CNN's 7 Hour Climate Change Madness

with actionable intelligence. Mag No mistake, America, You're a great American Again. The buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst, Remember an unprecedented Democratic Prince sinential town hall event, climate crisis, Biden, Warren Sanders, Paris, boot Y, Yang Castro, ten candidates, ten town halls, all on one night, tonight, five Eastern, seven hours of climate change madness. Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everybody tonight, Yang Cloba, Shore, Biden, if he remembers to

show up, it's amazing. It's amazing. Seven hours. I mean, if we made detainees watch this CNN climate change town hall, I'm pretty sure it would be a violation of a Geneva convention. Like I think there's a real case to be made that being forced to watch this CNN climate change town hall under any circumstances might be a crime against humanity. You can't make this stuff up seven hours now. I know that they expect those are all, but we're aren't,

you know, expecting people. No, No, I'm sure there's some CNN people like I need to watch all of this otherwise the climate's just going to destroy us all. Wow, that does feel a bit like there might be some exploitative timing here as well, with a hurricane that is just shy of being a category three. Now it's a category two, but very close to being a three, and it has strengthened in the last few hours to propagate this narrative that what we are doing is the cause

that we are the cause of this destruction. Our activity, meaning our economic day to day activity, is the reason that this is befalling us. You have to just marvel at the disconnect from reality that liberals are engaged in here, and just also seven hours. As if that wasn't enough, MSNBC, oh, that's right. They want to get in on this action too. They announced earlier today Climate Forum twenty twenty, a two

day event featuring the twenty twenty presidential democrats. Now to this, I just want to say, excuse me, MSNBC, but if you really cared about climate change, wouldn't your two day climate change event be more like a week? Oh? I'm sorry, don't have enough time to save the world. What a oh, what a bunch of what a bunch of lunacy. This is Andrew Yang, who has some good somebody I shouldn't say he doesn't have good ideas. He has interesting ideas.

You know, Andrew Yang is the guy who's like, you know, like, you know, maybe we could build you know, I don't know, maybe we could build a sports stadium the floats in the air, and we're all like, oh interesting, probably really expensive and can't work. But you know, you like to debate and discuss some of the things that he puts out there. And he also comes across like a reasonably earnest, nice guy, so you know he's not mean. You know, he comes across as really mean to me all the time.

Is boodha judge. I just seems mean, never seems to smile and make a joke, do anything even vaguely funny and self aware. He's just always like lecturing everybody, and especially about the Bible, which he has a seemingly loose familiarity with. But Yang wants a carbon tax of forty to one hundred dollars per ton. This is just this is just a massive, a massive government takeover of whole sectors of the economy. That's all. That's all that's going

to happen. That's what's going to come from this. You know, that's going to be the reality. And they're going to try to enrich themselves here. I mean, they're going to try to enrich government coffers by telling you that the

world is going to end. You know, I'm looking at and they all release their climate change proposals in advance of this whole town hall thing, right, and these candidates you look at them, it's all the same, because what are you really going to say, other than let's abandoned prosperity. Let's abandon what has brought more people as a function of technology and the impact on our day to day lives. Fossil fuels have done more to bring people out of poverty.

And because also you have to see the system of capitalism that we have is built upon industrialized economies that rely on fossil fuels. So really, the attack on CO two such as it is, is an attack on capitalism, which is why there's so much crossover with Marxist rhetoric and thinking with all of it. But yeah, Yang's up there. I mean, clubush are all of them, And you know, the Democrats in the audience, I really wish that I

could sit down with them, one after the other. I'm talking about the people that watch this and say to them, you really, you really believe that the world is going

to that the whole cities will be underwater. You know, these are people, mind you that make fun of anybody who reads the Bible for the most part and says, oh, you believe that this thing happened, you know, two thousand years ago or three thousand years ago, and you know in ancient Israel and at all that they Meanwhile, they're the ones that think that because AOC claims that cow farts are doing too much damage to the atmosphere, we're all going to be threatened with extinction if we don't

decide to radically upend the economy all the things that have brought us comfort and food and travel and air conditioning. Let's let's make that much more expensive, which means much more inaccessible, much more inefficient, and let's do it all because the people that keep telling us we're running out of time are extending the time. Whenever we've run out

of the time. They said we didn't have seven hour town halls, you know, I mean, this is this is what you expect because this is this is turned into a radical belief. It has gone from something that is in the background and now it is. It is a necessary, a necessary precondition for being a Democrat, for being a leftist in good standing, you must support abortion, you must support climate change, and increasingly you must support open borders.

But climate change is an absolute Now you are not allowed. You cannot be a heretic on this and be in good sending with the left because they have so much riding on this. They really do view this as a way to seize more power in your life via the government than would have ever been thought possible before. I mean, they're trying to create a benevolent Green East totalitarian society. That's why they're having a seven hour town hall at CNN and a two day town hall at MSNBC. We've

got more on this day with me. The hurricane. We got lucky in Florida, very very lucky. Indeed, we had actually our original chart was that it was going to be hit hitting Florida's directly. Maybe I could just see that, Kevin, it was going to be hitting directly, and I would have affected a lot of other states. But that was the original chart, and you see it was going to hit not only Florida, but Georgia could have was going

toward the Gulf. That was what we what was originally projected, and it took a right turn and ultimately hopefully we're going to be lucky. It depends on what happens with South Carolina, North Carolina, but it's heading up the coast. The President giving an update there on the US mainland damage of Hurricane Dorian, as he was saying, it looks like Florida did not get hit his badly as could

have been the case. The Bahamas got hit very hard though, and you know, the footage of that devastation is just it's a reminder of the power of Mother Nature despite all of our technological advances, also that the world is still a very uncertain and can be a very dangerous and unforgiving place. And you think about the Bahamas, a locale generally associated in most people's minds with paradise. That's where they go to get away from all their problems.

And then you see what's happened to the people who live there, Bahamians, and it's just it's heartbreaking. Home's gone. I think there's one I think on Grand Bahama Island. If I read correctly today, half of structures are either gone or severely damaged, which is just an astonishing number.

Will hopefully beginning them aid as quickly as possible. I know that there are some states in the southeastern United States that are also facing this thing, and just want everyone down there to know, you know, you're in our prayers, and please just air on the side of caution. You know. I always feel like it's easy to tell people, oh, just listen to the authorities. Well, you know, you know, as a conservative, I'm always also saying, you understand your situation.

You have the ability to improvise at the local level, especially for yourself and your family, that no government could ever have. But you should take into account the warnings and the assessments that are given to you. And I think that err on the side of caution is just

a good, a good rule when dealing with storms. And I remember here in New York City a number of times getting ready for very big storms and people had we had all this water on hand, and you know, once or twice it turned out to just be a pretty windy rain storm. And then there was Hurricane Sandy, which was the big one that people had been worried

about for some time. But any my thoughts and prayers everybody down there and the southeast United States, and we will keep following the story as this goes through the week. One other part of the new cycle that is getting very little attention this week. I mean, I told you yesterday about the story of the labor department labor department employee who was fired and was fired because of what is a really a false and defamatory allegation from a

lib reporter at Bloomberg. The border wall is getting built. This this is going to happen. There is going to be new border wall construction. Now, there could be some challenges in the courts, but here's what the here's what the president president says about this appropriation of funds from within the DoD budget. It was a few billion dollars presidents. This if this goes forward, folks, this is delivering or at least in the process of delivering on a promise.

And the wall is being built. It's going up rapidly. It's I guess most of you have been able to We're building very large sections of wall. It's a big factor was we just won the big Supreme Court case, as you know, and we we're building in different sections. We're building different sections simultaneously, and we think by the end of next year, which will be sometime right after the election, actually, but we think we're going to have close to five hundred miles of wall which will be complete.

That'll be what we wanted to do, is about five hundred miles that will take care of all of the areas that we wanted, including some of the marginal areas that we didn't necessarily need. But if we could have gotten it done, we were looking to do about a five hundred mile stretch. We should have it almost complete, if not complete, by the end of next year. By the end of next year, just in time for the American people to assess whether President Trump keeps his promises.

It is essential and I really, I really think this needs to be emphasized that is essential that the president deliver on the promise of building a wall at the southern border. He was mocked for this endlessly by his opponents, including a lot of Republican opponents, really all of them. In the early days, he has been ridiculed on this matter in the press. Even though I've spoken to border patrol, been down to the border. They think that wall in

a lot of areas is very helpful. And all the border patrol officers that I've spoken to are quite supportive of President Trump. That's including border patrol that has about a twenty five percent of border patrol or veterans and about thirty percent I believe or Latino and they're all very supportive of President Trump's overall approach to the border. Feelings in the border, and you know, they understand what the mission said is and what's going on down there.

But this is big. I mean, if he can get if he can get even a up one hundred miles of wall built, now, it's going to be challenging the courts.

It's going to be challenged the courts. I have to wonder, though, at what point, uh, you know, at what point is the executive branch going to say that, you know, we're not going to be constrained in day to day actions that are within our purview by a solitary federal judge somewhere that you know, you're gonna have a universal injunction from some judge who's gonna say you can't do this.

Federal government's not allowed to all the things one judge and to say sorry, you know, I I gotta wonder at what point, at what point does the administration say, Okay, we'll see you in court, but we're we're not going to we are not going to concede that a federal judge.

You know, what if a federal judge says that the president's uh, you're not allowed, not allowed to sign a bill, not allowed to sign bills anymore, you know, the president under some interpretation of the Procedure Act, you know, the president's not allowed to sign a any more laws. Sorry, Is the executive branch going to respect that and say, yeah, sure,

the President's not the president anymore? What if a federal judge says that the that the president United States, all of the laws passed while he's in office, everything he signed is null and void because he's not really the president because of Russia collusion. I mean, federal judge could could take that opinion. I mean they've they've taken opinions that are obviously wrong on other matters of executive branch

activity under Trump. So what happens then, is the administration really obligated to just say, yeah, you know what, you're right? Not even and I'm not saying that they just ignore entirely.

They go to court, but you know, pending pending review is no longer going to just be okay, you say, we can't do this, So let's wait nine months, let's wait a year as this makes its way through the courts, so that a higher court not packed with Obama appointed lunatics, you know, leftist uh, leftist activists in judges robes, is not in place to just say yeah, sure, you know,

we're hashtag resistance. You know. I think at some point the administration gets gets to a level or they say, um, sorry, you know, we're we're gonna we'll meet you in court on this one, and if we're found to have overstep, we'll stop. But you cannot tie the hands of the executive branch on any matter you want, for pure for pure political spite just because you happen to be a federal judge. And you know, maybe maybe this, maybe what I'm saying isn't the answer. But if that's not the answer,

then you know what has to be the answer. Start impeaching federal judges. You got to start having consequences for the lawlessness of left wing judges on the bench who clearly, and you see it, an opinion after opinion, and they can overturned time and again, clearly view their role as stopping Trump from enacting policy and using his executive authority.

And that's not their job. So if they are betraying their offices, they're betraying the power entrusted to them as federal judges by viewing their role as hashtag resistance in judges robes. And you're going to see it on this wall because you know, it's it's not the wall so much that bothers the Libs. It's that tramp, although it does it does certainly bother them. And also keep in mind that once that thing goes up and illegal crossings go down in sector after sector. Let's just remind ourselves

of how many journalists wolves don't work. Wolves don't work. The dumbest talking point you've ever heard in your life, were repeated ad nauseum on CNN and MSNBC. But there must be consequences for this judicial activism that's meant to just stymy Trump. They are terrified, really, I mean the Democrats, the left are terrified that Trump will follow through on this promise, proving that their claims that he was it

was all a fraud. He never intended to build a wall, and that he was just going to betray his base was wrong, that they were, that they were wrong, and perhaps they were lying. So that's why they, for political reasons for winning in twenty twenty, they're going to do everything they can to stop construction of this wall because if Trump, if he in my mind, if Trump follows through on this promise, he could withstand anything for reelection,

including a recession. I think if he gets the wall built, he could even get reelected if we hit a recession. That's how important this is. Right back, there is no divide among scientists. Less than two percent of climate scientists are skeptical about climate change. We have twelve years from twenty eighteen until twenty and thirty to either address this

or if we're going to have a versable damage. There is a growing danger that the ice cap will melt in Greenland and we will have you know, there won't be a big ice cap in the summer UH, and that the net result of that is that we're going to have a rise in sea levels UH that will be significant coming from Greenland and added to other sources of new new water, higher water, we could have cities in the United States engulfed UH and floods or or

gergen um or a climate change from Nixon, Ford and Reagan, Melton, Greenland and were gurgling gurgan over there at sea and then all of a sudden, he's a he's a climate change guy. Climate climate catastrophe, climate crisis. I think that's what they've settled on more recently. I pose this to you again. I think any fair minded person could ask this question and would have the same reaction I did to it, which is, how how crazy are they allowed to get before we can just tell them that we're

not We're not going to listen to this anymore. Cities are going to be underwater. Why would anyone believe that by the time the cities would actually be underwater? I mean, yeah, in five hundred years and five thousand years. I don't know. Maybe, but then we'll have you know, floating floating buildings or something, or you know, or we'll have a way to create giant hair dryers in a thousand years that basically like mop up all the excess moisture. Who knows, you don't know.

Maybe my giant hair dryer ideas probably about as sound as the science from that movie Armageddon. I don't want to clothe my eyes. You don't talking about Mark. You saw that one, that's right, the animals, the animal crackers scene. We all remember it. So uh yeah, man, I look, Gergan's over there. Everyone has to has to march to the same crazy climate tune over there or shittys under irreversible dammers. They were saying this ten years ago, there's

like this ten years before that. How many times we have to go through a ten years cycle? And they're wrong. And even if we did everything that they think they want to do, it wouldn't do anything unless you're going to invade India and China and tell them to stop carbonizing.

I mean, that's another part of this, the restriction on wealth creation in the third world, that you have to be okay with In order to make a serious dent in CO two emissions, I mean, to really turn around CO two emissions, you would have to tell the third world, hey, you're not allowed to go through the same processes of wealth creation and the attendant prosperity for your people that

we did in the developed world. Oh and so they're aware of this, and that's why I guess what we start doing Global Marxism, the redistribution of wealth from the First world as penance, as a as a form of it's like in indulgence back in the day in the Catholic Church, right, we would pay off the third world because we've gotten so rich putting all this CO two in the air, which is now I mean just that they call CO two, which is a naturally occurring gas,

which is a small percentage of the overall atmosphere. I think it's less than I don't want to say it. It's definitely less than two percent, and I don't want to say what the exact numbers off the top of my heads. I forget Producer Mark, tell me how much CO two? What percentage of our atmosphere is? In fact? CO two, if you would please, because I'll lose my train of thought otherwise. But these these changes in the designation, that changes in the rhetoric. You know, this is all.

This is all because they keep getting it wrong and they have to come up with a new This is narrative creation in real time. And I just when it comes to individuals changing their behavior. You know, I I am forced by the City of New York. I know you guys get I get so bitter about this, but I hate recycling. I freaking hate recycling. It's so stupid. It is such a waste of everybody's time. But there I am washing out my milk, my milk carton and like putting it in the recycling band of blah BLI

blah blah blah blah. Way, what is the CEO two? It seems like less than one percent? Okay, I said less than two Yeah, less than one percent. There we go, Thank you, producer mark less than one percent of the the atmosphere.

We really think that a minor percentage change and less than one percent of the world's atmosphere is worth All of this, all this uh you know, a hubbub, All this all this noise from the left, I mean, CNN is is like doing the equivalent of reading war and Peace in its entirety on air, except it's about the climate, and we are basing this on what exactly. The people that are the most vocal about it won't even change

their own behavior. Look at what they do. I think it was recently one of the you know, the British Royal family, and I think all that British Royal family stuff is ridiculous. I know people get all, oh, but but they're so fancy and they're like a part of a tradition for UK and all this other it's so no, no, I'm not into it. I don't like it. It's weird. Not into monarchies. Um, not into people hiring family members either, but uh, you know for political from elected office. But anyway,

there's that's a conversation for another time. Uh. This stuff that people like David Gergen is saying is just manifestly in saying, but this is what is expected of you, this is what you're told to do. I will say that there's a there's a we need a climate, and maybe this would be the But the problem is if I wrote this book, they would say, first of all, I have to take time off from doing things like

this show, which I love. So that's a no one has really written on the right, and someone's going to send me a link to a book that has ten Amazon reviews and has been read by like thirty people. So please don't do that. Okay, I can do an Amazon search too. On climate change, no one has written the equipped, the game changing conservative perspective on climate change in book form. Yet, you know, no, we need we

need a an inconvenient truth from the right. You know, we need something that becomes a cultural and political phenomenon that is the argument against this crazy that will reach everyone, that everyone can understand and work with and and rely on for the facts that it presents, but also the argument that it makes. We don't really have that, you know. You you see, here's a examples you have, you know,

Jonah Goldberg with liberal fascism. I mean that book, all of a sudden people realize, Hold on a second, the fascists were leftists. I mean history proves this, and yeah, there's national socialists and people have been aware of this for a while, but that book was a was a conversation changer on that issue. And Culter Audios America on immigration, illegal immigration specifically and the Wall. That book was a conversation changer. And I've said to you it's really why

Trump became president. So whether you know what lover or don't lover her, you guys all know, I think she's pretty great. But you know, and Culter is the single author who is probably most responsible for the rise of Trump to the presidency. And also whether you love that or not, I leave that to you. But there are other books that are like this that are changed. You know, Whittaker Chambers Witness. That's a masterpiece. But that changed national

perception about communist infiltration of America. It was real, it was happening, it was systematic. You know, we don't have that for climate change yet, and we need that. I mean, we need someone who goes, look, here are the predictions they've made. Here's all the quotes, here the you know, even when they when they start out, you know, Gergan goes ours, there's no where or separation or science community weber, uh, well except for the two percent of scientists. Well, do

two percent of scientists not believe in gravity? Do two percent of scientists? Uh, not believe that the world is round? Because if two percent of scientists think that climate change alarmism is not supported by the science and is in

fact nuts. Shouldn't we do a little bit of investigation into why that is instead of saying, well, regard or regarding our three eight percent or ninety eight, there's ninety rush eight, which there's one hundred, except there's two and two percent or two hundred ninety eight, we're I I'm sorry, but I just will never forget being on panels at them and they're like, wait, wait, everybody be quiet, gurgling Gurgen has some political insights to share contrens Democrats from

Reager Niction forward. So it's like, who is this guy? I know he's worked for every presidents in Zabraham Lincoln, but I really just don't I really just don't think I need to hear this. But we need that, though, and someone has to someone has to step up and do it, and preferably what it really has to be is a person who understands the messaging and the political fight, and probably teaming up with somebody who, in a way that is undeniable, has the background and facility and capacity

to understand the full scope of the science. You know, I wish there's a way I could I could help this come about, but this needs to be done. There are trillions of dollars at stake because of this insanity from or Left, literally trillions of dollars. And they still tell us all this stuff. They still keep claiming that if we don't make massive changes to our lifestyles, if we don't do all these things at the telling us we have to do, you know, the world's going to end.

This is what they're saying. The world is going to end. Unless you believe that Ocasio Cortez knows how to remake the American economy to save the world and make it better. And if you believe that, well then you probably deserve to live in the crappy country that she's going to create. That's just this is it's a republic if we can keep it. It's a capitalist, prosperous society if we're not too stupid to let it keep doing what it does.

But that's you know, with all these little socialists running around, that's increasingly that's increasingly a problem. The truth is that these storms that are hitting the Caribbean with this intense magnitude are historic, unprecedented, and these storms are man made. Storm the Virgin Islands was hit by two Category five storms only two years ago while President Trump indeed was

our president. The people who are most vulnerable to these man made storms are the ones who, in all cases are not the contributing factors to the carbon emissions that are causing these storms. These storms are being caused in huge part because of capital US. North American capital and places like the Virgin Islands and the Bahamas are the ones that are most vulnerable to these things. You see, folks, the developed world is responsible for this. That's what they

developed world is creating these man made storms. There is no evidence, it does not exist that any particular storm is manmade. This is a complete fabrication. There is no evidence for this at all. They say that overall global overall global temperature is they're talking about a point zero one degree rise over the last couple of years, and that's going to Oh now, the storms are really crazy. There. There have been storms for as long as there have

been storm systems. Okay, I mean this is but the people going to be This was a professor at Emory. But she's giving away a bit more of the game here, which is that this is ultimately about a global Marxist approach. And this is where the redistribution of wealth comes in, because a developed economy for the last one hundred and fifty years, an industrialized economy is inextricably linked, is in

fact built upon a foundation of carbon emission. So if you can isolate carbon emission as destroying the planet, every more developed, wealthy society in the world is going to bear a greater share of that burden and therefore has to pay the equivalent of environmental reparations to the developing world to repair the damage that has been done to the environment by a world where we have smartphones and computers and everyone drives around in a very you know,

comfortable car with all kinds of electronics that can drive, you know, for hundreds of thousands of miles pretty much before it really falls apart. I mean the cars these days. One of the problems of car industry has cars can last twenty years easily, so, you know, but but to leave in though and then play. People always think of fossil fuels. Then they think, oh, it goes in the car,

maybe I'll just bicycle to work. Half half of oil specifically is used in products, you know, from plastics to petroleum jelly to so you are buying things all the time that are reliant on fossil fuels in their very creation, never mind in their transport or their refrigeration or of the guys getting to work. This is an attack on capitalism.

You have to see it in those terms. You have to understand why it is so essential to the left that they can brainwash people and just just bludging them into this belief that you know, CO two is a global threat and we're all living on borrowed time unless we hand the keys of our economy over to AOC, which is that that's a terrifying thought. It should be a terrifying thought for anyone that the people that are pushing this the most that they don't know what the heck.

They don't know what they're talking about on the science, and they don't understand the impact on the economy. And what's perhaps even more frightening, they don't care. They have a messianic vision of themselves here that they are saving the planet. And therefore, if you really believe at pushing this climate change nonsense, you're going to save the planet.

What would you not be willing to do? This is the the challenge whenever you're dealing with extremism is that the extremist is always able to justify any behavior because they decontextualize their own thoughts and their own actions from reality around them, and they create an alternative reality where whatever they think is necessary must be done because of the threat, whether it's Antifa with fighting against fascism or a climate change alarmist with fighting against CO two in

the air, and the rest of us, the sane, rational adult world look at them and say, what is wrong with you people? What do you what are you not able to understand here? Climate change is a religious belief. I mean you can go back and do it. Do an anthropological study of civilizations throughout history, and they have their their creation myths, and they also have their end of day's stories, all of them do. And you know

this ties deeply into the human psyche as well. You know, we we want to believe or you know, our minds attached to this notion that, uh, there could be an end coming, because then it makes it feel like we aren't so insignificant, because once we're gone, perhaps everything is gone. Right, once we're gone, the whole world is going down. No, the world is going to go on and on and on, and we will be long since forgotten. There is a soleopsism that is also at the heart of the psychology

of the climate change alarmists. You know this. This gives them a greater sense, a greater sense of purpose in their day to day they're fighting against climate change, but also a purpose in the cosmos. Oh, everything is going to end. No, it's not, folks, I'm here to tell you. It's just nothing about It is not a bottle, it's not about it's about costating. The US settleson the gig, take us blaying, I'll sit out of my way. Was and none. This is over in this tat of New York.

The room and puck detti. That's true. That's how I'm who. I want this US Americans freedoms. You got the write and do that. I have the right to do this. That's why I do not like white libras a Democrats. They are the worst owned this earth. A white liberal and a Democrat wants to control you. That's what they

want to do. They are puck debting. So there you had in Grand Central right here in New York City, a an African American Trump twenty twenty supporter called in this video exchange with a Democrat I believe also African American Democrat. They're getting into the back and forth over more or less you know, how could you be a how could you be black in this country and support Trump?

That's what the Democrat was saying. And I want to step back for a moment from the the the specifics of the twenty twenty election and whether Trump has been good or bad for the black community in this country. I mean, you look at unemployment numbers, you look at overall economic metrics, and those are clearly favorable for Trump,

specifically with African American and Latino communities. It's it's always lost in the discussion about the Latino vote and how Trump is such an anti Latino racist that you had almost thirty percent of Latino's vote for him in the twenty sixteen election. Was I think twenty eight or twenty nine percent overall, So that's a lot of people when you added up nationally who are Latino and support Trump.

But the Democrats have to borrow one of their words normalized what is and inherently and inherently unethical, And I would argue irrational point of view, and that is that you have there is an acceptable and aptible perspective to have based upon one's ethnicity, skin color, national origin, and that that should be replicated throughout society. On pain of social ostracism, on being pushed out of your community, on

being cast out from whatever group you may mean. They used to call them when I was in college, they called it an affinity group. I don't know if that's still a phrase that's used on college campuses, but an affinity group was. You know, if you are a member of the Latino Coalition or the African American Coalition, that was your affinity group on a college campus. You you are pushed out from that group if you think differently

about certain matters. And I do think it's so interesting that it's not even issue by issue, it's not even issue specific. It's you must support a democrat. Now we know why. I mean, none of this is surprising to us. And you will see this be a centerpiece. I mean, yeah, they're gonna talk about free this and free that, and uh, they're gonna be pushing the socialism that someone else will pay for. And remember every time socialism has been tried in any country it's always told to the majority that

someone else is going to pay. It's always that you know, this isn't gonna cost you, It's going to cost somebody else, which is why, at least for in a short term sense and in a society where there are enough people who can be fooled, it can be a powerful political appeal. Someone else is gonna pay. You're gonna get all the

free stuff, someone else will pay for it. Uh. In our country, though, in into twenty twenty, what you're going to see is a focus on identity politics that is the strongest it has it has ever been in the sense of a negative focus toward the Republican Party, you know, under the Obama administration and when President Obama was running clearly identity politics. It's very powerful to have and and this was understandable that you know, as an African American

in this country, the first black president. That's it. Look, it is a compelling story. Let's just be honest about it. It is. It's a compelling story. And I can understand why the black community reacted in the way that it did, not just the first time around, but the second time around. Although the second time around for Obama's reelection. I do think there's more of a casema that. Okay, well, but was he a good president? I mean, forget about the

historic nature of it. Was he a good president? You're going to have all that enthusiasm and energy to vote for Obama is going to now be turned against Trump in the next in this next election cycle. And you know, with they tried to do enthusiasm for Hillary last time around because people still thought of Trump as a joke. But this isn't Trump as a joke. Vote for the Democrat that was twenty sixteen, twenty twenty is going to be Trump is an evil racist like Hitler, vote for

anyone other than him. And if you are a minority and you vote for Trump, there you know you are part of his evil. You are helping to destroy this country and oppress people from within your own, your own community of color. That's that's going to be the narrative storyline. It's going to be this deeply negative approach to all

things Trump. And I would just note that they start with a fallacy here, and the fallacy is Democrats start with a fallacy that you should think about your relationship to the state, You should think about politics very broadly based upon your skin color, first and foremost, that that is a determining factor in how you would vote, how you think, how you think of things like as varied

as abortion, border security, healthcare, tax rates, foreign policy. That skin color should be a defining factor for human beings in how they approach all these different issues. And it's an astonishingly in my view, it's an astonishingly destructive approach for this country to our political fabric. I think all this talk about how divisive things are, there is really I think you could argue no area of our politics that is more divisive, and largely because of the way

it is exploited by the ruling class. There's nothing that

is more divisive than racial politics in this country. Which is why you know CNN likes to fan the flames of this literally in the cases of the coverage and the and the enthusiasm and the real encouragement that many CNI and reporters had for the Black Lives Matter movement, even when there were instances of it burning down neighborhoods and looting stores, CNN was, oh, look at this, this is this is people speaking out against police suppression and violence.

But we should never accept that the way that they approach this is okay. And more, we should never accept that the basic, the basic approach that Democrats insist on from minorities is you are Asian, you are Black, you are Hispanic, you're anything. Therefore you must vote Democrat. And if you don't, no one wants to hear your reasons. No one wants to have a conversation. You are voted out, so to speak. You are cast out from your community, so damaging, and they do it so frequently that we

almost don't notice it anymore. And I'm just I'm imploring you to keep that in your mind as we enter what's going to be the most contentious election. It's I'm not saying it's the most important. You know, everybody says no, No No, I do believe this will be the most contentious election cycle of my lifetime. You will never see a nastier, more bitterly fought political contest than Trump versus

whoever's up against him. Because they're trying to prop up a whole squad of losers with these this Democrat field, most notably Joe Biden, and the only way they really think they're gonna win is to just heap so much trash on top of Trump that it's it's it's overwhelming. And one of the ways they're going to try to create that enthusiasm for dumping on Trump is going to be by exploiting racial division and playing to identity politics. Do you correctly say you have to a little bit?

Excuse me? Could somebody please silence the crying baby. I know I look like a cuddly grandpa, but I'm trying to spread Marxism here. It's hard work. I get tired, I get grouchy. No no babies, No little capitalist babies making noise in the background. Please, only little Marxist babies with you know, hammer and sickle Onesie's on. Please. Bernie Sanders, Man, Bernie Sanders still a top contender for the for the race.

It's it's amazing, It really is. You have to think to yourself, what what is this country coming to when someone with so little connection to the reality of our economy and such a a completely inadequate and inadequate understanding and unacceptable understanding of basic you know micro economics, right, which is a study of the specifics of how economics plays out in transactions and for businesses, and you know

this is this is the basics of supplying demand. Uh. Someone who doesn't understand this at all has has no connection to the realities of how an economy functions. He's still a very viable presidential candidate. It's it's madness. But you know, I know that we're still supposed to be focused on the on the gun issue, and I don't think anything is going to change. Although we'll have my friend David Harsani joining here to second, we'll talk about

universal background checks. There is this story that the Odessa shooter got a firearm from a private sale after being denied a firearm through a background check. Uh, you know, there is there is that story. I would just say that we are going to eventually reach a point where we've heard every talking point from the Democrats so many

times that we are we are numb to it. And then the question becomes, are we going to just say enough as enough, well we'll just do something to shut them up, or will we be able to tune it out. I hope it is the latter, but there are If you're looking at this from the piece by piece perspective gun rights, uh, you know there's some loosening of restrictions in Texas, and that there are places where you see action being taken at the state level. And certainly the dcv.

Heller decision at the Supreme Court was very helpful to the Second Amendment at the federal level, but it really just kept a Second Amendment from being eradicated. I think people need to remember that dcv. Heller just meant that you do have the right as a law abiding citizen to have a firearm in your home, and that and that they can't just say no guns for you anywhere,

because it's a right. Okay, so that's but if that wasn't a right, then there's no such thing as a second and then the Second Amendment is is null and void. So it was really taken from life support to intensive care. But it was definitely a minimal, a minimal victory at the corporate level, which is where I do think we have to increasingly devote our attention because you know, democrats, Democrats view the culture war and really the political war that's going on in this country as an across the

board affair that they make no distinctions. There's no difference to them whether they're pushing for corporate action, political government action, they just want their way. And that's why you have Walmart and Kroeger, for example, who are coming out and saying they no longer want anyone to openly carry in their stores. Now they have a right to do this, but let's understand what this accomplishes. It accomplishes nothing from

the perspective of safety. I mean, there's no such thing as a mass shooter or a criminal of any kind who goes, oh wow, you mean Walmart would prefer I don't open carry in the store. I guess I'm gonna forget about my diabolical shooting plan. That's never gonna have that that does not exist. And uh, you know, you have the establishment of some of these or rather some of these stores have established new rules where they are limiting law biding gun owners in, you know, in their stores,

things like open carry. And now I know Walmart is no longer going to sell handgun ammunition and it will not sell small I think it's small rifle ammunition or something. They said, I you know, not even clear on what the what the specifics are of the restriction, but they're restricting ammunition sales now in response in response to what has happened here. This follows after Dick Sporting Goods has also dramatically restricted firearms that will be sold, and Dick

Sporting Goods did pretty well sales wise. I think the stock is actually up, so it used to be a used at least be the percept that companies that take action based upon the outrage mob will suffer the consequences when normal Americans express their displeasure with them don't shut But that doesn't seem to be the case anywhere. There's

been a shift. You see this with Nike and Colin Kaepernick, and it's a different issue than the gun issue, but they've gone very deep on the social justice side of things, very publicly. And the fact of the matter is that if you're not a social justice warrior, are you not going to buy your dry fit running shorts from Nike now because of Kaepernick? The answer, let's be honest, folks, answer is probably that no, you're still gonna buy it.

And if you are a Walmart customer now because you can't get your ammo there, are you not going to go buy your ammunition from wal I mean, are sorry? You're not going to go buy your milk forget your ammunition? You can go buy your socks from Walmart. I think the answer there once again is probably Nope, you're still going to go. And so the risk tolerance, the corporate calculation has shifted out. And this is what this is the This is the type of incrementalism that the left

is trying to accomplish with the gun issue. But now the corporate calculation is, look that the pro gun people are still going to shop in our store if we just say, look, can we you know, we don't want any part We're not taking a position on it, we just don't want any part of this. We're not going to sell ammunition or we're not going to sell handguns or whatever it may be, and the anti gun people

will leave us alone. So this then becomes the safer option for them, even for a place like Walmart, that I believe is generally associated, at least in the minds of people on the coasts with more red state and rural areas. Now, is that not if it's probably not

fair of Walmart's really just the biggest retailer. It's very big in some inner city locations, and I understand that, but people think of Walmart as you know, very all American store that serves all kinds of communities, but especially in a lot of rural communities, it's a it's almost a superstore where you get all your stuff. There're not gonna sell guns. So these companies now are changing there, they're changing their risk parameters. And it's not necessarily that

they want to be woke. They just don't want to get attacked by woke and they feel like our side of this equation is less mobilized against them, you know, or we won't mobilize against them just because they don't want to get in the middle of this. And then of course you have the other side of or you have the additional side of this, where you know, San Francisco is now declaring the nra AT a domestic terrorist

organization and people have completely lost their minds. They there's so much, there's so much ignorance on the issue of gun culture, the Second Amendment in this country, and I'm I'm right in the midst of it here in a place like New York City where if I can tell you this, if I now, I couldn't legally open carry in New York from my understanding of New York laws under any circumstances, you can conceal carry a handgun if you get a very tough to get permit and it's

really hard. Um. But let's just say if I could open carry in New York, if that changed law and I walk, people would look at me like I was a threat and it might actually lead to an incident. I mean, somebody might assume that I would have ill intent if I were open carrying in this city and they didn't think that I was a law enforcement officers of some kind. So, you know, the cultural changes, the

corporate changes. Even though I don't think there are any massive legal changes coming to the Second Amendment and to the right to bear arms, there's all this other stuff and the left is achieving that we'll get more into this in just a moment. President. What is it define what an assault weapon? Ass Yeah, well, the assault weapons is where you can send my own amount of because and also when you put in the high high capacities on days, what is an assault weapon? Well, I would

say the team definitely qualified. But what is an assault weapon? Can you define what an assault weapons? Got an interview? I think you know it's the weapon that killed assault weapon is the weapon that killed nine people, nine people in Dayton in thirty second. Can you I just want him to answer what an assault weapon is? Can you define what an assault weapons? I certainly can't be legislation.

Can you define it? Can you define it? Uh? They're having some trouble there defining what an assault weapon is, which is not surprising, but they still want to ban them. Our friend David Harsani joins now. He's the author of First Freedom, A Ride through America's Enduring History with the Gun, an excellent book on the history of guns in this country. And also he's a senior editor at The Federalist. A very excellent sight. Mister Harsan, You're great to have you back, sir,

good to be here. Thanks. All right, so let's let's start with this. There seems to now just be this uh, this push among particularly among the journos, but Democrats too, Democrat lawmakers that the specifics don't really matter it, you know, blah blah blah, assault, rifle, assault, you know, schmifele, it's we just need to ban the guns to stop the violence. Is this a change in anything you think? Is this going to move the ball for them? No, it's not

right now. I think their plan is long term. You know, as you just saw, people can't define assault weapons. And that's I think in a way on purpose. I mean, you want to have this elastic word that can mean anything you want it to mean, so it becomes something that's just the bad thing. You know, it's an evil

thing to have an assault weapon. And what do they mean, Well, basically, it's just about aesthetics right now, and it's an incremental way to get to every semi automatic weapon, which is what I think they really want to ban or at least very very strictly restrict. You know, let's take into one part of this because the CNN I think, initially broke the story on this. But we're being told now that the shooter in Odessa bought the gun he failed a background check to buy a firearm, and then when

and bought the gun in a private sale. I don't know, I don't I haven't seen more specifics. If you have more specifics, by all means, let us know. But this is quite obviously going to turn into a major data point that is used for why we need universal background checks. Now, David, a lot of people it sounds like, well, we already have background checks, why not have universal background checks. I posed that I have my own version, but I want to hear the Harsani version. Well, I just want to

say I saw that story as well. There are really very little specifics, but whatever happened there, he broke the he's not supposed to have a weapon, and through a private sale either. So you know, I'm opposed to universal background checks because I think they will lead to a data national database of people. I don't understand how else

that can be done. And I also think it will inhibit depending on how it's done, but most of these bills will inhibit people from being able to lend their gun to someone, to give their gun to their relative or a good friend if they want to, without going through some kind of government check. And I just don't I just don't think that comports with the Second Amendment and the freedom of owning a firearm. I think that the laws that we have on the books already are

enough to stop most of these shooters. You're never going to stop all of them. And even if the case here was that he went through a private sale, it's an incredibly rare event. I can't think of another one of these mass shootings, high profile mass shootings, that happen in that way. I can think of a few right off the bat that could have been stopped by just

follow the laws that we already have. And if this was a private sale, and that's the way of getting around, you know, people are gonna say, well, why why can't we just require someone to go in and have the background check done at a federal firearms license you know, or a federal firearms licensee. Why not just go through that process, you said, because essentially a registry and it's

just unconstitutional. Is there anything else? Well, I mean, you know, it's already illegal to sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun, a to to buy someone a gun, uh you know, to buy the phrases escaping me. But to buy a gun for someone who's straw purchase, yeah, straw purchase of a gun. And uh so, I'm not sure what this does other than stop people who are law abiding citizens from just you know, get you know, giving their gun to their relative or selling their gun to

someone they know. If you're selling guns all the time, you have to have you have to have a license to do It's that's simple. Is there what's your what's your idea? Why why do you oppose it, why do I mean? I think that they're definitely going to create a registry. So that's I think the moment that you have every every single gun transaction that goes across the country, they're going to say, okay, well now we have a record of every gun transaction that's occurring. Any but I mean,

they already do have a lot of those guns. But I also think then you start to get into this area of well, if I if I do give you know, am I now breaking the law? If I give a gun to somebody to go sporting clay shooting and I haven't gone under a federal firearms licensee and that person for some reason get stopped and checked by a state trooper or whatever, Am I going to prison now for that? I mean, I want to know. You see, that's exactly

what they want. They want to make it harder. It's like a Maryland near d See where I live, getting a gun is incredibly difficult. That's what they want to do. They just want to make it more and more difficult. When we all know is this shooter and every other shooter does they ignore those laws any win do whatever

they like? It is is anything gonna you know, Yeah, I feel like part of my frustration year is that I come on radio and it's it's the same Liberals make the same arguments about this after every mass shooting. There's never you know, they usually completely ignore, Well, what you want to do wouldn't have even stopped the shooting

you're talking about. It's a very small percentage mass shootings overall of gun violence in the country, which is over from handguns and crime related, especially drug and gang related. But why they just think they're going to beat us into submission with the repetition? Is that the plan? What do you think the plan is? Well, I think that that a r fifteens because that you're used often by these derained psychopaths is an easy way to scare monger

people about guns. The truth of the matter is, like you just mentioned, uh, all all rifles are I think account for a very small percent you know, I don't know the exacting seven hundred of all the gun homicides last year or something like that, and within that that's not even a fifteens. You know, that's just rifles in general, more people are kicked to death, more people are punched to death, more people are killed with blunt objects and knives.

But it's an easy way to scare people because of the aesthetics of the gun and then of the horrible things that they're used for. But in the end, as far as gun violence goes, it won't do much. My my theory is, and I don't think this is you know, some some huge This not surprised you. I just think this is incrementalism. They blatch onto whatever they can, whatever they think is popular. You see the poll numbers on

this stuff, and that's what they want to do. Buybacks, assault weapon bands and universal back and buybacks aren't really I mean, that's a very gentle way of saying, you're going to give us your gun or you're going to prison. That's all. Yeah, it's called a lie. It's not a buy back because you never owned it in the first place.

It's it's confiscation. First, gun confiscation plans since as I wrote in a comm today, since Lexington van Concord, so never, never, not in the thirties or any other times, the government to pass the law that meant confiscating the guns of law abiding citizens, making millions of people into criminals instantaneous. I mean Connecticut, Connecticut I think I saw an assessment years ago, and they banned a lot of semi automatic

rifles at the state level. They expect that there are hundreds of thousands of people a couple of hundred thousand I think was the number, two hundred or maybe hundred and fifty thousand that just didn't comply. So technically those people are all now in the state of Connecticut felons. But they don't go door to door question that's soft and elsewhere, you know, assault weapons of people don't come and hand them in. I mean you're gonna have to

go get them at some point. Yeah. Absolutely, first freedom arrived through America's and during history with the gun. David Harsani is the author. Checkout his columns The Federalists. David always appreciate you making time for us, sir, anytime. Thanks for having me. See, we'll be right back art. We haven't talked more tonight about how we're going to beat Donald's Trump. I have an idea about Donald Trump. Donald Trump is not going to be beaten just by insider

politics talk. He's not going to be beaten just by somebody who has plans. He's going to be beaten by somebody who has an idea what this man has done. This man has reached into the psyche of the American people and he has harnessed fear for political purposes. So, mister President, if you're listening, I want you to hear me. Please. You have harnessed fear for political purposes, and only love can cast that out. So I, sir, I have a feeling you know what you're doing. I'm going to harness

love for political purposes. I will meet you on that field. And sir, all right, So you remember that that was Mary Williamson's big moment, and I have a I wouldn't quite say a soft spot, but I have a familiarity with miss Williamson because she was on the episode of Bill Marshaw with me. But we will recall that she had that moment and then she talked about the dark psychic force the Donald Trump has harnessed to do bad things to America. Here's the thing about Mary and Williamson.

She has unexpectedly stumbled upon a very important underlying truth about the Left that she, before running for president, was apparently not familiar with, and that is that the left is really mean and that they will lie about you, that they will lie, and they're very mean. I thought this was particularly interesting. This was from a New york An interview in The New Yorker with David Remnick. He said, quote, I know this sounds naive. I didn't think the left

was so mean. I didn't think the left lide like this. I thought the right did that. I thought we were better. There's a there's a real insight here, folks. I know so many liberals who really do think, really do believe that their side is where as for all the nice people. It's not even that their side is right, that their side is smarter, they believe that too, but that the nice people are on their side. I mean, I can just tell you, and I'm I'm giving this to you

as objectively as I possibly can. You know, look the left, for example, I mean I can tell you this and some of you who are going to get annoyed at me for saying it, but you know, the left is probably because they control the platforms and have take far more at bats than we do. But they're better at creative than we are. Meaning you know, they dominate Hollywood, they dominate TV shows, they do all this stuff, and

they have just more people in the game. Do I think conservatives could could make better shows that of course, But if we're just gonna look at the scoreboard, they're dominating us in those areas. And if it comes to if it comes down to making entertaining, uh, you know, fictional content, the left, generally speaking, manages to just do a do a good job on the creative. And you can argue with me about whether that's entirely because they control the platforms and or if it's just a function

of that's the way their minds think. And they're more you know, they're more willing to do the sex, drugs and rock and roll thing than conservatives are. I think that's one way to you know, with the left running things, you get a lot of you know, a lot of a lot of booze, boobs and violence, you know, when it comes to the creative. So if you like that or not, I leave that to you. But if you're talking about what goes on on the right, our people

are nicer, nicer than their people are. In the media, I'm talking. I'm not overall, I can't I can't say. I mean in the media, though, conservatives that I come across in news media are by a factor, I'd say of three to one. You know, there are three nice conservatives for every nice liberal I come across. Maybe it's more like five to one. They are really really nasty people on the left, really nasty that and you see

this in some of these organization. I mean you see this with Media Matters a as scummy an outfit as exists in the media landscape. Gawker, very left wing, disgusting, fortunately now defunct, but a horrible organization, ruined people, destroyed reputations, and took real glee in it. The young Turks with that psychopath who had the total meltdown about Dan Crenshaw. Guy's horrible. Is an unethical, stupid, bad person. There's a

lot of that, unfortunately in left wing media. Now I'm not saying it doesn't exist in the right, but for whatever reason, it is elevated on the left. I mean, you have these people. You know, Keith Olberman here's a perfect example, was universally known as a mean person, as a bad guy. Uh, you know, I mean there are others that I could I could talk about as well. You know, Jake Tapper, universally by those at least who've ever dealt with him, knows is one of the most

thin skinned human beings you will ever come across. And yet, you know, we're all supposed to be like, oh, well, that's you know, because he plays a news anchor on TV, We're all supposed to think that he's got gravitas. Mary Anne Williamson has found out the hard way that the left is really mean. They're just mean, you know, they're coming after her, and she's she says that they falsely accused her of having told AIDS patients not to take

their medicines. She's they say that she they false He's told her that lovelessness causes disease and that love is enough to cure their diseases. You know. They say that that she has been smeared by her own side in a way that shows a real vicious is now no a lotty like Buck the crazy Crystal Lady? What do we care? I'm just saying I think that her awakening to our own side is something that we need to encourage more. We need to encourage more of this to happen,

because Libs are really mean. There's a nat because of the self righteousness and the emotionalism and the sense that this isn't a difference in politics, is a difference between the good people and the bad people. They have no problem, they have no compunction watching the other side get destroyed. And then that reminds me of this guy, Ben Penn and the story that he wrote about Laife Olsen got

him fired from the Department of Labor. And now it to any person with basic reading comprehension skills, Laife Olsen did nothing wrong. It was a joke. He did not cross any line. He is not an anti Semite. He was not being anti Semitic. And this guy lost his job. And you know what, the Department of Labor is even now said, as far as I understand it, that they agree that you know, he didn't actually cross any lines to do anything wrong. Bloomberg is standing behind the report.

Better to be a party to a false better to be wrong than to have to admit that they ran a hit piece that was fake news and deal with a blow or the organization's credibility that would come from that. But you know, it's a It's a terrible thing to do. I would I would not sleep at night if I had gotten somebody fired from their job in the government just because I felt like getting some clicks for a website and I and I lied about a person and ruin their reputation to do it. I would not I

would not be able to handle that. Left is fine with it. Ben Ben hasn't apologized. Bloomberg hasn't apologized. Look at the way that you know they talk about it. In the gun debate. We say things like, oh, they don't understand, you know, they don't understand what they're talking about. Their ideas are wrong, their ideas are bad. What do they say to us, Oh, you don't care about dead children, you don't care about stopping mass shootings and the horrible

violence from it. Can they really believe that about their fellow Americans? I think, unfortunately the answer is yes. I think unfortunately there is so much There has been so much viciousness on the left for so long that they can't even see it for what it is. They can't even tell and it has been incubated on the left, so now we're dealing with the consequence of it. But yeah, do you mean to marry Anne the crystal lady who says that she doesn't even ever use crystals? So that's

an unfair sme but comes from the left, folks. They're very mean. Aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine's testimony brought about more good than the horror misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Cabinet on the court. We were going to have a conservative Elections have consequences. But he will always have an asterisk next to his name when he takes a scalpel to Robi Wade. We will know who he is. We know his character, and we know what

motivates him, and that is important. It is important that we know, and that was part of what motivated Christine. That is Christine Blasi Ford's lawyer, Deborah Katz telling you what we have known all along. That is the motivation. Now she said motivated in part, I would say motivated almost entirely by And the only part of that that you could add into the mix would be that she

was motivated almost entirely by politics. But then also the desire to be viewed among her fellow supporters of the hideous regime of abortion in this country, to be seen as a hero, to be on the cover of magazines

which she was put on. I mean, that's what ended up happening, and this is This is a frustration because yet again it reminds me of the Clinton Foundation situation, where I would go on CNN and say, we all understand that the Clinton Foundation is really a front for laundering money to the Clintons to buy access and contact with them, right, that this isn't really about charity, that the Clintons don't give a crap about charity. We all

know that, right, and it's CNN. They they'd all pretend to be very, very stupid when I would have this conversation with some of their anchors, and and punnits on another said, oh, what do you mean the Clintons. They're just doing good charity work, That's what There's no there's no other motive. And I said, okay, Well, the real test of this will be once it's clear that Hillary Clinton's not going to be president the United States, the donations dry up, because if it's about charity, then it

shouldn't matter at all. And as we saw, not only did the donations the Clinton Foundation dry up, they fell off a cliff and they had just shut down whole sectors of the Clinton When was the last time you heard about the Clinton Foundation at all in the news well, they're trying to cover up at some level there they don't have shame, but try to cover up the blatant nature of the pay to play scammut they were running. Why do I bring this up in the context of

Blasi Ford. A similar circumstances took place during the whole character assassination attempt of Brett Kavanaugh, which was still one of the most horrific things that I have ever watched in a political arena on TV. I think it actually, if we're talking just politics, it was the ugliest political

thing I've ever seen on TV. Was the ritualized and sadistic psychological torture that and all was subjected to for allegations that were clearly false to anyone who's not a liar or a moron, allegations that had no evidence to back them up, no substance in reality whatsoever. But I remember when that was happening, and you'll remember this too, that you had all these journalists that would say that this became a common talking point. Oh but but why

would she lie? She has no reason to lie? And they would say this, to which many of us would point out, other than being written about in the history books, forever as somebody who saved perhaps a women's a woman's right to choose, or as was said by Deborah Katz here at least will always have cast a cast in aspersion, created a question mark or an asterisk or whatever they want to say around any decision involving Judge Brett Kavanaugh, just to create the the basis for a multigenerational smear.

Also knowing that the left wing dominance in media and in the academy will mean that Blasi Ford give it ten years, She's going to be the hero of the narrative for all leftists, and they're going to teach us in schools just like you know, you always will hear that Clarence Thomas is the bad guy and Anita Hill

is a hero. You know, Anita Hill has Kerry Washington player in the HBO movie and defending women and all this stuff, and no one even really knows who gets all excited about it now the subject matter, in any detail of those allegations. They just know Anita Hill was the hero, the heroine, and Clarence Thomas was the bad guy, the bad guy because he's a conservative, and they want to make that the story as well. With Kavanaugh, and

with blasi Ford, they will try. I would just note that the media pretended to be completely a bunch of morons. All the issue of why would why would blasi Ford do this? Why would she come forward and lie, which is what she did about somebody to ruin his reputation, to defame him in front of the whole nation. Why I put herself through this? And it's because she got

to be the center of attention. She was considered a hero by everybody who is on the left, everyone who doesn't like Kavanaugh, an anyone who's ever had an abortion in the country and still believes in abortion as a sacred right of womanhood, which is a pretty terrifying notion, but that's a very widely held one. They thought that blasi Ford was being a hero, so it was obvious. And the point is it was obvious why she would

do this? Why would she lie? I got a lot of reasons why she'd lie, But all the journalists go, I don't know what she'd like. She's telling the truth. She has no reason to lie, That's what they would always say, no reason to lie. Well, here's her lawyer

giving you at least one reason. Now that the battle is over, or at least the initial phase of it is over, and it's to create a smear of Kavanaugh in case he is part of overturning Roe v. Wade, or in case there's any decision that comes down involving Judge Brett Kavanaugh that the Left doesn't like, they'll just say, oh, you mean Kavanaugh, the sexual assaulter. Havanall the would be rapist.

That's what they're going to do. And I just feel that there should be so much more accountability for the cowardly and idiotic journalists out there who, in moments where character would really matter, they feign or some of them perhaps are just the stupid, but most of them just feigned stupidity because it is politically more convenient for them in the moment. All of a sudden, they can't figure out what any normal human being paying attention to any

situation like this would be able to figure out. Why would a person come forward like this? Oh, because it's been so hard for Anita Hill since she came forward, She's been treated so poorly by by the press and by the establishment. Now she's gotten very cushy jobs. HBO show made, our HBO movie made about her where she's the heroine, and saything's gonna have with blasi Ford, And keep in mind that they've really just pushed away the other two. I can't even remember. I Sweatnick was the third.

I can't remember the name of the second accuser, an accuser who came forward despite not even being able by her own, by her own admission, being able to remember on her own, whether Cavana did anything to her, you know, she came forward and made this allegation against him. And then in the third instance, with Sweatnick, a crazy person who anyone could see, who had their eyes open and was being honest, was just a liar. Blasi Ford was a moderately a mildly convincing liar, meaning she was still

clearly lie. But there was there was a little she was better coach, There was a little bit more preparation in it. It was it sounded more plausible. Sweatnick came after Supreme Court judge, a Supreme Court justice now would be Supreme Court justice, of course, with the help of Michael Avanati. Who can it get scummier? I mean, the way that that guy goes after people on Twitter, if you haven't seen it, is hilarious. Got after some friends

of mine. They're not you know, you're not famous enough, basically, is what he likes to say to people. I mean, Avanadi is famous and almost the way that you know, Anthony Weener is famous for being a disgusting creep, right, I mean, they're they're famous for being bad people. They're not. They're not famous because everyone loves them. So you know, that's a distinction I think worth keeping in mind. But yeah, Christine Blasi Ford her lawyers come out and told us

what what I knew, what you knew all along. But now now we have greater confirmation. And the people that pretended they could not figure this out at the time, I do think that there should be accountability. I think we should bring them forward in the press and say, excuse me, I'm just wondering, were you really unable to figure out what the motivations here were. Now, of course we know that they would lie about it, but I

would like to see them lie again. The American people, I mean, many of the worst people you come across, and any prominent public role, our journalists, and this is just another another example of that. Over the last i'd say fifteen twenty years we've seen this increasing what many people call tribalism, and basically you can sum that up with contempt for other people's views and saying I disagree with you, and by the way, you're wrong about everything.

I think. In the past, we had elections, and yeah, they're pretty, they're pretty raucous, and they're pretty rough and tumble, and sometimes they're not civil. But welcome to democracy. But in the old days, the old days of being in why I didn't have this color hair. In the old days, when the election was over, we buried the hatchet, we got down to governing. It's like today all we stay in is locked in this election cycle and we're constantly

finding reasons not to cooperate. And no democraphy can survive that sort of a style. It does won't work. General Maddis there speaking of christiano'man pool who has the fanciest accents of any human being ever on the history of the world. It's really her calling card. I don't think that Maddis is political analysis here is especially as stute and I know I've been. I wouldn't even say I'm critical of General Maddis. I'm just I just have questions

I've been asking those questions. I don't want to naked seem like I'm bashing Maddis by any stretch. He's clearly, very very well respected throughout the military. I should when I say clearly, it's really what the journalists who cover the Pentagon, and you know that we go by what they say. I mean, I don't know. I haven't really spoken to that many rank and file soldiers about what

they think of Maddis. They might say is fantastic, they might say that, you know, I can tell you a lot of people thought that General Petreus was kind of a jerk. So we were always told, oh, he's a genius, he's gonna save well. I mean, he got things right in Iraq when he was in command, didn't exactly get things right in Afghanistan, But that never really gets talked about. General General Madister though, saying that we used to get

to the business of governing. Really, I think you could argue that that has been in recent memory, that has been the exception more than there. It certainly wasn't the case under the Bush administration, where I have not forgotten that there were efforts, real efforts to try to get criminal charges brought against someone like Dick Cheney where there was a special counsel about a non event leak of a non event person's name, and then that led to

the charges against Scooter Libby. There were it was. It was complete political trench warfare in the Bush years, and that was when we were under attack by radical Islam and the global Jihad. We were united for about six months after nine eleven as a country, and then it very quickly turned into anything to destroy Bush. Bush is Hitler.

I was in college and there were leftists on my campus and in the area of Amburst College who were making the case that they thought that Bush was basically a fascist along the lines of along the lines of Hitler, you know, that Bush. Bush had fascistic tennant just like you know. And they would say that Cheney was really running the country and that Haliburton was going to around us all up any day now. I mean, it's saying crazy stuff. So it was maddest not really around for that.

Its maddest not a part of that situation. I would have to wonder during the Clinton years when there was a very acrimonious impeachment fight, you know, when when were we getting down to the business of governing. I look, I will tell you. I saw my friend Ben Dominic tweeted this out today and he's read Mattis his book.

I haven't yet. I just told you what others tend not to say, which is that these books are a waste of time, They're boring, They're often either money grabs or just self aggrandizing, pedestal creation for the former government officials. You know, there was a time when the expectation was you served in the government and you just went into private life afterwards. And that was that he didn't need to create a post governmental cult around oneself. And there

was a time when that was the norm. And I really mean that, right, we have seen and you can measure this. Unlike Mattis saying that politics used to be much more civil, I don't. I'm not even talking about you know, civil like meaning the Civil War, when we were literally killing our fellow Americans over at political political differences, so to the doing of hundreds of thousands of US I don't think. I don't think his politics very stute. I think that the analysis, I should say, is very stute.

And then Ben Dominic was saying that the maddest book is just boring, which doesn't surprise doesn't surprise me at all, and given that I already know that without reading it. And also, you know how much work it would really is somebody who's in the process of writing a draft of a book right now, how much work, how much

time it really takes. These individuals who have been used to having staffs do a lot of work for them and people writing speeches for them and doing all these things, they're gonna They're gonna sit at a computer at a I was gonna say, a typewriter. That's really kicking at old school Rusa Mark. Have you ever even used the typewriter? You know, I've never even touched a key on a typewriter, only keyboards. I haven't used one, but I've seen one

and like touched the ya. I mean it's not a dinosaur like of course you've probably seen one, but I mean, you've ever actually tried to type with one? No? Yeah, I had computer class in elementary school. Yeah, I did too, I remember, and I remember thinking that this, you I was really smart and forward leaning in elementary school in that I was like, writing things out by hand is obviously way smarter and better. So this computer thing is ridiculous.

Turns out that we were all gonna have to worry about carpal tunnel syndrome for the rest of our adult lives pretty soon. So so Mattis' book is pretty boring. But when he says that based on Ben Dominant's assessment, which I trust, I haven't read it yet myself, but I kind of know it. It was like when you see a movie trailer, you know, you know if it's good or not. Yea, not really, you know, yeah, technically you should see the movie, but yeah, you know, usually

knows being in which the right I love this. On Rotten Tomatoes, I told you all to go and see Dave Chappelle's comedy special. I told you to go check it out. And just to give you a sense of what the score ratings were earlier today on Rotten Tomatoes, Sticks and Stones on Rotten Tomatoes has a Tomatometer score based on critics reviews of twenty nine percent positive. So

that's that's that's a very low critics score. Who wants to guess, christer mark, what percentage of the three thousand, seven hundred and fifty three people who rated on Rotten Tomatoes liked Sticks and Stones the Dave Chappelle comedy specially. I told you about what's the percentage? Eighty two ninety nine. Wow. Yeah. So everybody who saw this thing who was a viewer thought it was hilarious, and seven out of ten critics who reviewed it and review things officially for their livelihoods

thought it was bad. This is a microcosm of what woke culture does to you being woke, being a social justice warrior, you are not allowed to find funny things funny anymore. You're not allowed to laugh at anything other than white Christian males and mockery of them. You know that that's it. Anything. If you mock anybody else, you can't make jokes. You can't make jokes about women, you can't make jokes about any particular ethnic group, anything else.

You are going to get slammed by the social justice left. We know that the good news is that people like what they like, and I'm happy to see that the public at large, left, right and everything, everything altogether, everyone thinks that Sticks and Stones by Dave Chappelle is hilarious. Because it is hilarious. We can't let this go on. They would take it out five hundred billion dollars a year out of this country, including tellectual property theft which

was rampant. So our farmers will be helped. Nobody that we've done more for it than our farmers, and they understand. You have to win the war with This is a trade war, trade battle. You can call it anything you want. And this should have been done by presidents before me, and not just President Obama. This should have been done by President Bush and President Clinton. This should have been

done a long time ago. China has been absolutely the World Trade Organization has been a disaster for the United States. China has taken advantage of it and US, and that's not happening anymore. But the farmers have been taken care of sixteen billion dollars and twelve billion dollars each year. Okay, everything that Trump just said there about the US posture towards China under his administration, everything said there's true. Previous

administrations should have dealt with this and didn't. China is ripping us off, is playing dirty. The World Aid Organization should never have let China in, and it has been a disaster. Everything he's saying there is true, and we are supposed to skip past all of that in our assessment of this president as it relates to trade and

just more generally. I mean, yet, Bernie Sanders today saying probably the most dangerous president in the history of presidents, Well, why is it that this president is supposed to be so dangerous? Is the only one who understands what we're really dealing with when it comes to China? Why did it come to the why why did it fall on this president to have to be the one who's willing to deal with this, willing to be in a position

where he'll take the political heat. You know, what was the last time you can think of any of any politician who was doing something that he was right, He knew he was right, he was paying a political price, and he said, I know I'm gonna pay a political price for this anyway, but I want to do it. And I'm not saying it never happens. But that kind of leadership is rare. It is not the norm. Much more common for people to say, well, what's the most what is the most popular thing thing I can do here?

The thing that will most most likely result in my continued continuation in power, my continued ability to hold the office I hold and they do that thing, and that's not what Trump is doing on China now. I do think that because of the focus on getting on getting a trade deal done, or at least on continuing to wage the trade war, the White House hasn't been as vocal and Trump hasn't been as vocal in support of

the protesters in Hong Kong as I would like. But I understand he's trying to balance those two very important things, and ultimately, for us, here's the reality a trade war is more important than what's going on in Hong Kong. Might sound harsh, but that's true. Hey Dean Buck, it's time for Roll Call. I'm still very partial job Stall call. I always will be. I don't know why. I think it gets me the most fired up of our various Roll Call intros. So some fun news for all of you.

As of end of this month, the show is going to be available via podcast earlier on in the day. We're hoping by three pm Eastern, so you can start to get this thing in your daily routine in time to drive home, in time for your commute or a prepping dinner. You no longer have to wait for the podcast until late at or nine pm, eastrom which is what it had been until pretty recently. Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton. That's how we get this party started.

Let's get to it. Owen Buck listening to yesterday's podcast, and you asked about a movie. I think you were thinking of Army of Darkness, Ding ding ding. You are correct, sir, I was thinking about Army of Darkness and I've never I've still never seen it. Producer Mark, you can just you can just give me the nod here. Did you ever see Army of Darkness? No, he doesn't. He doesn't mess with that childish nonsense, producer Mark only. He only sticks at the classics. H William next up here. I

think you're missing the point about sleepy Joe. I think the reason he is still topping the polls is simple. The Democratic voters are not as crazy left as the party thinks they are. So the average dem won't vote for Trump, but also doesn't want to vote for a radical leftist. So Joe, with all of his false gaffs and senior moments, looks like the most sane person to them.

She'll tie, that is, William. I mean, you're certainly correct from the perspective of why Joe Biden has the support that he does up to this point, even though it is quite clear that Biden is not a really a marquee, a first tier national level politician. And it is because he does have the name recognition thanks to his eight years as Obama's vice president, and he seems like a dogmatic but not insane Democrats. That's the best thing you

could say for Joe Biden. Now he's also very old, he seems like he gets lost a lot, and there's all of that stuff. But here we have it. Jason, all right, buck, I've got to say I find it pretty disgraceful that Betto would be running on the backs of those killed in El Paso and elsewhere. He's using the slaughter of innocence to try and keep himself in the race for the presidency. Shame on him, and the sooner he drops out, the better it would be for

the nation. I saw, Paul Jason, it was pretty fantastic. It was my favorite poll that I've seen in quite a while, because the pole had Betto at a whopping zero percent nationally at this point. Now, I don't know if that's an accurate pole or not, but I did see it, and it feels like betto Beto is a zero, so he should be at zero. Buck, Why are you so mean? I'm totally just singing this song to your girlfriend because I want to be her friend. I'm not I'm not that guy at the front party with a

guitar who's just heading to be your girlfriend's friend. But like, how's other things in mind? I'm not that guy, Buck, I'd give myself an eight exactly exactly. He would always give himself an A. But he's a zero zero for betto Susan. Here we go. Hey, Before I started my business, I had a bumper sticker that read halt climate Change, I like seventy and Sonny. Before that, I worked for the government going to public sector businesses, and I had

another bumper sticker that read government adult supervision required. Because of a union flap, we could have any bumper stickers we wanted. I also copied a bumper sticker I saw annoy a liberal work succeed be Happy. I got the most positive comments on that one. Love the show Shields High. I mean, I used to have a mug with Rumsfeld on it. Back in the day. I had a lot of right wing kitch I think you could say I

had a lot of collectibles and Bush Gewat. I was big into the GWAT, the Global War on Terror At, a lot of Gewat memorabilia. I don't really have much of it anymore. I've got I've reached the point now where all my old CIA stuff, all my stuff from countries all over the world, and photos of me, you know, briefing the president and doing other cool stuff, that's all just like locked away in a closet now. I don't really,

I don't know. I used to have a little almost like a shrine to government service in my very small apartment, but now it's it's an under the bed in a plastic tupperware bin kind of thing shrine. So yeah, I'm not as I'm not as into the remembrance of those government days. C k hey buck, you mentioned General Mattis saying he had seven thousand books and read them all. I wasn't sure if you meant you didn't think he could have read that many. My my love of book

second only to my love of Dalmatians. I don't know, ck, that's already, that's strike one. I'm just kidding. Dalmatians are fine. They're very pretty if you like dogs that don't necessarily have the Swedish temperament. I'm just I'm gonna lose. I'm gonna lose a listener here. I'm kidding. Ck, I'm kidding. Dalmatians are great, and I'm guessing I have thousands of books myself, she writes, I'm kind of afraid to attempt

to count them. With bookcases in almost every room in my house, including the garage and the basement, finding books for ten cents at a thrift shop is like hitting the lottery. For me, I read approx. Me a one hundred books a year. It seems quite possible for General Matters to have read seven thousand over the course of his life so far. Good Reads is a fun app to keep track of what you've read. Even if I live to one hundred, they'll still be books awaiting in

my shelves. Fill your house with stacks of books and all the crannies and all the nooks doctor Seus's words of wisdom. Love your show, buck Ck, thank you for your note. And maybe maybe I'm just annoyed at myself because I feel like I used to rip through more books and more quickly than I have in the last couple of years because I've been very busy trying to do this whole media thing. I still read. I still

read books. I actually just finished I just finished the Kevin Williamson's book on Socialism, which I found very very interesting. It's pretty he deep dives, that's for sure. And I'm actually in the process right now. I've really died. I kind of want to read this book just on salt that I downloaded. It's just salt, but the history of it and how important. I know it sounds weird, but it was a best seller. I think Kurlanski, I think the name of the author I might read that. We'll see.

I'll let you guys know. You know, I did see something yesterday the guy who is behind the Goldman Sacks elevator account, which at one point was one of the funniest parody accounts on Twitter period. Now the funniest parody account on Twitter is Titanium McGrath, No question, Titany McGrath is the best social media parody account on Twitter that I have seen. And I'm a fan. I like to think that I'm a social media parody connoisseur. May we be a seer, but Titaniy McGrath is woker than woke,

is the way I would describe it. But Goldman Sachs Elevator, especially in the aftermath of the two thousand and eight financial meltdown, was just a really funny and biting satire of investment banker attitudes. That guy published a list of the hundred books that you have to read if you're that every man has to read. And I looked at it was a pretty good list. But there's a lot of stuff on there that I think that people just believe they have to read because everyone else said so.

So maybe I'll come up with a little list of my own at some point. I know, I keep saying, I'll post all the books you guys want. I just post all the books are all my Kindle online on a list, and you can see what I've read and see what I'm still hoping to get to. So there's a lot that look at. If I could, I would just spend three hours a day reading a book reading books two hours if I if I had my way, two hours a day of just reading books. But it's very hard to carve out. I got two hours day

to read the books. I gotta go to the gym for an hour I gotta And then some days I'm just in sweats, trying to prepare for radio and TV and things, and I never get any of these things done. It's tough, you know what it's like, folks. Procrastination is the devil that sits on all of our shoulders all the time, Steph, book, could you move into the belly or rather, how could you move into the belly of the beast? No matter how much I love the culture there,

I would never live there. I go to Amorous to visit family and can't get out of there quick enough. I love lefty hippies as long as they are three states away. Shields Hill. Well, Steph, I'd say, you know, I'm from New York, and so I can't seed this place to the commies entirely. You know, I can't bring myself to be completely I can't abandon my hometown, even though I know they are all these leftists running around and who run everything and all the rest of it.

So we'll see Thorburn. Hi there, Buck, if you'd like to discuss the more recent mass shootings are Thorburn. That's a cool Thorburn sounds like the name of a character from Game of Thrones, you know, Thorburn of the North, Thorburn of the Two Swords. You know that's kind of cool.

Maybe not all right? Whatever either, Buck, if you'd like to discuss the more recent mass shootings across the country and perhaps the why and the how behind their frequency, I know of a man who's spoken on the topic more than once and is, to say the least, very insightful. So with the possibility that you'll have another segment where you decide to talk about America's endless mass shootings, and you'd like to bring him on the name, the guy

is Tom Freel. Okay, thanks, I've never heard of this guy, but I will. I'll google him. Google it. That's what Alex Jones used to say, and he get really fired up about something. You google. It's on Google Illuminati to build the birds. It's all It's all there. It's all there if you just want to read it, if you just do do the research. Don't don't don't listen to that Maintree media telling you all that other stuff. Buck Sexton infiltration a conservative media guy. That guy's a CIA plant.

Buck Sex. I know I know what he's I know his game. He's got that smug face. Looks like that guy from Parks and Wreck. Looks just like him, except a little, a little bigger. It's like Parks and Wreck with poofy your hair. You can't trust a man his hair is that poofy. He may have a point about that. Actually he may have a point. Nicola spell flik Nikola. If the premise of an old horror movie revolted you that much, A thousand dollars says, it's the Human Centipede.

If it is, I'll send the money anyways, if you promise to not watch it. Thank you for your work. Buck. I've heard The Human Centipede is really gross, but I wasn't even I can't even begin to tell you or remember what exactly it was that That producer Brandon, who now is doing more, he guessed DJ's for us sometimes in the show, but we don't see much of him these days. But he's very into horror movies, and I

just I can't horror movies depressed me. I watched that movie The Witch, and I told you guys about it, and I was a little freaked out for a couple of days. And I'm a grown man, it's not afraid of nothing to nobody except apparently scary movies on the television screen. That gets me scared. I don't like it, so yeah, Brian, whoa, here we go. Buck. Not sure how most people in the States, how much most people's

it's realized that how badly the Bahamas was hit. I've been fortuit have spent a lot of time working in the in the Bahamas of the years, Marsh Harbor, the major town that area, has been completely wiped off the map. The people of Bahamas are some of the nicest, most genuine people I've ever met. The government of the Bahamas is bloated, corrupt and bankrupt, so recovery is not going

to be easy for them. Would be nice to see a few major cruise lines pony up, who've been profiting from the Bahamians generosity for so many years, send a few boats over to support these good people alongside our armed forces are already there to pray for the Bahamas. Brian. Well, Brian, that's a very important note to end the show on today, so thank you for writing it in. We are sending thoughts and prayers and if there's a way to send

more resources, food, medicine assistance. We should all certainly consider doing so in the ways that we can. Team has always an honor and a privilege to be here with you in the Freedom Hut. Thank you so much for listening, for hanging out. We'll be here time, same place tomorrow. Shields High