Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Shift gives away the
Speaker 1: game on day two of the Senate impeachment trial. Also,
Speaker 1: you got some senators walking out. Libs are furious about that.
Speaker 1: Are we fighting Russia over there? So we don't fight
Speaker 1: them over here? Trump will speak at the March for Life.
Speaker 1: Warren promises an intersectional cabinet and a surgical gown. Shortage
Speaker 1: means a shortage of surgeries coming up. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to
Speaker 1: decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Mag no mistake, America,
Speaker 1: You're a great American. Again, the Buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst,
Speaker 1: remember the press. Since misconduct cannot be decided at the
Speaker 1: ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote
Speaker 1: will be fairly won. Welcome to the Buck Sex and
Speaker 1: show everybody. The single most important moment of the marathon
Speaker 1: of Adam Shift's testimony yesterday or not his testimony, speechifying,
Speaker 1: his monologuing. It's like he's trying out for a high
Speaker 1: school declamation team. That's what we used to call it.
Speaker 1: It's a speech contest. Who can give the best prepared speech?
Speaker 1: Notice what he said? Okay, this is the guy, the
Speaker 1: point man for trying to convince the United States Senate
Speaker 1: to remove a president of the United States do elected
Speaker 1: by sixty three million votes cast, to try and overturn that, eradicate,
Speaker 1: erase that which can never really happen. I know, right,
Speaker 1: the election happened. Trumps in present for three years, but
Speaker 1: they want to undo that fundamental decision to give the
Speaker 1: president in four years, That's true. They want to make
Speaker 1: that go away. And so then we ask ourselves what
Speaker 1: really is going on here. We've been asking ourselves that
Speaker 1: question every day, and we've been answering it because we know.
Speaker 1: But Adam Schiff gave us the answer in case we
Speaker 1: had any questions still lingering, For example, why do we
Speaker 1: have to go through this whole fiasco because the American
Speaker 1: people cannot be trusted, cannot be trusted to show their
Speaker 1: own judgment about this president and his conduct. The lib elites,
Speaker 1: the political apparatus, former Republicans who are now turn coach,
Speaker 1: who go to the other side abandoning something, abandoning principles
Speaker 1: and causes that they claim to have cared about for
Speaker 1: decades of their professional lives. All of those people they
Speaker 1: get to make the decision the left, the Libs, the media,
Speaker 1: the deep state, academia, Hollywood, they get a bigger say
Speaker 1: than all of you. And oh, by the way, not
Speaker 1: only does Schiff want you to know, as he says
Speaker 1: that this cannot be entrusted to the American people. They
Speaker 1: talk about democracy so much, and yet they're so suspicious
Speaker 1: of democracy, aren't they. It's a system. Democracy alone does
Speaker 1: not give you a good outcome. It's just a process,
Speaker 1: a process for the distribution of political power. As we
Speaker 1: all know. We could sit here and look at times
Speaker 1: in history when there have been very bad outcomes from democracy.
Speaker 1: Most of you are probably saying, yes, that's right, Hitler was.
Speaker 1: In fact, democratically elected democracy does not mean good outcomes.
Speaker 1: But you're supposed to respect that process and hope that
Speaker 1: a just people will seek justice in the way they
Speaker 1: cast their votes. Democrats don't view us that way though.
Speaker 1: Clearly Adam Schiff thinks you can't be trusted to vote appropriately. Therefore,
Speaker 1: he would like to take away the possibility. He would
Speaker 1: like to remove that chance that you'll make the wrong vote,
Speaker 1: You'll make the wrong decision vote for Donald Trump's reelection.
Speaker 1: Has to stop us, has to cut it off at
Speaker 1: the pass can't allow this, and then that last part
Speaker 1: of it, we cannot be assured that the vote will
Speaker 1: be fairly won. Stunning stuff here. He's already laying the groundwork.
Speaker 1: He's already beginning the narrative which has been in the
Speaker 1: background of this entire impeachment fiasco, that if Trump wins again,
Speaker 1: he didn't win fairly. He must have cheated. There's some
Speaker 1: way that he gained the system illicitly, and therefore, what
Speaker 1: do we take from that? He's an illegitimate president, not
Speaker 1: my president. I have said this, I put this out
Speaker 1: on Twitter. I stand by it. I believe Trump will
Speaker 1: win reelection. As you know, I try not to say
Speaker 1: that too often. I don't want to get ahead of ourselves,
Speaker 1: but I do believe Trump will win reelection. I also
Speaker 1: believe and here are some other predictions. Maybe we should
Speaker 1: mark some of these down. The House if it maintains
Speaker 1: a Democrat majority, which who knows. I can't predict that
Speaker 1: for you. I don't know. But the House of Representatives,
Speaker 1: if it has a Democrat majority, there'll be some effort
Speaker 1: I don't know if it'll be successful or not, some
Speaker 1: effort to refuse to certify President Trump's reelection. Maybe eventually
Speaker 1: they'll cave, but they they'll do something. They'll say, oh, no,
Speaker 1: we you know, we can't. We all have a cold,
Speaker 1: we all have the flu, we can't come in and certify.
Speaker 1: I mean, they'll do whatever they have to do to
Speaker 1: cast doubt on the legitimacy. They are delegitimizing the very
Speaker 1: institutions of government that they pretend to care so much about.
Speaker 1: I mean, we were all treated to our own personal
Speaker 1: hell yesterday, those of us who had to watch this
Speaker 1: incredibly boring hearing, which I mean, all of this, the trial,
Speaker 1: the whole thing is so boring. And I'm watching it
Speaker 1: because there are important themes and things that come up
Speaker 1: during it. But it's not an entertaining thing at all.
Speaker 1: Let me say which you're all about the Kavanaugh hearings.
Speaker 1: It was gut wrenching. It was like watching an evil
Speaker 1: left wing ritualized torture session of a good man on TV.
Speaker 1: It was engaging. This isn't even that this is sitting
Speaker 1: there saying I can't believe Adam Schiff thinks he should
Speaker 1: talk so much. I got a glimpse of what hell
Speaker 1: is yesterday. Hell is watching Adam Schiff speak for hours, hours,
Speaker 1: it seems, upon hours about his newfound love of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: George Washington, the Constitution in Thomas Payne. That was what
Speaker 1: I took from yesterday. I mean, the Democrats usually speak
Speaker 1: about the Constitution as though they're talking about something kind
Speaker 1: of in the way. It's a bit it's usually a
Speaker 1: bit sordid for them, a bit old, a little out
Speaker 1: of date, written by evil white males. And yet here
Speaker 1: we are now being told that the Constitution is oh
Speaker 1: so sacred and Trump has violated it, and that we
Speaker 1: cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.
Speaker 1: You will, my friends, notice a pattern here. The two
Speaker 1: thousand election they claimed was not fairly one because of
Speaker 1: Bush v. Gore. The narrative there was the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: gave the election to George W. Bush. That was what
Speaker 1: we were told, and that really Bush didn't win. There's
Speaker 1: a whole movie, a better an HBO, A preposterous movie
Speaker 1: with Kevin Spacey, by the way, a preposterous movie you
Speaker 1: can go check out. And then, of course in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: we didn't really in it was Russia, and now it's
Speaker 1: going to be we didn't, you know, Trump didn't really win.
Speaker 1: It's there must be something with Ukraine, or he tried
Speaker 1: the same thing. These people are nuts. There is no
Speaker 1: reasoning with them on these issues anymore. I think they
Speaker 1: can't handle the prospect of being so foolish, so easily duped,
Speaker 1: so stupid, so emotional, that they would rather just live
Speaker 1: in a delusion. They'd rather just live in a world
Speaker 1: where they think that somehow all the things that they
Speaker 1: have believed all this time are true when they clearly
Speaker 1: are not. I mean, who can hear Adam Schiff talk
Speaker 1: about the shining City on a hill and not have
Speaker 1: a bit of a queasy feeling in their stomach? Adam
Speaker 1: Schiff play clip four, please, producer Mark. We have for
Speaker 1: generations been the shining city upon a hill that President
Speaker 1: Reagan described. America is not just a country but also
Speaker 1: an idea. But what worth is that idea if, when tried,
Speaker 1: we do not affirm the values that underpinn it. What
Speaker 1: will those nascent democracies around the world conclude that democracy
Speaker 1: is not only difficult, but maybe that it's too difficult,
Speaker 1: maybe that it's impossible. And who will come to fill
Speaker 1: the void that we leave when the light from that
Speaker 1: shining city upon a hill is extinguished. The autocrats with
Speaker 1: whom we compete value not freedom and fair elections, but
Speaker 1: the unending rule of a repressive executive. Autocrats then value
Speaker 1: not freedom of the press and open debate, but disinformation, propaganda,
Speaker 1: and state sanction lies. I mean, is he doing a
Speaker 1: Keith Olberman impression from back in the day, because that's
Speaker 1: a bit of what It reminds me of the level
Speaker 1: of pomposity self importance. Perhaps if I speak about things
Speaker 1: in a way that makes it sound so utterly serious,
Speaker 1: the American people will be swayed to my case that
Speaker 1: the president didn't actually do anything, but almost did a
Speaker 1: thing that would have resulted in nothing. But it sounds
Speaker 1: scary if I talked to you in this voice about it,
Speaker 1: and as if it was not clear how absolutely and
Speaker 1: utterly absurd this whole thing is. There was a moment
Speaker 1: yesterday when Adam Schiff actually said that we had to
Speaker 1: do this. We have to fight in Russia in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: so we don't have to fight them here. Let me
Speaker 1: give you the actual exact quote, because I have it.
Speaker 1: It is so stupid, It is so bizarre and absurd.
Speaker 1: And yet do you think the media. Here we go,
Speaker 1: the United States aids Ukraine and her people so they
Speaker 1: can fight Russia over there, and we don't have to
Speaker 1: fight Russia here. Is he that desperate for grandiose, sweeping,
Speaker 1: utterly moronic phrases that he'll just latch onto anything that
Speaker 1: sounds profound because the case is not only absurd but
Speaker 1: also pouring. Is that what this is really about? People
Speaker 1: were saying, Oh, he did such a fabulous job yesterday,
Speaker 1: a fabulous job describing what exactly that the president asks
Speaker 1: someone to find out information that would have been completely
Speaker 1: legitimate for him to find out about despite Democrats pretending
Speaker 1: that there's no there there. He's allowed to ask a question,
Speaker 1: and he's allowed told aid, he's allowed to decide to
Speaker 1: get answers as the commander in chief and as the
Speaker 1: executive in chief of the United States government. And that's
Speaker 1: where it really lies, my friends, That's it. After that,
Speaker 1: it's just a question of do you hate this president
Speaker 1: or do you accept this president. Adam Schiff will convince
Speaker 1: you that we have that Ukraine is a critical US
Speaker 1: national security interest, so critical that we wouldn't even give
Speaker 1: them guns under the Obama administration, no lethal aid whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Sent them other things, but they wanted guns, they wanted
Speaker 1: lethal aid. That's what they needed because they were in
Speaker 1: a war. And now we are to believe these democrats
Speaker 1: who tell us that this is the most important national
Speaker 1: security challenge of our time, or one of them a
Speaker 1: critical national security interest. How much are we really supposed
Speaker 1: to care about a border dispute in the east of
Speaker 1: Ukraine involving Russia. Ukraine is not a NATO country, is
Speaker 1: an ally, but Ukraine also has to fight its own battles.
Speaker 1: Have we not learned anything about the last twenty years?
Speaker 1: We're not sending we should not be sending. I should say,
Speaker 1: our soldiers to fight other people's battles all over the
Speaker 1: world anymore. People have to fight their own battles, their
Speaker 1: own interests, at stake, their own safety, their own homes,
Speaker 1: their own lives. It's not for us to always just
Speaker 1: call up our best and bravest Americans and go try
Speaker 1: to solve the rest of the world's problems for them.
Speaker 1: I would hope we've learned that after lust twenty years.
Speaker 1: But Adam Schiff thinks that we're helping fight them there
Speaker 1: so we don't have to fight the Russians. Here is
Speaker 1: he insane? We're not fighting the Russians. But remember he
Speaker 1: told you what this whole thing was about, and all
Speaker 1: of his all of his long and pompous and self
Speaker 1: important nonsense. This is really this is really just a
Speaker 1: question of the Democrats recognizing they're probably going to lose
Speaker 1: the next election, and they want you to leave that,
Speaker 1: and they want their own base to believe that it's
Speaker 1: illegitimate that Trump hasn't Trump cannot legitimately beat them again.
Speaker 1: Of course he can, and I think he will, and
Speaker 1: I don't know how they will handle that, although I
Speaker 1: do know that they will fail to certify immediately the
Speaker 1: results of the next election, just so they can keep
Speaker 1: this narrative. They can keep these stories going for their base,
Speaker 1: for the crazy left wing loons who you know, want
Speaker 1: to believe. Jesse Smollett and Greta Thunberg and there. These
Speaker 1: are people on the left. They get listened to these days,
Speaker 1: believed let's take policy advice, or let's take their word
Speaker 1: for it. Adam Schiff, let's listen to that guy. I
Speaker 1: remember the Adam Schiff who was telling us that he
Speaker 1: had all the proof of Russia Trump collusion, whatever, happened
Speaker 1: to that. Oh, there was no proof, but he kept
Speaker 1: saying there was proof. Guy's a liar. But ultimately anything
Speaker 1: is justifiable from their perspective, because this is all about
Speaker 1: making sure that the next election that they think they
Speaker 1: might doesn't count. You see, it never counts when Democrats lose.
Speaker 1: When the left loses, the system is never important or
Speaker 1: even sacred. When the left loses. There's always some external reason.
Speaker 1: And now, like a bunch of cry babies, they have
Speaker 1: settled on their favorite one. You cheated, You're in the
Speaker 1: freedom hunt. This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast.
Speaker 1: By most accounts, it was a virtuoso performance that drew
Speaker 1: praise from all sides yesterday. It was a stunning recitation
Speaker 1: of the facts that we've together constitutional framing American history
Speaker 1: and Donald Trump's laundry list of abuses of power and
Speaker 1: obstruction of Congress. Will have that in a fist. We
Speaker 1: are going to have that in a bit. But Willie
Speaker 1: I first a virtuoso performance. There are people at home
Speaker 1: and I feel badly for them who when Adam Schiff
Speaker 1: was doing this whole it really is just like a play.
Speaker 1: It's the Attris. You know, he is playing a character
Speaker 1: up there, and he looks at some points like he's
Speaker 1: going to tear up because he loves the country so much.
Speaker 1: This is the man who lied to the American people.
Speaker 1: Adam Schiff lied to the American people for years about
Speaker 1: the president of the United States being a traitor to
Speaker 1: his country. Has Adam Schiff ever apologized for that he
Speaker 1: was wrong? Objectively a question of fact here he was wrong.
Speaker 1: Did he ever say anything about that? Oh? No, of
Speaker 1: course not. Now just moves on to the next con Look, Libs,
Speaker 1: maybe just deal with the fact that you have a
Speaker 1: president in office right now who's better at this than
Speaker 1: you thought he would be. Who's better at this than
Speaker 1: the guy that you thought was a genius demigod before Trump.
Speaker 1: And a lot of the things that you know, the
Speaker 1: liberal elites and the Democratic Party have been telling themselves
Speaker 1: are true for quite a long time now just aren't.
Speaker 1: And I know that can be unsettling. I know that
Speaker 1: that can make someone feel like what's going on in
Speaker 1: the world around me? But that is where we are.
Speaker 1: And if they were going to be honest about this,
Speaker 1: if they're going to be adults about this, they'd find
Speaker 1: themselves in a position to start to say what is
Speaker 1: true about Trump and what is not? What has he
Speaker 1: done well? And what could he improve on? Instead? It's
Speaker 1: just everything Trump does is horrible laundry list of abuses
Speaker 1: of power? What's the laundry lists? We're talking about one incident.
Speaker 1: We're all in this boring mess because of one thing,
Speaker 1: a phone call for which we have the transcript, And
Speaker 1: we are being told by Democrats in elected office, and
Speaker 1: of course the media they're lackeys, or maybe the Democrats.
Speaker 1: You know who's the lackey of whom is a whole
Speaker 1: other conversation, But we're being told that the American people
Speaker 1: aren't allowed to decide whether or not that's an abusive power.
Speaker 1: Our elected officials have to decide if that's an abusive power.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, when they publican majority Senate a quits
Speaker 1: him will be told that, oh, well, those officials were dishonest,
Speaker 1: they were cheating. Thanks for listening to The bus Essen
Speaker 1: Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. We also live in
Speaker 1: a country in which we ask every citizen to serve
Speaker 1: on juries, and in the situation which they're asked to
Speaker 1: do their civic duty and serve on juries. Most of
Speaker 1: those people have other jobs. They haven't take a leave
Speaker 1: trump with the trial goes for alongside. Often they don't
Speaker 1: collect their paycheck from that. They are given a meager
Speaker 1: amount of money relative to what some of those people
Speaker 1: might make. And these people's jobs is to do this.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is literally the job. If you find
Speaker 1: it too annoying or frustrating or uncomfortable to sit for
Speaker 1: eight hours and listen, you can resign tomorrow and go
Speaker 1: get another job. But like, this is your job. I
Speaker 1: guess I like this. Libs are upset because as much
Speaker 1: as they're trying, on the one hand, they're telling just
Speaker 1: out of shift, but on a virtuoso performance. Okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: so such a virtual or the performance that senators were
Speaker 1: like falling asleep. People watching were you know, you know
Speaker 1: that thing. This is happening all the time. I was overtired.
Speaker 1: I feel like for half of high school, where your
Speaker 1: head would bob down, it would come back up because
Speaker 1: you were so close to just pass it out and
Speaker 1: slap in your face on the on the desk in
Speaker 1: front of you. That was like most of the people
Speaker 1: who were stuck there watching this thing there was nothing new,
Speaker 1: there's nothing we haven't heard before. It's all the same stuff.
Speaker 1: And then but just with more more emotive, more emotive
Speaker 1: from Adam Shift, Thomas Payne, George Washington at one point.
Speaker 1: At one point, Shift this was awesome. I was like,
Speaker 1: he's not really doing this, is he? He's like when
Speaker 1: Washington crossed the Telaware I'm like, we're going, we're comparing
Speaker 1: Trump asking a foreign counterpart if there were some annoying
Speaker 1: meddling from some Ukrainian government officials in our election, which
Speaker 1: has been report it on by numerous media outlets that
Speaker 1: haven't attracted it. And oh, by the way, also, can
Speaker 1: you find out what was going on with the former
Speaker 1: vice president's son getting paid more than a normal fortune
Speaker 1: one hundred company board member while his dad's running foreign
Speaker 1: policy in that country for America? Seems like kind of
Speaker 1: an interesting thing, can you get adds? They're comparing that
Speaker 1: to George Washington risking at all with the roll of
Speaker 1: the dice going across a Delaware river, and on Christmas
Speaker 1: Day or was it the day after Christmas attacking an
Speaker 1: encampment of British soldiers, which many say was able to
Speaker 1: keep Washington's army from being surrounded and annihilated. These are
Speaker 1: the kinds of comparisons that Democrats make with a straight face,
Speaker 1: not just with a straight face, with a face full
Speaker 1: of emotion. This is what this is what the country
Speaker 1: is facing right now. Oh good heavens. I also have
Speaker 1: to tell you, and I haven't really said this to
Speaker 1: you before, but I do believe this. It's hard not
Speaker 1: to feel like justice in this case would be taking
Speaker 1: into account that Democrats have already tried for three years.
Speaker 1: One version of Trump is a threat to the republic.
Speaker 1: Trump is a cheater who did not win the election.
Speaker 1: He worked with our with our enemies, the Russians. Russia
Speaker 1: is not an enemy state. It's an oppositional state. But
Speaker 1: to call an enemy state is to go too far.
Speaker 1: But worked with our Russian enemies in order to win
Speaker 1: an election he would not have won otherwise, and therefore
Speaker 1: he betrayed the most fundamental values of our democracy. For
Speaker 1: three years, they ran around repeating this narrative. And I
Speaker 1: love all these journalists, you know, all these news anchors
Speaker 1: they'll have on. Oh no, they didn't, necessarily, They just
Speaker 1: ran stories that let their analysts then come on and
Speaker 1: all repeat that to their faces, and you know, the
Speaker 1: Shudos and the Tappers and the Mattow's and just sitting
Speaker 1: there just bobbing their heads. Yeah, yeah, that's right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: totally trader. Trump's a trader. Three years of that, we've
Speaker 1: had lie lies. The people that were perpetrating that are
Speaker 1: either disgusting liars or total morons or a combination of
Speaker 1: those things. There's no accountability for them at all. They
Speaker 1: all still no one got fired for spreading all that disinformation.
Speaker 1: I mean a few people got fired for running just
Speaker 1: objectively false, single one off news stories that could be
Speaker 1: proven false right away, by the way, But those who
Speaker 1: concocted this narrative, which I would also note that I've
Speaker 1: spoken to many people, I spoke to the President himself
Speaker 1: about this, slowed down things in the White House, became
Speaker 1: a real drain on the White House's ability to handle
Speaker 1: other problems, created a siege mentality among senior administration officials.
Speaker 1: So they don't think that just because they couldn't prove
Speaker 1: the lie, the lie was not useful to them. And
Speaker 1: I bring this up because why shouldn't we take that
Speaker 1: into account as we look now at this at their
Speaker 1: allegations about the Ukraine conversation, you know whatever they want
Speaker 1: to call this the abuse of power around the Zelenski
Speaker 1: phone call. They lied to us about Russia collusion for
Speaker 1: three years. Why would I think that their judgment is
Speaker 1: sound now? And also how am I supposed to gauge?
Speaker 1: How should I weigh that they were willing to lie, cheat, steel,
Speaker 1: do whatever they had to do to try to take
Speaker 1: Trump out with the Mulla report and it failed, and
Speaker 1: now they're trying it again with something else. Do I
Speaker 1: think that they're object I mean, if you think that
Speaker 1: these people are being honest and objective and ethical and
Speaker 1: they care about the Constitution, you're just not very smart.
Speaker 1: You're just not a very bright person. You've been so
Speaker 1: brainwashed that you're not capable of looking at this with
Speaker 1: any sort of objectivity whatsoever. Right, So I think that
Speaker 1: that also needs to be factored in here. I mean,
Speaker 1: the same atom ship that was telling us the president
Speaker 1: effectively cheated to win the election with Russia's help is
Speaker 1: now claiming the President was trying to cheat with Ukraine's
Speaker 1: help in the next election. Well, he lied last time.
Speaker 1: Why do I think he's telling the truth this time?
Speaker 1: This is why it matters. It matters in a court
Speaker 1: of law. For example, it matters if you lie under
Speaker 1: oath unless you're doing it for Democrats benefit, like Andy
Speaker 1: McCay at the FBI, who, by the way, I still believe,
Speaker 1: will not spend a day in jail for committing the
Speaker 1: felony of lying I believe twice under oath to the
Speaker 1: Inspector General of the FBI. But different rules for Democrats.
Speaker 1: This is the country we live in now. It's really,
Speaker 1: in many ways the most damaging to our sense of
Speaker 1: a government body and a law, a rule of law
Speaker 1: that is a central characteristic of our americanness of being
Speaker 1: an American living in a country where there are different
Speaker 1: standards depending on whether you are on the left on
Speaker 1: the right when it comes to criminal law. That does
Speaker 1: pull us apart in very serious ways. That then does
Speaker 1: start to raise questions about how long are we gonna
Speaker 1: be able to continue this way? But it was also
Speaker 1: really boring yesterday. It was just so boring. I didn't
Speaker 1: even I was going to text producer Mark and make
Speaker 1: sure that he was watching every minute of it, but
Speaker 1: it went went super late. I'm glad, I mean, Fox
Speaker 1: didn't carry it live throughout the whole night. Which was
Speaker 1: which was a mercy for their audience, but it went
Speaker 1: until it went until late Again, we've heard all of
Speaker 1: this before. We know that they're not going to have
Speaker 1: the votes in the in the Senate, so that all
Speaker 1: that's left is now to argue to quibble over what
Speaker 1: the process is going to be before we get to
Speaker 1: this this acquittal. And you know, the President, for example,
Speaker 1: has said this, and you know, I think this is
Speaker 1: going to be a recurring theme. You're going to hear
Speaker 1: him bring this up more. Producer Mark playclip twelve. I
Speaker 1: would rather go the long way. I would rather interview Bolton.
Speaker 1: I would rather interview a lot of people. The problem
Speaker 1: with John is that it's a national security problem. You know,
Speaker 1: you can't have somebody who's at national security. And if
Speaker 1: you think about it, John he knows some of my thoughts.
Speaker 1: He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if
Speaker 1: he reveals what I think about a certain leader and
Speaker 1: it's not very positive, and that I have to deal
Speaker 1: on behalf of the country, it's going to be very hard.
Speaker 1: It's going to make the job very hard. He knows
Speaker 1: other things, and I don't know if we left on
Speaker 1: the best of terms, I would say, probably not, you know,
Speaker 1: and so you don't like people testifying when they didn't
Speaker 1: leave on good terms, and that was due to me,
Speaker 1: not due to him. I have been telling you this
Speaker 1: all along, and I stick with what I said. They
Speaker 1: should just shut this have a vote, shut this thing down.
Speaker 1: Do not treat this with greater dignity and seriousness these
Speaker 1: charges than they deserve. They did not have a fair
Speaker 1: problem us in the House, and no fair minded person
Speaker 1: would think otherwise. Trump was getting railroaded in the House
Speaker 1: the whole time. He was getting absolutely unfair treatment, and
Speaker 1: we all, we all saw it. And now they're complaining
Speaker 1: that there's not fair treatment in the Senate. I'm sorry. No.
Speaker 1: What is the lesson A critical lesson of Trump is
Speaker 1: m don't treat your enemies in a way that they
Speaker 1: will not treat you and have not treated you when
Speaker 1: there are real things at stake and you can't afford
Speaker 1: to lose, don't. Don't just give them the benefit of
Speaker 1: the doubt and treat them with good faith after they've
Speaker 1: been spitting in your face, and then they're going to
Speaker 1: get what they want in the end. No, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Trump has a better approach usually and I think he's
Speaker 1: saying that he wants them to interview a lot of people,
Speaker 1: knowing that that's very unlikely to happen. But I'm not sure.
Speaker 1: There's this big theory going around that Trump is going
Speaker 1: to show up himself and testify because of the theatrics
Speaker 1: of it. That's not going that's not going to happen,
Speaker 1: just like there was that big theory during the Muller
Speaker 1: pro that Trump was going to go under oath and
Speaker 1: subject himself to questioning by Robert Muller, which as we
Speaker 1: all know, would have absolutely, absolutely resulted in Mueller claiming
Speaker 1: that there was some some misstatement of facts, untruth, some lie,
Speaker 1: whatever he was going to call it, that was told
Speaker 1: by the President United States under oath, and therefore he
Speaker 1: would have had a felony and there, you know, and
Speaker 1: then then it would have been, oh, that's that's why
Speaker 1: they'll forget about Russia and everything else. It would have
Speaker 1: just been the lie that he told Muller. Ah that
Speaker 1: we got him. This is the game these people are playing.
Speaker 1: It's just power politics, and there's nothing about principles here.
Speaker 1: There's nothing about the good of the country and what's fair,
Speaker 1: what's right, and what's just that's why Adam Schiff, I
Speaker 1: mean he doth protest, He doth protest too much about
Speaker 1: the Constitution and about the need to look at the
Speaker 1: warnings of the founding fathers. Oh, here's an example. We
Speaker 1: play play fourteen. We are here today in this hallowed chamber,
Speaker 1: undertaking this solemn action for only the third time I'm
Speaker 1: in history because Donald J. Trump, the forty fifth President
Speaker 1: of the United States, has acted precisely as Hamilton and
Speaker 1: his contemporaries feared. President Trump's solicited for an interference in
Speaker 1: our democratic collections, abusing the power of his office to
Speaker 1: seek help from abroad to improve his reelection prospects at home,
Speaker 1: and when he was caught, he used the powers of
Speaker 1: that office to obstruct the investigation into his own misconduct. Yes,
Speaker 1: this is what was keeping Hamilton up at night. A
Speaker 1: conversation with the President of Ukraine that resulted a no
Speaker 1: action whatsoever. A harmless ask was what it really was
Speaker 1: from the President United States. Take can you get me
Speaker 1: some answers on this thing? Thanks? That's it. And you know,
Speaker 1: if the President felt like they weren't doing a good
Speaker 1: enough job on corruption and was going to withhold aid
Speaker 1: and if, in fact the answers about Biden and Barismo
Speaker 1: were part of not doing enough job on corruption, He's
Speaker 1: allowed to do that, as I have been saying all along.
Speaker 1: And now we go into I guess, producer Mark, we
Speaker 1: got another whole day? Is this on TV? It's all
Speaker 1: on TV all day today? Right? This is another Guys.
Speaker 1: You know, you know how devoted I am to this job.
Speaker 1: But I don't know. I might I might need to
Speaker 1: just watch like an hour or view of it and
Speaker 1: just call it a day. I just it's so there's
Speaker 1: just so little. I can always read the transcripts. That's
Speaker 1: what I've been doing. I'll read the transcript afterwards of
Speaker 1: the main speech by Schiff or the main main speech
Speaker 1: by Sipolonium. Sipoloni did a fantastic job, by the way,
Speaker 1: but there's only so much of this that you can take.
Speaker 1: I mean, it really is true. Hell is being stuck
Speaker 1: in a room with no escape while Adam Schiff lectures
Speaker 1: you on the Constitution, George Washington and the need for
Speaker 1: US national security interests to be inextricably linked with out
Speaker 1: of Ukraine. Absurd. My friends, you're in the freedom hunt.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton Show podcast leader McConnell and
Speaker 1: Senate Republicans don't want a fair trial that considers all
Speaker 1: the evidence. On four separate votes, every Senate Republican voted
Speaker 1: against requesting relevant documents for the trial. On three other votes,
Speaker 1: every Senate Republican voted against calling relevant witnesses before the Senate. Oh,
Speaker 1: that's right. The House, though, didn't need to do any
Speaker 1: of that. They have no answer for this. I mean,
Speaker 1: their entire argument is moot the moment you recognize that
Speaker 1: all their demands now were completely skipped over. When they
Speaker 1: had the votes and they had the power, they rammed
Speaker 1: through impeachment. Now that they don't have the votes, they
Speaker 1: want to cry and complain about in the need for
Speaker 1: more evidence, the need for more witnesses, the need for
Speaker 1: all of this. Intelligent reason why people can see through this.
Speaker 1: It's very obvious. It's very obvious what is going on.
Speaker 1: And everyone can get all high and mighty, but oh,
Speaker 1: it's about the republic. But we know what this is about.
Speaker 1: This is about the Democrats, a bunch of looney tunes
Speaker 1: socialists running for president, and they worry that any of
Speaker 1: the ones that they have, including Biden, are going to
Speaker 1: get crushed by President Trump when he runs for reelection,
Speaker 1: as he's running for reelection, and so they're desperate. They're desperate.
Speaker 1: This whole thing has been a desperation play from the
Speaker 1: very beginning. And now we're getting into okay, if we
Speaker 1: go down this path, they should listen to Buck hold
Speaker 1: the vote a quit. We know the store. There's no
Speaker 1: there's nothing else that we have. There's nothing else that
Speaker 1: we have to know. It doesn't matter. I don't care.
Speaker 1: I don't care what someone else says they think was
Speaker 1: going on with the president, because we know what actually happened,
Speaker 1: and I'm telling you that it's not impeachable, and I
Speaker 1: don't and it doesn't matter. They can pretend it really
Speaker 1: matters as much as they want. It doesn't matter. This
Speaker 1: whole thing is a pretense. This whole thing is putting
Speaker 1: on airs. But now they're going to tell you that, well,
Speaker 1: you can't. They get not only do they get to
Speaker 1: demand witnesses, they get to demand which witnesses. There was
Speaker 1: some talk yesterday will there'd be a swap a trade.
Speaker 1: Here's what Adam Schiff says about that play. Ten. This
Speaker 1: isn't like some fantasy football trade, as I said yesterday,
Speaker 1: this isn't We'll offer you this if you'll give us that,
Speaker 1: We'll offer you a witness that is irrelevant and immaterial,
Speaker 1: who has no irrelevant testimony, but a witness that will
Speaker 1: allow us to smear a presidential candidate if you want
Speaker 1: to get a legitimate witness. That's not a trade. Trials
Speaker 1: aren't trades for witnesses. We offered last night to have
Speaker 1: the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court rule on a
Speaker 1: question of materiality for any of the witnesses. And you
Speaker 1: know something, not surprisingly, the President's team was vehemently opposed.
Speaker 1: Not because the president's team doesn't trust the Chief Justice
Speaker 1: to make an impartial decision, but because they do trust
Speaker 1: the Chief Justice to make an impartial decision about materiality. No,
Speaker 1: because they have the votes. Are they going to give
Speaker 1: that up? This is a political process, shift, it's not
Speaker 1: a criminal trial. It is determined by politics by politicians.
Speaker 1: So why would they seed what they did? The House
Speaker 1: seed their authority to did Adam shift seed his authority
Speaker 1: to just do things how he wanted? Of course? Not
Speaker 1: keep coming back to it that that fantastic quote from
Speaker 1: Frank Herbert's Children of doone when I have When I
Speaker 1: do not have power, I ask for freedom because it
Speaker 1: is according to your principles. When I do have power,
Speaker 1: I demand obedience because it is according to my principles.
Speaker 1: Or basically what he says, what he wrote, that's what
Speaker 1: democrats do. That's their approach. Do what the democrats say,
Speaker 1: or the process is illegitimate. Give them everything they want,
Speaker 1: no concessions, no halfway. If you don't do that, the
Speaker 1: process is illegitimate. They're a bunch of unethical babies. Shift
Speaker 1: all the rest of them. We can. It's transparent what
Speaker 1: they're doing. We see what they're doing, and they don't
Speaker 1: really ca because the people, the emotional democrats who are
Speaker 1: convinced of so many things about themselves that are not
Speaker 1: true in general because of their political beliefs. The emotional
Speaker 1: democrats that are watching this, and I don't think it's
Speaker 1: even that many of them, they think that Schiff is
Speaker 1: a guardian of the republic, the second coming of Avanati.
Speaker 1: You could say, thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson
Speaker 1: Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. If you see it
Speaker 1: from another perspective, or pretty much nothing has been done
Speaker 1: since the global emissions of CO two has not reduced,
Speaker 1: and that is of course what we are trying to achieve,
Speaker 1: among other things. I mean, we're all fighting for for
Speaker 1: the environment and the climate, and if you see it
Speaker 1: from that aspect, what has concretely been done. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you see it from a bigger perspective than basically
Speaker 1: nothing so, but that's of course we had expected. It
Speaker 1: will require much more than this. This is just the
Speaker 1: very beginning. We are being scolded by a seventeen year
Speaker 1: old here for lack of the abandonment of civilization. That's
Speaker 1: that is what is happening. I want to be very
Speaker 1: clear about this. To take us to zero CO two emissions,
Speaker 1: which is the demand that we keep hearing, whether it's
Speaker 1: in one year or ten years, would result in the
Speaker 1: cessation of munderinade and we would have to go back
Speaker 1: to you know, by the way, it's not even possible.
Speaker 1: You couldn't You wouldn't be able to do this, and
Speaker 1: you'd have you actually would have millions of people starve.
Speaker 1: You can't do this. You can't make food without petrochemicals.
Speaker 1: You can't make you can't transport it, you can't keep
Speaker 1: it cold. You can't you can't feed the live stock.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just this is insane. It's insane, so
Speaker 1: stupid and so full is that a normal person would
Speaker 1: just dismiss this is this is this is as intellectually
Speaker 1: worthwhile this old zero CEO two or else we're all
Speaker 1: going to die, as intellectually worthwhile as a person who
Speaker 1: is pushing a shopping cart down the street with a
Speaker 1: big sign that says repent for we're all going to
Speaker 1: die in two hours. I mean, some of your probably
Speaker 1: call Lisi's saying repent, But you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't think you're gonna go, oh my gosh, I
Speaker 1: saw a guy with a sign that says we're all
Speaker 1: gonna die too. I don't think you're going to do that.
Speaker 1: I also don't think that in any other aspect of
Speaker 1: your life. And I still remember when I was I
Speaker 1: was on the couch that outnumbered, and some of the
Speaker 1: ladies there, one or two of them gave me a
Speaker 1: hard time about this. They were wrong. I was right.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say it because I said that. Why
Speaker 1: not just ask Greta Thunberg what we should do about
Speaker 1: monetary policy. She has as much knowledge as a seventeen
Speaker 1: year old who hasn't been to school in apparently three years,
Speaker 1: which when you're a teenager that really matters. Okay, you're
Speaker 1: you're actually losing. There's learning that's occurring that you are
Speaker 1: not getting. But you know, by the way, when she's eighteen,
Speaker 1: she's an adult, then can we just then it's then
Speaker 1: it's like we can totally talk about her ideas and
Speaker 1: talk about how stupid they are. Right right now we're
Speaker 1: supposed to be not because she's she's seventeen, it's gonna
Speaker 1: be eighteen soon. Eighteen is an adult. I just want
Speaker 1: to know where you know AOC is like twenty six
Speaker 1: twenty seven? Are we allowed to criticize her ideas? Are
Speaker 1: she too young? Where are the lines again? Now? I
Speaker 1: always tell you lips have no principles. It just all
Speaker 1: moves depending on what they need for their emotional impulses
Speaker 1: or their desire for power. There's no rules, there's there's
Speaker 1: no respect, there's no sense of there's an order to things,
Speaker 1: and it's not just what you want when you want it.
Speaker 1: You see this with the whole Greta Thunberg fiasco, and
Speaker 1: I absolutely I stand by one hundred percent, I mean
Speaker 1: a thousand percent. I double down and triple down. I'll
Speaker 1: put it all on that place on the table where
Speaker 1: buck gets to say buckets to place a bed on.
Speaker 1: This is lunacy that you know, multi millionaire journey, you know,
Speaker 1: and news anchors at CNN and MSNBC and ABC are
Speaker 1: are reporting on the commentary of a seventeen year old
Speaker 1: girl about climate I mean, this is insane, this is absurd.
Speaker 1: They any I challenge any human being on planet Earth
Speaker 1: to debate this issue. Anyone anywhere debate this issue with me.
Speaker 1: I'll go any we're gonna talk about this anywhere. I mean,
Speaker 1: it can't be some randow. It's got to be somebody
Speaker 1: I actually would enjoy crushing in a debate. So a
Speaker 1: blue check of some kind. But they'll they'll lose on this.
Speaker 1: They will lose, just like there were all these blue checks.
Speaker 1: I brought Upjesse Smellett before. Why is it that I
Speaker 1: was doing a show here saying you guys who are
Speaker 1: listening to remember, I was saying Jesse Smelltt lied and
Speaker 1: listen before we knew all of the stuff. We know,
Speaker 1: like this guy's a liar, and I had people coming
Speaker 1: how dare I had people who were coming after me
Speaker 1: publicly saying I'm, you know, an expert, and I work
Speaker 1: with the Innocence Project and I know the law, and
Speaker 1: run I'm like, well, you're an idiot because the guy's lying, okay,
Speaker 1: And how is it that I how's it that I
Speaker 1: knew this? I mean, how many times am I to
Speaker 1: come in here when I've made a really strong proclamation
Speaker 1: on an issue like that? Early on, I was saying
Speaker 1: that they were lying about Kavanaugh before the fake gang
Speaker 1: rape allegations from Julie sweat Nick and Michael Avanati sitting
Speaker 1: in El Chapo's prison right now or his salve that
Speaker 1: he was held in at the Manhattan Correctional Facility. I
Speaker 1: think that's also where Epstein allegedly killed himself. But why
Speaker 1: was I able to figure that out and the Libs
Speaker 1: were not? To this day, One of my I've told
Speaker 1: you this before. One of the things that makes me
Speaker 1: frustrated is the first time I heard about the I
Speaker 1: knew the Duke Lacrosse case was a lie, but that
Speaker 1: based on the facts. But that also I wasn't in
Speaker 1: public life yet, so I couldn't. That didn't give me
Speaker 1: an opportunity, but the UVA fraternity. I also knew that
Speaker 1: that was a lie based on just reading the story,
Speaker 1: and I was too. I wasn't certain enough to be
Speaker 1: willing to take the heat at that time for calling
Speaker 1: a rape a gang rape a hoax when, as we know, hoax,
Speaker 1: there's no human being alive today who could make the
Speaker 1: case otherwise the person who claimed that happened is like, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm a kind of a crazy person and a liar.
Speaker 1: But so that's a mistake that I promised I would
Speaker 1: never make again, because I was very angry that I
Speaker 1: did myself that I did not come forward as soon
Speaker 1: as I knew that was fake, because I told friends
Speaker 1: of mine, I'm like, this thing is fake. But Greta Thunberg,
Speaker 1: I walk around and I'm saying to people, okay, who
Speaker 1: wants to debate this issue? And they won't debate it,
Speaker 1: but then they'll take cheap shots when your back is turned,
Speaker 1: they'll say, oh, he's a child basher, child basher, Come on,
Speaker 1: well what is it? And also at what point, you
Speaker 1: know how we can try juveniles as adults if the
Speaker 1: crime is bad enough, I mean, if your voice is
Speaker 1: elevated onto a global stage on a policy matter that
Speaker 1: has real implications. Do we then get to treat you
Speaker 1: like an adult? Is that where we are? They did
Speaker 1: this with David Hog, David Hawk, who's an adult now,
Speaker 1: no more child bashing. He's eighteen or nineteen. Harvard accepted him.
Speaker 1: Of course, these schools are all they just prost these
Speaker 1: these elite institutions now prostrate themselves for just a just
Speaker 1: a little taste, just a hint of celebrity or relative
Speaker 1: of celebrity, child of a Democrat politician. Any school you
Speaker 1: want to go to, any school, you could be illiterate,
Speaker 1: Any school you want to go to, if you're the
Speaker 1: son or daughter of you know, respected Democrat senator or
Speaker 1: a member of Congress. If you're a Republican, you know,
Speaker 1: they're like, go play in the you know, go go
Speaker 1: make some hay bales or something you're not allowed, depending
Speaker 1: what kind of republic. If you're like a fancy establishment Republican,
Speaker 1: like a bush, then I'll take you. But that's another conversation. See,
Speaker 1: I keep it real, I keep it it's not quite
Speaker 1: as bad as if the Democrats. But the Republicans they
Speaker 1: will they will take some some dumb asses at these
Speaker 1: schools if they have a fancy enough last name, even
Speaker 1: if it's a Republican one. So on the Thunberg issue,
Speaker 1: why am I talking to this today? Well, Steve Manuchin,
Speaker 1: who's a very shrewd, very sharp guy. I actually know people.
Speaker 1: I've I've talked to people in my own personal life
Speaker 1: who know Manuchin from having worked with him in the
Speaker 1: pastor and they're all like, look, he's a he's a
Speaker 1: smart guy. He's very very very wealthy. He's a smart guy.
Speaker 1: He made his own money. He didn't he's not some
Speaker 1: inheritance trustaferian or anything else. But he's a sharp dude.
Speaker 1: And he said today, uh he they're all mad at
Speaker 1: him now. Manuchin says, this is the CNN headline. Greta
Speaker 1: Thunberg can explain US economic policy after she studies economics
Speaker 1: in college that this was after this was during a
Speaker 1: press briefing at the World Economic Forum in Davos. People
Speaker 1: just referred it usually as the Davos you know meeting
Speaker 1: or Davos period. Gretta Thornberg has called for a public
Speaker 1: and private sector divestment from fossil fuel company. Does that
Speaker 1: pose a threat to US economic growth or reporter as Manuchin.
Speaker 1: Is she the chief economist or who is she? I'm confused.
Speaker 1: The secretary applied it's a joke. Oh, they're not gonna
Speaker 1: let him get away with that, though, after she goes
Speaker 1: and studies economics and college, he can come back and
Speaker 1: explain that to us. Greta Thunberg responded, My gap year
Speaker 1: ends in August, but it doesn't take a college degree
Speaker 1: in economics to realize that are remaining one point five
Speaker 1: degree carbon budget and ongoing fossil fuel subsidies and investments
Speaker 1: don't add up. So either you tell us how to
Speaker 1: achieve this mitigation or explain a future generations and those
Speaker 1: already affected by the climate emergency why we should abandon
Speaker 1: our climate commitments. Blah blah blah blather. What does this?
Speaker 1: What does this even mean? Let's take a step back
Speaker 1: for a second to public and private sector divestment from
Speaker 1: fossil fuel companies. This is crazy. I don't mean that
Speaker 1: this isn't a good idea. This is insane. This would be,
Speaker 1: as I said, the cessation of civilization as we know it,
Speaker 1: no more investors. So what we'll think about that way,
Speaker 1: if the public and the private divest, take all their
Speaker 1: funds out, which would also I assume after me, you
Speaker 1: don't we're not going to buy fossil fuels anymore, right,
Speaker 1: because that money then goes to fossil fuel companies, you know, Exonmobile,
Speaker 1: British petroleum goes to these companies. So we're gonna everyone
Speaker 1: has to sell all their stock, collapse, the stock price,
Speaker 1: the public sector, no more subsidies, no more trying to
Speaker 1: get oil to people cheaply, and natural gas and other things.
Speaker 1: And then you know, don't buy it either. It's the
Speaker 1: idea is so insane that it's hard to even think
Speaker 1: through what their prescription is. And Manuchan squats this away,
Speaker 1: and you would think, okay, buck well, you know maybe
Speaker 1: maybe you know, the Libs can be a little crazy
Speaker 1: on this, but they understand what's really At some level,
Speaker 1: this is just sport for them. It's it's the theatrics.
Speaker 1: They like this girl with a you know, a foreign
Speaker 1: accent who goes around scolding the world like liberals enjoy
Speaker 1: this for some reason. Does young Hurdan show up in
Speaker 1: China and Indians scull them? By the way, it's always
Speaker 1: you know, basically America and Europe we're oh, my gosh,
Speaker 1: she's like a profit of climate. We have to no, no,
Speaker 1: she doesn't know anything. And yet all these liberals who
Speaker 1: are supposed to be information employees, people that they gather,
Speaker 1: they learn stuff, they disseminate information and knowledge. That's their
Speaker 1: entire job, that's what they get up every day to do,
Speaker 1: are either too stupid or too dishonest to call this
Speaker 1: out for what it is, which is that it is
Speaker 1: paddently absurd. It's just completely and utterly absurd. I want
Speaker 1: to bring you into some examples of that. Actually you're
Speaker 1: in the Freedom hud. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast,
Speaker 1: so you know I speak in these generalities. We're talking
Speaker 1: about the Greta Thunberg situation. Seventeen year old girl says,
Speaker 1: divest public and private sector, divestment from all fossil fuel companies, right,
Speaker 1: so all think of it like all oil and gas
Speaker 1: companies all over the world, which, by the way, would
Speaker 1: mean that the national the national economies of countries like
Speaker 1: Russia and Saudi Arabia, and you know, and Iraq and
Speaker 1: Iran and Nigeria and countries with hundreds of millions, hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions of people, their national economies would collapse overnight.
Speaker 1: Does she have a plan for this? Luckship with Warren
Speaker 1: have a five year plan for this. Greta Thunberg has
Speaker 1: no plan for this. But she says this, and people
Speaker 1: that are supposed to be knowledge workers just just eat
Speaker 1: it up like a bunch of complete and utter imbeciles.
Speaker 1: And and here I have a there's a great thread here.
Speaker 1: This is this gentleman is a Daily Beast and MSNBC
Speaker 1: guy named sam Stein. So Grete Thunberg is being treated
Speaker 1: and she's at Davos, She's being treated like somebody we
Speaker 1: all have to listen to as global leadership form that
Speaker 1: presidents go to, very important people go to this thing,
Speaker 1: sam Stein from whatever the place is. Whether just yea
Speaker 1: a Daily Beast which is one of the worst trash
Speaker 1: websites on planet Earth. But I really would love to
Speaker 1: better understand the psychology behind why Greta Thunberg seems to
Speaker 1: drive prominent Republicans and Trumpians so nuts. She doesn't drive
Speaker 1: us nuts, You moron? Why do you listen to her?
Speaker 1: Why do you cover her as a news story all
Speaker 1: the time? Why do you not ask any challenging questions?
Speaker 1: Why do you use the platforms. You have to magnify
Speaker 1: the message of pure ignorance, which is what she is spreading.
Speaker 1: This is just ignorance. And then if anyone tries to
Speaker 1: criticize it, which we are allowed. If you're going to
Speaker 1: force this in the national conversation by blasting it from
Speaker 1: all the air waves, shouldn't we be allowed to say
Speaker 1: that this is silly, this is nonsense. Shouldn't we be
Speaker 1: allowed to make those claims. Oh no, of course not.
Speaker 1: That's not allowed. Then you're being mean. It's not just him,
Speaker 1: Michelle Goldberg, she's a New York Times columnist. Here you go.
Speaker 1: She responds to him. Thuneberg, Greteth Thunberg. She's a young
Speaker 1: woman who challenges them and doesn't smile. Yeah, that's why
Speaker 1: we have a problem with it, because she's a young
Speaker 1: woman who challenge This is what Journalists are the worst people,
Speaker 1: And they're really kind of stupid. They're just they're just
Speaker 1: actors that can write a little better and sound a
Speaker 1: little smarter. Sometimes for the most part, they're they're really dumb.
Speaker 1: And I I'm not somebody that I didn't go to
Speaker 1: j school. I wasn't trying to do this whatever. I
Speaker 1: actually tried to do real things for a while, and
Speaker 1: how can anyone be So this is a New York
Speaker 1: Times columnist. I'm just read this. This is just the
Speaker 1: comment thread that these are all blue checks people. You know,
Speaker 1: they're they're showing you their psychology here around Greteth Thunberg.
Speaker 1: They don't understand that this is bizarre. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: like laughably and also it's uncomfortably bizarre now because are
Speaker 1: these people really? Are they in some kind of weird
Speaker 1: climate change cult? Eli Eliza Hogue, the president of nayroll
Speaker 1: Pro Choice American. Wow, I didn't even know who that was.
Speaker 1: But that's that's a pretty that's a maccabbre organization. It's
Speaker 1: their deep fear of powerful women. The fact that she's
Speaker 1: young and learned not to she writes something else but
Speaker 1: care early in life makes her even more terrifying. What
Speaker 1: if there's a whole generation of young women who don't care,
Speaker 1: that's their kryptonite. No, you know, it's scary, a whole
Speaker 1: generation of young women who would mimic Greta Thunberg and
Speaker 1: go speak about issues that they have no background or
Speaker 1: knowledge of and then hope that everyone just defends them.
Speaker 1: I mean, she's actually sort of playing the youth and
Speaker 1: women card here. That's not what we want women to do.
Speaker 1: If you want to put your ideas out there in public,
Speaker 1: you should welcome people trying to explain why or to
Speaker 1: debate why your ideas are wrong, especially on a matter
Speaker 1: of such great importance as this. Maggie Serota, staff writer
Speaker 1: at Spin bylines at Esquire, Glamour. Yeah, another left wing
Speaker 1: female writer. Same thing that makes them go insane over
Speaker 1: David Hogg. The unimpeachable moral clarity of their arguments? Are
Speaker 1: these people toldal morons? I really, I mean I have to.
Speaker 1: They don't understand why a seventeen year old with no
Speaker 1: knowledge of economics or science being given a platform at Davos,
Speaker 1: interviewed by CNN Time Magazine person in the year telling
Speaker 1: us to divest from fossil fuel companies a patently maniacally
Speaker 1: aggressively stupid thing to say and want anyone to do.
Speaker 1: And people are listening. Adults are believing this, Adults think
Speaker 1: that this is something that they should pay attention to.
Speaker 1: And these writers, I mean they are writers, but they're
Speaker 1: not'm very good. These writers are all taking this position
Speaker 1: that we're the problem. Do any I mean, I put
Speaker 1: out the challenge any writer these oh so smart I mean,
Speaker 1: because they were like smart classes and use like hip
Speaker 1: language at the Nation, at Salon, at Slade. Let's debate
Speaker 1: Greta Thornborg as a messenger of climate change, anybody anywhere.
Speaker 1: Let's have this debate, because I can't debate her or
Speaker 1: actually seventeen that I'm a bully and I'm mean, and
Speaker 1: so let's have somebody else stand in for her. And
Speaker 1: why should this be? Why should the medium magnify the
Speaker 1: message of an ignorant seventeen year old about divesting from
Speaker 1: fossil fuel companies a very specific charge. This is what
Speaker 1: she's saying should be done. And people that have been brainwashed,
Speaker 1: and yeah, that's a good idea. And then they get
Speaker 1: in their car and they drive to a store that
Speaker 1: uses energy drive from fossil fuel to keep their food cold,
Speaker 1: that they get back in their car to go back
Speaker 1: to their home that is either kept warm or cold,
Speaker 1: depending on what they need by fossil fuels, in a
Speaker 1: house full of products that, by the way, fifty percent
Speaker 1: a fossil fuel usage goes into making the products in
Speaker 1: their home, things like plastic things. I mean, these people
Speaker 1: are so ignorant. It's like they never learned anything. They
Speaker 1: don't read books. They just talk about the books that
Speaker 1: other people that they think sounds smart say they've read,
Speaker 1: and then they tweet snarky things at each other. I mean,
Speaker 1: by this list goes on and on and on, blue
Speaker 1: checks all taking the same Yeah, why is gretis so
Speaker 1: threatening to Republicans? I want to ask why are leftists
Speaker 1: so stupid? What has happened to them? The left used
Speaker 1: to have a real intellectual tradition that at least was
Speaker 1: worthy of grappling it. This is just insanity. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is people that you know, like roll roll around
Speaker 1: on the street, you know, muttering to themselves. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to The Busson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on
Speaker 1: Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Earl Nadler, I've known him a long time. He's a
Speaker 1: sleeves bag. Everybody knows that Pat Cipoloni is a high
Speaker 1: quality human being. I was very impressed with Patty a
Speaker 1: great emotion yesterday. A pat sibrilliant guy. But I've never
Speaker 1: seen that emotion, and that's real emotion. That's because he
Speaker 1: knows this is a hoax, and I was very proud
Speaker 1: of the JOBBI did. I like the way the President
Speaker 1: speaks about these sleazy democrats. I think it's I think
Speaker 1: it's appropriate. I think that it needs to be said
Speaker 1: the way that he says it. And I gotta tell
Speaker 1: you I like it. But there's something else. I just
Speaker 1: I wanted to play that just because it's kind of
Speaker 1: you know, brings a smile in my face. The President
Speaker 1: will just say it, that's tell it like it is
Speaker 1: about this stuff. I also want to point out that
Speaker 1: the president who we were told and there was a real,
Speaker 1: a real condescension from a lot of people, including a
Speaker 1: lot of conservatives early on, about anyone who is religious
Speaker 1: in a traditional Christian religious sense, right, I mean not,
Speaker 1: I know there's all this, you know, other of these
Speaker 1: churches now that it's like you're shown up to a
Speaker 1: rock concert and it's like if you pray enough, you're
Speaker 1: gonna get more money, because that's what God does. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of stuff out there, and I like,
Speaker 1: I don't don't talk about the religious stuff here very much,
Speaker 1: but there's a lot of stuff out there that I
Speaker 1: think people should ask good and well intentioned, good Christians
Speaker 1: should ask more questions like what's really going on here
Speaker 1: with these guys. But that said, Christians have received a
Speaker 1: lot of shade. I think people, you know, they've received
Speaker 1: a lot of condescension from the media and from others
Speaker 1: for saying that, well, even if Trump himself has not
Speaker 1: lived a life that seems particularly Christian, he's an ally
Speaker 1: of Christians as president with his policies and his actions.
Speaker 1: And we've been told that that's a you know, that
Speaker 1: was a Faustian bargain, and people who say that, of
Speaker 1: course never know who Faust is. But you know, that's
Speaker 1: a whole other thing. That's a whole other conversation. But
Speaker 1: we've been told that. And now it comes out that
Speaker 1: President Trump is going to be the first presidents, first
Speaker 1: Republican president, to go and speak at the March for Life,
Speaker 1: where you have usually over one hundred thousand people who
Speaker 1: gather to March for Life in Washington, DC, and they
Speaker 1: do such important they do such important work, the people
Speaker 1: that show up at this and their message is one
Speaker 1: of such importance. It is remarkable that you have not
Speaker 1: had other presidents who claim to be pro life personally
Speaker 1: and publicly in their policies, show up and give a
Speaker 1: bit more support. I mean the media always tries to
Speaker 1: just they give the bare minimum. Yeah, there's this thing
Speaker 1: going on. It's called the March for Life. Any any
Speaker 1: abortion stuff, you know, anti women, that's what they The
Speaker 1: way they talk about it, it's like there's a you know,
Speaker 1: there's a two for one sale going on at Walmart
Speaker 1: for deck chairs or something. I mean, they just they
Speaker 1: could care less, right, They try to just push it aside,
Speaker 1: even though it's a very large, very successful year in
Speaker 1: and year out rally. It's been going on for quite
Speaker 1: some time. And President Trump will be the first president
Speaker 1: ever to go and he's going to deliver a speech
Speaker 1: in person this Friday. By the way, March for Life
Speaker 1: is in its forty seventh year and it usually has
Speaker 1: about a hundred thousand people who show up. And you
Speaker 1: know what's interesting about the people show up. Put aside
Speaker 1: for a fact, put aside for just a second that
Speaker 1: they're showing up for a blessed reason. But beyond that,
Speaker 1: they show up and they know why they're there. They're
Speaker 1: not being used by anybody. They know why they're there.
Speaker 1: And compare this to so many of these left wing rallies.
Speaker 1: They get all his praise to the media. The Women's March,
Speaker 1: now it's an anti Trump march featuring a lot of women.
Speaker 1: They don't even know why they're there. March for Life
Speaker 1: knows why they're there, and God bless them. And I
Speaker 1: hope that they have a fantastic year this year in DC.
Speaker 1: And I'm very, very proud the President's going. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. Special treat for all of you watching listening.
Speaker 1: We got our friend David Harsani back in the mix. He's,
Speaker 1: of course, senior writer at National Review, and he is
Speaker 1: joining us now to talk about all of the things.
Speaker 1: Mister Harsani. Always a pleasure, always great to be her things.
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about the Glenn Greenwall
Speaker 1: situation and the way that journalists are talking or not
Speaker 1: talking about that. But but I did. I did a
Speaker 1: couple of things first, because we've been discussing a lot
Speaker 1: of things today on the show. I just what's kind
Speaker 1: of your what's your thirty thousand foot take? This is
Speaker 1: how Buck loves to ask this question on this whole
Speaker 1: set of trial thing. At this point, Adam Schiff, where's
Speaker 1: Harsanya and all this stuff. I'm having a lot of
Speaker 1: trouble getting excited about impeachment. It should be I think,
Speaker 1: far more entertaining at the very least, since it doesn't
Speaker 1: really matter. Nothing's going to change, and I think anyone's
Speaker 1: changing their minds, and I don't you know, I don't
Speaker 1: think it's you know, he's going to be removed, or
Speaker 1: that even maybe even one Republican senator is going to
Speaker 1: want to remove him in the end. I did notice
Speaker 1: yesterday that Adam Schiff was being before pretending that he had,
Speaker 1: you know, he was the next you know, Cato, the Elder,
Speaker 1: you know, just the greatest order whoever lived. And I
Speaker 1: found that kind of humorous because whenever I tuned in,
Speaker 1: I was just completely bored. I'm not saying he gave
Speaker 1: a bad speech, but it was middling, I think, and
Speaker 1: he's sort of a middling politician. But anyway, so my
Speaker 1: view of this is that everyone knows what's going on.
Speaker 1: We're repeating the same things over and over again, and
Speaker 1: nothing's going to really change on the ground, and maybe
Speaker 1: other than a few districts, you know, for grabs in
Speaker 1: the middle of America somewhere. I don't know, what do
Speaker 1: you think Democrats are trying to really get out of this?
Speaker 1: Is this the bass play? They had no choice. The
Speaker 1: base is crazy, and they got to feed the crazy
Speaker 1: to the base. Yeah, I mean, once Pelosi was in,
Speaker 1: I mean, what else can they do. They're going to
Speaker 1: have to follow it through to the end, and the
Speaker 1: best thing to do to put forward the best case
Speaker 1: you can. And for them, the best case is to
Speaker 1: be very non specific and to just generally say that
Speaker 1: this man shouldn't be president and we're going to throw
Speaker 1: everything we can out there. It's simply not a reason
Speaker 1: to impeach a president. Yeah, it just strikes me as
Speaker 1: the whole thing is such a It really is such
Speaker 1: a sham. But we're just I mean, we're talking about bribery, right,
Speaker 1: and all kinds of different specific criminals, supposed criminal activities,
Speaker 1: and now you know, we're back to saying that the
Speaker 1: Russians stole the election and that if we let Donald
Speaker 1: Trump run again, you know they're going to steal the
Speaker 1: election again, which is just the conspiracy theory. And don't
Speaker 1: even calls a guy out on it. Yeah. I also
Speaker 1: I'm fond of reminding everyone because sometimes people say know
Speaker 1: and then I say, go google it. That in the
Speaker 1: early days of the whistleblower thing, and this audience knows
Speaker 1: what I'm going to say. But the initial oh we
Speaker 1: got him was that it was a campaign finance violation.
Speaker 1: Do you remember that? That was my favorite that accepting
Speaker 1: a thing of value from Ukraine, trying to elicit the
Speaker 1: thing of value from Ukraine was a campaign finance violation, right,
Speaker 1: don't There's another argument that I don't get. First of all,
Speaker 1: I don't think that it's illegal what he did criminally
Speaker 1: illegal anyway, even if it was even everything if they
Speaker 1: said was true. But I don't get this idea that
Speaker 1: because he supposedly was doing it for person some kind
Speaker 1: of personal gain, that it's worse than presidents who undermine
Speaker 1: the Constitution. For me, the precedent set setting. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: attacks on the Constitution are far worse than some guy
Speaker 1: who's trying to you know, personally benefit in some political way.
Speaker 1: That that guy goes away and the other presidents who
Speaker 1: just you know, destroyed parts of the constitution basically you know,
Speaker 1: have set precedent. So I don't get that argument either.
Speaker 1: And just before we get to the Glenn Greenwell situation,
Speaker 1: I'm sure you've you've probably seen that Manuchin kind of
Speaker 1: dismissed Greta I mean Greta Thunberg as calling for a
Speaker 1: divest and divesting public and private sectors from fossil fuel companies,
Speaker 1: which I keep saying everybody. I mean, David, is it fair?
Speaker 1: You're you know, I always respect your opinion. You tell
Speaker 1: me what you think, even if you don't in sarily
Speaker 1: up with me. I don't think there's a way to
Speaker 1: describe that as a plan other than to say that
Speaker 1: it's crazy. I think that's crazy. It is more than crazy.
Speaker 1: It's essentially is saying that we have to undo modernity.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just so stupid. He wasn't listening to
Speaker 1: the show before Friends, But what did I say on
Speaker 1: the show? It's exactly what I said. It's so stupid
Speaker 1: that any human being who takes it seriously is not
Speaker 1: very smart, Like any adult that hears then and goes yeah,
Speaker 1: is not very smart. But I I did this thing
Speaker 1: before you came on. I read, I mean blue checks,
Speaker 1: sam Stein, Michelle Goldberg going down all these blue checks
Speaker 1: that right for fancy places David who are like, well,
Speaker 1: why why do they have to Why is Greta Funberg
Speaker 1: so threatening to Republicans? Why do they feel the need
Speaker 1: to like bash her ideas? Are they stupid? Like? How
Speaker 1: does Michelle Goldberg at The New York Times not understand
Speaker 1: why divesting from fossil fuel companies isn't like, try to
Speaker 1: help me work through this. I mean, I think about
Speaker 1: this topic a lot, and there's no I am not
Speaker 1: threatened by the teenage girl. I'm threatened by the people
Speaker 1: who take her seriously because they sometimes hold positions of power,
Speaker 1: and they are in the media, and they are policymakers.
Speaker 1: And the idea that we should take on the tremendous
Speaker 1: cost of even trying to reach you know, emission standards
Speaker 1: that levels that Democrats say they want, which is far
Speaker 1: far less than what Greta Thumberg is saying, is insane.
Speaker 1: Also essentially means destroying society. I know it will never happen,
Speaker 1: because people have shown me that they're not willing to
Speaker 1: even give up anything, you know, in this fight against
Speaker 1: climate change. They just want to force others to do it.
Speaker 1: So I mean, it's insane. I don't know. I can't
Speaker 1: make sense of it. I haven't been able to make
Speaker 1: sense of it at all. I mean, you know, we've
Speaker 1: gone through these these Mathusian people who think the world's
Speaker 1: always ending, they're always with us, they're always wrong and
Speaker 1: it never ends kind and someone else too sort of
Speaker 1: throw my hands up in the air. But but but
Speaker 1: the journalists from elite publications who who are we should
Speaker 1: all listen to bet A Thumberg and you're not allowed
Speaker 1: to criticize her, even when she said it's one thing
Speaker 1: to like to be on the climate change train, but
Speaker 1: the specific divest from fossil fuel companies that is essentially
Speaker 1: like telling every human being, um you know, just like
Speaker 1: go go jump off a bridge like it's it's completely insane,
Speaker 1: and that they they make it sound like the fossil
Speaker 1: fuel companies are forcing you to use fossil fuel or something.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the energy that's affordable, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's it's efficient. We use it to do everything in
Speaker 1: our lives that you can imagine, and it makes our
Speaker 1: lives better in almost every way, and we treat them
Speaker 1: like their Nazis or something. I mean, you know, they
Speaker 1: don't force you don't have to use all go out
Speaker 1: into the woods, camp use wood whatever you want. But
Speaker 1: you know, um, the idea that that society should be
Speaker 1: compelled to divest from them is just it's ridiculous. It's
Speaker 1: something someone who doesn't understand basic economics doesn't care. Yea,
Speaker 1: And yeah, I mean I know that I'm asking you
Speaker 1: for kind of thought experiment. I mean, if you and
Speaker 1: I sat down with the editorial board of the New
Speaker 1: York Times and and and we try to get them
Speaker 1: to do like I feel like they would, well, what
Speaker 1: would they say. Would they disagree with that I can't
Speaker 1: understand this, Well, they would walk it back and they
Speaker 1: would say, yes, of course that's a little much. You know,
Speaker 1: right away, we have to work towards that. It's always
Speaker 1: working towards that. I don't actually want to work towards
Speaker 1: that at all. I mean, people, I'm I'm I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, I believe in climate change, that there's change
Speaker 1: in the climate. I just I don't think it's a
Speaker 1: big deal. Yeah, I just don't care. Yeah, I just
Speaker 1: don't care either. Okay, We're I don't know, all right,
Speaker 1: So now let's get to I mean, Tucker last night
Speaker 1: how to shout out the end of his show to
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwall pruser Mark please say clip seven and Greenwalder,
Speaker 1: reporter of the Intercept, has been on the show many times.
Speaker 1: He's charged in Brazil yesterday. He's been accused of committing
Speaker 1: a series of crimes for printing text messages between government
Speaker 1: leaders as part of an expose unofficial corruption there. Now
Speaker 1: it's convicted, he faces a long term in some of
Speaker 1: the harshest prisons in the world. He could die in them.
Speaker 1: Greenwald is an American citizen, could probably find a way
Speaker 1: to fly back to New York tomorrow if he wanted,
Speaker 1: but he's refusing. He's pledging to stay in Brazil and fight,
Speaker 1: and we're not surprised by that. At the height of
Speaker 1: the Russia hystoria, Greenwalds should virtually alone on the American
Speaker 1: left and calling the witch hunt what it was. Dozens
Speaker 1: of times he came to this channel to say what
Speaker 1: he thought was true, at great personal cost to himself.
Speaker 1: Former friends hated him for breaking ranks. They denounced him.
Speaker 1: They tried to get him bounced out of his job.
Speaker 1: Even now, as he faces jail, some are still attacking him.
Speaker 1: But he bowled forward anyway because he thought it was
Speaker 1: the right thing to do. He's that tough, and that's
Speaker 1: self directed and something to admire, and we do admire it.
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwald. We are rooting for you tonight. Some strong
Speaker 1: words from Tucker there on Glenn's behalf. I just did
Speaker 1: David first, tell everybody what's going on, and then I
Speaker 1: want to get into where are all the big journals
Speaker 1: on this one? Yeah, I mean I should preface this
Speaker 1: by just saying that I strongly, strongly disagree with Filling
Speaker 1: Greenwald on a number of issues, and some of them
Speaker 1: I actually I find the testable. Yeah, he's heinous. He's
Speaker 1: heinous on Israel, he's heinous on terrorists. I've debated him
Speaker 1: on MSNBC on jehotism. He drinks Gehotism is basically our fault,
Speaker 1: and I'm like, yeah, explain that to you know, hindus,
Speaker 1: Explain it a whole anyway. Who over his view of
Speaker 1: history and his view sometimes Jews in general. I don't
Speaker 1: like it at all, But we'll say this, he's a
Speaker 1: principal guy. You know, he doesn't It's not like he
Speaker 1: just he's not partisan at all. And I think he's
Speaker 1: a principled guy, and I think he's a journalist, so
Speaker 1: meaning I don't you know, he breaks stories, he's broken
Speaker 1: and help break stories in this country. That has changed
Speaker 1: the way we think about government surveillance. And that's something
Speaker 1: that you have to take into account when you talk
Speaker 1: about him. So now he's in Brazil and he lives there,
Speaker 1: his husband is there, his husband is a member of
Speaker 1: the of the opposition. We have to mention, of course,
Speaker 1: that he's a political player. He's ideological, he's not, you know,
Speaker 1: someone by his journalists, but that doesn't mean that what
Speaker 1: he does is not true or the things that he
Speaker 1: exposes aren't true. And you know, the government of Brazil
Speaker 1: has been embarrassed by him because he's it's kind of
Speaker 1: a convoluted story, but he is. He has text messages
Speaker 1: between government officials that brought down the last government, you know,
Speaker 1: and so convoluted. But what he has done is what
Speaker 1: journalists should be doing. You know. He's found information that people,
Speaker 1: powerful people were hiding and he and he brought it
Speaker 1: to the public's attention. Um and you know, and now
Speaker 1: he's being charged with sort of like some kind of
Speaker 1: hacking law that he's helped a criminal conspiracy. You know,
Speaker 1: as part of a criminal conspiracy. Um. But in my view,
Speaker 1: what he's done is what journalists do here all the time,
Speaker 1: which is uh yeah, yeah, and then protect them and
Speaker 1: protect their sources, which any journalists would do. I don't
Speaker 1: know how much of this you've seen, but I've certainly
Speaker 1: seen there are people on the left, journalists on the
Speaker 1: left who are kind of celebrating this or are kind
Speaker 1: of saying, you know, haha, too bad for you about
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwald, which I just think is a reminder that
Speaker 1: these people that pretend to have principles and the word
Speaker 1: in the realm of left wing journalism have none. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, give me a right they You know, during
Speaker 1: the Obama administration, you had the administrations spying and on journalists,
Speaker 1: who had them charging journalists as well, and and and
Speaker 1: and throwing a guy who had made a YouTube video
Speaker 1: that upsets some people in jail, things like that, and
Speaker 1: you hardly heard a peep from them. Their their concern
Speaker 1: is very skewed in one direction, and only under certain presidents.
Speaker 1: David didn't. I didn't see the things you saw. I
Speaker 1: don't know if people were mocking it or not, but um,
Speaker 1: I haven't seen anyone actually where many people stand up
Speaker 1: for him. I mean, this would be a huge story
Speaker 1: if if it had been a journalist who they still liked,
Speaker 1: you know. And now that's the other part of this too,
Speaker 1: like why aren't why aren't journalists, I mean, journalists circle
Speaker 1: the wagons around Manu Raju of CNN because a senator
Speaker 1: said like you're a hack. They acted like this was
Speaker 1: you know, this was like, you know, the worst thing
Speaker 1: that had ever happened in American journalism, or at least
Speaker 1: you know, in a while, and that was nothing. And
Speaker 1: this is a guy who is an American still, who
Speaker 1: does do some real journalism. You and I agree, some
Speaker 1: of his opinions are horrifically bad, but he does do
Speaker 1: real journalism, and there's like, you know nothing, And I
Speaker 1: think I think it's because he's considered a traitor because
Speaker 1: of Russia illusion. I think that's what that's all about. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I agree. I mean, I think you have journalists in
Speaker 1: this country acting like their lives are in danger when
Speaker 1: they're covering Donald Trump. If you know, I forgot the
Speaker 1: name of Acosta's book, but I mean it's so laughable
Speaker 1: and they act as if, you know, as if they've
Speaker 1: they can't do their jobs. Meanwhile, I don't think the
Speaker 1: Trump at administration has done anything to inhibit journalists from
Speaker 1: doing their job. They're out there bashing the guy all
Speaker 1: the time, which is fine. They were allowed to do that.
Speaker 1: But when you have someone who is well known but
Speaker 1: a traitor to his you know people, uh you know,
Speaker 1: being he who might might end up in jail for
Speaker 1: doing journalism, there's very little outcry. It reminds me a
Speaker 1: little bit, though not to the same extent of how
Speaker 1: when you know, they sort of turned on Christopher Hitchins
Speaker 1: when he decided that here you know, you know that
Speaker 1: that used for the Iraq War, etc. Well, and geotism
Speaker 1: was like actually a real problem for everybody, and not
Speaker 1: just not just something that's a legacy of colonialism that
Speaker 1: if we ignore it'll all go away and it's fine. Yeah,
Speaker 1: right right, I remember those days too, Dave, are you
Speaker 1: writing on this weekend? Nasherview dot com? Check it out
Speaker 1: for everybody, But what are you writing on? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I wrote a piece that was just released in the
Speaker 1: magazine that's about sort of how we view the world
Speaker 1: as if it's as we're always heading in the wrong
Speaker 1: direction and things are getting worse when in fact, things
Speaker 1: are getting better for most people in the world. And
Speaker 1: it's this weird disconnect that I don't really understand things
Speaker 1: are getting I tell you that things are getting better
Speaker 1: all the time. Yeah, I mean that's the that's the headline.
Speaker 1: I just do you remember did you really go on
Speaker 1: road trips when you were a kid? Of course, do
Speaker 1: you remember what it was like? I remember going on
Speaker 1: family road trips and like trying to find something that
Speaker 1: wasn't fast food, that was like edible food was like
Speaker 1: a mission. You know, you had to like know somebody
Speaker 1: with some local knowledge or whatever. Now I know this
Speaker 1: is a small thing, but there's amazing food like everywhere
Speaker 1: in America. It's everywhere. It's a you know, going to
Speaker 1: a Chinese food place would be like the exotic food
Speaker 1: that you went to when you were a kid, like
Speaker 1: I Thai food, Afghan for whatever. You know, you can
Speaker 1: get whatever you want right now, Sonny that you mentioned.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, I talk about a cell phone
Speaker 1: and all be using things that are in a cell phone.
Speaker 1: You know, It's like when we used to drive as kids,
Speaker 1: they'd have to unfurl a giant map and figure out
Speaker 1: where you were going, argue. You probably lost you know,
Speaker 1: hundreds of hours in your life just arguing over how
Speaker 1: to get to places. And now you literally have a
Speaker 1: satellite system in your phone, in your car, wherever you are.
Speaker 1: It's just amazing. It is, indeed, David Arsha, Well, I'll
Speaker 1: check that one out because I like that because the
Speaker 1: world is getting better. And people I tell people they
Speaker 1: watched they listen to the show, watch the show that
Speaker 1: because they need to hear it because everyone's always like,
Speaker 1: we're all gonna die, not not true. Well, we are
Speaker 1: all going to die, but the world's getting better all
Speaker 1: the time. We all are gonna die. Yeah, David, Well,
Speaker 1: I know that one. David Harsani, everybody, thanks David, thank you.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom Hud. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. They're really trying to take it away from
Speaker 1: him again. I mean when Hillary says nobody likes him,
Speaker 1: nobody likes her, That's why she lost. I mean, nobody
Speaker 1: liked her. She had every advantage. She had this big
Speaker 1: machine behind her, she had the Obama, she had she
Speaker 1: had everybody behind and it wasn't even close. You look
Speaker 1: at three or six to two twenty three. She's the
Speaker 1: one that people don't like him, and I think if
Speaker 1: you if I had my choice in terms of personality,
Speaker 1: I might take him over her, but I probably would
Speaker 1: take neither. Biden is going to be interesting because he
Speaker 1: can't string together a sentence and if he makes it,
Speaker 1: if he makes it, you know, he seems to have
Speaker 1: a little bit of an edge right now. But it's
Speaker 1: it's rapidly disappearing. Bernie is surging, There's no question about it.
Speaker 1: And Bernie seems to be the one the party wants.
Speaker 1: But my attitude is, whoever it is, it is, whoever
Speaker 1: it is, I think it's probably gonna well, well, I'll
Speaker 1: stop making election predictions. But I did like his point
Speaker 1: here that it's funny for Hillary Clinton to say no
Speaker 1: one likes Bernie because I mean, you know, I guess
Speaker 1: that's you know, Democrats like Hillary Clinton as a politician,
Speaker 1: but personally, from everything I've heard from people spend a
Speaker 1: lot of time around her, she is not a likable
Speaker 1: human being. That is. That is the consensus that I've
Speaker 1: heard from many many folks. I don't I've never met her.
Speaker 1: I don't think you'll ever talk to me. But that's fine,
Speaker 1: not some not some big surprise. Not some big surprise there. Um,
Speaker 1: so we'll have to see. By the way, producer Mark,
Speaker 1: you see that you see that Eli Manning is retiring
Speaker 1: and that I dropped some I dropped some sports knowledge
Speaker 1: on the Twitter. It didn't really drop knowledge. Whoa whoa
Speaker 1: whoa hold on I had that Eli Manning. This is
Speaker 1: my tweet for everybody home. Eli Manning. Say what you
Speaker 1: will about him, but he won two of the greatest
Speaker 1: victories in the history of football in two thousand and
Speaker 1: seven and two thousand. You even watch those two games?
Speaker 1: I did? Wow. Yeah, See, that's why I knew about them,
Speaker 1: because I watched those Because that congratulations. You live in
Speaker 1: New York? Can you know that Eli Manning two seven,
Speaker 1: two thousand and eleven won those two? Do you remember
Speaker 1: the two thousand and seven Super Bowl? That might have
Speaker 1: been the most exciting sports event I've ever watched on
Speaker 1: TV anywhere it was? I mean, could you at least
Speaker 1: agree that that may have been the best football game
Speaker 1: you've ever seen then I've ever seen? Yeah, yeah, there
Speaker 1: are better scene and I've seen you absolutely And also
Speaker 1: to beat the knew that Patriots, who I remember where
Speaker 1: the invincible team. They were eighteen. Yes, to beat them
Speaker 1: in the Super Bowl was like unthinkable and yet Eli
Speaker 1: Manning pulled it off. So do you consider him an
Speaker 1: all time great quarterbo? No, he's terrible. This is my
Speaker 1: hot take on this. I don't know if we have time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you got about a minute. Okay. My hot take on
Speaker 1: this is that he's the most average quarterback in NFL history,
Speaker 1: other than the eight games he played to win those
Speaker 1: two super Bowls with two playoff runs. He's one hundred
Speaker 1: and seventy one and one hundred and seventy one in
Speaker 1: his career. That is the definition of average. And he's
Speaker 1: the all time leader in interceptions throne. That's not a
Speaker 1: good thing. I did not know that he'll only get
Speaker 1: into the Hall of Fame because he was Super Bowl
Speaker 1: MVP twice. Well, I mean those are two of the
Speaker 1: most incredible wins, which they are. I agree. I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: As a Giants fan, I appreciate it. Is it is
Speaker 1: it about rings? Is it about like overall stats? You know,
Speaker 1: when you look at your life, you look back at
Speaker 1: the career, what matters more. You appreciate the rings, but overall,
Speaker 1: watching him for that long he wasn't very good. Who's
Speaker 1: the Giants quarterback? Now? Wow? Daniel Jones? Wow, I don't
Speaker 1: even know that from Duke. I'm so I'm assuming he's
Speaker 1: not very good because the Giants are not very good. Um,
Speaker 1: he was a rookie last Year's all right? Fair enough,
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll get a little bit better. See Buck knows
Speaker 1: some things about the sports. That's all I wanted to
Speaker 1: talk about there, So we got that out. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple podcast at the iHeartRadio app or wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. Like Soft Butter on Warm Toast. Time
Speaker 1: to spread some freedom coast to coast. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call. Indeed, it is Facebook dot com slash Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton for roll call purposes. Also a team Buck at
Speaker 1: I heartmedia dot com. That is how we get this
Speaker 1: party going. That's how we get a crack olagin. Jean
Speaker 1: is going to kick us off here. Buck, you have
Speaker 1: an amazing swoop on climate change. Of course, the climate
Speaker 1: is changing, otherwise we would live in ice or lava
Speaker 1: or something. But are we doing it as humans? No,
Speaker 1: of course not. That's stupid and arrogant. We got out
Speaker 1: of the ice age without cars? All right, John, I like,
Speaker 1: I like where your head's at on that one. I
Speaker 1: think I'm pretty well aligned with you on this. All right,
Speaker 1: let's see what we have next here. Mark Buck the
Speaker 1: Beast is a nineteen eighty eight movie about a tank
Speaker 1: crew lost in Afghanistan. Actually pretty good for a relatively
Speaker 1: unknown movie. By the way, producer Mark has become essential
Speaker 1: to the show twenty seven going on fifty two. Somehow works.
Speaker 1: I am twenty six. Thank you for generation Z. They
Speaker 1: still check his idea when he tries to buy beer.
Speaker 1: That's only because I have a baby face. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: like you're you're young, and you're young, I'm gonna be
Speaker 1: forty letty s year old old man. I feel like
Speaker 1: you look older because of the beard. Yeah, that's true too.
Speaker 1: So I showed somebody photo of me, even from two
Speaker 1: years ago, without the beard, and and she was like,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, you're really young. If you share, you
Speaker 1: get carded. Maybe. Yeah, that's why I got And I
Speaker 1: got a couple of grays in the beard now and
Speaker 1: I want to, like, you know, sort of wax them
Speaker 1: out so people can see them a little bit more.
Speaker 1: Not And I pull them out. I mean like make
Speaker 1: them more prominent, so that looks like I've pluck them. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I mean like I want them to be. You know,
Speaker 1: wax them out was a wrong phrase. I meant like,
Speaker 1: tease them out so people can say, hey, look at
Speaker 1: that gray bearded fellow. He must have some wisdom. Just
Speaker 1: die your whole beard gray. That would be quite a look.
Speaker 1: If I had the swoop one color and the beard another.
Speaker 1: I think some people do. The beard does go your
Speaker 1: Your hair color changes more rapidly on your facial hair
Speaker 1: than on your ice. You see, look at Ted Cruz's
Speaker 1: kind of got like a wolverine beard. Like I give
Speaker 1: the guy credit like the wolverine beard for him works.
Speaker 1: It's like a Silverish show. You remember hect you weren't
Speaker 1: we weren't you weren't yet working the show. He actually
Speaker 1: gave me a beard chat out once on Twitter. Yes,
Speaker 1: I've heard you talking about it. Welcome to I know
Speaker 1: it was very exciting for me, said thank you, Senator Cruz.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the the beard club. Um, all right, Chris is
Speaker 1: And of course he asked producer Mark essential to the show.
Speaker 1: He already knows that, And I keep telling him. I'm
Speaker 1: only I'm the only one allowed to have a big
Speaker 1: head in here, too big. Perhaps I'm so Chris is
Speaker 1: next up. Let's see if he has a a It's
Speaker 1: not a paper straw though, right, Let's just let's just
Speaker 1: make sure. I don't are you saying I disintegrate you? No,
Speaker 1: I just just just making sure that you're not one
Speaker 1: of those paper strawst You're a real straw. It gets
Speaker 1: a job done. I had a friend sent me from
Speaker 1: her office that they just transitioned to paper straws, and
Speaker 1: she's like, can you can you do something about this?
Speaker 1: It's like no. Unfortunately, that was another thing about San Francisco.
Speaker 1: No straws, well, paper straws. If you wanted paper straw
Speaker 1: it does not. It is not okay. No, I'd rather
Speaker 1: drink a drink with no straw do what I did?
Speaker 1: Do you leave it? Do you leave straws in your
Speaker 1: alcohol mixed beverages? Yeah? Where do you pull it out?
Speaker 1: Because you think that like the little mini straws? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I like that, Yeah, just because it's with the ice
Speaker 1: over your face. Drink out of the mini straws? Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: Oh I do. I don't know about that we'll see
Speaker 1: there's gonna be some people at home. We're gonna wait
Speaker 1: put two or three in it. So it's like you're
Speaker 1: drinking out of a normal strack when the option for
Speaker 1: a normal straw isn't there. Wow, you triple up on
Speaker 1: mini straw. Yeah, that's one way to go. Chris writes, Hey, Bucks,
Speaker 1: since you were talking college basketball yesterday, if you are
Speaker 1: a producer Mark, want to experience real college basketball, you
Speaker 1: guys have to come watch San Diego State, ranked number
Speaker 1: four in the country right now. We have season tickets
Speaker 1: if you ever make it back out here. Well, Chris,
Speaker 1: thanks so much. Maybe producer Mark, we'll take you up
Speaker 1: on that. Do you know about this San Diego State team?
Speaker 1: Do you know about these guys? I was unaware, but
Speaker 1: good for them. Number four in the country's impressive. I
Speaker 1: know enough about numbers too. I'll start I'll see them
Speaker 1: in March madness when I start looking at college. Are
Speaker 1: you do you um? Are you like a do you
Speaker 1: do the thing where you bat bracket? Yeah? Yes, the bracket.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I'm in some bracket pools. Yeah. Have you
Speaker 1: ever won? No? I'm usually very bad fantasy football guy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: big fantasy football so my brothers, you would like hang out.
Speaker 1: The brothers a lot more than me. They're both really
Speaker 1: into fantasy football and very good at it. That's the
Speaker 1: only thing I really wager on. I actually won a
Speaker 1: league this year, one of my three leagues. Really I did.
Speaker 1: Who's your starting QB? H Lamar Jackson? So that's why. Okay,
Speaker 1: he had a good years. Lamar Jackson's gonna be the
Speaker 1: MVP of the league. Oh yeah, going, good choice, then,
Speaker 1: Jim GM slash producer Mark Um So yeah, I know,
Speaker 1: Well maybe if if we get out there, we'd love
Speaker 1: to take you up on those tickets to San Diego State.
Speaker 1: Sounds like fun, Jim, right, Um, I listen to you
Speaker 1: at six pm every day? Great show. What time do
Speaker 1: you tape? Jim, Thanks for listening. Live out there, and
Speaker 1: we we go, we go as much, we go as
Speaker 1: much on air, as close to time as we possibly can.
Speaker 1: Let's see here, Scott. In all fairness, you have to
Speaker 1: take what Bernie says in context if you're trying to
Speaker 1: transform America into a socialist, communist paradise, and he's highly
Speaker 1: likely correct that Donald J. Trump is one of the
Speaker 1: most dangerous presidents ever. I see, so what Scott's saying
Speaker 1: is that from Bernie's perspective, Trump is super dangerous because
Speaker 1: Bernie views Trump as a threat to the socialist takeover
Speaker 1: of America. That Bernie is trying to you know, I
Speaker 1: kind of see what you're saying. I mean, I still
Speaker 1: think it's a it's a grotesque exaggeration because that's remember
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders is trying to transform America. Bernie Sanders is
Speaker 1: not trying to preserve America as it is and the
Speaker 1: greatness of America as it is. He wants something radically different.
Speaker 1: But I remember he keeps saying political revolution. I mean,
Speaker 1: you don't call for revolution if you think things are great,
Speaker 1: you just want to do it a little bit better.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Scott, I like the outside the box thinking, Sharon,
Speaker 1: if they decided to call new witnesses, they should call Obama.
Speaker 1: Did Ukraine us I'm sorry, did Ukraine request US military
Speaker 1: aid when the Russian military marched into Crimea? Did you
Speaker 1: give them military aid? Forget about Hunter? Well, Sharon, I
Speaker 1: think that that that that wouldn't happen. But I I
Speaker 1: appreciate where your heads out. And they would say that
Speaker 1: that was a decision that the president is allowed to
Speaker 1: make without the whole turning point here for the liberal
Speaker 1: argument is that it's about the personal benefit that they
Speaker 1: say Trump would receive. All because of this alleged personal benefit,
Speaker 1: it is illicit. It is elicit for the president, it
Speaker 1: was not allowed. It was wrong for him to ask
Speaker 1: Zelenski for information. So there we have it. Here we go,
Speaker 1: Andrea right, we were served Mongolian Marmot at a diplomatic event,
Speaker 1: Marmot's Carrie, bubonic plague, and a couple of tourists died
Speaker 1: last year from eating it. Wow, that's not good. Well,
Speaker 1: that's not That's not the way I would want to go.
Speaker 1: Bubonic plague. That is scary, it's not fun. All right,
Speaker 1: interesting trivia. Thank you, Andrea. I did not I did
Speaker 1: not know that. Jack Right's love the show. I listened
Speaker 1: on Spotify. You're improcer, Mark, have a good rapport. You
Speaker 1: keep doing the voice impersonations and fighting the fight. Good brother,
Speaker 1: your podcast is number one with me. I turned my
Speaker 1: brother into in law rather onto it in Kenya and
Speaker 1: he loves it. He's amazed at how awful news is here.
Speaker 1: And when he gets on Sky News in the BBC
Speaker 1: over there, I sent him straight with the Buckster. Well, Jack,
Speaker 1: you're bringing up a very important thing here, which is
Speaker 1: you got to pass the fuck. You got to tell
Speaker 1: people about the Bucks Exton Show. Your word of mouth
Speaker 1: is what makes this show grow. You know, we don't.
Speaker 1: I don't have billboards all over the country. I don't
Speaker 1: get to go on a cable news show every night
Speaker 1: and promote my stuff. So you guys are the You
Speaker 1: guys are the frontline words spreaders. If you will, of
Speaker 1: the Bucks Exton Show, you are my evangelists for the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hut. So please do tell people about it. If
Speaker 1: you're ever board and you're like, I don't know what
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say to this person in my office, or
Speaker 1: if you're on a date, even I don't know if
Speaker 1: bringing me up on a date it's going to be
Speaker 1: helpful or not. That's a risk you take. But you
Speaker 1: know you'd never Oh what do you got? Did you
Speaker 1: just insinuate that on a date people should be like, hey,
Speaker 1: you should listen to the Bucks X, Yes I did, indeed,
Speaker 1: Like this is your first date. I'm saying if you
Speaker 1: run out of stuff, you know, if you run out
Speaker 1: of stuff and you get there, I'm no offense. Buck,
Speaker 1: no I'm just trying to say, but like if that,
Speaker 1: at that point you get to figure out if if
Speaker 1: the lady or the guy depending on you know too,
Speaker 1: if they love freedom you on a date. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: if you want to know if they'll free, which you
Speaker 1: should know right away. By the way, nowadays, if you
Speaker 1: listen to this show, chances are you don't want to
Speaker 1: date some comie. I'm just saying that's what I'm here for,
Speaker 1: so you can really use me as a litmus test.
Speaker 1: There are plenty of couples out there that complete I know,
Speaker 1: right wing to it happens. It happens all the time,
Speaker 1: but these days it's getting harder. There are all these
Speaker 1: stories about people whose marriages have been ruined sayings of Trump.
Speaker 1: So do you really want on a first date to
Speaker 1: ruin it like that? Yeah, you want to get it
Speaker 1: over the right away. I guess that's fair. Yeah, you
Speaker 1: want to bring up the buck sex and show on
Speaker 1: a date and you'll find out if this person is
Speaker 1: in fact a Sandernista and that's what you want to know. Sure, Yeah, see, okay, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm standing behind that one. I still say that if
Speaker 1: your date gets to the point that you're bringing up
Speaker 1: The Buck Sex and Show probably shouldn't be on that
Speaker 1: date anyway. I mean, people bring up Netflix shows completely different.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's that different. This show is David too.
Speaker 1: I watch Ozark, I watch The Buck Sex and Show,
Speaker 1: same thing. I think it is. So listen to me, producer.
Speaker 1: Mark's gonna get a code read when no one's looking. Jeffrey, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: Greetings from Spokane, Washington, home of the Gonzaga Bulldogs. Glad
Speaker 1: to have you back. Ben was great in your absence,
Speaker 1: but the Freedom Hut faith will neither. Daily Dose of
Speaker 1: the Swoop. On yesterday's show, you played a a clip
Speaker 1: of Greta in Davos spewing stats about climate change. Do
Speaker 1: you think she really understands any of the numbers stats
Speaker 1: that she's claiming or she just reciting when she's memorized
Speaker 1: from a script. It's sad to see a sixteen year
Speaker 1: old kid so wrapped up in climate change hoaks. Keep
Speaker 1: up the great work, Buck, ps high five. Your swoop
Speaker 1: is amazing and you keep us warm and safe at night.
Speaker 1: Jeffrey has a fantastic note, a fantastic message. Greta's seventeen.
Speaker 1: By the way, I saw that she must have just
Speaker 1: turned seventeen recently, Jane, am I the only one who
Speaker 1: thinks it's strange that while the Damns go on and
Speaker 1: on about Trump asking Ukraine to investigate corruption, not one
Speaker 1: Democrat has asked what corruption? Because they know Joe Barry
Speaker 1: and the rest of them were up to their eyeballs
Speaker 1: in corruption in Ukraine. Hey, Jane, I mean, that's why
Speaker 1: I had John Salmon on yesterday, because he's been looking
Speaker 1: into this, and I just don't know if we're ever
Speaker 1: going to really get the answers that we need to
Speaker 1: get on what was going on in Ukraine because there
Speaker 1: are a lot of people that are very invested in
Speaker 1: us not finding out that answer. But we'll still keep
Speaker 1: keep trying, keep looking for it. I wish I could
Speaker 1: go over there and dig for it myself, but my
Speaker 1: Ukrainian is it's not it's not that it's rusty, it's
Speaker 1: non existent. So I'm not sure that I'd be able
Speaker 1: to be that effective as an investigative journalist running around
Speaker 1: in Kiev, which is whatever it calls Kiev now, So
Speaker 1: I guess I gotta go to restaurant order Chicken Kiev
Speaker 1: instead of Chicken Kiev. But do you even know what
Speaker 1: is chicken Kiev? Do you even know it's a thing.
Speaker 1: I know that people are Kiev was a city, it is,
Speaker 1: But there's like chicken Kiev is a is a dish?
Speaker 1: You know? Do you like Hamburger is named for a place? Sure?
Speaker 1: Do you even know what it is? Frank Footer know
Speaker 1: as I'm saying, I don't know what chicken Kiva has been.
Speaker 1: Like Muffalo Wing, Yeah, exactly, exactly name for Buffalo, New York,
Speaker 1: which basically is in Canada, and when you really think
Speaker 1: about it, it's really far away. I have a friend
Speaker 1: that likes to go to Buffalo often and he says
Speaker 1: the wings are actually as good as advertised. Well, there
Speaker 1: you go it. Hope they have good buffaloing. Sure, and
Speaker 1: now we've got on the roll call Glenn. After this
Speaker 1: impeachment is over, would it be possible to have a
Speaker 1: few discussions on cooperating with Russia to have a naval
Speaker 1: base in the Mediterranean. Oh? Man, I don't think that's
Speaker 1: gonna happen. I think the relationship with Russia is pretty
Speaker 1: fraid right now. But we'll have to see how this
Speaker 1: impeachment thing plays out. It ain't over to the fat man.
Speaker 1: Let us say that over to the fat ladies things?
Speaker 1: Is that like a microaggression? Now? You know? Allow to
Speaker 1: say these things anymore? Just saying it ain't over till
Speaker 1: Producer Mark sings. Producer Mark, have we ever heard you sing? No?
Speaker 1: And you never will that guy. You gotta vote for
Speaker 1: Producer Mark to sing in the Freedom Hut at subpoint
Speaker 1: we're gonna get you gotta pick a song. No, We're
Speaker 1: gonna have to like raise money for charity, and Producer
Speaker 1: Mark will sing if we get like enough. I have
Speaker 1: self awareness to know that I'm bad at singing, so
Speaker 1: I don't see I'll tell you this when I come
Speaker 1: into the office sometime or the hut, you know, the
Speaker 1: studio here sometimes occasional I'm running a little behind occasional,
Speaker 1: very very busy with many things. So Producer Mark starts
Speaker 1: starts giving me too much of a hard time for that.
Speaker 1: I'll just start singing, maybe a Disney classic, maybe maybe
Speaker 1: you know the Bloodhound Gang song or you know what
Speaker 1: you know. I'll just sing a song and then then
Speaker 1: I'll do this, and then I'll put on whistling, which
Speaker 1: he knows drives me into it. Is that your favorite song?
Speaker 1: Ever whistled by flow writer. That's that's whistling makes me
Speaker 1: completely lose my mind. And you know that. So see
Speaker 1: he fights dirty? Do he fights very dirty? Philip war
Speaker 1: film The Big Red One. Not saying it's top five,
Speaker 1: but you should see it. Also, Valkomer plays a secret
Speaker 1: service agent in Spartan. So not an actual war film.
Speaker 1: Huh Okay, I've never even heard of Spartan, So this
Speaker 1: is Sparta. Jesse writes buck Sexton team, I'm the communications
Speaker 1: director for somebody would love to get on the show. Okay, um,
Speaker 1: we will reach out, Jesse, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: Ron Burgundy. I am Ron Burgundy. Um, so yeah, you
Speaker 1: know I will tell you. And this is an unpopular
Speaker 1: opinion I have. I do not find I do not
Speaker 1: find Anchorman as funny as everybody else I know people,
Speaker 1: I'm like, I don't. Last time Will Ferrell was good.
Speaker 1: It is the last time he was even remotely good bye?
Speaker 1: How do people stop? How do you go from being
Speaker 1: so funny to so not funny? Him and Sandler did
Speaker 1: it for a long time. Finally Sandler came out, but
Speaker 1: Eddie Murphy went from being the funniest person in Hollywood,
Speaker 1: and I heard his new movie on Netflix is good.
Speaker 1: I have Dolomite is my name. I don't even know
Speaker 1: what that and I watched him host SNL. That was
Speaker 1: actually pretty good. I mean, it is amazing if people
Speaker 1: go from being super funny to not funny at all.
Speaker 1: Robert writes belzerin Dead, He's just old, seventy five years old. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I came to the conclusion that Wikipedia just has up weird,
Speaker 1: like I think his brother died or has years active,
Speaker 1: so it makes you think that he's dead to feel
Speaker 1: better than because I felt a little bad for making
Speaker 1: fun of him. So now you can call him a
Speaker 1: lib or whatever, lib bells or that guy's a lib um.
Speaker 1: Let's see you get there, Billy. Hello, Buck. The Dems
Speaker 1: are just putting on her side show right now. It's
Speaker 1: Michelle Obama's going to come out the last minute to
Speaker 1: save them. She'll get all the different intersectional vote, a
Speaker 1: lot of and a lot of white votes. I hope
Speaker 1: I'm wrong, but that's what I think will happen. She's
Speaker 1: been promoting her book. I saw your comment on Tucker
Speaker 1: and you are correct. Thank you for your work, Billy,
Speaker 1: Thank you for writing in man. I appreciate it. Well,
Speaker 1: that's gonna be yeah, another fantastic Buck Sexton show in
Speaker 1: the books. Very exciting stuff, if I may say so.
Speaker 1: I'll be back here tomorrow. It's gonna be amazing as
Speaker 1: it always is. Please do tell somebody I. Oh, by
Speaker 1: the way, subscribe to our YouTube channel. How do they
Speaker 1: do that? Producer mark the show? You yeah, the Buck
Speaker 1: Section show on YouTube. Subscribe please till tomorrow She'll tie