Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake, American, You're a great American. Again the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show begins. Remember now, welcome to the Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show. My name is Rahem Kasam, filling in for Buck.
Speaker 1: This Thursday, the twenty seventh of December two thousand and eighteen.
Speaker 1: The phone lines are opened here in the Freedom Hut.
Speaker 1: The phone number is one eight four four nine hundred Buck.
Speaker 1: That's one eight four four nine hundred two eight two five.
Speaker 1: We've got a great show for you this evening, and
Speaker 1: I want you to be a part of it. Whatever
Speaker 1: you have to say, whether it's about the government continuing
Speaker 1: it's partial shutdown, who's at fault, whether you're from the left,
Speaker 1: the right, the middle, the moon, I want to hear
Speaker 1: from you, guys and gals today. We've got a lot
Speaker 1: of subjects to cover over the course of the next
Speaker 1: couple of hours, so stick with us. But I wanted
Speaker 1: to start with this. Over the last day or so,
Speaker 1: just when you thought the fake news media could not
Speaker 1: get any worse, we find ourselves subjected to another dog
Speaker 1: and pony show from CNN and NBC News this Christmas week.
Speaker 1: I want to quote the Washington Post, of all places
Speaker 1: for you right now. The Post published an article today
Speaker 1: by their media critic Eric Wemple, saying there were merely
Speaker 1: seven hours and forty seven minutes left of Christmas Day
Speaker 1: when NBC News published this story the headline Trump becomes
Speaker 1: first president since two thousand and two not to visit
Speaker 1: troops at Christmas time. But even the Washington Post not
Speaker 1: exactly noted for its Trump friendliness, even they are calling
Speaker 1: out NBC for not just publishing demonstrably fake news, but
Speaker 1: also for sticking to their story. They are standing by
Speaker 1: that story as if the President of the United States
Speaker 1: hadn't left the White House at all this week. Well
Speaker 1: we know he did, of course, not just because of
Speaker 1: the address in Iraq itself nor the stopover in Germany,
Speaker 1: but also because Air Force one, operating under a covert
Speaker 1: call sign was actually physically spotted in the air above
Speaker 1: Sheffield in the United Kingdom by some amateur plane enthusiasts. Yes,
Speaker 1: obviously the President did visit Iraq, unless there's some major
Speaker 1: conspiracy whereby he really did all of that from the
Speaker 1: basement of the White House. Maybe MSNBC. Maybe NBC will
Speaker 1: be telling us that the shadows and the videos don't
Speaker 1: line up quite right, or the flag was waving incorrectly.
Speaker 1: Maybe they're Iraq visit truthers, Iraq landing conspiracy theorists. Maybe
Speaker 1: Lee Harvey Oswald acting in concert with President Trump shot
Speaker 1: John F. Kennedy. Maybe what we do know, however, is
Speaker 1: NBC hasn't apologized nor really retracted its grotesque fake news story.
Speaker 1: Oh they put a little disclaimer on it, something something
Speaker 1: surprise visit not our fault, don't shoot the messenger. But
Speaker 1: the damage, the intentional damage, I'll remind you, was already done.
Speaker 1: The damage was supposed to be incurred by President Trump
Speaker 1: and his administration, as so many news stories a fashion
Speaker 1: to do nowadays. Instead it backfired, leaving yet another mess
Speaker 1: for the media, and specifically for NBC. You see, trust
Speaker 1: in the media has been declining for some time now.
Speaker 1: Gallop the polling organization, found that between two thousand and
Speaker 1: three and two thousand and sixteen, the percentage of Americans
Speaker 1: who said they have a great deal or fair amount
Speaker 1: of trust in the media fell from fifty four to
Speaker 1: thirty two percent. Sixty nine percent of adults in the
Speaker 1: current survey say their trust in the news media has
Speaker 1: decreased in the past decade. Just four percent say their
Speaker 1: trust is increased, and this week's incident muddies those already
Speaker 1: murky waters further. While few were to know that Fir
Speaker 1: Force one would take off in the dead of night
Speaker 1: from Joint Base, andrews ms I keep saying, NBC appeared
Speaker 1: so eager to criticize this president, getting one more dig
Speaker 1: in at him over the Christmas period, that they couldn't
Speaker 1: even wait until Christmas was well and truly over to
Speaker 1: take their shot. Well, they missed again. Even the Washington
Speaker 1: Post concurs. At the end of the analysis piece on
Speaker 1: the subject today, author and media critic Eric Wemple concludes,
Speaker 1: quote correct the piece, NBC News or prepared to stand
Speaker 1: legitimately accused of propagating fake news. And NBC weren't the
Speaker 1: only ones this week to humiliate themselves over the president's
Speaker 1: Iran visit. I want you to listen to the following
Speaker 1: CNN commentators. I'm sorry I'm subjecting you to this. The
Speaker 1: infamous Jim Acosta included their reactions and talking points over
Speaker 1: the visit to US soldiers. Is really quite something to behold.
Speaker 1: Let's play that clip. Is that unusual to see the
Speaker 1: president doing that on base? Does this run the risk
Speaker 1: of the president, you know, facing some accusations that he's
Speaker 1: turning some of this into a campaign stop? What are you? Well?
Speaker 1: You know, this is very interesting. The pool reporters traveling
Speaker 1: said that the troops brought the hats with them, including
Speaker 1: one hat that said Trump twenty twenty. We will have
Speaker 1: to see if that actually proves to be the case.
Speaker 1: The question is if they brought them or if the
Speaker 1: president brought them? What commander allowed that to really happen?
Speaker 1: Because this is very much against military policy and regulation.
Speaker 1: Troops are not supposed to be involved in political activities.
Speaker 1: The US military is not a political force. And there's
Speaker 1: no question the saying Trump twenty twenty and make America
Speaker 1: great again, those are political slogans of a Trump campaign.
Speaker 1: They are not governmental sayings to put to say the
Speaker 1: least right and John, I mean, what would the concern
Speaker 1: be if something like that is going on? Do you
Speaker 1: think or is this just you know, a soldiers there
Speaker 1: he's got a hat in his locker and he runs
Speaker 1: over and says, hey, when am I gonna have another
Speaker 1: chance for the president to sign one of these things. Yeah. Look,
Speaker 1: I mean it kind of blurs the line because the
Speaker 1: Trump is his slogan and where's that, where's that? You know,
Speaker 1: where's that line? But Barb's right, it is in fact
Speaker 1: a campaign slogan, that is a campaign item and is
Speaker 1: completely inappropriate for the troops to do. Supposed to do it,
Speaker 1: not supposed to do this, and I'm sure that their
Speaker 1: boss is seeing that. They're They're not going to be
Speaker 1: happy about it. But look, the president has to take
Speaker 1: some ownership of this too. Every time he's around military audiences,
Speaker 1: he tends to politicize it and he brings in complaints
Speaker 1: and grievances from outside the realm of military policy. This
Speaker 1: was wrong for him to do it as well. I'm
Speaker 1: going to be really interested to see Jim when we
Speaker 1: get video of his comments to the troops, his actual
Speaker 1: speech at Aliside, and I hope that he didn't politicize
Speaker 1: that those sets of remarks, But we'll have to wait
Speaker 1: and see. We're gonna have to wait and see which
Speaker 1: command or allowed that to happen. The military is not
Speaker 1: a political fools. It was inappropriate. The bosses won't be
Speaker 1: happy Trump has to take ownership over it. Listen to
Speaker 1: the stretch in their voices much better if you can
Speaker 1: go and watch that online. They are at such great pains.
Speaker 1: They know they're going to ridiculous lengths to implicate this
Speaker 1: president in something, anything, even something is innocuous. Assigning baseball caps, Well,
Speaker 1: let the impeachment proceedings begin. Surely this is the gravest
Speaker 1: deception ever foist upon the American people. Some soldiers wanted
Speaker 1: their commander in chief's autograph and posed happily with make
Speaker 1: America Great Again caps. The horror of it all. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: on the southern border, of course, no one really cares
Speaker 1: about the waves of mass illegal immigration coming into the
Speaker 1: United States. Well, unless it's a migrant child that's suffering,
Speaker 1: of course, then they're all down there with their cameras
Speaker 1: and their crews and the crocodile tears. Who've seen it
Speaker 1: in Europe before, of course, during the crisis of twenty fifteen.
Speaker 1: Is it really any wander I ask you, that we
Speaker 1: across the Western world have so little faith in our
Speaker 1: media overlords. Now, can it really be that surprising to
Speaker 1: the one time masters of the universe at this point
Speaker 1: that they have sufficiently abused the trust of the public
Speaker 1: to the extent that many are just switching off completely. I,
Speaker 1: for one, as somebody who regards journalism as a noble
Speaker 1: profession stacked with ignoble operators, have lost all sympathy for
Speaker 1: these people. M MSNBC, sure, NBC, CNN, to quote the
Speaker 1: President of the United States, you are fake news. The
Speaker 1: lines are open here one eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: buck one eight four four nine hundred two eight two five.
Speaker 1: You're going to go to a quick break now when
Speaker 1: we come back, more of your calls, and we've got
Speaker 1: some great guests for you here on the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. I'm Rahemkasam, filling
Speaker 1: in four Buck Sexton from the Freedom Hut here in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. The phone lines are open eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred buck eight four four nine hundred two eight
Speaker 1: to five. Want to go to the phone lines now,
Speaker 1: let's go to Charlie from Ocean City, Maryland. Charlie you
Speaker 1: with us. Yes, I am saying you made you do.
Speaker 1: Thank you taking my call. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. I'm a
Speaker 1: little older citizen and I've been listening to all this
Speaker 1: talk about building the wall, and it's very simple. Back
Speaker 1: in the sixties, I was in the CBS and I
Speaker 1: spent a couple of years in nom We built everything,
Speaker 1: and we have a wall in DC. It's the Vietnam Memorial,
Speaker 1: affectionately called the Wall. Now we can put a wall
Speaker 1: in our border with the Sbees. It's all military. It
Speaker 1: will be covered by military expense. The only problem is
Speaker 1: the cbees cannot build in the United States unless it's
Speaker 1: specified as training exercised. Could it be specified as a
Speaker 1: training exercise? Sure, it could be. You're teaching the Cbees
Speaker 1: how to build a wall. That sounds like a great
Speaker 1: idea to me. What do you think? What do you
Speaker 1: think the calculation is behind not going that route just yet? Well,
Speaker 1: I think I think the President in his staff is
Speaker 1: looking for other means how to fund this because they
Speaker 1: have contractors in mind who developed the prototypes and knowing
Speaker 1: this building President, because he built all his life, he
Speaker 1: can get this wall for much less than what is
Speaker 1: publicly stated. Makes a lot of sense, Charlie, We're gonna
Speaker 1: put that question to our next guest. Thank you so
Speaker 1: much for the call. We have Colonel Rob Manus joining
Speaker 1: us now on the line. A thirty two year combat
Speaker 1: veteran in the Air Force, a B Wing Squadron Commander,
Speaker 1: Colonel Rob Manus, Thanks for joining us, Thanks for him
Speaker 1: appreciate it you having beyond and just correct me if
Speaker 1: I'm wrong. You also have a new show, is that right?
Speaker 1: I do on the Blaze TV, The Rob Manis Show.
Speaker 1: You can find us on Facebook at the Rob Manis
Speaker 1: Show or if you just follow me on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Rob Manus. You can pick up the website that's m
Speaker 1: A N E. S. S. Rob. I wanted to ask you.
Speaker 1: I wanted to get Charlie in there first. What do
Speaker 1: you think of that idea? Is that feasible having the
Speaker 1: military build a wall? Oh? Sure, it's feasible. We do
Speaker 1: all kinds of things and call them training exercises in
Speaker 1: order to not just to do them, but to get
Speaker 1: value out of doing that. For instance, doing apply over
Speaker 1: using multi aircraft at a NASCAR raise for a football
Speaker 1: game costs a lot of taxpayers dollars, but the air
Speaker 1: crew is getting and the maintenance personnel are getting training
Speaker 1: out of that. So absolutely we could do that. The
Speaker 1: question is do we use cbs, Do we use the
Speaker 1: civil engineers in the Air Force the red horse folks
Speaker 1: who are who are deployable, or use them all and
Speaker 1: call it all one big training exercise. But absolutely possible
Speaker 1: and feasible to do that. So in the first part
Speaker 1: of this show, Rob I talked about the visit to
Speaker 1: Iraq and the media's heads blowing up. Of course, NBC
Speaker 1: accused the President of not having gone at all. They
Speaker 1: now Iraq visit. Truth is. Then you also had CNN
Speaker 1: talking about this, this massive, massive scandal that is surely
Speaker 1: going to bring the government down, of President Trump signing
Speaker 1: a baseball cap. I mean, as as somebody who has
Speaker 1: spent the dominant part of their adult life in the military,
Speaker 1: how does it make you feel to hear the military
Speaker 1: being politicized by the media in that sense? And is
Speaker 1: there really any any smoking gun when it comes to
Speaker 1: the president signing a baseball cap? I mean, this was ludicrous,
Speaker 1: isn't it. I mean two days worth of commentary about it. Oh.
Speaker 1: Absolutely not the set. But my buddy US Army retired
Speaker 1: Colonel Kurt Slichter and I are both being trolled by
Speaker 1: by CNN's paid hack on this issue, retired General Mark Hurdling,
Speaker 1: and he's been going back and forth with us pretty
Speaker 1: much since last night about this and and tries to
Speaker 1: say that it's a political, partisan, political activity and because
Speaker 1: they were in uniform, it's illegally. I mean, he's sent
Speaker 1: me copies of the regulation. I've had to cut pieces
Speaker 1: out and show it to him. You know, a first
Speaker 1: surprise that he's doing this, other than I know he's
Speaker 1: a political hack for CNN and he's made by CNN
Speaker 1: and that's what c any wants to do. But the
Speaker 1: not funny part of it is they're attacking the troops
Speaker 1: that are in combat on the ground in Iraq for
Speaker 1: asking the President United States to autograph some items. You know,
Speaker 1: he happens to have the baga hat. None of that
Speaker 1: is partisan, uh, And they have to be a uniform
Speaker 1: because they're in a combat zone and he's the commander
Speaker 1: in chief and if they want him to sign something,
Speaker 1: that's fine. Look, Barack Obama and Vice President Biden both
Speaker 1: visited my last base that I commanded, the base on
Speaker 1: in Out in New Mexico. That and we had we
Speaker 1: had the troops and civilians, their government, savinians, people from
Speaker 1: the base meet the airplane because they want they want
Speaker 1: to meet the president and vice president of the United States.
Speaker 1: They're not partisan people. Uh, And they'd hand them all
Speaker 1: kinds of things to get signed, and I really didn't
Speaker 1: pay any attention to what they were handing him to
Speaker 1: get signed because I didn't care. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: attack the troops and deplete their morale by making it
Speaker 1: a political issue when it's not. It's it's a commander
Speaker 1: in chief visiting your base. Well that was even Barack
Speaker 1: Obama on the way to an off based political event,
Speaker 1: you know. So it's just crazy. But CNN is telling
Speaker 1: us these guys. CNN is telling us that the command
Speaker 1: is going to be very upset and the bosses are
Speaker 1: not going to be happy, and there's going to be
Speaker 1: hell to pay for this. The reality is nobody's going
Speaker 1: to care, right, nobody cares outside of that CNN studio,
Speaker 1: No nobody cares. And they're actually lying. And General Hurtling
Speaker 1: is of using the facts from the ethics regulation that
Speaker 1: he himself sent me the link to this morning, and
Speaker 1: I had to cut out the part that talks about
Speaker 1: they're prohibited from partisan political activities and engaging in that
Speaker 1: and attending political events as a spectator if they're a
Speaker 1: uniform when they're not a uniform. They can do whatever
Speaker 1: they want, but that's not what the case is here.
Speaker 1: As the cases of Commandergy visiting combat forces, they happen
Speaker 1: to have some items that they wanted him to get signed,
Speaker 1: and that's fine, and none of it was partisan. Those
Speaker 1: items aren't even partisan. There's nothing about political parties even
Speaker 1: on those items that they got signed by the guy.
Speaker 1: I think it's ridiculous. And they owe an apology to
Speaker 1: the American forces in Iraq. You know, it really does
Speaker 1: make me sad to see things like that happening because
Speaker 1: we've seen that sort of attack on national morale is
Speaker 1: what it really is. It's not just even about the
Speaker 1: troops morale. So the troops morale reflects national morale as well,
Speaker 1: and they both play an integral part together. It's it's
Speaker 1: it's it's a lattice. They overlap and to attack national
Speaker 1: morale at Christmas no less, when the President is, as
Speaker 1: you say, in a combat zone visiting the troops, which
Speaker 1: is what they were complaining that he hadn't done. He
Speaker 1: was kicking their boxes and and and this is what happens,
Speaker 1: Colonel rob manis we've got to leave it there because
Speaker 1: we're up against the hard break. But I thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining us here on the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: You can catch Rob's work at rob Man s M
Speaker 1: A n e SS dot com. Stay on the lines.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back for more callers after this break.
Speaker 1: Welcome back. This is the Buck Sexton Show. Raheem Kasam
Speaker 1: filling in for Buck today live from the Freedom Hut.
Speaker 1: I have invaded the Freedom Hunt here in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: The phone lines are open eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: Buck eight four four nine hundred two eight two five.
Speaker 1: You know, I used to host a show over on
Speaker 1: another another network, and the callers were the most important
Speaker 1: part of the show for me. I really, I really
Speaker 1: don't care what I have to say so much, which
Speaker 1: is strange for somebody hosting a radio show. I am
Speaker 1: really much more interested in what you guys have to say.
Speaker 1: But if you are interested in the long term or
Speaker 1: the medium term, if you choose to unfollow me in
Speaker 1: what I have to say, you can find me on
Speaker 1: all the social media's as well. M Twitter at Raheem Kassam.
Speaker 1: It's rah e M k A S S A M.
Speaker 1: Same on Facebook and Instagram and all all of those
Speaker 1: YouTube you name it. I'm on there quite a lot,
Speaker 1: probably a little too much. I want to go back
Speaker 1: to the calls now. Nine one. Larry is in Ohio.
Speaker 1: Mister Larry, are you there? Yes, Regime Hope pronounced your
Speaker 1: name right, yeah, absolutely, go right ahead, Larry, are you there? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Can you hear us? We can hear you. Just fine,
Speaker 1: go right ahead with your point, okay, h They've been
Speaker 1: talking about this war issue as a star in the
Speaker 1: government shutdown. I ever read a idea, Let's have the
Speaker 1: Ambassador of the United Seats meet with the ambassador of
Speaker 1: Mexico and propose to them a radical idea of having
Speaker 1: Mexico vote their people vote on joining the United States.
Speaker 1: As an inn action to New Mexico. We'll take that
Speaker 1: twenty five billion for the wall and improve their infrastructure
Speaker 1: and ours and send enough FBI, CIA of whatever, do
Speaker 1: away with the cartel, and raise their standard of living
Speaker 1: much higher than it is now. Well, I did not
Speaker 1: expect that a democratic annexation of Mexico as a means
Speaker 1: by which to stop mass, mass illegal immigration. But don't
Speaker 1: you think if you were to do that, I mean,
Speaker 1: you'd if they were to actually go ahead and do
Speaker 1: something like that, you'd be creating millions of more American citizens.
Speaker 1: You don't think they just flood into the rest of
Speaker 1: the US while their infrastructure is being improved. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know we're talking theoretically here. Forard continues building cars
Speaker 1: in Mexico and large companies in the United States continue
Speaker 1: doing business in Mexico, they will be paid the same
Speaker 1: as American workers. I think, I think, I think you'd
Speaker 1: have to have a referendum within the United States as well.
Speaker 1: On that. I'm not sure that there'd be a great
Speaker 1: a great taste for for for Mexico joining the US, Larry,
Speaker 1: but I appreciate the radical thinking. Larry from Ohio. There
Speaker 1: phone lines are open, ladies and gentlemen. Eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred buck eight four four nine hundred two eight
Speaker 1: two five. We have We have Dana from Lake City
Speaker 1: in Florida. Dana, good afternoon, good evening. Hey, how are you?
Speaker 1: Thank you for Dickie marcall, Hey my pleasure, go right ahead. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm My concern is with the president, and you know,
Speaker 1: we have heard about fake news for a while. Well,
Speaker 1: we were all just duped in the idea that he said,
Speaker 1: you know, oh, I'm not going to go tomorrow, Lago,
Speaker 1: I'm going to stay in the White House where the
Speaker 1: government shuts down. He even tweeted for me. And realistically,
Speaker 1: this trip to Iraq had been planned for six weeks
Speaker 1: in advance, and I feel like we were just duped.
Speaker 1: We were supposed to feel sorry for his actions when
Speaker 1: all the time there's a whole another scenario going on
Speaker 1: behind the scenes. You know, well, do you think that
Speaker 1: was do you think that was him fooling or part
Speaker 1: of security protocol to make sure that you know the
Speaker 1: trip wasn't leaked. The White House, for better or worse,
Speaker 1: is a leaky place. That was his safeguard against the
Speaker 1: trip leaking out. Now, that would be one way to
Speaker 1: look at it. I suppose you don't like it. You
Speaker 1: don't sound like you enjoyed that. But did you feel
Speaker 1: empathy or sympathy for him when you read that? Poor me,
Speaker 1: I'm in the White House will alone this Christmas? Is
Speaker 1: that why you feel a bit dupe? Now? No, to
Speaker 1: be honest with you, No, I didn't feel any sympathy.
Speaker 1: I don't feel any sympathy for him at all. Frankly,
Speaker 1: I would prefer a president with much more dignity and class.
Speaker 1: But that's what we have, and that's what we're dealing with.
Speaker 1: That's an interesting point. Now you can probably tell that
Speaker 1: I am a big fan of this president, and I
Speaker 1: regard myself as as quite a dignified person. I'm sure
Speaker 1: there are a lot of people out there who are
Speaker 1: also dignified in regard themselves as such, but that do
Speaker 1: like this president. Do you can you not see their
Speaker 1: their point, The sort of Andrew Jackson esque brusqueness of
Speaker 1: this president may be the only way they feel that
Speaker 1: they can get anything done. Um, it would be nice
Speaker 1: if that were a fact. But you know, in the
Speaker 1: case of Andrew Jackson, he had a history of working
Speaker 1: towards certain goals. Donald Trump's goals have been to take
Speaker 1: advantage of real estate options, and realistically, there's in a
Speaker 1: bank in this country that will loan him a dollar.
Speaker 1: So that's why he's been learning, learning towards the Russians
Speaker 1: in order, you know, increase his bank stake. Well, I don't,
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't think that. I don't think there's
Speaker 1: not a bank in this country that would lend him
Speaker 1: a dollar. But I appreciate the fact that when you
Speaker 1: when you have been in real estate for a long time,
Speaker 1: and some projects succeed in some projects fail. Sure it
Speaker 1: makes you a riskier investment, But you don't believe that
Speaker 1: he has any tangible policy goals. I mean, there's been
Speaker 1: sweeping change to the federal courts system under under him
Speaker 1: so far? How been policies that have been enacted? Are
Speaker 1: those accidents? Well? No, The only thing that truthfully he's
Speaker 1: done since being voted in the Reblican party reboving your party,
Speaker 1: has taken the lead and move things forward. He is
Speaker 1: just a figurehead, if you will, at lowheart in my
Speaker 1: opinion and realistically, he has done nothing but create controversy.
Speaker 1: The Republicans are the ones running the show now, Dana,
Speaker 1: can I ask if and you don't have to answer this,
Speaker 1: but can I ask do you typically vote Republican or Democrats?
Speaker 1: So are you? Are? You? Go ahead? Well, anyway, let
Speaker 1: me finish one second. One. The only he's really done
Speaker 1: is remove everything that Obama had initially put in. And
Speaker 1: everyone thinks, so we're saving money because we've taken away regulations. Well,
Speaker 1: you know we'll pay with dirty water and dirty other
Speaker 1: things as the environment shows us in time. But you
Speaker 1: know that's just my opinion. I was concerned realistically with
Speaker 1: the fact that we were reduced, and he's sitting there saying, oh,
Speaker 1: poor me, I'm not taking my vacation, and then we
Speaker 1: get to see that realistically he's off, Oh, we were
Speaker 1: on a plane with all the shades down and it
Speaker 1: was dark, and that was well. Dana, thank you very
Speaker 1: much for your input and your call this evening here
Speaker 1: on the Buck Sexton Show. I'm very sorry that Dana
Speaker 1: felt duped. I wonder how you guys feel about that.
Speaker 1: I certainly took that tweet with a sort of tongue
Speaker 1: in cheek, you know, poor me in brackets. The President
Speaker 1: tweeted a couple of days ago about being being in
Speaker 1: the White House during the government shut down, and he
Speaker 1: said it was the only one in there. Obviously he
Speaker 1: wasn't the only one in the entire White House complex
Speaker 1: over Christmas. So I think that was a little bit playful.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure we should feel duped by it, but
Speaker 1: I appreciate the tone and the ability to have that discussion,
Speaker 1: and Dana was very polite but also forthright, and I
Speaker 1: think those are the sorts of discussions we need to
Speaker 1: be able to have and to laugh at each other's
Speaker 1: jokes and not resort to screaming and tearing our hair
Speaker 1: out all the time. Eight l four nine hundred buck
Speaker 1: is the number if you want to be part of
Speaker 1: that conversation. I also wanted to make mention very briefly
Speaker 1: of this, because I lauded the Washington Posts media correspondent
Speaker 1: in the opening part of this show, Eric Wemple, who
Speaker 1: had a bit of a go at NBC for what
Speaker 1: he called and what I called, there are opportunistic fake
Speaker 1: news attempt to portray Trump is not caring about the
Speaker 1: troops this Christmas this morning. So so let me retract
Speaker 1: some of that praise for the Washington Post, because this
Speaker 1: morning they published a story and I'm recalling this off
Speaker 1: the top of my head, so it's not going to
Speaker 1: be verbat him. The headline they published a story that
Speaker 1: said something like Trump without evidence, suggests that the furloughed
Speaker 1: workers in Washington, DC are Democrats. Now, there's plenty of
Speaker 1: evidence to suggest that the majority of those federal workers
Speaker 1: are Democrats. There was a study done after the twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen at general presidential election here by The Hill newspaper,
Speaker 1: an actual good journalist called Jonathan Swan, who's now over
Speaker 1: at Axios. He wrote an article entitled government workers shun Trump,
Speaker 1: give big money to Clinton, and they reported at the
Speaker 1: time that of the roughly two million dollars that federal
Speaker 1: workers from fourteen agencies spent on presidential politics by the
Speaker 1: end of September, around one point nine million, or ninety
Speaker 1: five percent, went to the Democratic nominees campaign. That was
Speaker 1: the Hill dot COM's analysis. And you go through the
Speaker 1: list of these of these donations by agency, agriculture, my
Speaker 1: eyes are kind of failing me. Here it's a small chart.
Speaker 1: I'm looking at Agriculture ninety nine point four percent went
Speaker 1: to Clinton, Commerce ninety nine point two percent, Defense eighty four,
Speaker 1: Education ninety nine point seven percent, and it goes on
Speaker 1: and on and on. So I don't think it's fair
Speaker 1: for the Washington Post to say Trump without evidence m
Speaker 1: complains or suggests that these furloughed workers are Democrats. That
Speaker 1: there is manifest evidence that that is the case, that
Speaker 1: is in print in writing, And I noted that later
Speaker 1: on in the day, actually after I had tweeted this
Speaker 1: Hill analysis from twenty sixteen. Later on in the day,
Speaker 1: the Washington Post mentioned that at the bottom of the article,
Speaker 1: in a second article that they ran on the story.
Speaker 1: So I wonder, I wonder if there were some sort
Speaker 1: of mere coppers going on at the Washington Post for
Speaker 1: attacking the president in the morning, for that suggestion, just
Speaker 1: saying that's that's all. Hey, let's sir, let's take a
Speaker 1: quick break now, because when we come back, we're going
Speaker 1: to have another good buddy of mine. He's he's called
Speaker 1: Gil barn Dollar. He's at the Center for the National Interest,
Speaker 1: which is I think the first foreign policy think tank
Speaker 1: that President Trump when he was candidate Trump gave a
Speaker 1: foreign policy speech too. And we want to get into
Speaker 1: the Syria discussion because I've heard so much alarmism on
Speaker 1: Syria in the last couple of days. And for those
Speaker 1: of you that don't know me, I have a history
Speaker 1: in foreign policy. I have. I have spent time at
Speaker 1: foreign policy think tanks, the Henry Jackson Society, which was
Speaker 1: a neo conservative think tank for my sins a good old,
Speaker 1: good old decade ago. Now we'll talk to we'll talk
Speaker 1: to Gil in a moment about that. So quick break now,
Speaker 1: don't go anywhere. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton's show.
Speaker 1: Raheim Casam here in the Freedom Hunt in Washington, DC.
Speaker 1: Want to get straight to our next Gil Bond Dollar
Speaker 1: is the director of Middle East Studies at the Center
Speaker 1: for the National Interest. Gil, thank you for joining us
Speaker 1: here this evening. Hey, Ray, how are you very well?
Speaker 1: We don't have much time because I ran late in
Speaker 1: that segment, so I want in the last segment. So
Speaker 1: I just want to throw it straight over to you
Speaker 1: and get all your thoughts, if possible, over the next
Speaker 1: five minutes or so on the withdrawal in Syria over
Speaker 1: to you. Gil. Sure, well, on balance, I think it's
Speaker 1: I think it's a good thing. Um. You know, there's
Speaker 1: been predictable hysteria across across pretty much the media, regardless
Speaker 1: of partisan affiliation, from you know, the theoretically leading foreign
Speaker 1: policy lights in both parties, the think tank world, the rest,
Speaker 1: the kind of foreign policy establishment almost you know, in
Speaker 1: this day and age, it's kind of bizarre unanimity that
Speaker 1: you very very rarely see in Washington these days on
Speaker 1: the supposed folly of the Syria pullout. So we can,
Speaker 1: you know, we can talk to you like about the
Speaker 1: specifics and how the decision was arrived at all. That
Speaker 1: I think that's largely speculative. Um, You know, you can
Speaker 1: go on some reporting and speculative about that, but in
Speaker 1: terms of the merits of pulling out of a you know,
Speaker 1: essentially a punitive expedition, I hope um in Syria that
Speaker 1: had had mostly run its course, and I never mind
Speaker 1: the illegality and a constitutionality of that war. Uh, I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm in favor of the substance of what we're doing. Well,
Speaker 1: So let me ask you then about the the the
Speaker 1: the alarmism behind a lot of the critique of this
Speaker 1: that if we have no twenty two hundred American troops
Speaker 1: in Syria, that Iran will take over the entire region,
Speaker 1: Turkey will establish a new caliphate, Russia will become the
Speaker 1: world's greatest superpower ever. I mean, these are the things
Speaker 1: we're being I mean, obviously embellishing, but these are the
Speaker 1: things we're sort of being led down the path to believe.
Speaker 1: What say you to those criticisms, Yeah, of course, I
Speaker 1: mean that that's stuff absurd and as you said, you
Speaker 1: can't really you can't have all those things to want. Um.
Speaker 1: If I had to pick a favorite, there was a
Speaker 1: I think it was Dana Milbank. There was a piece
Speaker 1: in the Post that that this proved that Russia had won,
Speaker 1: had won World War Three. I think with the phrasing
Speaker 1: which is which probably takes the cake for the most
Speaker 1: absurd and hysterical reaction. UM. But no, you know, Syria
Speaker 1: would never accord national security indust the United States. We
Speaker 1: dealt just fine with Richard Alissadon with his father when
Speaker 1: they were both in power. Now supposedly it's it's unconscionable
Speaker 1: that he's going to remain in power, and it has
Speaker 1: effectively won that civil war with some mopping up to do. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, the fact that they're that there are a
Speaker 1: few thousand nicest holdouts scattered throughout both Iraq and Syria
Speaker 1: is something we supposedly can't can't survive. UM. I don't
Speaker 1: think anyone can incredibly claim that's an existential threat to
Speaker 1: the United States or even at this stage even a
Speaker 1: serious threat to the Iraqi or Syrian regimes. UM. But
Speaker 1: you know, we can talk to us, piece, we can
Speaker 1: talk to other powers in the region. But but um,
Speaker 1: Iran is not is not a serious threat the United States.
Speaker 1: It's it's a somewhat serious threat to Israel. But the
Speaker 1: Israelis can take care of themselves just fine, I don't
Speaker 1: think we need to worry too much on that score. Um,
Speaker 1: the Turks, I'm sure we'll bite off some chunks of
Speaker 1: of northern Syries where it looks like will probably happen. Um.
Speaker 1: And and uh, the Russians have have renewed m renewed interests,
Speaker 1: and renewed weight in the region. But that's that's developed
Speaker 1: over through a few things, not least of which is
Speaker 1: their successful and pretty limited military intervention in Syria. Gil,
Speaker 1: I've got about thirty seconds here. Um, do we owe
Speaker 1: the Kurds anything? Because that's what we keep hearing at
Speaker 1: the moment. Well, the Kurds aren't dunning. I mean I've
Speaker 1: I've written this and so fuenty of other people. The
Speaker 1: Kurds have been Uh, you know, we've we've given them
Speaker 1: some support and they've they've taken it and they've run
Speaker 1: with it, and and they protect their own interests. But
Speaker 1: do you hear that line a lot? And I will
Speaker 1: tell you that the um that's here, that's that's the music. Gil,
Speaker 1: We're gonna have to leave it there, But I thank
Speaker 1: you for joining us here on the buck Sex and Show.
Speaker 1: That's gilbarn Dollar. Check his work over at the Center
Speaker 1: for the National Interest. This is the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Raheem Kassam will be right back after this break. Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the Buck Sexton Show. My name is Rahem Kassam,
Speaker 1: filling in for Buck today live from the Freedom Hunt
Speaker 1: here in an increasingly cold Washington, DC. So much so
Speaker 1: than I recently ordered thermals. I've never owned thermals before,
Speaker 1: and I'm quite excited about them coming. So there you go.
Speaker 1: There's something about me that you don't know and probably
Speaker 1: didn't care to know. The phone lines here are open.
Speaker 1: We do appreciate all your calls. I'm going to try
Speaker 1: and get to as many callers as possible this evening
Speaker 1: because that is my favorite part of the show. The
Speaker 1: number is eight four four nine hundred two eight two five.
Speaker 1: That's eight four four nine hundred Buck. But first, I
Speaker 1: wanted to bring you an interesting story that I don't
Speaker 1: think got enough pick up. A good friend of mine
Speaker 1: broke this story about a week ago. It's about the
Speaker 1: Nation of Islam. Alana Goodman from the Well newly from
Speaker 1: the Washington Examiner, formerly of the Daily Mail and prior
Speaker 1: to that the Washington Free Beacon, but now at the
Speaker 1: Washington examiner joins us on the line. Now, Alana, thanks
Speaker 1: for thanks for joining us this evening, Thanks for having
Speaker 1: mean are here. I know, I know you've got drinks
Speaker 1: to get back to, Alana, so I won't I won't
Speaker 1: keep you that long. But I just thought this, Uh
Speaker 1: you do if you've always got Alana as the girl
Speaker 1: who no matter where you see her, she's always got
Speaker 1: a martini with three olives in her hand. I mean
Speaker 1: she could be she could be at the Metro waiting
Speaker 1: for the train and she'll have a martini glass in
Speaker 1: her hand. Isn't that right? Is that an accurate depiction? Now?
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know, Alana. You broke a
Speaker 1: really important story last week about the Nation of Islam,
Speaker 1: and I wanted to make sure everybody knew about this.
Speaker 1: The headline nation of Islam receiving federal cash to teach prisoners.
Speaker 1: Talk us through this a little bit. Yeah, Nation of
Speaker 1: Islam has received about three hundred and sixty thousand dollars
Speaker 1: from the US government. This is through the Bureau of
Speaker 1: Prisons UM to teach their philosophy to prison inmates. And uh,
Speaker 1: you know this has been going on to two thousand
Speaker 1: and eight. And you know, as your listeners calledbly know,
Speaker 1: the Nation of Islam run by Lewis Skerricon, who has
Speaker 1: referred to Jews's termites recently. UM is a you know,
Speaker 1: it's a it's a fundamentally anti white, anti Semitic organization.
Speaker 1: And uh, you know this group is getting funding not
Speaker 1: just for you know, different program programming that they do,
Speaker 1: but actually you'll like to teach people in federal prisons
Speaker 1: about their philosophy. Yeah, this is an organization that has
Speaker 1: has called white people blue eyed devils and suggested that
Speaker 1: Jews are the synagogue of Satan. Um. How did the
Speaker 1: how did the Bureau of Prisons explain handing them three
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty five thousand dollars in contracts? Well, they
Speaker 1: actually haven't really explained it yet. I reached up them
Speaker 1: for comments for the story and gave them, you know,
Speaker 1: several days to get back to us, and in the
Speaker 1: end they just sent me pretty much the code UM,
Speaker 1: the US code that says that they're able to pay
Speaker 1: contractors UM. And that was it. So we really haven't
Speaker 1: heard much from them. They said that they don't keep
Speaker 1: their contracts for longer than six years and because the
Speaker 1: original contract in this case, UM was more than six
Speaker 1: years ago. They're not able to provide any more information about,
Speaker 1: for example, like what the Nation of Islam was teaching seasonmates,
Speaker 1: what materials were being used up, you know, what, what reading,
Speaker 1: what books, anything like that. And look, this is an
Speaker 1: organization that a lot of their literatures latently anti semitic. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, one of one of their most popular books
Speaker 1: is called The Secret History between Blacks and Jews, which
Speaker 1: clintons that you know, Jews were orchestrated the trans Atlantic
Speaker 1: slave trade. So this is uh, you know, it's very
Speaker 1: concerning from about what they were teaching, well deeply, and
Speaker 1: you'd think more so because of the recent controversy surrounding
Speaker 1: the Women's March and Linda Sarsare and the relationships that
Speaker 1: many of those people have had with Louis Farrakhan and
Speaker 1: the Nation of Islam. I mean, for the U, I mean,
Speaker 1: let's let's be clear about this. This isn't US government money.
Speaker 1: This is taxpayer money. This is ordinary people's cash going
Speaker 1: to an organization like this. I'm I'm I'm I suppose
Speaker 1: I was going to say I'm shocked, but really, I
Speaker 1: suppose we shouldn't be that shocked by it, But is
Speaker 1: there is there any Look, I would also add, I
Speaker 1: mean beyond just the taxpayer money issue, which obviously you
Speaker 1: know is very concerning on a public level. UM Congressman
Speaker 1: Peter King from New York, who I spoke to about this,
Speaker 1: the the point of UM radicalization in prison. I mean,
Speaker 1: radicalization has been a big issue. Uh. There was a
Speaker 1: center report who it was in two thousand and ten
Speaker 1: that found that dozens of UM, dozens of inmates who
Speaker 1: had been converted to Islam in prison and been radicalized
Speaker 1: had gone to Yemen and we're believed to be trained
Speaker 1: in al Qaeda CAM. So this is a big issue.
Speaker 1: And UM, you know, he he thought that that was
Speaker 1: something that we needed to look into more because um,
Speaker 1: you know, as as he told me, look like when
Speaker 1: he believes there should be vetting for people who are UM,
Speaker 1: you know, religious leaders in prisons, and as he said,
Speaker 1: like the vetting should stop when you learn that it's
Speaker 1: the aser coons group, Like that should be the end
Speaker 1: of the vetting. That's just the luck. We're not we're
Speaker 1: not we're not paying you to come in and we're
Speaker 1: not giving you money to teach these prisoners. Well, I
Speaker 1: think it's increasingly it's increasingly disgraceful that the US Bureau
Speaker 1: of Prisons don't want to or say they can't disclose
Speaker 1: more to do with the original contract there. I think
Speaker 1: that's that's bs for start um. And then and then
Speaker 1: you wonder what other sorts of groups have been getting
Speaker 1: this cash over over the last decade or so. I
Speaker 1: mean this started winning to two thousand and eight. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: and that was something you know, you mentioned me, which
Speaker 1: I think is great, a great idea to look into
Speaker 1: who else is getting funding. Um. The issue is that
Speaker 1: this stuff is not posted. I mean it is, it
Speaker 1: is posted publicly, um, but it's difficult to find out
Speaker 1: like who all of the contractors who want specific agency
Speaker 1: as KUM. And I want to mention also that the
Speaker 1: Bureau of Prison is under the Department of Justice, so
Speaker 1: these were, at the end of the day, Department of
Speaker 1: Justice contracts. It's extraordinary stuff. Alana. Just tell the audience
Speaker 1: where they can follow more of your work and your
Speaker 1: tweets and so on and so forth. Well, you can
Speaker 1: read me at the Washington Examiner and I'm on Twitter
Speaker 1: at Alanta. Good men there, it is all right, Alana,
Speaker 1: back to your martini, have one for me, since I'll
Speaker 1: be stuck in this studio for another two hours at least.
Speaker 1: But I am just I am literally just down the
Speaker 1: road from our favorite watering hole, so I may stop
Speaker 1: in later for a for a post show celebration. Alana
Speaker 1: Goodman there, thank you once again for joining us here
Speaker 1: on the Buck Sexton Show. Thanks for that phone number
Speaker 1: here is eight four four nine hundred Buck eight four
Speaker 1: four nine hundred two eight two five. If you're wondering
Speaker 1: why Buck has an English accent today, that's because I'm
Speaker 1: not Buck. My name's Rheim Kassam. I feel in occasionally
Speaker 1: four Buck. You might have heard me on here before
Speaker 1: you can. You can find me on the social media
Speaker 1: and all that as well. I believe you have another
Speaker 1: guest host tomorrow, if I'm not incorrect, in the form
Speaker 1: of my good buddy Harland Hill, unless unless something is
Speaker 1: drastically changed, mister producer, is that correct? I'm saying the
Speaker 1: right thing, Okay, good I like saying the right thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Harland Hill is a is a fantastic chap as well,
Speaker 1: so make sure you check out the show tomorrow. Well,
Speaker 1: obviously it's not going to be as good as this Swan.
Speaker 1: You know, Harland doesn't have the accent, but but he'll
Speaker 1: you're a good hands with Holland I want to I
Speaker 1: want to see if we have any other callers on
Speaker 1: the line. Let's go to uh let's go to Kenny
Speaker 1: in Boston. Kenny on line two. Are you there right?
Speaker 1: How are you doing? I just wanted to call to
Speaker 1: disagree with that previous caller who spoke about being deceived
Speaker 1: by Trump with the whole Iraq visit. It was a
Speaker 1: bit it was a bit hyperbolic, don't you think absolutely well.
Speaker 1: Of course he also dodged the question when you asked
Speaker 1: does he usually vote Democrat publicans? So I suspected as much. However,
Speaker 1: um no, I think it was just a coincidence or
Speaker 1: a matter of convenience because of the secrecy that was
Speaker 1: required for a trip like that as as usual, and
Speaker 1: then he just used it at that same time to
Speaker 1: play them, and he game them, but it does expose
Speaker 1: them in their fake news endeavors. So I did like
Speaker 1: that a lot. And in fact, he did a double
Speaker 1: because when it came out that they were trying to say, well,
Speaker 1: we shamed him into doing a visit. Well, no, the
Speaker 1: visit was planned, right right, I mean, this is incredible,
Speaker 1: isn't it. You had this I can't remember the woman's
Speaker 1: name now, Solid Solid Dad O'Brien or someone like that
Speaker 1: who was on Twitter crowing about, oh, we shamed President
Speaker 1: Trump into going to visit the troops, like Trump wasn't
Speaker 1: reading your Twitter, and then decided about ten minutes later,
Speaker 1: let's get to Joint Base Andrews and take Air Force
Speaker 1: one over to Iran. These things take between six and
Speaker 1: twelve weeks planning, especially for something in a combat zone,
Speaker 1: so very sensitive. And yeah, they've made themselves out to
Speaker 1: be quite foolish over this Christmas period, haven't they. Kenny,
Speaker 1: absolutely well, And I just want I just wanted to
Speaker 1: add one other thing. When there's a term that they use,
Speaker 1: what aboutism, Remember that's what about is or what about
Speaker 1: a right? Well, well, what aboutism is not even a word.
Speaker 1: What they're talking about in what about ithism, they're referring
Speaker 1: to history, recent history. So what they're saying, ignore what aboudhism.
Speaker 1: They're saying, ignore recent history. So that's really what they're
Speaker 1: you know what I mean, you know, that's a really
Speaker 1: good point. It's a very good point when they say,
Speaker 1: don't compare these two incidents. It's them trying, it's them
Speaker 1: running interference. You're absolutely right, Kenny, Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for that call. We are going to go to a
Speaker 1: break now because when we come back, I do want
Speaker 1: to get to more callers. But we also have a
Speaker 1: couple more guests in this hour that I wanted to
Speaker 1: bring to you, including my good buddy from American Majority
Speaker 1: Ned Ryan. He'll be joining us to talk about the extended,
Speaker 1: partial maybe kind of furlough shutdown thing that's going on
Speaker 1: here in Washington, d C. All I can say is Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Has been a very very pleasant place this
Speaker 1: last week, and it's because a lot of these people
Speaker 1: have left town. And it's because a lot of these
Speaker 1: federal workers are not milling about all over the place,
Speaker 1: the majority of them being Democrats. I'll have you know,
Speaker 1: thank you very much Washington Post if you didn't hear
Speaker 1: me in the first hour, correcting the Washington Post on
Speaker 1: their claim that President Trump said that these majority of
Speaker 1: the federal workers Democrats. They are indeed, and we know
Speaker 1: it for a fact. All right, quick break, we'll be
Speaker 1: right back here on the Buck Sexton Show. Welcome back,
Speaker 1: to the Buck Sexton show. I'm Raheem Cassam, broadcasting live
Speaker 1: from the Freedom Hut here in Washington, DC. I like
Speaker 1: these action packed shows. Lots of halls on the boards.
Speaker 1: The phone number here eight four four nine hundred Buck
Speaker 1: eight four four nine hundred two eight two five. If
Speaker 1: you are against me, if you are with me against
Speaker 1: any of our guests, I want you to call in.
Speaker 1: We can have a grown up discussion. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to scream and shower you unless you really push my buttons.
Speaker 1: But speaking of somebody who might scream and shout at
Speaker 1: me if I if I don't let him get back
Speaker 1: to his dinner soon. Ned Ryan, the founder and CEO
Speaker 1: of American Majority, joins us on the line. Now, Ned,
Speaker 1: good evening. Good to be with you. Man. Am I
Speaker 1: keeping you from dinner? Ned? No, I've already had dinner. Okay,
Speaker 1: keep me from a nice relax and leaving with my
Speaker 1: wife in front of fire. But I'm here. Let's go well, Ned,
Speaker 1: I just want to tell the listeners Ned took me,
Speaker 1: took me shooting in his backyard the other day, and
Speaker 1: I got so much hatred on social media, Ned from
Speaker 1: from my British followers. Yeah, because they are so squeamish
Speaker 1: about guns. Even the conservatives in the UK are so
Speaker 1: squeamish about guns, and if you, you know, insert an
Speaker 1: animal into that process, well then they just lose their
Speaker 1: minds totally. So I had to defend the Second Amendment
Speaker 1: all day the day after I saw you, and the
Speaker 1: next day on my Instagram feed they were absolutely losing
Speaker 1: their minds. But I wanted to thank you publicly for
Speaker 1: letting me shoot some trees in your backyard. Oh. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: you missed on some more fun today. I sided in
Speaker 1: my red dot on the AAR and got the SKS
Speaker 1: ready to go hunting on Saturday, which, hopefully, on the
Speaker 1: other end of it will be a nice big buck
Speaker 1: that I will enjoy eating. So not not buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: That's that's, of course, no sect. He wouldn't be nearly
Speaker 1: as good. He'd probably stringy. He God knows, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of meat on that guy. You've seen him recently, Well,
Speaker 1: that's true. I mean, you just have to do a
Speaker 1: slow He's not here to defend himself. I shouldn't I
Speaker 1: shouldn't be so mean. The next part of fun, though,
Speaker 1: when you come out, is I will take you deer hunting. Uh,
Speaker 1: and we'll knock down a deer and we'll have some nice,
Speaker 1: delicious backstrap. Fine by me. In the meantime, I think
Speaker 1: we have politics to discuss. Um we've We've only got
Speaker 1: about five minutes in this segment, so I didn't I mean,
Speaker 1: we don't need to spend too much time on this anyway,
Speaker 1: but it's it's but it's worth noting, and it's worth
Speaker 1: sort of assessing where where this might go. I'm talking
Speaker 1: about the partial government shutdown that now looks like it's
Speaker 1: going to extend in into January, with the House lifting
Speaker 1: today and not coming back until was it January two?
Speaker 1: I think they get sworn in January three. But you know,
Speaker 1: I'm of the opinion rehem. I have not been shy
Speaker 1: at all whether or not EDS on TV shut it
Speaker 1: all down, shut the government down. I've encouraged President Trump
Speaker 1: to shut the southern border down. I mean, these are
Speaker 1: this is a serious issue that we have to deal
Speaker 1: with in this country. To say that we have an
Speaker 1: immigration system, it is a joke. It's still broken. I
Speaker 1: wouldn't call it an immigration system. And at some point
Speaker 1: someone has to stand up and say we have to
Speaker 1: actually start questioning what we're doing as a country. And
Speaker 1: quite frankly, Rehem, I've been awesome about this too. We
Speaker 1: got to this point because of an unholy alliance between
Speaker 1: Democrats and Republicans. Democrats for political power and quite Republicans
Speaker 1: because their corporate donor base and they're afraid of endangering
Speaker 1: their reelection campaign funds. And at some point somebody like
Speaker 1: a Donald Trump had to say, enough of the stupidity.
Speaker 1: We have to say, we've got to fix this. We
Speaker 1: have to have In what world, Raheem, does a sovereign
Speaker 1: nations say we don't have the right to actually secure
Speaker 1: our borders and actually ask to people coming why are
Speaker 1: you coming, where are you coming from, what is your
Speaker 1: intention of coming here? And are you actually going to
Speaker 1: be an addition to this country? Are you in the
Speaker 1: best interests of this country or where your entrants be detrimental?
Speaker 1: This is what sovereign nations that are responsible, that that
Speaker 1: feel that is a moral obligation to their citizens. These
Speaker 1: are the things that they actually do. And I think
Speaker 1: that many in Washington, DC have been deeply immoral in
Speaker 1: dealing with this immigration problem. So what do you think
Speaker 1: is going to happen when they come back. How does
Speaker 1: this get resolved? I mean, the Democrats are offering what
Speaker 1: one point six billion the president wants five point seven?
Speaker 1: Will he take three? Will he take three and a half?
Speaker 1: Will the Democrats even go that high? Will they not
Speaker 1: want to flex some obstinate Seoul As the new House
Speaker 1: is sworn in, I think that they are determined and
Speaker 1: have dug in on resistance. They do not want to
Speaker 1: give Donald Trump a win. And I know many others
Speaker 1: have said this and pointed out twenty thirteen. You know,
Speaker 1: almost every Democrat I think maybe every Democrat in the
Speaker 1: Senate voted for I think it was forty six billion
Speaker 1: dollars and seven hundred miles offense. They just simply refuse
Speaker 1: to give Donald Trump a win and be This is
Speaker 1: where how far the Democratic Party has come in the
Speaker 1: last five years, where it has been almost entirely captured
Speaker 1: by the far radical left that doesn't want immigration reform,
Speaker 1: that doesn't want secure borders, they want open borders. And
Speaker 1: Democratic leadership actually has to swear fealty to these far
Speaker 1: left grassroots and donors if they actually want to stay
Speaker 1: in power. So I think what's probably going to happen, Honestly, is.
Speaker 1: I think we might be at an impass, and I
Speaker 1: think we're still going to be fighting about this coming
Speaker 1: into the twenty twenty election. And at that point we're
Speaker 1: gonna have a very clear, definitive difference between Donald Trump
Speaker 1: saying we have to have a order wall, we have
Speaker 1: to have security, and you're gonna have somebody far left
Speaker 1: that's going to be the Democratic presidential nominee saying we
Speaker 1: want open borders, we want to abolish ice, And at
Speaker 1: that point, the American people have to decide are we
Speaker 1: going to get serious about this issue or not, Because
Speaker 1: at some point there's a train coming down the tracks
Speaker 1: called reality. And when you look at our broken immigration system,
Speaker 1: you look at our broken welfare system, all of these things.
Speaker 1: At some point we keep on thinking it's not going
Speaker 1: to hit us. It's going to hit us. And I'm
Speaker 1: not really entirely sure what's going to happen to this
Speaker 1: country unless we make some hard decisions right now. And
Speaker 1: it's not really rocket science Raheem. Secure our borders. We're
Speaker 1: not going to allow everybody in, and at the same time,
Speaker 1: we're not going to have an open welfare system in
Speaker 1: which those that are coming across the borders illegally are
Speaker 1: tapping into this because we saw polls just recently in
Speaker 1: which over sixty percent of non citizens, half of which
Speaker 1: came here illegally, are on some form of welfare. This
Speaker 1: is unsustainable much longer, it is absolutely well, what a
Speaker 1: moment to end that sentence. There, You are perfectly on time.
Speaker 1: Ned Ryan, the founder and CEO of American Majority. Check
Speaker 1: out his work Google American Majority. That's Ned Ryan. All right,
Speaker 1: the phone lines are open. We're going to roll through calls,
Speaker 1: so be on the triggers. Eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: Buck eight four four nine hundred two eight two five
Speaker 1: more of your calls after this break. Welcome back to
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. I'm rheamcasam here in the Freedom Hut.
Speaker 1: Coming back to you guys on the phone lines now.
Speaker 1: Eight four four nine hundred buck eight four four nine
Speaker 1: hundred two eight two five. Want to start with Cynthia
Speaker 1: in Florida. Cynthia, are you with us? Hi regime? Hey Cynthia?
Speaker 1: What's on your mind? I just wouldn't say thank you
Speaker 1: so much for you in my call. I listened to
Speaker 1: the show quite often. I'm a big fan of Bucks
Speaker 1: and a big fan of yours and I love listening
Speaker 1: to the show. In your guest hosting, you bring a
Speaker 1: really cool perspective on current events. So I just want
Speaker 1: to call in and thank you guys for all y'all
Speaker 1: deeper the movement. Well, I appreciate that very much. Sodi,
Speaker 1: what have you made of the last forty eight hours
Speaker 1: in media land that we've been discussing on the show
Speaker 1: so far, the media has just been ridiculously fake news,
Speaker 1: worse than they usually are the last forty eight hours
Speaker 1: with the whole Trump visiting the troops, it's just ridiculous
Speaker 1: like they they're still keeping it up even though they're
Speaker 1: exposed time and time again. I don't know how they
Speaker 1: think that people are buying this anymore. It doesn't look
Speaker 1: like people are buying it. Cynthia, thank you very much
Speaker 1: for the call and for the compliments. I'll pass your
Speaker 1: best along to the great Buck Sexton as well. Let's
Speaker 1: let's keep on rolling with calls. Let's go to Paul
Speaker 1: in Mississippi Online four. Paul, good good evening. Hey, Hi,
Speaker 1: I enjoy your program. I enjoyed the Box program and
Speaker 1: wish your merry lady Christmas and a happy New Years.
Speaker 1: Absolutely Merry Christmas to you too, Go right ahead, Okay.
Speaker 1: One thing I want to say about him signing that
Speaker 1: kep for the soldiers. He is the commander in chief
Speaker 1: of the military. If he wants to sign a cap,
Speaker 1: he should there. But he'd be able to without kidding,
Speaker 1: all the meeting and all the Democrats and more, they
Speaker 1: were really desperate, they would They were desperate, Paul, weren't
Speaker 1: they that he brought those caps and therefore there was
Speaker 1: some kind of political campaign governmental military violation. But it
Speaker 1: turned out, as the pool reporters said, these were caps
Speaker 1: that belonged to the soldiers, So why shouldn't they have
Speaker 1: them signed if they want them signed? Sure? You know,
Speaker 1: you know I love our president and if I would
Speaker 1: take a bullet, so to him taking a bullet ifnique, Well, Paul,
Speaker 1: so what does this say to you? It's it's Christmas, right,
Speaker 1: It's supposed to be the the you know, a season,
Speaker 1: a time where we are jolly but but overtly going
Speaker 1: to great lengths to be nicer to each other and
Speaker 1: politter to each other. And the media hits the president
Speaker 1: with this over the last forty eight hours. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know, Trump derangement syndrome is a real thing. But
Speaker 1: I thought at least at Christmas they would take the
Speaker 1: foot off the fake news accelerator. Yeah, that's good. It's
Speaker 1: deeply disappointing. But thank you for your cole Pole in Mississippi.
Speaker 1: Let's go to Julie in Tennessee on line to Julie.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Good evening, raheem pleasure to talk to you. Um,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna get right into this whole um Muslims of
Speaker 1: America issue that you're the nation of Islam. Yeah, yes,
Speaker 1: well we have. What it is is, here's the Muslims
Speaker 1: of America, which is actually a front group for the
Speaker 1: Jamat al Fukra, who is connected to the Saik gilani Ye,
Speaker 1: who is connected to the murder of Daniel Pearl. No,
Speaker 1: you know your stuff? Huh, you know your stuff? Well,
Speaker 1: they're here near the TVA. They have a camp, the
Speaker 1: Tennessee Valley Authority Power Camp. You know, do our near
Speaker 1: our power plant and right behind Fort Campbell. What is
Speaker 1: that one called? Did you? By the way, did you
Speaker 1: ever read my book Julie called No go Zones? No,
Speaker 1: I have not. I've been wanting to so last year
Speaker 1: I wrote that and there's an entire chapter on jamasal
Speaker 1: Fugra and the Muslims for America camps which are in
Speaker 1: the United States. Tell us a little bit more about
Speaker 1: your experience with that. Well, we hunt, which you need
Speaker 1: to go deer hunting with your friends, but we hunt
Speaker 1: up in that area near the Cumberland City and we've
Speaker 1: heard automatic gunfire coming from down in that area where
Speaker 1: they have their camp. We also had have crossed paths
Speaker 1: with them in the Cumberland City area and they do
Speaker 1: not like they do not like seeing a woman dressed
Speaker 1: to hunt, I can tell you. And the the situation
Speaker 1: is when nine to eleven happened, they first of all,
Speaker 1: they guard their camp with you know what weapons, you
Speaker 1: know that they are. They are very heavily guarded on there. Yep.
Speaker 1: Absolutely So we've never driven by there because it's just
Speaker 1: probably not prudent. But when we've had to cross paths
Speaker 1: with them outside of that area, they just there. We don't,
Speaker 1: we don't speak to them. It's very uncomfortable. But because
Speaker 1: they've not done anything illegal per se, nothing can be done.
Speaker 1: And um, but the location of this camp being about
Speaker 1: seven miles right along the power lines from the TVA
Speaker 1: plant and I used to have I know where the
Speaker 1: camps located, but when you look at the where the
Speaker 1: camp is located right behind Fort Campbell as well, it's
Speaker 1: kind of curious. Well listen, I'm in prey with your
Speaker 1: with your working knowledge on the matter, and obviously depressed
Speaker 1: that you've got one of these camps right near you.
Speaker 1: For those of you who are skeptical about what Julia
Speaker 1: is saying, just just go away and look at it yourselves.
Speaker 1: Jamatal Fukra f u q r A. And remember that
Speaker 1: it was only in September of this year that a
Speaker 1: similar such compound in I think it was in New
Speaker 1: Mexico was was raided. So so just to a lot
Speaker 1: of people out there, I know, Julie, these things can
Speaker 1: seem outrageous and out there, but the evidence is compiled,
Speaker 1: the FBI is is well aware of it, and there
Speaker 1: are plenty of there's plenty of evidence behind behind what
Speaker 1: this group Jamatal Fukra is otherwise known as Muslims for America.
Speaker 1: Um So, Julia, I thank you for that call. It's
Speaker 1: it's very actually important to note, because we were talking
Speaker 1: about the Nation of Islam stuff, that there are actually
Speaker 1: more sort of militant groups than the Nation of Islam
Speaker 1: out there, and they are out there in the United
Speaker 1: States as well. And for those of you that didn't
Speaker 1: guess it, I wrote a book about a lot of
Speaker 1: this last year. It's called No Go Zones, where I
Speaker 1: specifically intended to prove, because I've seen it firsthand in
Speaker 1: Europe that no go areas are a thing. And I
Speaker 1: think I proved it so well that even CNN and
Speaker 1: MSNBC had me on their programs to discuss my findings.
Speaker 1: So if you are, if you're in the market for
Speaker 1: some reading material, feel free to pick up No Go Zones.
Speaker 1: We're going to go to a quick break now, but
Speaker 1: I want us many of you on the lines as possible.
Speaker 1: I love these calls. Today eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: Buck eight four four nine hundred two eight to five
Speaker 1: quick Break will be joined in a moment by doctor
Speaker 1: John Eastman from the Claremont Institute. He's gone an interesting
Speaker 1: story to tell you, guys, but for now we're going
Speaker 1: to pay some bills. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Amraheim Kasan filling in for Buck today. I think this
Speaker 1: is my third or fourth time doing this something like that.
Speaker 1: I feel like we're making like I'm making connection with
Speaker 1: you guys. Some great calls today. I really appreciate them.
Speaker 1: Lines are open eight four four nine hundred buc K
Speaker 1: eight four four nine hundred eight to five. I want
Speaker 1: to hear from as many of you as possible. How
Speaker 1: have two hours nearly gone of this show? Already doesn't
Speaker 1: feel like it, but those are the best shows, quick
Speaker 1: pace and lots of content. Line three, I think we
Speaker 1: have Charlie from Boston on the line of something to say, Charlie,
Speaker 1: you with us. I'm right here, Hey, how are you
Speaker 1: doing this evening? I'm doing great? Raheem. I've got an
Speaker 1: idea for President Trump, go ahead, what to do with
Speaker 1: all these immigrants that the Democrats insist on allowing in illegally.
Speaker 1: I think President Trump should provide them all free transportation
Speaker 1: directly to the precincts and counties where are these rich
Speaker 1: Democrats live in their gated communities, and drop them right off.
Speaker 1: Broward County comes to mind, Palm Beach County, Nassau County
Speaker 1: where Hillary lives. Uh um, you know, San Francisco, Calorama,
Speaker 1: Ester County in New York, Calorama neighborhood in Washington, DC.
Speaker 1: You know, just you know, it's letting them all come
Speaker 1: to the to the poor and working class communities and
Speaker 1: flooding them into those communities. Let these democrats that are
Speaker 1: so unwilling to secure the border, let them put them up.
Speaker 1: It's a very um it's a very interesting point about
Speaker 1: you know, I don't think anybody's under the misconception that
Speaker 1: you are going to stop every single illegal crossing into
Speaker 1: the United States, because some are not just over the borders,
Speaker 1: some are overstayers, some are on ya different methods of transportation.
Speaker 1: So what do you do when people do either qualify
Speaker 1: for some level of refugee status or asylum status or
Speaker 1: amnesty or whatever it is. At the moment you're saying,
Speaker 1: Charlie that the how these housing developments or the houses
Speaker 1: that they're put in, the places that they're put in,
Speaker 1: tend to be quite far removed from the political and
Speaker 1: cultural elite. And there's obviously a major reason for that.
Speaker 1: But it's it's interesting because you look at somewhere like London,
Speaker 1: for instance, now, which has experienced a massive amount of
Speaker 1: both legal and illegal immigration over the last decade or so,
Speaker 1: and you've got a situation there now where politicians, leading
Speaker 1: cabinet members are being attacked on the street. Now it's
Speaker 1: not always by migrants, some of it is homegrown criminality too,
Speaker 1: but there can be no doubting that there is a
Speaker 1: dovetailing of high levels of immigration to areas and increases
Speaker 1: in crime, drug crime, violent crime, burglary, carjackings, knife things,
Speaker 1: and of course terrorist attacks too. In fact, I was
Speaker 1: reading about this just this morning, Charlie. The Germans have
Speaker 1: finally acknowledge something that I was warning for so very
Speaker 1: long that along with this massive immigration that came into
Speaker 1: Europe in twenty fifteen, there has been massive rises in
Speaker 1: crime across those neighborhoods. And you're saying, let it go
Speaker 1: to the Democrat counties. Absolutely well, are we talking about
Speaker 1: the people that are here illegally? Yeah, nothing to say
Speaker 1: about and no qualms about legal immigration whatsoever. In a
Speaker 1: matter of fact, I'm frankly I'm a social liberal. But
Speaker 1: the people that are that are coming here illegally that
Speaker 1: the Democrats insist I'm allowing in just blossom right into
Speaker 1: Westchester County. It's it's a great idea. I hope President
Speaker 1: Trump is listening. Charlie from Boston, there with some ideas
Speaker 1: on what to do with the what to do with
Speaker 1: the hordes of illegal immigrants? Did I sorry, did I
Speaker 1: just dehumanize them by saying hordes? Is that? Is that
Speaker 1: not allowed now? And beside too insensitive there? I think
Speaker 1: it's a I think it's a very good point, Thank you,
Speaker 1: mister President. I like that. By the way, mister producer,
Speaker 1: I encourage that anytime you just want to want to
Speaker 1: throw something at me, keep me on my toes, happy,
Speaker 1: happy to have it happen. So we've talked so far
Speaker 1: today about the fake news, We've talked about the gosh,
Speaker 1: we've talked about the government shut down, so many other things.
Speaker 1: I really commend that story to you guys from Alana
Speaker 1: Goodman over at the Washington Examiner, by the way, because
Speaker 1: I bet you if the Nation of Islam is able
Speaker 1: to get four hundred thousand, nearly four hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: out of the Bureau for Prisons, than many other unpalaced,
Speaker 1: shall we say, groups will also be in that list.
Speaker 1: And actually we discussed the story last night and I
Speaker 1: suggested to her that she might go back and foyer
Speaker 1: the Prisons Bureau and say, right, I want a full
Speaker 1: list of everyone that you guys are good money to,
Speaker 1: but as as you know, they seem to tread the
Speaker 1: contracts after a certain amount of time, which is utterly
Speaker 1: bizarre to me. I wanted to bring you as well
Speaker 1: an interview with doctor John Eastman, but we've had a
Speaker 1: little bit of trouble getting ahold of him. On his end.
Speaker 1: He's a he's a professor at the Claremont Institute, and
Speaker 1: I guess, I guess cards on the table. I'm also
Speaker 1: a fellow at the Claremont Institute. Is a fantastic organization,
Speaker 1: but they are filing a complaint in the FED. Well,
Speaker 1: to have filed a complaint in the Federal District Court
Speaker 1: on November the twenty eighth, on behalf of the Pasadena
Speaker 1: Republican Club because in twenty seventeen, the Pasadena Republican Club
Speaker 1: contracted with the Western Justice Center for the rental. I'm
Speaker 1: just reading here from there from an article in the
Speaker 1: Pasadena Independent from the rental of the Maxwell House in
Speaker 1: Pasadena to hold an event at which doctor John Eastman
Speaker 1: was to be a speaker. Now, this happens a lot,
Speaker 1: and I know you guys out there have these same problems,
Speaker 1: and in the next hour, I'm going to bring you
Speaker 1: an interview with a young lady who's had similar problems
Speaker 1: with political discrimination. It's a story that was breaking over
Speaker 1: the course of today. You may have seen it on Twitter,
Speaker 1: but I will spay you the details now. Just there's
Speaker 1: a little bit of a teaser for you. So, doctor
Speaker 1: John Eastman was going to be the speaker, and less
Speaker 1: than two hours before the event, the executive director of
Speaker 1: the Western Justice Center, who was a retired LA Superior
Speaker 1: Court Judge Judith Churlin, sent an email to the president
Speaker 1: of the Pasadena Republican Club cancel the event two hours before.
Speaker 1: Now they've done events at this venue previously. I've I understand,
Speaker 1: but Judge Churlin, retired. Judge Churlin, I should say, said
Speaker 1: that doctor Eastman, a very well renowned professor by the way,
Speaker 1: was unacceptable as a speaker because of his leadership position
Speaker 1: in a faith based organization that promotes traditional marriage. It's
Speaker 1: the National Organization for Marriage and Judge Cherlin retired. Judge
Speaker 1: Churlin disagreed with doctor Eastman and his political and religious views,
Speaker 1: and so the Western Justice Center banned the Pasadena Republican
Speaker 1: Club from holding its event. That's the allegation made in
Speaker 1: this new complaint on political and religious discrimination by the
Speaker 1: Claremont Institute. There are other groups, other political groups that
Speaker 1: still meet at the Western Justice Center. So this was
Speaker 1: this particular problem they had with the National Organization for
Speaker 1: Marriage and doctor John Eastman. Now you see it happening
Speaker 1: in real life in person in places like that, you
Speaker 1: obviously see it happening on social media too, mass bannings, blockings.
Speaker 1: I can't, for instance, promote very much on my Facebook
Speaker 1: page anymore. They don't let me just block things all
Speaker 1: the time Patreon, which is a donor platform which I
Speaker 1: rely on for a significant part of my income. In
Speaker 1: case you don't know, I do a daily Raheem rant
Speaker 1: which works out at about sixteen cents a rant. On
Speaker 1: there they're kicking conservatives off on mass. So I really
Speaker 1: wanted to bring you the story from doctor John Eastman himself,
Speaker 1: but unfortunately weren't able to get hold of him. So
Speaker 1: I thought I'd walked you through it anyway, and I
Speaker 1: hope I did the story justice there. But it's good
Speaker 1: that institutions like Claremont exist and take the fight back
Speaker 1: to the political left on this right. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show, Ambrahem Gassan. We're going to go to
Speaker 1: a quick break now. When we come back, more great
Speaker 1: interviews and I hope more of your calls. The Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network the only dual certified veteran owned background investigations
Speaker 1: and vetting company. You can find them at MYGVN dot
Speaker 1: com or call eight seven seven, six nine five eleven
Speaker 1: seventy nine. Federally certified as a veteran owned small business
Speaker 1: and independently certified by the National Veteran Business Development Council.
Speaker 1: The only minority spend certification recognized by the Billion Dollar
Speaker 1: round Table. Headquartered in Chicago with offices throughout the nation.
Speaker 1: They are risk mitigation experts and work with startups all
Speaker 1: the way up to Fortune one hundreds. No data or
Speaker 1: client information is ever offshored, and all employees are located
Speaker 1: throughout the United States. So again, Globe Verification Network, that
Speaker 1: veteran owned background Investigations and vetting company. Go to MYGVN
Speaker 1: dot com. Welcome back. This is the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: My name is Raheem because Sam filling in for Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton today, broadcasting live from the Freedom Hut here in Washington, DC.
Speaker 1: I want to take as many of your guys calls
Speaker 1: over the last How is it the last hour? Already?
Speaker 1: I could just do this all day. I love the
Speaker 1: sound of my own voice. The phone number here is
Speaker 1: eight four four nine hundred Buck, eight four four nine
Speaker 1: hundred two eight two five. You do not have to
Speaker 1: agree with me, or agree with Buck, or agree with
Speaker 1: each other, or even agree with yourself. That's what political
Speaker 1: discourse is all about, and we want to have it
Speaker 1: here on the Buck Sexton Show. I've got a good
Speaker 1: friend of mine on the line. Terry Shilling is the
Speaker 1: executive director of the American Principles Project. Terry joining us
Speaker 1: to discuss what I think is an interesting story in
Speaker 1: the realms of social conservatism and from the pro life
Speaker 1: movements perspective. Terry, good evening, Hey, thanks so much for
Speaker 1: having me her here. Thank you, thank you for taking
Speaker 1: time out of your evening to join us here. It's
Speaker 1: a story which I hope you can help me understand
Speaker 1: a little bit more, because, as you probably know, Terry
Speaker 1: in on my side of the pond in the United Kingdom.
Speaker 1: These stories are you know, we what's we said about
Speaker 1: abortion is you know, the science is settled. We we
Speaker 1: just forget about it now. We just leave the debate
Speaker 1: where it is and nothing ever changes. But Ohio, I
Speaker 1: believe is changing or at least trying to change several
Speaker 1: things regarding their abortion laws. Terry, could you tell us
Speaker 1: elucidate upon this for us, Yeah, of course, And I
Speaker 1: just want to say that, you know, I think the
Speaker 1: reason that the political ramifications of abortion are settled in
Speaker 1: Great Britain and they're not here is primarily be because
Speaker 1: of how you guys answered that question, which was through
Speaker 1: the democratic process. Here in America, we had literally five,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, seven justices in black robes determined the abortion
Speaker 1: laws for the entire country back in nineteen seventy three,
Speaker 1: and so they kind they try to remove it from
Speaker 1: the democratic process and say this is settled for everyone,
Speaker 1: and to the Americans who are like, you know, we're
Speaker 1: still having this fight today. And what we've seen over
Speaker 1: the last forty years going on fifty almost actually is
Speaker 1: rapid advances in our advancements in technology, especially when it
Speaker 1: comes to healthcare, and we're seeing the faces of these
Speaker 1: unborn babies, were seeing their heartbeats, we know when they
Speaker 1: have fingernails. I mean, we've just gotten so much more
Speaker 1: information since nineteen seventy three went abortion we legalized across
Speaker 1: the country here and the states are now starting to
Speaker 1: recognize that through our laws. And in Ohio they just
Speaker 1: passed a fetal heartbeat bill which basically bands abortion after
Speaker 1: the point on which a fetal heartbeat can be detected.
Speaker 1: The reason that's important is because it's all an argument
Speaker 1: about the personhood of the child, which is what Roe contested.
Speaker 1: Roe said that the unborn child was not a person
Speaker 1: and it was not due to rights and um, and
Speaker 1: that's where the left has refused to want to go.
Speaker 1: And so the right now, especially in Ohio, is they're
Speaker 1: trying to ban abortion at the point in which there
Speaker 1: can be a fetal heartbeat detective because they say that's
Speaker 1: when personhood begins. So what's I understand that this is
Speaker 1: being challenged at several levels. There there are two different bills.
Speaker 1: You don't have to explain this one to me. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So back earlier this year, I think it was just
Speaker 1: in November, the state legislature of Ohio passed a fetal
Speaker 1: heartbeat band on abortion and sent it to the Governor's desk,
Speaker 1: and Governor Kasik actually zetoed that film and so today
Speaker 1: they had two votes in the state legislature in Ohio
Speaker 1: UH to override the governor's veto UM, and they managed
Speaker 1: to override the governor's veto in the House, but on
Speaker 1: it UH they actually got uh shut down. They lost
Speaker 1: by one vote. And it was one guy state Senator
Speaker 1: of Bill Beagle who flipped who was with the pro
Speaker 1: life side before the the the overturn happen UM, and
Speaker 1: it was just yeah, it was kind of a betrayal
Speaker 1: on his part. So what what actually is changing in Ohio? Uh?
Speaker 1: Nothing at the moment. I mean, they've they've they've done
Speaker 1: some more restrictions on abortion. Uh. They've they've banned uh
Speaker 1: dne abortions, which is a really gruesome UH procedure where
Speaker 1: it's it's mostly for late term abortions where they dismember.
Speaker 1: That's what the D stands for, is they dismembered the
Speaker 1: child piece by piece and pull it out. And so
Speaker 1: Ohio banned that procedure and Governor caseg veto the Heartbeat bill. Well,
Speaker 1: so the Governor Casey to my understanding of this, says
Speaker 1: that you know, this isn't going to be held up
Speaker 1: by a Supreme Court if there's a Supreme Court challenge
Speaker 1: to this anyway. So I'm just here trying to save
Speaker 1: ohioan's money. I mean, do you buy that saving them money?
Speaker 1: I mean no. I think Look, I think that when
Speaker 1: you're a legislator, you have a different job to do
Speaker 1: than a justice, and that that job is to legislate
Speaker 1: according to what you believe the Constitution should do. And
Speaker 1: it's not our role as legislators or as governors to
Speaker 1: determine what's going to be upheld constitutional or und constitutional
Speaker 1: by the Court. This is what the people sent their
Speaker 1: state representatives to uh Columbus to do, was to vote
Speaker 1: for these types of legislation. Um, they don't really care
Speaker 1: about what the Supreme Court says right now. What they
Speaker 1: are wanting to do is tell the Supreme Court, tell
Speaker 1: the nation that Ohio is against abortion after the point
Speaker 1: in which a field heartbeat can be you know, detective,
Speaker 1: and then let you know, let John Roberts and and
Speaker 1: let let those guys make their decision. But from my standpoint,
Speaker 1: I think that you know, as a citizen and as
Speaker 1: an American, I have to go with what my personal
Speaker 1: beliefs are and I can't try and make my decisions
Speaker 1: and my choices off of what everyone else is going
Speaker 1: to believe and say it do so, just just finally, Terry,
Speaker 1: before before we got to go to a break, do
Speaker 1: you think this moves anything outside of Ohio? Is any
Speaker 1: Is this going to aid any any other legislatives in
Speaker 1: making similar changes or trying to make similar changes? Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I want to I want to be clear. This
Speaker 1: was actually the second time that Kasik had vetoed a
Speaker 1: heartbeat bill. He had done it before with the same
Speaker 1: justification that this would be overturned at the Supreme Court. Look,
Speaker 1: I think that everything across the entire country is changing
Speaker 1: on this issue. I think that we now have a
Speaker 1: slightly pro life majority of the Supreme Court. I'd like
Speaker 1: to get it to six or seven. But I think
Speaker 1: that things across the country are changing on this Americans
Speaker 1: are pro life. Donald Trump ran as a pro life
Speaker 1: president and he won, and I think it had a
Speaker 1: lot to do with his deputi Hillary. Well, that's Terry Shilling,
Speaker 1: the executive director of the American Principles Project. Terry, just
Speaker 1: tell tell the audience where they can find out more
Speaker 1: about your work. Oh yeah, it's American Principles Project dot com.
Speaker 1: Or APPFDC dot org. We fight on the right to life, liberty,
Speaker 1: pursuit of happiness. If it's in the constitution, we're probably
Speaker 1: working on the issue. And and just for my amusement,
Speaker 1: tell them your Twitter handle, it's Pizza Politico. I come
Speaker 1: from a long line of a pizza restaurant tours, and
Speaker 1: so my two passions in life are pizza and politics. Terry,
Speaker 1: I've seen you. You You come from a long line of
Speaker 1: pizza eats. Is we Terry Shirley, thank you so much
Speaker 1: for joining us here on the Buck Sexton Show. We're
Speaker 1: gonna go to a quick break now, but I want
Speaker 1: to get to you guys on the lines as well.
Speaker 1: One eight four four nine hundred buck eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred two eight to five quick break now, then
Speaker 1: more of your calls, more interviews. We're gonna cram it
Speaker 1: all in. We'll be right back to the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: I'm Rahem Kasam filling in for Buck Sexton today live
Speaker 1: out of the Washington, DC Freedom Hut. I want to
Speaker 1: get to more callers in the next segments, so hang
Speaker 1: on the lines eight four four nine hundred buck eight
Speaker 1: four four nine hundred two eight two five. But at
Speaker 1: the last minute this evening before the show, or midway
Speaker 1: through the show. In fact, i'd like to I like
Speaker 1: to mix it up, keep myself on my toes. I
Speaker 1: decided to have on our next guest because of a
Speaker 1: story that's been breaking really over social media across today.
Speaker 1: I confess she's a friend of mine, so I want
Speaker 1: to I want to caveat it with that. But it's
Speaker 1: also another one of those stories that plays into what
Speaker 1: we were discussing earlier on about conservatives being banned from
Speaker 1: life effectively, whether it's a Republican club being banned from
Speaker 1: hosting a speaker, whether it's on social media. Now, i'd
Speaker 1: like to introduce you to a former Fox News producer,
Speaker 1: Perdis Salah, Perdis, Are you on the line? Yes? Put us.
Speaker 1: I think you should talk us through what exactly has
Speaker 1: been going on with you. This isn't just this hasn't
Speaker 1: just happened today. You've experienced this over some time, right,
Speaker 1: but but today the story really came out. I'm dodging
Speaker 1: around it because I want you to. I want you
Speaker 1: to lay it all out for us. Okay, thanks, Um. So,
Speaker 1: the past couple of days, I was looking for an
Speaker 1: apartment to rent in UM. I you know, I live
Speaker 1: in DC already. I've been living here for over two years.
Speaker 1: But I wanted to downsize and get roommates to save
Speaker 1: to save money on rent, and I wanted to stay
Speaker 1: in the same area that I live in. And so
Speaker 1: I was you know, surfing through the web based credless
Speaker 1: zillo so and looking looking for a room in an
Speaker 1: apartment UM since yesterday when I started, I was rejected
Speaker 1: by two UM. But I was rejected by two places
Speaker 1: that I applied for, and one of them sent me
Speaker 1: back in email. The first one was yesterday over the phone,
Speaker 1: I was told that, UM, they wouldn't be accepting any
Speaker 1: roommates who are either Trump supporters or fans at Fox News. UM.
Speaker 1: And of course I told him, you know, I told
Speaker 1: him that I worked there. So they were like, uh, no,
Speaker 1: way whatever. But then today, UM, I got the I
Speaker 1: received an email. I received it in writing, and UM
Speaker 1: it was. Their Their response was, well, thanks for applying,
Speaker 1: but you know or you're we we can't have someone
Speaker 1: thats for political views like you're they're really opposed to
Speaker 1: ours and we hate Fox by the way, UM, good
Speaker 1: luck with your search. So yeah, I, UM, you know
Speaker 1: I posted a screenshot of the email. Of course I um,
Speaker 1: I wiped out like there, I've watched out their name.
Speaker 1: There's idea for the ad on you know, the ad
Speaker 1: that they had online. Um, but definitely something that I
Speaker 1: was experiencing lately, and not just with apartments. But this
Speaker 1: is with the housing has to come out. So I
Speaker 1: just I'll read, I'll read the I'll read the response
Speaker 1: that you got out for the for the audience here.
Speaker 1: So you applied for this apartment and you've had this
Speaker 1: experience before and they responded, thank you for your interest, perdus.
Speaker 1: After perusing your various journalistic and social media posts, it's
Speaker 1: pretty clear your politics views okay, our diametry diametrically opposed
Speaker 1: to ours, and we hate Fox. Hopefully you will find
Speaker 1: a place where that will be a good fit. Now
Speaker 1: you've also said that you know you don't intend to
Speaker 1: sue or punish anybody or out them for not renting
Speaker 1: you a room. That's obviously it's it's their house and
Speaker 1: they have, I suppose the right to be as bigoted
Speaker 1: as they want. But but somebody else, a mutual friend
Speaker 1: of ours, ezra levant Over at the Rebel Media pointed
Speaker 1: this out on Twitter earlier. He said, if if you
Speaker 1: were on the political left and this had happened to you,
Speaker 1: and you were on the political left, you'd be on
Speaker 1: CNN right now, the SPLC, the Southern Property Law Center,
Speaker 1: and the ADL would be suing in your name. The
Speaker 1: landlord would be named in shame. Let's face it there.
Speaker 1: Their face would be out there, their phone number would
Speaker 1: be out there, their email address would be out there.
Speaker 1: They wouldn't have been blocked redacted from from the email
Speaker 1: that they sent. And you know, you would have a
Speaker 1: massive go fund me account with probably hundreds of thousands
Speaker 1: of dollars already in it, where you could probably buy
Speaker 1: a house in Calorama, let alone worry about renting one. Now,
Speaker 1: I know you do have a go fund Me to
Speaker 1: help you out in this at the moment, and I'm
Speaker 1: pleased to say that over the last I think it's
Speaker 1: been up for like three hours and it's already raised
Speaker 1: seven hundred and five dollars out of the thousand dollars goal.
Speaker 1: But I mean, we are we playing Why do we
Speaker 1: play fair when they don't play fair? Why shouldn't we
Speaker 1: out these people? Put us um? I mean a lot
Speaker 1: of people have said that, why you know, why are
Speaker 1: you They would do the same exact thing to you
Speaker 1: if you were progressive and you were saying and you're
Speaker 1: and you were saying, well, they're discriminating against me because
Speaker 1: of my the color of my skin. You know, I'm
Speaker 1: brown and I'm the child of Middle Eastern refugees. You
Speaker 1: know I could I uh, if that was my story.
Speaker 1: I mean, if that was the story that I presented
Speaker 1: to them, then I would get just discriminated then I
Speaker 1: then you know, I would shoe them and get them
Speaker 1: in trouble or whatever. Um. But I mean that it
Speaker 1: always angers me when I see people do that on
Speaker 1: the West always, and it like it feels disingenuous. UM.
Speaker 1: I mean because it's because it's there, because because it's
Speaker 1: like fair game. So why you know, because it's there
Speaker 1: is then why not? But it still makes me annoyed.
Speaker 1: I think that people should be able to um, people
Speaker 1: should be able to refuse service to other people. I
Speaker 1: mean this couple that this is these two guys who
Speaker 1: actually were like I mean the guy who who sent
Speaker 1: me this email. UM, they're like they're gay, So you
Speaker 1: know I wouldn't I UM, the same way that I
Speaker 1: think that they should be able to, um, refuse their rooming,
Speaker 1: their housing to people that they don't like. People should
Speaker 1: be able to refuse service to you know, like anyone. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well you and you probably have to bake them a
Speaker 1: cake now, don't you to apologize for applying for a
Speaker 1: room in the in their house? That's I think that's
Speaker 1: the penalty. Purdus. I just wanted I wanted to bring
Speaker 1: that story to the audience because it's breaking over the
Speaker 1: course of the day. Tell the audience where they can,
Speaker 1: where they can catch up with you your work, how
Speaker 1: they can support you. Um. You can find me on
Speaker 1: Twitter at Taras Sellers p A R D E S
Speaker 1: S E l e H. Purdis Is. She's being very humble.
Speaker 1: She's actually a bit of a Twitter celebrity with nearly
Speaker 1: I think fifty thousand followers now, So yeah, go and
Speaker 1: go and follow her support her work in any way.
Speaker 1: Cam Purdis, thanks for joining us here on the Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show and talking us through that. Um, thanks thanks
Speaker 1: for having me on absolutely right phone lines. Do you
Speaker 1: think that's right or wrong? Do you think she should
Speaker 1: out them or not? Eight four four nine hundred b
Speaker 1: U c K eight four four nine hundred two eight
Speaker 1: two five. I also want to get to the other
Speaker 1: callers who I know are waiting on the line as well.
Speaker 1: Let's let's get to Quint from Springfield Online to Quint.
Speaker 1: You're there with me? How are you doing? I'm good?
Speaker 1: How are you pretty good? Yeah? I used to work
Speaker 1: work at a correctional facility in the northeast here in
Speaker 1: a pretty liberal state, and uh, you know it was
Speaker 1: this is a good job and a good facility, great facility.
Speaker 1: They try to rehabuildate everybody, and uh, you know, and
Speaker 1: they've been you know, they did accommodate for all religions.
Speaker 1: Everyone could have their own you know, uh mass you know, Catholic,
Speaker 1: pass Muslim, Islamic or uh you know what what a Protestant, whatever,
Speaker 1: Hippim might be have accommodate. But it became, uh, you
Speaker 1: know to a point where like like, you know, nothing
Speaker 1: against Ramai or I thing, but do it. They would
Speaker 1: bend over backwards for the Islamic Um traditions to the
Speaker 1: point where they started to kind of breach security protocol,
Speaker 1: you know, like we couldn't even touch their meals or anything,
Speaker 1: or you can look at them or things like that.
Speaker 1: So I kind of started to breach like security. Hey, Quint,
Speaker 1: hang on the line. Don't go in where we've got
Speaker 1: We've got a hard break now, but hang on the line.
Speaker 1: I want to bring you back after the break and
Speaker 1: you can tell us more about this because I'm genuinely
Speaker 1: fascinated by it. This is the Buck Sexton Show. And
Speaker 1: if you want to have your say as well. Eight
Speaker 1: four four nine hundred two eight two five, I'm Rahem Kasam.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Raheim Kasalm here filling in for Buck today out of
Speaker 1: the Washington DC Freedom Hut. I'm hoping we still have
Speaker 1: Quint on the line from from Massachusetts. Quint, are you
Speaker 1: with us? Yes, sir, Hey, sorry about that earlier. We're
Speaker 1: up against the hard break, but I'm glad we I'm
Speaker 1: glad we kept you over. You were saying that where
Speaker 1: where you worked in the in the prison system, that
Speaker 1: Islam was treated with kid gloves. Is that right? Yes? Yes, yep,
Speaker 1: to the point where it's it almost like preached security
Speaker 1: protocol and that kind of them. The separate critical thing
Speaker 1: was they had us two classes on not only the
Speaker 1: gangs and things like that and then their situations. But
Speaker 1: like the radical Islam and the radicalization you know, for
Speaker 1: terrorism through this prison system. And they harped on it.
Speaker 1: I mean they said, looked out for ana, keep an
Speaker 1: eye on it. And we didn't. You know, it wasn't
Speaker 1: too prevalent or anything. But I mean this area, I think, Dave,
Speaker 1: some of the some of the people involved in nine
Speaker 1: to eleven came through here through the area is lived then,
Speaker 1: you know, in this in the northeast here, and so
Speaker 1: you know, I would I pay attention. And he was
Speaker 1: when they made he was uh a Muslim or practice Islam,
Speaker 1: and the he was kind of a challenging. He made
Speaker 1: to challenge me ridicular, and you know I would, I
Speaker 1: would treat him with respect and everything. But when he
Speaker 1: was released lower security, he left behind some shoes that
Speaker 1: had Islam Arabic writing on it, and I noticed the
Speaker 1: word Ghat on it. I don't know if I don't
Speaker 1: know how exactly what it's said or anything like that.
Speaker 1: I said, okay, you know, it was like left it
Speaker 1: as a message, you know, and I don't know exactly
Speaker 1: what it said, but I reported it and I turned
Speaker 1: them in and you know, you know, I asked like
Speaker 1: a week later, said, Hey, what happened today, And they said, oh,
Speaker 1: we lost the shoes. You know, the guys all so
Speaker 1: were you guys to tell them me to you know,
Speaker 1: keep an eye on this stuff. Yeah, they kind of
Speaker 1: like maybe the guy wasn't it wasn't a serious thing
Speaker 1: or anything, but you know, they kind of like definitely,
Speaker 1: like you said that, you know, with metence. You know,
Speaker 1: they're treating them with you know, definitely wouldn't really deal
Speaker 1: with the situation even though they were aware of it.
Speaker 1: You know, it's very interesting because you seem to be
Speaker 1: experiencing now in the United States something that that we
Speaker 1: went through in the United Kingdom about a decade ago.
Speaker 1: With this, we have had typically a massive Muslim population
Speaker 1: way way out stripping the number of Muslims in in
Speaker 1: in you know, why the society is a percentage of
Speaker 1: the population m in the prison system in the United Kingdom.
Speaker 1: And of course, uh, there was a there was a
Speaker 1: report into this a couple of years ago where they
Speaker 1: found that actually a massive, statistically high incidents of criminal
Speaker 1: non Muslims were converting to Islam in the prison system
Speaker 1: as well. And this links back to the story we
Speaker 1: were discussing with our friend Alana Goodman at the Washington
Speaker 1: Examiner earlier. The Chaplains, the Muslim Chaplains are given far
Speaker 1: more leeway than any other religion. But also, I want
Speaker 1: to quote for you here. I just pulled it up
Speaker 1: this Chief Inspector of Prisons in the United Kingdom, Dame
Speaker 1: Ann Owens. She said that people are converting to Islam
Speaker 1: in prisons in the United Kingdom because they seek support
Speaker 1: and protection in a group with a powerful identity. They
Speaker 1: perceive material advantages of identifying as Muslim in prison, including
Speaker 1: material benefits only available to Muslims, such as more time
Speaker 1: out of their cell and better food during Ramadan if
Speaker 1: they become Muslim? Is that something Quinn that you experienced? Oh,
Speaker 1: write on the money. These guys, they would they didn't
Speaker 1: care about the religion at all, but it would claim
Speaker 1: it and it'd get the extra meals. And it's still
Speaker 1: asked for extra meals, you know what I mean. They
Speaker 1: really did have no respect through religion and ore, and
Speaker 1: they would accommodate them. You know what. We knew it.
Speaker 1: We knew they were abusing it. And it was just
Speaker 1: as it's a it's you know, turning the other cheek
Speaker 1: sting with the Boston Parmers, you know, the Psarchaia brothers.
Speaker 1: They you know, these guys got a free pass, a
Speaker 1: free pass. It's extraordinary stuff and I think requires a
Speaker 1: lot more investigation. I wish, I wish there were real,
Speaker 1: so many real news agencies out there that they would
Speaker 1: get onto it. But certainly there should be enough on
Speaker 1: our side of that debate that more of this information
Speaker 1: comes to light. As I said to an earlier caller,
Speaker 1: quint I tried to do my part in investigating what
Speaker 1: was going on with artical Islam in Europe and the
Speaker 1: United States in my book last year, No go Zones Um.
Speaker 1: But but there is so much more than that just
Speaker 1: a single book can deal with. And and you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's a brutal task because of course, when you
Speaker 1: when you try and figure out what's going on, you're
Speaker 1: labeled an islamophobe and a hater and a racist and
Speaker 1: a xenophobe and all that kind of stuff. And it's
Speaker 1: really quite extraordinary when you think about it, because effectively,
Speaker 1: what the critics are saying then is the terrorism is
Speaker 1: inextricably Islamic. Right. They're saying to you that those two
Speaker 1: things are inseparable. That they're inseparable, and that by criticizing one,
Speaker 1: you are necessarily criticizing the other, and so on and
Speaker 1: so forth. Look, I came from a Muslim family. I
Speaker 1: haven't been the Muslim for about well over ten years now,
Speaker 1: but I know what goes on in that faith. I
Speaker 1: know what goes on in those mosques, I know what
Speaker 1: goes on in civil society within Muslim organizations. For the
Speaker 1: most part, Muslims who emigrate into the Western world don't
Speaker 1: want to be a part of anything fundamentalist or radical,
Speaker 1: but they are not helped by these leftists, liberals and
Speaker 1: progressives who treat radical Islam with kid gloves. Quinn, give, yeah,
Speaker 1: they're hypocrites. Sharia a lot, you know, the deuce little
Speaker 1: women and things like that. And then and then on
Speaker 1: the other hand, they say, oh, that's okay, you know,
Speaker 1: that's okay, And they fought this hard for women's rights
Speaker 1: and things like that, and then they want to turn
Speaker 1: a you know, turn a cheek to these guys. You know,
Speaker 1: all right, absolutely all right, Quinn, that's a great call.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for it. Here on the Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show, the phone number here is eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred Buck eight four four nine hundred two eight
Speaker 1: two five. I think I think it's break time for us,
Speaker 1: and then we'll be right back. We've got I'm going
Speaker 1: to bring you some some update on Brexit. I know
Speaker 1: a lot of you are interested in what's going on
Speaker 1: with Brexit. Brexit and the election of President Trump in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen were inextricably linked, as you know, the rebellion,
Speaker 1: the fight back between two sovereign peoples against I suppose
Speaker 1: what you would call the rise of the bureaucratic or
Speaker 1: administrative state. My friend Ben Harris Quinney, he's the chairman
Speaker 1: of the oldest conservative think tank in the United Kingdom.
Speaker 1: He's staying up very late in the UK. I think
Speaker 1: it's about one forty five in the morning, so he
Speaker 1: can join us on the show in just a moment.
Speaker 1: So quick break and we'll be right back. Welcome back.
Speaker 1: Final moments here are the Buck Sexton Show. Am ra
Speaker 1: him Becauseanthaning in for Bucks Sexton from the Freedom Hut
Speaker 1: here in Washington, d C. Headline jumped out at me
Speaker 1: over the break. Transgender inmate gets rare transfer to female prison.
Speaker 1: Just want to read this to here a transgender woman
Speaker 1: serving a ten year sentence in Illinois for burglary has
Speaker 1: been moved from a men's to a women's prison in
Speaker 1: what is a rare accommodation by state prison authorities. Her
Speaker 1: lawyers announced Thursday. Her lawyers announced Thursday. Apparently Dion Hampton,
Speaker 1: otherwise known as Strawberry twenty seven, was moved after a
Speaker 1: year long legal battle and resistance from the Illinois Department
Speaker 1: of Corrections. Well, it's going to work out. Well, all right,
Speaker 1: we are in the final stages here today. I get
Speaker 1: sad every time it's it's at the end of the show.
Speaker 1: I want to take a quick call from Patrick in
Speaker 1: New York State Online one, then jump over to Ben
Speaker 1: Harris Quinny. Patrick you with us, Hello, Hey Patrick, how's
Speaker 1: it going good? How are you doing tonight? Yeah? Good?
Speaker 1: Go right ahead, Well with the last color that you
Speaker 1: had um seeing that he got duped or felt duped
Speaker 1: by President Trump. Me personally, I'm not a Trump fan whatsoever. However,
Speaker 1: I do see that he was trying to make a joke,
Speaker 1: and I think that, you know, people are taking everything
Speaker 1: way too seriously these days. I think you're right too
Speaker 1: seriously and too literally as well. Right, yeah, exactly. I
Speaker 1: mean you you know, I follow I watch all the
Speaker 1: different um news channels, the mainstream. I watched the Right,
Speaker 1: the last everything, just to see what everybody's saying. And
Speaker 1: it seems that everybody takes every single thing just way
Speaker 1: too seriously and then they throw it. I mean just
Speaker 1: just say, they try to make it the worst case
Speaker 1: scenario possible. We're all in the mood for outrage all
Speaker 1: the time. Patrick, exactly. Well, I'm glad you're not. I'm
Speaker 1: glad you are more level headed. I try and stay
Speaker 1: the same way. Patrick in New York State, Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for the call here on the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: I want to pivot now to my friend Baron Ben
Speaker 1: Harris Quinney, the chairman of the oldest and sadly probably
Speaker 1: the only conservative thing tank in the United Kingdom. Ben,
Speaker 1: good evening, good morning for you. I guess well, no,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's the early hours. I consider at night
Speaker 1: time still, so it's good to be with you. No,
Speaker 1: it's what it's one forty five in the morning, is
Speaker 1: it not. Well, technically, you're right. I am being literal.
Speaker 1: I am being literal about it. Ben. I wanted to
Speaker 1: have you on because a lot of a lot of
Speaker 1: I know a lot of our friends in the United States,
Speaker 1: they often ask me. In fact, it's the first question
Speaker 1: anyone ever asks me is what's going on with Brexit?
Speaker 1: And it's become such a painful thing to have to answer.
Speaker 1: So instead of answering that question myself, I'm going to
Speaker 1: throw it over to you. What is going on with
Speaker 1: Britain leaving the European Union? I thought I thought we
Speaker 1: were out. What happened? What's happening? Well, it's fair to
Speaker 1: say that very few people in the United Kingdom understand
Speaker 1: what is going on with so I hope you're one
Speaker 1: of them. I don't think that. Well, it sort of
Speaker 1: is the author and things have progressed in the last
Speaker 1: few weeks. We've gone from a position where there could
Speaker 1: have been a number of potential deals to a situation
Speaker 1: where it is either May's proposal, which is not leaving
Speaker 1: the European Union. That's the Prime Minister's proposal, yeah, or
Speaker 1: what is termed a no deal scenario where all ties
Speaker 1: are automatically severed on our exit date March twenty ninth,
Speaker 1: and we fall out under World Trade Organization rules and
Speaker 1: have to remake all of our relationships with the world
Speaker 1: and the EU from there, and that I just I
Speaker 1: just most Brexiteers. Yeah, I just want to I just
Speaker 1: want to reset on that for people who don't quite
Speaker 1: understand what the deal means. So leaving, contrary to what
Speaker 1: you might think, when Britain voted to leave the European
Speaker 1: Union on June twenty, twenty sixteen, we didn't actually then leave.
Speaker 1: We enacted something called Article fifty, which is a part
Speaker 1: of our treaty with the European Union. That is a
Speaker 1: mechanism by which a nation is supposed to be able
Speaker 1: to leave, and it's effectively a two year long leaving process.
Speaker 1: And I can already I can hear the eyes rolling
Speaker 1: in the collective heads of Americans listening to this. But
Speaker 1: it sort of makes sense because there are so many
Speaker 1: things are so intertwined, whether it's scientific research or passporting,
Speaker 1: financial services, regulatory staff, judicial staff. It sort of makes
Speaker 1: sense that you do that. But Ben, as you were saying,
Speaker 1: we haven't really got anywhere with the post Article fifty negotiations,
Speaker 1: but we do leave nevertheless on March to twenty ninth
Speaker 1: next year. Well that's the crucial thing, and that's what
Speaker 1: our senior patron and senior Member of Parliament, John Redwood
Speaker 1: ensured was on the legislation that the date is fixed,
Speaker 1: that March twenty ninth bass fixed. We of course have
Speaker 1: a prime minister that supported Remain, we have a cabinet
Speaker 1: a government that largely supported Remain, and we have a
Speaker 1: Parliament that is largely also made up of Remained supporters.
Speaker 1: So they have been the ones that have been handling
Speaker 1: the Article fifty process, the two year process that you mentioned,
Speaker 1: and of course they've decided amongst themselves that it would
Speaker 1: be a good thing for us to more or less
Speaker 1: continue to be a member of the European Union. What
Speaker 1: a few backbench MPs and other campaigners like Nigel Farage
Speaker 1: outside of Parliament has said is that is not the
Speaker 1: Brexit we voted for. And so when that March twenty
Speaker 1: ninth deadline comes up, it's game over. If you haven't
Speaker 1: managed to come up with a deal that satisfies the
Speaker 1: British public, then we simply automatically leave under this no
Speaker 1: deal scenario. And as I say, that is now the
Speaker 1: best case scenario for those who support Brexit, and that's
Speaker 1: what we are now all preparing for. And American listeners.
Speaker 1: But it's actually very good news when it comes to
Speaker 1: doing a trade deal with the United States because it
Speaker 1: leaves the door wide open with absolutely no restrictions, whereas
Speaker 1: what the deal May is proposing would mean that we
Speaker 1: probably couldn't sign the kind of deal that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: is proposing. Yeah, and that's actually a big deal. It's
Speaker 1: not an insignificant amount of money we're talking about here.
Speaker 1: With the trade that takes place between the United Kingdom
Speaker 1: and the United States. This would be a big boon
Speaker 1: to President Trump, and it would be a massive shot
Speaker 1: in the arm for a British economy that needs a
Speaker 1: strategic financial alliances when leaving. Although the fastest shrinking or
Speaker 1: the slowest growing trading blog in the world still a
Speaker 1: big trading blog, so I can't go ahead. The no
Speaker 1: deal scenario is basically hitting the reset button and all
Speaker 1: of our trade deals throughout the world, which is going
Speaker 1: to mean choppy waters. But it also means a fantastic opportunity.
Speaker 1: And we are one of the leading trade partners with
Speaker 1: the United States. But I think the point is actually
Speaker 1: the potential that we have to become each other's pre
Speaker 1: eminent trading partners. And for that current multi billion dollar
Speaker 1: trade relationship to turn into a multi trillion dollar trade
Speaker 1: relationship over the next decade. And I think that is
Speaker 1: absolutely possible. And we're very fortunate to have a president
Speaker 1: in Donald Trump that wants to put us to the
Speaker 1: front of the queue rather than as Barack Obama said,
Speaker 1: to the back. Yeah, that was that was an extraordinary moment.
Speaker 1: For those of you who don't remember, President Obama flew
Speaker 1: to London and threatened the United Kingdom that they must
Speaker 1: that we must vote to stay in the European Union
Speaker 1: because one of the things that would happen if we
Speaker 1: didn't was we wouldn't have preferential treatment for a trade
Speaker 1: deal with the United States. And to their credit, actually
Speaker 1: it wasn't just Donald Trump. Throughout the twenty fifteen sixteen
Speaker 1: primaries and the campaigns over here in the US, I
Speaker 1: think Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and some other
Speaker 1: the other Republican candidate said well, well, well that's not right.
Speaker 1: You know, we share a bond with the United Kingdom
Speaker 1: and we want to continue being friends and allies and
Speaker 1: so on and so forth. And they came out and said,
Speaker 1: you know, Obama's pontifications on this are not relevant. He
Speaker 1: will not be president in at a time when that
Speaker 1: will be a thing that needs negotiating. So that's just
Speaker 1: another reason I am very happy that we don't have
Speaker 1: a Democrat in the White House at the moment because
Speaker 1: I think that would have been quite quite bad for Brexit.
Speaker 1: And you know the Brexit spirit were the original Brexit
Speaker 1: was Ben, it was in seventeen seventy six. Well, you
Speaker 1: could argue that there was one before that when we
Speaker 1: left the Catholic Church and formed the Church of England.
Speaker 1: But nonetheless, I think the sad thing is, yeah, we
Speaker 1: don't like that we in the United are not taking
Speaker 1: advantage of the friendship that Donald Trump has offered us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think we've given him the from from a from
Speaker 1: a UK government point of view, we've really given him
Speaker 1: the cold shoulder. Ben, that's the music, so we've got
Speaker 1: to leave it there, unfortunately. But that's Ben Harris Quinney,
Speaker 1: the chairman of the Bow Group. You can find them
Speaker 1: at Bow Group Bowgroup dot org. And that's it. That's
Speaker 1: the show. I've been Raheem gasam filling in here for
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton, Holland Hill. We'll be here tomorrow if you
Speaker 1: want to follow me, find me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube
Speaker 1: at Raheem Ghassam. This has been the Buck Sexton Show
Speaker 1: Live from the Freedom Heart. I hope I get to
Speaker 1: speak to you again soon