Is Systemic Racism A Conspiracy Theory?

three hours without a phone call. Try doing that sometime. No, welcome my friends to the buck Sexton Show. You feel that you feel that energy, friends, you see it, you know it. It's there, you can almost touch it. The battle is under way. Who's going to be running this country for the next four years? What's that going to mean for? You're free toom, your safety, your bank account, you're everything, you name it, right, your kids schooling. There's

a lot that's affected by this. I wish we could say we live in a country where no one has to pay attention to who the government is, who's running it at least, but that's not the case. As we know. It's a big deal, a big difference. Wars can be started for the wrong reasons, or its can be lost. Economies can collapse and crash. It does matter who's in charge, and it does matter that we speak honestly about what

the real downsides can be. But today I wanted to start with something a little bit different, a little bit less in the center of the news side. Oh, there's so much with Trump and now that we've got the Abraham Accords, we'll talk about that later on in the show, but the presidents finding these agreements for for Midi's peace between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain. But I want to start with something else, because what has really royal the

country this year? As we know that the twin pillars of our politics have been COVID, the lockdowns, the response and BLM. Let's drill down into this BLM issue, which is really an ongoing conversation. That's one way of putting it. Riots and looting and violence and all this around this too and police brutality discussions, but it's really an ongoing

conversation about race relations in this country. And at the center of it, there have been some theories, some concepts that we've all been told we have to accept uncritically we can't discuss, isn't it fascinating? Critical race theory is a doctrine that insists that you not be critical of the theory, that you're not allow it's based in critique, but criticism for you of these ideas is not allowed in that sense. It's kind of a rhetorical trick, isn't it.

But this was fascinating. There's a guy named Matthew Frank and he is a associate director of the James Madison Program and lecturer and politics at Princeton Universities. So this is a smart guy. Never heard him before, and he wrote this. This was on the Public Discourse dot com site. I've never heard of before, but this crossed my radar and I want to tell you about this because it's fascinating and it's philosophically central to this moment we were in.

No not everyone else. Today's were focused on oh, you know, Trump did this or Trump said that, And yeah, of course that's part of our fight, and we have to talk about that on many days too. But I want to take you into the philosophy of the fight for a moment because there are some concessions that have been made in our debates about all this. There have been some phrases, some mindsets, concepts that we've adopted consciously or not that maybe we really need to take a step

back and think much more about. One of them would be white supremacy. I've been trying to raise the alarm for a few years now on this show and an every platform and an area that I can that white supremacy as a term has been expanded because it is so odious and hateful and wrong. Actual white supremacy, the notion of white people being better than other people, is irrational, immoral, and wrong. And we all agree on that. Right, our

society agrees white supremacy. Bad white supremacists in movies are the bad guys. They're meant to be cheered against by the entirety of the American audience. And that is what happens. Right. They were the black boot wearing, swastika tattooed skinhead bad guys of the nineties. That's what white supremacy meant. And you could take it back to Jim Crow and to slavery, and there has been real, evil white supremacy in our history,

but the term has now been expanded. Now we will hear that the judicial system is a continuation of white supremacy. That landownership, that capitalism is white supremacy. These are all things the left claims. The expansion of white supremacy to include all these other areas is just meant to be a method of attack that you can't push back against. Well, are you in favor of white supremacy all of a sudden, No,

I'm in favor of capitalism. Well, capitalism, according to our new Marxist overlords on the left and the Democrat Party, capitalism is a form of white supremacy. We'd say, well, wait what, and they'll say, well, look at history and look what's happened. They'll try to make this argument, but ultimately the argument is are you in favor of They're just redefining what white supremacy is. So then you have to say, wait, hold on, I'm not in favor of

white supremacy. Ah, you're on defense, You're on defense. Another area of this is systemic racism. Right, systemic racism. Now, it's perhaps worth noting systematic racism would be a system that, as part of its function, produces racist outcomes. Systemic racism is just a way of saying, it's all throughout the system. It's not even just one output of a process that would be systematic. Systemic is the whole thing. There's racism oozing out of its pores, racism just billowing out from

all over the entirety of the system. So systemic racism is really just a fancy way of saying everything is kind of racist that the Left doesn't like. There's racism and everything that they don't like. We've allowed this to creep into our conversations, and in fact, I've come across this many times. You'll have people who think they're intelligent, who think they're knowledgeable and wise. They're wrong, but they do believe these things. You'll have Democrats and even some Republicans.

Look at Mitt Romney marching with BLM on his never ending quest to embarrass me and everybody else who voted for the guy in twenty twelve, and he's succeeding. He's succeeding in that quest. Good job, Mitte. But the whole purpose of this is to put you on defense because they'll ask you, are you saying there's no systemic racism? And you toronto and say, well, what does that even mean? And yes, in fact, I will say where is the

systemic racism? Because if you're just going to judge something by the output of a system without looking at either individual circumstances and other variable that go into a system, like the judicial system, for example, you would have to explain it is our judicial system systemically anti in some ways? It is antimail if you ever spend any time in

family court. But is it's esthetically anti mail? Because men are ninety percent of the of the defendants in criminal court over violent assaults more than No, that's that doesn't make any sense. It's not anti maile. It's just there are more males who commit violent acts than females. I know, is oh? Is that? Who were allowed to say this? Buck? Why are you? Why are you speaking the most obvious truths that everybody already knows. You're not allowed to do

that anymore. Isn't that interesting now? To borrow from one of to borrow from one of orwell is lesser known? To speak the truth in a time of universal deceit is a revolutionary act. That's what it feels like right now. There is so much universal deceit going on in it is this systemic racism construct? Now? This author I mentioned you.

Matthew Frank He wrote a piece, an opinion piece in Newsweek, and it was accepted, and he wrote about this on the public discourse as it was accepted on September eleventh for publication by the opinion editor of Newsweek, Josh Hammer. I know Josh's work. Just a good guy as a conservative. He's trying to get diverse opinions on there. It was accepted and published on September fourteenth in the morning. Two hours later, the editor in chief of Newsweek, Nancy Cooper,

just took it down, just took it down. Who does that? You have opinion editors that are allowed to approve and put on the side things. Here you have an academic from Princeton who writes about whether systemic racism is a conspiracy theory, which it is. We'll get to that. But they pulled down this piece two hours after its publication online, which is completely contrary. You're noticing this more frequently now.

That happened the New York Times with the publishing of the Tom Cotton op ed that op ed editor had to resign because he published a sitting center who, especially in retrospect, made not just an entirely within the bounds of discourse written argument, but was correct in the argument that he made that the rioting lunatics should face the force of the state. Sorry, Libs, but that was the Tom Cotton op ed of the New York Times. And now we have this Newsweek op ed. What was the crime,

so to speak, that Matthew Frank committed here. Well, he wrote a piece about how systemic racism is effectively a hoax, that systemic racism as a concept is just abuse for political purposes, and it does not really exist. It is in fact a conspiracy theory because you don't have any proof of it, and it is alleged to be disprovable based upon the emotional impulses around it. In fact, when you try to disprove it, that is taken as evidence that you have fallen for the or you are part

of I should say, the conspiracy. Right, you are part of the conspiracy. That's why this is It is a

conspiracy theory. And this really upsets liberals. This really upsets them because they think that this is a this is now a centerpiece of their ideology of their belief Oh my gosh, I oppose systemic racism just like they oppose climate change, just like they believe in, you know, women's reproductive rights, these concepts that they either speak about dishonestly or they become emotionally invested in without ever thinking what

is it that they're really claiming? What is what is the real claim of systemic racism is that there was racism in the past, there is racism today. If there's systemic races, show me where it is in the system. In fact, the only systemic racism that really exists is in favor in our system of black and Hispanic and Latino and Native American minorities in college admissions and for employment opportunities. That's the only systemic racial discrimination. And you

can say it's positive discrimination. They come up with new terms to justify this, but it's racial discrimination. And as the Supreme Court has already written in recent years, if you want to stop discriminating by race, stop discriminating by race. It's very straightforward. But they don't like that the left is invested in this. They derive power from this, They derive moral meaning from this gihad that they can wage

without actually taking any risks themselves. That's what's one of the things that's so seductive about left wing politics and ideology. All you have to do is espouse the approved phrases. All you have to do is, like a little arionette, dance to the tune that they want you to. And now they'll be nice to you, they'll help you, they'll promote you, they'll like you, and you're a good person. So this is why we have, you know, these labs.

This is why you have you know, a white female Wesleyan grad who thinks that she's a warrior for racial justice by screaming epithets in the face of a black police officer in DC who's just trying to do his job. That's how you get to that point in society because people are invested in this. They like this feeling that they get that is unearned virtue. Unearned virtue is central to the Democrat mindset today. Oh I believe these things. I share them publicly. I take these positions. I vote

this way, therefore I'm a good person. I don't even take the position that I vote for Republicans or that I'm a conservative because I'm a good person, although I think you could make that case, but I do it because I think it's just better correct right. It makes for a society of more safe, happy, prosperous, healthy, free human beings. But we have to keep pushing for that. It's not just oh, I take this position, therefore I'm better than other people. So what happened in this Newsweek piece?

Why is systemic racism a concept that the left is so devoted to. Well we should dig into this some more, but here's the short version of what happened in this case with the piece by Matthew Frank. They could not allow the editor in chief of Newsweek could not abide a piece making this case without at least an oppositional piece running alongside it. That was the claim they made. You see friends that are always tilting the battlefield in their favor and looking at you like, I'm not weighing

in on one side or the other. I'm just the journal like we're all a bunch of idiots. You're in the freedom mud. This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast. Is systemic racism a conspiracy theory. Brilliant stuff here from Matthew Frank. You know it's good because the Libs panicked at the very mention of it, at the very title, the thesis. They can't handle it. You think if systemic racism was so easily proven, if it was so omnipresent, How many times have you heard about that? Turn on CNN,

turn on MSNBC. You'll have some halfwit expert go on TV says, oh, we're all understand that systemic racism exists. In systemic racism, it's stomach. That's just kind of a fancy dressed up way of saying racism. But then when you're saying, well, if you're going to talk about a system that produces racism, show me the racism in the system, you got nothing. You get nothing. The best they can come up with is disparate impact theory. And when you say, well,

what does disparate impact theory tell you? It's well, look New York City. I know the prison system here a bit because I worked the NYPD New York City. Nine of Riker's Island, which is the main prison for New York is black and Hispanic. Now are we claiming in this that or would they claim I should say that the Bureau of Prisons or that Rikers Island New York Bureau of Prisons or Rikers Island is putting innocent people in prison? Is the system racist? Is that why? There

is that disparity in Rikers Island. Let's hear them make that claimant, and let's talk about that. Maybe they're right, but let's talk about that now. I think that they would not be right, but at least we could no. But instead it's just you are told to bow your head in solemnity and say you're right. You're right, there's systemic racism in and we'll where This is where Frank makes his most compelling arguments, and this is why the

left was so upset with this. Here he goes, Americans quote are talking constantly these days about racism and if anyone needed reminding of its dominant historical form, specifically anti black racum, it's still a very real thing and we all have a stake in its eradication. But is systemic racism a real thing in the United States? To judge from the weakness of the case made for it, I would say no. In fact, a thesis for the existence of systemic racism looks just like a conspiracy theory, with

one salient difference from other conspiracy theories. Let me explain, my friends, end quote. There is this is a thermonuclear stuff in politics. Now you're not allowed to ask these questions. Right. The Libs take this as ground they've already won. They say systemic racism, and the right runs and cowards in fear. And you say, why can't we talk? Show me this?

If you want me to make this better? If I'm supposed to be an ally which is a term that is much abused, But if you want me to be an ally with you, then point to where this is and don't expect me to accept false premises or lies or misrepresentations in the specifics. Oh, it gets better. Thanks for listening to the bus and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you

get your podcasts. I yes. Continuing with this polled Matthew Frank piece Newsweek doesn't like to write anything or doesn't like to publish anything that's worth reading, it seems. I also I love this conceit that conservatives, and Frank writes this many conservatives, No, their views must always be balanced and contextualized in conjunct him with liberal views in the mainstream media. But liberals opinions are never treated that way.

One hundred percent. You see this all the time. I'll never forget when I was at CNN and I was sitting there with a CNN anchor on set, and I asked her the question because she kept we kept doing these segments and it would be conservative political commentator Buck Sexton and political analyst Van Jones, political analyst or Gurgle and Garbor or one hundred and eighty years old, and Sexton over here wasn't around for her. Reagan Nixon administrator

over or administration of Rutherford B. Hayes. Always I'm like, why don't we have this guy on TV? Or Jeff Rucker says I'm smarting or sound old and authoritator, but they would always say political analyst for this other person. It was always the other person was a political and why was I a conservative political commentator but the lib DNC pro bigandist who always got to talk more and

didn't get interrupt. Look, CNN was great training. It was like going into the enemy camp for two years and seeing how all the sausage is made and it's gross. But I would see this happen, and I remember I asked the anchor, I said, why is that the case? And she looked at me with just this dumb stair, like what do you mean and I said, why am I always labeled as a conservative? But the liberal is always just a person who has expertise, a person with

a point of view. Now we all know the answer to this, but I'm telling when I tell you this, I'm being serious. She's now an anchor on CNN, and was she was an anchor then, but now she's a bigger anchor. And she looked at me and it was clear from her face, and this was off camera, and being honest with that, she just had never this had never occurred to her before. See it's so you want to talk about systemic, systemic undermining and silencing of conservative

voices in the American news media. That is systemic. It's all over the place. You see it. I'll show it to you. CNN doesn't even have real conservatives on air anymore. I mean, they got poor Rick Santorum, who's clearly got a mortgage to pay, so he shows up to get punched in the face over there. Feel bad for the guy. That's it. I mean, you know, what, do you want to talk about a system that is a system that is thoroughly soaked with anti conservatism. So, and I'll argue,

I'll talk about who are your contributors. How much time do they get on air? How often are they You know, I can actually point to why I'm saying this is systemic? Where is the proof? Taking us back to our initial thesis here, where's the proof for systemic racism in America? If they're going to talk to me about outcomes of systems only and not what is being done by this system, I would say, I would say, hold on a second.

Lots of things have spirit outcomes, right, I mean I remember it in CrossFit class, you know, seeing my bench press vers. You know, you put all your stuff on the board, and yes, I could bench press more than all of the women. That doesn't make me impressive, right, but it's a disparate outcome. Yeah, why you know is there oppression in that system? No, that's just the reality of it. There was no there was no bias against

the women. It just I could you know, I'm a dude, I could bench warn, right, I mean, who who cares? I'm just feeling these days like the gym is so depressing because I haven't been in seven months. And I'll take I'll take it. I'll take any upside I can. But my point is that just because there are differences

in a system. Unless you're a true Communist or Marxist, you'd have to and as we know, they create in many ways the most disparate systems where you have no rights, where the vast wealth disparities are even greater than they would be in a system like our own. Anyway, But you see here they won't even allow the debate to happen. They won't even allow the argument to occur. And they don't even they won't admit to the ways where they're

trying to skew the conversation. So back to this Frank piece where he's saying that this is a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are a hardy species of weed, he writes. Anti Semitism, whether left or right, thrives on them. Think of the foul fantasies of the protocols the elders of Zion. What else can explain these spread of the ludicrous q Anon examples could be multiplied, But two related features mark all conspiracy theories. First, the lack of evidence for their

central claims does not count against them. Indeed, evidence of the contrary does no damage to belief in them, but is regarded as either proffered a proffered by the credulous or deliberately faked by the conspirators themselves. Second, the very denial of a conspiracy theories truth is taken as confirmation of it. The denier will typically be declared to be

in on the conspiracy himself. Of course, he would say that he's one of them, judged by the presence of these two characteristics, that for its adherence is unfalsifiable, and that denial is taken as a guilty confirmation. The proposition that American society and institutions are afflicted by systemic racism has to be one of the greatest conspiracy theories of our time. So widely believed, is it? And what is fascinating? The true genius of the theory is that it has

no conspirators at all. It doesn't need them. In fact, their absence is central to the theory. Is this is important? I mean, I know, this isn't a huge news story today. Oh it always you're the latest Trump sweet No, this is important. This is if we're going to win not just the battle for this election, but the battle for this country's future. We have to fight back against wrong ideas. We have to fight back against destructive, incorrect, divisive ideology.

And I have seen this. There is a pervasiveness now of Okay, well, the left went through a period and went into the nineties where everything was racist. Oh, everything is racist. You watch the movie PCU and there's a group of uh, you know, black activists on campus in it, and there they walk around and it's supposed to be a joke. You probably couldn't make this joke anymore, but they just walk around. You know. The tree is racist, the blackboard is racist, the stones in front of me

a race. Everything is racist, right, And if everything's racist, nothing's racist, and we understand it. But now that that's systemic to it, so it adds this pseudo social science veneer. When then people feel like, oh, or maybe a non racist systemic racism. Oh okay. It's kind of like like the word strategic. You know, you add strategic to something and people all of a sudden go, oh, you're not just an analyst, You're a strategic analyst. Oh okay, you

know strategic or senior right. Oh, People all of a sudden they're supposed to think differently about whatever that is, modifying a senior advisor or a senior blah bli blah, whatever it is. But now here we are with systemic racism being dissected eloquently and expertly in this essay and being declared a conspiracy theory. And you know, liberals will lose their minds over this because people don't like to

think that they've been swindled, that they've been fooled. And you can't read this and think that there's not a large portion of American society that has bought into this concept. That's indefensible on the merits, that's just factually bizarrely wrong, he writes. Quote, it is usually the case with any conspiracy theory that the identity of the conspirator is a

matter of some moment. There may be purported conspirators who some names are known, or they may remain shadowy figures of mystery, but someone is at fault for the ills the theory claims to explain. Not so with systemic racism. The system, a college, or a profession, or the nation as a whole is said to be suffused with racism, and asking for the identity of the culprits is supposed

to be a sure sign of the inquirer's naivete. The fault for systemic racism is no one's in particular, and everyone's in general, or at least everyone not belonging to the aggrieved class of victims. This unique feature of systemic racism theory is indicated by its very name, as Brian Garner observes in Garner's modern English usage, Oh this wee get into the difference end quote. He talks about systemic systematic. But a thing quote is systemic if it affects or

is a feature of an entire system system wide. Notice that no personal agency is required or indeed is any part of a systemic phenomenon. And there's the beauty of systemic racism theory. Who's to blame is never answered with any particularity that will fix responsibility on known persons, For the answer is why everyone? What could be more impervious to contrary evidence than a wholly impersonal conspiracy theory about human behavior? No one is responsible and so everyone is responsible?

And therefore who end quote? There who gets to be the arbiter of how we tackle this and deal with this? Well? The high priests of systemic racism theory, don't you see? Ah? It all starts to come together, doesn't it. So I'm walking you through this because this matters. They're using this concept of systemic racism to justify why your kids are learning in school now the sixteen nineteen project, and how

America is a systemically racist country. They're using this theory to jam these you know, diversity and inclusion program brainwashing programs down down your throat in companies across the country, mandatory now. And they have this like white fragility, uh fraud. You know this con woman who goes around talking about the white fragility concept all the time. Oh, isn't that amazing? If you don't agree with my systemic racism idea, clearly

you're like or a fragile white person. See, it's all it's all meant to avoid debate, discussion, reason, argument, truth. It's all meant to avoid truth. It's meant to prey on people's emotions. You want to you want to be thought of a certain way. You want people to like you. You You don't want to be under a hack, you don't want to be under suspicion, So you go along with it. In that sense, it's actually very Soviet in its feeling too. Just go along, don't don't raise any issues,

go along. If you go against them, you're a counter revolutionary. You must be destroyed. And that's where it derives so much of its power from. I wanted to talk to you about this because one, it's always noteworthy when journalists, like the editor in chief of Newsweek is willing to abandon central precept, central tenets, central promises of the profession. Right. A doctor who doesn't keep confidence with someone's medical records

is not worthy of being a doctor anymore. A journalist who does not believe in the free expression of ideas and does not think that when you print something that you know is an opinion that one of your editors is put forward, pulling it to try to contextualize it in a way you won't offend your reader, is doing intellectual violence to the First Amendment. More than any of that,

I suppose. I just want to put you in a position today, those of you who do me the great honor of listening to this show, and we're about to get intoelve the news, and you'll know everything that's happened in the country by listening to this show, to be sure, But I do think the philosophy matters, because when someone now thinks they've got you cornered or in one of your children comes home from school and thinks that there's only one answer to this question. When someone says to you,

are you saying you don't believe in systemic racism? The answer to that question can now be yes, that is what I am saying. Prove me wrong, show me otherwise, and that, my friends will drive the left completely insane. You're in the Freedom und This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast, Went and Down. Friends. You know what you can always do if you want to try to win an argument and you have a losing argument, just lie right. That's what the Libs do. I'm not recommending you do this.

I'm just saying that's what the left does. Here is host of the View Sonny Houston, who has to has to clean up the mess that BLM activists made over the Weekend's to clean it up on TV. Here we go play six. According to a new Fox News poll, more voters classify BLM unrest as riots rather than protests. And that is scary because that's feeding into this narrative that the Trump campaign has been putting out there. And if you really look at the facts, ninety three percent.

Nine percent of protests are non violent, non violent, and in fact, when Trump has put in force, has put in a federal enforcement, out of those ninety three percent, the violence ratchets up right, And so more five percent of the protests actually that are links of the Black Lives Matter movement that was met by Forest by authority was met by Forest by authorities, compared to one percent of other sorts of demonstrations like COVID protests or protests

about being unhappy about not being able to go to the barbershop. And so this is manufactured by the Trump campaign. And I just wish that people understood that and knew that, and just looked up the real facts about protests in this country. I know that was painful to listen to, but I wanted you to hear. This is a person who is paid seven figures to go on TV and be a babbling moron. Everything that she said there is absurd. It's either just untrue or ridiculously stupid. It's embarrassing. But

she's got to carry the water for her side. She's got to be on team Democrat, and that means she's gonna have to say dumb things. Now, I actually think she's smarter than what she's presenting on TV. But she's it's like she's the lawyer for BLM. She's gonna have to try to do whatever she can to keep them out of jeopardy. Not nothing else matters, No integrity, no honesty, no intellectual decency in any of this. You know what

the end? You know what the percentage of protests that should be peaceful for a movement that claims to be about about justices. A hundred percent. That's what it should be, a one hundred percent. You know what they do when they burn down buildings and loot businesses and yell at people having they attack innocent human beings who have done nothing to them, who have no part of this. But even beyond that, they are inciting violence against cops. Yes,

that's right, let's say it. They are inciting violence against police officers across the country because they claim, and this is a central claim, this is not a secondary, not a tertiary thing. They make the claim that police are hunting and murdering young black men out of vicious racism in a systemic way. There's that word again, systemic, And that is a lie. It's a lie. It's not happening.

But people believe things that they're told that some people will take action on that, and that is what we saw over the weekend in California already early reports that as I've been saying, oh, who wants to place bets? That when you go through this guy social media, the shooter of those two Los Angeles Sheriff's deputes, who wants to place bets? You're gonna find out. Big BLM supporter, Oh, I'll take that bet. I'll give somebody ten to one

odds on that bet. But the media is, oh, we don't know yet, we don't know if BLM has anything to do that. That's right, just delay and delay and run cover for evil. Good job Democrats. Thanks for listening to the buses and show podcast. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Unleash the Deep States. I know it's not as cool as Unleash the Kraken, but you get the idea.

That's what the Democrat establishment wants right now. That's what they're pushing for, that's what they're hoping for with all of this. You're starting to see it all happen. Wow, It's so easy, no matter how humiliated you were in the past, no matter how clear it is that a government employee was engaged in the most grotesque politicization of his or her job, even if they violated sacred principles of their own institution, even if they humiliated the bureaucracy

with their actions. The deep state squad is getting plenty of airtime these days, no problem there at all. Easy to get on TV to be a deep stater and attack Trump. And we're just seeing the beginning of this last of this last effort. Let's start with Oh, there are so many of them. Let's start with Peter Struck. Peter Struck. Here he is, Here's what he says. How do we get them to start talking about Russia again

as part of the plan. How how do we get the Libs an opportunity to call out Russia because that's what they want to do. They want to talk about Russia. Because even though you might say pock hold on hold on a saying hold on a second buck, I don't know why I got kind of texts in there for a hold on buck. No. But really, even if you would say, we haven't we proven that this is all nonsense. Haven't we proven that this is false? This is this is strange, this is absurd. They would come back and say,

what do you mean that whole Special Council thing? They just didn't find all the facts. Man, there's just more out there, almost like a conspiracy theory that can never be proven wrong. It was never even and I don't know why this didn't catch on more. This was my initial theory about Russia collusion, even if Trump was willing to be that underhand, in which I do not believe. But just from a pure perspective of risk management for Trump and those around him, it's the dumbest idea in

the world. You're gonna work with the Russians. We're told the Russians wanted Trump to win? What would they give? What would Trump have ever gained from working with the Russians on this? And then think of the risk that he's taking and at any point the Russians can drop that. It's it's such a dumb theory. You have to be a blanking, blinkered moron to think that this. But the country is full of people. There are losers without a thing to add to public discourse. They're not intelligent, they're

not funny. They're not Who have you know, hundreds of thousands of social media followers now because they did the whole Russia collusion thing. Oh, I'm gonna get to the bottom of the Russia collusion at oh, this is he's a Russian asset, and then just say it was just feeding into this mania. These people should have really just followed the Kardashians or something instead, not tried to stretch

their little brains. So far unbelievable. Now Russia's coming back, even though we've all been talking about this, even though we've had all these Now Russia's coming back. Here's Peter Struck, Meet the Press, the gold standard of political journalism, right, meet the press. Here's Peter Struck talking about how well I'll let him. I'll let oh, Peter Struck say at Place seventeen. Look, I think it is clear I believed at the time in twenty sixteen, and I continue to

believe that Donald Trump is compromised by the Russians. And when I say that, I mean they hold leverage over him that makes him incapable of placing the national interests, the national security ahead of his own. That takes a variety of forms. I work counterintelligence for over twenty years, and I recruited spies during that time, and I defended against those people who are being recruited in our government.

One of the largest ways that people in foreign governments gain leverage, and certainly in the case of the president, is through financial entanglements. And I think when you take a look at the Trump financial enterprise, particularly it's relationship with Russian with Russian moneys and potentially those related to organized crime and other elements, that those interactions have placed him in a position where the Russians have leverage over

him and are able to influence his actions. Based on what top counterintelligence guy Peter struck, the FBI and CIA people are never going to think of them the same way, and they shouldn't, not after these morons have gotten through with line the public. Okay, they're financial entanglements where and also Trump's a billionaire. How much of a financial entanglement do we really think we're gonna have here? How much

of a financial entanglement are we really talking about? All Right, that's something that we need to know because they've also told us that based on the emoluments Clause. They've also told us that President Trump has had his foreign policy influenced by diplomats buying cheeseburgers and having martinis at the

Trump hotel. I'm not kidding. Oh, they're influencing him. Yeah, the sixty different countries that have had diplomats go have a cheeseburger or eat the delicious bacon at the Trump hotel. They're buying his foreign policy ten dollars at a time. Again, this is idiocy. I mean, intelligent people can't believe that Washington Post writes editorials on this. What kind of leverage do they think they have? Meaning, what kind of leverage do they think the Russians have against Trump? What would

it be? Oh, they're gonna promise him a hotel. The guy's already a billionaire who's built a global brand now that people will remember, not just for decades, probably for centuries to come. I mean Trump is now in the history books, and the Russians have lever remember when it was the p tape, But we're supposed to forget. The FBI believe that the CIA believed that, at least the deep state libs who work there did. They thought that there really was a Trump a Trump video where he's

getting a golden shower from prostagis. I mean, how much dumber is it going to get? They've learned nothing though. You see, they can't they can't allow themselves. It's like somebody who's a religious zealot can't ever answer any questions about their beliefs because even the smallest break in that in that mental armor will bring the whole thing crumbling down. Right, even the smallest chip in the wall of their belief

can bring the whole thing down. That's with people with weak faith, people that don't have real arguments and understanding for their beliefs. They're very sensitive about it. That's true of the deep staters. So you have struck, and then you've got vinmin the president. Oh, here we go, here we go, play play people. This guy the whole whistle blower thing was this this loser who's like, I'm more important than Trump Arshiberd making reform policy in Ukraine. I

was going to be Mukraine's defense minister. You hear about that story? Oh yeah, play eleven. The president suggested you are a never Trumper? Are you a never Trumper? I joined this administration, I joined the President's team. I joined this administration. Well, into this administration with the hopes of being able to do my job, with the hopes of being able to advance the US national security interests. I could say that I am now a never trumper. I

was not a never trumper before. I was non partisan. I would be regardless of what adminstration, I would just try to do the best I could advanced national security interests. But I think as the President's attacked and politicized me directly, we and in taking a very sober review of where this president is taking this country, the divisions they catering to our adversaries, the undermining over national security interests, that I am absolutely an never trumper. Oh, now he's an

ever trumper because the President was mean to him. But he wasn't an never trumper when he decided to try to undermine the sitting president of the United States with this nonsense over the over Ukraine phone call. Right, and the whistle blower. Remember I remember, Adam Schiff, No, you cannot talk, you cannot try to find that. May I denity the whistle blower is sacred. It's sacred. The total construct,

total fraud. By the way, the reason we can't know the whistleblower is trying to take down a president of the United States, and basically was Vinman all along. Yes, I swear, but the Libs never, I say, They never learn. But it's really just they never change. They never changed their mind, they never change their attacks, they never change on any of this. They're impossible, or rather they're incapable of self correction, a very important tool in life. Can

you self correct? Can you be honest with yourself about who you are, what you're doing, what you think, what you say, And is that the best version of you? Is that the most truthful version of you? Liberals, again, if you pull one brick out of the wall of their unearned self esteem, their unearned virtue, they're worried that the whole thing comes tumbling down. That's why they have

to shut themselves off from discourse. That's why they're not willing to have a real exchange of ideas, and they create all of these echo chambers for themselves and then try to shut down the few places where conservatives have real reach in the media for ideas that half the country shares, but only about ten percent of the media is willing to share. Oh, isn't that interesting? But the never trumpers out there. You're going to see all of them.

It's gonna be like the best of never Trumpers. I mean the compilation series that nobody wants, that nobody would buy. You know. Now, that's what I call never Trump. That's what's going to be. Remember those CDs. That's what's going to be coming your way. You're in the Freedom Mud. This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast. Yeah, I'm not doing it for political reasons. I want the vaccine fast.

If this were like the I call it the Obiden If this was the o'biden administration, you wouldn't have a vaccine for years because they would have taken two or three years. I've speeded up the process with the FDA. They've been great. Doctor Hahn has been great to add to the FDA. Alex Hazar has been fantastic. You know, it's been incredible what we've done because we're gonna have a vaccine in a matter of a matter of weeks. It could be four weeks, it could be eight weeks,

but we're going to have it. We're getting very good results and it's really looking good. And they're great companies, Fizer, Johnson and Johnson Moderna. We have a lot of great companies, it's not just one, and they're all doing really well. It's going to be soon now. Will it be before the election? It could be in terms of we have something and we'll start delivering it immediately upon getting it. But we're very close to getting the vaccine and that's

something I look forward to. You know, we've gone from thanks to the lockdown libes, we've gone from lockdown until vaccine is crazy. We'd never do that to you. Okay, we're locking down till a vaccine. They didn't really tell us that. They just decide if we're doing it. So now so it looks like we're gonna have to lockdown

into long after we have a vaccine. And for all this, I just want to say thanks Fauci and company, because this is the biggest self inflicted policy disaster of any nation in generations where we're going to look back on this because there's no benefit to so much of what we've done. There's just a lot of people who are afraid, who are being used, who are refusing to have open conversations and open debate about what's really best for us to do under the situation. So yeah, that's where we are.

And now they're trying to say things about the vaccine that, Look, I understand some of you. I understand some of you have your have concerns about the bodies governing us when it comes to this right now, the CDC messed up the testing originally, right the FDA, But I also know that vaccine testing like this is, if anything, too cautious, and they know that the eyes of the whole country are going to be on this at every stage. There are multiple vaccines in trial right now and looking like

it's they're gonna work. But put aside for a second whether you're even going to get this vaccine or not yourself. I mean, I'm probably going to get it based on what I read about it, so that I just have a greater degree of not worrying about infecting my parents. Let's say another even though I think we're through the pandemic, ninety percent through the pandemic at this point, I'm not expecting a major second wave this winter, and we'll see, you know. But then again, everyone's been wrong a lot

on this whole thing. But I'm pointing to what the Democrat narrative around this is right now, because for months, let's just be clear. For months they have been saying, oh, let's listen to the experts, But now, for obvious political purposes, they are turning around and telling us I'm about the experts on this one. Bill Gates, he who is the billionaire who funds the I M. E. That had those horrifically wrong, horrifically wrong predictions about this virus and what's

going to happen. Bill Gates has wondered, according to Bloomberg, whether the FDA can be trusted on a COVID vaccine right now? Oh, okay, so it was wear a mask because the CDC says so. Well, it still is that, right, wear a mask because the CDC says so. The vaccine, though I can't agree that it's safe, they'll tell you. Because the FDA can't be trusted under Trump. Why should we trust the CDC on masks but not the FDA on vaccines? I mean, you know, can they just be consistent?

But you know, Bill Gates and the whole live intelligency and the media, they're going to be wondering about this particular vaccine safety right and tell about November fourth, then suddenly it will be safe and mandatory. I bet if Biden wins, don't you see, that's part of the whole Biden miracle. Biden wins, and then oh well, now we've really had the time to see that this vaccine is

really going to work. And then they also have a justification for a mass inoculation, mandatory inoculation program that Biden will take credit for, and that will be also the excuse for finally letting us go back to normal life, and it will be timed perfectly with the Biden Harris campaign's political needs. That's what we're facing right now. Let's all be honest about that. That's what's going on right now, all right, There's no other reason to plane these sudden

concerns that the FDA has about all this. There's no other reason to do do. I'm sorry that the people have about the FDA. There's no other reason for this. And it's becoming more and more clear. You know, cal Cunningham, who's down in running in North Carolina against Tom Tillis, this is for They had a Senate debate last night in North Carolina and he told ten million North Carolinians that he's not gonna take an FDA approved COVID vaccine.

That's what we said last night, No he's not. He's not going to take it because no, no, now, look not because he thinks vaccines in general are problematic for the immune system, or that vaccines have heavy metals in them, or all these other things that you hear and look, some people in this audience, I disagree. I think vaccines have saved a whole lot of lives, and I think the numbers back that up. But you can direct your

angry emails about that to producer Mark. This is not opposition to the vaccine because of concerns about This is opposition to the vaccine because they don't want people to think that we've beaten COVID before they've cast their votes

in this presidential election. That's it. That's it. So after posturing as the pro science party for seven months of COVID, Democrats are about to wage the most dishonest anti vax campaign imaginable, even though it will directly cost some American lives because there are very at risk elderly people who you know, it is for those individuals getting a flu vaccine. Even though it's hit and miss. Sometimes it works, sometimes

it doesn't. That's considered in the grand scheme of things good medicine, for senior citizens to get flu vaccines, for those people to not get the vaccine because of the Democrat scare campaign here is all really just because they place beating Orange Man bad over the health of the American people. Nothing else is allowed to matter. Anything that gets in the way of must be destroyed because the Libs have gone full psycho here. They don't care about

your health. They don't care about that's all just pablum, all just talking points so that you say, Okay, maybe Biden's not such a bad guy. Thanks for listening to The bus Essen Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. But we have to do much more. And when the President says all they have to do is rake the leaves and ignore the climate challenge that we face, it's really quite sad. And I understand that he had an anti

science rally. Is the press reported it was an anti science rally in Nevada, So you see the challenges a clear one. But I don't have any complaint about any of the cooperation that is being received from the national level to our state in California. I can't speak for the other states. Right. Listen to chief scigenist Nancy Pelosi. Hey, it was it at Science rally. At Science Rally. Oh my gosh. They're gonna They're gonna cling to this mask

mania for as long as they can. It's the only thing they've got left because they abandoned social distancing with the protest, so they know they're gonna get clobber on that. They can try to lie to people, gas light us, but at the end of the day, they abandon social distancing for BLM, which, as we now know beyond any doubt, is a destructive, dangerous, and and ultimately really pointless movement. Unless you think the point of it was to get

Democrats elected and to hurt Trump and all that. Then I guess it served some purpose and to allow people to express their resentment and rage through a political prism or in the name of a political ideology, and that means smash windows, stolen merchandise, looted businesses, turned out buildings. Sure BLM did all of those things. But Trump held a rally in Nevada. I think Trump should hold more

of these rallies. I think the Democrats are worried that he's running up the scoreboard, and I don't want to see that. They don't think that that's acceptable. They want to do anything they can to undermine him at this stage. And you have, in my mind at least a Democrat party that is desperately clinging to this notion of the pro science party, that anyone who just gives it a few moments honest attention will come back and say, a

hold on a second. You mean the party that believes men can get pregnant, there are thirty seven genders, that there is somehow no difference between men and women except sexism is very real, that gender transition can occur before someone even hits puberty. I mean, you believe that, and that a fetus is not a baby, and that party and that the mother Earth gets angry and spews fire. It spews fire all over the forests in California, and that's why that's happening. That party wants the lecture us

all on science. You know, I worked out yesterday in the gym, and I for at least a period of time because there was another gentleman in the gym, I had to have my mask on, so I'm doing dead lifts and like and like a little old lady because I've had so much muscle atrophy over the last seven months. But I'm doing my dead lips, and I got my mask on, and I'm breathing really hard, and all I'm thinking is, how does anyone think that is the air I'm spewing this stuff out? The air is just going

above and below the mask. Just I'm breathing really hard, I'm shooting it all over. The mask is not stopping my air particles from flying all over. It's not doing it. But it doesn't matter. Right, This is this is the This is what the science tells us. That the science keeps changing. But they're sure about it. They're sure about it. And then there's oh, oh, let's hear from the libs other chief chief scientists, Don Lemon, that's terrifying thought play nine.

Shame on the president for reading these people into this situation. But they're adults. Why are they doing this? Adults who should know better science facts. Good things are happening, he says, good things are happening. Well, not with the pandemic, but you wouldn't know it from that crowd. Now, with a pandemic or the wildfires or the hurricane, but The president

doesn't want to talk about any of that. He is willing to risk the safety of his own supporters, as I just showed you just for the picture of a packed crowd indoors, so he can pretend everything is back to normal. Are you the mark? Are you being used? Hey? Ha ha? Really? Are you willing to put your lives in danger? Okay, that may be okay, fine, you want to do that, But what about other people's lives? What about the vulnerable in society, in your family that you

were going to come into contact. But think about someone other than yourself. Oh, now, it's all about the Libs want us to be thinking about other people. They want you to be thinking about other people. But they don't want you taking a vaccine, even if the FDA says it's safe. But they want you to listen to the experts, but only when it comes to CDC saying wear a mask, even though the CDC has changed his mask guide and so many times I can't even keep it all straight.

They want you to pretend that by wearing a mask when you enter a restaurant and then taking it off when you sit down at the restaurant, you're believing the science They want you to believe that it's necessary for me in a gym that's probably, you know, fifteen hundred square feet by myself, to wear a mask while I'm on a treadmill, because that's protecting people. This is idiocy. It's not science. It just you apply facts, reason and logic to this and realize that it's gammongering, it's lunacy,

it's absurd. You don't have to be a doctor. You don't have to you don't have to be as well read as Nancy Pelosi and Tom Lemon, and you can figure this stuff out. And then there's the other ways in which they're deeply anti science. And then there's the other ways in which they've got problems or one thing. I mean, the Green New Deal is really just a crazy religious belief for Libs. Mike Pence has called this

out play thirteen. Joe Biden wants to bury our economy under an avalanche of red tape like his own version of the Green New Deal. You know, the only thing green about the Green New Deal is how much green it's gonna cost all of us if they ever sign it in the law. It's true, it's true, But they think that they have the answers for the climate. They think they have the answers for California. You know, you

know what the truth is about California. Fascinating. This guy Blomberg who is from Copenhagen, from Denmark, Copenhagen, part of the Copenhagen Consensus. I think he runs it. This guy had an editor in the New York Post laying out some of the points that I've been saying. You're the one thing that I will be honest with you. So here's what I knew before I read this, just from

doing very basic research. Two degrees maybe close to three two degrees warmer in California, and they're telling you over that's about over the last thirty forty years, and they're saying that's why they're wildfires are so much worse. Okay, be in a room that goes from sixty eight to seventy degrees and tell me if you think that that's going to cause that much of an atmospheric difference, that there's there are massive conflagrations that occur. Okay, put that aside. First,

I mean, look, just think this through. You don't have

to be just think it through. And then also on the issue of how these are the worst fires ever the wets are wet, the hots are hot, or the fires are burning more the hurricanes and robbedy but all that stuff, right, Okay, let's think about Let's think about that, shall we for just a moment the sky Blumberg points out that there were much bigger fires seasonally that would burn in California in the eighteen hundreds, that it wasn't until they started to apply some forest forestry management to

these areas of California that you would have much larger areas that would burn much larger year and year out. And that the single biggest issue here is that there has not been there has not been forestry management applied to this, so that there's a tremendous amount there's years and years worth of kindling undergrowth that builds up, which means that when it goes, the fire burns much hotter, much stronger, spreads spreads much faster than it did in

the past. But that's because we have changed the way we deal with forests. But it used to be that there would be every year there'd be a big fires back the eighteen hundred California, big fires that would burn a whole lot more, much more than what is currently being burned. And now because we've we have firefighting that we do, but not a lot of forestry management. Yeah, it doesn't burn quite as far, but we keep running into this problem because of all the undergrowth. So it's

managing the forest. But even even just put that aside for a moment, because libs'll argument that, let's go to the climate change thing here. Gavin Newsom, governor California, and Eric I think his name is Eric Mayor Garcetti of

Los Angeles. They take the position that if we want this to stop, we need to lead the world on climate And if you think that a climate agreement that might get signed that would make Gavin Newsom happy in the next five or ten years is going to do a damn thing about forest fires in California, you're a moron. But Gavin Newsom knows that he's not. He's talking to people who it's not rational. They've been trained to believe this.

Does anyone really think that California changing it's CO two output, that that's that's the thing, you know, if they've got more solar panels in California, if they have less CO two emissions in California. That's going to change the climate in a way that would affect these forest fires. That is a lunacy. That's a lot, and you know it. Just think it through. It's a clear, a clear lunacy. But that's what they're pushing for you. That's what This is what the Party of Science wants you to know.

This is what the Party of Science they're They're not they're not about science. They're not about knowledge. They're about emotion and coercion and power and all this other stuff with the environment is just they've replaced God with Mother Earth. It's pathetic, it's regressive, but that's what they've done. You're in the Freedom mind. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.

We've heard from Washington Governor j Ansley, we heard from California Governor Gavin Newson refer to these as climate fires. Why do you think that terminology is appropriate here? If we look over the last four decades, what we see is just a steady decrease in the snowpack and steady warming of the ocean off the coast, a steady increase in how dry the forests are, and how long that period is, and it just sets all the conditions for

these these fires. The President I know visited California and said he just thinks, well, things will just get get better on their own. This is willful ignorance. This is putting your hands over your eyes and your ear saying I see no climate change, I hear no climate change. There is no climate change. Everything will get better. Wishful ignorance. At just it has resulted on the pandemic front of within a week we'll have two hundred thousand Americans who

have died. And what we're seeing in the West is just a steady scorching of our forests and now the incineration of our towns. I mean, what do they think that California is gonna Let's assume that this guy's right on the science here, that Senator Merkley, what is the state of California is supposed to do about this? Exactly? Or let's say that all the Republicans, because we're the big, bad, evil people who don't care about everything burning down, what

are we supposed to do to stop this from happening? Oh, stop global CO two emissions. Does anyone say this out loud and not hear how moronic? That is the only way to stop the fires in California is to limit global CO two emissions. It's not gonna happen, folks, It's not gonna happen. And as I've already told you, there are a lot of other reasons why these fires are what they are, And if they really wanted to deal with this, they would have to do controlled fires. But

controlled fires come with some risk, never entirely controlled. They also burn a lot of stuff that people get upset about. Environmentalists get upset, Oh, you're burning the trees. I don't want to do that. Some other nature comes in and just does it. That's what ends up happening. But you know, friends, it's Trump is anti science, Trump is anti women, Trump is a racist, Trump is a trader. You know, all the things we've heard before. That's what you're going to

be treated to this time around. Also that we can vote for Joe Biden, who we all recognize is a dotterering old buffoon. But nonetheless they want you to think that he's going to make everything so much better, so much better, that's the plan. Oh, and they want to blame trump support for all Trump's the borders somehow, the reason forever we're the reason for the pandemic, or the reason for climate change, or we're the reason for all

of these things. They keep wanting to tell us what to do based on their idiotic ideas, and also somehow think that we're the reason that all these things are happening. Isn't that fascinating? Here's joy Anne Reid still hasn't found the hateful bigots who hacked into her blog from ten years ago to make her a homophobe. You know, she said the FBI was investigating. We still haven't. Gosh, still haven't found those people that hacked hacked into her blog?

In quotes, Yeah, sure, here she is play seven. I mean, a lot of people have been giving up stuff, giving up parties with their families, birthday parties with their grandparents, and for their kids, funerals. People have been skipping funerals. People have been making tremendous sacrifices to try to end this nightmare. And Trump fans are taking the opportunity to fly to other states, to other states go attend a mask free rally. We're looking here at the crowds were

not wearing masks in front of Trump. They festooned some behind him so that they'd be on camera looking like they were doing the right thing, but the ones in the crowd weren't. Those people are going to be in the walmart with people who didn't choose to be, you know, completely irresponsible. This strikes me as the reason we can't get past this because there are some people. It's not just Trump, it's other people who are deciding to take risks with the rest of our lives. Just so much

stupidity in one sound bite. It's amazing, isn't it. Was she so critical of all the BLM protests, which, yeah, some of them were masks, they weren't social distancing, and a lot of them weren't wearing masks. Did she take the time to say that we had lost the right to have funerals and birthday parties and graduations. But BLM was having their massive protests for weeks and weeks on the streets so they could talk about how much they hate cops and how the white oppressor is destroying America

as per critical race theory. Did she have a problem with any of that. No, No, But she's got a problem with Trump holding rallies where not everybody is wearing a mask. You know, they mask shame selectively and wonder why we don't take this more seriously. Other countries that have decided that that masking have recognized that masking is not some huge weapon against this virus. We don't want to hear from them. We don't want to listen to that.

We've decided that this this is now it. You know you mask or you're a bad person, and this is absurd, but this is where we are. This is what they will say to you. Oh, speaking of absurdity, here's Bro Cuomo on the BLM shooting of the weekend. Need to hear this play eight the extent of what we know. That's it. I just showed it to you. Anyone who says they know why this happened is pushing an agenda because we don't know anything other than what you just saw.

And there are a lot of crazy people. I know, we don't like that word with mental health awareness, and I'm all about that, But you know what, that guy either has a bad mind, a bad soul, or bad brain, or a combination of all of them. Yeah, let's not jump to conclusions that the guy that killed two police officers in south central Los Angeles. I'm sorry to try to kill to sheriff's deputies in south central Los Angeles

over the weekend. Let's not jump to conclusions and think that maybe the constant drumbeat in the media of cops or murdering black men constantly. Let's not assume that that had anything to do with this, or I should say, let's not analyze the situation and come to that preemptive conclusion subject to repudiation by the facts as they additionally come in. Right. Sure, this is just like what they do with with Jihatat terrorism. We may never know the motive.

The guys run around yelling Alahu walk bar with a suicide vest on, saying he's doing for ices, but we may never know the real motive. I'm with this guy. Oh, let's not jump to conclusions. Let's wait until there are other things in the news cycle and people forget that there were also BLM protesters on video blocking ambulance access for these deputies as they were trying to fight for their lives. Let's just let's pretend like Nona, let's not

connect any of the dots. That's right. Cuomo, for his audience's benefit, will pretend to be a moron because it makes the audience feel are we don't know what happened here? Yeah, you know, you never really know when you're talking about a motive. You make the best guests you can with the facts as presented, and this one seems pretty clear. Thanks for listening to the bus seton show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or

wherever you get your podcasts. Well, we have a lot of countries that want to come in. So for years and years, these clowns have liked to criticize me. Well we disagree, disagree. Well, they never got anything. They never got anything done. They've been fighting for peace in the Middle East, and when I came in, I was told it was an impossible thing. You could never get it done. And we went around the other way. Instead of dealing with the Palestinians, we took the money away. We used

to give them seven hundred and fifty million. Then they treat us badly. I said, why don't they treat uspaily? We give them all this money. Nobody ever did this. I took it away. They're going to make a deal. You watch. But we started dealing with other people and everyone said this couldn't happen, and we made a deal with Uie, led by a man to Mohammed, who's a great leader, a great warrior, and we made a deal

with UIE. Then Bahrain came in, and we have many others going to be coming in over a short period of time, and the Palestinians will ultimately come into and you're gonna have peace in the Middle East without being stupid and shooting everybody and killing everybody and having blood all over the sand. President Trump letting everybody know there are deals that are getting done. It's not just all talk.

Deals that are getting done in the Middle East, increasing stability, helping our ally Israel, and bringing more Muslim nations closer to the US foreign policy goals in the region. Let's talk to somebody about exactly how momentous this all is. We have our friend David if fun with us now. He's the editor in chief of the Alga Miner. David as always great to have you, always a pleasure. But so first telling me what's going on today. We got

the White House, the Abraham Accords, deals getting signed. Let everybody know what's happening. Well, I think I said this once before, but I think this best captures it. The President's approach to dealing with the Middle East can best be described as a massacre of sacred cows. And in that clip that you just played, the President referred to

it the approach that they've taken. Where they've taken really looked at everything with a fresh set of eyes, and came to the conflict rial the region for so long from a completely new direction, and that is really to focus on the countries that are much closer to Israeli interests, have a much more pragmatic approach to their foreign policy, and those that are sort of standing on the threshold of peace with the Jewish State start with a low hanging fruit, if you will, and the rest will follow.

So today we saw a signing on the White House lawn, aptly named the Abraham Accords, named after the children of name for the children of Abraham. Obviously, Abraham's two children, Isaac and Ishmael, are said to represent the Muslim world and the Jewish world, bringing them both together in an historic moment, with United States brokering a deal between Israel and the Gulf States of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, the first such peace deal in the region. Since nineteen

ninety four when you and me Buck were kids. Indeed, so I was no, no, no, for sure, I was a young buck back then. But David, this is these deals will mean what assuming they're implemented as planned? What are the changes here? We hear about normalization of relations between Israel, the UAE, Israel and bach Rain. How big a deal is that? Well, what does that actually mean

for the people in those countries? Well, the incredible thing about these agreements, as opposed to past agreements that Israel has signed with both Egypt and Jordan, is that what was seeing on the ground for the people, as you say, is an incredible warmth and an incredible willing to cooperate and to work together and to get to know each other and to sort of integrate societies. So there's a

huge business an economic component here. There's air travel running between the two countries, including over Saudi Arabia, who of the first time has agreed to allow air travel from Israeli aircraft across its airspace. But there's also a security element, which is super important. There's a lot of shared concern between Israel and the Girls States and others in the region over Iranian expansionism, which is a big issue of course,

all forms of extremism on the ground. But I think beyond that, there is a whole host of challengers that are faced by states in the region, primarily water challenges, agricultural challenges, cybersecurity challenges that Israel has faced and found incredible solutions too. And some of the biggest challenges that are facing the UAE and Bahrain today have easy, out of the box solutions that have been developed in Israel. So what's incredible about this deal is that it's not

necessarily moral or ideological or charitable. In terms of how these states have changed their view is interest First. The interests have aligned in a way that has bought people together, and that's really the bedrock of the long lasting, warm, and far reaching, secure stable piece that we're seeing emerging today. Speaking to Dovidafune, editor in chief of the Alga Minor, great news site that focuses on Israeli, Jewish and Mideast issues, Dovid,

what would you like to see? Now we don't know if Trump is going to get four more years or not.

Let's assume for our purposes that he does. What would you like to see as the follow on agreements actions, and now that it sounds like we have we have momentum here, perhaps we even have a framework for a more durable future mid East piece, What do you want to see as the next steps If Trump gets those four more years and has his team pursuing these goals, Well, I'm pretty confident that the outcome of this election in the United States will tell us about the future of

deston stability in that region. There's no question that there are some actors that are sort of lukewarm, sitting on the fence, that are waiting to see the outcome of the election. There's an understanding that the America's diplomatic relations are going to hit in a very different direction if there is to be a Biden administration, and they want to wait and see what happens. They're not ready to quite jump in right now at a moment where things

may change quite dramatically. So I'm pretty confident that those that are on the fence are waiting to see where things go, and we'll jump in if Trump is reelected. There are also those that I wouldn't describe as sitting on the fence, but really malicious actors in the region, including the Iranians and others like that who are also trying to wait out the Trump administration and the hope that they're going to have a more charitable administration following

the Trump administration. Suddenly there's indication from the b In camp that he would sort of follow the Obama approach when it comes to dealings with a run. And the Palestinians as well. I mean, they're they're putting out statements, they're opposing the normalization that we've seen today. They're sort of jumping up and down, they're selking, they're crying, they're not presenting any alternatives. But it's pretty clear that that their strategy in terms of moving forward is just to

wait and see what happens. But if there is another four years of the Trump administration, they're going to be between a rock and a heart place and they're going to have to take steps if they want to avoid a firm and deterioration of their diplomatic standing. They're going to be forced to take steps, which is really necessary.

This sort of jolt and earthquake under their feet to get them to move forward and to take the risk to the necessary for peace to come to the table and to get real and to get serious about it. But what would be the next realistic step in this process that if you could, if we could get an agreement on next degree similar to the bob Rain or UAE deal, what would be the country and what would it stipulate. But leave aside the Palestinians for a second,

let's talk about other actors in the region. Well, there there are a whole host of others that have, you know, let's say, express tepid interest in the way things are developing. The most obvious is Ohman. There was a there was a bit of a you know, a screw up with Sudan where where fun Ministry spokes and put out a statement saying that they were jumping into the circle of peace as it's been referred to as well. But then they walked it back. But I don't think they're too

far down the line. The biggest prize, the big prize is Saudi Arabia and the movement that we're seeing now opening up the airspace. The very fact that Bahrain was part of the agreement that we saw today, and of course bahrain Is is almost a vassal state of Saudi Arabia, just sort of completely dependent on the Saudis for absolutely everything that couldn't have happened with that out to Saundy blessing and approval. So that's something that we could see

coming up pretty soon. It's more delicate there in terms of the Saudi geopolitical position, but I think it's just a matter of time. It's inevitable. So you think we could get an Israeli a US broker Israeli Saudi peace deal in the next four years of a Trump presidency. Possibly, I do. And the chances of that happening are about, let's say, fifteen times more likely if Trump is reallected. Dovit Ifu and everybody the Alga minor check it out at Alga miner dot com. Dovid always good to have

you all, my friend. We'll talk soon. Likewise, Tak you're in the Freedom Mind. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. I like this story. I think it's good. Let let's see what these professional athletes, superstar, millionaire celebrity are really all about. The La County sheriff calls on Lebron James. You're, according to CBS Los Angeles affiliate to step up to the plate and double the reward to find the gunmen

in the ambush of the two deputies. Sheriff Alex Villanueva challenging lakerstar Lebron James to contribute to efforts to find the gunman who shot to Los Angeles County deputies at point blank range. Villanueva made the challenge during an interview on a local radio show. There are two private pledges tolling seventy five thousand dollars in addition to the hundred thousand from the county, but the sheriff is calling on James to kick in one hundred and seventy five thousand

or three hundred and fifty thousand dollars. I want to make a challenge, Lebron James, he said, I want you to match that and double that reward because I know

you care about law enforcement. Quote. You expressed a very interesting statement on race relations and officer involved shootings and the impact that it has on the African American community, and I appreciate that, But likewise, we need to appreciate that respect for life goes across professions racist creeds, and I'd like to see Lebron James step up to the plate and double that. Do you think Lebron James is

gonna do this, and of course not. Now, look I know how the libs are gonna try to defend this. Was like, oh, what is Lebron James supposed to be the one person who's Yeah, but it's the principle. Lebron James could also just say, look, I'm not writing checks for everything here, but he could publicly state the shooting was was horrific and wrong and does not represent anything that Black Lives Matter is supposed to be about. He

can very easily do that. But no, Instead we have Jamiel Hill, who says insane stuff on social media on a regular basis. She says she had a response here. She said that the sheriff quote shouldn't be using the cold blooded murder of two officers to bully a celebrity and further a bad narrative that demanding police accountability means you sanction violence against the police. End quote. No that's not you don't you're not demanding accountability. No. No, I

like this is cute, This is clever. I like the little rewrite here that we always get from the Libs on this. The basis of BLM is the murder of unarmed black men is systemic, rooted in racism, widespread and continuous. That is a lie. But they don't say it's rare. They don't say that those officers are either often justified in the shootings that have become central to the BLM movement, or it was a mistake. No, no, no, they will. They don't say that. They just continue on with the

lie police accountability. The officers involved in these things lose their jobs and face life in prison, even when sometimes they do they have done a shooting that's entirely defied, justified under the law and under morality. But oh no, now it's about police accountability. See, friends, how we bring this full circle. Just like they want you to agree with systemic racism, now you have to agree with police accountability. Are police not accountable? Show me where? Show me where

the police are not accountable? And let's talk about this. Show me where cops murder on armed black men with no you know, with no consequences against them, against the officers. Show me where this is happening. Mike Brown, No, Mike Brown deserve to get shot. They can keep talking about this, and it's sad and you never want anyone to get shot, but Mike Brown attacked a cop according to black eyewitnesses and the DOJ. According to Eric Holder and the Obama administration,

Mike Brown got what was a legally justified shooting. But they still talk about this. Why why they bring up Trayvon Martin. They say, Oh, it's because he was wearing a hoodie. Trayvon Martin was shot by a Hispanic neighborhood watch guy. It wasn't even I don't think he was an officially part of it. He thought of himself as neighborhood watch. And Trayvon Martin was shot at least in part because he tried to bash the guy's head into

the concrete and he happened to have a gun. It was a bad move for Trayvon Martin, who was an adult male and six feet tall and one hundred and eighty pounds. Despite the photo of a twelve year old, the media liked to show all the time as the Trayvon Martin photo in the media right, just like the Mike Brown photo was always him in his cap and gown. I don't even know if I could find a cap and gown photo of me. That's the only photo from all of his social media they'd used, though Mike Brown

honor student to read it bonfire the vanities. This was seen as a tactic that Tom Wolfe wrote about decades ago. Right, I could take the person who may have even been an aggressor, but for the purposes of a specific narrative of racial injustice, turned them into some kind of a hero. Right Jacob Blake. Kamala Harris shows up and says that Jacob Blake, she's proud of him. He's an alleged rapist, but she's proud of him. When will any of this

madness stop? I don't know. People don't want to have discussions rooted in reality and in what is obvious and what is visible and what we all know. Instead, they want to create narratives. They have a story, they stick to it. They put a lot of false assumptions in it. They put a lot of either cherry picked or just flatly incorrect data in it, and then say this is what we this is the conclusion you draw from this.

And if you say, well, hold on, I don't draw that conclusion, they say you're not allowed to question it. We are, however, allowed to question the critical race training. Critical race theory training that the CDC was planning on doing in contravention of the Trump executive order that was supposed to stop this kind of thing. They go ahead with this anyway, And that tells you a lot about the nature and the the approach of the deep state,

doesn't it. But they were planning at the Centers for Disease Control to do one of these training sessions where they talk about white oppression and white privilege, and you know how bad all the white stuff is that's going on. It's it's really awful. And everyone's told, everyone told that they have to agree with this. You have to even

get on your knees. You know the quote White Allies in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where there were riots because the cops shot a guy who was Hispanic trying to stab an officer to death with a knife. They still had riots though, BLM riots the Spanic guy trying to kill a cop of the knife. BLM riots anyway. Yeah, that's that's the world we live in now. They told the White Allies on video to get on their knees. That video is that you get on your knees and beg forgiveness from

the BLM gods. Yeah, I don't think. I don't think so. Not on my watch, ladies and gentlemen, Not on my watch. But I'm happy to see that the CDC has been slapped down. And now the latest on this is that they will not be doing their critical race theory training, even though initially Christopher Ruffo, who's tracking all this stuff down, said that they were moving forward with a critical race

theory training program, and he obtained leaked documents. It was a thirteen week series called Naming, Measuring and Addressing the Impacts of Racism on the Health and well being of the nation. The first three training sessions were focused on racism, sexism, and systems of structured inequality. This is what they're going to be brainwashing CDC employees with thanks for listening to

the buses and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. So I know it's now been aboarded training thanks to the President's executive order and the attention that was given to the plan to just go forward with it anyway. But Christopher Rufo was actually obtained obtained the info about these training sessions, and I think you should know what was being planned for critical race theory training within the

Centers for Disease Control the CDC. Here you go, and this is all from Christopher Ruffo, who's been the guy unearthing all all of this information. He was on Tucker Show recently. It's really fascinating stuff. In sessions, the first three sessions, as we just discussed, were racism, sexism, and other systems of structure structured inequality. Then teaching CDC employees that they must address institutionalized racism and really said things

right in the garden of a racist nation. This is all from the official training materials that they have already taught at the CDC in the past, I'm sure, and we're about to teach again if it were not for the Trump executive order on this. In Sessions six through nine, the CDC claims that quote racism is a public health crisis and that systemic racism there you go. Systemic racism leads to police killings of unarmed black and brown men and women and lead to the disproportionate impact of COVID

nineteen on communities of color. See systemic racism. That's always that we've already talked about that what systemic or what is systemic racism, Where does it exist within the syst find me word, Who's responsible for making it happen within this system? Who's who's pushing the decisions or the frame work that leads to this systemic racism roof continues here.

In sessions ten and eleven, the trainers will teach CDC employees that they must target and destroy the values of focus on the individual, the myth of meritocracy, and the myth of American exceptionalism and white supremacist ideology. All of this is textbook critical race theory. This is what is being taught friends, end quote there of this is what is being taught in federal institutions with your tax dollars. Employees are being told this is what you must believe.

Federal government bureaucrats are trained, right, that's that word, trained to think this way, trained to think this is true. And yet we're supposed to believe this is in any way helpful. This is going to build a better society. And in the final session of the CDC teaching quote, employees are taught how to become activists. They will be encouraged to join an anti racism collaborative with eight collective action teams focused on communications, making, scientific publications, anti racists,

and influencing policy and legislation. The whistleblower came to RUFO rights quote. I thought maybe they would wisely cancel this training series. Instead, we got a message this morning confirming this was yesterday. The pressure to participate is palpable, and if you don't, you will have to explain why you aren't a racist. That's right, friends, in the middle of a pandemic, the CDC is spending time on white supremacy and destroying white supremacist ideas according to these training materials,

like the meritocracy exists. It's amazing, isn't it. Russ Vaught, who is the director of OMB, he came out and said glad to report per the president's director of the training is canceled immediately. So sanity prevailed this time around. But that doesn't mean that it's usually winning. That doesn't mean it's usually the case. Friends. We've got to continue to look at this and shine the light of honestly

public outrage on this. I mean, it is stunning, stunning what we keep seeing with all this stuff really is really astonishing. Oh one more thing, I got to spend more time on this tomorrow before we get to roll call. But a judge in Pennsylvania has said that some lockdown measures are unconstitutional. You don't say we're thinking about this. We've had businesses shut down, We've had masked mandates put in place, We've had all these things, no legislation. This

is just by executive FIA. I mean, we've had a stress test of how much America will accept tyranny, and we've just all decided to go along with it. Oh sure, why not? What's the worst that could happen? We're seeing what the worst is that could happen. It's it's the dissolution of our freedoms. Our rights are property all because people are panicked and so scared all the time because of the media. Darn it, you're in the freedom hud. This is the Buck sexon Show podcast. Hey, Team Buck,

it's time for roll call. Roll call everybody, Facebook dot com, slash Buck sexon Team Buck, and iHeartMedia dot com. That's how you get down with the roll call. Also, you could send us a direct message ou massage I believe in French. If you would like, you can do this. You can do this on Instagram too. Just go to buck Sexton and we'll get your stuff on the air, which is always fun for it always fun for everyone. Producer Mark, do you ever watched the show Locked Up Abroad?

I think so? Actually do Is that like the locked Up but you know the locked up in America but abroad? Kind of Yeah? Yeah, yeah, but it's always I was talking about brothers about this over the weekend because we were saying, what would be We're having a conversation is we're taking a little trip together, the two brothers in me and we're taking a little trip, and I would saying, what would be the worst country to be locked up abroad in? But not not including like Iran, North not

including access of evil countries, so Ron, North Korea? But where were the worst places? And then we just realized that every one of these shows, it's like the same. It's always a guy who's I was on all the day. It's always a British guy. By the way, He's like, I was on all the day. I was a lot in I was a lot in Vietnam, And I'm like, oh, I mean, mum, you know I should have I'll fly

it down here. I'll make some extra cash by just taking this package and I'll put him in my bag, you know, I'll travel to the next place, you know, in Malaysia. It's a great place in Malaysia. And then they went through him in bag and all of a sudden it was a different story altogether. Like and then they're like dunt undone the guys like caught with drugs, and he's like, you know what I mean, it's always the same thing. So this is a public safety announcer

for everybody. Definitely, don't travel to any country, but particularly a despotic Islamic country in say Southeast Asia or the Middle East, carrying like a kilo of heroin to make some extra money while you're on vacation. That's a bad idea. Wait, that's not a good idea. I thought I was advised bad idea to do that. Yeah, it's amazing. You have to tell people. That's amazing. These guys, it's like they're like a lot. It was having a great time on

the beach. I'm like, I'm like surfing, I'm loving it, but I'm running out of money and them on Hola day and I need to make more cash, so I'll take this brick of heroin and I'm like Oh, but this guy who gave it to me such a cool cat, Like, what could really go wrong? And then the police locked me in the scariest selling the world, full of rats and giant bugs, and you're like, yeah, that's what happens. Don't do that. So I just thought it was an

important safety tip for everybody. I'll take note. Facebook, Yeah, Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton, Team Buck, I saw Drey. I was just thinking about that show recently. I've seen it so many times. All right, Katie kicks us off the roll call. You're hey, Buck, thanks for your interview with Nas Felcher about the rise of homeschooling. I taught in public school long enough to become very disillusioned with it. Now I'm happily homeschooling my own kid in Mississippi, one

of the most supportive states for homeschooling. Because of this, there's a rich homeschooling community here that rivals any community provided through public schooling. We have sports teams, honor societies, clubs, and friendships provided through the many and diverse homeschool cooperatives and Facebook groups. To any parents that thinks they aren't qualified to teach their own kid, I would say, if you have a high school education or even the cognitive

ability to get one, you are qualified. And what's more, as much as those devoted teachers love their students, you know, and love your kid more than they do and will give them what they need to succeed. Shields Hie to you and all the families trying to do best they can for their kids. Oh, Katie, thank you so much for writing in about that. And I think that is a big part of it for for a lot of people, the concern over whether they are able even if they

want to homeschool, are they able to homeschool? I think that's a big part of what holds people back from it. So that's really important to here for someone who's both been a public school teacher and also knows the ins and outs of how to homeschool. So I hope that this happens a lot more. If nothing else, it would

be great for them to be more marketplace competition. That's not just based on the finances necessary for a private or even parochial school education, but the public schools need to know that they're not just going to get the same number of kids in the same district every year or the same money and not really have much in the way of standards to meet. Now, I know there are very good public schools. There are a lot of I understand that they're also a lot of really bad

public schools. Frank writes, love the show, of course, Frank, you're a man who knows how to get on roll call. I saw the Tom Hanks movie on Apple TV very much enjoyed it. Actually, he is on a destroyer I believe, not a submarine. It was very suspenseful and the time went by quickly. I also enjoyed seeing the details of how a ship captain a ship is captain minute by minute during a conflict. I think it would be worth seeing. Well,

I gotta tell you, Frank, I'm still curious. Yeah, I just saw the trailer and I guess I assumed it was a submarine for some reason, although that doesn't make much sense in retrospect. It doesn't look like a submarine, does it. Why do I think it was a submarine? Movie? Might just maybe I'm just getting confused with the Hunt for Rod October in my brain, which can happen. But if you like it, you know, I'm definitely down to check it out. I'm not going to bother producer Mark

every day about whether he's seen Cobra Kai. But today i'm producer Mark. Have you watched Cobra Kai yet? Have you watched The Mighty Ducks yet? Alright, alright, fair point, But Cobra Kai is thirty minutes long, so I'm just saying no, it's a show. Oh so it's like many episodes, so you can watch thirty minutes at a time, but you'll know if you like it based on the thirty minutes.

And I even think missus Mark has seen The Karate Kid, right, the movie the originally, I think everyone's seen The Karate Kid. I think so. I think it's like up there with Back to the Future. Et these are movies you had to see. And like Ralph's Machio is a big, big long Island guy. So that's true. That's true. Yeah, if you go back and watch that. Unfortunately, as I've had to explain to people before, I am not a hand to hand expert by any stretch of the imagination. Um,

but I do know that the crane kick. Don't don't try that one on home, folks. Don't don't try that one on a bar fight. That's like the worst finishing move I've ever seen in my life. You know, go on one leg, lift your lift your knee up. It's like you're begging for someone to shoot for your legs, tack you the ground and pound your face in. It's like the worst thing I've ever seen in a But anyway, it looked good for a movie. It looked cool in

the movie. When I was a kid, I was like, I want to learn the crane kick because I could beat up all the bad guys with my crane kick just like that. You definitely were like the kid, like you've said before, how you're the one who always talked to the cops. In college, you were always the goody two shoots. You were like best friends with the teacher, weren't you. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I don't even have to

guess the teachers like me, no question. I don't like being when I got older, though, I think once I hit puberty and became like a you know, a little more manly. I don't like being told what to do, which was a big problem for working in the CIA and then the NYPD. So were you a harm monitor? No? Get them here, no way type? Oh go blank yourself? Producer Mark that's that's uncalled for, absolutely false false. I'm not narking on people. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. Now. I

got it a little bit of trouble in high school. Actually, they instituted the buck Sexton lateness rule, where if you were less than thirty minute commute from school, you'd start to get double detention. I'm serious. I'm not a lot of kids traveled from really far away. Yeah, oh, this will shock you. I was late in high school all

the time, and you know why. I figured out that we had free period sometimes, and I figured out that your first attention, or rather your detention for missing one free period would be I think it was fifteen minutes or thirty minutes. But my free period in the morning could sometimes be an hour. So instead of checking in on time and then just sitting there for an hour and studying, I would just sleep and then go in and then take my fifteen minutes of detention afterwards. They

had to change the rule for me too. So that's what I was like, if you really want to know, this is like, now you show up an hour late for the show and take the going from me. Well, I'm just saying, like you know you're saying a whole I'm definitely not an all monitor because I was late all the time, so I was not going to be good. Yeah. So next up here, let's see we get Adam. First of all, great hair, even better show. Thank you, Adam. I'm not sure. I'm not sure I agree with that

analysis a little bit, but thank you. I learn a lot from listen. I'm just saying that it is the hair better than the show. I think there's a case. There's a case to be made, you know, I'm just asking questions. I learned a lot from listening, and I try to pass the buck whenever I can. My question is, how do the Democrat Party so successfully brand the Republican Party as evil? Anyone who knows basic American history knows the worst policies and most racist candidates were part of

the Democrat Party. Of course, there are to have been bad Republicans too. It just seems that it's accepted without question that Republicans are evil and Democrats are good. In your opinion, how did the left accomplish this, Adam? That's a fascinating question. I mean it's one that many people and myself included, have thought about a lot before. And I don't have a good, pithy roll call answer for you.

It wouldn't it seem like in a reasonable rational world, the Democrat Party because of its defensive slavery, it's Jim Crowe, it's you know, segregation, all the Dixiecrats, all this bad racial stuff from our past, and it is terrible. It is unjust and is wrong. It is something that we have had to confront and we did confront also with a Civil War, for example, where hundreds of thousands of Americans died in battlefield and got their limbs blown off.

And so we confronted it at one point in a big way, but and then continue to struggle through it and then the Civil Rights era and anyway, I'm not going to do the whole history of it right now, but how do the Democrats pull this switch? I mean, I think you could argue the greatest trick the Democrats ever pulled was convincing the Democrat Party that it's not deeply racist in its history, because it is. And how

do they do that. There's a cognitive dissonance there, I adam, I mean, yeah, they have control of the media and academia, and you know there's an absolutism that is very commonplace among Democrats that I don't think you find among Republicans. But it's amazing how they've done it. I would have to tell you that I think it is pretty amazing. All right, David, Next up here, producer Mark. Let me help you understand why the fans booed at the game

Thursday night. There are two very good reasons. One, the long established tradition to properly show respect for the flag and the country is to stand able while the anthem is playing. There are no other accepted practices for this. Wait, oh, I just work at David. We'll have to come back this Tomorrow's run out of time, everybody, We'll continue this roll call on the rest of the show tomorrow. Pass the buck go to Bucksexton dot com too. Shield Tie