Corey Crushes Congress

Sexton Show. Bucks SEXTONSI decoding the news and disseminating information. Who is actionable intelligence? Make no mistake American? Great, You're a great American again. This is the Bucks Sexton Show. The CIA analysts. I can speak for three hours without a phone call. Try doing that sometime. It is bucks Sex. No, he called the Attorney General to ask him to unrecuse himself from the Special Counsel's investigation. Session said no. His White House counsel said there should be no contact with

Session because of his recusal. So what does the president do. He calls you in to do what everyone else wouldn't do. He called you in to do his dirty work in secret because he knew it was wrong. Well, we will expose the truth. And President can hot eye behind you any longer? If you should be here to be telling the truth, because the truth will set you the American people. I ye back time and the general lady has expired. The witness may answer the question. I don't believe there

was a question, Congressman, Yes there was. Could you repeat the question and hear it. I'll be happy to repeat the just a rant him, just a rant. Welcome to the buck Sex and show everybody. Tombstone's one of my favorite movies. Top twenty. I'd say I wouldn't put in the top ten, but I think it probably makes in

the top twel I've seen it one hundred times. There's a really there's a bunch of very very good lines in it, right, And one of my favorites is when Kurt Russell tells the kind of weasily sheriff guy, I don't think i'll let you arrest us today, be hand remember that, well, Korey Lewandowski, when the Democrats decided to go after him today and try to make a scene and try to basically stood up there in Capitol Hill and said to all the assembled Democrats going after him

with everything had. I don't think I'll I'll let you arrest arrest me today. You could try to do the whole You could try to do holding him in contempt, but I don't think that's gonna work. That they could call the sergeant in arms. Technically they could go for it, but that would make quite a scene. Here's the real point of all those folks. It was a total mess today, a total mess on Capitol Hill. And I think that

there's a lesson to be learned here. Jerry Nadler, for example, got very frustrated at one point by all of this. Here's here's what Jerry Nadler said. Ever suggests to the President or anyone else that you thought your communications with him were official White House communications? Congress from the White House is directed not. I'd not disclose the substance of any discussions with the President of his advisors to protect

executive branch concientiality. And I recognize this is not my privilege, but I am respecting the White House's decision. Let me ask you some questions about your relationship with the president after he assumed office. How many times does the President asked you to meet him in the White House. The White House is directed not disclose the substance of discussions. Did you meet with the President alone in the White House in twenty seventeen. I don't know the answer to that.

How many times did he direct you to deliver a message to a member of his cabinet? The White House is directed not disclose the substance of any discussions. Did he ever discuss with you any concerns that he may have committed a criminal offense? The White House is directed not disclose the substance of any discussions with the President or his advisors to protect Executive branch confidentiality. I recognize this as not my privilege. I make a point of

order pursuing to clause to J two one eleven. We get it, we get enough enough, we get it, we get it. That's more or less what the hearing was today. That is what was going on at the House Judiciary Committee hearing with Korey Lewandowski, former UH advisor to Trump campaign manager for President Trump. And I gotta tell you, I think that Korey Lewandowski was taking the right approach here. The process is the punish with them with the processes,

the punishment with Democrats. We know this, This is why they keep bringing back the same different the same narratives at all. But let's have more hearings, Let's have more investigation. Oh, the FBI didn't investigate Kavana enough. Now they want a new investigation. We'll get to the Kavanaugh stuff. The Special Counsel Robert Mueller, he didn't investigate enough around around Trump and Russia collusion and an obstruction, And let's have more investigation.

There's never enough investigation because it's just harassment, it's undermining. It's the absence of good faith, the absence of seriousness, of decency, of worthwhile purpose from these congressional Democrats, just just needling, going after poking at every person around Trump, just trying to do everything that they can to try to undermine them, rattle them. And so Korey Lundowski was just not having it today. It's like I've been told by the White House not to answer your a coequal

branch of government. Take it up with the White House, Korey Lundowski, all these guys, they've already spoken to the Special Counsel that they've been through. How much interrogation is enough? You know, what if? What if Congress wanted to have somebody to call a witness, you know, every day the Congress was in session. I mean, is there a point at which it's obvious that this is harassment to everybody, because it should be there right now, Let's have more

more hearings on impeachment. Let's talk. They have the full report for Muller. They have the report, and today there were some moments where you know, they were telling they were telling Korey Lewandowski, you know, oh, well, well you need to read this, and he just said, I'm I'm not gonna read it. I'm not gonna play your game. I'm not gonna stand here and or sit here. Rather, it's not standing. I'm not gonna sit here and just jump when you say jump, do whatever you tell me

to do. He's a citizen, he has rights. He doesn't have to sign up for the humiliation humiliation session that the Democrats are insisting on. So he stood his ground. I gotta tell you, I've I've never I've never been impressed by Kory Lewandowski before. Now that's not to say that I just I've never been impressed by the guy. I've never heard him say anything particularly insightful. You know, I don't know. I also I've interviewen a couple of times.

Nice enough guy, fine, But today I was like, wow, I kind of understand now why Trump feels the way he does about Korey Lewandowski. He's a fighter. This is nonsense. The Democrats don't. The Democrats in Congress don't deserve respect when doing the things that they were doing today. Oh, read this section of the mull report. It was all about just trying to get their their cable news moment. Oh, look at that sound bite, really showing us how strong

they are at the resistance. It's not about good government, it's thought about fixing anything. And in fact, Korey Lewandowski made that case in conclusion. And it's sad to say this country has spent over three years and forty million taxpayer dollars on these investigations, and it's now clear that the investigation was populated by many Trump haters who had their own agenda to take down a duly elected president of United States. As for actual collusion or conspiracy, there

was none. What there has been, however, is harassment of this president. From the day he won the election. We as a nation would be better served if elected officials like yourself concentrated your efforts to combat the true crises facing our country as opposed to going down rabbit holes like this hearing, instead of focusing on petty and personal politics. The committee, folks, on solving the challenges of this generation. Imagine how many people we could help or how many

lives we could save. Democrats don't want to do any of that stuff. They don't want to try to fix problems. They want to create more problems for anybody who ever worked for Donald Trump. They want to drag them through them all. They want to ruin them. I mean, look at look at how the Democrats do their version of opposition to the Republican Party at this point, their ideas, their responses that are supposed to make things better for

the American people, that's all an afterthought. What they really want to do is just destroy the other side. It's just a ferocious hatred for Trump, for anybody who's worked for Trump, and they want to humiliate people and they want to destroy them if they have no common decency

whatsoever in this process. And so that's why when krey Lewandowski decides that he's going to take the position that this is a sham, that the people that are asking these questions have no interest in getting to the truth, that this isn't about illuminating any subject for the American people, that this is just meant to humiliate someone, to make them make their life more difficult, in order to prop up the political fortunes of a bunch of status Democrat

loons who are completely consumed with anti Trump hatred. He's just not having it. You know, they do this thing where they ask him a question, and I guess members of Congress because oh, it's in the Congress, and you know, people really have to treat it like it's this sacred place. I mean, Congress is full of clowns. Unfortunately, there are clowns on the Republican side too, but not as many as the Democrats side, but full of clowns. And that's

really on us. I suppose the American people. We're voting for them. So I'm sitting here in New York and we're not exactly putting forward the best congressman and congresswoman here. I'm coming to you from the place that gave America elected official AOC. So she's the boss. Apparently, at least of what one congressional district. So Corey decided that he was going to punch back. He was gonna fight back. And you could tell Democrats were a little flummixed by this.

They're used to just being able to talk over witnesses, you know, oh, the Muller Report, let's talk about more. They ask questions, they don't want answers. They ask questions merely as a form of attack so that they can then overtalk and override whatever the response was going to be. And this is, for example, the classic CNN anchor maneuver that I used to deal with. Explain to me why Donald Trump is racist and worse than Hitler, the CNN anchor would ask, and I'd say, well, I think that's

really a proproblem. But he's worse than Hitler. We all know this. Let's have another guest come in and say it. I mean, that's what the members of Congress do. It's like they're all these Democrats are auditioning for, you know, a little weekend show at MSNBC or there, or they're a morning show at CNN or whatever. They're not being

respectful to Lui Is And it's so funny too. You see the way that Democrats when when someone like like James Coomey is testifying in front of the Congress, or or someone like Bob Mullard's home hush tones, thank you so much, serve for your service. What you've done is amazing. So you're just such a patriot. Now tell us why Donald Trump should be destroyed and everybody around him has betrayed the country. I mean, you know, this is what

they do, and it's so tiresome. And I can imagine for people that are engaged in what's going on in the country and I don't know about politics insofar as it affects them and it affects their families and their communities, they've got to look at this and just think, is this the best we can do? And if not that at least they can look at Corey Lewandowski with the line of the day here when Eric Swalwell, who is just he's a he's just an empty suit, guy's got nothing.

When Swalwell decides to do exactly what all these Democrats were doing, just trying to poke at Lewandowski, trying to make him look bad. Corey for the win, I'm happy to have you read a congressman well, why don't you want to read it? Mister Lewindowski, I think you should afford me the same privilege you afforded Director Muller. Would you like to read it? No, you're welcome to read it. Are you ashamed of the words that you wrote down?

President Swallowell, I'm very happy of what I've written, But you're welcome to read it if you'd like you. Are you ashamed to read it out loud? I'm not ashamed of anything of my life, Congressman, an't you then? Why don't you read the words? Congressman, I've asked and answered your questions. Why won't you read the words aloud? I've asked and answered your question. Courressman, if you'd like to

read the words, you're welcome to. Well, you were ashamed to read them out loud, and you didn't deliver those words to the person the president asked you to. President Swallowell, I think that's the only time that that guy's going to hear that for a very long time. That was fun telling him read these words? Do this? Do that? What an embarrassment. The embarrassment here is all on the

Democrat side. I'm acting like a bunch of total jerks today, all of them no respect, no decency, and by acting the way that the Democrats were, they undermine the very institution that gives them their authority and their power in the first place. But there's another lesson here. We don't have to just allow the other side to constantly weaponize the process against us. We don't have to just be the ones that say, well, these are the rules, and we always play by the rules exactly as written in

the best spirit possible. So you know, that's what we're gonna do. You know, look look at what the Trump administration, for example, did during the Muller probe. Gave them you know, no claims of executive privilege during the Muller probe, access to every whatever, documents, all this stuff. Did that get them anything? Was there any good faith that resulted from that from the Democrats? No, You give the Democrats something out of good faith and they just think that you're weak.

They think that there's an opening. Now. So I like the way Lewandowski did it, you know, go Leonitis style. I'll come and take it. I mean, you know, if they want to fight, give them a fight. And this should be the way that everybody who goes in front of Congress, and they shouldn't just sit there and yes, yes sir, no sir, yes, ma'am, no, ma'am. They're gonna make fun of you, they're gonna talk over you, they're

gonna act in ways that are inappropriate. Make them call the sergeant at arms or whatever in the Congress and arrest you. Let's see how that goes. We got a whole lot more show. By the way, we can take some calls because we have Brewster Mark and producer John here in studio. So if you want to call in, we are live. If you would like to call in today, we can screen the calls, we can throw them on air, we can chat eight four four nine hundred two eight

two five eight four four nine hundred buck. We hope that is John is at the right number. We don't give it out that often. It's like the secret now, it's like the formula for Coca Cola. We don't We don't share it. Eight four four nine hundred two eight two five. We will be right back today about your favorite football team. I'm not Patriots. Patriots, so you're pretty

happy right now. Right Tom's a winner. Again. The problem we have here is we don't follow procedure because if it gets in the way of a good story, we don't like it. Around here. Tom is a winner. Tom Brady gets a shout out from Corey Lewardowski today. You know, I saw a video of Rob Gronkowski firing a mini gun. I'm gonna tell you it made firing a minigun look like a lot of fun. It's making the rounds on

social media. So I didn't know this. So every single line lit up right away as soon as we ask for calls, so we'll start Apparently people want to call in because we got we got calls. Every line's lit and we got like seven lines in here. So we will take some calls now and after the break two and then we'll get us some other things. First up, Matt in Ohio. Hey, Buck, good to talk to you, Budd, you too, Man, thanks for calling in. Hey. I wanted to bring something up that I have not heard anybody

since the election of President Trump. Bring up one of the best biggest victories. Think he's been able to accomplish and only he could do this. Two thousand and eight, I was changing jobs and my financial adviser told me. I was telling him it seems like we're coming down on hard times in two thousand and eight, and he says, yeah, but Matt, you have to understand that corporations right now are record levels, cash rich like never have ever been before.

The problem is they're hanging on to their money. And since that year, the government and the Democrats have been trying to find ways to get the capitalists to release their money to energize the economy. And President Obama couldn't do it in two terms. We got sixty seconds, Matt, So we got to get to a point here. Okay, The point is President Trump was able to do it. He was able to do it by giving them a

reason to invest back into the country. He made several maneuvers when he got elected to bring work back into the US and keep work here in the US, and they had to reinvest to do it. I do remember, Matt, thanks for calling from Ohio, my friend. I do remember people saying at the end of the Obama last couple of years of the obaministration, it was, you know, get ready for GDP to not be that great, get ready for an economic future that's not going to be what

it used to be. And then Trump comes in and it's like, Oh, of course the economy is booming. Oh, it's the Obama economy now, I don't think so. We'll take some more calls eight four four nine hundred two eight two five eight four four nine hundred, Buck, we'll light them up. We're live. We'll be right back, all right, team lines lit. We're taking some calls, not because we are live here in New York City. On the Buck

Section show. We will get to the possibility of a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, hopefully not a war between the US and Iran. We'll discuss that. Also, we got a whole lot more fallout from the Cavanaugh bombshell that blew back in the faces of those who thought it was going to take down the Supreme Court justice or at least further hurt his reputation. We will talk about that and then uh, we got some other interesting things here. Two. Um. But first matta, Oh wait, Charles,

I'm sorry Charles in Massachusetts. Y're up next? Or what's up? Yes? Well, the reason I'm calling is because of a lot of concern about the situation, as you say, in between Saudi or Radio and Iran. And the fact is is that if we get involved with a bombing rage in Iran. Of course we would have with Russia and China supporting Iran. And the result is that if we get involved, then it'll just give the Democrats and everybody a chance to oppose Trump, and it may very well jeopardize his reelection.

He's in other words, if we get into a war, he's out. This is what I've been hearing. It's a well, it's a big it's a big risk for him. Look, it's a big risk for the American people. First and foremost, right, we don't want another war. We've had enough of these wars. But beyond that, the president really broke with the GOP

establishment on foreign policy. That having a muscular foreign policy where people can't mess with America isn't the same thing as, Okay, this country's got problems, let's go in to topple the dictator and try to rebuild this country largely from the ground up. That's not the same thing. And Trump had a different approach, a more non interventionist, which is not the same as an isolationist, a non interventionist approach to issues,

particularly in the Middle East. So yeah, if he gets drawn into a war, Charles to your point in Massachusetts, that would be I'm sorry, in the Middle East. You're in Massachusetts, that would be a betrayal in a sense of a major campaign promise. So he can't do that. I mean politically, it's a terrible idea, and it's a bad idea just because it's a war that we shouldn't be fighting. So I hear man, Charles, thank you for

calling in, Tim in Ohio, double Ohio tonight. What's going on? Tim? Hey, that's been gosh a couple of months since I talked to you last Well, great to have you back, my friend. Hey, listen, uh, I gotta tell you something. I gotta two clips are Brad Pascal. I was listening out there. But we want to get the president elected. Okay, So these are just my my kind of key ideas that get it gone,

all right. Number one, I've worked for steel workers, but I worked in manufacturing under middle medical manufacturing, but steel workers I know that actually worked for steel production. It's slow. And also I'm a I'm a hobby farmer, but I have a lot of real farmers per se, and I'm saying, hey, what's a pulse man? You guys pissed off? Because it's China deal. You've hissnel to the trade deals. And you know what, we know Donald Trump's trying to do the

right thing. Giving him time. So here's the deal, though, He's got to go into I think, on his next couple of trips, go into rust belt areas and tell them we're turning to get this MCA pushed through, that everything's going to be better for everybody wants mcass through. Flip this thing on the Democrats, same in the Democrats for not helping out the farmers and the workers and

manufactures of this country. He's got to start flipping this thing one into areas and purposing on them and one of them putting it up, Nancy putting it up for a vote. You know what I'm saying. I hear you, man, Thank you very much, Jim for calling from Ohio. And yes, I think that there has been a uh how do I put this? There's well, there's certainly been a delusion on the left for a while and among the Democrats that the status quo on trade was good. That's not true.

Trump is right that the status quo on trade with China specifically, but also with some other countries was unacceptable, needed to be changed, needed to be updated, or needed to be dramatically shifted, as we see with China, where we have these ongoing now this back and forth on making making a fair deal with China un necessity on their end by saying, Okay, if you're gonna play rough, we're gonna play rough. So I think that there is some some wisdom in Trump getting he's going to though.

I mean this to Tim's point. He will be telling the American people, and specifically farmers and steel workers, people that have been directly affected by the tariffs, by the trade war, which called a trade war seems a little extreme given how small a component of our economy is and how limited has been up to this point. But let's say the trade mute that is playing out via tariffs. Trump will make the case that this was short term pain for long term gain, and that ultimately he's doing

what we always say we want politicians to do. We want politicians to lead, we want them to make tough choices that need to be made. Right. That's what he's doing on China. And is he gonna win? I hope so. But he is doing something the right thing to do. Yeah, I think that's true as well. James and Boston. What's going on? James and Boston. Hello, Buck, Hey buddy, before it gets lost, shield tie shield tie love love the show. Thank you, thank you so much, pleasure. Thanks thanks for

taking the call. And I know that I know that the audience has split on taking calls and not, but I appreciate you taking minds. Uh, taxes in two quick very more, two more quick points. If I may, if I can, I'll be very efficient. I know you're a student of history, very clear, You're You're terrific. You're you're the future talk radio, the president also, but definitely the future. Um. The income tax is not what we think it is. It dates back to eighteen sixty two. It's an exercise tax.

You can research it if I may give a website, Lost horizons dot com. Okay, and uh, if you if you'll do the research, you'll find out that it's only people exercising federal privilege who owed federal income tax. I don't want to get you know, overly complex, but for those that are interesting, I hope you do it yourself because I know you'd love to stop paying taxes and you can do it lawfully. I've been studying this for three years. I've filed. I cannot recommend anybody try this,

be honest with you. I'm pretty sure that oh gosh, you cameber the guy's name now. But there's a there's a finance guy that I used to do some work with back the day at the Blaze, and his dad tried this and they send him to prison for a long time. So I would not recommend this. Well, Buck, what I'm saying is, don't do it. Research it, Okay, research it comfortable, then you can do it. To two more quick points. Don't be comfortable with it as from I'm telling you, but go ahead, I'll be, I'll be,

I'll be real fast. I first interacted with you on Facebook, and I'm the guy that, yes, can correct your celiac. I won't go any further, but I can do that, all right. And last point and last point, uh, And I've been I've had the tools. This is what is my mission of life is helping people heal. Last point is the second Amendment. Talk to some of your friends who've commanded troops in the military. If the government's coming after us, they're not come with them with them for it.

They're gonna come with Abrahams. They're gonna come with a Patchrie helicopters eight tens. So the right to bear arms, we would need to turn back Tyranny. We'd need Stinger milions, we'd need javelin men. I'm not sure that's true either, But James, I do appreciate your colm words about the show. Thanks very much for calling in. Um all right, you know we we we open up the lines. If he could cure Celiac disease, he should be a billionaire. And if we need Stinger missiles, I need to know why

we can't pacify Afghanistan. They don't. I mean they have like one hundred Stinger missiles that don't work anymore because the batteries are dead. But you know, yeah, I don't know. Should we do one more? Should we do it? You know what? I think we're gonna get back to the show. I think we're gonna go back through the actual radio show here, so a team. When we come back, let's discuss where these where the latest is with the New York Times debacle, and then also we'll get into some

of the Iran versus Saudi Arabia situation. So stay with me, we'll be right back. I think this is sort of ground zero for why so many people mistrust the media, why the New York Times has the nickname for New York slimes with many people in conservative circles. The Times actually had to run an editor's note following up, how did this vital fact get left out? Okay, thank you so much for the question. We're eager to clear the air on this. First of all, there was no desire

to withhold important information from our readers. We have all of it in the book, and the essay is an adaptation of the book that, of course we had to edit for length and clarity. The thrust of the essay

was about probably a bad word choice. The point of the essay was about Deborah Ramirez, a woman who had gone to college with Justice Kavanaugh and had this experience where she alleged that he exposed himself to her and it was a very troubling event, and we lay out all the reasons why that was not just the moment itself, but the experience she was having at Yale being very difficult. Within that, we talked about this new, as yet unreported allegation because we thought it was germane it was a

similar type of situation to the Ramirez one. During the editing process, there was an oversight, and this key detail about the fact that the woman herself has told friends she doesn't remember it and has not wanted to talk about it got cut and it was an oversight and the Times adjusted it and we're very sorry that it happened. And not buying it. That is bull That is not something that you or I should believe for one second,

my friends. First of all, if it was an oversight, why did it take them over twenty four hours after it was published to add that editor's note. If it was just if it just got cut in the normal editing process. First of all, it takes a very special kind of journalist to think that the way do you enhance your journalistic integrity when it has been called into questions to say, oh, it was my editor's fault. Oh really, it was the editor's fault. That's very interesting because it

wasn't a little detail. This wasn't a spelling error, this wasn't a typo that was that was a naughty word by accident or something you know that can happen that then that can be the editor's all right, but this was and absolutely critical, essential detail that undermined the entire point of the article, which was that, oh, yeah, we corroborated Deborah Emirazes allegations against Kavanaugh. And oh, by the way, there's this other allegation that seems very similar, and this

other allegation added to the Debi Ramirez allegation. You know that they all remember, they always want multiple accusers because multiple accusers feels, at least to the public, like, well, there must be some truth to this. Now, even though with Kavanaugh there were three accusers and they were all they were all wrong. They were not telling true stories, different degrees of crazy in terms of the details, the lack of details, the lack of corroboration, and different degrees

of outlandish. But none of them had credible stories. Remain accusers against Kavanaugh. And oh remember it wasn't just three accusers. There was also the Kavanaugh raped day woman in a boat in Rhode Island accuser that came forward to the Senate. You didn't hear about her, You know why, because even Senate Democrats knew that's gonna be tough, because he's never been to Rhode Island at that point in his life.

So if we can't put him in the state, if he can say, definitely, I've never been in the state of Rhode Island up to the point when this allegedly happened. You know, you know, I have never been to Montana. So it's pretty easy for me to prove that, like, I've never killed anybody in Montana. But there were other people. Did she have a right to be believed? The woman who claimed that she was raped in a boat in Rhode Island, did she have a right to be But no, she did not. She had a right to be told

you're lying, go away, And that's what happened. So remember that there is such a thing as entire not credible and malicious. And oh, by the way, there can be legal penalties for that if you swear under oath, if you swear out a statement against somebody to the police, and those legal penalties should be enforced. Perhaps that's a little further down the line here in the conversation. Let's get back into the New York Times debacle. So they today tried to double down. They were not backing. Okay,

I guess they feel like they have no choice. I mean, the New York Times, if you are paying attention and and you're not a leftist who believes that anything that advances the cause of the left is inherently justified, then you find yourself saying The New York Times cannot be

trusted on politically sensitive issues. When I trust the New York Times to tell me, you know where I can get the best ruben sandwich in New York City, I mean, the food stuff that they do is good, and I think they probably don't I think they probably don't cheat on the weather, although heaven forbid we start talking about climate change. You know, there's some utility to the New York Times. Some of you are saying, yes for the

bottom of my bird or a rabbit cage. I mean, there are some things you can do with the New York Times where the politics don't really matter. But anything that is even remotely politically sensitive and then includes the arts book review, you know, you name it. It is a left wing propaganda machine, full stop. And that was what you saw yesterday with the this claim of an oversight. Ooh, in the editing process, we just happened to miss this

absolutely essential detail. You know what else they seem to leave out of that essay? Which comes up in the book. And by the way, will be joined by Tiana Lowe, who's really an up and coming star reporter over at the writer over at the Washington Examiner. You know what, She's done research on this and she read through the whole book, so she'll join us to tell us what we need to know about the education of Brett Kavanaugh.

Leland Kaiser was the best friend of Christine blasi Ford and Leland Kaiser according to this book that just came out, and they didn't want to focus on this part of the story, but this is information. I believe this was already out there a bit. And and thank heavens, Molly Hemingway who wrote her book before, and Kerry Savorino, who wrote their book before this one came out. They've already done all the research. And they're the ones who are

pointing this out. They're the ones who are pointing out when these unbelievable lapses in the liberal anti Kavanaugh narrative, you know, the unbelievable lapses and omissions of essential fact or fabrications even occur. At least Carrie and Molly are out there saying, Nope, that's not what happened. Nope, that's not true. That's why they had to append that editor's note. But Leland kai Or had some there's some very interesting

things about her situation. One is that she has more recently come forward and said that she just did not believe does not believe that this happened. This is Christine Blasi Ford's best friend who was supposed to be at the party, doesn't believe that it happened. And beyond that, and this maybe tells us even more, said that she was subject to the worst kinds of threats, intimidation, abuse in order to lie and back up Christine blasi Ford.

That's what the left was reduced to here, my friends, finding innocent people beyond Kavanaugh saying you better back up this woman who's either crazy or lying or else. Radicals have a habit, a habit of finding a way to justify anything that they want. You will probably be familiar, I'm sure with the Castro quote. Within the revolution, everything

against the revolution, nothing. Any time in the Soviet Union somebody was to become a target of the state and enemy of the state, they would say that the person was a counter revolutionary. And that's all you had to say. If you were a counter revolutionary, then you were against the single most important purpose of life within the Soviet Union, which was the revolution itself, the workers paradise that would come,

the socialist Marxist utopia of the future. How could you, how could anything be allowed to stand in the way of that. When radicals decide something is important enough, then they can justify absolutely anything. I bring this up just because I do not think it is a stretch at all. When you see, when you think about how devoted to the cause of abortion and Roe v Wade, many particularly many women of a certain age roughly you know, the Boomers and a gen X and gen y, when you

see how devoted to abortion they are. They believe it is sacred. They believe that they would enter a period of virtual enslavement as women if they did not have the right to term it a pregnancy at any point during the nine months of a pregnancy up to and

including the day of birth. So when you understand the radicalism behind the mentality, then of course someone could justify in their own head ruining a man's reputation, lying about someone ridiculing him, destroying him in front of the entire country, in front of his own family, sure, you may find that that's unsavory, might make you uncomfortable, But if you're a true revolutionary, if you really believe that a fundamental woman's right is on the line, as an abortion radical,

what would you not be willing to do? What would you not be willing to say? We know it came out recently that Christine blasi Ford's own lawyer said that one of the reasons. Now they would say, oh, it's just one of them, but one of the motivations was to protect rov wait, that's why. That's why she felt

the need to step forward. So there there's no question that there was a political motivation that The only outstanding issue is was that political motivation so powerful that it was used to wipe away any concern, any compunction, any hesitation at the most horrific and despicable character assassination of a good man that I think any of us can

can think of it. It was truly heinous. They try to do and are still trying to to Kavanaugh and the members of the Democrat Congress who are saying that they want to impeach Kavanaugh, that they want to have

a new investigation, even they should be utterly ashamed of themselves. Unfortunately, they are I'm sure not in the least ashamed of themselves, because why the most important, the most important thing to them is that there is a symbolism here that if nothing else, if you are in the Kavanaugh seat, if you're the person that the left asides is a threat to the agenda, you will go through hell and even if you survive, you will be scarred for life by it.

That's the message that has been sent here. Even though Kavanas sits on the Supreme Court, the message that I think Justice Roberts, for example, who also sits on the Supreme Court, pays very close attention to. He is a waffler, he is an institutionalist. He's somebody who does not want mean things to be said about him in the press and on law campuses all across the country. Don't think that the left gets nothing out of all of this. Sure, there's a kind of psychotic Catharsis for them, of just

trying to destroy somebody they disagree with. But it's more than that. They have sent a message, and the message will resonate and as people consider the possibility of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat at some point undetermined in the future opening up what has happened here with Kavanaugh, they will be willing to replay this. I think they'll be willing to go at this again. But to the point about hardliners and revolutionaries being willing to do whatever it takes,

because nothing can be more important than the revolution. I just bring you the some of the additional information that has come to light now about these two writers who put out this book at the New York The New York Times writers now are authors of this book, and the formidable and wonderful Molly Hemingway is on the case once again, and she writes the following. Robin Poel Graben and Kate Kelly wrote the much discussed and later corrected

essay in The New York Times. A New Atlantic published adapted excerpt of the book attempts to resurrect Poel, Grayban and Kelly's anti Kavanaugh smears, but once again has a major error. In a section explaining why they believe the accusers despite the lack of evidence, they write that their emotional reaction to the claims was that the claims rang true, but they get major facts wrong. This is from the book.

Remember the book that the essay adaptation left out that they that the woman has no memory of it, according to her friends, and has not gone on the record to say that this thing ever occurred. Not Ramira as the other the other woman quote using Martha's common sense test. The claims of Deborah Ramirez, while not proven by witnesses, also ring true to us. Ramirez, who was a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, said he drunkenly thrust his blank at

her during a party in their freshman year dormitory. The people who allegedly witnessed the event, Kavanaugh's friends, Kevin Genda, David Todd, and David White, have kept mum about it. Kavanaugh has denied it. HM, that's interesting. It's interesting because it's not true. It's pretty important, isn't it. The implication here is that, well, Kavanaugh's friends who are there, they

haven't said anything about it. The problem is there was the New Yorker article that was the first attempt, the first character assassination shot taken in Kavanaugh's direction on the Ramirez case, not the Blasi Ford smear, but in that regional New Yorker piece remembered by Ronan Pharaoh and Jane Mayer, this is what they wrote. So this is already out there on the record, has been for a long time. Quote. One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on

Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. I quote, I don't think Brett would flash himself to Debbi or anyone else for that matter. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation up, he responded, I have no idea. The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in

the incident commented, I have zero recollection. In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramira's alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and one other classmate, Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez's account of events. Quote. We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in

the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it, and we did not. The behavior she describes to be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett's Supreme Court

nomination was pending. Editors from The New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this. Does that sound like keeping mum? How could this new book? This ten months of thorough research for The New York Times, writers have declared that that is the people around Brett, you know, his friends. They kept mum about this. They didn't keep mum. They said, no way, this is crap. Brett wouldn't do this, This

didn't happen. We never heard about this. This is a lie. I mean, that's not exactly what they said. That's what they're saying. Why would she lie? Well, that's why I started out with, Well, because she's would you what would we say? She's responding to a higher power here. Roe v. Wade. Rovie Wade is the revolution in this case. Roe v. Wade is all that really matters to people of a certain liberal mindset. Anything that would keep it would be justified.

I think it's what's even more unfair to Kavanaughs. I don't believe Kavanaugh is going to overturn Roe v. Wade. I don't think he's going to be a part of that. I think Kavanaugh is much less of a doctrinaire right winger than many of the the left. Many on the left seem to just assume. But because he's not, you know, one of the far left activist judges on the Supreme Court, he is a target. Isn't that a pretty big though? The the that the Friends kept mum, isn't that a

pretty big error to have? Once again, another error and just as we see when they run these fake news stories that the media that has to retract and we know this is information that is left out or that they lie about that would be helpful to the pro Cavanaugh calls. Once again just like oh yeah, the woman that we claim that this guy, Max whatever's name is, you want to hear about Max Max Steyer is a

good governance advocate here here, this guy is. We need business, we need nonprofits, we need universities, we need all these associations who care about a policy issue, associate of government to take some peace of their advocacy and make it not about the policy, but make it about the execution, and make it about building capacity in our government. Okay, let me just jump in right there. Does anybody think that a guy that spends spends his time talking about

building capacity in our government is anything other than a liberal? Okay? Can we just can we just get that out there right now? Guys a lib? All right, guys, a liberal? Start with that. And he did defend the Clintons, and they left that I defend Bill Clinton and they left that off the essay. Now, you might say, buck, but these these errors. They would never do this on purpose because it would make them look bad. No, sometimes the smear only has to last a few days to have

the intended effect. People will believe it anyway. You see this with Twitter all the time. Some leftist in the media will say, oh, you know, there's video of Trump taking a bribe, and then they'll say, oh, no, sorry, that was that was somebody made that up on a blog. And the first tweet gets fifty thousand retweets and the second tweet gets five. Still feeds into the perception that Trump is corrupt. People will still think, oh, maybe that

was true. I don't know. I didn't see the other thing. Folks. We know what they're doing to Kavanaugh. We figured it out out, We've seen it coming all along. Nothing has changed. These people are radicals, and they're willing to completely cast aside any decency, any ethics, in order to destroy a man that even the authors of this book said, after college and I don't even know if I have the time to get into this, but after college he was Okay, here we go twenty We have found that we corroborate

these stories of Debrah Ramirez and Christine Blasi Ford. But in the thirty six years since, Bret Cavanaugh has been a better man. You know, whether he realized the error of his ways, whether and he consciously reformed himself or he grew up and simply matured. He has been an exemplary judge. Everyone we talked to couldn't speak more highly of him on both sides of the aisle. And he actually has a much more nuanced view kind of position on the court. He's not a right wing idealogue either.

He's actually in a st aublishment conservative who has promoted

women on the court. So that's something else I want to So what's more likely that psychotic leftists in the media, which the media is full of psychotic leftists, have created this whole series of lies and propped out these lies about Kavanaugh, who then without anyone, without ever getting in trouble, without ever having anybody say hey, you can't do that, when he was a you know, a man in high school, in college, becomes an absolute exemplar of good behavior, becomes

the guy that you want coaching your daughter's basketball team, living next door to you, teaching Sunday school, and is brilliant and is wildly successful. What's more likely that he just randomly became that guy after being the crazy grabby want to be rapist flasher man through high school and college, or that these leftists are lying don't let the whole oh we're being fairedom lives do this in the media all the time. They throw out a little this is

the Jake Tapper maneuver. One one real question and then ninety bits of prop ninety questions of propaganda. But oh I asked a real question. Oh yeah, sure, as an adult, he's been like the most amazing human being ever. But you know, must have been that he turned it all around after what he did in high school and college. Oh wait, no, I have a different idea, Libs, you're lying about this. Man corroborated, Ramirez corroborated. We didn't corroborate crap.

People were out of their minds, out of their minds. But they cannot admit that they were wrong about him all along because they were willing to be bad people, because they were so devoted to his destruction, and to admit that they're wrong now would be you were bad people without any justification really whatsoever. As you can tell,

the Kavanaugh thing pushes some buttons. It gets me upset because it's terrible and the people in the media that were involved in this process and the Democrats involved this process are disgusting. I don't disagree with them, they are disgusting. We'll get us slightly less less buck point of view on this later on in the show. But I want to move on to Iran and Saudi Arabia, and I mean there's a whole bunch of other topics I want to talk about it too. I got a little fired

up today. We will be right. See This's what happens when I take calls, I lose, I lose my sense of time, and we go we lose. Yeah, no more calls for a while. We'll be right back, mister President. As you know, I have never engaged in hateful rhetoric

against you or your family, and I never will. But you're offering our military assets to the dictator of Saudi Arabia to use as he sees fit is a betrayal of my brothers and sisters in uniform who are ready to give our lives for our country, not for the islam as dictator of Saudi Arabia. And for you to think that you can pimp out our proud servicemen and women to the Prince of Saudi Arabia is disgraceful and it once again shows that you are unfit to serve

as our commander in chief. You know, sometimes I think Tulsa Gabbard is substantially less awful than the other Democrat candidates. This is not one of those times. When did the president ever say that we were going to hand over troops to the dictator of Saudi Arabia to do with as he sees fit. I mean, this is just this is hyperbolic garbage. This isn't reality. Here's what should happen, or here's a bit of a backstory. We'll spend more time with this, but the sun we got to run

to a break here in a second. What's happening in the Middle East right now is a war between Sunni and Shia Islam. It's playing out in many different Middle Eastern Muslim majority countries. It's playing out in Syria, in Iraq between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and it's playing out in Yemen. It's playing out and you name a major player in the region. There are issues between Sunni and Shia. And this goes back for to say centuries doesn't even cover It goes back for oh going on fifteen hundred

years now, since the original Sunni Shia split. We and the Trump administration, I hope is going to take this approach. We care about this insofar as we do not want this to be our problem. This is not our fight. We do not want to get involved. But we also don't want the Iranians to be able to bring the global economy to not a screeching halt, but to really put a dent in it by attacking oil supplies. And that's a concern, what should we do about that? Then

how do we balance this out. I we'll get into some of those specifics and some thoughts on the way forward and the strategy here between Iran and Saudi Arabia in just a moment. We need to have a conversation as a country and as a Congress about whether or not this is an attack so directly relevant to America's interest as to justify military action. Diplomatic action is what's called for first, and our president should come to Congress and make that case if he is determined that this

is what calls for military action. And we have to be very cautious about the way that we move forward. And I think that's why it's important for Congress to be able to investigate and take the lead on whether it makes sense for us to engage. It's really important for us to remember this is our intelligence is war tainted towards Iran. Take military advice from Ilhan Omar. I'll start there. I don't think I'm going to listen to

what she thinks is the right move here. If I want to know how America is bad and we do all the bad things in the world, will then I'll listen to I'll hunt on more. And then we also had the Democrat there was it, Chris Coons. You didn't have a conversation as a country. Yeah, dude, that's right. That's what we're doing. We're having a conversation as a country. I think conversations actually much more straightforward than Democrats want to accept. That it is we don't want to war.

The run that, no, we don't want to war. A lot of people right now. What I mean by this is, you know, we don't want to war with North Korea either, but if North Korea blows a couple of you know, US airliners out of the sky or something, or if North Korea attacks US interest in well, then we got a war with North Korea. Right. It doesn't just say we don't want a war with someone doesn't mean that. Well now they now they have you know, an open field.

It's open season on America because we said we don't want to war with that country. This is all about the choice of whether or not to fight, or the choice of whether we want to start what is going to be a military conflict that could have unintended consequences take us much further down the road of nation building than we would ever want to go again, and all the rest of it. The conversation right now that Senator Coon's is saying we should have I would offer that

we are having it. And here's where I come down on this. If the Saudis are and of course we're going to be helping them, other allies are going to be helping them make sure that they have this lined up, it looks like they were cruise missiles. In fact, that's our report today that there were cruise missile components that were found and that the hoothy militias don't have that capability. Oh wait, maybe it's a bad thing that the Obama

deal allowed Iran to continue testing missiles short range missiles. Right, maybe that was a bad thing that it didn't touch the conventional missile program. But anyway, the Iranians pretending to be the Hooties or however you want to you want to frame it, attacks Saudi Arabia. Guess what. Saudi Arabia has been buying billions and billions of dollars of military hardbreak for some time. I remember there was a few months ago people said, oh, we can't sell the Saudies

more munitions. We you know, in Congress wanted to stop you know, the Democrats, and I think Rand Paul is in there too, probably because I don't always agree with Senator Paul, I like him on some stuff. If he'd actually, I think, be a pretty good president because he just wouldn't ruin things. And that's really all you have to do these days for a lot of these jobs. Just

don't ruin, you know, just don't ruin everything. And even if you try to ruin everything, like Deblasio was doing here in New York, it's still pretty hard to ruin everything. And I think that the do no harm approach. He is a doctor, after all, that Senator Rand Paul has that that would put us in goodstead. If you're present anyway as to what we should do here. We've been selling the Saudis all these very sophisticated weapon systems. We

help them maintain and train on these weapon systems. Guess what, maybe the Saudi's need to tell the Iranians back off with more than just words. And could this, you know, spiral into a broader conflict or whatever. Yeah, of course, But I gotta tell you this, what would our response be if we thought that the Iranians had just blown up a couple of US oil refineries, right, what would we would we sit there and be like, well, you know, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Of course we would.

We would respond militarily, and we absolutely should. The Saudis, as far as I'm concerned, should absolutely respond militarily to Iranian aggression. It should be proportionate, it should be within the you know, within what would be understood as punitive action as opposed to right. I mean, if they if they fire on some Iranian missile ships or something and they take them out, that's saying, hey, don't fire missiles into our refineries. If they start lobbing missiles into the

center of Tehran, well that's obviously a different situation. So this stuff happens, Right, we fired missiles at Syria and we are not at war with Syria. These things do occur. I think that we overcomplicate this by assuming that America has to be the one that does the strike. I think it would be a mistake if we did it. Why we weren't attacked an ally, that is fully you know, it's one thing if an allies attack that can't defend itself.

And now we get into the whole discussion about Kuwait and Saddam's invasion, and then we had that huge coalition because you know, we wanted that. You know, we want to make sure we kept those Middle East and oil

supplies going. We can be a little more leis a fair about geopolitics in the Middle East now, specifically because of fracking and natural gas and America's energy producers, who despite all the nonsense they have been subjected to politically speaking, and during the Obama administration, all the efforts to make it even harder for anyway, they we become an energy superpower that really matters. That's why we can sit here and say, all right, maybe the Sadies do something, maybe

they don't. But the Democrats want to make this sound like Trump is a war monger. Oh, he's trying to draw us into another war. You know, we don't have Bolton as a national security advisor. I think his influence on this president was dramatically overstated anyway, but you would assume that that means there's one less hawkish vote, so to speak, not really a vote, just an advisory role. But in the White House, we're doing something here, and

the Iranians are clearly feeling the heat. And one of the ways that if you are a despotic and sclerotic autocracy, one of the things that you do is, okay, well, our economies going, you know, going down the tubes. Let's lash out, let's start some conflict with someone, so that that's a possibility here. We shouldn't always assume that the Iranians approach everything with a strategy worthy of Tallyrand or Metternich or you know whoever, the great geostrategists of their era.

They're not geniuses on this stuff. They're very they're actually quite thuggish. The Iranian Guardian Council, the people that make the real decisions, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the IRGC. They respond to force, and they use force. That's pretty much where you start with them. In this case, we've been using economic sanctions for a long time, and we want to continue doing so. I think the Trump administration's approach,

by and large is correct here. I would hope that Trump and you know what, I'm I'm confident that he's not going to get drawn into I can't say I'm sure, and you know, I don't do future. I don't predict anything. I mean, I make I make predictions for fun, but I don't tell you that I can predict anything. But I think that it is likely that if anything happens here, it'll be the Saudis that do it, and that will

be up to the Saudis. You know, there have been other wars in the Middle East that we were not involved in, plenty of them, and life went on just fine here in America. The Saudis and the Iranians want to want to duke it out a little bit. We've already sold the Saudis very advanced systems. The Saudis are a very wealthy country. They want to fight it out with the Iranians, you know, Manoamano, that's not our fight. And I think that we have clarity in that. I

think that Trump has clarity in that as well. So we'll see if there's any further escalation here could come any day. We'll keep watching the story. We'll be right back. So team I often have people on the show where I'm going to talk to them about the book that they've written, and I've read it. I didn't have time to read this education or Brett Kavanaugh book yet. In fact, I don't even have a copy. I don't know if

it's out, maybe it's out today. But I want to bring on somebody who won has been following the Kavanaugh story all along from DC and also has in fact read this latest Kavanaugh screed. We're joined now by Tiana Lowe. She is a commentary writer at the Washington Examiner. Tiana, how's life down in the swamp? You know, it's gross and growny as always, but that's that keeps it interesting. Fantastic. Tell me about this book is what are some of

the biggest takeaways? Is somebody who read cover to cover every page of this New York Times I guess two New York Times writers that put this education of Brett Kavanaugh together? What are the big takeaways? What really happens in this book? So from just a writing perspective, it's a bit of a frustrating book because there's no index. The way that the story is told is extremely confusing, so it's hard to figure out what exactly the sourcing

on each claim is. But went through and my first story of the book was trying to figure out, you know, all the hoopla over the weekend was that now apparently seven people corroborate this Debbi Ramirez story and all we heard about. If seven people corroborate it, then it must be true. I went through each of the seven and it is as thinly sourced as the original New Yorker story was last year. So of the seven, only one person claims to have heard that Kavanaugh was the person

in the story about Ramirez at the time. And even then, this witness, Keen uphold he only heard about it from someone who he says claimed to be at the party, but that person has never come forward, and four people who were at the party at the time issued a statement last year that they deny this ever happening at the party. So the ramirest thing it's a bust. Then

we have this Max Sire allegation. As you know, Max Styre is a Clinton attorney who defended a President Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky Andandel He went to the FBI, but not Chairman Chuck Grassley of the Senate Judiciary Committee, like three days before the Kavanaugh confirmation, not even the hearing, claiming that he had seen Kavanaugh exposed himself to a

female student while he was at Yale. The kicker is that the woman at the center of this story, reportedly denied that this ever happened, so she refused to speak about this to the book, but she had multiple friends who said that she had always denied the story of her happening. And then that brings us to the third story, and that's about Christine blaisie Ford. As always, that was the most troubling allegation from the get go, just both on the severity of the context and also that Christine

blasie Ford seemed fairly sympathetic last year. But this book kind of has a story falling apart. So it always made sense that the other boys at the party who were going to be witnesses would deny the story if they were all friends of Kavanaugh. But her friend Leland kind Or was there, and as you may were call lost year, she just said, I don't remember this party

were happening. But now she's doubled down on it and said, not only do I not remember this party happening, but if she's saying that I'm the one who drove her there and back, it sounds she had no confidence in the story. So basically, all three of these allegations have kind of fallen apart, And that doesn't mean that I'm not accusing any of these three women of lying, but the evidence is non existent and in some cases exculpatory.

What do you think these New York Times writers ten were what do they think they're adding to our knowledge of this case which was already very very publicly and thoroughly adjudicated with the Senate hearings and people the entire country was fixated on this for weeks. As somebody who's read through the whole thing, what do they think they're

adding to this discussion with this new book? So for them personally, I'm not going to try and impugne their motives because they do make notes that an aw in

his professional career has had unimpeachable character. They go to great lean I think in their minds, to be fair, I think they thought that they could contextualize the story, which is only strange because that's what we wound up with that really weird New York Times piece wherever was about how Debbie Ramirez was so underprivileged because all she had was an above ground swimming pool in southern Connecticut.

I'm not really sure in the New York Times writers, I've ever actually met an underprivileged persman but they usually don't have access to above ground swimming pools only but on a medicine. I think the people who have clung to this story, I mean, think about it. Since Clarence Thomas, I don't think that the left recognizes a single Republican appointed did the Supreme Court as legitimate except for Justice Alito.

Think about it, Clarence Thomas, abuser, John Roberts appointed by a president who stole his election with Bush v. Gore, Neil Gorfik, Stolemerick Garlands seat, and now Brett Cavanaugh obviously serial sexual assulter. Right, which is which is more likely with Okham's Razer that every single Republican Supreme Court of pointe, as you said, but one is illegitimate or the Democrats are crazy. I mean, you don't have to answer that, but I'm asking the question exactly. Well, yeah, I mean,

that's that's the thing. I think that And again I'm not the funny thing about the cabin aster in particular. You know a buck, I am from LA. Most of my friends West Hillary voters and I have very civil discussions and then they're perfectly fine for the most part with our political differences. This was the first issue where I heard from friends who had never talked to you about politics, where they said, is this the new normal?

Will my brother get accused twenty years down the line of some chick that you know he raped her because he makes it into the public eye somehow. And again, if you look at the statistics, only two to ten percent of all rape allegations are false, So this is not a widespread problem. On average, well, ten percent, for example, would be higher than any other felony crime. So yeah, but the left is making it a problem. The Left is making it a problem by trying to publicly ruin

and destroy a man with zero evidence. And what do you think about the credibly accuse mean? This is something that we talked a bit about yesterday on the show, but this phrase has seeped into the conversation. Credibly accused, if credibly accused, merely means that a woman sounds believable in her tone and demeanor when making an allegation, which I suppose is the case with Blasi Ford. I can't even say it's the case with the other two because

we didn't see their testimony. That seems to completely upend evidentiary standards and corroboration for every other allegation of criminal or even just illicit conduct. For I think that's exactly true. I mean, I think that it's fair to say her

allegation was compelling, but it's not credible. I mean, I think that most p bowl, most people, when the politics are pushed aside, can kind of agree that for someone like a Harvey Weinstein, where it is more likely than he was more likely than not guilty of what he's accused of, she deserves to suffer social and professional consequences. I think we saw this since al Franken. I think

we saw this with Ray more with Kavanaugh. The thing is, the evidence didn't even come close to reaching that preponderance standard. And I think that if he were completely a political figure, everyone would understand that the West was not based on the principle of believe all women. It was based on the principle of you have the right to voice your accusation, and we will evaluate it based on the evidence that we can find. And again, this does not mean that

Christine Blizzyford deserves to be harassed because death threats. She deserves to be able to go back to her old life. She voiced her peace it wasn't proven. Let's move on. But it's the less that wants to relitigate this, and that's why we're back in this circus. Diana Low she read the book, so you don't have to, folks. But he's at the Washington Examiner. She's a commentary writer there. Follow her on Twitter at Tiana Lo Tiana great stuff.

Thank you so much for joining us, Thanks for having me. I say, all right, team, we'll be right back. Team. I want to tell you about a back and forth that I have with the with the city government here in New York. And this is a tale of bureaucracy, of sloth, of ridiculousness. This is for me now turning

into an education and of itself. I thought maybe I would be having this kind of conversation with you about me getting my me getting a handgun permit of New York City, which I have not yet started that process, but I am. I am very much planning on starting that process. So I haven't yet gotten any word about that, um well, because I haven't started. But I thought that we would be talking about, oh my gosh, they make me jump through all these hoops. They hate the second

of them in here, and that's gonna happen. So well, I'll give you all those trials and tribulations and you can you can just laugh at how ridiculous it is in New York City for all that. But I mentioned before that I've had a little bit of noise issue in my new home. I live in what is now it's it looks like something out of Tokyo. It's a very new building or something out of Hong Kong. You know, it's just it's just brand new. It's very tall, zero

character or anything like that. And I used to be somebody who was like, oh wow, I like a building. I like to live in buildings down in the village where there are red bricks that have just enough space in them for various you know, furry small creatures and things to get in and out of the apartment. You know. That was my That was my old standard of I'm a I'm a city dog. This is just what I deal with. But now there's time around. I'm living in this brand new building and and it's it's not I

will say, it's not an issue with the building yet. Um, it's an issue with the buildings around it, some of which are very old and I'm kind of high up. And so there are these these various HVAC systems. They look like, you know, the giant fans essentially fans that are you know, look like they're like eight or ten feet across, that are on the tops of these city buildings. And some of these buildings are twenty or thirty stories tall, and they have these h vacs and it just, you know,

makes all this noise. Okay, So I figured I figured out one of them had a broken belt, and I got I helped them. I'm a good neighbor. I helped them figure out that it was a broken belt and we got that fixed. It is making a very loud, screech noise. But then there's another one. There's another one that just happens to be just big and loud. And there are in fact, and I know I'm a little bit of a persnickety neighbor, but there are noise ordinances and and I was curious, so I called the department.

I know, this is crazy. I call the Department of Environmental Protection in New York City, John, believe it or not, to come and take a noise violation reading. They have these these uh noisometers. I don't know what they really called. They read the or they they measure the decibels. I like noisometer, but it's it's it's there's some other name

for it. And they show up with a little noisometer and it's a little bit like you know Egon from Ghostbusters, like he kind of waves this thing around and you know, Egon your mucus, you know what I mean that that's that's the vibe you get. The guy shows up, very nice fellow, and they take the reading the apartment, and sure enough, I'm not crazy, which is always good to know. The ambient noise created by this fan system is so loud that inside my apartment currently is it is a

noise violation under city code. So I think of myself, Okay, well, one, I'm not crazy, that's nice. And then two, I gotta figure out a way to deal with this now because I don't want to walk around all the day. You know, Oh, I'm gonna make some eggs or I'm gonna I'm gonna try to like write my book or something out here. I mean around the hole. That's what it sounds like, the whole you know, all day, twenty four hours a day, and you could say, Buck, how could you not know?

Sometimes the fan goes off, go off for twenty thirty forty minutes at a time, and it always comes back on. Obviously, I saw this apartment when the fan wasn't on right, So I walked in. I'm like, oh, it's it's so quiet. I'll love it. I got a little bit of a view. It's nice. Now I go in there, I'm like, oh,

I'm back in my apartment. You know, that's the noise, okay, And so it's I'm trying to make it not like the Telltale hard here, where the noise drives me completely insane, and you know that's a that's a whole other thing. Is that with you know, gently tapping tapping at my chamber door or whatever? Is that the Telltale hard or that mixed both that girl and Poe? Right? Oh? That was the was that the oh was I getting? Or the rave? The raven? The crow? Oh my gosh, Buck,

go back and read your literature. So I was close though, Um yeah, so uh the cask of a Montiando. I remember this stuff. This stuff was great. Well, I was back in like junior high so anyway, so I'm trying to figure out what do I do here. I've got this city, I got the city inspector, I got Egon. We'll call him Egon because he's got the noisometer, which you know, it looks kind of like a Ghostbuster thing, although not quite as cool. And he takes the reading.

He's like, yeah, man, this is a this is a violation. This is a and it's it's about it's twenty percent higher than it's supposed to be. That that that's and that's the legal limit for the noise. You can imagine how loud it is. So I'm not and I'm not being a big baby about this. It's really annoying. So so I I go to my my building and I say, hey, you know, can I just move to the other side of the building? You know, can I can I move the other side of the building. And you've got empty apartments?

Let me take one of those. And they say, look so far, and we may have to have a whole conversation about the building up here if they're reasonable or not. So far, it seems like they may be reasonable. They may let me move to the other side of the building, and they may we'll see, because there's no reason they shouldn't. I'm moving the exact same cost or you know, within twenty dollars or something, the same cost, department, the whole thing. But they said, can we have a copy, you know,

can you give us a copy of the report? And I said, oh, well, how how hard can that be? This guy was just in my apartment. He works for the city. The report's probably about you know, eight lines long. Sure you know what I foun out today, John about the report. I need to file a FOIA request, a Freedom of Information Act request to get this thing. I'm talking to the city government of the phone. I was like,

you guys are kidding, right, Like that's a joke. You're you're you're sitting in front of a computer that has information on it that is public information. But that is information about my home that I need, but you will not give it to me absent a FOYER request. What sense does that? It's it is absolutely public, but or you know, it's it's essentially I think they call it, there's some term for it, but it's it's a it's a city FOIA request, it's an official records request. And

you might say, well, buck, okay, maybe it's not that bad. No, No, it is that bad. It takes fourteen days for them to even respond whether or not I can get the records, and then there's a review period. I'm gonna get this stupid record in like three to six months. And I'm asking them like, how is this possible? How does anyone How does anyone who has ever written you know, city statutes or or the the you know, the laws and by buy laws and all that stuff for the city

in New York? How can anyone think this is a good idea? But then I realized, Oh, I know what this is. The They just make it as difficult as possible so that people go away. They just make it as hard. Oh, and then there's another little wrinkle here. They're not even sure what will be contained in the report because we could not tell necessarily what the source of the noise was on the first visit by Egon.

So I'm I'm supposed to have Egon or someone who is like Egon come back for a second visit to ensure that we know where the noise is coming from, which might mean that then there has to be a second Foyer request, which might take another two weeks of review and then three months of processing I'm losing my mind over here. How is this possible? What's the point of having a noise ordinance when when you you know

they're in violation, there's a problem. And I my recourse is to sit around and wait for lazy city employees to click on a few things and send me. It's gonna take months. I know city employees. They are overwhelmingly a very very I worked for the city. They're a lazy bunch. Not all of them, but most of them. And here we go, this is this is where we we have all these people their jobs. They're the Department

Environmental Protection as a whole unit. Just just to this because people completely you know, they have to vacate their homes because noise in the cities use a constant problem, which is the cost of living here in the noise are the two things that I wish I could change. Other than that, I actually kind of like it here with the cost of livings out of control and the

noise is out of control. But you know what this was, and I'm sharing this with you, one just so you can laugh at me, because this is what you get for living in New York City. But two, it's also just a reminder of like this. This is why you don't want the government in charge of things. Every person I spoke to today who worked for the City of New York was like, yeah, I agree. This is stupid.

This is a dumb system. I should be able to just print this off and send it to you, or I should be able to just email this to you. Why not, You're definitely entitled to it. Oh no, but let's let's delay it by weeks maybe months, and see, you know, and see then you know how we feel about this. It's just madness. It's just madness. But this is why you don't want the government in charge your life.

This is why a government of enumerated powers, a government that has to respect certain basic rights and and is not able to infringe on them. And there's a there's a reason why we have the system we do. It's because government is sloth and inefficiency and stupidity, and nobody cares. Nobody cares. The Papa Buck can't get any sleep, Nobody cares. This saga will continue, my friends. So there is a squeaker of an election right now. It's going on in Israel.

It is for the big job is Benjamin and Yaho Bibi going to come out the victor or what are the possibilities here? What could happen? Come may Man dovid Affoon on the line now. He is the editor in chief of the Alga Miner and he's gonna tell us what's happening, David. Great to have you back, all right, man, to just just bring us up to speed. What is

going on here? Well, look, the only thing we have right now, okay, so we don't have a final result or late at night would probably be you know, when everyone wakes up here in America tomorrow morning, we'll see what the final results are. The exit polls, you know, give us some idea, but notoriety, and in the past

they have not been precise. They usually take a couple of seats off of Prime Minister in Naho the Could Party, largely because there are absentee balants included from balancing soldiers and others that are not necessarily taken into account with the exit polls, and they usually vote more for the right wing. In the meantime, you've got these exit polls to show a dead heat, almost a dead heat, and they don't show Naho with his decisive and natural coalition,

which he'd be able to form now. It doesn't mean that he's lost a lot of support from last time, because when the calculations were made last time, there was they included the party of a big deleeverman who's traditionally seen as part of the right wing block, because that's she's shroud the attained. But now he's still to position himself as a kingmaker and he's actually come out ahead,

moving from five seats to eight seats. As a result of this election, he's basically driven the whole country through the system again for some gains, for some games, for his own coffee, and the gambit seems to have played off, to be honest. So what do you expect would happen if bb and we've just gotten used to I mean, how many how many years now has net and Yahoo been been running the show? Uh, It's it's been quite a while. So I think Americans, Yeah, longest prime minister, Yeah,

longest serving prime minister. So I think Americans like, well, you know, bb BBB understands who the bad guys are in the Middle East. He's an alive United States and you know, we're we're gotten comfortable with him in that spot because he's been in it for a long time and things have been relatively quiet and Israel certain of what was certainly compared to what was going on in the two thousands. If BB were to I I know, we don't know yet, and you know it's very very tight.

If BB were to lose, what would change in Israel and what might change in the US relationship with Israel or the folks here across the country? You know, how could this affect things that we care about here? But first start with on the Israeli side, what might be different? Well, look, there's no question that you know, who is an incredibly

competent leader on a whole host of levels. And you know, his leadership has really brought Israel to the international stage as as a paw player, as a very significant power plan both economically and politically and militarily, and you know that's something that whatever happens, he's going to be remembered for by the Israel And it's why, you know, despite all the shenanigans and the critique in the corruption investigations and everything else that's going on there, the israelis still

like him because he's good a job. He's really, really, really good at the job. Now, his main competitors are the Blue and White Party, you know, even though even if they are neck and neck, they have an even more unlikely pasthway to forming a coalition. Even though it's not clear what the others pathway will be, their pathway will be even harder. So it's you know, even if it's a tie, it doesn't necessarily mean that the DV is out by any means. But in terms of the substance,

there isn't actually a great deal that divides them. It probably has a lot more to do with style. Certainly, one thing is for sure. The left in the United States, for example, the Democratic Party or even the Obama administration, their views on the conflict in the Middle East are not shared at all by very many Israelis, I mean their constituency. That sort of perspective and worldview is held by you know, maybe you know, five seats or five

percent of the electric maybe even left. The Blue and White Party, which is Naho's major competitor, holds similar views on negotiations with the Palestinians, on Iranian expansionism, on you know, Israel's right to districts of territories in a lot of cases, you know, so certainly around the settlement block, so you know, substantially there isn't a great deal between them, the big differences.

You know that we're talking about a political novice, right Benny Gantz is a capable leader who led at the Israeli military, but he's new to the world stage. You know, he has not negotiated with Vladimir Putin before, and he doesn't have a long standing relationship with Trump or Bosonaro in Brazil or Modi in the countries that Israel's building ties with the survive and to floreish and to grow. So that's been the center point of Naho's campaign. He

knows that that's his strength over his rival. And you know, it remains to be seen and how the newcomers are going to affair in that regard. How do you think the Israelis right now are seeing the situation with Iran and Saudi Arabia. Are the Israelis behind the scenes very supportive of Saudi or are they? What do you think

they're then? And now? Who obviously who knows how long and how government's going to be what it is right now, But let's assume it continues as is what is the position of these really government in the in response to something like this, I mean, who, who would they what

would they like to see done? Look, there's no question now that you know really historically, you know, it's it's historical in terms of how it's unfolded that these rendings in the Saudis and lots of the Saudis, but the sort of more moderate sunny Access have been creeping closer and closer together over the last number of years, and that's sort of being precipitated by the threat from Iran, which is a shared threat now the Asrailis runs and

no illusions, they recognize that they and Alliance of Convenience and there's certainly skeptical about the long term prospects. Having said that, they do view it as an opportunity, an opportunity to open up dialogue, to work together and to to you know, suffer the harsh nature of those historical

harsh nature of that relationship. So you know, I think, uh, you know, they'll they'll be working together in terms of you know, behind the scenes, whatever we're seeing on, you know, in front of the of the scenes, there's a lot

more going on behind the team. And these ratings will be you know, working with intelligence in the Sounding community and across them the least the mutual and share the enemy that looms larger over the entire regions around and whatever they can do together to stem that toright, They're going to be doing both covert and and overt and uh, you know, they'll be looking for opportunities to push you in its fact wherever they can. The Alga Minor Folks,

the fastest growing Jewish newspaper in America. Go to Algaminer dot com for all things going on in in the realm of Israel and all things related to the Jewish people and our friend David Iffoon's the editor in chief. David, always appreciate your expertise, my friend. Great to talk to you. I was a pleasure. Buck team will be right back, you know. I found out today actually I'm gonna get to go to Nashville for the first time, get a little Nashville time in for the Buster. I don't wanted

to go for a long time. I feel like maybe I have a burgeoning country music career. I just don't know it yet. I have to learn to sing and play the guitar, or maybe I would learn. I was gonna say steel drum, that's Caribbean. What's the what's the steel guitar? Not steel drum, that's a different that's a different music genre. Buck. Maybe I need to spend more

time in Nashville so I know these things. But yes, INDI I will be in at Politic Con in Nashville, the twenty five twenty over the twenty sixth and twenty seventh in Nashville, Tennessee in October. So I found that out today, So that's exciting. So Nashville's getting crossed off the list, which is great. Austin is next. I really just need some some excuse. So somebody at KLBJ Austin needs to you know, in the audience down there. He's to help me think of an excuse to get the

powers that be to send me down to Austin. Nashville made it happen, Fort Wayne, Indiana has made it happen. Los Angeles and Orange County and you know they've made it happen. Team Buck, Los Angeles, Team Buck, Orange County, Team Buck, Springfield, Illinois has made it happen. So I need an excuse to go down to Austin. That's what I've decided I gotta figure out what it is. We got roll call in a moment, like soft butter on warm toast, Time to spread some freedom coast to coast.

It's time for roll call. What is soft butter and warm toast have to do with free? This? I didn't come up with it. What is this? This doesn't even make any sense. I just realized this as we're airing this across the nation. I guess freedom is easy, like spreading soft butter on warm toast. Like soft butter on warm, so it's easy to spread freedom. I think it's difficult to spread freedom. I think we put a lot of work into this. That liner was before me. He's getting

he's getting a Christmas present this year. I'm sorry that didn't go on here. I said, you make it look easy. That's Harry White spreading like I get a HONEK gift. Yeah, of course, thank you. Don't you get multiple honek gifts? Is that's how it works? Wow? I think I gotta get on. I haven't got an eight gifts since I gotta get on like the Amazon you know special deal section eight gifts gifts. Freedom, It's not that big man. Yeah, we'll figure it out, so we'll get you a honk

a gift. So now that we have that team buck at iHeartRadio dot com, that is the email address for us if you want to send us. But I also don't want people to stop using Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton. So to that end, we're gonna mix and match, and today we'll get into a little bit more of the Facebook messages because some of you really like that, some of you don't. Here we go, Johan, last night you brought up at some cops to be very happy to be the only ones allowed to carry. This is

something I've been saying for a long time. I'm retired military and law enforcement, and I can say without a doubt that most in both organizations feel separate from a general population. And we'll do what they're told to do, including forceable confiscation. Every dictator that has ever ruled and oppressed does only with the support of the police. With police being armed, like the military, people's right to bear arms in jeopardy, only bad things can happen. Well, yeah,

you're taking it further than I was. But you're saying your law enforce and military, yourself or former law enforcement or military. So that's certainly adds some weight to your note here, but I can tell you that there are I have spoken to cops who just say, yeah, people want to have shotguns for home defense and for going sporting clay shooting. That's fine. But I've spoken to cops who are like, I don't want people having handguns and

I don't want people having semi automatic rifles. I've talked to them. I'm not making this up. They're out there, so you know. I've also spoken to other cops who volunteer their own time trying to train conceal you know, trying to do conceal carry class for people because they want more. They think that the more people who appreciate and utilize their Second Amendment rights, the better. So there's clearly, I mean, there's a I'm just saying that there exists

within law enforcement mentality. I have no way of gauging which is the which would be even the majority. I don't know. I would think that law enforcement now nationally would be more in favor of the of an armed citizenry. But you know, you look at LAPD, NYPD, there are some major urban I mean, the NYPD has about fifty thousand employees over thirty thousand armed and sworn law enforcement,

So you know that that's a lot. So for those of you who are like well Buck, you know out here and out here in Indiana, you know, law enforcement is far more favorable to the Second Amendment, that's probably true, But you also have far fewer cops. So you know, I just I don't know. I think it would be interesting if we could get some data on this one. Andrea, Right, so there's a traditional Mongolian horn made of human thigh bone. Okay, guys,

my trumpet broke. Who's willing to help a fella out? Andrea? Or is it Andrea? Where do we go with? What's the go to? I was talking to your friend reason. I said Tara, and she said, no, it's Tara, And I'm like, do we really do? Really? Correct Tara and Tara? I mean, isn't that with that name? It's ridiculous, right, isn't that Tomato? Tomato? I mean really, Andrea or Andrea or Andrea could be a man or a woman. Really, you know, you've never had heard of a male Andrea

or Andrea. No, I feel like Andrea is the way a man? Andrea? Yes, like Andrea no, really, I feel like I've heard a man be that have that name before. Well, I've I met a man I've met I've obviously there are men named Leslie, there are men named Ashley Andre uh bam hmm. Okay, that's producer John. Maybe you're all maybe you're gonna get all eight Hanaka presents this year?

Maybe yes, you know, with with that kind of skill, we'll see all right back into into the mix here, Richard, uh right, the Democrats started the last well Civil War in your opinion, how long will it take this time? Well, Richard, I I don't you know. Look, I certainly I can't predict I always tell you I can't predict the future. No one can predict the future. But I don't think we're heading heading for that. I certainly would never I

would hope that we would never head for that. Again, it's it's almost difficult to read a history of the Civil War for me sometimes or to go back and dive into just because the human carnage and just knowing these are all Americans and we're just oh it was, it's just horrifying. But then again, you read the history of the First World War, the Second you know, war, is horrifying, So maybe that's true across the board. James rights,

Hey Bok, listen to Friday's show. I'm surprised by the fact that no one has pointed out Beta O'Rourke Beta O'Rourke rather saying an AR fifteen shot X people and AR fifteen shot. No one Ah, yes, pointing out that this is a tool. Be safe, brother, come on home with your shielder on it. Beta is a shield tosser, if there ever was one. Yes, For those who have not been around the show long enough, we sometimes refer to people as a shield tosser. This was a horrible insult.

You know, this was like, you know, this was the equivalent of a yo mama joke. Back in the day where the ancient Spartans, the Athenians, if somebody, if somebody was being a coward, you called them a shield tosser. Because the armor that in Phalanx warfare, the armor that hop lights the heavily, the heavily bronze clad foot soldiers of ancient Grease, ancient Macedonia. If you were going to

run away, guess what you had to toss. You had this big, heavy shield, so you'd throw your shield in the ground and then you actually had a chance of maybe getting away. If you try to run with your shield, you weren't going to get very far very fast. So that's why a shield tosser is a term for coward from ancient Greece, and we use it here sometimes on the show. Is Beta a shield tosser? I wouldn't want him next to me and the Phalanx, I can tell

you that much. Yeah, it's just like I understand why people are stopping me and like stopping you right now, because like if I just took out my guitar, maybe I could convince the spartans like not to try to like take all of our stuff and enslave our women and children. Like I could just like talk to them

and they would understand we could come together and unify. David, Right, it's gonna take in nineteen forties American military mentality to defeat a country like Iran that is culturally behind the rest of the modernized world. We all know today's political climate that is improbable. Look at the idiots that have been elected in this country. People actually vote for them. It's crazy to take care of buck Well. David, thank you and for writing in and yeah, I don't want

to war. They're on. I don't want to war they're on. I don't want us trying to clean up Iron's mess. I don't want us in church. I do not want young men from you know, Texas and New York and Florida and Iowa and Nebraska and California and you and I don't want them walking around with you know, armor plating on and carrying m fors and trying to make sure that a bunch of Iranian insurgents don't kill women and children and say, oh, look at the occupation here.

I mean, just please, we've done it no more. You know, there was zero gratitude from the Middle East really and very little, if any gratitude from the rest of the world for us trying to make a rock a better place.

So just start with that. Afghanistan. Yeah, there's some Afghans that appreciate us, but you know, not that much, not enough, not enough that it's worth doing this thing again, that's for sure, kel Van, right, Buck, I'll try to keep it short, but expanding on the possibility of red flag laws overreaching and manifest overreaching and manifesting in various forms.

My friend who was a very generic name, had her house loan delayed enough it might jeopardize her purchase because her name was the same as somebody on the no fly list. Government overreach is like a van and just grows until it takes over the whole house. Shields High from Anchorage. Nice up up in Anchorage, man, good to talk to Team Buck Alaska. Haven't heard from me a

little while. As to your your point about government messing up, Yeah, there there are no there's nothing about government messing up that surprises me. You can expect there's there's no level of incompetence where you'd say, wha, A government couldn't do that. I mean, the government is capable of any level of stupidity really because no one cares and there's really very little accountability. It's kind of a recurring fem here on

the show. So yes, could I could I believe that somebody was caught off in a red flag law just because their name was similar, they had a similar, similarly spelled name to somebody else. I absolutely can believe that. It's not surprising to me in the least. Let's see what we have here, Tracy, Hey Buck, I love your show. Tracy, I love your love of the show. Judge Kavanaugh was

appointed to represent our laws and constitution. He should make it work for him now and sue the pants off The New York Times Shields a Tracy in Mobile, Alabama, not to be said mobile like a mobile station. No, that's not right. Just in case, producer, Producer John, if you ever get stuck down there and you happen to be the first car to arrive after a lethal robbery in which somebody is shot, and then you're picked up by the local sheriff and you only have one phone

call and it is to your cousin Vinnie. I just want you to know how to produce, how to pronounce rather the name of the town you're in, because that'll help you when the judge is lack what is a ute? You know? Then you're gonna yeah, Producer, you know exactly at least at least now, see producer Mark, he's a young un so he doesn't know this movie. But thankfully you're here this week help it out. And so I could make references to movies from the early nineties where

Producer Mark was probably neck deep in Power Rangers. Maybe early nineties I was neck deep in some baby food oh man, wow, he just aged us again. All right, fair enough, Terrence Buck, great show has always but I've got to call you out on a point from today's show. During your bro Cuomo segment, you said people do hum with the sault rifles, just as you avoid undocumented and adhered to illegal because the language does matter. Please keep a left in check and shoot down the fictitious term

assault rifle. There's no such thing. Enough of the negativity. Keep up the great work, shields high. Look, Terrence, I love it, you love the show, and thank you for your good faith message here. But I gotta tell you, man, I keep going through. What am I gonna say? There's a certain class of semi automatic rifles that liberals will codify into law and say we're banning them. And it's not. It's not all semi automatic rifles because they are a

cosmetic feed. And you could say, but book, that's so stupid, and I say, yes, I know, that's so stupid, but it's what happens. So how do I refer to this thing that they have created. You know, undocumented is a is a nonsense, political, made up political term. It's not in any way a legal term. If they pass a law that says assault rifles are now banned, and here's

a list of ten assault rifles. Those things are then legally classified as assault rifles at least in that state, or if it's federal, then at the federal level that that is the term, right. You know, we could say, oh, but they're actually they're actually you know, freedom pop pop toys, but which actually sounds kind of fun pop pop, freedom pop pop. You know, they may they make a boom noise, that is true. The one thing about shooting that I that I never really I just I don't like super

I'm just an a grouchy old man. Producer John. We'll leave producer Mark out of this because he's like, yeah, that's right. I'm a old man and I don't like super loud noises. You know, this is the thing. I had somebody sitting next to me recently at a restaurant who thought that it was okay. And these were adults, These are not little kids, people in their in their

forties and fifties. There's like six of them, and they kept showing each other like ha ha, look at this YouTube video that I'm gonna blast on my phone, and showed other people at a restaurant and I sit here, I'm like, okay, I mean I can play this game too. What if I showed up at a restaurant I said, I like to put a boombox on the table and just blast my favorite, my favorite music from the nineties.

You know, I could sit here and I would just be playing the Cardigans and the Cranberries as loud as Yeah, that's right, zombie, thombie. I wonder how many people. I don't think that many people the audience are catching that one. Unlikely, maybe a little bit. They were actually pretty decent, all right, Gina, She's not Mina, She's Gina. Hi again. Bucks and discussing Bernie Sanders and the fact that he doesn't get it,

I disagree. I fully believe he gets it and is fully aware of all that will happen with complete government control of our lives. The housing thing. He knows that it will result in Ukraine housing Circa nineteen seventy four projects everywhere where there's only misery and government control. As with healthcare, education, business, diet, drugs, Bernie wants to saul O Lynsky model. He has spent years studying it. It is the endgame. While it may seem ignorant. He may

seem ignorant to the costs and stupid. He is not. He just hopes we are shields hid Gina, you could be right. It's very hard to know with libs whether they just don't know or they don't care about what's going to happen with the policies that they want and the realities of the things they advocate for. Make sure team you subscribe now to The Buck Sexton Show starting Monday. Unless we have some technical difficulties, it might be the late a couple of days, but starting Monday we should

have the show up every day at three eastern. You can listen as a podcast as much as you want whenever you want three eastern Monday through Friday. Download the show iTunes, the iHeartRadio app, and if you like listening on of course, on your local station. We'll still be on your local station. Nothing changes there at all. But if you like to get an early listen in, or if you want to be able to listen on demand,

then you can do it via podcast. So subscribe on iTunes the Buck Sexton Show, or on Spotify or on the iHeart app, or however you listen until tomorrow shield's high