Speaker 1: M h, you are entering the freedom hunt. Israel dropped
Speaker 1: some very interesting intelligence on Iran and its nuclear program,
Speaker 1: plus expectations incredibly high for the upcoming summit between Donald
Speaker 1: Trump and Kim Jung Un. Also an aftermath of the
Speaker 1: White House correspondence debacle dinner over the weekend, and an
Speaker 1: update on Joy read over at MSNBC. Did she apologize
Speaker 1: or what was what she said? We'll get into that.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where
Speaker 1: the mission or mission is to decode what really matters
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great
Speaker 1: American Again The Buck Sexton Show began the sect No.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Buck Sex and Show. Everybody. Great to
Speaker 1: have you here with me. I've got my first first
Speaker 1: day of my uh my swamp sabbatical. I guess we
Speaker 1: could call it. I am down here in our nation's
Speaker 1: capital and Washington, d C. Bringing back all kinds of
Speaker 1: memories showing up here as a young CIA analysts gosh
Speaker 1: over a decade ago and not having any money in
Speaker 1: my pocket, really just trying to figure out how this
Speaker 1: whole thing is gonna work. It was, It was quite
Speaker 1: a time. And now I'm here. I'm a radio host
Speaker 1: and doing a show here with you, and I'm gonna
Speaker 1: have some other exciting announcements. I think about all the
Speaker 1: cool things we get to do together coming up later
Speaker 1: this week, I believe. But you'll have to just hold
Speaker 1: off on that for now, or I'll have just keep
Speaker 1: you in suspense for now. So we have some big
Speaker 1: things to discuss today in the world. Um, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: save the correspondence dinner until later on in the show
Speaker 1: because it happened on Saturday weekend stuff. I wanted to
Speaker 1: get into the latest and and the most important stories
Speaker 1: from today and even some relatively late breaking news. Uh.
Speaker 1: If you have not seen this Net and yah Who presentation,
Speaker 1: that's really what it is. It is a full on,
Speaker 1: uh you know, standing walk and talk. It's like it
Speaker 1: reminded me a little bit of back of the day
Speaker 1: when Glenn Klenn Beck, my old boss, used to do
Speaker 1: the chalkboard. You know, Net and yah Who was kind
Speaker 1: of doing the chalkboard, except he was well talking about
Speaker 1: the Iranian nuclear program for all the world to see.
Speaker 1: And those of us now who have have spent time
Speaker 1: watching this can talk about Project Ahmad. Play eighteen so
Speaker 1: let me tell you the history of this material. We've
Speaker 1: known for years that Iran had a secret nuclear weapons
Speaker 1: program called Project a Mud. We can now prove that
Speaker 1: Project Ahmad was a comprehensive program to design, build and
Speaker 1: test nuclear weapons. We can also prove that Iran is
Speaker 1: secretly storing Project a mod material to use at a
Speaker 1: time of its choice to develop nuclear weapons. It's a
Speaker 1: big deal. You have the Prime Minister of Israel who's
Speaker 1: saying they have incontrovertible proof that the Iranians had an
Speaker 1: extensive nuclear weapons program. Remember they would say things like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: the Florida facility we built down under a mountain, but
Speaker 1: you know, because we wanted isotopes for medical research, so
Speaker 1: we built it under a mountains, a secret, hardened military facility.
Speaker 1: But we figured it was necessary because you know, isotopes
Speaker 1: and stuff for medical research. No serious person believes this,
Speaker 1: but this is what the Iranians say, because there are
Speaker 1: enough Iran regime enablers out there around the world and
Speaker 1: in the media specifically, that even an implausible deniability gives
Speaker 1: them some degree of coverage. And that's largely what the
Speaker 1: Iranians have been offering. Right the Iranians get away with
Speaker 1: all kinds of half truths and all outlies because there
Speaker 1: are people in the West who are favorable to them.
Speaker 1: There are people in the international community with a lot
Speaker 1: of prominence who I want to do everything in their
Speaker 1: power to one just stick their thumb in the eye
Speaker 1: of the Israeli state whenever they can, and and to
Speaker 1: help out the as they see it, besieged and harassed
Speaker 1: Iranian regime. There are people who take lots of people
Speaker 1: out there in the media who take that position. Just
Speaker 1: want of be quite clear on that. But it's gonna
Speaker 1: be a little harder to say. It's gonna be a
Speaker 1: little harder to say that the Iranians have been honest
Speaker 1: with us, because well, yeah, you heard about Project Ahmad
Speaker 1: there from that Yahoo. But we've got a lot of
Speaker 1: info now that they're gonna be sharing with the U. S. Government,
Speaker 1: not I think with all of us. In fact, he
Speaker 1: gives a pretty clear estimate of what it is. Play
Speaker 1: nineteen fifty five thousand pages, another fifty five thousand files
Speaker 1: on one and eighty three CDs. Everything you're about to
Speaker 1: see is an exact copy of the original Iranian material.
Speaker 1: You may want to know where are the originals. Well,
Speaker 1: I can say they're now in a very safe place.
Speaker 1: This is really a new usual. I've never seen anything
Speaker 1: like this for a ahead of state to do a
Speaker 1: video presentation like this. I mean it almost looked like
Speaker 1: he was I was talking about very serious stuff. But
Speaker 1: the stuff he's pulling, Uh, he's pulling covers off of
Speaker 1: de seed, you know. The he had sort of a
Speaker 1: I was gonna say, a blanket, I don't what you'd
Speaker 1: call it. He's you know, it's almost like he was
Speaker 1: revealing a magic trick up there on stage. He's like, Ah,
Speaker 1: look at this. We have all these binders of sensitive
Speaker 1: information about the Iranian nuclear program. So, in a sense,
Speaker 1: the Israelis are doing donuts in Iran's front yard here saying, yeah,
Speaker 1: what's up. You guys think you're so clever with hiding
Speaker 1: your nuclear program research and your aspirations for nuclear program.
Speaker 1: Guess what, We're more clever. So that's one part of
Speaker 1: this UH. And then the much bigger part but still UH,
Speaker 1: is to show the world that the Obama administration's deal,
Speaker 1: which I know is a what the P five plus
Speaker 1: one deal, the the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action j
Speaker 1: c p O, a pretty boring name for a pretty
Speaker 1: bad deal. Was an unwise maneuver because you are relying
Speaker 1: on some measure of honesty and good faith from the
Speaker 1: Iranian regime. You just are There's no way around that.
Speaker 1: There's no way to look at what happened with Iran
Speaker 1: and not think, hold on a second, we are taking
Speaker 1: their word for certain things, and we don't know the
Speaker 1: full truth of other things, and expect that somehow this
Speaker 1: is all gonna be okay in the end. And net
Speaker 1: and Yahoo I think made that a much a much
Speaker 1: tougher sell than it had been previously, and gets into
Speaker 1: how if the Iranians couldn't be trusted to tell the truth.
Speaker 1: Remember that they had the option of coming entirely clean
Speaker 1: with the international community on their nuclear program as a
Speaker 1: condition of getting into this deal in the first place.
Speaker 1: If they weren't willing to come clean to get into
Speaker 1: the deal, who thinks that they're not cheating right now?
Speaker 1: In ways that we can just begin to guess at
Speaker 1: play to develop nuclear weapons? Any baby, consider nuclear weapons
Speaker 1: both irrational as well as immoral. Well, tonight, I'm here
Speaker 1: to tell you one thing. Iran lied big time after
Speaker 1: signing the nuclear deal. In two thousand and fifteen, Iran
Speaker 1: intensified its efforts to hide its secret nuclear files. In
Speaker 1: two thousand and seventeen, Iran moved its nuclear weapons files
Speaker 1: to a highly secret location in Tehran. The Iranians line,
Speaker 1: why would we sign a deal that in any way
Speaker 1: takes the word of the Iranian regime and treats the
Speaker 1: Iranian state like it has been a good actor or anything.
Speaker 1: Why would an administration? Oh, that's right, because you know
Speaker 1: where this is going. Because the Obama administration was desperate
Speaker 1: for a foreign policy legacy. How can you have the smartest,
Speaker 1: most amazing, most talented, most knowledgeable president of all presidents
Speaker 1: in all history who does not have a single foreign
Speaker 1: policy accomplishment to his eight years in office and has
Speaker 1: a legacy of a lot of failures on the foreign
Speaker 1: policy front. The media just couldn't believe, it, couldn't accept it,
Speaker 1: and the Obama administration was unwilling to accept it, clearly.
Speaker 1: So they did everything in their power to try and
Speaker 1: get to a deal. They were moving as close as
Speaker 1: they could in every way they could to the Iranian
Speaker 1: regime and gave them concessions. So now you look back
Speaker 1: at this he say to yourself what many of us
Speaker 1: were claiming all along, that you can't trust Iran, that
Speaker 1: Iran is not an honest actor in this That was
Speaker 1: certainly the case. So Trump is going to in a
Speaker 1: few days look over this deal. He is going to
Speaker 1: have a uh, He's gonna have to make a decision
Speaker 1: is whether we stay in this or not. He's gonna
Speaker 1: have to negotiate over it. And remember that the decision
Speaker 1: that we were left with by the previous administration, the
Speaker 1: what they offered up was either give the Iranians way
Speaker 1: more than you should or war. That was a false choice,
Speaker 1: wasn't true. The options were give the Iranians, uh, well,
Speaker 1: make the Iranians come to your side at the table
Speaker 1: and make real concessions, or continue with the sanctions that
Speaker 1: were economically crippling the regime and causing a lot of
Speaker 1: pain and pressure for the Iranian state. Those were the
Speaker 1: options Obama decided to get rid of that take off
Speaker 1: the pressure. You see the juxtaposition of how Obama's team
Speaker 1: dealt with Iran versus the way right now at least
Speaker 1: Trump is dealing with North Korea. So one thing to
Speaker 1: say you want to talk because another thing to say, hey,
Speaker 1: let's talk, and I'm gonna take my leverage away while
Speaker 1: we're talking. You know, Trump is keeping all the pressure
Speaker 1: on with North Korea, with the Iranians. It's even really
Speaker 1: not a it's not even accurate to say that we
Speaker 1: reached an agreement with him. It's kind of a phased,
Speaker 1: long term process of just waiting to see what happens
Speaker 1: with sunset provisions at the end too, so they can
Speaker 1: just walk out of it when when all said and done.
Speaker 1: So here's here's yeah, who's four point conclusion from this
Speaker 1: massive intelligence member they got access to all this somehow
Speaker 1: they've got access to these Iranian archives. I know people
Speaker 1: are gonna say that it's Israel and they're gonna be
Speaker 1: a lot of people out there say, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's a forgery or the Israelis, you're trying to scare
Speaker 1: us into war with you know, again against the Iranian
Speaker 1: state or something, because people will always say, unfortunately, very
Speaker 1: untrue and scary things like that about the Israeli state
Speaker 1: for reasons I won't get into right now. But here
Speaker 1: is the conclusion of the Prime Minister himself on this one.
Speaker 1: You can draw four main conclusions. First, Iran lied about
Speaker 1: never having a nuclear weapons program. One hundred thousand secret
Speaker 1: files proved that they lied. Second, even after the deal,
Speaker 1: Iran continued to preserve and expand its nuclear weapons noil
Speaker 1: for future use. Why would a terrorist regime hide and
Speaker 1: meticulously catalog it's secret nuclear files if not to use
Speaker 1: them at a later date. Third, Iran lied again in
Speaker 1: two thousand and fifteen when it didn't come clean to
Speaker 1: the I a A as required by a nuclear deal.
Speaker 1: And finally the Iran deal. The nuclear deal is based
Speaker 1: on lies an Iranian deception. Yep, some of us have
Speaker 1: known this all along. Some of us have been saying
Speaker 1: this all along. And now the Israelis, through whatever means
Speaker 1: they used to get all this information, have proof. What
Speaker 1: will Trump do about it? We will just have to see.
Speaker 1: But at many levels, I think the part of this
Speaker 1: that will annoy Democrats the most. What makes them most
Speaker 1: angry about this whole conversation is not that they have
Speaker 1: some deep investment in the outcome of the deal with Iran.
Speaker 1: It's that they don't like that the Obama administration's foreign
Speaker 1: policy legacy could go up and smoke. That's what really
Speaker 1: bothers Democrats and big folks in the media here about it.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna talk also about the North Korea and
Speaker 1: then I'm gonna try to bring it home with some
Speaker 1: stuff here in the stage. It's the big news today
Speaker 1: seems to be all foreign policy focus. You know, I
Speaker 1: get a little me I think that I gotta put
Speaker 1: myself in this category. I think a lot of media
Speaker 1: folks find this state craft abroad stuff to be much
Speaker 1: of much higher interest than you're just everyday Americans, because, uh,
Speaker 1: this doesn't really affect any of our lives all that
Speaker 1: much right now. It might at some point in the
Speaker 1: future might not. So I'm gonna try not to get
Speaker 1: too in the weeds on this stuff for right now
Speaker 1: because I don't find it to be all that all
Speaker 1: that useful beyond what we have to know. So I'll
Speaker 1: get into some of the stuff on North Korea coming up,
Speaker 1: and then I've got joy reads kind of non apology apology.
Speaker 1: What does that tell us about the media and social
Speaker 1: justice warriors and all that, and and uh, we got
Speaker 1: a whole lot more so stare right there. I wasn't
Speaker 1: planning on talking about this cultural appropriation story. We'll get
Speaker 1: back to North Korea in a second. But this is
Speaker 1: this just gets me fired up. First of all, cultural
Speaker 1: appropriation is not a thing. It's not a thing, doesn't
Speaker 1: doesn't really exist. Um. Cultures are constantly borrowing, stealing, taking
Speaker 1: from others, and people take from cultures as they see fit.
Speaker 1: No one has any ownership of culture because how could
Speaker 1: we enforce that. The story I'm talking about here is
Speaker 1: a eighteen year old high school student named Kezia Dam
Speaker 1: from Utah who wore a Chinese keep How dress to
Speaker 1: her prom. It's sort of a traditional looking Chinese dress
Speaker 1: for those who I mean, I've never heard of a
Speaker 1: keep out before. About you? You know what it looks like, right,
Speaker 1: traditional Chinese dressed from the eighteen I'm sorry from it
Speaker 1: goes all the back to the seventeenth century. In the
Speaker 1: Daily Email here and there were all these outraged people
Speaker 1: on Twitter. So I just want to know where where
Speaker 1: does this stop and start? How do we are our
Speaker 1: suits with the neckties? Is that cultural appropriation? Who owns that?
Speaker 1: By the way, who gets down that? Do I have
Speaker 1: to I'm here in Washington, d C. Do I have
Speaker 1: to walk around and tell everyone that they're not allowed
Speaker 1: to wear sear sucker because it is what was was
Speaker 1: actually appropriated by the British during the colonial period in India.
Speaker 1: Sear sucker is actually sheer chuk, which is a crushed
Speaker 1: cotton fabric from South Asia. During the period of British
Speaker 1: imperial rule, they wanted to wear things that didn't make
Speaker 1: them sweat quite as much, and so seer sucker it's
Speaker 1: where we get it. Also, some of you are probably
Speaker 1: fond of Madras shorts. Oh yeah, Madras, like India, that's
Speaker 1: where that pattern comes from. Some of you are also
Speaker 1: probably wearing a Ingham shirt as you listen to this.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, that's right. Gingham shirt comes from Malaysia. That's
Speaker 1: where that pattern was found. So are we going to
Speaker 1: tell people they can't wear gingham and sear sucker because
Speaker 1: those are all appropriated during colonialism? I might add? And
Speaker 1: what about neckties? Who gets to wear them? Well, you
Speaker 1: might say that the necktie, as we know it was
Speaker 1: an appropriation, really made popular here because of the British,
Speaker 1: but the British barred it from the French. The French
Speaker 1: had the cravat, but they didn't even come up with
Speaker 1: the idea. It actually comes from Croatian mercenaries who served
Speaker 1: in the Army of I think it was Louis and
Speaker 1: they had a brightly colored piece of cloth they would
Speaker 1: tie around their necks and they were called the cravate.
Speaker 1: So yeah, we could do this thing all day. The
Speaker 1: outrage expressed on Twitter over the weekend about a girl
Speaker 1: wearing a traditional Chinese dress to her prom is an
Speaker 1: embarrassment for all social justice wars and leftist she was
Speaker 1: and mocking anyone she thought it looked pretty. If we
Speaker 1: can't wear things that we think look pretty or cool
Speaker 1: or fun because some people are going to claim offense,
Speaker 1: we are just giving up very basic rights to make determined,
Speaker 1: to make simple determinations about how we're gonna conduct ourselves
Speaker 1: in our day to day lives. Cultural appropriation is not
Speaker 1: a thing. It's not something to be to be worried
Speaker 1: about one or the other. It is not a thing.
Speaker 1: It doesn't really exist. It is a term used by
Speaker 1: ignorant people who want others to cower in fear at
Speaker 1: the accusation that they've conjured up out of nothing, which
Speaker 1: is that there's this thing called cultural appropriation. Preposterous. So
Speaker 1: people should wear the clothing of whatever culture they want,
Speaker 1: and end of story. Whether it's prom or anywhere else.
Speaker 1: This is just crazy. He's holding the line for America,
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton his back. We had a extensive conversation on
Speaker 1: the hardest issues that face our two countries. I had
Speaker 1: a clear mission statement from President Trump when I left
Speaker 1: their Kim Jong Un understood the mission exactly as I've
Speaker 1: described it today, and he agreed that he was prepared
Speaker 1: to talk about that and to lay out a map
Speaker 1: that would help us achieve that objective. Only time will
Speaker 1: tell if we can get that done. Is there any
Speaker 1: possibility that the US would accept North Korea as a
Speaker 1: nuclear power and allow them to keep some of their infrastructure.
Speaker 1: I don't see how that's possible. And again, the North
Speaker 1: Koreans have already agreed to this. They agreed to it
Speaker 1: in with South Korea, and they've pledged similar things since that.
Speaker 1: Now it's also the case that they've lied about it
Speaker 1: and broken their commitments. Just one reason. There's nobody in
Speaker 1: the Trump administration starry eyed about what what may happen here.
Speaker 1: But by demonstrating they've made a strategic decision to give
Speaker 1: up nuclear weapons, it would be possible to move quickly.
Speaker 1: There you have Bolton making the very important point at
Speaker 1: this stage that maybe the North Korea thing doesn't work.
Speaker 1: But you know what we risk by trying very little.
Speaker 1: People say, all at President meeting with Kim Jong ole
Speaker 1: and it's gonna enhance his stature so much. Come on,
Speaker 1: So what's the alternative not not engage in any process whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Let's see, I don't want to look at these line
Speaker 1: these up with the with the approach and in one
Speaker 1: case we have the outcome, which is Iran. The other
Speaker 1: case we just have the approach and the preferred outcome,
Speaker 1: which would be the Trump administration dealing with North Korea.
Speaker 1: But on the North Korean side of this equation, there's
Speaker 1: plenty of reasonab believe this is not going to work.
Speaker 1: People are saying over the week at all, Trump deserves
Speaker 1: the Nobel Peace Prize, you know, unlike the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: which I still think is somewhat embarrassed by the fact
Speaker 1: that President Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for being
Speaker 1: President Obama. That's not an opinion, that is a fact.
Speaker 1: They just gave him. He was Obama, he got elected,
Speaker 1: they gave him a Nobel Peace Prize. Pretty big embarrassment,
Speaker 1: but that's what happened. I don't want Trump to get
Speaker 1: a Nobel Peace Prize just for taking the first step
Speaker 1: in the process with North Korea. He should get a
Speaker 1: Nobel Peace Prize for results. Right. This is the president
Speaker 1: who's all about the private sector, the are of the deal,
Speaker 1: the negotiation table, all that stuff. I want to see results.
Speaker 1: We may not here. I I am. I put in
Speaker 1: less than fifty fifty, not nothing. It's not two, you know,
Speaker 1: but it's less than fifty fifty that this ends up
Speaker 1: going to a place where, um, we feel like Trump
Speaker 1: has had some kind of profound effect on this whole situation.
Speaker 1: And the South Korean President Moon j In uh was
Speaker 1: right when he says that, you know that the President
Speaker 1: Trump can take the Nobel Prize as long as the
Speaker 1: Koreans received peace and return you know, prizes, it's not
Speaker 1: what this is about. This is about stopping a future
Speaker 1: large scale war in the Korean peninsula. You know, of
Speaker 1: of all the wars in American history, in a lot
Speaker 1: of ways, I feel like the Korean War is the
Speaker 1: the most forgotten, given the scale of the casualties that
Speaker 1: we took, um given the players involved, because you very
Speaker 1: well could have had I mean, Douglas MacArthur was thinking
Speaker 1: about going after China with nukes. Folks, you know that
Speaker 1: that was that was something that was at least at
Speaker 1: least theorized about. Once the Chinese forces crossed the Yalu
Speaker 1: River and you had all of the the US or
Speaker 1: the Allied forces were pushed back, so you had I think, Um,
Speaker 1: what is it over over fifty casualties? I mean, the
Speaker 1: Korean War doesn't get nearly the amount of attention that
Speaker 1: it should. Um Korean War battle deaths according to CBS
Speaker 1: here at thirty three thousand, six fifty two and non
Speaker 1: battle death set three. Okay, so let's go roughly more
Speaker 1: like forty casualties from the Korean War, and if we
Speaker 1: could avoid another major confident in the Korean peninsula, that's
Speaker 1: something for not just us in the South Koreans, but
Speaker 1: for all of humanities. Celebrate. It's gonna be tough though
Speaker 1: North Korea doesn't want to give up its nukes. Let's
Speaker 1: not get silly about this. And I know you're not,
Speaker 1: but you know that some of the tribalism, the media
Speaker 1: discussion turns into Trump's amazing, He's a genius, he spakes Korea.
Speaker 1: Not the case yet, Maybe you think he's amazing and
Speaker 1: a genius. I'll leave that to you. But he has
Speaker 1: not fixed the problem with with North Korea, and it it
Speaker 1: will be very difficult for him to do so. But
Speaker 1: looking at the other side of it for a second,
Speaker 1: the the Iran deal and what we know about this
Speaker 1: now with the net and Yahoo presentation today, it's about
Speaker 1: twenty minutes and change along. Brother, I'd say it's worth
Speaker 1: watching if you can. You got a second, you know,
Speaker 1: throw it on. It's on a YouTube and all over
Speaker 1: the websites. It's over the interwebs. Uh. But you know.
Speaker 1: The Obama era Iran Deal proponents, most notably Ben Rhodes,
Speaker 1: former fiction writer and then chief propagandists for foreign policy
Speaker 1: of the Obama administration, h they are taking the latest
Speaker 1: revelations about how Iran has lied as evidence that this
Speaker 1: was a good idea. Essentially, if if you are a
Speaker 1: Democrat now who is trying to protect Obama's legacy, your
Speaker 1: position is see ir On lies so much and is
Speaker 1: so untrustworthy that we had to give them a deal
Speaker 1: because how else could we get them to stop? This
Speaker 1: is like saying, hey, this guy is way too drunk.
Speaker 1: He's had way too much to drink. He's got a
Speaker 1: big drinking problem. The only way we could get him
Speaker 1: to stop is to give him even more alcohol right now,
Speaker 1: in the hopes that we will buy off his favor
Speaker 1: with this and maybe then he'll stop being drunk. Right.
Speaker 1: You know that they lie, they cheat, they steal. The
Speaker 1: Iranians line cheat and steal. So let's put them in
Speaker 1: a position where we give them a lot and hope
Speaker 1: that they stopped lying, cheating, and stealing with no real concessions,
Speaker 1: no pain, no nothing, only upside for them. I think
Speaker 1: it was one of the most naive foreign policy moves
Speaker 1: of of my lifetime, certainly of a generation. And yet
Speaker 1: here we are with the Obama bros. Uh the guys
Speaker 1: that I forget. There's one guy who was the There's
Speaker 1: Ben Rhodes, and there's Uh Tommy whatever is naya? Dude?
Speaker 1: Ben Cozy was like two years ago. Bro, you guys
Speaker 1: all remember that that was that happened. Dude Ben Cozzi
Speaker 1: was like two years ago. Bra Um. Those are some
Speaker 1: of the people that are out there now making the
Speaker 1: case that what Obama did was was smart, was the
Speaker 1: right move. Remember with North Korea, they play ball, they
Speaker 1: do it. Our way, or we keep the sanctions and
Speaker 1: all the other options in place, where your on the
Speaker 1: plan was take the sanctions off, give them a lot
Speaker 1: of money, send them pile to cash, hope their behavior changes.
Speaker 1: These are just different philosophical approaches, you know. And you know,
Speaker 1: you could look at how Obama views America's role in
Speaker 1: the world, and I think take a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of analysis from that. Right, we are we cause
Speaker 1: a lot of problems. The typical, the standard democrat world
Speaker 1: view of what America does in the whole world is
Speaker 1: that we cause a lot of problems, that there's blowback
Speaker 1: to US foreign policy all of the Middle East, that
Speaker 1: many of the worst problems of Jihodism are are the
Speaker 1: result of American missteps or imperialism or overreach, and so
Speaker 1: we need to take that into account. Even when dealing
Speaker 1: with rogue regimes like Iran, we need to take into
Speaker 1: account the possibility that maybe, um, we've had a bigger
Speaker 1: hand in making this mess and therefore we have to
Speaker 1: pay some kind of penance in this whole process. It's
Speaker 1: crazy thinking, But if you if you were to walk
Speaker 1: around at college campus right now and speak to some
Speaker 1: of the so called foreign policy experts, in whatever department,
Speaker 1: in international relations department, political science department, they would tell
Speaker 1: you about how you know America has a special particularly
Speaker 1: the case of Iran. They'll start talking about the Shaw
Speaker 1: and Mosa deck, and there's this whole line that America
Speaker 1: is responsible at some level for what's gone wrong in Iran. Therefore,
Speaker 1: all of the wrong that Iran is currently doing in
Speaker 1: the region around the world, we bear some degree of
Speaker 1: responsibility for today. And if you take that mindset, which
Speaker 1: I think Obama's team did, then yeah, sure, do what
Speaker 1: you gotta do, get a deal, buy off the Iranians.
Speaker 1: I think it's crazy, but here we are. That's right.
Speaker 1: They lie, they cheat there, they're completely untrustworthy. So let's
Speaker 1: put a let's give make take a huge leap of
Speaker 1: faith and put a lot of trust in them. That
Speaker 1: was the decision that was made with the Iran deal.
Speaker 1: So we'll see if Trump stays with it. I think
Speaker 1: it's very possible he's going to say that, you know,
Speaker 1: we need to talk about some additional things Iranian Mullah's
Speaker 1: and if they say no, well then we'll be It's okay.
Speaker 1: It doesn't mean the options here are not Iran dealer war.
Speaker 1: We would go back to sanctions, and we're in a
Speaker 1: much stronger bargaining position in the Uranians are. That's it,
Speaker 1: and ultimately what we want is not unreasonable. We don't
Speaker 1: want the Iranian to have nuclear missiles and don't want
Speaker 1: them to have the ability to build nuclear missiles in
Speaker 1: a short period of time. That's it. And if they
Speaker 1: were serious about growing their economy and bringing prosperity and
Speaker 1: some degree of freedom to their people, they'd be willing
Speaker 1: to play ball. But they're not because it's a theocracy
Speaker 1: and a totalitarianism and an evil regime run by people
Speaker 1: who are oppressors of their own people. So we should
Speaker 1: just under I think this administration, for whatever flaws you
Speaker 1: may or may not believe it has when it comes
Speaker 1: to foreign policy, at least they know who the good
Speaker 1: guys are and who the bad guys are. They don't
Speaker 1: mix it up, they don't confuse it. When it comes
Speaker 1: to us in Iran, we're the good guys, they're the
Speaker 1: bad guys. And when you start from a place of
Speaker 1: moral clarity like that, you're much likely to get a
Speaker 1: good outcome in these kinds of high stakes international negotiations
Speaker 1: eight four four n eight to five. What do you
Speaker 1: think of the net Yido presentation or or the Irani
Speaker 1: Do you want us to stay in the Iran deal?
Speaker 1: Do you want us to uh take action against Iran
Speaker 1: of some kind? Any of those thoughts. I'm very curious.
Speaker 1: I'm I feel like I don't know team. I feel
Speaker 1: like I don't know where you are on this one
Speaker 1: right now. So I'm wondering eight four four five. We
Speaker 1: will discuss when we come back. Maybe not right away,
Speaker 1: but at some point we come back. MSNBC Joy read
Speaker 1: what it means to get a pass because you're in
Speaker 1: good standing with the social justice left. That's coming up.
Speaker 1: So I've got to follow up to that story about
Speaker 1: the guy getting thrown out of a bar for wearing
Speaker 1: his Maga hat. Remember I told you about this that
Speaker 1: it was West Village. It is very very hip, very
Speaker 1: trendy part of New York City, the West Village of
Speaker 1: New York City where the guy says he was wearing
Speaker 1: a Maga hat and he was kicked out and a
Speaker 1: judge said, you know what, they're allowed to private property
Speaker 1: and political affiliation is not a protected category. So for
Speaker 1: some of us, for love, you mean, you can get
Speaker 1: booted from the establishment. They can take the guinness right
Speaker 1: out of your hand and send you packing because you're
Speaker 1: wearing a maga hat. It seems so unfair. But Greg
Speaker 1: Piotic claims that that is in fact what happened. And
Speaker 1: now you have the owner. And but I was right.
Speaker 1: I actually know the owner of this bar. Not well,
Speaker 1: I don't have his phone number, and I think it's
Speaker 1: not like somebody I could call and meet for a
Speaker 1: drink at his bar. But I knew him growing up.
Speaker 1: He actually owns a few very trendy establishments in New
Speaker 1: York City. I don't go to these places because there's
Speaker 1: always reading books, being a good boy. Well, I just
Speaker 1: didn't go to these places. But yeah, John just called
Speaker 1: me a nerd. He's right. But the uh, the owner
Speaker 1: is somebody I know. Uh Is he a Democrat? I
Speaker 1: don't know, but I'm gonna guess yes. I'm assuming. I'm
Speaker 1: assuming he is. But now there, now you get the
Speaker 1: other side of this, and they're claiming that there are
Speaker 1: death threats against against people working at the bar, the owner.
Speaker 1: I almost I just have a hard time believing that
Speaker 1: anyone is so dumb that they would threaten somebody's life,
Speaker 1: even if they had no intention of actually following it
Speaker 1: up at all, but threatening someone's life over an incident
Speaker 1: like this. But there have been police reports filed. There have,
Speaker 1: in fact been some folks who have gone forward and
Speaker 1: said that this is going on there. So I just
Speaker 1: want to follow up with that. I guess I can't.
Speaker 1: I don't know. It would be kind of a on
Speaker 1: experiment to where a maga hat. I'm in downtown d
Speaker 1: C right now, where a maga hat around here? Going
Speaker 1: different bars. But it's a Republican administration. What are they
Speaker 1: really gonna do? You know? Who are they really going to?
Speaker 1: Who are they really gonna be? Well? DC is plus
Speaker 1: Democrat plus. We have Mac in Texas on the line.
Speaker 1: Hey Mac, how are you. I'm good, Thanks for calling.
Speaker 1: I don't know how you could be good. You're inside
Speaker 1: the ninth Circle of Hell, which you call fo Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, man, I'm in the belt Way. I'm a
Speaker 1: Beltway bandit right now? All right. No, I've been listening
Speaker 1: to you for over two years and this is the
Speaker 1: very first time I think I have seen you go
Speaker 1: from a false assumption. Oh that is that is on
Speaker 1: the Iran deal. You are going on the assumption that
Speaker 1: they were trying to negotiate. It's something anything for a
Speaker 1: foreign policy legacy. I go from the assumption they had
Speaker 1: no intention of stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons and
Speaker 1: gave them the cover to continue to do it through
Speaker 1: this so called deal, that it was their intention to
Speaker 1: achieve parity through the entire Middle East and give everybody
Speaker 1: a nuclear weapon so that it would all even out.
Speaker 1: Because the rumors are and it's unconfirmed that Israel has
Speaker 1: nuclear weapons, that they supposedly tested their nuclear weapon in
Speaker 1: South Africa during the apartheid regime, and I believe it
Speaker 1: was and uh, this has been the rumors that is
Speaker 1: circulated throughout them at least, and if everybody thinks you've
Speaker 1: got a weapon, then it's good, it's good enough. The
Speaker 1: reality is now, I think the Obama administration wanted everybody
Speaker 1: else to have a nuclear weapon so there would be
Speaker 1: part Well, I can I tell you that that there
Speaker 1: are actually some there are some Democrat left scholars out
Speaker 1: there who just openly advocate so so while I'm not
Speaker 1: sure I can I I can't agree with you that
Speaker 1: that was the goal. And look, you know, we can
Speaker 1: come at this from different perspectives. That that was the
Speaker 1: goal of the Obama team. I really do think it
Speaker 1: was about Obama and about what what it would look
Speaker 1: like for him domestically. Uh I can say that there
Speaker 1: are scholars who are considered mainstream who think that the
Speaker 1: answer to the problem is, in fact, let Iran get nukes,
Speaker 1: because then you'll have mutually assured destruction between Iran and
Speaker 1: Israel and they'll start to be more cooperative. Anyone who
Speaker 1: knows much about the Iranian regime is going to think
Speaker 1: that's pretty crazy, but there are mainstream articles about that.
Speaker 1: By the way, there are people who also feel like
Speaker 1: that's that should be the approach with North Korea. And
Speaker 1: this goes back to my my point about how people
Speaker 1: view America's role in the world. Right, if you think
Speaker 1: America is not really that much better than any other country,
Speaker 1: then why shouldn't everybody have nukes? An interesting point from you,
Speaker 1: Mac I pre sho hearing me down in Texas and
Speaker 1: thanks for being a part of the squad. Um. I
Speaker 1: want to talk about this joy read thing because I
Speaker 1: got I was called upon to discuss it with the
Speaker 1: Tucker last week on Fox and uh I think my
Speaker 1: prediction was absolutely correct. So I like talking about my
Speaker 1: correct predictions. We'll get into that. Also the caravan at
Speaker 1: the border wall and Clapper's alleged leaks that's coming up.
Speaker 1: Nine Line Apparel is a veteran owned and operated patriotic
Speaker 1: lifestyle brand. It's also a give back company. You see,
Speaker 1: nine Line is proud to announce a partnership with NASCAR
Speaker 1: driver Jeffrey Earnhardt to give back to children of our
Speaker 1: nation's fallen. From now through May nine go to nine
Speaker 1: line apparel dot com to get there. Remember the Fallen
Speaker 1: Memorial Day shirt, and with each shirt purchased, you have
Speaker 1: the option of submitting the name of a fallen soldier.
Speaker 1: These heroes names will cover Jeffrey Earnhardt's car at the
Speaker 1: Coca Cola six hundred over the Memorial Day weekend in Charlotte.
Speaker 1: The charity that nine and Jeffrey Earnharder partnering with is
Speaker 1: Angels of America's Fallen, whose goal is to support the
Speaker 1: children of those laws due to military service. Through programs
Speaker 1: run by Angels of America's Fallen, children who have lost
Speaker 1: a military parent are able to engage in sports and
Speaker 1: hobbies while honoring their parents legacy. Support our fallen heroes
Speaker 1: go to Nineline Apparel dot Com to get the exclusive
Speaker 1: Moral Day T shirt and all of their other patriotic apparel.
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton permission to coding the news and disseminating information
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistakes, American, here a great
Speaker 1: American again. This is the buck Sexton Show. Activity Analysts. No,
Speaker 1: I don't like it when people call for someone to
Speaker 1: be fired because they disagree with that person's opinions or views.
Speaker 1: I don't like it. I don't do it. And I
Speaker 1: also think that you should get the benefit of the
Speaker 1: doubt and second chances and all that. Otherwise, we just
Speaker 1: lose an important part of our culture, which is the
Speaker 1: free exchange of ideas without excessive fear of reprisal. All
Speaker 1: the time that all said, oh, this joy Read thing
Speaker 1: is just a complete farce. It's just out of control.
Speaker 1: I've never seen her show because I definitely do not
Speaker 1: wake up at eight am on Saturday to watch MSNBC.
Speaker 1: I mean, I I try not to watch MSNBC period,
Speaker 1: but I do have to see some of the clips sometimes.
Speaker 1: But joy Read is you may recall, I think we
Speaker 1: discussed this last week. She is a African American female
Speaker 1: host of a show on MSNBC. Also writes for the
Speaker 1: website The Daily Beast, and she is a I believe,
Speaker 1: I believe would self identify as a social justice if
Speaker 1: not warrior, somebody very very con cern with social justice.
Speaker 1: On the right, we call this m grandstanding identity politics usually,
Speaker 1: but you know, social justice warriors are people who take
Speaker 1: a very progressive view of well everything in society and
Speaker 1: have a particular I've actually wanted what is the if
Speaker 1: I what is the definition of a of a social
Speaker 1: justice warrior? I mean, we all know what it is,
Speaker 1: but do we have a one who will use the
Speaker 1: excuse of civil rights to be rude, condescending, and sometimes
Speaker 1: violent for the purposes of relieving their frustrations or validating
Speaker 1: their sense of unwanted moral superiority. That's from an urban dictionary.
Speaker 1: I gotta say that's a pretty good definition. High five
Speaker 1: Urban dictionary. So yeah, especially the part about validating their
Speaker 1: sense of unwarranted moral superiority. Social justice warriors are first
Speaker 1: and foremost concerned with virtue signaling right, showing everyone else
Speaker 1: how great they are all the time. This is why
Speaker 1: they like to carry around signs and fight things like
Speaker 1: global warming that they're not really fighting, but they just
Speaker 1: want to feel like they're smart and feel good about themselves.
Speaker 1: So Joey Read comes from that side of the political spectrum.
Speaker 1: Not surprising or even particularly interesting, except about ten years
Speaker 1: ago she had a blog. On the blog, she wrote
Speaker 1: stuff about gay people that would be distasteful in any period,
Speaker 1: but especially for somebody who happens to be a woman
Speaker 1: of the progressive left, a social justice activist with a
Speaker 1: television show. It's a big problem when you say things
Speaker 1: like gay people kissing, as she did. And I'm paraphrasing,
Speaker 1: not direct quoting, but it grosses you out. And uh,
Speaker 1: she I don't I don't want to even get it.
Speaker 1: If you go back and look at some of what
Speaker 1: she said, you would say, wow. A real hostility toward
Speaker 1: the LGBT community from her writing and also what made
Speaker 1: jokes about Charlie Chris said, called him miss Charlie all
Speaker 1: the time. But that all said, I I'm okay with
Speaker 1: somebody evolving in their views. I'm okay with people apologizing
Speaker 1: for overstating we're going too far with something, and and
Speaker 1: that's all fun. My problem with Joy Read is that
Speaker 1: she's a liar. And my problem with NBC is that
Speaker 1: they're letting her get away with it. I don't know
Speaker 1: how an NBC really claims to have any standards of
Speaker 1: integrity at all anymore, but they seem to. Brian Williams,
Speaker 1: he was a guy whose particular skill will sounding like
Speaker 1: this while he stares into a camera and reads off
Speaker 1: the teleprompter. But I look the park. Don't you trust me? America?
Speaker 1: There I was single handedly taking out Julius Caesar. It
Speaker 1: was tough stuff, but somebody had to do it, you know.
Speaker 1: Brian Williams had a little problem with the truth, as
Speaker 1: we know. And remember he also initially kind of doubled
Speaker 1: down in the lies. Oh no, I was there, but
Speaker 1: you know, and then it was I I kind of
Speaker 1: I'm trying to remember what his nonsense, uh escape hatch
Speaker 1: rationale was, but it was something like, you know, I
Speaker 1: thought I was there, but I wasn't really, you know,
Speaker 1: I must have been confused and all that report reportage
Speaker 1: of being in a rock and I was like, in
Speaker 1: really dangerous situations. So Brian Williams did that, and you know,
Speaker 1: and now you've got joy readers that MSNBC, but you know,
Speaker 1: owned by parent company or run by parent company. NBC
Speaker 1: and the big problem with there is that she's just
Speaker 1: been lying, lying about how her blog was hacked. And
Speaker 1: I said on Tucker's show on Fox last week, this
Speaker 1: is a tactic. It's a delay tactic now to even
Speaker 1: claim that that the FBI is looking into this. And
Speaker 1: I think, I said on air, you know that they're
Speaker 1: just gonna say, well, the FBI wasn't able to find
Speaker 1: evidence of hacking. But this is uh, you know, this
Speaker 1: is like searching for the real killers, right, You're you're
Speaker 1: gonna be looking forever, and we all know that you're
Speaker 1: never gonna find anything. This is this is the cyber
Speaker 1: version of that. Well, I think I was hacked, but
Speaker 1: nobody can actually find any evidence of hacking. But but
Speaker 1: I think I was hacked. That was the storyline in
Speaker 1: order to give her a few more days to avoid
Speaker 1: having to face up to the fact that not only
Speaker 1: did you say all this stuff, what does that mean
Speaker 1: going forward? If your joy read and if you're people
Speaker 1: that support her who like to find others who are
Speaker 1: insufficiently devoted to social justice or who even accidentally transgress
Speaker 1: against the LGBT community with their commentary or their writing,
Speaker 1: and then demands firing wants them fired. You know, we
Speaker 1: live in a country where brendan Ike of Mozilla can
Speaker 1: be fired from his job as the CEO of an
Speaker 1: internet company for what he did in terms of a
Speaker 1: political donation in California to a cause that actually won
Speaker 1: a statewide referendum at the time, and he can get
Speaker 1: fired for that. Years later, brendan Ike of Mozilla can
Speaker 1: get fired for being a proponent of traditional marriage at
Speaker 1: the same time that Barack Obama was a was a
Speaker 1: proponent of traditional marriage. But then they need to maintain
Speaker 1: some separation here so that the hypocrisy can continue in
Speaker 1: their favor. You know, they can't be too obvious about
Speaker 1: the fact that on the left, they'll excuse some degree
Speaker 1: of LGBT animosity or or or vitriol against that community,
Speaker 1: and on the anyone who's a conservative gets completely annihilated.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's why I find this so deeply distasteful.
Speaker 1: Here's really a study in a non apology apology from
Speaker 1: someone who is I guess, just so desperate and or
Speaker 1: so lacking an integrity that, you know, whatever works, whatever
Speaker 1: gets her through the painful news cycle and prevents NBC
Speaker 1: from terminating her from her her show, she'll do. But
Speaker 1: here's what she said. I've spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: trying to make sense of these posts. Hired cybersecurity experts
Speaker 1: to see if somebody had manipulated my words for my
Speaker 1: former blog, and the reality is they have not been
Speaker 1: able to prove it. But here's what I know. I
Speaker 1: genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things because
Speaker 1: they are completely alien to me. But I can definitely understand,
Speaker 1: based on things I have tweeted and have written in
Speaker 1: the past, why some people don't believe me. I've not
Speaker 1: been exempt from being dumb or cruel or hurtful to
Speaker 1: the very people I want to advocate for. I own that,
Speaker 1: I get it. I I believe I didn't write them.
Speaker 1: Come on, folks, right, come on, I truly believe I
Speaker 1: did you write them or not? Drey Reid, just just
Speaker 1: admit that you did. But the whole, the whole notion,
Speaker 1: I believe I didn't write them or or I've reported
Speaker 1: this the FBI and they're investigating, and they have not
Speaker 1: been able to find evidence. You know, have not been
Speaker 1: able to find evidence of a hacking. This kind of
Speaker 1: reminds me of the remember when Cliff from Cheers was
Speaker 1: on Jeopardy and his answer was, who are three people
Speaker 1: who have never been in my kitchen? And I mean
Speaker 1: technically the that's true because the answer to the question
Speaker 1: was Archibald Leech, Bernard Schwartz and Lucille Lesour. This was
Speaker 1: in the movie category, and those are three people that
Speaker 1: had never been in Cliff's kitchen. But that's not the point, right,
Speaker 1: who are three people who have never been in I
Speaker 1: always remembered that and uh with joy read it's well,
Speaker 1: the FBI hasn't found the hacking yet, right, because there
Speaker 1: was no hacking. We're not all morons, Like, don't speak
Speaker 1: to the entire country or whoever is paying attention to this,
Speaker 1: like they're a bunch of of of dumb you know,
Speaker 1: dumb dummies. I was trying to think of a way
Speaker 1: to expand upon that, but that's what she's doing at
Speaker 1: MSNBC is gonna let her get away with it. I
Speaker 1: can't fire, they won't fire, so they're gonna let this go. Well,
Speaker 1: this is why it's really hard to have any respect
Speaker 1: for the media. There's just no ethics, there's no honesty,
Speaker 1: and these corporations don't enforce Remember the same company that
Speaker 1: didn't want to run a story on Harvey Weinstein is
Speaker 1: now the company that's saying that they don't. They don't
Speaker 1: think that joy Read should even face any disciplinary action.
Speaker 1: Uh not remember, not for them. I'm not saying because
Speaker 1: the blog composed ten years ago, I think that's harsh.
Speaker 1: I think she should just come out said, look, this
Speaker 1: stuff is wrong, repudiated, apologize, move on. But she couldn't
Speaker 1: own up to it. That's what's so discrediting about the
Speaker 1: whole thing. Didn't have the character. They say that this
Speaker 1: is this is what I said then, and I was wrong.
Speaker 1: It's really actually I dare I say a teachable moment
Speaker 1: that could have been offered up. You know, even even
Speaker 1: joy Read dabbled in anti LGBT thought at one point, right,
Speaker 1: I mean that's and now has learned how hateful and
Speaker 1: bad that is. But no, won't even own up to it,
Speaker 1: won't even take responsibility. I will face no penalty whatsoever.
Speaker 1: I can tell you this though, if if Buck Sexton,
Speaker 1: conservative analyst over at MSNBC, which is this is not
Speaker 1: going to happen. But if that, I promise you that
Speaker 1: I would not be able to get away with this.
Speaker 1: There is an enormous double standard that's at work here,
Speaker 1: and people really do grow grow quite tired of it
Speaker 1: after a while. And and the social justice warriors, um,
Speaker 1: you have to remember this, they view there, their goals
Speaker 1: is really part of a righteous quest, and there's nothing
Speaker 1: they think is really beyond the pale that there's There
Speaker 1: are very few things, if any, that they're unwilling to
Speaker 1: say in order to help the narrative and help the
Speaker 1: overall goal. They will destroy people's careers, will destroy their livelihoods,
Speaker 1: destroy their lives, and not do so honestly if it
Speaker 1: serves the overall purpose of the agenda, the agenda of
Speaker 1: the progressive, redistributionist social justice left in this country. And
Speaker 1: because Joy Reid serves that agenda, she will be given
Speaker 1: a pass that he has been given a pass on this,
Speaker 1: as astonishing as it is and as embarrassing as it is,
Speaker 1: by the way, that's one thing I think one of
Speaker 1: the reasons I resent this so much, not just because
Speaker 1: I work in the media and I've seen this and
Speaker 1: it's played out exactly as I thought it would. I
Speaker 1: said last week, I think she's gonna delay this, and
Speaker 1: you're gonna this whole FBI thing is a ruse. Of course,
Speaker 1: it's a ruse, right, um, But you know, I can
Speaker 1: see I'm somebody who's very sympath that to anyone who's
Speaker 1: public facing in this way, interacting with the public all
Speaker 1: the time, sharing their thoughts. We're all gonna make mistakes.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna make mistakes, it happens, but just own up
Speaker 1: to it and move on. She's not doing that, and
Speaker 1: they're saying that's fine, and that sends quite a message
Speaker 1: to all the rest of us. Meanwhile, give it a
Speaker 1: few months and she'll be saying that some some conservative
Speaker 1: should be deep platformed or boycotted or because that's how
Speaker 1: the left works. It really is. I got a hold
Speaker 1: on I gotta talk to you about the caravan at
Speaker 1: the border. I'm still following this pretty closely. Remember it's
Speaker 1: it's mostly about optics. Now, it's only a few hundred people,
Speaker 1: but it is a reminder of what the law currently
Speaker 1: is in the country. It's a reminder of all the
Speaker 1: different ways there are to game the system, and that
Speaker 1: is what this is. And also that the Republicans have
Speaker 1: not upheld their end of the bargain here. They have
Speaker 1: been unwilling, unwilling to do what is necessary to change
Speaker 1: immigration law and to make things happened that we're promised
Speaker 1: during the campaign by Trump himself. I am I am frustrated.
Speaker 1: I am frustrated with the GOP on this. So we
Speaker 1: will continue to look at that and a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of other things coming. Oh yeah, third hour. I know
Speaker 1: you've heard the Washing correspondence, White House. I'm sorry, White
Speaker 1: House Correspondence. The third hour. I want to get into
Speaker 1: a little bit just because it was so grotesque, and
Speaker 1: I think there's some bigger lessons from it, but I
Speaker 1: know that that's already been dominating. The area is for
Speaker 1: quite a bit. Um eight four or four nine, eight
Speaker 1: to five. If you want to chat eight four four
Speaker 1: nine buck, Tomorrow's May Day, isn't it you might have
Speaker 1: to have a sighting of the one and only Comrade
Speaker 1: Commie Bear on May Day. I think that might have
Speaker 1: to happen. So we've got we've got big plants, big things.
Speaker 1: And remember, whenever someone asks you a question you don't
Speaker 1: know the answer. Who are three people who have never
Speaker 1: been in my kitchen? Is an acceptable response? Will be
Speaker 1: right back when I read some of these reports as
Speaker 1: I'm down in the swamp right now. So I'm surrounded
Speaker 1: by it, right I can smell it, all the methane
Speaker 1: all over this swamp um. But I read some of
Speaker 1: the reports, like this one about Kelly saying that Trump
Speaker 1: is an idiot, and I just think, to myself, there
Speaker 1: are mistakes and there's maliciousness, And this strikes me as
Speaker 1: the latter. This to me certainly seems like maliciousness because
Speaker 1: I just don't believe that the chief of staff walks
Speaker 1: around calling the President United States an idiot. And you know,
Speaker 1: I don't even care what Trump says privately or how
Speaker 1: he's interacting from the White House. I just don't think
Speaker 1: of the White House cheapest staff you walk around calling
Speaker 1: the boss an idiot. Yeah, if you feel that way,
Speaker 1: you shouldn't have the job. You should leave. And we
Speaker 1: need to have a much more robust tradition of people
Speaker 1: who leave administrations, you know, leave their privileged position at
Speaker 1: the top of the United States government on principle, instead
Speaker 1: of waiting till after they've left. In the case of
Speaker 1: Komy getting fired and then trying to cash in, I
Speaker 1: think it's way too obvious what's really at work with
Speaker 1: some of those situations. I think the self interest is
Speaker 1: a bit blinding for some of the folks involved. I
Speaker 1: just don't believe that Kelly Coultrump an idiot, as is
Speaker 1: reported here by what was saying. Oh, it was NBC,
Speaker 1: So it isn't that a surprise the network that's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: Joy reach totally taking responsibility by not taking responsibility for
Speaker 1: what she once wrote. Uh, they're also the ones that
Speaker 1: have broken this story, which Kelly is saying is complete bs,
Speaker 1: a total non story. He said, I've spent more time
Speaker 1: at the President than anyone else, and we have an
Speaker 1: incredibly candid and strong relationship. He always knows where I stand,
Speaker 1: and he and I both know this story is total
Speaker 1: b s ah, And he says it's just a smear attempt.
Speaker 1: You know, there's only a couple of things that are
Speaker 1: possible here. Either John Kelly, uh four star general he's
Speaker 1: a liar, or there's some journalists who work for NBC
Speaker 1: who are liars. I don't know if they wanted to
Speaker 1: get even with the administration after the debacle of the
Speaker 1: White House Correspondence dinner and Trump's rally or something. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I can't really get in their heads, but uh,
Speaker 1: there there that's one thing. And then oh, speaking of Polo,
Speaker 1: we have Kathy Griffin. Oh oh gosh, switching gears for
Speaker 1: one quick second here. So Kathey Griffin, she's the one
Speaker 1: who held up the severed President Trump head not long
Speaker 1: ago and was all, I'm so sorry. Uh well, now
Speaker 1: she's out there after all the media covers, she got
Speaker 1: where she was saying, she's so sorry, she's retracted the apologies. Well,
Speaker 1: the left never really apologizes. It's all just tactical. It's
Speaker 1: not not hardfelt. But here's what she was saying about
Speaker 1: the president of the view. I can't believe it's been
Speaker 1: a year, the year this month that the picture was released,
Speaker 1: and um we already yeah, by the way, I take
Speaker 1: the apology back. There you go, takes the apology back,
Speaker 1: thanks the apologies, and she went on and mocks the
Speaker 1: president everything else. So just just remember that the next
Speaker 1: time you get some teary eyed leftist who goes way
Speaker 1: over the line and uh makes a credible threat against
Speaker 1: the president United States, just just remember that that when
Speaker 1: they're apologizing, if it involves Trump, all apologies are temporary.
Speaker 1: You know, it's always just another opportunity to try to
Speaker 1: go after the administration when they're not looking, um, speaking
Speaker 1: of the administration, where it's let's get into uh the
Speaker 1: caravan at the border wall that's or the caravan at
Speaker 1: the border that's coming up here in just a moments,
Speaker 1: they're right there. Team, He's back with you now, because
Speaker 1: when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck
Speaker 1: never stops. Our immigration laws in this country are a
Speaker 1: total disaster. They're left at all over the world. They're
Speaker 1: left at for their stupidity. And we have to have
Speaker 1: strong immigration laws. So I think if I apologize, wouldn't
Speaker 1: make ten cents worth of difference to them. There's nothing
Speaker 1: to apologize for. We have to have strong immigration laws
Speaker 1: to protect our country. That was Trump over the weekend
Speaker 1: in Michigan, and you had this migrant caravan at the
Speaker 1: border right now. I objected so much of this. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, I've known all along the caravan wasn't
Speaker 1: going away. This is a political stunt. There's a reason
Speaker 1: there's so much focus on this right now, and this
Speaker 1: has now turned into ken Trump he counted on to
Speaker 1: back up all the rhetoric over immigration and and over well,
Speaker 1: how he really became president. I know people talk about
Speaker 1: his trade policies and trade stance. And they say that's
Speaker 1: where he connected with the American worker. But I think
Speaker 1: he connected. You can look back at a timeline of
Speaker 1: this and when he was talking immigration, he was more
Speaker 1: connected to those who were early supporters and and and had.
Speaker 1: There was more of an energy and a and a
Speaker 1: in electricity in his public appearances than on any other issue.
Speaker 1: I think in large part because people were many people
Speaker 1: were unwilling to speak honestly about immigration. And so when
Speaker 1: when just having some and come forward, think about what
Speaker 1: radical departure it's been from what what was acceptable even
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago. And we have been brainwashed
Speaker 1: by the media and by the establishment to think immigration
Speaker 1: is always good. It is never anything but good. It
Speaker 1: only helps, there are no costs, it does not hurt.
Speaker 1: Illegal immigration is good, it's not actually illegal. In fact,
Speaker 1: illegal immigration is better than what Americans can do in jobs.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the stuff that's been just drummed
Speaker 1: into our heads for such a long time. And it's
Speaker 1: one of the great cons of the Democrat Party of
Speaker 1: the last thirty really last sixty years, that they've managed
Speaker 1: to do this that otherwise very reasonable people who pay
Speaker 1: attention to what's going on around the world. They're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: pay attention, what's going on this country. More importantly, you're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, immigration brings a lot of benefits. That's a
Speaker 1: lot of really good things for US. Um So this
Speaker 1: is where we start to see that there's a turning
Speaker 1: of the tide. This is where the converse station starts
Speaker 1: to shift. You've got this caravan at the border and
Speaker 1: they're trying to claim asylum. Remember, they're not waiting at
Speaker 1: the border to look for the opportunity. You remember that
Speaker 1: game if you were kids, you probably played a Capture
Speaker 1: the Flag where you'd stand and you and then you'd
Speaker 1: run around and they're all these different strategies you try
Speaker 1: to get the flag. And this is not that, right,
Speaker 1: it's not just trying to run across the border when
Speaker 1: you're not gonna get tagged out by the border patrol.
Speaker 1: This is trying to go through the existing processes at
Speaker 1: the border, uh the Tijuana California border or Colexic the
Speaker 1: Colexico border wall where they're going to claim asylum. Well,
Speaker 1: they're just gonna walk up to border patrol and say hey, here,
Speaker 1: I am taking good to go, and from there they
Speaker 1: they get processed, and think about this, Why does somebody
Speaker 1: from El Salvador or Honduras get to go to the
Speaker 1: front of the immigration line when right now, uh, for
Speaker 1: a example, just just to pick a group that the
Speaker 1: media doesn't have much sympathy for, Syrian Christians aren't pushed
Speaker 1: to the front of the line and and they're being exterminated.
Speaker 1: Iraqi Christians aren't pushed to the front of the line.
Speaker 1: They're being exterminated, and they are would be love to
Speaker 1: be in America and if they go back home there
Speaker 1: a good chance they're gonna die. Meanwhile, you've got Central
Speaker 1: Americans who are given a special status that Iraqi Christians
Speaker 1: are not. Yeah, that's yourselves. Why why is that? Why
Speaker 1: do our current laws allow this to continue? And that
Speaker 1: was one of the key things that Trump when we're
Speaker 1: talking about the immigration situation and talking about the caravan
Speaker 1: at the wall, Trump is like, look, the laws are garbage,
Speaker 1: and he's right, play nine. Are you watching that mess
Speaker 1: that's going on right now with the caravan coming up?
Speaker 1: Are you watching this? And our laws are so weak,
Speaker 1: they're so pathetic given to us by Democrats, They're so pathetic.
Speaker 1: Nancy Pellous Chuck Schumer. We've gotten Mexico to work with
Speaker 1: us and stopping a lot of what's pouring in. But
Speaker 1: we have the worst laws anywhere in the world. We
Speaker 1: don't have borders. We're gonna build the wall we get again,
Speaker 1: We've already started, and the wall is lagging. My friends,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to sit here and tell you that
Speaker 1: things are going great with the wall, because they're not.
Speaker 1: The wall right now is lagging. We are not building
Speaker 1: the wall faster that they're gonna done. What happens if
Speaker 1: Trump loses the House or if the Republican Party loses
Speaker 1: the House in the fall, goodbye wall. This is donezo.
Speaker 1: So you know liners and that Trump says he's committed
Speaker 1: to this, and I believe he does want a wall.
Speaker 1: We are a long way from actually making that a reality.
Speaker 1: And in the meantime, what is the Republican cong was doing?
Speaker 1: People say, oh, buck, their hands are tied. They can't
Speaker 1: do anything because of the filibuster. Change the filibuster rule.
Speaker 1: Harry Reid did it, and as a result, Obama packed
Speaker 1: the federal judiciary with what are now never Trump anti
Speaker 1: Trump judges. That was a pretty effective threat. You can
Speaker 1: say what you will about Harry Reid. But you know
Speaker 1: the guy will shake your hand and then put on
Speaker 1: the brass knuckles when your head is turned and take it,
Speaker 1: take you down right. He's he fights dirty. And you've
Speaker 1: got Republicans that are sitting there like, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: we can't get anything through now. They need super and
Speaker 1: they need supermajorities to fix laws around asylum. They need supermajorities,
Speaker 1: a super majority in the Senate in order to address
Speaker 1: some of the insane immigration policies that we currently have,
Speaker 1: just to get construction of al all going, folks, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry they're lying to us. They don't really want to
Speaker 1: do these things. I think a lot of members of Congress,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna start having some meets and chatting with
Speaker 1: more and more of them in the days and weeks ahead.
Speaker 1: But it's not that they've been stopped from doing these things.
Speaker 1: Is that they're looking from an excuse for an excuse
Speaker 1: to not do these things. That's where I really see
Speaker 1: this right now. I don't believe that I don't believe
Speaker 1: that this is gonna get much better anytime soon. Um.
Speaker 1: I mean, Trump is saying he's gonna find on the
Speaker 1: wall play clip ten the Democrats actually feel they're probably
Speaker 1: right that all of these people that are pouring across
Speaker 1: are gonna vote for Democrats, are not going to vote
Speaker 1: for Republicans. They're gonna vote no matter what we do.
Speaker 1: But we have to have borders, and we have to
Speaker 1: have them fast, and we need security. We need the wall.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have it all. And again that wall has started.
Speaker 1: We got one point six billion. We come up again
Speaker 1: on September and if we don't get border security, we'll
Speaker 1: have no choice, will close down the country because we
Speaker 1: need border security. I'm gonna hold the president to that one. Remember,
Speaker 1: he could veto whatever the Congress starts to pass when
Speaker 1: it comes to another continuing resolution or another spending bill,
Speaker 1: another omnibus bill, or whatever he has powers that he
Speaker 1: can use. He doesn't just have to go along with
Speaker 1: it because that's what they want. And now I think
Speaker 1: we we've set a marker here. Do we really think
Speaker 1: though the Republicans are going to become brave on the
Speaker 1: issue of immigration right before the midterms? I highly highly doubted.
Speaker 1: They're always waiting to fight another day. They're always waiting
Speaker 1: for the next time. And in the meantime, look, what's
Speaker 1: happening to the country. Look at how we are coming
Speaker 1: apart politically, we're coming apart linguistically. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: a big problem. The number of of people in the
Speaker 1: country who have very rudimentary at best English is something
Speaker 1: that is an enormous train on resource versus And think
Speaker 1: about this. How could this be a problem for anyone
Speaker 1: to talk about? Oh? How could you? The English language
Speaker 1: is what unifies us from a cultural perspective as much
Speaker 1: as anything other than uh, perhaps the Constitution itself and
Speaker 1: rule of law and some of our our civic traditions.
Speaker 1: But the English language is essential. Why what do we
Speaker 1: have in common with Australia and Canada and many of
Speaker 1: our closest allies around the world. Oh those we're English,
Speaker 1: That's why. And this is why there's such a cultural
Speaker 1: similarity and and the crossover as well. But oh no,
Speaker 1: we can't can't talk about that stuff. Oh that's not right,
Speaker 1: you know, Nancy Pelosi. The Democrats are gonna get really
Speaker 1: upset if you keep discussing these things. So I think
Speaker 1: you're gonna find most of the caravan ends up claiming
Speaker 1: asylum and they get into the system. And it's happening
Speaker 1: while Trump is president, and I can hear a lot
Speaker 1: of stuff about how you know, they it's not their fault.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are obstructionists. At some point that the Republicans
Speaker 1: can't get this done, they should just be honest and
Speaker 1: be like, you know what we're we're unable to stop
Speaker 1: the inflow folks, you know smoking if you got them,
Speaker 1: because America is going down. I mean, that's it. At
Speaker 1: some point they should just be honest. If mass immigration
Speaker 1: is endless for the foreseeable future into this country. I
Speaker 1: will come right back and talk to you about some
Speaker 1: of the leaks that have been going on and some
Speaker 1: of what we found out about an unholy alliance. If
Speaker 1: you're between former administration officials and some of the people
Speaker 1: that are going on TV now doing commentary, we'll be
Speaker 1: We'll be right back with that. I mean, Brendan was
Speaker 1: head of the CIA, Clapper is a directive national Intelligence.
Speaker 1: Do they launch any investigation? I mean, and only a
Speaker 1: few people would have had access to these facts and
Speaker 1: these conclusions. So Brennan and Clapper, they are the people
Speaker 1: in the top. They are the ones who honsible for this.
Speaker 1: When they did it or not, they're responsible, and they're
Speaker 1: going out they have the nerve to be criticizing President
Speaker 1: Trump when they allowed the words leaks, probably the history
Speaker 1: of intelligence they hand the Conners and Peter King, who
Speaker 1: is a a bit of a brawler on the cable
Speaker 1: news circuit, to be sure, but he's talking about a
Speaker 1: couple of things that are getting a lot more at
Speaker 1: tension right now. Clapper and Brennan have now broken down
Speaker 1: any notion that people may have of a nonpartisan uh,
Speaker 1: senior intelligence apparatus. They you know, they've made it so
Speaker 1: that people that work at that level have to now
Speaker 1: deal with the administration thinking that any holdover from the
Speaker 1: Obama administration maybe some kind of a deep state element.
Speaker 1: I mean, these guys are hyperpartisan, Clapper and Brennan, and
Speaker 1: they've gone out there and they are now on the
Speaker 1: making the rounds on cable TV, constantly attacking the president.
Speaker 1: But Clapper in particular has gotten some more attention recently
Speaker 1: because he seems to have some connection to the whole
Speaker 1: dossier situation. According to the House Permanent Select Committee on
Speaker 1: Intelligence HIPSY, which put out a report last week, Clapper
Speaker 1: wasn't exactly truthful. Clapper didn't just keep it on the
Speaker 1: straight and narrow when it came to questions about his
Speaker 1: contact with the media and the dossier as as we
Speaker 1: know it now, right, So, Clapper is a guy who,
Speaker 1: as we look at this, we have to think, Hold
Speaker 1: on a second, he lied under oath. If you lied
Speaker 1: under oath, that's a crime. If he lied to Congress
Speaker 1: under oath, and they are now telling us about this,
Speaker 1: you'd think that somebody would prosecute for this. But he's
Speaker 1: very protective. Why is he so protected? Well, Jonathan Turley
Speaker 1: gets into a bit of the connectivity here. You know,
Speaker 1: he's the g W. Oh he's not far from rhyme.
Speaker 1: He's a GW professor who is not a conservative, which
Speaker 1: just tries to actually interpret the law instead of rewriting it.
Speaker 1: And here's what he said about clappers issues with regard
Speaker 1: to CNN and the dossier, Play fifteen. Clapper most certainly
Speaker 1: did lie to Congress. He was not indicted. In fact,
Speaker 1: the statute of limitations ran out not long before he
Speaker 1: took the job at CNN. What's also interesting is that Comey,
Speaker 1: the former FBI director, said that CNN was looking for
Speaker 1: a hook in order to run the story of the dossier.
Speaker 1: He said that to Trump that hook ultimately became that
Speaker 1: briefing with Comy that was used as the hook. But
Speaker 1: CNN reported that high level people had confirmed this information
Speaker 1: with them. If one of those individuals is Clapper, then
Speaker 1: he has a serious problem. He could be accused again
Speaker 1: of perjury. It's clapber line about his contact with CNN.
Speaker 1: Did Clapper give that juicy scoop to CNN about the
Speaker 1: president being briefed on the dossier? Remember that they had
Speaker 1: to find a way to get it out there, to
Speaker 1: launder it so it could be publicly discussed, and the
Speaker 1: way to do that is to use the media as
Speaker 1: the cutout in that process. That's what seems like it happened.
Speaker 1: That's what seems like happened here. That's uh, that's increasingly
Speaker 1: I think a clear case. There's a clear case to
Speaker 1: be made. And these former senior Obama appointees in the
Speaker 1: intelligence community have decided to become all out superpartisans trying
Speaker 1: to take down this administration while also collecting paychecks from
Speaker 1: media organizations. Were right away after they leave their government jobs.
Speaker 1: And you know, you think if you had been the
Speaker 1: former director of National Intelligence or a former CIA director,
Speaker 1: you would want to you would understand the seriousness of
Speaker 1: the issues that you handled, and would want to inform
Speaker 1: the public and steer policy. We don't need another clown
Speaker 1: telling us how terrible Trump is. We don't need that.
Speaker 1: I don't know why Brennan thinks that that's useful at
Speaker 1: this point, but it's really all about them, right, It's
Speaker 1: really all about these people, who, if not a deep state,
Speaker 1: were certainly a progressive paris state inside the top echelon
Speaker 1: of the United States government. And you know, it's it's
Speaker 1: just enough is enough? I do believe that there were
Speaker 1: high level leaks from people of the same stature, at
Speaker 1: least as Clapper and Brendon, whether FBI or you know,
Speaker 1: or Clapper and Brendon, right, it could have been them.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but I do know that very senior
Speaker 1: people are the ones who leak because they have connections
Speaker 1: to reporters, they have access, they have cover for those meeting. Right,
Speaker 1: you're allowed to when you're the FBI director, Right, you
Speaker 1: have some discussions with the press, you know, when you're
Speaker 1: when you're the d n I you're allowed to talk
Speaker 1: to the press. When you're just some other person way
Speaker 1: down the food chain. And FBI d o j or
Speaker 1: wherever you're talking to press, the you're gonna take those
Speaker 1: kinds of risks just not worth it. It's just not
Speaker 1: worth it. So we're looking at very senior people. I
Speaker 1: need to keep an eye on Clapper. And and then
Speaker 1: also just the way this whole thing went down. Did
Speaker 1: Clapper get a job at CNN because he was leaking
Speaker 1: information to them that they then ran scoops on too
Speaker 1: hurt President Trump? Is that the is that now the
Speaker 1: new cycle? Is that the way that this thing works,
Speaker 1: because it's not like journalism can take many more lumps
Speaker 1: without just collapsing under its own lies and ah just pretentiousness.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm all for a system where we admit
Speaker 1: our biases, admit what we want, admit what we're trying
Speaker 1: to do and accomplish, and then you know that the
Speaker 1: facts straighten themselves out because without facts, you have no credibility.
Speaker 1: So without credibility, you can't push the agenda. So it's
Speaker 1: not over just the facts, it's it's the The fight
Speaker 1: is really over the honesty of what perspective does one
Speaker 1: come from versus what perspective of somebody else comes from.
Speaker 1: But and another way to look at this would be
Speaker 1: to talk about the White House correspondence uh debacle over
Speaker 1: the weekend, which I did not watch live, I uh
Speaker 1: certainly watched the day after, but it tells us a
Speaker 1: lot about what the elite DC media thinks of not
Speaker 1: just Trump, but really the rest of the country. And
Speaker 1: we will get into that in just a few moments. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm in Washington, d C. Now it's already getting hot here.
Speaker 1: But the good news is that's a great time of
Speaker 1: year to kick back, relax and have a nice glass
Speaker 1: of G four tequila, is he G four is all
Speaker 1: about truly rate craftsmanship in the tequila process. The coolest
Speaker 1: thing you're probably gonna remember about G four is that
Speaker 1: it is distilled using fifty harvested rainwater and fifty percent
Speaker 1: spring water. The rainwater is actually harvested from an advanced
Speaker 1: rain collection system that was built into the distillery itself,
Speaker 1: and the name G four stands for fourth generation. These
Speaker 1: guys take their tequila seriously, whether you're gonna be making
Speaker 1: margarita's with it, sitting back drinking it straight, or with
Speaker 1: some rocks. I like to salt the rim of the
Speaker 1: glass myself. G four is simply delicious. It's at a
Speaker 1: great price point. You will love this artist in tequila.
Speaker 1: Go to G four Tequila dot life for more details,
Speaker 1: or give them a like on Facebook at Facebook dot
Speaker 1: com slash G four Tequilas Buck Sexton Mission Decoding the
Speaker 1: news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake
Speaker 1: America Great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Almos a analyst. Is this better than that phony Washington?
Speaker 1: White House? Carres Bombers? Is this more fun? I could
Speaker 1: be up there tonight smiling like I love where they're
Speaker 1: hitting your shot after shot. These people they ate you
Speaker 1: got shot and I'm supposed to and you know, you
Speaker 1: gotta smile. And if you don't smile, they'll say he
Speaker 1: he was terrible, he couldn't take any And if you
Speaker 1: do smile, they'll say, what was he smiling about? You know,
Speaker 1: there's no win. That was Trump in Michigan. And welcome
Speaker 1: to our three of the Buck Sexton Show team. That
Speaker 1: that was Trump in Michigan. And he's completely right. He
Speaker 1: was completely right. He is completely right. Uh. The White
Speaker 1: House correspondence dinner is a debacle. And this past weekend
Speaker 1: it was just an all out embarrassment. And to those
Speaker 1: who are wondering, I actually went to a White House
Speaker 1: correspondence dinner maybe six years ago now I think I
Speaker 1: went in twenty so yeah, it would have been six
Speaker 1: years ago, and it was boring, and I left in
Speaker 1: the middle of it, and I would and I've never
Speaker 1: gone back. I could have gone back. I've never asked
Speaker 1: to go back. I have no interest in going back.
Speaker 1: It's just not something that appeals to me at all.
Speaker 1: I'm down here, as you know, in the swamp right now,
Speaker 1: and it is among the swampy ist of swamp like
Speaker 1: events because it's all based on really a myth. Uh.
Speaker 1: You have all these people who are getting together and
Speaker 1: under the pretense that it's a celebration of journalism, but
Speaker 1: it's really a celebration of how cool and influential all
Speaker 1: of the people assembled are and they're supposed to be
Speaker 1: there talking about big j journalism, when in reality, it's
Speaker 1: all about hanging out with the people that they're not
Speaker 1: covering so much as they are constantly socializing with anyway,
Speaker 1: and it's all very clubby. A lot of this is
Speaker 1: built on access, and journalism in this country is largely
Speaker 1: a lot now or at least the notion of impartial journalism,
Speaker 1: it's just not true, doesn't exist. I prefer when people
Speaker 1: at least say things like, uh, someone's a a political
Speaker 1: journalist or a I'm sorry, am how I'd even take
Speaker 1: a political activist over a political journalist in most cases,
Speaker 1: because there's an honesty to it. Trying to achieve something,
Speaker 1: trying to push certain certain agendas, that's what most journalists do.
Speaker 1: So Trump's event in Michigan, which we may go back
Speaker 1: to in a second, was was great and it just
Speaker 1: shows you why was this guy and why was this
Speaker 1: movement able to defeat this Hillary swamp belt Way to
Speaker 1: sell a corridor machine the last election and the White
Speaker 1: House correspondence dinner was almost like it was made to
Speaker 1: order to remind all Americans why Hillary lost the last
Speaker 1: time around. She's amazing, Oh, I mean because it was
Speaker 1: a rejection, the opportunity to reject all this nonsense, this
Speaker 1: self congratulatory lies that are that are such a pervasive
Speaker 1: part of the contemporary media apparatus. And uh, but nothing
Speaker 1: was worse about it. And this was the worst one
Speaker 1: that there's ever been than Michelle Wolfe, a comedian that
Speaker 1: I have literally I'd literally never heard of before the
Speaker 1: White House Correspondence Dinner. Now I don't pretend to be
Speaker 1: really up on pop culture, but I am up on
Speaker 1: the culture broadly speaking, and I'm on Twitter and I'm
Speaker 1: pretty much on the Internet all day long in one
Speaker 1: way or another. And I had never heard of this person. Now,
Speaker 1: maybe she was gonna be great, and so the fact
Speaker 1: that this could have been a breakout moment for her,
Speaker 1: So the fact that her notoriety wasn't particularly high going
Speaker 1: into it didn't really matter me. She didn't just bombed,
Speaker 1: I mean she nuclear thermonuclear fusion bombed this thing. I
Speaker 1: mean it was like nothing I've ever seen in my life.
Speaker 1: And I didn't watch it live. I looked at I
Speaker 1: looked at it on playback the next day because why,
Speaker 1: I was having actually a nice weekend and did not
Speaker 1: want to watch the White House Correspondence there. I'll tell you,
Speaker 1: I actually was forced to cover. And this was really
Speaker 1: this was debasic, I tell you the truth. I had
Speaker 1: to watch the White House Correspondence Dinner from a studio
Speaker 1: in CNN and comment on the commentary in real time
Speaker 1: at the Correspondence dinner. I would rather take a pencil
Speaker 1: with plenty of letting it and stab myself in the eye.
Speaker 1: Now then do that again. It was brutal. But going
Speaker 1: back to what was the real low light of the night,
Speaker 1: this Michelle Wolf stand up Regine. Now they do this,
Speaker 1: there's a stand up part of this, but this one
Speaker 1: was just a reminder of how in the Trump era
Speaker 1: there is no class, There is no good faith, There
Speaker 1: is no kindness or decency at all extended to the
Speaker 1: other side, meaning the Trump Sign, even during a social
Speaker 1: event that's supposed to be a celebration. They can't be
Speaker 1: nice to Trump and the Republicans even during a party,
Speaker 1: which is what this is. Okay, this is not a
Speaker 1: political it's it's not supposed to be a political event.
Speaker 1: It's not supposed to be a political rally. And uh,
Speaker 1: the worst part of the whole thing was when Michelle
Speaker 1: Wolf you've probably heard this, but I want to walk
Speaker 1: through a little bit, got into the part of her
Speaker 1: act which was terrible top to bottom. It was truly unfunny, nasty,
Speaker 1: and also she just sounds like an idiot. She just doesn't.
Speaker 1: She didn't sound like like an intelligent, witty person at
Speaker 1: all during this. But here's how she spoke about the
Speaker 1: White House Press Secretary plicklip five, and of course we
Speaker 1: have Sarah had to be Sanders. We are graced with
Speaker 1: Sarah's president. I'd be saying her a little starstruck. I
Speaker 1: love you as aunt Lydia and the Handmaid's Tail, my parents.
Speaker 1: If you haven't seen it, you would love it. Every
Speaker 1: time Sarah steps up to the podium, I get excited
Speaker 1: because I'm not really sure what we're gonna get, you know,
Speaker 1: a press briefing, a bunch of lies, or divided into
Speaker 1: softball teams. It's shirts and skins. And this time, don't
Speaker 1: be such a little bit, Jim Acosta. Don't they really
Speaker 1: like Sarah? I think she's very resourceful, Like she burns
Speaker 1: fats and then she uses that ash to create a
Speaker 1: perfect smokey eye, Like maybe she's born with it. Maybe
Speaker 1: it's lies, it's probably life. And I'm never really sure
Speaker 1: what Sanders? You know? Is it Sarah Sanders, Is it
Speaker 1: Sarah Huckabee Sanders? Is it cousin Huckabee? Is it Anti
Speaker 1: Huckabee Sanders? Like what's uncle Tom? But for white women
Speaker 1: who disappoint other white women? Here here horrifying, idiotic, unfunny, nasty,
Speaker 1: painful to listen to. This is who this elite and
Speaker 1: elitist collection. Elitist actually not elite of of d C
Speaker 1: throne sniffers, which is really what we're talking about here.
Speaker 1: A lot of people that suck up to power, and
Speaker 1: what's worse, pretend that they're keeping power in check and
Speaker 1: holding power accountable. A lot of those people that were laughing,
Speaker 1: and and they picked this person to give a speech.
Speaker 1: Notice what she did. She went after, Oh, and I
Speaker 1: love Um. The guy who plays Uh. I forget his
Speaker 1: name from the show. He's a South South Asian American actor.
Speaker 1: I'm forgetting his name. Um. I think his name is Uh. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I can't remember his name, but he he was trying
Speaker 1: to He's got a big Twitter following all these actors
Speaker 1: that don't know anything to do that. They weren't making
Speaker 1: fun of her appearance. Really, they're talking about a character
Speaker 1: from the show Um character from the show The Handmaid's
Speaker 1: Tail who is just austere and large and mannish, and
Speaker 1: that's who she likens her too, and then makes a
Speaker 1: soft essentially makes a lesbian softball player joke. That was
Speaker 1: what she did. So let's just call out what she did,
Speaker 1: that was what she did and uh, and then also
Speaker 1: made fun of her makeup. This is just nasty, this
Speaker 1: is pathetic. I'm gonna be a mean girl on the
Speaker 1: podium stuff. And you know what's in many ways the
Speaker 1: most astonishing part of it that there were a lot
Speaker 1: of journalists who the day after this were either saying
Speaker 1: she didn't they did something called gas lighting, saying she
Speaker 1: didn't make fun of Sarah Huckaby Sanders appearance, which is
Speaker 1: just a lie, or we're saying it's Trump's fault. This
Speaker 1: was the big take. Oh, it's Trump's fault. You see,
Speaker 1: they are pathological, they have a they have psychological issues.
Speaker 1: There's been a break from reality, there's been a break
Speaker 1: from rational thought and reason with a large portion of
Speaker 1: the Washington press corps. Anyone who would think that a
Speaker 1: comedian going up on stage and mocking the appearance of
Speaker 1: a prominent woman in a uh, in a white house
Speaker 1: role is the fault of the president, will make excuses
Speaker 1: for any behavior whatsoever. But that's what they do. You know.
Speaker 1: In the It's like I mentioned to you, with Trump
Speaker 1: Trump Law you have and the Trump the anti Trump judiciary,
Speaker 1: and now there's the Trump standards for media, which is
Speaker 1: just anything to hurt the administration is justifiable. That's all
Speaker 1: that matters. And anything that gets in the way of
Speaker 1: that is to be forgotten, is to be pushed aside,
Speaker 1: is irrelevant, that is, that is exactly how they act.
Speaker 1: Now it gets worse, and there's more. So I want
Speaker 1: to talk to you a little in a little more
Speaker 1: detail about some of the worst parts of this because
Speaker 1: it was a real window into what the White House
Speaker 1: press core. And it look, there's a lot of if
Speaker 1: you're like a media person in the DC or New
Speaker 1: York area that is part of any establishment, any established
Speaker 1: and establishment media at all, you tend to go to
Speaker 1: this thing, you know, news media I'm talking about, you
Speaker 1: tend to go to this thing. And the lack of
Speaker 1: self awareness that this crew has is just astonishing. It's astonishing.
Speaker 1: And you know, so many of them are so deeply insecure, untalented,
Speaker 1: and they're just weasley, little suck ups, you know, that's
Speaker 1: really what they are. Never really been all that interested
Speaker 1: in doing anything other than promoting themselves. And it was
Speaker 1: just like a collection of it was it was like
Speaker 1: a bonfire of the vanities and we were watching a
Speaker 1: burn in real time. Uh So I want to get
Speaker 1: into a little more of this right after we take
Speaker 1: quick a quick beat here, so I stay right there, team,
Speaker 1: We've got more on the White House correspondence debacle when
Speaker 1: we come back. Information is everything when it comes to
Speaker 1: background and vetting needs. And that's why Global Verification Network
Speaker 1: is simply the best possibility for you out there right now.
Speaker 1: Global Verification is the only dual certified and veteran owned
Speaker 1: background investigation company. They don't send your stuff overseas, their
Speaker 1: people aren't located overseas. You'd be amazed how many so
Speaker 1: called vetting companies are doing all their stuff outside of
Speaker 1: US territory, which means, by the way, they're not as
Speaker 1: hack proof. You don't know what really going on. You
Speaker 1: want people that are here, located in the States. Your
Speaker 1: information is never offshore. Your data is kept here, and
Speaker 1: all the people working on your cases, all the respontigation
Speaker 1: experts are here in the US of A. Check it
Speaker 1: out for yourself. Go to my g VN dot com.
Speaker 1: That's my g VN dot com, or call Global Verification
Speaker 1: Network at eight seven seven six nine five one one
Speaker 1: seven nine. We should definitely talk about the women in
Speaker 1: the Trump administration. Here's Kelly in Conway, Man. She has
Speaker 1: the perfect last name for what she does. Conway. It's
Speaker 1: like if my name was Michelle Jokes, frizzy hair smokes.
Speaker 1: You guys gotta stop putting Kelly In on your shows.
Speaker 1: All she does is lie. If you don't give her
Speaker 1: a platform, she has nowhere to lie. It's like that
Speaker 1: old saying, if a tree falls in the woods, how
Speaker 1: do we get Kelly Inn under that tree? How do
Speaker 1: we get Cary Inn under that tree? I do want
Speaker 1: to meet the person. I want to meet the collection
Speaker 1: of idiots that thought that this woman should be given
Speaker 1: this platform at all. Ever, I'd like to I'd like
Speaker 1: to have a conversation with him. I know I'll never
Speaker 1: get this opportunity, but I'd like to sit around and
Speaker 1: say so. Explain to me how having this nasty, shrill voiced,
Speaker 1: untalented I wanna be clowned, because at least clowns are funny. Uh.
Speaker 1: Someone explained to me how that was ever a good idea.
Speaker 1: This is one of the things you see about many
Speaker 1: people in the media is that they are where they
Speaker 1: are largely because of connections and conniving, not because of
Speaker 1: any particular talent, and you could say, oh, buck, this
Speaker 1: is the White House corse on its association. Yeah, what
Speaker 1: is what does it? It's a scholarship organization, then just
Speaker 1: raise money and give people scholarships. The whole thing is
Speaker 1: a joke. I completely agree with those who are saying
Speaker 1: that it should that at least the correspondence dinner um
Speaker 1: should look. People allowed to throw a party if they
Speaker 1: want to, but this should go away. The president should
Speaker 1: not attend administration personnel. I gotta say it. I don't
Speaker 1: know why. Some of the folks who showed up were
Speaker 1: upset when things got nasty. Who worked for the administration.
Speaker 1: I would never show up if I work the administration.
Speaker 1: I don't want to be around this. I know you
Speaker 1: knew what it was gonna be, right, I mean we
Speaker 1: all kind of knew. I get it. Maybe they wanted
Speaker 1: to give the benefit of the doubt to the left.
Speaker 1: But how many times can Lucy pull away the football
Speaker 1: on this one before we see it for what it is?
Speaker 1: But it gets even worse too. You know this is
Speaker 1: this goes to show you how the left is so
Speaker 1: thoroughly destroyed comedy. Remember you can't have a Pooh that
Speaker 1: character from the City Simpson's anymore. And I actually do
Speaker 1: a pretty good impoo personate a poor personation, um, but
Speaker 1: I can't do that because I want to get in trouble. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: you can have a left wing comedian get up the
Speaker 1: correspondence dinner and say this play clip seven. My fence
Speaker 1: is also very anti choice. He thinks abortion is murder, which,
Speaker 1: first of all, don't knock it till you try it,
Speaker 1: and when you do try it, really knock it. You know,
Speaker 1: you gotta get that baby out of there. She's making
Speaker 1: jokes about punching a fetus until it dies. Is that
Speaker 1: is that funny to any any essentient human being, anybody
Speaker 1: with more than a couple of brain cells rubbed together?
Speaker 1: Is Where where's the humor in that? How is that funny?
Speaker 1: This is a professional comedian who I'm sure it was
Speaker 1: paid handsomely to do this, and that's what she thinks
Speaker 1: she should be making jokes about. And I'll note that
Speaker 1: there was some, if not rowning, at least a little
Speaker 1: bit of a hesitation in the room when she made
Speaker 1: that comment. But there are people who laughed. I think
Speaker 1: that's funny. You know, what does the left really stand for? Now?
Speaker 1: That's a question I'm not gonna try to answer all
Speaker 1: at once, but just remember that that that's a joke
Speaker 1: that could get made. And I like to line these
Speaker 1: things up. A Pooh is cultural appropriation, racist and terrible.
Speaker 1: After entertaining people for decades and doing a lot of
Speaker 1: really incisive political commentary and not punching up, not laughing
Speaker 1: app but laughing with the character of a Pooh on
Speaker 1: The Simpsons. But there are people who are still defending uh,
Speaker 1: Michelle Wolf's complete disaster of a stand up, including that
Speaker 1: abortion show. There are people think that, you know, it
Speaker 1: wasn't it wasn't nearly as terrible as I seven think
Speaker 1: it was. And uh, they're just they're delusional, they really are,
Speaker 1: um And and they're just they're stroying so much that
Speaker 1: is good and decent in this country and they think
Speaker 1: they're making it better, which is really one of the
Speaker 1: particular diseases of progressivism. It's very troubling. But that that
Speaker 1: was one of the most unfunny jokes I ever seen.
Speaker 1: And you know, for all these and I don't I
Speaker 1: don't have some of the clips you had. You know,
Speaker 1: um Cuomo's brother on on CNN, and he was getting
Speaker 1: into it with with Matt slap over. How come you
Speaker 1: call out the White House Correspondence dinner stand up, but
Speaker 1: you don't call out Trump? Right? This is now they
Speaker 1: are just admitting they have no standards anymore. The only
Speaker 1: standard is does it attack Trump and does it scratch
Speaker 1: the itch that the left has of trying to debase
Speaker 1: to fame and assault Trump always in at all costs.
Speaker 1: That is the only standard, that is the only rule
Speaker 1: that exists that they that they care about um. And
Speaker 1: that's why Trump's the juxtaposition of the Trump rally with
Speaker 1: this just complete and utter baccanal of stupidity at the
Speaker 1: Correspondence dinner. Uh, that's why I think it was so powerful.
Speaker 1: And you had moments like this from Trump that I
Speaker 1: really appreciated. Play eleven. All around the world, we're respected again.
Speaker 1: We're not pushovers anymore. We're not pushovers. You saw the
Speaker 1: President of France. He came in, great guy, claim your
Speaker 1: American presidents and your American representatives. But it's not happening anymore.
Speaker 1: We're respected again. As a nation. We're respected. We're not
Speaker 1: the Patsy's anymore. We're not the pushovers anymore. You know
Speaker 1: who the you know who. The people that really lost
Speaker 1: out on this in this whole weekend were those who
Speaker 1: think that they have the right to judge the rest
Speaker 1: of us um from their purchase in the media. I
Speaker 1: don't want to hear any more from them. You don't
Speaker 1: want to hear any more from them. And I'm glad
Speaker 1: in the sense that they exposed themselves in this way.
Speaker 1: You won't catch me at this correspondence dinner, uh, And
Speaker 1: I don't think others should go either. And I'm glad
Speaker 1: that Trump had his rally and just got right to
Speaker 1: the American people with her UM. I do want to
Speaker 1: tell you, I want to light it up a little
Speaker 1: bit in here, So I want to tell you about
Speaker 1: the most interesting part of my weekend, which involved a
Speaker 1: tiny pet of the poor sign variety. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: He's holding the line for America. Buck sexton his back.
Speaker 1: So I had an incredible experience over the weekend where
Speaker 1: I my my little sister. I'm so proud of her.
Speaker 1: She's the coolest, most awesome little sister on the planet.
Speaker 1: She is getting married in um just about a month,
Speaker 1: so I have a I have a wedding that I
Speaker 1: am going to New York this week, and that's not
Speaker 1: her wedding, another family member's wedding and one of my cousins.
Speaker 1: And then I got a wedding from my little sister
Speaker 1: in a month. It's gonna be fun. So Buck is
Speaker 1: gonna be rocking the wedding season hard in eighteen. I've
Speaker 1: already got I got a new summer suit, which I
Speaker 1: never really spend money on things like this, so I'm
Speaker 1: excited about that. You know, a suit that's I used
Speaker 1: to think, Oh, I'll just wear a year round suit. No, no,
Speaker 1: there's that. That's a bad idea, especially if you're gonna
Speaker 1: go to a wedding that's gonna have any outdoor stuff
Speaker 1: in summertime in New York or d C. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I I was. I was with my family over the weekend,
Speaker 1: and my little sister decided she was gonna have a
Speaker 1: friend come over and bring over micro pigs, which some
Speaker 1: of you saw this on the various social media platforms, right.
Speaker 1: I posted some photos on Instagram, on Facebook. These things
Speaker 1: are amazing. I now, before I got a lot, I
Speaker 1: saw a lot of comments about Buck. How can you
Speaker 1: like bacon and small pigs in this way? And I
Speaker 1: agree that there's a little bit of a disconnect are
Speaker 1: But let me just get into micropigs. Apparently they are
Speaker 1: able to be trained like dogs, which is just amazing
Speaker 1: to me. That they come when when the the the
Speaker 1: owner would say come, they'd come by names, so they
Speaker 1: can they recognize names. You can have them not not
Speaker 1: only will they use I'm just telling, by the way,
Speaker 1: these teacups or I don't think that. Yeah, they call
Speaker 1: them micro pigs, but they're like teacup pigs, same idea.
Speaker 1: They're tiny. I mean, I was holding them there. Look
Speaker 1: they look like little baby pigs, but they stay baby
Speaker 1: pig size the whole time. And you can train them
Speaker 1: to use a little potty, so you can potty train
Speaker 1: these tiny pigs. And I said, well, can you put
Speaker 1: little little mini diapers on the mini pigs and she said, no,
Speaker 1: we don't do that, and I said, yeah, that's were
Speaker 1: it obviously, Why would I ask that? But they were pretty,
Speaker 1: They're pretty incredible little animals, really really cute, and they
Speaker 1: apparently are very affectionate. They become very attached to people.
Speaker 1: I was I was amazed. I'd never the only pigs
Speaker 1: I've ever seen are pigs on a farm that were
Speaker 1: you know which you usually think of right, big and
Speaker 1: sloppy and like that looks like yummy bacon. Now I
Speaker 1: saw all the commentary about my micro pigs and bacon bits,
Speaker 1: and guys, you know there's there's differences here. Okay, those
Speaker 1: are big mean pigs and micro pigs are very different
Speaker 1: because their pets. But this is all you know, I
Speaker 1: I really don't have. This is where I start to
Speaker 1: accept that emotion overtakes reason when people say to me,
Speaker 1: you love steak and hamburger so much. You know cows
Speaker 1: are are mammals, but you would you would risk your
Speaker 1: own personal safety for you're a dog that you care about. What? Why?
Speaker 1: Why is that I don't have answers to these things?
Speaker 1: I really don't I how can I think that pigs
Speaker 1: are cute and adorable and maybe want to have one
Speaker 1: as a pet, but also ate bacon. I mean, miss
Speaker 1: Molly was giving me a hard time. She's like, you
Speaker 1: ate bacon in the morning and we're playing with baby
Speaker 1: pigs in the afternoon in a little pen. And the
Speaker 1: answer was yes. And I don't really have much of
Speaker 1: a much of a thing to say beyond they're really
Speaker 1: cute and fun and I also cannot give up bacon
Speaker 1: because it's delicious. So I'm a kind of a crossroads here, team,
Speaker 1: I don't have an answer. You know, this is like
Speaker 1: I need to speak to some kind of a an
Speaker 1: animal ethicis or something to to help me understand. How
Speaker 1: is it possible that you can find an animal cute
Speaker 1: and want to have it around, but you could eat
Speaker 1: its cousins. But then again, you look at the animal kingdom.
Speaker 1: If we're gonna be totally honest, here are lots of animals.
Speaker 1: You know, they love their own family, but they'll eat
Speaker 1: other animals. There's there's tons of this that goes on,
Speaker 1: even bears, I mean even more sophisticated animals. You know,
Speaker 1: a male bear will eat little baby bears off it
Speaker 1: if they're not his. So I I know, I'm I'm
Speaker 1: going down the the teacup pig hole here a little bit.
Speaker 1: But they're amazing. If you guys haven't seen them, I
Speaker 1: would recommend you check out on on Instagram or on Facebook.
Speaker 1: I put them all over the place, the cutest little
Speaker 1: things ever. And and what I would ask is any
Speaker 1: of you who have photos of super cute, uh, super
Speaker 1: cute baby animals of any kind. Facebook dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck sexcent Pro. I want to see what you got
Speaker 1: because I know there are a lot of you that
Speaker 1: live in areas where you're not amazed if you can
Speaker 1: find a domicile with more than four hundred square feet,
Speaker 1: like many of you live in places where there's actual
Speaker 1: grass and trees, which sounds amazing, by the way, So
Speaker 1: you have room for things like animals as well as
Speaker 1: human beings to stretch out and not be able to
Speaker 1: cook with one hand and open the door to the
Speaker 1: front door with the other and then put their foot
Speaker 1: in the shower all at the same time. You actually
Speaker 1: have some room to spread out. So if you have
Speaker 1: some cute animal photos, face swoop dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: sex and post them under the teacup pig photo that
Speaker 1: I have up on Facebook. Let's see what you got. Um,
Speaker 1: But John, do I I probably have to make sure
Speaker 1: that we can post photos up there. Right Maybe that's
Speaker 1: turned off, So I'm just realizing that this might not
Speaker 1: be um, you know what, Send me them in the
Speaker 1: roll call in box and I'll post the cutest ones.
Speaker 1: That's how we'll do it. So Facebook dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck sex and send me the cutest baby animals that
Speaker 1: you've met. It can't just be off the internet, right,
Speaker 1: You've got to actually have had some connection to them.
Speaker 1: And uh, it'll just be a nice thing for the springtime.
Speaker 1: We'll do a little collage for you all of cutest
Speaker 1: Team buck pets on on the Facebook page. Which reminds me.
Speaker 1: We've got roll call coming up here in just uh second,
Speaker 1: So stay right there, Dame buck It's time for roll call.
Speaker 1: It's kind of an intense roll call. I kind of
Speaker 1: like our our jazzier You know what, John, we we
Speaker 1: can kick that one out of the rotation. We can
Speaker 1: drop that one on the and the forget and to
Speaker 1: forget about it, Bucket. I don't like that roll call
Speaker 1: when it's but I am the one that picks the music,
Speaker 1: so I have no one to blame but myself. But
Speaker 1: sometimes just to make it a little spicy, a little fun,
Speaker 1: I just grab something out of our music. Ben, I'm like,
Speaker 1: this sounds interesting and don't even really give it more
Speaker 1: of a more than a five second listen. Uh, So
Speaker 1: let's get into roll call. If you want to be
Speaker 1: a part of this, by the way, you should just
Speaker 1: send us a message at Facebook dot com. Slash Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton or official Team Buck at gmail dot com. First up,
Speaker 1: we have Shannon, who writes, Hey Buck, I'm a loyal
Speaker 1: listener for the last three years. Well, thank you so much, Shannon.
Speaker 1: I really appreciate that. You're definitely my favorite radio show
Speaker 1: podcast and I never miss radio show Slash podcast and
Speaker 1: I never miss it. Quick question, I'm going to a
Speaker 1: Ruba in a few weeks. What do you recommend? Oh?
Speaker 1: And when did you start working on all of your voices?
Speaker 1: Hillary is my favorite. It sounds just like her, and
Speaker 1: and and the Andrew Cuomo voice is amazing. Keep it up,
Speaker 1: chields high, Shannon, Shannon, when you go to Ruba, do
Speaker 1: not get pulled into the big fancy hotels. The restaurants
Speaker 1: so not very good and they are very overpriced. Uh.
Speaker 1: But there's a place called Yamanjo which is actually in downtown,
Speaker 1: the main city in a Ruba. I forgot what it's
Speaker 1: called the top of my head, but you'll know it's
Speaker 1: where all the cruise ships pull in. That place was phenomenal.
Speaker 1: And you know what, Shannon, I'll write back here on
Speaker 1: Facebook and give you a sense of what's on of
Speaker 1: my other favorite spots where miss mine and I had
Speaker 1: a had a great time in a Ruba, very just
Speaker 1: a very pleasant, civilized place, really beautiful, amazing beach. So
Speaker 1: I'll send you some more restaurant rex. And Hillary just
Speaker 1: wants to let you know put your suntam motion on
Speaker 1: so you're not gonna forget it now. I probably just
Speaker 1: saved you from getting a second degree burn on your
Speaker 1: tum tum because you're gonna put some block on now
Speaker 1: because Hillary told you too. It's very important. So here
Speaker 1: we go. Kirk is ax he rants buck. I watched
Speaker 1: the Fox and Friends segment with my wife and ten
Speaker 1: year old daughter. We thought the host interrupted you so
Speaker 1: much they prevented you from finishing your eggs. What's up
Speaker 1: with that? Something good that came out of it, though,
Speaker 1: is my ten year old daughter baking a cake with
Speaker 1: her friend yesterday. I noticed she used your paper towel
Speaker 1: technique to crack the eggs. Yes, Kirk, honestly, that is
Speaker 1: super exciting for me. Thank you so very much. Um.
Speaker 1: On another subject, you had me l O L with
Speaker 1: your amorous stoplight destruction story. I have a noise pollution
Speaker 1: favorite for you. The construction worker in an enclosed and
Speaker 1: safe area making hundreds of shifts into reverse in his Bobcat,
Speaker 1: engaging the reverse shrill every time we are flooded with
Speaker 1: useless noise. Kirk from Houston, Well, Kirk, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for your message. I know what you're talking about.
Speaker 1: By the way, when you the backup noise, bip bip bap,
Speaker 1: it's particularly terrible when it's from a machine that you're like,
Speaker 1: this isn't even gonna run me over. You know, maybe
Speaker 1: if I were. I know, people say buck what about
Speaker 1: children and stuff? But come on, like, realistically, this thing
Speaker 1: is not running anybody over. You know. It's like a
Speaker 1: golf cart with a backup noise. I mean, yeah, theoretically
Speaker 1: it could crush somebody, but it's pretty pretty unlikely. And
Speaker 1: as to the egg, I'm telling you, I'm so good
Speaker 1: at I don't want to show off. So maybe this
Speaker 1: is a humble brag where it's just a brag. But
Speaker 1: I can do one handed egg cracking with my paper
Speaker 1: towel technique without getting shell in there. That's skills, my friends.
Speaker 1: Chef Ramsey would be proud, you donkey. Uh so I
Speaker 1: should actually I should have we should have a drop
Speaker 1: of Ramsey yelling you don't keep you know. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: tell you all something I wanted last week to get
Speaker 1: the guys on the on the board. I wanted John
Speaker 1: and Mike to have a Chef Ramsey dropped to use
Speaker 1: after my after My egg extravaganza on Fox and Friends.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you something though, Uh, It's really hard
Speaker 1: to find a good Chef Ramsey clip where he's not
Speaker 1: using a lot of profanity. It's like, oh, look at that,
Speaker 1: Jeff Ramsey's got salty language going on. But Kirk, I'm
Speaker 1: glad that your daughter learned the new technique. It's great too.
Speaker 1: It's so much easier to clean up. And if you
Speaker 1: go on the edge or the you know, the rim
Speaker 1: of a bowl or a pan, you're gonna get shell
Speaker 1: in there. And I don't care how good the eggs are.
Speaker 1: I don't care what kind of cheese and herbs or
Speaker 1: herbs if you're British you use. If you get a
Speaker 1: big chunk of shell and you just crunch into it,
Speaker 1: it kind of ruins it. You know, it ruins it.
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's if it's long, gross hair
Speaker 1: in your food or crusty eggshell. I guess we all
Speaker 1: go eggshell. Actually I'll answer that one for myself. But
Speaker 1: there we have it. Uh, Jerry writes, What's up Buck
Speaker 1: podcast listener, original Saturday Squad and Blaze subscriber, when you
Speaker 1: had your shows over there? I love black rifle coffee
Speaker 1: and I make it cold brew style using a French press. Well, Jerry,
Speaker 1: you are a fancy fellow. It's very bougie. I like it.
Speaker 1: I let it sit for twenty four hours on the
Speaker 1: counter and plunge and pour over some ice cubes in
Speaker 1: the morning and the rest of the day will be good.
Speaker 1: You should give it a try. He should also check
Speaker 1: out comedian Owen Benjamin. He's a libertarian conservative and has
Speaker 1: recently been attacked by those snowflake losers on the left.
Speaker 1: He even lost his his manager and a few jobs
Speaker 1: over saying out loud that he doesn't think a seven
Speaker 1: year old should be given hormone treatments. Please looking at
Speaker 1: get him on the show sometime. You'd love him. Speaking
Speaker 1: of love, put a ring on Ms Molly's finger. Keep
Speaker 1: up the good workshields high Jerry, Well, Jerry, thank you.
Speaker 1: I don't know Owen Benjamin. I'll have to look up
Speaker 1: is work, but I have a feeling that if you
Speaker 1: think it's so excellent, I will also think it's quite good.
Speaker 1: As to a seven year old getting hormone treatments, it's
Speaker 1: completely insane. Uh, anyone who is below the age of eighteen,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, getting hormone treatment. Look, people would say, Buck,
Speaker 1: you're not a scientist and a doctor. Okay, true. You
Speaker 1: know how many scientists have studied the long term effects
Speaker 1: of of hormonal therapy meant for a transgender meant for
Speaker 1: as part of a transgender what they now call a
Speaker 1: gender affirmation process. Uh, the answer is zero. Nobody knows
Speaker 1: what the long term I mean physical. Forget about psychological
Speaker 1: effects for a second, which I think are also profound.
Speaker 1: There are no studies that I am aware of that
Speaker 1: have ever been done of that. It is such a
Speaker 1: new phenomenon, how could there be so forget about you're
Speaker 1: not a scientist, Buck, You don't know. Scientists don't know.
Speaker 1: But they're just getting pressured and and bullied into into this.
Speaker 1: So I digress. Uh. Let's see who's and Ms Molly's amazing.
Speaker 1: I agree, Jerry, And don't worry. I'm working on it.
Speaker 1: I'm working on it. Uh. Let's see Kenneth writes in
Speaker 1: you lost a listener when you announced you'd be on Colbert, Kenny,
Speaker 1: I wasn't really on Colbert. It was a joke and
Speaker 1: I was trying to extend it out a little bit
Speaker 1: as a joke. So I hope you came back, man.
Speaker 1: I hope you gave me. Hope you gave me another shot. Uh,
Speaker 1: Andy's up here here, rights hey Buck. First heard you
Speaker 1: on the Blaze, and I love listening to you on
Speaker 1: the I Heart radio app. You are with a new
Speaker 1: wave of conservative conservatism in this country needs a young,
Speaker 1: new fresh voice that uses humor and pop culture to
Speaker 1: oppose the left. Thank you for all you do well,
Speaker 1: thank you so much, Andy. I appreciate that. Certainly aspire
Speaker 1: to have a very you know, unique vibe, tone and
Speaker 1: style here in the Freedom Hunt and he also writes,
Speaker 1: I'm a day late to the action movie party, but
Speaker 1: you should check out Kung Fury if you have it already.
Speaker 1: It's a It's thirty minutes of epic, unrealistic madness. I
Speaker 1: don't know, Andy. You know, I'm gonna tell you guys something,
Speaker 1: and usually, you know, my my own family will make
Speaker 1: fun of me. They'll say that if there's if there's uh,
Speaker 1: dudes with long hair battle axes and swords, wenches, and
Speaker 1: Ale Buck likes it, which is generally true. So anything
Speaker 1: that's a historical either fiction or historical epic or uh
Speaker 1: whatever it may be, that has those things, you know,
Speaker 1: dude swords, dudes with swords and axes fighting, uh beer,
Speaker 1: wenches and all that stuff, I tend to like it.
Speaker 1: This is not in that category, but it is historical epic.
Speaker 1: So many of you told me, and I'm I'm I'm
Speaker 1: hoping I don't make anybody annoying me here to watch
Speaker 1: The Terror. That Miss Molly, because she has lots of friends.
Speaker 1: She went out Saturday night with all of her girls.
Speaker 1: They had a girl's night and I stayed home and
Speaker 1: I tried to watch some episodes of The Terror, and
Speaker 1: it's really well done, and I can understand that there's
Speaker 1: a kind of foreboding from being by the way, it's
Speaker 1: about the search by a brit too large British vessels
Speaker 1: explorer vessels for the Northwest Passage, which is essentially the
Speaker 1: naval route through the islands of Northern Canada connecting up
Speaker 1: into the Arctic Circle. And obviously you catch that at
Speaker 1: the wrong time and wooden ships, etcetera. Very very bad
Speaker 1: things happen. I'm gonna try to push for I got
Speaker 1: three episodes into the Terror. Didn't love it, and I
Speaker 1: should love it because it's right in my wheelhouse, got
Speaker 1: British dude ships, It's got everything. But you know, it
Speaker 1: just felt like it was a little slow for me.
Speaker 1: And I'm not really seeing how it's going to be
Speaker 1: more than a lot of guys like I'm so cold,
Speaker 1: Captain freezing, you know, get it, get it together, man,
Speaker 1: Your love of country shall keep you warm. You know.
Speaker 1: I kind of see how that's all it's going to
Speaker 1: be the direction. But I'm gonna give it a few more.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna give it a few more. Snyder, we get
Speaker 1: one more here. Hey, Buck, great seeing you on Fox.
Speaker 1: Keep speaking, my friend, Will Snyder, As I am a
Speaker 1: radio host, I and I indeed intend to keep speaking.
Speaker 1: But I greatly appreciate the encouragement. I hope that you
Speaker 1: will tell some folks out there about this show I
Speaker 1: do known as the Buck Sexton Show. So with that,
Speaker 1: my friends, I'm going to get ready to close up
Speaker 1: the hut. I'm gonna be down here in d C.
Speaker 1: Every day this week, So that's gonna be something back
Speaker 1: this week in the New York City for a wedding.
Speaker 1: But I'm gonna have my hands full, to be sure,
Speaker 1: with all the things I'm working on. I have an
Speaker 1: announcement for you about the project I'm working on, but
Speaker 1: it's not to be officially announced just yet. But I've
Speaker 1: got exciting stuff to tell you about Team and it
Speaker 1: will come out this week. To stay tuned for that.
Speaker 1: And until tomorrow, from the swamp, the edom Hot bids
Speaker 1: you adieu, and she'll tie m hm