China!

hundred Buck. That's eight four four nine hundred to eight to five. The future of talk radio buck Sexton. Yes, in our country closed, shuttered, gone six million jobs at least, God, and now they're starting to come back. You see what's happening with Chrysler, with Fox con with so many other companies wanting to come back into the United States. But we have one particular problem, and I view them as a friend. I have tremendous respect for President she We

have a great relationship. But there's gonna be some tariffs and there's gonna be some pushback on the theft of intellectual property. Welcome to the buck Sexton Show, my friends, Thank you for being here. The market has had kind of an interesting ride today down down seven points, which many are understandably a little little freaked out about my My four oh one k is now a one oh one k uh and and it wasn't much to begin with. So it's been a rough been a rough day for

retirement plans and people with with stock stock park of accounts. Well, this was absolutely necessary. Look, yeah, two major things happened today with the administration, well with the government. One is China tariffs, trade, intellectual property theft, and actually the last part of that I think is the most important. We're gonna get into that in just a second. And then also this omnibus spill, which is a disaster, it really is.

It's it's frustrating that this is where we are and that so many Republicans are comfortable going on TV saying yeah, you know, it's great, it's great. No problem. Not nothing to see here, folks, No problem. We will talk about that too later on the show. I have updates for you on the Austin serial bomber. We also have a breaking news story on former Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapperman. I will talk to you about and the Vegas shooter.

There's video of him now, and I watched it all today and I'll talk to you about that as as well as some other topics that will come up over the course of our discussions. But first on China. China, there you go. The President is pushing back finally against our nearest competitor. And there's a lot of freak out

about this. But let's understand that there is this notion, uh, there is this notion that we can be in a world where competition just benefits everyone and there's really no winners and losers between nation states, and that doesn't make sense. It's not really true. Yes, free trade is great. It's made a lot of people very wealthy, and the last hundred and fifty years has pulled globally more people out of poverty than all the years of human history before.

So I'm all about all about capitalism. I love commerce, baby, it's great, But there are other considerations for nation states as well. It can't always just be driven by quarterly earning statements. And when we're looking at China specifically and what they've been doing, now there's a problem. And I'm trying to to piece by piece take apart the conventional wisdom.

I can tell you more or less what a lot of conservative journals of opinion out there, various columnists are going to say, because it's the same stuff they've been saying for twenty years about China, which is, you know, let's just trade relationship, everything will be cool, just give it time. And things aren't getting better in fact, from

the perspective of politics in China. From if you're looking at this from the angle of is our nearest competitor on the world stage becoming a more free and less bellicost place or not? Uh, the answer is that it is not becoming a more free and less bellicost place. So that's it's not working for us. Um it is something that needs to be addressed. I would recommend if you have some time. This is a little a little digression,

but it's it's important, it's powerful. I think if you have the time to go back, read a bit about the Venona project. Lots of books written about it. The Venona was started because the well, because we wanted to have a sense the US military and national security complex wanted to have a sense that's what the Soviets we're

really up to. And then we figured in terms of the Second World War and what the what their plans were visavi Germany, where they're going to have a separate piece, and and we we kept it going because we figured out, wait a second, there's a lot of Soviet agents that had penetrated the United States government. Now this is pre internet, this is pre mass communication other than radio and printing press, right, I mean some some television coming into into the scene

pretty pretty soon. But you had to have people in place to steal a lot of the info that you wanted to steal. And the long term ramifications of that theft were severe. We know that it accelerated a Russian nuclear bomb, for example, by at least I think eighteen to twenty four months they estimate, They don't really know. This is just an estimate. What how quickly could they have gotten there if they hadn't been purloining our nuclear secrets? And think about that for a moment. The Soviets were

actually getting the Crown Jewels stuff. What could be more sensitive than our nuclear technology in the you know, late nineteen forties, early nineteen fifties, Soviets got into that. They had a lot of fellow travelers, people who ideologically were aligned with them, be because they felt like the Soviets, for one, had been the force that had truly defeated Nazi Germany. And this is not talked to kids in school these days, but that was common among American leftists

that it was really the Soviet Union. Now, I know, the battlefield losses on the Eastern Front were orders of magnitude larger than the Western Front, but they didn't think of that as well. The Soviets had a terrible war machine to use because of the purges of Stalin. Stalin got rid of all the good generals. That was a problem.

You're gonna fight Nazi Germany, you probably want to have your best general's right A Stalin was had already eliminated them, liquidated them, and that led to many of the disasters on the Eastern Front, but not nonetheless the back to the theft of intellectual property that occurred there. It was civilization changing. It allowed the Soviets to punch well above their weight when it came to the military in particular, but also in economic espionage, industrial output, things like that.

Their system eventually collapsed because it was obviously on faulty foundation. And you know what you mean to tell you that, but this is still not really understood in the American consciousness that that the theft of information from US by the Soviets was a a massive national security not just vulnerability, but loss. The same things happening with China right now. I keep repeating it because it is so important that Chinese. We don't even know how much the Chinese are stealing.

And the difference now is that they don't have to have people working in the Manhattan projects, right they don't have to, although, by the way, the extent of old school Chinese espionage too. I'm sure there's a lot going on that not just the public doesn't know about, but nobody in this country knows about, including the people whose jobs are to prevent any theft of intellectual property or or military or intelligency secrets by the Chinese. This has

been their m O for decades now. This has been going on for quite a while, and because of the Internet and because of connectivity, a lot of it can be accomplished via cyber and what would have taken one person. I mean, I've gone back and I've told you before about the Metroken Archives. It's worth it. Get it that you can get a copy. I think you can even a lot of it's been posted on the internet for free. You want to see the kind of stuff I'm talking about.

What what do the KGB really do? What were their operations really like during the Cold War? You can find out because we have their archive. We have the KGBS archive. It was uh, it was published years ago after the wall fell. And when you see the extent and also honestly the risk taking of the operations they were willing

to engage in, it's it's pretty breathtaking. But it was going after everything because they were trying to beat us, and they knew that if they add the economic if they had economic advantages military advantages, that was going to be critical. You know, we're both big countries with a lot of natural resources and devoted you know, devoted populations at the time two one ideology or the other. So what we see with China right now is at that level.

We don't think of it that way. We got all the free traders people think tanks in DC are sitting around talking about how, oh, it's so great and look at all the cheap stuff in Walmart. That's true, but that comes with a cost, and not just a cost to your credit card. It's a cost of the US as the global superpower over the long run if we don't do something about it, and that is what the

president is up to now. And go back and look at the Clintons didn't want to stand up to China, pushes, didn't want to stand up to China, the Obama Obama years, no standing up to China. Finally, now we were presidents saying we're we're going to change things, and we're gonna hold them accountable for this policy of just outright theft.

It is stealing. It's interesting me that we have a country where people seem to understand that if you were to take all the you know, if you were to to set up your own network and you were to call it BNN for the Buck News Network, and all I did was just take everything that was on CNN and run it on BNN, You'd say, well, you're you're stealing. You can't do that. I'd say, well, but does it really matter because I just have it and they have it,

and I'm gonna monetize it and they're gonna have it. And And he said, well, yeah, of course it matters. Right, It is theft. It is stealing. Although the Buck News Network, I think I'm onto something. I think that would BNN we could do like a whole series of parody skits. And I'm like, let's interview a few more porn stars. Maybe they met Donald Trump at one point in time. Hey, do you ever meet him? You know, let's go to some strip clubs in Florida and just see if anybody

happens who have ever met Donald Trump. That'll be a great assignment for our reporters. That actually happened, by the way,

at CNN, not at BNN. So there you go. Yeah, and the producer Mike is saying that you know, this is this we were onto something here, but theft of inntellectual property we understand as actual theft and something that we people be sued for it and there has to be protection of it because otherwise, what's the what's the point of R and D, what's the point of putting forward all of this, all the resources to create, to be a producer if you can just steal, well that

Chinese even getting a free ride on a lot of this stuff for a long time, they've been stealing. That's it is theft. It is theft. And our companies go up against their companies. They are now putting restrictions on the kind of exactly the kind of projects. Remember, I think it was a week or two ago I said that what the what the Chinese love to do is say, hey, ge, hey, IBM, let's do a joint venture. We're going to give you

access to our huge market. You're gonna sell a lot of stuff which will make your shareholders have but you're also gonna have to give us your semiconductor technology. You know, you're also gonna have to show us how small you can really make those microchips for that project or whatever the case may be. This is this is meaningful and what it what it really comes down to is there are considerations that have to go into our discussions of trade with China that aren't just about how do we

make the most money the fastest. You know, you you might have a great business plan for selling PlayStation four in Iran, but if you try, you're well, actually, I don't know what the laws are right now based on the Obama air sections, but they're generally speak if you try, you're probably gonna go to prison because there's all all kinds of criminal restrictions on what kind of business you can do with the Iranians. Right, So we understand that there's more than just how do you make money here?

We understand that there is a long term plan that has to put into effect. Does that mean it's gonna come without some pain in the show? I don't think so. I think this is gonna be It's gonna be rough. You better strap in here because the Chinese are gonna push back. It's like we finally decided no more free ride, no more free ride. And a lot of folks who just like the status quo because the status quo was enriching them personally or riching their business are going to

kick and scream about this. But we need to understand what's really at stake here. And uh, well, I don't think that we are quite as on a dangerous path as you were with the Soviets, with the with the Chinese. Give it some time. History tends to suggest that it's unlikely that two superpowers are gonna stay best buddies for all that long. We got a whole lot more show.

I gave you a sense what's coming up. If you want to weigh in by all means eight four five eight four four n buck, we will hit a break. I gotta talk to you you us Omnibus Bill. We've also got Gordon Chang who will be joining us shortly to talk about what he thinks of all this China. Massy's my among my very favorite analysts on all things China, so we'll have him joining us a few minutes. Stay with me. We're losing three hundred and seventy five billion

dollars with China. It could be five hundred and four billions, depending on the way you count, a lot of different ways of counting, but no matter how you count, it's bad, and we're doing something that will be the start of making trade with China more fair. It was so far down and our presidents, frankly, our past president should never have allowed this to happen. This has been many, many

years now. I think there's another another approach or another way to analyze what we're doing to China how it could respond, which is, you know, how outrage can they really be that if they're going to charge a you know, a fifteen percent terraf on something, we'll charge a fiften terrafons if we catch them stealing our intellectual property, we're gonna retaliate. But on the trade issue, where it really is about the numbers. Seems to me that this should

be reasonable minds could prevail here. You know, I don't think they will on the Chinese side of things, because they like the advantage that they've had and they've got their own domestic political considerations to worry about. Very interesting I mentioned I like to talk about the Soviets because I think that puts it into that starts to put

us in the frame of mind here where. But instead of thinking about it first and foremost as a military competition between two superpowers, were an economic competition between two superpowers. But this was a quote that I saw online is actually in The Times from a former China analyst for the FBI who said the following The Times quote. If a beach were a target, the Russians would send in a sub frogmen would steal ashore in the dark of night and collect several buckets of sand and take them

back to Moscow. The US would send over satellites and produce reams of data. The Chinese would send in a thousand tourists, each assigned to collect a single grain of sand. When they returned, they would be asked to shake out their towels and they would end up knowing more about the sand than anyone else. In other words, the Chinese have infinite patients end quote. Uh, that's what we're up

against now you're starting now. It all makes sense, right, A cyber theft here, economic espionage, They're all the things that we're seeing over the long term. China wants to be able to dictate global economic policy. China thinks that it wood in the future become the country that everyone turns to for leadership, for direction, for orders. However, however it all shakes out. Um, So I think we need to start looking at this in that context, and everything

I'll started to make a lot more sense. We've got Gordon joining us. I know, I meant to get to the Omnibus bill. I will right after Gordon joins us here, and we're gonna get into this. Look, guys, you know, I voted for Trump because he's a vessel for an agenda. He's agenda and it needs to be enacted. And I don't want to hear all the kind of both sides of the mouth talk from Paul Ryan about how you know this is a good spending bill, because it's not.

We'll talk more about that though. Stay with me. I've been speaking with the highest Chinese representatives, including the President, and I've asked them to reduce the trade deficit immediately by one billion dollars. It's a lot, so that would be anywhere from twenty five percent, depending on the way you figure two maybe something even more than that. But we have to do that. The word that I want

to use as reciprocal. When they charge for a car to go in and we charge two percent for their car to come into the United States, that's not good. That's how China rebuilt itself. President Trump speaking about China and tariffs and closing the trade gap earlier today. As you know, uh, markets not reacting so well to it, at least for today. But we take a longer view here, and to help us take that long view, we've got Gordon Chang on the line. He is the author of

The Coming Collapse of China. Also you can go to Gordon Chang dot com for all of his latest Gordon, thanks for joining. Thank you so much. Buck. What do you think about the President's announcement? Let's just start there. I think it was absolutely necessary. You know, no one wants to um engage in what could be the beginning of a very long cam pain and struggle with China. But unfortunately, um, you know, we've tried every other thing

trying to accommodate the Chinese, and it hasn't worked. So, for instance, we had that September two thousand fifteen agreement between President Obama and Sie Jumping announced in the Rose Garden that neither country would steal the commercial secrets of the other. Well, you know, the Chinese just continued to do that, and so, um, you know, at this point, we have no choice but to impose severe costs on China.

No one likes it, but unfortunately there's no choice. What do you think the Chinese reaction to this is going to be, Well, they said that they don't want to see the start of a trade war, which is incorrect because you can accuse President Trump with many things, but you can't accuse him of starting a trade war with China because the Chinese have been engaged in a trade

war against us for decades and we have been oblivious. So, um, you know, the Chinese will huff and puff, but we got to remember they don't really have very many cards to play, because last year, eighty eight point eight percent of their overall merchandise trade surplus related to sales to the United States, and that's up from an already astounding sixty eight point zero percent in two thousand sixteen. You just can't battle with them a trade deficit country and

expect to win. Gordon, we know that China has been engaging in currency manipulation. It has tariffs up. Trump has been sounding the alarm about this actually not just during his presidency in campaign, but for a long time before that as well. Uh. Do do you think that this is going to affect the way that we deal with China though? On other issues? I mean, essentially, are are they going to make our lives harder now dealing with

North Korea and in other places? I mean, or is this going to be mostly restricted to a trade to trade issue? I don't think it will be restricted. You know, the US for a very long time has tried to stove pipe, as they say, in other words, to not let trade disputes effect, for instance, cooperation on climate control or whatever. Um. You know, at this particular time, though, UM, I don't think the Chinese think that way, and I

don't think we should think that way either, um. But I do believe that if we impose costs on Beijing that are so severe that they very well may have no choice but to be better on other issues such as North Korea. You know, this is gonna get very difficult, UM, but we hold high cards. And the only way Chinese, the Chinese, can win a trade war with us is

if we refuse to exercise the political will. Um. That's necessary, but we have all the tools in the toolbox, as they say, so we should win this one now for people out there, just so everyone understands what the likely near term ramifications are. And everyone're speaking to Gordon Chang. He's the author of The Coming Collapse of China and he also writes for various publications. You can see everything

at Gordon Gordon Chang dot com. Uh Gordon. The paying for the Chinese side of the equation will be what, well, it could very well be UM throwing their economy into um, you know, into chaos and turmoil. Could be the end of the Chinese political system as we know it. Um. All sorts of things could happen because right now China is not growing at the six point nine pace that they claim for last year. It's actually growing at less than half that which means the U s economy is

legitimately growing faster than China's. Um. They've got a lot of debt. They're accumulating debt at the pace of about a year. They're in trouble and UM so anything that Trump can do to um undermine confidence in China will go a very long way to changing the Chinese political system. UM. That's not our goal, of course, but UM, we have the ability to put c jumping out on the street. What's the good side of this? Now? So let's let's say that Trump nax I mean, you already did sign

today some of these these actions. But if he continues on this path and things go as well as they could be reasonably expected to go for the American side, the folks listening to us right now across the country, Gordon, Um, is there is there a light at the end of the tunnel, because right now people are just seeing the Dow get pummeled hundreds and hundreds of points today and

they're saying, what the heck is going on? Yeah? Well, you know, the markets don't like uncertainty, they don't like disruptions. But the current relationship with China where they take somewhere between two hundred billion dollars of US intellectual property a year is completely unsustainable. Um so Um, this trade relationship, and indeed the relationship with Beijing in general, has got to change. Um so. Um. You know, the markets won't like it, um and they could very well get worse.

But um, you know, the Chinese know that Trump held um ways to really cause extreme pain for China. So, uh, is this more of an I mean, Gord, is this more of a national secure already imperative in your mind? Or is it an economic imperative or is it just a straight up combination of both fifty It's certainly both because, Um, the way we pay for our military, the way we defend ourselves is having a vibrant economy, and the Chinese are taking intellectual property, which is the heart of the

American economy. We don't make things as we used to. What we do as we innovate, we create technology, and the Chinese are stealing it. And that is a mortal threat to the United States. It's not just economy, it's national security as well. So um, it's a combination of both. And so this is an existential challenge to American society. We actually had the FBI Director Christopher Ray talking about this exact issue ultimately is going to have a real

impact on American jobs, American businesses, and American consumers. So is that, in fact, Gordon, your read too that that this is going to have down the line impacts that will be helpful? Well, I think it has to be helpful because we can't really be any worse than we are at this particular time. Um. And I actually think because we I think the Chinese are going to be low to retaliate if they believe that President Trump is political.

Will you know, they have been um successful at a trade war or whatever you want to call it for a very long time because Americans have tried to integrate China into the international system, not imposed costs, try to

be accommodating. Um. But um, you know, if the President of the United States is willing to use all the elements of American power, the Chinese are going to realize that they can no longer continue to do what they've done, I mean increasingly predatory trade practices, closing off the Chinese market to American companies, stealing US intellectual property. I mean,

what's there to like with about this? Is there a way, is there a future in which you see Gordon a China that is no longer in the grips of authoritarianism? Is this also going to have a long term political effect if the United States, as you say, uses all the tools it's this at its disposal and sees this through well. First of all, Buck, China is not in the grips of authoritarianism. It's now in the grips of totalitarianism. Siejun Paying, the current Chinese ruler, has taken China back

to more control. Um. His belief is that he should have absolute control over the party at the Communist Party, and the Communist Party should have absolute control over society. And he's been very effective in both of those goals. So this is a very different China than it was five ten years ago. UM. And yes, Um, that system is fragile. Um. We know that there are a lot of people in China who don't like what's going on.

Siejun Paying has been destabilizing the Communist Party's relatively stable institutionalized system that we've seen over the last five ten years. So a lot of things could go very wrong, especially if Trump decides that he is not going to take it anymore and I think that probably our president is

getting there. May not be there yet, Buck, but um, you can see with the way we've defined China as a threat in the national security strategy and in the national defense strategy, and with what he's been doing on tariffs and trade, it's very much a different relationship, and I think Beijing has got to be extremely alarmed at these developments. Gordon Chang is the author of the Coming Collapse of China. Also follow him on Twitter as well. Gordon, thank you so much for for being with us here

in the show. We always appreciate it. Thank you. Buck. All right, everybody, we're gonna roll into a quick break. We're gonna be back with a whole lot more, including some updates on on the Vegas shooter coming later on in the show. On the Vegas shooting from some time ago. You're you're gonna want to hear that we've got some new information to share. We'll be right back. Wait, wait, wait,

I've actually got something else breaking news here. Oh my, oh my Bolton to replace Nick Master as National Security Advisor. Another exit from the White House happening live as we are on air. Oh my, I Bolton to replace McMaster, the mustache is replacing Mr Clean. That's right, that's my national security analysis. All right, we got more. We'll be right back. So McMaster is out and Ambassador Bolton is in as the National Security Advisor. That is the breaking

news I have for you here on the show. Um. I will tell you that McMaster always had a good reputation. But there are a few things. One is, he was one of these guys who was I'm pretty sure he was in the don't say radical Islamic terror camp, which I just disagree with and always have and always will. So that's that's already. That's strike one from from my perspective. Um,

But he was a well respected and smart guy. I'm not gonna there's nothing nothing but um from people that I know who worked with them, And this isn't like I've I've heard from fellow journalists. I'm talking about people that either worked on the Mill or Intel side who knew new McMaster. They said he was a sharp guy, and I'm sure he did a good job for the president, and you know it's not. But we're seeing the realignment

based on on policy and vision. So you know, McMaster is not being asked to depart or is not departing of his own volition. I'm not sure how the the change happened. I don't know if there was a an actual a request for resignation. We'll see. I just know this has literally been breaking while we're on air here. But NC Master was was a good man and I think served as well as he could and I think probably did a very competent job as a national Grey advisor.

But Bolton is gonna be very much aligned with Trump on issues like North Korea, on the Iran deal, which is gonna be a whole that's a whole new ball game for Iran. You want to talk about disrupting the status quo, um, Bolton is not going to take the nonsense on on Iran. And he has a mustache that really is it should be able to be trademarked. His mustache is awesome. I heard somebody say that Trump said that he wanted to be shaved once. I remember that

was like a rumor out there. I completely disagree. The Bolton stash is a great thing. It's up there with the bernankey beard, which was also I mean the thing about Bernanky without the beard, it's like Samson without the hair.

It just doesn't work, It doesn't make sense. I think Bolton will do a good job and this is gonna have in terms of what this means, why why should we all care Iran deal that's on the table now in a way that it wouldn't have been with McMaster in uh in the role of national security advisor, or at least now you have a national security advisor who's gonna be working with the president tighten, tighten the screws on Iran and also on North Korea. Bolton knows a

North Korea shoe backwards and forwards. One more note, I'll say, on the good side of things for Bolton, there are a lot of national security analysts who go on TV who honestly aren't very smart. I'm not gonna name names, because that would be mean. You want me to name names. I'll name names. I'll name him. No, No, I won't, I won't name him. Uh. But there are a lot of nashcurity advisors, I mean the national security analysts noted,

a lot of national security advisors. A lot of these analysts go on TV and I'm like, well, the person may have spent a long time working for the government, and their service may have been honorable, but they don't have very much to add to the conversation right now. A Bolton is not is not in that category. He's a very smart guy. Um, I know who the phone are. Bolton is not a phony. I think it's really interesting that CNN and the announcement refer it says Fox News

analysts becoming national Security advisor. It's like or former US ambassador to the United Nations. It's like a guy who's been in the government game for decades or or that. You know, you can take this one or two ways here, you know, would be like saying man with prominent white mustache becomes national security advisor or the former United States ambassador at the United Nations. You know, career lawyer and diplomat who served in a bunch of Republican administrations. You

take it either way. CNN take it either way. So there we have it. And also this is just a little aside, but I think this is really meaningful. In the early days of my career, there was a show that I used to do with Fox called Red Eye. Many of you are probably familiar with it. I really I it was a joy to do that show. It was a really funny good show with a great energy and it. Uh, I learned a lot. I'm doing it early on in my career allowed me to have a

little fun. Initially, they all wanted me to be very sort of serious journalist when I got into this game, and I was like, no, I've I've got other speeds, folks. I mean you all know that, but I'm talking about early on, and Red Eye was a place where we all got to. There was the there were jokes made that kind of continued on. You know, people learned that the name of my vehicle in college was in fact

the Shagging Wagon. For example, that was on Red Eye. Yeah, it's because it was a wood paneled station wagon that was not something that you would call a babe mobile. Uh. It was great though. Whenever somebody wanted to move their furniture, I was the coolest guy on campus because that thing had that thing had a caboose, had a caboose on it. The big it looked it's kind of like a wagon. The here it was actually a Roadmaster. I don't know if you familiar Roadmaster, but that was that was my whip.

And you know, if there was if there was any rain and you tried to come to a quick stop, you were very likely to hydro playing through the intersection. But you know it was it was a good, good situation. Um So the shagging wagon that came from Red Eye, these people still tweet shagging wagon at me, like that's a that's a meme that has lasted to this day.

Um But Bolton, why am I talking about this? Because Bolton, as serious a career and as serious a man as he is, he was actually a guy who would do Red Eye. And I you know what, I always respected that I was he was he was willing to uh have a little fun and play along with everyone and and uh, you know, let the stash be the stash, you know, let him do his thing. So I always like that about him, and I wish him all the best. I think it's I think it's great. I wholeheartedly support

support this choice by President Trump. I think it's it's a it's a wise decision. And he's got he's putting pieces around him right now in terms of senior policy personnel that are really going to um see things his way. And I'm I'm thinking that this is gonna be good because it's like a stormy sees ahead, not just with China, Iran too, and North Korea. Whoa, I'm taking along. He's back with you now, because when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck never stops. The American people

didn't elect Democrats to control the United States Congress. They elected Republicans. I don't think we told the voters when we were running for the job, and they gave us the privilege to come here and serve that we were going to continue to fund planned parents who We're gonna restrict Second Amendment liberties. Let some bureaucrats take away your Second Amendment rights, not a court of law. I don't think they said we were gonna fund this Gateway Earmark

boondoggle project and not fund the border wall. I mean, the one thing we don't have fund is the one issue we all campaigned on, a border security wall, and that is not in the legislation. So it can't get any worse than this bill. I like Representative Jim Jordan, by the way, I like him, guy. Guy, rolls up the shirt sleeves and get it done. Welcome to our two of the Buck Sexton Show. By the way, that

was that was Jim. That was JJ right there, dropping some truth bombs because this omnibus bill which they passed in the night, you know, and and they it's two thousand, two hundred and thirty two pages by the time the bill was passed to the time that it will go well, assuming it makes through the Senate what we run out of money tactic. We don't really want out of money, but the government is no longer funded as of what Saturday, right, Yeah,

so no one read this thing. It's literally not possible for the members of Congress who voted on it to read it. But everyone just looks at the top line numbers and if they get the little thing that they want, they're happy. This is not the way it's supposed to run, folks. This is not the way this is supposed to happen. And I like talking about all the good things. I'm willing to take the heat for Trump's for Trump's policies on China and North Korea, and the the breaking with

consensus and the shattering of the echo chamber. I'm all for it, but there also has to be some consistency here for spending for the wall, for all of the other stuff that we were promised. As I said, I'm in favor of the Trump at Jenna. Do I find Trump to be highly entertaining and in many ways just a force of nature. Absolutely, But first and foremost, I want what he said he would accomplish during his campaign. I am all in favor of it, and I wanted

to happen. And I know many of you listening, most of you listening due too. I cannot sit here in good conscience and say to myself, yeah, this is this is what this is what we sign up for. I mean, Mick mulvaney, who's a sharp guy. By the way, mcmulvedy's smart dude, but you know he he likes it. But what what choice does he really have trying to get the president's priorities funded? And this omnibus bill does that.

It funds national defenses, you're Sarah mentioned, It give the troops the increase that we were trying to get them in their in their compensation. It funds opioids, it fund school safety. It's a tremendous increase in workforce development, something that doesn't get a lot of attention, but this administration has been pushing since we got here. It actually starts taking a look at funding infrastructure um and it also does a lot of what we wanted, not everything we wanted,

but a lot of what we wanted on immigration. I think that's a little I think he's being a bit of a salesman there, be honest with you, you know, and it doesn't doesn't really do what they wanted immigration. Okay, let's let's get into some of these numbers here. So we're we're gonna look at this from their perspective of two important areas or two Maine, two main regions. One you have on the one side, you have president's priorities. Right.

I've actually got a little pad in front of me so I can make sure I don't going to one of my digressions where I forget what I was talking about and all of a sudden we're having a discussion about hop light tactics circa. You know. Um, but here we go. Uh, you've got priorities the president, and then you've also got the debt, which we'll talk about two

debt and spending. Okay, so presidential priorities. Yes, it gives more funding for the troops, and I can be persuaded that that is a good idea, although keep in mind that the decrease in military funding was primarily a function of the sequester, which was a decrease in the increase in the rate of federal government spending that Republicans agreed to some years ago after Democrats assumed they would not,

and then very rapidly thereafter. Republicans are like, whoa, whoa, that's way too much, way too much austerity in terms of this. So we're just looking at priorities. So we're gonna get into the debt and spending side of a second. I know this is this is it's like we're having a wild and wild and crazy party right now. This is this is like a Malibu beach party we're having talking about the debt and the deficit. But it's important,

it's important stuff. So what do we have here? We have thirty three miles of border fence in Texas, one point five billion dollars for the wall. That is. To call that a start is a little bit like me saying, you know, I am going to buy a house, so I am going to put three dollars in this piggy bank. It is true that that is a start, but it's tough for me to get all that excited about that. I think that's fair right, thirty three miles, got a lot more miles to go, and we got a mid term.

Come it up. We do not have and endless uh an endless array of options, especially if the mid terms don't go our way to get this thing done. Show you got thirty three miles in Texas one point five seven billion for the wall. No one's read. This thing still has to go through the Senate, and like Trump could veto it, but I don't think he will because all of his White House is saying very nice things about it. We do. We have Paul Ryan talking, talking,

whispering sweet nothings about the omnibus bill. You know, Mr like fiscal sanity. You know, he's not much of a fighter, you know, Oh he's yeah, we got let's let's hear Mr Ryan has to say, the Speaker of the House about the wall, play it on one point six billion. The one point six billion is the total? Is that wrong? Because I only heard six d fifty million total six for the entire but the voter also, you need you

need fences, you need cameras, you need electronic devices. You need these, you need the air real devices to be at the police and in the mountainous areas. You can't build the wall over a mountain, so you need cameras and you need drones up there. So it's a border wall system that the Border Patrol tells us they need, and so we fund their request based on what they say they need to secure the border. And it's different kinds of all based on different kinds of conditions on

the ground. And that's what we fund with a billion dollars. It's a big border there, Paul, it's a big border. Let's not let's not be silly. One point five seven billion is not going to get it done at all. I mean, I know he's not saying the whole wall is gonna be built, but this is this is a drop in the bucket. So let's not pretend. It also doesn't do anything about sanctuary cities. So to say, I guess they're just gonna fight that out in the courts exclusively.

But to say that that is um, you know, just say that that's getting our immigration priorities is I think a stretch. I think that's a stretch. And no one has read this thing, which is also just fundamentally an issue and in terms of the priorities, the President you know, not a lot of enforcement dollars here for immigrations and customs enforcement. Nothing really new on that. Look tough to get excited about. I'll be honest with you, and I know we're supposed to say no, like this is all

gonna be great. Maga, everything's gonna be amazing. You got two or fifty six to one or sixty seven was the vote in the House. Chuck Schumer likes it. I don't know, how does that make you feel about it, Chuck Schumer. Let's see what he asked to say. Overall, we Democrats are very happy with what we've been able to accomplish on a number of very important priorities to the middle class in America. Infrastructure, education, opioid treatment, mental health, childcare.

This spending agreement brings that era of austerity to an unceremony send and represents one of the most significant investments in the middle class in decades. If that doesn't put you on edge, folks, I don't know what will. If it doesn't make you think twice about this that you've got Chuck Schumer who's basically talking about how amazing it is. We gotta have a long talk the debt is twenty

one trillion dollars. I got involved in politics and media at the height of the Tea Party, really right all right, right right around that And when I when I first started doing this, it was when the Tea Party had just had that massive wave in the midterm election, and uh, it was all about the debt, the depths in and spending, and Obama was spending us into oblivion and he was trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars. We understood then

that this was a problem. Mathematically, it is a problem one that will eventually choke out, uh, block out and choke off a lot of I guess choke out if I want to get really aggressive about it. You know, there's that private sector spending one that is going to mean the service on the debt is going to be more than military spending within ten years on our current trajectory. So paying back the interest on this debt is going to be more than we are spending on the military

within a decade. It is too much. As I've been saying to you, this does not become obvious until it is too late. It is a a problem that will require a mass of political will to tackle in advance of the crisis, or we can just wait for the crisis. What I see with this spending bill, this may be unpopular some folks, but this is what I see is just let's have a spending free for all, spending bonanza. What are you? What are the Democrats want? What do

the Republicans want? Let's just get it. You know, this is sending the kids into the toys. R us may at rest in peace. Yeah, I know, it's sad, right, It's like a part of my childhood's going away, uh, sending him in and saying, you know, well, you all get to don't worry about the credit card bill. You all get to get whatever you want. Of course, everyone's gonna be happy. What happens when that bill comes to. What happens when the bill comes to, and it's gonna

be on us. It's gonna be on on the generation below, the below, the boomers, the generation below, the millennials, the generations that are coming up that we haven't even named yet. They're gonna have to pay back higher taxes, slower growth, more all kinds of government restrictions and regulations in order to try to deal with the economic dislocations that will

come from this. It's bad. It is bad, and I'm you know, I see a willingness to speak the truth and to be politically brave and to show leadership from this administration on a number of it. Look, immigration is a totally different discussion now because of Donald Trump. I'm not forgetting how we got here. I respect that and I know that. But he's gotta you know, you can't get that excited just because you know the quarterback is taking you fifty yards down the field. Right you gotta

put points on the board. It has to be more than just the effort. And with immigration, this is not putting points up on the board. And with spending, this is I'm gonna really belabor the football analogy or this is this is a fumble. This is not good. Umm.

I think Rand Paul, we can. Rand Paul has been so I picture him right now in like a montage in a track suit, you know, just just training and getting all fired up for what will inevitably be a lot of news hits and you know, maybe some filibustering or you know whatever he's got up his sleeve, because this is this is his sweet spot right now. And the problem is he's right we can't keep doing this.

Why aren't we hearing more people say that. I understand, there are a lot of issues where you gotta give you gotta get the Trump administration leeway to do things differently, do things their way. You know, the our goals are aligned. I want success for them. I want success for all of us. So I'm like, all right, let's see, let's see if he can get it done. He's he's the guy that had a ninety five percent chance of losing the election according the New York Times and Election Day.

He's we gotta give him a wide berth to get some things done. Spending is spending twenty one trillion dollars. Twenty one trillion dollars. This is not. This is not responsible for our government right now. It just isn't. It isn't, And I know that's not people want to hear. It's like saying that the party is out of beer. I am the waha showing up, turning off the music, telling everybody they have school tomorrow. But that's what's happening right now.

We cannot keep doing this. And just for understand this, Schumer and all the rest of them, if we hit a big correction, in the market, and there's an economic downturn, and we see some rising unemployment, and you know, we have a I'm not even talking about some big reset what some people think is coming, but that's a whole separate discussion, you know, or or or a jubilee even um. But I'm talking about just a real shift in the economic wins. They're gonna Oh my gosh, they're gonna all

make it Trump's fault. It's all Trump's fault, all the spending. It's so irresponsible. It's all look at what he's done, all this military spending, everything else. So I don't think that they're in this too. That's not how it's gonna play out, all right, eight four four nine hunder two eight two five. You want to call in, I've I

appreciate a lot of you have called it. I'm sorry I have not gotten to your calls on the lines, but we will try to get some if you're if you're willing to be patiently, we'll try to get some coming up here in a little bit. Oh wait, I'm sorry, there's one more thing before we I know we're going really late. John, pardon me for a second here, Why are we funding planned parenthood. Why is the government funny plan? Parent?

If we have a Republican House, republican Senate, Republican president, why I need I need an answer to that question, folks. That's about a lot more than money. When do we fight on that? We're gonna wait till after the mid terms. Lives are at stake there, You notice, well as I do, All right, now we'll hit a break. We'll be right back. So I asked the team in here on the Omnibus sill.

I figured that there must be some entertaining Rand Paul audio out there, because, as we know, this is where this is where Rand steps in, This is where Rand goes big. He puts away the surfboard, and just I just always think he's like a surfer. I don't know why. I know he's from Kentucky. Not a lot of waves there. But nonetheless, do you'd hanged in? He's very mellow, but he writes he's been live tweeting as he read through the two thousand, two hundred and thirty two page long

Omnibus bill. And here are some of the here are some of the Randy, Randy and pardon me highlights. On page two oh seven, he writes two thousand plus pages to go reading about the ever wastefull six billion dollar National Science Foundation. He also put a photo of himself with the printed out bill, which he said took over two hours to print in his office. And I will I will tell you it is quite large. If you lifted this thing, you could wail on your packs and

get bulging biceps. Bro, do you even live? Bro? I mean, it's it's serious. It's a big it's a big bill. You will be amazed when you see how how many pages it is and when was the last time you had a two thousand page But I've actually never read a two thousand page books, So you could tell me if you've ever done that. I think maybe I've gotten up into like the eight hundreds or nine hundreds once or twice. I don't think of ever. I don't think

I've ever broken four digits with a book. Um, I don't know, you know, true true confessions by Bucks accident on air so uh Page to forty oh, here's a here's a bright spot. Good news for states rights. No funds will be spent to prevent any states medical marijuana initiatives. Page to seventy eight nine hundred and sixty one million dollars to destroy our chemical weapons. Who wasn't exactly who convinced our government to pay billions to develop weapons we

now find deplorable. He's got more. Here are some highlights. This is from Senator Paul's account Twitter. He's he's live tweeting his reading of the two thousand, two two page bill. One million dollars for the Cultural Antiquities Task Force. I will be honest with you, I did not I was not aware of that that we had that six point to five million for the Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation, twenty million dollars for countering foreign state propaganda, twelve million

dollars for countering disinformation and pressure. What does that even mean? Five million dollars for Vietnam Education Foundation grants, fifteen million dollars for U s a i D. Promoting international higher education between universities. Wow. Fifty one million dollars to promote international family planning? Why why are we paying for other places family planning? This is your tax dollars. I mean I could go, I could go all day with this rand.

Paul literally is going all day with this folks, My friends, fellow conservatives patriots, Americans, do we care about this? Yes or no? He's back with you now, because when it comes to the fight for the funk never stops. The Facebook is a is a wonderful American company, but it's no longer accompanies to it. It's a country, and they have enormous power. They knew enormous good. But we need to talk about whether Facebook has been a good steward

of of our data. We need to talk about how we can preserve the good, good aspects of Facebook while stopping the corrosive effects. Their platform was weaponized by a foreign adversary, and there's still many questions about whether that adversary worked with the Trump campaign and whether that whether the Trump campaign used Facebook to amplify stolen, hacked information that the Russians were using in their campaign. Facebook at the center of the news this week for a bunch

of different reasons. For Democrats, it's just Facebook is no longer among their favorite companies because they blame Facebook for Hillary's loss at some level, and so there's this surge of we need to do something about facebooks. It's been weaponized.

It's an information weaponization platform that's just doing terrible things to us all over the place, and yeah, what is that Representative Swallwell, Eric Swalwell, I actually don't even know who that Yeah, that's Representatives swallow must be Okay, I don't even know what that guy is, to be honest with you, fot five of these folks run around a lot of them. So uh And that was also I was Senator Kennedy before that. Here's things going on right now.

Mark Zuckerberg has been making the rounds doing interviews, talking to people, and he is showing some showing some I don't know remorse is the right word, but he's definitely saying, you know, okay, I know, we're we're we're sorry for what's what's happened here. Um, this was a major breach of trust, and and I'm really sorry that this happened. Um. You know, we have a basic responsibility to protect people's data and if we can't do that, then then we

don't deserve to have the opportunity to serve people. So our responsibility now is to make sure that this doesn't happen again. And there are a few basic things that I think we need to do to ensure that. One is making sure that developers like Alexander Cogan, who got access to a lot of information and then um improperly used to just don't get access to as much information going forward. I mean, Zuckerberg has all the charm of a pungent burp, so I don't think his political future

is what some others do. Although then again, how some people get really far without having much the way a charm. Um, But Zuckerberg is not a guy that I think is going to get the masses on his side. It's it's also hard to It's it's hard to pull off the everyman routine of a politician if you're wealthy. It's really hard. If you're like seventy billion dollars wealthy, that's gonna be a tough one. Min. I've struggled with bills too. It's difficult. Um. But why he is taking this position is a is

a surprise to me because Facebook didn't really do anything wrong. Um. Facebook could also very easy to say everyone needs to calm down and stop acting like this is such a big deal. Instead though they are, and this is from the CEO on down saying oh no, well we'll address this right away. Now. There are a couple of things here. Maybe this is just the pr strategy. Maybe this is just about not wanting to upset users and look bad, and the Silicon Valley companies spend a lot of time

trying to convince everybody that they're just these forces for good. Um, So there's that, There's that aspect of it, but there might be something else at work here. I just want to just want to experiment this for a second, because there's some other stuff that Zuckerberg said like this. I

actually I am not sure we shouldn't be regulated it. Um, you know, I think in general technology is an increasing um increasingly important trend in in the world, and I actually think the question is more what is the right regulation rather than yes or no should it be regulated? Why would the CEO of one of the most profitable companies in the history of a planet. The capital efficiency of Facebook is is like a wonder of the modern age. How much money it makes on the money it spends.

It's incredible. It is a like the biggest a T M machine to have ever been built. Why would the CEO be saying this regulations? Maybe it's because the ideologically is just inclined to accept state intervention in his enterprise. That's possible. That's possible. And right now he's just kind of saying this stuff because Facebook has gotten a bit of heat. People are, Oh, but but he's going to

pass because it's all about Trump. And now now the Camera j Analytica is increasingly looking like it's not even a good psychological warfare operation. I mean, it's such nonsense. And I knew it was nonsense from the start. I've known people who have been like, Oh, we're gonna take this, and we're gonna anytime somebody tells you they've got an algorithm for you that's gonna answer some question that nobody else has been able to answer, you need to be

very skeptical. All Right, it's not that easy. I'm just gonna have an algorithm's gonna tell you know everything you need to know. Nope, very difficult to do. Um. But there's another possibility here, which is that Facebook understands that government regulation, that big government and big business go hand in hand. This has been very true of banks and investment banking, a lot of the other financial sector activities

out there. They're like, yeah, DoD Frank, it's very expensive, it's bad for us, but it also is anti competitive because regulatory costs, as we all know, are quite real. And if Facebook has to deal with all these regulations, and if that then involves you know, legal costs and just compliance costs for the for the staff and everyone else, it just means that the likelihood of their being competitor social media networks is lessened. There's nothing that Facebook does,

it's all that that that's all that magical. It's just the best of what has been tried in this realm. Wasn't even the first, as you know, sorry friends, turn my space. Um, it wasn't the first one, but it was one that caught on the most. And it hasn't really evolved in amazing way since the initial first few years of it. I mean, it's you know, there's a lot of other places where you can do pretty similar stuff, but it is right now the dominant force. It is

the eight pound guerrilla in the social media space. And so the mere invitation for government regulation to me seems to be indicative of, yeah, let's regulate it, and let's let's make it so that any other company that wants to do this is gonna have incredible compliance costs, have real liability under the FTC. For example, for any any misuse of data. Compliance with data misuse issues gonna go skyrocketed, And the more the government gets involved, the higher the

cost of business becomes. As you know, Facebook can handle any cost of business. Really, I mean, realistically, could somebody who wants to create something that's better than Facebook, which right now we think, oh, that's not possible, but the history of innovation tells us it's just a matter of

time and it is quite possible. I think we're gonna reach a place where there's a political schism in the social media world, meaning people are just realized that you can't build a business around YouTube and Facebook, or you can't be reliant on YouTube and Facebook for your business, when in fact they can decide to shut you off because they've changed their mind about firearms, that changed their

mind about servative speech, or any number of things. So there's gonna be more of a push for this, and everything seems like it's gonna last forever until it doesn't, and nothing lasts forever. So that's what I have to say about Facebook. And I've got some other news that I meant to get to earlier. I'm gonna return to now. On James Clapper, I almost said Jake Tapper, because it

rhymes with Clapper. That's a different dude on on Clapper, the former d N I might be this is the this is one of these stories I read, I go. You know, it doesn't seem like a big deal. This could be a very big deal. Actually, what am I talking about? Well, as though we're finding out who's gonna get the final rows, you're gonna have to wait until after the break. So James Clapper is very on me

with the press. Um. I don't know if he's now officially a SCENA contributor, but he's on CNN all the time. And I know that former CI director Brennan is an NBC senior national security analyst. I think class Clapper. I think Clappers on contract with CNN now very chummy with and very anti Trump, very chummy with journalists, and has

a history of difficulty with the truth in public. Regarding the public, Clapper is nonetheless very welcome over at CNN, where they think that bureaucrats of long service equals genius and on unimpeachable integrity, which is unfortunately not the case. But something very interesting came up today about Clapper specifically, and this is Katherine Herrod from Fox News reporting on it.

The allegation is that the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, this is the person who oversees all of the intelligence agencies and whose primary responsibility is the protection of gasified information. They say the following that he quote provided inconsistent testimony about contacts with the media, including CNN. Of course, he

is now a CNN contributor. And based on our reporting, the line of questioning by the committee focused on that Trump Tower briefing in January, which is when the president was told for the first time about the unverified Trump dossier. And as you remember, that briefing was leaked to the media and that's really how the dossier story got into the mainstream. The efforts of Fusion, GPS and the fall

of to do that really had not been successful. But the leaking of the briefing at Trump Tower really accomplished that. One thing that has been lost somewhat in all the discussions over Russia collusion and all that is where did

the leaks come from? The leagues to the New York Times, Washington Post and some others CNN, uh, and I mean leak leaks like classified information and finding its way to reporters, all in an effort to hurt the Trump administration, undermines specific individuals and the Trump administration, most notably the president himself. Where did all that come from? How many people have been found as the source of those leagues? Zero so far,

But that may change. I don't believe that mid level people at d O J or or you know, any of the intel agencies are deciding to take it upon themselves to wage one man or one woman warfare against the Trump administration. The seniors do that. At the top level, the executive suite, the people with a lot of access who are already used to interacting with the media in a way that the rank and files don't. The rank and file risk their jobs for hanging out with the

media in some of these places. I mean, you cannot do it. But the top folks, you know, they go to fancy parties and they'll go to the correspondence dinner and all that. How is it that we haven't found any of them yet? Well, I think the answer to that is that we haven't looked particularly hard. Well, that might be changing. I know Attorney General Sessions, friend of the Freedom Hunt, I know that he is looking into this matter specifically because the crimes were committed, no question,

crimes were committed. Assuming that information was classified, and we have every reason to believe it is, then that would be illegal. But wouldn't it be interesting to see if the former Director of National Intelligence may have may have, I can't say did, but may have leaked information about a dossier to get the whole thing started. Um, I'm sorry the briefing on the dossier specifically, like like told the media that Trump had to be told about the dossier.

That is a form in itself of recular reporting. Right. If you are the d n I and you are making the choice of what goes into the president's folder, and you include some crap, lousy dossier that you know includes this stuff about the Golden showers and all that just garbage, but you make that decision, and then you also you also decide to tell the press that the decision was made to include that in the briefing. You've created that news cycle, You've created that story wholesale. Right.

Not only are you telling the press something you shouldn't, but you are the reason that that thing happened in the first place. That you then chose to tell the press about almost like what we've seen all along with the dossier and the efforts to use it in the files a court and everything else. Right the you know, one source was used to support another source, which was used to report the initial source which was used to

get it. I mean, it's just all running around in a circle, and it's a pretty tight knit group that we're really looking at for this stuff. And I just think there's the very real possibility that we may at some point have someone who was a senior Obama administration official, very very senior, would have betrayed his or her oath and violated the law in a fit of Trump arrangement syndrome. It's gonna happen. We're gonna we're gonna get somebody, and it's not gonna be some some rando that no one

cares about it. It's gonna be a name, you know, And it will be very interesting to see the Democrats circle the rank and they will that person will be treated as a martyr of the of the greatest caliber. That person will be treated like the true patriot by most of the media because they're gonna their their opinion of this is, yeah, you gotta break the law. To stop Trump. Go for it, whatever you have to do, it doesn't matter. They're gonna be all in favor of it.

So we need to keep an eye, keep an eye on that story. Um. I can't say that we know yet exactly what's going to happen, but there's the very real, very real chance that at some point it will be it will be unearthed, it will emerge that one of Obama's top people was playing dirty, and I mean top people in government, in the intelligence positions. This has always been my problem with Brennan for the last week or so and before that. I expect something different from people

in the intel community and people in the military. And to see all these former senior intelligence chiefs that are just partisan hacks who are leveraging that they were recently at the top of the intelligence chain for petty partisan ends. This is this is unacceptable, It is gross, and people should know that. All Right, we gotta we got a big third hour coming up here in a few moments. I just want to tell you what what we've got. I've got the update on the Las Vegas shooter case.

The videos have been released. I watched them. I'll talk you through what you see in them some new information, but a lot of it is confirming what was already believed. We also will discuss some of the new information about the Austin Cereal bomber. And then I'd like to, if I have time, get to the latest on some of the what do they what do we have like a

turd of the Parkland uh political movement? I mean, I don't know what the never again kids whatever we're calling them, I don't know what they're hashtag the hashtag never you know, Hog and company. We've seen some very interesting, um, we've seen some very interesting commentary from from him recently. And the way the media is, the media is exploiting these kids in ways that I think that the kids are bringing a lot of all themselves by the media is

exploiting them in ways that's really unethical. So we'll talk about that. And then also, of course I would I would be remiss if I did not note that Trump may have had his greatest single tweet ever today, which is really saying something for this president. But it is quite possible that Trump had, in the history of his Twitter account, his single best moment. That the p Stilla Trump or de la Raisi stance or whatever. You know what I'm saying, We'll be back. He's holding the line

for America. Buck Sexton his back. Welcome to our three of The Buck Sexton Show. We have the video to talk about from the Las Vegas mass shooting from many months ago now, but first, just some updates on the Austin serial bomber, so Mark Anthony Condite year old. We know that he blew himself up, we know he was the bomber, and now we're trying to go through the well,

who was this guy? And how did this happen? How did we find ourselves in a place where this individual was trying to engage in mass murder, mass murder by bombing, And so far not a whole lot of information that suggests that we could have known that not we, but that the people around him could have known that this was happening. He was part of a Christian survivalist group I've seen that reported called riot righteous Invasion of Truth.

And he was homeschooled and was taught gun skills. But there are millions of kids who are taught gun skills. I don't know. I don't even know how many kids are at home school. Do you have any idea. How many kids are in home skilling on It's a lot, um, But none of that sticks out, does anything to be anything unusually need to be concerned about. Just okay, So

he played role playing video games. He sometimes talked about weapons and explosives, but so do a lot of people I know, Um, I mean, especially in the circles that I used to travel. And but you know this is this is not anything about him that seems to be remarkable. In the run up to this, he has extended family in Colorado. They say that nothing really about this. They didn't see it coming, and they're shocked and they don't

know what the motive is. There's a twenty five minute video on his phone where he confesses to the attacks. I just had producer Mike check that no snow clips in the video are out yet. I've been looking for them all day. Um, but there's nothing. There's nothing that we can say about the video other than he admits to the attacks. I'm assuming he rambles on about a whole lot of other things. We don't have details on law enforcement from that just just yet. Um. He was

caught because of his FedEx office stop. The CCTV footage and that was very important track him down, as I thought was the case at the time, and that's really all we have. Otherwise people say he's quiet, relatively you know, relatively normal, harmless, seeming twenty three year old, and turned

out he was a serial bomber. How he could have how he could have transitioned into that that kind of evil, that level of darkness I have, I don't know, you know, with with Jee Hottest, I'll say this, there's a a whole psychological seduction that goes into the radicalization of of

of Gee Hottests. You know, they're they're shown videos of terrible atrocities, you know, abroad, and they're they're told that that American soldiers and our allies are killing women and children and discriminately doing all kinds of terrible things, and that is there. It is their moral obligation to be a righteous soldier for for Allah and all this stuff. And it's it's wrong and it's crazy, but at least

it it follows a pattern, It follows the past. You understand how they do this, right, You understand how the brainwashing occurs. All of a sudden, someone could think that it would be moral or ethical or even a a necessity to kill innocent people with a suicide bomb or anything like that overseas as a gee hottest with someone like condit Ah. No history of abuse that we know about,

no um, no history of severe mental illness. They're just they're just saying that he was kind of a quiet, nerdy kid and decided to become a serial bomber and went went through a lot of trouble and planning and everything else to do this. So I don't have much more for you other than that. I think we'll have a lot when the twenty five minute video is released. And also, as I mentioned, we have the video now and you can see that of the Vegas mass shooter.

So that's what I've got for you on the Austin

serial bomber case. I want to switch switch gears for a moment though, because and so this is a usually I don't I don't mix stories in one segment, but I just wanted to mention that there's still this movement of foot to use the some of the more visible youths from the Parkland school that was the scene of that mass school shooting for the purposes of curtailing the Second Amendment for gun confiscation or gun restriction, all that, all that stuff, and they appeared, some of those students

appeared on MSNBC last night. Well, I wish you guys success, I wish you resilience. I wish you'd be continuing and lifelong ability to laugh at people who use opinions you don't care about them with you anyway, They're right here start started a Jackie car and nevs right here. They're here for me, that's right, ten million dollar a year. News anchor Rachel Maddow says she's star struck by the Parkland.

Remember this is just some of the Parkland kids that got a lot of media attention because I say, what the media likes. We have an interview. This just came through and this courtesy of the Daily Wire there where I found this with David Hogg, who's probably Gonzalez is also very well known of these students pushing this anti gun agenda, but Hogg is the one who's the most well known, I think. And he gave an interview to

one of these new liberal sites. I don't know what the site is even, what's it called The Outsider or something, The Outsider, the Outsider, Okay, I got it right. Look at that he gave an interview. We had to bleep it out. But this is what he says. That This is what this person who is elevated by the media by the likes of matt Ow and others, says about the nrright play the pathetic that want to keep killing our children. They could have blood from children spattered all

over their face and they wouldn't take action. When you're oldest parents like I don't know how to send an I message and just like give me the phone and you take in You're like, okay, let me handle it, and you get it done in one second. Sadly, that's what we have to do with our government because our parents don't know how to use the democracy, So we have to. I think, what secrets are out there that want to continue to sell more guns, murder more children

and honestly just get reelected. Where what type of person are you when you want to see more money than children's lives? What type of person does that? Yeah, that's the that's the vanguard now of the anti gun movement after Parkland. That's the person who's been on He was on the Bill Maher show. Of course, he's on CNN m SEC all the time. Here's what I can say. Um, he's not very smart and he's disrespectful. So you have that.

That's just the truth. Uh, And the fact that all these news organizations have been elevating them up while he says things like the n r A wouldn't change their minds if they had the blood of children splattered on their faces. You a week later he'll be saying, we need respectful dialogue. But just don't forget who these people are and the adults who are putting them forward as

victims to shame politicians into taking action. All those media outlets CNN, the Bill Maher Show, they should be ashamed, but they're not capable of shame. Clown shows, that's what they are. The surveillance footage is remarkable in its banality. It shows Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas gunman, in the

days before his mass shooting. He cuts a lonesome figure as he moves through the Mandelaide Bay Hotel, playing video poker for hours in the casino, buying snacks at a newsstand, watching a Lebron James interview in a restaurant and The Times, chatting with hotel stuff. The Las Vegas shooter who killed

fifty eight people, injured over five hundred wounded, over five hundred. UM. He there is now shown in videos that I've been released from the mental a Bagasino exclusively to the New York Times, which put out a video series on it today, which I've watched, and it's, uh, it's eerie. UM. I have to tell you, if you get the chance to

watch and would, I would recommend it. You have Stephen Paddock looking like just another somewhat schlubby guy at the slot machines, you know, walking right, He's going to a sushi restaurant. He's he's playing the slots, He's going about his business, talks to some employees, every everything seems completely normal.

And now we have the surveillance footage that we've all known has been around for a while, the surveillance footage of Paddock moving bag after bag after bag into his two rooms that he actually booked in the corner of the Mentelai Bay on the thirty second floor, from which he unleashed the thousand or so rounds on the music festival across the street. He planned this meticulously. He planned this meticulously, and ah, he absolutely measured it out he

made some stops that you see on these videos. He made some stops at a residence that is outside I forget the name of the town, that was outside of Las Vegas. He bought a bolt action rifle, went to a shooting range. Guy like has spent a lot of time at the range. But in this video what you see or just all of these bags coming in one after another, and the rollerbags, it just it just looked like luggage. There. People were saying originally, oh, he couldn't

have brought this all by himself. No, he did it over seven days, peace by peace. He's just rolling in one bag after another, rolling in one bag after another, and they're helping him with it. The staff there has no reason to believe them, and there's no signs of any kind that it is a situation that they should be concerned about. And then you just see him walking around as though he doesn't have a care in the world.

Guy has all the urgency of somebody who's, yeah, a retiree who's just kind of hanging out shooting the breeze. I mean he's not. There's nothing about him. It's from couple except that the entire time, because he was he moved the weapons in over seven days. It had to be on his mind what he was gonna do. He also rented a room up the street that overlooked another festival, another music festival that was up the Las Vegas Strip, and he maybe was planning to hit that one first,

or he he did. I would assume that he did reconnaissance of both and figured that the Mandalay Bay gave him a better vantage point. And then that horrific scene ensued where he just let out one once, one blast, one one series arounds after another, burst after burst after burst. You see all these modified A R s in the room. Um well, I can't actually tell the photos if they're which ones have bump stocks and which ones don't. But he's got I think at least nine long guns in there.

He had extended extended magazine. I think he had a hundred round drum, but I might I might have. I might be mistaken on that one. It was methodically planned though, and there was no one helping him bring the stuff into the room, And he kept a separate room next door to the suite where he did most where he did the firing. Oh, he kept a separate room next door. You have to watch it because it is incredibly unnerving that any human being remember this way. He didn't snap.

It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. He didn't. It wasn't that his wife just left him and he just wanted to kill as many people as possible any beginning of the shooting. And this this is all on video as well. It's it's tough to watch. I'll I want to be clear about that the moments the stuff in the in the casino is not at the moment he opens up, because there's a lot of first person footage from the uh the grounds of the music festival, and initially there's a couple of very faint pops. He

fires off a few rounds at a time. There are two theories they talk about as to why he did this. One is that he was just trying to see if he had measured out the range properly, so he was zeroing in in before he wanted to unleash bursts, extended bursts, and the other is that he might have actually been trying to see if he could to start this whole thing off hit these fuel tanks of a jet fuel that were beyond the beyond the actual grounds of the

music festival. Um, they have nothing to share at this point still about motive. It's hard to believe, but they really don't have anything to share when it comes to motive. They don't know why they don't. There's no insights that I've seen that were worth anything in terms of the analysts that are out there. Um, they've done a brain exam on him, and they just have nothing but questions here.

I'd like to tell you that I have a an analysis of this that will explain things that I I think that I've got this one nailed down, and I just don't never seen anything like this. The biggest smash shooting in modern American history. And no, no, there's nothing about this guy's past, nothing about his background that would make you think, oh, well, you know he was someone to be on the lookout for. It's in that sense it's additionally terrifying. I always feel like when we know

that somebody was problem, we just failed to deal with them. Well, we gotta make we gotta figure out better procedures we have, we have to come up with a way to deal with deal with them, right. But at least we know that we could have done something with this guy, I don't know, there weren't teams of people that The teams of people helping him were the bell boys, the bellhops, the you know, the staff in the Mandalay Bay that's

it was helping him. They didn't know the response, and I don't know, we'll see some of you in the law enforcing community may really disagree with me here, but the response seems pretty I'm talking about in the hotel outside. You just gotta get to cover, get people to safety. Understand it's mayhem, it's carnage, and it's it's horrifying. Inside the hotel, the security response from the security guards still seems to me to be just weirdly slow. They couldn't

figure out where well. I mean, they got a guy who's shooting through a door at them, and it took of I think seven minutes before they got police up there. I have to go back and even look at the timeline. I also don't understand why we were given so much incorrect information about this in the the not just the first few days, but in the really the first two weeks after. We've given timelines that were wrong. So I would recommend it if you if you are someone who

still wants to know what really happened here. I mean, he transported twenty one bags over the course of seven days. He jokes with staff, he passes out tips. He's just hanging out, playing slots, eating sushi, bringing bag after bag of various semi automatic rifles into a hotel suite overlooking a concert the whole time, planning to just shoot as

many innocent people as possible. It is. It is as dark and evil as it gets, and nobody could have seen this thing coming from what you see in these videos. Nobody wouldn't know. They didn't have the bright neon signs here, they didn't have the red flags, none of that. He was taking his time, and it seems to me that maybe this was just person who wanted to go out in a in a blaze of evil glory, and that's that was the only motivation that I can see to this.

He's back with you now, because when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck never stops. I wanted to get into if you notice in the national press talking about Trump's behavior, his personal behavior, but what he said, he did and does is a textbook definition of sexual assault and thinking, then we will think about this so he's going to talk about his person than that he said, because about famous, because I'm a star, because get a billionaire, I can do things other people can't can't. What a

disgusting assertion. Gosh dang, the press always asked me, don't I wish I were debating him? No, I wish you were in high school. I could take it behind the gym. That's what I wish. Take him behind the gym, Joe Biden says. I gotta say, of all of the Trump feuds so far, this one is among my very favorite, because first, well you get Biden there, who's clearly trying to to give his his lungs of workout in preparation

for a run. These guys all have the Larry King disease. Folks, they think they're the only and it's true of ladies in the profession too, but they think they're the only ones who can do the job and that they're needed. Oh where would America be without blue color? Joe Biden? The answer is exactly where we are right now, because we don't care and we don't need him. But he thinks we do, and he went after Trump there, Take him behind the high school. He says, you guys ready

for the for the Trump response. First of all, I I gotta say, of all the Trump tweets, this is among my very favorite from from this morning Market down on your calendars, March, the day of the greatest Trump tweet of all time, Crazy Joe Biden. This is what Trump wrote, Crazy Joe Biden is trying to act like a tough guy. Actually he is weak, both mentally and physically, and yet he threatens me for the second time with physical assault. He doesn't know me, but he would go

down fast and hard, crying all the way. Don't threaten people, Joe. I was reading this this morning. I just kept reading it over and over, and I think it might be the only tweet that I've read aloud to myself, just because I it's so fun each time you read it. And you know, there's a part of me that wanted to wanted to yell the Trump uh sweep the leg, sweep the leg. No mercy, no mercy. These guys are like ready to just tussle out there. I think they're

both in there seventies. And while there is such a thing as as old man strength, I don't know if you ever come across it. But those of you who ever got on the wrong side of your grandpa, you know what I'm talking about. Old man strength is a real thing. It's fierce, it's there, and it surprises you. But I, first of all, if we if we did go back in time, Trump, Trump is like six three and he's actually a pretty big dude. So way back

I see. But now I was gonna say, way back in the day, clearly Trump would be victorious if they were to have gaged engaged in pugilistic combat of some kind high school Biden, I'm talking about now in high school Trump, Um, But now I think they should be a little bit, a little bit beyond this. Uh. It's a little bit like the scene and step Brothers and I have you seen that movie where they're just like wrestling out in the lawn and it's all going crazy

and haywire. But of all of the all of the Trump tweets all time quote, he doesn't know me, but he would go down fast and hard, crying all the way. Don't threaten people. Joe is among my very favorites. Reminds me this this kid that I knew growing up. His name was his name was Kyle, and we were all at the gym once and we saw his dad, and his dad had old man strength. You know. His dad was one of these guys who would be out there

and you could see like there was a fierceness. There wasn't a lot of we weren't a lot of weight plates moving, but there was a fierceness in all of the Cibex machine, you know, all the Nautilus machine movements that he was doing. You know, like like he was angry. You know, he was in his fifties and he was angry.

Um and I was like a teenager. We're talking about back in the day here, And I just remember he said, is the son walked over to dad and he's like, you know, hey, Dad, you know you keep working out and you may be able to actually, you know, go a few rounds with me. You said something kind of you know, Josh and him just messing around a little bit, and his dad goes, kylie, oh, if if if it were you and me, there'd be two sounds, me hitting you and you hitting the floor. I always remembered that.

I was like, okay, gets the point across the silly tough guy talk from any any politician at this point, it's pretty pretty funny. Um, I just like that Trump told Trump called him uh mentally and physically weak. Just look across the board. Don't get into an insult contest with Trump. This is like getting into a prickly contest with a porcupine. Folks, you will lose. Trump is better at the insults. He is just better at the insults

than the opposition. They of all the places they're gonna go, this is the one that they should be the most certain they will lose. He really has a gift for nicknames and slapping people down. For for buckslapping people if you will. It was like you never is gonna get John's actually very simple, although I guess we'd have to call it a Trump slab. I guess. So we're gonna hit a break here, will be back with roll call. Let's get right to it because we have a lot

of great messages today. Let's hop in to the roll call, Team Buck. It's time for roll call. All right. These are coming to us courtesy of our email box, which is official Team Buck at gmail dot com. And you shall now hear from yourselves out there across the country. We have Ryan in New York who writes, Hello Buck, love the show, love your insight, and maybe above all else,

love the wit. Well. Thank you, Ryan. I'm typically a day or two behind because I primarily listened to your podcast, and most often doing that during my commutes to and from work. On the subject of school safety, I've often wondered why we aren't simply uh coside ring an approach whereby we bulletproof walls, windows and doors. Perhaps there's even

a cost sensible approach to it. For example, is there such a thing as a kevlar membrane that would be installed beneath a layer of sheet rock hurricane proof windows would stop small caliber bullets, the point being that the school would become a safe haven rather than shooting a fish in a barrel. With that set, I'm very much in favor of concealed carry for license gun owners, which

would also be a deterrent. Of course, like any rational person, I know that nothing will stop a highly motivated psycho. Thank you for being a voice of reason in a world of lunacy and deception. Shields high from Ryan, Ryan, I'm with you on the concealed carry, and we obviously just saw a couple of days ago a armed school resources officer who stopped a shooting and confronted and killed a school shooter. So the evidence is clear on that it can work, It can help, It can stop mass

loss of life in a school. In terms of hardening the targ it as a function of the facility making the walls bulletproof. It's just cost prohibitive for one, and I don't know that that would really stop all that much because remember, sure people can be hit through doors and through walls, but for the most part, a shooter is going to be trying to shoot the people that he sees out in the hallway in a school. And on top of it, I just am one of the few people I feel like he's willing to say it.

But it is true. School shootings are not as common and as a large a problem from a policy perspective as the media would have us believe. This is about guns. The narrative is about stopping people from owning guns. It is not primarily concerned with stopping school shootings. So thank you very much for your note. My friend um Brandy is next up here. Hi, Buck, love your show and I'm Oss original Saturday Squad. I'm a podcast listener and just now matching up on Friday show, including the Irish

movie quotes. I recall a listener once suggest that you check out the movie Boondocks Saints, so I have to reiterate that suggestion because that has to be the best Saint Patrick's movie out there, although as an animal lover, I would recommend just fast forwarding through the cat scene as it is pretty awful. Well, Brandy, thank you for the note. I have never seen Boondocs Saints. I had some friends in college who were big fans of the movie, and somehow it escaped some of my weekend movie binge

sessions when I was an undergrad. I believe it's ultra violent, so I might have to either fast forward or skip around a bit. Uh. But well, I'll check it out. I'll see if I can get it on demand on my TV. Here, and thank you very much Brandy for being oss and for your note. We have another email in here, remember official Team Buck at gmail dot com if you want to send us your thoughts. Greetings Buck, Hope you're well. Um, this comes what was a lot in here. This is from Dave. Very glad to hear

your comments about the land situation in South Africa. It is not surprising this is not covered in the news. Maybe when the slaughter starts, but I have been aware of this for some time. Ms Molly is also very popular here in Alabama, Alabama. Let her know this. Some of the things and these emails will not be appropriate for her. And don't be a fool. Marry the girl

if she will have you. Um, okay, thank you. I'm gonna I'm gonna skip around here, and uh, I appreciate very much the kind note from the Alabama self titled Bucks Alabama Fan Club Shields High. And then we get one more coming up here on school safety. I'll wait, no, that was we already did that one. Excuse me, folks. Uh, here we go, Daniel, right hey, Buck love the show. I've been a podcast listener since you first filled in for Rush. I love the history podcast. But I get

us that's dead. Now. It's not dead, Daniel, we are. I've just pulled in many directions. It's not dead. I promise you. It's gonna come back, and it's going to have a place where it will live. Uh. And we're gonna add more to it and we I just needed to do a test run of it. And then I'm gonna go back and figure out a way to continue

it and make it sustainable. And it really has to do with the time that we're spending on it and whether we go with a a subscription model for the podcast or an advertiser model, because I can't have uh, the studio time and the things that I do for it if it's gonna just gonna continue on as a as a product that we don't treat as a business, right that that's really the issue with the podcast. We have enough downloads for it to be a business. We just need to figure out which side of the business

we're gonna go in. But that's what it is. Sometimes it just comes down to dollars and cents in life. And you know, I'm hoping that there will be just a few thousand folks out there even if we do go subscription route, uh, and it would be the price of a cup of coffee once a month. I mean, that's what we're talking about, Um, that there'll be enough folks that really appreciate it that if we did it once weekly, they'd be willing to subscribe. So that's the hope,

and that's we're working on it. Just trying to fill in the back inside of that. Alright. Next up here we have Daniel Hey Buck Love the show. No sorry, it's a continuation of my bad Daniel. I've got coffee brain right now. I've been drinking too much caffeine and it means that the synapses are firing too quickly. Anyway, black and white movie recommendation is Doctor Strange Glove. Honestly, it is inexcusable that you haven't seen it yet. Also, in the war against the Dad Bod, you need to

enlist the Jocko podcast. You had him on the show. Truly a great and inspirational guy. He's got my lazy self up and getting after it at oh four hundred every day. Thanks for the great show, Shields high and never forget it's all in the reflexes from Daniel. And now we will get into the Facebook of part of Roll Call for a couple of minutes at least we'll have a big round up of Facebook messages. We got a ton this week on Friday for our freestyle. But

here's what we get it. If you want to join in the fun Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton I'm in writes Hello, Mr Sexton, just wanted to say I love your show. Always a thriller every night I listened on I Heart Radio, still trying to get a handle on the times you guys come on, meaning Beck, Hannity, Rush and you podcast. My ten year old showed me what it was and I'm only thirty seven. But I have to ask, are you the secret brother of Chucker Carlson.

You guys look so much alike. I don't believe Tucker and I are related, but you got Tucker in Buck. Sounds like a great buddy cop show maybe or something Tucker and Buck or I don't know, maybe not a cop show, but some kind of a show. It was very nice to Tucker to have me on this show earlier on in the week. As to when I him on six to nine. Easter is when I'm on. That's

when I'm on the I Heart app. You can also always listen to my going to Buck Sexton dot calm uh here we go, Hold on a second, um whoa uh oh boy, Bud, don't know where to start with your coverage of Marcus meet him tonight. First off, I will say I love your show. You're even keeled. Don't resort to add homed this is from Gentry. Don't resort to add hominem often, and your points are well researched and thought out normally. That being said, he was not making a Nazi joke. He was, in every sense of

the actual context, making an anti Nazi joke. As a Jew myself, I found it hilarious, as the video clearly starts with them saying his girlfriend loves the dog, so he wants to make it the least cute thing he can think of. This is no different than Mitchell and Webb playing s S officers when one ponders to the other, are we the batties? Because of this skull insignia, the Nazis were obsessed with his screen name, Count Dankila has nothing to do with marijuana. It has to do with

dank memes. Well, Gentry, do you know where dank Originally? I'm just gonna jump in here for a second. Dank memes is what people say now. Before that it was dank marijuana, Sir, I'm just talking about the derivation of the word um. And this goes on for quite some length. Uh, there's a lot going on here. My friend Shields Higbuck, keep up the good work. Otherwise her coverage. Wasn't that bad? Um? Okay, so a few things. Gentry sank he is Jewish. He's

saying it's not offensive. Look, you know, some people find it really He said he's making Joe gas the Jews. That was one of the things that he said. I think that's in really poor taste. So but I will note that I'm doing I'm doing a segment on a national radio show about this guy in the UK because I think it's crazy that he's in trouble for this. I think it's crazy that he's been kicked off of you. You've been going to prison for this. So I'm I'm in favor of the free speech here. I think that

was clear from the segment. If we're gonna go back and forth a little bit on whether you think that joke is offensive or not, Um, you know, to each his own on that one. And an offensiveness is is subjective, although I think this one is stretching the limits of subjectivity at some level. Um. And I also love pugs, so I hate that a pug is somehow brought into the middle of this mess. Uh So, anyway, I I appreciate it, um, and thank you for writing me and

so there we get it. Some people think that it was not even offensive folks according to my inbox here, Um, I have to agree to disagree on that one. But that's actually gonna have to close out the Freedom Hunt for today. Although I've got about a hundred other notes here that I'd love to get to. Will pick them out for tomorrow, a bunch of them. Actually, maybe we'll do uh an elongated segment towards the end of the show tomorrow in the Freedom Hunt of just Team Bucks weeks.

This is one of my look this is the part of the show that I always look forward to. So with that, I'm gonna say we'll close it out. Thank you so much for being here with me Tomorrow Freestyle Friday and Yes in appearance by Commie Bear Shields High