Bernie and Omar's Anti-Americanism

lot to get to during this episode. As you may know, this week, I released my new book American Ingred ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamists Takeover of the Democratic Party, which uses ilhan Omar as sort of the personification the symbol of where the Democratic Party is is going and delves into the danger for American national security and ultimately our core values and principles to the extent this hostile

takeover of the Party continues. So we'll get to that directly and infuse that into some of the stories that we grapple with during today's episode. We'll also talk about

the coronavirus. That's where we'll begin today's episode, as well as a discussion on the corruption of our education system, the Democratic Party, showing that democracy dies in darkness, the increasingly hot confrontation with China in general and over Huawei, and the all important fifth generation technology five G technology

in particular with David Goldman. Our education segment will be with Joy Pullman of the Federalist and last, but not least, we'll also have a conversation with Michael Pack, who is the producer of a spectacular new documentary on Clarence Thomas that I urge you to see. But as noted, the big talk today the last several days is this potential

pandemic in the form of coronavirus. And this story, interestingly enough, implicates a major theme that I've talked about on any number of episodes filling in for Buck, dealing with US China relations, the threat of the Chinese Communist Party, It's nature, and ultimately what the consequences are for all of us to the degree to which it remains as strong as

it has been. So I want to talk about the coronavirus story in context of what it says about China and then what it says about America in our reaction to it. Frankly, the shameful, sickening, and disgusting reaction that we've seen from the left politicizing an issue that cannot

be politicized. Just like national security should never be politicized because it deals with the life and limb of American citizens, so too it should be the same with anything public health wise that is as major as this potential pandemic. Let's start, though, with China, where this whole thing started.

About ten days ago, Jimmy Lay, a media tycoon, ardent hawk, anti Chinese Communist Party figure in Hong Kong, an owner of the Apple Daily newspaper, which frequently takes a confrontational tone towards the Chinese Communist Party, wrote an article in The Wall Street Journal that I urge you to pick up, read and let it absorb a little bit, because it describes the nature of China and also what it means for us. I'm going to read a little from that

article and you understand why. In a moment, he wrote, there exists today no vaccine for the coronavirus now engulfing China. That is a challenge for President Shi Jinping as he struggles to contain it. But the spread of the coronavirus has revealed a truth that poses a much greater risk to mister She. There is no cure for Chinese communism except the collapse of the party. The more mister She pursues his authoritarian agenda, the more distrust he will sew

at home and abroad. Far from transforming Beijing into the world's waiting superpower, his policies will instead keep China from taking its rightful place of honor in a peaceful, modern and integrated world. This much should already be clear from how badly Chinese authorities have botched their response to a virus that each day claims more innocent Chinese wives. He goes on to describe the Chinese authorities quashing those doctors who were speaking out in the Wuhan province where this

outbreak started. When the outbreak did happen and a seafood market was identified as the probable origin of the virus, local authorities closed it down. They hid the threat, telling the public that the market was merely being renovated. In other words, as the outbreak was already underway, the local government did what communist governments always do. Cover up. Deception is China's true real rule of law and let me stop right there. Deception has been at the core of

every communist aalitarian regime in the history of mankind. Why because the truth is the strongest weapon against its totalitarian regime. That's why they need to control the flow of information, and by the way, why they want to control all information and communications around the world through as we'll talk about a bit later, dominating fifth generation five G network infrastructure.

Lie goes on. Now, the world must start asking something that Chinese people living under communism ask themselves every day. How reliable can China's political, social, and economic institutions be when it's local government leaders routinely lie to their citizens and superiors alike, Mister she has no understanding of this.

He talks of a people's war on the coronavirus and has mobilized vast resources to combat at Communist governments excel at mobilizing resources because their command economies and these big actions quarantining entire cities, deploying the military, building hospitals, overnights can look impressive, but their efficacy is hobbled by the

lack of free community. And that's what prevented Doctor Lee, the doctor who is a whistleblower on this who himself succumbed to the virus February seventh from getting his findings out in a way that might have avoided much of this pain. And the same problem makes it so that no one in China can ever trust what anyone else says. That goes for mister she himself. China's president cannot trust the information he is getting. The lack of trust means

he must make decisions in the dark. No institution can function effectively this way. But stop for a moment just to point out that again, the free flow of information is pivotal to free societies, precisely because good ideas compete with bad ideas, and hopefully the best ideas went out if we're not suicidal in capitalism, why does capitalism work? Because there are price signals. There are prices that tell us how much people desire of a product and how

much they're willing to pay for it. Coordinate the actions of millions of people, hundreds of millions, billions of people, and tell of those who are bringing those goods and services to market whether or not they're doing the right job and fulfilling the demand properly through profits and losses that can be analogized to governments making decisions as well, to the extent they have to intervene in different areas of our lives. If you have no price signals, you

fail ultimately. That's why all these communist countries do ultimately fail. But they can hang on for an awful long time and create a ton of misery and kill millions of people in the process. Let me continue a little bit from this article. The Communist Party sees things differently. It's leaders are betting the projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative, Whawa's advanced five G wireless network, and the MAIDE in China twenty twenty five industrial policy will ensure

China's global supremacy in the decades ahead. He says. Let's assume for the moment that this is true. Without institutions and a culture of trust, the China dream will prove empty. The Chinese Communist Party continues to rule using deception and fear, but as the coronavirus evolves into a global pandemic, it

undermines the case for authoritarian competence. Even worse for party leaders is the potential for public unrest when the fear of death seems more menacing and immediate than the fear of dictatorship, and he quoses out his article by saying, this the devil's bargain. Mister She has always offered the people of China as this surrender your freedom and an exchange you will enjoy continuing material improvement in your day

to day lives. But if the consequence of surrendering your freedom may be losing your life, that becomes a much harder sell. Today, mister She is still seeking more control as it means to stop the coronavirus, But control does not mean stability, especially when it helps create and feed a health epidemic. If the coronavirus does nothing more than expose this single truth, it may prove as revolutionary as

any event in China's history. Let's just point out that our Democratic Party today wants control over every aspect of our economy and in particular healthcare. They want a nationalized healthcare system. We see what happens in China when you have a commanding control of so maybe those who are attacking our president this administration ought to step back a second and look in the mirror, and in the next

segment we will talk about that. But I want to tie this back to the fact the story of Jimmy Lai himself, who wrote this op ed. It was revealed that he was arrested today in Hong Kong Friday in Hong Kong, quote, according to one article, for taking part in an unauthorized anti government in March last year amid the city's most serious political crisis for decades. Let me repeat that again. He writes this op ed ten days ago talking about the Chinese Communist Party's failures with respect

to coronavirus. Ten days later, arrested in Hong Kong for

his role supposedly in protests. Christian Wynn wrote a great piece on this I urge your read it on Fox Business, where he notes that he and two others Jimmy Lay and two others were charged and released for a legal assembly so called related to one of the scores of mass gatherings against the government that have taken place ince West June Andrew Ie, a pro democracy member of Hong Kong's Legislative Council, observed quote the three were not even organizers.

This is clearly political persecution. Authorities also reportedly charged by with allegedly intimidating a reporter in twenty seventeen by using foul language. That journalist works for Oriental Daily, a pro Beijing competitor newspaper. In reality, the Hong Kong government, whose activities are increasingly directed by Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party, is trying to use the disastrous coronavirus outbreak to its advantage. Protests have dropped off due to concern about the outbreak.

Rather than focus all of their energy on public health, authorities are evidently hoping instead to crack down on pro democracy sentiments. This politics before health conduct fits with actions by China's Communist government on the mainland, which included harassing doctors who warned of the outbreak and misuading the world of its severity and scope. So what is my takeaway from all of this before we talk about the impact

on America and what a response has been. We cannot or certainly should not rely on China for anything essential. And you may have seen so many of the everyday medicines that we use in this country are produced in China,

delivered by China. Parts used in American weaponry, in our vehicles, in our computers, and other critical technology that we use every second of every day made in China, the network infrastructure or the phones that we rely on to the extent it's Huawei back and even if it's not related to h Huawei necessarily made in China. You want to

make the case for decoupling from China. Why we need to shift our supply chains away exhibit A. This pandemic, Not even to mention SARS and other problems that we've seen before this, you cannot be tied inextricably intertwined to a Chinese Communist Party led China. You can't. When I come back, we'll talk about the way that the Democrats cynically, shockingly, sickeningly are trying to capitalize on this crisis. This has been one garden for Buck Sexon here in the Buck

Sexon Show. Be back just after this. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexon Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weinegarden in for Buck Sexton. And before the break we were talking a bit about coronavirus, which has shocked those in

our financial markets. And you've likely seen if you're watching your four oh one K or any of your portfolios that the last several days, the markets have tanked, to put it lightly, because of the spread of coronavirus to the African continent, including it one of its largest countries in Nigeria, in places like Italy, and then of course several cases here in the US as well. And Sean Davis, my colleague at the Federalists, had a great line about

what the reaction has been here. He said, a handful of this is a tweet, a handful of never Trump a looo, and left wing media personalities are really struggling between bashing the redneck prepper rubes for being prepared for coronavirus quarantines and blaming Trump for not doing enough to prevent global pandemic that started in China. It's so strange, Yes, it is strange. Indeed, this is an issue where there cannot be the hyper politicization that there is in everything else,

but the left is forcing it. My argument is simply this, we are talking about a potential pandemic and Democrats are trying to use this to bash the president. We're going to destroy ourselves if we can't get over political bickering and snipering in the face of all the myriad threats that we face, and it's to be expected, but it's

no less shameful. I think that the responses from the media and other Democrats attacking the Trump administration's fitness to deal with this issue, because they love to talk, always talk about the fitness, notwithstanding their own problems, really reflects Actually they're not only their willingness to try to win at all costs by politicizing anything and everything, but how

desperate they are going into twenty twenty. This is the thing that they're holding onto a disaster in the United States. That's what they want. That is what they are saying at the end of the day. And you know, we saw this before the midterm elections as well, many of them cheering on any sort of economic correction contraction because they know, they admit that the Trump economy is strong.

It's the same thing here, but it's even more sick because this is again about the life and limb of American citizens, the first priority of every single representative, or what is supposed to be the first priority of every single one of our so called representatives. But for a second,

let's also point out who the party is. If they're going to politicize this, they should be caught out for the fact that this is a Democratic party that couldn't build a functioning healthcare website with three hundred million dollars. They want to take over all of healthcare. They can't build a website with infinite resources behind it for their Obamacare portal. This a party that couldn't run a caucus

in Iowa. The AP just announced it will not be able to declare a winner after certification is finally completed, which I believe it's used to be tomorrow, weeks after the caucus. This is a party of open borders. Meanwhile, according to one report, Brandon Judd, the president of the National Border Patrol Council, said on February tenth that there were three Chinese nationals who were apprehended illegally entering Texas with food symptoms and who had to be quarantined. Luckily

they didn't have the coronavirus. But this is a wake up call, he said. This is a party of Bolshevik Bernie Sanders, do you really think that with a socialized healthcare system, we're going to be able to quickly innovate and get vital vaccines to the marketplace. No, we're gonna go the exact same way as China. You think Bernie would be able to deal with the equivalent of a Chernobyl. And by the way, we haven't had Chernobyls precisely because

we're not the Soviet Union, we haven't had Chernobyls. But you have to think twice about if they were in power. And I'm not politicizing it. I'm saying that it is a threat when they are in power potentially. And I'm also not saying that I would be attacking them while they were in power. I would be providing criticism intended

to push them towards doing the right things. Were they in power, with he and his central planners and his czars overseeing everything, you would run the risk of Chernobyls. So what do I think ultimately happens. If we're going to focus on the political aspect of this for a second,

I think this is going to backfire on Democrats. I think there's a good chance of it because while this is something of a September October surprise, except months in advance, which they probably view as a bad thing about this potential pandemic emerging, I think the Trump arrangement syndrome is going to backfire here. They could have said, if the Democrats could have said, this is the time to come together, rise up a partnership, act like grown ups, even if

they don't believe it, they could have said that. They could have pandered. They didn't. And what I think they're underestimating here is that one of the core traits that Trump exudes, and he has from the time he descended on that escalator, is strength, fortitude, anti political correctness, goal based, pragmatic again, strength at core, and do what needs to

be done and cut the bs. So in a wartime sort of mode or a crisis kind of mode, you can bet that he's going to exude strength and patriotism

and seek to instill confidence in the American people. And I am confident that we certainly have the capability to grapple with any sort of disaster to befollow us as a country, but not to the extent half the country or the party representing half the country embraces an anti American ethos like as I'll talk about the party that is now Bernie Sanders and ilhan Omar, the American ingrate, as my book title is, party Now represents. This is Ben Weegarden for Buck Sexon on the Buck Sex and Show.

We'll be back at just after this. Thanks for listening to the Bus Sex and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show. This is Ben Wee Garden in for Buck Sexton. And as I noted at the top of the show, this week I released my first book, American ingrate ilhan Omar

and the Progressive Islamist Takeover of the Democratic Party. And I urge you to get your hands on at least a few copies of the book, one for you, one for your kids who need to read this before they get indoctrinated in the schools that we're about to talk about a little bit later, and we have another generation

of anti American self loathing fellow citizens. And then as well, to bug any of your Bolshevik Bernie Brow friends, not really to bug them, honestly, but to point out that for those who are would fashion themselves JFK Democrats, your grandfather's Democrats or your father's Democrats, to understand the stakes if the Democratic Party is to be fully taken over by its progressive wing, and that is sort of the broader message that comes out of American Ingred, but it

uses ilhan Omar as the figure to get there and also delves into not just the danger posed by an anti American blame America first cohort of Democrats dominating that party, but also the danger that ilhan Omar herself poses. And I'm going to tease that out and explain it in just a second, but I first want to point out people talk about ilhan Omar and focus on this figure ingratitude.

That ingrate in my title is I think what the viscerally negative reaction is to someone who says that on nine to eleven, some people did something, or maybe you didn't see this tweet that Thanksgiving is a time to remember that this is a country founded on genocide and colonialism and it's only continued that America is the scourge of the earth, conceived in sin and continuing to sin in every engagement we've been involved in a country that

is unjust demanding a completely radicalized social justice so called agenda that would actually hurt the very people ilhan Omar claims to speak for, and by the way, her district is ranked on any number of measures as one of the worst in the country for Black Americans minorities, who she claims again to speak for, and her party claims

to speak for. Someone who believes in overturning our capitalist order, free homes for all who need it, socialized medicine, abolish ice, so free for all at our borders, no actual freedom for American citizens, and the imperiling of our life and whim.

But again we need to It cannot be emphasized enough that on top of the radicalism, and we haven't even talked about all of the jew hatred reflected in her remarks and her associations and ties, and in spite of the alleged criminality associated with the bizarre allegation backed up with substantial evidence, and I go in chapter and verse an American ingreat to talk about it that she fraudulently married her brother, a foreign national, in order to have

him come over here, get an education, and then leave, at which point she reunited with the person with whom she had been with for years before and might have still been with during the years where she was married

so called to this foreign national. On top of all of the raft of criminality associated with that, and it implicates not just marriage fraud and immigration fraud, but also student loan fraud as well, so educational fraud with respect to the public funding used to get him into school, same school she attended, and then perjuring herself in the divorce proceedings where she broke off the relationship with this man, and then also by the way, tax fraud associated with

the fact that she filed jointly with her current husband, now actually divorced, but the person who she would ultimately marry, with whom she had had three children, filing jointly for taxes when she was not technically married to him and still technically married to this previous person that she had allegedly fraudulent, fraudulently married. Leave aside all that craziness for a second. Consider that background in context of how powerful

Omar is not just symbolically but substantively. She was recently named the co chair of Democratic front runner Bernie Sanders campaign in the pivotal twenty twenty state of Minnesota, along with another gem Keith Ellison, the state attorney general whose seats she took when she became a member of the House. She recently proposed a battery of foreign policy bills that

Ben Rhodes described as the new progressive baseline. This is a foreign policy agenda that is about so called justice, equality, fairness, making up for America's sins by appeasement, submission, demilitarizing quote unquote, and then, unless we forget this is a member of the House who, in spite of her known vario and anti semitism, the blame America first positions and siding with our adversaries by the way, as I'll get to in a moment, and the potentially commising background that would stop

her from ever being able to get a security clearance under normal circumstances, but she doesn't need it because she has that House Foreign Affairs Committee seats and as a member of Congress, and oh, by the way, Grapple is with the most sensitive national security and foreign policy information and issues on that committee. She is able to act with total impunity while holding those positions because her party

is effectively condoned her rhetoric and her behavior. And it started first when they put her on that committee, powerful committee, in what seems like a deal that Speaker Pelosi made with Party progressives to appease them by putting her in that spot, knowing some of the things that she had said about Israel hypnotizing the world in her infamous tweet years before, and party officials, by the way, in Minneapolis area had warned about this. They were nervous about it.

They had an intervention with her about it before she ever won that House seat. Clearly the intervention didn't work. The red lion was when her party refused to censure her by name and for her specific comments regarding the so called Israel lobby and her invocation of other anti Semitic tropes. But again, what it shows is that the party has caved to its progressive wing. And if you want the clearest example of it, we have Bernie Sanders right now as the front runner. But before that note,

we had impeachment. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi, under normal circumstances, in a world where the squad didn't exist, would have pushed for that impeachment. Do you think Gerald Nadwer would have been on board. Do you think Elliot Angele would would have been on board? Honestly, do you think Adam Shift necessarily would have been on board? You probably didn't even hear about Adam Shift's name until the last couple

of years. Why question is why, and the answer is because they saw when AOC was elected that any one of them could get picked off in a primary. The Democratic establishment is terrified. You see it in the effort likely to steal a nomination from Bernie Sanders, and we'll get to that a little bit later. And you see it in the candidates staking out more radically left positions than candidates have ever staked out before, pandering to a left wing that they had not many of them had

not fully associated within the past. And you see it in the decisions that Spuccre Pelosi has made and some of the bills that have been brought to the floor in the House. And it is precisely because they fear for their political lives, because they know that there are many aocs out there, and there are many ilhan Omar's out there. So when you see Bernie Sanders embrace in ilhan Omar, obviously he's there with her already, but it reflects the fact that this progressive poison is ascendant in

the Democratic Party. And how can a party that represents half the country be an anti American party and keep this country actually together? What will unite us. At the end of the day, it's completely about disunifying the country.

It's about pitting people against each other. It's why, as I go into great depth in this book American Ingrate, I talk about Ilhan Omar's intersectionality and politics of identity, which is all about dividing us, rubbing raw the sores in our society to put us against each other, divide

us and ultimately take us down. But from their perspective, taking us down is bringing us up to another level, because in their perverse worldview, bringing America down, putting America second, is America first for them, that blame America first ideology. For them, the old is the only moral just thing to do, because we are the worst country in the history of mankind in their view. So at the end

of the day, why does Congresswoman Omar matter? Why should we care about the fact that she has been elevated and embraced by her party? And I make the comprehensive case in American in Grade that she has indeed been embraced by the party because what she represents symbolically and her own power substantively is being embraced by the front runner of the party. Is where the party is shifting ideologically. She's a leading indicator, if not an indicator of the

fact that the party is already there with her. And I will talk about the danger of the fact that she is where she is and the party is where they are. Just after this break, this has been one garden for Buck Sexon on the Buck sex and show back just after this you're in the Freedom Hud. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexon Show. This is Ben Weine Garden in for Bucks Sexon and we have been talking about the release of my new book. Very excited about it. The reception

has been exceptional so far. If you hadn't seen Newt gang Ridge tweeted about it and said essentially that American ingred ilhan Omar and the progressive Islamist takeover of the Democratic Party shows exactly where this anti americanism and radicalism reflected in Bernie Sanders for example, and by the way, many other Democrat candidates refusing to speak at APAC. The American Israel Joint Group Bipartisan are arguably a left leaning group. Honestly,

they won't speak there. In in Bernie's embrace of Castro and the Communists. And I appreciate speaker gang Rich making that point because it's an essential one that this represents, this progressive movement represents anti Americanism. Blame America first, put American second, third, not just second to third, put Americans last. And as I've argued, a vote for Bernie Sanders is a vote for ilan Omar and the ideology she embraces. And again that is where the Democratic Party is right

now with Bernie as the front runner. Now. In terms of ilhan Omar's own danger as an individual, I noted the alleged criminality, the anti American positions. I also talked about the ethics violations, or if I didn't, she has had ethics violations with respect to her campaign spending, refuses to answer when questioned on almost any of this, and then she has all the substantial power that we've talked about.

Not mentioned is her Islamist collusion, and that is with foreign regimes, dignitaries associated with Sunni Islamist groups, her support

of Shia Islamists. With respect to the Iranian Molocracy, she stands with the Iranian Molocracy and its allies against America's partners in several of the Sunni Arab states like Saudi Arabia and Egypt and Jordan, and of course our key partner ally in the region, Israel, who perversely, amazingly, as a result of the Obama administration policies, has now ended up in a partnership with these countries that before would have sought to destroy Israel, an amazing thing, one of

the only positives of the Obama foreign policy agenda. Miraculously this has all transpired and materialized. But ilhan Omar's own Islamist collusion, and I had a editorial about this in

the New York Post this week. I urge you to check out just regarding ilhan Omar's ties to Turkey alone, and the jumping off point for this, and actually the jumping off point for the whole book was at a picture surface of ilhan Omar as a state representative in twenty seventeen meeting with Turkish President er Towan on the

sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York. So the first question you have to ask is why the heck is air to one meeting with a state representative from Minnesota on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, and the reporting very scant and often foreign language on that meeting shows that they were talking about Turkish Somalia

relations of all things, which is bizarre. Omar, a native of Somalia, has maintained incredibly close ties to a Somali regime that is one of the most corrupted in the world. It's a Shariah based regime. It's a constitution talks about social justice and Shariah, which fits in perfectly with Ilhan.

Omar's associations with all manner of Islamist and her pro Islamic identity combined with her progressivism, and she has talked about her views of Islam and Islam itself being a ideology, a theopolitical ideology that fits with this social justice milieu

as well. I go into great length to talk about her ties and several meetings that she's had with senior Turkish officials, including Ardwan, her taking fifteen hundred dollars from a man reported to be er Towan's cousin who lobbies through a Turkish group against things like, for example, the recent House resolution to recognize the Armadian genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Turks, which the Turkish government hates terrible pr for them, so she takes fifteen hundred dollars from him.

She meets with all of these officials fifteen hundred dollars in campaign contributions, that is, meets with all these Turkish officials, says she's going to say nice things about Turkey, has said nice things about Turkey and context in particular of Turkey helping Somalia, which again, what is a US representative, Why does she have a stake in this? What is

her equity in that issue? She is one of the only people not to vote to censure or rather to recognize the Armadian genocide as being perpetrated by the Ottoman Turks.

And then she also votes against sanctions on Turkey. There's a person who loves sanctions when it comes to Israel, and she's tweeted BDS Saudi BDS Saudi Arabia before, but then she goes out she votes against sanctions on Turkey over their incursion into Northern Syria against the Kurds, and that was overwhelmingly bipartisan support for those sanctions, just like

there was overwhelming bipartisan support for that aforementioned resolution. She takes Turkey's side on those issues, and then she writes in the Washington Post about how she's really against sanctions when it comes to Turkey. They're detrimental, they hurt people, They're all these terrible humanitarian knock on effects, but completely silent on how she squares that with her support of the terror tied BDS movement against Israel. That's just Turkey.

But I document at great length in this book Elanomer's ties again to Somali leaders, some of whom are terror tied, certainly corrupt her own husband in law serving in that regime ultimately. And then her affiliations with all manner of anti American, anti Israeli radical groups and individuals in the US, including care which of course was an unindicted co conspirator in the largest terrorism financing case dealing with Hamas in

US history. And these ties are legion And we are talking about her speaking in front of these groups, her appearing pictured with these individuals, working with these individuals on any number of issues in Congress, her taking money from them, campaign contributions to the tune of over twenty thousand dollars from Islamist linked individuals, and that was only as of

last year. You put all this together, and she represents the personification of what I deem the Progressive Islamist Alliance or axis, and it is jew hatred that is the glue that holds that intersectionalist alliance together as representative of ultimately hatred for Judaeo Christian Western civilization. And that at core is the importance of this book. It is about a war on us. So I urge you to pick up American Ingrate, ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamist take

Over the Democratic Party. Tweet out a picture of it, be happy to sign copies. This has been wandering in for Buck sex And on the Buck Sex and Show, and we'll be back just after this. Thanks for listening to the Bus Sex and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or where you get

your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben wine Garden in for Buck Sexton, and we open today's show by talking about coronavirus and in particular what the implications are and what it tells us about the ruling Chinese Communist Party, which, as I've argued at length, is the number one threat to American liberty engaged in a whole of government comprehensive strategy to become not just a regional hegemon, but the world hegemon as well as

the impact on America and frankly, the catastrophic consequences to the extent we are going to politicize a potential pandemic that we're just going to tear ourselves apart as a country, which, by the way, of course, is what all of our

adversaries love. In some ways, it's almost providing a lifeline to the Chinese Communist Party because when you consider the coronavirus, after the quote unquote trade war that they have endured under the Trump administration, after what transpired in Hong Kong, they've had a lot of losses over the past few years, and the coronavirus, of course, is having massive economic consequences. You have all manner of Western businesses shutting down operations there.

We've already seen the shift of supply chains, which I think is a welcome development and which President Trump himself

has encouraged in tweets and statements in the past. But it ought to be noted that there are other dimensions to this competition as well, and the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party has not receded, even though it has substantial problems right now as a consequence both of this emerging potential global pandemic as well as the consequences of the so called trade war that has transpired to date.

And this is an area that I think again is the seminal contribution on the foreign policy side of the Trump administration, which has been the reorientation of US national

security and foreign policy towards the Chinese Communist Party. And in spite of how critical I have been on this show in the past, of a politicized law enforcement, particular at its most senior levels, abusing the spy apparatus, the intelligence apparatus, weaponizing and politicizing it in a bid to not just undermine the Trump administration agenda, but really ultimately as an attack on us, we the people who voted for it and who voted to overturn establishment policy and

again focus on America first, on China. There has been an amazing sort of bipartisan realization that the status quo is untenable, unsustainable, and does pose a great risk ultimately, and we're not fully there, as you see with Mike Bloomberg, for example, who won't call she dictator and says he has to answer to his constituents, when his constituents are other people in the Chinese Communist Party who threatened his power.

At the end of the day, it's laughable. And of course many of these candidates directly or indirectly have had commercial financial ties to China in the past as well,

so disastrous on that count. But there has been a realization, I think, and I think it's pretty well documented in the highest reaches of the US government and even on a bipartisan basis to some degree, with the likes of even Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, a realization that we have given China the world since we've opened that relationship, and at every single point of crisis, we as a

nation have really caved to them. Probably the best example of this, the most horrendous example of this being in the wake of TMMN Square, when the Chinese Communist Party engaged in a disaster and we essentially let them off the hook and said the status quo will continue, and we have enabled the Chinese Communist Party to get rich, and they've thanked us by continuing to steal our crown jewels, threatening today our Navy for example, in the region, and

of course seeking to dominate the world with five G technology, as we'll talk about shortway with my next guest, David Goldman. But it does bear noting the actions and the words that Trump administration officials have taken, and again I say that in particular in the realms of national security and

foreign policy. And I'd urge you to draw your attention to a few recent actions which demonstrate that even if there was a Phase one trade deal with the Chinese Communist Party, the Trump administration is as ego by it as ever in terms of continuing to counter the Chinese

Communist Party with a whole of government strategy. And there have been a few speeches delivered recently that I urge you to read in full because it just represents a remarkable sea change in you s foreign policy, in particular from Attorney General William Barr Bill Barr, as well as Secretary of State Pompeo, and bears noting that just a couple of weeks ago, the Department of Justice unveiled a nine count indictment in which it alleged that four members

of the PLA that's the Chinese Army Research Institute hacked Equifax's computer networks, stealing sensitive information including names, birthday, social security numbers of almost one hundred and fifty million Americans that's almost half the country in other words, and driver's licensed numbers from ten million or more Americans. And these PLA officers were also charged with engaging in economic espionage

and a raft of other crimes as well. That's a remarkable thing that that indictment was revealed, because in the past, the US would have never engaged in an operation to

prosecute PLA TIEDE officials, let alone PLA officials themselves. What Barr said was, for years, we have witnessed China's veracious appetite for the personal data of Americans, including the theft of personal records from the US Office of Personnel Management, which we've talked about talked about at length of the show, the intrusion into Marriott Hotels and Anthem Health Insurance Company, and now the whole sealth theft of credit and other

information from Equifax. This data has economic value, and these thefts can feed China's development of artificial intelligence tools as

well as the creation of intelligence targeting packages. And what Bar has overseen at the Department of Justice is a China initiative that has led to a number of public actions charging individuals and entities for crimes relating to everything from the infiltration of US academic and research institutions and strategically significant and sensitive areas, to charging people with committing espionage on behalf of the Chinese government, trafficking and counterfeit

goods which steals millions, if not billions of dollars ultimately in wealth from Americans over time, the illegal importation of goods manufactured in China, and numerous trade theft cases, as well as, of course, actions against the telecommunications giant and central player in China's grand strategy, Whawei, the behemoth, the crown jewel for the Chinese Communist Party in their effort

to be the dominant world power. So i'd urge you to read Attorney General Bar's speech at the CSIS think Tank, as well as a speech delivered by Secretary of State Pompeo to governors in which he talked about the Chinese Communist Party's targeting of American political officials, including governors around the country. Next, We're going to have an in depth conversation with a China watcher par excellence, an expert when it comes to Huawei in specifically and the Chinese Communist

Party and its grand strategy generally. David Goldman, this has been one going in for Buck Sexton on the Buck Sexton Show. We'll be back with David Goldman just after this. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weinegarden in for Buck sexon and we've been talking about as we always do, for about an hour when filling in for Buck Sex and the pivotal foreign threat of our time to our liberty as Americans, that

of the Chinese Communist Party. And one of the shrewdest and most knowledgeable China watchers out there is my next guest, David Goldman, known as Spengler, where he writes for the Asia Times. He also contributes frequently to PJ Media and also I'm proud to report and happy to report has a book coming out later this year regarding some of our topics today on Huawei in particular, You will be assimilated. David, thanks so much for coming on the program. Bran, thanks

so much for having it's a great pleasure. So first I should say, you work in financial markets in addition to all your writing, and we've seen financial markets essentially tank in the West during this last week in large part and I hate when financial watchers attribute market movements to one or two particular events, but in this case, I do think it is safe to say in response

to coronavirus and government responses to coronavirus. So first, I just wonder if you'd give us your general take on what has transpired and where do you think this is going, both for China and the US. The point at which the markets went bananas is when Korea and Japan and Italy showed a very large number of cases. The rate of spread of the virus outside of China became significantly greater than the rate inside China itself. China is a

detallature in surveillance state. If you go by an aspirin and you're not on the quarantine list in the city like Uha, the police will come and give you a test for COVID nineteen to make sure you're nottivating quarantine. So the Chinese have had the capacity to locked down gigantic members of the population isolated a city of thirteen million people. Very hard to do in the West, and the rate of infection in China has level dwelt, but

outside China much harder to control. So with Japanese schools shut down, with a Japanese island of Hokaido quarantined at home, with lower a thousand cases in Korea, and rapid spread in Italy, nobody knows what kind of damned this will inflict, and also what kind of political problems it will dredge up in its way. God forbid that Bernie Sanders becomes president of the United States. But if you have a sufficient crisis like this, obviously it increases the chances of

something terrible like that happening. So the degree of uncertainty is so great about this that it spooked the market. I think the market has gone much too far, by the way. Personally, I've been buying certain stocks this morning, and I'm comfortable that we're not going to have anything like the two thousand and eight crash. Totally different situation.

Not very worried, but I do think it would be appropriate for saying emergency tax cuts and similar to spending to come from the major governments as a way of timing the economy over getting over the hump as we learned to double the virus. And it's worth noting also that there was a report I believe from the Jerusalem Post last night that is an Israeli company was supposedly within weeks away from developing a virus to handle coronavirus,

so potentially vaccine. Yes, yes, that's true, but it's very unlikely that any vaccine is going to have a measurable impact in the rise in the several months that we'll worry about. Now. Sure, I want to transition to something that we've discussed on this program atlant on numerous occasions, and that is China's Grand strategy. It's focus in particular on being a dominant player in technology and networking and

information technology in particular. And so we'll start very narrow to get to a broader question, which is how does fit into China's grand strategy. Walway is an entirely unique development in five thousand years of Chinese history. I can't overestimate how important it is. For the first time China has managed to enlist the towns of ten to thousands, so some of the best Western engineers and scientists. It

is not a Chinese company. It is an imperial company in which the Chinese Empire has put into harness many of the best minds in the West. For example, we are very cross with Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of England, for allowing Wali to build out part of Britain's five G network, and the American officials seem to be shocked by this decision. They could have seen it coming. Ten years ago. Two eleven, Wali hired the Chief Information Officer

of Her Majesty's government, John Suffolk. Two and twelve Wali anounced that was going to spread two billion dollars around in England in the form of research grants, laboratories, R and D, all kinds of things. They have bought their way into every university department, every startup, every lab that

has anything to do with telecommunications. They've hardwired the British scientific establishment into their project, and they've been doing it in public view, bragging about it openly for more than nine years. So the extent to which China has linked itself into the scientific contento, large school lead and key parts of the corporate sector in Western Europe and of course Russia, obviously Southeast Asia is up to the Chinese

have never attempted before, they ever done before. Now they have a juggernail which is extremely hard to stop, and it can't be stopped us by scolding our allies working with you've written some very interesting stories regarding your experiences touring Wahwei facilities. Of course under the close watch, I'm sure of their handwears. Meeting with Huawei officials, officers, regular workers there. Can you share some of your insights that

you think are most pertinent regarding those visits. I became aware of this by stumbling into the manhole, so to speak. I'm the forest gump analyst here. I just happened to be there at the right time. Four years ago, I was working as an adjustment banker for a little boutique in Hong Kong and we wanted to get Walwe's business.

Nobody was objecting to it then it wasn't on the radar, so I introduced them to the government of Mexico, where by the way, Walwi is now building Mexico's national broadband system, including five G. I'm the American border. You don't hear a lot of talk about that, but it was something of an accomplishment. So I took the Mexican ambassador to Chi to Huawei headquarters in Shenzen and we went through the exhibition hall of their technologies, which looks like ten

air and space museums in the National Mall. It's an incredible place. And afterwards they sat the Mexican delegation down in a little amphitheater, and a fellow from while they came up with a power point and said, you are a big country. You have bad broadband. Bad broadband means you are poor. We will make you rich. You can become rich like China. Let us come in and build a national broadband network. Then we bring in Chinese e commerce, we bring in Chinese e finals. When we bring in

Chinese technology, you will become like China. Sounded like the board. You will be assimilated. And Mexicans are just stunned. The massador said, how long have you been doing this? The Chinese guy kind of looked at his watch and said, oh, I don't know, seven or eight years. And their mouths are on the floor now. Of course they are doing it. So what China wants to do is not just spin and spy on our information flows or steal our secrets.

That's so nineties. What China wants to do is become the dominant force in the world economy and use its control of broadband to layer in all the new technologies. Go to de find a twenty first century artificial intelligence, automated manufacturing, autonomous vehicles, remote control surgery, medical diagnostics, or artificial intelligence via the cloud, and all of this is public. You can go to Wawei's website and watch their confidence

speeches on this and streaming video. You can read their profiles for transforming the technological capability of every country in the world. They've got a little profile of a hundred countries and what they want to do to them. This is a plan for China to be de transformative factor in the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the dominant power in the world economy. So it'd be fair to say that in this case, the communists are selling us the rope

with which to hang us. Well, I mean, it's a communist I've met more communists in Cambridge, Massachusetts than I have in China. This is if it were just communists. Ben and I fight with all of my conservative friends about this all the time. Communistry idiots. Communism isn't that became a wasn't It's a stupid idea. The Chinese are the embodiment of the old Mandarin meritocracy which has ruled China for twenty five hundred years. They just happened to

be called to communist party. We're dealing with a five thousand year old empire that's curious, pragmatic, energetic, brutal and ruthless and has now woken up from five thousand years of slumber, looked at the world and said this looks appetized into us. Why don't we take it. We're speaking with David Goldman here and we'll continue this conversation right after the break. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexon on the Buck Sexon Show. Back just after this.

Thanks for listening to the bus Sex and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, and I want to continue this conversation with David Goldman. He's known as Spangler for Asia Times. He writes at PJ Media and elsewhere, and as I noted previously, is

one of the shrewdest China watchers. There is, and we've been talking about Whawei as a seminal player in the Chinese Communist Party's grand strategy to be the dominant world power. And that brings us naturally, naturally to the question of how far behind is America and why have we failed to date to counter the CCP in this endeavor. Well, see our technol companies bend. It's not so much that

they're rearranging the decktures and the Titanic. It's more like their sealing and the the silver spoons from the dining room. They've had a twenty year freide where they figured out that if they invest in software, which is infinitely scalable, marginal costs of adding a customer, zero, huge rates of return in equity, they don't have to do the dirty and lower return job of building the hardware. Let they contract that out to the Asians. Not simply China, of course,

it's a Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, of course, South Korea. It's all the same model. The Asians subsidize chip fabrication plants the way we subsidize sports stadiums or airports. So the US tech sector instead of investing in physics, hardware, changing nature, high tech manufacturing concentrated exclusively on software. Cisco, for example, use through the dominant telecommunication equipment company in the world. They've moved almost entirely out of hark Or. They're a

software company. They've got a return in equity of thirty five percent. At breakfast stows a few months ago with a senior guy from WAWE, and he said, we don't understand you Americans. If you were worried about us, why didn't you just have Cisco by Ericson. That's the big Swedish telecommunications company and the closest to a competitor that WAWE has. Have Cisco by Ericsson and create a national champion that competes with us. And I told the Walwe guy, well,

it's real simple. Cisco as a return of equity of thirty five percent. Ericson had a return of equity last year of about zero. So Cisco stock price would go down, and we don't do anything that doesn't boost stock prices. That's simple. So we've been entirely focused on shareholder value and going for the quickest buck without thinking about long

term consequences. Whereas a Chinese have been digging in and building the infrastructure to dominate not just five detelecommunications, but all the many manufacturing, mining, retail, finance, shipping applications that come often so in just a couple of minutes. And I know it's difficult to condense it or distill it.

You've argued in effect, if not directly, for a national industrial policy, and free marketeers will of course fear the government and private sector working hand in hand, legitimate fears in many cases, but of course we're dealing with an existential threat here. Or they'll argue that the government directing projects in space like telecommunications will lead to all of the problems that we know tend to come from central planning. So what is your response to them? And then what

does your whole of government plan look like. All those objections are valid, and the best way to avoid them is do what we did under the Reggae devestation, where we were spending the equivalent in today's dollars at three hundred billion dollars a year in basic scientific research. We contract out to the big corporate labs which don't exist anymore, to look into all kinds of things, out of which we got chief and fast semiconductors, the semiconductor laser optical networks,

the Internet itself. Virtually everything that went into the digital age came out of a basic science grant from the Defense Department, but we let private companies raise money and take the risk of commercializing the inventions. So I think we need to work our way back up to that three hundred billion dollars a year level, about a point and a half of GDP of subsidies for basic research.

We need to train more engineers to get there. We need to train more scientists, We need to persuade the corporations that used to have these giant industrial labs to rebuild. And it's absolute we could do overnight, but we need to go backs of the kind of things we did and won the Cold War under Reagan, who was of course a great free marketer and did not allow the private sector for the most part, to exploit government subsidies, which is what many of my free market colleagues worry about,

as do I. We've been speaking with David Goldman. I urge you to read everything you can that he writes, and he is a book coming out later this year on many of the topics we've just spoken about that. It will be titled You Will be Assimilated. David, thank you so much for coming on the program. Ben, thanks so much for having me. And this is Ben Winegarden in for Buck sex In here on the Buck Sex and Show. Back just after this you're in the Freedom Hud.

This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton and with my last guest, we talked about the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party. But as I've talked about on numerous occasions a show, ultimately America has the capability to grapple with any foreign adversary, almost any challenge we could possibly face externally. The greater challenge that we have is do we have the will

and do we have the internal strength the cohesion. Are we united enough to grapple with not just those external problems but the internal problems that we are facing today.

And a couple of those core problems are one the collapse of the family and two and relatedly in many respects, just the horrid shape that our education system is in, something that our adversaries a certain way themselves taken advantage of and one of the keenest experts on the state of our education system where it's headed, where we are today is Joy Pullman, who is my colleague, the executive editor of the Federal Issues, written an ebook recommending more

than four hundred classic books for family was with young children, which I urge you to take a look at. And she's also the author of The Education Invasion, How Common Core Fights parents for control of American Kids, a book that I actually interviewed Joy on in the past, and she wrote a great piece at the Federalists recently where she talked about an exchange on Morning Joe which implicated the whitewashing of Bernie Sanders's communist coddling. So with that background, Joy,

tell us about that exchange and your thoughts on it. Well, it seems, you know, look, it wasn't a big deal, but it kind of underscores a lot of things that are the service, kind of like a tip of the iceberg sort of thing. So I think it was Wednesday morning on Joe Scarborough show on MSNBC Morning Joe, he and a guest were talking about you know, Scarborough has been public about his concerns about socialism and communism, and Bernie Sanders potentially becoming the Democratic nominee label is one

of those. So even though he is obviously a leftist, Scarborough isn't willing to go as far as to label

the ideas you know, socialism or communism. So he and his number There are a number of panelists, but the one he had this exchange with was a fellow from Princeton University Eddie and I don't know if I'm probably not going to pronounce his name well, but Gaudi Gaude anyway, so what they you know, the fellow was seemed to be, you know, kind of advocating for Bernard Standers, and one of the things that he said was, you know a

lot you know Americans. He didn't think that Bernie's comments supporting socialist dictator Fidel Castro Cuba was necessarily a bad thing because he noted that a number of Americans think that America is basically an imperialist, colonialist power. And Scarborough said, okay, well that's two percent of Americans for the other ninety eight percent, how does this work? Well, but what I want on to talk about in the article is how

actually that's not two percent of Americans. You know, depending on the question that you're asking and you know, and the poll that you're looking at, something between thirty and forty percent of Americans, and especially higher percentages of young people will agree. I mean half of you know, half of Americans will agree that with the statement that America is a racist and a sexist country. You know, thirty

to forty percent of especially young people will agree. The United States, you know, it shouldn't be proud of its history. United States wasn't great and never will be. A twenty percent of them said young people that America will never

be great. You know. So again, some of these are minority numbers, that they are very sizeable minority numbers, and it's a shocking how big that is, and that obviously has grown across time, this negative view of people, you know, of American Again, I think America definitely comes in for criticism and a number of things that we've done corporately politically, I think we still do now. I mean, we're overseeing what I consider to be mass genocide with our laws

about abortion. You know. So definitely think that America can be criticized, but that doesn't mean that I hate America. And the growth of really negative opinions among Americans, especially given that we know that the growth, that growth is fed by public tax dollars, public education institutions. Attacking the very nation that feeds them, that supports them, that sustains them. That is a new and it's very troubling thing for

the future of this country. And I have to have a little tie in here to my book American ingrids ilhan Omer and the Progressive Islamist take over the Democratic Party, because, as I note in that book, while she was raised herself in a Marxist Islamist dictatorship in Somalia in the early years of her life, and her family served that regime, she could have gotten the same anti American ideas there, like the ones you just described to imperialist colonialist occupying power,

just as easily from Somalia as in the encove that she lived in in Minneapolis. That is a really scary concept to consider, and it begs the question, how did the American education system become anti American? Well, I mean it's taken a long time. You know something people are familiar probably with the phrase the long march through the institutions, But I mean part of it just is that the left deliberately targeted cultural institutions, one of the chief ones

of which is education. And quite frankly, people on the right, conservatives and even people who wouldn't call themselves political conservatives but are kind of dispositionally moderate or conservative, they we haven't put it up. We haven't put up a fight.

You know. Really the left has been the aggressors in this case, and you know, they keep pushing and coashing and keep pushing, and it's I don't think it has dawned fast enough on Americans a of all what they're doing, and be the consequences of it, and then you know, maybe to add a C there. Therefore, you our response has just been extremely lacking. You know, we we have known about problems like this for at least the past

fifty two one hundred years. You know, I've done you know, some search about the history of American education politics, and you know, so this has been evident from the beginning, and Americans have been complacent, particularly our political leaders on the right have done way too much, you know, trying

to be moderates, trying to be partisan. And while they have you know, basically done that, you know, the you know, the schools have been transformed under their feet into agents you know, that really turn Americans against their own country. And I mean, I think that's completely outrageous. There's no point in a conflict country can exist. You know, if we are literally teaching people to hate the country. You know, that is educating them and in many cases clothing and

feeding them and housing them in school. You know, schooling them is you know, we just can't continue as a country if we're going to allow our own institutions to attack our existence. Only a country that has it really good on a relative and absolute basis could have the time or the sort of narcissistic self loathing that we do to have these great institutions and then seek to tarnish them. It really is a remarkable thing. Do you think there's something in the American psyche that is just

broken at this point? Well? I do, Actually, I mean, I think it's a Western thing. Self criticism is something that the West says that you don't see to the same extent in for example, the Eastern you know kind of heritage. So I mean, and I think there is legitimacy. Again, there is something that makes it can be a strength to criticize yourself to notice your flaws and seek to correct them. I mean, the America most maybe the most notably did that, you know, with the Civil War and

a civil rights movement. Sure we had a flaw, and you know, we worked to fix it and that needed to happen. So there are absolutely positive things that come from that. But there's also, you know, a point where it goes too far, you know, where you say that because America has done things, therefore all the good things are negated or we can't notice them or talk about them too or put the evil things in context. And

that really is what education ought to be. I don't advocate for education is indoctrination from a conservative point of view, I want people to know the truth, and you know, they're left instead of presenting people all of the facts in the whole context and doing that as a developmentally appropriate time. I mean, I have not shown my preschoolers, you know, pictures of whipped American slaves, right, but that is a historical fact that people need to see perhaps

at some point. I haven't brought my babies to the American Holocaust Museum, but I've been there, and I think Americans should go there, right, you know, So that process of education needs to be done wisely in it, but

it needs to have the whole truth. And too many times and too often, especially nowadays, American kids are not given the whole truth, and that colors their worldview and and and I think really what needs to happen is we need the American kids need to start with a disposition to love and have affection for their country, and then from that orientation then they learn how to criticize it, just like within a family, right, And you know, we all have families and we all mostly love them, but

we're also free to criticize our families, right. But you do that from wanting your family to be better, you know, and so rather than hating your family and wanting to destroy it. So what Criticizing out of love and criticizing out of hatred are two completely different things and only one of them is the one that the left tries to do typically. Today, Well, we're up against a break in about a minute and a half or so. But

before we hit that break, I wanted to ask. I've seen a book for toddlers titled A is for Activism and for every letter of the alphabet, it's just it's beyond parody in some ways, but the fact that this is really in bookstores is remarkable. And then as you go up the grade levels, you have Howard Jin's people's history. Now we have the sixteen nineteen project pervading many school

districts throughout the country. Is there any competition from our side to the left's content continued along March through the institution of the Academy, There is very very little. There is some, there are some very tiny, you know, less than I think one or two percent of the country has access to private school choice programs. Republicans have really I mean, they play talk a big game, but they do not act a big game when it comes to

jeffreying parents. I mean the plurality of parents. So that is, you know, the largest group of parents, something around forty five percent want to send their kids to a private school, but only ten percent of American parents do that, right, So huge mismatch between what Americans want and what they're getting. And Republicans have really dropped the ball on making sure they can access that. And so, I mean, and the right has completely I mean, I just wish this weren't true,

but it is true. Has ignored the fact that education and family is crucial. Maybe you know the bet that plus religion, I would say, you know, in terms of the culture cultural impact, those three things are the chief ones, and the right has a very poor game on at least two of them. And we are losing the country because of it. And if we don't start getting with the program and taking I think we should have a boycott, divestment,

sactions movement for Marxist education. We need to not send taxpayer dollars or support or put public names on any education institution that attacks, you know, the country that gives it money and gives it children. We'll be back with more with Joy Pullman just after this. Thanks for listening to the bus X and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show.

This is Ben Weingarten in for Bucksex In and before the break we were talking with Joy Pullman about the Long March through the Institutions, which, by the way, the Long March, the origins of it start in part with Antonio gramscy leftist Italian official who ideologue, rather I should say who espouse this sort of view of taking over

through cultural institutions to ultimately impact everything else. And it bears noting that former Mayor Pepodijj's father was the world's foremost expert on gram sheet, So if you think he's the moderate in their party, you might want to think

again about that. Joy was just talking before the break about the challenges that we face both in academia and outside of academia as well, and I think it dovetails with something that I talk about at length in my book American Ingrate about the decline and religiosity, devotion to building families, and also love of country among in particular younger generations. What do you think the link is, Joy, between what is transpired in our education system and the

declines in all of these essential areas well. It's really hard to I mean, I think it's that's almost you know, chicken or the egg question. It's hard to say, you know what came first, families getting you know, becoming a mess, or school is becoming a mess. I would probably say, you know, families becoming a mess, right, because I mean, I know a lot of teachers and they will uniformly tell you, you know, we have to deal with so much stuff, so much personal stuff, that it's really hard

to make way for the business of education. And you know, the family is the place that sets the child's first loves and and orient you know, his kind of direction in the world. And a lot of families, you know. I mean, actually this happened to me when I became a parent. I wasn't aware of how explicit I need to be in order to teach my children to behave the way that I want them to behave. I saw, you know, a lot of the things the kids would

just pick up or get through osmosis. And I was wrong, even about simple things like how to play with toys, you know, and of course discipline things, but also of course with um you know, these these ideas of the heart, you know, these orientation short of the world, what to love and how to love it. Kids need to be explicitly and openly taught that. And that, in fact is something again that the left tends to do better than

the right. Right they openly propagandies they're kids, like you were saying with this little board book about a for activists. I mean, I think that's a ridiculous thing to teach a child. But at least the left gets that little children need to hear the most important things right away when they're too you know, have it on their lips, you know, just I mean, you know, I was so. For example, the school my kids go to as a classical, private Christian school, and the very five six year old

kids are memorizing the First Amendment. They don't know what the First Amendment means, but it is going to be. It's in their heart. They have taught that it's something that is valuable, used as a valuable class time, and it is something that the school comes back to over the years and it deepens and deepens in their heart,

and it becomes a part of who they are. And you know, I think the First Amendment, you know, and these things like scripture versus and hands, they're much much more valuable and worthy of a child's mind and attention, you know, than ridiculous activist board books about ridiculous political causes. Right, for me, politics is a lot as secondary to these deeper and transcendent things. And you know, but but again,

typically the people on the righteous we don't think. And again, like I said, I've been guilty of this as a parent myself, haven't thought about the fact that that explicitly that it's not going to happen by osmosis. The kids need to be actively enculturated. They need to be actively taught what is good and what is wrong, and it has to be completely saturating their entire life. And we can't just assume that someone else is going to do it. We have to do it ourselves, and we have to

make sure that it is happening. And as the fact that we haven't done that is the reason. You know that kids' minds are so empty and available for propaganda today. And you've written extensively about education policy in context of common core and beyond. Practically, what would be sort of your three point plan for restoring a love of country and a knowledge of our core institutions and our real actual history. I mean, I think, first of all, eliminate

the US Department of Education. You know, the federal government takes ten cents on the dollar of all the money given to public schools and controls with it the other ninety percent. And it is a bureaucratic institution that is anti as an institution, is anti American, anti freedom, anti parental choice. The more we can do to cut down its power, its influence, in its reach. The better you know, states will be able to be set free to be

more responsive to parents and localities. And the second thing at the state level is, you know, state Republicans have got to get to get the parents really need to have real school choice there. They need to be able to be completely in control of the money that is spent on behalf of their kids and needs to not be able to, you know, to be accessed and controlled by special interests who obviously don't have America's best interest at heart. So those, you know, those are the very

first two things. Those are political things. But I think the third thing is, you know, parents, conservative donors, people who vote in Republican primaries. We need to start prioritizing education as an a crucial thing for the future of our country. You know, the party doesn't matter so much

to me. It only matters in terms of you know, it helps that the country is made better because I believe an idea is stronger and our ideas are not going to be as easily sown and among a rocky ground of minds that have been taught to hate America, to think that it's an inherently sexist and racist and don't know a dang thing about the Constitution or the founders or all the things that they went through that

do make our country great. So the people people on the right need to stop treating education like you know, it's it's not a priority, that it's just a side issue or it's a local issue. They need to be tackling this head on and being extremely serious about not sending taxpayer funds and American children to tuitions that are controlled by leftists. Last question, and one need not be conspiratorial to sort of follow this line of thinking. It's very clear that there has been a dumbing down in

our education system combined with indoctrination. You also have the heavy subsidization of higher education through the federal government, and then you have, as a consequence, all of these people with massive student debt. They sort of start their careers behind many of them and obviously this can be cliched, but study things in college that do not lead them to be productive in the private sector, and so then you have them economically hobbled and ultimately dependent on government.

Do you see the linkage between those points? Oh? Absolutely, and yeah, if I were a conspiracy theorist, which I try to interpret what happens in light of the best available explanation, the most positive one. But if I were or a theorist, I would say that was deliberately done, you know, because people who I mean, I mean and the American founders talked about this explicitly, and they put it into our founding dot documents such as the Northwest Ordinance.

They said that our system of government cannot continue to endure it with an ignorant people. If you are stupid and you're dependent, you cannot run your own life. So we need to have, you know, an economy and education,

system of culture that focuses on self reliance. And so that requires a certain way of being, certain habits of behavior, and frankly, you know, government not preying upon people and locking them into that scenario you you describe that makes them automatically dependent, you know, when they are just starting out in their life. We've been speaking with the Joy Pullman. She wrote a great piece of The Federalist recently titled

Dear Joe Scarborough, More Americans hate America than you think. Joy, thanks so much for coming on the program. Well, thank you, And this has Ben Weinardon in for Buck Sex and on the Buck Sex and show back after this You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben

Weingarten in for Buck Sexton. We just talked at Wayne with my federalist colleague Joy Pullman about the perversion, the corruption of our education system and the knock on effects of that. Really not focused on enough in terms of what are the actual what are our biggest weaknesses as a country faced with all manner of foreign adversaries, any number of challenges that every country has to deal with. But at core, the people are the strength of the country,

and America remains by far the strongest world power. We have intellectual capital, we have the technology, we have the firepower, but do we have the will? And the way you break the will if you believe that America's strengths are actually its weaknesses or they ought to be turned into weaknesses, is you start with indoctrinating generations of people in an anti American ideology, and that is at core one of the major major parts of American ingrate. Ilhan Omar and

the progressive islam As takeover of the Democratic Party. She is a consequence of it. A person like Ilhan Omar could never get elected in another era of America. Couldn't happen. And yet, as I noted, and I write at length in the book, and I've explained this in interviews elsewhere, and we talked about her a bit here, she could have just as easily gotten these ideas here in the America's heartland as in Mogadishu, sam in Minneapolis as Mogadishu.

That is a remarkable commentary on the state of where

America is now. Of course, that's not even getting into the consequences of our academic system that has led to a situation where they're oponents of open borders, and where we would have allowed this massive influx of Somali immigrants harboring the kind of ideas that elan Omar does in the first place, from a country, by the way, that, as I noted, was a Marxist Islamist dictatorship and today, and as it's been for the last decade, ranked consistently

as the most corrupt country in the world. And oh, by the way, in terms of the refugees who were settled here, rates based on some studies of upwards of eighty percent fraud in terms of immigrants coming here who started in Somalia. And we see these knock on effects of the dominance of progressivism not just in the academy, but then ultimately in all of our institutions, even in

the business world. And we talked at length in a prior episode about Woke Capital and how Blackrock, the world's largest asset manager, was starting to infuse not just the rhetoric of the company, but even it's investing positions or the positions that lets clients invest in through black Rock be impacted by a progressive worldview, in particular on the matter of climate change, but even beyond that, because basically there's been a massive shift in the corporate world, among

especially the elites that run the largest companies in the world, towards a different view as to what the purpose of a company is now among these people who naturally many of these executives came out of our elite schools dominated by progressivism, indoctrinated in that milieu, operating in the same world at the cocktail parties the attend, and where they send their kids to school with other parents who have the same worldview. These companies now believe that they have

a job of activism. It's not just a turn of profit. It's not just to reward their shareholders and their other stakeholders. It is to be political. Actors use their corporate power to impose upon us their views. Sometimes it's explicit, sometimes it's a little bit more implicit, and they express it in ways like we will not allow you to through our vehicle invest in, say coal producing coal sector companies, non clean energies, we won't touch them for the way.

This example of this another financial institution, and this was reported by Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review. Recently, he writes an article JP Morgan Chase joins the war on America's energy and he starts JP Morgan Chase has decided that it's better for the company to join the progressive environmental gods than to continue supporting the great American energy miracle that has brought so much prosperity, stability, and job creation to this country. Has the left finally won the war

for the heart and soul of corporate America. During the company's annual investor Day on Tuesday of this week, the Giant Bank announced it would no longer be financing loans for oil and gas drilling in the Arctic, and would divest from its financing coal plants or mines. It also announced it would be divesting from any company that gets the majority of its revenue from coal by twenty twenty four.

When the left camp went at the ballot box or in a democratic debate in legislators, it seeks recourse through the courts or even better, the culture and markets. In this case, groups like Rainforest Action Network bullied the bank into submission publishing reports showing JP Morgan Chase to be the single biggest lender to the oil and gas industry. Now, of course companies are most concerned with they're not most

concerned with, but a chief concern is their reputation. You're only as good as your reputation, and they hate being attacked by activist groups and will do anything to essentially pay for protection, and that may be literally paying for protection in the way of investing in things that these activists demand of them. Are conversely not investing in things

that activists demanded them. So this article goes on. At Tuesday's announcement, JP Morgan committed to investing in two hundred billion dollars, say, paying for protection in two hundred billion dollars worth of projects and support of the United Nations sustainable development goals. That is, the company's credential in the elite world that will make its profits kosher. Sort of an extortion that the progressives make companies pays the cost

of doing business in a political system they control. However, it is never enough for the leftist anarchists who are now demanding the Bank also pull out of financing drilling in the lower forty eight states as well. And then Horowitz goes on to note that it's truly hard to overstate the economic miracle that oil and gas drilling as

ushered into our job market. We have now become the global superpower of oil and gas production and exports, by the way, against all of these progressives, in the face of them, in spite of Obama's own anti energy agenda, because fracking, thank god, proliferated during that time, to the point that even the conflict with I ran in January did not cause a spike in energy prices at all. These woke corporate executives are willing to destroy essential parts of our economy if it comes to it to try

to appease an unappeasable progressive mass. And now, as I've argued in the past, there are likely government incentives that make it such that it is profitable for them to

do this. But ultimately, we, the American people, suffer if we're going to destroy the energy sector because financial institutions won't channel money into these very productive areas that, by the way, don't just help create jobs for Americans, create wealth for Americans, but also make it such that we don't need to be reliant upon, in some cases, our worst adversaries. So if there is some sort of crisis in the Middle East, it doesn't tank our economy. Woke

capital is incredibly detrimental to America. And what is even scarier is a report that recently claim came out from Real Clear Politics. They did a poll of about twenty five hundred registered voters and they ask them this question, which of the following comes closer to your view? The purpose of a corporation is to maximize financial returns for shareholders, but also to over value to customers, invest in employees, deal ethnically with suppliers, and support the communities where they work.

Here's another response. Potentially single purpose of a corporation is to maximize financial returns for shareholders, and then the other answers don't know. Seventy seven percent of respondents responded with that first answer, that a corporation as all of these other required goals besides producing a good or service that people want to buy such that they are profitable. Do

we want businesses operating on the basis of politics? And is there any way that doesn't end up corrupted ultimately when you have progressives in power, businesses taking progressive positions, and of course private public so caught partnerships between them. And what does it mean when you have companies that are basically going to shut out or piss off fifty percent of the country on any given issue. Is that where we want to be? Is that where we want

to be in our civil society? Or do we want to be a live in wet lives society where people have freedom to choose where they go and companies aren't constantly imposing their own ideologies on their customers. This has been one gern in for Buck Sexon on the Buck Sexton Show, Fight against will Capital all you can We're back right after this. Thanks for listening to the bus Sex and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, and we have had plenty of gloom and doom in today's episode. Talked to edwyanth about Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and I believe that a person who is the perfect corrective or foil talan Omar in many respects is the Supreme Court justice that I most admire. I think a generational Supreme Court justice, and that's Justice Clarence Thomas. And I am so pleased to be joined

today by someone who I think agrees, Michael Pack. He's the president of Manifold Productions and independent film and television production company and the producer of the new documentary Exceptional Documentary Created Equal Clarence Thomas in his own words, which you can find out all about at Justice thomasmovie dot com. Mister Pack, thanks so much for joining us, and thank you for having me on the show. Ben. So let's

jump right in. Justice Thomas, as I noted, is in my view, the greatest jurist of this generation and one of the ways the Left likes to savage him is to harp on the fact that he doesn't typically ask questions of those presenting arguments at the Supreme Court. So I think your documentary created equal Clarence Thomas in his

own words is an interesting response to that? Was that intentional? Well, that's right, they say, because he doesn't speak in an argument, that he's not acting the court, he's not smart, he's not articulate, But quite the opposite is true. I mean, he's very acting the court and has been since the beginning. Especially he's written over six hundred opinions, thirty percent more than any other Supreme Court justice, including Justice Ginsburg. So

he's very active, and he's a great storyteller. And so in fact, we fashioned the documentary so that he can look right at the audience and tell them what is very dramatic, eventful, and I think inspiring life is like without filters, really, And I think that's another way that he's minimized by the Left in his enemies is downplaying the drama of his story. And our film tries to do that correct that. And you documented with vivid imagery and as you noted, storytelling without giving away too much

of the plot. Our listeners may well know that Justice Thomas grew up poor in many ways, filled with anger, but also imbued with many of the traits bestowed upon him or inculcated in him by his grandfather, traits that we'd probably today ascribe to conservatism, even though back then they were just traditional. It seems like ultimately those character traits sort of sort of shine through and were reflected

in Justice Thomas's politics. But before he got to the Justice that we see today, he was sort of a leftist radical. What changed him, Well, that's right, I mean, it's important to go back to the part, the earlier part of the story that you alluded to to understand what changed him. As you say, he grew up first in dire poverty. He was born in Pinpoint, a gull Of speaking area outside of Savannah, and his father left

before he could remember. So his mother, though, brought him and his brother when he was about six to Savannah, and he had there experienced dire poverty in the jim Crow South, something it's hard pressed almost imagine today. Didn't have enough to eat cold in the winter, and after a couple of years of this, his mother, realizing she couldn't take care of her two boys, brought them to her father, his grandfather, to raise, and as you said,

that was where he got his values. His grandfather believed in hard work, working from son to son, no excuses, and he had converted to Catholicism and sent Justice Thomas and his brother to Catholic schools then segregated by run by Irish nuns who loved the boys and gave them a good education and solid values. And then he did

reject that for it well, rather before he did. He succeeded in that environment and decided he wanted to become a priest and went to the seminary and other seminaries, unlike his earlier schooling, had been all white and were

just desegregating. And it was there that he first experienced racism really and it reached a peak for him in nineteen sixty eight when he was watching TV the day that Martin Luther King Jr. Was shot, and one of the white seminary and said, I hope that son of a bitch dies, and that shocking comment capped off just as Thomas is feeling that the church wasn't doing enough for civil rights, and then he just slipped. He became an angry black man. He decided to want to be

a priest. He told his grandfather, who kicked him out of the house, and that's what began his radical period. And he had to go wherever he could, and he had a full scholarship at holy Cross and his radicalism continued there. He upstart the Black Student Union. They invited black panthers to speak. He supported, as he says, anyone who was in your face, from Stokely Carmichael to Malcolm X. And it was only by sort of hitting a kind of bottom that he started to come back to get

back to your question. Then he participated in an anti war rally in a nearby Cambridge that became a near riot, and he felt himself getting swept up in the madness of the crowd, the hysteria of the crowd out, and he was scared by what he had become. And when he returned to holy Cross well after midnight, he went in front of the chapel then closed, and he had never had prayed in a long time, and then he prayed and asked God, if you will take anger out

of my heart, I will never hate again. And that was his beginning of his coming back to his spiritual values and what he thought of as the political views as well of his grandfather. That as you say, we may think of today's as conservative, but we're really fundamental kind of common sense values of both his grandfather and a lot of people in that period. But he did have a series of experiences both through college and law school and later that made that were the milestones and

his political journey back. And he finally the first Republican he voted for was Ronald Reagan in nineteen eighty in and then went to work in the Reagan ad ministry. Yeah, it's probably worth noting that the fact that he turned on his fellow radicals, it's probably one of the reasons he's most reviled today by the predominant American left. What did you discover in making this documentary about Justice Clarence Thomas that you never knew about him, or that our

audience might not know about him. I didn't know that much before I began, But I think the thing that stands out to me most is his resilience through his life, surviving and overcoming many obstacles, including one that happened later in the story than we said so far. You know, the attacks on him the Benita Hill part of his confirmation battle, but also the growing up in the difficult way he did. He had great resilience and he refused to define himself as a victim. I mean, that's what

stands out to me most. He could. He has a very good basis to call himself a victim. He grew and poverty, he had a single raised by a single mother in the jim Coosouth, subject to wheel racism, but he won't define himself as a victim. And I think that has allowed him to succeed in spite of all those difficulties. And I think that's what makes it sorry,

inspiring and memorable. Yea, what in your view are the one or two most pivotal lessons from Justice Clarence Thomas's wife that you would like viewers and listeners here to take away. I think that not define yourself as a victim is a big one. I mean we all are tempted that way. I mean, we who are conservatives always accused the left of doing it, but we can fall into it too, and it's in a way a human trap and one that we should avoid. True or not

it's suffocating to your life. So that's one big lesson. And the other lesson is that Justice Thomas stood up for his principles against opposition, and I also found that inspiring. So I appeal to you our listeners to go see the movie. As you said in your intro. They can find out about it at Justice thomasmovie dot com, where we list where it's playing each week. It plays in different theaters. It's been in a hundred so far. But if it's not in a theater near your listeners, they

can sign up on the website. If there's a big enough group, we can make a screening happen. So if the first step is to go to Justice thomasmovie dot com and they can see the trailer and get it sense what the film is like, so they want so I appealed to them to go, bring their children. I think it's aspiring for young people and bring people of

different political views. I think even if you don't like his politics, you should understand Justice Thomas whatever you're you know, if you're a liberal or if you disagree with them.

We've been speaking with Michael Packy's the producer of the Exceptional New documentary created equal Clarence Thomas in his own words, Michael, before you have to run out on us, want to ask one last political question, and that concerns the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which is a very significant part of the feral government, and that it's engaged essentially in putting forth the American message and combating propaganda of our adversaries.

And it's been reported that you've been tabbed to be the CEO of the Broadcasting Board of Governors. Could you provide us just a bit of a status update on where your nomination is right now? Okay, well, really that's a whole other subject subject, a good topic for another broadcast.

But I have been since it's a new year. I've been renominated by the President, and I had already had my hearings for the Senate for a relations committee, but they're set to vote, so after they committee votes and then it goes to the full Senate, and it's been a slow process, but who knows, the end could be in sight. I think it is a very important position, and I'm honored that the President wants me to serve

in it. We'll look forward to continuing conversation another time, but as for today, again the name of the documentary has created equal Clarence Thomas in his own words. You can find more at Justice Thomas Movie dot com. Michael Pack, thanks so much for joining us today. Thank you, Bet. And this has Ben one Garden in for Buck sex And on the buck Sexton Show. We'll be back just after this. You're in the Freedom Hud. This is the buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show.

This is Ben Winegarden in for Buck Sexton. And we'll try to put a tidy bow on what we've discussed during the program today. And we started talking about coronavirus, what it means for China, what it means for the US, and we talked a bit about American ingred at ilhan Omar and the progressive Islamist takeover of the Democratic Party.

My new book that I urge you to pick up, as I said before, at least three copies, one for you, one for your children, and one to anger a Bernie Brow or more seriously, to any of your still rational Democratic friends to understand what is coming if a party representing fifty percent of the country is dominated by anti American, blame America firsters in general, and in particular someone as dangerous as ilhan Omar, And as I've argued, a vote for Bernie Sanders is a vote for ilhan Omar and

everything that she embraces ideologically, as well as the actual national security threat posed by her own collusion with the swamist adversaries, both foreign and domestic terror tied groups and individuals sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. And that is actually the perfect representation of the ticking time bomb that is this ascendant progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

And the Democratic establishment gets the danger here because they understand that perhaps for the majority of Democrats out there, the average Democrat voter, and the average Democrat voter, by the way, tends to be much older than the woke progressives who might be the loudest today and who are

clearly playing a substantial role in these primaries. But they understand that the average Democrat voter is more in the mold, at least relatively of a JFK sort of Democrat, a Pat moynihan sort of Democrat, than these Democrats than the squad.

But all the energy in the party resides with its activist, progressive, radical anti American wing and so you see that we've ended up in a situation where a party that hates wealth attacks the wealthy, is behind me too and other such movements, the establishments putting all their eggs or some of their eggs at least in the Mike Bloomberg basket, for example, even though I think he's a terrible candidate in terms of having no appeal whatsoever substantive or stylistic,

well in general, but then also to the key swing states that are at play here, and they're going to let this billionaire come in and as he said before, buy how seats he essentially let slip in that last debate, buy a nomination, steal it from a true believer, or at the very least help the party with his mass of resources, and keep afloat some of these other figures directly or indirectly himself, so that the nomination can be stolen from Bernie Sanders. And I'm of two minds on this.

On the one hand, I think Bernie Sanders is maybe their most compelling candidate. And for those who think that it's going to be a cakewalk if it's Trump versus Sanders, I would urge some caution there not because on a substantive basis, he should beat Donald Trump in any stretch, in any form, it would be cataquismic, absolutely cataquismic to the country. But Bernie Sanders is sort of the opposite

side of the populous coin. And I've argued the very simplistic case for Bernie's strength is this, he appears to be genuine. He's been consistent on nearly every issue for four decades. He's the real deal when it comes to his ideology. He takes positions that would be perceived as politically suicido, but which resonate with a core on the Democratic side. And when you hear people go out there and attack him, like James Carville, they're not saying I

disagree with his ideas. They're saying I think he's politically toxic potentially. But they all are ideologically in his direction, oriented in his direction. But Bernie is a candidate with a message, and he is the right messenger, just as Donald Trump was. Content free candidates who try to pander and push to try to win over in the Democrats case, the woke anti American progressives, they're showing themselves to be

not the real deal. They're not genuine Bernie is the original, genuine article, and a candidate with a message be it's a candidate with no message anytime. And that's why I think he has a real chance still in their fields, even though if he only gets a porality not a majority. The party that talks about democracy dying in darkness is willing to take away of the nomination from the person

who gets the most votes. That is what they all basically agreed to when every candidate who was asked the question. But Bernie said, if you have a porality, that's not enough to win our nomination, which means that they're asking for a broker convention. And a brokered convention, I believe where it's taken away from Bernie would lead to nineteen sixty eight catastrophe for Democrats. Literal riots, chaos, violence, tearing

their party apart. Except the cops will stand down because the Democrats do not believe in there being any policing today. It will be an embarrassment for them, it will be

a disaster for the country. But ultimately, I think what you're seeing is that there is a real civil war for the heart of it, and my book American ingrate Ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamas Takeover of the Democratic Party argues that even if the Bernie wing doesn't win today or tomorrow, it is destined to win the way things are going, and they are empirical and anecdotal reasons

for it. But what really matters is that it means the end of a pro American fifty percent of the country representing party, and that's a disaster for the country as a whole. This has been Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexon on the Buck Sexton Show. I want to thank Buck for the opportunity to fill in for him, and I want to thank you for listening and again urge you to pick up my new book, American Ingrate.

Ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamas Takeover of the Democratic Party have a great weekend, and thanks so much for joining us.