedom Hunt. That's that's the plan.
Speaker 1: That's what we got going on, So please join for that.
Speaker 1: I will see you tomorrow or talk to you tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Shields High Team, Buck. It's an honor and a privilege
Speaker 1: to bring you my thoughts and all the things that
Speaker 1: matter to us as Americans every day. And your opinion
Speaker 1: matters a whole heck of a lot to me. You know.
Speaker 1: That's why I love roll call so much. It's also
Speaker 1: why I'm excited to tell you about a new social
Speaker 1: media site, snippy dot com. If you're frustrated with the
Speaker 1: discourse on your social media page is if you're tired
Speaker 1: of the obvious shadow banning and left wing progressive nonsense
Speaker 1: that's going on in the conventional social media platforms, Snippy
Speaker 1: is what you need. Its founders have created a forum
Speaker 1: where people feel free to express their thoughts, frustrations, ideas, anything.
Speaker 1: You can write about what's on your mind, share photos,
Speaker 1: strike up a conversation. All on snippy dot com enjoy
Speaker 1: freedom of ex Russian without suppression from left wing administrators.
Speaker 1: This is a place where discussion is valued, a place
Speaker 1: for your opinion matters. Snippy dot com is free to join,
Speaker 1: open to all, jump in, let your opinions be heard.
Speaker 1: No censorship, no agenda. Snippy dot com again. S n
Speaker 1: I P p y dot com