Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. The prospects for getting
Speaker 1: that Walt Trump promised are shaky. We will break that down.
Speaker 1: What's going to happen with this budget deal? What does
Speaker 1: outgoing Speaker of the House Paul Ryan say about his
Speaker 1: Republican legacy? And also a look at the dual track
Speaker 1: rule of law for left and right in this country.
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, magnor mistake American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American again, the buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst,
Speaker 1: Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everybody, Look, it's been
Speaker 1: a tough week for the Trump team. I let's just
Speaker 1: say it. This is not where we wanted to be
Speaker 1: at this point in the year. And no, I'm not
Speaker 1: just talking about the Fed raising rates, the stock markets
Speaker 1: sliding down. The Dow Jones Wow swung nine hundred points.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a lot, a lot of volatility in
Speaker 1: the market, uncertainty about the future. That's that's all the
Speaker 1: kind of stuff that we would expect at this point.
Speaker 1: No matter what you know, there's a market correction underway.
Speaker 1: None of this is all that surprising. But we were
Speaker 1: promised a wall. You know, we could play for you
Speaker 1: just endless montages and sound bites of Trump saying the big,
Speaker 1: beautiful wall, gonna build the wall. We were promised a wall.
Speaker 1: I need to know from this administration, from the president,
Speaker 1: how that's going to happen. Now. About a week ago,
Speaker 1: Trump was saying we're gonna shut down, We're gonna have
Speaker 1: that fight. I mean, remember we discussed it here on
Speaker 1: the show, that throwdown he had with Nancy Pelosi and
Speaker 1: Chuck Schumer in the Oval office. You know, there were
Speaker 1: people like me who didn't see the Trump phenomenon early on.
Speaker 1: You know, I had my reservations, and one of my
Speaker 1: biggest reservations was is he just saying this stuff? Now?
Speaker 1: That said, I didn't see any other option better than Hillary,
Speaker 1: and I think putting him in the position to win
Speaker 1: was the right move no matter what. So I mean,
Speaker 1: I have no regrets. I have no regrets, but I
Speaker 1: do have concerns about where this is going with Trump. Now.
Speaker 1: I do have my worries because this was a central
Speaker 1: promise and this would have been one of those times
Speaker 1: where we could have said you know, despite all the pressure,
Speaker 1: all the opposition, all of the mainstream media gathered together
Speaker 1: in this effort to try and tear down this president,
Speaker 1: he will have he would have pushed through and kept
Speaker 1: faith with his bass and kept faith with the promises
Speaker 1: that he made. And I don't see how he walks
Speaker 1: away from this right now without at least expecting those
Speaker 1: of us who are really rooting for him and supporting him,
Speaker 1: and people like me who are out there openly defending him.
Speaker 1: You know, it's not always easy. It's it's not fun
Speaker 1: to have to go on TV sometimes when they say,
Speaker 1: you know, why did Donald Trump's charity pay the eleven
Speaker 1: dollar boy Scout fee for his son twenty years ago?
Speaker 1: I mean, one who cares, right? But two, I don't
Speaker 1: know why did they do that? That seems strange. I
Speaker 1: don't like having to be in a position where I
Speaker 1: know every time he calls somebody horse face or there's
Speaker 1: some other you know, No, are things that I would
Speaker 1: prefer don't come from this administration. Now, this doesn't mean
Speaker 1: I don't support the administration. It just means that there
Speaker 1: is a give and take here, and he represents a
Speaker 1: movement I did not have some massive change of heart
Speaker 1: where I think that you know, Trump is a leader
Speaker 1: for all time based on his personal conduct. Right. No,
Speaker 1: we were supposed to be able to count on Trump
Speaker 1: to follow through, to be a weapon against the establishment,
Speaker 1: to break down the old order, and to follow through
Speaker 1: on promises. We still may be there. I'm hoping that
Speaker 1: in a week, in a month, in a year, I'll
Speaker 1: think back on this time on this show and I'll say, oh,
Speaker 1: man Buck, and I was you know, I was putting
Speaker 1: the putting the cart before the horse, or I was
Speaker 1: getting ahead of my skis, or you know, think of whatever,
Speaker 1: you're cliche and you're tired metaphor all that stuff. I'm
Speaker 1: hoping that's the case. I think it may still be
Speaker 1: the case. I am optimistic, as I'm as optimistic as
Speaker 1: somebody who's as cynical as politics as I am can be.
Speaker 1: But there is no way that I'm just gonna let
Speaker 1: this slide. Yeah, We're gonna go into a Democrat cons
Speaker 1: because we are. We are in We are going to
Speaker 1: be in full on defense mode starting in mid January,
Speaker 1: meaning those who are part of the conservative movement, those
Speaker 1: who are Trump supporters, we are going to be battening
Speaker 1: down the hatches. We are heading into a squall. Democrats
Speaker 1: and the media want payback. The Muller probe is not
Speaker 1: ending any time soon. You know. I've been saying that
Speaker 1: other people. Oh it's gonna end by Labor Day. Oh
Speaker 1: it's gonna end by Christmas. Nope, this thing is gonna
Speaker 1: go on and on and on because the purpose of
Speaker 1: it is to grind away at Trump and his supporters.
Speaker 1: The thing that motivates Weissman and Muller and their team
Speaker 1: of angry Democrats is that they know the processes, the punishment,
Speaker 1: and if they can just keep this thing going, it's
Speaker 1: a very effective means of stunting, of hobbling the Trump
Speaker 1: administration and its mission. It just has to keep doing
Speaker 1: what it does. They don't have to prove collusion. They
Speaker 1: never were going to prove collusion. It's a farce. It's
Speaker 1: a joke. But we can't counter on executive orders either,
Speaker 1: by the way, to move the football down the field
Speaker 1: for Trump, because all it takes is one judge in
Speaker 1: the Ninth Circuit and the Fifth Circuit and whatever circuit
Speaker 1: to say sorry, Trump doesn't get his way, And by
Speaker 1: the time that gets up to the Supreme court or
Speaker 1: it gets overturned, we'll be even closer to election, and
Speaker 1: you know what happens. You know, a year from now,
Speaker 1: we're just an election mode. There's not going to be
Speaker 1: any policy, They're not going to be any any bills
Speaker 1: pass or anything important going on in that regard. So
Speaker 1: the first two years was when Trump really had the
Speaker 1: opening to do something meaningful, meaningful on immigration, and we
Speaker 1: have not gotten it yet. There maybe a time when
Speaker 1: Trump can you know, finally do this. You know, I
Speaker 1: also say I don't know why he hasn't released more
Speaker 1: of the information about the Russia origin a Russia collusion
Speaker 1: investigation and its origins. He told me, the President told
Speaker 1: me that he was he was going to do that.
Speaker 1: So yeah, that that's we're looking at. That that's going
Speaker 1: to happen. Hasn't happened yet. It was not a good
Speaker 1: week for General Flynn this week. It has not been
Speaker 1: a good week for the administration. So we need to
Speaker 1: be honest about that. We're not effective in spreading the message.
Speaker 1: We're not effective supporters of the movement or activists or well,
Speaker 1: you know whatever, patriots. However you want to self describe
Speaker 1: this point in time in this country, we have to
Speaker 1: be honest about where things are and where this is
Speaker 1: all going, and after pressure, where we can And I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm here in DC, I'm talking to all my people.
Speaker 1: I'm talking to people that are going in and out
Speaker 1: of the White House on a regular basis to talk
Speaker 1: to the people that are making these decisions. And I'm saying, look,
Speaker 1: you got you gotta you guys are gonna make this happen.
Speaker 1: It's go time, and you know it's not too late.
Speaker 1: That's one of the reasons why I'm sitting here talking
Speaker 1: about this, because there are people I know who listen
Speaker 1: to this show here in DC who have real leverage,
Speaker 1: sway and access, and they can get the word out.
Speaker 1: They can tell people to tell the man himself, you've
Speaker 1: got to fight this fight. We were told for heading
Speaker 1: into a shutdown. We were told that the President was
Speaker 1: willing to go to the mat on this, and that
Speaker 1: is not happening. And I have not gotten to acceptable
Speaker 1: answer as to why that is the case. Accountability, my friends, Accountability,
Speaker 1: we must enforce it ourselves. We must be willing to
Speaker 1: self correct this movement, to assess where it's going, what
Speaker 1: it has accomplished. Yes, judges, great deregulation, great tax cuts, Gramy,
Speaker 1: you know, we're all you're aware of all that. I'm
Speaker 1: aware of all that. Not Hillary. Wow, great, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: there's so much good stuff and I am forever thankful
Speaker 1: to Trump for those things, and the movement and the
Speaker 1: political miracle that he pulled off is still incredible. But
Speaker 1: it's not enough. We're not there yet. You know, if
Speaker 1: this is going to be a momentous administration that is
Speaker 1: the equivalent of what Reagan was for thirty years after
Speaker 1: he was an office and still is in many ways
Speaker 1: to this day. Trump has got to be willing to
Speaker 1: have the tough fights and we haven't had haven't had
Speaker 1: it on healthcare, haven't had it on an immigration. And
Speaker 1: you know, keep in mind the president doesn't just have
Speaker 1: the Democrat to contend with. You know, we could get
Speaker 1: a major national security challenge here. Who knows what's going
Speaker 1: to happen. Yeah, there's the Chinese and their preparations to
Speaker 1: overtake us economically and militarily in the next twenty years.
Speaker 1: And but South China. See, something could heat up really
Speaker 1: fast all of a sudden, You're in the the midst of
Speaker 1: a crisis. Terrorism could come back. God forbid, and then
Speaker 1: the administration's embattled just dealing with Chihatas you know, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of stuff that falls into those unknown, unknown
Speaker 1: categories that can come back and bite you. So the
Speaker 1: time is now. Trump has said that this is what
Speaker 1: we're going to do. We're going to have this fight.
Speaker 1: They're going to build a wall. I hope that he
Speaker 1: still intends to keep his promise. I think he will,
Speaker 1: but I expect him to. I was on Fox last
Speaker 1: night and we discussed the Flint situation and also this
Speaker 1: shutting down of the Trump charity, and it really it
Speaker 1: really turned into a discussion about the two tiers of
Speaker 1: law in this country. It's one of the most damaging
Speaker 1: things that's happening in America right now. It's a bigger
Speaker 1: concern for me in the near future than, you know,
Speaker 1: than other big structural problems, you know, the debt and
Speaker 1: things that we could talk about at length. Why is
Speaker 1: it that we have just come to accept that Republicans,
Speaker 1: for political purposes, get destroyed by abuse of the law
Speaker 1: and abuse of power from within the government, and Democrats
Speaker 1: get to skate, get to get off scott free for
Speaker 1: for far worse violations. Why is it. The Clinton Foundation
Speaker 1: doesn't ever get investigated by any attorney general, State attorney general,
Speaker 1: US Attorney General a usays nobody. No one's going after
Speaker 1: Clinton foundation two billion dollars raised, big pay to play
Speaker 1: access scheme. But we're hearing about a Trump charity that
Speaker 1: they wanted to shut down two years ago that's got
Speaker 1: a little over a million dollars in total assets. Why
Speaker 1: the disparity. We'll tackle that in a moment. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: The charge was out of line for part of the
Speaker 1: hearing today. I think people were surprised by that. But
Speaker 1: there's possible for two things to be true. It's possible
Speaker 1: that Flynn got again the rough end of things here.
Speaker 1: He was set up by the FBI. It's also possible
Speaker 1: that he lied. These things can be true simultaneously. I
Speaker 1: think they were two tiers of justice, my friends. It's
Speaker 1: very troubling. It's very troubling because it's systemic, and if
Speaker 1: you know the history of how high level prosecutions go,
Speaker 1: you know that republic alikins always, always, always seem to
Speaker 1: just get the doubt of the benefit, as they say,
Speaker 1: and Democrats get the benefit of the doubt, and then
Speaker 1: some they get the Hillary treatment, the white glove treatment,
Speaker 1: the oh, we're not going to put you under oath,
Speaker 1: We're not going to prosecute you, We're not going to
Speaker 1: chase after you treatment. Victor Davis Hanson one of the
Speaker 1: pre eminent conservative minds in my opinion, in this country.
Speaker 1: He expressed he's gone into this as well. He might
Speaker 1: sound like, Wow, I don't want to sound grandiose, sound
Speaker 1: like yours. Truly. Maybe I sound like Victor Davis Hanson sometimes.
Speaker 1: But he says that there is an inequality in the law.
Speaker 1: Play clip three. There's a really inequality of the law.
Speaker 1: I mean, we talk about the elites, but think of
Speaker 1: the array of people who have not told the truth.
Speaker 1: Andrew McCabe was fired for line to federal investigators. James
Speaker 1: Comey's statements about the FISA Court and the role of
Speaker 1: the dossier are not true. James Clapper light under oath
Speaker 1: to Congress John Brennan Light under oath to Congress. Susan
Speaker 1: Rice lied when she said she did not request surveiled
Speaker 1: transcripts and have the moun mask whom Aberdeen and Cheryl
Speaker 1: Mills lied when they said they did not have knowledge
Speaker 1: of the email server of their boss. Hillary Clinton. We've
Speaker 1: had a lot of wrongdoing by elites and nobody's there's
Speaker 1: been no consequences. So the American people are not paranoid.
Speaker 1: They're saying, well, the Muller investigations going here, but they're
Speaker 1: going after misdemeanors are nothing, and here these felonies go
Speaker 1: completely on address them. That is at the heart of
Speaker 1: the issue, and that's what the phenomenon of the Special
Speaker 1: Council and all the different nonsense around it from the
Speaker 1: media has shown us that there is one set of
Speaker 1: laws or one it's really it's the application of law.
Speaker 1: It's the decision to investigate and the decision to prosecute.
Speaker 1: The biggest one being the decision to prosecute, you know,
Speaker 1: because you can have an investigation and go through the
Speaker 1: motions and nothing happens. The differentiation, the real point of
Speaker 1: departure here is are you going to face charges? Because
Speaker 1: the decision to prosecute is the decision to destroy. Once
Speaker 1: you are getting prosecuted, you are suffering. You are being punished,
Speaker 1: even if you're innocent. That's the single biggest difference in
Speaker 1: this whole process. Who gets prosecuted is where you really
Speaker 1: have to look at the inequality where you know, we
Speaker 1: always focus on how other disparate sentences and who goes
Speaker 1: to prison longer, no, who gets prosecuted when it could
Speaker 1: go either way. You know, this is when we're talking
Speaker 1: about lying under rowth campaign finance violations, you know, conspiracy
Speaker 1: to defraul the US government, these kinds of charges. I
Speaker 1: don't know how we're supposed to trust the judgment of
Speaker 1: some of the people involved here, like Homey, who's a
Speaker 1: liar and a snake and a self dealer. Why are
Speaker 1: we supposed to trust McCabe a liar under oath? Why
Speaker 1: hasn't he been charged? I never get good answers to this.
Speaker 1: Weissman whose Muller's Number two destroyed Arthur Anderson, caused so
Speaker 1: many people their jobs, ruined life for what to make
Speaker 1: a name for himself, Just like Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special
Speaker 1: Council appointed by James Comedy to go after Scooter Libby
Speaker 1: and Cheney and Karl Rove. The Mueller investigation is not
Speaker 1: something that is apart from all of this at all.
Speaker 1: It is just the heart of it, is the center
Speaker 1: of it. Victor Davis Hansen continued play for this Muller
Speaker 1: investigation is not in isolation. We had remember from the
Speaker 1: day Trump was elected, we were told that the voting
Speaker 1: machines were fogg we're going to sue. And then there
Speaker 1: was in a group we remember about the electoral college.
Speaker 1: We had to overturn to the electors. And then we
Speaker 1: went to the twenty fifth amendment that Trump was unbalanced,
Speaker 1: and then that didn't work. Then we went to the
Speaker 1: emoluments clause he'd profited even though his businesses had lost
Speaker 1: a billion dollars, and then we've gone to the Muller
Speaker 1: And so there's a slow motion, if you will. I
Speaker 1: don't want to be two psychodramatic like MSNBC guests, but
Speaker 1: there is sort of a slow motion coup to overturn
Speaker 1: the elections when we should just take a deep breath
Speaker 1: and say, we have a chance to adjudicate this in
Speaker 1: the next twenty election, and we do not want to
Speaker 1: destroy two and a half two over two centuries of
Speaker 1: American constitutional jurisprudence. He's right, It's just like what I've
Speaker 1: been telling you here, all these different constructions, all these
Speaker 1: different interpretations of the law, including ones that are just
Speaker 1: such a reach, such a stretch, so flimsy. The logan Act,
Speaker 1: the Emolument's clause, the twenty fifth Amendment as applied to
Speaker 1: Trump because they don't like his tweets, all things meant
Speaker 1: to end this presidency using some legal mechanism. Now it's
Speaker 1: FEC violations. Oh, the Federal Election Commission. That's what they
Speaker 1: think they're going to do. They make it up as
Speaker 1: they go along. They have no ethics, they have no honor.
Speaker 1: We are fighting a dishonorable enemy here for the future
Speaker 1: of the Trump administration. So while on the one hand,
Speaker 1: I have criticized, and I think rightly so, that Trump
Speaker 1: needs to get back on message here and get back
Speaker 1: on track with promises he made to all of us,
Speaker 1: But on the other we all need to be prepared
Speaker 1: for the vortex that is coming our way. He is
Speaker 1: going to be lawfare on steroids, and Trump is going
Speaker 1: to get every true believer in supporter. He has to
Speaker 1: mount up shields. Hie. You know it's interesting here, mamie.
Speaker 1: This is another win for the so called Steel dossier.
Speaker 1: There's the question of whether there's the tape that exists
Speaker 1: that was brought up in the Steele dossier, which is
Speaker 1: by the way, looking better and better as more charge
Speaker 1: are broad nothing. Nothing in that dossier. The Michael Steele,
Speaker 1: the Christopher Steele dossier has been proven to be wrong.
Speaker 1: When I read the Steele dossier when it first became
Speaker 1: publicly available, what occurred to me is somebody who used
Speaker 1: to do this for a living is there were a
Speaker 1: lot of details that should have been easy enough for
Speaker 1: the FBI to run down and corroborate. There were sources
Speaker 1: that were identified with enough specificity that they should have
Speaker 1: been able to figure out who they were. You know,
Speaker 1: the incident where they go in brief Trump at Trump Towers.
Speaker 1: That's five months after this information started to come into
Speaker 1: the FBI. And the thought that they hadn't corroborated it
Speaker 1: by then and yet they were using it as information
Speaker 1: that was worthy of briefing the president elect is just
Speaker 1: astonishing to me. It is astonishing. As our friend Annie
Speaker 1: McCarthy says, there it is. You know, we began that
Speaker 1: SoundBite with a bunch of different you know, mainstream media
Speaker 1: hacks all saying, oh, the dossier, dossier looks real. Can't
Speaker 1: disprove the dossier, you know, if we don't know, let's
Speaker 1: assume it's true. You know, that's just craziness from these people,
Speaker 1: and as Andy points out that the dossier was presented
Speaker 1: to Trump, this was this was really the compromiut. You know,
Speaker 1: they often talk about how Flynn was compromised and that's
Speaker 1: why they had to talk to him, which was a lie.
Speaker 1: Sally h has cooked that up. But they'll talk about how,
Speaker 1: you know, somebody has compromising information on Trump. The only
Speaker 1: people who really had compromising information on Trump were the
Speaker 1: federal government employees, the deep staters, who showed up in
Speaker 1: a meeting with Trump to present him with this fanciful
Speaker 1: list of nonsense paid for by Hillary and the DNC.
Speaker 1: This whole thing, the fact that the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: under so much pressure in getting so much, you know,
Speaker 1: such an assault from all these different legal angles, and
Speaker 1: nothing happens. Nothing happens to those who weaponize the intelligence community.
Speaker 1: Nothing happens to those who were so reckless and so
Speaker 1: abusive in their power here, and they were There's no
Speaker 1: there's no two ways about it. To run a run
Speaker 1: fis a surveillance on carter Page. You've got to be
Speaker 1: blanking kidding me on carter Page. To run FBI and
Speaker 1: maybe even Intel assets against George Papadopoulos, this is all pretextual.
Speaker 1: This is all a few people with access and power
Speaker 1: who hated Trump, didn't like the idea of him being president,
Speaker 1: thought Hillary deserved it, wanted to make sure that that happened,
Speaker 1: and knew that when Hillary won, they'd be heroes. And
Speaker 1: then when Hillary didn't one, they had to they had
Speaker 1: to create a justification after the fact for all of
Speaker 1: this this stuff. These same names keep coming up. I
Speaker 1: like to remind people, James Comey is the one who
Speaker 1: appointed Patrick Fitzgerald to be the special prosecutor, the special
Speaker 1: prosecutor who then went after Scooter Libby on Oh, that's right,
Speaker 1: lying under oath. That's all they got, Scooter Libby on
Speaker 1: lying under oath and obstruction, which is just essentially piling
Speaker 1: another count on top for lying. So there's a history
Speaker 1: for these individuals. None of this should be a surprise.
Speaker 1: None of this is a shock. These are bad people
Speaker 1: who have been involved in the politicization of the Justice
Speaker 1: Department and the utilization of the federal government's power for
Speaker 1: partisan ends stretching back for years. But with Trump they
Speaker 1: went all out. I mean with Trump, it was break
Speaker 1: the glass, do everything you gotta do. We've got to
Speaker 1: stop this guy. And yet Trump is the only one
Speaker 1: and people around him that suffer any consequences. It is
Speaker 1: a grotesque injustice that Hillary Clinton faced nothing for her recklessness,
Speaker 1: which was it was not just about although that was,
Speaker 1: you know, the primary criminal issue. It was not just
Speaker 1: about the exposure of classified information to the server. It
Speaker 1: was also the fact that she did that because she
Speaker 1: wanted to evade records requests. She wanted to evade FOIA.
Speaker 1: She wanted to evade FOIA because she knew that people
Speaker 1: were going to be asking her for favors. And if
Speaker 1: there was ever any real transparency around the Clinton Foundation,
Speaker 1: then the whole house of cards would fall down. But
Speaker 1: you know, do people still talking to people look at
Speaker 1: the dossier and say to themselves a whole lot of
Speaker 1: sect and you know, is this something that we ever
Speaker 1: should have believed? Other way? It's it's forign And you
Speaker 1: want to have a foreign intervention the election, I mean
Speaker 1: you hired a foreigner to use foreign sources and ran
Speaker 1: that to the FBI. That sounds like foreign intervention to me.
Speaker 1: You want to talk about collusion, that's collusion. I mean
Speaker 1: that's working with foreign entity should try and try and
Speaker 1: throw a presidential election very very clearly. So you know,
Speaker 1: you know, John Ratcliffe Byther was talking about the Coomy,
Speaker 1: the Comy testimony here. You know, Comy's been doing his
Speaker 1: usual self aggrandizing grandstanding this week. That's that's Coomy's favorite thing.
Speaker 1: Um And Ratcliffe spoke about how, you know President Obama
Speaker 1: was communicating with Hillary on this unclassified server. These people
Speaker 1: were all lying about how they didn't know that Hillary
Speaker 1: had this. There's no way they didn't know. This was
Speaker 1: coming from some weird email address that was not a
Speaker 1: dot gov email address, No way play It confirmed that
Speaker 1: President Obama was communicating with former Secretary Clinton on an unclassified,
Speaker 1: unauthorized server at least at one point in time while
Speaker 1: Secretary Clinton was in Russia. So it was fair to
Speaker 1: ask those questions. That wasn't any information that he volunteered,
Speaker 1: and so we were really trying to probe into that,
Speaker 1: trying to probe into that. You know, Lauretta Lynch was
Speaker 1: also down on on Capitol Hill today and you know,
Speaker 1: not a whole lot, not a whole lot it's going
Speaker 1: to come of that either. You know, she's just not
Speaker 1: She's not somebody who, under any circumstances the system would
Speaker 1: ever hold accountable for anything charges against her. She didn't
Speaker 1: even recuse herself, folks from the Hillary investigation, even though
Speaker 1: the tarmac didn't even reccuse herself. They say, oh, Buck,
Speaker 1: that's why Comy had to step forward. No, she should
Speaker 1: have had to recuse herself. She should have had to
Speaker 1: take her medicine on that one. And Comy should not
Speaker 1: have bailed her out. She's a political appoint point D.
Speaker 1: That was her decision to sit on a private plane
Speaker 1: on that tarmac in Arizona with Bill Clinton while Hillary's
Speaker 1: under investigation by the DOJ telling everybody to wait outside.
Speaker 1: That was her decision. She should have had to own that.
Speaker 1: But Comy wanted a bit. Why did Comy baill are out? Oh,
Speaker 1: because he figured Hillary was going to be president. Comy
Speaker 1: thought he had a chance to be a hero for
Speaker 1: Hillary and Hillary was going to win. This was this
Speaker 1: was all about his own advancement. But yeah, Lynch today,
Speaker 1: But here's the representative Nadler said about this play fifteen.
Speaker 1: It was a total waste of time. It was simply
Speaker 1: rehashing things that had gone that would be gone over
Speaker 1: in public many times. Unfortunately, it was a waste of time.
Speaker 1: There was no universe in which they're going to press
Speaker 1: charges against Lynch. I don't know what has to or
Speaker 1: even hold Lynch accountable for anything. I don't know what
Speaker 1: has to happen for Republicans to wake up. But we
Speaker 1: are in a a state of lawfare with the left,
Speaker 1: but only one side is really fighting. They use the
Speaker 1: law as a weapon against us, and we get to
Speaker 1: have other conservatives lecture us about how we don't want
Speaker 1: to we don't want to hurt the rule of law
Speaker 1: and fight fire with fire. Well, okay, so that just
Speaker 1: means our side takes the casualties. It turns out the
Speaker 1: Congress is not entirely worthless. I guess they managed to
Speaker 1: in the Senate at least pass a bill. Oh look
Speaker 1: at this, Oh my, what a shock. Eighty seven to
Speaker 1: twelve overwhelmingly passed this criminal Justice reform bill today, And
Speaker 1: in a Senate it's got to go to the House,
Speaker 1: but it's expected to easily get through the House, and
Speaker 1: people are all saying that, you know, it should make
Speaker 1: it to the President's desk this week for signature, and
Speaker 1: they're also excited about out this And look, I'm I
Speaker 1: am very sympathetic to look taking a hard look at
Speaker 1: the criminal justice system and essentially making sure that we're
Speaker 1: not sending people away for longer than they should go that,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, prison conditions shouldn't be I will
Speaker 1: say one thing that I always I thought that Obama
Speaker 1: was I'm gonna say that I thought Obama was spot on.
Speaker 1: I did not. I did not think that it was funny. Ever,
Speaker 1: you hear all these jokes in Obama, to his credit,
Speaker 1: and some things Obama did were good, let's not all.
Speaker 1: Let's not say it. Everything Obama did was bad, all right,
Speaker 1: it's not true. To his credit, he said that people
Speaker 1: in the pop culture, you know, hip hop artists and
Speaker 1: comedians and others, shouldn't make jokes about getting raped in prison.
Speaker 1: There's nothing funny about a man raping another man in prison.
Speaker 1: There's nothing to be joked about that. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it's horrific. Uh, it's it's just, you know, it's the
Speaker 1: it's really the word first imaginable conduct. And there used
Speaker 1: to be this acceptance in the pop culture at some
Speaker 1: level of like, well that just happens, Like no, that
Speaker 1: should not happen at all. Um. Sexual violence is never
Speaker 1: okay against anyone ever, and you know, that was just
Speaker 1: indicative though of how, you know, prison conditions that should
Speaker 1: not be occurring in a in a civilized, rule of
Speaker 1: law society. You should not be in car shoot and
Speaker 1: have to worry about getting getting raped, for example. So
Speaker 1: there were clearly areas of criminal justice that that need
Speaker 1: more attention. And those who were saying, oh, buck and
Speaker 1: I get conservatives like to be a little bit uh.
Speaker 1: You know, we tend to say lock them up, you know,
Speaker 1: throw away the key. Okay, what about non violent offenders?
Speaker 1: He talked to Bernie Carrick, who went to prison for
Speaker 1: I think four years for for more or less taking
Speaker 1: some improvements on his home that he didn't report. You know,
Speaker 1: I went to prison four years for that, and he
Speaker 1: was in you know, he was in a federal prison
Speaker 1: with people that have done really bad stuff. He's not
Speaker 1: a bad guy. I actually like I like Bernie care.
Speaker 1: You know, he's been a really strong voice for everyone
Speaker 1: needs to think long and hard about how long we
Speaker 1: send people away and what we're sending them away for.
Speaker 1: You know, we need to stop this idea that just
Speaker 1: because you get sent to prison, lee your humanity no
Speaker 1: longer counts. You know. Yeah, the different a different feeling
Speaker 1: about murders and molesters and uh and rapists, but a
Speaker 1: lot of people in prison for not that stuff. So
Speaker 1: they gotta remember that. The stuff that this this bill
Speaker 1: does the first step back. I spoke to members of
Speaker 1: Congress about this. It gets people out a little sooner
Speaker 1: for good behavior. It changes some of the three strikes
Speaker 1: three strikes situations so that you're no longer getting life.
Speaker 1: You'll get twenty five years is a maximum for three strikes.
Speaker 1: Twenty six hundred prisoners sentenced for crack cocaine, we'll get
Speaker 1: a reduced palty. There's a whole bunch of things that
Speaker 1: it does, and it's essentially trying to lessen some of
Speaker 1: the punishments, even out some of what has been done
Speaker 1: it and I think by and large it's probably it's
Speaker 1: it's good. I mean, I think this makes sense. There
Speaker 1: are concerns that people will be getting out earlier who
Speaker 1: are bad people, and I understand that, and that's you know,
Speaker 1: we do have a very high rate of incarceration in
Speaker 1: this country. We also have a plummeting rate of violence.
Speaker 1: Although I am a little bit against the conservative orthodoxy
Speaker 1: here and that I think that technology has played the
Speaker 1: single largest role in the crime drop that we have,
Speaker 1: and I can't point to any study that tells you that,
Speaker 1: but just think it. Through the proliferation of cell phones,
Speaker 1: video cameras, and instantaneous communications has changed crime in a lot,
Speaker 1: and also the ability to use digital footprint and to
Speaker 1: track people through electronic meaning. It's just it's it's harder
Speaker 1: to get away with certain things, and the communication with
Speaker 1: law enforcement is a lot faster and a lot more efficient.
Speaker 1: So I think that's been driving a lot of this.
Speaker 1: You look at the crime drop really has coincided with
Speaker 1: the proliferation of cell phones. Think about it. Crime in
Speaker 1: the US, Yeah, I was going out for a while,
Speaker 1: but the nineties I got really bad in New York
Speaker 1: and you know, nationwide, you see as technology gets better,
Speaker 1: crime is going down. I know, it's just a theory
Speaker 1: that I have. People may disagree with the honor, They
Speaker 1: got a lot of other things I'll say, But but
Speaker 1: here's the other part of this that that I can't
Speaker 1: help but focus on for a moment. The Congress is
Speaker 1: about to pass and Trump's about to sign a criminal
Speaker 1: justice reform bill. All right, fine, why is this? You know?
Speaker 1: Is this the only thing that the Congress is really
Speaker 1: able to do. Are we supposed to accept that unless
Speaker 1: you have a supermajority now you can't get as a conservative,
Speaker 1: you can't get anything done. It really does feel like,
Speaker 1: you know, heads they win, tails we lose, and really
Speaker 1: feels like at at a time when we've been told
Speaker 1: that we can't expect there to actually be a wall,
Speaker 1: that it's not going to happen, it's not going to
Speaker 1: come through. Um, well, all right, but what about what
Speaker 1: about the fact that there should at least be an
Speaker 1: effort to do it right? Why? Why are we not
Speaker 1: even having this fight? Oh but you got tax reform
Speaker 1: and you've got criminal justice reform. That's not what MAGA
Speaker 1: was all about. That's not what the twenty sixteen election
Speaker 1: was supposed to bring us. And I'm sorry, but my
Speaker 1: feelings on the Criminal Justice Reform bill are a little
Speaker 1: more muted than they would otherwise be because I get
Speaker 1: the sense that we're supposed to take this and and
Speaker 1: be so, you know, thankful for the Republican action here,
Speaker 1: but this isn't something you know, any administration could have
Speaker 1: done this, any of it was already moving this direction
Speaker 1: to Rand Paul and others and Mike Lee. They've been
Speaker 1: pushing for this for years, for years. It's a little
Speaker 1: surprising that Obama actually didn't push for this, But I
Speaker 1: think Obama when it came to policy, was disappointing in
Speaker 1: many ways, even to his base, even to the left.
Speaker 1: The First Step Act is just what it says. It's
Speaker 1: moving in the right direction for a more look to say,
Speaker 1: what is a more fair criminal justice system. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of talk now also about how there needs to
Speaker 1: be more done about sentencing and about you know, how
Speaker 1: long you know about mandatory sentencingment right now, if you're
Speaker 1: you know, if you go to trial and you're convicted
Speaker 1: of federal crime, you serve the full sentence. So they're
Speaker 1: going to try to change that. And really, state prison
Speaker 1: is where a vast majority of the prison population resides.
Speaker 1: Federal prison is a pretty small percentage overall. So this
Speaker 1: doesn't this doesn't tackle what they call the mass incarceration problem,
Speaker 1: and it also doesn't watch at all upon the most
Speaker 1: serious federal crime. So just remember that there's no you know,
Speaker 1: you can't be a you know, a human trafficker or
Speaker 1: a terrorist and be covered by some of these lesser
Speaker 1: punishments some of the changes in the First Step Act.
Speaker 1: But it's just hard for me to get that excited
Speaker 1: about this the same week that we're told basically there's
Speaker 1: not going to be a wall. We're supposed to see
Speaker 1: this and say, oh, look how great this is. We
Speaker 1: are we are heading into some rough seas in twenty
Speaker 1: nineteen with this administration, and you know they're going to
Speaker 1: have to do more than just take it on the chin.
Speaker 1: They're gonna have to find a way to fight back
Speaker 1: effectively against the Democrat on slot that's coming. And the
Speaker 1: First Step Acts as not going to cut it. And
Speaker 1: soon the House will become the care of a new majority,
Speaker 1: and what I know will be a spirited Republican minority.
Speaker 1: I wish the next leads well, but it is. It
Speaker 1: is precisely because this is so momentary. It's because you
Speaker 1: are here for just a small part of history that
Speaker 1: you are inspired to do big things. And on this score,
Speaker 1: we have achieved a great deal. We have much to
Speaker 1: be proud of. Three years ago, when we last gathered
Speaker 1: in this hall, we began a great journey to set
Speaker 1: our nation on a better path, to move our economy
Speaker 1: from stagnation to growth to restore our military might, and
Speaker 1: we have kept our promises. This House is the most
Speaker 1: productive we have had in at least a generation. Today
Speaker 1: we have passed one and seventy five bills, more than
Speaker 1: half of them with bipartisan support. Wow. Paul Ryan outgoing,
Speaker 1: outgoing Speaker of the House and the most productive in
Speaker 1: our generation. He's like, we passed a lot of stuff. Yeah,
Speaker 1: like what exactly what that we should care about? Definitely
Speaker 1: didn't get funding for a wall. Where is the the
Speaker 1: MAGA agenda right now? Make America great again, as you know,
Speaker 1: is the rallying cry of all those who support Trump
Speaker 1: and early Trump supporter and one who I'm very much
Speaker 1: curious to hear his take on what's going on right
Speaker 1: now at the movement is our friend Raheem Kassam, who
Speaker 1: will also hear filling in on the show next week.
Speaker 1: He's the author of No Go Zones and has a
Speaker 1: piece out of the Daily Caller dot com today about
Speaker 1: sut Us, which we will get to as well. Raheem,
Speaker 1: good to have you back, any thanks for having me
Speaker 1: about Hey man, what do you think about what's going
Speaker 1: on here? Trump is now saying, yeah, it looks like
Speaker 1: maybe we won't have a shutdown. After all, We're going
Speaker 1: to come up with some kind of a deal in agreement.
Speaker 1: I'm concerned. Yeah, it's not great. Um, you know, there's
Speaker 1: there's no doubt to the early MAGA adopts such as myself,
Speaker 1: the MAGA agenda is on the ropes at the moment.
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody should be trying to fool themselves
Speaker 1: that there's some cunning for d chess plan going on here.
Speaker 1: You know, with the Muller investigation and with the loss
Speaker 1: of the midterms. You know, although it wasn't the Blue
Speaker 1: wave per se, this is the hardest point of the
Speaker 1: administration so far. And instead of I see a lot
Speaker 1: of people sort of hungering down and saying, oh, we
Speaker 1: don't need to worry about this. The President's got it
Speaker 1: all in hand. I think what we should be doing,
Speaker 1: what people should be doing out there is doubling down,
Speaker 1: just as the Establishment is now currently doubling down in
Speaker 1: order to take the fight to them, not just at
Speaker 1: the next election, but in right in the new year.
Speaker 1: You know, twenty nineteen is going to be the Establishments
Speaker 1: year of retribution. We're seeing all of the things, whether
Speaker 1: it's the Trump Foundation and the indictments and what's going
Speaker 1: on with General Flynn right now, and the No Board
Speaker 1: of Wall funding was seeing all of them coming together
Speaker 1: at the same time, and that's planned. It's not a coincidence.
Speaker 1: It's not something that's just sort of happened because it's
Speaker 1: been a couple of years and these things take a
Speaker 1: couple of years. They have always had this plan. And
Speaker 1: it's the same thing across the Atlantic as well, you know,
Speaker 1: the Brexit movement being thwarted at its current juncture. The
Speaker 1: establishment always moves in step with one another with itself.
Speaker 1: You know, they plan together much more than our side
Speaker 1: plans together. They have all of their international conferences, they
Speaker 1: exchange information, they're in constant touch. So it is it
Speaker 1: is a cause for concern. It should be a cause
Speaker 1: for people's concerns, and it should be a cause for
Speaker 1: people to actually go out their lobby, their congressman and
Speaker 1: senators and you know, as Paul Ryan just said, I
Speaker 1: mean I remember when Paul Ryan was held up as
Speaker 1: a darling of the Tea Party movement. By the way,
Speaker 1: it's not about the number of bills passed, as you
Speaker 1: rightly pointed out, Buck, It's about what has actually got done. Now,
Speaker 1: there is one area in which this administration is still winning,
Speaker 1: and that in judicial appointments, whether it's on the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court or in federal judges. It has something to be
Speaker 1: very proud of there that there are institutional changes taking
Speaker 1: place across the court system. And one might argue, in fact,
Speaker 1: I've heard many people argue, there is perhaps the most
Speaker 1: important part of this president's legacy so far, and may
Speaker 1: well be his best legacy going forward into the future.
Speaker 1: But people wanted that wall belt, you know, they didn't
Speaker 1: want what did he tweet the other day an artistically
Speaker 1: designed steel slat wall. They wanted a big, solid, brick
Speaker 1: and concrete wall. People are realistic, they knew it wasn't
Speaker 1: going to happen across the entire border, but there are
Speaker 1: segments that they do know need that, and this president,
Speaker 1: you know, I think should have and I think the
Speaker 1: impetus amongst his base at least was there to shut
Speaker 1: down the government over this and really take the fight
Speaker 1: to the Democrats over it. But the answer to why
Speaker 1: that's not happening is because the administration it doesn't have
Speaker 1: a lot of people. It's it's got fewer people on
Speaker 1: the front lines than for instance, the Obama administration or
Speaker 1: the Push administration did, and they're all overwhelmed over this
Speaker 1: Christmas season. I've got to spend a lot of time
Speaker 1: with them that Christmas parties here in Washington be seen
Speaker 1: and the prevailing consentatus where we can only do so much.
Speaker 1: There are only so many of us, and they're not
Speaker 1: getting massive institutional support from the legacy Republican think tanks
Speaker 1: or the RNC or a lot of these sort of Trumpers,
Speaker 1: or the November ninth brigade of people who just jumped
Speaker 1: on the administration after the election. So that was the
Speaker 1: situation as it stands. Sorry to go off on a
Speaker 1: bit of a rant. No, we wanted a rant. That's why.
Speaker 1: That's why you're here. We want a radium rants. Speaking
Speaker 1: of which, and by the way, I mean I agree
Speaker 1: with you. I think that it's it would be delusional
Speaker 1: at this point to think that everything is just going
Speaker 1: swimmingly for the Trump administration, right. I mean that it's
Speaker 1: not helpful to anyone, no matter how much one wants
Speaker 1: Trump to be successful, helpful to ten that there aren't
Speaker 1: some some real drawbacks and pitfalls that are that are
Speaker 1: either still out there or that have already happened. But
Speaker 1: that all said, you know, I guess now we've got
Speaker 1: to get ready for I've been saying, you said, your retribution.
Speaker 1: I like that construction of it because it's true. I've
Speaker 1: been saying political trench warfare, which I think is what
Speaker 1: we're going to be seeing. M But but also I
Speaker 1: want to ask you about your peace up in the
Speaker 1: Daily Caller today about how George Soros is named the
Speaker 1: Financial Times Person of the Year. What is up with
Speaker 1: that right here? Yeah? Well, and that's that's a big tell.
Speaker 1: You know, the establishing refuses to learn any lessons from
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, whether it was in Europe, the Nited Kingdom,
Speaker 1: or whether it was here in the United States. They've
Speaker 1: taken the approach that they can just wear down this movement,
Speaker 1: where down this president, wear down this administration, where down
Speaker 1: the global revolt against the sort of wounds neoliberal world order.
Speaker 1: And my contention is that they can't, but they are
Speaker 1: going to make a fair crack of it. And there
Speaker 1: are certain tells out there. And one of the tells
Speaker 1: is Financial Times, which is arguably the world leading newspaper
Speaker 1: alongside the magazine The Economists of that sort of traditional
Speaker 1: neoliberal world order, and they've decided this year to award
Speaker 1: their manadier Person of the Year. I'm sorry to George Soros.
Speaker 1: And they said it wasn't just about what Soros has
Speaker 1: achieved this year, which is typically what you've base some
Speaker 1: of the year on. They said openly that it's about
Speaker 1: what he believes in. Now. Sous is obviously a divisive
Speaker 1: and contentious figure across the political divine, but why he
Speaker 1: believes in effectively is a pure greed and profit motive
Speaker 1: for him, whether it means selling out countries, nation states, identities,
Speaker 1: cultures and so forth. And it's been very utterly clear
Speaker 1: about that. And I suggest people, if they can get
Speaker 1: out of their hands, are on the Financial Times today
Speaker 1: or on the website read that piece. It's a very
Speaker 1: hagiographic take of who your source is. But leaving so
Speaker 1: far as to laud him over owning many homes, one
Speaker 1: of which being in Marrakesh near an orange grove near
Speaker 1: the opulent Lammonia hotel. And also they also laud the
Speaker 1: fact that he wears a gold plated hearing aid. Now
Speaker 1: that I think tells us all we need to know
Speaker 1: about you know who the standard bearer for the for
Speaker 1: the political cause as far as the establishment is concerned
Speaker 1: is And it made me smile at least to note
Speaker 1: that they couldn't give this award to Angela Merkel because
Speaker 1: she's leaving. They couldn't give it to Theresa May because
Speaker 1: she's failing. They couldn't give it to Emmanuel Macron because
Speaker 1: obviously the yellow vest protests in France are showing that
Speaker 1: he's also on the ropes. So they've defaulted to this
Speaker 1: eighty eight year old financier who makes a living out
Speaker 1: of ruining other people's lives through his hedge fund and
Speaker 1: through his open society foundations, and again tells you they'
Speaker 1: everybody to double down in twenty nineteen, and i'd blenty
Speaker 1: think we are up two right in. Becausam is the
Speaker 1: author of No go Zones, and you can read his
Speaker 1: latest on the Daily Caller today. He's got a piece
Speaker 1: up on George Soros Rare. He'm great to have you, buddy,
Speaker 1: We'll talk to you soon. Thank you. Buck. More bad
Speaker 1: news for Facebook this week, and you're just reaching this point,
Speaker 1: I'm sure we are, Like, how much more violation of
Speaker 1: trust can I endure from these guys? These left wing organizations,
Speaker 1: these far left social media platforms. Enough enough, right, Well,
Speaker 1: I've got a place for you to go, snippy dot com.
Speaker 1: Snippy dot com is a new social media site without
Speaker 1: any of the biased or left leading nonsense. And you know,
Speaker 1: thousands and thousands of you have already joined snippy dot com.
Speaker 1: I'm hoping thousands and thousands more will join because they've
Speaker 1: been doing updates and they are really off to the
Speaker 1: races as a new social site. S ippy dot com.
Speaker 1: They do not shadow band, they don't do any of
Speaker 1: that stuff. They're not sharing your information with third parties
Speaker 1: in egregious fashion to try to profit off your data.
Speaker 1: None of that stuff's going on, all right. They have
Speaker 1: an updated user interface and exciting new features also available
Speaker 1: on the Apple App Store and for Android. Snippy dot
Speaker 1: com free to join, free to post, go check it out.
Speaker 1: I was just posting yesterday snippy dot com. First of all,
Speaker 1: President Trump is going to only support something that advances
Speaker 1: his position, you know, and he's laid out a number
Speaker 1: of things that he wants to do to keep America
Speaker 1: safe and build the wall, and we're going to continue
Speaker 1: working with him on that. If there's an opportunity for
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi to work with him. President Trump has already
Speaker 1: said he'll do that. When the President says he's not
Speaker 1: going to back down from border security, and then he'll
Speaker 1: find the money. Quote won't way or the other. It's
Speaker 1: because he has a solemn obligation to all of us,
Speaker 1: including people who didn't vote and people who didn't vote
Speaker 1: for him, to make sure that we are protected in
Speaker 1: our communities. Folks, this is everybody's business. This has to
Speaker 1: be nonpartist. And this is about border security. It's a sovereignation.
Speaker 1: They're saying the right stuff, aren't they. They're telling us
Speaker 1: that they they will fight for a wall, that President
Speaker 1: Trump is dedicated to border security, to getting us border security,
Speaker 1: and that there will be a wall. But I'm here
Speaker 1: to tell you there's not going to be a wall,
Speaker 1: not unless something really profound changes in the next few days.
Speaker 1: And this is this is a big disappointment and culture
Speaker 1: today with her column. And you know, look, I think
Speaker 1: some of you probably think Anne is great. Some of
Speaker 1: you are not such a big fans. I've always really
Speaker 1: liked Anne, both as an author and as a person.
Speaker 1: She's always been very, very lovely to me, and you know,
Speaker 1: I'll never forget I bumped into her once with my
Speaker 1: entire family, I mean, my siblings, my parents, my cousins
Speaker 1: on the streets in Manhattan, and she was just you know,
Speaker 1: she took photos with us, and she was just lovely
Speaker 1: to everybody. And I knew her at that point from
Speaker 1: working with her a little bit at Fox. But she
Speaker 1: was the one who gave Trump really the idea to
Speaker 1: run on immigration, and he read Audios America and went
Speaker 1: with it, you know, he read Audios America and took
Speaker 1: the argument and ran with it. And she also was
Speaker 1: the one who was saying Trump was going to win
Speaker 1: before anybody else. Well, here's what she writes today in
Speaker 1: her column. If you were elected president after decades of
Speaker 1: politicians doing nothing about the millions of illegals pouring into
Speaker 1: our country every year, committing crimes, dealing drugs, driving drunk,
Speaker 1: molesting children, and killing Americans like Kate Steinley, and your
Speaker 1: central campaign promise, repeated every day, was to build a wall.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't you have spent the entirety of your transition period
Speaker 1: working on getting it done. Wouldn't you have been building prototypes,
Speaker 1: developing relationships with key congressional allies and talking to military
Speaker 1: leaders about using the CBS or the Army Corps of
Speaker 1: Engineers to build the wall. Wouldn't you skip the inauguration
Speaker 1: and take the oath of office in San Diego so
Speaker 1: you could get started on supervising wall construction immediately after
Speaker 1: putting your hand in the Bible and being sworn in
Speaker 1: as the leader of the free world. You would, if
Speaker 1: you meant it well, Donald Trump didn't do that. Now, obviously,
Speaker 1: Anne's being a little little facetious with some of that
Speaker 1: there end quote, by the way, in case you couldn't tell,
Speaker 1: But she's very frustrated. And I'm very frustrated because all
Speaker 1: along I had this concern that Trump was saying the things.
Speaker 1: He was saying revolutionary things about what a president should do,
Speaker 1: what needs to happen in this country. He was talking
Speaker 1: about he was talking about the wall, but wasn't serious
Speaker 1: about it. I don't know if we can say that
Speaker 1: quite yet, but it's looking like that may be the case.
Speaker 1: When is the shutdown supposed to happen, where are we
Speaker 1: going to be in a better place? I mean, here's
Speaker 1: what Trump used to say about shutdowns Play thirteen. It's
Speaker 1: like pulling teeth getting these guys to get it done.
Speaker 1: And you have no idea how tough I've been, And
Speaker 1: I say, hey, if you have a shutdown, you have
Speaker 1: a shutdown. The shutdown can also take place after the election.
Speaker 1: I happen to think it's a great political thing because
Speaker 1: people want border security one way the other. It's getting done.
Speaker 1: And you could do it before the election or after
Speaker 1: the election. If you do it before, there's a lot
Speaker 1: more pressure to get a great solution, but it's risk here.
Speaker 1: If you do it afterwards, there's less pressure, there's less risk.
Speaker 1: I'm just not sure you'd ever make as good a
Speaker 1: deal that was in August of this year. Does that
Speaker 1: sound like somebody that is gonna back down from a shutdown?
Speaker 1: Trump could veto it. He does not. He does not
Speaker 1: have to allow this to happen. Trump does not have
Speaker 1: to go forward with business as usual on this. But
Speaker 1: it looks like that's what he's doing. And we haven't
Speaker 1: even solved forget about put put aside the wall for
Speaker 1: a moment, which is a big, a big thing to
Speaker 1: just set aside at all. He hasn't been able now.
Speaker 1: I know what people say, Oh, it's not his fault
Speaker 1: and it's not okay, guys, but you know, we got
Speaker 1: to hold a politician responsible for fulfilling promises that that
Speaker 1: politician made. He didn't promise to, you know, to try
Speaker 1: really hard. He said there's gonna be a wall. He said,
Speaker 1: Mexico's gonna pay for it. I never believe that that
Speaker 1: was gonna happen, but you know, it was a it
Speaker 1: was a good applause line. And maybe that they we're
Speaker 1: going to have some kind of a teriff for tax
Speaker 1: in place that would eventually fulfill that promise in some way.
Speaker 1: But I don't even care. I don't care if Mexico
Speaker 1: doesn't paid for the wall. I just want there to
Speaker 1: be a barrier so that we have real security at
Speaker 1: our southern border, to stop the cartels, stop the drug smuggling.
Speaker 1: But Trump isn't even willing to do everything in his power.
Speaker 1: I would be more sympathetic here if he had done
Speaker 1: everything in his power to get that wall built. He
Speaker 1: has not done that. We have not gone to a shutdown,
Speaker 1: the government has not been shut down. We have not
Speaker 1: forced the Democrat's hand on this one. See where the
Speaker 1: American people are, See where the pressure is when it's
Speaker 1: clear that Democrats are unwilling to spend a few billion
Speaker 1: dollars to do something that will only help and could
Speaker 1: help a tremendous amount with our border with immigration. You know,
Speaker 1: this is a difficult one. There's some very good people
Speaker 1: out there who are making the case. I think Trump
Speaker 1: does have a lot of support for his immigration policy. Men.
Speaker 1: Here's Thomas Homan, who was acting ICE director. Here's what
Speaker 1: he says about how there's just they're just scams going
Speaker 1: on with our border. Playlip bit. Most of these people
Speaker 1: are knowledge in the side of the seekers. Violence is
Speaker 1: not acclaimed for asylum and lose it. What the politicians
Speaker 1: all to be doing, rather than going on there pulling
Speaker 1: a political point that they're doing, they all to be
Speaker 1: here in Washington, DC fixing the loopholes and our immigration
Speaker 1: laws that causes these caravans even exists in the first place.
Speaker 1: I've been up on hill many times this past year
Speaker 1: with the Secretary close grazing asylum bar you know, addressed
Speaker 1: the Florida Settlement agreement. Give ICE attention money so it's
Speaker 1: not back to catching release. If they close these loopholes,
Speaker 1: they will stop alaw this ill the immigration but it
Speaker 1: isn't about protecting the Barter, it isn't about closing loopholes.
Speaker 1: It's about taking on the Trump administration. It's about politics.
Speaker 1: Head of Public Safety and National Security, forget the wall
Speaker 1: for a second. They're not even doing other things that
Speaker 1: are necessary to built the illegal immigration crisis. They haven't
Speaker 1: closed the loopholes. We haven't figured out what we're gonna
Speaker 1: do to stop family units from rhyming by the tens
Speaker 1: of thousands at the border and claim asylum. For those
Speaker 1: who are curious, because this came up recently, someone asked me,
Speaker 1: this refugee is somebody who wants essentially to claim asylum,
Speaker 1: but does it from outside of US borders. An assy
Speaker 1: lee or someone who wants asylum is already inside the
Speaker 1: United States. So if you're in the US, you're you're
Speaker 1: asking for asylum. If you're outside the US and want
Speaker 1: to come in, you're asking to be a refugee. That
Speaker 1: is the difference. But we have not gotten this promise
Speaker 1: fulfilled and we cannot forget this. And Trump needs to
Speaker 1: figure something out here. It's not over. Maybe he orders
Speaker 1: he orders some funds shifted around. Maybe the military is
Speaker 1: able to start this in a meaningful way. But just
Speaker 1: telling us the walls being built when it's not is unacceptable.
Speaker 1: You are now entering the Freedom Huttle Operation Center. All
Speaker 1: programs must be kept strictly neat to know Team Buck
Speaker 1: is cleared and ready to the Buck brief. The decision
Speaker 1: to withdraw American an American presence in Syria is a colossal,
Speaker 1: in my mind, mistake, a grave error that's going to
Speaker 1: have significant repercussions in the years and months to come.
Speaker 1: That's right. President Trump today has declared that we are
Speaker 1: going to pull troops out of Syria, and Marco Rubio's
Speaker 1: claiming that it is a it is a huge mistake.
Speaker 1: It is a huge mistake. Now, now, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of complexity involved in this, and there's a lot of
Speaker 1: different arguments that can be made. Let's together unpack some
Speaker 1: of this, shall we. We have a small contingent of
Speaker 1: US troops in Syria right now. They are working with
Speaker 1: Kurdish allies on the ground and still engaged in operations
Speaker 1: against the Islamic State. Now isis, despite President Trump's tweet today,
Speaker 1: has been beaten in battle, but is not eradicated. The
Speaker 1: movement has been defeated for now, but isis absolutely could rebound.
Speaker 1: One thing that I have to say, and this isn't
Speaker 1: a side, but I can't help myself. One of the
Speaker 1: bizarre idiocies of the Obama administration and on Syria. You
Speaker 1: could talk for quite some time just about all of
Speaker 1: the mistakes that were made, all the lack of strategic vision,
Speaker 1: the lack of clarity of purpose, the spending five hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars to train I think it was seven guys
Speaker 1: or something. I mean, just unbelievable ineptitude from the a
Speaker 1: team of so called geniuses, including Obama himself, in dealing
Speaker 1: with the Syrian civil War. But you know, one thing
Speaker 1: about it that always really I just found bizarre was
Speaker 1: that Obama. You know, you know, as no one calls
Speaker 1: it ISOL anymore, that was an Obama thing. The Obama
Speaker 1: administration and Brennan at the CIA and some some executive
Speaker 1: branch Obama appointees insisted on calling it ISOL. And people
Speaker 1: that I knew in the intelligence community were as like,
Speaker 1: everyone calls it isis, everyone calls it isis. Why do
Speaker 1: they know it's the Islamic state of Iraq and Syria?
Speaker 1: Why do they have to do this as Islamic state
Speaker 1: of Irakan de levant or if you're really pretentious, you
Speaker 1: call it dash. At least dash is correct, that's the
Speaker 1: Arabic acronym. But people that are calling it isola Obama,
Speaker 1: it's gonna be isol working on us. Let's gonna be
Speaker 1: We're gonna freed them. I'n't always say why does he
Speaker 1: do this? And the answer was because he thought it
Speaker 1: sounded smart, just like the same reason Obama would say
Speaker 1: ta Liban and bakthan It's like he does not speak pashtough. Okay,
Speaker 1: we don't need him to do this weird, But that
Speaker 1: was the thing, you know, with Obama, so much of
Speaker 1: it was just he sounded the way smart people think
Speaker 1: a smart person is supposed to sound on these issues.
Speaker 1: You know, he spoke about them, used the verbiage that
Speaker 1: the elites would want, and so that to them is
Speaker 1: the signal that you're smart. Meanwhile, the decision making in
Speaker 1: Syria was terrible, terrible, and it was a disaster now
Speaker 1: the Islamic state because of Oh that's right. Another thing
Speaker 1: that the media doesn't talk to you about very much.
Speaker 1: A dramatically accelerated military campaign, and it was a Trump decision.
Speaker 1: He does not get much credit for it, but it
Speaker 1: was a Trump decision as commander in chief that really
Speaker 1: turned the tide. He said, you know what, the guys
Speaker 1: on the ground, the people out there on the battlefield,
Speaker 1: they determine, not a bunch of people sitting at desks
Speaker 1: in DC, the people on the ground in Iraq, in Syria.
Speaker 1: They determine what we have to go after and when
Speaker 1: we go after it. With the air strikes and with
Speaker 1: any other kinetic military activity in theater, you know what,
Speaker 1: We call that a game changer. The pace and ferocity
Speaker 1: of the air strikes, particularly since Trump came into office,
Speaker 1: was made a huge difference in this fight against the
Speaker 1: Islamic State, and it's what rolled them up and made
Speaker 1: them collapse as rapidly as they did. So that Sir
Speaker 1: Trump does a get credit for this, be sugar credit
Speaker 1: for it. Now is the Islamic State? Eradicated, No, it
Speaker 1: is not. In fact, I actually just spoke to a
Speaker 1: former four star general, Stanley Mcrystal about this, what about
Speaker 1: a week ago. He said that the best open source
Speaker 1: assessments now of how many fighters the Islamic State has
Speaker 1: under arms in Syrias somewhere in the neighborhood of thirty
Speaker 1: thousand ish, which is what they had a few years ago.
Speaker 1: They rolled into a rock and took Mosul, and so
Speaker 1: they still have a lot of people that they can
Speaker 1: call to arms, but they've mostly gone to ground right
Speaker 1: there now mix again with the civilian population. They have
Speaker 1: one safe haven on the Iraq Syria border that is
Speaker 1: roughly the size of the island of Manhattan. It's not
Speaker 1: a very big area, but they have one area they
Speaker 1: still fully control. And then there are you know, some
Speaker 1: other places where they've as I said, taken refuge among
Speaker 1: the broader population. And this is classic counterin certaincy problems
Speaker 1: that if you don't eradicate the virus, if there are
Speaker 1: only a few cells of the virus left, it could
Speaker 1: come back. And that's what we're dealing with the Islamic
Speaker 1: state now, and that's the big concern in the in
Speaker 1: the short term. Right. This is why people are for example,
Speaker 1: Mark A. Ruby are out there saying that this is
Speaker 1: a huge, huge mistake and how could we how could
Speaker 1: we do this? Oh, you know, Lindsey Graham another one
Speaker 1: Rubio and Lindsay Graham played fourteen. It is my belief,
Speaker 1: but we won't know until we'll ask the appropriate parties
Speaker 1: that this decision by the process was against sound military advice.
Speaker 1: That he did it himself, which has ever right to do,
Speaker 1: but he needs to own it. He does own it.
Speaker 1: I don't think President has the problem with that. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, I like Kavanaugh hearing Lindsey Graham a
Speaker 1: whole lot. I want to just keep bombing everybody until
Speaker 1: there's no one left to bomb. Lindsey Graham, I'm not
Speaker 1: sure that I can agree with that guy quite as much.
Speaker 1: Now he's losing. Lindsay Graham two point zero from Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: is going back to one point zero, and that's there's
Speaker 1: a lot of neo Khan in Lindsey Graham. I can't
Speaker 1: say that I particularly support some of his his never
Speaker 1: mind just the specifics of his foreign policy, but his inclinations.
Speaker 1: And now this is the big philosophical debate right now
Speaker 1: of what's going on in Syria. As we've had US
Speaker 1: troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, for I mean, obviously Afghanistan
Speaker 1: was a little earlier than Iraq, but we're going on
Speaker 1: now two decades of this. It's it's gonna be like
Speaker 1: twenty years before we really realize, oh my gosh, how long?
Speaker 1: How long are we going to keep troops in these
Speaker 1: two countries? And now there's even more acceptance I think
Speaker 1: than ever before in foreign policy circles, at least, that
Speaker 1: the that the presence in Afghanistan and Iraq is a
Speaker 1: permanent one, akin to what we have in South Korea,
Speaker 1: in Germany and you know in Japan that we're just
Speaker 1: gonna have bases there and a few thousand troops in
Speaker 1: each place to keep it off and falling apart. We
Speaker 1: don't want that in Syria, and we need to start
Speaker 1: scaling back in some of these projection of power circumstances.
Speaker 1: You don't want to make this our fight. I mean
Speaker 1: the US history of and forget the US, the Western
Speaker 1: history of interventions in the Lavant, specifically of Syria and Lebanon,
Speaker 1: stretches back to now almost a hundred years of unsuccessful
Speaker 1: military It goes back to Pykes Pico and the Battle
Speaker 1: four Declaration. You know that era. How many people even
Speaker 1: would know off the top of their heads or would
Speaker 1: know a period, but the French, in the earliest days
Speaker 1: of the French Air Force, I mean, go back to
Speaker 1: the nineteen twenties, the French were bombing Damascus because of
Speaker 1: unrest and rebellion and fighting. This is not something that
Speaker 1: we want to be involved in. This is not a
Speaker 1: place where we want US troops walking the streets or
Speaker 1: being in any position where they're going to be deployed
Speaker 1: on a regular basis and in harms way. Basically, we
Speaker 1: can't make all of this our fight, and I think
Speaker 1: Trump recognizes that. And this is Trump is sophisticated foreign
Speaker 1: policy thinker. No he is not. Does he have good
Speaker 1: instincts and does he understand the basics of who the
Speaker 1: good guys are, who the bad guys are, and what
Speaker 1: we need to do with the bad guys? Yes, he does,
Speaker 1: which is more than you can say for the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: Clarity and decisiveness for the commander in chief are qualities
Speaker 1: you really need. He he's got the most impressive military
Speaker 1: in the history of the planet to lean on, but
Speaker 1: he needs to be clear about what he's trying to
Speaker 1: achieve as commander chief and needs to be decisive. And
Speaker 1: as he has with the air campaign against the Islamic State,
Speaker 1: let the experts implement you you come up with division
Speaker 1: and give the authority. Let the experts on the ground implement.
Speaker 1: But I understand that. You know, the concern is that
Speaker 1: if we pull out of Syria, there's gonna be this
Speaker 1: domino effect, But the realities, we're still going to have
Speaker 1: troops in Iraq next door. So this is just slightly
Speaker 1: scaling back our residence in the region. This is this
Speaker 1: is not a complete upheaval of a US presence in
Speaker 1: the region that's going to lead to a domino effect
Speaker 1: and a cascade of losses to our allies in the ground.
Speaker 1: So I think that that's an overstated issue. And I
Speaker 1: do think that the the basic approach here of Trump
Speaker 1: and those who are seeing this way is we just
Speaker 1: we got to stop doing this. No more wars to
Speaker 1: build other people's countries for them. We're done with that.
Speaker 1: And one other side side note here Assad has won
Speaker 1: the Syrians civil war. The Russians, the Iranians, and the
Speaker 1: Assad regime accomplished what they wanted in Syria, but that
Speaker 1: happened when Obama was in office, and we're not going
Speaker 1: to change at anytime soon. We're not about to fight
Speaker 1: a war against Assad and it would be insane for
Speaker 1: us to do so. And with that in mind, we
Speaker 1: also shouldn't have US troops in that country, because what
Speaker 1: will end up happening is as Assad grows more powerful
Speaker 1: and takes back more of his territory, then there'll be
Speaker 1: the real possibility of him wanting us to leave, and
Speaker 1: he wouldn't confront us directly. But what happens if all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, people under the guise of the Islamic
Speaker 1: States start getting really more sophisticated. What if we have
Speaker 1: a couple of massive truck bombings take out one hundred,
Speaker 1: maybe two hundred US troops. You know what today is,
Speaker 1: don't you? If you go back and you look at history,
Speaker 1: you know this is. This is a day what I
Speaker 1: think will realize that we began to see the limits
Speaker 1: of what our mission should be. And I think that's
Speaker 1: what Trump. I think that's what Trump is understanding. So
Speaker 1: I know people are going to give a really hard
Speaker 1: time for this, but I think in Syria it's the
Speaker 1: right move. And I think also we're gonna have to
Speaker 1: take a really hard look at pulling out of Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: and much sooner than a lot of the strategic planners
Speaker 1: were thinking what Russia has done here and where the
Speaker 1: true brilliance of this intelligence operation comes from is. Way
Speaker 1: back in the early two thousands, the Russian military conducted
Speaker 1: a strategic study and started carrying out a disinformation plan
Speaker 1: in which they said that instead of carrying out kinetic
Speaker 1: warfare against your enemies, the best thing we can do
Speaker 1: is create a disinformation and frame around that nation to
Speaker 1: the point where over time, as we are constantly tearing
Speaker 1: them apart and feeding them with false information, they would
Speaker 1: actually welcome an invasion. Russian disinformation is not new. Disn't vormatzia.
Speaker 1: It's not new. There you have one of MSNBC's favorite
Speaker 1: security analysts. They put on this guy, Malcolm Nanci all
Speaker 1: the time. None of this is near the KGB was
Speaker 1: doing it for decades and decades beforehand. Russian disinformation this is,
Speaker 1: this is in the in the very nature of the
Speaker 1: Russian state. There is absolutely nothing that is uh. You know,
Speaker 1: we're looking at this now like this is some kind
Speaker 1: of crazy shock. We're in a period of hysteria over Russia.
Speaker 1: I mean, this woman who but Boutina, who was She's
Speaker 1: been held in solitary confinement, She's facing years and years
Speaker 1: in prison. She didn't even do anything, I mean in
Speaker 1: terms of accomplishing anything. You shouldn't even manage to do anything.
Speaker 1: Didn't move any policy, he didn't steal any information. She
Speaker 1: thought she was, you know, advocating for Russian interest and
Speaker 1: probably in some ways thought that it was places where
Speaker 1: US interests coincided. I mean, I don't know, I don't
Speaker 1: know what she was really pushing for, trying to get
Speaker 1: Russian influence in the NRA. I mean, whatever was she
Speaker 1: was doing, it's not the scariest thing that's ever happened
Speaker 1: in this country by a mile Smith going on the
Speaker 1: biggest crime in history. Oh my gosh. There's a lot
Speaker 1: of the dumbest people that go on MSNBC. Are are
Speaker 1: the conservatives that they find or the former Republicans I
Speaker 1: should say, speaking of which I think I got Maxim
Speaker 1: Boot on My Hill Show tomorrow morning. Oh gosh, here
Speaker 1: we go. That's gonna be That's gonna be a I'm
Speaker 1: gonna take a shower after that. Um. But Malcolm Nantz
Speaker 1: is this guy they put on with Brian Williams, and
Speaker 1: he's really digging into this too, because they had their report,
Speaker 1: the Senate report about how there's all the Russian social media,
Speaker 1: the idea that Russian social media changed the election and
Speaker 1: is a strategic threat to the United States is insane.
Speaker 1: This is crazy. Even Nate Silver, who's like the statistics
Speaker 1: guru of the left right, the five thirty eight guy
Speaker 1: for those of you know five thirty eight dot com.
Speaker 1: Even he wrote yesterday that it's not even the top
Speaker 1: one hundred reasons why Hillary lost the election. This is
Speaker 1: a lefty who looks at data all day. But he
Speaker 1: understands that spending a few thousand dollars, it spend like
Speaker 1: four thousand dollars on Google, you know, spent four thousand
Speaker 1: dollars on Google. Adds that's nothing. This is ridiculous. But
Speaker 1: nances telling that audience what they want to hear about Russia. Oh,
Speaker 1: Russia's so scary. Play two. They have amplified racism to
Speaker 1: the point where the alt right, Steve Bannon's own creation
Speaker 1: of Gamers is now the wholly owned subsidiary of the
Speaker 1: Trump campaign and our believers in David Duke the klu
Speaker 1: klux Klan, Richard and Richard Spencer the neo Nazi, and
Speaker 1: Robert Spencer the Islamophobe, to the point where they're mainstreamed.
Speaker 1: This is how effective this information warfare campaign has been
Speaker 1: carried out they went after to suppress the African American vote.
Speaker 1: And there is no doubt in my mind or anybody
Speaker 1: else's in the intelligence community that doesn't believe that it
Speaker 1: took American citizens to assist them in really getting down
Speaker 1: to where these voters were who needed to be suppressed. Wow,
Speaker 1: Malcolm Nanced, this is why we ask you all the
Speaker 1: time to come on this podcast. Scary stuff, but it
Speaker 1: needs to be said, needs to be heard. Wow, you
Speaker 1: sir so much for joining us once again. Or Brian
Speaker 1: Williams say, wow, that was sheer lunacy. I played the
Speaker 1: whole thing for Zoonia here. But this is what passes
Speaker 1: for insight an analysis now in democrats circles and on
Speaker 1: the left, the alt right and ben and Blato. Before this,
Speaker 1: it was Halliburton and Cheney and the evil you know,
Speaker 1: machinations thereof and these people just they can't handle it.
Speaker 1: They lost. You lost the election, all right, you lost
Speaker 1: the election. Hillary was a crappy candidate. Stop blaming Russia.
Speaker 1: Stop scare mongering with the alt right. What was the
Speaker 1: last time you even heard about the ault right? You
Speaker 1: even see there? All right? What is the alt right?
Speaker 1: Doesn't even exist anymore? It's like five the losers who
Speaker 1: hang out, you know, in a basement somewhere. But who
Speaker 1: the ultright? I didn't band. When was the last time
Speaker 1: you even saw Bannon speaking of people? This is just
Speaker 1: all nonsense. I'd like to start to get us into
Speaker 1: the Christmas spirit a little bit here, you know. I'd
Speaker 1: like us to be able to think a little bit
Speaker 1: about the holidays and you'll tie, cheer and all that
Speaker 1: good stuff. And so with that, I will present to
Speaker 1: you one of my favorite, one of my favorite viral
Speaker 1: videos out there right now about I don't know what
Speaker 1: it is about little British kids. You know, some of
Speaker 1: you remember Charlie bit my finger, and you know Charlie
Speaker 1: bit my finger, And I don't know about you. I've
Speaker 1: watched that video almost as many times I've watched We'll
Speaker 1: do it live. We'll do it live. H blank it,
Speaker 1: We'll do it live. Anyway. Another great was that, in
Speaker 1: fact Bill o Arreley's finest moment in all in all
Speaker 1: TV history. Brandon, is that fair? What do you think
Speaker 1: it's great? Yeah? Yeah, I think it's the most memorable.
Speaker 1: But a little British kid, Charlie bit my finger, he
Speaker 1: may actually have been outdone recently by a dad talking
Speaker 1: to his son, a little son named Jackson, about Father Christmas,
Speaker 1: which I forget is what what of course, adorable little
Speaker 1: little British children call Santa Claus right Father Christmas. But
Speaker 1: but here's just a little I just want to share
Speaker 1: a little fun. I know, policy and politics, we do
Speaker 1: this all day long. Here's a little bit of a
Speaker 1: fun video out there about Jackson and what he says
Speaker 1: he's gonna do if he's not on the good boy list.
Speaker 1: Play it he might absolutely, that's why you're That's why
Speaker 1: you're on the noty list, I swear, trust me. Well,
Speaker 1: that's why you're on a note list because because you're
Speaker 1: being noty right now. So you're going to be a
Speaker 1: note list if you can talking about that, because Father
Speaker 1: Christmas's note to me, because you're being noted, So you're
Speaker 1: on a noty list. I know I'm a good list.
Speaker 1: You're not because you're not because you ain't being good Bye,
Speaker 1: I'm on a good list. If you say that again
Speaker 1: again and then again. Father Christmas sprung me last night
Speaker 1: when I was at work, I said, you better tell
Speaker 1: Jackson to start being a good boy or he's going
Speaker 1: to stay on the naughty list. That he won't. I
Speaker 1: get no presents for Christmas. That's what he said to me.
Speaker 1: So you've got to start being a good boy. You
Speaker 1: want the wow punching must Actually I'm on the good list.
Speaker 1: I'm not on the naughty list. Appercut. I don't know
Speaker 1: if you caught that. He gotta mumble that. The dad
Speaker 1: obvious just being the son. But the little sun God, Yeah, Appercut,
Speaker 1: Father Christmas like this, he does this, little not on
Speaker 1: the naughty list. Oh man, just if I had a
Speaker 1: cool English accent, just think about how how fantastic it
Speaker 1: would be for radio. Sorry, guys, no cool English accent here.
Speaker 1: That's why I try to bring on. I bring on
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of cool English accents. We get Rahee,
Speaker 1: we get Charles Cook, Chef Tom Rogan, back on, he's
Speaker 1: going to find one and two. He's got an English
Speaker 1: accent right here. Uh you know, he's he's a fun one.
Speaker 1: Charles has them more laid back. Anyway. I'll stop talking
Speaker 1: about English accents. But I just thought I thought that
Speaker 1: was kind of a fun one. I'm sure there'll be
Speaker 1: other fun Christmas Christmas sound bites so we can share
Speaker 1: with you and maybe Brandon, can we pull a little
Speaker 1: Christmas music maybe for some of our intros and outros here?
Speaker 1: You know, what are we? What are we? Chop Liver?
Speaker 1: You know it'd be nice to get or can I
Speaker 1: still play Jadel Drade old tradele Oh dude, you can
Speaker 1: play Tradoldra Okay, then we're cool. Yeah, there we go.
Speaker 1: Of course, man, drop some Tradel Drado in there. When
Speaker 1: does Hanakahan, by the way I think it ended, I'm awful. No,
Speaker 1: I'm well, I'm obviously not great either because I didn't know.
Speaker 1: I thought you know, you know, you know what when
Speaker 1: people say Hanaker song, if you know what comes to mind,
Speaker 1: Brandon Adam Sandler, of course, yeah, here comes Hanaka. Time
Speaker 1: for hermonica or whatever. I forget the words, but you
Speaker 1: get the idea. So yeah, a little Jackson, a little
Speaker 1: bit of Hanakka. We've got some fun things to talk.
Speaker 1: Oh oh. And then there's there's this this lady over
Speaker 1: at gosh where is she? Olivia Nutzi, who's a reporter
Speaker 1: for The Daily Beast. I actually met her once a
Speaker 1: long time, very briefly. Um, but but she says that Trump,
Speaker 1: who is fighting the war for Christmas does not like Christmas.
Speaker 1: I think that she's from New York Magazine. Oh wait,
Speaker 1: New York Magazine. That's the magazine that employs the guy
Speaker 1: who said that I have daddy issues and I'm very
Speaker 1: lonely because I cooked a steak. That's right, that's the guy.
Speaker 1: He's the the Pulitzer Prize winner in twenty seventeen for criticism,
Speaker 1: and his criticism of me is that I cooked a
Speaker 1: steak and therefore I have I have daddy issues. By
Speaker 1: the way, a lot of people saw that have since
Speaker 1: have either reached out to be or said something to
Speaker 1: me like wow, And I said, yeah, I know, I
Speaker 1: really I should have had you know miss Molly. Oh anyway,
Speaker 1: I did not forget. It doesn't matter. She was right
Speaker 1: there with me though I was cooking the steak. I
Speaker 1: was like wow, calling me, calling me lonely and with
Speaker 1: daddy issues. That seems that seems uncouth, seems unnecessary. Here's
Speaker 1: what Olivia Nuzzi of New York mag though, which is
Speaker 1: I think we can say a trashy publication says about
Speaker 1: Trump and Christmas parties played twelve. This person went on
Speaker 1: to say that Christmas is about the Lord Jesus Christ,
Speaker 1: and it's not about Donald Trump. And that may explain
Speaker 1: his sort of aversion to celebrating this on a regular basis.
Speaker 1: But it wouldn't surprise me to talk about Christmas all
Speaker 1: the time. I don't think he's not very good at
Speaker 1: staying on topic when the topic is not Donald J. Trump,
Speaker 1: even Trump, even Trump haters hate him when it comes
Speaker 1: to Christmas parties. You know, they say he's not even
Speaker 1: good at Christmas parties, which I would note. You know, Brandon,
Speaker 1: I don't have that much fun at work at work
Speaker 1: Christmas parties. You know, I'm not somebody that tends to
Speaker 1: spend much time at them, because you know, you can't.
Speaker 1: You can't booze it up. That's a bad idea. You
Speaker 1: don't want to be that guy that gets lit at
Speaker 1: the company Christmas party and starts, you know, starts xeroxing
Speaker 1: parts of his anatomy. You don't want to be that guy,
Speaker 1: and so, you know, you end up just sort of
Speaker 1: standing around and talking to everybody. I understand it's a
Speaker 1: nice it's nice people do it. But and I hear
Speaker 1: stories about Christmas parties and people used to go to
Speaker 1: back in the nineties. You know, back when people could
Speaker 1: still do fun things, and those Christmas parties sound awesome.
Speaker 1: Christmas parties today it's like we're all sitting around drinking
Speaker 1: juice and uh, you know, maybe eating some What do
Speaker 1: they even serve? I mean obviously general cocktail fair. But
Speaker 1: what's Christmas food other than baked ham cookies? Yeah, Christmas cookies. Oh, eggnog,
Speaker 1: That's what I was trying to think of, eggnog. I'm
Speaker 1: not really an eggnog guy. First of all. Now I'm
Speaker 1: gonna sound like somebody that's you know, watching his figure.
Speaker 1: But eggnog, if you look at it, is you might
Speaker 1: as well have a chocolate milkshake. And so if my
Speaker 1: choice is between a chocolate milkshake and eggnog, I go
Speaker 1: chocolate milkshake. I don't care what time of year it is.
Speaker 1: Am I making sense here? Brandon? Is this is too
Speaker 1: random for you? No, I'm into it. I agree with you.
Speaker 1: I think like a Christmas party like an office Christmas
Speaker 1: parties just hanging out after school because you can't do
Speaker 1: anything more work. You just end up talking about work.
Speaker 1: It's like, no, I'd rather be home. That's right. Underwear,
Speaker 1: you know, it extends the work there. You know what
Speaker 1: they should do. They should let everybody sign a release
Speaker 1: that this is not actually a work function for legal purposes,
Speaker 1: so you can't get in trouble for what you say,
Speaker 1: or you know, you're just a normal citizen. I think
Speaker 1: it up not responsible for office conduct. You can just
Speaker 1: kind of hang out. Then office parties would be fun.
Speaker 1: I mean, I remember at the Blaze office party a
Speaker 1: few years ago. There might even be video that's Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton may have done some Gangham style. You know that.
Speaker 1: I think that happened U. But now it's it's not
Speaker 1: really a thing that people people get so excited about,
Speaker 1: you know, they don't really don't really let it rock out.
Speaker 1: I'm not a big egg non guy. I'm definitely not
Speaker 1: a pumpkin spice latte guy. And I'm finding now that
Speaker 1: people have like pumpkin spice latte air freshener. And this
Speaker 1: is just atrocious. By the way, if that video of
Speaker 1: you doing Gangham style came out, then I would assume
Speaker 1: you're lonely with daddy issues. Well, thank you. I could
Speaker 1: take that Gangham style. Man. That was a phenomenon for
Speaker 1: a while, that video. At one point, if you recall
Speaker 1: was the most I think it was the most watched
Speaker 1: YouTube video of all time. Oh speaking, it's from South
Speaker 1: It's from South Korea. That guy's name was sy Over.
Speaker 1: I'm taking you guys back. I know, almost as annoying
Speaker 1: as the Maco Raino, which was also inescapable for a
Speaker 1: period of time. Do you know that Aquaman which is
Speaker 1: out in international release. I don't even know is it
Speaker 1: out in the US. I don't even know what in
Speaker 1: the theaters now. But Aquaman has made Brandon two hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty million dollars in China alone. That's insane. And
Speaker 1: the thing is, I've heard that it's a terrible movie,
Speaker 1: and I don't understand why they have to make these
Speaker 1: bad superhero movies. In fact, I would like to have
Speaker 1: a great Christmas superhero movie made. You know they should
Speaker 1: have Yeah, Batman Begins what or no Batman Returns rather
Speaker 1: not Batman against Batman Returns was a Christmas movie, but
Speaker 1: it was a little dark and depressing. I'd like, doesn't
Speaker 1: they do Deadpool feature Christmas? I think you're right. I
Speaker 1: think Deadpool might have a new one. I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's come out yet, though, I think Deadpool might
Speaker 1: have some Christmas stuff going on at the first Deadpool
Speaker 1: was great, But this is this is what I always say.
Speaker 1: The reason why these superhero movies generally stink, although I
Speaker 1: like the first Deadpool movie, is because they're made for
Speaker 1: the international market. They're not making it for Americans to
Speaker 1: go see. So of course you're gonna have a lot
Speaker 1: of CGI because they're really just going to throw up
Speaker 1: on the screen all this, you know, different flashing lights
Speaker 1: and boom bang, lots of stuff because when you put
Speaker 1: the subtitles, who cares? Right? So I think Jason Momoa
Speaker 1: is pretty excellent what he does. I loved him in
Speaker 1: Game of Thrones. But my understanding is Aquaman is scarbage.
Speaker 1: That's disappointing. But I'm just thinking about movies I might
Speaker 1: see over the holiday season. I'm getting into Battlestar Galactic US.
Speaker 1: Maybe we can all start talking about that, But let's
Speaker 1: talk about the Second Amendment and some infringements on it
Speaker 1: coming up. Background checks are essential. Every business has got
Speaker 1: to have them for new employees. Right. This is just
Speaker 1: a it's a liability issue, it's a sound business practices issue,
Speaker 1: and you want somebody that you can trust that will
Speaker 1: tailor a background investigation program to the needs of your company,
Speaker 1: large or small, whatever business you're in. That's why you
Speaker 1: need Global Verification Network. Global Verification Network is the only
Speaker 1: dual certified an owned background investigations. This is a veteran
Speaker 1: owned business, and you know we love supporting veteran owned
Speaker 1: business here on the show. They're headquartered in Chicago. I
Speaker 1: know the CEO personally. He's a great guy. He really
Speaker 1: cares about his business because he knows how important it
Speaker 1: is to get the information right, to make sure they
Speaker 1: get it to you efficiently and quickly. That's why whenever
Speaker 1: you call Global Verification, they're gonna answer the phone. Speaking
Speaker 1: of which, call them, tell them you heard about them
Speaker 1: here on the Buck Sexton Show. Eight seven seven six
Speaker 1: nine five one one seven nine. That's eight seven seven
Speaker 1: six nine five one one seven nine, Or go to
Speaker 1: MYGVN dot com for all your background investigation needs Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network. The bump stock ban is going into effect.
Speaker 1: We mentioned this yesterday on the show, and I've got
Speaker 1: to tell you, you know, this is one of these
Speaker 1: This is one of these areas where at first I
Speaker 1: was kind of okay with the idea. In fact, even
Speaker 1: the NRA, So don't don't blame me. Even the NRA
Speaker 1: was favorable to a bump stock ban after the horrific
Speaker 1: mass shooting in Las Vegas, which which involved the guy
Speaker 1: who had some some rifles with bump stocks on them,
Speaker 1: some without bump stocks. But I figured this is this
Speaker 1: is a novelty item to me initially when this when
Speaker 1: this came out and I knew what a bump stock was.
Speaker 1: I've I've never fired with a bump stock. I mean
Speaker 1: I've I've fired all kinds of stuff, but I've never
Speaker 1: fired anything that had had a bump stock on it. Um.
Speaker 1: But to me, it was almost a novelty meaning that
Speaker 1: this would be like lawmaker saying, you know, we're gonna
Speaker 1: ben chainsaw bonnets, which if you remember that USA Today
Speaker 1: article a while ago that had the chainsaw bayonet, which
Speaker 1: spawned some of the most amusing memes on the on
Speaker 1: the internet. Um, the chainsaw bayonet ban would not be
Speaker 1: a big problem for me. I do not think that
Speaker 1: we would have destroyed the Second Amendment, or the Second
Speaker 1: Amendment would no longer matter if we were a place
Speaker 1: that no longer had chainsaw bayonets, right, because they're not
Speaker 1: really and that's kind of how I thought of bump stocks.
Speaker 1: I thought of them as unimportant. But the problem with
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment haters out there, the problem with the
Speaker 1: gun grabber crowd is that if you give them a
Speaker 1: bump stock, they'll take your ar I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: if you give them an inch, they'll take a mile.
Speaker 1: And that's what that's what the real concern is here.
Speaker 1: Because this is not a hat tip to our friend
Speaker 1: Sean Davis yesterday who mentioned this, and I did a
Speaker 1: little more reading on it today. This could be a
Speaker 1: big problem. You have this, yeah, and you have a
Speaker 1: few issues where it. First of all, the idea that
Speaker 1: the government could, with just the an act of the
Speaker 1: DOJ and an executive order turn you into a felon
Speaker 1: who faces ten years in federal prison unless you take
Speaker 1: a prescribed action, in this case, turning in a device
Speaker 1: that you had legally, legally obtained. That's a that's a
Speaker 1: scary thing. That's a power that should not be taken lightly.
Speaker 1: And this is also my problem, one of my problems
Speaker 1: with what you see whenever they impose new magazine restrictions.
Speaker 1: I don't mean like, oh, you can't have maxim magazine
Speaker 1: it's too naughty. I mean, you all knew that. I know. Wow. Wow,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, it's late bad joke. You know. I'm just
Speaker 1: trying not to be one of those journals who says
Speaker 1: a clip I don't want to I don't want to
Speaker 1: tend capacity clip to be allowed, because, as you know,
Speaker 1: it's not a clip, it's a magazine. But the magazine
Speaker 1: restrictions sound like they're, you know, not that harmful until
Speaker 1: you realize, well, in some places it means that some
Speaker 1: person is going to be at the range, a lawful
Speaker 1: gun owner is gonna be the range, and an undercover
Speaker 1: is going to be at the range, you know, checking
Speaker 1: on people's stuff. Because this happens. I am YPD. Guys
Speaker 1: have told me about cases about the thing like this,
Speaker 1: and they'll see you've got a magazine with them greater
Speaker 1: than tend capacity, and all of a sudden you're arrested
Speaker 1: and now they're gonna make you a criminal based on
Speaker 1: a law that's stupid to begin with. It doesn't really
Speaker 1: do anything. So there's a lot of reasons why you've
Speaker 1: got to be very cautious when they start doing this stuff,
Speaker 1: when they start not even legislating about the Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: but just dictating. I mean, this is this is the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice saying now that if you are an
Speaker 1: owner of a bump stock, you are you have ninety
Speaker 1: days or else you will be subject to felony prosecution.
Speaker 1: And what they're doing is by an order of the
Speaker 1: DOJ member. It's not even an Act of Congress. So
Speaker 1: it's not like, you know, this is just government overreach.
Speaker 1: They're saying that a bump stock effectively turns a semi
Speaker 1: automatic rifle into a fully automatic rifle, and that is
Speaker 1: not true. Hashtag not science. This is accurate. This is
Speaker 1: not a question of you know, what we believe or
Speaker 1: what we'd like to think. This is just false. Everyone
Speaker 1: listening to this show, I'm sure already knows, and many
Speaker 1: of you know in much greater detail than I do,
Speaker 1: the differences between the actual firing mechanism of a semi
Speaker 1: automatic versus fully automatic, and what goes on inside the
Speaker 1: receiver and how the gas operation works, and the trigger mechanism.
Speaker 1: But the easy way to remember it is a semi
Speaker 1: automatic as you pull the trigger fires once, fully automatic,
Speaker 1: as you hold the trigger down, it keeps firing until
Speaker 1: you run out or you no longer depress the trigger.
Speaker 1: And they're saying that a bum stock makes a semi
Speaker 1: amatic fulliomatic. That is not true. And in fact, modification
Speaker 1: of a semi automatic to make it truly fully automatic
Speaker 1: is very illegal, and fully automatic weapons have been strictly
Speaker 1: regulated by the government. I mean, you have to get
Speaker 1: special federal permission. That takes a long time. It's not
Speaker 1: easy to do. You know, you have to get special
Speaker 1: permission to own one, and a machine gun that's that's
Speaker 1: manufactured after nineteen eighty six. If you own that, that
Speaker 1: is that results in a long prison sentence. So here's
Speaker 1: why this is so problematic. Not only are you now
Speaker 1: making possibly I don't know how many people I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone knows how many people own bump stocks.
Speaker 1: I'm guessing it's probably in the thousands, maybe in the
Speaker 1: tens of thout but I have no idea, that is
Speaker 1: a guess. But not only are you putting people now
Speaker 1: in a position where they could be subject to that
Speaker 1: they could be subject to prison time. You're also setting
Speaker 1: a president whereby any executive branch, like for example, if
Speaker 1: there was a Democrat president and Democrat Congress, calling the shots.
Speaker 1: All of a sudden, any executive branch could come along
Speaker 1: and say, you know what, we're just gonna ban this
Speaker 1: type of fill in the blank. And if you don't
Speaker 1: like it, tough and the constitutional test about common usage
Speaker 1: and dcv Heller doesn't doesn't behold muster anymore. We don't care.
Speaker 1: And this is confiscation. I mean, this is forced confiscation.
Speaker 1: So it's not even a ban on future sale. This
Speaker 1: is you have to turn in this thing. At the
Speaker 1: federal level, top down, you can see how this all
Speaker 1: of a sudden gets abused. They can redefine firearms terminology
Speaker 1: so that they will cover it under a previous federal law,
Speaker 1: or they'll they'll shoehorn this into a federal law that
Speaker 1: should not apply, and then they can say at the
Speaker 1: national level, you got to turn this stuff in. This
Speaker 1: does not end well. This is not a place that
Speaker 1: we can just skip over and say, you know, who
Speaker 1: really cares? This is for Congress to do. And you know,
Speaker 1: as my friend Shawn Davis writes here, if the government
Speaker 1: can get away with lawlessly declaring a piece of plastic
Speaker 1: to be a machine gun, then it can get away
Speaker 1: with saying you're a r fifteen is a machine gun
Speaker 1: knocking in your door, confiscating your guns and throwing you
Speaker 1: in prison. End quote. Sean's right, So bump stocks, this
Speaker 1: band is not okay as constituted? What is that? Who
Speaker 1: wants to guess? Who can guess what that is? And
Speaker 1: what that comes from? Brandon? I didn't. I didn't tell
Speaker 1: you what that audio was. I just sent it to you.
Speaker 1: What do you know what that was? Well, you labeled
Speaker 1: it something, so I know what it is. Okay, But
Speaker 1: what movie is it from? Isn't it from The Nature Turtles? No?
Speaker 1: But not a bad not a bad. Yes, that is
Speaker 1: the most iconic nunchucku scene in the history of film.
Speaker 1: That is Bruce Lee from Enter the Dragon when he
Speaker 1: takes the nunchucks or nunchuckoo off of an attacker and
Speaker 1: then has that moment that it is probably one of
Speaker 1: the most very famous Bruce Lee moments of all time. Actually,
Speaker 1: and you might be saying, Buck, why why are you
Speaker 1: telling us about about numb nunchucks. People call them numbchucks,
Speaker 1: nunchuck o nunchucks. The truth is that it's actually in
Speaker 1: the news right now, believe it or not. I've got
Speaker 1: good news for you. When it comes to your ability
Speaker 1: to carry a weapon that I don't think is a
Speaker 1: particularly useful one, but it looks cool. A judge in
Speaker 1: New York, no less, a federal judge. US District Judge
Speaker 1: Pamela Chen struck down New York's nunchuck ban as unconstitutional
Speaker 1: earlier this week. Did you know this one, Brandon? I
Speaker 1: did I hear? I heard of that? Is that pretty awesome?
Speaker 1: I mean, apparently this is still America. You could walk around,
Speaker 1: eat a big mac and carry your numb chucks, driving
Speaker 1: your pickup truck with a big old American flag out
Speaker 1: the back in peace. I think this is I think
Speaker 1: this is exciting out that. No, I couldn't in New York.
Speaker 1: It was illegal. They'll they'll rescue for which is insane.
Speaker 1: By the way, it's two sticks with a string between them,
Speaker 1: makes no sense at all. But in New York in
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy four, band the bandy weapon known as as
Speaker 1: nunchucks along with brass knuckles because kung fu was really big,
Speaker 1: and people actually saw the movie Enter the Dragon, and
Speaker 1: they saw what was done with numchucks in that movie,
Speaker 1: and they thought, oh gosh, it must be so incredibly dangerous.
Speaker 1: These numbchucks, so they banned them. It was it was
Speaker 1: a criminal violation and considered a deadly weapon. Um and
Speaker 1: that was That was the way it was for gosh
Speaker 1: over over forty years. And now finally to the karate
Speaker 1: enthusiasts in the audience, you can carry your num numbchucks
Speaker 1: or I like to say numb chucks, even though that's
Speaker 1: not really it is numchucky for those who really want
Speaker 1: to know. Numbchucks they believe come from a flail that
Speaker 1: we're used in Southeast Asia for the purpose of threshing
Speaker 1: rice or soybeans. People have come up with different reasons
Speaker 1: or different etymology for this thing. It is common in
Speaker 1: okin now in karate, and it has also been picked
Speaker 1: up by other martial arts as well. It is two
Speaker 1: sticks that are connected with a with a string or
Speaker 1: with a chain. And and I will say that the
Speaker 1: the numb chuck is is among the coolest to watch
Speaker 1: somebody you know play with. But also if you hit
Speaker 1: yourself with them, because I may have I may have
Speaker 1: fiddled with some numbchucks in my day, Brandon, you don't
Speaker 1: want to you don't want to catch yourself in the
Speaker 1: nose with them, it's not fun and other places. Among
Speaker 1: among other places, there's definitely some If you go on
Speaker 1: YouTube and you check out some numb chuck fail, it
Speaker 1: is a It is a reminder that there are really
Speaker 1: two kinds of people, trained and untrained, and when you're
Speaker 1: playing with numb chucks, you want to be you want
Speaker 1: to be trained so you can It is a good day,
Speaker 1: a good time for U. For the Second Amendment with
Speaker 1: regard to numbchucks, not so good with the bump stocks,
Speaker 1: but definitely better. And it reminds me that my favorite
Speaker 1: Ninja Turtle um by personality type was always Raphael but
Speaker 1: Michael Angelo of the teenager being Nina Turtles had you
Speaker 1: brought up, he was the numbchuck guy. And I think
Speaker 1: that that was probably the coolest weapon. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: so too. And it's funny they should have banned it
Speaker 1: to band because when I was I would say this facetiously.
Speaker 1: When I went to see the Nikja Turtles at Radio
Speaker 1: City Music Hall, they had a musical. Back when I
Speaker 1: was a kid, they sold nunchucks outside the place like foam.
Speaker 1: I was using it like Michelangelo, and I hit my
Speaker 1: brother in the face and I was grounded for two weeks,
Speaker 1: true story, two weeks. Man, then they didn't mess around
Speaker 1: in the Brandon household. I know, I got violent. I
Speaker 1: wanted to. Uh I had I had foam, a foam
Speaker 1: version of it when I was a kid, because in
Speaker 1: the eighties there was that martial arts craze where they're
Speaker 1: opening up karate dojo's everywhere. But but then then things
Speaker 1: now with mixed martial arts, people actually see how how
Speaker 1: fighting tends to tends to go down. And usually, and
Speaker 1: every time I say this, somebody, someone who's like, I'm
Speaker 1: a ninth degree black belt, sends me a message it
Speaker 1: gets mad at me. I'm just saying, for most of us, okay,
Speaker 1: for us mortals, a spinning roundhouse kick when you're leaping
Speaker 1: off the top of the roof of a car is
Speaker 1: not a great move to pull in a street fight,
Speaker 1: just from what I've seen, from what I'm told. That's
Speaker 1: but numb chucks are legal in New York now courting
Speaker 1: this judge under the Second Amendment, by the way, because
Speaker 1: they're saying that it's a weapon in common usage before
Speaker 1: they banned it. There you have it. The show ain't
Speaker 1: over yet, folks. Keeping it real it's time for roll call.
Speaker 1: I can't believe how few days there are left for
Speaker 1: roll call for anything in twenty eighteen. Just a little
Speaker 1: preview next week, my friends, I am going to be
Speaker 1: taking a few days off, so that means that I'm
Speaker 1: going to be hanging out with family and Miss Molly
Speaker 1: for the holiday. And the good news is though, I
Speaker 1: have a lot of excellent fill in guest hosts scheduled
Speaker 1: for next week. I mean people that you're really gonna
Speaker 1: want to hear from. You'll have a Rahim Kassam in
Speaker 1: the mix. You'll have Harlan Hill doing his thing. I
Speaker 1: think Harlan's a first timer. Also going to see if
Speaker 1: we can get the Godfather doctor Mike Opelka in the
Speaker 1: mix again I guess not technically a doctor, but you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, and maybe even Ben Weingarten if
Speaker 1: we can make that happen. So we've got some great
Speaker 1: guest hosts. So don't think that the Hut is not
Speaker 1: going to be a rock and next week and then
Speaker 1: once we get into the new year, oh, they're not
Speaker 1: going to be able to pry this microphone out of
Speaker 1: my hand. We're gonna have a lot of work to do.
Speaker 1: But I just wanted to give you that heads up
Speaker 1: for next week. So don't think that there won't be
Speaker 1: action in the Freedom Hunt. There will be. There will
Speaker 1: be every day next week, so make sure you tune
Speaker 1: in and hear from some of our favorite guest hosts,
Speaker 1: some of our favorite buddies. I with that. That was
Speaker 1: kind of an eye that got a little a little
Speaker 1: more guttural than I intended. But I here we go.
Speaker 1: Let's see what the action is. I want some new
Speaker 1: Facebook messages, well, not new messages, we got a lot
Speaker 1: of those. I want those two. I want new people
Speaker 1: to write, though. I've got some of my usual buddies
Speaker 1: lighten up the box, which I appreciate, but I'd like
Speaker 1: to hear from some of you folks out there who
Speaker 1: have never written before. Facebook dot com slash buck sexon
Speaker 1: is the way to do it. So now that we've
Speaker 1: established that, we can get into it. First up in
Speaker 1: this piece, we've got Michael who writes, honey glazed hams
Speaker 1: are baked, not roasted. Best stay back on those skis, dude, Well, Michael,
Speaker 1: savor the flavor, because you are correct on this one.
Speaker 1: Honey baked hams are baked and not roasted. So I
Speaker 1: guess I just I just lost out in the pork
Speaker 1: knowledge contest. So there's that. Speaking of knowledge, I think
Speaker 1: I'm going to do a Filet mignon tonight. And I
Speaker 1: even have a lobster tale that I managed to get
Speaker 1: that I might. I might make my own surf and
Speaker 1: turf baby, That's how I roll. Lisa writes, can someone
Speaker 1: please tell the Republican Party that we don't care about
Speaker 1: a government shutdown, but we do care about border security? Well, Lisa,
Speaker 1: I think you might know from listening to the show
Speaker 1: that I'm with you one hundred percent on this one.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm doing everything that I can here to get
Speaker 1: the word out. I'm disappointed, disappointed with Trump on this one.
Speaker 1: And this might be a recurring theme because the president,
Speaker 1: you know, it's one thing for him to be slapping
Speaker 1: around CNN on Twitter and doing all the stuff that
Speaker 1: he does when I feel like he's trying to execute
Speaker 1: on the agenda. But I did not, in fact vote
Speaker 1: for President Trump for his any Twitter game or his
Speaker 1: sparkling personality. I definitely didn't vote for him for his
Speaker 1: personal ethics. I voted because he made promises as a
Speaker 1: politician to fulfill an agenda and to take this thing
Speaker 1: all the way to the promised Land, so to speak,
Speaker 1: and that is not exactly happening right now. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying he has failed. I'm not saying I don't support
Speaker 1: him anymore anything. I'm just saying we have to keep
Speaker 1: him honest. We gotta call balls and strikes, and this
Speaker 1: unwillingness to make the wall a essentially sene qua non
Speaker 1: right without which what it's not gonna fly. It's not
Speaker 1: gonna fly. With me, I think I'm I'm annoyed by
Speaker 1: this and I can't hold it back. Thomas right, it's
Speaker 1: a great day, buck. President Trump has spent two years
Speaker 1: d esclaim in the middle of these conflicts and has
Speaker 1: reached a point where d D is confident we have
Speaker 1: outlived are welcome in Iraq. In Afghanistan. He announced we
Speaker 1: will be with drawing troops from Syria and their support
Speaker 1: in Iraq will follow. I'm hopeful we'll hear an announcement
Speaker 1: in a few weeks. The troops in Iraq will be
Speaker 1: fully withdrawn by March. The scale down of troops in
Speaker 1: Afghanistan will begin in February and complete about the end
Speaker 1: of next year. It's time the leadership of those Middle
Speaker 1: Eastern countries to side their own fate. We will be
Speaker 1: watching Shield tie well. Tom. I don't know. I don't
Speaker 1: think that he's going to pull troops out of Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: and I think he might even balk At pulling troops
Speaker 1: out of Iraq and maybe even Syria too. In Syria,
Speaker 1: we've got a relatively small footprint, and so that's a
Speaker 1: much that's a much easier operation than it would be
Speaker 1: in some of these other places. You know, we shouldn't
Speaker 1: be rebuilding these countries though. We shouldn't be the ones
Speaker 1: who are in charge of making a successful nation in
Speaker 1: any Middle Eastern country. It's not our fight. And I
Speaker 1: have tired of this, and I think the whole country
Speaker 1: has tired of this. And it's a lesson. It's a
Speaker 1: less than we have learned. Even when you are the
Speaker 1: hedge Amon, even when you are the super hour of
Speaker 1: the whole world, you can't want a decent rule of law,
Speaker 1: representative democracy more than the people in that country. Sometimes
Speaker 1: they wanted to Germany wanted it to Japan wanted it
Speaker 1: to do the Afghan people, some of them, not the
Speaker 1: way that we necessarily would Walt them too though, and
Speaker 1: not enough. It's just and it's just not going to
Speaker 1: be our problem. It's not going to be our fight anymore.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a good thing. But I also
Speaker 1: would keep an eye on Trump backtracking on this one.
Speaker 1: The establishment is very much invested in us continuing, you know.
Speaker 1: I mean, you've got guys like Rubio and others who believe,
Speaker 1: you know, Lindsay Graham, I miss I miss Kavanaugh hearing
Speaker 1: Lindsay Graham. I don't like, let's bomb bomb bomb everybody,
Speaker 1: Lindsay Graham. I don't think that's a good a good idea. Carla,
Speaker 1: Thank you, Buck. I was feeling discouraged today about the
Speaker 1: same things you were the guests you had clarify the
Speaker 1: flint stuff. At least I stayed up too late listening,
Speaker 1: but it was worth it. Well, Carla, thank you for
Speaker 1: giving me your time. I really do appreciate it. Ed.
Speaker 1: I'm glad that you feel like you can come here
Speaker 1: and I bring on guests who I respect and who
Speaker 1: I know bring something to the table, and they're not
Speaker 1: just going to tell you whatever they think that the
Speaker 1: overwhelming percentage of this audience wants to hear, or that
Speaker 1: Republicans or conservatives want to hear, we're gonna tell you
Speaker 1: what they think is true, and I do the same thing.
Speaker 1: And that's a standard that I have for people that
Speaker 1: we put on this show, and I think we do
Speaker 1: a pretty good job of always sticking to it. You know,
Speaker 1: Occasionally some bloviators slip in or also I try out
Speaker 1: new people. We put new people on as guests, and
Speaker 1: I can't really know till I hear from them, But
Speaker 1: by and large, the repeat, the repeat customers we have
Speaker 1: in terms of our guests are I think as good
Speaker 1: as as anybody in this business, and they do a
Speaker 1: phenomenal job. So I'm glad that they were able to
Speaker 1: illuminate it for are you? And yeah, the Flint situation
Speaker 1: was disappointing. Look, it's been a disappointing week for Trump supporters,
Speaker 1: for people that care about this movement and the populous
Speaker 1: conservatism that has been promised and in some ways acted upon.
Speaker 1: I don't really want to hear that much more about taxes, though,
Speaker 1: because yes, we had some tax reform, but it wasn't sweeping.
Speaker 1: It certainly wasn't a flat tax or a fair tax,
Speaker 1: and that's establishment GOP one on one, nothing different about that.
Speaker 1: The thing that Trump has been most successful in thus
Speaker 1: far are his Supreme Court and federal federal court picks,
Speaker 1: which he has outsourced largely to people who know more
Speaker 1: than him about that. But that's good. That's what he
Speaker 1: should do, right, and that's why he has experts in
Speaker 1: those matters. So his picks for judges and his ability
Speaker 1: to fight back against the media narrative and to create
Speaker 1: space for conversation that was even under previous GOP regimes
Speaker 1: disallowed because of political correctness. That's where Trump has been
Speaker 1: most successful, and also shining a real light on the
Speaker 1: media for being a bunch of clowns and a bunch
Speaker 1: of fake news jerks. But in terms of immigration, no,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, not successful. Healthcare, no, I'm sorry, not successful.
Speaker 1: There are some areas where we have not won yet,
Speaker 1: you know, or haven't even seen real progress. You know,
Speaker 1: the border right now is as bad as it was
Speaker 1: before Trump came into office. That's just the truth, and
Speaker 1: I'm here to tell you the truth. Bob writes Buck
Speaker 1: been listening to talk about wanting to learn how to cook.
Speaker 1: I've always liked to cook, but the past few years
Speaker 1: have really kicked it. Up. One of the best resources
Speaker 1: I found was a show called good Eats. I really
Speaker 1: recommend you take a look. It's a combination of Julia Child,
Speaker 1: Mister Wizard, and the Muppets. The main thing I like
Speaker 1: is that he teaches you why you do things a
Speaker 1: certain way. Shields High love your show, Bob, Well, Bob,
Speaker 1: thank you. I'll definitely check that out. I'm really I'm
Speaker 1: really working on my cooking these days. One because I'm
Speaker 1: obviously trying to impress Miss Molly with new skills. And
Speaker 1: two i am honestly too worn out from my day
Speaker 1: to day schedule, which is up at five am, done
Speaker 1: at nine pm to be much of a much use
Speaker 1: in the gym. You know, I've definitely lost whatever whatever
Speaker 1: muscle that I had acquired from previous gym outings. From
Speaker 1: the last couple of years. Some of you would probably
Speaker 1: noticed I got I got very lean and mean for
Speaker 1: a while there. That is kind of fading away. So
Speaker 1: I'm spending more time in the kitchen and embracing that.
Speaker 1: But I'll get back into the gym. I'm gonna have
Speaker 1: to change my schedule up a little bit in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: but more on that later. Nothing will change on radio,
Speaker 1: So that's the good news. Shanna writes, Can I learn
Speaker 1: more about your background? Well, Shanna, you could have just
Speaker 1: Wikipedia and me before, but now there are people that
Speaker 1: have changed my Wikipedia page and deleted it, so that
Speaker 1: doesn't really work. If you google me all more about
Speaker 1: my background. There should be a fair amount of stuff
Speaker 1: up there, some interviews and things here and there. But yeah,
Speaker 1: or you could just listen to this show and know
Speaker 1: that I'll occasionally tell you anecdotes or a little bit
Speaker 1: of personal stuff, and that's the way it's going to be.
Speaker 1: All right, that's it form for me and my friends.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for hanging out with me here
Speaker 1: in the Freedom Hunt. As always, I will see you tomorrow,
Speaker 1: Shields High. It's time for conservatives to no longer live
Speaker 1: by the leave of the left when it comes to
Speaker 1: social media. These big companies out there, Twitter, Facebook, they
Speaker 1: are dominated by progressives and that filters all the way down,
Speaker 1: not just into their algorithms, but how they have terms
Speaker 1: of service violations enforced, all the stuff that they're doing.
Speaker 1: I've got a place for you to go where none
Speaker 1: of that is a concern. Snippy dot com. Snippy dot
Speaker 1: com is a new social media site. And if you've
Speaker 1: heard me talking about it and check that out a
Speaker 1: little bit, go back and check it out again, because
Speaker 1: thousands of members of teambuck have joint snippy dot com
Speaker 1: and they're expressing their opinions and stirring up lively conversations
Speaker 1: like it's an unbiased social media site that's all about
Speaker 1: conversation and community. You've got nothing to lose. It's completely
Speaker 1: free to join, free to post. Go see what you
Speaker 1: want to talk about there. Go find some other folks
Speaker 1: on team buck, or find people who actually know about
Speaker 1: baseball unlike me. Snippy dot com. It's totally free. There's
Speaker 1: no shadow banning and no suppression of conservative thought ever. Now,
Speaker 1: with an updated unit user interface and new features, it's
Speaker 1: available in the Apple App Store and for Android snippy
Speaker 1: dot com