Dems Go Loco Over Wall

freedom hunt. Democrats are now the House majority. We've already gotten a sense of where this is all going. Folks. They are nuts. All the Democrats have to do is not be crazy, and they can't do it. We'll talk about their socialist tendencies, the tax rates they're putting forward, the ideas that they are espousing, and the incendiary rhetoric they're using against the president. That and also the border shut down and the fight of the Wall. Coming up

on the Buck Sexton Show. This is the Buck Sexton Show where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake America, You're a great American Again. The Buck Sexton Show begins the sect of it. When your son looks at you and says, Mama, look you won. Bullies don't win. And I said, baby, they talked, because we're gonna go in there. We're gonna

impeach the Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. There you have it a pretty good summation of what you're going to be seeing from the incoming Democrat majority in the Congress. We're going to impeach the mf in president. That's from a newly installed US Member of Congress, Rashida to Leib, who says that not only are they going to impeach Trump, but they're going to use in public with people there or you know, people obviously videoing this, use profanity about

the president. Now, I understand that the immediate inclination of the left is going to be to say, oh, but Trump, Trump uses such coarse language and Trump says such bad things, and you can't complain about this. Now, I'm not really complaining about the fact that a member of Congress wants to debase herself and the office that she represents and the constituents that she has by using that kind of language.

You know, there's a difference between calling somebody a dog or calling somebody a jerk and using that kind language, which I obviously can't use on the air. I think you all know what I'm talking about. Though. That's about as extreme as it's as it's going to get in terms of curses that you're going to hear somebody throw around, in terms of phrases that someone could use to try and debase the president, that's that's really a new level.

I mean that that's crossing a line. I have never seen or heard Trump say anything in the same stratosphere of profanity as that. Now, this is from a new member of Congress. It's not the President, it's not Nancy Pelosi. I know what the counter arguments are going to be here, but I wanted to drill down into this for a moment, just because this is not a one off, folks. This

is not something that comes out of a vacuum. You know that woman who is now a sitting member of Congress, who also some of you are probably saying buck talk about how she's a you know, anti Israeli some would say anti Semitic, pro Palestinian activists. And I know there's a whole other background we could get into here, but I'm more concerned with the overall context in which somebody can come in, and she's one of the first Muslim

women ever elected to Congress. I'm concerned with how this is not that surprising given the kind of things that have been said about this president freely for a long

time by the press and by the Democratic Party. Let's not forget that as we start twenty nineteen and now have Democrats in control of at least the House of Representatives, that we are coming off a year where the hatred of the left, the willingness of left wing activists and the mainstream media and the Democratic Party to act in the most heinous and just destructive ways toward their fellow

Americans was on display time and time again. As these Democrats are now entering office, and there's this new hope on the left that they're going to hold Trump accountable and there's finally going to be a check on his power, as if there haven't been checks on his power all along. This is a delusional stance. All it takes is one federal judge to stop Trump or who doesn't want Trump to do something, and all of a sudden Trump can't do it, and he doesn't say, you know, no, I'm

just gonna go ahead anyway. But there's a context for the hatred against this president, and it's that this has been building and building and getting more toxic and more destructive. There's been a corrosion of the soul of the progressive left. That has been an ongoing program. I mean, this has been an intentional policy, mean to make people not just disagree with Trump and his supporters, and don't forget that

part of it, it's the supporters too. It's you and me, not just to disagree with Trump or to even hate Trump, but to hate all of us and think that we are bad. It's not that we're wrong, it's that we're bad people, and we're wrong, but more importantly, we're bad people. That's what they really think. That is what the Democrat base believes. They think we're all racist, they think we're all hateful. They think these things, and that is not

about to change. That was not just a coping mechanism for the last two years, really, but that has been building and now we will see it channeled and weaponized. Now we'll see the full scope of their crazy. Representative Hank Johnson, here's an example. I mean, this is now not just this is now the the standard that you will hear from people talking about Trump. This is this

is an outliers. I'm not you know, I know. We started the show this woman in Congress who's yelling, you know, profanity about calling the president of profane word and and and also saying she's gonna impeach him, which let's not forget. We've had a credulous, laughably credulous media running around for the last six months saying, oh, no, we're gonna wait for the Muller probe defend, and they're gonna wait for them,

We're gonna wait. Well, they want to impeach the president too, but they've been claiming we're gonna wait for the Muller probe to finish before we make any decision about about impeachment. No, they're not. It's a lie. They're gonna they're going, mark my words, they are going to impeach this president. They're not going to remove him. And I even I would even willing to concede. I think Nancy Pelosi knows it's

probably not a good idea to impeach the president. But she's gonna be in the kind of puncher's pilot position here. She's gonna say, look, if this is what all know, if this is what all you crazy's want, I mean, and all right, I guess I'll give it to you. She is going to get so much pressure from the left wing, lunatic Democrat Party base that I just think

that impeachment is a foregone conclusion. And that's why when you hear people already coming out and saying and they already had a member of Congress file articles on peachbi, I know this is this is going to be an ongoing thing. I mentioned Hank Johnson. Yeah, here's here is the standard line from the left on who Trump is

and who Trump supporters therefore are. Play clip twenty two Americans elected an authoritarian, anti immigrant, racist strong man to the nation's highest office, Donald Trump and his make America great Again. Follow us who want to return America back to a time when white men and white privilege were unchallenged and where minorities and women were in their place. Much like Hitler took over the Nazi Party, Trump has taken over the Republican Party. Nazi Party Trump, Trump has

taken it over. This is not a fringe This is not a a fringe position. This is not something that you will not hear from more and more Democrats, and you have been hearing from Democrats obviously for quite for quite some time now. I do want to focus in on some of the policy that they've been discussing as well, because we're starting to be reminded and this is the greatest advertisement for the Republican party in power, really is

the Democrats talking about what they want to do. That's when you really get a sense of, oh my gosh, you cannot give these people power. You cannot allow them to be in a position where they get to make decisions, because their ideas aren't just bad, I mean they are catastrophically bad. You know, today you had your introduction to the House of Pelosi articles of impeachment and an effort to maybe abolish the electoral college, right voting, this brinksmanship

on shutdown, profanity from a new member of Congress. You've got this insane tax scheme that okaus Y Cortez is talking about. I just played audio of that guy talking about how Trump is a Nazi and this is day you know, this is day one, This is day one. Where does it go from here? And that's why I have to laugh. I have to laugh when people say, oh, yeah, there's gonna be an infrastructure bill, and there's how can

this is the favorite? The favorite? And I'm man, I get forced to ask it too, So don't don't you know dredge up audio of me saying the same thing. There We all end up having this conversation, even though I think a pretty useless one, of well, what are the ways that the new the new you know, Democrat majority can work with the Republicans in a bipartisan fashion to make America. It's not gonna happen. It's not gonna happen.

It is not going to happen. Okay, that's we can sit around and talk about it, But that's not what this is about. You and I my friends are in the early phase of a struggle for power that will not stop. That will be a continuous, ongoing, bare knuckle brawl until twenty twenty, and then it just goes into a new phase with whoever wins and you know, and then the cycle resets. But but we are, we are

on a on a pathway now to twenty twenty. Nothing of any real political significance from a legislative perspective, is going to happen between now and then it's just you know, and people talk about gridlock. I'll say this, you know, let me give you a little moment, a happy because we're here on a Friday because Bucks happy. Do you know there's I like that song. Um, let me give

you a little moment happy. Though, I think the founders wanted gridlock to be common, I think that it should be hard for the Congress to make massive, massive transformations to this country. I do not want it to be a simple thing for them to take it upon themselves, one way or another, to transform this country. I think

that it's probably for the best. A lot of very smart historians, analysts, pundits, people that look at these issues all the time will tell you and have told me that in a lot of ways, the less the Congress does, the better for the rest of us. Now, there are things that they can fix, but oftentimes they try to fit. Look at Obamacare, they say they're fix it. If they're

making it worse, they're making it worse. You know, if if we can just get a few a few wins, a few more wins racked up from the president's side of things like oh, I don't know, another Supreme Court justice would be really nice, then I think you're you're pretty much just in a election twenty twenty showdown, which is where we're heading. And in the meantime, it is stuff.

If you're gonna Democrats are gonna be all those And this is what I meant before about the context, right when when you have this member of Congress screaming the president is an mf or all of these marches in the streets, the Women's March and Antifa and showing up outside of conservatives homes and chasing them down in restaurants, and the psychopath who tried to kill Steve Scalise and a bunch of other members of Conservative members of Congress.

Any all of that background, all of that history is now going to be funneled into channeled into the histrionics, the grandstanding, the narcissism, and the nastiness of Nancy Pelosi's Democrats. So, you know, this has been a very It's been a good twenty four hour introduction to what we're going to be up against here, which is a lot of a lot of a lot of kind of worthless talk about policies that the Democrats know they have no chance of

getting through in the next two years. But they're going to be engaged in a propaganda battle to see also where where they're going to run for twenty twenty and then just just tear down this president. I mean, the effort is going to go into hyper drive here, overdrive, hyperdrive, whichever one is more of a drive. That's what they're gonna do. Team. We're in the midst of our Friday salon here on the Buck Sexton Show, so I'm very

much enjoying it. If you want to send me your thoughts, note Facebook dot com slashbuck Sexton is a great way to do it. We've got more on Pelosi's paranoid and crazy Congress and also the Wall shut Down Showdown coming up. One of the things that's so beautiful to watch is three point two percent wage growth that hasn't happened in so long per our country. That's an incredible thing. That means people are actually getting more money, taking home more money.

A lot of good things are happening. Labor participation ation rate increased to sixty three point one. That's an incredible number also, so I just wanted to bring that out. The economy is very good, and remember from the time of my election, the stock market's gone up very close to thirty percent. And that's with all of the things that are happening. Three hundred and ten I'm sorry, three hundred and twelve thousand jobs and latest jobs report unemployment

still below four percent. In sameer times, this would be the primary news story, the single most important thing that we've been told today by the news media. Meanwhile, give you a sense of where things are. You know, on the other side of things, you have CNN and MSNBC and all these different Here you go CNN, hundreds of TSA screeners calling out six okay, and also on seeing an amen allegedly chased a woman into a karate studio, it went, just how you okay? Well, that's that's the

top story. I guess there must be a viral video with that. Speaking of viral videos, you know, there was this uh Okazi Quartes dancing video. It's not worth playing on Eric because you can't see your dancing. It was put out by some anonymous Twitter account and it went

it went viral. People were all talking about this last night, and it was a big conversation among the the Twitterati, you know, the various media folks out there that are all Unfortunately, we're all we're all glued to Twitter these days because of the president and and the importance of some of the proclamations that come via tweet. But this a Kazy Cortes's video. She's danced around, she's having fun, and look it's cute. I mean, she's she's an appealing person.

You know, she will talk about her terrible ideas and bad economics in a second, but she's an appealing person. And I saw all this, all this reporting, or at least all this commentary on how oh look at people jump, you know, jumping conclusions and trying to bash Okazia Quartez for dancing and having some fun when she was in college or on this video. And then I looked around,

and I've still I put out this challenge. I said, can someone show me one instance of a conservative of any note, of an actual conservative of any with any kind of platform or following her voice, who was calling Okazia Cortes out for this video? And I still have yet to see one. Tons of people claiming that Republicans pounce and Republicans have overreached on Okazia Quartz And then I look at I say, well, hold on a second where it says who who says who Poles or Poles?

Oh yeah, Michael Cohen. Yeah, that was that was a different era, wasn't it. So I just wish people would be honest about whether there really is this overreach on this issue with Okazi Quartez, but also in general, you know, conservatives basher for policies, not for her persona. That's an important thing. They're just making her more famous all the time. And Libs don't care if Okazio Cortez, you know, isn't good at math. So I mentioned Okazio Cortes and and

her her tax rate, you know, and a math. And this is where you're gonna have real This is where I think you're gonna have real problems for the for the Democrats going forward. They're not the moment that people get into a place where they hear what the reality of these policies are. Things like a green New Deal, right, that's you're gonna hear a lot about that coming up. I mean, it's not going to happen, but they're gonna be proposing this idea of a green new deal, um.

And and then also just on the redistribution of wealth and what what paying your your fair share, right, bringing back the old Obama phrase paying your fair share. Maybe. I think today she said, was it seventy percent Ocasio Cortez on taxes, Yes, seventy percent tax on the on the super wealthy too fund the Green New Deal. And you always hear people trot out this, oh well, under the Eisenhower administration, So yeah, let's go back to let's

go back now sixty some oddiars. Under the Eisenhower administration, the top tax rate was, you know, ninety one percent and two things one. Nobody paid. Whether that might have been the rate, nobody paid that rate. You know, this is like saying, well, in Greece in the mid two thousands, the tax rate was whatever it was. Yeah, but it didn't matter what the tax rate was. Nobody was paying taxes, which is why Grease had the problems that it did.

I mean the tax compliance rate. It's not nobody. I'm exaggerating, body, The tax compliance rate was very, very low, and no one was really paying ninety one percent. This is also where I get it, I get a little revolutionary in my tone here. You know, if we're gonna have these high taxes, we need to we need to have a wealth tax. It can't be a tax on income. A tax on income prevents people from ascending the ladder. It

punishes people for productive activity. Tax on wealth. You know, if we're going to start, you know, just having the government confiscate from people, well, it shouldn't confiscate from somebody who makes two hundred and fifty thousand dollars one year, the same as it confiscates from somebody who's worth ten million dollars. And it is making two hundred and fifty thousand dollars on unearned investment income every year. Right, that's not we're going to talk about fair. That's not fair.

And we already have an incredibly and like I don't think of wealth tax a good idea. I'm just saying, if we're going to go down this road, let's not pretend that one the people at the at the top end of the of the spectrum are going to be able to fund all of this. There's there's not enough money. There's not enough money to do this. And you know, I understand that right now because of the Republicans are spending a lot in you know, Trump we got almost

a trillion dollars deficit this past year. It's not not good in that sense because Republicans are spending a lot the discussion about the debt and what it's going to mean when interest service payments on the debt start to crowd out more of overall spending. You know, we're not in as strong opposition as we should be to make that case the American people, because the Republican Party and yes, the Trump administration have been somewhat complicit in blowing up

the debt. I mean, we're not We're not as bad as Obama was, right Obama. Obama took it and basically doubled it, which is pretty remarkable. I mean, if you're gonna say, one thing that Obama definitely accomplished was putting the United States in a long term dire fiscal situation. So he did manage to do that, which which was remarkable in its own way. But this notion of a seventy percent tax rate only is that going to fundamentally change not just this country's economy, but the global economy.

We are responded, this country responsible for so much innovation and wealth creation. You go back and I know that some people, you know, this doesn't really get headlines, doesn't really get a lot of attention. You go back, you look at how much of the world lived in true poverty, even as far back as nineteen fifty, right, so not that long ago. A lot of you were alive in nineteen fifty, you know, you go back and look at what was what the global poverty index was then and

what it is now. And there are billions of people who aren't in poverty anymore relative to what was going on then. And this is because of the American approach, which other countries have to adopted obviously, you know, Japan and Western Europe to very degrees, and but rewarding productive behavior and ingenuity and risk taking and wealth creation in and understanding how much human self interest is a motivating and mobilizing force in society and the good that that creates.

This has you know, we are so blessed. We're almost you know, people all that our life today, we're almost like the spoiled brats of the human race because we didn't have to go through what some of the others, what some of the others have in the past. You know, we didn't have to deal with the constraints, the artificial constraints on our productivity and on our ability to choose our own destinies put on us by this state. Remember the left, the Democrat Party is now the American Socialist Party.

They they are playing a little bit of foot see with the terminology, but that's where they are. And that's why the radicalism in the language that you've heard in the last two years is when you're now, it's being translated into policies abolishing the electoral college, a seventy percent tax rate, impeaching the president, a Green new Deal, you know, a radical transformation that just means a radical transformation of the energy sector that will make this country a lot

poorer very quickly. This is what these people really want to do. The biggest advertisement for keeping Trump and Republicans in power, fortunately for us, is the Democratic Party. As long as the American people are paying attention. Let's talk about that wall fight coming up. You ran your campaign promising supporters that Mexico is going to pay for the wall and that the wall was going to be made

of concrete. You just said earlier that the wall could be made of steel, and right now our government is shut down over a demand from your administration that the American taxpayer pay for the wall. So how can you say you're not failing on that promise to your supporters. A very nice question, so beautifully asked. Even though I just answered, it didn't let me take excuse me? Are

you ready? Are you ready? I just tell you that we just made a trade deal and we will take in billions and billions of does far more than the cost of the wall. The wall is peanuts compared to what the value of this trade deal is to the United States. As far as concrete, I said I was going to build a wall. I never said I'm going to build a concrete I said I'm gonna build a wall, just so you know, because I know you're not into

the construction business. If I build this wall or fence or anything that Democrats need to call it, because I'm not into names. I'm into production. I'm into something that works. If I build a steel wall rather than a concrete wall, it will actually be stronger than a conquered Steel is stronger than concrete. Okay, okay, yep, you could check it out. This is so dumb, but it tells you a lot of it where the Democrats and their their lackeys in the media are this It's a wall it's a fence.

It's a barrier. No, it's a fence. Everyone knows. We're just talking about barriers at the border to stop people from coming into the country illegally. We don't care what color defense is. We don't care what hype the barrier is, as long as it is a physical obstruction to prevent illegal access. How are we even having this discussion? Maybe though, it's because there's a little bit of concern among the left wing propagandists in the media and their allies in

the Democratic Party over what's going to happen here. Maybe they've started to realize that the more the American people pay attention to this really can't spare five billion dollars to build a wall, and Trump is having the shutdown. They could end the shutdown anytime they want. Just give the man the money he needs to start building this wall. Five billion dollars is nothing the government. The federal government loses an estimated eighty billion dollars a year in Medicare

and Medicaid fraud. In fraud, the federal government's spending how many billions of dollars on fourign eight, how many tens of billions of dollars on FOIGN eight every year. We don't have five billion dollars with the border, but they focus in on, Oh, the fence is not a fence, it's a barrier. Oh, it's not a barrier, it's a wall. That's just this is just a semantics game. This is nonsense. It doesn't do anything. Why why would anyone spend their

time on this? And then also you said Mexico's gonna pay for it, Well, Mexico's not paying for it. Okay, Well maybe Trump was wrong and in that Mexico won't be able to pay for it right away or it Still, that doesn't mean that it's not a good idea to build a wall. That that's not some argument ender, you know. That's uh. CNN's Caitlin Collins. I know Caitlin, and I like Caitlin. I don't know. She used to work a

daily caller. We've we used to hang out sometimes. I look, she's seen Jim Acostas turn himself into a household name by going after the president. I understand, if you're at CNN, there's no better career move than going after the president. But I don't think she was I don't think she was doing herself long term any favors there. But you know, maybe I'm wrong. She's become like I said, I like her,

and I it's hard. It's hard for me to see what's going on over at CNN these days because I know some good people over there who are on air and and they're just doing what little Jeff Zucker tells him to do. You know, that's that's really You got to dance to Jeff's tune over there or else you're out of luck. You know, he decides whatever gets paid. He decides, you know, whether you whether you live or dies, so to speak, at CNN is completely in Zucker's hands.

And obviously he's a he's an anti Trump fanatic at this point. So uh, and it's it's just a shame, um. But this idea that it somehow is a useful addition to the national conversation here to pretend that the specifics of the wall, oh well, you know the wall that he's talking about now, the slats that wasn't one of the one of the initial prototypes. Who cares? What is this?

I think it's desperation. I think it's the left and the Democrats just trying to find a way to just to kick up dust, to throw smooth blow smooth, throw smoke, blow smoke. You can do lots of things with smoke. You can just smoke it. Um. Democrats used to talk about building a wall. By the way, this this also gets lost. You know, if we had an honest press Corps, they would be holding Democrats feet to the fire. On the Secure Fence Act of two thousand and six, huge

bipartisan majority said yeah, let's build it. Let's build a border fence. And this this was because everyone knew this was a very effective thing to do. But now they're pretending to like, oh, it's not But Democrats, even in recent years have talked about their desire to build a wall. Democrats have been saying openly it's a we have the internet, we have the interwebs, we can pull this stuff up, we can find it. Here's a here's a whole montage

of them play clip nineteen. I voted numerous times when I was a Senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders. People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the

same as people who entered the US legally. The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe that their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration. But those who enter our country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we cannot allow people to pour into the US undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Who knew that Hillary, Schumer and Obama were

slid a bunch of racists, right, Wow? They must really not like Mexicans because they're talking about illegal immigration being bad. You can't do this, It's not a good thing for the country, Hilary said. Quote I voted to spend money to build a barrier. Oh my gosh, she said barrier. Well she didn't say wall. The dumbest stuff that you're hearing these days coming from these democrats I do. And

also the hypocrisy and dishonesty of it. It really bothers me. Maybe, though, just maybe the President's going to find a way a way through this. It is it is possible, it is conceivable that the president finds a way through no matter what happens with a shutdown. Now he's saying he's not going to cave. And I think one thing you say about Trump is trying to force that man to do

something he doesn't want to do. Good luck, Democrats, good luck getting Trump to cave when he's really set on something. And I'm not saying he's not a guy who changes his mind, but if he's dug in, looking how douging he is on trade, He's gone against the He's gone against the most unanimous expert consensus on trade, almost unanimous. It's not n US, but he's going against it, and he's he's not backing down one bit. You don't think he's gonna ride this shut down out as long as

he has to. But then there's a possibility maybe he just gets a little bit of funding and they say, oh, well, you can't use it for this reason or that reason, and then he just drums there is maybe he declares the national emergency play eighteen. Have you considered using emergency powers to grant yourself authorities to build this wall without congressional approval? And seconds ago you have, Yes, I have,

and I can do it if I want. So you don't need congressional approval to build the national emergency because of the security of our country. Absolutely no, we can do it. I haven't done it. I may do it, I may do it. But we can call a national emergency and build it very quickly. And it's another way of doing it. But if we can do it through a negotiated process, we're giving about a shot. I think

that's the right attitude. Now, if Trump did declare a national emergency, there's no question that the federal anti Trump, never Trump judiciary would shut it down with another nationwide But this will we got to change this, by the way, folks, you can't have one federal judge just declaring for the whole country all the time. Sorry, you know that the

executive branch can't do this thing. But you get you get an it'll get a nationwide injunction that'll stop the building of the wall, and then you'll probably get a request for a stay, and then I'll go to appeals and then it'll make its way that you know that the Supreme Court in the election year might be looking at whether or not the president can use emergency power to build the wall. And you can imagine how contentious

that will be. But if Trump takes it there, if he just if he does truly everything that he can to get this wall built as he should, then I think he's in excellent shape for twenty twenty and then he may have an their four years to get this wall going. So that's why this fight is so important, which is why Pelosi and Schumer obviously don't want to budge at all on it. They understand the political The one thing Nancy Pelosi does know is what's good for

her and what's not. I don't think she knows what's good for the country and what's not, or maybe it's more apt to say she doesn't care, but she definitely knows what's good for Nancy Pelosi, which is why she is in the position she is in now. So we'll look, We're going to continue to talk more about it. This is the most important issue in the country right now, no question immigration. Who's gonna win. I mean, this is this is like the Obama care fight of twenty ten,

and you know we lost that one, folks. I don't think we want to see what the future is like for this country if we lose this one. I don't think that we're going to be able to rebound from what would really just be the end of any effort to have a secure border. You know, you'd one hundred and fifty five thousand people apprehended in the last year at the border, five hundred thousand visa overstays every year.

You have hundreds of thousands of illegals coming into the country every year, and they're not planning on leaving anytime soon. That's why the numbers. I've told you as a joke, it's now or never. Trump understands that, and that's why I'm so pleased to see these willing to fight on this one. But I worry about these Republicans, weak knees among a lot of GOP establishment types. We got more on this. Stay with me. We need protection in our country.

We're gonna make it good. The people of our country want it. Without a wall, you cannot have border security, it won't work. Hopefully, we're gonna work together and we're gonna get lots of things done. I think the Presence made it very clear. Yes, there's no wall, no deal, but look, we really are prepared to negotiate. We're prepared to talk. I like that they're saying that no wall,

no deal. But you know the issue with opening this up here there you had obviously Trump and Pence with a one two punch on on where we stand in this shutdown. The issue is that the Democrats aren't opposed to the wall really for any reason. When I say the Democrat Democrat Party broadly speaking is opposed to the wall because it will work and because they like illegal immigration.

The Democrats that you're going to have to negotiate with to get funding for a wall, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. Their main opposition to this, at least in the immediate sense, is they are against it because Trump is for it. They don't want there to be a wall because that would be a win for Trump and they know that and politically they will not allow that. You know, I spoke to the incoming budget Chairman, John Yarmouth today on rising and I just said, you know, it's five five

billion dollars. There's not a lot of money. And the head of Order Patrol, the head of Immigration, of Customs Enforcement, you know, every border patrol age and I've talked to all say that a wall is useful and a wall works, and we need a wall and places where we have a wall on the southern border or a barrier of some kind. It's already proven that it works. So what is this nonsense? I mean, what is this fabrication that we're always told experts say a wall won't work. I

never see anybody that'll go, oh, there's an expert. You know, this is why, you know, you can't take their word on any of this stuff. You can't take their word with the Oh, all the experts agree, agree on climate change, all scientists agree. Well that's not true, but they'll say it. They'll say it because of the momentary propaganda value of the lie and the hope that people aren't paying close enough attention that they'll be held to account for the falsehood.

You know, they'll they'll just go go forward with with the same nonsense they've always done. You know this, this is a very straightforward issue, and it's being made complicated by the Democrats, not not by the Republican. Republicans are not the ones that are complicated. It's very easy to give them what they want. Democrats the ones you say, we want border security, but you know not, that's not border security that will actually secure the border. That's that's

a complicated position. That's a difficult thing to to make work and to make sense. You know, here, here's Pelosi and you know she's back. Everybody, Hey, that's a Pelosi. She's back, and you're gonna be hearing a lot from her in the next two years. So get ready for We're we're gonna be gonna be spending plenty of time holding Pelosi to account here on the show. So that will be I'm hoping, very entertaining for us as well as worthwhile. But here are some of the things that

she says about the wall and about the negotiations. Your play clip too. What we're asking the president the Republicans in the Senate to do is to take yes for an answer. A wall is an immorality. It's not who we are as a nation. And this is not a wall between Mexico and the United States that the president is creating here. It's a wall between reality and his constituents.

I wonder who writes these seemingly gotcha lines for Nancy Pelosi dispute on TV that when you think about it for more than a second, you realize it is idiocy. This is not an intelligent thing. A wall is an immorality. Well, a wall is an inanimate object. So I can't understand how a wall is an immorality. And if let's play this out for a moment, let's take Nancy at her word here froment. If a wall is immoral, isn't our border patrol? Immoral? Isn't our border? Immoral? Isn't the whole

idea that we will take people? You know, current US law that exists because of the Congress, that she is now the single most important official working in which is, as I say it, astonishing, But that's where we are as a country. Oh well, but the law is that if you try to come to the country legally, you'll be stopped. Is that immoral? Is our border? Immoral? Democrats are never forced to have a real debate on these issues.

They are never forced to get deep into the discussion about any of this, and they just stick to the talking points. It's very superficial, very surface level, and all about trying to rile people up emotionally without having to engage on the substance. That has been their tactic to deal with immigration for a long time, and as you know, it's probably the single on this show. I think we talk with immigration more than any other policy issue. And

we have for quite a long time. I mean, I think immigration is from the perspective of what the government can do, should do, needs to do, what the Trump administration needs. So it's probably the single most important area where there needs to be success because it's an existential issue for the Republican Party for conservatism, for limited government, and over the long term, it's an existential issue for

the United States as we know it. It will not be the same country in fifty years, some would say in fifteen years unless we get I handle all this and understand what the real implications are of nearly unrestricted mass immigration that's been going on for decades that has overwhelmed the systems of assimilation that we have had in place in this country for a long time. But the idea that the wall is an immorality, why when Nancy Pelosi says that a real press corps would push her

and say is a border immoral? Is it immoral that we don't let anyone just come into this country and then have a claim on our stuff. And I mean that quite literally. If you're allowed to just come to America because you want to be in America and get the full benefits of being here, then you're essentially able to apprise yourself of or able to acquire for yourself the benefits of the state that are paid for by the taxpayer. So is that that's all good, that's fine,

that's acceptable. I mean, at what point is it theft? What point is this breaking of laws eroding the very foundation of national sovereignty and of the state itself. But there's more Pelosi in the wall plicklip three. Resident cannot hold public employees hostage because he wants to have a wall that is not affected, not effective in terms of its purpose, not cost effective in terms of what the opportunity costs it is of a federal dollars to spend.

And the President said, Mexico is going to pay for this. Oh, let's let's anchor ourselves into reality. Mexico is not going to pay for this wall. So no, he could make Mexico pay for the wall after the fact. I don't remember the President saying that the Mexico is going to pay upfront. He could start taxing remittances, which I think would be an excellent idea. There should be taxes on remittances.

You've got about twenty billion dollars a year flowing south of our border, most of it, you know, just just in pure cash, untaxed, unaccounted for, and subsidizing the Mexican economy. I always fine, it's such an interesting argument. You'll hear this from lefties too, from from progressive types. Oh well, that's a good thing, because the stronger the Mexican economy is, the less likely people are to come here. Okay, but we're still subsidized. You know, you could say that about

a lot of different countries. So so how much more do we need to subsidize the Honduran economy and the El Salvadoran economy and the Nicara You know, you just go all the way down the line. We again subsidize them enough that people don't want to come here. Being an American is a very special thing. We are lucky you and I understand that. I know that people listen to the show actually all over the world, and some of you aren't Americans, but vast majority of us listening

to the show are American. There are some Canadians, what's up, Team Bot Canada. There are some Canadians listen to the show too, But we understand that it's it's a privilege and we're incredibly lucky and are grateful for that, but that doesn't mean that we want to give it away to everybody and allow it to be destroyed either, right, And is it fair? You know, there's the accident of birth is a real thing. There's a lot of things that aren't fair. One of the most important things in

life is to understand that life is not fair. And the fact that you and I were born in the greatest, wealthiest, freest country in the history of the planet and not born in the midst of a civil war in Somalia or a North Korean gulag is to our everlasting benefit and just a stroke of incredible good luck for all of us. Right, we are very, very lucky comparatively and not I don't even have to go with present day

worst case scenarios places like North Korea. You know, we're lucky compared to what we would have been dealing with in you know, in basically all of the world you to one hundred years ago. We're lucky, not just in the time we were born, but in the place we were born. So there's a lot that we have to be a lot that we have to be thankful for. But the you know, the Democrats don't see it this way.

They see it as we owe the world, we owe the third world, in particular the redistribution of wealth that will occur from citizens to non citizens through a mass amnesty, through open borders, through continued infiltration of illegal aliens in this country. Rona McDaniel said this about about the Democratic Party and Pelosi, and you know, she definitely hit hit some of the highlights here play for the Democrat Party is now the party of sanctuary cities, abolish ice, open borders.

She called a wall immorl. What we know about the walls and the borders that we have is that it has decreased illegal crossings by ninety percent where we have them. She called that immorl. I think it's immorl to give more money to foreign governments than you do to protect our border. The president's asking for five billion, she gave fifty four billion to foreign governments. Her priorities are out of whack. The American people now see Republicans are fighting

for our country. Democrats are doubling down at obstruction and everything against this president that they can do, instead of solving the problems at home. Rememb're this fight's all over spending five billion dollars on border screup. Think of think of all the money. I mean, you know this, this point about priorities that Ron McDaniels making here you use the R and C chairwoman, This point about priorities is

a very poignant one. I think. I just consider all the money that's been spent in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in foreign aid to countries le Honduras like Mexico. Think of all the money that the federal government is spending that they're taking from tag The federal government has no money, it has your money. So think of all the checks

that sent into governments all of the world. And think of here we are talking about, as I've said, I mean maybe second only to the you know, the economy and the and the debt, but the long term, biggest challenge we have, most important challenge we have is is secure orders and immigration. You know, after the debt deficit in the economy, and they won't spend five billion dollars to maybe get this thing right. And if they're so sure that it wouldn't work, wouldn't it be worth spending

the money. Wouldn't it be worth allowing Republicans to go off on this fool's errand and Trump to do his wall that all Mexican's gonna pay for it. They all think they're so clever with this, put it up, and then and then let's see what the numbers are. If they're right, there'll be no change in illegal crossing, there'll be no more secure border sectors than they currently are. And then they can laugh at us and say we're

also dumb. And you know what, if that happens, I'll say, Wow, guys, I guess every single real border expert I spoke to, and every person that's worked on law enforce in the border, we were somehow all wrong. But I will say that. And they're not taking the position that they're not sure this will work. They're saying it won't work, it won't work, it's foolish, it's dumb. Well, if they're so sure, let's

try it out. Let's try it out. And if this were a good faith negotiation of the Democrats, they would say, you know, we're not gonna even five billion dollars. We're gonna give you two billion dollars, and we're gonna pick one sector of the you know, the US Texas. I start the Mexico Texas border. You take one piece of the border where we're having a lot of legal crossings, and we're going to use that as a test case.

And if it really, if it really does shut down legal crossings there, even if across the entire border it remains unchanged, well then at least we know that sector by sector it could work. So there are ways to test out this theory and see who's right. They don't want to do it. They don't want to do it, and as we've been discussing the things they do want to do or are just nuts. You know, all the Democrats have to do is not be crazy, and they are incapable of doing it. So we do have that

going for us, which is which is very nice. In the midst of all the whining that comes from the left, you have to wonder why in the world would anyone act this way. My guess is they're just not getting their daily dose of black rifle coffee. You know, that's why they're running around all upset, trigger warnings, crying about this, that and the other thing, acting like the world's going to end because the climate change. I got an idea,

drink some black rifle coffee libs. It'll make your day better, all right. I love Black Rifle. I drink it every day. I want everyone to drink it. I want you to drink it. It is rose to order delicious, fresh coffee that gets delivered right to your door. And Black Rifle Coffee gives a portion of sales to veteran first responder causes. Join the coffee club. They'll just send it to you every month. That's what I do, and that's what I drink. Nothing cures a bad attitude quite like starting your day

with the most American coffee ever, Black Rifle Coffee. Visit Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck and receive fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Riflecoffee dot Com slash Buck. Speaker Pelosi is basically align herself with her left wing, and I think that for her to back off will be very expensive. The President has said publicly so many times now that he won't sign anything that doesn't pay

for border security. That for him to back down would be very expensive, and I think this is one of those cases where exhaustion is the only thing that's going to work. I mean, people can get anxiety written, we can have mass TV coverage of every meeting, but the fact is neither side is tired enough to start moving towards an agreement. As you know, I'd advocated several weeks ago to provide a legal path for the Dreamers as

part of a package that would include border security. You would think the Democrats would be very interested in trying to help seven hundred thousand people who came here as children, But the fact is they dislike Trump a lot more than they care about young Latinos. Now. I agree with Mit in general on I'm sorry, Mit, I meant Newt mits. I got Mit on the brain this week. Sorry about that. I agree with Newt in general on a lot of these immigration issues, at least right now. Mit is if

you go back, gosh, I gotta step sing Mit. Newt if you go back, is somebody that I think has, let's just say, evolved in the issue of immigration. He's much more open to the Dreamer situation dealing with that now, and quite honestly, even I think it is sensible, because if you don't have a secure border before you get the Dreamers, the cascading effect of the amnesty for dreamers will overwhelm your ability to have any leverage negotiations to really get border security. I mean, you have to get

border security now. It has to be real, it has to happen, and you have to change the whole conversation around preventing illegal entry into the country and also enforcing immigration law in this country and giving up this point of leverage on DACA. Remember DACA turned into DAPPA, which is deferred action for the parents of arrivals. So now it was kids who are here and their families and oh, by the way, people who came here and it's not

just kids. People came here as kids who claim to have come here as kids, and you know, if they've had kids, then you know even the extended family is not going to get because there are going to be citizens. And then so no one's going to be sent home. And you just start looking at this and you know, there's no way that we come out of this with a more secure border down the line if we give up on some of these issues that are so important

to the left right now. And they know that because what I'm saying is if they get dreamer amnesty, and I don't like the term dreamer, but that's you know, I can't think of you know, if they get amnesty for illegals governed under DACA, then the next thing is just going to be another amnesty. They're just gonna keep holding out. They don't budge on these things. There might be there might be a compromise here. This is what Rampaul said, Play eight. Well, you know, I think there

is a compromise when you think about it. The Democrats last year, almost every one of them in the Senate voted for twenty five billion dollars for a wall. Now the president's only asking for five billion. Now, the democrats new position is zero. So I figure you take their

position zero the president's position five. I haven't split the difference, you know, two to two and a half billion dollars, and I think that would probably be adequate to have a deal where both sides can say, you know, they didn't give the president what he wanted, but the President didn't cave in and get nothing. In their counter, they're increasing foreign aid to other countries to over fifty billion dollars. There's a twelve billion dollar increase in foreign aid. Many

of these countries hate us and burn our flag. And the President campaigned on America first, so he wants to spend that five billion dollars here at home. And I think the Democrats are gonna have a lot of explaining as to why they won't spend any money at home on security, but they're willing to send it to foreign countries, many of whom burn our flag and chant death to America.

Well said by Senator Paul. We'll be right back. A lot of news stories now about how difficult it is for people that are affected by the shutdown, and well, we can be sympathetic to those who are working without a paycheck. It's also perhaps a good time to ask some questions about is this really the federal workforce that

we need? Is it the size we need? Is this really essential to borrow a term that is often used in these situations, Well, I've got somebody who has no qualms looking at this and asking those tough questions and coming up with some answers that may not necessarily be what the public sector union folks want to hear. We have Inez Felcher in the House. He's a senior policy analyst and the Independent Woman's Forum, and she's ready to

drop some knowledge here with us on Friday Ines. Thanks for calling in, Thanks so much for having me back. So let's let's just start with the reforming civil service, chopping it down, make it a different. What should we do with our federal government employee workforce? According to your most recent white paper? Well, I think Donald Trump has

some great ideas. When he mentioned that the last State of the Union address, he said, give managers the power to hire and fire to make sure that the federal workforce actually works for the American people. And that sounds like a really basic thing, But the way that our civil services had today, it's basically an impossible goal. It's tie in the sky just to have a civil service, a competent civil service that actually works for the American people.

And that's the case because for the last about one hundred years, since the progressive era, we've been piling all of these job protections on top of federal employees to protect them essentially even when they're doing a really bad job or when they're outright defying the people that we elect to direct them in their jobs. Now, you mentioned to me off Fair that there was a Project Veritas video.

James O'Keefe outfit that came out pretty recently where you had federal government employees who were saying what they were pleased with their ability to frustrate Trump's agenda by essentially not doing what they're supposed to do as employees of the of the executive branch. That's exactly right. So James O'Keeffe's outfit uncovered basically when undercover with some of these folks.

These are some of the folks who actually were if you recall that there was a moment, especially during the Kabinaugh hearings, but even before that, Republican senators, Republican officials

who worked in the administration were being chased out of buildings. Actually, the main organizer of the group that does that, that goes to restaurants and yells at Republicans is a socialist and she works in the States Department, And so she wasn't one of the many people they caught on tape basically saying, yeah, we're gonna go ahead and obstruct Donald Trump's agenda because we don't agree with Donald Trump's agenda, and we worked for the federal government and it's impossible

to fire us. This is a deep constitutional problem. It doesn't matter if you like Donald Trump. Where you don't like Donald Trump. This is a deep constitutional problem. It's

a democratic problem, right, small d democratic problem. When the person that the people elect has very little power over the people who are supposed to carry out his agenda, and when they have absolutely who do not stand for election right before the American people, when they have this much power to sign me that agenda, there's a democratic problem here. How hard is it to fire most people under civil service regulations? What kind of hurdles are there

in place? Well, it currently takes between a year and three years. There are four separate different systems that one might go through to appeal a dismissal. There are two that are used the most often. The other two are used in particular instances. But either way that you go, there's a twelve step or more slow chart for a manager to go through to fire someone, and even for

the most egregious misconduct, it can take years. So just as an example, the head of the Caribbean VA who was actually completely corrupt and was convicted of corruption by a criminal court. So he was convicted of a crime during the course of his job. This wasn't a crime that he committed on his own time. He was committing celonies while he was on the jobs. And it's still he was in jail, and it still took two years

for the v to actually fire him. Okay, so the American taxpayer paid his salary while he was sitting in jail after being convicted of corruption while on the job. It still took two years to get rid of that guy and to make sure that the American taxpayer was not paying his salary. That is how long. And most managers they just don't deal with it. It's not worth it. For just a poorly employed, performing or even defiant employee.

They just find ways to move them around at best and to get them out of everyone's way to the extent that they can. And oftentimes even there's I'm sure, as a former federal employee yourself, bof you've heard of the notorious notion of getting rid of an incompetent employee by actually promoting him so that you no longer have

to deal with him. Oh. Absolutely, I mean I was always amazed at how much shuffling of people would occur based upon you know, you'd send some people, you'd send some people forward and put them up for positions that would have even the high you know, a higher paygrade than what they're supposed to have, just because you didn't want them in the office. So there's there's plenty of

that stuff that would go on. There are a whole there were a whole agencies, whole places in the federal government where they'll just kind of park you instead instead of firing you. You know, I I think you would have been proud in as Earlier the week, I got to speak to a representative from one of the I think it is the biggest federal public sector union, and I just said, you know, why do we have to

have public sector unions? And she looked at me like she had never even this had never even occurred to her. And I said, you know, I'm pretty sure FDR, way back in the day, it was like, well, unions are good, but obviously public sector unions would be crazy. We can't have government employees with their own unions against the American people. That would be nuts. No, that's what we have now. That's absolutely what we have now. And as you said,

even FDR thought it was nuts. So the unionist is actually layered on top of all these caections that they have by law, And the purpose of a lot of these things, right, purpose, original purpose and a lot of these protections and union protections among others, was to make sure that we don't have a totally corruptible service, to

totally politicize to civil service. Right. But the cure has turned out to be way worse than the disease, because now we have, as you mentioned, an entire class that's insulated from the American people, from the voter, who imposes their political views upon the American body politic with absolutely no legitimacy to do so. And the idea that the civil service is somehow a political because of all of

this is ridiculous. So in the last election federal employees, ninety five percent of the donation from federal employees went to Hillary Clinton ninety five percent. The only places that are more politically spewed than the civil service in America are maybe faculty lounges and maybe Hollywood awards ceremonies. The civil service is incredibly less leaning, but we pretend that it's a political and everyone sort of goes about their jobs and hands that these people do not have an agenda.

They do just like any other American. The difference is they they're working for a government they ought to be responsive to the American people, and right now they're not. You know, this is kind of a random aside and as but I had to interview today. Did you ever watch the show The West Wing. I've watched a few episodes here and there of it, but I'm not a a voracious watcher. Let's say that. Yeah, yeah, the true

meet me too. I probably have seen maybe a half a dozen episodes total of my life, but I've seen a few of them. But the deputy, the deputy White House chief of staff character is an actor that I got to interview today and I thought it was you know, so we were having kind of a Hollywood media talk and I said, so, you know, what do you think about Hollywood speaking about how politicized and how these places are really a uniparty under themselves. So what do you

think about how politicized Hollywood is? Hollywood's really says, we're not really that liberal. So, oh my gosh, of course, now it all makes sense. Hollywood's not really that liberal. The federal government's not really that liberal. You know, this is this is why we never get anywheres because we can't even start with the basic reality of what's happening. Well, absolutely, and people, I mean I grew up in the Bay Area, right,

and none of them actually label themselves as liberal. If you talk to them, they're like, oh, I'm an objective moderate, right, but the premises that you come in with are incredibly less wing. And I don't know it actually is a larger left wing problem. I think they refuse to see their own ideology. They pretend that everything, all the conclusions they come to are simply a dispassionate analysis of the fact,

which is not true. But it leads them to feel like, oh, okay, if you're well, if you're not left wing, you must not care about facts. You must be live in an alternative fact universe. Right. So I mean, that's the larger this is By the way, that's the go ahead. I was gonna say that that's the liberal that CNN caters to you. By the way, that's the whole purpose of CNN.

It launders liberalism. It's it's an echo chamber. It's just the people with the same basics mistis underlying, disagreeing about maybe a policy here or there, but having the same fundamental principles talking to each other and then pretending that it's a real discussion that actually spans the political spectrum in America. It Jeff doesn't. And the same thing in

the civil service. They may not think of themselves as explicitly political, but in the way that they see the world, they are, and it comes out when you actually look at something like their donations and see that they're ninety five percent go to the Democratic Party. And by the way, in the States Department, your favorite, I'm sure it's ninety nine percent that went to Hillary. Yeah, think about that, everyone, ninety nine percent of donations the last presidential cycle, the

State Department went to Hillary Clinton. What a surprise. Inanez Felcher, everybody. Independent Women's Forum also readers stuff on the Federalist Inez. Have a fantastic weekend. Give Jared a high five for me. I'll talk to you soon, talk to you to see you. Moore coming up, stay with us. It's a way to make noise, but it actually isolate Smith and puts him in a much narrower, smaller group. Very smart, he's been

a governor, he's been a very successful businessman. He could come in there and have six or eight or nine really positive ideas he could make a real contribution, but to posture as the anti Trump, I think it's a really narrow career path. And I just think my guess is he has some advisors who thought it was clever. Newt didn't like it, did not like that. Mitt op ed on Trump, and my next guest also not a fan of it, and I'm not a fan of it either. So we'll all just dive into this together. He's got

a piece up in the Detroit News. Romney stands for failed Politics of the past. Guest host of this program, Clairemont Institute fellow author of the book No Go Zones, which you can get on Amazon, and I highly recommend to you. The man himself, mister Raheem Kasam, is joining us before his weekend festivities kickoff or He'm great to have you back. I didn't know about weekend festivities. The buckets drive January for me. Oh my, I don't even know. I don't even know how that's going to go. But

it's probably a good thing. You know, we should all get a good start, a good, strong start to the new year. Romney did this and we've been talking about it all week and I don't want to overplay this. I just I have a curiosity about what do you think Romney thinks he was doing here? Well, look, I mean, let's let's go back to when Trump was first running for president and Romney came out against him. Then Mit Romney, you know, audition for Secretary of State and President elect

Trump entertained the idea. Then Romney slammed him again. Then Romney sought the Senate seat in Utah, and Trump and the administration gave them, gave him their blessing for whatever it was worse. And now he's in the Senate and

he's slamming Trump again. So when you want to talk about bad character or poor character, as Mitt Romney suggests in this in this OpEd in the Washington Post, there's there's any one person in that relationship between those two men who have shown themselves to be poor of character and repeatedly hypocritical and backstabbing in that Romney And it comes down to this for me analyzing this over the last twenty four to forty eight hours, because I think

it is something that requires us to be a fleet of foot when it comes to watching the opposition that the make America great again crowd experiences from within its own quote unquote conservative slash gop rax. I think that's a very important thing. And it comes down to this. Mitt Romney is not somebody who understands, as they say in my article in the Detroit News, the sort of

a wildcatterie, the risk taking abilities of somebody like President Trump. Now, those risks sometimes come with rewards and sometimes they come with failures. But remember Romney comes from the school of thought that you always do things by the book, play it very safe, and you'll incrementally, very slowly rise. And that's been the sort of conservative gop mantra for the

last ten fifteen years. But it hasn't got them very far, because fighting against radicals, fighting against the Democrat machine actually

requires radicalism. In return, fighting fire with fire as President Trump's whole stick, and it appears to at least, if not completely be working at this point, at least is keeping the harvest line elements of the political establishment at bay and even seeding radical elements within the Democrat Party like the Alexander Occasio corteses who are now taking the fight to the Democrats from within. If anything, Trump's emboldened the radicals inside the Democrat Party to take on their

own establishment. And I think this is what Mitt Romney really despises, because in a world of eccentrics and in the world of characters, somebody in the likement Romney disappears. He has no place, so he thinks he can grab some headlines in the Washington Post, he can get some airtime on CNN and really kick off this sort of new McCain flakelike resistance within I think actually it's probably

going to new to him in the long term. What does it say to you that the GOP's last two presidential offerings before Trump were McCain and Romney, who are two of the most vocal anti Trump Republicans anyone can think of. Well, that's certainly. I mean, they had their chance. They had multiple chances to go out there and prove the case, and they failed to do it over and over again because they didn't. What they didn't do is aim listened to ordinary people in the United States. They

didn't listen to their concerns. You know. They ran on things like tax cuts, which the GOP made the mistake of trying to do it this last midterm election to look out worked out we didn't run on the radical id views in Washington, DC, which aren't actually radical ideas, and the rest of the country like, oh, I don't know a semblance of border security or I don't know helping ordinary people find jobs. And look at the jobs numbers to day that came out under this radical president.

Those are the things that the mccains of the Romney's are shoot for so long and just turn their backs on when it came to actually campaigning. So for Romney and you know the failed Weekly Standard and the departing Jeff Blakes of the world. This is this is their ideology dying. And of course when an animal has wounded, it will lash out. And that's what Mitt Romney's doing is he is the personification of a dying breed of

pseudo conservatism. And I think if if the magatypes, if the trump Trumpists, Trumpites, whatever you want to call them, if they're good enough and they're smart enough to see that they can actually bury that pseudo conservatism for a good generation him. Kassam, everybody, Raheim, can we actually can we bring you back right after this Breakouf, because I want to ask you about what's being called by some

the victimhood populism of Tucker Carlson. Others are saying Tucker Carlson nailed it in this monologue early this week where he diagnosed some of the problems. Can you talk about that? Do you have a minute? Absolutely? Yeah, all right, We're gonna stick with Rahem Kasam will be back in just a moment. You know what's really smart figuring out who you want to hire for each position you have so that you can take your business to the next level

in twenty nineteen. You know what else is really smart? Starting the new year off strong by going to zip recruiter dot com slash buck to hire the right people. Unlike other job sites, zipp recruiter finds qualified candidates for you. It's powerful matching technology scans thousands of resumes to identify people with the right skills, education, and experience, and actively invites them to apply to your job so you get qualified candidates fast. That's why zippercruiters rated number one by

employers in the US. This rating comes from ing sites on trust Pilot with over a thousand reviews. Right now, my listeners can try zip recruiter for free at this exclusive web address. Zipp recruiter dot com, slash buck. If you love this show, show your support for the Freedom Hut and zip recruiter by going to zip recruiter dot com, slash buck again, zip recruiter dot com slash buck. Zip

recruiter is the smartest way to hire Now. You had said before the shutdown that he was being quite cavalier and that maybe the shutdown will give him more time to golf. But in the end, it was you that took a holiday, and is it retake the holiday? I observed the Christmas holiday for a few days, and why cut in fact and cut in half the time I would have had with my fan? Was that a cheap shot? But the faid, Oh, it's not it's not important. It's

totally unimportant. The President may not know this, but Hawaii is part of the United States of America. Maybe he

doesn't realize that. I love how We're back with Raheem Kasam here, author of No Go Zones, Clairemont Institute, fellow host, guest host of the show You're listening right now, Raheem, I like how Pelosi there is asked by Savannah Guthrie if she made a cheap shot in another context and then she follows it up with she pivots doing a different cheap shot, which is maybe the President doesn't know Hawaii as part of the US, which was neither clever

nor nor insightful. But but I do have this question about how it is that there are so many people who believe that Nancy Pelosi has the interests of the American people at heart. I really, you know, I want to talk about trump populism and how some conservatives have issues with that, But to me, Pelosi is the quintessential limousine liberal. Couldn't be more you know, distant from normal

Americans and their concerns. And yet we're always told that she's practically like a social justice warrior who just you know, has hashtag resistance tattooed on her arms. It's crazy to me, Well, she's going to be in a lot of trouble over this this Congress, I think, and mostly from her own side.

She doesn't represent what the Democrat Party a base, that the active base at least is wishing for in this Congress, and she barely manages to cobble together enough you know, support in not in the sense of the number of votes she gets to become speaker, but in the sense of the rhetorical and passion support that you need amongst your own, you know, your parliamentary party effectively to guide them.

I mean, we've already got stories in the last twenty four hours about you know, this move on to or party from last night, where you've got one of the congresswomen swearing and saying we're going to impeach Trump, which is something that Pelosi had tried to get them away from. The talking points of the media over here is fascinated by people like Alexander Arcasio Cortez, and I think Pelosi

number one will get very envious of that. But number two will lose a lot of power within her own party the results, So she's going to be constantly buying for power inside on your right. She has to prove that she can represent Trump represents to the conservative base, and I'm afraid she doesn't. She's sort of like the Paul Ryan figure in her own party. And Paul Ryan lost so much credibility and support over the last couple of years that he almost became irrelevant to most conversations

about the future of conservatism. Now. On the issue of conservatism as it should be today, or where the right should be focusing its energy. There was a Tucker cross in monologue that was also then turned into an essay, or maybe it was an essay turned into monologue, whatever it was, it was on populism this week and really diagnosing some of the problems of American society and some

of the inadequacies of the political elites in addressing that. I, of course, any of that, Tucker says, you're going to have a lot of pushback from the left. They're gonna say it's terrible, it's it's racist, or whatever. They'll always

have the same knee jerk reactions to it. But there were many on the right of the kind of Weekly Standard, National Review, never Trump variety, who are saying that this is perpetuating victimhood, that this idea of a populist conservative movement that needs to take care of workers, that needs to reassess global trade and the free market at all costs mantra that we've had is somehow a sell out

of principles. You know, you were there in the early days with Bannon talking about things like populism for conservatives. What do you make of this? Well, look, I'm glad that it's finally getting the airtime it deserves as a new guiding philosophy for the political right. And Fox News not exactly the most populist or nationalist are out there giving Coger Carlson the air time to do this. I think is it can only be a very good thing.

You know, we should be welcoming conversations like this, but instead, David French in National Review, they poo poo it. They say, you know that this is this is a debasement of conservative values. Now, you know, British and American conservative values

differ quite a bit, and I understand that. But I've also come to understand that when you talk about conservatism in America nowadays, people automatically think free market capitalism, low taxes, and perhaps even though not in practice, the theory of

limited government. They don't really talk enough about, especially not in DC, family values, sovereignty, border control, jobs, wages, you know, as Tunis Carlson said in his monologue, dignity, human dignity, and this is this has been the clarion call of the so called populists in Europe over the last five or six years. When you look to Hungary and it's lea the Czech Republic, in Austria and the United Kingdom's Brixit vote. The human dignity element came in a very

strong way. You know, people in the United States, the average family would struggle to put four hundred and fifty dollars together in case their boiler breaks down in their home. That's an undignified position for the world's wealthiest nation to impart upon its citizens. So something has been broken, but the establishment right didn't want to admit it because it would mean having to admit that there was something fundamentally

incorrect in their ideology. Now, conservativism, it's conservative, isn't supposed to be an ideology like a lot of the lefting dogmas. It's actually supposed to be a guiding philosophy. And the guiding philosophy behind that is effectively the nuclear family in your community. So it was incredible that Tucker managed to

do thatteen minutes. And I understand it's gone superviral on the Internet in the last twenty four hours, and I think that's because for all of the magazines and quarter leads in journals out there, nobody's managed to boil it down just so succinctly and to such a massive audience, and of course that will cause what I call conservative ink. You know, the consulting class, the think tank class that

you know in Washington, DC. You know the guys that were feeling us all those free drinks over the Christmas period, but their defensive Christmas part is it causes them great irritation. The drinks were good, they now have to go back to their donors. The drinks were fine, you know, you know, it was it was, it was all right, but the conversations were not like this. And it's it's so refreshing to me that that Tucker is moving these conversations on.

And it's an addendum to that, he's written an amazing article as well this quarter in the American Conservative magazine about about the foolish and endless wars that Western nations have found themselves dragged into. So he's really becoming a torchbearer for the populist writing. I say more power to him who's written that article. Right, Oh, Tucker wrote an arcle American servant. I didn't know that he wrote about that. That's I'll have to find that one. I've obviously seen them.

I've seen the monologue from this week. I just look, I like the robust debate, and I give the guys on the other side of this one who at least put their names to things and want to engage with these ideas seriously credit for being a part of an important discussion on the right and not just being you know, because because there really are and I think it's important keep in mind, they're people that just disagree with some aspects of Trump's you know, nationalism, Trump's view of trade.

You know, there there are places to have disagreement on policy, never mind on the personal matters. And then they're the people like Anna Navarro who or Jennifer Rubin who are just in no meaningful way on the right except to pretend they are so they can trash people on the right. So those are the people that I have no time for and and don't need to hear from it all. And I'm fine with just if I could just I would be okay with that as well. And in fact, I would like to see some of these some of

these ideas played out in massive debate settings. But David French, at the end of his National Review card criticizing Tucker Carlson, says the populist elevation of the political over the personal. It's perhaps the worst possible response. He's not actually tackling

the ideas. He's just saying that bad mean good, and that's all I'm afraid the establishment has at the moment, it's not willing to say, well, actually, the ideas that we've been espousing in the cane that Romney, the Ryant ideas for the last twelve years plus has failed a lot of people in the country. So I've yet to see anybody on the political establishment right take Tucker or Anon or anything like that. Hyper Seriously, I'd like to see someone step up to the play, but I don't

think we are going to see anyone. Well, I mean to the earlier points that we were making here, there is a lot of personal investment that some of the voices in this have just in being right above making sure that the movement is pushing in the right direction and acting in ways that are are for the betterment

of the entire country. Right. So I think that there's essentially we're in the midst of a giant clash of egos on the right, and for a lot of people, they can't get beyond the fact that you know, Trump hasn't been their guy, and they don't want to hear it. I mean, today I was dealing with some people who are even kind of who are who are on the right, and they were they were just saying, well, you know the jobs numbers. I guess that. I guess they're good. No, no,

they're good. It's just it's a good jobs number. Well, but I'll tell you what any were up against the debate you want to moderate because you're a very fair guy. If you want to moderate the debate, I'll take part on the populist national side. You find me an establishment conservative who can hold their own against me in debate, I'll be there ten out of ten times. Well, I'm I love this idea actually, and I'm not. This is

not just a throwaway from me. Before we let you go to enjoy your weekend, raheem, Who if I could, if I could help arrange a conservative populism versus you know, traditionalist GOP debate for you know, with with you, who would you want to who would you want to uh have on the other side of that? I mean or or you know, you give me a couple of names. Who comes to mind. Yeah, it's a it's a good question.

I mean, I think it would have to be someone from from you know, the National Review Stable, to be somebody from from I think there were some people like that that way in trying to the Federalist um. You know, I think I think I can get you a short list of five to ten people. We should do this. Yeah, no, we should. And I have the we have the ability of the you know, the resources and the platforms to do It's him. Let's give us one some thought because I think because I you know, I do want this

discussion to be aired out more. I do think people need to hear it and not just oh, you know Trump mean Trump say bad things on Twitter, Trump nasty to women. You know. Therefore, on my side wins. Well, if we're talking about trade, I don't really care what Trump is writing on Twitter. But you know, we're talking about the purpose that people should feel day to day in their lives as Americans. I think that's that's worth more, and that's that's a more important issue than just the

back and forth that we've been seeing a lot of time. Anyway, I've obviously had fun talking to Raheim because we've gone way over time. Here check out No Go zones. Follow Raheim on Twitter if you're not already, and and well we'll have Raheim back again sooner him. Have a great weekend, my friend. Thank you everybody. Remember the Mullet pro That's a thing that's still going on. Haven't yet had any

resolution to it. Have not been told when this thing is going to end, where it's heading, or what the end result is going to be. But we are getting more information and no surprise to any of you, as we find out more about the origins of what you could call, more broadly, the Russia collusion investigation. Doesn't look good. It is not confidence inspiring. That's a pretty easy way

to put it. And we've got somebody on now who has a very interesting addition into the canon of knowledge about just how shady the whole dossier Russia collusion fantasy really was. Lee Smith is an investigative journalist. He's with US now. He's written a piece up on the Federalist. New documents suggest the Steel dossier was a deliberate setup for Trump. Lee, great to have you back on the program. Buck, thanks for having me on. It's a pleasure. Happy New Year,

and how do all your listeners do? Happy New Year? To you. So, so tell me, my friend, what do you What do you have here to suggest that the Steel dossier was in fact a setup meant to just

take down Trump? Right? I mean, there are some interesting and useful details here, as well as some very helpful interviews from some former US officials and some current US officials which you know, which which points to specific housing wise of why Carter Page was targeted with the size of warrant, and how that would get them in there, and how that would allow them to monitor the communications of the entire Trump team. So I put a lot

of different moving pieces in here together. How they weaponized this dossier as you nicely pronounced it, and managed a media campaign. I think it's really important to see these two things moving in tanda, the media campaign as well as, I guess, for want of a better word, we might call it the spy campaign, since a lot of it was run by FBI counter intelligence people. How these things merge. So I had some more details which I think are

very helpful and very interesting. One of the other important things about the piece, I think is to remind people that this has been going on for nearly two years. James Comey ushered in the era of the dossier January sixth, twenty seventeen, when he briefed President elect Trump on the existence of this thing. That's the fact of that briefing was leaked to CNN and then BuzzFeed later published the

entire document. And since that the last two years, we've been living with this not only the nonsense Russia investigation, not only Russia Gate, which is filled the pages, filled print and broadcast media, but as I point out in the Federalist piece, uh, there have been other operations modeled on the dossier operation, targeting not just Trump team policies,

but also targeting the American public. So that's that's how what what what I think the piece adds to the to the discussion targeting the American public house quote if you um, I mean I think the American public was targeted with the Russia Gate. Uh when with the dossier operation. I mean, this was about a bunch of people. You're saying it was an information operation, It was a it

was a propaganda operation, right, Yeah, that's what I mean. Um, you know they were contesting uh kendidate and then an election that that they didn't like. Um, so yeah, so

so so so that's what I mean. They were, you know, going after the going after the election, going after the election, right information operation, And I mean, did you do you find that the To me, it seems like the dossier has just gotten lost in the memory hole for so many people because it served its purpose, which was to give the at the time, to give some kind of a fig leaf for all these different pieces to be put in play to go after Trump, to go after

people around Trump. And now that a lot of time has passed and there's no collusion proof whatsoever that's been shown, yet everyone's kind of like, yeah, what was that dossier again? What was that all about? Where, in my mind, shouldn't we be verifying if the dossier was ever really a thing that anybody should have paid attention to. It seems like there's not as much interest in this from journalists

or the government as there should be. I think that, you know, unfortunately, most of the press was part of this, uh, part of this information operation, so there's not a lot of interest on that part of of trying to see what was going on here. And certainly we see right now. I mean, there are large parts of the Department of Justice, including the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who was still

pushing back. I mean, when Republicans were in control of the House and in control of oversight committees, they were pushing back on House intelligence, on judiciary, on oversight. And now that now that the House has changed hands and it's in Democratic hands, we're likely to get the answers that we're going to get are not going to come through the House. But I think that one of the things we're going to see happen is I mean, who has already Brad Sherman, who is filing, you know, filing

some sort of impeachment papers. I think that this is going to come up again. They're going to use the Russia Gate stuff. They're going to use They're going to use the dossier, They're going to use all of these things again to target President Trump. To that that is, that is for sure, We're gonna have to Yeah, we're gonna to see if if they're able to actually get the bottom this. Lee Smith, everybody check out his piece on the Federalist. Lee, thanks so much for calling in,

Thanks for bringing me on. Oh, it's almost the weekend, team, which means that I have a very exciting and very very social weekend plan of watching movies with Miss Molly. It's gonna be who it's gonna be, gonna be crazy. I don't know how we're gonna how we're gonna keep up with all of it. Lots of time on the couch, lots of napping. But there will be some film watching, I think, or at least some Netflix watching. And I saw this. I saw this piece by Kyle Smith over

a National Review. I think Kyle's an astute guy. Have had him on the show many times in the past, many different shows in fact. And he says he's got this piece out ten conservative movies that hit home in twenty eighteen, and and I was really curious. It's like, wow, what ten conservative movies? What could be? You know, what could be on this list? And sure enough he does

have some some good ones. I'll start in order of the top of the list down to h you know, so we'll start with with the the biggest and the best, I guess, and move our way downloads a little bit. But he points out the chap Aquittic on Netflix is a movie that you can watch now. I saw it when it was streaming online a while ago. I think we actually I think I might have even had the producers of the movie on on this show. I can't remember now, I think we did. And Chapa Quittics pretty

good producer, Mike, you see this one, Yeah I did. Yeah, they were on the show. Actually they we had they were a sponsor for they were right, Yeah, and they were. That's right, they were a sponsor on the show. We

love our sponsors. Uh. You know, I like this movie just because, for the first time that I can think of, it was fun to see the Kennedy's finally get a little bit a little bit of the truth treatment, you know, where we're so uh inundated in the in our culture with people trying to pretend that the Kennedy's were fantastic, that the Kennedy's were, you know, Camelot and all this stuff, and at Teddy Anny Wash you know, kind of a dirt bag. You know, it's not not a good guy.

Yeh man. He got away with murder. You start with that, and then everything else is kind of you know, you could throw and yeah, you know he's a womanizer and you know, a booze hound and all that stuff. But you know, at the end of the day, he let he let a woman drown the back of his car, and and the whole effort to salvage his political career affords. Anyway,

chap a quick. It's look, it's not gonna be a popcorn eating blockbuster kind of experience for your for you, but if you haven't seen it, you know it was. It's a good movie. So I I point that one out and then, or rather Kyle Smith points it out, but I agree with him. He's got number two on his top ten list. Here is Halloween, which I am, which is now available on demand. I have never seen, Mike, I just realized this. Any of the Halloween movies have you? Yeah?

A lot. Actually, I'm a big Christmas movie guy. So Halloween, the the original Halloween. Yeah, Halloween, the horror movie. Halloween. Isn't it about Halloween not Christmas? Yeah? My mind is still on vacation down in Florida where I just got back from. But so I'm still thinking Christmas. But I actually do like, I actually do like Halloween movies. Um, and I don't like You're about to start a whole existential discussion. There is Halloween a Christmas movie. I know

you could, you could. It is a Halloween. It is a holiday movie. You could say, well, how is it conservative? I don't. I have no idea unless they're trying to say, like conservatives, Kyle Smith writes. He writes about it, the importance of armed individual self defense, the fallen nature of man, the incompetence of state authorities, the necessity of capital punishment for evildoers, and even the vapidity of liberal true crime podcasters.

All gets traumatized. Well, he's made me in his description, He's made me kind of want to want to watch Halloween. Maybe I'll see if this Molly wants to download it. Yeah, that started out as a stretch, but then I could see where he was going. Yeah, what's kind of like how when you when you think of about it? You know, Grand Turino very conservative movie. Yeah, Ghostbusters, very conservative movie. Ghostbusters about a couple of plucky entrepreneurs who start a

small business and get screwed over by the EPA. What could be more of a conservative fairy tale than that? It's very true, so you know some Yeah, sometimes these movies you don't think of as conservative, turns out they are. But I also would throw in there, Mike, I saw I've always thought that if I was going to make a movie. There are a few genres that I feel like you can't miss if you do it right. And I'm not a I'm not a big Sasquatch person, you know,

I'm not. I don't get that excited about Sasquatch. That said, I've always been surprised that there aren't more excellent offerings in the Sasquatch film and it's kind of horror and uh and thriller movie genre, you know, movie genre. I found one over the break. It's called Primal Rage, which is not a pretty good title for a Sasquatch movie, but it is like it is the the big Foot of your nightmares. I mean, it's like hunting people down

and it's it's incredibly violent and a very brutal, brutal movie. Um, but I gotta say it was pretty entertaining. Actually I'll check it out. Yeah, yeah, I mean I'm I'm somebody that just feels like they're there are movies that you know you can watch, you think yourself, I could do a better version of this, uh and and that's definitely one of them. I feel like I one day will write the great Sasquatch horror movie. And this is just a weird, A weird thing I thought of before. Oh,

back to uh, back to the list. Here, um Gosnel, the trial of America's biggest serial killer. I know we've had I've had him people from that Nick Searcy, for example, I had him on Rising. I think we had him here here on Radio two. I have not seen Gosnell, So I've got to add that, add that to my list. First Reformed. I don't know what that. Have you heard of that? I don't even know what that is? No, yeah, I haven't the only one, actually I did. I did

not hear of it. I know of Gosnel, I know Halloween, and I know Chap a Quick. The other ones I don't know about. And then this is the one that really surprised me here, Black Panther, he says. The new Black Panther is a rebuke to the old Black Panthers, as played by Chadwick Boseman in this terrifically entertaining and smart blockbuster. I am a I'm a Black Panther contrarian. I do not like Black Panther as a movie at all.

I thought it was loud, dumb, and too long, and I would I would say for example, if we're talking about a superhero movie with an African American in the lead role, I think Blade with Wesley Snipe's a better movie. I think it's a better movie the Black Panther. Maybe I'm crazy. I haven't heard great things about Black Panther. But Blade was an excellent movie, right, Blade's an excellent movie. I mean in Black Panther, at the end, you've got

cgi uh, you know, Rhinoceros is running people over. I mean, it's just nonsense. It's just I don't know. And I get I said this at the Hill today because we're talking to Black Panther came up earlier today. I just I don't understand. Everyone has drunk the Black Panther kool aid. They're all being told that it's the greatest movie and you have to love it, you know, you have to be into Black Panther. And I'm just like, I don't I don't get it. I don't see it. Yeah, yeah, anyway,

Well that's that's what. And then there's the Death of Stalin. I will say that's on showtime. I've I've been told that's excellent. So that actually this weekend, I think Death of Stalin top of my list producer, Mike, if you pick one of these up, you gotta come on and give us your review, right, Yeah, I will watch one of these. I'm looking at a couple of them look really good. Um that the Stalin sounds the most appealing to me right now, so I might go with that,

and maybe we can we're first reformed. I'll go with one of those. Ding I think the Gods, no one. I don't think I could get through that. That's for me. That's I'll get and yeah, disgusted all at the same time, you know, I mean I was for Schindler's List for for quite a while. After I saw it, I was kind of, yeah, you know, kind of traumatized. I think it's important that people see that movie, but I don't. I think I'd have a traumatic experience if I sat

through Goss. Although I'm told there's not it's not gory or anything, which is obviously good, but it deals, you know, the subject matter. It's tough to tough to watch and listen and hear about that and not I think come away angry and that was all happening in Philly, your hometown. I know. I was just about to say that and it's uh, it's a little disappointing. You know. They gotta wait. I'm gonna have to watch it at some point so I'll everybody know what I think. But I am a

next seriously, but all right, that's yeah. You know, he was in the Shape but he was the only good thing in the Shape of Water, which is a movie about a woman who has sex with her aquarium pet. And every time I say that to people, they think that I'm weird, and then they think about They're like, oh my gosh, you're right, Buck, that's right. It's a bizarre movie. Ye, I believe it one best picture. But the oscars now are about as meaningful as a Nobel

Peace Prize, which is, as we all know, not very meaningful. Meaningful. So let's let's come back and do some role call team to close out the show for the and kick it off for the weekend. Stay with me like soft butter on warm toast. Time to spread some freedom coast to coast. It's time for roll call. Indeed, it is

time for the roll call. I'm trying to uh, trying to think about ways I can I can follow through on some of the things we've discussed, some of the changes we've discussed for the show in the new year, so I have not forgotten. I know we've said we're gonna get away to get more calls going here. That's gonna happen. We've we've got We've got plans, folks, we got plans. So roll call, though, is always fun. So we're gonna keep going with that. Rocky kicks us off.

It is imperative we let the people who vote Democrat, no, they are supporting the things that Democrats are pushing. After talking to a number of them, it seemed there were more single issue voters when I mentioned the other issues they're pushing. They seem to think they can separate themselves. We have to let them know we are holding every one of them responsible for the craziest, stupidest ideas. Don't let them escape responsibility. All right, Rocky's Rocky's got a

plan and he's gonna fallow through on it. Andrea, all right, thank you so much for acknowledging publicly that the opioid crisis is not patient doctor base, but illegal consumption based. I have a very painful and debilitating condition for which my doctor will no longer prescribe meds. I had safely been on for six years. To make it worse, the symptoms are extremely bad in the cold, and we're about to be stationed in Mongolia, oh gosh, where it's usually

negative twenty to negative forty in the winter. I'll have to entertain dignitaries while in pain, which makes it difficult to move, think or interact. Thanks mainstream media and military healthcare for letting me down horribly. Keep up the good work. Maybe your voice and other rational voices will help reverse

some of this. Yeah, Andrew, it's it's troublesome because there is a clear preference in the media for talking about the downsides of opioids when it comes to prescription drugs and doctors who are prescribing, they always want to focus on that part of the problem. And in the last five years that's become a smaller and smaller slice of the last ten years, it's become much much smaller than it was, and yet the problem is worse than it

ever was. And that's because the cartels have seen an opening and there's a lot of money to be made for them, and they're now just providing at the street level. They're providing these drugs for people that they can now get illegally, but they're illegal drugs, right if you if you buy fake oxyconton, which might actually even be fentonel, so it's incredibly dangerous. But if you buy that from

the cartels, that is a felony. That's illegal. It's illegal from a seller, it's legal for anyone to buy it. So that's part of the illegal drug trade. And it is disconcerting because one of the reasons that there was such an opening for this explosion of prescribing certain drugs OxyContin. OxyContin is the most well known one, but one of the reasons for it is that there's a lot of

chronic pain. People are living longer, but also as life expectancy has gone up and people are trying to be more active, they're dealing with more chronic and debilitating pain and there's not The truth is that are modern medicine is pretty disappointing when it comes to really effective pain management, or at least you have to really become your own advocate within the health system to find ways to get

the assistance you need. And there's no there's you know, there's no easy fix, and there's a lot of bad information. There are a lot of people who will tell you, oh, it's in your head, or maybe it's maybe it's fibro myalger, or maybe it's this, or it's that. They just they just don't and the answers they don't know. Um, pain management, once you get into the real you know, the real deep weeds, if you will, of things like the gastro intestinal tract, of of pain management, of you know, neuro

neurobiological function. We know stuff, but we also don't know a lot of stuff, meaning that modern medicine's got a long way to go on that. So anyway, Andrea, stay strong, keep your shield high and uh and and hopefully you'll be able to find a regiment that works well for you. I'm sure you will. Just keep just keep looking and remember what I said, You've got to be your own advocate. Joseph, all right, it's happy Friday, Buck. I really enjoyed listening

to you shredding budget chairman this morning. Could could up the fight shields high? Um. Yeah, I I did get to talk to Joseph saw me on Unhealthy and I asked the budget chairman, is there any I love to do this? I like to do the understated question that just wrecks that just ri e kt, as they say on Twitter, leave somebody wrecked by just asking a question that exposes what the real agenda is or what they're doing.

I mean, I had somebody on not long ago, and her whole thing was how Trump's Trump's deregulation and all she does is study regulations and advocate against the deregulatory efforts of the Trump administration. And I said, well, Trump has gotten rid of how many thousands of regulations? Is there a single regulation he's gotten rid of that you can name person who only works on regulations that was a good was a good decision? Crickets chirping, Nothing, couldn't

name one. So every federal government regulation Trump's gotten rid of, we're supposed to believe they're all good ideas, meaning the regulations were all good ideas. That's laughable. It just goes to show how people are are often because they're especially in DC, when you're talking about lobbying or policy advocates, they're they're mercenaries. They're they're paid for an outcome. They're not paid for the best interests of the American people.

And in the budget Chairman Yarmouth, what I will say is a very nice guy from from Kentucky. He's very charming guys, he's very friendly. Um. But you know, I ask he's he's the incoming Democrat budget chairman in the House, and I say, is there an area of the government where we're spending too much money? And what do you think?

He says the only thing that he singles out defense, and then we hear a yeah, we need to balance the budget more generally, you know, kind of some a little bit of this, a little bit of that, not too hot, not too cold, just rite talk. And then he starts talking about raising taxes. So this, this is just the This is the Democrat, the Democrat two steps. This is what you're always going to hear from them.

The only thing we spend too much money on, they'll admit his defense and the only thing we really need to do is raise taxes. As if that's going to get us out of the twenty two trillion dollar hole that we're in, or even over the long term, stabilizes it is not. Mike writes Buck. I listen every night in LA on eleven fifty am, and of course that's a six pm start time for your show out here.

I guess you're aware of the situation that they have replaced your show sometimes with UCLA sports programming and not just games, but locker room talk. Is there anyway we can get them off of eleven fifty, am, Man, I'm telling you that most of your shows were placed in November and December. Well that's a and then Mike writes, I love your show. This is not good. This is

not good at all that they're cutting you off. Well, I don't know, man, I'm on one hundred and thirty stations or so one hundred and twenty seven I think, or something like that. So I'm not sure what's going on with this one, but I will look into it and team. That's gonna be it for this weekend or for this week rather have a fantastic weekend. I will talk to you Monday, shield Hie. It's a new year. That means new hiring, bringing new people into your company,

into the fold, and that means background checks. Now, you may be listening to this and you're somebody who's got a company with ten employees. You might have ten thousand employees, maybe working on HR department. Maybe you're a small business owner. You gotta have background checks done. The person that you should have. The organization you should have doing your background checks is Global Verification Network. GVN is the only dual

certified veteran owned background investigation and vetting company. Okay, they are experts in risk mitigation as well, and they never offshore any client information. They never subcontract this stuff out. You deal with them. You call Global Verification Network, you'll get Global Verification Network on the phone, speaking of which, give them a call for your background investigation and vetting needs. Eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine.

That's eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine or GOMGVN dot com