Fighting To Win

packets to our troops, both at home and abroad. And now we're bringing this battlefield proven liquid directly to your door. Strifeforce Energy Liquid packs, available in four flavors, have zero sugar, zero calories, and are made with only the finest ingredients. For the fuel to power through your toughest fight, simply add Strikeforce to sixteen to twenty ounces of water, tea, lemonade, yogurt,

even a nice cold beer. Go to Strikeforce Energy dot com, enter discount code buck at checkout, and for every packet you buy, we will donate a packet to military members around the globe. Strikeforce Energy dot Com discount code buck. Because Strikeforce Energy is the fuel for the fight you are entering. The Freedom Hudge another day of media meltdown over the possibility that some of their favorite talking heads who are part of the anti Trump resistance may have

their clearances revoked. Why should this be a national crisis? I'll address that also. We know that the deep state will continue on no matter what. But what should we take from the investigation as it goes on and the reality and the possibility that there could be a whole lot more Folks, We've got a fantastic show coming up. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence.

Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again, the Buck Sexton Show begins giving Remember the White House wanted to target for this punishment of stripping security clearances, and this very much looks like an enemy's list people that the presidents of the administration feel have been criticizing him unfairly. This is really disturbing. What we're seeing is not surprising because it's the next troubling step on this downward spiral

toward weaponizing and politicizing intelligence for political purposes. It's a very dangerous day for American democracy. This is the move of an autocrat, not an American president. Stripping them of their security clearance. That is not what you've seen in a democracy. That is exactly what you see in authoritarian regimes and an autocratic kind of move. It's the kind of thing you'd seen of an Anna republic. I mean, I find it horrifying. Obviously, welcome to the Buck Sexton Show.

No surprises, they're my friends. You have people who are completely and utterly devoted to this idea that President Trump is an authoritarian, is a fascist. Even they've decided that the President of the United States is not able to exercise Article to power without them saying that there's something terrible going on. I have yet to read a legal analysis out there where they say the president does not

have the right to take away somebody's security clearance. He is, in fact the superuser, the end user in a sense, when it comes to classification, the president is dare I say, the alpha and the omega. He's the beginning. In the end, he gets the final. Say. The courts have deferred for a long time to the executive branch on issues of clearances. So this is not a civil rights issue, This is not a criminal procedure issue. This is just does the

government want to give you a clearance or not. Does the executive branch, which has control over secrecy and all related classification protocols, do they want to give you a clearance or not? And I know people are saying, oh, well, it's that's a bad precedent. I understand that there is a precedent here that other presidents could use for nefarious purposes. But let's put this into context, shall we. How concerned should we really be that former intel chiefs wouldn't have

their clearances anymore. Also, let's keep this, let's keep it real. The next president, if it were a Democrat or even a Republican that felt differently, could reinstate those clearances or could reinstate the And this is where you get into and I don't want to bore you with too much of this, but there's a whole there's eligibility versus access. Right. Access is hey, here here's classified information. You are allowed to see it. Here it is you are a government

employee that has a need to know here's your classified information. Right. Eligibility is more you know you could get it. You know you are cleared to work in a place where you can do that. You know you could show up a government building if they had a need for you and have access to classified information. Now that that comes into play more for people that leave government service, someone like me. For example, if I left the CIA and I immediately want to go to another agency, you know

what happens with my clearance. But what Trump is talking about and what has now gone the media, you heard all that, Oh he's an autocrat, He's terrible, he's the worst, all these all these bad things. What Trump is talking about are these former senior I mean as seniors a guest, right, the DNI, former DNI Clapper, former CIA director Brennan, former actor Attorney General Yates. I think Susan Rice was on

there too. You know, He's got a whole list of people that just because of some courtesy or some notion that they are special, they keep not just the eligibility of a clearance, but also continued access. They can be called and they call them courtesy briefing. So if you were the pharmacy I directed, they will bring you in for meetings and you can see everything and anything that you well that they deemed to show you, right, that they deem worthy to show you, are necessary to show you.

Why is that the case people say, oh Buck, all the institutional knowledge. We need. The institutional knowledge. This is what I have a fun advantage today, folks. I do not know of another radio host anywhere in the country who was once a holder of a top seaker clearance. There probably are a couple, I just I can't think of them, but I am not aware of one who

ever had a top sea clearance. I did, so I have some sense of what goes on here, not just from reading about it, but from having to deal with it, from knowing it. So that is an advantage that will hopefully give me a little special something during today's discussion of this, because they've made this the biggest this is now the centerpiece of hashtag resistance this week. Last week it was Trump has destroyed NATO and Helsinki and he's Putin's puppet and all this stuff. Nonsense, But that's what

they were saying. This week, it's he's a tyrant and he's creating a police state because he's taking the security. He hasn't even done it, he just brought up the possibility of doing it. I think he's got I don't even think he's going to be Honestly, I think I'll probably walk away from this because who really cares. Well,

hold that thought for a moment, Who really cares? When you have the kind of relationship that former intelligence chiefs have with news organizations today, given that those news organizations are in full tilt doing everything in their power to tear down and destroy this presidency, I think it's fair to ask some questions. How sure are we that these people that have no more actual need of a clearance to do a job because they don't have jobs with the government. How sure are we that they are not

abusing or exceeding they're mandated in some way? How certain can we be? Senator round Paul, Clearly, it's not sold that this is something we can skip over that we can assume is not a profit at all. Play clip three place. I think there's a great danger to having people on television who are speaking off the cuff, who are getting classified information. There's a great danger that they

could reveal something that they shouldn't reveal. And so yes, I think this should apply really to most people who retired. You know, I'm gonna say this right now. I don't I don't think that that's really I think that's much less the concern that one should have than that they're intentionally giving information to the media to think this president.

You know, it's one thing if you're a former Intel officer and not forget intel officer, former Intel chief, and you're going on TV, you know that you're gonna be held to account ats some level for your words. Right if you start talking about, you know, all of our super secret plans to colonize Jupiter, you might get yourself into some trol because you know that's not a good idea.

But if you pass information along and it is referenced only as a national security source, you know, with the close access or who was involved in the matter or whatever, and you were the source for news that damages the administration,

you're probably gonna get away with that. And I have never seen in my lifetime what's going on right now where you have the people that were just in charge of the CIA, just in charge of the Director of National Intelligence Office, who are not just speaking out or writing the occasional editorial, they are in house talent essentially

for CNN, for NBC. This is the new normal. And I'll tell you when I first did this, a meaning that I made the switch in the media One it was an accident, and two it was much less commonplace at the time. There were some other people who were former CIA. There were some of the people former INTEL and I always knew that I had to draw right red line between my former work and what I could talk about on air, and that I would be held

to account. And I had no expectation that I could ever leverage what I only knew because of my time at the CIA for a news story or anything else. Look, I was on air. Here's a perfect example. I was on air the night of the Benghazi attack on TV on cable TV that night without getting the details. There's a lot of stuff that I could have said that night that I did not because I was I had in my obligations in the very front of my mind the whole time, and that's still the way that I

approached this. But I will say that when you see some of these other folks out there, and I mean I've mentioned Brennan did this in particular, they go, well, you know, they'll ask him, do you think the president that the Russians might have something the president? He'll say, well, I know, I was the former CI director, and yes, I do think it is certainly possible, imply or giving the impression that maybe he does know something because of his time at the agency that would obviously be highly

classified and he won't say what it is. But it uses it as a kind of, you know, a secret, a secret rhetorical weapon against Trump that is unprecedented. I've never seen this before. I never thought I would see it, and it's all over the place now. In fact, you're really you know, you've got all these intel chiefs. You get the sense that they're just biding their time before they can write books, go to the Aspen Institute and appear on CNN a lot that's there. That's now their

life's work. That's what they want to do with themselves.

There's an even more important later here though. On the one on the one hand, I just find that unseemly, and people say, oh, Buck, but you know whatever, Look, and it's it's different when you're when you go in, you work there for a few years, you come out or whatever, ten years, fifteen years, whatever it may be, you come out, and overtime also your your knowledge of any classified fades, so the risks of you even having any also over in your mind evaporate with a matter

of years almost nothing. That's why to go right away from being CIA director out into the public sphere that's really aggressive. To go right away from being FBI director to being a hyperpartisan political actor is damaging. Is damaging. Dare I say to our institutions and to our sense that we can trust these organizations? And then there's the specifics of this moment in time, this case that we

are dealing with here. Not only do we have these individuals who still hold their clearances and have access if they wanted or if they're called upon for their insights or whatever, as if we really need, like James Comey to wax philosophical for us. But these are not just individuals who have become very partisan. They are out there shaping public opinion on a scandal that a number of them have their fingerprints all over from their time in government.

So you have Clapper and Brannan and Komey and others who are appearing on TV leveraging the gravitas that they have because their most recent title and also the perception that they must know everything that's going on and everything that's so, you know, when you have the most recent CYI director accusing the sitting president of treason. That's really damaging because the public's mind set on this issue is going to be, well, he's a ci he must know

something we don't know. That's the whole game they're playing. That's what they're up to, and Trump knows it and he's sick of it. They were not only making this case publicly, but they were involved in the construction of this narrative from inside of government. They're coming at it from both sides. They are all in on tearing down this president. So people are really going to tell me that the current commander in chief has no prerogative to say I'm gonna put an end to this, or at

least I'm gonna send a message. I'm gonna send a message by doing what I am constitutionally empowered to do. Trump's not saying they can't spa This is what people say, Oh, it's silence saying no, no no, no. He's not saying they can't criticize him. He's just saying they don't get to criticize him and maintain their access that they only have because they were political appointees of the previous administration. In some cases and in others, you say, well, Buck, their life,

their lifetime civil servants. Well, actually they were leftist the whole time. We've just now seen them for who they really are and all that stuff about you know, mission first and honor and duty and somehow in the era of Trump, none of that matters. It stopped Trump at all costs to give us Hillary. Hello, are these people

really serious? You know, I have to deal with sanctatomy and all the sanctimony from the rest of them, Clapper and brennanal because Hillary would have been our great ethical choice, the champion of this country and the national security stage that we also desperately need. These people are unserious, but

they're also dangerous. And I'm glad that the President is willing to ruffle some feathers and then some And I'm glad that he is making an issue of this, because you know, it is disingenuous to say that the media having but these guys are. Clapper is terrible on TV. I mean, he's gurgling with Gurgan is more articulate. Clapper is terrible. Why is he on TV while he's the director of National Intelligence? He saw everything his decade is

a government service. Someone When he says that the president is basically destroying the country and a trader, he must know something we don't know. That's why these guys are also valuable to these networks. That's where they've gotten I'm sure big contracts as contributors. And it's wrong. It's wrong.

Remember Bush, for all the bad stuff about the Bush administration and the stuff that I would have changed, he didn't, you know, he didn't take cheap shots at the Obama administration because he thought that there was just that was just dishonorable. Forget about Obama taking cheap shot of the administrator. You got the whole former government national security apparatus taking

cheap shots the Trump administration. It's appalling. It's appalling. Eight four four nine two eight two five eight four four nine hundred buck. We have a fantastic show, so much more coming your way. Stay with me this next time had explode, which, by the way, I hope Democrats do

run a democratic socialistation. We don't know, because I think you'll lose spectacularly, and then I will look forward to election night when I finally get to sell everybody I told just so, if you end up running a radical problem with socialism in the words of Margaret Thatcher. At a certain point, you run out of spending other people's money. Venezuela one of the richest countries in the world in the seventies. Now the average Venezuela has lost twenty four

pounds because they're starving. To name one country that socialism has ever worked. And also, every every democratic socialist was going on TV saying that it's good needs to start paying ninety percent in tax I think you should start paying the amount of taxes that every socialist in this country thinks you need to. Because if you think the government is so good at spending money, look at the vehicle.

Is dangerous. I'm just dangerous. I like it, Megan, Megan McCain over there, fired up, all of you dropping dropping bombs on socialism. I like it. I gotta say, job Megan. Uh. This is also a moment where we're having a lot of talk about radicals on the left, because you know, you've got Alexandria Occagio Cortez, the new darling of the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, and my old Blaze colleague Ali Beth's Stucky has made a video of and look,

it's it's a it's a satire. Right, she clearly cut up an interview and pretends to interview her. It's just like, it's what the Daily Show did four years and Ali put this video up. It's a CRTV video on Facebook. It's gotten over a million views, and you've got left wing politicians and journalists freaking out about the satire video there. They are either humorists or they're idiots. They're saying that

it should be taken down or that it's unfair. You know, here you go, Shane Goldmocker, this faked interview of Ocazio by CRTV as nearly woman interview didn't happen. It takes clips from Margaret Hoover show and edits in faux questions, not labeled as satire. Well, it's obviously satire, dude, it's not.

It's not. They're not in the same room. And then and then Okazio Cortez weighs into Republicans are so scared of me that they're faking videos and presenting them as real on Facebook because they can't deal with reality anymore. Here's one bona fide truth. Election day is November six. Oh no, no, miss Okasi acquatas, we can deal with reality.

People that are still clinging to the notion that socialism is going to be a better pathway for this country than the capitalism that has created unprecedented and almost unbelievable wealth and prosperity. Those are the people that I think have a reality problem. I want more of this, though. I want more humorless left wing democrats coming forward to advocate for why we should have socialism. By the way, remember I've told you they'll they point to Norway, they

point to Sweden, they point to these countries. All right, the middle class pays massive taxes in those countries. The middle class is carrying the burden of the welfare state that they have in those countries. And by the way, they're not sustainable. He's holding the line for America. But Sexton is back. All right. We got some calls coming in on the lines, doctor Rick in Maryland with another

diagnosis of America. Doctor Rick. How you doing. Oh, it's it's a pretty grim pog This is for the short term, at least to a mainstream media. I'm doing good. Hey, um, I'm going to ask you a question. You know. I keep waiting for the tipping point on this thing where the evidence mounts and mounts that there that defies of warrant was completely unwarranted, and that this is just a witch hunt. But it's not happening yet, and they're even

double tripling down. Um. And I was wondering your thoughts of, you know, when when is it going to flip, because when it does, I think people are going to be really upset at the mainstream media and how you know they weren't getting the proper information. Now I would I would say this, there there are uh, doctor Rick, there are multiple answers to your question. It's kind of like a choose your own adventure here, right, So let's assume let's assume that the Democrats take the House, in which

I know terrible, but let's assume that that happens. Then I think we never get any answers because they will prevent any serious investigation the House from going on, and we will switch into impeachment mode very quickly, and they'll be all kinds of just grandstanding and nonsense, just lots of nonsense, because they're not going to remove Trump from office because they're not gonna take the Senate. They're not

gonna have two thirds in the Senate. Even if they did take the Senate, but there'll be a lot of a lot of political grandstanding and just wasted time on how you know Trump should be impeached? Why should it be impeached? They're not even just because you know, not because of Russia collusion. They can't prove that that's not why. They'll have some other make believe reason why so. But

let's assume that that doesn't happen. At what point do we have a real turning point with the media where they no longer will be able to claim that there's any possibility of this whole Russia collusion farce being on

the up and up. That's a good question. I think they're going to be dead enders on this one because they there's no way they can admit they were wrong on this without permanently and forever damaging whatever credibility they have left with people who aren't just complete progressive bots, you know, who don't just buy it at all, hook line and sinker. So I think it's h M. I'm trying to think of what it would take for them to finally agree because the Muller probe is I've already

I've said this all along. When Mueller doesn't have any Russia collusion charges, doctor Rick. You know what they're gonna say, Well, he just didn't find them because of all of Trump's obstruction. He just didn't find them because of all the you know, payoffs from Putin to whomever. I mean, they'll make something up. Well, my hope is in science is there's this theory that

science doesn't change in a nice, meet upward way. It's by revolution Coon's theory of revolutions in science, and I'm hoping the same thing here that that and maybe we're seeing it in this hashtag walk away movement, which I think is a reality. I think that the reasoned people are looking at this insanity and just leaving. I think that's why ratings like CNN is in the basement. So maybe they maybe they'll become irrelevant and the populace will

move past the mouthpieces of my hope. Well, doctor Rick, I'm hoping with you. Thank you so much for calling in. Good to talk to you as as always. So let's talk the Justice Department for a second. Jeff Sessions, who is my favorite cabinet official because occasionally he just pops in. He's just like I want to hang out in the freedom hood and he shows up and I'm like, Jeff, buddy, what's going on with my friends? Good to talk to you. And he's like, he's like, Buck, your radio shows the

bitch radio show in the country. I'm like, I know it is, Jeff or mister Attorney General, I know it is, but thank you so much for for your kind words in this imaginary conversation we're having. But Jeff actually showed up today to speak to a Turning Point USA rally or a conference or whatever whatever the specific designation is here in DC, and there was a moment that, oh, this got the attention to some of the liberal journals

out there. Play it lock all right, well, lock her up, they say, lock her up talking about Hillary Clinton, And I know a lot of you were chanting along with them, and that's cool, that's fine, But Jeff didn't really chant with them, all right. The Attorney General just kind of like kind of chuckled at you know, anyone listening to that clip. If you watch it, it's even more clear he's just kind of like, oh gosh, they're saying, you know, he's a whole lock her up. I see what you

guys are saying. You know, it took him a second and process what the chant was, and that's all he said. But they reported this as Oh my gosh, he joined laugh as he joined chance of lock her up. That's what's being reported all over the place. Oh, the chief law enforcement officer joined as he was laughing. Over Look, I mean it's you know, it's a little funny. No one's locking Hillary up. You'll notice that Jeff Sessions could

restart the whole probe into Hillary's emails. I mean, they could go back to that if they really wanted to, They could reopen it. Just because there was a decision made previously not to press charges, that does not mean another administration can't can't come along and say, you know what, we're actually gonna Obama thought about doing that with so called torture or enhanced interrogation with intelligence officers. Obama thought

about that. Remember, Bush was of course not going to do it, but then Obama was putting it out there. He decided not to. But the argument at the time wasn't Obama can't. It's that he shouldn't. So I would just note that Hillary Clinton is a no jeopardy of even being an investigated again by the DJ for all the things that happen for all the stuff that went

on there, and then I think about this one. You know, we don't we don't often get as clear a picture of how the left is deluded when it comes to the way they report on things in this But this was from CNN Politics just as I was on air. Here they're writing a story on how the Justice Department instructs US attorney's offices not to use the term undocumented immigrants and instead refer to somebody illegally in the US

as an illegal alien. Okay, how is this controversial? How many times do I have to explain this to the left? Illegal alien is the actual term under federal law. And we're talking about the Justice Department here, which is supposed to care about federal law. It's not supposed to care about what the latest social justice warriors have to say about this, or what the no no, no, no, no no. It's supposed to be what is the law and how

do we enforce it? And you know, I gotta tell you, I think there's a willful ignorance here from the media on this one, because this is so easy, This isn't even really a discussion to be had. What they want the Justice Department to start referring to them as undocumented immigrants just because they said, just because the media has decided to do that. They really think that that's how this works. Unfortunately, I think the answer is, yes, they

do believe it, that is how this works. But you know, I think this is a much This is a much more important story. This is a much bigger story about what's going on, which is that there are a lot of people out there who are journalists. Here in the swamp of me. I'm in the swamp, and let me tell you, it is swampy. It is. The closer you are to all this stuff. New York feels very unswampy by comparing Harrison, because you don't have all the you know, the I walk down the street, I walk past the

Washington Post offices. I see journalists all the time. I was on a train today. I saw a guy from Axios. I see people from Politico. I walk down the street. You know, everywhere you go, you get journalists everywhere. It's like journalists and politicians run this city. And they do. But the fact that they are reporting on this is it's even a story. Here's a headline for you, folks. Justice Department thinks the law is the words written on the page that are the law. WHOA, that's crazy some

of these folks. I guess it is. It is crazy to them. By the way, we're gonna talk about the status of the global gehags. I think that's kind of slipped from most people's consciousness of these days. We'll talk about that coming up in just a little bit. We also have Sean Davis joining from the Federalist. Hey will be dropping truth bombs like it's going out of style, so that'll be coming up here too. The Federalist dot com is so much great stuff that they're writing these days.

And then the third Hour, if you stick around, which you obviously should, we'll talk about all kinds of fun stuff, including paying for college by a revenue share program of your salary. Oh yeah, that. I'm more coming up to perpetuate unfair trade practices. I think there are better tools to use to get them to play fairly. So I just don't think the tariff route is the smart way to go. I understand the president's plan. I understand what he's trying to do, and and the goal he's trying

to achieve is a good one. A better deal for Americans, better trade agreements. I just don't think tariffs are the way to go, and our members are making that pretty clear. Chinese are convinced that they can cause enough pain to the American farmer that the Trump administration will blink. The Trump administration sent an important signal today was Secretary produced

announcements that we're not going to back down. And frankly, if you look at the total behavior of the Chinese since nineteen ninety one, it is an absurdity to allow it to continue. But when you start to change it, they're going to fight it. I don't look, they've had a great deal. They have ripped us off every single year. They've stolen our intellectual properties, they've rigged the game, and

of course they don't want it to change. But I think President Trump is right and we had better figure out how to engage in this kind of a fight and win it. Making tremendous progress. They're all coming. They don't want to have those tariffs put on them. They're all coming to see us, and the farmers will be the biggest beneficiary. Watch we're opening up markets. You watch what's going to happen. Just be a little patient, they're all aiming at anybody that likes me, and they have

lobbyists like nobody's ever seen, fighting to win. That's what Trump is doing here on tariffs. Folks. This is important. It's important to all of us that you see how this is playing out and you get the honest, the honest scoop if you will, on what's really going on when it comes to this teriff fight. Okay, here's just

a quick update from Trump today. The Trump Administrations Court of the New York Times here announced up to twelve billion dollars an emergency relief for farmers hurt by the president's trade war, moving to insulate food producers from looming financial losses that could be a direct result of Trump's policies.

The aid to farmers, announced by the United States Department of Agriculture will come through a direct assistance program, one designed to help with food purchase and distribution, and one specifically geared toward promoting trade. So you got the president saying, all right, look, if you're gonna, if they're gonna allow this to go forward, right, if these countries won't pull down their trade bears China is can't we see what's

happened here. China is specifically targeting parts of the country with its retaliatory measures on our retaliatory measures, because that's what our tariffs are. Our tariffs are in retaliation. This is not a fight that we really started, and that's an improper framing of it. In the discussion, we are saying to other countries, if you're going to have this tariff, we're going to have that tariff. If you're going to do this, we will respond. And then you know, it

goes back and forth. People say, well, Box, that's a trade war. Well yeah, but right now, it's just a one way trade war. Right now, it's just China does whatever they want and we say, okay, China, that's fine, No big problem there now. Trump tweeted out today that tariffs are the greatest. Either a country which has treated the United States unfairly untrade negotiates a fair deal, or it gets hit with tariffs. It's as simple as that. And everybody's talking. Remember we are the pig piggy bank

that's being robbed. All will be great. The presents ready to fight this one. And he knows it's a risk, folks. Any negotiation comes with the possibility of failure. Though it's

not a negotiation. Any negotiation could go badly. This is negotiation is a performance in and of itself, and the fact that the President isn't backing off this and it is trying to take measures to make sure that our farmers aren't just bearing the whole brunt of this because the Chinese are doing and hoping that we're going to fold quickly. They're hoping that the response from the administration is going to be, Okay, we got the midterms coming up.

They're going after states where you know, there's some real toss ups and some close races. So why don't we just forget about this whole thing and let the Chinese continue to do what they're doing. The response of that is what you're getting from this team, from Trump and

his people, is no, that's not going to happen. And I'm sorry, but you know, Larry could Low and Trump and the people that are pushing this the hardest on the world stage, they know that if this doesn't work out, They know that if the economy tanks and we end up getting the worst end of this whole situation and dealing with these trees on trade, they're gonna be judged for it, and there will be consequences at the ballot box. I'm hoping that there would be consequences. You know. I'm

not saying Trump is gonna win this. It could go wrong. By'm like, what's with Paul Ryan? Well? Why is he always out there? You know me? You know, you just don't have this with Democrats. You never had Nancy Pelosi. Yeah, I attackted you and the radio show. You never had Nancy Pelosi during Obama's first two years in office, going out and just publicly and completely undercutting him on a policy issue. You just didn't have it. I mean, maybe

I'm forgetting something, but you just it wasn't there. Democrats have discipline, maybe because they're obsessed with power and exercising state power and so at least they can all agree on that. But Democrats have discipline on these issues. In the Republicans, we've always got to watch what's happening on our own side. We've always got to watch our flank for the next Republican turn code to go. Oh, I don't want to. I don't know if I want to

go along with that one. Paul Rynas where he's not he's not helping our team, that's for sure, doesn't It doesn't make our lives any easier with this stuff. But you know, I suppose this is this is what we should just expect. Now that you're going to have Republicans who are running for cover. Don't want to be associated with this. We want to stick the consensus. I just

come back to this. The consensus is apparently other countries can have whatever tariffs they want on US products, and we will not put those tariffs on their products come into this country. And that's the way that it's going to be. That's the consensus. And China can get away with all of its manipulative practices and all of its predatory mercantilist actions around the globe, and we're just gonna say, you know what, let's not rock the boat. Well, Trump

is saying, let's rock the boat. And if that has some effect on the EU in Canada and Mexico as well, we'll deal with it. We'll deal with it. But you know, the markets, folks, you know the money money talks, and the markets are not really spooked by this. The markets seem to understand what's going on here. Maybe they've priced in the risk at some level. But they're not nearly as concerned about this as much of the media wants to pretend that they are. So, you know, we'll see

how this, we will see how this plays out. There's just like with North Korea, just like with so many different things that, so many different initiatives that the Trump administration has under way. We are being told to judge these things before we actually have the results of it. We're being told to judge it before we know if in fact it was a success. And that's just a reflection of the fact that people in the media hate this president. I mean, they just hate him. They just

hate him. That's why he doesn't get the credit really from the me. You when North Korea starts dismantling an ICBM facility, it's right, intercontinental ballistic missile that was reported today. They don't really focus on that. Last week it was North Korea is already a failure, The deal is already a failure. This week it's okay, well maybe it's not a failure, but let's not talk about it. Look, this is why nobody trusts him. But you know, the good

thing is Trump's a fighter on this one. We'll talk about how he fights against the mainstream media when we come back. The FBI calls home title theft one of the fastest growing crimes. Brace yourself because having your credit card stolen is nothing compared to the hell you're in for once an identity thief takes control of your home title. Look the folks at home title Lock make sure that this isn't a concern that you're gonna have to have. Right.

But I've seen if you don't have home title Lock, how easy it is to transfer your home's title to a thief. They can forge your signature, they can get all the information online, and it is such a straightforward process. I've seen a demo where they've done it. Folks, if you don't think it can happen to you, I'm telling you eighties shocking. The steps that they have to go through are not difficult at all. Protect yourself for just pennies a day. Home title Lock protects my most valuable asset,

my family's home. Register now for a free analysis and discover if your home's title has been compromised. That's a sixty dollar value. Free Visit home titlelock dot com. Again, that's home titlelock dot com. Buck Sexton Permission Decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake, America, You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton show. The CIA analysts. No, but it's all what you want.

And just remember what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. And I'll tell you, I have so many people that are so infavable because we have to make our country truly great again. Remember make America great again, and then in two and a half years it's called keep America Great. So the way we keep America great is to make at least reasonable I'm not saying at least reasonable, at least fair drade deals, not stupid Drede deals like we've put up with the twenty

five years. So we're changing it, or we're changing it rapidly. The thing that feels new after Helsinki is that the country's shook up and freaked out about it. There is something about him doing that to Putin's face rather than presumably just on his batphone with him or however it is they up in constant phone communication, which is what we hear from the Russian side. Did the president get help from Russia to win his election, Yes he did.

Is our president subordinate to a foreign power? Does our president answer to a foreign government and a foreign leader? The worst case scenario that the president is a foreign agent suddenly feels very powerful. You don't need a pay me back, pay me back, pay me back transactional interaction in order to live as a compromised person in betray your country in that way. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. I wanted to really give you a compare

and contrast there for a moment. You know, you have the president the United States who is who is just straight up warning people what you're seeing on the news is not what's happening. Don't trust them. They don't have your best interest at heart. They are pushing an agenda and being dishonest about it. And then you have you know, Matta who's saying that the President United States is a

foreign agent. Think about the disparity here. You have a president whose entire campaign time in office is defined by really a kind of superpatriotism, a president who, if nothing else, anyone who's around him, for whatever flaws he may have. He's not perfect. I don't pretend he's perfect. You know he's not perfect, But he definitely loves this country. But the left wing media that was madaw there, who's getting

millions of viewers of night folks? I mean, you know, finally in MSNBC is catching catching up on some nights to Fox after so many years of just getting completely schooled in the ratings. But you have people that are watching as she says that the president of United States may in fact be an agent of a foreign power, which is another way of saying a trader. They're calling this president on cable news a trader, without evidence and without any reason or sanity behind this, but they keep

doing it. You know, this is what our president sounds like when he's talking about America. This is the president that the left wing is calling this guy a turncoat, guilty of treason, and a trader. Play ten, play ten, and eleven. For more than a century, the VFW has represented American heroes who promoted American values, and they did so with honor. You are the universal symbol of the patriotic pride that beats loudly in every single American heart.

We don't apologize for America anymore. We stand up for America. We stand up for the patriots who defend America. Remember Washington's advice that the best way to preserve the peace is to be prepared for war, and that is exactly what we do all the time. My thinking is always on military and military strength. That is why I'm proud to report that we are now undertaking the greatest rebuilding

of our United States military in its history. We have secured seven hundred billion dollars for defense this year and seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars next year. Approved. That's the guy they say can't be trusted. That's the person who's unfit to be commander in chief. You know, you saw in that room day speaking of the veterans of foreign wars, and you saw the way that veterans look at him, the way that our active duty military responds

to him. They know they're the ones putting their lives in line for this country day in and day out. They know what this president thinks when it comes to them, no doubts. And yet the media calls him a traitor, a puppet of Putin doing their bidding. This is so far from reality that I really do worry, as I've said to you so many times now, but that there's been some kind of a break from reality that the Democrat Party in the left in this country is having

something of a nervous breakdown. Collectively, They're having a collective nervous breakdown because you can't make sense of this otherwise. This is the president that they say is not a patriot. This president's all about patriotism, you know. This is the one that they say is doing Russia's bidding, how by building up our military, by having more aggressive policies towards Russia than any of his predecessors. That's the way that

he's doing Putin's work for him. You know, I do you really do believe these are not serious people in the sense that they should not be taken seriously. But we have to take the threat of their lies and of their undermining of the administration seriously because they're very powerful still. They get away with this kind of stuff all the time, you know. And you know that's why having a president who will just say, you know what, enough is enough, and I'm not going to stand for

this anymore. I keep saying. I remember what it was like during the eight years of the Bush administration. It was like watching your little brother get get weggies all the time, and you weren't able to help him. You know, it's just stunk. Bush was getting pummeled in the media and just took it and just took it. Oh yeah, well at least Bush was a gentleman. They'd say, Now, yeah, Bush just got rolled. They went after him with everything that they had. They tried to throw his vice president

in prison on some BS charge. Scooter Libby got the brunt of that one, unfortunately, but you know the whole thing. Okay, that's how they were playing the game. And Bush was like, well, you know, I just don't want to be a you know, a bad guy. You know, we were in two wars, a brawl, but Bush didn't realize that we were in a political street fight here at home. Trump knows that he knows what he's up against. Play sixteen. Just stick with us. Don't believe the crap you see from these people.

To fake news. I mean, I saw a piece on NBC today, NBC not just CNN. CNN is the worst, but I saw a piece on NBC. It was hot throppy. They were interviewing people. They probably go through twenty and then they picked the one that sounds like the worst. But they went through a group of people. In fact, I wanted to say, I gotta do something about this.

Trump terrible. You know, he's got a tremendous command of the room, and he understands, he understands his people, he understands his base, his voters, and the fact that he will just say it. I mean, CNN, they are the most smug, disingenuous bunge. I'm talking about the TV. Look, there's good people at all these different organizations. Right, there's nice people working off camera. There's nice people who are correspondents you wouldn't remember I've never heard of before. Right,

this is a tough business. People take jobs where they can. I'm talking about the big wigs. I'm talking about the people over there that are multi millionaires, that are somewhat household names, and they're pushing along with the network execs an agenda that's dishonest. Up until now, we've had all Republican presidents say, well, the means you know, the media is kind of bias, but you know, we're hoping we'll

work with them more. Up until now, you would see that presidents would just take this on the chin and then hope that their goodwill to the other side would be reciprocated. It never is. It's so refreshing to have a president who rolls up as sleeves and says, Okay, you want to do this, you want to scrap, let's scrap.

You want to play dirty, Let's play dirty. And that's what I think is one of the one of the truly great things about this administration is that we don't have to just sit around anymore and just take it, just take it, just deal with it. And that's why they're freaking out so much. That's why you get mattaw going on our shows saying it was an agent of Russia. An agent of Russia. In what universe if Trump had if the Russians had something on Trump that could really

bring him down, He's gonna run for president? Why he's a billionaire. None of this makes sense, folks. You don't even have to get into the fis and the nounz and all will do that too, But you don't even have to do that. It just doesn't make any sense. The motives don't add up, the storyline doesn't hold together, because ultimately, the real storyline here is and always has been, that Hillary was supposed to win that election. Hillary was supposed to be in power, giving liberals what they want,

reaffirming their worldview. CNN, MSNBC and the other broadcast networks, we're gonna have all kinds of access, and they'd have this pinnacle moment in their careers where they'd be all cozy with Hillary's White House for eight years, and that was stripped for from them. They feel and whether they have to pretend it's unfair or really believe it's unfair, that's what they're gonna do. That the election was unfair. That's what they're gonna say. It's pretty pathetic, but it's

also dangerous for this country. We're gonna talk about jihad the moment. What's happening to the global jihad right now? You don't hear about it very much anymore. We'll discuss that with an expert. So stay right there. I'm sure we have some hr specialists listening. People who are property owners, those who are either hiring or think about leasing out

a property that they have to somebody. You know what, you gotta do a background check, and you better trust whoever's doing that check for you, and know that there's anything that comes up, You're gonna get somebody on the phone. Who will handle the problem with care. That's what Global Verification does. Global Verification is the only dual certified, veteran owned background investigation and vetting company. They are headquartered in Chicago with offices across the nation. All the work is

done here. It is never off short. So for the business owners or people that are in the HR departments of business listening to this, I'm telling you give Global Verification a shot. They will be your background investigation and vetting company. Go to MYGVN dot com. That's my GVN dot com or call eight seven seven six nine five eleven seventy nine eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine Global Verification Network. What has happened in

the global ghat everybody? I was talking about this yesterday. During the Obama administration, you will recall there was a period where we had a major attack. It felt like every month for over a year. I mean there were just mass casualty terror attacks in Europe and here at home. Isis inspired, isis directed remote control plots. It's died down so much, and I'm wondering why that is. We have somebody who can help address that question. A whole lot

more joining us right now. Robert Spencer is with us. He is the director of Jihadwatch. He is a new book out as well, The History of Jihad or Robert, thanks for making the time for us great to be here, Buck, Thank you. Well, let me ask you that question first before we get into the history. Let's talk about the present of jihad, if you will, are things right now? Isis is not entirely defeated eradicated, but it certainly is

a shadow of what it formerly was. Is the Trump administration taking the fight to the Jihadis in a way that's quiet them down? Or should we we getting ahead of ourselves? What do you make of the current situation? Oh? This is very much the Trump effect. And it shows that Jihadis understand strength and they understand weakness, and that's really the only calculus that they deal with non Muslims upon.

And so they looked at Obama and all his goodwill gestures to the Muslim brotherhood and to Iran and aiding Jihad forces in Syria against Assad, and they thought he was weak and they took advantage, and so the Jihad was advancing. They see Trump, they see that he is strong, and that's why it's been a bit in abeyance since he's become president. But as I show in the book, this is a fourteen hundred year old struggle as far

as they're concerned. It has ebbs and flows, it has periods of activity and periods of relatively less activity, but it never goes away because it is based on fundamental Islamic doctrines. Do you get into or could you, Lisa, just tell us now what you make of this ongoing discussion and debate about how jihad has no military meaning. I know you've heard this, Robert, I've heard this too. I've heard this my prior life as a canter terrorism mans to hear this all the time. No military meaning,

It just means striving. What do you make of it, Well, it does mean striving or struggle in Arabic, and it's true that you know, you can have struggles or strivings that are great and some that are trivial. You can try to you can struggle or strive to quit smoking, and you can struggle or to defend your civilization. It's the same word in Arabic jihad, and it also has

that same kind of shade of meaning. But there is no denying that the primary meaning of jihad in Islamic law and Islamic theology is warfare against unbelievers to establish the rule of Islamic law over them and render them

second class, discriminated against on an institutionalized basis. And what I show in the book is that this is not just some small groups idea, or some idea that al Qaida invented, or some reaction to the United States foreign policy, or reaction to the establishment of Israel, or any of these fashionable explanations. But this is something that goes all the way back to the beginning of Islam fourteen hundred years and has been a constant warfare around the world

everywhere Hulsums have gone where they're a non Muslim. We're speaking of Robert Spencer, who's got a new book out, The History of Jihad. Robert, if you had to pick a place right now that we should be watching, perhaps more than we are, where jihad could become a major problem not just for that country of the region, but perhaps a global threat, as we have seen with Afghanistan, with Syria, with Iraq, with Egypt. I mean all these

different countries around the world. But if there was one place that you were saying, keep your eye on this one. Things could go bad. There is there one that comes to mind. Yeah, absolutely, Jordan is the one that immediately leaps to mind. Most people think of it. They think it's a moderate Muslim country. We've got this king who's on our side, and that's the end of the story.

But actually Isis, the Islamic State has considerable support in Jordan even now, and the president you may recall, not the president, I'm sorry, the king. A few years back, you may recall, after the Jordanian pilot was burnt alive by ISIS on a video that they circulated around the world, the king of King Abdullah of Jordan actually vowed to take the fight to them, but he never actually followed up. And he did not follow up because of the significant

support that Isis enjoys in Jordan. That country is a tinderbox that could very easily be destabilized the king overthrown right now. Saudi Arabia is facing the same threat. That's one of the reasons why they are modernizing, letting women drive all these things, trying to let steam off some of the reform pushes in that country, and also to

gain international support against Iran. Which is a very serious threat for Saudi Arabia with Shiis all across the eastern seaboard of Saudi Arabia, right near Iran, and that's where the oil fields are. And so you're talking about if Jordan goes, Saudi Arabia could go or vice versa, and the whole area could be engulfed in a large scale war very easily. What do you what should we know?

What should we be thinking about with regard to Iranian jihad at this point, we know people always talking about Iran as a hardline reactionary Islamist regime, which which it clearly is. But I think in the popular conception, jihad is thought of more war with Sunni Jihaddest groups like al Qaida in the Islamic State and others. But the Iranians don't just want to have Jihaday don't just want to have radicalism at home. They want to export it

abroad as well. Yes, that's right, and that's why Iran has a significant part of the last part of this book, because they are pursuing jihad purposes, jihad goals around the world. They don't do your right, They don't have with the

exception of his Bala jihad group in Lebanon. They don't go in for terror groups like al Qaida and the Taliban and so on, although they actually do support them, because Iran is trying to position itself even though it's Shiite and the Shiites are a small minority among Muslims worldwide. Iran's trying to position itself as the leader of the entire Islamic world, so they fund Sunni Islamic terror groups

like Hamas, al Qaida, the Taliban, and more. And they are also pursuing a geopolitical strategy of destabilization of the West. For example, there is a communist party in Spain that is funded by the Iranian regime and it has nothing to do with Islam. But the Iranians are calculating that if they can destabilize the government in Spain and destabilize the governments in general around the West, then they can

help to advance their own agenda. One of the other examples of this is that his Bala, they're wholly owned and operated subsidiary, is operating in northern Mexico with the drug cartels. Obviously, that's not the perp the end goal of being there. They're ultimately working toward getting here. If you want more details on this, folks, if you want to know more about what we're talking about, you can get the book History of Jihad by Robert Spencer, who's

with us now. He's director of GIHI Watch. Robert, thank you so much for making time. Good luck with the book, and come back on the show soon. Thanks. Buck, always a pleasure. Call me anytime, all right, team eight four four nine two eight two five eight four four or nine hundred Buck, we have so much more coming. He's back with you now, because when it comes to the fight for truth, the fuck never stops. And Grennan leaked

the information to Harry Reid. Rice goes on TV after Benghazi in lies on five different networks about the cause, the catalyst of the attack in Benghazi. Clapper Light under oath Comy leaked information through a friend to create momentum for a special Council McCabe Light three times under oath faces a criminal referral. And we know Peter struck it and telling the truth because he couldn't even admit that

there was bias in his statements too. In his text messages to Lisa Page in the committee hearing, two weeks ago. So the president is fighting back just like he should. And what we also know is this past weekend, everything that we saw in this in this FIS application confirms what we've all been saying for say, you have to really desperately try to put the words together the way

that they did. Instead of just having a simple definition, which could have been candidate to hired hired fusion, GPS right or US person one to hire source one to go get the information. That was really simple to explain. The courts would have understood it easily. And I think the courts would have at that point well they should have rejected. I'm not sure they would have, but they should have. I don't blame the judges. I think that

judges were misled. Well what really happened here. I want to bring on somebody who has a very well informed point of view on this. You read through all the stuff and he's fierce on Twitter. We've got Sean Davis with a co founder of The Federalist. Check out his latest at the Federalist dot com. Sean' good to have you back, good to be here, Thank you for having me.

So so you actually have to deal with the with the Twitter rage mobs coming after you for saying things like, Okay, so this FISA, well, what do you think The FISA information that came out over the weekend tells us. It tells us that dj and FBI willfully deliberately misled the FISA court. They lied to it. They claimed that an article that had been sourced directly to steal not only corroborated steel this circular reasoning, but that Steele wasn't the

source of it. They deliberately withheld material facts from the court, like the fact that the DNC and the Hillary campaign funded Fusion GPS, which had hired the source one they

the FISA application. For anyone who has followed the story, corroborated, confirmed, and backed up everything that people like Nunez and Jim Jordan and people like us that the federals who have actually read the documents knew from the beginning was that the Russian collusion investigation, from the very beginning, was a setup job started by spurred by false information put together by a Hillary Clinton campaign contractor. And I'm seeing a return of the Oh no, it wasn't Carter Page. It

was Papadopolis that got this whole thing started. And I keep coming back to you if they can open up a FISA or a surveillance operation of any kind. Quite honestly, never mind FISA. Because of what they had on Popidopolis. There's no such thing as a Fourth Amendment anymore, because the FBI can just be like, yeah, we heard you talking about a thing, and we want to know more, so we're just gonna mike you up. I mean, it's Shawn,

It's crazy. No it is. And if you actually listen to the words of the people involved in the alleged Popadopholis meeting which gave rise to the investigation, their rationale makes no sense. We were told that it was a meeting between Alexander Downer and George Popadopolis in which Hillary's emails being offered by the Russians were explicitly mentioned, and then two late two months later, Alexander Downer brings that to the attention of the FBI, and then they immediately

spring into action and they start this investigation. But even Downer, who is allegedly the guy who started this whole thing by having this conversation with Popagopoulus, says that conversation didn't even happen, that way that emails never even came up. So when you have the guy whose information was allegedly used to start the investigation saying no, I never actually

said that stuff. And when you combine that with everything else we know about the cavalcade of lies that we've been given, you can come to no other informed conclusion other than that this was a setup, hack, political job from day one that never should have been approved by any court with a lick of sense or understanding of

the Fourth Amendment in the Constitution. Now, I saw also that there were some there, some defenders of the deep state or just anti trumpers out there who were saying, oh, well, this proves that the new Nez memo was wrong, the New nes memo for many months ago, I looked at this, and I read this over the weekend. I read the four unter page report. A lot of it was redactive, which made it easier, but I remember reading through and thinking,

I don't see how this, How does that disprove? I mean, what is the case they're even making seawan that because it mentioned somebody that they should have you know, because they didn't specify Hillary Clinton here or there, but they kind of should have known that it was Hillary Clinton that they did talk about it. I don't even understand what the cases they're trying to make about this. No, no, the case they're trying to make is that Trump deserved it,

and everything flows from that. The most ridiculous assertion I've seen that so divorced from reality, is that, oh no, no no, no, you can't claim that they withheld the origins of the report from the fires the coort because they included in a footnote a tiny note that said they think us identified person one, which by the way, is Glenn Simpson. Incusion.

GPS might have wanted to discredit the Trump campaign, as if somehow that encapsulates, you know, saying, you know, explicitly, this was funded by a political party two and candidate two who were seeking to defeat candidate one in the election. Okay, even if if somebody who wanted to discredit a campaign could be an ex wife, could be an embittered neighbor, could be a political rival, could have been a business rival, to say that that somehow stified the standard of honest

disclosure is offensive and nonsensical. Yeah, I'm amazed that people are even trying to hold this up, But I would just note that the that the the privacy of all these people that were not Trump associates was apparently very high up on the fives are, you know, on the minds of these FBI agents, But the privacy of Carter Page or George Poppadoppolis that doesn't matter at all somehow, right Like everyone who's involved here, all the shady characters

that are sicking the FBI on Carter Page, they're fine. They we need to make sure that their names that appear in this When when an eighth grader could read some of this five and stuff and go, okay, well we're talking. We know who we're talking about here, right like we know which presidential presidential campaign won, we know who you know, who we're dealing with. So it just seems like it's there's a dishonesty at the heart of a lot of the and that's not even including the redactions.

That's just the places where they, you know, try to hide the specific identity of a name or an unnamed person. Right in getting into carter Page, anyone who has paid attention to him, listened to him and also read the case against him presented in the application and the dossier. The idea that this guy was somehow a secret Russian spy is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.

And it's funny that, in addition to the silly dossier nonsense and all the circular referential self referential corroboration of the dossier, the FBI and dj cited a case without telling the court what actually happens that involved some corrupt Russians, and they said that Carter Page had been involved with it, without telling the court that he had actually assisted the

FBI in bringing those people to justice. I mean, the whole thing, from beginning to end is a joke, and anyone who says otherwise is being dishonest or they're incompetent or illiterate. Now, what do you think about the stripping of the possible stripping of clearances. I'm taking a lot of heat shown. I'm like, why, first of all, why is this defcon one for the media all of a sudden. A clearance is not a civil rights issue. It's not a constitutional issue. It's a privilege, not a right of

any kind. The presidence of commander in chief. He can strip clearances if he wants to. And when you've got people that were in the government using their high, high level access to undermine the incoming presidency. I don't think they should have clearances. That seems to make sense to me. Well, I think you can get broader than that. If the only reason you had a clearance is because you were working in government, you don't need that clearance anymore when

you leave government. I don't care if you're James Comey or James Clapper or John Brennan. Once you're out of government, especially if you're a political appointee, especially if you're a political appointee and you're eighteen months out, there is no reason on Earth why you should get to keep your security clearance. And it's rather obvious if the only reason these reporters are just so up in arms about it is because as soon as these guys lose their clearances,

these reporters lose their access to classified leaks. Yeah, Sean said it, everybody, and I think Sean's right. So there you go, Sean Davis, everybody of the federalists. Check out what he's written at the federal dot Com and also all the other fine writers over there. Sean, keep owning the libs on Twitter, all right? You make me proud. This administration is on a crusade against people who they do not consider original Americans. What they've done at the

border is an example of it. What they've done in Puerto Rico, and they are on a jihad to deport as many people as they can who they believe are not in the United States legally. And the fact is, instead of supporting our ICE officers, many of these Democrat politicians who are really disciples of a very low IQ person, Maxine Waters and perhaps even worse Nancy Pelosi, they've launched vicious smears on the brave men and women who defend

our communities. ICE officers work in dangerous conditions to protect our communities, and more than a third of ICE officers happened to be veterans themselves. Thank goodness for ICE, because we have some of the worst drug dealers, terrorists, criminals, and MS thirteen gang members and we're either throwing them the hell in jail, are throwing them out of our country. And ICE goes up there and they walk in like it's another day in the office. Thank goodness for ICE.

The Democrats that's want to abandon ICE, they want to end ICE. ICE is tough and smart and they track them down and they stop tremendous amounts of crime and these are great people and then not being treated properly. So that's the president on Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency known his ICE. You know, Democrats picked this fight. They picked this fight with regard to ICE. They were the ones who decided that they were going to make

this a campaign issue for the midterms. A'mbolish abolish ICE like they decided to do that. They did not have to do that. This was a choice that they made. And looking at this now, I have to say that this is going to be I would hope a hindrance for them. I hope that this hurts them in the mid terms because it should. Don't think that their propaganda has not had a market effect. Though they're anti IIS agitation have resulted in people really thinking poorly of Immigrations

and Customs Enforcement and what this is. That's why Trump's so important there. You know, I played that Cuomo. No bother likes ye because that's very cold. You put it in your hand and it feels like, oh no, I can't feel my fingers. Oh wait, that is a different kind of ice. I'm the Governor of New York. I should know better, but I played that where he said crusade in geehad. First of all, he's trying to be provocative with that whole thing, right, A crusade a geehad.

All of it is harder when it's icy outside because of coldness with ice, you know. The the governor was saying that the Governor of New York was saying that stuff because he thinks that this is going to be

good for Democrats right now. Trump though, points something out that this whole abolished Ice mantra, this mania about abolishing immigrations and customs enforcement, does not take into a count or at least most people don't understand that when they are defaming Ice and calling them, you know, tyrants and thugs and all these terrible things. They're saying, abolish ice, it's it's guilty of war crimes or inhumanity, not war crimes, sorry,

in humanitarian acts. Inhumane acts. Although the sum have said that it is effectively like a concentration camp down there, So don't don't think that there's any rhetoric that's really beyond the pale for them. But with the decision to make abolish ice, a campaign issue. But I remember Democrats did this. This was all Democrats. They created this whole narrative. What they are going to have to live with now is that immigrations and customs enforcement is, as was mentioned,

a large percentage of about a third or veterans. So these Democrats are defaming and in a sense rhetorically spinning on veterans. They're definitely defaming and spitting on law enforcement here. And I can't help but notice that the respect that they feel, the reverence, Oh my gosh, the FBI is incredible, especially FBI leadership and DJ leadership amazing when it comes to the Russia collusion probe. You know, the FBI and the intelligence community are all of a sudden beyond criticism.

By the way, for people like me that were in the intel community when there was a Republican president before, and it wasn't in the interests of the mainstream media to prop up some narrative of infallibility for the intelligence community. I just I want to laugh and cry about what's going on right now. Oh, we were mocked for getting I Rock wrong. We were mocked for black sites for torture.

Not just mock, I mean they were talking about throwing some of us in prison for that, Black Sites, torture, WMD, all these different debacles that's all forgotten now Now it's how could you ever question the intelligence community assessment on Russia? How dare you, sir? And Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, which is also law enforcement in law enforcement agency that doesn't get the benefit of the doubt, that doesn't get any

special consideration or protection or anything else. No. No, they think that anything that they can do to undermine it at this point is somehow justified. They think that that's a fair thing. And Trump is the only Republican politician I know of right now, the only Republican leader period who is really making the case about what Democrats do want. The forgotten men and women of our country are forgotten no more. The Democrats are trying to find out who

are these people that came out to vote. Where did they come from? Remember that, where did they come from? Now they know, But they're not going to the Democrats who are going so far left that nobody can believe it. They want open borders and crimes. Okay, we want strong borders and we want no crime. That's other than that. We're very similar other than that, we're very subject. We also know that to be a strong nation, we have

to have these strong orders. We cannot send our military to confront threats abroad only to allow those same threats to cross our borders and to threaten us right here at home. Trump understands what's really going on with immigration, and he makes the case in a way that we get it, We hear it. It's sensible. We know that the Democrats have been lying on this. We know that you can trust Democrats on this issue. It couldn't be any more clear. He says it. He doesn't dance around

the issue. He's not saying, oh, let's do work permits, or let's find a way to increase visas or no, no, no, let's deal with the fact that the Democrat party right now doesn't want to send anyone home was here illegally. In fact, I'm seeing people say why do they even call them illegals? Well, because the official term is illegal alien. If people who come into the country illegally aren't going to be deported, I want to know, should we even have that law on the books. A law that is

not enforced very quickly ceases to be a law. But what Democrats want for the purposes of trying to take back power so they can then win the House and then move right onto impeachment. Is getting their base fired up with promises of abolishing an agency that's only doing what Democrats until about a minute ago, we're pretending they wanted too, which was enforcement of immigration laws. You know you need a home security system, right, but which one

should you get? A lot of them will lock you into long term contracts, The customer service is garbage, and you didn't even know how to use this system. He ends up getting police sent to your house because you can't type in the code. Forget all of that. Make your life as easy as possible when it comes to the best around the clock protection you can find Simply Safe. Simply Safe is all about making sure that you are

in charge. You are in control, your home is safe, your family is safe, and if you have any questions or any problems, they are there for you. Okay. This system is also designed so that you don't even have to notice it. It's so intuitive and easy. You can download an app. I have it at home. Once you check it out, you'll see is the only home security system you will ever need or ever want. Once you check it out, visit simply safe dot com slash buck. Now,

that's simply safe dot com. Slash buck again, protect your home by visiting simply safe dot com slash buck. Buck Sexton Remission, decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show. CIA analysts Sexton. No welcome back, everybody. Why is it that of all of the transgressions in our modern society that seemed to be the most likely

to be made up? There are there's a there's a category of racist or xenophobic, you know, various transagressions related to the isms racism, sexism, etc. But particularly racism. And we find out that they are hoaxes. This is something that you can't help but but pick up when you see enough of what's going on in the news. There's

no way to avoid this. And we've got another one here, another one here about a server at a steakhouse in Texas who made up the viral story about a customer, a customer who who allegedly wrote, we don't tip terrorist on a receipt. This was in Odessa, Texas. He wrote in zero for his tip. This was what the story initially said, and at the top of the receipt decided to write that, you know, we don't tip terrorist his story.

This story became international. Okay, this got international attention. People all across the country. We're being told about this terrible situation at the Salt Grass Steakhouse of this server who has you know, we don't tip terrorists and he gave him zero. And I know I would note that a lot of us read this and thought to ourselves. Myself myself included no, no, I'm buy it. But you're not

allowed to say that. Oh no, no, not allowed to say that ever, No allowed to suggest that maybe we before we jumped to conclusions and possibly rule in someone's life. Right Once, once you've been branded a racist in the in the kind of viral moment of the media, you're done. I mean not only you're gonna lose your job, you're gonna lose your reputation and you may be unemployable. I mean it's if you write don't tip terrorist on a Muslim guy's receipt at at at a restaurant, you may

find yourself unemployable until you change your name. I mean, this is gonna have real ramifications. But a lot of us saw this and thought to ourselves, you know that just I don't know, it just seems too Who would be so stupid as to do that? Right, You're because remember it's with a credit card, so they know who you are. You're gonna take that risk in this day

and age, in this media environment. Put it aside whether somebody would would just decide to be such a jerk, because there are people who are you know, look, I know they're a racist and bigots and all that. And this is where the left always comes in and says, oh, the racism is real. I know, racism is real. We all know racism is real. It's real around the world, by the way, it's real, and every society, at every place on the planet, there is no such thing as

a race free society. It does not exist in fact. And when you actually go into countries that are particularly homogeneous, well, when you have a country where there's very little racial uh, you know, very little in terms of racial diversity, you see that the people there can be particularly uncomfortable with

outsiders and those different from themselves. Anyway, So this guy, he wrote this, or he claims that that the waiter in this restaurant attacks this, claims that the guy wrote, you know, we don't tip terrorist, and it was a fake. It was a hoax. It was a hoax. What awe surprise. A lot of us feel like this is in fact something that we should come to expect at this point.

There's there's a lot of these, whether it's a girl in New York making up a story about two guys attacking her wearing aga hats while they're on the train. You know, we see these these incidents that just sound too perfect out of the left wing playbook and you know, a playbook of victimology. And we say, well, I just don't think I just don't think that that is a likely scenario. And if you suggest that, if you say that, you're a bad they want you to know you're a

bad person. You know. If you say, well, I've got some questions, can we ask for further details? Can we have the victim actually tell us a bit more about who who did this or why or what they think

really happened, then you're a bad person. Meanwhile, this keeps happening, and you know, you got to ask yourself this question, if racism in this country is really as bad as they say it is, and if anti Muslim bigotry is as terrible as they are suggesting all the time, why do we have so many of these hoax hate crimes

that come up? And why is it that after an incident, for example, of Jihada's terrorism, I'll see on the you know, the huffy and posts, the sitesvox dot com and others, they'll run some statistic about a rise in hate crimes. Then I'll look and the hate crimes will include someone who allegedly said something mean to someone wearing a headscarf somewhere. Well, that's that's not exactly a five alarm fire. I mean, I feel like that, that's not nice. But we could

probably use more details before we go much further. That said, you do take risks. Now, there's no question that there have been a number of instances of people attacked for wearing Trump garb, for wearing things that associate them with the Republican Party. And what's even more astonishing, well, perhaps it shouldn't be astonishing. I guess we should be at a point now where I suppose we accept this kind

of behavior, not behavior, but approach from the media. They will push it aside, they'll try to do the minimum of coverage on it, and you can't help but get the sense that for the mainstream media, whenever somebody wearing a MAGA hat is in fact attacked, there is a sense that, you know, maybe that person had it coming, maybe they you know, maybe they should have thought twice before they decided to show their support for this president.

So this is when when we get into why people don't trust the media, why they think the media is dishonest. This is one of the areas where they really do show their bias. The way that different vetim different victims are treated by different media outlets. That really shows you what their political biases are, and it's something that they can't help themselves. They'll do this all the time. Republicans, particularly white male Christians, are just not victims that the

media wants to talk much about. It's not something they want to spend much time on. And these racism hoaxes, it's a version of what you see on Twitter. You see on Twitter you'll have a left wing journal journalist

who will write something inflammatory about President Trump. It'll be completely untrue, but they'll write something about Trump or his administration, and then they will issue a correction, perhaps of the tweet, but they want to leave the initial tweet up usually and that's because the initial tweet got you know, thirty thousand retweets, went viral. The correction tweet got ten retweets. Nobody cares. So you you, you benefit from being a

partisan who is dishonest. You benefit from being someone who's a political actor pretending not to be. And you know, this is when I look at what's going on with the way that these different you know, media outlets treat these incidents of you know, a hate crime hoax. They just don't want to talk about it. They don't have an interest in it, they don't have any focus on this. And you know, you just you know, the initial story and this is what I mean by the Twitter comparison.

The initial story about the incident of racism, National News, all these outlets covering it, the correction when it's a complete and utter hoax. Okay, the employer found out that his employee made it up. That doesn't get nearly as much attention. This is all you have to see to understand the narrative formation that is at work here, and This is how the other side is always is playing the game. I want to talk to you speaking on

narrative formation. I want to talk to you about this shooting up in shooting up in Canada where you know, they were very quick to tell us right away, they were very quick to tell us that this was a mental health issue. And I'm not saying it's not. I know I read that the guy was you know, had a long history, had a history of mental illness. But they've immediate they turned this into a gun control discussion in a city that has very tight gun control, in

a country that has tight gun control. That's what they are switching to right away. I just wonder, is there anything, you know, ideologically speaking, is there anything that we need to take a look at here other than just mental illness? Could it be mental illness plus radicalization of some kind. I want to walk through that with you coming up here in just a moment, team, so stay with me for that. So, there was a shooting that did not get a whole lot of attention in in Toronto. Initially

it did. To be fair, initially it did. And the shooting was in a crowded area that I'd leave It's called like the Greek town or a Greek area of Toronto, and you had a lot of people were hit and thirteen wounded, two people killed, including a ten year old girl. So this is a multiple person fatality shooting with over a dozen people who were hit by bullets. And immediately people started to get into their position for okay, how do we make this a political fight? What do we

do to I'm just being honest about this. Every time there's a mass shooting now of any kind, people try to establish some means of using it for political gain. Right there, They're gonna infuse it with their narrative, whatever that may be. However it is that they see it, they come together and come up with some way to

attach it to their favored, their favored talking one. And I saw this one, I thought to myself, Okay, well, what's gonna happen here is it's immediately going to turn into a gun control versus terrorism struggle in the news media. That's what they were going to make of it, and

sure enough they did. But I would note that, you know, there is this period where we're all told now to wait with the motive, and sometimes you see why that's a good idea there was a a vehicular attack in Canada that was one of these involved what is it, involuntary in cell, involuntary celibate, you know, maniacs who just who couldn't get any female attention, so he just ran a bunch of people down with his car. That's yeah. That was April ten. In April ten people were killed.

That was when the driver of a rental van struck all these people on the sidewalk. So, you know, you don't always know. And I'm not somebody who jumps right to the oh, it's terrorism, it's terrorism, because sometimes it's not terrorism. Sometimes it's just a crazy person, and sometimes it is some form of extremism that is not gee hootism or the most likely, you know, the most likely situation which has given these kinds of shootings, you would expect it, you'd expect it to be a gee hottis right.

So I look at this one, and sure enough the name came out of the shooter, twenty nine year old Toronto resident. The gunman has been identified as Faisal Who's sin. Now I have to ask you what are we to make of the motive here? This guy is dressed in black, He walks up to a walks up to this restaurant area in a trendy neighborhood and just shoots as many people as he possibly can. Now they are telling us that this is psychosis, that he is somebody who has

a long history of mental illness. I am not denying that is the case. He may have a lot of

he may have a long history of mental illness. But I would just be cautious about this new trend that I'm seeing in a mass shooting that perhaps involves somebody of Islamic extraction, that there may be a reactionary move to label these things as mental health related, because then everyone feels everyone feels sympathy for the family, right, everyone feels like, oh, well, it was no one's fault, this was just a very deeply mentally ill person or not.

Everyone feels sympathy for the for the family of the shooter. But you know what I mean, there's there's a greater sense of this was just a terrible tragedy, severe mental illness, and that's what led us. But you know, when you look at the statistics, millions and millions of Americans, for example, I'm it's true in Canada as well. I have some form of ment of a mental health challenge, whatever it may be, it's on a tremendous spectrum, right, And we

see this from physical health too. There's a huge difference between you know, I have a cold and I have ebola. Right, there's a huge spectrum of what constitutes illness, and that's true of mental illness as well. And I'm not saying I can't diagnose this guy. I don't know his history, but I do sense. Okay, Well, here's a guy who is clearly he is of Islamic extraction, shoots up a bunch of people, and immediately we're being told, oh, well, we don't know the motive, but he has a history

of mental illness. Okay. Is it so extreme that he was completely that he was not of sound mind and would not be able to stand trial in a court. Or did he have a history of you know, abusing some alcohol or drugs and some tough times and he turned to radical Islam. You know, I just would keep

an eye on this. I'm I'm not suggesting I don't know the full details here, No one does yet Moore's coming out, but I sense that, in an effort to always make these incidents that could involve somebody who may have been a radicalized jihadist. To make it about mental health and guns is a much more comfortable position for a lot of people doing the reporting and everything else than to talk about Islamic radicalization. I'm just noting this because I'm wondering, I mean, what are the chances that

this guy involved the mass shooting. Canada does not have a vast population of Muslim Canadians. It does seem like a coincidence that this guy who you may look at and say, hold on, he has an Islamic background. Was there Islamic radicalism involved here? Oh no, no, don't even

ask that question. Let's just go right to mental health and let's throw everybody, by the way, who has any kind of a mental health issue into this position where oh so, now that's the you know, anytime it's anytime there's a mass shooting in the US or in Canada, we have to have a discussion about how mental health recorded to be more accessible to the authorities, and mental health treatment perhaps needs to be a closer in line with law enforcement. And you know, there's a tradeoff there, folks,

there's a tradeoff that's being made. You know, when we decide that. I don't know if it's the case here, but I'm just trying to get ahead of where I think some of this may be going. When we decide that somebody who may have turned to radical Islam but has a background that has some mental health issues in it, if it's going to be just a focus on mental health, then you can see that, oh, we're not going to

talk about radicalization and what really occurs. And by the way, it's not going to be counter radicalization efforts that we focus on. It's going to be well, how do we have better information sharing with law enforcement personnel about you know, people who have substance abuse issues, people who have PTSD, people a whole host of very common, very widespread, and very understandable and treatable mental health problems. So there's politics of all, I'm not even going down the Oh Canada

says tighter gun laws. Toronto is very strict gun laws. But now they're staying tighter gun laws. We all, we all know they're going to do that no matter what. But I thought it was it was just not worthy that here, everywhere there's no talk of even the possibility of radicalization, and the press it's just oh, he has a background with mental health health issues. Let me tell you a lot of Jihadas have a background that you could point to and say there are mental health problems there.

But that's not to say that the primary problem is mental health. The primary problem is the radicalization that they go through to become mujahideen, to become holy warriors. Right, Maybe that has nothing to do with this. Maybe this guy didn't even pray. Maybe this guy's not even Muslim.

I'm not even religious. I'm just looking at this and asking some questions and urging some caution before we accept the narrative and move on, because that's what they always want you to do with these Even when it turns out it is radicalization, we've already moved on. Right, Oh, it's guns and mental health. Move on. Oh it's guns and mental health. Move on. That to me seems a bit convenient for people who are very political in how they cover these cases. All right, I'll be right back.

He's holding the line for America. Buck Sexton his back. How to pay for college? The topic that a lot of folks are focused on these days, because I think that as we've got more and more people than ever before, going off to college and we're not seeing that it is necessarily a wise decision from from a return on investment perspective. At least you know that the earnings are not necessarily keeping up with the expectations of a lot

of people that are taken on these debt burdens. Remember a trillion dollars a trillion dollars student debt burden, which a student loan burden. Well, the same thing which is out there and people are are understanding now that maybe there needs to be a rethink of some of these policies about student loans. Well, here's at least something you got to give credit for it being thinking outside the box.

The Boston was Boston Herald or Boston Club. Boston Herald reporting that colleges are asking for a share of future salary in lieu of loans. Here's what they say. As more students baka the debtloads they face after graduation, some colleges are offering an alternative, will pay your tuition if you offer us a percentage of your future salary. Norwich University announced Tuesday it will become the latest school to offer this type of contract, known as an income share agreement.

An origeous program is starting out on a small scale, mainly for students who do not have access to other types of loans or who are taking longer than the traditional eight semesters to finish their degree. So you know, in this case they're gonna be paying a percentage of their salary. I gotta say that, you know, maybe this is a good idea, Maybe it'll work better for people. You know, Milton Friedman, in fact, was the one who

offered income share agreements back in nineteen fifty five. Yale University had some experiments with a back in the seventies, So this is not a completely new idea, but you're seeing it come back because people are realizing that, you know, the the term of the agreement and everything else can be favorable in comparison to a massive debt load with a set percentage rate on it. So they cite someone here is paying back eight percent of his income. Oh,

it's less than less than agents take. I can tell you that. And the federal loans allow people to also, you know, you can do part federal loans and part this way. But you know, this is a good at least this is moving in the right direction. You know, at least you've got people here were thinking about how they're going to be able to service their debtload, how they're gonna be able to meet the expectations of repayment that they have set up for themselves or that they

have been set up with. And you know, that makes things, uh, I think down the line, it could make things a bit easier. But I would also note that if you have to go through such extreme lengths to pay for an undergraduate program, it is worth asking a question. When I've asked here many times, how valuable is that undergraduate

program really? You know, I can tell you this and the graduate level, what you're talking about, law school, business school, those kinds of programs people are not shy about saying if you're gonna pay for it yourself, If you're gonna pay for it yourself, you better be in a position to say that it's an elite school. It better being elite school, because if you're going to pay for it out of pocket and it's a second or third tier institution,

it's not about snobbery. It's just about the marketplace value of it. You know, you don't want to go to the worst law school in the country. Some of you're probably yelling at me. Yeah. I saw that piece on Michael Cohen too, and they're saying it's the worst accredited law school in the United States. I think Cohen's a great lawyer. No, but I thought that piece was. There

was some snobbery in that one. But there is an overall point here, which is, if you're going to take out loans, you should understand that this is a product that you were buying. That these degrees, whether the advanced degrees or an undergraduate degree, it's it's a product. Yes, it's an education, but you're in a better position now. Anyone is in a better position now than ever before to educate himself or herself. There are more resources, more

free knowledge, and more self training than ever. And I do think that there's a lot of Look, I wish I knew computer coding. I wish there were a whole bunch of things that I have no background and whatsoever. I still think it's amazing. I don't know how I'm gonna you have had this experience. I think it's astonishing that we get people that graduate, they go all the way through college and have never taken a basic finance

and you know, financial management, class. I don't mean managing the assets of millionaires and hanging out with Thurston how the third on the yacht. I'm talking about what should you do for your long term financial future? How should you structure if you're going to rent? How much of your how much of your income should you be spending on rent? If you're out of four oh one k?

What's the proper percentage? What's a ETFs? Every American should actually know these things, and a lot of us and myself included, have had to be self taught with this after all that schooling. You know, I think I had the you know, the history of Ancient Rome three or four different times in my academic career. I think we could have taken one semester to say, hey, here's how not just you balance a checkbook, but here's how you

should think about your long term finances. Here's what different career ears can provide you in terms of compensation, what you can do with that compensation, how you can structure your long term you know this kind of like you see these commercials, and they've always got these commercials. Everyone looks like, oh, we're just hanging out on a beach, and they're like we'll take care of your long term investments. All these financial management companies, they should be teaching us

that stuff anyway. And also some of these people that are involved in these loan share programs. I think the schools are going to find out. I think the schools are gonna find out the hard way that women in gender studies doesn't exactly pay well. And now that they're going into business with these students, they'll see that. But we got roll call coming up, Team Buck, It's time for roll call. All right, let's look at the latest

in roll call. If you want to be a part of it, Facebook dot com, slash buck, sextant, send me your thoughts, your ideas, your wants, your knee needs, all of the above. Let's get into it, Troy. Right, dude, Oss here original Saturday Squad. You have to go grab Marie Haarf's interview last night on Martha McCallum show and see what an atrocity it was. She was actually arguing that helping the Iranian people in their plight actually helps

the Mullahs. It was a train wreck, and frankly sad to see Fox News try to pass that off as credible. Then right after her is Lindsey Graham and watch what he says first Firsthandbuck, It makes a great SoundBite, great for a laugh on tonight's show. Lastly, during last night's show, the radio network kept playing news updates from NBC News

during the break. I'm with you since the Saturday, but I have to be honest and tell you that I think your audience deserves better than having to sit and be forced to listen to such subbar media coverage during commercial breaks. Waiting to hear you again. We are listening to you because we don't want to have to listen to the MSM. So why is your company forcing us to Troy on the stream? Do we know? Or is

that on your local station? Because I have no you know the local stations, because we're affiliated over one hundred and twenty markets. Local stations can air whatever they want to in the breaks. If it's on the stream, I'd have to check out and see what's going on there. But I can't speak intelligently to it, obviously, Otherwise I would, at least I'm honest. William writes, Buck, why don't you talk about all the missing children in this country in

other countries as well? Why don't you ever talk about the child trafficking that is running rampant. Please help these children. Well, William, I mean, I just cover what I see in the news cycle and what I think is in any given day top of mind for folks. If there's a particular story you think I should be aware of, or if there's a narrative here that people need need to know, by all means, send it to me. But I'm not.

I just don't. I'm not not covering it. I just don't know what story you want me to talk about. But I do appreciate the thought. Greg right Hey Buck, the Northern Newcastle County Republicans, the largest Republican group in the state of Delaware, invites you to our Rolling on the River annual fundraiser event. If you can't make it, please feel free to donate some extra stuff you found in the process of moving. We could use it from Greg. Well, Greg, let me look into this one and if I can

make it, Delaware is not that far away. Sounds great, But I gotta check the schedule and I will get back to you, and I'll write back to you when I'm not in the midst of a live or radio show. Melvin, what's up? Melvin. It's a cool name. I like the name Melvin. Hey Buck, I'm at the gym listening to CNN and Cooper's interpretation of the released docks is that it supports the Russia investigation. And they showed a CNN reporter trying to interview an angry Devin Neunez. Did you

see that? And what do you think Shields high Melvine? I did not see that. I can't say that in any way surprises me. And as to Nunez, I can tell you that I'm supposed to be interviewing the man myself tomorrow on Rising, so I'll I'm sure be able to get answers to questions you would actually want asked tomorrow, So you should check that out. So it's a perfect transition there. Next up here, what's Trump's around tweet? Maybe

the greatest tweet ever? This is oh from Michael. He's so right to call them out in a very provocative and public way. Michael. I have no problem with him calling out the mulas, And I don't really understand why people seem to think it's such a bad idea, you know, I mean, it's saying that they're part of the axis of evil. Is that any Is that better than saying that what Trump did? I think that people get so caught up in their Trump's Arrangement syndrome they lose they

lose some context here. Next up is Alex. You mentioned a book a while back and I was trying to read it. I can't remember the title, but I thought it was something like the Death of the Gods and was about the failure of communism. I could be way off on the name, but I was wondering if you might know what I am looking for. Well, yes, indeed, what you're asking about is a compendium of essays from

former Communists called The God That Failed. So it's a book from nineteen forty nine that has six essays that are that are brought together by or that are pulled together. And it's from former it's from former communists, some very prominent ones at that. And it's also a song by Metallica. Those of you who are like exist lie that was the closest I can get to kind of do Metallica here on the show. But yeah, that's The God That Failed as a song by Metallic as well. But I

don't know about that song. I do know about the book. It is powerful, and it tells you a lot about communism and why it's so terrible, and all the falsehoods and the inhumanity that is the core of communist ideology. I highly recommend the God that Failed. You will be glad. I think you can. I mean, look, I don't know if somebody owns the if someone's estate is getting money from the rights to it or something, but I think you can just download a PDF of it online pretty easily.

It might even be one of those things that on your kindle you can download for free, like I downloaded recently what was it that was free? Treasure Island for free? Never never signed it in school, I felt like I should read it. So there's plenty of things. A lot of the Penguin classics are available as free kindle downloads. Sean Rights, Hey Buck, do you even lift bro? So many things I'd like to comment on, but so little time. I like how your morning show is really rising up

to its challenge. Crystal, however, seems to keep taking left jabs at you while you write the ship's course. Maybe parlay with the young lass and ask her to play more by the rules, unless banter is par for the course you know, Sean, We're we're a work in progress with rising and I'm always trying to be constructive and friendly and additive. That's how I approach it and others.

Some of you have been listening to this show long enough that you know There's been an extra fire in my belly since I've been down here in the swamp one. I think because of my proximity to a lot of the government stuff that's going on here. Now. I'm right, I'm right near it. You know, I could. I could walk from where I am to the White House in five minutes. I could walk to the Capitol Building in

fifteen or twenty minutes. But there's also the sense of freedom that I have when I get on the air waves at night and get to talk to all of you. So yes, indeed, Bill right, Gutfeld called you Tucker l m aoh, yes, Bill, that is a thing that happened. Gutfield did call me Tucker. One's kind of by accident, and then he just leaned into it and called me Tucker again. Brittany writes Buck, I made it to Roll Call a few weeks ago, and you totally made my day.

I rate your opinion as highly as Russia's thank you for everything you do question. Was there ever an official statement put out for why Russia invaded Crimea. Someone suggested they are trying to take back the old Soviet land. But I needed to ask you, Shields High, well, Brittany, Russia hasn't really invaded Crimea so much as they put up what people believe was a rigged referendum that allowed for a vote in the territory of Crimea, which does have some major Russian naval base and it is also

very strategically important territory. But that referendum allowed the people of Crimea to go back and join the well, whether it was the people or was the Russian state the point people say it was a rigged referendum, but it was in Crimea, and they they were the international monitors, and people who look at the stuff said they're irregularities, and they're cheating and all kinds of stuff. Ukraine is where you've had Russian paramilitaries essentially involved in a stealth invasion.

So that's a bit a little different and a bit more severe, to be sure, And I hope that that for now at least answers the question. Craig writes, good afternoon, guys. In response that I say good afternoon, Craig Sean writes, buck love the Hillary screech. What if you were to record I should be president or something like that and play it every time HRC comes up in a news story or whenever. And two, I live in the live

free or die state New Hampshire. You should come to New Hampshire during presidential primary season for a remote broadcast and interview candidates. Shields high Well, Sean, I actually did that. I went up to New Hampshire interviewed all but Trump and Cruise at the New Hampshire primary in the last election. I sat down with Rand Paul Marco Rubio, that guy from Ohio that I do not find particularly persuasive forgetting to k sick there you go rhymes with basic and

yeah everybody else. I'm trying to remember who else was even up there for that, but I interviewed a whole bunch of them, like six or seven candidates, maybe so as it wasn't the full fifteen. I'm trying to think of the off the top of my head who else. There were a couple of others, but I can't remember, And that tells you a lot about the Republican field again't remember exactly who they were, so yeah, I'd be happy to go back there though with rising James right

looking good on the Greg Gutfeld Show. Keep up the good work. This Cortez lady will destroy New York. Capitalism is good. We were always brought up to earn your pay and the things you buy, like a car in a house. This shows you work hard for your money. If the liberal socialists want free things, how do you value things that you have? Not because you did not earn it, there will be no value. Thanks for taking your time listening to your voices. Your shield tie from

James up in New York. Well, thank you very much James for writing in. I do appreciate it. Good to hear from you. All Right, that's gonna be it for Roll Call today. Obviously tomorrow we'll be hanging out quite a bit more. I'm planning a very special Freedom Hunt podcast this week. The plan right now, if we can make it work, is to have Jesse Kelly and Sean Parnell basically come on air. So we're gonna have a former Army ranger and a former marine just talk a

lot of smack to each other. And I just get to stand there and laugh while they make jokes. So that's the plan for later on this week. If you missed last week's please do check it out. I have a fun chat with Jedediabila about Trump and politics and media and all kinds of stuff. Until next time, my friends, you have your orders, shield tie. Don't drink comie coffee. You want to make sure that whatever you're putting in your cup every day to get your day started or

keep you going. If you're a coffee guyline me, you want to make sure that you're drinking stuff that is from veterans, and all about veterans. That's Black Rifle Coffee. They've got fresh, premium coffee that comes to you. By the way, if you want every month courtesy of a coffee club that you can join, I highly recommend I'm

a member. I highly recommend you do that. This is a company that, as you know, is formed by former Special Operations vets and Black Rifle simply is the best in the business when it comes to roast to order coffee delivered right to your door. All Right, you will love these guys and you will love their coffee. I drink Black Rifle every day, and I want people listening to this show to do the same. Visit Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck receive fifteen percent off your order.

That's Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck