Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Join the conversation
Speaker 1: and message Buck on Facebook, Instagram, or email Team Bucket
Speaker 1: iHeartMedia dot com. He may read it on the show.
Speaker 1: Fauci the flip Flopper. This guy is absolutely unbelievable. He
Speaker 1: gets it wrong over and over, and in fact, he
Speaker 1: gets what feels like promoted in the process because the
Speaker 1: Biden administration kept him around. I'm going to pull apart
Speaker 1: the nonsense today. I'm gonna make sure we all understand
Speaker 1: just what has really happened here to this country because
Speaker 1: of the powermad lockdowners, and we can never allow this
Speaker 1: to happen again. I'll get into all of that, but
Speaker 1: I'm somebody who likes things to be as convenient as
Speaker 1: they possibly can because I'm very busy. I know you
Speaker 1: are too. And I recently had this experience where I
Speaker 1: got a delivery in New York City and it was
Speaker 1: just it was the wrong thing. They sent me the
Speaker 1: wrong the wrong package. And I went to the company
Speaker 1: directly and I was having a text exchange in seconds
Speaker 1: and we got it all fixed. I didn't have to
Speaker 1: wait on customer service hole, I didn't have to speak
Speaker 1: to somebody. What's your reference number, what's your reference number?
Speaker 1: Five times? No, just texting, bam done fixed. That's how
Speaker 1: Podium works. It's a messaging platform to power your business.
Speaker 1: I absolutely love it. It helps you reach customers wherever
Speaker 1: they are. Business messaging with Podium helps you gain reviews,
Speaker 1: collect payments, communicate with customers, and capture leads, all from
Speaker 1: a single inbox. It's so convenient and straightforward. It also
Speaker 1: helps you adapt to changing customer expectations. Because when I
Speaker 1: can handle an issue with a business via text message
Speaker 1: quickly and it's all right there in front of me,
Speaker 1: I don't have to wait on hole, I don't have
Speaker 1: to talk to somebody, it's so much easier. And then
Speaker 1: I want to use that business again. So for your business,
Speaker 1: you need Podium. Get this setup. It's so easy. Once
Speaker 1: you start, you'll realize, oh my gosh, this is a
Speaker 1: game change. It'll your whole customer experience will be boosted
Speaker 1: tremendously by this, and it's just going to help your
Speaker 1: sales and overall profits. Find out how Podium can help
Speaker 1: your business reach more customers with a real time chat service.
Speaker 1: It's just going to be a game changer for you. Okay,
Speaker 1: get started free that's right. Get started free today at
Speaker 1: Podium dot com slash buck. For all the business owners
Speaker 1: out there, try this service. You will love it. Podium
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. That's Podium dot com slash Buck. Well,
Speaker 1: I said it right at the beginning of that's where
Speaker 1: it came from. I think it was obvious to smart people.
Speaker 1: That's where it came from. I have no doubt about it.
Speaker 1: I had no doubt about it. I was criticized by
Speaker 1: the press because China has a lot of people taken
Speaker 1: care of. They took care of Hunter, they took care
Speaker 1: of Joe, They took care of everybody, didn't they And
Speaker 1: people didn't want to say China. Usually they blame it
Speaker 1: on Russia. It's always Russia, Russia, Russia. But I said,
Speaker 1: right at the beginning, it came out of Wuhan, and
Speaker 1: that's where all the deaths were. Also, by the way,
Speaker 1: when we first heard about this, there were Buddy begs,
Speaker 1: dead people laying all over Wuhan Province and that's where
Speaker 1: it happened to be located. So to me, it was
Speaker 1: very obvious. I said it very strongly, and I was criticized,
Speaker 1: and now people agreeing with me. So that's okay. He
Speaker 1: was right, folks. Trump was right on the Wuhan coronavirus
Speaker 1: outbreak and pandemic, and the haters, the doubters, the anti
Speaker 1: trumpers were wrong. Yet another one you have to add
Speaker 1: the list. And not only was Trump right about this
Speaker 1: despite all the criticism, and but let me say many
Speaker 1: people right about I always thought the lab theory was
Speaker 1: more credible. It just made more sense from the very beginning.
Speaker 1: If it came from bats at at a wet market,
Speaker 1: why weren't they all why weren't all the cases traced
Speaker 1: to the wet market. And if it came from bats
Speaker 1: in nature, well this didn't happen where the bats live,
Speaker 1: generally speaking, six hundred miles away. It just didn't add up.
Speaker 1: But you're concentrating bat viruses in a lab, A bunch
Speaker 1: of lab technicians and researchers get sick with a bat
Speaker 1: based virus. This seems pretty straightforward, doesn't it. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not straightforward to people that don't really care about
Speaker 1: the truth but just want to use this for political advantage.
Speaker 1: And with that we turned to the Biden administration. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden and all the people around him supposed to be
Speaker 1: so smart. Oh, they believe the science. That's what they
Speaker 1: want you to think. They believe the science. Well, here's
Speaker 1: what we've since found out. Joe Biden's team shut down
Speaker 1: a State Department investigation into the Wuhan laboratory as a
Speaker 1: source of the COVID nineteen outbreaks. According to Daily Mail,
Speaker 1: the distance of the investigation, run primarily out of the
Speaker 1: State Department's Arms Control and Verification Bureau, had not previously
Speaker 1: been known, nor had the Biden administration's actions. The revelations
Speaker 1: will lead to uncomfortable hit n't say allegations for Biden
Speaker 1: that his team politicized the public health effort and harmed
Speaker 1: the nation by shutting down a useful inquiry begun by
Speaker 1: his predecessor. The decision to terminate the inquiry was made
Speaker 1: after Biden officials were briefed on the team's draft findings
Speaker 1: in February and March of this year. According to a
Speaker 1: State Department spokesperson, investigation was shut down because the Biden
Speaker 1: team had doubts about the legitimacy of the findings. Those
Speaker 1: involved have told journalists that the questioning of their evidence
Speaker 1: was unfair and unwarranted, and they had been objective Oh,
Speaker 1: so this is the Biden team coming in the flax
Speaker 1: for mister magoo. Biden coming in and saying no, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: shut down that investigation into the Wuhan Institute of Virology
Speaker 1: as the basis for the whole pandemic, I mean, as
Speaker 1: the place where the outbreaks started. Shut it down, or
Speaker 1: because the findings were being so politicized. If that were true,
Speaker 1: why didn't we know about this? If that were the case,
Speaker 1: why don't they make the findings public. Let's let the
Speaker 1: people decide who was politicizing this, folks. The mentality that
Speaker 1: the Democrats have these scorched earth anything for power principles
Speaker 1: not allowed to stand in the way. Mentality isn't applicable
Speaker 1: to just certain hot button topics. This is not something
Speaker 1: that occurs occasionally on the left. This is their approach
Speaker 1: to everything. And we all know that it was very
Speaker 1: politicized that Donald Trump was the guy saying, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, this virus came from China. This is because
Speaker 1: of what the country that he was willing to confront
Speaker 1: in a way that other presidents before him had not.
Speaker 1: This is because of what China's recklessness and deception led to.
Speaker 1: He keeps saying this, and sure enough, that meant that
Speaker 1: Democrats had to push in the opposite direction. That meant
Speaker 1: that Democrats had to take the position insisted that they
Speaker 1: must take the position that this was not true. Oh okay,
Speaker 1: I thought on something like this, when it comes to
Speaker 1: a pandemic that's killed millions of people around the world,
Speaker 1: that infected hundreds of millions, perhaps even it will end
Speaker 1: up being a few billion people getting it infected with this,
Speaker 1: We'll never really we'll never know the full number, but
Speaker 1: when you look at asymptomatic cases and transmission all over
Speaker 1: the world, it's certainly hundreds of millions of cases. With
Speaker 1: that as the situation, couldn't we expect that partisanship wouldn't
Speaker 1: rule the day, Not with Democrats. Oh no, the Biden
Speaker 1: team shut this down. Just imagine for a second that
Speaker 1: the Trump administration came into office during a pandemic, or
Speaker 1: even even make it simpler, imagine Trump won a second
Speaker 1: term and it came out that he shut down an
Speaker 1: investigation into the origins of COVID nineteen because some of
Speaker 1: his political appointees didn't really like what the findings were.
Speaker 1: That would be the top news story all across the country,
Speaker 1: and you'd have libs shrieking he didn't follow the science.
Speaker 1: They'd be completely losing their minds. Fauci would be on TV,
Speaker 1: you know, more than he already is, if that's even
Speaker 1: humanly possible. It always followed a science, and it was
Speaker 1: troubling that the data was not allowed to direct the
Speaker 1: observation of the you know, that's what we would be hearing.
Speaker 1: But because the Biden team did it, it's yeah, you
Speaker 1: know the Stummig deal. Oh, speaking of the Fouch he's
Speaker 1: wrong again, He's wrong again. How many times does this
Speaker 1: guy get to be incorrect? How many times does he
Speaker 1: get to say something that he has to change his
Speaker 1: tune on? A week later, a month later, again in
Speaker 1: the Daily Mail quote, Fauci defended the United States modest
Speaker 1: and very respectable, very very respective. This is the most
Speaker 1: respectable funding of the Wuhan Laboratory, which is now the
Speaker 1: center of speculation as a possible source the COVID nineteen virus.
Speaker 1: Fauci appeared before a congressional buddy a budget committee on
Speaker 1: Tuesday defended allocating six hundred thousand dollars through a group
Speaker 1: called Eco Health Alliance, which then paid the Wuhan Institute
Speaker 1: of Virology to study the risk that backed coronaviruses could
Speaker 1: infect humans. Under the terms of the funding, the money
Speaker 1: could not be spent on gain of function research, a
Speaker 1: controversial practice which explores how viruses mutate and become more
Speaker 1: transmissible or more dangerous. End quote. Oh, isn't that so cute?
Speaker 1: I'm sure the Chinese institute was really worried about what
Speaker 1: kind of research they were going to do with the
Speaker 1: money that taxpayers from the US we're sending them. I'm
Speaker 1: sure we could trust them on that, because when you're
Speaker 1: talking about transparency, truth and accountability government backed institutions in
Speaker 1: I'm the top of the list. Baby, Yeah, that's right,
Speaker 1: the gold standard of honesty. Sure, sure they are. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is all looking like the people who were right
Speaker 1: from the beginning. Now we're in a position to say,
Speaker 1: not only were we right about the Wuhan coronavirus origins,
Speaker 1: but also we've been right about lockdowns, about masks, about
Speaker 1: so much here and oh, one more thing before I
Speaker 1: get to more more in depth analysis of the of
Speaker 1: the latest Fauci flip flop. I just read read a
Speaker 1: story today about how there is a new study out
Speaker 1: They looked at seventy five people, so it's not a
Speaker 1: large study, but a new study, and it said that
Speaker 1: those who have people even who had low levels of
Speaker 1: a coronavirus and COVID nineteen infection, had anti bodies for
Speaker 1: at least at least eight months and as long as
Speaker 1: eleven months detectable antibodies. Now that doesn't even cover t
Speaker 1: seal immunity, but detectable antibodies. They believe it's not just
Speaker 1: about the blood, but in fact antibodies that emerge from
Speaker 1: the bone marrow. Now, I bring this up because they're
Speaker 1: they're once again telling everybody, including the recovered, go get
Speaker 1: the shot. Go get the shot. It's so much better.
Speaker 1: And I've been telling you they don't know that. They
Speaker 1: don't know. There's something called an amnestic immune response, which
Speaker 1: often happens from recovery from natural infection. An immune response
Speaker 1: would cover things like, you know, if you if you
Speaker 1: get a virus once that you later on come into
Speaker 1: contact with many years later, your body can actually still
Speaker 1: deal with it at an elevated level, conferring lifelong immunity
Speaker 1: in many cases. Is there an amnastic response for COVID nineteen.
Speaker 1: The answer they don't know. But just as what they've
Speaker 1: done with the investigation into the origins of COVID nineteen,
Speaker 1: just as what they've done on masking and everything else,
Speaker 1: they don't have answers. They don't have the data to
Speaker 1: prove what they say they can, and so their response
Speaker 1: is shut up and do what you're told. I say
Speaker 1: enough of that. We had a big scare with saws
Speaker 1: Coovie one back in two thousand and two two thousand
Speaker 1: and three, where that particular virus unquestionably went from a
Speaker 1: bat to an intermediate host to start an epidemic and
Speaker 1: a pandemic that resulted in eight thousand cases in close
Speaker 1: to eight hundred deaths. It would have been almost a
Speaker 1: dereliction of our duty if we didn't study this. And
Speaker 1: the only way you can study these things is you've
Speaker 1: got to go where the action is. So I often say,
Speaker 1: somewhat tongue in cheek, you don't want to study bats
Speaker 1: in Fairfax County, Virginia to find out what the animal
Speaker 1: human interface is that might lead to a jumping of species.
Speaker 1: So we had a modest collaboration with very respectable Chinese
Speaker 1: scientist to a world experts on coronavirus and we did
Speaker 1: that through a sub grant from a larger grant to
Speaker 1: Eco Health. The subgrant was about six hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: over a period of five years, so it was a
Speaker 1: modest amount, and the purpose of it was to study
Speaker 1: the animal human interface, to do surveillance, and to determine
Speaker 1: if these bat viruses were even capable of transient infection
Speaker 1: to humans. That's a very long way of the FOUCH
Speaker 1: saying that, yes, in fact, the US government, through a subgrant,
Speaker 1: did fund research on bat viruses in Wuhan, China. Do
Speaker 1: you recall how indignant he was? How dare you he
Speaker 1: was basically saying to Senator rand Paul on this one,
Speaker 1: do you recall how outraged the FOUCH was over that?
Speaker 1: And now here he is, You know, you don't want
Speaker 1: to study bats in Fairfax, Virginia, you want to do
Speaker 1: it in Wuhan. Hm. Really, So there was research going
Speaker 1: on there that was funded by US taxpayer dollars. That's
Speaker 1: not a conspiracy theory. That's not something that was just
Speaker 1: dreamed up on some blog somewhere. And we're supposed to
Speaker 1: believe that Fouci still has credibility on any of these issues.
Speaker 1: Why should anyone listen to this clown at all anymore?
Speaker 1: That's my honest question for you. Why should anyone, in fact,
Speaker 1: why should he keep his job? Senator Rand Paul once again,
Speaker 1: as he has done many times here thanks we have
Speaker 1: somebody in the Senate who loves liberty, believes in the Constitution,
Speaker 1: and has an MD to challenge the little lab coat,
Speaker 1: Tyrant Fauci. Here's Rand Paul on how this never should
Speaker 1: have happened. It absolutely should not have occurred, and play
Speaker 1: clip two. We may never know whether the pandemic arose
Speaker 1: from the lab in Wuhan, but we do know that
Speaker 1: so far, no intermediate animal host has been discovered. Thousands
Speaker 1: of animals at the wet market have been looked at,
Speaker 1: none of them have carried COVID nineteen. We've tried to
Speaker 1: infect COVID nineteen into bats. It doesn't grow well in bats.
Speaker 1: It seems most adapted and suitable for humans. We may
Speaker 1: not know whether this ever arose out of a Wuhan lab,
Speaker 1: but I think gain of function research where we take
Speaker 1: a deadly virus, sometimes much more deadly than COVID, and
Speaker 1: then we increase its transmissibility to mammals is wrong. In
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen, NIH stopped all of this research. I'm using
Speaker 1: the same definition to say any gain of function research
Speaker 1: should not be funded in China with US taxpayer dollars,
Speaker 1: and I recommend it. Yes, thank you. Any problem with that?
Speaker 1: Any want to take the opposite point of view, given
Speaker 1: what we've just gone through around the world and here
Speaker 1: at home in America, anybody think that that's a strange
Speaker 1: thing for Senator Ran Paul to be suggesting at this
Speaker 1: point he has been right. He was right on the
Speaker 1: theatrics of Fauci wearing masks, and it is not, sir,
Speaker 1: it is the science. It's the science because there could
Speaker 1: be droplets coming out of my mouth and those droplets
Speaker 1: are being stuck in the mask. Yeah. Sure, that's worked
Speaker 1: so well, hasn't it. It just shut down the virus
Speaker 1: all across the country. All the mask wearing we were
Speaker 1: doing pure idiocy. Here people are still wearing masks in
Speaker 1: my gym as of yesterday, ten people in the gym
Speaker 1: in New York City. I'm the only one not wearing
Speaker 1: a mask. And I'm proud to saying that somebody has
Speaker 1: taken down the you must wear a mask signs in there.
Speaker 1: I don't know who it is. There's some anti mask
Speaker 1: bandit who has been pulling down I don't know. I
Speaker 1: mean maybe I know, but I don't know. Can either
Speaker 1: confirm nor deny that someone is pulling down the mask
Speaker 1: signs in the gym in my apartment building, which you
Speaker 1: know is a pretty big gym actually because it's a
Speaker 1: large building. And those those folks who go in, they
Speaker 1: still mask up. They're on the treadmill, dry heaving into
Speaker 1: their mask on their face because they think I'm big.
Speaker 1: I'm taking the virus seriously because I'm listening to Fauci.
Speaker 1: I listened to Fauci. Fauci will save us. These people
Speaker 1: have it's a mental illness. They've got a real problem.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you want to say it's pandemic
Speaker 1: PTSD or it's Fauci induced anxiety disorder, but they got
Speaker 1: an issue. These people are vaccinated two folks. I can
Speaker 1: tell you that right now, and they're still freaked out
Speaker 1: about it. But we have been lied to so much.
Speaker 1: If anything, what this has been a massive exercise in
Speaker 1: is a reminder for everybody that credentialing or credentialed experts
Speaker 1: who make policy do not necessarily make good policy. And
Speaker 1: when they tell you shut up, I have a degree
Speaker 1: in this, you should always always question them right away.
Speaker 1: What do you mean? Okay? So why does that mean
Speaker 1: that you know more about this issue? Why does that
Speaker 1: mean that you're making a better judgment call about this issue.
Speaker 1: That's where it really all falls apart. But FAUCI has
Speaker 1: come out and said that they were there was a
Speaker 1: US grant and it was going to gain a function
Speaker 1: research or I'm sorry, it was going to bat research.
Speaker 1: Whether there was gain a function going on or not.
Speaker 1: Fauci does not no, So who us closer to the
Speaker 1: truth this whole time, people saying that money was going
Speaker 1: US taxpayer dollars were being funneled to the Wuhan lab
Speaker 1: for a gain of function research, or people who were
Speaker 1: saying that's crazy. This came from bats that live in
Speaker 1: cave six hundred miles away from Wuhan, and there's no
Speaker 1: intermediary species they can really find that shows where the
Speaker 1: leap occurred. And there are people that had nothing to
Speaker 1: do with the Wuhan wet market who were coming down
Speaker 1: with this virus in considerable numbers before the major outbreak.
Speaker 1: Shut up and listen to Fauci, this is what it
Speaker 1: turned into. We have really been separated, I mean human
Speaker 1: beings around the world, but particularly here in America, into
Speaker 1: those who think for themselves and those who must be
Speaker 1: a part of the herd, the massive sheep situation. That's
Speaker 1: what has happened all over the world. You know what
Speaker 1: I'm really looking forward to tonight Taking a beautiful filet,
Speaker 1: right I'm a big filet, mean young guy, out of
Speaker 1: my fridge and searing it perfectly and just cutting into it,
Speaker 1: looking at the juiciness, the buttery taste that I know
Speaker 1: will come. And I'm excited because it's the best filet
Speaker 1: I've ever made at home, because I'm using produce that
Speaker 1: is top quality. Moink, baby, you gotta try monk meat.
Speaker 1: This is delicious grass fed and grass finished beef and lamb,
Speaker 1: pastured pork and chicken, wild caught Alaskan salmon, delivered directly
Speaker 1: to your door right there. Animals are raised outdoors, their
Speaker 1: fish swim wild in the ocean, and monk meat is
Speaker 1: free of antibiotics, hormone, sugar, and all the other stuff
Speaker 1: that junk you'll find in prepackaged meats. You want this
Speaker 1: in your freezer I'm telling you, I've got a whole
Speaker 1: freezer full of mink right now. The ribies are incredible.
Speaker 1: That chicken is absolutely just delicious. I've got lamb chops
Speaker 1: that I'm going to be using this weekend, searing them,
Speaker 1: cook them myself. This is the best meat delivery service anywhere,
Speaker 1: and I love it. It's really top qualities. Off. You
Speaker 1: know that I'm big into cooking proteins, big into cooking meats.
Speaker 1: All you have to do to get this delivered to
Speaker 1: you right now to join the monk movement is go
Speaker 1: to monkbox dot com slash buck that's m o I
Speaker 1: n k box moinkbox dot com slash buck and listeners
Speaker 1: to this show get free bacon for a year. I've
Speaker 1: actually got to get another monk box sent to me
Speaker 1: because I've already run through my bacon. I opened it.
Speaker 1: I ate it all in a week by myself, that's
Speaker 1: how good it is. But you'll get free bacon for
Speaker 1: a year. M o I n k box dot com,
Speaker 1: slash buck that's moinkbox dot com slash buck. O there
Speaker 1: right now and get the best grass fed, farm and
Speaker 1: pasture raised beef, chicken pork possible delivered right to your
Speaker 1: door moinkbox dot com, slash buck Colifi. I mean, is
Speaker 1: an unjust doctrine that has been codified in statute after
Speaker 1: statute that has allowed for law enforcement to operate with
Speaker 1: callous disregard of black and brown bodies, with reckless impunity
Speaker 1: for our lives without any consequences. You know, George Floyd
Speaker 1: was brutally murdered. Why did that happen? It happened because
Speaker 1: we have to affirm the fact that black lives matter.
Speaker 1: Because our lives have not mattered, they have not been valued.
Speaker 1: There was no humanity, no grace extended or afforded to him.
Speaker 1: Black folks have been dehumanized and consequently have been brutalized,
Speaker 1: survey profiled, murdered, lynch So what will be the determined
Speaker 1: to that we have much work to do beyond just
Speaker 1: one bill. This is the kind of anti cop rhetoric
Speaker 1: and the dishonesty that is central to the BLM movement
Speaker 1: which has resulted in disaster for this country. I want
Speaker 1: everyone to be clear on this. I don't want there
Speaker 1: to be any question. When you look at the data,
Speaker 1: you look at the timeline of the last twelve months
Speaker 1: in America, BLM has resulted in a massive spike in
Speaker 1: homicides and shootings across America. More people are dead, more
Speaker 1: families are shattered because of the narrative that is being
Speaker 1: pushed here by people like Congresswoman Pressley qualified immunity for example,
Speaker 1: Let's just take a look at qualified immunity. Okay, they
Speaker 1: say it is a racist doctrine on the left. Well, no,
Speaker 1: it's actually a very straightforward doctrine established back in nineteen
Speaker 1: sixty seven by the Supreme Court, and there are many
Speaker 1: statutes that codify it. It protects state and local officials,
Speaker 1: including police officers, from personal liability unless they have violated
Speaker 1: clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. So what this means,
Speaker 1: it's very straightforward. But the left relies on ignorance and emotion,
Speaker 1: especially around the racist cops lie. Our cops are not racist.
Speaker 1: I'm sick of this crap. Our cops are not racist.
Speaker 1: You know it, I know it. Thanks to our cops.
Speaker 1: We live in a very large and very complicated country
Speaker 1: where people, mostly in their day to day are doing
Speaker 1: really well and safe. And you know it's not the purge,
Speaker 1: so thank you for that. But the lies continue anyway.
Speaker 1: Qualified immunity. Let's take a look at this for a moment.
Speaker 1: If you got rid of qualified immunity, what it would
Speaker 1: mean is that a person I get arrested by a cop,
Speaker 1: I can sue the cop personally in court and say
Speaker 1: that he was you know, that he was rough with me,
Speaker 1: that he violated my rights in some way, and he's
Speaker 1: got to go defend himself in court personally. And if
Speaker 1: he were to lose, he loses his house, he loses
Speaker 1: his pension, you know, he loses his bank account. What
Speaker 1: qualified immunity does is it says, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: you can't even drag a cop into court personally if
Speaker 1: he's acting within good faith in his job. Now, if
Speaker 1: a cop pulls me out of a car for no
Speaker 1: reason and handcuffs me and then you know, breaks my
Speaker 1: kneecap with his nightstick for fun, and it's all on video,
Speaker 1: and he clearly violated my rights in this process. Qualified
Speaker 1: immunity can be waived by the department, and it often is.
Speaker 1: But you see, I can't do what the Left wants
Speaker 1: to be able to do, which is, if nothing has
Speaker 1: there's no violation of my rights, drag a cop into
Speaker 1: court and see what I can get think of all
Speaker 1: the ambulance chasing lawyers that would want to take this
Speaker 1: one up the way that they would try to exploit
Speaker 1: the cries of racism and police to try to try
Speaker 1: to get a jury to go along with Oh, well,
Speaker 1: even if the cops seemed like he was doing a
Speaker 1: good doing his job lawfully and within the scope of
Speaker 1: his authority, acting in good faith, we're gonna We're gonna
Speaker 1: sue him. Anyway. Maybe the jury will decide, you know,
Speaker 1: this is a makeup call. You'll start getting all these
Speaker 1: makeup call juries. Well, they'll say, well, this cop didn't
Speaker 1: do it. But there's listen to what Aana Pressley says
Speaker 1: in Congress, all the racism, all the evil from law enforcement.
Speaker 1: This is so divisive and destructive, and it's actually not
Speaker 1: reflective of what the American people overwhelmingly believe about their
Speaker 1: cops and about each other. America is not a country
Speaker 1: that is the shining example of racism. America as a
Speaker 1: country where it's a very diverse country, more so than
Speaker 1: any other country even close to its size in the world.
Speaker 1: America is a very diverse country where we treat each
Speaker 1: other with respect and dignity, overwhelmingly, and we see each
Speaker 1: other as Americans, and instead of celebrating that greatness, instead
Speaker 1: of celebrating where we are as a country, the left
Speaker 1: just seeks to exaggerate our faults and tear us down.
Speaker 1: You know, if you've ever been in a relationship, a
Speaker 1: personal relationship where somebody exaggerates the faults of the other person,
Speaker 1: doesn't look at the whole reality of it, but looks
Speaker 1: at just small things. This can manifest through nagging, This
Speaker 1: can manifest through being hypercritical it. You'll destroy the relationship.
Speaker 1: Do you have to remember if somebody you know, if
Speaker 1: your wife is kind and loyal and honest, and you
Speaker 1: know family first, but all you do is say, you know, honey,
Speaker 1: you know your food, you're you're really your cooking really
Speaker 1: isn't that good? You know? And your cooking actually represents
Speaker 1: your lack of interest in this relationship in fact, because
Speaker 1: you're not a better cook. I can't believe that you
Speaker 1: even take this relationship seriously. You can destroy anything by
Speaker 1: exaggerating imperfection, by lacking context, by lacking proportionality, to destroy
Speaker 1: any relationship, destroy any business arrangement, anything. So this is
Speaker 1: and this is central by the way to the whole
Speaker 1: Marxist ethos, which is to look at inequality in human
Speaker 1: existence and pretend that it is the result of nothing
Speaker 1: but systemic, systemic forces of oppression, not luck, not life
Speaker 1: is unfair, but we do the best we can, and
Speaker 1: we have laws that are supposed to treat people and
Speaker 1: seek to treat people equally. And we are not all
Speaker 1: equal in gifts, talents, abilities, work, ethic We're not, and
Speaker 1: so there's not going to be equal outcomes. But instead
Speaker 1: of that perspective, you see, what the left provides is
Speaker 1: the exaggeration of a deficiency and really a maniacal fixation
Speaker 1: on deficiency to create the crack in the dam, to
Speaker 1: bring the whole thing down. That's what they're doing. This
Speaker 1: is how Marxists use class warfare and envy in the
Speaker 1: more traditional context of Marxism. And it's how right now
Speaker 1: you're seeing racial division used to try to bring society down.
Speaker 1: It is so reckless, it is so disgraceful, but it
Speaker 1: is a central theme of democrats because unfortunately it works.
Speaker 1: It's a powerful tool. We all have envy, we all
Speaker 1: have insecurities, resentments everyone, But do we control it, do
Speaker 1: we have perspective on it? Are we honest about our
Speaker 1: own roles in what frustrates us in life? Or do
Speaker 1: we blame the system? Do we blame the other for
Speaker 1: all the ways in which our lives are not quite
Speaker 1: what we think we want them to be. And as
Speaker 1: you know, oftentimes when you get things in life that
Speaker 1: you think you really want, you find out, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: just wish I'd spend more time with my kids, or
Speaker 1: my grandkids, or my brothers or my sisters or whomever,
Speaker 1: my best friends. I wish I had focused more on that.
Speaker 1: So much of I think what drives the leftist mindset
Speaker 1: as well is an obsession with the superficial. Yes, of course,
Speaker 1: in the context of the racial Marxism that we see,
Speaker 1: they're obsessed with skin color. Leftists are obsessed with it,
Speaker 1: but also with this idea that if only material circumstances
Speaker 1: changed a little bit for people, you know, if people
Speaker 1: if student loan debt was erased, let's say, you know,
Speaker 1: this is a big push by aoc oh, it would
Speaker 1: be life changing for the people. And I'm not saying
Speaker 1: there aren't things you can do literally help people, and
Speaker 1: that you know, being out of debt isn't a good thing.
Speaker 1: But if you're really looking at the macro perspective, if
Speaker 1: you're looking at what matters in life. I think the
Speaker 1: leftist has the wrong focus. I think the left has
Speaker 1: replaced God and a sense of the everlasting and our
Speaker 1: purpose on this earth with a devotion to the state
Speaker 1: and state authority and state power. And this has played
Speaker 1: out in other societies. This is not some crazy dream
Speaker 1: I've come up. But this is what you have in
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union before it collapsed, and to some degree
Speaker 1: it's still in Russia today. This is what you have
Speaker 1: in China today, the obsession with power and the elevation
Speaker 1: of material and superficial things over what is really our purpose?
Speaker 1: In what way do we matter in our day to
Speaker 1: day How does the left answer those questions? What by
Speaker 1: making sure that the state pays for gender affirmation surgery.
Speaker 1: That's really how we know that we've become a country
Speaker 1: with actual worth. That's how we know we've become a
Speaker 1: country where people have meaning in their day to day lives. Really,
Speaker 1: just pick an issue, oh, where a woman has a
Speaker 1: right to terminate or pregnancy at any point over the
Speaker 1: course of nine months of a pregnancy, any point for
Speaker 1: any reason. That's that's how we affirm, that's how we
Speaker 1: realize that we have purpose as human beings. No, I
Speaker 1: think the left, unfortunately, isn't just a corruption of politics.
Speaker 1: It's a corruption of the soul. And you see this
Speaker 1: with much of the rhetoric and the approach of the
Speaker 1: BLM movement. They are maligning law enforcement. They are maligning
Speaker 1: those who are making sacrifices day in and day out,
Speaker 1: who are taking risks, who are carrying a burden for
Speaker 1: the rest of society. And they do so to pander,
Speaker 1: They do so to fan the flames of resentment, to
Speaker 1: divide society. You know, what is the left's answer in
Speaker 1: what way do they want to build? Take more money
Speaker 1: from people, spend more money, but how do they build
Speaker 1: us as human beings, as a nation as Americans? Division?
Speaker 1: Always division, always anger, And it's just frustrating to see
Speaker 1: this as a person who wishes the best for this country.
Speaker 1: I mean, here's a perfect example what I'm talking about.
Speaker 1: This was on ABC News last night. To tweet from
Speaker 1: ABC News's official account, former President Barack Obama. Since George
Speaker 1: Floyd's death, quote, hundreds more Americans have died in encounters
Speaker 1: with police. Parents' sons, daughter's friends taken from us far
Speaker 1: too soon. End quote. Or he said, but the last
Speaker 1: year has also give us reasons to hope. Okay, so
Speaker 1: that's the full quote. All right? Are there hundreds of
Speaker 1: murders by police that have occurred that we don't know about?
Speaker 1: Why is the former president, you know, taking special time
Speaker 1: to mourn people who were killed by law enforcement when
Speaker 1: let's live in reality, a vast majority of those people
Speaker 1: were killed in justified shootings, meaning they were trying to
Speaker 1: kill somebody or in the act of committing a violent felony,
Speaker 1: often against a police officer, but sometimes against just the
Speaker 1: innocent bystanders. Why is Barack Obama focusing on this because
Speaker 1: you have to dig into it a little bit. Otherwise
Speaker 1: you just hear, yeah, cops kill the hundreds of more people.
Speaker 1: They're terrible. Cops are so racist. Barack Obama gross and
Speaker 1: reckless and misleading pandering, which is really an Obama specialty.
Speaker 1: If he thinks that police have committed hundreds of unpunished
Speaker 1: murders in the last year, he should say so instead
Speaker 1: of being an intellectual coward. That's part of why we
Speaker 1: want a bipartisan bill that is supported by most Americans.
Speaker 1: In this country. This country should be united behind police reform.
Speaker 1: This is not anti police, This is just pro people
Speaker 1: pro policing. This is about constitutional policing in the United
Speaker 1: States of American. That African Americans and other minorities should
Speaker 1: not be fearful of interactions with the police, and they
Speaker 1: should leave those interactions alive and able to go home
Speaker 1: to their families. And we think that that is a
Speaker 1: message that the entire country can get behind. And if
Speaker 1: the entire country is behind it, like we think they are,
Speaker 1: then we can make sure we pass this on a
Speaker 1: bipartisan basis and hurry up and get this done so
Speaker 1: that we can move this country forward and protect human life.
Speaker 1: How about this as a message for the whole country,
Speaker 1: a message for all of us. Don't commit violent felonies,
Speaker 1: don't resist arrest. And you have about as much reason
Speaker 1: to fear law enforcement statistically as you do being killed
Speaker 1: by a deer coming through your windshield while you're driving
Speaker 1: down the road. Not saying it never happens, but you
Speaker 1: know it's a few dozen people a year. Maybe don't
Speaker 1: don't do those don't commit a violent felony, Okay, which
Speaker 1: is a fair ask. I think of all of us
Speaker 1: no violent felonies. Don't resist arrest when the cops say
Speaker 1: you're under arrest. This would be good messaging. When the
Speaker 1: police say are under arrest, everyone in schools across the
Speaker 1: country should be told guys, when that happens, it's it's
Speaker 1: game over. Take it up in court, hands behind your back,
Speaker 1: be polite, don't say a word, get in the back
Speaker 1: of the car, go to the police precinct. If someone
Speaker 1: does that, I don't care what color they are or
Speaker 1: in anything else. If someone does that and a police
Speaker 1: officer then decides to man handle them, hurt them, abuse them,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm gonna be at the front of the line
Speaker 1: saying that officer needs to lose his badge and go
Speaker 1: to prison. We can't have that crap. But let's let's
Speaker 1: set some real standards here, because here's here's the reality
Speaker 1: of law enforcement in America today. All right. And I
Speaker 1: saw it up close as somebody who is you know,
Speaker 1: I was in the MYPD, but I was really a
Speaker 1: civilian counter terrorism expert. I was kind of almost like
Speaker 1: like an in house academic slash former or spy. I
Speaker 1: wasn't really a you know, I wasn't a cop, but
Speaker 1: I was with cops all day, and I was doing
Speaker 1: surveillance with them and out with them, and I saw
Speaker 1: law enforcement up close end personal. You know, it's like
Speaker 1: the equivalent of doing an eighteen month ride along. In
Speaker 1: many ways, our cops are good people. Our cops are
Speaker 1: doing a good job. And there's the reality is that
Speaker 1: some federal bill is not going to change the abernt
Speaker 1: events where you have a bad cop doing bad things.
Speaker 1: It's not gonna make any difference. We have all the
Speaker 1: laws on the books really that we need when it
Speaker 1: comes to you know, state and local law enforcement and
Speaker 1: the way that they're conducting themselves. I think our cops
Speaker 1: are good. You know. It's it's like if you're looking
Speaker 1: at if you're looking at a professional sports league, do
Speaker 1: we need a massive transformation of the rule book or
Speaker 1: is the league working out and the rules we have
Speaker 1: are good. It doesn't mean that there aren't sometimes people
Speaker 1: that need to be suspended or kicked out of the league.
Speaker 1: I think our cops are doing a good job, and
Speaker 1: in fact, they were doing a better job before BLM
Speaker 1: said they were doing a bad job. The violence needs
Speaker 1: to stop. It's unacceptable. People deserve to feel safe in
Speaker 1: their neighborhood. They deserve to be able to send their
Speaker 1: kids out to the sidewalk to play and to recreate
Speaker 1: without bullets flying by. That's unacceptable. We should be holding
Speaker 1: those perpetrators accountable, and it's going to take a very
Speaker 1: comprehensive effort. Yes, it includes safety beyond policing, and it
Speaker 1: includes police. And you know, I'm one that has been
Speaker 1: working lockstep with our chief are Adondo, and I'm calling
Speaker 1: on the council members to try to work with them
Speaker 1: as well. It's just the reality of the situation. You know,
Speaker 1: when you make big overarching statements that we're going to
Speaker 1: defund or abolish and dismantle the police department and get
Speaker 1: rid of all the officers, there's an impact to that,
Speaker 1: and there's an impact. Do we need massive change, Yes
Speaker 1: we do. We need accountability and culture shift within our department.
Speaker 1: End when your police walls don't work was the dumbest
Speaker 1: slogan the Democrats ever had. And then defund the police
Speaker 1: came along took the number one spot. That was Minneapolis
Speaker 1: Mayor Jacob Fry, who is admitting, I mean he's trying
Speaker 1: to soft pedal it a little bits. He's trying to
Speaker 1: downplay it but admitting that. Yet there's been a huge
Speaker 1: spiking crime in Minneapolis and it's a disaster and it
Speaker 1: is directly related to the defund the police narrative. Is
Speaker 1: this a surprise to anybody? Does anyone find this information
Speaker 1: out and go, oh, my gosh, You mean getting rid
Speaker 1: of law enforcement resources and personnel and undermining police in
Speaker 1: their jobs and making it harder for them to do
Speaker 1: their jobs. You mean that results in bad people doing
Speaker 1: bad things even more so. But wait a second. I
Speaker 1: thought by constantly be rating and maligning law enforcement, we
Speaker 1: were going to make our streets safer. I thought we'd
Speaker 1: make them safer if we're oh oh, nobody really thought that.
Speaker 1: But there are all these other things brought into the conversation.
Speaker 1: All these other ideas get mixed into this, and that's
Speaker 1: how you get to a place where defund the police
Speaker 1: is a mainstream chant because it's not about safety, it's
Speaker 1: about social justice. It's not about making sure that cops
Speaker 1: are accountable. It's creating a narrative of why there is
Speaker 1: crime in some communities that law enforcement seems unable to lower,
Speaker 1: That why there are some parts of the country where
Speaker 1: there's violence going on it has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: people making decisions in those communities. It is the cops fault,
Speaker 1: and that's very comforting for people's that's something that they
Speaker 1: want to hear. They'd rather believe that it's the cops
Speaker 1: than that it's the breakdown of families, otherlessness, drug abuse, victimology, narratives,
Speaker 1: any of these things through all over the country is
Speaker 1: true in any high crime community. It is a preferable
Speaker 1: thing for a lot of the activists, leftists and Democrats
Speaker 1: to hear that cops are the problem. This is a
Speaker 1: huge distraction and this is a this is a lie,
Speaker 1: but it's one that has gained mainstream traction all over
Speaker 1: the Democrat party. And everyone should be really really disgusted
Speaker 1: by this because this is not just something that happens
Speaker 1: that we can say, all right, you know, maybe the
Speaker 1: tax rate shouldn't have gone up, maybe maybe we slowed
Speaker 1: some economic growth a little bit with that tax increase.
Speaker 1: This is people getting shot and killed in greater numbers.
Speaker 1: This comes with real consequences for people who are relying
Speaker 1: on sound judgment, which is always a risky proposition from
Speaker 1: the elites and the people in power, and what they
Speaker 1: get in return, what they get in response is just
Speaker 1: utterly incompetent nonsense. I mean, the defund the police movement
Speaker 1: is is an abomination. It really is. It's a horrible idea.
Speaker 1: And you've got the mayor of Minneapolis who is straight
Speaker 1: up saying, yeah, maybe we've been a little too far
Speaker 1: with this. People should be embarrassed. They should there's there's
Speaker 1: shame attached to this. They there should be a real
Speaker 1: sense of, uh, you know, people, we should be indignant
Speaker 1: about it. It's so obvious, but we had to go
Speaker 1: through a year of this before all. It turns out
Speaker 1: if you, you know, get rid of cops and cut
Speaker 1: the budget, you know, things get worse. Of course they do.
Speaker 1: Some people know that this was the wrong move all along,
Speaker 1: and some states are taking action in the right direction
Speaker 1: all the moment. Tom is with places like Florida and Texas,
Speaker 1: red states with Republican governors. That's where it feels like
Speaker 1: good decisions, at least for large states, good decisions are
Speaker 1: being made. Blue states are just hemorrhaging people. They're a mess.
Speaker 1: Texas Governor Greg Abbott's out there just saying, look, we're
Speaker 1: gonna take action against cities at the state level. We
Speaker 1: will take action against cities that defund police. Play five. Well,
Speaker 1: the reason it's stronger is because, as you pointed out,
Speaker 1: I'm about to sign a law that will ensure that
Speaker 1: cities in the State of Texas will not be able
Speaker 1: to defund police. First, the context, and that is that
Speaker 1: you pointed out what's going on in Minneapolis or it
Speaker 1: is both a tragedy and a disaster. What's going on
Speaker 1: for the residents of Minneapolis because of the defunding of police.
Speaker 1: And you've seen the same thing and Portland and Seattle
Speaker 1: and Chicago and New York, etc. Harris, Unfortunately, we had
Speaker 1: the same thing happened here in the State of Texas
Speaker 1: where the city of Austin defunded police, which is why
Speaker 1: you saw that tragic situation reported in Austin, Texas, and
Speaker 1: because Austin defundi police. We wanted to do two things
Speaker 1: in this session. One, we wanted to make sure that
Speaker 1: there were going to be consequences for the city of Austin.
Speaker 1: The second is we wanted to make sure that no
Speaker 1: other city in the state of Texas would defund police.
Speaker 1: So here's what we're doing in the State of Texas
Speaker 1: to put teeth into this law that provides real consequences
Speaker 1: for cities that do defund the police. One, We're going
Speaker 1: to dry up their revenue sources in a way that
Speaker 1: basically will put the city out of business. What happens
Speaker 1: is a residency. We're going to defund the city, defund
Speaker 1: the city if they defund the police. This is the
Speaker 1: public safety measure. It's the kind of action that needs
Speaker 1: to be taken. This is what people should expect. Well,
Speaker 1: they should demand that this happens. I mean, I was
Speaker 1: in Austin some weeks ago, maybe about a month ago now,
Speaker 1: and I met with a member of the only Republican
Speaker 1: member of the Austin City Council and she walked me
Speaker 1: through it took me through city Hall in Austin and
Speaker 1: also talked to me all about the crime situation there
Speaker 1: and how things have gotten much worse and quality of
Speaker 1: life is going down. Vagrancy is going up, assaults going up,
Speaker 1: all kinds of criminal offenses on the rise. They cut
Speaker 1: the police budget over one hundred million dollars. Why should
Speaker 1: the police budget in Austin be cut over one hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars because one cop killed George Floyd in Minneapolis?
Speaker 1: I mean, can you imagine for a second, if we
Speaker 1: if the response after sometimes, for there'll be someone in
Speaker 1: the military who, over the course of fighting a war,
Speaker 1: they'll kill a civilian in a way that under UCMJ
Speaker 1: is a murder, and that will happen. Would anyone say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: there's one guy who snapped and kill the civilian while
Speaker 1: in uniform in the military, so let's defund the military.
Speaker 1: Now that that would be crazy. But it's very much
Speaker 1: what goes on here with the defund the police movement.
Speaker 1: So I'm happy to see Governor Abbott, Governor DeSantis, people
Speaker 1: that are in charge of large states making sure that
Speaker 1: that they're doing everything they can to just stamp out
Speaker 1: this nonsense. Just get rid of this craziness. It's just
Speaker 1: not I mean to say, it's not helpful, as is
Speaker 1: a real understatement. It's not sane, it's not reasonable. This
Speaker 1: was never a good idea, and we've already seen what
Speaker 1: it results. We've done the experiment. We shouldn't have had to,
Speaker 1: but we've done the experiment, we've seen the results, and
Speaker 1: they show us that defund the police, as I've said,
Speaker 1: is perhaps the dumbest Democrats slogan in living memory, and
Speaker 1: it's got a lot of competition. Well, I mean, I
Speaker 1: think that the party has been completely taken over, and
Speaker 1: I know that a lot of people had hoped that
Speaker 1: once Trump had left Washington that maybe they would get
Speaker 1: their party back. Clearly that is not the case. And
Speaker 1: so there's only a couple of directions to go here.
Speaker 1: Either the party is reformed or a new party is created.
Speaker 1: And so we will see. But the impact as long
Speaker 1: as you have a network that continues to be the
Speaker 1: mouthpiece that continues to spread just tremendous lies about everything
Speaker 1: under the sun. I mean, people still believing that the
Speaker 1: election was stolen, people still trying to investigate the election.
Speaker 1: So with all of that going on, it doesn't surprise me.
Speaker 1: But joy one thing that's different now since January sixth
Speaker 1: my Republican colleagues who know better, but they are still
Speaker 1: beholden because they are afraid. In the past, they were
Speaker 1: afraid of a primary opponent. Now they're afraid for their
Speaker 1: se and that's a profound change. That's very frightening. Oh
Speaker 1: that's right. Let's take advice from a left wing member
Speaker 1: of Congress on what's going well, or let's take the
Speaker 1: analysis of a left wing member of Congress on what's
Speaker 1: happening within the GOOP now, because she really wants what's
Speaker 1: best for the GOP, as I'm sure you already know,
Speaker 1: she really wants to see a Republican party that's united
Speaker 1: and strong and sure all that you know, this is
Speaker 1: now the focus on the deficiencies of the GOP, whether
Speaker 1: it's the GOP voter or GEOPE politicians. This is going
Speaker 1: to become a deafeningly loud narrative from the corporate Democrat
Speaker 1: media because Biden is a loser and the Democrats are
Speaker 1: a disaster at governing. We all see it. They're not
Speaker 1: good at this. Their ideas are bad. And so what
Speaker 1: is their response you'll get from the people in charge?
Speaker 1: You think they'll have introspection and self correction or will
Speaker 1: they just double down on all the things that haven't
Speaker 1: worked before, either in recent or distant memory, and find
Speaker 1: a way to make this about the insurrection on January sixth,
Speaker 1: Oh the insurrection. Yeah, it was the most terrifying thing
Speaker 1: to happen in this country since the Civil War. I mean,
Speaker 1: this stuff that's being said about it is appalling. But
Speaker 1: they're okay, So now there's the insurrection. These are the
Speaker 1: primary Democrat talking points, the insurrection, the threat of white
Speaker 1: nationalist terrorism. Right, there's all these things they say, But
Speaker 1: there's also the oh, GOP members don't accept the results
Speaker 1: of the election. They don't accept the results of the election.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, what are we gonna do? Meanwhile, Biden's president.
Speaker 1: You know, every the country's marching on, but they act
Speaker 1: like there's some huge deal. Smarmy, you know, smarmy O'Donnell
Speaker 1: over at MSNBC. He's he's getting all high and mighty
Speaker 1: on this one. I just want to give a important
Speaker 1: context to what this claim is. But this is being
Speaker 1: made all over the place by leftists that they that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump supporters think that he won and that's so
Speaker 1: crazy and destabilizes our democracy and all this sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: Here's that jerk O'Donnell play fourteen. Well, they definitely are
Speaker 1: in sync with the Trump vote. We have a new
Speaker 1: poll showing that fifty three percent of Republicans fifty three
Speaker 1: believe that Donald Trump is the true president. So that
Speaker 1: means fifty three percent of Republicans fail a basic mental
Speaker 1: competency test question, who is the president of the United
Speaker 1: States the true president? What they mean by what people
Speaker 1: are saying is they think that Biden gained the system
Speaker 1: and that there was malfees into the last election. They
Speaker 1: don't think that Donald Trump is actually in the White
Speaker 1: House right now running things. So I mean, either the
Speaker 1: way the way he frames this I think is absurd,
Speaker 1: But beyond that, Democrats spent four years while Trump was
Speaker 1: president pretending Hillary won the election and not just in
Speaker 1: you know, it wasn't just something that they told themselves
Speaker 1: so they'd feel better about supporting Woa like the worst
Speaker 1: human being ever to be in American politics in the
Speaker 1: in the post World War two era, Hilary Clinton. I mean,
Speaker 1: they were trying to make it seem like that was
Speaker 1: a normal thing. And beyond that, they got a special counsel.
Speaker 1: They took serious legal action based upon this lie that
Speaker 1: there was Russia collusion, which was I'll never forget when
Speaker 1: President Trump told me, he actually told me this in
Speaker 1: the Oval office. He's like, Russia collusion, It's such a
Speaker 1: stupid idea. It's such a dumb thing to do. Even
Speaker 1: if somebody was willing to do it, which Donald Trump
Speaker 1: was not, it wouldn't even make any sense. You're gonna
Speaker 1: work with the Russians to hack in to the DNC
Speaker 1: server so that then they can release information about how
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders was being treated badly by the DNC and
Speaker 1: expect that to throw the election. Of course, Bernie said,
Speaker 1: we all knew Bernie Sanders was getting the rough stuff
Speaker 1: from the DNC. We all knew that that was what happened.
Speaker 1: It wasn't some big surprise. It was just proved it.
Speaker 1: But Hillary was still running. There wasn't. There wasn't some
Speaker 1: you know, smoking gun moment where oh, I don't know.
Speaker 1: In fact, Hillary was completely caught breaking the law many
Speaker 1: times over with her email sending classified over an unclassified server,
Speaker 1: doing all kinds of really bad stuff and was bailed
Speaker 1: out by the system because the system believes she's one
Speaker 1: of theirs, and this system thought that she was gonna win,
Speaker 1: so they don't want to be on the wrong side
Speaker 1: of her either. But they spend four years pretending that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump was an illegitimate president. And what they won't
Speaker 1: do is understand that now for a lot of people, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe they maybe they're not sure about some
Speaker 1: of these election claims. Maybe maybe they're you know, they
Speaker 1: don't they're still waiting to see some of the evidence
Speaker 1: or whatever, but they'll say that because what's fair is fair.
Speaker 1: You wouldn't accept ours, We won't accept yours. That's the
Speaker 1: attitude I understand. That's how people feel about this. You know,
Speaker 1: you wouldn't accept Donald Trump's legitimacy. Well, a lot of
Speaker 1: Trump voters saying they don't accept Joe Biden's legitimacy. It's
Speaker 1: you know, reciprocity here, it's a it's a reprisal belief
Speaker 1: in many ways, and it's just fun. I'm sure in
Speaker 1: these polls to tell some polster you know who, then
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, they're they're threatening our sacred democracy with
Speaker 1: their ideas, you know, all that stuff. So that's something
Speaker 1: you know, we could be focused on. The Democrats could
Speaker 1: be focused on real problems, like spending too much money, inflation.
Speaker 1: Here's say Senator Roy Blunt on how folks, this is
Speaker 1: gonna this is not gonna end? Well, play fifteen. If
Speaker 1: we spend seven point one trillion dollars, that adds fifty
Speaker 1: six thousand dollars for every American family to the national debt.
Speaker 1: Every American family can do a lot with fifty six
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. They could send somebody to a public institution
Speaker 1: of higher learning for about five years for fifty six
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. They could make a lot of house payments
Speaker 1: for fifty six thousand dollars. That's how much seven point
Speaker 1: one trillion dollars would add to the balance sheet for
Speaker 1: every single family in America. We've got to get reasonable
Speaker 1: and real about spending or inflation will be a problem.
Speaker 1: Government stability will be a problem, the dollar will be
Speaker 1: a problem. And we don't want any of those things
Speaker 1: to happen. We don't. But Democrats don't look into the
Speaker 1: future and deal with reality. They see this as they're
Speaker 1: in charge. They've got power, They're going to spend your money.
Speaker 1: If you've got a problem with that, they're feeling is
Speaker 1: too bad tough for you, not something that's going to
Speaker 1: slow them down one bit. And I just worry. This
Speaker 1: is another instance where we're going to We're going to
Speaker 1: find that we have to suffer the consequences. We have
Speaker 1: to learn the hard way because Democrats refuse to learn
Speaker 1: the easy way, which is through the application of logic, reason,
Speaker 1: a knowledge of history. No, forget all that stuff what
Speaker 1: feels right now, like what's best for them, that is
Speaker 1: the Democrat mantra of governance. That's what they're going to
Speaker 1: keep doing. There are a lot of VPN providers out there.
Speaker 1: You've probably heard of a couple of them, and maybe
Speaker 1: you've even used a VPN before. But I'm really into
Speaker 1: doing my research on my sponsors and on all the
Speaker 1: companies I'm going to use. I only recommend brands to
Speaker 1: my listeners that I use and believe in. I can
Speaker 1: say with full confidence that Express vpn is simply the
Speaker 1: best VPN on the market. Here's why Express vpn doesn't
Speaker 1: log your data. Lots of really cheaper, free VPNs make
Speaker 1: money by selling your data to ad companies, and Express
Speaker 1: vpn developed a technology called Trusted Server that makes it
Speaker 1: impossible for their servers to log any of your info.
Speaker 1: Then you've got speed, another really important factor here. I've
Speaker 1: tried a lot of VPNs in the past. A lot
Speaker 1: of them will slow down your connection, make your device sluggish.
Speaker 1: But with Express vpn for months now I've been using it,
Speaker 1: my internet speeds are perfect. The last thing that really
Speaker 1: sets Express VPN apart from other VPNs how easy it
Speaker 1: is to use. You don't have to input into a
Speaker 1: program or anything. You just fire up the app, click
Speaker 1: one button to connect. It's so easy even your grandparents
Speaker 1: could use it. Or if you're a grandparent, you can
Speaker 1: use it. Trust me, this is a VPN for you.
Speaker 1: Protect yourself with a virtual private network that I use
Speaker 1: and trust. This encrypts your data on your device and
Speaker 1: prevent spying from big tech by hiding your IP address.
Speaker 1: That's what a VPN does. You need this Express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. Go to that website now Express
Speaker 1: vpn dot com slashbuck and on a one year package
Speaker 1: you'll get an extra three months free Express vpn dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck. That's Express vpn dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: What should the US government do in response to the
Speaker 1: most recent revelations about the origins of the Wuhan coronavirus
Speaker 1: and much more? Also, what's going on with the latest
Speaker 1: in terms of border policy and the second order effects
Speaker 1: of it that go far beyond the actual border and
Speaker 1: border zone itself. We're joined now by Senator Marsha Blackburn
Speaker 1: from Tennessee to talk about this. Senator Blackburn, thanks thanks
Speaker 1: for being with us. I'm delighted to be wishy, thank
Speaker 1: you for having me on. What are your biggest takeaways
Speaker 1: a member of the US Senate who now is going
Speaker 1: to be looking at the issue of US funding through
Speaker 1: a subgrant that doctor Fauci has admitted occurred. Money went
Speaker 1: from taxpayers funneling through a third party to the Wuhan
Speaker 1: Lab doing research into bat viruses. We also know that
Speaker 1: Fauci has flip flopped on a number of issues and
Speaker 1: people are calling for some accountability here. What do you
Speaker 1: think should happen and do you believe that there's a
Speaker 1: role for the Senate to play? Well? I do think
Speaker 1: that there is a very important role for the Senate
Speaker 1: to play because we are responsible for this oversight and
Speaker 1: when you look at the money that when into various
Speaker 1: groups that were funding at this research, and when you
Speaker 1: he will not answer the question as to whether or
Speaker 1: not there with participation in gain a function research and
Speaker 1: if that was funded during the time of the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: This is something that we do need to review. What
Speaker 1: we do know is that during Secretary Pompeio's time at
Speaker 1: the Department of State that our diplomatic scientists had expressed
Speaker 1: concerns about what was happening at the Wuhan Lab. So
Speaker 1: it is time for doctor Fauci to actually, you know,
Speaker 1: tell us what he's what he knows, and it is
Speaker 1: time that we began a series of investigations. If the
Speaker 1: President is going to shut down the State Department's investigation
Speaker 1: into the Wuhan lab, it's going to depend on those
Speaker 1: of us in Congress to pick that up and figure
Speaker 1: out exactly what happened. We know that over a series
Speaker 1: of decades, China took our jobs, moved our manufacturing to China,
Speaker 1: encourage US companies to become reliant on then and then
Speaker 1: what did they do? They sent us this virus, so
Speaker 1: finding out how it started, knowing if it did indeed
Speaker 1: escape from the lab through gain a function research that
Speaker 1: they were doing at that lab, this is a question
Speaker 1: that needs to be answered. We also know that the
Speaker 1: as you mentioned that the Biden administration, there's a report
Speaker 1: out that they may have shut down or that the
Speaker 1: Biden administration came in and said that State Department officials
Speaker 1: who are trying to look into and collect information about
Speaker 1: what happened with the origins of the Wuhan coronavirus, that
Speaker 1: Biden said no more, that they cut this off. Well,
Speaker 1: what possible reason, Senator, could they have for doing that.
Speaker 1: Aren't we all supposed to be on the same page
Speaker 1: about getting to the truth about what happened with the
Speaker 1: origins of this virus. We should all be on the
Speaker 1: same page. You can't prevent something like this from happening
Speaker 1: again if you don't know how it happened in the
Speaker 1: first place. So it is only something that would embold
Speaker 1: in China. But look at Joe Biden's policy. He wants
Speaker 1: to go to green energy. Okay, well, who makes solar panels? China?
Speaker 1: Who makes wind turbines China, Who makes the batteries for
Speaker 1: electric cars? China? Who is it that is cornering the
Speaker 1: market when it comes to manufacturing antibiotic and active pharmaceutical
Speaker 1: ingredients that are necessary for vaccine? There again, that is China.
Speaker 1: And what President Biden has done with his decisions is
Speaker 1: to make decisions that are going to encourage China and
Speaker 1: then decisions that are not going to bolster US manufacturing,
Speaker 1: US research, US sovereignty. Look at the border, US protecting
Speaker 1: US citizens. Look at what happened with COVID nineteen, So
Speaker 1: the priority should be protecting this country. We're speaking of
Speaker 1: Senator Marcia Blackburn of Tennessee Senator, I want to ask
Speaker 1: about something going on in your home state. There reports
Speaker 1: the Biden administration is flying illegal alien children into Tennessee,
Speaker 1: often in the middle of the night. It seems like
Speaker 1: they're trying to keep a very low profile on this
Speaker 1: without any involvement or knowledge of the community elected officials
Speaker 1: like the governor. You, as a senator for Tennessee, what
Speaker 1: can you tell us about this? And does AJHS have
Speaker 1: answers for you. HHS does not have answers. Indeed, they
Speaker 1: are avoiding answers. And in addition to the four Plaims
Speaker 1: that landed at Wilson Air in the middle of the night,
Speaker 1: we talked to a Tennessee and who has He was
Speaker 1: on a flight from Dallas to Chattanooga that ended up
Speaker 1: landing at about one o'clock in the morning, and there
Speaker 1: was a chaffrone for I think ten to fifteen children
Speaker 1: that were not US speaking children, They were migrant children.
Speaker 1: This individual talked to the chafferone they were going to
Speaker 1: Chattanooga to go to be housed in a facility. They
Speaker 1: had new backpacks, clothes, iPhones. So this is taxpayer dollars
Speaker 1: that are being used to help the cartels finish the
Speaker 1: job that they are doing to keep to get these
Speaker 1: migrants into the country and to position them, whether it
Speaker 1: is in a shelter or sending them to a sponsor,
Speaker 1: which many times the sponsor, so called sponsor they're going to,
Speaker 1: is affiliated with a labor work crew or an MS
Speaker 1: thirteen gang, or a drug ring or a sex trafficking organization.
Speaker 1: Senator Blackbird, I know you've introduced a bill recently that
Speaker 1: would try to deal with the border crisis which keeps
Speaker 1: its ongoing and actually worsening. Everyone that I've talked to
Speaker 1: down there, and I recently was at the border myself,
Speaker 1: no one thinks that this has been dealt with effectively.
Speaker 1: Really hasn't been dealt with at all by the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris, the Vice President, and borders are has still
Speaker 1: as I speak, you yet to go down there. Can
Speaker 1: you tell us about your effort to in state migrant
Speaker 1: protection protocols here? Yes, the migrant Protection protocols, This is
Speaker 1: basically President Trump's remain in Mexico policy, and I have
Speaker 1: turned that into legislation that we are seeking co sponsors
Speaker 1: for in the Senate. We are trying to push this forward.
Speaker 1: The border Patrol regularly talks about how effective that policy
Speaker 1: was because if you had people coming to the southern
Speaker 1: border and they wanted to apply for asylum, they had
Speaker 1: to remain either in their home country or in Mexico
Speaker 1: until the time of that asylum hearing. Some people were
Speaker 1: granted asylum, some were sent back to their home country
Speaker 1: because the claims were not valid. Now, the Biden administration
Speaker 1: did away with that policy, and what they have done
Speaker 1: since Joe Biden was sworn in, they have had over
Speaker 1: a half million, over a half million illegal aliens approached
Speaker 1: the border to claim asylum. So thereby they are having
Speaker 1: to process them, which is catch and then release them
Speaker 1: into the country the release part of catch and release,
Speaker 1: and then at some point in the future, maybe a
Speaker 1: year or two years, three years, they will have an
Speaker 1: asylum hearing. So this is what this is a big
Speaker 1: part of what is wrong with that process, and reinstating
Speaker 1: those protocols would be a tremendous help to our border patrol.
Speaker 1: Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: joining us. We appreciate you being here. We'll talk to
Speaker 1: you soon. Thank you, bye bye. Well, listen, they're talking
Speaker 1: about it's a time for choosing. The American people have
Speaker 1: already chosen, and they showed up in unbelievable volumes that said,
Speaker 1: what we want is a president who will keep America first.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is America last. We don't have to look
Speaker 1: any further than the cancelation of the Keystone Pipeline. And
Speaker 1: then what do they do for Russia? They take off
Speaker 1: the sanctions so that they can finish their pipeline. We
Speaker 1: see surprisingly today that the Palestinians actually referred to Secretary
Speaker 1: Blincoln as Secretary Clinton. Well, that's because they're reverting back
Speaker 1: to a Clinton way of doing business. And what did
Speaker 1: they get. What did the Biden administration do two thousand
Speaker 1: rockets into Israel? And what did they get in return?
Speaker 1: They get all kinds of concessions from the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: That's not leadership. It's time that we can revert back
Speaker 1: to what works, and that is peace through strength, a
Speaker 1: oldness that President Donald Trump brought to the American people. Now,
Speaker 1: that's not what Democrats want to do. Democrats would much
Speaker 1: rather do what we would all expect them to do,
Speaker 1: which is reward bad behavior, bend the knee to our enemies.
Speaker 1: Just just essentially do everything in their power to make
Speaker 1: life as as difficult as possible for the bulk of
Speaker 1: the American people while going around the world and trying
Speaker 1: to buy off play kate and assist even palettes of
Speaker 1: cash delivered sometimes some of the worst actors on the
Speaker 1: global stage. There, he had former White House Cheep of
Speaker 1: Staff Mark Meadows this saying, look, Biden takes an America
Speaker 1: Last approach, and that's true that the Democrats have deeply
Speaker 1: internalized a philosophy of America is a problem and America
Speaker 1: needs to pay the price for that that we have
Speaker 1: historically and to this day oppressed other people's all over
Speaker 1: the world, that we've caused instability and misery and our
Speaker 1: imperial power. I mean, this is they don't talk about
Speaker 1: a lot of the Democrat Party, but this is well,
Speaker 1: they do in some places, but this is internalized. They
Speaker 1: believe this stuff. They think the greatness of America is exaggerated,
Speaker 1: even jingoistic to talk about. Here's a Secretary of State
Speaker 1: b Lincoln who's just saying, you know, okay, well, now
Speaker 1: we're about to write a check. The American people are
Speaker 1: writing to give three hundred and sixty million dollars to
Speaker 1: the Palestinian people. Play nine. We're also working in partnership
Speaker 1: with the United Nations, the international Community, the Palestinian Authority,
Speaker 1: the Palestinian people, the Government of Israel to assist in
Speaker 1: the relief and recovery efforts in Gods. This relief is urgent.
Speaker 1: We have to respond to the profound need to help
Speaker 1: people in this moment. To that end, I informed President
Speaker 1: of Boss and earlier Prime Minister Nyago that the United
Speaker 1: States will notify Congress of our intention to provide seventy
Speaker 1: five million dollars an additional development and economic assistance for
Speaker 1: the Palestinians in twenty twenty one. Will also provide five
Speaker 1: and a half million dollars an immediate disaster assistance for
Speaker 1: Gaza and a little over thirty two million dollars for
Speaker 1: US emergency humanitarian appeal. This new assistance comes on top
Speaker 1: of significant support that the United States has recently committed
Speaker 1: and resumed to the Palestinian Authority, Palestinians to different different
Speaker 1: agencies in groups. In total, we are in the process
Speaker 1: of providing more than three hundred and sixty million dollars
Speaker 1: in urgent support for the Palestinian people. Three hundred and
Speaker 1: sixty million dollars. Now, I understand when you're a government
Speaker 1: as ours is right now with Biden running things, that's
Speaker 1: talking about spending trillions of dollars. Three hundred sixty million
Speaker 1: dollars doesn't seem like that much money. But I also
Speaker 1: have to ask a question here, why is Gaza America's problem? Now?
Speaker 1: You could ask this about a lot of foreign policy
Speaker 1: situations all over the world, but why is Gaza our problem?
Speaker 1: I think it's fair to ask this. There are a
Speaker 1: lot of countries in the region. There are a lot
Speaker 1: of very wealthy Muslim majority countries in the Middle East.
Speaker 1: There's of course our European friends and allies. And you know,
Speaker 1: there's a very wealthy countries like Japan and China. Why
Speaker 1: is Gaza our problem? Now? Look, I feel I feel
Speaker 1: sympathy for any human being who is suffering through no
Speaker 1: fault of their own. I feel sympathy for the Palestinian
Speaker 1: families that have lost you know, housing because of Israeli
Speaker 1: air strikes, or people who have lost family members, as
Speaker 1: as as collateral damage in these air strikes, which I
Speaker 1: do understand that phrase. You know, collateral damage is easy
Speaker 1: to say when it's not your family, and I understand that,
Speaker 1: I fully admit that, and um, but it was an
Speaker 1: unintentional killing. You could say that unintentional loss of life
Speaker 1: on the part of the Israeli strikes. But why is
Speaker 1: this something that America and the Biden administration leads leaps
Speaker 1: into with this we have to we have to send
Speaker 1: them three hundred and sixty million dollars. I mean, that's money.
Speaker 1: The federal government is taking the money, the productivity of
Speaker 1: the American people to write these checks. And it's not
Speaker 1: clear at all to me as to what, First of all,
Speaker 1: what will this even accomplish in Gaza. I'd want to know.
Speaker 1: I'd want to see. We've been I mean, Gaza as
Speaker 1: a place has been receiving international aid for years and
Speaker 1: years and years, and it never really seems to get
Speaker 1: much better. They have hum Moss as the elected government,
Speaker 1: which is terrifying. But there's so much wrong thing from
Speaker 1: Democrats on foreign policy. They approach it all. It's it's
Speaker 1: like they're trying to do the wrong thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: here's the Secretary of State again on the Iran nuclear deal,
Speaker 1: which they want to rejoin. Play eight to run you No,
Speaker 1: I think the most important thing when it comes to
Speaker 1: when it comes to this, is what we committed to
Speaker 1: do from day one of this administration. Well, we've said
Speaker 1: along that if there was an opportunity, we would seek
Speaker 1: to return to usual compliance with the JCPOA. But we
Speaker 1: also said that from day one we would be keeping
Speaker 1: our closest allies and the closest partners fully and contemporaneously
Speaker 1: informed of what we were doing and where we're going.
Speaker 1: And that's what we've done, and that's what we'll continue
Speaker 1: to do. That is how you keep faith with your
Speaker 1: partners and allies on some thing that, of course is
Speaker 1: of great consequenced Israel. Uh, we understand that. And again
Speaker 1: we have the same objective. And let's see where where
Speaker 1: things going the next in the next few weeks. But
Speaker 1: I can again tell you that we are fully fully
Speaker 1: engaged with our with our partners here in at least
Speaker 1: making sure that they're fully informed of what we're doing. Man,
Speaker 1: this guy is poring, Isn't he sorry about that? Listening
Speaker 1: to the current Secretary of State, Buddy, the Biden administration
Speaker 1: foreign policy, it's just going to be a continuation of
Speaker 1: Obama's eight years of foreign policy, which we're really an
Speaker 1: unmitigated disaster. So that's what's coming your way America. With
Speaker 1: Memorial Day weekend ahead, flag season is officially upon us.
Speaker 1: I've been telling you about our friends at Allegiance Flag Supply,
Speaker 1: a great American small business story whose founders started the
Speaker 1: company because they were tired of buying American flags that
Speaker 1: got tangled or worn out so quickly, and believe strongly
Speaker 1: that the American flag should be made here in America.
Speaker 1: You might be saying to yourself, a flag is a flag, buck,
Speaker 1: isn't it No? No No, my friends, if you've had an
Speaker 1: American flag in the past out in front of your house,
Speaker 1: or you know somebody who has, you've seen the constant
Speaker 1: tangling around poles or the quick deterioration because of wind, rain, sun.
Speaker 1: This is where American flags from Allegiance Flag Supply really
Speaker 1: stand out. Their flags are made from top quality nylon,
Speaker 1: a material that's strong and durable but lightweight enough to
Speaker 1: fly nicely in a breeze. The flags are also made
Speaker 1: with mold resistant material and crafted using double needle locks stitching.
Speaker 1: In addition, when you buy their flag set, you receive
Speaker 1: their non tangle flag pole spinners that ensure your flag
Speaker 1: will spin around the pole. No more tangled flags. Allegiance
Speaker 1: Flag Supply brings the respect to the manufacturing process that
Speaker 1: the American flag deserves, and you can experience it's the
Speaker 1: high quality of this craftsmanship in front of your own
Speaker 1: home by going to show Allegiance dot com and enter
Speaker 1: promo code buck for ten percent off your order. Again,
Speaker 1: summer and flag season are upon us. Go to this website.
Speaker 1: Now get a flag everybody this time, come on this
Speaker 1: time a year, this time in America. Show Allegiance dot Com.
Speaker 1: Enter promo code buck. That's essential. Make sure you enter
Speaker 1: that promo code buck for ten percent off your order
Speaker 1: and get yours in time for Flag Day on June
Speaker 1: fourteenth that show Allegiance dot Com. Enter promo code buck
Speaker 1: for ten percent off. Reckoning with the Aftermath of George
Speaker 1: Floyd looking at the pathologically soft and tender America that
Speaker 1: countenanced last summer's riots, and this has yet to materialize.
Speaker 1: We will join our friend here, Pedro Gonzalez, who's the
Speaker 1: author of this piece at American Greatness American great am
Speaker 1: Greatness dot com. Reckoning with the Aftermath of George Floyd.
Speaker 1: This week obviously was the anniversary of George Floyd's death, Pedro,
Speaker 1: thanks for being with us, Hey Buck always going to
Speaker 1: be here. So you went through this in substantial detail
Speaker 1: in your in your piece, What is the takeaway that
Speaker 1: you think America should have now that we are one
Speaker 1: year into the post George Floyd movement era or the
Speaker 1: the the movement era, I should say, of of George Floyd. Right, Well,
Speaker 1: the left thinks that we didn't go far enough. That's
Speaker 1: that was what CNN's John Blake wrote on the anniversary
Speaker 1: of Floyd's stats was that we didn't have our racial reckoning,
Speaker 1: that that we had a missopportunity. Either it was a
Speaker 1: missopportunity or a false start. But basically, after everything that
Speaker 1: happened last year, we're still back at square one. As
Speaker 1: far as people like Blake and many other leftists agree,
Speaker 1: this is I think this is actually the general consensus
Speaker 1: is like, there's still so much work to do and
Speaker 1: last year was either the beginning or, like I said,
Speaker 1: a kind of false start. And I think conservatives are
Speaker 1: in this weird place where the GOP's official stance is
Speaker 1: basically like, yeah, a lot of the basic arguments of
Speaker 1: like systemic racism are true. So that's why we've made
Speaker 1: Tim Scott our figurehead, and that's why the GOP is
Speaker 1: committed to criminal just reform because we basically agree. I mean,
Speaker 1: we don't agree on all the you know, on all
Speaker 1: the details, but we yeah, okay, okay, America is bad,
Speaker 1: but it's better now, and you know, we're going to
Speaker 1: show you it's better by basically also going all in
Speaker 1: on on criminal just reform. So and of course, like
Speaker 1: everyday Americans, who I think are in many cases conservative
Speaker 1: and their sensibilities, disagree with that because they're the ones
Speaker 1: that lived through the riots on the street level and
Speaker 1: saw businesses get destroyed, at homes get vandalized, and friends, family,
Speaker 1: and police officers get injured, maimed and even killed. So
Speaker 1: in a way I actually agree with Blake. We haven't
Speaker 1: had a reckoning. It's just not the one that he wants,
Speaker 1: but America needs well. I think in your you're raising
Speaker 1: here that there's there are there are fundamental lies that
Speaker 1: are at the heart of the of the BLM movement.
Speaker 1: For example, the narrative is zag and it's not that
Speaker 1: easy to explain without getting into some specifics, but that
Speaker 1: that young, unarmed black men are systemically in large numbers
Speaker 1: killed by police without legal justification and without punishment for
Speaker 1: the officer, which is which is central to the belief
Speaker 1: of BLM. This is a lie and this is just
Speaker 1: not true. That's not the same thing as saying it
Speaker 1: never happens. But to suggest that this is an urgent
Speaker 1: national problem, I mean the urgent problem is the enormous
Speaker 1: increase in homicides. But quite honestly, the homicide rates in
Speaker 1: places like Chicago and Saint Louis and Memphis and New
Speaker 1: Orleans and Baltimore was far too high before the BLM
Speaker 1: homicide spike. And yes, these are in predominantly minority black
Speaker 1: and brown neighborhoods where a lot of these shootings are occurring,
Speaker 1: which means that they're suffering from them more. That is
Speaker 1: the reality of what's going on in America. But that
Speaker 1: is not what we're talking about. It. It's still if
Speaker 1: you brought up center to Tim Scott, if we pass
Speaker 1: some law, this is going to change what is supposed
Speaker 1: to change here. No cop is ever going to be
Speaker 1: an e lethal force situation and perhaps make the wrong
Speaker 1: decision or use excessive force. That's never gonna happen. Right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: you've already lost if that's your position. No, we'll pass
Speaker 1: a law and fixes it's you've already you've actually already
Speaker 1: given up the most important issue here. But when you
Speaker 1: look at things retrospectively, how has the country changed. Well,
Speaker 1: violent crime has soared because police have retreated from policing
Speaker 1: violent crime, especially in inner cities. So you know that
Speaker 1: was a huge backfire. But of course it's not true
Speaker 1: that they're completity policing, because it also seems to be
Speaker 1: the case that not just law enforcement, but also the
Speaker 1: military and the intelligence community, after last year's devastating riots,
Speaker 1: their principal targets now are This is not hyperbole. It's
Speaker 1: like Trump supporters and people who are identifiably conservative. You
Speaker 1: can find examples of There's a guy named Bishop Garrison
Speaker 1: who is in charge of the Pentagon's who's overseeing a
Speaker 1: lot of the Pentagon's project to ferret out extremism. This
Speaker 1: is a guy who thinks that white supremacy is a
Speaker 1: nation ending threat, and he connects his explicit support for
Speaker 1: the sixteen nineteen project to his work at the Department
Speaker 1: of Defense, And like, that's the guy that's overseeing the
Speaker 1: military's anti extremism efforts. How do you think that's going
Speaker 1: to go? And I mean you're seeing the same with
Speaker 1: police departments. There's an instance that I wrote about with
Speaker 1: Jonathan Petland where basically cobs served. You know, they're happy
Speaker 1: to enforce like pandemic measures, and they're also happy to
Speaker 1: politicize these confrontations between civilians and criminals, especially if they're black.
Speaker 1: But what about violent crime, you know, things that actually matter.
Speaker 1: They're retreating from that. So there's basically the country has
Speaker 1: changed in a really bad way. And on top of that,
Speaker 1: obviously like all these small businesses were destroyed, and who
Speaker 1: did that benefit? It benefited the people like Jeff Bezos
Speaker 1: and these huge corporations right that were also in a
Speaker 1: lot of ways materially and morally supporting the riots. So
Speaker 1: that the country has changed in a fundamental and awful way.
Speaker 1: And I think that when you just give a cursory
Speaker 1: examination to the events last year, it's it's absolutely horrific,
Speaker 1: and it's mind boggling that we don't even talk about it.
Speaker 1: There was one instance that everyone seems to have forgotten
Speaker 1: about where a police officer in Vegas was shot in
Speaker 1: the head while trying to while dealing with the BLM rights.
Speaker 1: He's not paralyzed from the neck down and is on
Speaker 1: twenty four hour respirators support and basically his life has
Speaker 1: changed forever. No one seems to care about that. And
Speaker 1: that's just one example. You know, you had security contractors
Speaker 1: killed and a security contractor killed in California. You had
Speaker 1: a retired police captain killed the Missouri and you had
Speaker 1: not to mention all the people that were injured and maimed, Like,
Speaker 1: why doesn't anyone care about this? Speaking of Pedro Gonzalez,
Speaker 1: he's a senior writer at American Greatness. He has a
Speaker 1: piece at am greatness dot com reckoning with the aftermath
Speaker 1: of George Floyd. You know, Pedro to that point. Earlier
Speaker 1: this week there was a live news shot at at
Speaker 1: George Floyd's square. And I do, I do think there's something.
Speaker 1: I think there's something really really grow morally grotesque about
Speaker 1: elevating this man as as a hero, certainly as a martyr,
Speaker 1: but really as a hero. I mean there are murals
Speaker 1: of him in Europe as if that has you know,
Speaker 1: as if their situation is the same as ours when
Speaker 1: it comes to law enforcement, their history, whatever, whatever, we're
Speaker 1: talking about. I mean, this is a man who was
Speaker 1: who was a had a long criminal history. This is
Speaker 1: somebody who, during a home invasion this is all a
Speaker 1: matter of public record, pointed a loaded firearm at the
Speaker 1: belly of a pregnant women who he was robbing. And
Speaker 1: this is somebody whose face is now in murals as
Speaker 1: though he's some kind of a saint. And at the
Speaker 1: live shot at the George Floyd Memorial, gunfire was ringed.
Speaker 1: This happened on live TV. Gunfire bam, bam bam, shots
Speaker 1: just ringing out. You would think that there would be
Speaker 1: some embarrassment that this is what happens at a at
Speaker 1: a seemingly holy sight to the left. But no, not
Speaker 1: at all. But by the way, the gunfire wasn't from cops, folks,
Speaker 1: in case you know anyone was curious. Yeah, no, it's
Speaker 1: it's crazy, But no, there is no shame, there's no
Speaker 1: contradiction in these things. They don't care. And if anything,
Speaker 1: it's somehow attributable to white people and white supremacy. I
Speaker 1: mean ultimately that this this all goes back to that,
Speaker 1: and I think that's the really pernicious thing is we
Speaker 1: have not reckoned with the theoretical justification of all these things,
Speaker 1: which is that even when there's violence in inner cities
Speaker 1: or shooting at the at the the Floyd Square, it
Speaker 1: all somehow can be reduced to a symptom of white supremacy.
Speaker 1: That's what you're actually seeing, and that the violence and
Speaker 1: the criminality these are not causes but symptoms of a
Speaker 1: basically what the sixteen nineteen Project has said about America,
Speaker 1: that America is fundamentally bad and evil, and you're not
Speaker 1: allowed to point out these contradictions. And I think another
Speaker 1: aspect of this that has flown under the radar is
Speaker 1: that this is I think a tremendous indictment of the
Speaker 1: entire American political system. I don't know how else to
Speaker 1: put it, but leading up to the BLM riots last year,
Speaker 1: you had a bunch of prisoner releases. A bunch of
Speaker 1: people got out of prison early on the grounds that
Speaker 1: they had to stop the spread. And apparently the virus
Speaker 1: was running rampant through prisons something because we were releasing murderers, rapists,
Speaker 1: drug dealers, burglar's serial offense like really bad people. In
Speaker 1: many cases, they went on to repeat offend almost as
Speaker 1: soon as they were released. There's at least one instance
Speaker 1: I can remember off the top of my mind where
Speaker 1: a guy got out of prison and within like forty
Speaker 1: eight hours he stabbed and killed somebody else. And there's
Speaker 1: examples of like sex offenders who were released because you know,
Speaker 1: we don't want them to get sick in prison, and
Speaker 1: then what do they do. They go and expose themselves
Speaker 1: to someone almost immediately after the release. So here's a
Speaker 1: good question, because these releases happened just before and during
Speaker 1: the riots, how much of the violence is actually a
Speaker 1: tribute to policy decisions on the state and local level,
Speaker 1: to politicians, bureaucrats, administrators, and governors letting people out of
Speaker 1: prison early or just letting them out of prison altogether
Speaker 1: in order to stop the spread. And then these people
Speaker 1: went on to participate in writing and looting, and then
Speaker 1: if they got caught in a place like New York
Speaker 1: where you know they've limited to cash bail, they get
Speaker 1: caught and then immediately released. This is another thing that
Speaker 1: I think is huge and we haven't discussed, and it
Speaker 1: is a I think a tremendous crime against the country
Speaker 1: that we did this, and also that we're not asked
Speaker 1: in a lot of ways it parallels the whole the
Speaker 1: pandemic origin thing. Right, We're not supposed to talk about
Speaker 1: the fact that it really looks like this thing came
Speaker 1: out of a lab. You're supposed to ignore that it's
Speaker 1: very similar to that in this sense. Speaking of Pedro Gonzale,
Speaker 1: senior writer at American Greatness, and if you go to
Speaker 1: am greatness dot com you can see his piece they're
Speaker 1: reckoning with the aftermath of George Floyd Spader, I want
Speaker 1: to note, you know, it seems that there's always this
Speaker 1: I write a lot of the commentaries this week from
Speaker 1: various leftists and corporate media democrats where where they point
Speaker 1: to disparities, they'll say that this community, this, this racial
Speaker 1: ethnic community is arrested at this rate compared to other communities.
Speaker 1: And then that is always that has always put forward
Speaker 1: as as de facto evidence of racism from the police.
Speaker 1: When when I sit here, and I mean I can,
Speaker 1: I can just off the top of my head tell
Speaker 1: everybody that you know, Riker's Island, the main prison in
Speaker 1: New York City where I am is over ninety percent
Speaker 1: black and hispanic, uh is the claim of the left
Speaker 1: seems to be that that is because of racist cops
Speaker 1: and and the thing is, no one really believes that, right,
Speaker 1: it's not racist cops that are the reason for that,
Speaker 1: but we're not allowed to talk about it. Yeah. Well, basically,
Speaker 1: what you're saying is that people people don't have agency,
Speaker 1: is what you're saying, and specifically that blacks and non
Speaker 1: whites generally do not have agency. They're not in control
Speaker 1: of their actions. And there is a topical example. In
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, a black man snuck into the home of
Speaker 1: a ninety five year old World War Two veteran over
Speaker 1: thanksgetting weakened and beat him to death with his own
Speaker 1: mantle clock, which he later pawned. And in court he
Speaker 1: said that it wasn't a cold budded killing, that he
Speaker 1: the reason he lashed out and murdered this old man
Speaker 1: was because he was white and he resembled his oppressors,
Speaker 1: and that you have to this is what he in
Speaker 1: his defense attorney argued that you have to consider the
Speaker 1: environment that he grew up in, that he's a product
Speaker 1: of his environment and he can't be held accountiful for
Speaker 1: his actions, and that it was not a coal bludded crime.
Speaker 1: It was a it was a warm blooded crime of
Speaker 1: kind of like it was a cry for help. And
Speaker 1: he said, you know, I stole not because I enjoyed it,
Speaker 1: but because I needed to steal. And I think that
Speaker 1: the great part about that was that his mother and
Speaker 1: his sister were in court and they were deeply obviously
Speaker 1: sorry to the family of the World War two veteran.
Speaker 1: And when he said that, the sister told the press, no,
Speaker 1: we had everything we needed when we were growing up.
Speaker 1: But even obviously even if they didn't, that still doesn't
Speaker 1: justify murder. But but what's underlying that whole argument is
Speaker 1: that he doesn't have agency. He's not in control of
Speaker 1: his actions. So that's basically what this argument is is
Speaker 1: that people and specifically non white minorities have no agency.
Speaker 1: I hate to take the system, the system effectively is
Speaker 1: and this is where you get the system is making
Speaker 1: people do things, or the system is responsible and Pedro,
Speaker 1: I mean, you had the White House say community violence recently,
Speaker 1: referring to acts of violence, right, not not violence. It's
Speaker 1: that the community is responsible for violence, not violence against
Speaker 1: the community. Right. Yeah, yeah, you're all you're all responsible.
Speaker 1: That was actually what this man's attorney side, like that
Speaker 1: basically the community had a responsibility for the way that
Speaker 1: he turned out just totally absurd. And I hate to
Speaker 1: use this line that I'm really critical of, you know,
Speaker 1: like saying like this is real racism or Democrats through racist,
Speaker 1: But I mean, in a way it's true. If you're saying, well,
Speaker 1: blacks don't have agency, you're taking this kind of paternalistic
Speaker 1: stance that they have to be protected from themselves and
Speaker 1: others because they're just not in control the actions. They
Speaker 1: can't operate freely in society. The conservative political philosophy believes
Speaker 1: that all people are equal in the eyes of God,
Speaker 1: the law, and end each other. But we'll have to
Speaker 1: leave it. They're right now, Pedro, thanks so much for
Speaker 1: joining us, Pedro Gonzals of American greatness. We'll talk to
Speaker 1: you soon. Thank you. He has asked the Department of
Speaker 1: Education to issue this review and brief, and last I checked,
Speaker 1: I believe that they're in the process of developing that route,
Speaker 1: that brief and review, and I believe that once the
Speaker 1: Department of Education comes back again knock on wood, but
Speaker 1: very hopefully saying that he does in fact have the
Speaker 1: legal authority to cancel student loan debt, not he can
Speaker 1: do it without Congress with a stroke of his pen.
Speaker 1: Then once they release that brief then it's on us
Speaker 1: and to then triple down on our organizing and to
Speaker 1: get him to do it. He has expressed, you know,
Speaker 1: some talk around a ten thousand dollars level. I don't
Speaker 1: think that that's enough. We need to push him. I
Speaker 1: believe in full student loan debt cancelation, but we have
Speaker 1: to push him to at the bare minimum a floor,
Speaker 1: a fifty thousand dollars that Senator Warren and Senator Schumer
Speaker 1: have also advanced. The Democrats really are the party of
Speaker 1: selfishness and childish behavior, which is why AOC is actually
Speaker 1: such a good spokesperson for the modern Democrat party, why
Speaker 1: she's so powerful, why she has the following that she does.
Speaker 1: Fifty thousand dollars, just just wipe it away. You got
Speaker 1: student loans, fifty grand wipe it away. People that have
Speaker 1: for the last twenty years been paying offer student loans.
Speaker 1: Too bad. Oh you have mortgage debt, you have credit
Speaker 1: card debt, NA, Sorry, that's your problem. Oh you had
Speaker 1: to run up credit card debt to pay for groceries
Speaker 1: or for for gas for your car to get to
Speaker 1: your job. Now you should have studied, you know, gender
Speaker 1: studies of the Caribbean eighteen fifty to nineteen fifty at
Speaker 1: University of Who gives a crap, right, that's what you
Speaker 1: should have done. But you know, instead you got a job,
Speaker 1: or you did you did things the way that you
Speaker 1: thought were responsible, because they were. And you know you're
Speaker 1: but you're not part of the You're not part of
Speaker 1: the folks that are going to get all this all
Speaker 1: this government money thrown at them, because so democrats do
Speaker 1: try to find ways to take money from some and
Speaker 1: give it to others. Again effective, just like politics of envy. Effective.
Speaker 1: You get power this way. But a lot of you
Speaker 1: out there that either didn't that paid off your student
Speaker 1: loans or didn't you know, I didn't go to a
Speaker 1: business school. I didn't get a master's degree, and I
Speaker 1: got into some of the humble brand. Not a humble
Speaker 1: bragg is a brag. I got into some of the
Speaker 1: best business school programs in the world. I didn't go
Speaker 1: because I didn't want to run up two hundred grand
Speaker 1: and student debt. How was a government employee before that?
Speaker 1: I don't have any money. Oh but now I could
Speaker 1: have run at least like ac count on fifty grand
Speaker 1: according to AOC to get wiped away. Man. I guess
Speaker 1: you know. The government really is just a lot of resystem. Now,
Speaker 1: some people win, some people lose, depending on what AOC thinks.
Speaker 1: Are they targeting Trump with a grand jury in New
Speaker 1: York question, we have to look at now, that's what
Speaker 1: the reporting is saying. This is really interesting, really concerning
Speaker 1: important stuff that I want to break down for you here.
Speaker 1: This is again all dailymail dot com. The grand jury
Speaker 1: will sit three times a week for the next six
Speaker 1: months in New York. Will also weigh charges against other
Speaker 1: Trump organization executives. He has been accused of inflating values
Speaker 1: of his assets for tax benefits. He's facing two investigations
Speaker 1: into his business practices at the state level. Trump has
Speaker 1: denied all wrongdoing. It says the probes are further examples
Speaker 1: of democratic which hunts. All right, this shows you what
Speaker 1: we are up against. In case you were wondering, in
Speaker 1: case there was any lingering doubt, which I doubt there was.
Speaker 1: But this should be a reminder to all of us
Speaker 1: of what it means to be a conservative leader in
Speaker 1: America today. A Republican politician, a man who created effectively
Speaker 1: a movement by running for office. Here he is now
Speaker 1: being targeted after leaving the over love, no goodwill, no
Speaker 1: good faith from the other side. How many times have
Speaker 1: I come on air here and told you that the
Speaker 1: only real motivating principle for the Democrat Left, the only
Speaker 1: thing that binds all the different elements and interest groups
Speaker 1: and all the rest of it of the left together,
Speaker 1: which now is the Democrat Party, is the pursuit of power.
Speaker 1: Whatever they have to do, whatever they can do to
Speaker 1: that end, that is the deciding factor. Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: now living down in mar Lago. I guess he's at
Speaker 1: Bedminster's in New York this week whatever. He moves around
Speaker 1: a little bit, but he's basically in mar Lago for
Speaker 1: the wintertime. And he's a former president. He has been
Speaker 1: deep platformed, DP platform from Facebook, from Twitter, from these
Speaker 1: different very powerful tools that he used better than any
Speaker 1: Republican before him. There is no person to this day
Speaker 1: who was more effective on the right on Twitter than
Speaker 1: Donald J. Trump. And I was honored that there were
Speaker 1: so many times when he saw fit to retweet my
Speaker 1: Twitter account, which was always a an illuminating experience because
Speaker 1: of all the crazy Hollywood celebrities and left wing pundits
Speaker 1: and people that would start attacking me. Oh, they all
Speaker 1: like to make fun of my name is if Ooh
Speaker 1: you got me there, you know, and now you really
Speaker 1: won the argument with that one. But as we know,
Speaker 1: the left is full of childishness and stupidity. So none
Speaker 1: of that is none of that is surprising. All very
Speaker 1: aware of the way they operate. But this now just
Speaker 1: goes to show you how much they play hardball, how
Speaker 1: much the other side of the aisle here will use
Speaker 1: power in very real ways, not in rhetorical terms, but
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, they will use this state.
Speaker 1: They will use the prosecutor's office to send men with
Speaker 1: guns to take you from your family and lock you
Speaker 1: in a cell for the crime of being a conservative,
Speaker 1: for being important to the conservative movement. Now do I
Speaker 1: think that they will actually do this, because this is
Speaker 1: the rubicon. Friends, Once they cross this, we are in
Speaker 1: a different political world. I mean, they've got to be joking.
Speaker 1: They're convening a grand jury here because they say Donald
Speaker 1: Trump inflated assets. Well, a lot of the time the
Speaker 1: assets were talking about here, whether it's his brand, association
Speaker 1: or real estate. There's going to be some differentiation. There's
Speaker 1: going to be a sliding scale of people that think
Speaker 1: it has one value, it has another value. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: did Trump probably air on the side of thinking his
Speaker 1: assets were worth more? Did he believe they were worth more?
Speaker 1: Sure that would surprise me. You're gonna bring a criminal
Speaker 1: charge against it. Notice it's not even he may owe
Speaker 1: some back taxes. That's not what the story is. It's
Speaker 1: we want to go after him for fraud. That's what
Speaker 1: they want everyone to take away from this. The fact
Speaker 1: that this would even be leaked is so interesting, isn't it.
Speaker 1: A grand jury is supposed to be secret. As you know,
Speaker 1: grand jury proceedings are not public. So why are their leaks?
Speaker 1: Oh we all know why. Because this district attorney in
Speaker 1: New York is a Democrat hack pretending to be an
Speaker 1: even handed prosecutor. Si Vance wants to be a I
Speaker 1: get a big book deal, I'm on the boards of
Speaker 1: lots of companies, and I'm beloved at liberal cocktail parties. Guy.
Speaker 1: When all said and done, and he knows that even
Speaker 1: going after Donald Trump in this way makes him a
Speaker 1: hero to the left. Oh, they'll say he's being brave.
Speaker 1: That's one of the great things about being a leftist.
Speaker 1: You get to do what benefits you, what appeases and
Speaker 1: pleases the mob, and then act like you're a hero
Speaker 1: for doing it. How many times have you seen, even
Speaker 1: on a college campus, you know, some student will stand
Speaker 1: up to shout at a conservative speaker on a campus
Speaker 1: and everyone in the room erupts in praise, and they'll say, Oh,
Speaker 1: that person's so brave. Yes, it's so brave to chant
Speaker 1: what the mob wants you to, to do what they
Speaker 1: demand of you. That's really brave, isn't it. Donald Trump
Speaker 1: was a president that the left will never forgive. They
Speaker 1: won't forgive us for voting for him, and they will
Speaker 1: not forgive him for the four years he put them through.
Speaker 1: For holding the mirror up to the corporate media, showing
Speaker 1: a bunch of frauds with a bunch of faith they are,
Speaker 1: for taking the fight to the other side, for showing
Speaker 1: that conservatism could be something that was a cultural phenomenon too.
Speaker 1: Young people were excited to go out with their Maga
Speaker 1: hats on and go to Trump rallies. Trump expanded the
Speaker 1: Republican Party with unprecedented numbers of minority, particularly black and
Speaker 1: Latino voters, coming out for him relative to GOP norms.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot about him that they hate, but
Speaker 1: they always took it personally. They viewed Trump as someone
Speaker 1: who betrayed his class. He betrayed the elites by running
Speaker 1: the campaign he did, by saying the things he did
Speaker 1: about them, by showing us all that the emperor had
Speaker 1: no clothes. He became the emperor then said, look, you
Speaker 1: can say I don't have clothing, but all those other
Speaker 1: guys did either. It's really all a charade, this DC thing.
Speaker 1: It's a farce and not a good one. And now
Speaker 1: they want payback. Now they want to go after him.
Speaker 1: And this was leaked. It was leaked to smear Trump.
Speaker 1: This for all the Trump haters out there, for all
Speaker 1: the Democrats that still believe that he colluded with Russia
Speaker 1: or any number of other absurd things that are said,
Speaker 1: for all those people, this is a vindication of sorts
Speaker 1: all they're thinking about prosecuting him. But just remember that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump here went through two in one term, two
Speaker 1: impeachment proceedings, a special council, so many different, you know,
Speaker 1: efforts in the media to create a narrative of him
Speaker 1: as a traitor, as a rapist, as a thief, as
Speaker 1: a criminal, as you know, just you go down the
Speaker 1: list as a white nationalist. They threw all this stuff
Speaker 1: at him, and just the fact that he made it
Speaker 1: through four years was a repudiation of their ability to
Speaker 1: set the narrative and determine the agenda. Right. They want
Speaker 1: the power to be able to destroy with someone. When
Speaker 1: the corporate media and the Democrat Party decides that somebody
Speaker 1: must be ruined, nobody can withstand that, because then it's
Speaker 1: like when somebody stands up to Amafia don right. If
Speaker 1: you can get away with it, other people might think
Speaker 1: the same thing. If Trump is able to endure all
Speaker 1: that they threw at him, and so far he's been
Speaker 1: able to. I know he didn't win a second term,
Speaker 1: but they weren't able to get him removed from office,
Speaker 1: and he beat them in twenty sixteen soundly and left
Speaker 1: a movement left Make America Great Again as a rallying
Speaker 1: cry for the right. If Trump could endure all they
Speaker 1: threw at him, other people, Ronda Santis, you name it,
Speaker 1: other other Republicans could come forward here and say that
Speaker 1: they could also withstand it all. They could be in
Speaker 1: a position to take all the slings and arrows of
Speaker 1: the left. They can't have that. That would then hurt
Speaker 1: their power, which, as we've already discussed, is the single
Speaker 1: most important thing to Democrats in all cases. So what
Speaker 1: do they do now. They're deciding whether they're going to
Speaker 1: convene I'm sorry, whether they're going to indict, to bring
Speaker 1: formal charges via the grand jury against Donald Trump former.
Speaker 1: And notice this is a state level, so there won't
Speaker 1: be any pressure on Biden to for the sake of
Speaker 1: you know, political harmony, not that that's a thing really,
Speaker 1: but for the sake of political continuity. Remember we had
Speaker 1: you had, you know, Ford after a Nixon um, there
Speaker 1: there'll be a push for Biden to part. And if
Speaker 1: it was a federal charge, and not that Biden wo
Speaker 1: as I've said, but at least there will be something.
Speaker 1: But this takes it entirely out of Biden sense. This
Speaker 1: is entirely this is a state function. They'll bring charges
Speaker 1: in New York against him. I'd like to think they
Speaker 1: won't do this, but the Democrat base, I mean just
Speaker 1: because not that they're above it, but they would have
Speaker 1: to understand at some level how politically ruinous this would
Speaker 1: be to any sense of unity and any sense of
Speaker 1: a shared American political stability between Democrats and Republicans. This
Speaker 1: would be not a shot across the bow. It would
Speaker 1: be a a barrage right into the bow. And I
Speaker 1: would like to think that they're not so vicious and
Speaker 1: reckless that they would do this, But I can't. I
Speaker 1: can't say they won't. How could I say that the
Speaker 1: people who lied about Russia collusion for four years are
Speaker 1: unwilling to sully themselves in this way, go to this level.
Speaker 1: How could I believe that the people who sent dozens
Speaker 1: of men to arrest Roger Stone at five am with
Speaker 1: a CNN crew watching to maximize the humiliation, long guns drawn,
Speaker 1: like they were arresting Pablo Escobar in the nineties. They
Speaker 1: didn't arrest him, they shot him. But how could I
Speaker 1: think those kinds of people wouldn't be willing to bring
Speaker 1: criminal charges against a former president for inflating and inflating
Speaker 1: the worth of his assets for tax benefits. They're sending
Speaker 1: the irs in a sense after Trump. That's the game
Speaker 1: the Democrats play. Don't ever forget that. In recent days,
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren, Senator Warren, former presidential candidate from Massachusetts, has
Speaker 1: made it clear she thinks that this tripling of IRS
Speaker 1: agents as part of the Biden infrastructure plan is a
Speaker 1: great idea. Why do you think Democrats love the IRS
Speaker 1: so much? Is it really? Yes, It's that they want
Speaker 1: more revenue, which means taking more of your money. They
Speaker 1: higher taxes, more taxes, more of your money to spend.
Speaker 1: They know how to spend your money better than you do.
Speaker 1: Don't you know that Democrats are convinced of it. But
Speaker 1: then again there's a whole other level. And we remember
Speaker 1: from the Obama years, and this is just a replay
Speaker 1: of all the Obama strategies with Biden at the helmet
Speaker 1: instead of Obama. The targeting of the Tea Party by
Speaker 1: Lois Learner and the IRS. The IRS is a fearsome
Speaker 1: weapon to be used by Democrats in partisan warfare. Who's
Speaker 1: going to want to be the person who speaks out?
Speaker 1: Who's going to want to be the conservative who's in
Speaker 1: the crosshairs of an engorged a newly funded, enlarged IRS.
Speaker 1: Who's going to want to be the person that has
Speaker 1: to worry about that? Even if you're right and they
Speaker 1: have nothing on you, think of all the lost nights
Speaker 1: of sleep and all the all the expense and all
Speaker 1: the exhaustion, the anxiety you go through. Better to just
Speaker 1: go along, better to not get treated like Trump, a
Speaker 1: former president. This is how they do their business. We
Speaker 1: sit around on the right and say, oh, but what
Speaker 1: about what about this historical precedent? Or wait, I see,
Speaker 1: I think we're being too rough with the other side,
Speaker 1: And we get lectures from Sass and Romney and Kinzinger
Speaker 1: and other jackasses. But they say, let's try to throw
Speaker 1: a former president in prison for some trumped up pardon
Speaker 1: the phrase, nonsense. That's what they say. That's what they
Speaker 1: come at us with, and we have to respond with
Speaker 1: the full recognition of the severity of this act. If
Speaker 1: they go forward with it. I can't say, I'm I
Speaker 1: can't say it's inevitable in my mind, but I cannot
Speaker 1: tell you by the same token, I can't tell you
Speaker 1: they won't bring a criminal charge against Trump. Here. It's
Speaker 1: looking more likely. And that's the whole point, isn't it.
Speaker 1: We're not gonna get to roll call today. We'll definitely
Speaker 1: get into some of it tomorrow, but we'll have a
Speaker 1: lengthy roll call later on this week, for sure. So
Speaker 1: send us your thoughts at Facebook dot com, slash Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton or email us at Team Buck at iHeartMedia dot com.
Speaker 1: You can also send us a direct message on Instagram.
Speaker 1: So we always like hearing from you all there. Please
Speaker 1: follow me there if you're not already. And this is
Speaker 1: where we check in with our buddy producer Mark and
Speaker 1: see what's going on. What is going on a producer
Speaker 1: Mark world? Not much as usual? You keep coming to
Speaker 1: me from doing What is your day? Like? When when
Speaker 1: this show is done? What kind of things do you do? Honestly,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna be very candid with the audience for a moment. See,
Speaker 1: my wife still isn't here during the week, as you know,
Speaker 1: we still haven't moved yet. So I just go play
Speaker 1: video games and then I watch the Mets or whatever
Speaker 1: sports are at night. That's basically my lift. Now that's
Speaker 1: kind of nice. Yeah, it sounds really nice, but when
Speaker 1: you do it every day, it just gets mind numbingly boring.
Speaker 1: What are the video games you're into these days? Usually
Speaker 1: I'm just playing NHL or well I just rotate to
Speaker 1: the the sports games. Ah See, I just played the
Speaker 1: Last of Us, which was a wreck from somebody on
Speaker 1: Team Buck from a long time ago. It's it's very
Speaker 1: much like a what's that Walking Dead? It's very much
Speaker 1: like a Walking Dead rip off, but as as a
Speaker 1: video game. But it's really it's a really good game
Speaker 1: play experience, I will say. And I was then even
Speaker 1: going to get the second one, which is the last
Speaker 1: of US two, but I've I've been told that it's
Speaker 1: very social justice e and there's all kinds of stuff.
Speaker 1: There's all kinds of stuff in there, so I'm probably
Speaker 1: gonna probably not gonna get too into that. But the
Speaker 1: only sports game that I play on PS four is
Speaker 1: the FIFA game. What's the best PS four sports game?
Speaker 1: I would say NHL is usually the top one. Could
Speaker 1: I play it? Even if somebody who doesn't really understand
Speaker 1: or know much about hockey? Oh yeah, that was the
Speaker 1: thing we did in college all the time. Even our
Speaker 1: friends that didn't like hockey at all would love the
Speaker 1: video game. I will have to check this out. So there,
Speaker 1: maybe maybe we can join like a co op thing
Speaker 1: where I play with you too. You know, Oh, I
Speaker 1: think you are the one person in the world that
Speaker 1: could probably beat well, there we go. We'll see about that, there,
Speaker 1: wise guy, we'll see about that. Everybody, let us know
Speaker 1: your thoughts. Please right into the Buck Saxton Show Team Bucket.
Speaker 1: Iheartmata dot Com Facebook message. Then it's Facebook matches, tell
Speaker 1: us segments you want to hear from guests you want
Speaker 1: more of, or maybe less of, but more of hopefully
Speaker 1: until tomorrow she'll tie