Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom Hudge. The resistance thinks they
Speaker 1: have achieved victory over Trump, but my friends, they celebrate
Speaker 1: far too early. This president will fight through, push through,
Speaker 1: and come out victorious. On the other side, we'll talk
Speaker 1: about that, plus what's going on in Sweden. A party
Speaker 1: on the far right is gaining a lot of ground.
Speaker 1: Here's a hint immigration And also speaking of immigration, how
Speaker 1: has the left handled the Molly Tibbots case. We'll get
Speaker 1: into that a much more coming up on The Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the
Speaker 1: mission or mission is to decode what really matters with
Speaker 1: actionable intelligence. Mag Noor mistake America, You're great American Again.
Speaker 1: The Buck Sexton Show begins on the Analys No. Welcome
Speaker 1: to the Buck Sex and Show. Everybody. Great to have
Speaker 1: you here with me as always. You know what I'm
Speaker 1: I'm I'm here to be a little ray of sunshine today, folks.
Speaker 1: I know it's a tough one out there and Trump
Speaker 1: supporter land for some of you list, I think a
Speaker 1: lot of you are like, you know what, Buck, No,
Speaker 1: it's not it's fine, It's gonna be fine. They got
Speaker 1: they got nothing. They still got nothing. There's still no collusion.
Speaker 1: But we sit here and we understand that one. I mean,
Speaker 1: the left has completely lost their minds. The Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: because it has no scruples, has a tremendous amount of
Speaker 1: area to maneuver. Right, can do anything it wants to do,
Speaker 1: can find any number of different ways to come at
Speaker 1: the president. Ohmment, he's crazy. Oh, he's a racist. We
Speaker 1: have to get rid of him because of you know, racism,
Speaker 1: always a Russian stooge. Oh now it's obstruction. Oh I'm sorry. Actually,
Speaker 1: now it's campaign finance. Finally, they just come at him
Speaker 1: with new charges all the time, charge after charge after charge.
Speaker 1: As I keep telling you, what is more probable that
Speaker 1: there are people who refuse to accept that he is
Speaker 1: the president, that he defeated Hillary Clinton in a free
Speaker 1: and fair election because they have lost power and prestige
Speaker 1: and even a sense of self as a result of
Speaker 1: Hillary's loss, Or that Trump just has broken all of
Speaker 1: these different laws. Never any proof of any of it, though,
Speaker 1: But he's broken all these different laws, and they're just
Speaker 1: hot on his trail and they're figuring it out. I
Speaker 1: think we all know the answer to this. UM. I
Speaker 1: think that this is a moment in time that is
Speaker 1: testing us because we understand that the other side will
Speaker 1: stop at nothing, they will do anything that they can,
Speaker 1: and they are celebrating this. There's no small part of
Speaker 1: me that feels disdain for those who want to celebrate
Speaker 1: the downfall of a presidency which has not happened. My
Speaker 1: rents and I believe in my heart of hearts absolutely
Speaker 1: will not happen. But that folks would want to celebrate
Speaker 1: that at a time when actually the country is doing
Speaker 1: so very well tells you all you need to know
Speaker 1: about them. And the same Democrats that want Trump to
Speaker 1: get impeached, to get removed from office, to or even
Speaker 1: to get criminally prosecutor the ones that you know, we're
Speaker 1: happy to root against our soldiers and their safety in
Speaker 1: the Iraq War, remember the Pelosi era and the House
Speaker 1: Representatives two thousand and six, two thousand sevent eight. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. There were Democrats who are hoping we were
Speaker 1: going to be even more bloodied in Iraq than we
Speaker 1: were because it would it would be hard for Bush.
Speaker 1: That's right, that was what the mindset was, and I
Speaker 1: saw it. I remember I was in the c I
Speaker 1: as a rock office, and I was briefing people going
Speaker 1: down to Capitol Hill, meeting with the top policymakers, meeting
Speaker 1: with the president. And I remember what the Democrats were
Speaker 1: like that. Now that mentality has just shifted. Instead of
Speaker 1: Bush is a war criminal, it's Trump is a can
Speaker 1: paying finance criminal. Is that even? Is that even a thing?
Speaker 1: The dirsh waited on this one. We also interviewed him
Speaker 1: on my show Rising This Morning, Play four teen. Some
Speaker 1: stations are already playing the funeral music for President Trump.
Speaker 1: But this is much more complicated and much more nuanced.
Speaker 1: First of all, the crime itself is very very vague.
Speaker 1: They try to put Edwards, the former presidential candidate, on trial,
Speaker 1: and of course they got an acquittal. But second, it
Speaker 1: really require depends completely on the credibility of Cone. And remember,
Speaker 1: as Judge Ellis said, when they squeeze people like Metaphor
Speaker 1: or Cohen, uh, they squeeze them not only to sing,
Speaker 1: but sometimes to compose. And it's very easy to embellish
Speaker 1: a story. This is the beginning of a story that
Speaker 1: will unravel over time, but it's not nearly as deadly
Speaker 1: lethal as some have portrayed as being. Now you mentioned
Speaker 1: John Edwards, John Edwards for those who may have forgotten.
Speaker 1: Was a particularly only a genius politician, He was a
Speaker 1: He was a slimy fellow. Was known to conjure, and
Speaker 1: I mean that in the in the sort of older
Speaker 1: sense of the term, to to bring up to be
Speaker 1: a conjurer of the voices of dead children for the
Speaker 1: purposes of swaying juries. To give very large verdicts to
Speaker 1: people who were plaintiffs suing hospitals and or doctors. That
Speaker 1: was how John Edwards made his money. Yeah, and I
Speaker 1: mean he actually this was on court record. I claimed
Speaker 1: to speak for a dead child. The dead child was
Speaker 1: speaking through him. That was who John Edwards was. Vice
Speaker 1: presidential candidate folks for the Democratic Party at different times.
Speaker 1: I mean I think he won a number of primaries
Speaker 1: at different times. Was number two in the UH in
Speaker 1: the running for the Democrat presidential nomination. And he had
Speaker 1: a love child with is that is that the property
Speaker 1: whatever the term is. He had a child out of
Speaker 1: wedlock with a real hunter who had been his videographer.
Speaker 1: He had hired her after made He were in a
Speaker 1: bar where I meet all my videographers, and they had
Speaker 1: an affair and his wife was dying of from cancer
Speaker 1: at the time, and some of his when he was
Speaker 1: running for office. When Edwards was running for office, some
Speaker 1: of his supporters arranged for I think a million dollars
Speaker 1: or so to take care of his mistress and the child,
Speaker 1: to pay for their upkeep and everything else, and to
Speaker 1: keep this quiet. So they brought charges against him. Charges
Speaker 1: were brought against John Edwards for that, and there was
Speaker 1: no conviction of John Edwards. So I just want to know,
Speaker 1: get given that that was the outcome there, why why
Speaker 1: would the outcome here with a a much lesser issue,
Speaker 1: with much less clarity as to Trump's involvement or whether
Speaker 1: Trump really knew and at what point he knew. I
Speaker 1: know he said earlier today and interview the Fox he
Speaker 1: only knew things later on. Why would we think that
Speaker 1: this would then? If that was not criminal? My friends,
Speaker 1: how could anyone really think that this would be criminal?
Speaker 1: With Trump? It's as though we've we we have. I'll
Speaker 1: be talking about running the experiment in the economy later,
Speaker 1: but we've run the experiment from a criminal justice standpoint
Speaker 1: on this, and everything for Trump was should be, should
Speaker 1: be fine, and I believe he he will be um
Speaker 1: this is interesting, But the one more noting from our
Speaker 1: friend Andie McCarthy on Cohen's role on all this play fifteen.
Speaker 1: These guys got on the government's cross hairs because of
Speaker 1: their connections to first candidate and now President Trump. I
Speaker 1: don't think there's any question about that. But I do
Speaker 1: think that the Cohen case ended up in the Southern
Speaker 1: District because Mueller didn't see him Cohen as somebody who
Speaker 1: was going to advance his Russia investigation, and the Southern
Speaker 1: District had a different line of interest in Colin. I
Speaker 1: don't think they regard him as a witness. I think
Speaker 1: for precisely the reason you've pointed out. You know, he's
Speaker 1: made statements that are all over the map. They did
Speaker 1: elicit that from him today when he gave his allocution
Speaker 1: at his guilty plea. But I think if they regarded
Speaker 1: him as a valuable witness or a cooperator, you'd see
Speaker 1: a very different kind of plea agreement. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: I don't think Cohen's got anything. Folks, his lawyers trying
Speaker 1: to make it seem like he does, trying to get
Speaker 1: a better deal, trying to get a little sympathy for him.
Speaker 1: I don't think Cohen's got any goods because there's no
Speaker 1: goods to be had. One more thing, I'm more taught
Speaker 1: with this more and I gotta get to the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court and how they're not trying to make this effect.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court and the Democrats are utterly shameless. As
Speaker 1: you know. Trump is um is a movement. One thing
Speaker 1: that I have to remark on excited it's it's fascinating
Speaker 1: to me is that the Left seems to think if
Speaker 1: they were able to impeach and maybe even remove this president,
Speaker 1: that they would stop everything that he stood for. When
Speaker 1: I think that in many ways they have no idea
Speaker 1: what they will have unleashed on themselves politically speaking, if
Speaker 1: they stop this president through a legal weaponization, through this
Speaker 1: which hunt process, because trump Ism will continue on even
Speaker 1: beyond Trump, whether it's six years or six months from now,
Speaker 1: if he were to step down, We've got a lot
Speaker 1: more show coming. Eight four to five, eight four buck
Speaker 1: stay with me. The Judiciary Committee should postpone Judge Kavanaugh's
Speaker 1: hearings at this moment in our nation's history. The Senate
Speaker 1: should not confirm a man to the bench who believes
Speaker 1: that presidents are virtually beyond accountability, even in criminal cases.
Speaker 1: The doubts about Judge Kavanaugh's fitness for the bench were
Speaker 1: just magnified by Mr Cohen's plea agreement. The prospect of
Speaker 1: the president being implicated in some criminal case is no
Speaker 1: longer a hypothetical that can be dismissed. It's very real.
Speaker 1: Oh what a surprise. Now the Supreme Court is also
Speaker 1: going to be they think at one of the political
Speaker 1: spoils that they can count on here, Chuck Schumer immediately
Speaker 1: jumping onto this one. Uh, the idea that they would
Speaker 1: delay the they would delay the confirmation hearing of Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: is is so classic, isn't it. By the way, that
Speaker 1: they're not going to win the sett anyway, So what's
Speaker 1: this going to be. What they're really saying, though, is
Speaker 1: that Trump is not the president, you see. That's what
Speaker 1: they're tapping into here. That's where they get this idea
Speaker 1: that they can get away with saying things like, well,
Speaker 1: it's you know, the Supreme Court would be illegitimate. In fact,
Speaker 1: that's what some Democrats are saying. There is a line
Speaker 1: out there now that essentially says the Supreme Court would
Speaker 1: be an illegitimate institution if Kavanaugh was put on it
Speaker 1: by Trump. Krugman. I think the New York Times takes
Speaker 1: this line because essentially Trump is not no longer really
Speaker 1: the president, not my president. Has turned it into no, no,
Speaker 1: not my president. They think this is this is real,
Speaker 1: and this is what brings you back to folks. This
Speaker 1: is all political. It is all political, okay. They it's
Speaker 1: not that Trump has is the worst person ever who's
Speaker 1: done all these terrible things and all this other stuff. No,
Speaker 1: that's not what's happened. I know you know this, but
Speaker 1: we we have to remind ourselves of it. They have
Speaker 1: done everything that they can to weaponize the Department of Justice,
Speaker 1: weaponized federal prosecutors against the administration and the terror I mean,
Speaker 1: the part of this that just drives me insane is
Speaker 1: that the administration, the Trump administration, should have stopped this
Speaker 1: in the very beginning. Never should have had a Jeff
Speaker 1: Sessions recused himself, you know, just it never should have
Speaker 1: been allowed to happen. It was a huge mistake. Those
Speaker 1: of you who have been listening to the show for
Speaker 1: a long time now. I was opposed to the appointment
Speaker 1: of a special counsel the whole time from day one,
Speaker 1: and said there's a bad idea it's a bad idea
Speaker 1: because I knew this is exactly what would happen. The
Speaker 1: Special Counsel would be created to look into Russia collusion
Speaker 1: and deal with the threat to our democracy, and then
Speaker 1: it would just be subpoena this, subpoena that, bring this person,
Speaker 1: and bring that person, and charge this one with lying,
Speaker 1: charge that one with tax raw and charge that one
Speaker 1: with you know, obstruction, whatever it is. It would just
Speaker 1: become a vessel for the Democrats to get vengeance via
Speaker 1: the legal system, and in doing so. I mean, these
Speaker 1: are the people that have been lecture ring us about
Speaker 1: institutions and about they're the ones. How can you take
Speaker 1: seriously that Democrats have not politicized in ways that I
Speaker 1: don't even know if we'll ever be able to repair
Speaker 1: the federal justice system. I mean, this is we saw this, folks.
Speaker 1: We saw this with the way that the I R.
Speaker 1: S was used to go after conservative groups, and everyone said, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe it was just a little just a
Speaker 1: little mistake, just a little whoopsie. No, it was much
Speaker 1: worse than that. There's no accountability there whatsoever. But they
Speaker 1: weaponize this state against citizens that generally speaking, I have
Speaker 1: problems with the state and here with this with the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court fight. You know, you can see that there,
Speaker 1: this is all it means to an end all these
Speaker 1: all these different prosecutions, they're bringing all these cases, everything
Speaker 1: that they're doing. They say it's about Russia collusion. They
Speaker 1: say it's about finding some you know, formulation that will
Speaker 1: allow them to, uh, you know, to to go in
Speaker 1: front of the American people and say, well, you know,
Speaker 1: we've investigated the Russia collusion with Trump and this is
Speaker 1: what we found. They're just looking to get stuff like this.
Speaker 1: They're trying to get Cohen on his taxi licenses or
Speaker 1: his taxes or is whatever, and flip people and flip people,
Speaker 1: and you know, yeah, do I think that Trump made
Speaker 1: a mistake by having some of these people around. I'm
Speaker 1: sure you know. Do I think that when Scaramucci met
Speaker 1: me in the green room at Fox News way before
Speaker 1: Trump took office, he should have been like, hey, you
Speaker 1: you're really smart and very ethical. I should actually make
Speaker 1: you like Deputy White House Press secretary. Yeah, they probably
Speaker 1: should have done something like that. I'm just saying I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna be shy about it. I said, hey, mooch,
Speaker 1: how can I help Mooch. Mooch didn't want my help,
Speaker 1: so Mooch lasted five days, seven days or whatever it was.
Speaker 1: Boch could have used my help. Uh, but you know
Speaker 1: that they brought in that he brought in some very
Speaker 1: bad people, There's no question about it. And he had
Speaker 1: coming around and well before the campaign. But you know, people,
Speaker 1: I get it. People. They have an affinity for an individual,
Speaker 1: and you know, you know, you think you can trust
Speaker 1: somebody until you can't. But this whole thing about the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, this is laughable. What what constitutional basis is? Well,
Speaker 1: we have some guy who's a convicted felon and a
Speaker 1: and on the record a liar who says that the
Speaker 1: president told them to do something illegal. So now he
Speaker 1: does is he not the president anymore? No, No, that's
Speaker 1: not how this works. You don't get to use an
Speaker 1: allegation to uh, to take back a Supreme Court pick. Ultimately,
Speaker 1: these people are really they're they're also worried about Roe v. Wade.
Speaker 1: You know, Oh my gosh, what would what would we
Speaker 1: do in a world where women just have to actually
Speaker 1: have their babies? How will how would democrats face such
Speaker 1: a daunting and horrific future? That's what keeps them up
Speaker 1: at night that everybody that that babies get to live.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the Democratic Party. It's really sick.
Speaker 1: It is they got they've very deep rooted problems, and
Speaker 1: they've they've turned this anger on Trump. You know, there's
Speaker 1: no effort whatsoever to convince the American people that Democrats
Speaker 1: have any good ideas. Every time they try to talk
Speaker 1: about an idea, they sound like a bunch of idiots. Oh,
Speaker 1: Kasio Cortez, free school, free this, free that. You know
Speaker 1: he's gonna do more. You're gonna do more for minorities.
Speaker 1: Do what, Well nothing, We're just we're gonna do more
Speaker 1: for them. Well, well, what does that even mean? Stop
Speaker 1: asking so many questions. You must be racist. This is
Speaker 1: the entire opposition effort. This is what the Democratic Party's
Speaker 1: turned into, a bunch of little bureaucrat tyrants. They use
Speaker 1: the and I know it's yes, Look, guys, I agree,
Speaker 1: it's a problem that you have Trump in power. But
Speaker 1: then again, look at what happens even though he's in power.
Speaker 1: You know, he's got people in the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: that I eat him and he can't get rid of them.
Speaker 1: And if you did get rid of them, people would
Speaker 1: mutiny and they would freak out. You have these deep
Speaker 1: state elements. These leave behind most of the mostly from
Speaker 1: the Obama administration, but silom have been around for decades.
Speaker 1: They hate Trump. He can't get rid of them. And
Speaker 1: every time he tries to exert his constitutional executive authority,
Speaker 1: you've got people up. Whether it's a some random federal
Speaker 1: judge or somebody else. You know, they come out and
Speaker 1: try to stop him and take away his constitutionally granted authority.
Speaker 1: Even though the whole thing is just a mess. And
Speaker 1: I know that right now it's tough for some people
Speaker 1: to stand beside the president. But look, it's for me.
Speaker 1: It's not really about Trump. It's about the agenda. It
Speaker 1: is not about the man. I don't really care about
Speaker 1: the man. He is there to serve a purpose. He
Speaker 1: is in a role. He has powers for a reason
Speaker 1: as long as he is using those powers. Two ends
Speaker 1: that I agree with, and also, by the way, think
Speaker 1: are beneficial to all of us, are in the long run,
Speaker 1: going to promote uh wealth and I mean for all
Speaker 1: of us as in the sense of prosperity and and
Speaker 1: it better outcomes for the American people that will greater,
Speaker 1: have greater respect for our freedom and our liberty and
Speaker 1: our individual dignity and rights. I'm supportive of it. All
Speaker 1: this other stuff, you know, the stuff Stormy Daniels and
Speaker 1: Avanadi and the media, that's the whole thing is just
Speaker 1: such a circus. It's such a circus. And it's because
Speaker 1: the Democrats offer up nothing in response. We've we've seen now,
Speaker 1: we've had that if we've run the experiment, folks, We've
Speaker 1: run the experiment, and Trump is better at the economy
Speaker 1: than Obama was. That's what's going on. We've run the
Speaker 1: experiment and Trump understands business better than the leaders of
Speaker 1: the Democrat Party. That's it. They can they can say
Speaker 1: they want to fight against as they can say that
Speaker 1: you know, it's oh it's the Obama economy, that's all noise.
Speaker 1: Oh and that we shouldn't have Trump appointed Supreme Court
Speaker 1: just says why this is ridiculous. But you know, I worry.
Speaker 1: I think Jeff Flake is still on safari. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm seeing being serious, I think he's on safari. He was,
Speaker 1: and people like, is he coming back meaning in time
Speaker 1: to vote? No one really knows. I think Brussour is
Speaker 1: a disgrace. I suspect I'll be taking it away very quickly.
Speaker 1: I think that Brussour is a disgrace with his wife Nelly,
Speaker 1: for him to be in the Justice departments and to
Speaker 1: be doing what he did, that is a disgrace. That
Speaker 1: is disqualifying for Mueller. And Mr Mueller has a lot
Speaker 1: of conflicts also directly yourself. So you know that Mr
Speaker 1: Mueller is highly conflicted. In fact, Tomy is like his
Speaker 1: best friend. I could go into conflict after conflict, but
Speaker 1: sadly Mr Mueller is conflicted. But let him write his report.
Speaker 1: We did nothing, there's no collusion. But if he was
Speaker 1: doing an honest report, he'd write it on the other side,
Speaker 1: because when you look at criminality and you look at problems,
Speaker 1: take a look at what they did, including colluding with
Speaker 1: the Russians. The other side, what was Bruce Or doing right?
Speaker 1: You remember Bruce Or was I think number four the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice and very much involved in the dossier,
Speaker 1: Russia collusion and all that stuff. His name is popped
Speaker 1: up a bunch. You remember his wife, Nellie Or was
Speaker 1: actually an employee of Fusion GPS, which paid for and
Speaker 1: then manufactured uh the dossier sent helped pay and send
Speaker 1: it around. Right, all this stuff going on, So the
Speaker 1: big question is what was Bruce or doing And it
Speaker 1: is the one that our next guest addresses in her
Speaker 1: latest column. Kim Strassol is with us now. She's on
Speaker 1: the Wall Street Journal at a chorial board. She's a
Speaker 1: columnist also the author of The Intimidation Game. Kim. Great
Speaker 1: to have you on. Thank you so much for joining. Uh,
Speaker 1: I just want to pose your question to you. So,
Speaker 1: what the heck was Bruce doing? Hi? Hi, Buck, thanks
Speaker 1: for having me on. Well, look here's you know what
Speaker 1: he's doing. He was funneling information from Christopher Steele, the
Speaker 1: obviously the author of the infamous dossier from Christopher Steele
Speaker 1: to the FBI. And the reason that this matters is
Speaker 1: that the FBI had already terminated Christopher Steele as a
Speaker 1: confidential human source. He had broken all of the FBI's
Speaker 1: rules by talking to the press, and so they said,
Speaker 1: we can no longer work with you. And yet we
Speaker 1: now find that months after that happened, Bruce or the
Speaker 1: senior Member of the Judiciary, is act or at the
Speaker 1: Justice Department, is acting as an intermediary and and sending
Speaker 1: information from Christopher Steele to the FBI. And he's doing
Speaker 1: that even though his wife works for the same organization
Speaker 1: that Christopher Steele does. He obviously has a huge conflict
Speaker 1: of interest. He does not disclose this, at least not
Speaker 1: in his financial forms and as so far as we know,
Speaker 1: not to his superiors. Um and so that's an issue
Speaker 1: as well too. Now this would seem to me to
Speaker 1: be a case of kim ra We would already have
Speaker 1: a lot of answers here. Why haven't Why have we
Speaker 1: heard more about this guy? I mean the conflict of
Speaker 1: interest just in that his his wife was Look, I
Speaker 1: think we can all assume that he was talking to
Speaker 1: his wife a lot, right, they lived together, uh, and
Speaker 1: she she helped bring this information to him. How can
Speaker 1: the FBI justify any this or do we just not
Speaker 1: know what the FBI really says about it? Well, they
Speaker 1: haven't even tried to justify it, and I think because
Speaker 1: it's unjustifiable. And this is an important point I tried
Speaker 1: to make in the columns. It up until now, the
Speaker 1: FBI has continued to insist it did nothing wrong during
Speaker 1: despite you know, everything that we know about what they
Speaker 1: did do about using the dossier, not telling the court
Speaker 1: entirely about the dossier running informants into a presidential campaign.
Speaker 1: I mean, these are things that I think should be
Speaker 1: very troubling to anyone, no matter what side of the
Speaker 1: aisle you're on. But throughout that they have insisted did
Speaker 1: nothing wrong. This clearly is problematic, um, not just in
Speaker 1: terms of what Mr or himself did and the fact
Speaker 1: that he didn't disclose it, um, but that the FBI
Speaker 1: chose to use him because again, remember that this informant
Speaker 1: program or source program that they had that Mr. Steele
Speaker 1: was part of, that they were using. It's not some
Speaker 1: willy nilly thing. It's got rules, guidelines, his entire manual gathering,
Speaker 1: you know, governing who can be an informant to and
Speaker 1: a source for the FBI, and what they need to
Speaker 1: do to maintain that status, and what the agents handling
Speaker 1: them need to do. Um. And this was all disregarded,
Speaker 1: and the FBI went back to Bruce or uh And
Speaker 1: and continued to obtain information from a source that they
Speaker 1: had terminated for violating their own rules. What would happen here?
Speaker 1: What has to happen, Kim for there to be accountability
Speaker 1: for how this was handled? The dj N FBI side.
Speaker 1: I mean I put myself in this category. I think
Speaker 1: a lot of folks feel like, well, you know this
Speaker 1: just this is drags on, a dry bags on, and
Speaker 1: you know, yes, okay, Struck was Struck was fired, McCabe
Speaker 1: was fired. I mean, some people have clearly have been fired.
Speaker 1: Are we ever going to get a comprehensive report on
Speaker 1: just what they did? I mean, the president's in power,
Speaker 1: he should be able to direct the executive branch to
Speaker 1: produce the necessary documents, give us the information. Is it
Speaker 1: a function of waiting for the Mueller probe to end?
Speaker 1: I mean, essentially, is the are the President's hands tied
Speaker 1: to try to get to the truth here and let
Speaker 1: the American people know what happened, because anything that he
Speaker 1: does is going to be called meddling in the ongoing
Speaker 1: Muller probe. What do you make of all that? Well,
Speaker 1: I think we can feel pretty confident that we are
Speaker 1: never going to get an internal house cleaning and a
Speaker 1: report on an admission of a problem from within d
Speaker 1: O J or FBI. That is really, to me very
Speaker 1: disappointing that you do have two new leaders there, Rod
Speaker 1: Rosenstein at the Department of Justice and Christopher Ray. Neither
Speaker 1: of them have shown an inkling of interest in saying, look,
Speaker 1: there was a problem here, we are looking into it.
Speaker 1: This is why so and so was fired, this is
Speaker 1: why so and so was moved out of their position.
Speaker 1: Because remember, nearly every part of that Comy inner circle
Speaker 1: has now either been fired or removed from their jobs
Speaker 1: or retired. Um. That is to me an admission that
Speaker 1: there was clearly a big problem and that internally they
Speaker 1: recognized it, but they have not come clean to the public.
Speaker 1: So the question then, I mean, we at the editorial
Speaker 1: page of the Wall Street Journal have been advocating every
Speaker 1: chance we have that the President uh declassify many of
Speaker 1: these documents. It doesn't have to be a lot. There's
Speaker 1: a discreete a number of them. We even went out
Speaker 1: and said, here are the ones that would provide the
Speaker 1: most information to the American public. Um and at least
Speaker 1: to get that out there. And then, because I think
Speaker 1: the only other avenue we really have will be to
Speaker 1: wait for the Inspector General's report, but that could be
Speaker 1: at least another year in coming. Kim, I've got a
Speaker 1: theory I want to test out on you. Everybody we're
Speaker 1: speaking of, Kim Strasso, obviously of the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 1: Her pieces what was Bruce or doing? She tries to
Speaker 1: answer it, but the the short version is wasn't good.
Speaker 1: Uh So, so you should definitely all check that out.
Speaker 1: But Kim, here's my theory, because people have asked me this,
Speaker 1: they say, how is it that you have some of
Speaker 1: these individuals at FBI d o J who seemed like
Speaker 1: and I'm not talking about the ones that have already
Speaker 1: been fired or under suspicion, but yeah, I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: you mentioned Christopher Ray for example, FBI director. How is
Speaker 1: it that these guys are also in on it? And
Speaker 1: I try to explain it to people this way. I
Speaker 1: think that if we really knew what happened at the
Speaker 1: top reaches of the d o J and the FBI,
Speaker 1: I mean, if we really knew without you know, the
Speaker 1: games and the redactions, if the American people found out
Speaker 1: the truth, they would have a very hard time thinking
Speaker 1: of the FBI the d o J in the same way.
Speaker 1: And so even for those who are not necessarily anti
Speaker 1: Trump or you know, they weren't Hillary cronies, but people
Speaker 1: that are institutionalists that have spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: in those decades in many cases in those organizations, they
Speaker 1: feel like they have a duty to the greater good
Speaker 1: to protect those institutions from the you know, the the
Speaker 1: I or any the the distrust for generations of the
Speaker 1: American people. What do you think about that? I think
Speaker 1: you've nailed it. This has long been my argument too,
Speaker 1: that these folks are institutionalist, and I think part of
Speaker 1: it is what you describe, that they feel the need
Speaker 1: to protect the department or agency that they work for,
Speaker 1: UH to the extent that they are willing to overlook
Speaker 1: and even justify things that if they were on the
Speaker 1: outside they would not. I think too. It's also a
Speaker 1: bit of an I use this word carefully, but but
Speaker 1: craven nous and that you and I both know if
Speaker 1: you work in an institution, you were surrounded by people
Speaker 1: on all sides that are saying, no, what we did
Speaker 1: was okay, it was okay, it was okay. It's very
Speaker 1: hard to break from that pack to go and basically
Speaker 1: infuriate everybody who works for you and works with you
Speaker 1: and around you. And so I just don't think you
Speaker 1: have the test of leadership there. And remember neither Rod
Speaker 1: rosensty nor Christopher Ray were necessarily chosen for those reasons.
Speaker 1: If you look at the rest of the Bush Bush
Speaker 1: the Trump cabinet um, they were chosen as reformers, people
Speaker 1: who were going to come out inside and really shake
Speaker 1: things up. But Rod Rosenstein and Christopher Ray both came
Speaker 1: in under somewhat of a hurried and dress a process
Speaker 1: um where they weren't necessarily vetted because they were going
Speaker 1: to clean house. They were vetted as a safe choice
Speaker 1: that would be easily confirmable by the Senate in the
Speaker 1: middle of that entire rush that surrounded the whole supposed
Speaker 1: Russia scandal. Kim, just before we let you go here,
Speaker 1: what do you think Mueller's motivation is? I know, I'm
Speaker 1: kind of asking you to look into a man's mind.
Speaker 1: You know nobody can do that. But do do you
Speaker 1: think do you think he's a partisan along the lines
Speaker 1: of some of these others that clearly I mean, anyone
Speaker 1: who tells me that stalker McCabe that they aren't partisans
Speaker 1: they didn't use their office, I just can't take that
Speaker 1: argument seriously anymore. Do you think Mueller just views it
Speaker 1: as he has to almost mechanically go through literally every
Speaker 1: nook and cranny of the investigation. Just go through everything
Speaker 1: he can, because that's the only way the American people
Speaker 1: will have faith and assistant. Or do you think he's
Speaker 1: actually he's anti Trump? I mean, do you think this
Speaker 1: is this is a witch hunt. He knows it, and
Speaker 1: he's down for that. I think he's something almost as
Speaker 1: concerning as a partisan. He's a lawyer and you know,
Speaker 1: a prosecutor. And look, this is one of the problems
Speaker 1: with special counsels is nobody wants to go in and
Speaker 1: spend two years of their life and say I didn't
Speaker 1: get anything in the end, right And and this is
Speaker 1: always the issue with a special counsel is that they
Speaker 1: do not feel as though they have done their duty
Speaker 1: or their job unless they come out of it having
Speaker 1: bagged someone, someone big, preferably because the field that that
Speaker 1: was their mission. Um And and we've seen that again
Speaker 1: and again and again and so far, Mr Muller has
Speaker 1: done a pretty decent job of unraveling UH what clearly
Speaker 1: was an effort by Russians to engage in some small
Speaker 1: time disrupt and UH and chaos sewing here in the
Speaker 1: United States. He's trolling on social media, et cetera, and
Speaker 1: so on. It's great that he did that, but I
Speaker 1: don't think he necessarily ever viewed that really as his job.
Speaker 1: I think it's a noble job that he'd done that,
Speaker 1: but remember he was more specifically tasked with looking into
Speaker 1: Mr Trump, and and having come up completely short on
Speaker 1: that front in terms of collusion and obstruction of justice,
Speaker 1: it seems he's just not willing to let it go.
Speaker 1: Kim Strass of everybody of the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board,
Speaker 1: the one and only, Kim, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: make the time always great to have you stopped by
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hunt. Thank you. Could I just take one
Speaker 1: opportunity to remind everyone that Michael Cohn has suffered a
Speaker 1: tragic and difficult experience for his family. He's without resources,
Speaker 1: and we've set up a website called Michael Cohen truth
Speaker 1: dot Com that we're hoping that he will get some
Speaker 1: help from the American people so he can continue to
Speaker 1: tell the truth. The audience isn't They don't know if
Speaker 1: you're ready to donate landing, but we did check before
Speaker 1: we went to air. It's got seventy dollars in it
Speaker 1: so far. And listen, we appreciate you coming on. I
Speaker 1: would say the reaction of your audience, maybe that they're
Speaker 1: not as interested in getting the truth out about Donald
Speaker 1: Trump as many other people in the country. Approximately sixty
Speaker 1: of the country would not have the reaction of your audience. Okay,
Speaker 1: by the way, it's I was I overstated. It's twenty
Speaker 1: it's not seventy thousand. But you know, for Cohen's Hope
Speaker 1: Hope Springs the Journal, I guess yeah, I I suppose so, folks.
Speaker 1: I don't know what to make of this. Now that
Speaker 1: we live in a country where even people who are
Speaker 1: our villains and rich villains at that, I think that
Speaker 1: they should set up a go fund me page like, hey, hey,
Speaker 1: will you uh you know, will you give me some money?
Speaker 1: You got anything for me? What is that all about? Um?
Speaker 1: You know what what is that? What are we supposed
Speaker 1: to make of that? And this is crazy? I mean,
Speaker 1: Cohen is rich. Cohen has made millions of dollars millions
Speaker 1: of dollars. Uh, and you know he's now asking people, Um,
Speaker 1: he's asking people to give him cash so that he
Speaker 1: can pay his legal bills. Because everybody realizes right now
Speaker 1: that Cohen is trying to get on the you know,
Speaker 1: he's hoping the door is going to be open to
Speaker 1: him to be a hero of the resistance the way
Speaker 1: McCabe and Struck and some of these others are. And
Speaker 1: you know what, what what you end up finding from
Speaker 1: that is that at least those guys, yes, they were
Speaker 1: deep state, and they were bad and they were Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, producer, might just let me know. Struck is
Speaker 1: up to four hundred and forty two thousand dollars four
Speaker 1: hundred and forty two thousand right now his go fund
Speaker 1: me account, So I guess, you know, co cole and
Speaker 1: just has no shame at all about this, and he's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: let me let me just go for it here, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna I'm gonna request more money. Look, I will say
Speaker 1: this though, even if you're rich federal prosecution, you will
Speaker 1: you will blow through a fortune like it's nothing. Um.
Speaker 1: I've had I have some friends who are very expensive.
Speaker 1: One one friend in particular, is a very expensive criminal
Speaker 1: defense attorneys like the sometimes he actually had a client
Speaker 1: he told me this once and you know, without breaking
Speaker 1: any confident confidentiality, but a client who basically decided, look,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna take a I'm gonna take a deal, not
Speaker 1: because I'm guilty, but because I don't want to go bankrupt,
Speaker 1: and I'm only facing you know, like six or twelve
Speaker 1: months or something, and doesn't didn't want to lose all
Speaker 1: of his money in his house and everything, because it
Speaker 1: wasn't worth it to him. And that's what people and
Speaker 1: he had been fighting for a while, and you know,
Speaker 1: they offered him a deal and was gonna go to trial,
Speaker 1: and he said, finally, are I'll take the deal because
Speaker 1: he knew if you want to trial, he's gonna go bankrupt. Now.
Speaker 1: I don't think Cohen's better go bankrupt. I just think
Speaker 1: it's funny though, that, you know, Landy Davis is out
Speaker 1: there with Cohen now trying to turn him into some
Speaker 1: kind of a reformed guy. When when wait, McCabe has
Speaker 1: raised over five hundred thousand. My gosh, folks, the people
Speaker 1: you know, you know, I always tell you how the
Speaker 1: left takes care of their own. Now they're doing it
Speaker 1: in the open via go fund me accounts. If you
Speaker 1: are a deep state uh petty tyrant who used your
Speaker 1: political power or used your government authority to try to
Speaker 1: take down Trump, there are now people who will just
Speaker 1: will actually throw money, throw money to you. They'll just
Speaker 1: give you money. I mean, this is like an after
Speaker 1: the fact bribe in a sense, right, McCabe and straw
Speaker 1: cab me, they're they're getting paid for their they're ill deeds.
Speaker 1: And now Cohen wants to get in on that too.
Speaker 1: I also see here there and they're subpoena ng uh.
Speaker 1: New York State has subpoena at Cohen and Trump Foundation.
Speaker 1: They're just trying to pile on New York State. All
Speaker 1: all the New York State legal apparatus just wants to
Speaker 1: what wants to pander to the Democrat base and do
Speaker 1: everything they can to look like they're trying to get
Speaker 1: in on the on the takedown of Trump as well.
Speaker 1: So nothing here I think that's all that significant. But
Speaker 1: they are looking to go after Trump Foundation. They're gonna
Speaker 1: go after everything, folks. This is just gonna be. This
Speaker 1: is the way they're gonna oppose Trump. They can't beat
Speaker 1: him on policy, they can't beat him on substance, So
Speaker 1: they're just gonna use the law to bludge in this
Speaker 1: administration into you know, inefficiency, one way or another. New
Speaker 1: York's Democrat Governor Andrew Proma even declared that America was
Speaker 1: never great. Oh, I say, tell that to our great
Speaker 1: soldiers at World War one, World War two, free in law,
Speaker 1: so many others. Tell them to the folks that sent
Speaker 1: a rocket up to the moon, and our great astons.
Speaker 1: Tell them to all of the great medical research we've
Speaker 1: done in this country. And he says America was never great.
Speaker 1: I would imagine that's career threatening, right, I would imagine
Speaker 1: how did you get away with that one? You know,
Speaker 1: the President raises there the point of Andrew Cuomo saying
Speaker 1: that America was never great. He says, you know, that
Speaker 1: should be career threatening. But as I've told you, no,
Speaker 1: for Democrats, that's pretty pretty standard to denigrate America and
Speaker 1: it's past and to view it as in its totality,
Speaker 1: in the aggregate and negative thing. It is common among
Speaker 1: a lot of progressives. Remember, this is also what what
Speaker 1: Obama was supposed to do for the left wing mind
Speaker 1: was to begin the healing of americ Aerica, the the
Speaker 1: change of America to a remember, the fundamental transformation of
Speaker 1: the country. That was what he promised. I'm not I'm
Speaker 1: not putting words in his mouth. That was what President
Speaker 1: Obama said, the fundamental transformation of the country. Why would
Speaker 1: you want to fundamentally transform a thing that had been
Speaker 1: the greatest, freest, most prosperous, most benevolent ever. Wouldn't you
Speaker 1: just want to keep that going and the trajectory and
Speaker 1: the general direction it's already been going. Obama promised fundamental transformation,
Speaker 1: and Trump is in many ways a corrective to Obama
Speaker 1: is um which we are seeing now with the economist.
Speaker 1: We're seeing with how prosperous things are. By the way,
Speaker 1: they hate the fact that this country is doing so
Speaker 1: well economical right now. They hate it because what does
Speaker 1: that say about Obama and all of his advisers. Oh
Speaker 1: they're all supposed to be so smart, right, Guthner and
Speaker 1: axel Rod and Jared and all these people around him.
Speaker 1: Oh they're all so brilliant. They know how to run
Speaker 1: an economy. No, they don't. The Obama administration didn't know
Speaker 1: how to run a lemonade stand when it came to economics,
Speaker 1: when it came to free enterprise and entrepreneurship. They think
Speaker 1: that big established players are great because they donate to
Speaker 1: They tend to donate to democrats. Right, Big government and
Speaker 1: big companies go hand and hand in hand big business,
Speaker 1: But they don't like the fact that the economy is
Speaker 1: doing so well, and Maria bar Aroma was making the case,
Speaker 1: I would note that we're an uncharted territory here because
Speaker 1: everyone's thinking, Wow, the economy feels really good, but also
Speaker 1: it feels like it might even get better Play eighteen.
Speaker 1: And I think that's really the key, the resilience of it,
Speaker 1: because this rally that we've seen in stock prices is
Speaker 1: based on real fundamental It's based on earnest growth, economic growth.
Speaker 1: You know, for a time it was based on the
Speaker 1: fiddle reserve and cheap money because you know that the
Speaker 1: fiddle reserve basically went to zero and interest rates after
Speaker 1: the financial crisis. It was all on the Fed to
Speaker 1: take us out of the financial crisis in two thousand
Speaker 1: and seven. But it did. Rates were low, it helped
Speaker 1: things come back. And then it was all about the
Speaker 1: corporate sector. Corporate sector, you mean, like a like a
Speaker 1: corporate tax cut, for example, could spur growth and investment,
Speaker 1: innovation and hiring. Oh my gosh, it's almost like the
Speaker 1: stuff that conservatives have been saying forever. It's almost like
Speaker 1: the GOP on some of these economic issues is based
Speaker 1: in what works, not in what what not? In what
Speaker 1: feels good to say, which is a very important difference
Speaker 1: you have with the with the Democrats on a whole
Speaker 1: host of things. Trump, by the way, is not is
Speaker 1: not backing down. We're backing off when it comes to
Speaker 1: China and tariffs. You know he's he is taking on
Speaker 1: some of these tough problems economically, despite the fact that
Speaker 1: you know he's just they're coming at him from every
Speaker 1: direction and all this Russia collusion nonsense. Here here's what
Speaker 1: Trump had to say last night about China and terrorists.
Speaker 1: Play three. When China makes a car they held into
Speaker 1: the United States, there's two and a half percent tariff,
Speaker 1: of which they don't pay, so they pay nothing. That
Speaker 1: it's a wonderful deal. When we make a car, we
Speaker 1: sell it into China and there's a tariff. And that's
Speaker 1: just the beginning. There's others. We are a country with
Speaker 1: unbelievable potential. We are a country that has been ripped
Speaker 1: off by everybody, and we're not going to be ripped
Speaker 1: off anymore. And if it takes me the little eggs
Speaker 1: to tell senators and Congressman and all of the people
Speaker 1: that really do have your your heart in their hands.
Speaker 1: In many cases, sometimes I wonder where they're coming from
Speaker 1: with these suggestions. But it's going to have to take
Speaker 1: that little period of them with that big said, we're
Speaker 1: moving so fast nobody could even believe it, and every
Speaker 1: country wants to make a deal. Deals are getting made, folks.
Speaker 1: The economy is coming. Left hates it because Trump was
Speaker 1: supposed to be a disaster. Remember it's not that they
Speaker 1: said he would just be coasting on what they're now
Speaker 1: calling the Obama economy, which is a pathetic rewrite of
Speaker 1: of reality and of history. But they said that he
Speaker 1: would be terrible. He would be a terrible steward of
Speaker 1: the economy. He would mess everything up for us. But
Speaker 1: then there's also the So there's the economy, which Trump
Speaker 1: and the Republicans are winning on right now, no question.
Speaker 1: Now there's also immigration. These are the two main reasons
Speaker 1: why I think it's not a done deal for the
Speaker 1: Democrats in the mid terms. Yet it's not a done deal.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's not gonna be an uphill climb. First,
Speaker 1: the fact that Democrats transitioned so quickly from family separation
Speaker 1: at the border as an issue that they were just
Speaker 1: they were pounding that issue even after the administration conceded
Speaker 1: and said we'll do something to fix this. That kept
Speaker 1: pounding it. You know, it's all about scoring political points.
Speaker 1: Even after the problem had what was being addressed. But
Speaker 1: even after that happened, they couldn't help themselves but to
Speaker 1: start calling for the abolition of ICE, which is just crazy.
Speaker 1: Play five. The new platform of the Democrat Party is
Speaker 1: to abolishize. A vote for any Democrat in November is
Speaker 1: a vote to eliminate immigration enforcement, throw open our borders,
Speaker 1: and set loose vicious predators and violent criminals. Well, many
Speaker 1: Democrats are calling to abolish ice. Today, our brave vice
Speaker 1: officers successfully carried out a fourteen year old deportation order
Speaker 1: against a Nazi criminal who was living in New York.
Speaker 1: You know the way that was reported, folks. A Nazi
Speaker 1: prison guard, an actual Nazi prison guard, right, Not not
Speaker 1: somebody that voted Republican a couple of years ago. I
Speaker 1: mean a Nazi Nazi, Because they say everybody now who's
Speaker 1: are calling the left is calling everybody they don't like
Speaker 1: a Nazi these days. I mean a a part of
Speaker 1: the Third Reich Nazi was living in New York and
Speaker 1: Trump and the administration sent him back to face justice
Speaker 1: in Germany. He was deported after seventy five years being
Speaker 1: in this country, and the media narrative on that one
Speaker 1: was Trump. You know, Trump uses this issue to pounce.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, Conservatives pounce one of the favorite ways of
Speaker 1: saying overreach that the Democrats have in their in their
Speaker 1: papers and on TV. And then there's the issue of
Speaker 1: the wall. Play clip four. We're getting the wall bills
Speaker 1: going up. We're getting that bill, so we have three
Speaker 1: point two millions. We're looking for five billion this year,
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden it's gonna be finished and
Speaker 1: it's gonna be very, very effective. You heard about today
Speaker 1: with the illegal allien coming in very sadly for Mexico,
Speaker 1: and you saw what happened to that incredible, beautiful young woman.
Speaker 1: We've had a huge impact, but the laws are so bad.
Speaker 1: The immigration laws are such a disgrace. We're getting them changed,
Speaker 1: but we have to get more Republicans. Let's hear what
Speaker 1: Democrats have to say about that terrible murder at the
Speaker 1: hands of an illegal alien in Iowa. I've got some
Speaker 1: of that coming up for you. Stay with me. It's
Speaker 1: absolutely essential that you have a home security system that
Speaker 1: gives you peace of mind and that you feel like
Speaker 1: you're in full control of and you get great customer
Speaker 1: service as well as round the clock monitoring to make
Speaker 1: sure you, your family and all your stuff is safe.
Speaker 1: Simply Safe is the best bet for all of this,
Speaker 1: my friends. There's a reason that simply Safe has become
Speaker 1: now valued at a billion dollars. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: a major company because they understand this business backwards and forwards,
Speaker 1: and they do a great job. I have a simply
Speaker 1: Safe system at home. It is so intuitive and user friendly.
Speaker 1: It takes minutes to set it up. Once you get going,
Speaker 1: you can download an app to your smartphone control everything,
Speaker 1: monitor everything remotely. And oh, by the way, if your
Speaker 1: WiFi goes down in your home, you're simply Safe, keeps working.
Speaker 1: If your power goes out, You're simply Safe, keeps working.
Speaker 1: Monitor for fire, theft, water damage, gas, all kinds of
Speaker 1: protection for you, and no contracts. Simply Safe dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck again, simply Safe dot com slash buck. I
Speaker 1: want to get one last question here because it is
Speaker 1: a story, a very important story in the news that
Speaker 1: has to do with Molly Tibbots, the young woman in
Speaker 1: Iowa who was murdered. Her body believed to be found yesterday.
Speaker 1: A person has been charged with that. This person is
Speaker 1: an undocumented immigrant. UM Mike Pence and the President have
Speaker 1: suggested the immigration laws need to be stronger so that
Speaker 1: people like this man who is accused of this murder,
Speaker 1: we're not in the country. Your reaction my I'm so
Speaker 1: sorry for the family here, and I know this is
Speaker 1: hard not only for the family, but for the people
Speaker 1: in her community, the people throughout Iowa all But one
Speaker 1: of the things we have to remember is we need
Speaker 1: an immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where
Speaker 1: real problems are. UM. Last month, I went down to
Speaker 1: the border and I saw where children had been taken
Speaker 1: away from their mothers. I met with those mothers who
Speaker 1: had been lied to, who didn't know where their children were,
Speaker 1: who hadn't had a chance to talk to their children,
Speaker 1: and there was no plan for how they would be
Speaker 1: reunified with their children. I think we need immigration laws
Speaker 1: that focus on people who pose a real threat, and
Speaker 1: I don't think mamas and babies are the place that
Speaker 1: we should be spending our resources. Separating a mama from
Speaker 1: a baby does not make this country safer. What a disgrace,
Speaker 1: Senator Elizabeth Warren is what a disgrace. I'm not surprised.
Speaker 1: But even though I expect just a degree of just
Speaker 1: disgusting commentary from her, even even though I would expect
Speaker 1: that she would pander and put politics above any common
Speaker 1: decency in her analysis of this, that was a particularly
Speaker 1: going interview. I mean, I was taking just some notes
Speaker 1: there as as we play the audioce I can quote
Speaker 1: directly she said that she was so sorry, and then
Speaker 1: she wanted to talk about the community, and then she
Speaker 1: wanted to talk about Iowa. Fine, then the butt comes.
Speaker 1: But we need an effective immigration policy and we need
Speaker 1: to focus on quote, real problems and quote I'm pretty
Speaker 1: sure that it gets that. It doesn't get any more
Speaker 1: real then a a wonderful young woman going for a
Speaker 1: job being murdered in her hometown and a part of
Speaker 1: the country that violence is a rarity. I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: that that's as real as it can possibly get in
Speaker 1: the problem realm. That's not what Elizabe Warren thinks, of course,
Speaker 1: immediately wants to turnun and start talking about a different
Speaker 1: issue at the border. You see, this is what they do.
Speaker 1: This is there? What about is hum This is when
Speaker 1: they can't defend something, so they want to talk about
Speaker 1: some other part of it. All Right, you and I
Speaker 1: can have a real discussion about immigration. Yes, if you
Speaker 1: cut back on immigration, are there some great people that
Speaker 1: aren't going to come into the country. Yes? Is that?
Speaker 1: Does that mean that you don't want to do it?
Speaker 1: Not necessarily? You might want to make that trade off. Right,
Speaker 1: Conservatives understand that there are tradeoffs in life, and we
Speaker 1: are honest about that. Liberals live in this fantasy land
Speaker 1: of everything they think is amazing and there's no cost
Speaker 1: to it. I had Milania Trump's families immigration lawyer on
Speaker 1: my show earlier in the week, and I just not
Speaker 1: sick of all the talking points from him. So he's saying,
Speaker 1: you know, immigrants are amazing. Back all the you know,
Speaker 1: look at all the companies they found that all this
Speaker 1: stuff is okay, that's fine, But what about illegals. Oh,
Speaker 1: we shouldn't call them illegal, call them undocumented. No, No,
Speaker 1: not playing that game. There are illegals. That's what the
Speaker 1: federal law calls them. That's what I will call them.
Speaker 1: They're in the country illegally. If you're going to call
Speaker 1: somebody a criminal for a campaign finance violation, for example,
Speaker 1: I think you should call somebody a criminal for being
Speaker 1: in the country when they are in violation of federal
Speaker 1: law every day they're in the country. But when I
Speaker 1: asked him, why not ten million illegals? If illegals have
Speaker 1: no downside, If illegal aliens only bring great things to
Speaker 1: this country, doing the jobs Americans won't do, if they're
Speaker 1: better than us, why should we even have any caps
Speaker 1: or or any enforcement. They say, Oh, we're not open borders.
Speaker 1: You know, we're we're expelling people. We're we're ending people back.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, is that bad? Do we only send
Speaker 1: people back who are here illegally, who break the law
Speaker 1: in addition to their illegal status. If that's the case,
Speaker 1: I'd like to know, Well, then why don't we just
Speaker 1: letting everybody who wants to come and unless you break
Speaker 1: the law, you get to stay. What is the breaking point, folks?
Speaker 1: What's too many? We're at eleven million illegals, they say,
Speaker 1: I think the number is much higher than that. I
Speaker 1: think the common sense tells you the number is much
Speaker 1: higher than that. But they won't even admit that there's
Speaker 1: a possible downside to this. So how can we have
Speaker 1: an adult how can we have a serious discussion about it.
Speaker 1: The answers, I just I frankly don't know. I don't know. Um,
Speaker 1: that's not really their purpose though their purposes demagoguery. They're
Speaker 1: the ones that want to bring in, you know, the needy,
Speaker 1: the women and children, and take care of them and
Speaker 1: clothe them with with your money, by the way, with
Speaker 1: you know, the taxpayer footing the bill as much as possible. Oh,
Speaker 1: I know, I hear that there they don't get welfare.
Speaker 1: That these are all half truths or mistruths or untruths.
Speaker 1: This is not this is not not reality. Um. But
Speaker 1: when Elizabeth war is faced with the reality of what
Speaker 1: happens when you have sanctuary city policies in place, when
Speaker 1: you have millions of illegal immigrants, the immigrants in the country,
Speaker 1: you will have situations where people are killed. And this
Speaker 1: has happened thousands of times over the years. People are
Speaker 1: killed by illegal immigrants, and we're not allowed to think
Speaker 1: of that as a cost of illegal immigration. Why someone explains,
Speaker 1: if if we're we can look at what happens when
Speaker 1: our southern border is intentionally overwhelmed by people trying to
Speaker 1: find a way to come into the country that is
Speaker 1: not legal, but that exploits gray areas and loopholes, and
Speaker 1: to try to try to beat the system. That's what
Speaker 1: they're trying to. The people that are showing that the border,
Speaker 1: claiming asylum, saying that they're come from they come from
Speaker 1: a country with there are too many gangs. That's that's
Speaker 1: beating this system. That's not really what we have in mind,
Speaker 1: and with asylum practice, that's not really what we have
Speaker 1: in mind with our refugee programs. But if we can
Speaker 1: look at what's going on there and say, okay, well
Speaker 1: we shouldn't separate families, and Elizabeth Warren's gonna demagogue that point.
Speaker 1: What about the fact that Molly Tibbots has been separated
Speaker 1: from her family forever, not temporarily, not a few days,
Speaker 1: not a few weeks, forever, and she was brutally murdered.
Speaker 1: Is that a cost? Why is it we're only allowed
Speaker 1: to hear about the Valedictorian dreamers? This kid was a dreamer.
Speaker 1: I have a woman coming on my show tomorrow on
Speaker 1: On Rising who is a an angel mom and her
Speaker 1: son was viciously beaten to death and set on fire
Speaker 1: by a dreamer. So you know they can either make
Speaker 1: a policy argument as far as I'm concerned that bringing
Speaker 1: people or allowing people to stay in the country abetting
Speaker 1: lawless this rewarding lawbreaking, that that's a good thing for
Speaker 1: us or right, or they can deal with the reality
Speaker 1: that for every story that they want to tell about
Speaker 1: somebody who's doing great stuff, who's a dreamer, it's completely
Speaker 1: within the realm of of of acceptable discourse. It's an
Speaker 1: a necessary counterpoint even to say, well, what about the
Speaker 1: illegals are in the country who are part of m
Speaker 1: S thirteen and murder people and ruined communities, and what
Speaker 1: about that? What about them? They're a part of this
Speaker 1: whole process too. But there's a lack of any honesty
Speaker 1: from Democrats on this, as well as so many other
Speaker 1: issues these days. But I thought that was really that
Speaker 1: was even for Warren, that was pretty amazing. Real problems.
Speaker 1: She says, we gotta focus on real problems. I doubt
Speaker 1: you would have said that if Ah, the tibbots Is
Speaker 1: were in the room. All I mean, although I don't
Speaker 1: know it's Lizbeth Warren. She is utterly shameless and just
Speaker 1: a pandering, complete phony, you know, very wealthy, very cushy,
Speaker 1: positions that she's maneuvered herself into by playing the game,
Speaker 1: doing whatever she has to do, and now she wants
Speaker 1: to play the social justice warrior and the one who
Speaker 1: cares so much about illegals. It's you know, I can
Speaker 1: tell you this. Her kid doesn't go to a school
Speaker 1: that's overrun with English as a second language and lots
Speaker 1: of illegals everywhere. I'm just telling you that's I'm making
Speaker 1: a I don't even know if she has kids. I'm
Speaker 1: just guessing. But it's not her problem. It's not her problem,
Speaker 1: that much is for sure. For decades, credit cards have
Speaker 1: been telling us buy it now and pay for it
Speaker 1: later with interest, despite your best intentions, that interest can
Speaker 1: get out of control fast. With lending Club, you can
Speaker 1: consolidate your debt or payoff credit cards with one fixed
Speaker 1: monthly payment. Since two thousand and seven, lending Club has
Speaker 1: helped millions of people regained control of their finances with affordable,
Speaker 1: fixed rate personal loans. No trips to a bank, no
Speaker 1: high interest credit cards. Just go to lending club dot com,
Speaker 1: tell them about yourself and how much you want to borrow,
Speaker 1: pick the terms that are right for you, and if
Speaker 1: you're approved, your loan is automatically deposited into your bank
Speaker 1: account in as little as a few days. Lending Club
Speaker 1: is the number one peer to peer lending platform with
Speaker 1: over thirty five billion loans issued. Go to lending club
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck, check your rate in minutes and
Speaker 1: borrow up to forty dollars. That's lending club dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck, lending club dot com slash buck. All loans
Speaker 1: made by web bank member f D I C Equal
Speaker 1: Housing lender. This is not working because the Republican Party
Speaker 1: has not stood up to this president, not once. So
Speaker 1: even if there is a guilty verdict from Mataford, even
Speaker 1: though Cohen has turned himself in the fact that he
Speaker 1: was even sworn in its president after the Access Hollywood tape,
Speaker 1: let me know for a fact that the Republican Party
Speaker 1: is actually not working on behalf of the American people.
Speaker 1: They're working on behalf of Donald Trump, and he's been
Speaker 1: able to bully them into their silence. And I don't
Speaker 1: think that today changes much. Unfortunately, I'm sure we'll hear
Speaker 1: what he has to say about this at his his rally.
Speaker 1: The Fox News is talking about, you know, a girl
Speaker 1: in Iowa, and not this right, and tomorrow morning we
Speaker 1: know who wake up and tweet and sort of you
Speaker 1: know a girl in Iowa, she says, a girl in Iowa. Yeah,
Speaker 1: why why would why would they just talk about some
Speaker 1: random girl in Iowa. Oh, that's right, that that MSNBC
Speaker 1: political analyst was referring to Molly Tibbitts. So this is
Speaker 1: where I am reminded folks once again that the left
Speaker 1: is not just delusional but also really unfeeling, really cold
Speaker 1: in how they approach their hashtag resistance to Trump. Right there,
Speaker 1: there's something deeply wrong with them. I'm on an emotional,
Speaker 1: on a psychological level where all that matters is attacking Trump.
Speaker 1: All that matters is coming up with some way of
Speaker 1: humiliating this president or his advisors or people around him
Speaker 1: or who supported for supported him, and the basic human
Speaker 1: decency that we would all expect in a situation like this,
Speaker 1: when you have a girl who was brutally murdered by
Speaker 1: an i legal alien, you would expect that commentators would
Speaker 1: go on TV and at least be respectful to the situation.
Speaker 1: But they don't really feel that need, they don't really
Speaker 1: feel an obligation because for them, this is this is
Speaker 1: all or nothing. If it takes down Trump, it must
Speaker 1: be good. If it is in any way, even in
Speaker 1: the short term, helpful through Trump or not not damaging
Speaker 1: enough to Trump, then it must indeed be bad. This
Speaker 1: is how they approach everything, you know. I'm I'm going
Speaker 1: to be going to a a book opening or book
Speaker 1: party for and Coulter later on this evening, and I
Speaker 1: was able to just thumb through her book. I have
Speaker 1: a copy of it here, and I think we're having
Speaker 1: an on radio tomorrow and she'll also be on Rising
Speaker 1: so as really making the rounds right now. But the
Speaker 1: opening chapter in her book is is Trump is Worse?
Speaker 1: And she's obviously kidding. She's very funny. The opening chapter
Speaker 1: of book is called Trump is Worse than Hitler times Infinity.
Speaker 1: And it's a great opening the book because that's that's
Speaker 1: a pretty good description of the liberal mindset right now.
Speaker 1: Trump is the worst, most destructive human being ever, when
Speaker 1: in reality, the country's actually doing great. Uh. The economy
Speaker 1: is is booming by any by any objective measure. It
Speaker 1: trust me, if the economy wasn't booming, you'd be hearing
Speaker 1: whatever thing wasn't going well, you'd hear about that constantly
Speaker 1: on TV, but also that the Trump is in many
Speaker 1: ways governing as a as a moderate, a moderate Republican
Speaker 1: at least he backs down when these Ninth Circuit judges
Speaker 1: come up with these completely cockamami rulings and decide that
Speaker 1: they're going to replace executive authority with their own whims
Speaker 1: and for all of this that they still think that
Speaker 1: Trump is somehow worse than Hitler. Time's infinity to borrow
Speaker 1: from Ann You cannot reason with these people, You cannot
Speaker 1: find a way to to to catch some kind of
Speaker 1: a middle ground with them. They are on a mission.
Speaker 1: And it really does speak to how Trump has upended
Speaker 1: their sense of their own importance in their own virtue.
Speaker 1: You know, we often talk about virtue signaling here. It's
Speaker 1: something that progressives do. They like to show each other
Speaker 1: and in their minds, the rest of the world, at
Speaker 1: least the world that matters how moral and good they are.
Speaker 1: They really feel this need. I'm always of the mind
Speaker 1: that moral people just act morally and don't expect any
Speaker 1: praise or recognition for it, and don't feel the need
Speaker 1: to shout it from the of tops constantly or or
Speaker 1: on social media as the case maybe, but One of
Speaker 1: the things that Trump has done is he has, in
Speaker 1: a very public way and from a very powerful pulpit,
Speaker 1: challenge some of these concepts that liberals whole dear for
Speaker 1: the purposes of virtue signaling. Right. Uh. They they really
Speaker 1: do believe themselves to be the party of of the
Speaker 1: smart people and the nice people and truth. Uh. And
Speaker 1: when Trump, for example, says that there beloved fake news
Speaker 1: is in fact fake, that really upsets them because they
Speaker 1: watch it every night thinking that in the in the
Speaker 1: feedback loop that is, uh, the left wing news cycle,
Speaker 1: and look conservative news too. See, let me just take
Speaker 1: a little digression here. I'm not saying that there isn't
Speaker 1: conservative news and there's not a feedback cycle there too.
Speaker 1: But conservatives know what they are watching is coming from
Speaker 1: a center right perspective, except that what they're watching comes
Speaker 1: from center right perspective, and also understand that all the
Speaker 1: other stuff out there is left too far left. I
Speaker 1: don't watch uh you know, I don't watch a Fox
Speaker 1: News show and think to myself, well, like this is
Speaker 1: exactly neutral. No, we're talking about the opinion shows. I'm
Speaker 1: watching conservatives who are on air, who are who share
Speaker 1: my values and are taking a similar point of view
Speaker 1: to me. Right liberals watch CNN, they watch Anderson Cooper
Speaker 1: and they think, this is just the truth, This is
Speaker 1: just what matters. This is just journalism delusional, but that
Speaker 1: is in fact what they that is in fact what
Speaker 1: they think. And by Trump coming out and really making
Speaker 1: headway in this argument against them, and it's not just
Speaker 1: on that right, it's also on you know, it's also
Speaker 1: on the the legacy of obama Ism, which is a
Speaker 1: lot of social just this ideology wrapped into big government.
Speaker 1: You know that that whole approach to governance was bad
Speaker 1: for the economy, created a lot of misery and what
Speaker 1: was really wrong. And people who supported that and felt
Speaker 1: so good about themselves for supporting it, don't like to
Speaker 1: see that this brash billionaire Donald Trump can come kind
Speaker 1: of busting in on the political scene and do a
Speaker 1: much better job than Obama, who was there their savior.
Speaker 1: So so they are angry at Trump because politics is
Speaker 1: deeply personal for progressives, because they view it as a
Speaker 1: means of enhancing their own personal brands all the time.
Speaker 1: And then also there's the issue of for the left,
Speaker 1: politics as a religion. For the right, when we're when
Speaker 1: we're doing it properly when we're not getting ahead of ourselves,
Speaker 1: are getting uh, you know, jumping the shark. Politics is
Speaker 1: about a governing approach. Politics is about philosophy and what
Speaker 1: works best in society to order people on their rights
Speaker 1: and protect individual dignity. But it's not about this is
Speaker 1: my only reason for being. And I think liberals need
Speaker 1: to take a long look in the mirror for why
Speaker 1: is it that for them, a challenge to their political
Speaker 1: beefs is like an existential challenge to their very core.
Speaker 1: Is Sweden going to the far right? Here's a story
Speaker 1: you probably won't hear getting much attention elsewhere, if any.
Speaker 1: Sweden often pointed to as what liberals aspire to for America.
Speaker 1: Right liberals here will say that they want democratic socialism
Speaker 1: along the lines of what they have in Sweden. Sometimes
Speaker 1: I'll say Denmark or Norway, but Sweden tends to be
Speaker 1: number one on that list. But Sweden is not what
Speaker 1: it used to be very uh troubling ways. It's not
Speaker 1: nearly as safe as it used to be based on
Speaker 1: the statistics, and it has brought in, as you probably
Speaker 1: have heard and read, many hundreds of thousands of refugees
Speaker 1: particularly from the Muslim world in the last couple of decades,
Speaker 1: and they're having an election coming up in Sweden, and
Speaker 1: the Swedish TV channel did a compilation of some stats
Speaker 1: and what they found is that sixty percent of the
Speaker 1: men I'm sorry, fifty eight percent, So just shy of
Speaker 1: si fifty eight percent of men convicted of rape or
Speaker 1: attempted rape in Sweden. Now, keep on, this does not
Speaker 1: include reports of a rape where or someone was charged
Speaker 1: or where someone was charged and not convicted. So but
Speaker 1: but almost six of men convicted of rape or attempted
Speaker 1: rape over the last five years were foreigners. And of
Speaker 1: that population that you're talking about, almost all of it
Speaker 1: from the Middle and foreign born from the Middle East
Speaker 1: and North Africa and um South Asia, almost all of it.
Speaker 1: Now you may be wondering, okay, buck well, to put
Speaker 1: this in a real context, what is the popular what
Speaker 1: is the percentage of Sweden? So so almost all of
Speaker 1: the foreign born convicted rapists are from Muslim majority countries.
Speaker 1: I'm just these are the statistics from Swedish TV. They're
Speaker 1: equivalent to BBC. I'm not I'm just going with what's
Speaker 1: with wright and writ and form. By the way, reported
Speaker 1: by the BBC. Okay, so this is you know, people
Speaker 1: can get all crazy with me and yell at me
Speaker 1: for this, but this is the BBC compiling Swedish TV information. Uh,
Speaker 1: and let's call it. So, I don't think keep saying
Speaker 1: fifty percent, I know, keep going back and forth. Um,
Speaker 1: are are foreign born Muslims in Sweden that are that
Speaker 1: we're guilty, found guilty of rape And eight percent of
Speaker 1: Sweden is Muslim overall. So the percentage of the population,
Speaker 1: and that's the entire Muslim population of Sweden, So the
Speaker 1: percentage of the population that is Muslim and and foreign
Speaker 1: born that would fall into this category of the last
Speaker 1: five years is even smaller than that. So let's call it.
Speaker 1: Roughly five percent or six percent of the population has
Speaker 1: been responsible for almost six of the rapes in this
Speaker 1: country of over about about fifteen million people, I think.
Speaker 1: So you have to think of it also in the
Speaker 1: context that this is like the size of a pretty
Speaker 1: decent sized US state. You know, this is not a
Speaker 1: massive country like Germany or France in terms of population,
Speaker 1: and the total number of offenders are talking about here
Speaker 1: was about eight hundred and forty three, with a hundred
Speaker 1: and ninety seven from the Middle East and North Africa,
Speaker 1: forty five from Afghanistan. Um. These are people who were
Speaker 1: given refugee status, folks. Uh, these are refugees who then
Speaker 1: go on to commit rapes. That's what is happening in Sweden,
Speaker 1: and that's what we're talking about here in these statistics. Now,
Speaker 1: there are two ways to approach this as a policy matter.
Speaker 1: The liberal way are meaning our liberals. I don't I
Speaker 1: can't speak to Swedish domestic politics, assume everybody is pretty
Speaker 1: much liberal, but the the liberal American approach to this
Speaker 1: kind of an issue would be to one. I guess
Speaker 1: there are a few ways they might too it. Actually,
Speaker 1: there are few liberal ways. There's one conservative way, but
Speaker 1: they might try to just ignore it, which is what's
Speaker 1: going on in Sweden. I would note, until recently getting
Speaker 1: harder and harder for them to ignore this stuff. But
Speaker 1: they don't want to talk about it. They don't want
Speaker 1: this to become a part of public discourse. So that's
Speaker 1: one option that they might go with. The Other one
Speaker 1: is to say, and this is this mirrors what goes
Speaker 1: on in this country with the immigration debate, and and uh,
Speaker 1: Molly Tibbitts's to say, Okay, well, maybe something really bad
Speaker 1: did happen because or bad things do happen because of
Speaker 1: either illegal immigrants or refugees or whatever. It may be
Speaker 1: illegal aliens, but it's not fair to the rest of them,
Speaker 1: meaning not fair to the rest of the illegals or
Speaker 1: the refugees or the non citizens of the country to
Speaker 1: judge them all based on the actions of the few. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's I can that. That's an argument, that's a real position,
Speaker 1: a real good faith argument, I can. I can understand that.
Speaker 1: And then there's another way to go though. What if
Speaker 1: the citizens of a country say, we don't want a
Speaker 1: a dramatic increase in rapes in our country or or
Speaker 1: assaults in our country, no matter how many wonderful other
Speaker 1: people it brings in. So that is to say, you
Speaker 1: know you you you are not a bad person. If
Speaker 1: you live in a town. And I saw one of
Speaker 1: my friends Brian's suits on radio actually made this point
Speaker 1: via Twitter. I thought was interesting. He says, if you
Speaker 1: live near a prison, right, and the prison is is,
Speaker 1: everything is fine with that prison, But once a year
Speaker 1: an inmate breaks out and hacks a family of four
Speaker 1: to death with an axe on on his way to
Speaker 1: breaking free, and you are upset because that one family
Speaker 1: of four each year, a new family of four gets
Speaker 1: hacked to death by one. If the prison comes out
Speaker 1: here and says, well, you know it's only one a year,
Speaker 1: would that be okay? Would you be a bad person
Speaker 1: because in your community you would say, I don't want
Speaker 1: to suffer these casualties, even if they're not that many.
Speaker 1: I want zero casualties. One would think that this, this
Speaker 1: could be a reasonable policy position, not based on a
Speaker 1: a problem with anyone's ethnicity or skin color, which is
Speaker 1: what of course this always turns into that discussion for
Speaker 1: the left, but just because you you don't want to
Speaker 1: be importing the problems of the third World into your country,
Speaker 1: which is what's going on in Europe with some pretty
Speaker 1: horrific effects in many cases, I don't all cases, not
Speaker 1: even a majority of cases, but enough cases that it
Speaker 1: is forcing a shift in political discussion such that in
Speaker 1: Sweden right now, folks, the far right party in Sweden
Speaker 1: may actually win this upcoming election. Um this, you know,
Speaker 1: people are thinking that the migrant problem such as it is,
Speaker 1: may mean that the the far right, uh social Democrats
Speaker 1: party UH in Sweden may in fact be getting thirty
Speaker 1: percent of the vote cheese more than double. This is
Speaker 1: the expectation for the upcoming Swedish parliamentary election, but which
Speaker 1: is on September nine, by the way, but that would
Speaker 1: be double more than double what they got before the
Speaker 1: migrant surge. Sweden, by the way, economically is doing well.
Speaker 1: Unemployment is low. It's people always say, it's ranked in
Speaker 1: one of the you know that, the happiest countries in
Speaker 1: the world to live. So why would you have this
Speaker 1: swing toward the far right, which who knows? I mean,
Speaker 1: I need to look into what the far right even
Speaker 1: is like in Sweden. But it's just immigration, folks. So
Speaker 1: a country that's incredibly progressive, full of democratic socialists like Sweden,
Speaker 1: is surging to the right for one reason, one reason only,
Speaker 1: in its immigration. And in this country we're told that
Speaker 1: if you have any qualms whatsoever about nearly unrestricted illegal
Speaker 1: immigration into the country or poorly restricted, you know, however
Speaker 1: they want to phrase it illegal mcra in the country,
Speaker 1: you're you're a bad person, You're a racist, you're xenophobe,
Speaker 1: all of these things. Meanwhile, the most progressive country on
Speaker 1: the planet is swinging to the right because they're dealing
Speaker 1: with these problems and they just don't want to deal
Speaker 1: with them anymore. The government can tell everybody that's fine,
Speaker 1: but people know it's not fine, and they just don't
Speaker 1: want to deal with it. So as much as government
Speaker 1: can try to jam these progressive multiculturalist policies down the
Speaker 1: throats of the Swedish voter or the American voter, we
Speaker 1: all can come to our own conclusions about how much
Speaker 1: unrestricted immigration from the third World we really want. And
Speaker 1: in Sweden the answer is a lot of them don't
Speaker 1: want any more of it. You need a little boost
Speaker 1: to help you get through the day, to help you
Speaker 1: push through that long afternoon or get things started early
Speaker 1: in the a m. You want to go with a
Speaker 1: veteran owned, operated and founded company that will give you
Speaker 1: all of that energy you need. Strike Force. Strike Force
Speaker 1: energy comes in four different flavors. It is delicious. I've
Speaker 1: got a couple of the pump models on my desk
Speaker 1: so that whenever I just need a little zap, a
Speaker 1: little X or something, I can just put a squeeze
Speaker 1: a strike Force into water. I actually like a lot
Speaker 1: of iced tea. He's got a little of sweetness to it.
Speaker 1: So take an unsweetened iced tea, pull a little strike
Speaker 1: Force energy into it. Lemon goes great with this, and
Speaker 1: it is a delicious way to give you that little
Speaker 1: extra boost. Go to strike Force Energy dot com. Use
Speaker 1: promo code buck that will get you a packet sent
Speaker 1: for every packet you buy the military members overseas that
Speaker 1: Strikeforce Energy dot com promo code b U c K,
Speaker 1: strike Force Energy dot com promo code buck, and they'll
Speaker 1: deliver one for everyone you buy to a service member
Speaker 1: at home or abroad. Sarah Michael Cohen under a putt
Speaker 1: is guilty to, among things, paying Stormy Daniel from Karen
Speaker 1: mctem could during the campaign, and he says he did
Speaker 1: it at the direction of the President of the United States.
Speaker 1: Did President Trump committed crime? As the President said, We've
Speaker 1: stated many times, he did nothing wrong. There are no
Speaker 1: charges against him, UM, and we've commented on this extensively.
Speaker 1: Then why not lookport these payments again. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to get into the back and forth details. I can
Speaker 1: tell you, as the President has stated on numerous occasions,
Speaker 1: he did nothing wrong. There are no charges against him
Speaker 1: in this UH. And just because Michael Cohen made a
Speaker 1: plea deal. Doesn't mean that that implicates the president on anything.
Speaker 1: Here today is that the president has never lied to
Speaker 1: the American people, because so many people now look back
Speaker 1: at that tape of him on your Force LA and
Speaker 1: saying he knew nothing about these payments, when in fact
Speaker 1: we now know he knew everything about these payments. So
Speaker 1: has he lied? Look again, I think that's a ridiculous accusation.
Speaker 1: The President in this matter has done nothing wrong and
Speaker 1: there are no charges against him, the president said Fox News.
Speaker 1: So I see journalists think of themselves now as the
Speaker 1: truth police, the truth police. That's an interesting way for
Speaker 1: them to position themselves, especially after many many years of
Speaker 1: not just covering for the lines of politicians that they
Speaker 1: like I did not have sexual relations with that woman,
Speaker 1: but also engaging in all kinds of misdirection and deception
Speaker 1: with regard to their own agenda. If you view modern
Speaker 1: journalism as leftist dominated and full of lies, and that
Speaker 1: means you're paying attention and you understand what's going on,
Speaker 1: then you have a very hard time hearing from all
Speaker 1: these people who work at news organizations where they will
Speaker 1: look you in the face and say we are not
Speaker 1: biased in any way. We are not pro democrat at CBS,
Speaker 1: We are not pro democrat at CNN. We are not
Speaker 1: They really and on all these newspapers you know, you know,
Speaker 1: three d of them or whatever it was, right the
Speaker 1: same editorial and are all taken the same line. But
Speaker 1: they still think somehow they're they're you know, independent and
Speaker 1: just speaking truth to power, and that they still believe
Speaker 1: their own line of crap. They really do. But if
Speaker 1: they're going to be the truth police, you know, there's
Speaker 1: some things, there's some questions that I want answers to, like,
Speaker 1: where was the truth police hammering the White House in
Speaker 1: every way they possibly could in the abdministration when we
Speaker 1: were told this whopper of a lie. If you like
Speaker 1: your doctor, you can keep your doctor under the reform
Speaker 1: proposals that we put forward. If you like your private
Speaker 1: health insurance plan, you can keep it. If you like
Speaker 1: the plan you have, you can keep it. If you
Speaker 1: like the doctor you have, you can keep your doctor too.
Speaker 1: We will keep this promise to the American people. If
Speaker 1: you like your doctor, you will be able to keep
Speaker 1: your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan,
Speaker 1: you'll be able to keep your health care plan period.
Speaker 1: If you like your doctor, you'll be able to keep
Speaker 1: your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you'll
Speaker 1: be able to keep your health care plan. If you've
Speaker 1: got health insurance, you like your doctor, you like your plan,
Speaker 1: you can keep your doctor. You can keep your plan.
Speaker 1: If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.
Speaker 1: If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
Speaker 1: Now I understand that this this is one when liberals
Speaker 1: start screaming what about is and what about is um?
Speaker 1: But that lie, which those were all different instances every
Speaker 1: time you heard Obama saying that, those were different points
Speaker 1: when he was in public giving speeches with an adoring,
Speaker 1: fawning media all around him, and we were told that
Speaker 1: Obama was basically our our savior and that he was
Speaker 1: better than us too, that we weren't we weren't really,
Speaker 1: we weren't really up to up to par for what
Speaker 1: what Obama was bringing to this country, and he was
Speaker 1: really there to fix the faults of this country. That
Speaker 1: was part of the narrative. But that lie really mattered
Speaker 1: to people because that was a specific issue in the
Speaker 1: Obamacare fight that they knew, they knew they would have
Speaker 1: had opposition in the Democrats would not have been able
Speaker 1: to get that bill through if people knew that they
Speaker 1: might lose their health care plan, that that could be
Speaker 1: a deal breaker. And so the decision to lie there,
Speaker 1: and it was a lie. There was no way, and
Speaker 1: this was based on all of the the internal preparation
Speaker 1: research that they did, or rather that the different special
Speaker 1: interest groups who came together to write this bill for
Speaker 1: the Democrats. Uh, they decided that this was the way
Speaker 1: it was gonna be, and they needed Obama out there
Speaker 1: to pitch this idea to make sure that the American
Speaker 1: people would at least enough of the American people would
Speaker 1: go along with it, that the Democrats would have some cover,
Speaker 1: and that they would jam through the largest entitlement program
Speaker 1: in in decades, which has as everyone knows, it's a
Speaker 1: disaster because they can't even let us deal with the
Speaker 1: full weight of it. Uh, they keep delaying it, right,
Speaker 1: they keep on doing everything possible so that their constituents
Speaker 1: don't really have to deal with Obamacare. And that's not
Speaker 1: the only major lie. I mean that we also have
Speaker 1: this one who remembers This one is in fact what
Speaker 1: it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what
Speaker 1: it transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course,
Speaker 1: as you know, uh, there was a violent protest outside
Speaker 1: of our embassy, sparked by this hateful video. You know,
Speaker 1: just before I get into how that was such an
Speaker 1: obvious lie, and that Hillary, as we know from the
Speaker 1: email to her daughter when she was Secretary of State,
Speaker 1: knew it was a terrorist attack right away. Anybody who
Speaker 1: wasn't a complete moron in the government that was had
Speaker 1: any access whatsoever, knew this was a terrorist attack right away.
Speaker 1: But they had to change the narrative because it was
Speaker 1: right before people are gonna cast votes, and Obama, who
Speaker 1: was so weak on foreign policy, such a a panderer
Speaker 1: to the rest of the globe. Obama was gonna had
Speaker 1: this whole story about how he had destroyed Al Qaeda.
Speaker 1: Know Bi Lan was dead, General Motors was alive. And
Speaker 1: then there's a terrorist attack on the anniversary of nine
Speaker 1: eleven that kills the U. S. Ambassador and three other
Speaker 1: brave Americans serving abroad. That's a bad look. So they
Speaker 1: had to come up with something else. So it was
Speaker 1: just you know, protests and and that was a lie.
Speaker 1: They knew it was alive. And not only they know
Speaker 1: it was lie. But Candy Crowley, if you will recall
Speaker 1: at the debate when this came up with Mitt Romney
Speaker 1: and Barack Obama lied for Obama in a way that
Speaker 1: may have actually turned the election. I mean it definitely
Speaker 1: hurt Romney in a profound way, because Romney kicked Obama's
Speaker 1: butt in that first debate, just just took him to town,
Speaker 1: I mean took him to school. The second debate, though,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, Candy Crowley are he dared call
Speaker 1: it a terrorist attack. Candy Crowley comes in, of course
Speaker 1: to save Obama, and you know, there you have it.
Speaker 1: You know, you have Democrats lying on major things, journalists
Speaker 1: covering for them. And now I'm not saying that I
Speaker 1: don't think Trump ever has lied. Of course, I think
Speaker 1: Trump has lied about things. I'm just saying I can't
Speaker 1: be made to care enough about Trump's lies to want
Speaker 1: to give up all of the winds and all the
Speaker 1: benefits for this country that we have had because he's president.
Speaker 1: They keep thinking, if they can get us to admit
Speaker 1: that he lied, then everything else will fall in place.
Speaker 1: For Okay, we shouldn't support Trump anymore. No, that's not
Speaker 1: how it works. That's not how any of this is
Speaker 1: gonna work. I've got a lot more teams, stay with me.
Speaker 1: It didn't get nearly as much coverage for obvious reasons
Speaker 1: as some of the other big breaking stories in the
Speaker 1: last twenty four hours. But there's a pretty pretty rough
Speaker 1: indictment that got handed down. Um not rough asn't unfair,
Speaker 1: but rough as in, it's gonna be tough to if
Speaker 1: the facts are accurate in the indictment, tough to beat
Speaker 1: this one for corruption against California GOP Congressman Duncan Hunter.
Speaker 1: I've interviewed Congressman Hun before, and you know, I said
Speaker 1: this today. I always felt like there was something, there
Speaker 1: was something that he just never was quite the the
Speaker 1: figure in in conservatism or in Republican politics that you
Speaker 1: would think a guy who's, you know, looks the part.
Speaker 1: He's a former marine, he you know, he has a
Speaker 1: good presence. What was going on there? I mean, look,
Speaker 1: maybe I just didn't know him well or and then
Speaker 1: this grand jury indictment comes down accusing him of filing
Speaker 1: false campaign reports and wire fraud. And here is what
Speaker 1: we find out about the allegations, at least against the
Speaker 1: San Diego based Congressman San Diego such a great place.
Speaker 1: I'd love to be a San Diego based anything, I think.
Speaker 1: But so here here's what. Here's the sum of the
Speaker 1: stuff that came out of this twofo dollars they say
Speaker 1: worth a campaign to pay personal expenses. The Hunters, the
Speaker 1: husband and wife. By the way, Duncan Hunter and his
Speaker 1: wife are both caught up in this. They are both
Speaker 1: being criminally charged. The Hunters allegedly overdrew their joint checking
Speaker 1: account more than eleven hundred times during a seven year period,
Speaker 1: leaning to more than thirty seven thousand dollars in overdraft charges.
Speaker 1: This is all according to the indictment uh and as
Speaker 1: as reported on Politico, their credit cards were also maxed out,
Speaker 1: leading to twenty four thousand dollars in additional charges. You know, folks,
Speaker 1: you probably don't need me to tell you this, but
Speaker 1: one thing that I am absolutely sure of, and everybody
Speaker 1: that I've ever talked to who knows anything is sure
Speaker 1: about the first thing you do when you have money.
Speaker 1: The first thing you do when you have any money
Speaker 1: that you don't need for immediate expenses is payoff credit
Speaker 1: card bills. I don't care how good an investor you are,
Speaker 1: you're not making twenty a year uh, year in and
Speaker 1: year out with your investments. So if you have any
Speaker 1: spare cash and you have credit card debt, pay off
Speaker 1: your credit card debt. I've I've had to have this
Speaker 1: conversation with with some friends of mine who were shocked
Speaker 1: when I explained to them what an APR actually means
Speaker 1: and how credit card companies really make their money. They
Speaker 1: make their money by turning you into an indentured servant
Speaker 1: of sorts that's just trying to pay off the debt.
Speaker 1: But you're never really going to get out of the
Speaker 1: debt unless you managed to save and get ahead of
Speaker 1: the monthly payments anyway. So this is almost like reading
Speaker 1: about somebody. Duncan Hunter and his wife sounds like people
Speaker 1: who would have been at the racetrack and, you know,
Speaker 1: spending their last dime because they've got the you know,
Speaker 1: they've got the good number or whatever. You know, they
Speaker 1: know what's gonna happen next. And that's all bad enough
Speaker 1: when just the numbers are bad. But what's really gonna
Speaker 1: make this a a tough case for Duncan Hunter, and
Speaker 1: also just the reputational damage is that in some of
Speaker 1: the instances there were really egregious case is the most degree,
Speaker 1: just the one that everyone's pointing to, is that he
Speaker 1: wanted to buy some golf clothing and told his treasurer
Speaker 1: that it was golf balls for some wounded warriors, but
Speaker 1: it was actually golf clothing for him, according to the indictment,
Speaker 1: and es Stantil proven guilty. We have to see. But
Speaker 1: once you start pretending to do charitable stuff, if you
Speaker 1: were doing charitable stuff or pretending to do charital stuff
Speaker 1: for veterans and it was in fact a lie, the
Speaker 1: jury will you will have no sympathy from that jury.
Speaker 1: The jury will not be even a little bit. Uh.
Speaker 1: I think at least willing to hear about how you know,
Speaker 1: we're all flawed and you know nobody was you know,
Speaker 1: nobody was really injured here anything. Let's not get And
Speaker 1: I don't think Duncan Hunter is gonna go away for
Speaker 1: that long. It's not that much money. And again he's
Speaker 1: gonna maybe he's gonna defend himself. I don't know if
Speaker 1: he's gonna take a plea or not. But it also
Speaker 1: just reminds me that I think there's a there's a
Speaker 1: ad trend in American politics right now where people view
Speaker 1: being a public servant, particularly being an elected official, as
Speaker 1: not just a pathway to UH prominence and fame and
Speaker 1: prestige and all that stuff, but also as a pathway
Speaker 1: to great wealth and really really an entitlement to great wealth. Essentially,
Speaker 1: if you are you know, a member of Congress, a senator,
Speaker 1: or somebody who's cabin official. This there's this sense of, well,
Speaker 1: I should be able to have the kind of money
Speaker 1: that all these people that I'm interacting with, you know,
Speaker 1: the donors and the people at my fundraisers, and and
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of a lot of our
Speaker 1: elected officials they fall into this trap because you know,
Speaker 1: you don't and a lot of you're gonna say, buck
Speaker 1: Congress and make a lot of money. Well, you've got
Speaker 1: to maintain two residences, you know, one in dec basically
Speaker 1: and one in your home district. You you know, you
Speaker 1: gotta pay DC taxes. It's it's actually not a lot
Speaker 1: of money, you know, a lot I think congressmen are
Speaker 1: making about now. Everything is relative, folks. Right my first
Speaker 1: year out of out of school, I was making in
Speaker 1: the thirties. Um, so I know that it's not easy
Speaker 1: to and I'm you know, paying all your bills on
Speaker 1: that is not easy wherever you are. UM anyway, Congressmen,
Speaker 1: I think make about a hundred and fifty k. But
Speaker 1: if you want to have two homes and have a
Speaker 1: few kids, and maybe want to send one of them
Speaker 1: or two of them to private school, you know that
Speaker 1: you're gonna run through that a hundred and fifty grand
Speaker 1: very quickly. And that's where or maybe it's a hundred
Speaker 1: and seventy I forget something like that. That's where I
Speaker 1: think some of these politicians get into trouble. They have power,
Speaker 1: but not necessarily wealth, and they and they just can't
Speaker 1: help but feel that that power should entitle them to wealth.
Speaker 1: And clearly Hillary Clinton hollow is the best example of this,
Speaker 1: uh in many ways the most egregious example of this,
Speaker 1: and the fact that she has faced not only no
Speaker 1: charges for her massive scheme of self enrichment, but also
Speaker 1: that she hasn't really even been investigated. I know, this
Speaker 1: is what about is M Why are you doing? What
Speaker 1: about is UM? But I think we're also all subjected
Speaker 1: to a misperception of the wealth of other people. You know,
Speaker 1: I think we all are in this place where we
Speaker 1: will will look on social media. We see things on
Speaker 1: Facebook or on Instagram. If you're on Instagram, and everyone's
Speaker 1: just showing this life where they're always out to these
Speaker 1: incredible meals. They're always on vacation. And I like to
Speaker 1: tell folks this life is actually tough. Life is struggling
Speaker 1: to pay your bills. Life is worrying about where you know.
Speaker 1: People ask me, Buck, why do you why have you
Speaker 1: moved so much? It's not because I like moving because
Speaker 1: I don't have the money to stay in the apartment
Speaker 1: that I was living in. Because I've lived in two
Speaker 1: very expensive cities for my entire adult life. So when
Speaker 1: they raised the rent, I gotta move. That's stressful, you know,
Speaker 1: every time you deal with that. I mean, I've moved
Speaker 1: probably ten times in my adult life. Think about that,
Speaker 1: ten different I've had at least at least ten different homes,
Speaker 1: nothing about it and never owning anything. Just moving around.
Speaker 1: Life is that. It's paning credit cards, it's dealing with movers.
Speaker 1: It's having a boss or a colleague who is berating
Speaker 1: you without cause and doesn't appreciate you. It's uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's a spouse or a significant other getting sick and
Speaker 1: leaning on you. And you having to you know, that's life.
Speaker 1: And I think that we all get this idea that
Speaker 1: life is just traveling from you know, uh one and
Speaker 1: one incredible beach vacation to an incredible ski vacation too,
Speaker 1: you know, the to a a winery somewhere, and because
Speaker 1: that's the life that everyone wants to present about them.
Speaker 1: So if not, look, some people just like to share
Speaker 1: they're happy stuff with their friends. And I'm not saying
Speaker 1: it's not always about you know, conspicuous social media sharing
Speaker 1: for its own sake. I think some people do just
Speaker 1: want to celebrate with their friends. This is what I did,
Speaker 1: and this is kind of fun, Like everyone does. You know,
Speaker 1: I go to a wedding, I'll take a photo, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is what we're all doing. But we
Speaker 1: need to keep that in context. No one, no one
Speaker 1: shares photos of themselves when they've had food poisoning for
Speaker 1: two days and they look like they're gonna keel over,
Speaker 1: and they're in the office and they're being told they're
Speaker 1: not doing a good enough job and they just got dumped,
Speaker 1: and you know, that's life. That's been life for me.
Speaker 1: I've had to do this show with all of those things.
Speaker 1: That have happened, right, I mean, you know this is
Speaker 1: not recently. Don't worry well again, knock on wood. But
Speaker 1: I I do think that there's this there's a perception
Speaker 1: now that maybe is influencing the thinking of particularly the
Speaker 1: some of these this younger generation of politicians, Republican and Democrat,
Speaker 1: who feel like they should be liveing this instagram worthy life,
Speaker 1: and they really don't think of public service as serving
Speaker 1: the public. They think of it as serving themselves. And
Speaker 1: from what we see in this report, if it's true,
Speaker 1: then I think you'd have to agree that Duncan Hunter
Speaker 1: is in that category. And that's a shame. That's a shame.
Speaker 1: He service country honorably, hears a marine and now it
Speaker 1: looks like he's gonna serve some time in prison for
Speaker 1: being a corrupt public official if the allegations are true.
Speaker 1: Got more coming up, Teams, Stay with me. You know,
Speaker 1: rarely do I see something and I think to myself, man,
Speaker 1: that looks like a terrible idea or I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: like that, And I'm surprised. You might say that's the
Speaker 1: curmudgeon in me. You might think that, well, Buck, of
Speaker 1: course you think that because you do like to yell
Speaker 1: at young uns which to use people under the age
Speaker 1: of you know, from twenty to thirty. I guess, uh,
Speaker 1: to get off your lawn. But I saw this phenomenon
Speaker 1: in the streets of d C. Probably a few of
Speaker 1: you have this in your own towns. I know my
Speaker 1: l A listeners know exactly what I'm talking about. High
Speaker 1: five l A. I'll be out in l A by
Speaker 1: the way in a few days for some some business.
Speaker 1: Electric scooters. Now you may think buck is an electric
Speaker 1: scooter or something that my grandma rolls around and it
Speaker 1: goes like and you know, you sit on it, and
Speaker 1: I think that's technically called a rascal, But yes, that
Speaker 1: is a form of electronic scooter. But what I'm talking
Speaker 1: about our actual scooters, like what used to play on
Speaker 1: when you were a kid, you know, and you sort
Speaker 1: of one leg on one leg you're using to kick
Speaker 1: at the ground and it makes you go and you yeah,
Speaker 1: you know what I'm talking about. And I as a kid,
Speaker 1: I remember my parents got me a scooter. I think
Speaker 1: it was called the Black Widow, which I don't know
Speaker 1: why I remember that, but I do. But it was
Speaker 1: like an all black scooter. And I thought when I
Speaker 1: was ten years old or eight years old or whatever
Speaker 1: that that was the coolest thing ever. But I had
Speaker 1: to actually peddle that myself or whatever you call it.
Speaker 1: When you kick your leg and you scoot her along.
Speaker 1: In d C. As a pilot program, they've started this
Speaker 1: electric scooter stuff where you it's like Uber, so you
Speaker 1: have an app. The app tells you where the scooter
Speaker 1: is and then you go. You you just click in
Speaker 1: with your the app. Essentially you take a photo of
Speaker 1: the of the thing. I'm really not good at explaining this,
Speaker 1: but you it's a little bar you know how they
Speaker 1: scan barcode. There you go, you take a photo of
Speaker 1: the bar code and you hop on and this thing
Speaker 1: goes about fifteen miles an hour. And it's not that
Speaker 1: I care about this, but it's completely green, so it's
Speaker 1: all it's all considered green transport, so yave the environment
Speaker 1: or whatever. But you go about fifteen miles an hour
Speaker 1: and it allows you to really just get around the
Speaker 1: city with tremendous ease. It's incredible. I mean, I look
Speaker 1: like such a dork, and I admit this. I accept
Speaker 1: that I look like a huge nerd and that someone
Speaker 1: from one of like the rival left wing publications out there,
Speaker 1: who maybe recognizes me from Fox or something like that,
Speaker 1: is going to take a photo of me and mock
Speaker 1: me relentlessly, and I will deserve it for riding around
Speaker 1: on this nerdy electric scooter. But I love these things.
Speaker 1: They are so fun and I feel like, you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: it brings out the kid in me. What can I say,
Speaker 1: but you go, you know, you get to go all
Speaker 1: of all of the city and this little scooter. And
Speaker 1: the great thing is, unlike a bike, you have full control.
Speaker 1: So when I get too close to somebody or some
Speaker 1: maniac you know, comes flying out of the out of
Speaker 1: the doorway and isn't looking at what they're doing, you
Speaker 1: just can basically hit the brake and step off and
Speaker 1: you're totally stable. So I think it's a lot safer
Speaker 1: knock on wood. Of course, then bicycle riding around the city,
Speaker 1: which I've always thought was just because people ride around
Speaker 1: on bicycles are crazy, right. A lot of them go
Speaker 1: way too fast, they can't control the bikes. People have
Speaker 1: been killed in New York City because they've been hit
Speaker 1: by bicyclists. So bicycles, I find, and there's also kind
Speaker 1: of a militant attitude that bicyclists have about the bike
Speaker 1: lane and everything. Uh, the scooter people, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: I'm a scooter person yet, but I'm getting close. The
Speaker 1: electric scooter people can also use the bike lanes, but
Speaker 1: we can do the street as well, And a lot
Speaker 1: of them go up on the sidewalk, but that's a
Speaker 1: no no unless you're running really late, and then you know,
Speaker 1: life's tough. But these things are so fun and it
Speaker 1: just makes me think, how, you know, what we consider
Speaker 1: the future of how we get around and where we
Speaker 1: live and and commuting and all this, it's going to
Speaker 1: be so different in ten or fifteen years. Either there
Speaker 1: will be autonomous driving pretty soon, and flying cars I
Speaker 1: think is probably thirty or forty years off. I know
Speaker 1: people say they're five to ten years off, but I
Speaker 1: think it's more like thirty years off before they're really happening.
Speaker 1: But these electric scooters, I'm telling you, and you can
Speaker 1: plug them into the wall all so you don't have
Speaker 1: to worry about you know, how how do I recharge
Speaker 1: my electric scooter? You just plug it in. So it's
Speaker 1: just it's like an electronic appliance essentially that can get
Speaker 1: you too, and from work in fifteen miles an hour.
Speaker 1: It's just fast enough that you're really moving along. It's
Speaker 1: essentially as fast as most people would be able to to,
Speaker 1: you know, to run or sprint over um maybe a
Speaker 1: quarter a mile or so. I don't know. I don't
Speaker 1: know how fast that really is. But it's a lot
Speaker 1: of fun. And you know, I might have to take
Speaker 1: a photo of myself just for the team, because I
Speaker 1: know you guys won't share anywhere, and I know you
Speaker 1: won't make fun of me a lot if you see me, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, riding around d C on it on an
Speaker 1: electric scooter. That is nice to the environment, clean energy
Speaker 1: and all that. But I live just far enough away
Speaker 1: from the office as well that it can be because
Speaker 1: I have to go back and forth throughout the day.
Speaker 1: This is a game changer, folks. It's really fun. I
Speaker 1: love it. The company is called Bird and there's another
Speaker 1: one called LimeBike. Those are the two that are in
Speaker 1: d C right now. They're rolling this out pun intended
Speaker 1: as a program in different cities across the country. D
Speaker 1: C is one of the places, but in at Los
Speaker 1: Angeles right now. The main place for this, the mecca
Speaker 1: of electric electric scooter riding is Venice and Venice Beach
Speaker 1: in Santa Monica, where apparently there's some ill will toward
Speaker 1: the scooter nerds from the general public because they leave
Speaker 1: their scooters everywhere and they zip around, they knock people
Speaker 1: over and stuff. Um and I'm just realizing now you're
Speaker 1: all gonna make fun of me a lot for this.
Speaker 1: But you know what, it's okay because I have no
Speaker 1: secrets from the team. I like to tell you what's
Speaker 1: going on and the you you can say I'm a
Speaker 1: giant dork. I understand, you can say that I'm a geek.
Speaker 1: But once you stand up one of these electronic scooters
Speaker 1: and or electric scooter and it gets you from your
Speaker 1: home to the you know, to the grocery store, the
Speaker 1: barbershop or whatever, and you don't break a sweat in
Speaker 1: the dead of summer, and it's you get there in
Speaker 1: as fast basically as if you took a car. If
Speaker 1: it's in the city, if it's you can't go on
Speaker 1: highways and and stuff with him, they go fifteen miles.
Speaker 1: But once you've done it, I'm telling you're gonna say, wow,
Speaker 1: that's kind of fun. Now it's just a function of
Speaker 1: how do you make this look cool? And I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't think that putting little fins and maybe a
Speaker 1: flame decal on the side of my electric scooter would
Speaker 1: do it. So I'm open any ideas, folks. How do
Speaker 1: I make team buck? How do I make myself look
Speaker 1: cool while I'm coming into the Freedom Hut on my
Speaker 1: borrowed share app electric scooter. I pose that question to
Speaker 1: you before roll call. The show ain't over yet, folks,
Speaker 1: It's time for roll call. Alrighty, roll call man. I
Speaker 1: got a little I love roll call back, get a
Speaker 1: little sad because it's the end of the show and
Speaker 1: shows the best part of the day every day, folks,
Speaker 1: especially right now where it feels like I am just
Speaker 1: a man alone in the swamp ump. You know, I
Speaker 1: I don't work at a at a conservative place. It's
Speaker 1: a it's a newspaper. It's both sides. But I you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not surrounded by conservatives in the office. And then
Speaker 1: I leave the office and I am surrounded by angry,
Speaker 1: raging liberals. So that's not fun. And the culture here
Speaker 1: in d C is very anti Trump and very liberal,
Speaker 1: so you know, it does feel weirdly isolating when I
Speaker 1: get to talk to you. It feels like dispatches from
Speaker 1: deep behind liberal lines. That's really you know, this is
Speaker 1: when I get to It's like I'm on a ham
Speaker 1: radio and I'm talking to my my fellow members of Well.
Speaker 1: I was going to say the resistance, but that's already
Speaker 1: been taken by a bunch of progressive whimps. But some
Speaker 1: other cool secret society of the of the Defense of
Speaker 1: the Republic or something, that's what this really feels like. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'll stop labbing roll roll call, Facebook dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck Sexton, Kelly is up first, love your chromo impression.
Speaker 1: Did you ever see any of the coverage of CNN
Speaker 1: from election night? I wish I had saved the recording,
Speaker 1: but it has to be out there somewhere for you
Speaker 1: to find. I was a pregnant insomniac at the time
Speaker 1: and watch everything on multiple channels through the middle of
Speaker 1: the night. Just as they started to realize Hillary's going
Speaker 1: to lose the wheels started coming off. Chris Cuomo did
Speaker 1: an analysis and said, if we're gonna win, we need
Speaker 1: to hang onto these states. And then he quickly realized
Speaker 1: what he said and tried to correct himself by saying,
Speaker 1: I mean Hillary, if she's going to win. He barely
Speaker 1: looked at the camera until they went to commercial a
Speaker 1: few minutes later. Hilarious. Never watched CNN again after that.
Speaker 1: You should add Christie your arsenal of impressions. He is
Speaker 1: quite worthy. But seriously, I appreciate your show and listen
Speaker 1: to you a podcast as a military spouse. I'm also
Speaker 1: grateful for your support of the arms services. Thank you
Speaker 1: for all you do well, Kellie, thank you for your
Speaker 1: support of the show, and also please thank your your spouse,
Speaker 1: your husband for uh his service to the country. So
Speaker 1: thank you very much for that. And I have a
Speaker 1: governor him impression Bro Cuomo. We have a name for him,
Speaker 1: a nickname, that's the other Cuomo. But I can't say
Speaker 1: that I have a an impression for him because he's
Speaker 1: not that interesting. There's not enough about him too, He's
Speaker 1: not interesting enough to mock. Well, I guess that's what
Speaker 1: I'm trying to say. But thank you so much for
Speaker 1: your kind note, Maria writes, Trained to Boussan is excellent.
Speaker 1: It received a rare on Rotten Tomatoes. Outstanding effects, good
Speaker 1: but predictable storyline, and characters you'll fall in love with
Speaker 1: not to mention zombie zombies zombies. Well, that is quite
Speaker 1: a recommendation, Maria. I'll see if MS Molly wants to
Speaker 1: watch it with me this weekend. We're thinking about picking
Speaker 1: out a movie together, so Trained to Boussan sounds like it.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Ms Molly gets a little scared by
Speaker 1: the scary movies. So and I'm not gonna say I do,
Speaker 1: but I'm not gonna say I don't. I do like
Speaker 1: a good zombie flick though, Cornelia Rights Rising is my
Speaker 1: favorite morning show, but it would be able to It
Speaker 1: would be nice to be able to watch the whole show,
Speaker 1: uh without ads as one video instead of the clip format.
Speaker 1: I keep having to remaximize my video so I can
Speaker 1: watch it full screen. However, despite this issue, I'm an
Speaker 1: avid viewer, So keep up the good work with Crystal,
Speaker 1: and you're excellent reporting Shields High Well, Cornelia, thank you.
Speaker 1: It's nice to have somebody who likes the show right
Speaker 1: in because some of you have been There's been a
Speaker 1: lot of helpful critiques of the show so far, so
Speaker 1: I'm glad that there's also some folks who usually around
Speaker 1: the politics of not me, but I do appreciate you
Speaker 1: guys writing in no matter what you think about the show. Um,
Speaker 1: and we're we're working on it and fine tuning it
Speaker 1: all the time. Kyle writes Buck, listening to your discussion
Speaker 1: about the left abuse of the word fascist while extolling
Speaker 1: the virtues of democratic socialism, I think it's always important
Speaker 1: to note that the proper term for the Nazi Party
Speaker 1: was the National Socialist German Workers Party, and that an
Speaker 1: achieved power initially through a democratic process. If calling it
Speaker 1: democratic socialism is supposed to make it sound like a
Speaker 1: cuddly ideology, I wonder what progressives would think about the
Speaker 1: term democratic national socialism. Hey, it's democratic, so it has
Speaker 1: to be good, right. Well, you know, Kyle, this is
Speaker 1: kind of a and add on to what when people
Speaker 1: joke around about like the People's Republic of North Korea.
Speaker 1: You know, it's sorry, the People's Democratic Republic of North Korea.
Speaker 1: I left one out there. The People's Democratic Democratic Republic
Speaker 1: of North grew. The DPRK is neither democratic, nor republic,
Speaker 1: nor of the people. So you know, the more you
Speaker 1: have to say it in your name, sometimes the less
Speaker 1: true it is. Uh. And that's to your point about
Speaker 1: socialism yes, and the National Socialists, uh, that is National
Speaker 1: Socialist German Workers Party, the Nazis. They will always say
Speaker 1: that the same way the Democrats will just proclaim that
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party of to A is so different from
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party of before. They'll say the same thing
Speaker 1: about socialists, that the National Socialists were not really socialists.
Speaker 1: And this is an argument because they don't want that
Speaker 1: history at their feet. I'm wondering, by the way, when
Speaker 1: when we all agree that all statues of anybody who
Speaker 1: is a socialist would also come down Given the history
Speaker 1: of socialism, of enslaving people vias government control, and the tyranny,
Speaker 1: murder and oppression of millions done in the name of socialism,
Speaker 1: you know, you would think that that might also be
Speaker 1: a part of this historical revisionism that we're all going
Speaker 1: through now, or rather historical revisiting that we're all going through.
Speaker 1: But nonetheless, uh, we have aries. You're right, you're all wrong. Thanks, aries.
Speaker 1: I can always count on areas to keep it one.
Speaker 1: You're all wrong. Zombie Land is the best zombie movie
Speaker 1: of all time. By the way, if Trump gets pushed
Speaker 1: out of office, at the very least, I'm checking out
Speaker 1: John Galt style. I will, although I suspect many will
Speaker 1: go Ragnar Donna scold, Nice Atlas shrug, reference aries, and
Speaker 1: it was always my friend. Good good to hear from you,
Speaker 1: uh Tate writes in buck Love the show you demand,
Speaker 1: Please help us understand the media is madness. It is
Speaker 1: truly depressing to watch how giddy they are about this
Speaker 1: Cohen case. It seems they cannot wait to scream to
Speaker 1: the rooftops. I told you so. I'm beside myself with grief.
Speaker 1: I think I may have leave Trump alone derangement syndrome.
Speaker 1: So there's that from Matt Uh. You know, buddy, It's
Speaker 1: all gonna be okay, it really is. It's it. They've
Speaker 1: never managed to stop Trump before. They're not gonna stop
Speaker 1: him this time around. I'm telling you it's all gonna be.
Speaker 1: It's all gonna be just fine. Um. I I still
Speaker 1: have a lot of faith here, even though look there's
Speaker 1: some bad stuff going on. They they really think they've
Speaker 1: got Trump in a corner, but nobody puts Trump in
Speaker 1: a corner. Rob writes in Listen to your podcast, you
Speaker 1: made a comment about how New Yorkers read more books
Speaker 1: than people from uh from l A. You showed your
Speaker 1: true colors, Buck Elitism. It was a joke, man, It
Speaker 1: was a little l a New York trash talk. Gosh, Rob,
Speaker 1: don't take things so seriously, buddy, you know, just because
Speaker 1: California has, uh, you know, better weather and more beautiful people,
Speaker 1: and you know the ocean, and you know New York. Hey,
Speaker 1: we got brighton beach and hot dogs and and really
Speaker 1: good pizza, although they ever look at pizza in l
Speaker 1: A now too. It's just a little a little bit
Speaker 1: of trash talk. You know. It's like when I say
Speaker 1: things about New Jersey. You know, I love New Jersey.
Speaker 1: New Jersey is the uh, the sort of heavy attitude
Speaker 1: cousin that I'm always happy to see and I'm glad
Speaker 1: I don't, you know, share a home with you know
Speaker 1: what I mean? Like New Jersey's as great. New Jersey's
Speaker 1: part of the fam as a New Yorker, I love.
Speaker 1: I love New Jersey. So next up, before I got
Speaker 1: myself into more trouble Dale, Hey, Buck, we are back
Speaker 1: from our inaugural trip to NYC this past week, and
Speaker 1: we'll let you know how much we appreciated your suggestions
Speaker 1: that I solicited from you. We did hit some of
Speaker 1: the touristy sites, Empire State Building, Top of the Rock,
Speaker 1: but truly, some of the best experiences were the ones
Speaker 1: you suggested. Lunch at J. G. Mellen's Cheeseburger and Chile.
Speaker 1: Oh Yes, Strolling through the Upper East Side to Central Park,
Speaker 1: past the Model Boat Pound, Lead Boat House, Bethesda Fountain,
Speaker 1: and up to the Lennon Memorial. Saw a Phantom of
Speaker 1: the Opera on Friday, and let's just say there's a
Speaker 1: reason it's been playing for thirty years. Unfortunately, our trip
Speaker 1: was cut short due to a family tragedy, but we
Speaker 1: still intend to return to see the UH Metropolitan Museum
Speaker 1: of Art, walk the high Line, and visit Greenwich Village.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much, Buck for the tips for me, it
Speaker 1: really made my first trip to New York City. Want
Speaker 1: to remember. I like it better than I ever thought
Speaker 1: I would. Well, Dale, I'm so glad you took my advice,
Speaker 1: my friend, and I'm really glad you had a good
Speaker 1: time and you should definitely by the way, I'm sorry
Speaker 1: to hear about the UH, the the death and the family,
Speaker 1: but I really hope you get another chance to go
Speaker 1: to New York City and and have a you know,
Speaker 1: have a great time there, and yeah, definitely check off
Speaker 1: the rest of that list that I gave you. Uh
Speaker 1: And you know that's that's the way to do New
Speaker 1: York City. Plan out beforehand and really go see some
Speaker 1: of the New York's an incredible place. So is Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: which is a place I'm going in two days. I'll
Speaker 1: be in l A this weekend for all U l
Speaker 1: A folks out there, so maybe you'll see me strolling
Speaker 1: around West Hollywood or Santa Monica. That's where I tend
Speaker 1: to hang out. I will be with you all tomorrow
Speaker 1: here in the hut Shields. High hiring is challenging, but
Speaker 1: there's one place you can go. We're hiring a simple, fast,
Speaker 1: and smart, a place where growing businesses connect to qualified candidates.
Speaker 1: That place is zip recruiter dot com slash Sexton. Zip
Speaker 1: recruiter sends your job to over a hundred of the
Speaker 1: webs leading job boards. But they don't stop there. With
Speaker 1: their powerful man technology, zip recruiter scans thousands of resumes
Speaker 1: to find the people with the right experience and invites
Speaker 1: them to apply to your job. Folks, I have colleagues
Speaker 1: here at the Hill in d C that we hired
Speaker 1: exclusively by using zip Recruiter. I have a zip recruiter account.
Speaker 1: I have dealt with this program. I have dealt with
Speaker 1: zip recruiter and it's given me fantastic people to work with,
Speaker 1: so I can give it my utmost approval and guarantee.
Speaker 1: You should definitely check this out. There's no wonder that
Speaker 1: zipp recruiter is the highest rated hiring site in America.
Speaker 1: My listeners can try zip recruiter for free. That's right
Speaker 1: free at zip recruiter dot com, slash sexton. That's the
Speaker 1: exclusive web address zip recruiter dot com, slash sexton