Hold The Line w/ Buck Sexton - 06-11-22

as they do something right. That's what they seem to think. Friends, it's time for hold the line. Welcome to hold on. I'm Buck Sexton. He had another chance last night, Joe Biden, President of United States. Better for worse. I think we

all see it's pretty much always for worse. But he had an opportunity to bring together the American people and say some intelligent things, first of all, about the national healing process that should still be underwear in the aftermath of the horrific shooting in Uvalde, amongst some other shootings as well in recent days that having gotten nearly as much attention but also atrocious the shooting in Oklahoma, for example.

But Joe Biden took the opportunity to give a speech that was rooted in emotional blackmail, a lot of untruth, a lot of misdirection, and was basically just an opportunity to attack his political opponents instead of actually looking at what would be serious about trying to stop violence in this country. Joe Biden wants to tell you how much he hates the NRA and the gun owners out there who don't want to go along with this. Here he says, though,

that he has by partisan legislation to do something. This time, we have to take the time to do something, and this time it's time for the Senate to do something. But as we know, in order to do any get anything done in the Senate, we need a minimum of

ten Republican senators. I support the partisan efforts that include small group of Democrats and Republicans centers trying to find a way, But my god, the fact that the majority of the Senate Republicans don't want any of these proposals even to be debated or come up for a vote, I find unconscionable. We can't fail the American people again. Do what, Joe, That's really what this comes in. Okay, do what we'll talk about some of the things that

he said should be done. And see, the reason they want to get so much of the emotion out there is that they just want a mobilized mentality on this issue without having to explain how then the actions that they want taken wouldn't actually change anything that we've seen going on. And for example, Biden mentioned there have been

twenty mass shootings. Now, how you define mass shootings is something that people There are different definitions of it out there, but usually it's three or more people who have been shot. Often these mass shootings involve gang activity and other criminal activity that is completely in a different category from the kind of mass murder that we saw in that school

in Uval Day. But here's Biden saying, there have been twenty mass shooting since you've all day watched, since Valdi just over a week ago, there have been twenty other mass shootings in America, each with four or more people killed or injured, including yesterday at a hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a shooter to liberally target a surgeon using an assault up and he bought just a few hours before his rampage that left a surgeon, another doctor, receptionist and a

patient dead and many more injured. That doesn't count the carnage we see every single day. It doesn't make the headlines. So how would any of the things which include an assault rifle, band, magazine limitation, How would any of these things that he wants, safe storage requirements, red flag laws would they have stopped? He said there have been twenty mass shootings. Would they have stopped any of those mass shooting? If the answer is yes, Joe Biden should tell us

how and which mass shooting would have been stopped. Let's just say, for example, the shooter in Tulsa, Oklahoma, had been told sorry, there's an assault rifle ban. In effect, shooter could have just bought a pistol, just as lethal, could have used two pistols, like the horrific mass shooting at Virginia Tech, where it was two pistols. It was not a rifle that was used in that mass shooting.

In fact, if you look at the ford Hood shooting, another mass shooting, high casualty account many debts attributed to that incident. That horrific incident, pistols, not a rifle. So changing the weapon isn't going to actually change the lethal intent of psychopathic Hillers, So how would it have stopped anything? He doesn't even pretend that he has an answer to that. But what he does want, of worse is political mobilization. Here.

He wants people who are Democrats and I guess some independence, although he's not winning over any independence with this from the numbers that we can see. He wants his political rivals, the Republican Party, to suffer the consequences of not going along with these proposals that quite clearly would do nothing to stop gun violence in any meaningful way. Why. I've been in this fight for a long time. I know

how hard it is, but I'll never give up. Congress fails, I believe this time a majority of the American people won't give up either. I believe the majority of you will act to turn your outrage into making this issue central to your vote. Enough enough, No, he's wrong, that's not going to happen. But it does make the left

wing anti gun base feel good about themselves. Really, so much of Democrat politics around guns is just they don't like gun owners in general, lawful gun owners, criminals Democrats always have a soft spot for, but lawful gun owners they do not like, and they want to always remind everybody of that fact in whatever ways they can. Um karine. Jean Pierre says that Biden knows how to get things done because he's taken on the gun lobby. Watch thanks.

If the resident thinks that Congress must act immediately to end this apidemic of gun violence, is he going to bring any of the key players from Capitol Hill to the beach with him tonight? Okay? Um uh so, I don't have a whole thing that he knows how to get things done. He does, he does. I mean, he's he's beating the gun lobby before he has but it's not it's not say this is how it's done, but it's not his thing. It's actually fact we saw he did that in the Senate during his crow Congress days,

that he beat the gun lobby. Think about this beat the gun lobby as if there's some all powerful enemy out there. That's the gun lobby. The problem that they have is gun owners, as in Americans who have Second Amendment rights who don't agree with this nonsense. That's it. At the end of the day. By the way, since we're talking about ending or rather limiting mitigating violence to the greatest of your possible loss of life. Look at

Democrat policies and cities all across the country. Do you think they're really strict about enforcing gun crimes when it comes to when it comes to people who are associated with gangs, people who have a previous criminal history. Not in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago. Oh no, no, they're letting them walk. In many cases, they're giving them plea bargains that they should never be handing to people with any kind of violent intent who are carrying firearms

on the streets. But you know, social justice. And then there's this Oregon's decriminalization of drugs, for example, Democrats push this Oregan's first in the nation's scheme to decriminalize drugs and encourage those possessing them to seek medical help has been blighted with problems. They've had a seven hundred percent increase in overdoses in the past year seven x. Another Democrat policy like going soft on crime, like defunding police

that results in people dying in large numbers. Why don't they address that? Because these large numbers of people that are dying from this one hundred thousand plus overdoses last year. Now Democrats would rather just do a lot of virtue signaling. Let's talk about protecting your home first. I don't know if you saw this. There was a recent story about an Arizona real estate agent who found that the home she lived and was listed for sale. That's fine, right,

except no, it wasn't actually selling her home. He was the victim of home title fraud, a devastating crime that happens all over the country. According to the experts at home title lock, the crime is incredibly profitable and hard to detect. An identity thief simply creates a fake title transfer for your home and refiles as the new owner. Then he can take out loans on your home or sell it. Typical identity theft services don't cover you, and

neither does homeowners insurance. Home title lock does. Home title puts a barrier around your home's titled the instant. They detect anyone tampered with your home's title, They help shut it down, and they help get your home back in your name. So go to hometetlelock dot com. Now tell them that Bucks sent you for thirty free days or protection. That's hometetlelock dot com again, hometetlelock dot com. Support from my podcast is brought to you by Manscape, the best

and men's below the waste grooming. Their products are precision engineered tools. Manscapes Performance Package is the ultimate men's hygiene bundle. Join over four million men worldwide who trusts Manscape with its exclusive offer for you twenty percent off and free worldwide shipping with the code buck at manscape dot com.

The Performance Package four point zero includes a ton of men's grooming products like the Lawnmower four point zero trimmer, the weed Whacker, Era NOO's hair trimmer, performance boxer, briefs, and a bunch of other great men's hygiene products you never knew you needed, plus a travel bag to hold at all. A lawnmower trimmer is the best. It's got a cutting edge ceramic blade to reduce grooming accidents, and it's waterproof so no more messes on the bathroom floor.

You'll also get the waterproof weed Whacker Nose, an ear hair trimmer with proprietary skin safe technology which helps reduce nick snags and tugs in all those delicate areas. Get twenty percent off and free shipping with the code buck at manscape dot com. That's twenty percent off with free shipping at manscape dot com and use code buck to unlock your confidence and always use the right tools with Manscape.

I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions. That was that under Chuck Schumer back in twenty twenty, funding and off a lot like he's calling for consequences, perhaps even inciting

violence against sitting Supreme Court justices. Suspect Nicholas Roski has been arrested fast forward, of course there's today and charged with the attempted murder or kidnapping of Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh. This man was arrested less than a block from Kavanaugh's Maryland home in possession of a handgun, knife, zip ties, and burglary tools, among other things. Roski also made a deranged nine one one called the police as a warning

before he attempted to find the justices home. New York Post reports California man was incensive about the League Supreme Court draft opinion, and he was arrested near Justice Kavanaugh's Maryland home Wednesday, after he hatcheder planned to kill the jurist to quote, give his life purpose, join me now, discussed senior editor at The Federalist, David Orsaani. David, thanks for being with us, Thanks for having me. So this is officially someone arrested for attempted murder of a sitting

Supreme Court justice. Don't I don't know how much digging around you did, David into the Democrat media, but this was covered, if at all, as like a page seven midway down the fold story. In a way, it was pretty shocking. No mention of it at all last night on PBS airwaves or on PBS's website. It may may have updated it today, but this happened yesterday. It was a minor news item in either the New York Times a Washington Post. I can't remember now which one it was.

But if this had been let's say, you had a sodomayor under similar threat with a pending decision, does anyone think that the media wouldn't act like this was the great And by the way, it is a grave threat to the institutions of our government. But it feels like the partisanship is all that really matters to a lot of the folks in the media. Well, yeah, it doesn't

get tiring to always say. Imagine if it had been you know, a liberal who has happened to you or whatever, you'd have you know, we'd have we'd be in the midst of a national conversation about right wing violence. You know, it would be front page news. We'd still we talk, we'd be talking about it all the time on every single cable network. And these people just simply don't care because they other people incite and instigate this sort of thing.

And it's not just I'm not saying that Chuck Schumer, you know, is responsible for the actions of a madman, but I will say that it's not. It's it's the constantly calling people child murderers, fascists, insurrectionists. You're talking about people on the right and dehumanizing them. So if I thought those things were true that they said, I would pick up a gun too. I mean, we'd all want to pick up guns. It would be a rational thing to do. But it's of course an insidious lie, and

yet they do it all the time. And it's it's just this whole rhetoric that you see on MSNBC that now you hear senators. I mean, Chuck Schumer is a very powerful man, and the things he said in that clip, I mean there's specific threats to specific people. It's just insanity. Yeah, I mean to anybody would say, well, oh, he's just talking about what political consequences they have lifetime appointments to

the Supreme Court? Well, how are they gonna feel the fury of the public for a decision that some leftist lunatics don't like. I mean, there's you know, it's not like when you're running against somebody in the general election you're saying, oh, you know, you're gonna feel the fury of at the ballot box, and these are these are judges.

He did have to step back from that and apologize, But I mean, I also can't forgive or forget that in the immediate aftermath of the leak of the draft opinion, David and the protests outside some of these judges, including Kavanaugh's home, which are explicitly clearly illegal under federal statute. And as I've explained this to anybody who asks, oh, okay, so if I'm being prosecuted, I can hire a mob to go stand outside the home of my prosecutor, screaming

crazy stuff. That's the justice system we think we're allowed to have. So Jensaki at the time was saying, well, you know, there's a lot of stuff that people are upset about, so no big deal for these protests outside Supreme Court justices homes, and it's conservative justices. Let's be honest. Yeah, of course, I mean they would never let this happen to the others. But I'll say that, you know, you make a good point. These are lifetime appointments for a reason.

They're lifetime appointments because we don't want justices pressured by by politics, by protests, by picketing. And yet the Senate, the Senate leader tells people to go to the president. They actually said. I think Saki said like something like, you know, it's just part of the process or whatever she said. It was basically encouragement for people to go and pressure politically lifetime lifetime judges. I mean, it's it's an attack on on separation of power, it's an attack

on civility and decency. I'm all, listen, I'm basically a First Amendment um, you know, absolutist. I mean, if you want to you know, go on the street and yellow people, you know from you know, decent you know, decent space. That's fine by me, but they're but to have our leaders, to have left wing leaders basically inciting and egging on these people, that is completely out of line. And you know, and that's why I think part of the reason why

they don't cover this stuff. You wrote in The Federalist, David that normally I wouldn't blame Democrats for the actions of extremists. The problem is that not only does the left continue to push the boundaries with humor like threats, but they are engaged in the relentless daily smearing of their political opponents as seditious, vote stealing, child murdering, fascists and insurgents. If this were true, violence would be justified.

But it's just a sinister lie. I mean, I do think that that we have reached a point now where you have the total normalization of from the left, from the Democrats, of treating anyone who would cast a vote for any Republican as effectively a threat to our government. I mean, that's what this whole direction thing is all about. They don't care about the you know, the very foolish and simple minded and you know, in some cases criminal depending what they did. People that were actually in the

Capitol on January six. It's about everybody. It's about everyone whoever casts a vote for a Republican Yeah, have you noticed that, you know, I've noticed that people demand that I take some kind of ownership of people who went into the Capitol. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't agree with what they did. I don't probably even agree with their philosophical ideas if they have any ideas.

I don't know if they had any. But yet you have a person who tries to wipe out Bernie Sanderson, tries to wipe out Republican leadership, or you have someone showing up someone's house where you have a summer of rioting and you know, and murder, and you know, the destruction of the lives of thousands of people. And no, they don't take any any ownership of that. They don't. They just disconnect from it like it has zero to

do what they're reatoring. Well, it can't. You know, again, we're trying, you know, they want us to play by two sets of rules, and that you can't have a civil society of functioning democratic republic, when you have two sets of rules where you put you know, when one person doesn't show up for a subpoena, you put him in shackles, and the other guy gets you know, nothing happens to him. I mean, you just simply can't function

that way. And that's literally what's happening. I know I'm jumping all over, but I think these things are connected. Agree with you. By the way, De Santis had a good statement in the Kavanaugh threat situation. He said, it wasn't even just the fact that this guy was looking to murder someone, which is very serious in itself, that was being done in service of changing the outcome at the judicial branch of government. And that is really really problematic.

I mean, this is someone who was looking to alter the course of this nation through violence, and it's coming at a time when Democrats are suggesting that people who

don't agree with them are a threat to the government itself. Yeah, I mean, the leak itself, most likely, almost surely was meant to put pressure on the justices who might turn overturn rov way and the things that, you know, a Senate leader of standing on the steps of the Scode is yelling about consequences, is trying to make them intimidate those judges. This is just it's a outlandish I don't even know historically speaking as certainly in modern history, nothing

like this has happened. I mean, the closest I can think of is when Barack Obama sort of braided the Supreme Court for upholding the First Amendment. But other than that, I really, I really can't think of any comparable situation to this. David, appreciate joining us, Thanks for being here. Thank you. At first, I want to talk you about protecting your online data. A lot of companies promise your

privacy is guaranteed, but we know that's not true. That's why you need a new privacy and cybersecurity application tool called Secure. It's spelled SEK. You are. Secure is using proprietary encryption and offering secure instant messaging and email with Secure all of your communications based on servers and data centers hosted in Switzerland, without using any of the big

tech platforms. Privacy is a big issue now. Without real security, people can read your emails, your messages, even your bank information. Secure will never mind your data, never ask your phone number. You can send emails to your doctor. Banker, lawyer, or anyone else with total confidence you're not being spied on. Secure is your solution to stop the constant theft of

your digital identity. Costs only five dollars to the messenger, only ten dollars to the messenger and email combination package. Go to secure dot com and take back your privacy today. That's sekuar dot com and use promo code buck for twenty five percent off. We'll be right back with more. Hold the line. Pandemic Arab policy. Title forty two remains in limbo, but migrant shelters in Bordertown say now is

the time to prepare for its end. With a massive migrant caravan already heading toward our border, many are concerned that the termination of Title forty two will open the floodgates even more to illegal immigration. More than a year, Arizona's Attorney General, Mark Bernovich has been fighting to get the Biden administration to do its job. From suing DHS Secretary Mayorchis to the CDC to present Biden himself. Bernovitch is doing everything in his power to protect this community,

stop the White House from rescinding Title forty two. Berney in general the state of Arizona, joins me. Now A G. Bernovich. Good to have you, sir. Thank you Bob for having me. I really appreciate it. So just tell me this. The

end of Tittle forty two would be a problem. But as I understand it, mister Attorney General, the reality of Title forty two as it is at the border right now, whether it's Arizona, Texas, you name it, is that they're not really using it except against illegal Mexican and Central American migrant. What's going on? Yeah, I mean, you know you mentioned this that we'ven't been involved in so many lawsuits against the Bide administration trying to force them to

do their job. Now we went into court, we led the coalition, our lawyers argued that the Biden administration who could not resume the title forty two. And what we had found out they were doing was they were trying to play these games where they were trying to create exclusions and exceptions for people from certain countries, and the

court told them they could not do that. But we have seen the Biden administration in the past when we suit him over the permanent guidance or that time most temporary guidance where they were not supporting people deportation orders. You know, they would tell the court they're doing it, and they would slightly tweak the policy, and then they would say, well, we're following that decision, but then they

would change and create a new policy. So the one thing that has been very consistent is the Biden administration is trying to systematically undermine the rule of law and basically eradicate our entire southern border. I know, folks like we've talked about this where we thought at one point they maybe wanted to abolish ice, but it's clear they

just want to eradicate the southern border. So that's why I keep having to go into court and keep getting these injunctions, keep getting these restraining orders, just to try to get the Biden administration to do their actual job. Entitle forty two is one of the last things we have left in our toolbox, so I'm doing everything I

can to save it. Here's that list of one of the cases you've brought Arizona v. Garland challenging DHS fast Track Asylum system, Arizona VCDC, challenging the replication of Title forty two. We were just discussing. You've also challenged DHS's final guidance, challenging Biden administrations illegal violation, led into cancelation of border wall construction, and once again challenging interim guidance. So you are not afraid to take the Feds into

court over this stuff. How have these challenges played out? You're winning, some losing some something in between. What's going on? Yeah, I mean we unfortunately, for example, in the border wall, you know, that's still a litigation. We didn't know we were successful at the beginning to appen. We we're continuing

to litigate it. One thing you did not mention is that I literally argued to a Supreme Court in February of the public charge rule, and this is where the Biden administration tries is trying to give government welfare medicst non citizens. And so I'm very confident we're gonna win that case. We had take that all the way to

the US Supreme Court. You know, we got the restraining order to stop a Title forty two from being revoked, and you know on the permanent guidance, some of these other cases are still winding them way through the courts, and unfortunately, what the Biden administration is shown is a complete disregard not only for administrative procedures, but they're shredding

the constitution of the process. And so I'm doing everything I can but to try to hold them accountable and to try to force them to just follow the existing law. And so you know, we've been very successful in some cases. In some cases we literally are having to take to the US Supreme Court to make sure the court orders the Biden administration just follow the law and do the

right thing. So with that in mind, what would need to happen for I mean, right now, obviously a federal judges said Title forty two cannot be rescinded as it currently stands. At some point it will be rescinded. One would assume, right it's a pandemic related CDC authority. So what would have to happen for it to be legal? And what would be the change is necessary from your perspective that the Biden administration could make so that they wouldn't get the massive search. I mean, we already have

a huge caravan. They asked him a ten to fifteen thousand on the way, So what could they do differently? And then how could we get and then what happens when Title forty two goes Yeah, Title forty two, I think we all recognize it's like the little kid the story about holding the finger in the diet. I mean, that's all we're doing. These are stock out measures, and it's because the Biden administration is feeling to build the wall, which when it was working, they tried to ascend the

remain in Mexico policy. They aren't deporting people's deportation orders. They're trying to incentimize and monetize people coming here like in government benefits. We're trying to stop that. So Type forty two. What we basically argued is that, look, if the Biden administration wants to rescind it, what has been good for the goose is good for the gander and an assents these left wing groups, they always sue Republican administrations trying to tell them they cannot change rules or

policies without going through the proper rulemaking process. So what we've said, and what the judge agreed with, is that if the Biden administration wants to restend to revolt Title forty two, they have to go through the process, the legal process, and now would include rulemaking and public notice in common and so yeah, ultimately, if the administration wants to change that policy, they can, but we've are that they have to do it in the legally correct way,

and that basically means the states get to have input saying this has happens will affect us and this is how illegal immigration is impacting us all over the country. So they have to provide that notice and they have to provide public input in notice in common from the states as well. So you are currently the attorney general in Arizona, you are running for a Senate seat on

the Republican side from your state. You have a primary to get through here with your primary opponent being like Masters Trump Donald Trump, former present the United States Dorist Masters, and today he put out a statement I wanted to let you react to a mister attorney general. He said

that Mark Bernovitch is such a disappointment to me. He is the current Arizona attorney general, and while he understands what took place in the twenty twenty presidential election and that it was rigged and stolen, he only views it as something he would not like to see happen again. That was a statement that former President Trump put out, how do you respond to that? I mean, I think I've heard your policies, and I've seen a lot of what you've you've done as attorney general. It would seem

to be in line with President Trump's ideology. So what happened here? Yeah, you know, Buck, I can never control whether people are going to say or do, and what I've said, I'm literally told President Trump this is that if you care about securing the border, if you care about confirming good federal judges that were the first laws it is, and not create policy. You care about low energy prices and energy independence, if you care about low taxes,

low regulation, you go through that entire agenda. I've actually been there. I mean, I was a prosecutor and I began my career game prosecutor protecting our communities. I worked in a think tank called the Goldwater to where I wrote extensively about federalism and low energy prices. And now as an age, look at all I've done. Whether we're suing the Biden administration of run constitutional vaccine mandates were literally last year, and I've brought this up to the President.

The most important election case in the generation is literally called Bernavici, DNC, And when the left wing groups tried to come into places like Arizona, I fought them all the way to the Supreme Court and the Court of heel ability of states like Arizona and other states now to enact election integrity measures that limit and restrict ballot harvesting and out of preseine voting. So I've actually been

in the forefront of these fights. So you get a lot of folks now that come up and they talked the talk, they've never walked the walk, They've never actually been in the fight. And then they can say a lot of things now, but where's the evidence, where's the receipts as kids saying nowadays with what they've actually done. And I've been in the forefront of this and holding at the end of the day, I think it's important

to be principled. Arizona taken on Mark Kelly because the stakes are so high, and if you want someone that understands limited government, federalism and concernative principles, then I'm the guy learning General Bernovitch, State of Arizona. Good to see you, Sara, thanks for being with us today. Thanks Mark, Thank you very much. Each morning, the president of the United States receives a highly classified briefing on the most important issues

facing the country. It's called the President's Daily Brief, or PDB. It's delivered by America's spies and analysts. Well, now you can hear your very own PDB in the form of a podcast hosted by me Brian Dean Wright, a former CIA operations officer. Each morning at six am Eastern, I'll bring you fifteen to twenty minutes of the most important issues facing the country, giving you the critical intelligence and

analysis you need to start your morning. One of the most liberal cities in America is putting its progressive prosecutor on notice. Finally, the first time ever, San Francisco has recalled its district attorney, Chessi bud Dan, as voters hold him responsible for a surge in murders, violent crime, and shameless shoplifting. So will this recall send a message to soft on crime prosecutors across the country. Let's ask former

NYPD Coppen conservative commentator John Cardillo. John, good to see you. Hey, Bacco is good to be again. So this is a good thing. It's not a seismic shift, right, I'm sure they're going to replace. When the mayor London Breed puts forward his replacement and they have elections, they're going to replace him with a Democrat to San Francisco. But at least it's moving in the right direction here. What do you think? Yeah, I mean, look one thing about We'll

get into this guy ratible as they come, right. Aaron's for whether underground members, convicted cop killers, contemporaries of such illustrious luminaries as Bill Ayres and Assada Shakur, who the Joanne Chesimar and wrights a bit on those, I mean, just radical radical terrorists. But here's the thing. Jesse Bodin did not do one thing that he did not tell people he was going to do any campaigned. Nothing was a surprise with this guy. He laid out the blueprint

during his campaign then executed it to the letter. San Franciscans is radical leftist. Fuck. Maybe they don't really like the real life version of these utopian which are really dystopian policies they promote. Because he didn't do anything he didn't say he was going to do. Here he is last night, by the way, in his concession speech, here's Jesse Budan soon to be the former District Attorney of San Francisco. Watch. People are angry, they're frustrated, and I

want to be very clear about what happened tonight. The right wing billionaires outspent us three to one. They exploited an environment in which people are appropriately upset, and they created an electoral dynamic where we were literally shadow boxing. I mean, this is amazing. We just take this is amazing.

The right wing billionaires are I mean, sixty percent of San Franciscans voted to kick this clown out of office because they're sick of the home invasions, the assaults on the street, the theft, the armed robbery, you name it. And why does he think they're all so upset? This guy is like a lunatic. Oh, I mean, didn't you see the AGM and cameras that that hidden footage of Hilarry Ellison and Elon must upping raw sewage and Herwin needles on the streets of San Francisco. I mean, the

guys out of his mind. Look, he was letting bad guys go free. He wasn't prosecuting worse bad guys. And he and so many other Democrats have abandoned quality of life. Crimes. They won't even touch him, which we know. You and I know this, right, we both in some fashion with the NYPD. You were over there on the intel side, I was there on the law enforcement side. We know that when you addressed what Rudy Giuliani get, addressing quality of life crimes typically leads to a reduction in the

bigger crimes. This had nothing to do with anyone or anything other than you're so polite in the way you say his name as well Chessebo'dan's refusal to be a prosecutor. He wanted to be a far less activist, not the chief law enforcement officer, the chief prose prosecutorial officer of the city of San Francisco. It's amazing, John, because as we all know, there was a thirty percent increase in homicides in nationwide in twenty twenty to twenty twenty one.

George Floyd Movement and BLM and all this played into this, of course, But the progressive prosecutors, they had already been seeded into all these different city bureaucracies in the years leading up to this, in part because I think of the media stoking a racial panic over the election of Donald Trump, right so twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, you start seeing the Chessa bou Dan and you know the Kim Fox and these other Larry Kraszner, these progressive prosecutors taking office.

And it wasn't just that they had one year. The next year, twenty twenty two to twenty twenty one was also terrible in these cities. So we knew it wasn't just a pandemic blip or whatever crap they were saying at the time, the lies they were telling. In San Francisco, for example, twenty twenty two verses twenty twenty one. Larceny so far this year up twenty percent, assaults up eleven percent,

homicides up eleven percent, rape up nine percent. So they had a terrible year of crime rise across the country, but in San Francisco, San Francisco specific, and it keeps going. John, I think that was what people disabled. Enough is enough? Yeah, I mean it goes back to addressing those quality of life crimes, right, the broken windows pleasing strategies you do.

And I talk about this a lot, and so sometimes I don't delve into it when we're on air, but it's important to understand that maybe you have new viewers, which I'm sure you do with your audience grows who or maybe younger, they don't understand we're talking about. And simply, but what Rue Giuliani his police commissioners understood in New York City in the nineties when they manage a crime reduction, crime fell off a cliff in New York is if you go after the little things, the big things follow.

Very simply put, if you arrest a guy or a shoplifting or jumping the turnstile in the subway not paying the fair oftentimes when you run their information after the arrest, you find they had warrants for delany robbery, delany burglary, felony. Has solved some of these bigger crimes, and but getting those people off the street, returning them on those warrants to a judge, you were reducing crime across the board. Again, these progressive das. I'm so glad you brought up Larry

Krasner in Philadelphia. He was really George Soros' first experiment with funding far left district attorneys to affect social change in the wrong direction. And look where Philadelphia is today. It's a mess. I have phillyops reached out to me on Twitter on Facebook all the time telling me how bad it is. But it's very simple. If you address the quality of life crimes, if you actually enforce the law as crazy as it sounds, buck crime drops, and

when you do the opposite, prime rises. The big city crime spike isn't just San Francisco, as I noted a moment ago, John, and again in its second year of rise right twenty twenty, twenty twenty one was the worst year pretty much ever for a one year crime spike nationwide twenty twenty one verse twenty twenty two, though San Francisco's up seven point eight percent, New York City though with a new mayor, up thirty eight percent, Los Angeles

eleven percent, Chicago thirty five percent, Philadelphia twenty two. Philadelphia last year had its all time murder record, and it's just running slightly below that pace six months into twenty twenty two. John, I, I just want to know what your take is on I've got a theory that in some of these cities they're realizing that the progressive prosecutors, I mean, that's just essentially suicidal for the city, but bringing in a kind of mainstream Democrat who's still a

little you know, wishywashi. That's not going to turn the momentum around. They're gonna need a Giuliani like figure to come in and say there's a new sheriff in town. I mean New York City is the proof of that, right, Eric said Eric Adams. I mean the guy who's in New York City police officer, retired as a New York City Police captain. And crime is rising in New York City. Why because instead of being a leader, instead of saying I had twenty three years in the New York City

Police Department, I made a d behind my name. But I know it works, and I know what doesn't to reduce crime. What's he doing? He's deferring to guys like Alvin Bragg, the bar left Manhattan District that won't prosecute anyone for anything. He's now beholding the radicals in the New York City Council and crime is rising. Also important notice city like Portland, Ted Wheeler, one of the furthest

left mayors in the United States. There was a period in those years you mentioned Buck twenty one, twenty two, twenty to twenty one when Portland saw an eight hundred percent increase in murders. This is unheard of. We haven't seen these numbers since the seventies. Crazy, but we'll see if people are waking up. Even Democrats they got to wake up too, because they've managed to take over and now destroy their own cities. John, my friend, always words

a wisdom. Good to see it, great to see a buck. Thanks. Billionaire Elon Musk seems to have won at least one battle against Twitter. Earlier this week, Must threaten to walk away from a deal to buy the social media company if it didn't allow him and his legal team full access to its internal data to address concern about the

number of spambots on the platform. In a letter to Twitter, must attorney wrote Twitter's latest offer to simply provide additional details regarding the company's own testing methodologies, whether through written materials or verbal explanations, is tantamount to refusing mister Musk's data requests. Twitter's effort to characterize it otherwise is merely

an attempt to obfuscate and confuse the issue. Mister Musk has made it clear he does not believe that the companies lacks testing methodologies are adequate, so he must conduct his own analysis the data he has requested as necessary to do so. After Twitter had about forty eight hours of deliberation, it appears Musk will receive the information he asked for. Joined me now to discuss former Facebook intelligence analyst and director of Heritage's Heritage Foundations Tech Policy Center

Para Frederick Carrett. Thanks for being with us, orts, thanks for having me. So let's start with what is it forever and at home? You know, people work in this stuff and the media care a lot more about the Twitter situation, I think than everyday folks. But so explain to us what the issue was here. There are too many bots on. Basically, Elon, as the purchaser of Twitter, wants to know how many fake accounts there are? Is

that what this is exactly? And the lawyers, the letters that are flying between the lawyers, Elon's lawyers at least are saying that this is a clear material breach of the takeover agreement because Twitter has said we're not going to let you look under the hood in this way. We're not going to reveal proprietary information. They're calling it private information that they don't want to reveal to the

public about their bot counting. And their spam methodologies. So Twitter has itself publicly said that we the platform is comprised of only five percent bots, but Elon said, nah, I've done a little digging with my own people, and we're thinking it could be upwards of twenty percent bots, composed of you know, what the platform is, or the automated accounts that are on the platforms vice the real legitimate,

authentic users. So that's what this is about, because if Twitter is comprised of twice any percent bobs, then Elon's not getting his money's worth out of this platform. It doesn't Hey, it's not real political discourse that's going on. It's not real authentic users that are engaging with each other.

It's you know, those automated accounts that push various you can push propaganda, you can push advertising, you can push all sorts of crazy things, you know, strings and puppeteers from state ling actors like the CCP can run rampant on these platforms too. So Elon wants to know what he's paying for, and Twitter has thus far said, we're not going to let you in on that because all

of that is proprietary to us, our private platform. In an article on the Verge, they wrote that Twitter will give Elon Musk fire hose data access to settle bot complaints, and Twitter preparing to grant Elon Musk unprecedented access to platform data in an effort to address his concerns about automated accounts. So this fire hose of data they're talking about,

how could they assume that? I mean, if someone's going to buy your company, don't they and you have an agreement with them that they're looking at they're doing their due diligence. How could they hide this? I mean, that's it just seems like this is so basic. Yeah, no kidding, And that's why I think what's going through Elon's head as well. He wants to make sure that he's what

he was promised is what he's actually getting. So if that fire hose of data comes at him, you know, Elon knows a lot of smart people in the industry. I hope he has an army of data scientists, of programmers, of people who can actually comb through this data and make sense of it. That would be great and look and basically double check the methodologies for bot counting and all of these spam accounts. So that would be fantastic,

But you're right, it's the most basic thing. And what I think this actually does end up highlighting buck is the fact that these tech companies they do not operate with transparency as one of their major goals or one of their major values whatsoever. If Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has to beg and beg and beg to get access to a platform that he should ultimately end up owning, then this is a problem. Think of what the average American user gets when they sign

up for these tech companies. It ain't transparency. Well, what do you what do you think he may find here? Because there's clearly some sensitivity on the part of the current and hopefully soon to be former Twitter leadership about their data their practices. Do you have some sense of what Elon could be looking at beyond just bots? You know, Twitter's had a long heads up right now, so they've had time to sort of try to clean up their act.

There were reports initially when the deal first emerged in the public eye that they were sort of mining their p's and ques, that they were halting all a product tinkering and any sort of different sort of evolutions of their product. From being shipped so that remember everyone was experienced on the conservative side at least that there was tick in user counts and whatnot. So I think they've had a while to try to clean up their act

and get those content moderation processes. If they don't want Elon to investigate and look at what they're doing that's obviously been very biased, they're probably cleaning that up right now. They've probably had a lot of time to clean it up, as you know, we in the intelligence community to burn all the documents and whatnot would have done before we're getting out of embassies overseas, So I think it's I think they've been given a lot of lead time to

clean up their act. But you know, Elon's good and again he has really powerful friends who are good at this stuff too, so we'll see. I think they'll be able to ferret something out for the American people to look at. Do you think this transaction, the purchase of Twitter, which could have enormous implications for our information ecosystem on the new side, just free speech implications in general, Do you think Elan's gonna actually end up the owner of

Twitter based on what you're seeing? You know, book I think it's fifty fifty. And just in terms of what Elon's thinking himself, he could be walking away or he could again be setting himself up for those more advantageous terms and actually trying to get this platform added discount. So at this point, you know, I was a little skeptical in the beginning. Then my hope really really spiked. But look at what they're throwing at him. Remember when

the board took those poison pills. Look at the Joint SEC and DOJ investigations by the Biden administration reportedly into his other business dealings. Look at the sexual misconduct allegations. I mean, these people are throwing everything they can at Elon.

And if he ends up actually confirming that the bobs are only at five percent or in an area that Twitter sets they are, I really really hope he does, and I really hope he takes over breaks the ideological monopoly that these big tech companies have over Americans and uses it as a force for free speech in the world, as he says, So I hope it goes through. Right now, I think it's fifty fifty. To be completely honest, do any of these free speech devoted platforms that have been

popping up in the last couple of years. I mean, you were at Facebook, which is kind of the granddaddy of all this, if you will, right, I mean, the biggest one and the one that really got the whole social media revolution started. So do you think that whether it's Getter or truth Social or any of them, could they maybe break parlor? Could they maybe break out? You know,

I think it really depends on their underlying technologies. So there's a company called Rumble that you're familiar with, the YouTube competitive competitor, and there they have their own cloud hosting services. There's other even specifically designed cloud hosting services that are for free speech, like righte Forge. So you know, it depends on if they make themselves themselves invulnerable to something like Amazon Web Services yanking a parlor off of

their cloud hosting services. So, conservatives, if they build with that full digital stack in mind and have an acknowledgement that the infrastructure actually matters, not just the platforms sitting on top of those cloud oasting services and those servers,

then I think they have a chance at survival. But if they just ride on top of what these big tech platforms have already built, then you know there's always the chance that you're going to get snuffed out, or you have to be beholden to the ideology of these companies and what they're pushing. Dare I always appreciate it. Thanks for being with us. Thanks Buck. Each morning, the President of the United States receives a highly classified briefing

on the most important issues facing the country. It's called the President's Daily Brief or PDB. It's delivered by America's spies and analysts. Well, now you can hear your very own PDB in the form of a podcast hosted by me Brian Dean Wright, a former CIA operations officer. Each morning at six a m. Eastern, I'll bring you fifteen to twenty minutes of the most important issues facing the country, giving you the critical intelligence and analysis you need to start your morning.