Speaker 1: You're in the freedom hunt. Thanks for listening to The
Speaker 1: buck Sexton Show podcast. Get the latest from Buck at
Speaker 1: buck sexton dot com. Is anybody surprised that Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: isn't doing a great job fixing our border by vegan
Speaker 1: Central America? That it's a debacle? Pretty much? Is this
Speaker 1: a shock to anyone? What has ever shown people who
Speaker 1: are who are fixed or who are fixing their attention
Speaker 1: on results and ability? What has ever shown them any
Speaker 1: inclination whatsoever of Kamala Harris to get the job done,
Speaker 1: To just be Harris and have people push her along
Speaker 1: and vote for her and elevate her. Yeah, sure she
Speaker 1: can do that, But to actually get results that shows
Speaker 1: a skill set that shows inability beyond playing the system.
Speaker 1: This shouldn't be surprising at all. Right, it's not surprising. Well,
Speaker 1: get more into this in a second. But you know,
Speaker 1: we're living in a digital age where your personal data
Speaker 1: is always under attack and your online privacy seems to
Speaker 1: be a thing of the past. There's a better way
Speaker 1: you can protect your information and privacy without worrying about
Speaker 1: the prying eyes of big data. Introducing Secure an encrypted
Speaker 1: instant messaging and secure email service hosted in Switzerland. Why Switzerland,
Speaker 1: It's where the world's strictest data privacy laws are applied.
Speaker 1: By using proprietary technology and military grade encryption methods, a
Speaker 1: proprietary platform and servers hosted in Switzerland, Secure protects your
Speaker 1: data from the Invasive Cloud Act and other privacy intrusive laws.
Speaker 1: These are secure email and instant messaging services never seen
Speaker 1: before in the market today, and they're away from big
Speaker 1: tech platforms such as Amazon Web Services, Facebook, WhatsApp, Microsoft
Speaker 1: and Google. Take back your privacy and online security with
Speaker 1: Secure by going to secure dot com. That's s e K.
Speaker 1: You are very important. With the spelling here. S e
Speaker 1: K you are dot com. Use a coupon code buck
Speaker 1: for one week free and twenty five percent off. Be
Speaker 1: sure to use that coupon code buck. Just go to
Speaker 1: the website now Secure s e K you are Secure
Speaker 1: dot Com and regain your privacy as well. Listen, I've
Speaker 1: been to the border before, I will go again. But
Speaker 1: when I'm in Guatemala dealing with root causes, I think
Speaker 1: we should have a conversation about what's going on in Guatemala.
Speaker 1: What a disaster, Kamala Harris is here, What a disaster.
Speaker 1: Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, and they're being reminded
Speaker 1: of what was so apparent when she wanted to be
Speaker 1: the next president instead of vice president, an appointed position
Speaker 1: president of the United States. With even Democrat voters this
Speaker 1: isn't a Republican. Democrat voters were like, I don't like her.
Speaker 1: US seems very staged, very fake obviously, so and here
Speaker 1: she is acting like everybody else is crazy. She's the
Speaker 1: borders are who will not go to the US Mexico border,
Speaker 1: And she's laughing whenever she's whenever she's challenged on this.
Speaker 1: It's pretty easy. Why not just saying, you know what,
Speaker 1: I'll go to the border tomorrow. Stop asking me this question.
Speaker 1: I'll go to the border tomorrow because she won't go.
Speaker 1: She won't go because there will be a press corps
Speaker 1: that travels with her and they will have to cover
Speaker 1: the disaster and she will be photographed there. We all
Speaker 1: understand what's going on here. This is not actually that complicated,
Speaker 1: but she keeps making it worse because her answers are absurd.
Speaker 1: It's nonsensical. I mean, here she is telling everybody with
Speaker 1: no trace of irony. Here with zero self awareness, Vice
Speaker 1: President Harris, who thinks she's soon to be president. Harris
Speaker 1: is out there telling people listen to this play too.
Speaker 1: I also believe that if you want to fix a problem,
Speaker 1: you have to go to where the problem exists. If
Speaker 1: you want to address the needs of a people, you
Speaker 1: must meet those people. You must spend time with those people,
Speaker 1: because the only way we can actually fix the problem
Speaker 1: is to understand the problem. The problem is at our border.
Speaker 1: But she doesn't seem to understand, maybe because she refuses
Speaker 1: to go here. She's telling you, if you want to
Speaker 1: fix it, you have to go to where it is,
Speaker 1: exactly Kamala, and you refuse to do that, and then
Speaker 1: you lecture us as though you are doing that, which
Speaker 1: makes everyone think, is she just obduse? Is there some
Speaker 1: kind of a disconnect. It's as though she does not
Speaker 1: understand what is so obvious to everybody else. But she's
Speaker 1: upsetting pretty much all sides on this border trip. I'm
Speaker 1: sorry on this immigration Central America talk about the US
Speaker 1: border without going their trip, and some of them are
Speaker 1: upset that she's even willing to say with The Democrats
Speaker 1: have to pretend they believe, which is that people shouldn't
Speaker 1: come into the country illegally. So, I mean, here's a
Speaker 1: here's a left wing media host on the View, the
Speaker 1: dumbest talk show on television, Play seven. But I was
Speaker 1: a little surprised at the clumsiness of her language because
Speaker 1: she said, you know, don't come, don't come, and she was,
Speaker 1: I think, referring to illegal passage into the United States
Speaker 1: as opposed to seeking legal asylum, which is what Alexandrio
Speaker 1: Cassio Cortes is talking about. And of course this country
Speaker 1: was founded on immigration, founded on people coming here legally
Speaker 1: and seeking asylum. But using those terms, so those words
Speaker 1: don't come, don't come, I think is pretty inflammatory, and
Speaker 1: I think that's why she's getting so much pushback because
Speaker 1: because of those words. I mean, the Supreme Court just
Speaker 1: ruled this week that people that come here illegally and
Speaker 1: stay here for twenty years still can't apply for a
Speaker 1: green cart because of the circumstances by which they came
Speaker 1: to this country, And so, of course you shouldn't come
Speaker 1: here illegally. But our vice president could have done I think,
Speaker 1: a better job in terms of her language. Yeah, this
Speaker 1: is a legal analyst on the View, Sonny Houston, who
Speaker 1: seems to not understand immigration law. She notes at the
Speaker 1: end that yes, you cannot apply for legal status in
Speaker 1: this country if you came here illegally, even twenty years ago.
Speaker 1: We know a lot of people didn't come twenty years ago.
Speaker 1: They came, you know, now, year ago, two months ago now.
Speaker 1: But the part that keeps getting left out and AOC
Speaker 1: and the other far left propagandists don't want you to
Speaker 1: pay any attention to is that the people showing up
Speaker 1: now at the border who are being apprehended, they are
Speaker 1: all breaking the law. They are doing what is the
Speaker 1: equivalent of trespassing on US sovereign territory over an international border.
Speaker 1: They refuse to go through the ports of entry. They
Speaker 1: don't want to have to wait, so they just show
Speaker 1: up and they walk, they literally walk into America and
Speaker 1: say here, I am give me asylum. And they're not
Speaker 1: actually people that overwhelmingly are worthy of asylum. This is
Speaker 1: just the reality. I want to be an economic migrant,
Speaker 1: I want to have better opportunities for jobs is not
Speaker 1: an asylum claim. Lying to the border patrol, by the way,
Speaker 1: is also a crime. So people who say I am
Speaker 1: fleeing political violence, when really they're actually looking for a
Speaker 1: better job or they want to live with other family
Speaker 1: members who are already in the US are also breaking
Speaker 1: the law. This is lawlessness and Democrats don't get to
Speaker 1: have it both ways. They don't get to have the
Speaker 1: state drag people, you know, by the scruff of the
Speaker 1: neck out of church for failing to dumble mask like
Speaker 1: a bunch of morons. The fact that we have to
Speaker 1: do that, the fact they ever told us that isn't
Speaker 1: an embarrassing They should be ashamed of themselves. Fauci, that
Speaker 1: little fascist the worst. But they want the state to
Speaker 1: drag you out for that because it's the law. It's
Speaker 1: really an executive order, but it's the law. And on
Speaker 1: this issue, though, all of a sudden, immigration laws just
Speaker 1: don't count. Doesn't really matter anymore. And keep in mind,
Speaker 1: we have a de facto open border, we have coyotes,
Speaker 1: the cartels making huge sums of money over this. It's
Speaker 1: just an unsustainably lawless, reckless situation. And AOC, the radical
Speaker 1: left of the Democrat Party, which is increasingly calling all
Speaker 1: the shots, is out there complaining that the Biden policies
Speaker 1: aren't humane enough. Play five. Well, I think the issue here,
Speaker 1: and first of all, you know, I think This is
Speaker 1: not just about the Vice president. This is about the
Speaker 1: Biden Administration's immigration policy writ large is not working. It's wrong,
Speaker 1: and it's inhumane. Why what is inhumane about it? If
Speaker 1: AOC wants every Latin American, or for that matter, developing
Speaker 1: country all over the world migrant to just be able
Speaker 1: to come to America, she should be honest about that
Speaker 1: and say that she wants full on open borders and
Speaker 1: a dissolution of the current legal immigration system that America has.
Speaker 1: That's the only honest position that she could have, because
Speaker 1: otherwise she's just another person who's complaining about a system
Speaker 1: that is failing, largely because Democrats refuse to enforce the
Speaker 1: laws that are on the books, and they keep saying
Speaker 1: it's inhumane. I just want to know, do you want
Speaker 1: to pay for every person from all over the world
Speaker 1: who wants to come to America in whatever numbers they
Speaker 1: want to come to America? Do you want to be
Speaker 1: responsible for their health care, for their education, for the
Speaker 1: massive expansion of the welfare state that we all know
Speaker 1: is going to happen, is already happening as a result
Speaker 1: of a huge influx of illegal immigrants into the country. Yes,
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants are more likely to need state assistance, more
Speaker 1: likely to show up in an emergency demanding free healthcare,
Speaker 1: free health services. You know, there's just so much dishonesty
Speaker 1: around this issue, and it's awful. And then there's the
Speaker 1: other part of this too, which is the so that
Speaker 1: the is the we're not humane enough because you know,
Speaker 1: taking two million illegal immigrants into America this year roughly,
Speaker 1: that's what the numbers are looking like. You know, that's
Speaker 1: we're not nice enough as a people. A million legal immigrants,
Speaker 1: two million illegal immigrants. Why not twenty? Ask AOC, ask
Speaker 1: a Democrat? Why not just let anyone who wants to
Speaker 1: come into the country come into the country. And they
Speaker 1: don't have an answer for you. They'll say something like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, we have a system and we have laws. No,
Speaker 1: but you don't want the laws to be enforced. You
Speaker 1: oppose at every stage Democrats, those laws to actually be implemented.
Speaker 1: So that's just dishonest. You're just lying about what you
Speaker 1: really want here, which is what they do all the time.
Speaker 1: AOC calls him inhumane, and everyone seeing that the Biden
Speaker 1: administration doesn't have any answers on immigration that it's willing
Speaker 1: to say out loud and that Kamala Harris is just
Speaker 1: flailing on this trip and everyone seeing this is the
Speaker 1: person the Democrats really want to make the next president
Speaker 1: of the United States. Please, when you've lost CNN and
Speaker 1: you're Kamala Harris, you know things are going badly. This
Speaker 1: is a CNN piece. Unnamed White House insiders were left
Speaker 1: perplexed by the performance of Vice President Kamala Harris on
Speaker 1: a recent trip to Guatemala and Mexico to address the
Speaker 1: root causes of immigration problems at the US southern border.
Speaker 1: Early in the administration, Joe Biden assigned Harris the unenviable task.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, because that's notice how they make it sound
Speaker 1: like it's not Harris's fault. It's an unenviable test of
Speaker 1: ostensibly overseeing the hot button political issue. Harris's team subsequently
Speaker 1: made clear her focus would be on these systemic issues
Speaker 1: at play, focusing on the Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras,
Speaker 1: and El Salvador, from which a majority of border migrants come.
Speaker 1: Harris has been a lightning rod for criticism. Yeah you
Speaker 1: don't say okay anyway, I just even the White House
Speaker 1: is like, my gosh, she's making a mess of this thing.
Speaker 1: But notice that there's a trend here. It's important you
Speaker 1: see this. The Left has a ideological framework that applies
Speaker 1: to many issues, and in this case, what you're seeing
Speaker 1: is this systemic, this systemic causes component coming to the
Speaker 1: forefront all over again. Right, It's just like what you
Speaker 1: see with the law enforcement crisis across the country, or
Speaker 1: the lack of law enforcement because we're undermining cops. We're
Speaker 1: undermining our law enforcement officers, and so you have spiking
Speaker 1: murder rates. Instead of dealing with the problem directly, more
Speaker 1: cops on the streets, more prosecution of violent criminals, lock
Speaker 1: up violent criminals, longer, back up our cops when they
Speaker 1: have to defend themselves and others. Instead of going right
Speaker 1: to it, they want to take some roundabout politically expedient route. Oh,
Speaker 1: let's hire more social workers. Let's defund the police, which
Speaker 1: actually caused the problem. I mean, look at it. You
Speaker 1: can line these two issues up. You can line up
Speaker 1: the border, and you can line up defund the police
Speaker 1: and the crime surge in this country, and you see
Speaker 1: a tremendous commonality here. It's very obvious. Right, how does
Speaker 1: it all start? Bid administration comes in. Biden administration comes in,
Speaker 1: gets rid of hermine in Mexico, speaks very differently about
Speaker 1: the border, doesn't want to do interior enforcement. Everybody knows
Speaker 1: it's wide open, okay. Biden administration in twenty twenty is
Speaker 1: supportive in the campaign of the BLM movement, then comes
Speaker 1: into office, all the focuses on the January sixth insurrection
Speaker 1: and not on the riots that occurred then and the
Speaker 1: violence that's occurring now because of the undermining of cops.
Speaker 1: So Biden's worldview. The Democrat Party essentially because Biden it
Speaker 1: just does what his handlers say, is responsible for the
Speaker 1: creation of a problem, right, making something substantially worse, and
Speaker 1: then instead of addressing it in the obvious way in
Speaker 1: the border, securing the border, turning people away, deporting those
Speaker 1: immediately who do not show up for their hearings, deporting
Speaker 1: those immediately who are on the list to be deported,
Speaker 1: and turning away people that have false asylum claims that
Speaker 1: are obviously false at raising the credible fear standard to
Speaker 1: a point where it actually means something. Stead of doing
Speaker 1: any of that, they want to deal with the root
Speaker 1: cause of migration in Central America which on it in
Speaker 1: a best case is gonna maybe help the problem a
Speaker 1: little bit in a number of years if they put
Speaker 1: a lot of resources in time into it. Doesn't that
Speaker 1: sound just like their approach to law enforcement and defund
Speaker 1: the police, adding social workers. You've got shootings and murders
Speaker 1: spiking fifty percent, sixty percent, seventy percent in cities across
Speaker 1: the country year over year. And instead of saying, let's
Speaker 1: stop the bad guys from shooting people, let's put more
Speaker 1: cops on the street, let's back them up, let's deal
Speaker 1: with the problem, the Democrats want to deal with. Oh,
Speaker 1: the root, the systematic, systematic or systemic causes of this.
Speaker 1: That's what we have to do. Let's have more social workers,
Speaker 1: Let's have you know, more after school programs or whatever. Okay,
Speaker 1: I mean maybe we could even say that some of
Speaker 1: those things are are reasonable ideas or of the long run.
Speaker 1: Although I think the social workers instead of cops thing
Speaker 1: is just insane. But anyway, you know, because they're already
Speaker 1: are social workers. And I got news for you. Social
Speaker 1: workers don't want to respond to a domestic violence call.
Speaker 1: They don't not without a cop. There. You know, Psychiatric
Speaker 1: personnel don't want to respond to an emotionally disturbed person
Speaker 1: call not without a cop there. But you see how
Speaker 1: they do the same thing. The same fundamental fallacies apply.
Speaker 1: Democrats have a worldview that is wrong when it comes
Speaker 1: to cause an effect, that is wrong when it comes
Speaker 1: to history, that is wrong when it comes to who
Speaker 1: the good guys are, who the bad guys are, who's
Speaker 1: breaking the law, who's supporting the law. And this means
Speaker 1: that they're just making wrong choices over and over again
Speaker 1: on the border, on law enforcement, on any number of issues. Right,
Speaker 1: and this is you see what I mean. Though they
Speaker 1: cause the problem, then they won't address it directly because
Speaker 1: the indirect approach allows them to pander to their base
Speaker 1: and have this social justice first approach to something that's
Speaker 1: really a law enforcement issue in both cases, the border
Speaker 1: and the murder rate spike in this country. And then
Speaker 1: when they really want to just push something that's nonsensical,
Speaker 1: they go back to the historical the historical framework for something. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: maybe we want to stop Central Americans from coming into
Speaker 1: America illegally by the hundreds of thousands a month, But
Speaker 1: it's really our fault, you see, It's our fault that
Speaker 1: people are leaving Central America. America's fault, your fault, my fault.
Speaker 1: Because of US history in the region. You knew this
Speaker 1: was coming. Joy and Reid said over on MSNBC the
Speaker 1: following you got to hear at play six. There are
Speaker 1: seven countries in Central America. There's another dozen countries and
Speaker 1: two sort of arratories in South America. We'reking met four
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty three million people in South America. It's
Speaker 1: something like what forty four million people in Central America.
Speaker 1: The United States southern border with Mexico is not the
Speaker 1: only important issue that matters to the world. Those seven
Speaker 1: countries have a long history with the United States, much
Speaker 1: of it troubling. The United States used much of Central
Speaker 1: America as essentially a giant plantation. Google the United Fruit Company.
Speaker 1: We have a long, sordid, torrid history with this region.
Speaker 1: The history does not begin at the border where people
Speaker 1: are showing up. That is not the only important thing
Speaker 1: that matters. There's a whole history that long proceeds people
Speaker 1: arriving at the border between Mexico and the United States.
Speaker 1: I'm glad that she has Google and could do a
Speaker 1: quick search of the United Fruit Company and the history
Speaker 1: of Central America before she went on air to pretendially
Speaker 1: know something about these issues. But I will just say this,
Speaker 1: we want a secure border. I don't care what the
Speaker 1: US was doing in Central America in the nineteen eighties.
Speaker 1: I want a secure border. I don't care what the
Speaker 1: US was doing when it comes to agricultural policy a
Speaker 1: century ago. I want to secure border. We've been to
Speaker 1: the border. We've been to the border. You haven't been
Speaker 1: to the border, and I haven't been to Europe. Go
Speaker 1: to the border as well, so then you do see
Speaker 1: the plague. Listen. I've been to the border before. I
Speaker 1: will go again. But when I'm in Guatemala dealing with
Speaker 1: root causes, I think we should have a conversation about
Speaker 1: what's going on in Guatemala or so, can you commit
Speaker 1: right now that you will indeed visit the US Mexico
Speaker 1: border until you do it soon, Jeremy, let me tell
Speaker 1: you something. But yes, I will, and I have before. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's really on top of the issue, folks, Really, she
Speaker 1: really gets it. You know. It's funny too, is that
Speaker 1: is that the Democrats they can't get on the same
Speaker 1: sheet of music about this because while some are pretending
Speaker 1: you know the the Biden administration because at the national level,
Speaker 1: they know that fifty one percent of the American people
Speaker 1: are not down with an open border. They're not and
Speaker 1: so they have to play this game. But those Democrats
Speaker 1: who get to be the far lefties because they either
Speaker 1: have a congressional district or even a state that's so
Speaker 1: blue that people are absurd and don't understand cause and
Speaker 1: effect and don't know anything about what's really happening at
Speaker 1: the border. You got people like Bernie Sanders running around saying,
Speaker 1: you know, we should actually make it even easier for
Speaker 1: people to come into America illegally. Play eight. He said,
Speaker 1: the wall is symbolic and it represents so wouldn't it
Speaker 1: be proper to tear that symbol down in order to
Speaker 1: achieve that? It? Maybe, but you know, it's how much
Speaker 1: theise are gonna cost. They're dumb. Did you do that
Speaker 1: tearing down? I don't know. Maybe the answer is yes,
Speaker 1: that's something that's something you're willing to consider. Yeah, you're
Speaker 1: willing want to will tearing down exhibiting fencing between us.
Speaker 1: But again, if you're it's going to cost me billions
Speaker 1: of dollars to tear it down, I rather invest that
Speaker 1: maybe and the needs for childcare in this country. But
Speaker 1: it's something you know, we can look at. It's something
Speaker 1: we can look at. Why would you look at that?
Speaker 1: What possible purpose could there be in tearing down a
Speaker 1: section of border wall that to a man to a person,
Speaker 1: border patrol will tell you walls fences help make their
Speaker 1: job easier. I've never heard anybody in border patrol say
Speaker 1: anything different. Of all the people I have talked to
Speaker 1: you in border patrol, in in you know, customs and
Speaker 1: Immigration enforcement, never heard anybody say anything different than that.
Speaker 1: Who's a actual employee and civil servant of those organizations.
Speaker 1: Maybe you'll hear political people say something different. So why
Speaker 1: would you tear down some of the wall. Well, because
Speaker 1: you're trying to play kate the radical left wing open
Speaker 1: borders base. That's why. That's the only reason why. There's
Speaker 1: no other reason that you could give. And if you're
Speaker 1: somebody who really believes that we shouldn't we shouldn't be
Speaker 1: able to have sovereignty, why is America I always want
Speaker 1: to ask these internationalist libs Marxists this question. Why is
Speaker 1: it that America is the only country in the world
Speaker 1: that anybody wants to go to that is not allowed
Speaker 1: to determine who comes and who goes. Try to just
Speaker 1: show up sometime in a country that requires a visa
Speaker 1: for a US entry and say no, but I really
Speaker 1: want to be here. I think I have a better
Speaker 1: chance at a job here. I want to be here.
Speaker 1: Try to do that. You're going to be put on
Speaker 1: a plane, sent back home and probably detained for many hours,
Speaker 1: maybe a day or two, in uncomfortable conditions, and told
Speaker 1: you know, you're not coming in. That's what's going to happen.
Speaker 1: Are all those countries racist? Is it always racism that
Speaker 1: results in people not wanting an open border because the
Speaker 1: rest of the world is allowed to have borders. Somehow
Speaker 1: America is not allowed to have borders. Why is that interesting,
Speaker 1: isn't it? And as we all know, if it were
Speaker 1: about safety, there are plenty of places in Mexico where
Speaker 1: Central Americans would have much eat and much easier time
Speaker 1: linguistically and culturally, and are perfectly safe. There are a
Speaker 1: lot of parts of Mexico, plenty of states in Mexico
Speaker 1: that people have low crime rates. And it's not you know,
Speaker 1: I know there are bad parts of Mexicans too, they're
Speaker 1: bad parts of the US. Maybe you go go check
Speaker 1: out what it's like these days in some parts of
Speaker 1: Baltimore or the South side of Chicago, or there are
Speaker 1: parts of the US with really high crime rates too.
Speaker 1: But this is not about what's true, folks, This is
Speaker 1: not about what's really going on. This is about feelings.
Speaker 1: You see, Democrats are always motivated by how they feel
Speaker 1: on these issues and how it makes them feel about themselves.
Speaker 1: That's the most important thing. That's why the virtue signaling
Speaker 1: impulse is so powerful among the Libs. That's why they
Speaker 1: believe so strongly in all of this. AOC is among
Speaker 1: the She's really it's like, it's like idiot leftists who
Speaker 1: just graduated college created a pseudo Marxist member of Congress
Speaker 1: and like, you know, on a computer and then built
Speaker 1: one you know, like like like like they created the
Speaker 1: perfect distillation of faculty lounge left wing idiocy and made
Speaker 1: it made an actual person based upon those upon those parameters,
Speaker 1: you get AOC. And here she is telling everybody because again,
Speaker 1: part of this is there's a liberal guilt, like we
Speaker 1: have to take in as many people from the Third
Speaker 1: world as possible into America. Illegally. We're already were already
Speaker 1: taken refugees, We're already taken a million league immigrants. We
Speaker 1: have to just make it so that whoever wants to
Speaker 1: show up and can get her on foot can come
Speaker 1: into the country because we owe it to them. We've
Speaker 1: the American people owe it to them. And remember you,
Speaker 1: your tax dollars will go to support these individuals, and
Speaker 1: those taxes are taken from you by force by the state,
Speaker 1: and that AOC and the rest of the Democrats ultimately
Speaker 1: will support men with guns showing up to your home
Speaker 1: to drag you away and lock you in a cell
Speaker 1: if you refuse to pay those taxes to support the
Speaker 1: massive welfare state and the monetary policies necessary for the
Speaker 1: bid administration to do what it wants with the incredible
Speaker 1: spending increases that we're seeing. So you're not given a
Speaker 1: choice in any of this, and they will support men
Speaker 1: with guns locking you up if because the law is
Speaker 1: the law. Right, the laws the law, say the authoritarian
Speaker 1: Democrats until they don't like the law, and then you know,
Speaker 1: when it's immigration time at come on, laws don't count.
Speaker 1: And we say that's hypocritical, and they say exactly this
Speaker 1: is about power. We don't care that it's hypocritical. Don't
Speaker 1: you see that It doesn't sting them, it doesn't upset them.
Speaker 1: They don't have any principles, so telling them they're unprincipled
Speaker 1: has no effect. So that's how you get where we
Speaker 1: are right now. And it's also why there's so much
Speaker 1: virtue signaling among the left when it comes to the
Speaker 1: immigration issue, AOC citing how we owe it to these
Speaker 1: immigrants crossing into America illegally because America has done so
Speaker 1: much bad climate change stuff that the climate change has
Speaker 1: made it bad in Central America, and so that's why
Speaker 1: they're fleeing. So it's really our fault. Played then this
Speaker 1: is also climate policy that is impacting the global South disproportionately.
Speaker 1: Even though these farmers and these folks in Central and
Speaker 1: South America contributed to climate change the least in terms
Speaker 1: of their carbon emissions, they are experiencing the ravages the
Speaker 1: most right now and first, and so US climate policy
Speaker 1: has contributed to this. US foreign policy, US economic and
Speaker 1: trade policy has helped contribute to conditions that that people
Speaker 1: are fleeing just not true. I mean and want to
Speaker 1: say it's not true. It's it's absurd. Central America is
Speaker 1: getting the worst of the climate change brunch right now. Really, well,
Speaker 1: this is an argument that a person is making who
Speaker 1: expects to be treated like she knows anything and has
Speaker 1: and it has even a baseline of necessary intelligence to
Speaker 1: wax philosophical on these issues. Really apparently, Yeah, it's our
Speaker 1: climate policy that's making people leave from Central America. I
Speaker 1: just want to know. Was it our climate policy that
Speaker 1: was making things so rough in Central America in the
Speaker 1: nineteen eighties? Oh? No, that would be our foreign policy. Somehow,
Speaker 1: It's always our fault, right, And it's not the communists.
Speaker 1: It's not the Sandinista's fault. What happened the nineteen eight
Speaker 1: it's not the Soviet Union's fault. No, No, it's all
Speaker 1: our fault. It's it's amazing how this sell this constant
Speaker 1: desire for self purification through showy victimhood. Oh we were
Speaker 1: so bad, Look what America did. I'm not one of
Speaker 1: those bad people, though, is central to the Democrat ethos.
Speaker 1: It's just pathetic after a while, isn't it. The amount
Speaker 1: of impact you and I have had on Central America's
Speaker 1: climate is zero. I don't want to hear about it,
Speaker 1: it's absurd. This is crazy person talk o what AOC
Speaker 1: is talking about. Though, Yes, we have to look at
Speaker 1: root causes, but there's a crisis at the border right
Speaker 1: now today, and you have to address that today while
Speaker 1: you look at the root causes down the road. I
Speaker 1: think also part of leading is optics and showing that
Speaker 1: and showing what you care about and what your goals are,
Speaker 1: and going to the border would have made a big difference.
Speaker 1: This has been a discussion for weeks. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: why it hasn't happened. It's a lot of easer you've said,
Speaker 1: been done, but perhaps should have been a priority. Perhaps, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: when you've lost Micah, when people who will say anything
Speaker 1: on TV as long as NBC Universal keeps sending those
Speaker 1: big paychecks to them, when you have got somebody will
Speaker 1: say anything on TV and knows that her job is
Speaker 1: to just constantly pump up and praise Biden, Harris, all
Speaker 1: of them, and she's saying, yeah, maybe maybe it should
Speaker 1: have been a priority. I also think it's funny too
Speaker 1: easier said than done. No, it's actually really easy. As
Speaker 1: the vice president, this is US soil. If everybody was
Speaker 1: saying if there was a huge crisis, you know, in
Speaker 1: in Topeka, Kansas. We're all worried about Topeka. Don't you
Speaker 1: think that the vice president would be expected to go there. No,
Speaker 1: we're not even asking her to go to a foreign country.
Speaker 1: When we say the border, it just means go down
Speaker 1: to a part of America that is closed to another country.
Speaker 1: This is not hard. So I think it's funny. She goes, Oh,
Speaker 1: it's easier said than done. No, it's actually easier done
Speaker 1: than said. For Comla Harris, you just go, just go.
Speaker 1: It's not not challenging at all. But I'm sorry, I just, oh,
Speaker 1: my gosh, it's so pathetic. This administration is such a joke,
Speaker 1: such a joke. You know, there were things about the
Speaker 1: Trump administration stylistically and in terms of you know that
Speaker 1: my big beef, and I don't want to be a
Speaker 1: broken record on this, My big beef was a lot
Speaker 1: of the personnel tois and notably the my kids are
Speaker 1: going to be my top advisor's decision. That was a
Speaker 1: huge mistake from the very beginning, totally wrong, totally gross,
Speaker 1: and people just didn't want to say. I said it
Speaker 1: on this show, and I got a lot of heat
Speaker 1: for it from folks. But I was right, and you
Speaker 1: know I was right. And if you think I'm If
Speaker 1: you think I wasn't right, go ask anybody who worked
Speaker 1: in this White House what it meant to have Jared
Speaker 1: Kushner have full determination on who got access to the
Speaker 1: President of the United States and who did. Not a liberal, folks,
Speaker 1: a liberal, would you want Joe Biden or Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: to basically be the de facto chief of staff under
Speaker 1: the Biden under a Trump administration? No, So I was
Speaker 1: telling the truth and I wanted to do something about it.
Speaker 1: But so much easier for people in the media just
Speaker 1: run around maga. Yeah, you know conservative media. No what,
Speaker 1: no one everybody wanted to cheer for the good stuff.
Speaker 1: Nobody wanted to be the coach at halftime that said
Speaker 1: I want this team to win. Therefore, here's what Trump
Speaker 1: needs to do. People didn't want to hear it, and
Speaker 1: we lost this last election. Ah, you can tell me
Speaker 1: o Bak you know they cheated or they who's the
Speaker 1: president now? Right? I still focus in on results first
Speaker 1: and foremost. We deal with reality. Friends. We're not liberals.
Speaker 1: We don't create an alternate universe. We deal with reality
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is the president. There were things that could
Speaker 1: have been done differently that would have changed that, including
Speaker 1: fighting against the way that the Democrats were changing elections
Speaker 1: using the pandemic as an excuse to change elections in
Speaker 1: the actual height of the election season. But there were
Speaker 1: aspects of the Trump administration that, as you know, I
Speaker 1: felt the need to sometimes criticize. Overall, I think the
Speaker 1: agenda was very powerful, and I think that's what we're
Speaker 1: going to return to, hopefully with a I believe a
Speaker 1: descentist twenty twenty four run with Trump's backing, and that's
Speaker 1: that's a winning a winning ticket, I believe. But we
Speaker 1: knew with Trump that there were some aspects of this
Speaker 1: that we're gonna be you know, it's gonna be a
Speaker 1: little bit of a show. You know, it's gonna be
Speaker 1: a little rough around the edges. Sometimes it was also
Speaker 1: gonna be very amusing, and it was. And the way
Speaker 1: that he took it to the media was incredible. And
Speaker 1: finally people really understand that journalism is a fraud in
Speaker 1: this country. As a profession. It doesn't really exist. There
Speaker 1: are some people who can do journalism, but it's not
Speaker 1: it's not a profession anymore. It does not if you
Speaker 1: believe that journalism is people actually speaking without political impetus
Speaker 1: and pushing agendas. But what's funny to me is that
Speaker 1: this Biden administration, given what we were promised and now
Speaker 1: what we're seeing, it's pretty hilarious, isn't it. They didn't say, yeah,
Speaker 1: Biden's gonna be too old and we're not really gonna
Speaker 1: hear that much from him, but you know it's it's
Speaker 1: gonna be Uh, he's gonna be a guy that relies
Speaker 1: on the advisor. No, we were told that Biden and Harris,
Speaker 1: we're gonna do a great job. Biden and Harris, We're
Speaker 1: going to restore our democracy, our faith in government. They're
Speaker 1: gonna get all these amazing things done. They're gonna do
Speaker 1: all this great stuff. Like what I mean the people
Speaker 1: that are saying, look at the vaccines. Uh yeah, the
Speaker 1: operation warp speed of the Trump administration got a record
Speaker 1: time vaccine program done, and then the Biden administration inherited
Speaker 1: a vaccine distribution plan and just played out the plan. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm sure they made some adjustments anybody would have, but
Speaker 1: that's it. I mean, this is like saying, oh, Biden,
Speaker 1: you know, funded the military. Yeah, okay, we kind of
Speaker 1: expect that. You know, what's the what's the difficult decision
Speaker 1: that's been made here? What is the choice that that
Speaker 1: Biden Harris has made that has resulted in a better
Speaker 1: America for a vast majority of the people who live here.
Speaker 1: They don't have it habit. You're starting to hear that
Speaker 1: the Democrats are getting frustrated because they can't get what
Speaker 1: they want. Here's here's little Chuck Schumer talking about the
Speaker 1: GOP and negotiations over infrastructure bill play eleven. Well, look,
Speaker 1: we have we're proposing, we're pursuing a two path proposal.
Speaker 1: On the one hand, there's bipartisan negotiations and those are
Speaker 1: continuing the first world between President Biden and Senator Capitau
Speaker 1: with just Republicans. Those seem to be running into a
Speaker 1: brick wall. But a bipartisan group led by Senator Cinema
Speaker 1: and I think Senator Portman as the lead Republican, are
Speaker 1: trying to put something together that might be closer to
Speaker 1: what the President needs. And so we're that's good, but
Speaker 1: that's not going to be the only answer. We all
Speaker 1: know as a caucus, we will not be able to
Speaker 1: do all the things that the country needs in a
Speaker 1: totally bipartisan in a bipartisan way. And so at the
Speaker 1: same time, we are pursuing the pursuit of reconciliation, and
Speaker 1: that is going on at the same time. And it
Speaker 1: may well be that part of the bill that will
Speaker 1: pass will be by partisan and part of it will
Speaker 1: be through reconciliation. But we're not going to sacrifice the
Speaker 1: bigness and boldness in this bill. We will just pursue
Speaker 1: two paths and at some point they will join. Get
Speaker 1: ready for the partisan steamroller. Friends, whatever they can do,
Speaker 1: even if they have to abuse the process to use
Speaker 1: the process, the Democrats will. Fellow New Yorkers, it's time
Speaker 1: to move on to unmask ourselves and our kids. That
Speaker 1: is the piece in the New York Post opinion section
Speaker 1: from our friend Carol Markowitz, who has been a warrior
Speaker 1: for the truth during this pandemic the whole time. Carol,
Speaker 1: great to have you as always, Thank you, Buck, thanks
Speaker 1: for having me. I gotta tell you the people that
Speaker 1: are still walking around with masks on this this is
Speaker 1: now and I mean this, it's an anxiety disorder. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is a men. So this is now mental illness.
Speaker 1: And I know they don't want to believe that because
Speaker 1: they believe the science, and they believe the science the
Speaker 1: whole time. But no, no, no, And those of us
Speaker 1: who were saying all along that anyone who's vaccinated really
Speaker 1: should have no concern about whether someone else is vaccinated
Speaker 1: or not, we never should have like, let this get
Speaker 1: conceded to the other side as an argument because it's absurd.
Speaker 1: And now there's all these problems. I mean, Carol did
Speaker 1: just give us a sense of some of the where
Speaker 1: are some of the places where? I mean, this is
Speaker 1: true in New York, but it's true in Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: it's true in a lot of cities across the country.
Speaker 1: They're these like remnants of faucism. What's still out there? Yeah, So,
Speaker 1: you know, people say to me all the time, like
Speaker 1: why do you care about other people? Asking why why
Speaker 1: do I care that you know eighty percent of my
Speaker 1: neighborhood still walking around outside post facts in masks. Well,
Speaker 1: the reason I care is because it continues to affect me.
Speaker 1: Last weekend, I took my middle son to a roller
Speaker 1: skating birthday party in Prospect Park, and the rules make
Speaker 1: no sense to pick up your skates. You need to
Speaker 1: wear a mask. To put on your skates. You can
Speaker 1: take off your mask, but when you're skating in the
Speaker 1: spacious rink with very few people in it, you need
Speaker 1: to put the mask back on. And we got told
Speaker 1: twice by the security guard to adjust our mask, even
Speaker 1: though his own mask was below his nose because it
Speaker 1: was ninety three degrees outside. And then the kicker of
Speaker 1: all this is when it's time to have food and cake.
Speaker 1: It's a really tight area where there's like five birthday
Speaker 1: parties going on, and everybody's on top of each other
Speaker 1: and we're all eating and blowing out candles and singing
Speaker 1: Happy Birthday. And literally, if you had to design where
Speaker 1: masking would ever make sense, it would be in that area.
Speaker 1: But obviously post backs and you know, in June twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one, we shouldn't be masking anywhere, But if anywhere,
Speaker 1: it would be there, and there you don't have to mask,
Speaker 1: so none of it makes any sense. It's completely mind boggling,
Speaker 1: And so I care. I care that so many people
Speaker 1: are still masking because it affects me. We still have
Speaker 1: these rules because all these people are still masking. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's these these remnants, you know, in my building, for example,
Speaker 1: where I am in New York City. For everybody listening there,
Speaker 1: I mean I lived in a building there are hundreds
Speaker 1: and hundreds of residents, so just to give you it's
Speaker 1: it's a very large building with a ton of people
Speaker 1: coming in and out all the time. And I've basically
Speaker 1: started the mask insurrection. Yeah, I will not tell everybody. Yes,
Speaker 1: I'm the one who has pulled down the mask signs
Speaker 1: in the gym. I'm the one who never wears a
Speaker 1: mask in the gym. And now others are finally joining along.
Speaker 1: They come in, they see me because they don't want
Speaker 1: to wear a mask. No one wants to wear a
Speaker 1: mask when they work out. And these are some of
Speaker 1: these guys. I mean they're actually like and girls. They're
Speaker 1: like really good shape, and they're like twenty five or thirty,
Speaker 1: and I'm sure they're vaccinated. The idea that they should
Speaker 1: be on the treadmill like heaving into this cloth over
Speaker 1: their mouth is completely insane, and that anyone demands this
Speaker 1: of other people is insane. And they still do it
Speaker 1: in a lot of places. In my in my lobby,
Speaker 1: they have a big masks required indoors. Now I don't comply.
Speaker 1: But there's this weird tension because the people that still
Speaker 1: think this stuff needs to be happening. They they don't
Speaker 1: want to be told that they're silly and kind of dumb.
Speaker 1: They want to still live in this fantasy land that
Speaker 1: they're the normal ones. And by the way, airplanes still
Speaker 1: require it. Cabs ubers any uber anywhere in the country.
Speaker 1: If you're listening to this in Nebraska right now, if
Speaker 1: you're listening is wherever you are, UBER still requires you
Speaker 1: to mask up. Why, Yeah, yeah, it makes no sense,
Speaker 1: and especially you know in situations like airplanes. Again, yeah,
Speaker 1: we all wear our masks, you know, sitting an into
Speaker 1: part on airplanes, and then we all take off our
Speaker 1: masks to eat and drink because that somehow makes sense,
Speaker 1: and then put the masks right back on because you know,
Speaker 1: the aerosols we just we just spit all over the place.
Speaker 1: Aren't going to affect each other. None of it makes sense.
Speaker 1: None of it's made sense for a long time. And
Speaker 1: I have to say that, Like in the winter and
Speaker 1: in the fall and last I made my kids mask
Speaker 1: outside because I didn't want to get yelled at by anybody.
Speaker 1: I didn't. I didn't want to get it into altercation
Speaker 1: on the street while I'm with my children. But now
Speaker 1: I'm like, bring it, bring it on, let's let's let's
Speaker 1: have a fight in June twenty twenty one about masking
Speaker 1: on the street because I'm not having it anymore. I
Speaker 1: couldn't agree with you more. And I'm I'm starting to
Speaker 1: get to the point now where you know, my my
Speaker 1: local grocery store, because I like, you know, the I like,
Speaker 1: you know, fancy coconut waters and things like that. You know,
Speaker 1: So I go into a grocery store. There's two that
Speaker 1: but but but they both actually those kind of more
Speaker 1: standard grocery store and the more sort of health food
Speaker 1: you know, vegan friendly alternative grocery store I go to.
Speaker 1: They both require masks, and I mean, I don't want
Speaker 1: to see. What I think is so unfair is that
Speaker 1: the way that they always move around the discussion, so
Speaker 1: you can never get accountability. Like if I go in
Speaker 1: there without a mask on and and somebody tells me
Speaker 1: and I cause a problem, you know that I'll be
Speaker 1: dragged if I like, bring this to social media. But
Speaker 1: people saying it's not the fault of the employees. I'm like, well,
Speaker 1: whose fault is it? Like, you know, show me the
Speaker 1: person making the decision, right, Yeah, And I think a
Speaker 1: lot of it has this kind of you know, just
Speaker 1: taking the mask got off and waiting for somebody to
Speaker 1: say something to you, because that's the only way we
Speaker 1: really get out of this. I think so many people. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, we started this conversation with how many people
Speaker 1: are just have anxiety about removing their masks and how
Speaker 1: many people are afraid. But I also think there's some
Speaker 1: large subset of people who are just following the crowd
Speaker 1: and they don't want to stick out, and they don't
Speaker 1: want to have an argument. They don't want anybody to say, hey,
Speaker 1: why aren't you wearing your mask, and so they're wearing it.
Speaker 1: So those of us who are open to having the
Speaker 1: conversation and open to having the argument, we should lead
Speaker 1: the way on this. Speaking to Carol Markowitz, she's got
Speaker 1: a great piece in the New York Post, the editorial
Speaker 1: page in the New York Post, and she talks about
Speaker 1: what it was like taking your son to a party
Speaker 1: outside roller skating and sure enough, you have to wear
Speaker 1: a mask or in the rink, you have to wear
Speaker 1: a mask, yeah, which is completely bonkers. But you know, Carol,
Speaker 1: I you know, I have to say that as as
Speaker 1: far as I'm concerned, there needs to be a repudiation
Speaker 1: of Fauciism. And this is what this is why, because
Speaker 1: I've had people say, oh, you're too upset about this
Speaker 1: or something I said, and I'm like, I don't think
Speaker 1: I'm upset enough. Actually, because we're while while the reductions
Speaker 1: are happening, and people who live in Florida are like,
Speaker 1: oh great, um, I was just in Miami. There are
Speaker 1: still plenty of places that do the whole the you know,
Speaker 1: the mask theater of you gotta wear it when you
Speaker 1: go to the hostess stand in the restaurant, but then
Speaker 1: you can take it like there. It is not a
Speaker 1: mask free zone. People are are wrong when they say
Speaker 1: that it is actually still and we have to repudiate
Speaker 1: that this. There are a few things it did not work,
Speaker 1: and this is still considered a controversial thing to say,
Speaker 1: but mask mandates, mask policies did not work anywhere near
Speaker 1: as advertised. That's one part of this. And the second
Speaker 1: part of this is that you know, they they've just
Speaker 1: begun to begun to see and we've talked about before
Speaker 1: natural immunity and how this doesn't really ever get discussed.
Speaker 1: The Cleveland Clinic, not right wing crazydoc dot com. The
Speaker 1: Cleveland Clinic just did a study of over fifty thousand
Speaker 1: people and sure enough, those who are vaccinated are vaccinated
Speaker 1: versus those who are have natural immunity, same level of
Speaker 1: protection for them. What a shot. And this is another
Speaker 1: fight we need to have. It's not over. Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: you know I have to My column in Today's New
Speaker 1: York Post is about New Yorker's please take off your masks.
Speaker 1: But I had another one two days ago on Monday,
Speaker 1: where I talked about how we must confront where Fauchi
Speaker 1: went wrong. He has to answer questions. We lived under
Speaker 1: his insane guidance for fifteen months and we did really
Speaker 1: crazy things over and over again, and we need him
Speaker 1: to answer questions. And yet we have this media who's
Speaker 1: asking him like, Wow, how are you so amazing? And
Speaker 1: that's you know, that's what we get from our press.
Speaker 1: But we really need some answers. And one of the
Speaker 1: things I need answered from him is he did not
Speaker 1: think that the masks could contain the virus because the
Speaker 1: virus is too small, and he was talking about medical
Speaker 1: masks at the time, and then we all moved collectively
Speaker 1: to cloth masks. So did the virus grow is without
Speaker 1: how the cloth masks were able to contain it according
Speaker 1: to his you know calculations. I want to hear it
Speaker 1: from him. I don't want to hear it from amateur
Speaker 1: you know doctors on Twitter. I want doctor Fautre to
Speaker 1: answer what changed his mind on masks specifically. It's just
Speaker 1: it's something that there will be so much of a
Speaker 1: of a fight over because it did become a cultural
Speaker 1: and political symbol, as we all now know. It did
Speaker 1: become a sign of Democrat tribal allegiance and anti trumpism
Speaker 1: and all these things. And when you add all that together,
Speaker 1: that I mean it is it is my belief that
Speaker 1: mask wearing as people did it in this country, which is,
Speaker 1: you know, put a cloth mask on, take it off sometimes, yes,
Speaker 1: times know, whatever, touching all the time had zero appreciable
Speaker 1: effect whatsoever on the spread of COVID. That is my
Speaker 1: honest belief. And it has been really all along. Although
Speaker 1: I was open in the beginning to okay, maybe like
Speaker 1: maybe this will actually really work the whay we're told
Speaker 1: and if we let this go, for everybody who's like, Buck,
Speaker 1: why are you still on this, You're going to be
Speaker 1: wearing masks on planes for the next two or three
Speaker 1: years minimum, folks at least. Yeah, because they must have
Speaker 1: places where it still goes on to perpetuate this fantasy
Speaker 1: that what they did was worthwhile. Right, absolutely right, And
Speaker 1: I think that, you know, I don't understand the wanting
Speaker 1: to not talk about this anymore, like or just saying like, Okay,
Speaker 1: it's over, forget it, Like I can't forget it. I
Speaker 1: can't forget the fact that my five year old today
Speaker 1: is still in school masks my kid. You know, I
Speaker 1: have three kids eleven, eight, and five. They're all masked
Speaker 1: in school. They're all masked at recess. And it's crazy.
Speaker 1: And we continue to do this, and I have no
Speaker 1: faith that we won't continue to do this in the fall.
Speaker 1: Where do you think where do you think we should
Speaker 1: we should draw the line on restaurants here, Carol, because
Speaker 1: there are some places that yeah, there are some places
Speaker 1: that are doing this separate on the honor system based
Speaker 1: on vaccine passports, but they're actually not legally allowed to
Speaker 1: demand but they're kind of like intimidating people into self
Speaker 1: segregating by vax status in restaurants here in New York.
Speaker 1: I mean, I mean, I'm just telling everybody. I may
Speaker 1: end up causing a scene somewhere, like I might be
Speaker 1: some like right wing talk radio host goes viral because
Speaker 1: I'm going to lose my mind on these people, and
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say who's in charge. I want the manager,
Speaker 1: like I want the owner. I want to know who's
Speaker 1: actually making this decision, right right. It's also amazing, I'll
Speaker 1: Appundon on Twitter pointed this out. But they're putting all
Speaker 1: the unvaccinated people together in one space, and a lot
Speaker 1: of places like here's the vaccinated area, and here's the
Speaker 1: unvaccinated area, and all the unvaccinated people are sitting together,
Speaker 1: which is riscuer than just Prinson reading them around. Um, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know, and I don't I also don't know
Speaker 1: how they're going to enforce this, or how they're going
Speaker 1: to what about people who can't get the vaccine or
Speaker 1: you know, um, just for all kinds of medical reasons.
Speaker 1: Are they just never going to be allowed to go
Speaker 1: to restaurants again? Um? What about the fact that it
Speaker 1: is like the most easily forged piece of paper in
Speaker 1: the world. This vaccine card that they gave us with
Speaker 1: our you know, the name of the the vaccine on
Speaker 1: it is, it's it's ridiculously easy to forge. I just
Speaker 1: I have no faith in this like insane system. I
Speaker 1: think we need to drop it as soon as possible.
Speaker 1: Carol Mark, what's everybody? Go check out her latest in
Speaker 1: the New York Post. She's been one of the very
Speaker 1: There's been like a handful of as Carol, and I
Speaker 1: got to say, and I gave you real, real props,
Speaker 1: real high five on this. There's the pressure to even
Speaker 1: just bend the knee a little bit on this stuff. Well, yeah, masks,
Speaker 1: aren't that big a deal even if I'm a like
Speaker 1: you know and and and you know, oh, well, do
Speaker 1: kids really need to be in school? Zoom? Schools just
Speaker 1: as good. There were so many plays and you held
Speaker 1: the line, you stayed strong on it. So you deserve
Speaker 1: a lot of praise for that. Thank you, and thanks
Speaker 1: for coming on. We'll talk to you soon. Thanks so much.
Speaker 1: It's about seven percent of people say, you know, only
Speaker 1: if needed, and thirteen percent of people say absolutely not.
Speaker 1: What holds the thirteen percent back it's really four main
Speaker 1: reasons up. Some of it's just logistics. I don't want
Speaker 1: to take the time off. I think there's really going
Speaker 1: to be costs, even if you say there's not. Another
Speaker 1: reason is safety. It was rushed. I think this is
Speaker 1: going too fast. They would actually be more convinced if
Speaker 1: there was full approval. There's a group of people who
Speaker 1: say there's enough other people getting it, I don't need
Speaker 1: to get it. And then and then finally, the politicalization
Speaker 1: of this. You know, like we've talked about with so
Speaker 1: many other issues, it's affected vaccines. So ninety percent of
Speaker 1: Democrats have either received this or say they will, where
Speaker 1: it's about fifty percent of Republicans. So that's really broken
Speaker 1: down quite significantly across political lines. What exactly is the
Speaker 1: reason that this CNN doctor leaves off natural immunity for
Speaker 1: the reasons people would get would refuse vaccination. I'm just wondering.
Speaker 1: He's a doctor, he must know that there are a
Speaker 1: lot of people out there for whom that's the reason
Speaker 1: they don't want to get vaccinated, because it is it
Speaker 1: is probably pointless. And certainly this this is near and
Speaker 1: dear to me because I have very much as you
Speaker 1: know I had to miss a week of the show,
Speaker 1: which I always I hated doing, but I had no choice.
Speaker 1: I was super sick. I had COVID. It was confirmed
Speaker 1: by a test, no question, and I had all the symptoms.
Speaker 1: I lost taste, you know, the whole thing. And I'm
Speaker 1: supposed to get vaccinated. Why where's the science on that? Well,
Speaker 1: they say, shut up, get vaccinated. Stop asking so many questions. No,
Speaker 1: I think, I think I want to ask questions. I
Speaker 1: think I'm I'm not done trying to track this down
Speaker 1: and figure out what's going on. And sure enough, you're
Speaker 1: not going to a lot of talk about this undo
Speaker 1: many channels. But the Cleveland Clinic, which is a very reputable,
Speaker 1: highly esteemed medical institution, the Cleveland Clinic studied this is
Speaker 1: this is from the Fox affiliate in I believe in
Speaker 1: Cleveland studied the Yeah, it is in Cleveland. In fact,
Speaker 1: it's the COVID nineteen vaccination among people caught the virus.
Speaker 1: In those who haven't, the study finds that anyone who
Speaker 1: previously tested positive for a Star's cove to infection did
Speaker 1: not get additional benefit from the vaccine, which suggests the
Speaker 1: vaccine should be prioritized to people who haven't gotten the infection.
Speaker 1: The clinic says this research provides insight into how the
Speaker 1: immune system protects the body once a COVID nineteen infection
Speaker 1: is confirmed. During the study that was conducted on fifty
Speaker 1: two thousand, two hundred and thirty eight employees in the
Speaker 1: Cleveland clinic, the clinic says not a single incidence of
Speaker 1: stars cove to infection was observed in previously infected participants
Speaker 1: with or without vaccination. The clinic still recommends anyone who
Speaker 1: can get the vaccine should Why Okay, they can tell
Speaker 1: you that it's probably not going to you know, it's
Speaker 1: it's not going to hurt you, is what they'll say, right,
Speaker 1: Why not? They have a why not attitude? But my
Speaker 1: attitude is why give me a Why Why should I
Speaker 1: go make an appointment get a shot that I don't need?
Speaker 1: Does anyone have an explanation for this? They do not.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I'm sick of do this because we say so,
Speaker 1: we have lab coats, or we're the media, and we
Speaker 1: have friends who have lab coats who come on who
Speaker 1: say things and they don't know what the heck they're
Speaker 1: talking about. They don't have these answers. In fact, here
Speaker 1: fifty two thousand employees of plus employees of the Cleveland clinic,
Speaker 1: not a ingle incidence of COVID infection among the previously
Speaker 1: infected with or without vaccination. Doesn't seem to matter. You
Speaker 1: were infected, You're good. That's what this is telling you.
Speaker 1: And Fernauer says, Oh, we don't know how long natural
Speaker 1: immunity lasts. Guess what, we don't know how long vaccine
Speaker 1: immunity lasts. So, I mean, at what point is it
Speaker 1: just observed? At what point is it too much? This
Speaker 1: is why, you know, all of this fauciism, all of
Speaker 1: this belief in the infallibility of these experts, has been
Speaker 1: a disaster. It's been a disaster all along. These people
Speaker 1: have been making it up. They do not have answers
Speaker 1: they pretend to have. Why is it that I've been
Speaker 1: telling you, I've been talking to you about natural immunity
Speaker 1: for how many months now as an issue that deserves
Speaker 1: so much more attension. They just suppress it. Shut up,
Speaker 1: get the shot, shut up, get the shots. There are
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty million people in this country who
Speaker 1: have had COVID. A lot of them I know, have
Speaker 1: gotten shots. But and that's an estimate, of course, one
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty million. But how many people out there
Speaker 1: fifty percent have gotten the shot? How many people haven't
Speaker 1: gotten the shot but have immunity. Do they even try
Speaker 1: to get that number for you, No, they don't. They
Speaker 1: just they just go go worship at Fauci's altar some more.
Speaker 1: That's what the media tells you. I know, you should
Speaker 1: be able to share your thoughts online without being shadow
Speaker 1: band censored, suppressed, and also without being tracked all the
Speaker 1: time with everything you're doing. But that's not the reality
Speaker 1: of the Internet today. As you know, the big tech
Speaker 1: machines are always following your every move online and they're
Speaker 1: often shutting you down and censoring you. It's time you
Speaker 1: fight back against big tech with Express VPN, take back
Speaker 1: control of your privacy and your security. When you use
Speaker 1: the Express VPN app on your computer or phone, you
Speaker 1: anonymize much of your online presence by hiding your IP address.
Speaker 1: That makes your activity much more difficult to trace and
Speaker 1: sell the advertisers. Express VPN encrypts one of your network
Speaker 1: data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cyber criminals. Revoke
Speaker 1: Big text right to your data today, Secure your Internet
Speaker 1: with a VPN I trust for online protection. Visit Express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slash buck that's Express vpn dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck. To get three extra months free with my
Speaker 1: exclusive link. Go to Express vpn dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: right now to learn more. I said to Peter, at
Speaker 1: some point she may go to the border. I don't
Speaker 1: have any trips to prevfore you or predict or timeline
Speaker 1: for that. But what I would reiterate is that her
Speaker 1: assignment was to work with countries and leaders in the
Speaker 1: Northern Triangle to address root causes, address corruption. I'm sure
Speaker 1: we're working together to address humanitarian concerns. I will say
Speaker 1: we're not taking advice from former President Trump or most
Speaker 1: of their publicans who are criticizing us on this, given
Speaker 1: they were all sitting there. Well, we created this problem
Speaker 1: we walked into both at the border and with the
Speaker 1: movement of migration that has been growing over the last year.
Speaker 1: Utter bullcrap. You know it, I know it. Anybody who's
Speaker 1: honest knows it. But this is what you get from
Speaker 1: this White House. Now, Yeah, the problem at the border
Speaker 1: was created while Trump was in office. Really, no, there
Speaker 1: was a surge. Trump deal with it. It went away,
Speaker 1: and then the Democrats came in. They removed the solution
Speaker 1: that Trump and the Trump administration put into place, and
Speaker 1: then the flood started again. Okay, it's like there was
Speaker 1: a crack in the damn. Trump said, whoa, there's a
Speaker 1: crack in the damn. Hey, how do we fix this?
Speaker 1: And then they plugged it. They plugged the hole, and
Speaker 1: then the Democrats came over and said, whoa, what's with
Speaker 1: this plug in the hole? Let's open it up. They
Speaker 1: open up and say, oh, look at the crack in
Speaker 1: the damn. Trump Trump did this. It's exactly what's happened
Speaker 1: at our border. It's just it's absurd, folks, It is absurd. Anyway.
Speaker 1: I just I had to play that for you from
Speaker 1: Jen Jen Saki. You know, h man, it's just the lies,
Speaker 1: so many lies. But then there's the exaggerations. Senator klobaschar
Speaker 1: deeply unimpressive and nasty woman. From what I understand, Senator
Speaker 1: Kloba said this recently about the January sixth insurrection Play nine.
Speaker 1: The Chief of Staff to the Head of the Army
Speaker 1: actually said, in one of our many interviews that we
Speaker 1: did for this report, said, you know, this is not
Speaker 1: like a pickup game. This situation where they just suddenly
Speaker 1: all come together and can do it. This was like
Speaker 1: the super Bowl of domestic terrorism, and there should have
Speaker 1: been planning ahead the super Bowl of domestic terrorism. So
Speaker 1: I just want to be clear. The super Bowl would
Speaker 1: be the absolute peak of something, right. So so the
Speaker 1: January sixth insurrection, in which not a single government official
Speaker 1: or targeted person was killed. Only person killed was a protester,
Speaker 1: actually a rioter, Ashley Babbott, shot in the neck, unarmed
Speaker 1: through a door by a member of Capitol Police who
Speaker 1: didn't even didn't give any warrants, pulled his gun and
Speaker 1: shot on the neck. Okay, um, yeah, we're just supposed
Speaker 1: to accept that. I guess you know that. Imagine that
Speaker 1: that happened with somebody trying to burn down the police
Speaker 1: priesting from Minneapolis on behalf of BLM. If a Coppet
Speaker 1: shot a BLM rioter in the neck, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: person person be a martyr. They would be naming athletics
Speaker 1: stadiums after that person. They'd be. They'd be naming streets
Speaker 1: all across America. There'd be there'd be murals noticing quite
Speaker 1: a difference here in the in the approach. Right, we
Speaker 1: see this, but calling the super Bowl of terrorism really
Speaker 1: more more so than than Timothy McVeigh, more so than
Speaker 1: all the ISIS inspired mass shooters and mass murderers on
Speaker 1: US soil in recent years. Really, the super Bowl of
Speaker 1: mass terrorism was January of domestic terrorism, rather was January six. Wow, Okay,
Speaker 1: what do they really wants to do about this? Let's
Speaker 1: just for the purposes of discussion. What would make democrats happy?
Speaker 1: I wasn't at the insurrection. You weren't at the insurrection.
Speaker 1: I had nothing to do with it. You had nothing
Speaker 1: to do with it. Well, what is it gonna make
Speaker 1: democrats happy? When will they just stop their stop their
Speaker 1: whining and crying about this? Okay, we've we had an impeachment,
Speaker 1: We've heard about it a million times. Everybody on the
Speaker 1: right who knows anything right away knew that it was
Speaker 1: a just from a a pure optics perspective, never mind
Speaker 1: also a rule of law perspective, a disastrous and stupid thing.
Speaker 1: And we've said so all along. Uh, what do they
Speaker 1: want us to do? When do we stop hearing about this?
Speaker 1: I don't support it now, I never supported it. I
Speaker 1: never would have thought it was a good idea of
Speaker 1: condemned it. Everyone else I respect on the right has
Speaker 1: done the same. Donald Trump has condemned the riot. What
Speaker 1: exactly do they think is going to be achieved here?
Speaker 1: A lot more than just accountability, That's what you have
Speaker 1: to remember. There's this guy who's a former senior FBI vision,
Speaker 1: which the FBI is an institution, And I'm sorry because
Speaker 1: I know they're a good patriotic FBI agents who listen
Speaker 1: to this show and thank you for you know, locking
Speaker 1: up people that commit you know, elder fraud and you
Speaker 1: know an abuse and do a you know, cross state
Speaker 1: child abuse and kidnapping and uh you know all kay,
Speaker 1: you know, go after MS thirteen MS thirteen organized crime
Speaker 1: and cartels and all this. Thank you for all that work. Okay,
Speaker 1: the good work that the FBI does, we appreciate. But
Speaker 1: you know, you don't really hear about that. You know,
Speaker 1: you don't really hear about the FBI chasing down, you know,
Speaker 1: child molesters and finding cartel hitman and dealing, you know,
Speaker 1: bringing down cartel distribution networks that are killing Americans by
Speaker 1: poising them with you know what you what you end
Speaker 1: up hearing about, Unfortunately, are the senior FBI bureaucrats, you know,
Speaker 1: political folks who are always looking to get a pat
Speaker 1: on the head from Nancy Pelosi in the Washington Post.
Speaker 1: That's what you end up hearing. And that's really troubling
Speaker 1: because it undermines, it rightly undermines our confidence in the
Speaker 1: FBI as an institution. Here is among the most lunatic
Speaker 1: people I've ever seen from any wing of the of
Speaker 1: the US government, any part of the US government. This
Speaker 1: former assistant you know, deputy assistant director or something. It's
Speaker 1: you know, he's maybe a top ten guy or top
Speaker 1: five guy or something the FBI. I don't even remember.
Speaker 1: But Frank Figliuzzi, this guy's nuts. But there's a reason
Speaker 1: they keep putting him on MSNBC night after night to
Speaker 1: look into the camera and say shockingly stupid things that
Speaker 1: are also though concerning things, because the audience that hears
Speaker 1: it believes that this guy's not crazy. They think he
Speaker 1: is a reputable expert and somebody who should be listened to.
Speaker 1: He's going on TV and he is, well, you can
Speaker 1: hear for yourself. Play three look or Chris Ray testified
Speaker 1: publicly on the Hill that what happened on January sixth
Speaker 1: is domestic terrorism. What have we learned from our experience
Speaker 1: with international terrorism? In order to address that problem? Arresting
Speaker 1: low level operatives is merely a speedbuck, not a roadblock.
Speaker 1: In order to really tackle terrorism, and this time domestically,
Speaker 1: you've got to attack and dismantle the command and control
Speaker 1: element of a terrorist group. And unfortunately, and I know
Speaker 1: this is painful to hear, that may mean people sitting
Speaker 1: in Congress right now, people in and around be former president.
Speaker 1: That's how you do this. Otherwise, recruitment, inciting, and cult
Speaker 1: like leadership continues to recruit people to violence. This guy
Speaker 1: is a lunatic, I mean, and really is is doing
Speaker 1: considerable harm to the country that he supposedly spent his
Speaker 1: life defending in the FBI doing real harm, oh, the
Speaker 1: command and control network. So under this framework he's just describe,
Speaker 1: there are Republican members of Congress who are like the
Speaker 1: bin Laden of the January sixth insurrection. This is what
Speaker 1: he's saying. They're like the Alaki of the January sixth insurrection.
Speaker 1: We just need to prove it. What a horrifying and
Speaker 1: clearly insane thing for a person to be going on
Speaker 1: TV saying, remember this guy is. He's not just some
Speaker 1: crazy journo who you know, only only hangs out with
Speaker 1: left wing loons who watch too much MSNBC who live
Speaker 1: in Brooklyn or something. This is a guy who was
Speaker 1: a former senior FBI official, and he says this kind
Speaker 1: of crazy stuff, but he feeds into what the left,
Speaker 1: what the Democrats want to hear, which is that the
Speaker 1: other side, the Republican Party, is basically a white nationalist
Speaker 1: evil party run by terrorists who want to destroy the country. Comma. Therefore,
Speaker 1: any level of viciousness, any level of authoritarianism, any level
Speaker 1: of crushing the other side is inherently justified, don't Isn't
Speaker 1: that so convenient? Isn't that so convenient? There's no need
Speaker 1: to think about decency, never mind fair play or the
Speaker 1: rule of law when dealing with Republicans, because they're the
Speaker 1: insurrection party. Now, even they're elected members of Congress, even
Speaker 1: the former president's inner circle, they're the equivalent of domestic
Speaker 1: terrorist masterminds. This is what this psychopath is saying on
Speaker 1: national TV, and the audience that's hearing it. I can
Speaker 1: tell you this watching MSNBC. They're not very smart, but
Speaker 1: they're emotionally disturbed, but a lot of them have authorities.
Speaker 1: Don't of them have ability to really throw their weight around.
Speaker 1: They think, Yeah, this guy figle Utcie, he's making a
Speaker 1: lot of sense. We do have to get the terrorist
Speaker 1: masterminds sitting in Congress. We got our friend Alan West
Speaker 1: with us now. He is the chairman of the Texas
Speaker 1: State GOP, also a former lieutenant colonel in the United
Speaker 1: States Military. Chairman West, great to have you. Gonna be
Speaker 1: with you, Buck, I'm on the road and down to
Speaker 1: San Antonio. I hear great things about that city, you know.
Speaker 1: I hear it's really up and coming. It's been been
Speaker 1: on my radar for a while. Now I gotta go
Speaker 1: check it out myself. Tell me this, what do you
Speaker 1: make of the end results here of the Vice President's
Speaker 1: tripped down to Central America when it comes to doing
Speaker 1: something about our border. I think it was an utter
Speaker 1: failure that you actually had the president of the Tatemala
Speaker 1: scolding the Vice President of the United States America and
Speaker 1: undermining this whole line about that they're going down there.
Speaker 1: She went down there to get to the root causes
Speaker 1: of the crisis that we have on a border here.
Speaker 1: He once again reiterated just the same as the leadership
Speaker 1: of Mexico reiterated that they're a problem. They're the reason
Speaker 1: why we see what's baught on by them changing the
Speaker 1: policy that we're very successful. Of the Trump administration, it
Speaker 1: seems like they're doing everything to try to avoid actually
Speaker 1: facing up to what has caused the issues at the border.
Speaker 1: There's this there's this fixation. Chairman west On Root causes
Speaker 1: as if what will stop the almost two hundred thousand
Speaker 1: illegal migrants coming into the country a month between now
Speaker 1: and the end of the year is anti corruption coordination
Speaker 1: with our state Department and Guatemala and an infusion of
Speaker 1: cash to their government. It's just this is unseerious stuff,
Speaker 1: isn't it. Yeah, it's totally uncostable. And for Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: to go down there and try to say that it's
Speaker 1: because of the weather that people are coming here, well,
Speaker 1: the weather was bringing myself maybe the same during the
Speaker 1: Trump administration. It's all about the policies. But really and truthfully,
Speaker 1: I think we have to come to the understanding is
Speaker 1: that they don't care about what is happening at the
Speaker 1: border because the bottom line is they are getting exactly
Speaker 1: what they wanted to have what the progressive socialists left
Speaker 1: wanted to have, which is an open borders policy, and
Speaker 1: that's exactly what they have implemented by executive border. So
Speaker 1: they're happy to flood the state of Texas with hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of illegal immigrants and tie up our border
Speaker 1: patrol agents, tie the hands of the ICE agents so
Speaker 1: that they can't deport people. Do you think that we're
Speaker 1: getting to a point now where the American people are
Speaker 1: seeing in large enough numbers, I mean enough Americans are
Speaker 1: seeing that the Democrats just always speak out of both
Speaker 1: sides of their mouth on immigration and really don't want
Speaker 1: the flow to stop. They don't want border security because
Speaker 1: I can't imagine observing what's really going on. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know you're down in Texas and watching this issue
Speaker 1: very closely, but I can't imagine even a pretty casual
Speaker 1: observer of the situation at the border and the numbers
Speaker 1: coming away thinking anything other than this must be not
Speaker 1: a bug, but a feature, if you will, of their
Speaker 1: immigration desires. You're absolutely right. This is a pillar of
Speaker 1: their program. This is intentional in every way, shape, form,
Speaker 1: and fashion. And if the rest of the country knew
Speaker 1: exactly what has gone on in some of these ranches
Speaker 1: and some of these areas. You talk to the mayors,
Speaker 1: you folid in Texas and what they're having to do
Speaker 1: to help us secure their schools, and the fact that
Speaker 1: we have illegal immigrants trying to carjack kids and the
Speaker 1: parking lots of schools. You know, this is this is
Speaker 1: just unbelievable that people have to live in this state
Speaker 1: of terror. And what you are finding is that people
Speaker 1: in the state of Texas along the Royal Grand Valley
Speaker 1: down to the county level, they're going to take this
Speaker 1: situation under under control of themselves. And I think it's
Speaker 1: so important that the state of Texas steps up and
Speaker 1: resolves this situation and stop sitting around and waiting for
Speaker 1: the federal government because Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, they're doing
Speaker 1: exactly what the left wants them to do. Treman West,
Speaker 1: one of the one of the things that I keep
Speaker 1: telling the audience is that if you were to ask,
Speaker 1: because I've done this before with Democrats, what is the
Speaker 1: downside of illegal immigration? What are some of the reasons
Speaker 1: that it is a problem that needs to be fixed,
Speaker 1: not something that just needs to be managed? And allowed.
Speaker 1: They sputter and they get angry and they say, oh,
Speaker 1: that's xenophobic, or you know that, there's never really an
Speaker 1: answer from Democrats. I just want to pose to you,
Speaker 1: what are some of the downsides that people should be
Speaker 1: aware of, whether it's in Texas or anywhere in the
Speaker 1: country that's being affected by this of illegal immigration at
Speaker 1: the levels we're seeing at our southern border. Yeah, absolutely right.
Speaker 1: I think when you look at the flow Upconneil and
Speaker 1: the OPR crisis, so I mean there's having a harmful
Speaker 1: effect on drug uses in Washon. The DC just recently
Speaker 1: saw the seizure of enough Fincinnil that killed twenty one
Speaker 1: million Americans, hundreds of millions of dollars, weapons, all types
Speaker 1: of the Cineloa drug cartail. It's a national security issue, Buck,
Speaker 1: We've had people from over one hundred and forty different
Speaker 1: countries being apprehended crossing our southern border. It's an education
Speaker 1: issue because people are going to our schools, as they say,
Speaker 1: healthcare issue at a time when we're trying to turn
Speaker 1: the corner with COVID nineteen that we're allowing people to
Speaker 1: come in here, we're not doing the appropriate medical screening
Speaker 1: and even if we do know that they're testing positive,
Speaker 1: we're still releasing them out. We have a safety and
Speaker 1: security and local criminality issue that you can talk to
Speaker 1: anyone along the border about that. So it is a
Speaker 1: plethora of adverse, second third, fourth order effects on here
Speaker 1: in the state of Texas and further internally into the
Speaker 1: United States of American. Speaking to Chairman Alan West of
Speaker 1: the Texas State g OP, also a former lieutenant colonel
Speaker 1: in the United States Military and a former member of Congress,
Speaker 1: Chairman West just wondering, you know, and I wondered, I'm
Speaker 1: hearing some things that you may have some thoughts about
Speaker 1: running for high office again. What can you what can
Speaker 1: you tell us about that? Well, you know, when you
Speaker 1: look at where we are in Texas, Texas is the
Speaker 1: lynch and to hold the constitutional Republican we call American
Speaker 1: together and this is the front lines. And a lot
Speaker 1: of people have asked me to consider getting back into
Speaker 1: elected office. I have not been an elected office in
Speaker 1: a decade, and so we have resigned from being the
Speaker 1: chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. We did that
Speaker 1: last Friday, effective the level of July, so that we
Speaker 1: can look at you know, continuing to serve this great nation,
Speaker 1: our God and to say the Texas and an elected position.
Speaker 1: So stand by for an announcement to be forthcoming Chairman West. Everybody,
Speaker 1: Alan West. Great to have you on, sir. We look
Speaker 1: forward to talking to you more about what you got planned.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. I look forward to share it
Speaker 1: with you up. Lawsuit alleges Dante Wright carjacked and assaulted
Speaker 1: a man three weeks before his death. Just as a
Speaker 1: reminder for everybody, Dante Wright was the man who was
Speaker 1: shot by an officer in what seems to be a
Speaker 1: case of negligent homicide. But the officer thought she was
Speaker 1: pulling a taser, she shot Dante Right. This is a
Speaker 1: lawsuit now that looks at well, what did Dante Right
Speaker 1: do before his death? There are people that want money
Speaker 1: from his estate, which has gotten a lot of money
Speaker 1: from the state because of a shooting. Let's bring in
Speaker 1: our friend here, John Cardillo, former NYPD officer and conservative commentator,
Speaker 1: to weigh in on this. John. Always great to have you.
Speaker 1: Great to be with you, Buck. I think this is
Speaker 1: really interesting, John, because here we see and it's going
Speaker 1: into the court record. It's a civil suit, but a
Speaker 1: civil suit against the estate of Dante Wright, who is
Speaker 1: going to as we don't always going to end up
Speaker 1: getting you know, the family will end up getting a huge,
Speaker 1: you know, millions and millions of dollars settlement, because that's
Speaker 1: what tends to happen in these cases of police What
Speaker 1: does seem to be in you and I've talked about
Speaker 1: actual police misconduct in this case, the woman thought she
Speaker 1: pulled her taser, she pulled the gun, she shot the guy,
Speaker 1: But that doesn't prevent his estate for being from being
Speaker 1: liable for shooting somebody just weeks before his death, carjacking
Speaker 1: him and basically being responsible, you know, in a civil sense,
Speaker 1: for being a career criminal and a bad guy. Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, we know his history. He had a
Speaker 1: he had a violent criminal history. He was or is
Speaker 1: this thing that looked You and I have analyzed this
Speaker 1: case on air off air, I've done that with other
Speaker 1: people looked bad for the cops. Like you said, I
Speaker 1: think that fact pattern is going to stand true even
Speaker 1: even under evidentiary scrutiny and testimony in court. She thought
Speaker 1: she was pulling a taser, she pulled a gun, thought
Speaker 1: it was a non lethal trigger. She was pulling it
Speaker 1: was lethal issue number one. I agree with you one
Speaker 1: hundred percent, book, his family's going to get big money.
Speaker 1: But the irony here is that we may never have
Speaker 1: known about his prior history of shooting people had his
Speaker 1: family not been in a position to get this mega money,
Speaker 1: these millions, because they were uncollectable prior to that. Right,
Speaker 1: he didn't have money, so these people may never have sued,
Speaker 1: and have they not sued, we wouldn't know about his
Speaker 1: violent criminal history. So in a really aut an ironic way,
Speaker 1: the improper actions of that female police officer or sergeant
Speaker 1: I think she was, is what led to us finding
Speaker 1: out about his background. Because now people saw some dollars
Speaker 1: signs and today this guy shot me. Let me collect
Speaker 1: a few bucks. I just don't. I also think that
Speaker 1: it goes to something that we've discussed before, John, which
Speaker 1: is that every individual incident that the BLM movement wants
Speaker 1: to put forward as something that we all have to
Speaker 1: spend time as a nation talking about a national conversation
Speaker 1: about police brutality and all this, And yes, the facts
Speaker 1: of that incident matter, but that doesn't then mean that
Speaker 1: they can create a true cult of martyrdom around these
Speaker 1: individuals as though their civil rights heroes. I mean, there
Speaker 1: are murals of George Floyd as though he's a great guy. Now,
Speaker 1: you know, people can say, all right, they disagreed with
Speaker 1: the use of force that an officer shown used. And
Speaker 1: obviously now he's got a murder conviction of his record,
Speaker 1: he's facing a long stretch in prison. But that's different
Speaker 1: from saying George Floyd is somebody who our kids should
Speaker 1: learn in schools is a hero, or that they should
Speaker 1: walk by murals of him. And the same thing with
Speaker 1: Dante Wright. I'm sorry, but you know is this is
Speaker 1: now an active court case. These are the facts, and
Speaker 1: his history matters. Listen, if that stands true for most
Speaker 1: of the martyrs of the Black Lives Matter movement, go
Speaker 1: to Brianna Taylor. You know I travel a lot, buck
Speaker 1: you travel a lot. I don't know how many cars
Speaker 1: I've rented in my life, hundreds, maybe more. But I
Speaker 1: do know a dead body was never found in one
Speaker 1: that I rented for my drug dealing X. I mean,
Speaker 1: and that is an actual thing that occurred in Brianna
Speaker 1: Taylor's life. She rented a vehicle for her X. It
Speaker 1: was a known drug trafficker and a dead body was
Speaker 1: found in the trunk. I mean the heroes that this
Speaker 1: woke movement, the Black Lives Matter movement, the anti Antifa
Speaker 1: movement of chosen would be anti heroes. There would be
Speaker 1: people that children will warned to stay away from at
Speaker 1: any other point in history. But now they're given the
Speaker 1: funerals of heads of states. Their families are given tens
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars before any evidence is presented. That
Speaker 1: was the George Floyd's situation. There was an anecdotal video
Speaker 1: and the family was given twenty seven million dollars. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get in the weeks legally, but
Speaker 1: find me the logic behind that. Right, you've got punitive
Speaker 1: damages compensatory damages. This guy was never going to make
Speaker 1: twenty seven million bucks in his life. Really, that was
Speaker 1: the punitive damage in this case, for a guy who
Speaker 1: was a career criminal who never gave his family anything.
Speaker 1: That was the compensatory damage in this case. So everything
Speaker 1: is really upside down. But I think you raised the
Speaker 1: most important point. We are creating heroes that they're canonizing.
Speaker 1: They're making saints out of people that led horrible, horrible lives.
Speaker 1: That drove them into these interactions with the police. And
Speaker 1: I also think John, it's worth noting. I mean, you were,
Speaker 1: you know, for forever one listening. By the way, I
Speaker 1: was a civilian analyst detailed to the NYPD while a
Speaker 1: CIA intelligence officer. It was a very peculiar arrangement. John
Speaker 1: was actual NYPD with a badge with a gun, arresting
Speaker 1: bad guys. Right. I was doing a very specific thing
Speaker 1: and really just responding to the Director of Intel and
Speaker 1: the commissioner. But so John did the real job. And
Speaker 1: you know, if you had brought a guy in, a
Speaker 1: really bad guy, you brought a cop killer in John, right,
Speaker 1: you arrested him and you have him in custody, and
Speaker 1: you know you decided I'm gonna get even. And you
Speaker 1: know you you broke that guy's kneecaps with your nights
Speaker 1: Get nightstick while he was in custody, and you you know,
Speaker 1: you tuned him up really badly. Uh, you're gonna I mean,
Speaker 1: you're gonna go to prison for that, right, You're gonna
Speaker 1: be held responsible. Nobody would then turn around though, and say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: this guy's this guy's a hero, meaning that the guy
Speaker 1: that you beat on they'd say, well, you shouldn't do
Speaker 1: that to him, But that doesn't make him you know,
Speaker 1: that doesn't make him a civil rights icon. You know
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. It's no, he doesn't look and that's
Speaker 1: a great example. So I don't know if your listeners
Speaker 1: are going to remember about Geez. I don't know. Twenty
Speaker 1: years ago or so, fifteen years ago, there was a
Speaker 1: cop in Justin Volpi who did a pretty horrible thing.
Speaker 1: He sodomized a prisoner with a plunger handle. Because the
Speaker 1: case the Abne Louie m a case exactly right now
Speaker 1: this I went to the Academy with that cop, Justin Volpi.
Speaker 1: He was in my sister company. In the academy, we
Speaker 1: knew this guy shouldn't have been on the street. We
Speaker 1: all expressed reservations, and when Justin Volpi was ultimately arrested
Speaker 1: for that he went to federal prison, every one of
Speaker 1: the cops I know said, good, that was a stain
Speaker 1: on the NYPD people, that weren't it, you know, the
Speaker 1: Police Academy's two thousand people. I just happen to have
Speaker 1: known the guy because he was in my sister company.
Speaker 1: I was in thirty two. He was in thirty three.
Speaker 1: But that being said, we knew and nobody came to
Speaker 1: this cops defense. Nobody said, Oh, well, he's a great son,
Speaker 1: he's a great cousin, he's a nephew, he was a
Speaker 1: high school football star, he was an aspiring guitarist, he
Speaker 1: was an honor student. No, he was a bad guy
Speaker 1: who did a bad thing. Let's get him out of
Speaker 1: our ranks. That's also a real noticeable difference when a
Speaker 1: cop does wrong. Despite all the anecdotal lies, cops that
Speaker 1: get up and go to work every day and do
Speaker 1: the right thing want to see that person prosecuted. They
Speaker 1: want them off the force. They don't want that blowing
Speaker 1: back on them. Morale's bad enough. And that's another really
Speaker 1: important distinction. We don't glorify the bad guys in our ranks.
Speaker 1: We're speaking of John Cardillo, former NYPD and conservative commentator CHNA.
Speaker 1: I gotta get your take on this. I've been talking
Speaker 1: about it. Deblasio is asking for help from the ATF.
Speaker 1: Now this is the this is the newest, you know,
Speaker 1: the newest tactic of distraction. Oh, I need defends to
Speaker 1: come in and do a bunch of gun seizures. That's
Speaker 1: going to stop the crime surge in New York and
Speaker 1: is ignoring the eighteen hundred offers cut out of the
Speaker 1: forest by defund the police pandering. Yeah, oh yeah, and
Speaker 1: I'll take it one step further. He's asking the ATF
Speaker 1: Task Force to come in and do the exact job
Speaker 1: that precinct level anti crime and citywide street crime did
Speaker 1: that was eliminated. Those units were disbanded by the NYPD
Speaker 1: for being too proactive, and so he knows it works.
Speaker 1: They were two of the most effective units in the
Speaker 1: history of the NYPD's street crime covered the entire city,
Speaker 1: and an anti crime did the same job at the
Speaker 1: precinct level. They got to know it a bit more microscopically.
Speaker 1: I worked on that team for a bit. Outstanding cops.
Speaker 1: They did outstanding work. They saved lives. Also important to
Speaker 1: notebuck stop question and frisk. It's not stopping chrisk. Stop
Speaker 1: question and frisk. This infuriates me. A liberal judge named
Speaker 1: shursheinlandined stop question and frisk unconstitutional. Shortly thereafter, she resigned
Speaker 1: from the bench. Why because she knew herd decision was
Speaker 1: not valid. Stop questioning frisk was established under Terry v.
Speaker 1: Ohio in nineteen sixty four, the United States Supreme Court
Speaker 1: set followed properly, it is absolutely constitutional. People are dying
Speaker 1: in New York City because the Deblasio administration won't simply
Speaker 1: go to the Appellate Division and appeal Judge Sheinlan is
Speaker 1: not even on the bench anymore, is ruling. If they did,
Speaker 1: invoking Terry v. Ohio sixty four, stop questioning frisk could
Speaker 1: be back in place. Bringing back street crime and anti
Speaker 1: crime used the Rudy Giuliani, Michael Bloomberg model, the the
Speaker 1: Rate Kelly model, to Bill Bratton model, to Bernie Carrick model,
Speaker 1: crime will plummet. The Blasio knows it, but he can't
Speaker 1: say it but the NYPD. So he's going to bring
Speaker 1: in the Feds to do the job the NYPD could
Speaker 1: be doing. John Ely got about about forty seconds here
Speaker 1: before we got to jump. But just the belief out
Speaker 1: there with so many people is that stopping frisk was
Speaker 1: it only unconstitutional, but that it didn't work. What's your
Speaker 1: quick your quick response to that absolute best tool I
Speaker 1: ever had in my toolbox going after illegal guns and robberies.
Speaker 1: I mean that pretty much does it all. It's amazing.
Speaker 1: De Blasio. It had had a jihad again, stop question
Speaker 1: and frisk going, and unfortunately, I think that seeped into
Speaker 1: a lot of people's minds and New York City is
Speaker 1: now suffering the consequences of us. Anyway, our friend John
Speaker 1: Cardillo always great to have you on these law enforcement matters. Sir,
Speaker 1: We'll talk to you again soon. Thanks Buck, great to
Speaker 1: talk to you. I think I am sympathetic to teachers
Speaker 1: and educators everywhere who are committed to doing our jobs.
Speaker 1: And our job is to tell the truth. Our job
Speaker 1: is to tell the good and the bad. Our job
Speaker 1: is to tell the light and the darkness. And I
Speaker 1: think that's what students want. And I know I've had
Speaker 1: so many students who've come to my classrooms in colleges
Speaker 1: angry that they did not learn about systemic racism and
Speaker 1: even about slavery during the K through twelve years. Okay,
Speaker 1: I don't believe him, so I'll just start with that.
Speaker 1: I think he's lying. I don't believe that people have
Speaker 1: come up to them and said that they never learned
Speaker 1: about slavery in their K through twelve education in this country.
Speaker 1: I do not believe that, So I'll just start with that.
Speaker 1: They didn't learn about systemic racism. Well, yeah, because systemic
Speaker 1: racism is a politicized ideology of racial Marxism that has
Speaker 1: no solutions and is really just a form of power
Speaker 1: transfer from a conservative, constitutionalist, rule of law based society
Speaker 1: which is based on the individual and individual action and
Speaker 1: a color blind society, to one in which you have
Speaker 1: intersectionality and the constant balancing and rebalancing of racial privileges
Speaker 1: in this country by a left wing racial Marxist elite
Speaker 1: that now effectively controls not only the culture but the
Speaker 1: Democrat Party. Those are the options that we see right now.
Speaker 1: Those are the That's the situation that we face in
Speaker 1: this country. And I think it's interesting that he said
Speaker 1: he's sympathetic. Ibraham Kenedy is one of the most well
Speaker 1: known instructors out there. He gives these speeches. He makes
Speaker 1: a lot of money he goes give speeches about systemic racism.
Speaker 1: I wonder what he thinks about situations like this. A teacher,
Speaker 1: this is the New York Post today at a posh
Speaker 1: New Jersey prep school quits overcritical race theory. I want
Speaker 1: to share some of this with you. An English teacher
Speaker 1: has resigned from a top New Jersey prep school that
Speaker 1: is using critical race theory to create a hostile culture
Speaker 1: of conformity and fear, causing white and male students to
Speaker 1: believe they are oppressors, she said. Dana stengel Plow accused
Speaker 1: the Dwight Englewood School in Bergen County of forcing students
Speaker 1: and faculty to embrace a single set of beliefs, choking
Speaker 1: off free speech in the process. The schools ideology requires
Speaker 1: students to see themselves not as individuals, but as representatives
Speaker 1: of a group, forcing them to adopt the status of
Speaker 1: privilege or victimhood. Stengelplow wrote in her letter to school
Speaker 1: brass As a result, students arrive in my classroom accepting
Speaker 1: this theory as fact. People born with less melanin in
Speaker 1: their skin are oppressors, and people born with more melanin
Speaker 1: in their skin are oppressed. Men are oppressors, women are oppressed,
Speaker 1: and so on. She continued. This is the dominant and
Speaker 1: divisive ideology that is guiding our adolescent students. You know,
Speaker 1: there's so many ways to attack, that's all. A quote
Speaker 1: from this New York Post piece by Dana Kennedy and
Speaker 1: Tamar Lappin there's so much in the way of methods
Speaker 1: of approach to attack the critical race theory as intellectually
Speaker 1: bankrupt because it is. There's so many ways you can
Speaker 1: you can address this. I mean one of them is
Speaker 1: to say, all right, where is the actual racism in
Speaker 1: the system? Now, if we're going to say that disparity
Speaker 1: of outcome is inherently racist when there are racial differences
Speaker 1: when you look at it outcomes, whether it's on you know,
Speaker 1: SAT testing, or on jobs hiring, or on getting mortgage, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, mortgage loans, that that excludes whatever other data
Speaker 1: that we can actually look at and say, hold on,
Speaker 1: maybe it's not racism in this system. Maybe there's something
Speaker 1: else at work, or maybe something else is going on,
Speaker 1: and you know, you can start to look at this
Speaker 1: and say, okay, is it is it sexism that uh,
Speaker 1: you know, our laws against homicide, for example, sexist. Well
Speaker 1: you look at them and say, well, hold on a second.
Speaker 1: I mean men commit a five to ninety of murders
Speaker 1: in the country, so our laws, you know, so do
Speaker 1: you'd ask a whole lot of second, why is that
Speaker 1: going on? Our laws against murder sexist against men? No,
Speaker 1: men are committing more murders. Are the SATs racist because
Speaker 1: Asian Americans, for example, do disproportionately Well, well, I can't
Speaker 1: tell you why that happens. We could have discussions about culture,
Speaker 1: we could have discussions about tradition, we could have discussions
Speaker 1: about a whole lot of things. But I don't think
Speaker 1: it's accurate to just say that the SAT is racist
Speaker 1: because Asian Americans do disproportionately. Well, right, you'd have to
Speaker 1: show me where in the SAT is the racism that
Speaker 1: makes Asians do disproportionately. Well, just looking at results and
Speaker 1: declaring it evil and wrong and a product of racism
Speaker 1: is not intellectually honest. It's not because there are lots
Speaker 1: of things. You can show lots of different situations where
Speaker 1: you look at an outcome, you'd say, well, this is
Speaker 1: you know that this outcome is is disparate among groups,
Speaker 1: and it wouldn't be the result of sexism or racism
Speaker 1: or anything. There are a lot of factors that go
Speaker 1: into it. There are very these are very complicated questions,
Speaker 1: but we're not even allowed to discuss factors. We're just
Speaker 1: told you have a disparate outcome, therefore it must be
Speaker 1: I mean, you could take this too you know, people
Speaker 1: will say they'll they'll say, on any number of issues, um,
Speaker 1: they will point to a disparate outcome as as evidence
Speaker 1: of racism, and you'd say, well, we'll hold on a second.
Speaker 1: You know, is there racism in Major League Baseball because
Speaker 1: you have a disproportionate number of you know, people from
Speaker 1: Latin America, Latino Americans and people from Latin America who
Speaker 1: are top baseball players. I don't think that's the result
Speaker 1: of pro Latin racism. I don't believe that. But you
Speaker 1: look at the disparate outcome, you say, well, clearly there's
Speaker 1: there's a problem here. You know, not enough Asian American
Speaker 1: baseball players, So there's clearly a problem. Right. You see,
Speaker 1: once you start to look at this, once you move
Speaker 1: away from the framework that they always want to use,
Speaker 1: which is just meant to silence you can keep you
Speaker 1: in fear, you can have a more a more clearheaded
Speaker 1: discussion about these very complicated issues. Critical race theory wants
Speaker 1: to shut all of that down, that's the whole point
Speaker 1: of it. I have a different take than you'll hear
Speaker 1: from most conservatives about New York City mayoral candidate Mile Wiley,
Speaker 1: who's something of a national figure as well, because she's
Speaker 1: a frequent legal analyst guest on MSNBC, which, as you know,
Speaker 1: is a far left channel of alleged news. It's really
Speaker 1: just amocrat and socialist and Marxist propaganda package through a
Speaker 1: corporate network. But Maya Wiley is getting a lot of
Speaker 1: attention right now for being a huge hypocrite. Not on
Speaker 1: one but on a couple of issues. She's a big
Speaker 1: defund The police proponent wants to cut the NYPD budget,
Speaker 1: the largest police force in America, wants to cut that budget,
Speaker 1: buy a billion dollars. But it turns out that miss Wiley,
Speaker 1: whose husband is a multi millionaire investment fund CEO. Miss
Speaker 1: Wiley lives in a four thousand square foot three million
Speaker 1: dollar mansion in Brooklyn and pays for private security. She
Speaker 1: pays five hundred and fifty dollars a month, as do
Speaker 1: her neighbors. They pitch in for private security to patrol
Speaker 1: their area, which is already a low crime area, very
Speaker 1: very safe neighborhood, wealthy neighborhood in Brooklyn. Here an NYC. Now,
Speaker 1: this is not anything to really be surprised about. This
Speaker 1: is classic lib stuff. This is what liberals do. This
Speaker 1: is what leftists do. They want to defund the cops.
Speaker 1: They want to disarm you, as a law abiding citizen,
Speaker 1: from protecting yourself, your home, your family. They want less
Speaker 1: police on the streets because that will help the sensibilities
Speaker 1: of those who hate the cops, because of the BLM
Speaker 1: movement and the Democrat propaganda, and the fact that it
Speaker 1: means more violence, more shootings, more rapes, more murders. All
Speaker 1: that just the price that the social justice left is
Speaker 1: willing to have other people pay. That's the way this goes.
Speaker 1: You see, other people are the ones who will suffer.
Speaker 1: It's not Mia Wiley or husband or earth family or
Speaker 1: their friends. No, no, no, they've got private security. They
Speaker 1: live in a rich neighborhood. They don't care. It's like
Speaker 1: CNN anchors who go from Hudson Yards here in New
Speaker 1: York City when they're not working at home, which of
Speaker 1: course they've been doing for the pandemic, up to their
Speaker 1: two to three to six million dollars apartments, depending on
Speaker 1: which anchor we're talking about, on the Upper West Side
Speaker 1: or maybe down in the West Village, and then they
Speaker 1: go to their Hampton's houses sag Harbor or East Hampton Southampton.
Speaker 1: You know, got a two three four million dollar place
Speaker 1: on the beach. They're not worried about what's happening out
Speaker 1: in Brownsville. They're not worried about what's happening in the
Speaker 1: South Bronx. The shootings that are occurring in numbers we
Speaker 1: haven't seen in twenty years in parts of New York.
Speaker 1: This is true if libs all across the country, the elites,
Speaker 1: the ruling class, the millionaires who go on MSNBC to
Speaker 1: preach social justice and defund the police and all this,
Speaker 1: I don't care about what's actually happening to the people
Speaker 1: they allegedly are advocating on behalf. It doesn't matter to
Speaker 1: them because they're not in they don't live in high
Speaker 1: crime neighborhoods. They don't have to worry about what's going
Speaker 1: to happen to their homes, their families, themselves when they're
Speaker 1: trying to get into their front door at night after
Speaker 1: a long day of work. They've got chauffeurs, they've got
Speaker 1: town cars that pick them up, you know, They've they've
Speaker 1: got drivers that take care of all that. They're not
Speaker 1: riding the subway and dealing with the insane vagrants that are,
Speaker 1: you know, putting all kinds of human refuse on the
Speaker 1: subway and doing all kinds of disgusting stuff and attacking people.
Speaker 1: And no, they're not worried about any of that because
Speaker 1: it's not their problem. They're not speaking to the people
Speaker 1: that are suffering as a result of the permissive, pro
Speaker 1: crime liberal policies out there. They're speaking to the other elites,
Speaker 1: the other people that watch seeing in an MSNBC and
Speaker 1: think it's gospel, who also live in safe neighborhoods. And
Speaker 1: then those individuals when they do speak to people that
Speaker 1: are supposed to be more in touch with BIPOC communities, right,
Speaker 1: Black Indigenous people of color BIPOC is now the non
Speaker 1: white acronym that the left uses all the time. But
Speaker 1: BIPOC communities that are suffering from this crime wave in
Speaker 1: places like New York, the people that they speak with,
Speaker 1: who are the community organizers there, they're also millionaires. They're
Speaker 1: also not affected the same way by this crime. The
Speaker 1: everyday folks who are trying to pay their bills, trying
Speaker 1: to do the right thing, trying to live their lives
Speaker 1: and peace and trying to get ahead with some hard work.
Speaker 1: That's too bad for them. Maya Wili is too busy
Speaker 1: preening for the cameras. Morally, Mia WII is too busy
Speaker 1: making a show of how much she cares about social
Speaker 1: justice and defund the police while she lives in a
Speaker 1: mansion with private security in Brooklyn. And this isn't even unusual.
Speaker 1: This is the classic story for Democrats who want to
Speaker 1: be an elected office. They pretend to be so disconnected,
Speaker 1: so dumb that they can't figure out whether it's Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi or name a prominent Democrat who's in favor of
Speaker 1: defund the police. And I'll show you somebody who's probably
Speaker 1: got millions of dollars, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars
Speaker 1: in the bank, and lives in a in a wealthy
Speaker 1: neighborhood and has no concerns about violent crime in their
Speaker 1: own area. And sure the surge of violent crime in
Speaker 1: other places, that's not their problem. What is their problem
Speaker 1: is making it clear to their constituency that the cops
Speaker 1: are the real enemy. Yeah, that'll get it done. Oh
Speaker 1: and if you thought that we haven't addressed enough of
Speaker 1: the absurdity in the hypocrisy of New York City mayoral
Speaker 1: candidate Maya Wiley, who is really the classic liberal elite,
Speaker 1: went to Dartmouth and then Columbia has you know, Columbia
Speaker 1: Law School has played the system to her advantage at
Speaker 1: every opportunity, that much is clear, and now has married
Speaker 1: you a multi millionaire Wall Street guy, lives in a
Speaker 1: four thousand square foot mansion, pays for private security, has
Speaker 1: drivers taking her all over the place, and she wants
Speaker 1: to make sure that if you live in a high
Speaker 1: crime neighborhood, there are less cops, fewer cops on the streets,
Speaker 1: less likely for police to be able to intervene in
Speaker 1: time if you're the victim of a violent crime, less
Speaker 1: likely for the bad guys out there who are victimizing
Speaker 1: all communities, including communities of color, at higher rates than
Speaker 1: we've seen in twenty years, less likely that police will
Speaker 1: be able to deal with that crime surge to bring
Speaker 1: it back down, to bring the numbers moving in the
Speaker 1: other direction. Because it's all about the liberal elites, you see,
Speaker 1: they don't care about the people they pretend to care about.
Speaker 1: This is one of the this is the fundamental fallacy
Speaker 1: of the modern Democrat party. That the whether it's AOC
Speaker 1: who lives in a super fancy apartment in DC, and
Speaker 1: ado Is is driving around an seventy thousand dollars sports
Speaker 1: car and complaining about how the government's not fixing her
Speaker 1: Avola's ceiling in Puerto Rico. This, this is the way
Speaker 1: the Libs think they get to be rich, they get
Speaker 1: to be powerful, and complain about how everybody else isn't
Speaker 1: doing their part to to you know, to be to
Speaker 1: be more devoted Marxists. Oh and as if it's not enough,
Speaker 1: Maya Wily also says that uh says that that talented programs,
Speaker 1: gifted and talented programs in the public school system are
Speaker 1: racially discriminatory. Now, I wanted I wanted to just ask
Speaker 1: you this. Do you think that she sends her children,
Speaker 1: she has two children. Do you think that Maya Wily
Speaker 1: would be mayor if New York sends her children to
Speaker 1: the local public school. I'm just just take a guess, folks. Remember,
Speaker 1: gifted and talented programs are quote racially discriminatory, she says,
Speaker 1: end quote and by that in New York City, do
Speaker 1: you know what the Democrats mean. They're telling you there
Speaker 1: are too many Asians in those programs. That is the
Speaker 1: complaint they make about Stuyveson. Yes, this is true of
Speaker 1: the left. They view it as a problem that Stuyvesant
Speaker 1: High School and other high schools in New York have
Speaker 1: such a high proportion of high achieving Asians because they're
Speaker 1: the dominant ethnic category in those schools, in these gifted
Speaker 1: and talented programs, in particulars places like Steveston Bronx High
Speaker 1: School of Science. But do you think that she sends
Speaker 1: her daughter to just the local public school, because come on,
Speaker 1: public schools are the backbone of America, right, that's what
Speaker 1: the Democrats say. Oh no, she sends her daughter to
Speaker 1: a fifty one thousand dollars a year private school. Oh okay.
Speaker 1: But if you're a hard working person without RMIs financial
Speaker 1: means and your child happens to be talented enough, hard
Speaker 1: work enough to get into a gifted and talented program,
Speaker 1: Miya Wily wants you to know that those programs are
Speaker 1: racially discriminatory. Pace for private security lives in a mansion,
Speaker 1: wants to defund police. Says that gifted and talented programs
Speaker 1: in public schools are racially discriminatory. Sends one child to
Speaker 1: a school for the gifted and another to a fifty
Speaker 1: one thousand dollar year private school. She's the quintessential Democrat.
Speaker 1: She's the ultimate, the ultimate liberal. In twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: Maya Wily. So this is what the Democrat Party has become.
Speaker 1: I think we should all be very clear about that.
Speaker 1: Speaking of elite liberals, rock and roll, fellow patriots, it's
Speaker 1: time for roll call, Mom and the roll call. What's up,
Speaker 1: Producer Mark? What's going on? Man? How are all the things? Oh,
Speaker 1: the things are going Yeah, their hatest and greatest. Uh
Speaker 1: nothing really just kind of in a waiting purgatory motives usual.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is really getting kind of crazy, you know, Buck,
Speaker 1: I was supposed to close a month ago. I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't even know what to do anymore. What do
Speaker 1: you mean to you know? Should I? Should I start
Speaker 1: sending some angry tweets at the homeowners Association? You know
Speaker 1: you can put it possible. I don't know if you
Speaker 1: have to, Fred, Producer Mark. You can only mail them things,
Speaker 1: you can't tweet them. Come on, the rules were made
Speaker 1: in the nineteen seventies. So oh, that's right. I need
Speaker 1: I need to fax them something or get it, get
Speaker 1: a notarized letter sent to them. Fax is way way
Speaker 1: too high tech. You have to mail it from the
Speaker 1: post office with a stamp in the way they take it. Well,
Speaker 1: let's get into roll call for everybody. Facebook dot com,
Speaker 1: slash buck Sex, and Team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com. Also,
Speaker 1: just so you know, folks, I'm gonna be uh out
Speaker 1: next week. We're gonna have guest hosts in next week.
Speaker 1: So nothing bad has happened to me. I'm just taking
Speaker 1: some time to get geared up from the new show
Speaker 1: June twenty first. But I also want to make sure
Speaker 1: you know that while I'm gonna be doing the Clay
Speaker 1: Travis and Buck Sexton Show twelve to three pm Eastern
Speaker 1: Time across the country four hundred ish three hundred to
Speaker 1: four hundred stations something like that, hundreds of stations across
Speaker 1: the country, I will still be doing the daily Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show podcast, So don't think that that podcast feed
Speaker 1: is going anywhere. We're gonna have the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: That is also where I will be putting specials and
Speaker 1: history shows and things like. I think We're also gonna
Speaker 1: do some long format interviews where I just if I
Speaker 1: have one really great guest I want to talk to,
Speaker 1: we might do you know an hour and drop it
Speaker 1: on the podcast. So that's the kind of stuff that
Speaker 1: we're planning there. I don't want you to think it's
Speaker 1: it's going away. And yeah, maybe a siege of Malta
Speaker 1: part two that needs to happen. I'm aware that that
Speaker 1: needs to happen. Now, even snow Princess makes fun of me.
Speaker 1: She's like, are you still promising your audience and not delivering?
Speaker 1: She's like, she's like you now she's become their advocate.
Speaker 1: She's like what. She's like, I'm gonna stop, no more
Speaker 1: cookies for you until and I'm like, all right, fine,
Speaker 1: she's gonna have to carry it on. I only have
Speaker 1: a couple of shows left to be the ummudsman for.
Speaker 1: She'll be there in the background rooting for Team Buck.
Speaker 1: That's the way it's gonna go. So here we go.
Speaker 1: Let's get into some of the things we have. Kiara,
Speaker 1: who writes, Hey Buck, I'm a thirty eight year old
Speaker 1: single conservative woman liming in Nashville. The only guys that
Speaker 1: ever asked me out end up being leftist. Starting to
Speaker 1: worry there are no single conservative guys close to my age.
Speaker 1: It really feel it's important to share the same values
Speaker 1: with a significant other. Where do I find these guys?
Speaker 1: Where do I find conservative guys? Well, Kiara, I would say,
Speaker 1: and I hope I'm saying your name properly. I would
Speaker 1: say that anything that involves firearms is a good place.
Speaker 1: So maybe go to the range, go to some range events.
Speaker 1: Great place. People always say church, and I think there
Speaker 1: are some churches there's enough sort of young single people
Speaker 1: that you know, you maybe can kind of get to
Speaker 1: know somebody that. But I also feel like not a
Speaker 1: lot of folks you have to go to a church
Speaker 1: mixer or something. Not a lot of people want to
Speaker 1: walk up to somebody in the pew and say, hey,
Speaker 1: stop your praying and start your drinking with me tonight wine.
Speaker 1: You know, that's a little that might be a little tough.
Speaker 1: So those those are ideas that I would put there.
Speaker 1: I'd put out there for you. And also I think,
Speaker 1: and I do not know about this, I can say
Speaker 1: from personal experience, I think there's like a couple of
Speaker 1: MAGA or conservative dating apps out there. You know, that's
Speaker 1: another one you could you could try, you know what
Speaker 1: I'm saying. So I'd give that a shot. I'd give
Speaker 1: that a shot. But look, if you're in Nashville. There
Speaker 1: are plenty of guys. Plenty of guys the gym. By
Speaker 1: the way, here's a thing I'll tell you in my experience,
Speaker 1: the gym is a place where it is very hard
Speaker 1: for a guy to meet a girl. And some of
Speaker 1: you are going to simul Buck, I met my wife
Speaker 1: of the gym. Okay, well, congratulations with your popeye forearms
Speaker 1: in your six pack. But like, the gym is a
Speaker 1: slightly intimidating place for a guy to go up to
Speaker 1: a girl. But if you strike up a conversation with
Speaker 1: a guy, then he knows it's kind of game on.
Speaker 1: So that's another opportunity I would say. So, I hope,
Speaker 1: I hope. Are those are worthwhile suggestions? Dale? Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: I cannot begin to tell you how happy I am
Speaker 1: for you. I always felt like you were the true
Speaker 1: heir apparent. I know that sounds like hyperbole, but there
Speaker 1: are a lot of people I know that I've been
Speaker 1: saying that too for several years. That's really kind, Dale.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I certainly will continue to be a loyal
Speaker 1: listener and wish you the best. Coming after an iconic
Speaker 1: legend is never easy. PS. I guess this means you
Speaker 1: won't read my stuff on air anymore. Kidding. Good luck man,
Speaker 1: godspeed Dale. No, I will be reading your stuff. The
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show is continuing. For everybody who is listening
Speaker 1: to this on radio right now, please please subscribe to
Speaker 1: The Buck Sexton Show. You can download it on the
Speaker 1: iHeart app. You can download and listen on the Apple
Speaker 1: podcast Store in the Apple Podcast Store, you can listen
Speaker 1: on Spotify on Podbean. So those are all places where
Speaker 1: you can listen to the Bucks Exton Show. And I
Speaker 1: think you should listen to the Bucks Exton Show, so
Speaker 1: please check it out. Marcus right, Actually, this one's gonna
Speaker 1: be too long. Mark. Let's hold Marcus for tomorrow because
Speaker 1: I will be able to get to this whole. It's
Speaker 1: a long, very nice note. We'll get to it. Pablo, Hey,
Speaker 1: Buck First, congratulations. I only listen to two radio shows
Speaker 1: during the day, you and Rush. I know you've been
Speaker 1: humbled by this opportunity. Therefore you and therefore you deserve it.
Speaker 1: I do not know what the new show will be
Speaker 1: like or if you will have roll Call as part
Speaker 1: of it, so I wanted to write in for possibly
Speaker 1: one last time. I do know the new show will
Speaker 1: be informative and array of hope in the conservative world.
Speaker 1: Shield Tie and thank you, Pablo, Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: It's very kind of you, and I have always been look,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna sid I've always been really proud of
Speaker 1: how many people say that they listen to two shows,
Speaker 1: Buck and Rush. There's a lot of you out there,
Speaker 1: and that is the highest compliment that I could possibly
Speaker 1: have in this business. So thank you very much for that.
Speaker 1: But Pablo, I just want to reiterate for everybody out there,
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show June twenty first until forever is
Speaker 1: continuing as a daily podcast, so you will have this
Speaker 1: show you're listening to now is going to sound very
Speaker 1: much the same. It's just going to be podcast only,
Speaker 1: not radio. Twelve to three will be the Clay Travis
Speaker 1: and Buck Sexton Show. So that's the plan. Talk to
Speaker 1: you folks tomorrow. Shields High