How Libs Launder Ideas

what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again, the Buck Sexton Show begins, analysts, he's a great guy. Now, so this is right now probably the world's most famous dog. I don't think I have to use the word probably. And Conan is a incredible It's an incredible story. I learned a lot about this particular type of dog, and we just gave Conan a medal and a plaque and it's really uh And I actually think Conan knew exactly what was going on.

Welcome to the Bucks Acton show. Conan the dog that chased down Abe Baker bug Daddy who went to the White House yesterday. One thing that I'm I'm just surprised. We can't see to get an answer on and people keep saying Conan is male, Conan is female. I understand that we are in a time of a particular sensitivity about about about gender, but I mean, this is a very straightforward process. Do we know, guys, I've seen it reported that Conan's a boy dog and Conan's a girl dog. Well,

Conan's a wonder dog. That much is for sure. We know that. And there were a lot of folks that were smiling yesterday as the President brought Conan, the Special Operations dog to the White House. Sure enough, if you thought that, there would be no way that the journos would make this something that Trump did wrong or that Trump is to be criticized for. There were people who were saying that they didn't like Trump bringing the dog to the White House. They didn't like that Trump made

a joke about the dog going after reporters. Nothing is allowed to be funny, nothing is allowed to be lighthearted. It all has to be always and at all times destroy the Trump residency if you deviate from that for even a moment, even just to say wow, look at look at the really cool Belgian Malinois that is at the White House that was involved in a very high level and successful US military raid to go after the

most wanted terrorists really in the world. I think you would argue, or you could argue, Abubakara Baghdatis more wanted than I'm in Olswaheri. By the way, as we are here in New York City, there is also a I don't know what is going on down the hallway. There's a whole a slew of puppies from what is it, from the ASPCA. This is a sign They come to iHeart once a year, I believe. And I just went to walk and get water and there were just a bunch of puppies that just adorable. There's just a whole

there's just little puppies all play with. There's like six of them. They're all they're they're about fifteen feet from our studio right now and they're absolutely adorable and they want they need homes. They need exactly. They do adoption drives every year before the holiday. You know, it would be a great wedding wedding gift. Producer Mark I live in an apartments. A dog I held is going to be huge if you look at its pause. Yeah, it's gonna be huge. He's gonna make him get a get

a house though. Yeah, you gotta you gotta have room for the puppies and for a little marks and little marquettes that are gonna be coming. Puppies first, then we'll talk about That's what I always say, Puppies first, all right. So the good news about this week is that the journos are all pretty much on early Vaca because they work so hard, so we get to talk about whatever we want here in the Freedom up. There are some

interesting things breaking. There's some stories that we can dive into a little bit more deeply because we're not in the midst of I saw. I think it was Jonathan Swan over at Axios who referred to democrats impeachment mania as a wishful frenzy. I've said that was very as a nice turn of phrase from mister Swan. I agree with that, a wishful frenzy. Indeed, Oh it's coming, it's happening. That's why we had producer Mark play a montage. We

need a montage. I haven't seen Team Americans so long that I might actually go back and watch it again over the holidays, and they never made a sequel, which I was promised. I was told there would be a sequel, and there was not a sequel. But we had a montage for you and it was from twenty seventeen and it was everybody from you know, Don Lemon to Joe Scarborough and everybody else. The walls are finally closed again on this president. He's gone too far. It's all over

for him. The beginning of the end. That's what I'm trying to think. What the other ken phrases are that we always hear. It turns out it's not the beginning of the end, to borrow from Churchill, it is the end of the beginning. However, in this impeachment process, we are now in the midst of it. And some interesting notes on the timeline. I wanted to establish today where it's all just going for a moment, so that we can have an expectation as they try to they're going

to come back. Congress is going to come back, and right now they're in recess. They're staffs that were working furiously on this report. So I want us to know what to expect going forward, because there's going to be a race to the finish, because you know, the members of Congress are not going to spend Christmas and the holiday in DC working. No, no, no, Congress doesn't do that kind of thing. So they're going to have to cram and ram all this stuff so that it gets

done within the timeline. It's almost like politics and the political time line, specifically of a Democratic primary. He's pushing this whole thing and that it's not about the sanctity of our republic and protecting the foundations of our constitution. Nancy Pelosi's weeping, weeping at the notion that they have to impeach the president. They really don't want to. He's just such a big, mean meaning that they have to impeach him. No, they don't really have to impeach him

at all. As we know, they were going to impeach him no matter what. But let's now look at what's going to happen. There's been a clear drop in the polls in support for certainly removal of the president and even impeachment of the president. Some are saying, I believe it was Ari Fleischer, who's a savvy political observer. He said, perhaps now would be a good time for them to just go for a vote of censure instead of going all the way here and voting for a an actual

impeachment of the president. And I'm telling you Democrats can't do that because we have to remember what the first purpose of all of this is. It's not to get to the truth. It's not to protect the Constitution. It's not to give a full accounting of the facts to the American people about an incident that no one's even really going to remember. And six months, maybe even six

days after at least this whole thing is over. It is about trying to make sure the president of the United States is at a disadvantage in the election, using the process as a weapon against President Trump's reelection chances. That's all this is. That's all this is, ultimately, in

terms of its purpose. The left demands this. The Democrat base, the progressive maniacs who stand outside of college amphitheaters and chant by the thousands of curses and swears and call everyone racist, and all that component of the Democratic Party, which is increasingly the Democratic Party, the mainstream of it. They insist that a president that they have called a traitor, a criminal, a rapist, certainly a liar, many many many times crazy. I can't think of I'm probably leaving a

few out that they've called all those things. How could the Democrats say all that and then not impeach him as far as the left is concerned, So we are going to an impeachment vote that is I think a fate at Holm Plea. There's not a better way to say it than the French way. Sometimes the French have got it. It's like the Germans. Sometimes the Germans have some super long word that means something very specific, and when you need that word, say it in the German.

You know, is there a better way to say zeitgeist than zeitgeist? I don't think so. That's not a long one, but there's some really long ones too. So the timeline then becomes really important. As we're going into the holiday, we have a moment to catch our breath here and say, tomorrow we'll talk about turkey, stuffing, coffee, you know, no big whoop, We'll talk about all those things too. The the perennial fight year and in year out. Is turkey

a worthwhile primary protein on your Thanksgiving table? I'm seeing some people start some noise on the on the Twitter and on the Facebook that maybe you just maybe just see her Ribbi and just stop with all this gobble gobble nonsense. You know, maybe just go with your favorite food and be thankful that you can eat it and celebrate in that way. Or is that sacrilege? I don't even want to know a producer Mark Things, producer Brandon. We'll find out from him tomorrow where he stands out.

But you're a turkey guy, aren't you. Of course you've probably you're probably one of those maniacs who eats turkey, not on Thanksgiving. I mean, what do you mean, maniacs that eats turkey out? I'm like a whole turkey or like like you'll eat turkey at other points of the year. You will skip over the far superior meats and eat turkey anyway. Yeah, I'll have a turkey sandwich like slice Deli meat, maybe a turkey burger occasionally. This is part of this is part of the problem here. We need

we need truth in turkey. I don't see what the problem is. Turkey's just not worthwhile. Now, are you gonna hate me that I say I'm a dark meat turkey type of guy. No, no, no, I like the dark meat, dark meat turkey, dark meat chicken. You only live once go with the dark meat. It's more that's it's higher fat content that who cares, it's delicious, Brandon, you a

turkey guy. I guess we're getting this done today. Yeah. No, I like turkey, turkey and cheese because I told you I eat like a ten year old nice turkey and cheese, And I like the one you gonna have like a slice. Are you gonna have like turkey and then some mashed potatoes then like a slice of American cheese? Is that what you go for? What's your Yeah? That sounds good. Oh okay, all right, yeah, lunches on you good talk. So the impeachment timeline instead of the turkey timeline, this

is what's gonna happen. If you look back at the impeachment process from the Clinton era when I was I was just a young lad. I was in high school. I don't remember much about this. I do remember seeing some of the snippets of the interview on TV and going, whoa, there's some stuff that happens with the president that's really surprising. But it started and finished within a matter of a few months. This time around, they're going to have to

do the same thing. Why it's not because democracy dictates it be. So it's not because the vision of the founders blah blah, it's none of that. It is because Democrats have to get this thing done before. You have a bunch of Democrats senators who need to be showing up in the Iowa caucuses and in the first New Hampshire primary in early February. This thing has got to get done before then. Now question that. I so. So

that's why they're trying to ram this thing through. They're going to have the report out, maybe as soon as next week. I'm seeing you're also going to have the Horowitz report schedule. This is the report from within the Department of Justice looking into Fiser abuse. We've already talked about this a little bit on the show. I believe it's December or ninth or the tenth of the eleventh, something like that. Second week December, you have the Fiser

Report coming out. I don't know how they're going to try to time this with the release of the impeachment report, but we already know what the impeachment report's going to say. It's just going to be another version of the recitation of bloviation and exaggerated disconnected factoids that Adam Schiff has been reading out at the start of each proceeding. All that's all it will be. They may tack onto it

some other things. And right now they're probably furiously looking at the data to decide do we call it bribery, do we call it extortion? Do we call it abuse of power? Abuse of power has the most leeway. It's not bribery and it's not extortion, so they can call it that. But now they're just making now and now they're just crazy, and which I guess they are. But

that's a leap. Everybody knows that's a leap. But they have to get this thing done before the Iowa CAUCUSUS rolls around or else they're going to start to have some problem. It's going to look like they didn't really think this thing through. I think it's quite possible they didn't really think this thing through. That brings me to my main man, Cocaine, Mitch Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

He and his Senate Republican colleagues will be in a position to drag using the process just like Democrats do. To drag the Democrats through an annoying, difficult stretch just to sort of show the country as much dirty laundry from the Democrats side as possible on all of this. Get Hunter Biden out there, call Adam Shift. I worry that this is where Republicans say, oh, well, we're just Republicans in the Senate. I mean we'll say, oh, well, we're through all that, We're too good to do that.

Now we're not going to do that. No, No, this is we are going into the twenty twenty election. My friends. This is an eye for an eye territory. This is time to make the Democrats live by the rules that they established for all of us. And the only rule is that there are no rules when they have power. So maybe it's time they get a taste of their own medicine. I hope cocaine Mitch decides to exact a terrible price from the Democrats through the Senate trial. We

will see if he does. But now you know it's got to happen really in a matter of weeks. They do not have months unless they plan on just allowing the impeachment proceeding in the Senate to hijack the Democrat primary. And given that Bloomberg just got in, everybody understands that this Democrat primary, there's no front runner. There's no one

who's particularly inspiring or great. I don't think they want to add to their troubles, unless, of course, you want to make the argument that Hillary Clinton is behind all of this on the sidelines, you know, be in the shadows, just waiting for her moment to emerge as the consensus candidate. But let's not get too conspiratorial. Not today, maybe tomorrow. I'm not even sure if we came to an agreement today that it would be enough time. I'm not even sure if we came to an agreement today that it

would be enough time. I'm not even sure if we came to an agreement today. So we had Nancy Pelosi there talking about the US Mexico Canada Agreement, and we kind of turned it into the remix. It's fine, whatever I might even today enough time. You get the idea. Our point here is that they feel like they don't have time for this in the Congress. I'm here to just remind everybody that they got time for this sham and beachment trial. The US Mexico Canada Agreement, which does

need a cooler name. I am not gonna lie to you. It needs a cooler name. For sure, would benefit American workers, would help this economy, would help the country. It's the dare I say, the right thing to do. If Congress took its job seriously, if the Democrat majority in the House wasn't entirely consumed with and only concerned with harmon President Trump's electoral prospects, then they would most certainly take action on this item. They would do what they could

to pass this. But it seems they have no interest whatsoever in that because legislation that would pass going into an election year would benefit the president. I think this is necessary context for evaluating all of the sanctimonious speeches you will hear from Democrats in the days ahead about how, oh, our duty to protect the American people, we have to

protect them from trumpy so evil. Well, they could still say all the horrible things they say about Trump and try to damage him in all the ways that they do and do business that helps the American people. They

don't have to make these things mutually exclusive. They make it mutually exclusive because anything that is good that comes out of government right now is to the benefit of Trump, and he is the president of the United States, despite their delusions otherwise, so they have no interest in really helping people. I also mentioned I believe that not the show that we should be thank full for the employment

numbers at this time of year. A lot of people going into this Thanksgiving and have jobs that we were told would not exist based on the numbers of even the projections back in twenty fourteen. We are at you know, for people to try to say, this is the Obama economy, and that's preposterous, that's a joke. We are at a

fifty year low. It has been fifty years since we have had so many people, particularly of prime working age from twenty five to fifty four, which I leave is also the demo for media stuff, right, twenty five fifty four, Yeah, consider that prime working age two. It's been fifty years since we've had so many people of that age range in the workplace gainfully employed. The country right now, despite the absence of this narrative in the media, the country

is doing very well. Trump's policies and decision making has been working. It is bringing benefits to you and to me. We should be a bit thankful if the fact remains we have a president, a commander in chief who has no respect for the rule of law and no concern whatsoever for ethics or honor or for the values that truly make America great. No respect for law. That's what they say about this president. Meanwhile, you have had forty

nationwide injunctions by liberal activist judges against this president. That is twenty x what you had under the Obama presidency. Because people who are of the leftist mindset, they are increasingly totalitarian in their aims. They want control of everything. They want to punish you for speech, for thoughts, even

if they can, if they can find a way. I do believe as we find out more about the way the Chinese use algorithms and the mass surveillance state to try and demand obedience of people and even do education in real time online of anyone who would dissent from the dominant view, that a lot of liberals look at that with some degree of envy. If only we could

do that here. Meanwhile, a lot of us look at this and say, they already have near information dominance because of the way social media works, because of the way are broadcasting networks have just they have adopted this narrative that liberalism is now liberalism and the truth are synonymous. So anything a liberal thinks must be true. It's not that they're liberal, it's that it's just the way it is. This is a stunning, stunning departure from good faith journalism,

from good faith provision of information. But meanwhile, Michael Bloomberg runs around saying that we are to be terrified of what the president will do in this country, and he has no respect them for the rule of law, no respect for ethics or honor. You mean like the Clintons. That's a family with a lot of respect for ethics and honor. Right, that was what we were told we should That was the option we should have taken the

last time around. The same people lecturing you right now about how Trump is so unethical and so they're also the same people who pretend that Hunter Biden getting millions of dollars to do a no show job in Ukraine while his dad is pointment on policy there. That's fine, it's fine, no problem, nothing to see there. It's not illegal. Yeah, well neither us. What the president did with Ukraine is it?

Is that the standard or not. I'm just curious. The standard changes every day, though, depends on whatever they want. I wonder what changed here. It wasn't long ago that Michael Bloomberg, who was the latest entry into the Democrat primary, Michael Bloomberg, said that he was too old. Would you producer, Brandon,

would you play clips seventeen? Please? But it's just not going to happen on a national level for somebody like me starting where I am, unless I was willing to change all my views and go on what CNN called an apology tour. Joe Biden went out and apologized for being male over fifty white. He apologized for the one piece of legislation which is actually a pretty good anti crime bill, which if the Liberals ever read it, most of the things they like would be easy in that bill.

They should have loved that. They don't even bother to read it. Your anti crime, you must be anti populist, and so everybody else. And Betto whatever his name is, he's apologized for being born I don't mean van kind and people's a lot of people love him and says a smart guy, and if he wins, I'd certainly support him. I just like him, so sorry that I was born a sis gender hetero male who is white named Betto even I mean, I took the name betto, but I'm

still a white sis Nermel. It's true what he says here about how you have to go around and apologize all the time. In fact, there's data that Andy know who will be talking about again here in a minute. There's data that is circulating right now that the only the only racial group in America that views its own racial group negatively white liberals. White liberals do have white liberal guilt. This is a real thing. And this is

a poll that's been circulating all week. And my friend and you know, if he is no longer suspended from Twitter, we'll get to that. You could see it in his in his feed. Now, let me just first say that no one should ever feel badly about their race. It is. It is a bizarre and immoral thing to take the view that one race is is. Let you know that your own race would be less than another race. This is This is completely contrary to sound and ethical thinking

for anybody. All races are the same, All race are just human beings. It doesn't these are superficial characteristics of no importance to us as people. And yet white liberals think that there's something wrong with being white we've all had this suspicion for a while. People have talked about white guilt since I was remember hearing the phrase eman back when I was in high school, and it's a

very real phenomenon. You have these these white liberals they've adopted because they believe so much in the power of victimhood and victim's status. They talk about this for all these other individuals. The only way that they can then leverage the victimhood status of other so called the press groups is for them to say that they're sorry, that they realize they are, by nature white liberals, by nature of their skin color, are part of the oppressive class,

and therefore they have to make amends. And to make amends they want to elevate all of the allegedly victimized classes and all that way they become the good people, and the good people who also need to be in power. I might add, this is where you get these sanctimonious white liberals who will walk around constant people like Betto orc a perfect example. It's country is so racist. It's

just like the most racist country ever. And I just understand that by telling everybody how racist in his like, Betto is not racist because he's saying it's always like so racist. That's where we are. That is where white liberals are and their beliefs about all of this. But you know, Bloomberg is right on some things, and the things that he's right on will be a problem for

him in the prim area, the Democratic primary. You're not allowed to say stuff like lower more aggressive policing to lower crime can be a good idea, whether you believe in stopping frisk or not. There was a lot of other stuff that went on in New York City to bring the crime rate down down dramatically, down, so dramatically that it feels like an entirely different city from what it did when I was when I was growing up here.

But I mentioned to you, Andy know before, and I didn't want to touch on this topic because it ties into a few things. One of my favorite podcasts, as you know that, I've listened to it a long time, and I don't I don't have the time to listen to really any other because this is the best podcast. I don't only have a lot of time to listen to other podcasts, but once in a while someone will say, you gotta listen to this, and I listened to Joe Rogan and Neval Ravocant talk to each other on the

Joe Rogan Show. And since that, I've been following Nevall's work a little bit more when I can, and he tweeted out I think it was earlier this week that they want to police your speech because they can't police your thoughts. The idea of being if they could police your thoughts, they would they would like to get into

that is the ultimate control. And for people who think that controlling others is necessary for a good society, for people who think that control of the population through government that is benevolent but all powerful, right, this is the government in place of God. This is central to the entire progressive thesis, a progressive approach to America, to any country. And this is why they also want one world government. They'll be one super government that has all the right ideas,

that takes care of us all so well. I mean, this has resulted in misery, deprivation, slaughter, and genocide in other countries, the same thinking taken to its ultimate ends. But liberals still think in this country that they'll get it right, and so they're just creeping along. There's just this edging along toward total control and control of thoughts is certainly a part of that process. We see this

in China. I mean they're trying to leverage technology. Now you have the social credit system, you have a mass surveillance state, and now they're using algorithms to determine who's a problem, who is not on board with the ideology that they are supposed to be or that they are told they need to be. We see this working all the time, and unfortunately has also seeped into our own, our own system of censorship. It's not quite as pernicious here, it's not quite as as powerful as it is in

the context of China. But Andy No, who is best known for being a guy who will go out there and cover Antifa, well, Andy No responded to somebody who said that essentially transgender individuals are under murderous assault in this country, that there is a plague of violence against trans gender Oh, by the way, he also I found here Andy's this is a twenty eighteen survey from a n S. I don't even know what that is, but

Andy tweeted this out. Mean in group bias by Raith resnicity, and you have a huge disparity of white liberals who do not like do not like the fact that they are that they are white, which is a thing that it's not surprising to any of us, but it is noteworthy as we see what's going on. I'm trying to find this other one where you have an Andy No Twitter suspense conservative journalist Andy Know and here's why he committed hateful conduct according to Twitter. You might wonder, what

does a journalist. By the way, Andy is, Andy is a minority, He's Asian American. He's also openly he's gay. What did Andy No do that was hateful such that in response to a Chelsea Clinton tweet, ah, white liberal, there we go. In response to a Chelsea Clinton tweet, Twitter would suspend him. Well, Chelsea Clinton tweeted out the following. Since twenty thirteen, more than one hundred and fifty trans people have been murdered in the US. The majority are

black transgender women. An epidemic of violence and hate. Now one hundred and fifty over the course of six years. To call that an epidemic in a country of three hundred and thirty million people would seem to be a bit of a stretch, right, What is the overall number? What is the overall population and how much What is the homicide rate for them versus the homicide rate for black transgender females. It turns out that there is no particularly high rate. But see you start to ask these

questions and people get angry at you. What are you saying? It's not no, of course, it's it's a horrible thing that anybody would would murder anyone of any gender identity or endy, any race, anything. It's the most heinous crime out there. You cannot murder people. We're all opposed to murder. But if we're talking about public policy, and if we're talking about the numbers, then can't we be honest about it?

Andy wrote that the one hundred and fifty deaths over several years, we're in a nation of more than three hundred million people. That's hardly an epidemic. He said, the US is one of the safest countries in the world for trans people. The murder rate of trans victims is actually lower than for the CIS population, meaning for the

for the heterosexual population. And he also then tweeted out the following, also, who is behind a vast majority of these murders of black transgender females, African American males not allowed. By the way, this this is statistically he is correct, This is true, This is a fact. This is not a for debate. In fact, there's only a handful of these one hundred and fifty murders that Chelsea Clinton that she's going to run for Senate and then president. By the way, just you heard it here if I haven't

heard it somewhere else. Chelsea Clinton, she thinks she should be the leader of the free world because mommy and daddy are famous. But and we're politicians. Obviously Dad was president. Mom thought she was going to be president, still does. But one hundred and fifty murders over the course of six years, we're told this is an epidemic. It's not an epidemic. Every single life lost is sad, is wrong, and there should be a full investigation and the perpetrator

should be punished. But this is not an epidemic. So Chelsea Clinton has millions of followers. Why is she saying this, Oh, because it's about it. It's the virtue signaling of look at this particularly oppressed group, and how concerned Chelsea Clinton is with this oppressed group. Andy Know comes out and says, well,

that's actually not a lot of people. By the numbers per capita nationwide, it's not and it's lower than the national average for people being killed in this country outside of any victimized group, and a vast majority of the perpetrators happened to be African American males, which he just

pointed out. That's just a sit that's also true. So the people that are killing these black transcender females are overwhelmingly and I think was only a handful of acceptance to this blackmails just he just shared that, and this is data. You can check it up on the check it out on the FBI website. You can check it out online. This is data. Twitter suspended him for this for hateful conduct. Why is this hateful? Why is this hateful? We're talking about numbers. We're talking about a public policy

issue of importance. Why is the number okay to share and then analyze it, but then contra or rather other numbers, additional numbers to give context, are not allowed to be shared, all, my friends, because unfortunately the left has already adopted this position for a long time, and you're going to see more and more of it. Facts can be hateful. Numbers can be hateful. It's whatever they determine, that's what is hateful. Twitter, Facebook, Google,

all the different news organizations. They get to decide what is hateful because they get to decide what is speech and what is allowable. We getting pushed closer and closer to a society where we no longer really have freedom of speech. We seem to be forgetting this. They tell us what, oh, we're going to get into, by the way, pronoun users Later on in the show, too, they tell us what we can say about other individuals, and they tell us, now the force of law will be used.

They're openly advocating for hate crime laws that criminalize speech. Say the wrong word and you can go to prison. Journalists who are supposed to live and die by the First Amendment. Anything to protect the First Amendment. Journalists are saying, yeah, well except for really hateful stuff. This is the country we are increasingly living in. And I think we are a bit of the boiling frog in the pot here. We are not paying close enough attention to how quickly

our rights are routing on this at all. I hope Andy gets his Twitter account back. I got to check and see, but it's just a matter of time before yours truly gets suspended. You watch God's used imperfect people all through history. King David wasn't perfect, Saul wasn't perfect, Salomon wasn't perfect. And I actually gave the president a little one pager on those old Testament kings about a

month ago, and I shared with him. I said, mister President, I know there are people that say, you know, you said you were the chosen one, and and I said you were. I said, if if you're a believing Christian, you understand God's plan for the people who rule and and and judge over us on this planet, in our in our government, pretty uncontroversial stuff if you're a believing Christian from Governor Rick Perry, now energy sectary Rick Perry and liberals freak out about it. Why because they're okay

with Democrats in office talking about God. But when Republican does it, the theocracy has arrived. I just had to do. But this was so absurd, so silly. This became a news story yesterday that Rick Perry. Christians is that God chooses leaders and that God's hand is at work in all things in the world. God has a plan. This is now controversial. Got to have background checks done for your business. That's where my friends at Global Verification Network

come in. They're the only dual certified, veteran owned background investigation and vetting company. Now, I understand that there are a lot of other people out there who are doing background checks by getting the work to people overseas. You don't want that. You want someone who's doing it all here in the US of A. You want to support a veteran owned company and a company that does not outsource its work its investigations overseas. It also means better

control over the data and better customer service. When you call Global Verification Network, you're going to get somebody on the phone who can answer any questions you have fast whatever size business you're in anywhere across the country. Please use my friends at Global Verification Network for all of your background check needs. Give them a call at eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine again that's eight seven seven six nine five eleven seventy nine.

Or you can go to MYGVN dot com. Again, that's my GVN dot com. Cisgender, fat shaming, heteronormativity, intersectionality, patriarchy, rape culture. These are all terms that you have probably become familiar with, if not from listening to this show, just because they're out there now in the discourse. They sound like they should mean something because you hear them a lot. But where did they come from? In fact,

I told you all, what was it now? Maybe a couple of years ago, that I had just heard this term cisgender for the first time, which struck me as odd because, starting at a very young age, I had a pretty expansive vocabulary. I'd never heard of this thing before. Where did it come from? Intersectionality? Where did it? Where did it come from? Well, there is a fantastic article in the Wall Street Journal by Peter Bagozian about something

called idea laundering. This really matters, by the way, even if you don't care about what crazy academics are saying on campuses, this is you often have heard me say that campuses are the laboratories for left wing craziness. That's where they're doing the most experimentation, in a place where there are really no constraints on the stupidity, on the absurdity of their ideas, and they come out of these

laboratories with these ideas. The campuses propagate these different words and concepts into the broader society with the stamp of approval of well, it's comes from university professors who have peer review journals, and Bogosian walks us through what he calls idea laundering. This is really interesting because this is how it all happens. The reason why your kids, for those of you who have kids about this age, will be coming home from school, certainly from high school, being

told about gender identity versus sex. What's the difference? The reason your kids will come home and be told that intersectionality is the truth of all American society, that there are different groups that are constantly in a battle for who is oppressing who. Heteronormativity a fancy way of saying most people are heterosexual, that's all that, that's what, and

then they extrapolate all these things from that concept. That's the heteronormativity is that the dominant culture, the dominant perception that people have of sexuality is that men are attracted to women and women are attracted to men. It's not the case that that's the only way things are in this or any other society, but that has been the dominant paradigm. How do you get these ideas. Oh, fat shaming is the one that actually Bogosian singles in on here.

What do you do if you are a particularly activist minded academic, how do you create concepts that then will get fed into the broader society and have a real influence. I mean you look at, for example, the Obama administration.

The Obama administration's policy on bathroom usage for people that have gender identity issues was you better allow the you know, the twelve year old boy to use the twelve year old girls locker room, or else we will consider pulling Department of Education funding under discrimination discrimination accusations that you're being discriminatory. So this goes all the wayp About rape culture, This was another one I kept hearing about all the time,

rape culture on college campuses. CNN even had a documentary. I didn't watch it because it's CNN and CNN's crap, but CNN had a documentary I think called The Hunting Ground about college campuses. There were these journals who were so very gullable, not just in the Duke lac Loss case where there was no rape and there was a really a deranged accuser who tried to ruin a bunch of people's lives and a power mad Democrat prosecutor knifeong

try to ruin some young boys lives. Media went along with that, because you know, there's this culture of rape on campus. Rape is a felony. You know, you sit down to have lunch with somebody and you tell them that you got caught up in a stock scam ten years ago, you served a little time. They might say, yeah, you know, we all make mistakes. You know, you served your debt. Decide you sit down and say that you

were convicted of rape. The person's going to rightly want to end the lunch and say, what the heck is this? It's a rape culture that just the notion that that's a phrase that should be in common usage is absurd on college campuses, That's what they say. Where does all

of this come from? It comes from campuses. It comes from the takeover of academia by left wing activists with degrees in social studies without really much to add to the discourse, and who don't really view their role as making sure that people who go to school know things and gain certain skills. They view their role as making sure they only know certain things that they tell them.

They have to know for the purposes of being the shock troops of the left, when they are going through adulthood and then raising their own children, they are indoctrination factories. You see this all the time. How often do you have a left wing speaker show up at a college campus and thou people challenge me on this. By the way, when we talked about the a Culter speech at Berkeley, I said I had brought this up in the show, and someone, some blue check journal idiot was saying, to me,

who this happens, look at the look at a Trump rally? Said, well, am I talking about political rallies, talking about invited speakers to a college campus. Name me one time that a left wing speaker has shown up at a college campus and there have been a thousand, two thousand, angry, screaming, profane, shrill, shrieking conservatives saying you're not allowed to speak here. How many I could sit here and run through, off the top of my head, dozens of speeches where that has

happened with leftists. I mean, I don't know if the number was one thousand or one hundred protests, but you know where they try to shut it down, shut it down, don't allow people to be heard. The ideas are too dangerous, you see, including ideas that in many cases have been considered consensus or status quo within the academy, stretching back for decades. How do they do this? How do they change the conversation so abruptly so that now we have

to use terminology that they set for us. Ah, let me bring you back to this Pagosian piece, an idea laundering its fabulous piece, really important, because this is why you're again while your kids are coming home saying sis gender and gender idea and all the stuff. You're like, what it all starts in the campus. Here's what they do. You got a bunch of people that feel a certain way in academia. We feel like fat shaming, for example, is wrong. Now being mean to anyone is wrong. Being

mean to anyone because their weight. I think I'll vast majority of us all have different times or we're struggling with weight, or we're trying to get a little healthier, we're trying to drop some pounds. There's a lot that goes into weight, including genetics, including people's socioeconomic circumstances. You know, it's just not as simple as oh, just show willpower.

I mean, there's there's a lot that goes into it, and people should be considered about that, and it's a struggle that I think a lot of us all share. But that's different than creating an academic discipline around fat shaming, which is what colleges have done. How they do it will they start a journal, an academic journal. In this case, it was called Fat Studies. They created an academic periodical

called Fat Studies. And they had than other academics right about how talking about fat as a bad thing, or being overweight or obesi is a bad thing was psychologically harmful and distressing and all. And then they have other academics who peer review this. But they see the peer review process is supposed to be, and this goes back

to the roots of the academy. It's supposed to be a process of distilling truth through opposition to what is being written there or looking for flaws, looking for counter arguments, looking for ways that this that the peer review is supposed to be. Is this thing unassailable? Is it true? Try to show us that it's not true. That's not how peer review works. And social social studies departments or whatever,

social science is rather which are not science. As a political science major, it can tell you there was no science to it at all. The few times we looked at regression analysis and statistics and things, everybody's eyes rolled that in their head and they said, let's argue more about you know, abortion rights. Nobody cared about any of

that other stuff. There's really no science to it. But if you look at the social sciences across the academy, which you find out is that as long as you're taking a left wing point of view, the peer review process for these journals that they just make up is meant to just consolidate the opinion around whatever is being promulgated. So they all they all go, yeah, it's great. You know,

the kind of fat shaming is a terrible thing. And then when people say, well, what about the health risks and the I mean, that's the biggest public health epidemic we really face actually now has to do directly with diseases of excess, disease of excess calories and the type two diabetes, among other things, and they just shout all that down with excuse me, we have a fat studies journal that explains all of this. It is peer reviewed. It is the science now, but it's not the science.

It's just the consolidation of like minded opinion in something they are calling a journal that they are saying is peer reviewed that is really just there forwarding of a narrative, a narrative based on emotion and feeling, a narrative that is not rooted in any reality. Here's an example in Fat Studies, the Journal Toward a Fat Pedagogy, a study of pedagogical approaches aimed at challenging obesity discourse in post secondary education. Does anyone even know? I mean, I just

read that to you, dude. I read it. I've read it before, I read the piece before it came on error. I don't evenally know what they think they're saying here. And that's part of this as well. They dress up flimsy thoughts with fancy words because then most people just sort of say, Okay, it looks it looks like it's academic, and therefore there's some impremature on the fact that this is coming out of a college or a university. There

must be some truth to it. I always say that word a little bit funny because I feel like I say it wrong sometimes. But whatever, I learned words by reading them, not by hearing them. These articles tell us that obesity is a narrative such as being healthy at and there's another narrative such as being healthy at ever at every size, and there's no reason to privilege one narrative over another. Is to see this. The reason why he focused in on fat studies here in this piece

is because that's just not true. Being morbidly obese is very, very dangerous for your health. There is no alternative. There is no scientific alternative narrative about how being morbidly obeses is okay for your health. This is not the same thing as don't be mean to people that are struggling with weight. I've struggled with weight. Lots of people want to struggle with weight. Everybody struggles with weight. Really, that you know you come across in a day to day

basis just they don't necessarily talk about it. But to say that, yeah, you know you weigh you weigh a thousand pounds, that's fine, that's the way you know, that's the way God made you is not This is not based in any science. This is just narrative. And then when you start to take this and look at Okay, what about cis gender and heteronormativity and all these other concepts that come out they're giving fancy words to. Well, we have a feeling that people shouldn't just think that

being heterosexual is the normal thing. Well, normal is a word that it views some value judgment on things, but it is certainly the majority, and then there's no reason to believe that that's going to change anytime soon. Intersectionality, they're different groups that are all filled with oppression against each other, and that there's an actual hierarchy of oppression that the left looks at throughout American society. You know, are you black? Are you Latino? Are you white? Are

you Asian? Are you trans? Are you? All these different things? And that every discussion of politics has to the first thing you do is put somebody on that board, if you will, not chessboard, on that playing field, before you can discuss the merits of an argument, the drawbacks of an argument, what's true, what's fair, it's good, what's decent? Now forget all that first, Where where does this person go in the intersectional hierarchy? This all comes from academia.

This is a problem for the kids who have to study these places. This is from the Bogosian piece. Quote. Students leave the academy believing they know things they do not know. They bring this knowledge to their places of employment, where over time laundered ideas and the terminology that accompanies

them become normative, giving them even more unearned legitimacy. This is why you've heard of some of the terms we began with sis, gender, fat shaming, heteronormativity, intersectionality, patriarchy, rape, culture, and whiteness. They've been laundered through the pure reviewed literature by activist scholars, then widely taught for years before being

brought into the world. This is not knowledge. These are just feelings dressed up by academia to make it seem like if you argue with this, you are breaking with the consensus of the super smart people who all they do is sit around thinking about this stuff, and yet it's full of jargon and absurdity. This is where you got that piece that was published in a peer review journal, and the title of the piece was and I quote

the penis as social construct end quote. It was published and peer reviewed by an academic journal that claimed to be the authority on different genders studies and they put this thing out there because they're so steeped in this kind of thinking, and they're so used to taking ideas that are that are just really about either political or cultural proclivities and prejudices and make it seem like there's something behind this, or then will I feel this way.

It would be like if I if I created an academic journal about how marzipan is a greatly underrated food that everybody should eat more and should be more readily available because it's delicious and I just don't see it in enough places. And I got a bunch of other people that love marzapan to come together and say, hey, we reviewed this, and he's right, you should have more marzapan, especially around the holidays. I'm starting a movement. I'm not

building any science. This is a Lynskyite community organizing in place of academic intellectual rigor and pursuit of the truth that it has overtaken our college campuses and universities. It's why these kids come out spouting these things, and they get so defensive and so angry when you challenge it, because these ideas are not supposed to be challenged. It's

peer reviewed, it's put out in the journal. Professor so and so and Professor so and so use this and you get to sound smart because use these big, new fancy words. But what does it all mean? Nothing? I antand what it's like to go through the process of buying life insurance. I had to do it before I

went overseas. It felt a little bit weird. But that's why you need to check out my friends and Ethos Life Insurance because they make sure that there's no hassle, no nonsense, and they'll find a plan that allows you to make sure that your family is prepared for an uncertain future. This is something you've got to do. It's the responsible choice and Blink makes it easy for you. There's no fine print or silly appointments or fees that

you just really can't afford. Ethos Is approach is simple to blend industry expertise, technology and the human touch that helps you find the right policy for you to protect your loved ones. It only takes about ten minutes to apply and ethos is already trusted by thousands. Get a fast, free and personalized quote right now at Ethoslife dot com. Again, that's Ethoslife dot com. Ethos Life Insurance is life insurance that actually fits your life. That's what I don't know.

This is a real story. Because I mentioned marzipan and my my activism in favor, I wanted to pick something kind of random, but I do really, I mean, marzipan and chocolate. You ever eat it? No, that's too it's like way too, You're not. That's not a burger with no bun and American cheese on it. I don't even know what marzipan is. Are you serious? Sweetened almond paste, it's amazing. It's liking candy sometimes anything with paste. So

you usually you think you can. You can give your your takes on food, and you're allowed because food is literally about taste, right. We use the word taste for things we like. Food though, is like how does this taste to me? And it is inherently subjective and people have different taste buds. And don't use too much hot sauce, folks. Over time, it starts to you you're the burning and everything that can actually dully. I'm just telling you hashtag science.

I like hot sauce too, but don't go too crazy with it, Tom Nichols. Tom and I know each other a little bit. I've had them on the show in the past. Tom is now a Democrat, he used to be a conservative, umbroke him. I don't know what to say, he tweeted out. I think people often pretend to like non American cuisines as a way of showing sophistication. I'm honest enough to say, my mostly Irish taste buds cannot handle whatever it is, whatever's called Indian food in the

US and the UK. You may continue with your outrage. And you know what's amazing. There was outrage. People were saying this was racist. People were saying should get fired. You are not allowed to not like Indian food. I guarantee you. If you trashed American food as a white male, people would say, oh yeah, so of course America America people like you know, what's considered sophisticated among liberals to

say America has no culture. Yeah, We're just the most wealthy, powerful, sophisticated, culturally dominant country in the history of the planet, and we have no culture. That's a really, that's a smart take. People say this stuff all the time, but this is a BBC News story. All right, Say you don't like Indian food and you get trashed globally for being a racist.

This is the world we live in now. I also wanted to just point something out here, you know, I like to dive into the left wing desire to control speech and to make us use certain words. And I do think we're heading into a place where the idea laundering that the grievance scholars engages in has already become the way that you are judged by in social media interactions. You can now be banned. We talked about Andy No getting suspended because of hateful posts. It's not hateful, it's

just stating facts. But stating facts can be hateful to leftists. But also if you have to remember that even if you give them what they want, in some cases, what the left wants now in discourse is often absurd and self contradictory. It is destined to only result in more demands about what you can say and how you can say it. So don't think that you buy them off by just by conceding on this or conceding on that issue.

You concede to what you think is right, what you think is morel For example, I've always said if somebody wants to change their name, everyone has a right to change their name. So if a guy named Bob now wants to be called, you know, Claudette's, I will call Bob Claudette the same way that you know. My middle name is Buckman, and people call me a buck and everyone goes, why do you such a weird name? I don't know. Ask my parents. They wanted to make life harder than it had to be. I love you, mom

and dad. But you know it's this is people allowed to choose you allowed to choose your name. You're allowed to choose your name. That's different though, than saying you have to be a party to falsehood or a fraud. To say that, you have to be willing to agree to say things that you know to be untrue. And here's something that I that I thought was very very interesting today looking at the argument around announcing your pronouns

is thing you're supposed to do. You know, my pronouns are he and him, and people do this and you know you're at a It's really become something like the secret handshake at a left wing rally group. Anything you stand up and you say, and this reruinds me. During the Occupy Wall Street days, remember that protest movement people would do. They would do this thing where they would twinkle their fingers in the air as a way of

showing applause. Um. They would also they would snap instead of clap, and they would do this thing called mic check. They go mike check, my check. And you know, one person says something that everyone repeats it as a way of amplifying the message. These were These were cultural signifiers of being and good being in the in group with the left, of being in the in the cool kid group, if you will. For most people, because a very very small percentage of the country has a problem with its gender,

doesn't understand its gender. It's less than one percent of this country. For most people, saying what your pronouns are would seem to just be an enormous waste of time.

But here's the issue with that. The reason that you are supposed to say what your preferred pronouns are now, and this is according to leftist doctrine, this is now if you're going to be you know, you've had this at you know, CNM when they had their town hall and Chris Cuomo pro Cuomo made his joke a year here my pronouns, and everybody's like, not funny, not funny.

But the reason you say it is that it is meant to show that there's nothing out of the ordinary, and therefore there should be no disapproval heaped on people who do not seem visually to align with whatever their preferred pronouns are. So so the point here is to make it that if everybody announces their pronouns, then when people feel compelled to announced their pronouns, they won't be automatically singled out for being strange for announcing their pronouns.

So it's like we all do it, and therefore, um, you know, nobody should feel left out. I mean, it kind of reminds me of I think it Wasn't Saved by the Bell where Lisa Turtle Sprain. Remember this, Lisa Turtle sprained her ankle and she had to go to prom and they did a dance called the Sprain where everybody was pretending that they because she didn't want to feel left out, so everyone showing the sprain. You know what I'm talking about? Remember that? Yeah? Yeah, I think

she went with Screech right, yes, but grudgingly. Yeah, who had quite a career afterwards, career in jail of Stuffy Dustin Diamond. I watched that show so many times I even remember their names. I believe her name was Lark Vorhees, Yes, and there was Mark Paul Goslar and of course Mario Lopez.

I believe. I believe it was a little right of center, by the way, I I've been the host of the Vecture or something like that of those anyway, So everyone danced like they had a spring ankle, because then no one felt like they were left out with the spring. That was the whole idea. If everyone announces their pronouns, then no one's left out when they have to announce their pronouns. That's the or it feels feels weird. Here's

the problem. This is why I'm starting with. This is why I'm trying to tell you the left is absurd. It doesn't make any sense when people announce their pronouns, and everyone is announcing their pronouns and the pronouns align with what you would expect them to be in a vast majority of cases. Then when someone is expected to announce their pronouns and they have a different gender identity, they will clearly be different than the people that are

announcing their pronouns. So just by announcing, and it doesn't change the basic fact that you have somebody who perhaps appears to be male who says, my pronouns are you know, she, her and hers, So you haven't dealt with the issue at all. And then when it just turns into is well now you're being Now everyone is announcing their pronouns, is therefore playing into perhaps the stereotypes around who does and does not conform to their general identity. So we're

just back where we started. It doesn't do anything. It makes no sense to announce your pronouns. It's supposed to be some kind of concession to a group that feels aggrieved and put upon. But if we all actually did what they tell us to do, the next demand would be, well, you know, now we can't announce our problems because when we do, it's just showing the people that announce them that they're different. It's like they're having to proclaim it

to everybody, their differentness. It changes nothing. This is stupid, it is absurd. But it's really not about being kind. It's not about being decent. If it were, i'd be in favor of those things. It's about getting you to bend the knee. You bend the knee on announcing your pronouns, and then you bend the knee on nobody announces your pronouns. You know, you bend the knee on saying that somebody is a she when it's a he. And then you've bend the knee when you say that we're not allowed

to use any gender specific pronouns for anyone anymore. And then this of course also influences how we can talk about policy. You know, are you are you allowed to object to a transgender female biologically male being the counselor for a day camp for you know, a bunch of you know, young girls. Is that is that's on there? You're allowed to look at gender identity that way? It's you know, and they just expect you bend the knee

or they will destroy you. And this is why we spend time on these issues here on the show, because the way you're allowed to talk about things, and the way that society insists that you only use certain words, whether it's undocumented or you know, cis gender or any of these things. This is all for a purpose, and the purpose is not being polite. The purpose is getting

you to bend. The purpose is getting you to say, okay, fine, I submit, I'll do what you tell me to do, because once they get you to start the habit of submitting to their absurd and constantly changing demands, then they can just continue on with that momentum and get you to just start conceding to other things too. And they know that. You know, once you say fine, fine, leave me alone, then you'll say, fine, leave me alone. I'll

do it on this other thing too. You know, I won't go to Chick fil A anymore because you know the Chick fil A is so big at it. You know, I won't do this. I want to just please just let me live my life in peace. I'll do whatever you want. This is what they want, that sentiment, that feeling of I'll do anything in order to prevent the continue to intellectual psychological harassment. That's what they want. Don't give it to them. Think this stuff through on your own.

That's why we've got the Freedom Hunt Friends, big headline right now on foxnews dot Com Collision Course long Away to report on Five's abuse from the Inspector General could scramble DEM's impeachment plans. Some of us have been saying by some of us I mean, certainly me all along that perhaps the imperative for impeachment at all costs isn't only driven by the desire to thwart the twenty twenty election that's the primary one, but also perhaps to get ahead.

I believe I said this on Brett Bear Show a couple of weeks ago, to get ahead of the report that's going to make things look pretty bad for the Democrats. Here's where we are right now on the whole fish abuse. People call it spygate. I think that's a little too broad. It's like almost calling it like bad gate or something like spygate is it's not. That doesn't really work for me as a term. But you know, look, there's no

good term for it, I understand. But the effort, the effort to use the intelligence apparatus of the United States government against a presidential campaign, that that has somehow been treated as is normal, that that has found its way into our discussions about what's going on with the presidency. And people say, yeah, well, of course, of course they surveiled Carter Page, and of course they did. No, it's

not an of course situation, this low level lawyer. That was the report we had last week from within the Department of Justice who was removed and maybe criminally prosecuted

for changing something that went into a Fizer report. They're going to try to say that this was just a lone actor once again, somebody else doing something that only makes sense if they have a feverish hatred of Donald Trump and are willing to do anything, including getting fired and losing their job and losing perhaps their freedom, to stop Trump. But we're told that this is this is a one off, this is a one off. This isn't

somebody this lawyer that they're saying, change the FIZA. There's nothing to be worth about here, nothing to be concerned about here. I disagree. I disagree. The problem that we're going to face here is that they first of all, they've brought over to CNN, so anything you can see from CNS is kind of hilarious. They've got McCabe over there, They've got the former General Counsel Baker I believe, of

the FBI. This guy is over there on CNN all the time, and they were the ones in power, and CNN has people analyzing essentially their own actions as though they're fair minded experts on these issues. They're putting them in front of you, because CNN was in on this whole thing too. Tapper found out about the dossier being brief to Trump, you know, within two days, and then he got all mad at Ben Smith from BuzzFeed because

Ben Smith actually showed people what the dossier was. And Tapper wanted to squeeze as much as he could out of that whole dossier story as long as he could because he's a hack and a fraud. But yeah, that was the that was the way this thing was all going.

And yet now we look at it and say to ourselves, huh, maybe, just maybe what we will see when this Fiser report comes out is that there was an effort to pretend that people were very dumb and had very bad judgment at senior levels of the United States government, when really what they were doing was playing dumb as that they could make mistakes that what happened to be negative for Trump.

That would allow, for example, different communications that Carter Page had with anybody in the Trump campaigned to be looked at to be part of the collection process under that fires a warrant, and you know, Papadopoulos and these different investigations that were going at this time. This is not possible.

None of this is possible in a good faith law enforcement effort, where people would say, we'll hold on a second carter Page, who had worked alongside the FBI against Russian spies, was known to the FBI, I'd already met with the FBI, and who the FBI knew Russian spies, said was kind of an idiot. He's the nexus for

this whole Russia Trump conspiracy. And remember this, my friends, even if they tell you that they had a legitimate justification for looking at Russian interference in the election, which I believe they did, that is a big leap from Okay. We also have to make sure that we can investigate the presidential campaign and then the presidency itself of Donald Trump because of this theory that Trump and his campaign were working with the Russians. Where does that come from?

Who originated that idea? This is what we really have to know. I mean, I think people would say, right now, you might be guessing, you know, Brandon and Clapper and there are a few people that come to mind, but we're what were the real origins of all of this. We may get closer to that with this report that comes out on FISA We'll also find out those of

us who were saying the dossier was necessary. Without the dossier, it probably wouldn't have been able to get to the level of the FISA request they had on Carter page. We'll see how accurate that was. We also, though, have the problem of the bureaucracy covering for itself, which I think is you're going you're going to see that that's that's going to happen here. I wish it weren't the case. It will be the case. The bureaucracy will be covering

for itself at some level. They will say that bad judgment is not criminal, and bad judgment in matters of using the fearsome powers of the federal government against the presidential campaig that just comes down to bad judgment, that's all. Bad judgment isn't about politics, it's not about criminality. You can't think that there really is a deep state just because these guys kept on bending the rules and making poor decisions that all happen to go toward getting dirt

on Trump. That's right. They love to talk about Trump getting dirt on Hunter Biden. Our own FBI under the Obama administration was trying to get dirt on President Trump and use FISA to do it if they can. Let me let me just say this. If they can get a fis a warrant on Carter Page, they can get a FIS A warrant on anybody. You can always come up with some pretext. You again, any friends in a foreign country. Yeah, you know those friends probably have foreign

friends who are bad. Let's just run a FIES on. It's a joke. It's absurd. You know they talk to people like me. Oh well, he has friends in foreign countries, and he knows in the intelligence services, and we know we better, we better monitor him. So I'm I don't have high hopes, which now reminds me of the Buddha Judge, like the Buddha Judge song and d have seeing this the the high hope stance that everyone's doing now for Buddha Judge. This is like his followers did. They was

mocked on SNL this weekend. Oh it was. They said he was trying to get a negative percentage of the black vote. Wow, I did not see that. But I do not have high hopes for the Inspector General report being a massive blow to the deep state. I do think though, that they're gonna want us to swallow. It'll be like the other Inspector General report where they said that there was no bias in the Hillary Clinton email investigation, which was not true. There was bias. They showed us

all this bias and they said there wasn't bias. They're gonna show us all kinds of abuse of FISA, but then in order to protect the institution of the Department of Justice and the FBI, they're gonna say it wasn't political though, So there really isn't any abuse that went on here. Oh no, there was abuse a team. I know, we're going into the Thanksgiving holiday and a proser Marketer's football over the Thanksgiving holiday, Right, that's the thing that

happens that people. I see it in the background sometimes at the various homes where I've been for Yeah, there's the football thing that happens. But there's been some big stories in the news for football, and I don't want to skip over them entirely. But I figured i'd bring somebody in who, for example, unlike me, knows that the Rams now play in Los Angeles and not Saint Louis. You learned something new every day, especially for me in

the world of sports. We got a sports expert with us though our friend Clay Travis is with us now. He is the OutKick, the coverage host, also author of the book Republicans by Sneakers. To Clay, thanks for coming back, hey, ap. So let's start with this editorial New York Times editorial, which is how it came into my vision my daily deep dive here from Tennessee Coates the cancelation of Colin Kaepernick. He's making the argument here that Colin Kaepernick is a

victim of cancel culture. After well everything but also this tryout. What really happened with Colin Kaepernick both at this tryout and also tell me, what do you think the reality is of whether he's part of cancel culture? Well, I think that Colin Kaepernick has realized that as a barter he is more valuable than he is as a backup quarterback in the NFL, which is the job that he would have if he really wanted to continue to play sports.

And so I think he made a conscious decision to where the Consequente T shirt and to perform in the fashion that he did with his own camera crew there and everything else because he wanted to continue to be a social justice warrior martyr for the woke sports media out there, and the reality is what this guy is a backup quarterback, and backup quarterbacks are not necessarily given a lot of attention in the NFL, certainly not if

their starting quarterback is healthy. And I think Colin Kaepernick is aware that if he is on the sideline, not actually playing, that his value as a martyr declines precipitously, and so I think in many ways he sabotaged the tryout that the NFL tried to set up for him. Now, one of the things that comes up when people talk about about Kaepernick, I mean, it was pretty amazing reading this this New York Times piece, and if you saw the Coats editorial I read, I read it. I mean

it was it was totally absurd and ridiculous. And the fact that that guy is considered to be some sort

of intellectual heavyweight oftentimes just kind of bottles my mind. Yeah, because well, what I've told from my friends who actually paid pretty close attention to the NFL is that Kaepernick, before the whole taking anything, he was already dropping down the depth chart and people didn't really care, and his career wasn't looking so good, that's correct, he get in fact, had lost his starting job to blame Gabbert, who is not a well known or well received quarterback in his

own right. And so yeah, well the baling was I think a trans parent employ to draw attention to himself when he recognized that he was otherwise not going to be receiving very my attention. And again, I mean, he had a contractual obligation to stand for the national anthem, just like the NBA players do, and and to equate

him with cancel culture is frankly just absurd. Look everybody in the NFL, whether you are the most talented quarterback in the league or the guy hanging on by his flinges to a special stop, they're all subject to an equation that I would like to say, which is, so long as your talent exceeds of problems, you will always

be employed. And the problem that Colin Kaepernick has is if Aaron Rodgers or Russell Wilson or Patrick Mahomes couk a need to protest anything, they would still be employed in the NFL because they're three of the best, arguably the three best quarterbacks in the NFL right now in

this league right historically and proven wise. And so if if those guys decide that they wanted to make a political statement, they might get fined, they might face a substantial blowback, But every team, I believe, would continue to employ them because they're that good at playing the position in which is so difficult to find talent quarterback. The problem Colin Kaepernick had was not that he took a knee.

It was that he took a knee, and his talent no longer was sufficient enough for teams to be willing to put up with the challenges he brought to bear from a protest perspective. And I've kind of made this joke before, using it from a hyperbolic sense, but look, I mean, Aaron Rodgers could take a knee and say that he thinks Isis was unfitly treated by the Trump administration, and somebody would probably still employ him to play quarterback

because he's just that good of a quarterback. And people would roll their eyes and say, I really don't care about the politics that he espouses. And the problem for Colin Kaepernick is he's not that good of a quarterback, so people do care because again, his problems exceed his talents now speaking of people that are having problems on and now off the field. I did see because it became a viralo moment that dominated the news cycle for a few hours. This incident with Myles Garrett where he

swung his helmet. Just tell us give us the quick backstory of what happened there and then the aftermath, because I did see the storyline percolate for at least a few hours. A couple of days ago, there was a claim that there might have been a racist component that led to the swing of the helmet, which a lot of people, myself included thoughts sounded rather dubious under the circumstances. But what happened and where are we now? Well, for

six days there was no succestion. After the swarm helmet hit Mason Rudolf on the head Miles Garrett place in the Cleveland Grounds, Mason Rudolfs beclore the Backs floy to the Spokes Steelers and at the end of their Thursday night football game, which happened what I guess a week

or almost two weeks ago. Now, as we moved closer the Thanksgiving we had Mason reactive in the head with a helmet which kind of unheard of falling at him by this defensive player, And for six days nothing was said about the motivation other than Miles Garrett lost his temper, he apologized, he was saying all of that, and then at the end of that six day window, suddenly news came out that he was claiming that somebody, Mason Rudolph, had said a racial flaurer to him and that was

what prompted the attack, and the NFL said they had investigated it, found no evidence, and upheld his suspension. He made that claim in an appeal to hearing. So what I just described it as was a racism hail Marry that his attempt at the last minute was to try in some way justify his behavior by sighting the way that he had been treated, and I think that's just laughably absurd. Is the punishment appropriate here for Miles Garrett

for the crime. I mean, I think it's a significant punishment, But I think the NFL knows that the importance of setting a precedent here is that using a helmet as a weapon in the dangerous position to be in. Mason Rudolph was not seriously injured, luckily for him, but he could have been, and I think the FL needs to have its players know that this is this behavior that is simply unacceptable. So make Miles Garrett's going to be

out for the rest of the season. Uh, And we'll see what happens at the end of the year with whether he's allowed to return to start next year, which I think you will. And the six game suspension feels about right to me. Can I just ask you a quick lightning round of some stuff before Thanksgiving so I can pretend that I know something got football and I'm with my aldish yeshoho. Who is the best quarterback in the NFL right now? Oh man, you just stepped into

a huge debate. I think the best quarterback in the NFL right now is Russell Wilson. I think there's a strong argument for Patrick Mahomes, for Aaron Rodgers. Those are the three best. Lamar Jackson is having an incredible season and he may be the favorite for the MVP, but those are the four that I would that I would name off the top. Tom Brady interestingly not having that great of a season. So if you want those five names and that information I just gave you, you can

fake it to your make it there. Yeah, well I got one more. What is the what is the worst coach team in the NFL right now? Yeah? Well, no team that's under fire the most right now. Jason Garrett is the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys and they just lost to the New England Patriots. And he has

done a really poor job of maximizing his talent. He's been on sort of the chopping block for a long time now, and the Dallas Cowboys sort of perpetually swing from you know, the excitement and enjoy and pure jubilation of hey, We're going to go to the super Bowl to the depths of despair after every loss. They're six and five, may win their division, likely to make the playoff, but Jason Garrett has not endured himself to the fan base for yet another season. And who do you think

is going to win the Super Bowl? I gotta ask? Yeah. So, if if I were predicting right now, I think it's hard to say anything against the Patriots. So I picked the Patriots out of the AFC, and I would pick the forty nine ers out of the NFC, And god, I mean it sinks to continue to pick him. But Brady and Belichick of the greatest coaching player combo in NFL history. And they aren't dead yet, and so as long as that's the case, I feel like they will

find a way to triumph into the season. Even know, I think, like a lot of your listeners, i'd prefer that not be the case. If you guys want somebody who knows about sports and really breaks it all down for you, you've just heard it here. But Clay Travis has his own podcast out Kick the Coverage, or you can check out Also his book is Republicans Buy Sneakers two, which I know is true because I'm a Republican and

I buy sneakers. Clay, I have a very happy Thanksgiving man, Thanks for giving us your time, and we'll talk to you after the holiday. I appreciate that I have a good Thanksgiving as well with everybody else out there as well. If everybody has a green holiday, all right, geem When you want to spot that burglar when he's casing your home or after he's in, well you could ask John who's blink camera alerted him to burglars trying to break in while he and his family were home, Or Shannon,

who's blink camera caught a feat stealing packages. Both times, Blink video clips were sent to police to help convict the crooks. Blink Motion activated indoor and outdoor cameras are wire free, set up in minutes, and run on two lithium batteries that last up to two years. And when you're away, blinks Live feed option lets you monitor your home and checking on kids and pets from anywhere using your smartphone app. No contracts, totally affordable. In fact, Blink

systems start at just seventy nine ninety nine. Thanks to Blink home security just got easier. Visit blink Protect dot Com, slash Buck, blink Protect dot Com, slash Buck one more time. Team Blink Protect dot Com slash Buck also available on Amazon and at best Buy. Blink is an Amazon company, and it works with Alexa, blink Protect dot Com, slash Buck. So there's a story team that's making the rounds right

now in some places on on the right. I haven't really seen it elsewhere, but here's the basics of it. And I just want to say that I can't really assess this other than to say that people that I know and think have good judgments say this is probably crap. But even when there's a story that is not true, sometimes there are some elements in the background of the story that are worth noting. But I also I don't

know that it's not true. So, and it's reported the Jerusalem Post, which is a reputable publication, and it is about whether or not Ilahan Omar is an asset of Cutter. This is the story that's out there. A witness in a deposition in a federal court in Florida has gone on the record to say and give some details about this. Here's the basics of the story. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar was recruited by a foreign government, received funding from a foreign government,

and passed sensitive information through intermarries intermediaries to Iran. A Florida court has been told that's not That doesn't mean the court has found nor has anyone brought charges. Okay. The claims came during testimony by Kuwaiti born Canadian businessman Alan Bender, who was giving evidence in the trial of Sheikh Khalid Binhamed Alfani, the Qatari Emir's brother, stand is accused of ordering his American bodyguard to murder two people

and of holding an American citizen hostage. His deposition obtained by Al Arabia English was authenticated by the attorney for the plaintiffs, according to the publication. All right, now, a lot of people on the right really don't like ilhan Omar because of her politics, because of what she says, because of the anti Semitic stuff she has said in the past. So people see this and they immediately jump

with the story. I've seen a lot of people that follow the follow ilhan Omar's career and they've been following some of the other controversies, possible campaign finance stuff, the whole situation with her, you know, the husband, and then the other situation with the brother and the what's going on with the possible the allegation, I should say, of a marriage fraud, which believe in marriage fraud is a crime punishment about the five years in federal prison when

it involves an immigration vile. So if you marry somebody but you're not really getting married, you're just doing it so they can get a green card to be here, and you're found out, you're going to prison for that, and they do occasionally enforce that, which is so interesting because so much of the rest of immigration law is left as like, you know, who cares, doesn't matter. We don't have to really enforce this stuff. But the Ilhanomar story,

people are saying this is it's flimsy. It's an allegation in court. Yeah, the guy's under oath, but you know who knows if they can and he's just saying he was told this. There's no there's no proof, so I'm not there no proof. Usually what I want to know about ill Hanomar. It is a bad thing when it is so very clear that the press has no interest in vetting, investigating and looking at a person in politics because of that person's political political beliefs and also because

of that person's background. The media does not want to be seen as even investigating. And you could say that through an investigation of ilahan Omar, not just on this Qatari thing, because this might be complete garbage. And I'm being honestly that it doesn't seem to me like it's

I mean, is it theoretically possible. I mean maybe sure, given her view of American foreign policy and her view of the rest of the world, could you see maybe some people using her as an agent of influence in the United States against foreign policy that would be in the us interest. Yes, but that's very different than having any actual proof of the allegation, which which we don't have.

But these stories, a story like this, get more oxygen, get more attention, in part because we know we cannot trust the mainstream press to do what they would normally say they're doing, which is to vet a person, looking to that person's background and bring the public the truth about a situation which they don't know. I mean, we know that they don't do that as a general rule, but they particularly are hands off about certain people, and

ilhan Omar as one of them. So I would just note that I don't know the story is true or not. It strikes me as unlikely. But I also know that we can't trust the press to tell us how much investigation has there been of ilhan Omar by journalists regarding a campaign finance issues and also the situation with the brother and the husband and the I mean, I don't even know the but nobody wants. Nobody wants to touch that stuff. Nobody wants to go near any of it.

Usually journalists when they have am This is a member of Congress, a public figure elected office. You would think that there could be some belief some understanding that this person would be subject to a degree of scrutiny that's not dictated by politics and by intersectionality and wokeness and all the rest of it. But no, that is, in fact the the overriding consideration that they that they have here. So for those who were going to ask me about this,

I just I don't. I don't have much more, m much more on this than just to say it doesn't strike me as particularly, it doesn't strike me as likely. But you can't trust the press to find out any truth about ilhan Omar that would be problematic for her. So that's kind of where that's kind of where we are.

I was iding you to mention this before I find it, you know, I know I keep saying nice things about Yang and Tulsi on the show, and I'm not I'm not trying to just do this as a as a as a thing, as a bit that I do on the show. Where we get we get into why Yang and Tulsi are the most likable of Democrats, although I think they are. I saw this piece though the weekend. It was so remarkable to me that Andrew Andrew Yang hashtag Yangang Andrew Yang makes jokes, sometimes self deprecating jokes

about Asian American stereotypes. And this was interesting because usually what you see is that you're never allowed to make jokes about any even if it's it's really meant to be playful and it's not supposed to be degrading in any way, but you're not allowed to make jokes about it about any non white ethnicity, as as particularly as

a white person anymore. It had been the case. I had thought that you could, though make self deprecating jokes about an ethnicity if you were of that ethnicity, But even that rule in this current era of extreme wokeness seems to be changing a little bit. There is a concern that was is Andrew Yang quote reclaiming stereotypes with Asian jokes. Experts say not so much. First of all, experts in jokes, Who are these people? This is NBC News,

experts in being funny? Well, what were they experts? We're talking about here? That's always good expertise is a very abused claim. But they're saying that he isn't doing a good thing by trying to reclaim stereotypes. They see, this is what they change the rules all the time. You know some ethnicities, for example, can use slurs against that ethnicity as a means of reclaiming the term. We're told that all the time, But you can't use it if you're not of that ethnicity. But you can if you are.

But now you can't make jokes about your own ethnicity. And I think the reason that they feel this way, although who knows, they probably changed the logic beyond this all the time, is because then it lightens everybody up a little bit where they might think it's they don't have to be quite so woke and quite so on guard. And maybe somebody would get the idea that you could make some jokes based on stereotypes we are laughing with and not at an ethnicity. That would be an idea

that the left considers dangerous. So I can't have that. So Yang is not allowed to make jokes about Asian stereotypes, even as an Asian American. That's the reality of the left today. I just want to note that what we will do is have what we will do. What we will do is have a four percent tax on income

excepting the first twenty nine thousand dolls. All right, good, you're better at arithmetic than I am, guess what that means is if you have that average family in the middle will make sixty thousand a year, that means we're going to tax you on thirty one thousand at four percent. Anybod who believes this is a fool, that this is where this will stop. They're going to create just a little carve out tax to give you free healthcare. This

is the Bernie Plan. Now, this is the latest version of what we're being told the Bernie Plan is going to be. But what they're saying here is that or Bernie saying rather, is that four percent above twenty nine thousand and you'll never have to worry about healthcare again. My friends, No way, no way, it's not gonna work. It's not gonna happen. That four percent tax won't be enough. Then you know what happens. It becomes a five percent

and then a six percent tax. You have to fund the programs that Bertie Sanders is talking, but even begin to fund them, you would have to raise taxes dramatically, not just on millionaires and billionaires, this is the essential lie that they keep telling, but on everybody, and taxes that get raised that much, on people across the board. Are going to have all kinds of implications for jobs,

for productivity, for just wealth creation. Overall. We are in a remarkable period right now, the longest bullmark in the history of the United States, lowest unemployment in fifty years. Things are very prosperous right now. Why would we start listening to the socialists at this point in time? You know, if America goes down this path of socialism in twenty twenty, you know we're gonna get what we deserve. We're gonna get along and hard. It's going to be a rough

way forward. We have all the empirical evidence we need. We have all of the data, and just look around you what's going on in the country right now, Look at all the ways that we can try to judge on the numbers, how things are going. You're going to hand over control of the economy to Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party. I mean, I know you won't listening to the show. There's some liberals who listen, which I appreciate. Liberals are like, he's he's a bit of

a savvy fellow, this sexton. We've got to keep an eye on him, make sure it doesn't get a little too puppulo listen too powerful. But the truth is Bernie Sanders' plan would be a disaster for you. And I know you know that, but there's so many people who don't believe it. When I was at Politicon debating Bernie Sanders healthcare spokesperson, the person a Signers campaign, she's just living in a fantasyland. You're gonna have great doctors, great healthcare.

Everything can be super efficient. It's gonna be it's gonna be fantastic, and you never have to worry about paying for any of this ever. Again, well, it's not true. By the way. By the time you figure out it's not true, you'll have had one You'll probably have had one generation that has gotten used to having their healthcare paid for by the government. It won't be very good, but they'll get used to paying for it, and then they'll just put this unsustainable burden on future generations of

paying for the health that they've already gotten. This is the doomsday machine within our own political and economic system that no one is willing to face up to. Nobody is willing to diffuse the debt bomb. Nobody is willing to say that you can't keep doing this promising things, giving things today and then promising that somebody else will pay for it in the future. And this becomes the

easiest scam in the world. I mean, if your taxes are never going to get raised in your lifetime, why wouldn't you say, yeah, give me all the benefits you want right now. Make it somebody else's problem. This is just intergenerational socialism, that's all it is. And this is what Bernie Sanders is promising you without saying as much, by claiming that they're going to pay for your healthcare and everything's going to be fine and all the rest

of it. But this might even be a worse analysis from the guy who's supposed to be the smart one of the Democrat candidates or the smartest one of the Democrat candidates now mayor Pete Buddha judge. He has this to say about the Syrian Civil War play Cliff ten Oh. This is very important because we are already seeing evidence that a conflict in migration crisis are increased because of things like drafts and fires that are accelerated by the

problems in our climate. There's some evidence that this contributed, true example, to the Syrian Civil War. I mean, this is an absurd stupidity. Climate change contributed to the Syrian Civil War? What this is? This is so beyond bonkers. But I've heard other people say this too, because you know, climate climate chan is a religions climate change. Climate involves everything, right, Oh, it's warmer outside, so then it's more likely that people

might be outside. And then you know, climate change is called using murders in the streets of Chicago because it's warmer, right, and murders in the streets of New Orleans or New York or wherever. I mean, it's kind of true. But is a climate change it's causing people to murder people or people murdering people. This is absurd. This is The

fallacies of causation here are truly mind blowing. And you know when you have this supposedly the supposed genius really of the Democrat, I always a Rhode scar but I told people are RhoD Scholar. Not that impressive, don't that's all. It's like, it's the RhoD Scholar now is like the Nobel Peace Prize. Anybody who knows anything knows that was like, come on, very political, But yeah, climate change is the

cause of the Syrians Civil War. You have to stretch hard to think of ways that liberals could be crazier these days. And this is why, you know, I saw the segment last night the Tucker did on his show where he said that the only person in the Democratic Party who could unify the entire Democratic Party has the national recognition and favorables and everything to wipe away all the Democrats problems right now from the primaries is Michelle Obama.

And she says she doesn't want oh, but he played a clip of Obama saying in two thousand and six, oh, no, I'm not running. Of course, I'm definitely not running. And if we end up having Obama's president for eight years, you know, I'm talking about the outlie or possibility of a Hillary Hillary Clinton run and I don't think it is likely, but I don't think it's impossible. I think you also would have to say it is not impossible for there to be a Michelle Obama candidacy and a

Michelle Obama presidency. She would be make no mistake about it. She would be formidable, my friends. And you know, we're used to seeing these deeply uninspiring Democrat candidates with all kinds of problems and negatives. And unfavorables and all this stuff. Michelle Obama is a widely beloved figure and has all the connections and all the name recognition the Democratic Party

could ever want. And then some do I think she's going to get into I wouldn't put money on it, but if she did, I do believe she would be the candidate, and I do believe that Trump would have his handsful. I think that that's true. You've got to just think back to, you know, the narratives of the Obama administration and the feelings of the you know, what Obama left the Democratic Party with after he was no

longer in office. I mean, you know, we've been saying the only way to set right twenty sixteen is if Hillary somehow becomes a candidate and beats Trump. Now in twenty twenty. That's one narrative, for sure, But think about the narrative of Michelle Obama and the Democratic Party going forward if she were to run. I don't I don't know. Look, I've never talked to Michelle. I don't know. Everyone says, oh,

she'll never do it, she'll never do it. Does anyone doubt that if Michelle Obama announced that she would first of all, Joe Biden support would evaporate overnight. Everybody right now that would vote for Joe Biden would be like, oh sorry, Joe back there now. Now we're going to Michelle Obama. See you let so so in the national poll, she would be the front runner at that I am absolutely confident of. And then look at some of the

other candidates out there too. You know what, what what support? Really? What support lingers for Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris and Michelle Obama and I we're thinking a little bit outside the box here, my friends. The way the Democrats can turn this whole thing around is something like a game change moment. And in this case, the game change candidate would be would be Michelle Obama. And you know, look, I was not a fan of the Obama presidencies policies

at all. As you know, I went, I went to the mat trying to fight against them when I first got into this world of media. This is the one thing that I don't think Democrats have the strategic foresight to bring, you know, to make this happen. I don't think. I think the Democratic Party is too at war with itself in too many ways. And maybe Michelle Obama just

also doesn't want to do it. She'd rather just be super famous and super rich and like have everyone talked about how wonderful she has all the time when she just had to be the first lady. That's it, just had to be first lady. He's the most wonderful person ever. But you never know. Tucker did a segment on the last time I was watching it, and I was like,

I think this is uh. I think I think he would be onto something if this a reality, But right now it is just speculation, which pundits in political season love to do. Like soft butter on warm toast. Time to spread some freedom coast to coast. It's time for roll call, Facebook dot com, slash buck Sexton for roll call or team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com. So, by the way, it's one quick note. I got a little I got a tweet last night. This is very nice. I said.

I just said something about my friend Sarah Carters. I saw her. I watched a little Fox last night. Usually I'm too busy, but I watched some Fox last night and I said something. I said, I was watching my buddy Sarah Carter be awesome on the Hannity Show. She's a great journal lit some one of the nicest people out there you'd ever meet. And Johnny Joey Jones, who's also a super nice guy, Purple Heart recipient, military EO

D veteran. He responded to me, from my experience, buck climbs the ladder with one hand and reaches down with the other. That's rare in this business. And I applaud it when I see it, and I told him that was very nice, and then I made my day. It was very nice of very nice of Johnny Joey Over. He's now a Fox contributor, Very nice of him to

say that. And you know, not that I do, and not that I help people behind the scenes for accolades, but I've helped a lot of people behind the scenes for somebody without a lot of cloud in the business. So it was nice to get a I do because I like to do it. I think it's the right thing to do. But it was nice to get a shout out from jj Over at Fox News, Johnny Joey Jones about that, well, I guess that would be JJJ, but about that one, So it was very nice of him.

All Right, let's uh let's get into the royal call, shall we. Justin, it's going to kick us off here. Hey Buck, working in pharmaceutical supply chain, I can tell you how to reduce prescription medication costs starting today with no effort by the government. Today, our patents expire after twenty years, and it can take up to ten years

from filing to get them into the market. That means the millions and billions of dollars we spend on R and D and other activities have to have to be recouped and a profit made in ten years before a product goes generic. Is actually hurts the early adopters of a new treatment the most, as they are the most likely as they are most likely the most sick and the current treatments aren't working. As such, they pay the

brunt of this. If the patents were extended another ten years, that could literally cut the costs in half, as we would we could amortize the cost even further and reduce the cost produced as we'll be living more prior to

losing our patents. Justin, that's interesting. I mean, I just feel like you're kind of dispersing the cost more over a longer period of time, which ultimately means that consumers are still paying the same amount, but it would mean that in the short term, as you point out, people that are desperate for very for new drugs for things, and when they have drugs that aren't working that might help them. So certainly interesting an interesting way to approach it.

I'd have to look at how the math would work out on that. Let's keep in mind, I mean patents are in the sense of government intrusion in the marketplace, right, I mean, you're giving people to incentivize research and development. You are giving a temporary monopoly to a company, monopoly via government regulation, government legislation, so you know, you're not really you know, it's not just the market operating and

you've got a product, somebody else can make that product. Well, you know, patents are open to interpretation and there's a balancing test that has done of how long. But I mean, for example, I think like Mickey Mouse or is still under I mean things that are there are things that are patented that are now going on like one hundred years old that are still a copyrighted I'm sorry, not patented so and people argue that that wasn't initially supposed

to be the way the copyrights worked. You know the fact that the Beatles catalog from the sixties is still worth billions of dollars or whatever it is, At what point does it fall into common usage? And you know, we could play a Beatles song here and not worry about getting sued. I'm just saying, TJ. Did producer Mark say that he shucked corn and skinned a cow over the weekend? Wow? What a standard American? Sounds like. Buck needs to hang out with Mark Moore in the off time.

I bet Mark catches catfish from dust till dawn. Not to mention, he can probably skin a buck and run a trot line. Uh yeah, do you know how to do all those things? Yeah? Of course. I go fishing in the Hudson River often. I just have to get rid of the dead bodies. Also, so I'm actually part NYPD agent. I help them with the dead bodies and I go fishing at the same time. Well, funny man, I can tell you that I've actually gone fishing in the East River. Why for what? Stripe bass that you

would eat that? We took it to a fancy restaurant on the Upper east Side and they fillated for as. No, it's an estuary comes in right from the ocean. Do you know the disgusting things that are probably in that river? Yeah, But if you're saying the fish, they have a filtration process, the gills and stuff, it's fine. Next you say you're gonna drop something on the floor of the subway and then eat it, that's the same thing. I mean, I have a strong immune system, you know. Trying to make sure.

Even Producer Brandon look back on that one. He was like that, I need to get some glass between you and I here. I mean, it's gonna be flu season soon, so get after it. And by the way, do you get a flu shot? No? Are your flu shot? Guy Brandon? I think I'm gonna get one because I don't want to miss a whole week of the show because I had the flu three years ago and for a week

I was immobilized. I couldn't do anything. What happens if both of us get the flu and then Producer Brandon gets to run the show and do the show, and you'll hear a lot about guns n' rosie. Yeah, appetite for distraction? What is it? Distortion? Yeah? You can yell, we could. I'll repeat what you say after the mic. Aaron, WHOA, this is long buck. I was wondering if you could address COPA when you return from the holiday. It was

all pass in nineteen ninety eight, of course, authored by Democrat. Recently, YouTube had to settled with the FTC for one hundred and seventy million and changes rules as a result. That means that a lot of good, clean family content will be wiped out financially, for one, because they're not allowed to use targeted ads. This makes no sense to me, et cetera, et cetera. I love free market. I hate to see regulation. Aaron, I don't know much about COPA.

All I know this is Coppa, not like COPA Ka band different, Right that's a different or the right, Yes, that's a different, or the COPA mundial the World Cup for those of us who like to watch little soccer because we're barely American, Uh, Aaron, I don't know much about the CEO PPAM other than what I saw on the show Silicon Valley, which I do find to be a very funny show, quite quite a clever show. Um So I got nothing for you on that right now? Then I'll have to look at it. Maybe'll come back

to it after the holiday. A producer Mark reminds me. Usually he guilts me and he says, you promised the audience. He's he's your advocate here in the hut. I just want to do what I want to do. I'm an artiste here in the hut. He makes sure that I keep promises to the degree that I can all up to Producer Brandon after Thanksgiving. That's sure. Actually, Producer Mark is going to be not thinking about us as he is downing. You know, mudslides and my ties in Jamaica,

love those, all of those things. We are going to do a live show tomorrow, my friends, so you should listen tomorrow. We'll have a special Thanksgiving extravaganza. Also over the holiday, when you're talking to friends and family, what are you going to tell them? Download the buck sect and show. Subscribe on iTunes. Best podcast out there. Talk to you tomorrow. Shields High. I understand what it's like to go through the process of buying life insurance. I

had to do it before I went overseas. It felt a little bit weird. But that's why you need to check out my Friends and Ethos Life Insurance because they make sure that there's no hassle, no nonsense, and they'll find a plan that allows you to make sure that your family is prepared for an uncertain future. This is something you've got to do. It's the responsible choice, and Blink makes it easy for you. There's no fine print or silly appointments or fees that you just really can't afford.

Ethos's approach is simple to blend industry expertise, technology and the human touch that helps you find the right policy for you to protect your loved ones. It only takes about ten minutes to apply, and Ethos is already trusted by thousands. Get a fast, free and personalized quote right now at Ethoslife dot com. Again, that's Ethoslife dot com. Ethos Life Insurance is life insurance that actually fits your life.