FBI Bombshells

The Future of talk radio. Buck Sexton, Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. Everybody, Oh my gosh, A lot going on today. I will be honest with you. I will tell you that I had been planning, and some of you saw this on Facebook this morning. I've been planning to just really change it up today with a show that would be things of of interest to me and maybe a little bit of historical storytelling or something. I don't know. I just wanted to get away from what

had been so dominant in the headlines this week. And then at about two o'clock today, boom, big stories, I mean, just big stuff dropping. The biggest how has to do with this Russia indictment Russia collusion situation. Um, you have Special Counsel Mueller charging thirteen Russians with interfering in the twenty sixteen election. That's that's at least how it's being presented. I'm gonna dig into this a bit. This is Oh boy,

it's gonna be a bit frustrating. But here's uh Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein with just exactly what's going on and Grand Jury in the District of Columbia to day return an indictment presented by the Special Council's office. The indictment charges thirteen Russian nationals and three Russian companies for committing federal crimes while seeking to interfere in the United

States political system, including the presidential election. The defendants allegedly conducted what they called information warfare against the United States with the stated goal of spreading distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general. Now, this is being spawned by both sides. The Trump colluded with Russia and betrayed his countryside, also known as the mainstream media as well as the No, this is nonsense. How could anyone

think this about Trump? I'm so sick of this Malarkey investigation as being a day when we're where we come to a conclusion, right, there was there was there was no collusion, there was interference. There was no collusion yet how much interference was there. Here's the problem, folks, It's never gonna end. This is the They're never gonna stop. It doesn't matter what comes out, it doesn't matter what the actual information is. Rod Rosenstein, Muller. Heck, even throw

Combie in there. If you stopped taking Twitter photos of waterfalls for a moment, throw Comi in there. And if they all said, you know what, we've really looked into this and Trump there was no collusion with Trump. He didn't do anything wrong. You know what the press would say, Still unable to find Trump Russia collusion, but questions linger. That's all. So I'm just preparing. It's never gonna change.

So let's just get so we'll focus on the facts and ignore as much as we can the nonsense political spin that's being put on all this by people who aren't invested in in the facts. They're invested in a narrative. Here's happened, Um, you had a bunch of Russians, according to the indictment and I read through the indictment several times. You had a bunch of Russians part of a Internet reason that they had some phony name for Internet research company, and they set up phony bank accounts in the US

two and and took on ideas of Americans. So so there Look, there are some actual crimes that occurred here, um identity theft by or fraud, but they set up sock puppets and Facebook stuff, and I think they maybe got a rally or two together somewhere by using the Internet in order to run a whole bunch of different messages during the election. After the election, they were sometimes pro Bernie Sanders, they were pro Trump in some ways,

they were anti Hillary, anti Rubio, anti Cruise. This started everyone. This is according the indictment to So this is all now all on the record, official d o J position, criminal proceeding. This is not theoretical. This started in there. Did anybody almost in the world, including maybe like President Trump's immediate family, think that he was going to win the election in probably not seem pretty unlikely at the time. If if you think back, I know a lot of

your like Buck, I saw it coming. Maybe you saw it coming in Okay, I don't think so. I doubt that that would be quite a prediction that all said, the Russian effort here was to just create a sense of agitation in the political system and some degree of of undermining of the sanctity of our electrical process or something like that, basically just to so confusion and chaos. They call it information and warfare, which I would notice that's that's a that's pretty strong terms for some Facebook

sock puppets and Twitter trolls. That seems to me to be perhaps taking this a bit far, which is also why I'm I'm a little concerned about what this really means going forward. So now is is fake news if it involves if a foreign country puts fake news out there? Is that a Is that an act of war? What is the additional illegality here? In the indictment, it specifically mentions defrauding the government of the United States and defrauding the Federal Election Commission by by by being a part

of our process, by spreading lives, by by rumor spreading essentially. Look, I'm I don't like Russia. I don't you know, like I like Russians what I mean that, but I don't like the Russian government meddling in our stuff. I don't I don't think this is a good thing. But where does that stop and start? The Internet is global, folks.

Here's the biggest problem I have with this. And by the way, I don't think that I've forgotten or or I'm not going to get to the FBI just just doing a straight up a face plant on the whole uh stopping the shooter thing. I I knew that that it looked kind of bad for them, and then we've got that they just ignored the TEP. We will get there. That's probably gonna wait until the second hour, but I promise you we're going to really roll up the sleeves on that one, because Wow, I just wanting to get

that out there. That's something we will have to tackle today too, because a lot of big news for a Friday. Uh. Well, the biggest problem I have with this, and I actually tangled with the former CIA director. He was never, never my boss at the agency, so I have no particularly fondness or loyalty to him. But John Brennan, who wrote that the do o J statements and indictments revealed the extent and motivations of Russian interference in the election, claims

of a hoax in tatters. My take implausible that Russian actions did not influence the views and votes of at least some Americans. I responded to Mr Brennan, former CI director, close confidante of Obama's, by the way, and a hyperpartisan, and I know that's the case. It's I got people who tell me things. But here's what I respond said.

Under this standard, Mr Brennan, any foreign actor anywhere in the world can undermine the results of any U s election by setting up a few sock puppets buying some Facebook ads, because that would also influence quote, at least some Americans. You'll notice that there's no effort, nor is there any curiosity in the part of the media to try and engauge the extent and effect of this effort. They're saying things like, oh, it looks like they spent

a few million dollars. A few million dollars to influence the US presidential election. Is that a joke? If they were trying to influence a congressional seat in Oklahoma might be like, all right, you know, a few million dollars, that's gonna be a lot. Yeah, But us presidential election. Does anyone take Russian sock puppets? Seriously? Was this? Was this having any effect? Now here's the problem with this.

It leaves it all completely open ended. They can say, and technically there's truth to it, that Russia interfered in our election, and that's all they want to keep saying, because the subtext of that for the Democrat left is that Russia interfered in our election and therefore Donald Trump is an illegitimate president. We all know that, right, That's

what they're really saying, that's the subtext. What I'm saying in response to that is, this is the equivalent of at a presidential election saying there was some voter fraud and we can point to at least a few cases of people into I did for voter fraud. Therefore, this election was tainted by voter fraud and we can't consider it to be legitimate. See. A reasonable response to that would be does it I mean, are we talking about a few hundred votes with over sixty million casts? Because

that's obviously not changing the course of the election. But that's not what they're doing here. This is the this is the digital equivalent of well, because thirteen Russians working with a few dozen other Russians created some fake Facebook accounts that said, you know, lock her up for Hillary, that that brings the election into doubt. I would also note that the the saber rattling over this just visa vie Russia is astonishing to me. Okay, so we're worried

about Russia doing this in the next election. How do we stop this? And what's a legitimate recourse other than to say, okay, Russia, don't do this. Are we going to give the power to any non state actor in Russia or anywhere else in the world for that matter, to cause major diplomatic incidents for US because they set up some US based social media accounts. As I said, there are some aspects of the Russian intrusion into our

process that certainly break laws identity theft. Although identity theft, you really want to get down to this, the fact that matters that identity theft occurs, and what I mean that I'm not talking about when you open bank accounts and but just creating false accounts. People do that all

the time. I'm not charged. Clearly, the addition of some of the other criminal statutes into this indictment today about these thirteen Russians in the election is to give it a little bit more half, little more teeth, a little more clarity, because things like information warfare and spreading distrust are not crimes. That's what troubles me about this. So Mueller saying effectively in this indictment, the DJ is saying, remember, he's not apart from the Department of Justice, he's just

a rogue operator within it. That's what the Mueller probe is. But they're saying effectively that this is information warfare. Huh. That seems to me to be troubling because if it's information warfare, what is the proper response and how do we stop it? And what is a way to quantify the scope and scale of the problem. They don't make any effort of that because the narrative on the left is Russia interfered in the election. The narrator on the right is well a version of what Rosenstein said in

a statement today. I think he wrote this what I've identified for you with the allegations in the indictment. There's no allegation in the indictment of many effect on the outcome of the election. So there's nothing about collusion and there's nothing about changing the course of the election in the indictment. For some of us, we've reached the point where, okay, if they don't have it, now you know they clearly don't have it. But for the other side, it's just yet,

they're always inserting the Yet we don't have evidence of collusion. Yet, we don't have evidence that it changed the course of the election yet, And that will never change, folks. And

that's what's so frustrating about it. You're not dealing with good faith actors on the other side here, the Democrats, the left, they don't care what the eventual outcome is, the processes, the punishment, and as long as they can keep running with this storyline that Russia did anything just just tip the scale just a tiny bit in favor of Trump. It cast aspersions on the legitimacy of the Trump presidency. Trump is therefore deserving of no degree of respect,

no degree of bipartisan goodwill. He's hashtag not my president. They would say so as much as today to me. To me, it's it's really inflated by the left situation. It's just not as big a deal as they want to make it into. It's also not going away anytime soon, so we'll get into it more of this. But you know, I take a different approach. I saw a lot of conservicing. See no collusion, no collusion. I want to say, guys, yeah, no collusion. But that doesn't stop this because they just

say no collusion. Yet they say we're going to find collusion. So just you know, don't think that this is the end of it based on the fact that they haven't asserted any Trump Russia active conspiracy here. I've also been telling you all along that they use the term collusion and not conspiracy because collusion will be used as a political word so that this becomes a political crime, as an impeachment becomes the only viable route to deal with it.

Conspiracy has a specific legal definition and terminology attached to it that they will never or be able to prove. And they know that. That's why it's always been about collusion, because those words otherwise could be used somewhat interchangeably. All Right, we have a lot more here. What do you think, By the way, the thirteen I really want to hear from all of you because I look at this and I'm just like, what is Muller doing These Russians are

never gonna get extradited. They're never gonna face justice. They set up some sock puppets. They use some fake bank accounts, you know. They I don't think they stole money from anyone, although I have not. I have to have to go back and look at that. But so there's they're guilty of some identity, identity theft and wire fraud. It's not good. It's criminal, but it's also not keeping me, you know,

up late at night shaking in my booties here. And as for the information warfare, I just think it's laughable. I'm not okay with it. I don't approve of it. I think Russia is a bad actor in this situation. But I also think, come on, everyone, let's get a grip here. I really think that they's had any effect on anything. The answer overs, and then it's absolutely all right. Eight four four to five. It is Friday. I want to hear from lots and lots of you folks out there.

Eight four four buck will be right back. The defendants posed as politically and socially active Americans advocating for and against particular candidates. They established social media pages and groups to communicate with unwitting Americans. They also purchased political advertisements on social media networks. The Russians also recruited and paid real Americans to engage in political activities, promote political campaigns,

and stage political rallies. The defendants and their co conspirators pretended to be grassroots activists. So is this information warfare or just FEC violations or is it both? You know, I'm wondering where do we Where do we draw the lines here? They're saying that thirteen guys indicted for this, that's it. You'll notice that there's some I I think, very feverish moving of the goal post that's going on here by many of those who have been promoting a

narrative about Russia collusion for over a year. Now, do not forget my friends. Do not let them change and rewrite history. The whole frenzy behind this is not that a few people created some social media profiles to try to trick some people into what hating Hillary. Think about how much noise was out there, we were talking about

separating the signal from the noise. How many millions and millions of Twitter accounts, hundreds of millions of Facebook account they're posting things about the election, literally hundreds of millions, and yeah, this was the difference maker. This is laughable, except people think that it is the biggest political scandal of the last you know, hundred years or whatever. I mean,

the Democrats do. But the story was not that there was some Russian intrusion into our political ecosystem via social media, right, That was not what was getting them all riled up. Don't let them just ease into that now. Oh No, it was that there was high level cooperation with the

Trump campaign to do that. We still have nothing on that zero And we cannot allow those who were promoting that storyline for over a year to just kind of slink away, just be like, hey, you know, yeah, we we really were just worried about those sock puppets and Twitter trolls. No, that is not what was at the heart of all of this, because that's not gonna stop. Someone explained to me how the FBI is supposed to

handle this. There are some someone in Russia, some group in Russia sets up a few a few hundred accounts to try and help a political candidate in the US, and they're tweeting stuff out about them. Are we and they're pretending that it's coming. It's coming from like you know, Bill in Kentucky. Uh, are we gonna do what? We're gonna block the Internet from Russia to the U. S. I mean, let's let's think about this for a moment. We're gonna freak out yell at the Russian government for this.

I just want to know what what's the real response? You know, we were talking about trying to deal with Russian intrusion the elections, So how do we do that? Anyone have any ideas. I'm wondering. We'll be back. He's holding the line for America. Buck Sexton his back. After the election, the defendants allegedly stage rallies to support the president elect while simultaneously staging rallies to protest his election.

For example, the defendants organized one rally to support the president elect and another rally to impose to oppose him, both in New York on the same day. There he had Deputy Attorney General Rodenstein from a statement today after the indictment of the thirteen Russians, as I said, by the way, Russians who will never be extradity the United States. So I'm glad that justice will be served by indicting these guys who are in Russia and nothing is going

to happen to them. But anyway, I know, look, you go on the record, we show the Russian government you know, don't don't do this kind of stuff and all the rest of it. But yeah, there you have it. Here's here's something that I want to want you all to keep in mind. It's quite clear based on the timeline

here was when much of this guts started. It is quite clear from a timeline that the purpose of the sock Puppets and this member of sock Puppet is a fake identity on Facebook or I think people use it for Twitter too, um and a troll you all know, to Twitter trolls. So it's really kind of the same thing. Uh. The reason they did all this was to create some

degree of distrust and chaos in our political system. But I just think it's a laughably inept effort to do that, right, I mean, this would be like the equivalent of me running over And I know some of you like, hey, what the Obama administration do in Israel during its election? But maybe we'll go there later. But if if I showed up in a foreign country and I did a printing of leaflets, you know, root for this candidate, not

this candidate. This guy did these bad things, and I just started handing them out to people on the street. I'm sure I'd be violating some election law in that country, and fine, but would anyone really think that I would change the outcome of the election that way? Our elections such fragile things, that's such a meager effort would have

any impact on the outcome. And yet if CNN and MSNBC we're reporting on it, they'd be like buck Sexton interfering in the election in yeah, Azerbaijan or wherever, right, interfering in the election. Technically true, But as I said to you with the voter fraud issue, okay, but we need some sense of context and scale, some sense of how important this is. You know, it's also technically true that I committed a crime today. It is technically true. You could even say that today I branded myself a

criminal because I jay walked a couple of times. Because I'm a New York City and we all jaywalked. Would it be fair to call me a criminal because I jaywalked today? Is it? Is it? Specifically? If you want to get really technical about it. Did I break a law? Yes, yes, But should I be locked up for that one? I really hope not, because all the rest of my fellow New Yorkers are Gonnet locked up too. I think I'm trying to illustrate the point here. I hope it's Uh,

it's clear enough with what I'm trying to say. Uh. Meanwhile, the press just wants to freak out a Trump Russia day president president by day, kid right presiders Russia and the grocer. Yeah, let's just let's just go to war with Russia over there's everybody. Let's just let's just get to it. The sock puppet twitter troll War of twenty eighteen.

These people are nuts. Most of them don't even know that the Communist Party during the Soviet Union was sending funds to various fellow travelers in the United States, specifically so that they would publicized communist ideology, anti American stuff. And by the way, they also infiltrated some major left wing publications with all that, but they don't like to talk about that. And they infiltrated the State Department look up Alger Hiss and a whole bunch of other places

in the United States government. Again, I'm not saying anything that's okay, But in the case of setting up some you know, weekly communist rag that's printed in someone's basement somewhere in the fifties of the sixties, you know, I don't think they are about to overthrow the US government with that. None of this stuff is new. It's just being exaggerated now because we all know why. It is

to make Trump's election illegitimate. That is the fundamental purpose of this entire thing, and to try and pretend it's anything else is preposterous. I want to know. I would like some of these people who go on TV. By the way, it's like CNN, it's just basically hiring anyone who's ever worked for and every anyone who's ever worked for Mueller or James Comey is like finding employment and airtime over at CNN. Now, isn't that curious? All these FBI and d o J folks that with an ax

to grind against administration. Oh, they're just they are just civil servants doing their duty, sir, Will you with action Russia? Yeah? Sure, Trump should have. Oh man, he could have some fun with that one. I think he just wanted to ignore it. But you have all these people now that are running around with us on TV, and they're saying this stuff, and at the end of the day, they're doing Russia's

work for them. Nothing could be more undermining about our elections than the storyline that CNN has been running with for over a year now, and MSNBC and the New York Times and the Washing Post and many others. Right, they are clearly convinced or willing to convince their fellow Americans that Trump cheated. That's what this is about. Trump cheated.

Here's a fun thought experiment, folks, with the thirteen Russians indicted today, do any of you think that if Hillary had won the election, we would all be sitting here worried about the Russian intrusion into the next election? No? No, Remember how there was this moment in time some months back when they admitted, the press admitted that the Obama administrator should have made a decision not to make a

huge deal out of the Russian metaling. Right, FBI knew about this, they knew there were these stock puppet accounts and stuff. Obama administration didn't make a big deal. How was it that it wasn't such a big deal then, But now it is such an enormously big deal. How was it that we went from President Obama saying this, what is it about our political system that made us vulnerable? Two? Uh, these kinds of potential manipulations, which, as I've said publicly before,

we're not particularly sophisticated. This was not some elaborate, uh complicated espionage scheme. They hacked into some Democratic Party emails. Not an elaborate, complicated espionage scheme. I know that specifically about the emails and not about the stock But it was all part of the same effort. Right and Obama, the president receiving the PDB every day, the Presidential Daily Brief, he was clearly aware of this stuff. He must have been made aware by the FBI, and they decided not

to make a big deal of it. But yet that was then. It wasn't a big complicated espionage scheme. Now we are told things like this by former Justice Department officials. If the indictments we believed it has proven, it looks

like a pretty sophisticated operation. These groups functioned um trying to present themselves as Americans, had enough clout online to show some followers, and and tried to get in touch at least on a couple of occasions with members of the Trump campaign and helped to organize um various kind of of rallies. Both it looks like foreign against Trump. So what are we to do about that? What are we to make of it? How do you stop that?

I would note, are we going to have mandatory verification of Actually wish that social media did have man mandatory verification. I wish that every person with a social media account had we all got to know who they were, exactly, who's operating it and there was none of this stuff. That actually be a great idea for like a new version of Facebook where everyone it has to be a real person, you've got accountability. That would be great. I'm all in favor of it. But this is not realistic.

It's not the way that it works right now. So there's a there's no end in sight to this, folks. You know, I know Trump tweeted out that there was no collusion. He's correct, there's no collusion. Um And I saw that my old friend Kaylee mckin then he was on Fox and she said, this is the end of the Russia collusion conspiracy. It's not the end of the conspiracy. I think she was implying it should be and I would agree with that, but it is not the end at all. They will not stop. It is not going away.

So this is the big news that we get on on Friday. This continues on, and you know now you're going to have all kinds of talk about when the next shoe will drop them all investigation. I will note that there I saw only today some people on the left now that we got these thirteen indictments out there, so some people who were uh saying, well, I mean,

nobody really took it seriously. There was collusion at the top level the Trump campaign, because why would he be reaching out Why would the Russians have contact with a C list player even in the Trump circle like Carter Page and Papadopoulos the No matter what anyone says, those are low level people in the campaign. If Trump is involved, why the Russians interacting with them? That makes no sense.

But they're just changing the story so that it seems like they're less crazy as this goes along, because eventually there will not be any more room for them to say, oh, there was Russia collusion. Oh it's any day now. But until that day we get to keep hearing not yet, not yet, they're on it, and the press will be asking the president, may the president, will you sanction Russia? Yeah, that's how this is going to go. Oh, by the way, it's Fridays. You know what that means. It's action movie

quote Friday, where it's an effect. Today we're not action. You could ask yourself question, lucky you a movie? This spot off? Quote Friday's action movie quote Fridays? Here you actually movie quote Friday? Everybody? Are we got lines? We'll get to some calls after the break. Stay with me our two. We're gonna talk about this. It's FBI situation. They messed up big time, folks. We will get into that in the next hour. Stay with me. Does this end today? Like? Is this over for the Trump campaign

and any of the officials. I think it's particularly good news. That doesn't mean that that that word is subject is not subject to change, but at least on the available evidence at this point in the investigation, I think that the White House probably should justifiably breathe a sigh of relief, meaning that the secondary aspect of the mandate has not been proven. In other words, there's no evidence yet that has been developed, and this indictment would seem to be

consistent with that. That would indicate that there was collusion by the Trump campaign in Russian efforts to interfere and influence the two thousand and sixteen presidential election. Yeah, it's not over that, guy's right, it's not over. Going to keep on just grinding on the background. Let's take Charles in Houston. What's up, Charles, Hey, Buck, how's it going, man? I'm good, Thank you for your call. Hey, I just want to talk about informational warfare for part of it.

That's you know, they're trying to they're trying to demonstrate, you know, there's no monetary value going back and forth, at least none that none that they have divulged to us right now. But George Sorrow spends all his money. He's a for national influence in super PACs and actually spending money. So why aren't people up in arms about that? It's going to the US citizen. I don't have to check.

I think he is. I think he is a U. S citizen, But I mean he's he does not sound like a U. S. It is in because he is so autos But you know, yes, he is a U. S citizen, So okay, well, I mean, and then then that takes that off the table, you know, but that's where I was going with that. Not sure, it's not sure where we could go there, but we'll check. I could. I could be wrong, I mean, I but I also wonder,

you know, he is a US citizen. Yeah. I also wonder, Charles, at what point does this become so so if it's an f EC violation, meaning it's a Federal Election Commission violation for Russians to be trying to remember wage information warfare that's from the indictment, which I've never even heard of as a crime before. I'm not saying there's no such thing as information warfare, but that's a very malleable term, right.

Uh So, So can I can any one now anywhere in the world set up an account where they're like, you know, my name, my name is you know, my name is Jim, and I live in America and I'm voting for so and so, and it's actually some dude in I don't know, the Philippines or India or Turkey or you know who knows where? Right, and are they waging information warfare? Acains the United States, it seems a

little extreme. Well with with an open internet, you know, so it's gonna open internet and go down that route. People didn't do whatever they want exactly, but even take the international flavor out of it. What if Buck sex and tomorrow writes a blog post based on information of that moment staying something, then comes back six months later, Oh it was, you know, there was They found more information. They come back and say, well, Buck was spreading information warfare.

He's you know, he's a he's a terrorist against the state, he's domestic And where does the line get drawn with this? This is what I was amazed, and I got a lot of heat for this day on Twitter because I said, this seems like weird overreach to me. Look, I'm not saying that identity theft and and wire fraud or whatever are in crimes. I get that. But the whole point about how how information warfare is being waged by the Russians here, I'm like, uh, they information warfare. They were

advocating for different political candidates in this country. By the way, we do all kinds of the US government openly does all kinds of stuff. We've got our pro democracy organizations abroad. Guess what a pro democracy organization in a country that doesn't have democratic elections is influencing the country, right, I mean, we have all these different international institutions that we're influencing

countries all the time. I just think the information warfare concept is that just kind of that strikes me a little weird. You know, if they just indebted these guys for identity theft, they'll be like, yeah, okay, fine, information war A conspiracy to defraud the United States government was what they was what they actually said in the indictment. Defraud the government, how I mean defraud and the individuals who have their identity stolen. Fun but defraud the government

because they were spreading ideas. That's called politics book. That's what I thought by our foreign Also, how about this, a lot of foreign media entities are state sponsored. So is now a state sponsored media entity that operates in this country. We're just talking about Al Jazeera earlier in the week, and they might have to register as a foreign agent, right, But there are a lot of foreign media entities Dore's does the Daily Mail, the UK based

Daily Mail? Do they are they waging information warfare in this country? If they spread a story that's a lie or the the BBC are absolutely right, the BBC that that's government news, that's government information. So okay, So people say, well those aren't hostile. Okay, So what about what about Chinese uh state sponsored media? What about like Shinhwah news agency? Are are they waging information warfare when they post stories on the internet in English and people share them here?

I mean, I'm just trying to think this thing through beyond oh my god, Russia, and you know it starts to get a little hazy, doesn't it. Well, you're using you're using logic again. You're trying to think of the bigger picture, not the immediate sound by. You're trying to say, okay, if they say this, what does it mean for ABC

and D as well? You know you're you're thinking down the road and implications, right, You're not just going to the Democrat Montra going not our president like you're pointing out before. Well, I appreciate that. And Charles and Soto sends the guards, how do you have a good weekend? You have a good weeks misses you bye bye? Um Kenny in Boston, Kenny, we got about actually we got like less than a minute but you've been on hold that everyone else is on the hold. What do you got, Kenny?

I got a couple of things. I got a quote, and I have a thing about the Russian blockbuster as it's called. You know, what's the scariest thing about me is the timings and the patterns of these announcements and stuff. They come at a great time. So how is it possible that this particular Russian thing was based on the fact that they dropped the ball on the shooter investigation and that this story has actually been lying and waiting.

You know, they just hastily through this together or got the thing through and all of a sudden, Oh yeah, I guess what we get. We don't know when these uh indictments were laid down. We're gonna talk about Kenny, thank you for Colina. We're gonna talk about the FBI what we found out today about how they handled that tip. The FBI got a tip that could have prevented that shooting. Folks. So I had planned team Welcome to our two of the Buck Sexton Show. I had planned, because it was Friday,

to move on to some other topics. I felt I felt like we had discussed what was necessary with regard to that terrible shooting in Parkland, Florida. I didn't I wasn't gonna touch on the subject at all today. I didn't think it was really something we had we had to do. I felt like we had covered it. And then this FBI statement comes out this morning, and I am. I am at a level shocked, but also not at all.

You know, there's a part of me that wants to believe that the FBI is more on it than this, And then there's also know a part of me that knows that federal bureaucracies and the federal government. That's what I said to you yesterday, that the government can't protect you all the time, and the government can't protect you that well, a lot of the time. It's up to you. It's up to all of us. You gotta protect each other,

gotta protect yourself. Here's this FBI statement. I'll just read it to you, and then, well, I don't know what what we're supposed to make of this. It's on January, a person close to Nicholas Cruz, the Parkland shooter, contacted the FBI's Public Access Line tip line to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about cruizes, gun ownership, desire to kill people, uranic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the nation provided by the callers should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken. We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the p L on January five. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office and no

further investigation was conducted. At that time. FBI Director chrispher Ray said, we are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our process for responding to information that we received from the public. It's up to all Americans to be vigilant, like I've been saying, and when members of the public contact us with concerns,

we must act properly and quickly. We have spoken with victims and families and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it. That's the statement, uh, in terms of a foul up, Folks, in this situation, I'm having a hard time thinking how much bigger of a mess up you could see from

the FBI side than this. They received a name, with detailed information and a specific claim that this school shooter was likely to conduct a school shooting, and they just did nothing. Now, notice what happens when you put this in conjunction with the other story. And that was already concerning enough that the YouTube comment about quote I want to be what he said, I want to be a professional school shooter. I'm going to be a professional school shooter.

End quote. How that was flagg for the FBI. The FBI met with the person who flagged it, which I will note. You know, when they just do that and don't follow up and try to find the person who did it, makes you think do I really wanna do I really want to see something say something? Because all of a sudden, I've got FBI guys who are like, well, how do you know this person? You know, what do

you know? What do you know about this? Look, I can understand from a normal person's point of view on this, you might say, maybe I'm just not gonna see something and say anything. But they had that information about the YouTube posting in true name Nicholas Cruz spelled in a way that very few people in the country spell their name that way. I mean, if they had done an Instagram search of the name. Okay, I'm not talking about some high level, super secret scurel FBI stuff. We're not

talking about you know, rerouting spy satellites here, folks. If they had done an Instagram search of the name on the YouTube comment, they probably would have found the kid right away. I'm guessing there aren't a lot of Nicholas Cruises that are writing that kind of stuff and have photos of them all over the place with knives and guns and looking pretty aggressive and mutilated animals and all

the rest of it. Right, So if they fell down on that one, and I was willing to say, Okay, look, a lot of comments, there's a lot of stuff going on that nothing's perfect, and you know, there's human error here. I understand that However, when you have someone who is calling in to the FBI line with detailed information and a name about an individual who may be involved in a who maybe soon to be a school shooter, and the FBI does nothing, What the heck is the point

of the FBI's public access line. And I know, I do think it's unfair to immediately jump to a conclusion that I saw a lot of people doing on social media, which is, oh, well, you know, maybe they were doing there was too much Russian Russia investigation going on for there to be any resources put to this. I don't

think that's fair. Different offices different But I do think if someone had called into that tip line and said, you know, I I know the guy who offered to give the Trump campaign Hillary's hacked emails, I feel like that person would have gotten there would have been a call back, and there would have been some action taken. I do think that's true, which tells you something about the priorities these days of America's premier law enforcement agency,

at least from the top down. You know that that may be that the influence that this collusion hysteria has had is deeper than we think. But I'm surmising. I'm I'm theorizing on that one. But you'll notice that there was this recitation of the mantra after this terrible school shooting of if you see something, say something, it's incumbent upon each each one of us to report to the authority's report to the authorities. It was reported repeatedly and

in detail. Everybody knew every red flag was seen and noted and spoken about. And what we get to here is is there is there nothing the government can do or would do to stop this. And I think the answer is maybe even if they had followed up on this, maybe the intervention by the FBI to sit down with this kid and say, don't be a psycho killer that might have had some effect. I don't know. We also could argue, what have a accelerate the process, but it

seems like there's very little hope. If they can't stop Nicholas Cruise from being in a school shooter, what makes you think that they're going to stop the next one. This kid could not have been anymore obvious, aggressive, blatant, leaving a huge trail for everybody. I mean, if we were to put this in terrorism in terms, this would be like the guy who you know, is walking around the back of the mosque saying, I want to be a suicide bomber. I want to be a suicide bomber.

And everyone knows and they interview him and everything, and he's on the FBI's radar, and then a couple months later he's a suicide bomber somewhere. Yeah, that is pretty analogous to what happened here this guy. All the flags were there, we saw them, we noted it. The FBI didn't pass it along, didn't didn't look into this. I would say this. I wonder what other tips were called into the public access line that that did get followed up on. Where they looking into, you know, Medicare fraud

and Florida. Where they were what were they spending their resources and time doing well? I guess they didn't even pass it onto the field office. So not to single out the Florida field office, but what were they spending their resources on what could be a higher priority than at least look it into this. They've they've got the people, They've got the people to run down the all the stuff we're seeing with the Russia. We look, we had this all this fan for today, right thirteen indictments in

Russia of Russians for setting up sock puppets. That's a whole lot less important than what what happened earlier this week in Florida, a whole lot less devastating, not even the same universe, not even the same stratosphere of importance, and yet nobody looked into it. Um, this is my friends, this is not This is not good. It does not

look good for the FBI on this one. Um, it makes us feel It makes it feel like the whole see something, say something campaign is just lip service, you know, see something, say something ing has meaning, maybe if you're talking about I don't know, someone engaged in white collar fraud somewhere, or maybe Russia collusion. But school shooting. This didn't get this didn't get any resources or any attention whatsoever.

I mean human error. I was willing to give the FBI some benefit of the doubt on the YouTube comment because I figured, Okay, there's a lot going on, you know, they there's a lot of comments that are posted here and there. But that was because you didn't have a full picture, and what it was just Nicholas Cruz a

name and one comment on one YouTube clip. Okay, there's a lot of any of you have spent time in the comment sections of websites, no, pretty gross, scary stuff that people are saying, and all the rest of it. But this call, this call had everything quote cruises, gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, disturbing social media posts, potential of him conducting a school shooting. The FBI could

have followed up on this in two minutes. They could have looked at this kid's instag I mean it was all there. They didn't even have to investigate really, I mean, heck, they could have brought in a high school kid and said, hey, this is what we were told. What do you think you know? Can you do a do a quick scrub of social media? Could have brought in an intern. I would have been able to figure this out. Nothing. Ah, Look, it looks pretty bad for the fbion. I don't know

what else to say. I remember or all the you know, the different you know, the heat that the intelligence community got for while both WMD and Rock and then before that Missing nine eleven. And I'm a believer in accountability for these massive and very powerful federal bureaucracies. I really am. And I don't know what accountability looks like for this, because this is this is bad. Governor Scott of Florida's saying the FBI director should resign. I think there's a

there's two philosophies on that point. On the one hand, you have people who will say, pardon the phrase, the buck stops with the guy at the top. That would be Christopher Ray. So even though he had no direct ability to influence this, there has to be a show of accountability. Maybe the other side of it is, are you really going to have the FBI director resigned because of what employees far down the chain of command did

not do has nothing to do with him. I tend to fall more into that category, just because I don't think you can hold the head of an organization responsible for uh incidental or or not incidental, but aberrant one off conduct. It's one thing if it's systemic and not caught, and there's a there has to be accountability for that. But who man, it's a bad it's a bad day for the bureau um. I don't think there's any way around that. And I don't know who it's tough, folks.

Given the week we just had as a country, well we all just went through. We saw, we heard the videos, the footage, everything, and I was really hoping, just for the purpose of a bit of psychological recuperation, we just moved past it today and then this happens the FBI. Hey, I mean they they came clean, So I guess there's that's a good sign at least for some sense of accountability. But I don't know how they can miss a more

obvious one than this. This is this is Hey. I think a guy across the street is trying to build a truck bomb. Here's his name. I've seen photos of it. You can check it out online. He's been posting stuff about how he wants to build a truck bomb. You really should check this out. And the FBI doesn't. It doesn't even begin to look at it, see something, say something. Come on, what do you think ben't too harsh? Not

harsh enough? What are we to make of this? The backle at the bureau eight four eight four, four to eight to five. We'll be right back herb in New Jersey. Welcome to the Bucks Acton show. Sir, dude, how are you? I'm good, dude, how are you? I'm doing pretty good? Hey, listen,

I wants your opinion on this possible scenario. So, um Muller was charged with investigating the possibility of Russian interference in our election, and lo and behold, today we get these indictments charging these individuals and organizations with violating various

laws relating to the conduct of our election and other charges. Um. So, out of gratitude for a job well done, President Trump UH declares the investigation successfully completed and rewards Mueller with an appointment to replace Ray as director of the FBI, with the charge of cleaning up the mess that currently embroils the FBI because of things like the botched UH Clinton email investigation and the UH the Docier debacle that

led to potentially bogus spice a warrant. And now look at this mess in Parkland, Florida, where they dropped the ball and should have at least paid this guy a visit to talk to him. So is there is there a question in their herbari? Well, I want to know what do you think of that? Of all that stuff

they mean, all the things you're talking about. Well, yeah, I mean, here's here's my My suggestion was, suppose Trump declares that we have a successfully completed the investigation into Russian meddling in our election, the indictments that were issued today. But he can't. He can't that that doesn't work because the Mueller probe is still ongoing and Mueller has already said that. Okay, well I missed that part. I'm just

thinking that. You know, all along we've been hearing that the Russians medal, the Russians medal, the Mustans medal, and and now we have the proofs of the Russians medal and uh. In his statement today we heard, um, uh, what's that guy's uh? The deputy director Rosenstein. Rosenstein made a very uh appointed statement that there were no and it's in the indictment also, there there were no US citizens who were knowing participants. Yeah, winning versus unwitting is

the terms is the term they use. Yeah, right, it's no collusion. Yeah. But but did you hear my whole thing herb about yet? Because the Left is not given up on this. They're just saying they haven't proven it yet. And what Rosenstein said is that, yeah, there's nothing in this indictment about that, but there could be another indictment or even a superseding indictment with more of it. I hear you her, but I appreciate you calling it from New Jersey, and thank you for sharing your thoughts here

on the show. All right, Mark in Waynesboro, Virginia. Hey, Mark, Hey Buck, it's a pleasure to talk to you. Hey. So, in America, there used to be a time when men that were in the high positions of power, whether they were generals or government officials, if seventeen innocent, precious American children died on their watch, at a bare minimum, that individual would resign, and in some cases, out of honor, that individual would go out into the woodshed in the

backyard and either hang themselves or shoot themselves. Now, we had an athletic director and a football coach down there in um Florida that, without a second thought, gave their life to protect those innocent kids. But look at the classlessness of Director Ray. Look at the complete despicable behavior of all of these bureaucrats in Washington, d C. They have proven that not only are they corrupt, but they have absolutely no interest or desire whatsoever to do their

job to protect the American people. And that's with a budget of money that is an un goodly sum of money to any of us. You had asked if you thought that he should resign or if somebody lower down

the chain should be held accountable. What's astonishing, Buck is no one has been held accountable yet, and you and I both know, Buck, that no one will be held accountable, and any absence of honorable men in this fraudulent federal government in Washington, d C. The American people are gonna do nothing but suffer under this joke of a federal

government of here. Mark, I appreciate you calling him, and I will say that I think that Nicholas Cruise will be held accountable, but that will be not nearly enough justice under the circumstances. Um, we gotta roll into a quick break here, folks. When we come back, we will have much more. By the way, if you want to throw any thoughts at me on Russia, on the FBI's mess up here, or even if you eat Friday, you can give me an action movie quote if you're so inclined.

I was hoping to have a bit of a lighter show today, but the news conspired against me. The news colluded against me. We'll be back alright, Team lines are lit. Let's get to them. We have Todd in Greenboro. Hey Todd, Hey, how are you doing books? I'm all right, thank you for your call. I just want to ask, freaking what's the last color want from this government? Three fifty freaking million people in this freaking country, and what he wants to he want He wants somebody to control everybody. What

what are we gonna do? But on top of that, the shooting, how are you going to correct it? It's all pointing fingers one way or another. Oh, it's his fault. No, it's their fault. No, it's it's your fault, homie, it's your fault. Freaking The American public needs to realize it's your fault. These are your kids out here pulling triggers, freaking because you are weak. Well, I mean maybe it's it's I think you could say that it's it's our responsibility to keep our children safe. It's the fault of

the shooter. Nicholas Cruz and I do think that there is, uh, there's reasonable criticism of the FBI is failure to follow up on a very specific tip about exactly what happened here. But there's a currently an environment of every running around just trying to hang whatever their political issue is on this like a Christmas tree. I mean, it's just terrible. I mean there there's so much grandstanding and nonsense and

that's not helpful at all. And and looking even when I mean, I know I had I had guests on yesterday talking about greater security at schools. Here's here's just something that's just reality. I'm sure, And I know you know this, Todd. Somebody has an Air fifteen and they're planning out a a mass slaughter of civilians and they know, they know the area well, they know the target well, they understand who's gonna be there, where they're gonna be, and they're just trying to kill in us in people.

You could have had fifty arm guards there and at best you might have had a faster response time and a fewer casualties. But people were almost there was no way that you weren't going to take casualties once the shooter got on the grounds and had an air fifteen in his hands. It's just it's just not realistic to think otherwise. Correct. But can I ask a question, yes, sir, is it is it a question of security or is it the question of your government? Well, I mean, well

it kind of rolls in together. But I mean security in schools. We put more security on our in our banking system than we do on our children. I mean, who are the greatest teachers. Who are the greatest teachers in America? That's one question. That would be American special Forces. They jump into other countries and teach them how to kill people. They are the greatest teachers in America. Now you've got retired freaking green Berets all over the East Coast,

all over America. Could you not put them in a school, have them have a weapon on them, and they could stop this mess. It's security, it's not freaking your government. What are we doing? What are we doing? Well? The answers, I think, by the way, Todd, we're not going to do very much. I think we're probably gonna do nothing in the aftermath of this. That's different from what we're already doing. I appreciate you calling in. I appreciate your passion.

Thank you, sir. Have a good weekend. Al in Colorado, welcome to box section show shields high buck sheels high Al. I want to offer a solution. Um. First of all, they are they all just stop giving every federal employee uh an automatic uh employment until retirement. You have to be able to fire them, and they can't. Yeah, civil service firing is almost impossible. I've talked to you about

this before. If you if you show up on time for your job, leave on time, and don't break the law, it is very hard to fire a civil servant, right and don't punch your boss in the nose. Uh. That my solution. My solution is, you know the problem. The problem lies in that, uh, you notify the FBI that so and so is is a bad guy. Yeah, goes out and says, howdy, um, what you're doing? He says nothing, jef I can't do anything because he hasn't done anything yet. Well,

that that's a good point. That's what I've been saying. Let's let's say al that that the FBI had not let's say the FBI had not failed to as it as it admits, failed to uh follow protocol here and they had met with Nicholas Cruz. They sat down with him and they said, hey, we see all this stuff. We're hearing some very bad things about you. They can't lock him up based on anything that I have seen and and so, if he's really committed to this. He may say, oh, wow, the FBI visited me. They're on

to me. You know, I better go that they can't. And then people have said things like, why can't we put them under surveillance? You're you're not gonna put every every whacko in the country under twenty four hour surveillance because you just can't. You don't have the resources of the time, of the manpower. There's no way you'd be

able to pull that off. And you also then get into whole question about, well, how can you put somebody under twenty four hour surveillance that they haven't actually committed a crime yet. These are the problems of living in a free society, my friends. You know, the rule of law sometimes means that things like this are are complicated. Buck,

I've got a solution. Here's my solution. Okay, um authorize these i FBI guys when they when they go out and they find this young man um and he is a he is a man at nineteen, he's definitely a man um. And you take him and you put him in the car and you drive up to the nearest

prison and they're all over health half acres. You take him to the nearest prison and you say we're just going for a visit, and you're walking through there and you show him these miscreants in the prison and say which which one would you like to be the voice toy for? This is? This is some version I think al of the I believe it's MTV, and I'll thank

you for Colinger from Colorado. I believe it was MTV that did a version of a did a show called Scared Straight where they would bring juvenile delinquents into a very frightening prison and have them I mean, I remember watching this, so I know it's a thing. I think it was called Scared Straight. But they would scream at them in prison to get the juvenile delinquents to stop there.

They're delinquent ways basically, and they had guys who I mean, I remember that there was some very uh how do I put this, Some some salty language was used by the convicts to really to really bring the point home. Um, I want to there's a little bit of a feud going on right now, a feud brewering that while has some fun with here where CNN is calling out by name on TV one of your I'm guessing favorite senators.

Certainly i'd say, he's in your top fifty senators for sure, maybe your top five, maybe your favorite, but definitely your top fifty. Who is that senator? And what is the feud? If you stay through the break, you will find out all these things. So I just want to tell you a bit about how CNN likes to present the gun control debate on on on air. I remember many years ago, after the new Town shooting, a friend of mine was asked by producers overseas before I worked there. I don't know.

I was asked at CNN to present the pro Second Amendment point of view, and he was on a show with a live audience. They didn't tell him that. They also didn't tell him that during the show he would be asked to stand up and give the second time a point of view surrounded with the parents of Newtown victims. That was how they wanted to, you know, structure things. They thought that was the way to go. That wouldn't in any way influence his feelings about making his point

of view. They would have parents standing next to him who are crying, understand Annalie, who were heartbroken about what had happened, and he was supposed to be the one defending the right to bare arms standing right next to them. That was how they that was how they wanted to do it, CNN, and that was Piers Morgan's show. By the way, if you're wondering, um, which I'm sure's no surprise to any of you, that Piers Morgan would take

that approach, he is. He is aggressively ignorant on the issue of gun control and the Second Amendment UM, and still weighs in on this issue all the time. He might be great on other things, he might be a really nice dude. I don't know. The point is he's not right in the Second Amendment. Uh. But CNN also wants to go after people like Ted Cruz, for example, and say that Ted Cruz is well, we have the clip.

We invited Republican Senators Marco Rubio ted Cruz while he's from Texas, because he talks about this issue a lot. We invited the governor to come on the show this morning. They declined. We say, let's get after it. It's not a slogan, it's an approach. You have to take these issues on. You gotta ask the tough questions. You must be held accountable. Rubio says this is an inexplicable tragedy

that couldn't be less true. Governor Scott is actively fighting right now to penalize doctors who even asked patients in their state if they have firearms? Where are they? They will come on here, They're on Fox News this morning, the mother Ship, so they won't be pressed about gun control. What are they afraid of? Yes, what are they afraid of? Well, here's the problem with that. Mm hmmm, the whole issue. Uh. Ted Cruz says that he gave a fifteen minute exclusive

interview to CNN that they just never aired. So it seems pretty unfair, doesn't it to have a CNN anchor saying that Ted Cruise is scared to talk about gun rights. Notice how gun control is what some people say, gun rights is what other people said. The language always gives you such a a sense of which side of the issue one person is going to be on. Ted Cruz had appeared or had called, and they just didn't use

the interview. I would note that I had the I had the experience of doing a CNN show for Brian Stelter once, an interview on terrorism, and Stelter thought he had a big gotcha moment, and it was because I said that something was Islamic terrorism and it was going to be that it was too early. It turns out I was just right. Uh, and they gave me the they did. We did the whole interview, and it was supposed to air on a Sunday. We interviewed on Friday.

They just never told me anything, never aired it, and pretended that there was breaking news on a Sunday, which is why they couldn't arrow it. You see, these are the games fake news plays. This is this is how they operate, folks. It's all journalism, integrity and honesty when it suits them to say so, but when it comes down to it, it's just all a show. It's not journalism, it's activism, and they're always trying to protect some very

fragile egos and very flimsy intellects over there. Nonetheless, I would love to see Ted Cruise go on go on CNN and talk on control with any of their anchors. It would be a wipeout. My advice to any of those CNN anchors would be, uh, save yourself the humiliation, and I'm sure I have a feeling they will. But this was not just some one off thing. They actually were running a graphic on tv UM, so they were presenting it as though it were news. Unwilling CNN ran

a graphic unwilling to appear on CNN. What are they afraid of? This was a full screen on CNN's air national channel across the country. Governor Rick Scott center mark of Rubio, Senator Ted Cruz, and Ted Cruz is like, that's bull I'll come on your show and it's I'm talking about this issue. In fact, I did for fifteen minutes an interview already with you, and you just chose not to run it. And now you're gonna call me a coward? How much dirtier and more dishonest do you

think they can really get? Kind of makes you wonder, isn't it. Mike and Alabama got some thoughts? What's up, sir? Kay Bugus? Is Mike and Alabama shield tied? Mike? I don't know. In regards to the Florida shooting, I don't know if there's a direct way it would be applicable. But I do know that in Florida they have a thing called the Baker Act, and uh it allows for

involuntary Uh. I don't know if it's incarceration, institutionalization I think is the word you might be looking for, Yeah, for someone that's got mental health issues, And it doesn't necessarily mean they've committed a crime of any sort yet. Uh from what I understand, both of the the guy's parents were deceased, so that may have been a reason why they it and go with the Baker Act. But I think lawenforcement can initiate that as well. I could

be wrong. No, there there is and and Mike, I won't pretend to be an expert in a in a legal process or the specifics of its state by state, but there I know there are ways that you can have somebody involuntarily committed to a mental institution if they proved to be a harm to themselves or to others. But that is a it is a high bar, and I have to say it's generally with with very good reason.

That's a high bar, right, I mean, could you imagine people that just need some help, You wouldn't want them to be uh sent away to a mental institution. And also it leaves a mark on on a person's record. You will never be able to get a gun after that, legally, you will never so it's there, but it's it's tricky

with this guy. Do I think that there probably could have been a case I'd have to bring a psychiatrist with with background and how the state functions on this on the show, My my gut tells me that you probably could get this guy, uh sent away for and sent away to a mental I mean, you know, not we before the shooting, it would have been sent away to get help. Now it's you know, sent away for life,

if not into the into a lethal injection room. But at this point, yeah, at this point, but beforehand, it would have been sent away to get them help. And and I think that it's there, but I look, it used to be a lot easier to do that, and they've changed the law of the a c l U has fought like mad against involuntary institutionalization, uh, you know, to to elevate the standards. It's one of the reason why I mean, look, I'm here in New York City

and I see severely mentally ill people. They're usually uh the home, they're usually homeless, and you see them and they're doing things on the street, and it's very clear they're severely mentally ill. But unless they're a danger to themselves or others. You generally can't get them committed. And part of the problem is that by the time it's clear they're a danger to themselves or others, it's too late,

you know what I mean. Sometimes the first time it's clear is when they've you know, cracked a rock over some old lady's head for no reason. So it's and there's no there's that. I keep saying this because it's true. There's no easy answers. Mike Alright, Rock and Roll, thank you for calling him my friend. I appreciate it. Good to talk to you and have have a good weekend. Um, and it's it has been quite a week. You noticely that they don't talk about this very much either. The

markets actually had a really good week. I feel like last week everybody was, oh my gosh, the bottom is falling out of the market. What are we gonna do Now, Everyone's like, yeah, it's it's coming back, It'll be all It'll be all right. That's good, that's a good thing. I'm trying to find the positives. Oh, CNN reporting playmates alleged affair with the president. I haven't read this. Have you guys read the story yet? Oh you have all right, I'll have to read. I didn't read this one today.

I was busy with the Russia and the and the FBI stuff. Um this this is one of these things where the media will I'm not gonna say it's not a story, but they're gonna run with a story for as long as they can. And I think this affects the Trump base. I think it's probably a zero one way or the other. I don't think they care. Nope,

So we will see. Uh, this is just kind of where we are now and the way we deal with political not political scandals, politicians personal scandals, you know, whether you believe it or not, still is just not going to have an effect. Things have changed quite a bit. We will talk about immigration coming up, because I think that that is a subject that we can get some greater clarity on after it was so pushed aside this week with some of the other major events that had happened.

We'll also have a friend joined to talk to us about an interesting program in well a research that shows that school choice may help lessen criminality, which you can imagine that I have all kinds of interesting discussions going forward. I wish that they'd get back on uh school choice issue at the the national level. It has not been something that's been a part of Trump's agenda. And we will have some of your thoughts via roll call. We'll have kind of an extended session. We'll spend at least

a solid segment of roll call coming up. It reminds me by the way Facebook dot com slash buck sex in if you want to share thoughts. Also, we always post stories and more on buck Sexton dot com. Please do check it out. We'll be getting into that and a whole bunch of other things. And then by the time our third hour has done, folks and you listen to it, your weekend gets to begin. So that's exciting. We'll be right back. Hey, everybody, I just want to take a moment to say before our before I bring

in some esteemed guests here. I just find it so disappointing the way people get so nasty to each other over the whole Russia investigation thing, and particularly look, I expect the left to act like a bunch of maniacs. A lot of them of stake their their careers at some level, not really, I mean people will forget, but they stake their credibility on their being really an impeachment

that comes out of all this. They think they're gonna take the media, believe they're gonna make right the election by taking down the Trump presidency with this narrative that will lead to an impeachment. So there's a lot of there's a lot going on here, but it just bums me out to see the different people who are involved

in all this, who are just uh, just nasty. And their conservatives, Yeah, they somehow believe this, They've somehow bought into this, and they refer to other conservatives as as Trumpists or Trumpers because they don't think that the president United States had some hatch, some conspiracy with the Russians. That just the whole thing is so nuts, and it

is you know, it is problematic. It is troubling. Uh, it is really bothersome to me that we have reached this point now where you can't even really have a civilized discussion about this. You can't even you know, you have uh, you have Adam Schiff making quite clear what the real goal is here. Play clib seven for me for a second. The president's conduct was so incompatible with

office that they needed to vote to remove him. Uh, it is going to be important for people to know that that was not something that we were seeking from the very beginning because of what this will put the country through. So I think early talk about impeachment before we finished our investigation um makes that case more difficult if the evidence comes to support it, and we need

to let Bob Mueller do his job. A big part of what I consider my job right now is making sure or we stay the hell out of Bob Mother's way. Because they want to impeach Trump. I mean, this is it is, This starts to get to be pretty preposterous here. I mean, they there's a reason. There's a reason that they're so set on this Mueller investigation. So so we know that some Russians, some Russians have been indicted and it's not going to change anything. There mightn't even to

die some more Russians. Not gonna change And we've we've known about this for a long time. We have been hearing about Russia interference in the election for a year and a half. And you'll notice no one ever has some policy in mind for it, no one ever has a solution they want to talk about. This is just all about Trump. Which I can kind of handle at some level, But I also feel like, you know, because I know I expect this, but I just feel like,

what's with these conservatives? They really would rather they want they want to they want to be right on this one in that Trump portrayed his country. That would make them feel better. They'd be happier with the future in which we have I guess a Pence by the way, It's not like they would accept Pence as a replacement for Trump. If in fact they did repeat and removed from from office, they would say the whole thing was illegitimate.

They they would uh, it would cause a crisis of governance and a crisis of confidence in our governing institutions in this country, the likes of which certainly has never occurred before in my lifetime. But it's just disappointing. There's a there's a childishness in the media on this issue that it's it's just gross. It feels icky. Anyway, we're gonna talk more about what's going on with immigration here

in a second. I've I've been saying to you that, you know, some big stuff happened this week on the issue of immigration. It's not like this just we should just skip over it. So I wanted to bring in our friend Marker Corey and from the Center from Immigration Studies. I know, Friday, and we're gonna be talking policy kind of late on a Friday. But yeah, hey, we're we're always we're always focused on what matters here, folks, or

at least most of the time. Sometimes not really. When I'm screaming and pretending to be a journalist yelling at at Trump, maybe that's not or or my Sorrows impression, which, by the way, I feel like I don't get enough appreciation. I think my Sorrows is pretty good. Like I think it's if you listen to Sorrows, don't know, he's sort of enough sounds like these, and he has you can talk about the markets and the things that the market is doing, and I feel like that's kind of listen

to some Sorrows audio. That's pretty close. It's not perfect. Gosh, everyone's a critic. Yeah, it's like somehow my Hillary impersonation, which sounds nothing like Hillary. Everyone is like your spot on you know, somehow that's perfect. But my Sorrows, which which if I called you and let the message on your machine and you may in fact, believe was sorrows. You're just you're you're rejected that one. It's just not fair, folks, It's just not fair at all. Oh, Sonny, we've got

my thank you, my Bernie Bernie Sands. I wish you would run again, just so I could do Bernie all the time. But like, hey, it's Bernie's night, and the mood is right for socialism. You know, we'd have so much fun with the burn. I kind of missed the burn. He was a great character to work into things him. And if you remember Janet Politano, big sis, you know, talking about Homeland, talking about the border strip searching guys that are trying to get drugs in the country, and

the whole thing Janet to Politano. You know, there's a whole bunch of a whole bunch of different characters. Alright, alright, we're gonna get into some serious stuff in a minute. We've got our friend marcret Corey and joining also. I wanted to bring in a friend and a contributor to the Federalist Enis Felcher, who's gonna talk about how school choice has a has been shown. It's not proven yet. There's some studies show dramatic impact on crime as in

reduces it very much. We will get into that and much more in just a couple of minutes. Your team, stay with me. I am optimistic. One of the reasons why I'm so optimistic as the President did something that many of us found surprising and very intriguing. He said that he was willing to support a path of citizenship, a twelve year path of citizenship for Dakas for these dreamers. So is immigration reform dead or not? Where are with with all this? We've got somebody who can shed a

lot of light on this. We have Marker Corey and with this he is from the Center for Immigration Studies c i S dot org. He's the executive director. Mark. Always good to have you on the program. I'm glad to be here. Than our first keys update us on what happened in the immigration kind of got pushed aside, even though it's probably the single most important policy issue facing the Trump administration right now. Kind of push aside

this week. But some stuff happened. What happened this week with Congress, Well, the President had a submit, did some an outline of what he would like Congress to pass um. In other words, amnestying the Dreamers, and he actually increased it to amnestying up to almost two million people, not just the one with the DOCCA work permits from Obama's illegal program, but a million extra. These are people who

came here illegal, but they came as minors. Um. He sweet tried to sweeten the deal by by adding up by asking for an amnesty for almost two million people in exchange for changes to chain migration policy so that only husband's wives and little kids can be brought here from abroad, not other relatives, getting rid of the visa lottery, which is literally a lottery we give green cards out at random to people across the world. And funding for

the wall, and other enforcement measures. That was a package. Congress in the Senate specifically had four measures. One of them was that, and then several couple others that were much weaker. Brought them all up for a vote. What the majority leader in the Senate said is, look, let's just have a free for all here. Whatever you guys can put together, bring it up for a vote. See if it gets the sixty votes it needs to pass the filibuster rule. All four measures failed. This was on Thursday.

None of them passed, and the Senate basically has decided that, you know, they're finished with this, They've got other things to do, and now it's up I guess, to the House of Representatives to see if they passed something that amnesties these DACA young people. They're not kids, but the twenties and thirty year olds illegal immigrants. Um and UM. That's kind of where it is now. So, but even if the House does pass something, it still has to get through the Senate, right, so it seems it seems

to be pretty unlikely Mark that this is actually going anywhere. Yeah, I think it is quite frankly and um. The reason there was of an urgency to do something about this is that the President canceled the DOCCA program, which was illegal to begin with. Under Obama, President said he was

gonna pull the plug on it on day one. He waited till day two hundred, but he finally did pull the plug on it, and March, the beginning of March is when the program expires, because they gave him a grace period and people would start losing their work permits. So there was this idea that they had to get it done by them. Well, several court rulings outrageous. Court rulings actually said the president couldn't do that, um, in the words, he couldn't cancel a memo, that's all. It

was a memo from a previous administration. Supreme Court's going to strike those down almost certainly. So at some point, people with work permits are gonna start losing the work perments they're gonna expire. And I think once that happens, maybe there'll be some more interest in doing something on this, but probably not so. I think, um, they're the What this really boiled down to is that the Democrats and some of their Republican pro immigration allies valued keeping chain

migration very high. In other words, they were unwilling to cut immigration by a couple hundred thousand a year rather than amnesty. You know, these young people who grew up here. They made the choice that it was more important to them to let these young people who grew up here lose their work permits and go back to becoming regular illegal aliens than it was to um reduce immigration back to the level it was in the nineteen eighties. It's

not even very radical. We're speaking to market Corey and executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies here, Mark, can you give me some clarity on what we know about illegal immigrants specifically and crime and what person? Because I've seen some articles here and there that are saying that like a large percentage of federal crimes are committed by illegal aliens. Do do we have good data on that? What can you tell me about the numbers? There's nobody

has good data on this. Their studies all over the place, but none of the data is particularly good. And what, um, the there's no questions that illegal immigrants make up a hugely disproportionate share of the federal prison population. But remember most people in jail are in state prisons. That's where most of the crimes are punished. Not you're a burglar, you stab somebody, you go to state prison, right exactly. Um. That having been said, there's been research that suggests immigrants

might be less likely to be involved in crime. But again, the data is terrible on this. It people don't want to know. The FBI does not do a good job of collecting data on this one. Does A recent report by a scholar named John Lott l O. T T who has done a lot of work on the gun.

Oh yeah, I know John, we thought him on the show. Yeah, he got a data source from Arizona which specifically, in other words, from their state prison that specifically does ask legal status, and he found a very disproportionate rate of criminal activity on the part of illegal immigrants specifically. So that's an important finding, but it's just one finding. This is something that the powers that be literally don't want to know the answer. Well, that was my next question.

How is it possible, Mark, that we have people who are in custody and yet we don't have numbers about how many of those who are in the government's custody are actually illegal aliens. That just seems unfathomable to me. They keep all kinds of data on the prison population. Yeah, I mean, look, I'm not saying they don't know in each individual case. But remember, if you know a fact about the various people you arrest, but you don't enter

it into your compute system, then it doesn't matter. If it's on a piece of paper, no, one can never really know it. You can't use that data for analysis. It's kind of like with these DOCA people we were talking about, a lot of them used translators to sell out their applications. They were supposedly they're so assimilated, they're so Americanized, that we need to give them citizenship. And yet a lot of them don't even know English, and so we would be good to know what percentage don't

know English. You know what it's on the form, but they never answered it into the computer, so there's no way to know. There was a program that there was a program mark that was talking about briefly at least by the White House earlier this week that would have changed the Supplemental Nutritional Nutrition Assistance Program SNAP, better known as food stamps, by having a food box essentially as part of the benefits. It wouldn't be entirely the equivalent of cash, which is what an E B T card

is right now. And I people are asking me this, and I said, look, I don't really have the answer for you, and so I wanted to pose it to you. Do we have good numbers on on either immigrant usage of federal welfare and or illegal alien usage of federal welfare? We actually do, and were we seem to be the Center for Immigration Studies, seems to be the only people

who ever used it. Let me explain, there is um information from the Census Bureau surveys on whether people have used government benefits, but it seems that it was underestimated. That's usually where the data comes from. That's what we've used at the Center when we report this. Well, there's a different survey which for technical reasons is much more difficult to use, which specifically is about use of government programs.

And what we found was we were the first people ever looked at that to figure out what immigrant welfare uses. We found out that families headed by a foreign born person this is legal or illegal, put together, about half of them use at least one government welfare program. Is what we found UM and it's really pretty remarkable. Illegal immigrants UM are cipher. I don't have the number in front of me. It's slightly lower because the illegal immigrants

themselves are not eligible, but their children are eligible. And if you get an E B T card to go shop at the grocery store, the four year old is not going to the grocery store with that. In other words, he's getting you're getting it on his behalf because he's a US citizen born here, but he's not doing the show. So in illegal can almost be the custodian of the federal benefits for the legal child, right, not almost, but literally. And it's not like the kid is the only one

eating the food, you know what I mean. So, so these benefits are widely used, even by illegal limrates, and it's not because anybody's ripping off the taxpayer. The fact is almost all of these families, immigrant families, legal or illegal, who are getting government benefits, they're people working in that family. It's just that they're a mismatch for our economy. They're low skilled people, and they can't earn enough money to

feed their own children. Literally. So the question is not so much how do we keep immigrants from using welfare? The more important question is why are we letting people in who are incapable of earning enough money to feed their own children? And Mark before we let you go.

It seems to me that perhaps with the way Trump has approached immigration reform up to this point, he may have exposed something which which you also alluded to I believe before, which is that it's actually not necessarily DACA recipients who are the crown jewel of the Democrats immigration reform desires. It may actually be chain migration, which I've noticed they're now calling family based migration, which is one

of the terms for it. It's just the chain migration is also a long used, normal term which they're trying to make, you know, somehow problematic or unpc But no, I think you're right. The goal here, or let me put it this way, the more important thing is to keep immigration going indefinitely into the future. And the DOCCA young people, I mean, they're happy that if they could get them green cards, sure that they're not against that.

But if they don't, But I mean, if the price of that is giving up an unending flow of immigration in the future. Remember last year we had one point two million people got green cards. If that's the price, if reducing that down to say eight or nine hundred thousand or six or seven hundred thousand is if that's the price, then they're not going to pay it. They're okay with these DOCCA people losing their work permits because the more important issue is keeping immigration going indefinitely at

as a high level as possible. Real quick. You don't expect any major legislation immigration this year? Is that fair to say? Yeah? I think, I mean I may be wrong, but yeah, if you were. If I were a betting man, I would bet lunch on nothing happening. Well, I'm putting my chips right next years on the table. I think the same is true everybody. Marcret Corey and c I s dot Org for the Center for Immigration Studies work. It's a great site. They do fantastic stuff. Mark, have

an excellent weekend. Thank you for joining team. We're gonna roll into a quick break, will be back with an interesting study that very few people know about that I think has implications for a lot of stuff when it comes to uh schools in this country, and when it comes to violence in fact in this country and criminality, and how schools can play a role perhaps in lessening all of that. I know I'm speaking in very generic terms that because I want our expert to inform you,

So stay right there, all right. So we talked about school choice among conservatives with some regularity. It hasn't gotten a lot of attention in the Trump era, but I think it's something that we should refocus on, and there are actually some research out there that shows that may have benefits beyond just the usual test scores, math, reading and all of that. It could actually have a much bigger societal impact. But I have to bring on the expert to talk about this when we have in s

felture with us now. She is a contributor to the Federalists, and that's great to have you on. Thanks for having me, Buck, all right, so tell me about this research. I've heard you speak about it briefly before, but apparently it's something that ties together behavior and school choice in ways that really would matter to broader society, right exactly. I think it's it's really important to think about the broader implications.

I think actually behavioral implications and UM societal or community implications are actually a lot more important to our daily lives than things like test scores. Although I'm happy to go through the evidence that shows a school choice raises

math and reading scores. UM. The evidence that I want to talk to you about today is actually these two studies that came out fairly recently, One about a charter school in New York in Harlem, and the other about the Milwaukee Bouncer Program, which is the longest running modern

school choice program in the nation. UM. The first study is UH comes from both Harvard and Princeton, a joint study UM, and it was on the Promise Academy charter school in Harlem, And I actually found that enrolling in this charter school versus and match public school student dropped the crime rate of the incarceration rates to zero, right, so it reduced it by a hundred percent. If we were talking about some kind of big government program, right,

I'm sure that that would be on every paper. Um, then the New York Times would have a lot to say about a big government program that reduced crime by a hundred percent. YEA repeat exactly. You're telling me that if people enrolled in this students enrolled in this school of New York City, the crime reduction for those students was a hud. That's pretty astonishing, right for boys, it didn't do as much for girls, but it did reduce their crime as well. But they commit Girls commit far

fewer crimes than boys do to begin with. Um, but I feel like I'm being woman explained right now. But that's okay. We all have our advantages. Um. Anyway. The second piece of evidence is a study from the University of Arkansas, which has a whole department that studies the effects the school choice, and it's on this very long running voucher program that started in which is why we can actually go ahead and do longitudinal studies on kids as they get into their they graduate from high school

and get into their twenties. Um. And as it turns out, there were enormous effects of the Doucher program UM on all sorts of criminal measurements, so felony convictions for kids in the program versus a match public schools didn't sell by almost eighty percent. Okay, drug crime was down by best.

I mean, I think we get the picture right that these are massive effects that we haven't been able to replicate with any of the big government programs that we have, either in education or UM in the crime prevention arena, right, um and and right especially this week, people are asking a lot of questions in as about what can we do with troubled youth and how do we prevent you know, problems from those who slipped through the cracks and everything.

It sounds like this is at least in an area that is worth pursuing more, which is does school choice have an effect a massive dampening effect on violence? Yeah? Absolutely, And I think it also circles back to the main point, which is people care about the values that their kids are learning in school, right. It's not. Of course, we all want our kids to to learn how to read and to do math um, but the values are equally important.

Trooping a child's character used to be a large part of education, and increasingly in the public school system or in the traditional public school system, that's either something they don't pay any attention to it at all or um, you know, it's controlled by one left wing point of view, and parents are left, as they have different values, are left with very few options about you know, if they can't afford to send their kids to a private school

on their own dime, um, they can't homeschool because mom and dad both work, right, they have very very few options to find a school or an education for their kid that actually fits with their values. And this is what the conservatives should because especially concerned with right um, our ideology is going to die out if we keep sending our kids to the public school system that teaches them to be left wingers. Right um. And that's you know, some of that we can counteract at home, but not

all of it. And so it's incredibly important that we get these choices that then have so much of an impact, not just on tat schools, but on things like families, on communities, on crime rates, on values, things that conservatives normally like to talk about. Yeah, crime behavior, violence, and

society at large. If schooling can have an effect on this, a very positive effect on this, and school choice in particular, it would seem like that scenario that should get a lot more attention under from the administration and from the media at large. But as we know, teachers unions not so much a fan of this stuff, and as from what I understand, absolutely not, teachers unions basically resist all change to the education system, even though pretty much everyone

agrees that the education system is sailing our kids. The unions have this constant refrain, which is, if you give us more money, will make it better. Right, We've we've been giving them more money, both on the federal and the state levels for basically forty years, and they haven't done better, and in fact, the problems hasn't many ways

gotten worse. Um and and so they every time they come back with the same refrain, the same refrain, if you just give us more money this time, we'll make it work, when in reality, we spend among the highest per pupil spending in the developed world where number three, Um, you know what have they spend in DC, by the way, is it's like private school tuition per student? Oh yeah, it's like Sidwell Friend's tuition, not just any private school.

It's thirty thousand dollars per student. That's astonishing. Imagine just imagine if every DC parent got thirty thousand dollars in their pocket to send their kids to whatever educational experience was best for that kid. Just imagine the impact that that would have. But instead it's going into the same system that is repeatedly failing kids, um and failing families who don't have a lot of other options. He has feltures a contribute to the Federalists. You can re relatest

at the Federalist dot com. Also follow her on Twitter. And as We're gonna have to get in touch with somebody at the White House to get them start looking at school choice stuff, because I'm not hearing enough about this and I feel like this is this is one place where conservatives win when people know the truth absolutely and more importantly, get in touch with your state legislators. Get in touch with your state lawmakers, because education policy

should be made at the state level. And largely still is. The funds come from the state, and the states really set the policy. So talk to your legislators. Make sure that you know they know that this is an important issue for you. It's to me, I think it's the survival of our ideology, of the belief systems that we have of um, you know, civics in America and really of citizenship in America. We don't, you know, improve the quality of the education that our kids received. We're just

going to continue down the wrong path. And as felt everybody follow her on Twitter and dinas have a great weekend. Thank you for joining. Thank you day. We're gonna roll into a quick break here we come back. We're gonna get into some roll call. Man, It's a lot for a Friday, everybody. I tell you today I kind of cleared out the schedule, you know. I talked to some Fox people. I'm like, you know what, I'll do one hit today. I don't. I can't no more TV for me,

wear some sweats. I'm gonna cook myself a nice Friday style brunch, you know, a lot of bacon, a lot of eggs around like one o'clock in the afternoon. You know, I just really kind of lean into it. I was gonna do a little a little bit of reading for pleasure, which is, I know, such an anomaly these days. He's gonna kick back, relax, and you put on some Cat Stevens and let the cat pur. And instead, I know,

now his name is like something like Yosef Islam or something. Right, Cat Stevens changed his name to Salmon Islam or Yosef Islam or something. I forget what Cat Stephen's name is. Now. Anyway, you gotta let the cat pur while you're drinking some zema. And and I was just sitting around, you know, thinking that it was gonna be pretty chill, and sure enough it was like blam, huge story on Russia and then blam, FBI dropped the ball and I'm sitting here, I'm like,

oh no, my whole day got turned upside down. And then, you know the problem with with getting involved in this stuff as you start to see some of the some of the Twitter battles. You know, right when the news breaks, you want to get in there, and next thing you know, you're in some You're in some long Twitter to exchange with some clown from who knows what network, and You're like, why am I even doing? What am I doing with my life? Like what is the point? What is the

point of this? I should be focused on the content for the show, focused on making sure that I'm as prepared as I possibly can be every single day for the Freedom Hub, which is no doubt my mission and my mantra. But it was quite a change today. So anyway with that, I I will get into I will get in from Pope. There we go yet, Team Bucking. It's time for roll Call? Who roll Call? We gotta make some cool like you know what I mean? We should probably take some some lee Aramy quotes. Isn't that

as the guy's name from Full Metal Jacket? Actually movie quote Friday. I should know this, you know what I'm saying, and we can intersperse them and create our own thing for roll call, Like I didn't know they stacked stuff that high, you know that stuff something like that, and we put that in there. That's amazing. I admit. I think that there are a couple of movies where you have to think of it as a movie in in

two parts, and one of them is Wedding Crashers. The first hour of Wedding Crashers is like a highly entertaining, amazing movie that I can watch anytime. The second hour is a not funny, depressing, weird devolution into the depths of human despair and like frailty. It's not what I was signed up for at all. Right, Basically, when they leave the island with the really nice country house on the on the shore of Maryland in wedding Crashers, it's

no longer a movie you should watch. I I kind of and some of you gonna get mad at me, but you know what, that's okay. I like to I like to provoke sometimes. I feel the same way about Full Metal Jacket first hour. Full Metal Jacket is like cinematic masterpiece. It's incredible. Uh, it's, you know, among among the best of Kubrick's works. The second hours. You know, he could have like taken it and put it in the middle of the movie Platoon and been like, yeah,

it's like all kind of the same. It was fine, it was not. I didn't have quite the same In fact, and I think Lee Airmy and I'm probably getting his name wrong, but that the drill instructor really carried the movie on his shoulders. Um he did quite an amazing job, a timeless a timeless character, and I'm sure he's a conservative all right in roll call Now, pardon the digression there, big fan of your show. This comes from John So John, I'm a big fan of you original Saturday squad here. Oss.

You have the perfect mix of analysis, opinion, and humor, and you are polite to callers. Miss the days when you be doing your show after a panel appearance on CNN and you would vent some anger. That was good stuff. I download all your shield HiPE podcast. You should consider doing a deep dive on Operation AJAX. Uh. There's probably a lot of misinformation regarding this. For a recommendation, I would recommend blank he's a blankety blank blank blank. Okay, anyway,

keep up the good work and shields high. Thank you very much, John. Yeah. That The only good part about CNN is that when they would cut me off and not let me respond ring an ambush, I would then sometimes come on radio and just vent spleen or like a solid thirty minutes on it, which which made for some good radio buck There were buck slaps all over the place. They're just buck slaps left and right, so you know there whoa hey, there came out of nowhere. By the way, every time we do that, I think

of the the radio show on Parks and Wreck. Do you guys know Parks and Wreck? The show where the guys you know what's his name, crazy Ira and the douche. It's that's like among the best parts of the show. Although the guy whose name is like Mervin Myrtle or whatever, who's the the NPR style host, I actually like his pseudo radio show more. You know. It's like, oh, we're listening to uh, Swedish jazz music and he's just so boring, and they're talking about like the mating habits of flying

squirrels and stuff like that. It's a you know, NPR. It's it's great. It's great stuff. And now I'm not actual mp are I mean their version of MPR in Parks and Recreation. Another thing, I'll give you a tip, skip the season two. If you haven't seen Parks in Rex. Season one is garbage. Just go right to season two on Netflix and start watching it. From there, you'll love it. Ron Swanson will be your favorite TV character, one of your favorite TV characters of all time. But season one

is bad. It's almost like unwatchable. So you gotta go right to season two. You miss nothing, all right? Now we have uh Bill, who's next up? Food for Poor? Thirty to forty years ago, the poor could get basic food, flour, beans, cheese, Uh, power, power eggs. I guess that's powdered eggs, right, powdered, Yes, power high powered powdered or I can't speak power eggs. Sounds like something you take before you're lifting. Yeah, I'm lifting away. It's I'm very strong, going to pump you up.

I have to the clap thing. I don't know if you could hear that. Not a lot of SNL sketches really hold up from back in the day, Like there's a there's a lot of nostalgia with them. But if you go back and you watch some of the Jim Blushi stuff, feel like this doesn't this doesn't hold up all right. He writes food for the Poor thirty or four years and you get that stuff. They all had to take, Uh. They had to take all these commodities,

not just what they wanted. This means they had to prepare the food instead of just pouring it out of a box. They would take all and if they did not want something, throw it in the trash or sell it to someone. All right, Bill, Well, thank you for the historical context there. I would say this, I'm gonna have to return to this issue of food and food stamps and all that. This this was this is a

surprise during the show. I mean we the response on the phones, on email and Facebook to that one segment, which I just kind of thought about something I had read earlier in the day was was profound. People were really really into it. Um. So we will get into that some more. Uh Irwin rights the following, Hey, Buck, I agree with you, there's really no solution to this problem.

Fully support the Constitution, the Second Amendment, and therefore support the idea that this kind of unfortunate situation is a cost of doing business, you know earin I'm so open to any ideas that will fix this that don't have really bad trade offs, that are all and and are also worthless actions to prevent it. Right, If someone says we can do this, it would stop gun That's why when people say more armed security at schools, all right, how much more I don't know how highly trained up

for discussion, but more not opposed to that? Will it stop some Maybe? Is there any real downside as I see it, not really. You know, your school safety officers there for any number of safety issues. Right. The guy who's standing there, who's got a glock on his hip to make sure there's not a school shooting, could also be the guy who have you know, a student is having some kind of you know, major health emergency. He

could be a first responder. I mean, it can sort of many hat the positions that people have with regard to this, they're not just it's not like they're standing there in a you know, standing there in some kind of you know, armored personnel carrier on the lookout, right. I mean they're gonna be able to interact with students and do things. They're not dug into a machine gun nest with a fifty cow waiting for someone to come

after them. They can be helpful to other parts of the school atmosphere and keep kids safe without having to engage an active shooter. Right, there's other stuff anyway, Bill writes the following, and I'm sorry, Bill, because it got frozen there for a second. Hey, Buck, great work on your radio show. Really enjoy listening to it on Stitcher. That's right, everybody, you can listen on stitcher. By the way, could you have your people tech people look into your

voice level? It seems kind of low and have trouble When I turn it up the bump music comes on. It's really loud. Is this a thing? Are we are we having? Is this on me? Oh? I turned my oh oh, all right, this is a This is apparently my radio technique. Folks. Occasionally I don't speak right into the microphone because blue blue. But yeah, you guys are right. You're not the first people have told me that I

get all animated and I assume I'm talking. I assume the whole team is in the room with me, and I'm not actually speaking to people across the entire our United States through a little metal tube that I have to be very close to it all times or else my voice does not really carry over it. But we have a ton more messages in the in the inbox for this week. I will hold some off for Monday. And you know, by the way, we're also going to start thinking about some ideas for going live with video

or maybe post show video or pre show video. So you've got ideas on that, let me know. Facebook dot com, slash box, sex and official Team Buck at gmail dot com. If you want to email us, we should probably get a company email for that. By the way, just a thought makes it sound like I'm doing Wayne's World thing out of my basement here. We should get a real one. Hey, everybody, have a great weekend. Excited to join you next week. Shields High