It's A Total Schiff Show

This is the bus Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence, magnor mistake American, You're a great American Again the Buck Sexton Show begins. He's a great guy. No, welcome to the Buck Sex and shure everybody, thank you so much

for being here. Man. We have a lot to get to today, because it is the Shift Show, as people are calling it, aptly named aptly titled Adam Schiff running the Circus as the New York Post depicted it on their cover this morning, The circus up on Capitol Hill. The whole thing is really quite absurd, quite obvious, quite transparent, and yet here we are supposed to be transfixed by what is the most clear and in my opinion, the irrefutable partisan employ the Democrats have launched since the Russia

collusion nonsense of a few years ago. And yet here we are being told that this is our democracy at stake, the republic itself is at risk. You have a very basic argument that the Republicans have, which is that this is all just garbage. And then you have these ornate theories that keep shifting and changing, shifty shift. The language

is always being addressed, adopted, changed, altered, replaced. I tell you, my friends, if you were to steal a car, somebody would say, if they were going to bring charges against you, that this person is guilty of auto theft. It wouldn't be this person is guilty of auto theft. No, actually, this person's guilty of interfering in interstate automotive commerce. No, actually, this person created a danger to passers by with the illegal transport of a vehicle not owned by him. No,

it's pretty straightforward. When someone commits a crime. What the crime is? Right? You say it, this person did this thing. If Trump had really broken the law, isn't it obvious that they wouldn't have to concoct a new legal theory just defying his impeachment every week? What is it? This week, What was it last week, what was it the week before?

Just go through a timeline of this, and what you see is that they keep changing the rules, changing the game, and also changing the very allegations that they are making. Initially we heard, and don't let this to slip slip

down the memory hole. Initially we heard that this was an election interference issue, and they even went as far as to say that this was a campaign finance issue, essentially trying to tie what happened here, they say with Trump and Ukraine and Zelenski and the phone call back to the earlier charges that they had already made about a thing of value at Trump Tower. Oh, that was election campaign violation. Oh, and then there was also the

effort to use this Stormy Daniel situation. That was election campaign violation. They've tried this before, and they're going back to these areas on purpose. The problem with the initial allegation was that any normal rational person would say, hold

on a second. If a president doing a thing, asking a foreign leader to do a thing that would benefit him politically, is a thing of value from a foreign actor, then isn't every intelligent presidential act of foreign policy involving an interlocutor, wouldn't wouldn't at all be a campaign finance violation benefits the campaign makes him look good doing this for his own purposes. They couldn't stay with that, But that was initially what they were going with with this

whistle blower. They were trying to create the basis of a criminal complaint. And then they started to use this language of the quid pro quo, which is in this case Latin for Democrats want you to be really scared. Oh, quid pro quo. It is true. Unfortunately, the way Mulvaney set it up when he had that somewhat disastrous interview a few weeks ago, I think what he said was accurate. He just didn't understand the politics around it, that foreign policy is built on quid pro quos. Do this thing,

or we won't give you aid. In fact, I believe earlier this week the Trump administration began to investigate or began to put forward a policy of cutting off foreign aid to countries that don't have religious freedom. Great, give religious freedom to your people that were not giving you foreign aid. That's you know what that is. That's a

quid pro quote. Well, he heard this all the time from people and that was then the talking point, because once they had established that there was some kind of a quid pro quo, then it was very likely thereafter that they would try to also change the legal language, also change whatever the charge may be on the basis of what we've established the quid pro quote, which goes into discussions of fraud, extortion, bribery, you know that on

That's where we are now. Now we're hearing about this as a bribe or extorting a foreign ally, this is very important most Americans, and just go around and ask any of them. Don't really get all that excited or care that much about whether you know, this Ukrainian guy talking to that Ukrainian guy talking to this administration official who talked to that administration official thought that there should

be an investigation. There wasn't an investigation. The javelins where I mean it all starts to get okay, I mean, this is just foreign part, Like what do we why are we really supposed to care that much? I mean, just from the perspective of a casual observer. And what ends up happening is that people have to latch on. The Democrats have to put forward certain things that sound ominous and this is not new, This is not a new tactic. That's why bribery, extortion, crimes against the Constitution.

They're saying these things, but then they're not actually able to prove any of them. But they're just hoping that the repetition of the words in the context of an impeachment, an impeachment proceeding will be enough that there'll be some support from their side, for some support from people outside of their base for this, which I don't really think is going to happen. But they're just justifying this along the way with the choice of scary sounding words that

they use. And this should be a reminder also of what they did during Russia collusion. Why didn't they initially say it was conspiracy, which is a federal criminal charge. Well, because conspiracy, as it is written in the statutes, there are certain elements that you have to be able to prove to it. They didn't want it to be about having to prove the elements of an actual crime with Russia collusion. They wanted it to be it looks bad, it's a maybe it's a crime, or maybe it's a

political transgression. So that was why collusion gave them more room more leeway. Okay, you didn't actually take an affirmative step in a conspiracy, so we can't actually say it's a conspiracy. You didn't actually do the thing that we are saying you did, but you kind of wanted to and you benefited from it even though you didn't do anything. So that seems a collusion. We'll call it collusion, even though there is a real crime of collusion, usually has

to do with companies that are price fixing. But then that wasn't enough, and then they moved to treason. They started saying, well, the president, oh, and we're hearing that again, betraying the constitutions. What they're saying betraying the constitution is the verbiage of today. But back during the Russia collusion, this is now just Ukraine collusion. This is two point zero. Back during Russia collusion, we would hear about treason that

the president committed. And then some people said, well, hold on a second, there's actually a deaf NISI to treason. I know that that gets a lot of attention. That's a buzzword, but you can't just throw that around because people know what treason is. So can we come up with something else? Oh, and then it was obstruction, then it was obstruction. They keep switching the crime. They never

can prove the crime. And so instead of saying, maybe we should stop just accusing this president of criminal acts that he has not committed and beat him at the ballot box, which the Democrats are very worried about doing because they have weak candidates and the Democratic Party has lost its mind, they just say, let's go on to the next one. Let's just move on to the next allegation.

They don't have to prove anything, they don't have to actually answer to their own side, because no matter how crazy what they say may be, no matter how outlandished the allegation against Trump, as long as it is anti Trump. The people who hate Trump, who vote for Democrats, who watch MSNBC and CNN and read the New York Times, the Washington Post and others, they give them an a for effort. You didn't get Trump this time, maybe you'll get them next time. Let's come up with something else.

They're going after his taxes, saying he's a tax cheat. They would after they're going after him on the emolument's clause. They wanted to use the twenty fifth Amendment. It says though, the Democrats, instead of trying to make their case for other American people shouldn't trust them with power, have all just sat around in a room with lawbooks and had a bunch of very unethical lawyers saying, well, maybe we could take this law and stretch it and find a

way to pretend that the president violated this one. This is the way that they are approaching the twenty twenty election, not making a case the American people, but trying to pretend that they have a criminal case to make against him, to make against the president. And then every time it falls apart, they fall back on well, where it's really a political issue, it's a political crime, and then they find an other one. They act like he's broken the law.

Oh no, we can't prove that. Turns out he didn't break the law. Well, what he did is bad bad faith when it comes to the Constitution and our democracies undermining our institutions. One thing that people are saying today who are reading between the lines a little bit looking closely, that the deep state in a sense is also on

display on trial here for everyone else to see. Notice how the Democrats will put forward from the testimony this morning, they will put forward their witnesses, and their witnesses can talk about, well, my father did this amazing thing for the country, and that and my grandfather and my great great great grandfather, and you know, my family has been

serving this country selflessly since the revolution. And I have no that's great, sure whatever, that that's all fine, Except why is it that the backstory intended to give the appearance of gravitas of a political selfless service to country in order to give additional weight to the allegations that these Democrat only called witnesses are going to give against

the president. Why is it that is necessary or worthwhile for the American people to hear about these people their backgrounds, so that we are so that they are more credible as witnesses. But we cannot hear from the whistleblower. And in fact, the whistleblower's identity is to be kept a secret because his motivations to light the match that has led to this absurd conflagration, his motivation is irrelevant. That's where they keep telling us the underlying facts are true,

regardless of what the underlying facts. We know what the underlying facts are, the motivation for bringing the allegation is really everything. In fact, there never should have been a whistleblower complaint because he's not a whistleblower and this isn't within his purview as somebody working for the federal government. But as I've told you, they have to protect that scan Am as long as they can. And as they get deeper into this impeachment process, then it won't really

matter all that much. They'll have all these people on the record saying effectively with the whistleblowers initial allegation. And I still sit here, and perhaps I'm the I feel like I'm a lone man on the island saying this, but certainly a lone man on Manhattan Island saying it these days. Although Hannity's uptown, so I guess there are other people here, other people who here on the island. But there's nothing there's nothing wrong, meaning there's no violation

what the president did. You cannot like it. It's bare knuckle. I'm not going to pretend that there isn't a dual justification for what he did, but no violation. There's no crime. Certainly, And as the Democrats walk around pretending to care so much about the Constitution and the rule of law. Just

remember something. All these Democrats today on Capitol Hill are ranting about the rule of law and duty to the Constitution, but never forget that they were just fine with Hillary Clinton violating the Espionage Act over a hundred times with recklessness, which is specified in the statute. And they couldn't care less because she was their candidate and she was going to be in power, and that is all that mattered.

Remember the Democrats, power is what matters. One week after that, Donald Trump would have the now infamous July twenty fifth phone call with Ukrainian President Zelenski. During that call, Trump complained that the US relationship with Ukraine had not been reciprocal. Later, Zelenski thanks Trump for his support in the area of defense and says that Ukraine is ready to purchase more Javelins, an anti tank weapon that was among the most important

deterrence a further Russian military action. Trump's immediate response, I would like you to do us a favor. Though, Trump then requested that Zelinsky investigate the discredited twenty sixteen Crown Strike conspiracy theory and even more ominously ominously look into the bidens. Neither of these investigations was in the US national interest, and neither was part of the official preparatory material for the call. Both, however, we're in Donald Trump's

personal interest. Guess what, Adam Schiff doesn't get to determine what the national interest is when it comes to foreign policy, donald Trump does. It does not matter that Adam shift doesn't like what Donald Trump says. It does not matter that all these Democrats in Congress do not like what he said. It is not a violation worthy of impeachment or worthy of any of this to do something that

Democrats don't like. But they are the same way that they have been criminalizing political differences with Republicans for years, and we sit there and take it. You know, you want the Romneyite McCain's style Republican Party. Just let Republicans get pros aecuted for stuff while Democrats get away with everything. That was what we were told we had to do for a long time. That's just sit back and take it. Scott Walker, Bob McDonnell, Rick Perry, Chris Christie got on

the list. All these Republicans getting prosecuted for things that they didn't even do, things that weren't even crimes. But everybody, you know everyone Scott Walker was investigated, not actually indicted. They were trying to get him, desperately trying to get him. And the biggest one of all, President Trump investigated for over two years by a special counsel for something that the special counsel had to know within the first thirty

days of the investigation, was completely bogus. But grind that process on us, that machinery of the deep state, the federal bureaucracy that just oh, they all believe so strongly they're doing all this great stuff the American people. Here are a few things. The federal government is way too big. The federal government is way too powerful. There are too many federal employees, they cost too much money, they don't do enough work, and they think they're much more important

than they are. That is generally true across the federal government. It is especially true of the State Department. Let me tell you, you'll see some of that on display today. That's for sure. They think that they know better than the president and therefore they have some extra constitutional right to interfere with the president. We've seen this happen, We've seen this continue to happen. And the response that we're told the president should have is just take all this

incoming and never do anything back national interests. You know what I think is in the national interest finding out if there was anything strange going on with CrowdStrike? Why are Ukrainian back companies the only company that looks at the DNC servers. The FBI doesn't look at the servers the Democratic National Committee during an election year when they're hacked, and we were supposed to think that that's not strange.

We're supposed to believe that that's just fine. It's kind of like how we're supposed to believe that a rumor allegedly passed on in a bar to George Papadopoulos is enough to justify an FBI investigation of a presidential candidate when it's Trump but a vice president. So I'm getting fifty thousand dollars a month from an ultra corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company that's assumed to be just fine. Debunk conspiracy, they say, because it's Joe Biden and he's a Democrat. Oh,

isn't a weird how that happens? These are the questions we must ask an answer without rancor if we can, without delay, regardless and without party favor and without prejudice, if we are true to our responsibilities. Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of a country America was to become a republic. He answered, if you can keep it. The fundamental issue raised by the impeachment in Korey into Donald J.

Trump is can we keep it? Isn't it great to have Adam Schiff telling us about the vision of the founders? It doesn't just make you feel warm and fuzzy to have this sleazy, dishonest lib prosecutor, now of course in Congress telling us about how it's a republican we can keep it. Meanwhile, he is spearheading the effort once again after Russia collusion. Wow, what a coincidence. There's another vague, bit ominous, but vague conspiracy that means Donald Trump can't

be president anymore. The first one didn't work, but now there's another one, a different one. I ask you to

just approach this as a rational person. What's more likely that they keep concocting, they keep constructing, fabricating these narratives to end the Trump presidency, or that Trump really does manage to engage in these nefarious, multifaceted international plots that are egregious violations of the constitution, treason perhaps even, but they never get proven, they never actually go anywhere, nothing even happens as a result of them, as we see

here in Ukraine. But we are told that this is the worst thing that a president has perhaps ever done in the country. This is absurd. If you just look at this like a normal person, you understand right away this is absurd. But they're not going to back down.

They're not going to back away. They'd prefer the continuation of what has been their most effective resistance tactics so far, which is just to continue to flood the air waves with nonsense, conspiracy theories about the president, to use the federal bureaucracy against the president, to call for deep state elements from within the government to speak out against the president and use their privileged access and positions to do it. And with each failure, we are told, forget about what

we said before. Now we've really got him. Forget about the fact that we lied to you about that other thing about Russia collusion, or about obstruction, or about whatever about the emolument's clause, about the twenty fifth Amendment, about you know that we've created all of this frenzy. The next this time it's real. This time he has violated his oath to the Constitution and must be removed from office. Only deranged people or or really stupid people at this

point can accept this. I mean that there is no explanation for this other than they are full of it and they're crazy. There's nothing more. There's nothing more that really can be said about how is it that Trump is at the same time the most incompetent, unfit president in history, just a bumbling buffoon, if you will. And yet on the other side of this, he never manages to get caught doing the really bad thing that they

say that he was doing. They have to have people say, well, it isn't really the violation, isn't really the crime that we've said it is. But if you look at it from this angle, you know it's it. Is it this color or that color? You know? Is the dress blue or is the dress gold? I mean, this is what we keep doing with Trump, according to the Libs, And there's no accountability for it on their side because, as

I said, they don't care. They don't care about the things that they profess matters so much they don't care about the sanctity of our democracy, about about the institutions. They only care about institutions when they serve their interests, the interests of left wing power. That's it. They don't care. That's why when the Supreme Court doesn't go their way, they're like, yeah, let's just add a few more seats

onto it. That's why when the electoral College doesn't give them the end result, they want, Oh, let's abolish the electoral college. When the Constitution says things that even they can't get around, it's well, the constitution's really old. Maybe we should just forget about it, or we can't know what it really means, or it was corrupt from its origins,

or whatever it may be. There is no institution at the left will not throw under the bus at the first sign of any obstruction of their agenda, the first sign of any trouble, if it's a speed bump for them, it goes under the bus. By the way, Shift in one of his best moments, This was great today play twenty two. This is Adam Shift talking. Do you anticipate when we might vote on the ability to have the

whistleblower in front of us? Something new of the four hundred thirty five members of Congress, you are the only member who knows who that individual is, and your staff is the only staff of any member of Congresses had a chance to talk with that individual. We would like that opportunity. I mean, when might that happen in this proceeding today? First, as a gentleman knows that's a false statement.

I do not know the identity of the whistle blower, and I'm determined to make sure that identity is protected. Adam Schiff is telling you that he doesn't know the identity of the whistle blower. Really, we know the whistle blower met with Adam Schiff's staff. How is that supposed to work? So staffers that work for Adam Schiff met with this person, and Adam Schiff who who does have access to classified information? And he's like, no, no no, no,

I don't want to know who this person is. How could he know if the whistle blower is credible at all? He's gonna take the word of his staffers entirely on this.

He's gonna leave that decision making, leave himself vulnerable to what would happen if he ran with this thing and it turned out to be a forest, which I think we're going to find out it is in terms of who the whistle blower is and what just a clear Democrat partisan and the media, by the way, the lie of omission here that the media is engaged in by not not just sharing the name of the alleged whistleblower and background, but their unwillingness to try to dig, define,

to confirm. It's the single most important bit of information in the country right now when it comes to the news cycle. They don't care, no obligation to get to the truth. And that's why the media is broken. It has been overtaken. You others there are I think you know, on a recent survey of colleges across the country, there

were more self in the social sciences. There were more self described socialists and Marxists by a factor of three, I think, than there were Republicans on college campuses in America. That same phenomenon of just how did this place become such a political political monoculture where everyone thinks the same, it's just this echo chamber of left wing nonsense. That same phenomenon existing journalism. See. The only reason we don't know all this is because journalists say Oh, I won't.

I'm not going to share my political affiliation. I know what their political affiliation is. It's ninety ninety five percent Democrats and including far left radical let's you know, Viva la revolution Democrats. And yet here we are. Oh no, they're just presenting us with the facts. They don't want to present us with the facts of the whistle blower. Does any person in America believe that Adam Schiff doesn't know the identity of the whistle blower? Really? Does anyone

really think that's plausible? He doesn't know. Now, why would he say that, Because they're going to fight to make sure that Republican members of the House who do have access to classified information, remember the whistle they're acting like the whistleblower is the is the nuclear codes to the you know, the nuclear football that travels with the president

who cares. So there's a whistleblower statute. He doesn't even qualify into the statute, And the statute says explicitly that they can decide if they think it's going to come out anyway, that they're going to tell people who the whistle blower is. You know, this isn't We're not We're not talking about somebody who's you know, I mean, anyone in public life these days can claim their life is in jeopardy. I mean, that's all bullcrap. I saw see and oh, this person is going to be so much

under threat. This person is going to have a fat CNN contract and a book deal by by the end of the year. You watch whose life is in jeopardy? Though, anybody who speaks out on any of these issues gets death threats, and every person I know in conservative media, their families get threatened. We don't get to walk around like, excuse me, you can't criticize me. I've had psychotic leftists get up in my face before I went to a party and scream epithets at me. That doesn't work right.

But oh, the whistleblower so scary. This guy thinks he's saving the republic. I'm sure. I would also say that the Washington Examiner, which I believe was the first one that I know of, that reported on Eric Sharamello, Who's who they reported on it as the whistle blower, and they're photo circulating everywhere. The entire world knows who this guy allegedly is. If it were you, and if there really was such a high price to possibly be paid

for being the whistle blower. Don't you think you'd be like, Hey, I'm not the whistle blower, right, I mean, are we allowed to apply common sense and reason to this or are we just supposed to swallow whatever nonsense is being thrown our way by Adam Schiff and these hyper partisan Democrats. They're making a mockery of this process. They're making a mockery of the Congress, a mockery of the rule of law,

of fairness of justice. And as they do it, they say they're doing it because they love this country so much. It's appalling. It's appalling. Trump is such a horrible president, they say. And yet they can't let a free and fair vot occur. Why why can't we have a vote? Why can't we have an election to determine whether or not this president's done a good job. Here's the problem

that looms the mackam minds of Democrats. They've convinced themselves that twenty sixteen was not just an anomaly, but that twenty sixteen was unfair, was stolen? Wasn't right now? As crazy as Libs are these days, and they have gotten crazier. I mean, there's empirical evidence, there's data out of support. They've gotten crazier. As crazier as they are. Isn't it going to be harder even for the most diehard Nancy Pelosi fan MSNBC watching climate change alarmist thirty seven genders

adhering leftist, isn't it? Isn't it going to be hard for them to explain to themselves how Trump is the worst president ever, a threat to the nation, a criminal, and could be the end of this republic. But he got reelected two terms. I know that they'll come up with some Oh he cheated again. I mean that there they'll be labs. There's no reason with them at all. But there will be some who will have to think, what does this mean about their vision for America, their

view of what this country really is. If they really believe that Trump is all the things they say, and he manages to beat whatever boring, pandering democrat they put forward, what does that mean about their ability to really understand what's going on in this country and what America is all about. They don't want to have to deal with that reckoning. They don't want to have to have that that day of of Clarity, and that's why they're trying

to do everything they can to avoid it. You see, impeachment isn't going to result in removal, though there is a theory out there I want to get to in a second about how it could. I don't think it'll happen, but it's interesting and it shows you just more of this. Open the rule books, open the law bucks, and find

some loophole and just exploit it against this president. But even if impeachment doesn't work, and if you don't get removal afterwards, which I don't think, I mean, you will get impeachment, but you won't get removal by the Senate. Remember that if this is helpful in preventing Trump from getting reelected, it would be just like what Harry Reid said about his slander, his false allegation that Mitt Romney hadn't paid taxes in ten years. Well it didn't win,

did he. That's in the background of all of this too. They pretend that this process will be a disappointment to the left if it doesn't get a removal of the president. But we all really know this is just another desperate attempt to drag this president down into the mud and all of his supporters and see what happens afterwards. That's where this really is. The USMCA will create up to half a million American jobs and add at least one point two percent more to our total GDP, and it

should be much higher than that. Yet Democrats in Washington would rather pursue outrageous hoaxes and delusional witch hunts which are going absolutely nowhere. Don't worry about it. Then pass the USMCA and deliver real stuff for the American workers. Another way that Democrats, unfortunately are winning with all of these underhanded tactics, or at least are getting benefit from all these underhanded tactics, is that we're not talking about what has this president done and what has it meant

for the American people. What's really going on right now. Interestingly enough, you know, one part of this that never really seems to get talked about is that the president has been willing to stand up to China, and now we have protests in Hong Kong where Hong Kongers are fighting back against mainland Chinese totalitarianism. I'm not saying that one led directly to the other, but you have the first leader of the free world in decades, who's willing

to say enough nonsense China. I do think that, even if it's a bit subconscious, the willingness of America, the beacon of freedom for the rest of the world, to say China, knock it off. You are not all powerful Chinese Communist Party. Is it possible that influence some of the thinking of Hong Kongers who wanted to stand up for their own rights and freedom in response to, of course, this extradition law that was a violation of the pack that the Hong Kong had made with the Chinese government.

I think it is certainly worth consideration. But let's take it home for a second. Forget about forget about that, let's look at oh I don't know things that people usually in a reelection campaign are told should matter that they were told that shouldn't matter in twenty twelve with Barack Obama, by the way, because the economy was in crappy shape. But you're supposed to vote for Obama because you know, he gave a good speech and was a

charismatic guy. So vote for Obama because of that. Even though the economy was the slowest recovery out of a recession, since the Great Depression, maybe because of things that the administration, the Obama administration did. Meanwhile, the Trump administration, the numbers are just booming all over the place. Play clip eight if you would please, producer Mark unemployment has recently achieved

the lowest rate in fifty one years. African American unemployment, Hispanic American unemployment, and Asian American unemployment have all reached the lowest rates in history. Women's unemployment the best numbers in seventy one years. We expect that that number of seventy one years, which isn't good compared to the other numbers, is it, but women also will soon be historic. We think blue collar jobs are leading the way in our

middle class boom. We've added twenty five thousand mining jobs, one hundred and twenty eight thousand energy jobs, one point two million manufacturing and construction jobs. And manufacturing was supposed to be dead in our country. You would need, according to a past administration representative at the highest level of that past administration, you would need a magic wand to

bring back manufacturing jobs. Well, we brought them back, and we brought them back to over six hundred thousand manufacturing jobs as of today. That should matter, not this impeachment garbage. After the spectacular implosion of their Russia hoax on July twenty fourth, in which they spent years denouncing any Republican whoever shook hands with the Russian on July twenty fifth, they turned on a dime and now claim the real mouthfeasance is publicans dealings with Ukraine and the blink of

an eye. Were asked to simply forget about Democrats on this committee falsely claiming they had more than circumstantial evidence of collusion between President Trump and Russians. We should forget about them reading fabrications of Trump Russia collusion from the Steel Dossier into the congressional record. We should also forget about them trying to obtain nude pictures of Trump from

Russian pranksters who pretended to be Ukrainian officials. We should forget about them leak in a false story to see an n while he was still testifying to our committee, claiming that Donald Trump Junior was colluding with Wiki leagues, And forget about countless other deceptions large and small, that make them the last people on earth with the credibility

to hurl more preposterous accusations at their political opponents. And yet now here we are we're supposed to take these people at face value when they trot out a new batch of allegations. But anyone familiar with the democrats scorched earth war against President Trump would not be surprised to see all the typical signs that this is a carefully

orchestrated media smear campaign. Devin Newness gets it. How can anyone listen to that and not come away saying, Wow, Democrats really are insane and they are so dishonest and this is all just meant to kneecap a president before a reelection a reelection can happen. How can anyone hear this and not think that the motives of the Democrats,

the motivations behind this whole impeachment nonsense, are clear. I don't know, folks, I mean, you know, they they keep lecturing us on the need to protect our sacred democracy. It was like for people who love democracy so much, they don't seem to care all that much about voting, as in, when people vote and you lose, you are to respect that. They do not respect it. They are not okay with what happened in twenty sixteen, they have not moved on. Here's a noted biased lib journo at CNBC,

what is his name, John Harwood. He tweets out this about the what was going on today that the Ambassador Taylor has made clear the effect of Trump's actions was to strengthen Vladimir Putin's Russia in its war against Ukraine, a US ally struggling to defend itself. One that is not true, because the aid got delivered. And oh, by the way, the javelin missiles that we're hearing all the javelins were compromised or delayed because of Trump trying to

get answers about an investigation. The Obama administration would not give those to the Ukrainians for fear of angering Russia too much. So the Obama administration was too wimpy to do this thing. Trump comes in and does it. But then we are told, oh, because he almost didn't do the thing that Obama's administration that Obama himself was too wimpy on foreign policy to do, he should be condemned. How about praising him for helping the Ukrainians out in

a way that was meaningful. And then there's a whole other level here This is a policy dispute. What the Trump administration decides to do visa the Ukraine has a built in check and balance, has a built in oversight. You know where it's from the voter. You don't like what Trump did, vote against him. If you like or you know, or if you don't like Trump in general, vote against If you like him, vote for him. And this is supposed to be very easy, stop, very straightforward,

but no, No. Pelosi and a classic Democrat tactic, likes to tell you the thing that is the most untrue and as the most obviously false, they like to assert that thing as though it were true. Please play sixteen, producer mark if you would. It's coming any second now, sixteen.

There we go. We are defenders of our democracy. And so I'm very prayerful, soughtful, and actually sad today that our country has to come to a place where the president doesn't understand that Article two does not say that he can do whatever he wants, that he is not above the law, and that he will be held accountable. Defenders of our democracy, they're sad, Oh, so sad that we have to impeach the president. It's like so sad. We really don't want to. We really don't want to.

These people are so these Democrats are so disingenuous. They talk to all of us like we're so idiots, and if we don't see through them, we are idiots. And that's true anywhere anyone across the country. If you can't see that Nancy Pelosi's a fraud and a liar, and that Chiff is a disgrace and an unethical clown, I don't know what to say other than not very bright, not very bright, or if you understand all those things, which I think is true of a lot of Democrats,

you do recognize that those things are true. But Pelosi and Chiff are effective weapons against the right and against conservatism because they have no scruples, because there's nothing that is effective that they are unwilling to do. Well, then you're just embracing the very gutter politics that you pretend not to like. On the other side, you pretend not

to like. When Donald Trump plays a little rough, plays a little tough with the opposition, Oh, he's coursening the discourse, they say, as they threaten to throw Trump's family in prison and to prosecute him when he leaves office, and that reminds me there is a theory going around right now, and I don't think it will happen, but I would just note that it's another instance of trying to use the rules as a weapon against the president, try to

craft rules regulations in the government that will hurt specifically

this president. That the Senate when it has the trials, you know, the Senate has to have two thirds majority to remove of two thirds majority of the members, president can remove the president from office after articles of impeachment are presented, but it's very open ended in the Constitution just says It just says that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will preside and there might be one or two other other than they vote tally specific so the rest of the trial and the Senate has kind

of left up the Senate members to the side. So it is at least theoretically possible that Mitch McConnell I don't think would ever allow this, but it's theoretically possible that they could have a secret Senate that this is.

This is at least the conspiracy rumor whatever you want to call the idea that is floating around on the internet that they would have a secret ballot and that if there were a secret ballot to remove the president of the Senate, that a lot of Republicans would go along with it and then would then make Vice President

Pence president of the United States. It's an interesting idea because I will say that there are a lot of Republican senators who I think secretly do despise Trump, not because of his policies, but they just don't like the man. They don't like who he is, what he stands for, and also what his ascension means about them. They thought

that they know. There are a lot of Republicans, especially the ones who are who are occasionally thrown a few scraps from the table at the New York Times, occasionally given some of the leftovers at the Washington Post with a little little pat on the head. There are some Republicans who fall into that category who really don't like that Donald Trump has come along and shown that you

don't have to be that way. You don't have to take the scraps from the Democrat media's table, you don't have to play nicey nice with them all the time while they're spitting in your face. You can actually try to fight back, and if you don't fight back. That's a choice you're making. And if you're a whimpy Republican who refuses to stand up for the values of your own side, well then maybe that's on you. Right. They don't like that. Do I think that they would vote

to remove I don't know. They won't get to a secret ballot because I think the outcry would be too much. They would recognize that. I mean, I think that it's some way that might be the end of the Republican Party if they if Mitch McConnell and the Senate and their Senate majority said yeah, let's have a secret balloty get rid of Trump. I mean, you're not going to have accountability for that vote. So it's never going to happen. But it does raise some interesting some interesting dynamics even

in the Republican side. Look, there's still a lot of never Trumpers, and there are some people who are secret never trumpers, right, so they never signed on. They never said, you know what, I was wrong about this guy. I'm going to get on board and help and push for the agenda. They've just said yeah, yeah, sure, sure, I like him, and in back channel, yeah he's terrible. Let's leak some stuff about him, and there's a lot of that in Congress and across the Republican Party. There's no

question about it. There still a lot of bruised egos on the Republican side from the twenty sixteen election when Trump just thumped all of his competitors. But right now it is, as Senator Durban says, up to the House of Representatives play clip fourteen, Well, I don't know if it'll be proved in one day. It could be accumulation of evidence people who are credible and understand that the Republicans on the committee are going to be cross examining

each of these witnesses in terms of their credibility. But I think it was up to the House of Representatives to make this decision as to whether they go forward in these articles of impeachment. And I think they have to establish an abuse of power by the president to do that, establish an abuse of power by the president. To do that, they are creating a faux legalistic mechanism for the punishment of policy differences. That is what is happening here. That's what's really going on. So make no

mistake about it. Well, let's talk about Democrat Kennedy's for saying, let's switch it up a little bit. And I feel like we've we've had a little too much talk about the impeachment already today. I feel like people need to

understand that impeachment is. It gets boring really fast. So there's some other stuff, other things that I wanted to get to, like, for example, a laship with warrants out there on the campaign track talking about how billionaires they didn't know, they didn't do great thing, They didn't build new companies and employ thousands of people. No, they're just taken from mainstream, just doing all kinds of dash day thinks. But when Elizabeth Warren tries to connect with voters, that's

what all of a sudden you have. I'm gonna get me a beer. Oh really, I'm sure she's just cracking back a bud any night of the week, just hanging out, just one of the folks, one of the multi millionaire, tenured law professor at Harvard, Fake Native American folks out there. But she this was a great bow. But she got asked, what does she now? Look she's she's a lady who is up in her ears. She could just say, look, I don't I go for walks when I work out.

I didn't ask her to what she we're gonna Fortunately she didn't say yeah, like I do a lot of CrossFit or something. But they asked Elizabeth Warren and one of these, oh, let's have a lighter moment with this candidate. What does she work out too? And this was just this was just great. Play clib one favorite song to work out too? Anything from Patsy Clin, Patsy Klin, favorite pa who works out to Patsy Klein. I don't even think you'd go for a walk listening to Patsy Cline necessarily.

I'm crazy. Can you play? Are you allowed to play? Play for like five more seconds? Okay? I mean here, here's what I'm trying to tell you. My friend producer Bark, I think that this is another moment where Elizabeth Warren is so incapable of having a normal, normal human conversation that she just sort of panicked and just thought of something instead of just saying like I don't listen anything on her workout or I don't really work out you Patsy Kline. There's just no one listens to Patsy Cline

when they work out. It's it bad that I didn't even know who Patsy Cline was. It's probably the first time I've ever heard her. When I just played that, I kind of want to do. Maybe I'll do like the different Democrat candidates sing Patsy klines. We could do like Bernie crazy, crazy, fulfilling, so lonely like that, you know what I mean? You have a lot of the Democrats sing things. Yeah, let's because they're they're, you know,

a happy bunch. I guess I don't know. Would betto come back just to sing yo, I'm crazy crazy for feeling so blue. Yeah, you're not as good at singing in better voice. You can't really singing better, But I think I think your vocal chords would seize up most likely, or at least they should. Oh, speaking of vocal chords. Season A season GOP, Hello, Well we're not done. We're

not done here. This was great. I had to have producer Mark Chase this one down because I was just thinking to myself, no way, this audio really exists, folks. I I you know that, you know Hillary Clinton, what happened? You know that. For a long time now, I've been one of the people saying it it's crazy fulfilling. So vote no. No, it's crazy, uh that she would ever consider running again for president. But she's considering running. I'm telling you she can't give it up. It's who she is.

She thought she was put on this earth to run for president. I thought she was she was here in this world to run for president. So if there's another opportunity, and if you really believe that the Democrats had the twenty sixteen election stolen from you, what better way to put right the universe, to make right the wrongs of the past than to have Hillary Clinton br your consensus Democrat candidate third times a charm for Hillary run for

president consensus candidate in twenty sixteen. We found her on the BBC. Hello, Yes, Hillary Clinton, we think you actually should be president of the United States. To BBC where everyone talks like this, which makes them inherently smarter. If you have this accent, you must be smarter. It's not true. By the way, here's what you said. I had to produce your mark for tracking this one down last night late wake three. Are you going to run again? No? Not no, I'm that is that is one hundred percent.

So in a few days, I'm not going to open my newspaper. Well, you know, I never say never to anything that a few days. I know it's way past time, but you know I I look, I think all the time about what kind of president I would have been, and what I would have done differently, and what I think it would have meant to our country in the world. Um, So of course I think about it. I think about it all the time, being you know, being able to

do that. And look, whoever wins next time is going to have a big task trying to fix everything that's been broken. Bill Clinson, your dad, your husband, didn't rule it out last month when talking to Georgetown, he said, I can't rule it out, So you are ruling out. Well, look, I as I say never, never, never say never. Um And I will certainly tell you I'm under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it. But as of this moment, sitting here and this studio talking

to you, that is absolutely not in my plans. That is absolutely not a denial. Folks, Notice how she kind of was dancing. Oh no, I'm not. I'm not thinking about that right now. I mean, I am getting pressure from a lot of people. I am being told by people across the country that perhaps I should run, But I'm not saying I'm gonna run or am I. I mean, she can't help herself. She you know, why why can't she say never? Here's an easy one. Am I ever going to run for president? No? The answer is never.

It's never gonna happen. Okay, And at this point, should I be or should producer Mark be a more likely presidential Kennedy in the same world than Hillary Clinton. Yes, it's nuts that she would run for president again again, but uh, maybe I have to contradict myself here for a second. Is it really that nuts go into a convention to unify the Democratic Party? I'm sure I don't even know what it is, and you have to beget

into the party, you know, rule books and machinery. But I'm sure there's a way last minute, if they wanted to, they could replace whatever candidate they have, or replace the candidates that they have, and just Hillary becomes the consensus candidate once again. She was the consensus candidate last time around. Pretty much except for Putty Well did not get a fair shake, which is true, he did not get a fair shake from the DNC, And there's never really been

any accounting for that. But as a result of the Wiki leaks disclosures, we knew a little more about that than we would have otherwise. But we already pretty much knew that the Democratic Party was in the tank for Hillary. So that's not any real surprise. But is Hillary going to run? That we're still here and that she can't, She cannot tell you, Yeah, I'm not running, tells you a lot, speaks volumes about it, doesn't it. Yeah, she's

thinking about it, folks. I'm sure you're going to see some articles about how they would But the way it would have to be is that she wouldn't run. They would draft her. The Democratic Party would would pull it like the like the old Roman general that has to be pulled out of retirement to save the republic. They would take Hillary and make her make her run for the good of the country. That would be the Democrat storyline.

I think it's quite striking from a British perspective going through this book that, as I understand, in case I've made a terrible error, who you haven't included Margaret Thatcher? Was there a row about that? Did you think to include her? Because surely she comes to mind with gutsy woman. Even if you didn't like her, well, she does, but she doesn't fit the other part of the definition in our opinion, which really is knocking down barriers for others

and trying to make a positive difference. I think the record is mixed with her. I thought she was incredible strong. I remember taking Chelsea to see her in the Parliament when she was Prime Minister and we were visiting, so I had, you know, a lot of understanding of what it took, and I thought it was clever of her to, you know, really try to mold herself to be more acceptable in terms of everything from hairstyle and speaking style

to clothing style. All right, Hillary has done all that too, Just for the record, go back and look at the transformations that Hillary's gone through over time. And I don't begrudge anybody in politics either. They're going to be judged on their appearance, how they dress, how their hairs. But I mean, let's not let's let's just be honest. Every politician does that. So that's a weird thing for her to.

I didn't understand why she'd really had that in accept if it's a backhanded way to say, yeah, well, she just did what she had to do to be one of those big, bad evil conservatives. You're talking, you're writing a book about gutsy women, and you're gonna hedge on Margaret Sure, the Iron Lady. Really Hillary, Oh of course the answers, yeah really, because the book Gutsy Women is all about, I think, paving the way for the next phase of the Clinton dynasty, which is going to be

Chelsea Clinton. What has Chelsea Clinton ever done that as gutsy other than just be Chelsea Clinton. I don't know what to say other than I do not like political dynasties. I wish I wish we would stop, folks. And it's

a it's a bipartisan thing. I understand it. I know that this is you know, Bush Bush, and people are already thinking it's going to be Trump Trump, and people are thinking that it should be you know, Chelsea Clinton, and then it should be you know, or maybe Michelle Obama or one of the Obama children when they're when the young girls are older. I mean no, no, there is there is no like, you know, inherited trait of I'm a great politician because my mom or my dad

was a politician. No, we need to stop doing this. It makes us, It makes our country look unsophisticated politically. We have three hundred and twenty million people we gotta keep you know, Oh, let's go job. Let's vote for Jeb a third Bush for president. Really the only people in the country we can vote for president named Bush. Well, as we know, please clap didn't really work out well, it was close. I really I don't know what I could do to get you know, we need term limits

and we need an end of dynasties. Now, when I see an end of dynasty, I'm not saying you can outlaw it, but I just mean we should stop this. We do have a public look, it's a little bit of like a longing for monarchy, a little bit of a longing for people to be um, you know, for for the comfortable powers that be to continue to be the powers that be. I don't like this. I am. I am anti monarchy, I'm anti dynasty, and I think that everybody else should be too. I think that's a

pretty easy one to justify. But all right, oh wait, speaking of an iron lady Margaret Thatcher, who probably has the best known quote about socialism of all time, which is that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. I mean, I think they hate her just for that line alone. I think the left will forever hate Margaret Thatcher because she just nailed them in one sentence in a way that they

can never escape from. You know, it just distilled the essential fallacy of socialism down into one line, into essentially a bumper sticker, kind of a long bumper sticker. But it depends on how bigger car is. I don't know if I'll fit on your priest, but it might fit on a pickup truck. Um. Here is just a little little collection of some of the Remember we're talking the Clintons, we're talking gutsy women, Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher. They're a

little little wishy washy on that one. Here's the Iron Lady played. Whether is discord harmony? Maybe being truth where there is doubt, maybe bring faith, and where there is despair, maybe bring hope. And to all of British people, howsoever they voted, May I say this, now that the election is over, May we get together and strive to serve and strengthen the country of which we're so proud to be. Apart to those waiting with bated breaths for that favorite

media catchphrase, the you turn. I have only one thing to say, you turn if you want to. The ladies not for turning. And that's I mean, that's just a little I mean, we could you could have just we could sit here for half an hour. The Margaret Thatcher's greatest hits. I mean, that lady, she was a badass. She really was a very strong prime minister and a very important time in the United Kingdom. And yet the

left in this country just knows instinctively. You know, if if if you ask your your average college campus student who was who was a better leader? Che Guvara or Margaret Thatcher, guaranteed your average college student, if you walked around, would say to you, Oh yeah, che Guvara, way way more important, more charismatic, more you know. Oh yeah, they don't even know any They don't know anything about Thatcher.

They don't even about the Falkland War, than anything about the labor strikes, and no, no, nothing, you know nothing about that. All they know is that you're bad because that's your conservative and not a friend to the socialist, collectivist left. And that's all that they think that they have to know. That's all they've been told, and they

don't need to know any more than that. Oh, we will get to the there's a little follow up to Northwestern Universities nonsense from from yesterday, which was truly stunning. But I wanted to switch gears a little and talk to you about the situation of the dreamers and President Trump has upset some people with his tweet where he said that there'd be a deal for Dreamers, notably my friend Ann Coulter. She's not happy with this. I think she said Trump has to go in a tweet as

a result. The political reality is that if you're going to get anything really done on immigration, the dreamers are the best bargaining chip for it. Now, does that mean that there's no case to be made that Dreamers should not be getting some protected status or some you know, additional benefit, even though it's not their fault. Look, I've said this before on air and been saying it for years. If you if your parents engage in a let's say, you know, a stock fraud. No one Stone's dying as

a result of this or any but you're not. They engage in a stock fraud and they buy a nice little house that you're living in as a kid with money from a stock fraud. Is it fair that the government's going to come take your parents away and take that house. It is not fair not to you as a kid. But is that what the law says? Yeah, it is what the law says, because would it be fair for them to keep the ill gotten proceeds for the kid? Maybe the parents go, but the kid gets

to stay in the house. Nope. So there is an argument be made that the benefit that dreamers get, even though it is not agreeve they And also there are a lot of them that are going to claim they were brought here at an age that's younger than they did. But put that aside for a moment. Even if what they say, if what they say is all accurate, I would just respond by saying that, yeah, it's it's highly I'm highly sympathetic to people being punished for something that's

not of their doing but of their parents doing. But that happens in this country all the time. We put people in prison routinely in this country to the tremendous detriment of their children. I'm really in a lot of wise. I mean, if you want to especially if I mean think of like a single parent household. I mean, what happens then the kid's hand over the state. But in any household, when the state incarcerates a parent, you can argue this is doing tremendous It's obvious, just tremendous harm

to that child. Child is clearly being punished for something that is not of that child's doing. Are we just going to not put anyone in prison as a kid? I ask you these questions in earnest. You know, then you have to start, you have to start looking. Okay, it's the dreamers. It's not their fault, but a lot of things that aren't people's faults go against them as a matter of law. And this is just the reality

of it. Nancy Pelosi, on the other hand, is out there telling people that they should be proud that they broke the law, that this is a good thing. Play clip five. Please thank you for bringing us all together so that we can say thank you to our dreamers for America, making America more American with their hopes, optimism, courage, determination to make the future better for their families, and that for that we are grateful to their parents. Please

thank your parents for us. As was mentioned, by Antonio for giving us the opportunity to have you in our country. Thank parents for breaking immigration law. To all the legal immigrants out there listening to shar right now, I'm waring, how does that strike you? How does that sound to you?

Those of you that did what you were supposed to do, obeyed the rules, obeyed federal immigration law, went through a lot of hassle, a lot of time, a lot of money, a lot of effort to mean the country legally, to have the Speaker of the House, the most powerful elected Democrat in the country right now say that it's a great thing that these parents stole for their children what you had to work for. How does that How does that make you feel? I mean, I have some guesses.

I'm going to assume it's pretty darn frustrating. And then, just as an American, as a citizen, as somebody who is called upon, under threat of force by the federal government to pay outrageous rates of taxation, to obey all kinds of laws that I think are garbage, but I do because I'm going to be a law abiding American. But to then be told by a person who works for the legislative branch at the highest level that writes our laws. Thank you, people who violated our laws. You

are the greatest of Americans. And these are the same people who, when it comes to Trump, are always telling us about the threat to the rule of law and undermining it. Undermine rule of law all the time. They have no problem with it. I don't care laws. They don't like our laws to be ignored. Laws that get in their way, like the espionage actor Hillary, are to be cast aside. This is what really starts to pull apart at a society. I mean, I've said this before.

It is not in fact, if you if you're looking for what will what really starts to constitute a tyranny. It is not the draconian enforcement of universally applicable law. Essentially the law is really strict, but it's applied against everybody equally. A society can actually handle that. A society, though, on which there's the capricious enforcement of law. You get prosecuted, you don't, you get thrown in prison, you don't based on political or religious or any other affiliation. That's a

society that's heading for big problems. And Democrats are largely embracing that hypocrisy, that divergence has become acceptable to them. In fact, that divergence has become an advantage to them, And we see it now playing out on Capitol Hill.

We see it with the Mullar probe and the way that they cover up for Democrats all the time, the way that they are unable to see how much they have perverted the justice system, and the pursuit of the power that they so desperately crave because they're so certain that they know better than you about what to do once they're in power, and they can make choices for you in your life that are better than the choices

that you can make. And that's the role the Democratic Party really thinks that should play in American life, the decider for you for all of us, which is a scary thing when you listen to people like Schiff and Pelosi and many, many, many other Democrats in the House of Representatives who not only seem disingenuous and dishonest, but not very smart, which is in some ways the scariest. Are the Mexican cartels a national security threat to us? Of course, the answer is yes, how big of a

threat are they? Well, I'm telling you right now, there is a conspiracy of silence in the media about what's really going on, not just with the scope and the devastation of the opioid epidemic across the country, because it does not affect favored victimized constituencies of the progressive left, so it can't really be something that we all need

to worry about. In fact, it has heard a lot of red areas of states, and therefore there's just a less of an interest in the media, despite the fact that it is a plague that is taking tens of thousands of lives every year. Here's a story from the Washington Post today that does not give context that I'm going to give you. She bought what looked like a percocet pill. Now her alleged dealer is charged with murder on authorities say. Authorities say Pete Arrington sold percocet pills

to two women at a restaurant in Germantown, Maryland. One woman went home, squallowed a single tablet, and then fifteen minutes had passed out. Her boyfriend called nine one one. Paramedics revived her with doses of nax loan and took her to a hospital. She survived. The second woman also went home alone took a single tablet. She was not found till hours later, slumped in bed. She was cold

and stiff. She was obviously gone. The pills the women took, police say, were stamped and marked as percocet, a brand named pain Medication, but they were faced and contain FENTONYL, a synthetic opioid fifty times more powerful than heroin. And with that, in the eyes of Montgomery County police, who have arrested and charge him, renders Arrington's actions a homicide. My friends, this fellow, mister Arrington, he did not make

this pill. This pill was made to look like it came from Big Farmer, which we know the left hates because it's capitalism and Big Farmer has done some very bad things. Do you know who's making these pills that look like pharmaceutical grade perkis at oxycotton water, the Mexican drug cartels. I know this because I was told by a very senior DA officer about this. You can also read about it if you want online. There are studies about what's happening right now. How do they even know?

How do they know how much of this is out there? Well, let's think about this for a moment. Shall we We have tens of thousands of people you're dying from drug overdoses. We have pharmaceutical companies getting su out of existence. I mean, they're going bankrupt, their multi billion dollar fines, are having to pay criminal charges being brought. So doctors, and I know because I just spoke to a friend of mine

a week ago about this, who's a doctor. Doctors are terrified to overprescribe any of this medication that's all been clamped down, and yet we still have sixty seventy thousand people you're dying. Well, the cartels have flooded our streets with pills that are made to seem like they are pharmaceutical grade, when really they are cheap and dangerous fentanyl and fentanyl if you take it, is far far higher risk than say, taking a perkose set. Even illicitly taking

a percose set. You don't know what the dosage is, you don't know what the chemical composition really is of this thing you're taking. But if the dealer in Maryland, who perhaps didn't even know that he was selling fake perkos set, is to be charged with murder, what do we say of the Mexican cartels that are making these pills in vats in Mexico, bringing them across our porous border and then hiding amongst the illegal alien community in various cities and selling it to people, and those people

are dying. The cartels are guilty of murdering thousands and thousands of Americans every year under the laws that I am telling you about right now. There's a story that you're not going to hear the mainstream media talk about. Isn't that a shock? It's not really a shock at all, Timbuk, I want to tell you about a big story from Russia. These caper worthy of Oshina Levin. He's astonishing about the cat. These replaced by a cat because of regulation on the

Aeroflot airline. This is amazing. This is a stupid story that I'm gonna tell you what because you're gonna like it. So there's a cat, and in fact is a fat cat that was told Well, let me let me back up for a second. A guy named Victor or sorry McHale Gallian decided that he was going to bring his cat with him from Moscow to Vladivostok on the Pacific coast of Russia. Food, and he had a fat cat, and literally a cat that is fat, not like you know,

a rich person. I mean like a cat that had had too many cans of tuna, as we are wont to do in this time of year, by the way, you know, no judgments, no judgments. But the cat was

too big, too zaftig, full bodied if you will. For Russian National airline Aeroflot, they had a twenty pound weight limit on cats in the cabin and the guy didn't want to put little Victor, who was the name of the cat, even the whole of the airplane you pulled to hold the airplane, that's viticles in Russia, it's like a cat cat icicle even though, and then you have to thaw the cat that's vitabed. So they didn't know what to do here. They didn't know what to do

this guy. And this has been all, by the way, confirmed by the airline. It is now the stuff of social media legend. And the airline took sanction against this guy because of it. So they weighed his cat and his cat was found too fat, and so what do you do? He doesn't want to not be able to Fly's eight hours of Love The Vustuck, which I hear is lovely this time of year if you like, you know,

being a human icicle. And so he found he went to social media and Moscow and asked for help finding a cat that looked like Victor but wasn't Victor and was under the twenty pound way because Victor was twenty two pounds. So even if you put Victor in like a little trash bag and had him running on the treadmill like people do it and they're trying to make wait for wrestling, it's not to get down below he

is that gonna lose two pounds in a day. So they got a cat that looked like Victor, and they went through with the aeroflood station and they weighed the cat. The cat seemed the cat was under the twenty pound weight limit. And then this guy switched out in the terminal because this was the baggage claim area had to do. This switched out to the terminal the impost body double cat for Victor. He's vere fret, cut too much caviare and managed to carry chubby Victor in the first class

area in his carrier and not under the plane. You'd think that this would be happily ever after. But Aeroflot was not amused, so they took because of very regulation in Moscow and the raw show you can do these things, so they took I think they said two hundred and seventy thousand miles. This guy had accrued all of his frequent flyermunt miles on air float, which I'm sure is one of the worst, probably one of the worst airlines in the world, I'm guessing is run by the Russians.

But all of all of those miles are gone. They took away all his miles because he violated policy, so they are very upset. But to this it just just pruducer Mark. When need these time to get your fat cat in the first cluss lounge, I would like to say all is fair in love, war and fat cat transportation, right. I mean, he keeps doing what he thought was right for his pet. I'd go to extreme lengths Daunley's dog, who, by the way, is way over the weight lifts. You

know they're building weight limits. I shouldn't even say this, but my parents know that there's some buildings they couldn't live in, not because the breed of dog is unacceptable, because there's an anti you know, there's a breed list for shot buildings in New York. But she's over the weight limit out of New York buildings yet, what a twenty pound dog? Usually something like that. Too much, a little too much Thanksgiving turkey early. You know, it can

happen sometimes. But a dog, it's got a little extra, you know, come on, dogs only live once. It's not a big deal. But anyway, this is this is the story now and it's making me miss commye Bear too. So maybe we'll have to bring back that character here on the show. But this is a fun story at a Russian um. What else did I have for you today, my friends? I have so much I'd like to get to.

Oh out of the United Kingdom. We have a story of some people who are doing education about gender issues and this is a video that has been circulating online and they have children, small children who have been told things that well, i'll let you say, factually challenged, but have become very in vogue right now. This is from this was just making the rounds on social I'm seeing

everybody's commenting on this. This is now part of the effort to teach children that gender and sex are different things. Or there's no separation. A producer mark, pull this clip, please play. Hi, I'm needing a sex educator, and I'm eva a sex I use the pronounced sheet and her because I'm a woman and when I was your age, I used to be a girl. Gender is how you feel on the inside about whether you're a boy or a girl, a man or a woman. If you're an

a binary, feel like neither or both. People can also be fluid, feel more like female or male on a based on a different day or time. It's really an individual. Absolutely, everyone born with a volva is a girl too or false or not. Everybody is sure and that makes sense. But our genitals actually don't determine our gender. So some people are born with volvo's can be boys. I'll learn a little bit more about gender. We actually have an

extra special visitor too successful. I have been through the spectrum if we were to say a spectrum of so I just I mean that that clip goes on for quite some time. They asked a room full of what looked like about maybe seven or eight year olds. True or false, everybody born with a volva is a woman. I am here to make sure that we are all on the same page. Folks, it is true that everybody born with they evolva is a woman, is female, is of the female gender. This is a fact. Facts first,

doesn't matter what people feel like. Things are what they are, Situations are as reality dictates. They're trying to teach kids this nonsense now, And look, I know that this always gets caught up in you know, should anybody ever be rude or discriminatory or or unkind to somebody who's transgender or gender flood? Of course not. But then again, as as ethical moral people, we understand that you should never be unkind rude to anybody for no reason, you know,

for no good reason. Ever, it doesn't matter who the person is, but that certainly extends to if somebody has gender transition issues or whatever. I mean, you treat everybody with with the kindness and decency that you would want for yourself and for your own family. That said, policy has to be rooted in some reality. And when you're talking about policy matters, you've been talking about also education. We need to educate people with what is true, what

are facts, And that is not happening here. It is. It is the case that for a vast majority of the human population. Your genitalia. Of course, your genitalia dictates your sex, and also your genitalia dictates your gender identity. Now, there are some instances there's there are people who are intersex formerly known as hermaphrodites. There are some biological irregularities that can occur where it can be a little more complicated than that. But that's not the claim that's being

made here. The claim that was made is actually your gender can change depending on the time of day. How can gender be a real thing if your gender can switch? How is gender a construct worthy of discussion even if your gender can change in a given day. I feel this is what these so called expert instructors are for children, are saying, if I can be a woman in the morning, a man in the afternoon, and not quite sure in the evening, what does that mean about the way society

is supposed to react to me? And are we really now supposed to say no more separation of the sexes into bathrooms because who knows, really what somebody might You might walk into the man drum and feel like a woman and want to You know, this is absurd, It not even makes any sense. What are you even talking about? What is the what is the purpose of all this? But I really do believe that ultimately, I mean I ask what the purposes? I think I know what the

purpose is. The eradication of gender roles is very much in line with statist collectivist ideology, that you eradicate gender roles and all human being you know, that you create a radical equality where all human beings just become functionaries of the state, a kind of superstate, and the family no longer matters, gender no longer matters. All these normative concepts around us that also very much influence our relationships with human beings, which are always more important than our

relationship to the state. I don't care who you are. My family is more important to me than any government, true true fact, true story. You know, my loved ones are the most dear thing in the world to me.

And so when you break down those bonds and you you eliminate them by saying, well, I mean, there's no such there's no different between men and women, there's no particular you know, marriage can be between a man and any number of women or any You know that we're heading toward that, by the way, where we are going to start to have more open discussions. That's why they're doing these stories about polyamory and polyandry and these different things.

We are going to head into that direction. So the institution of marriage is going to be changed to the point where it's effectively just a contract like any other contract, nothing special to it or about it. We are also heading into a phase where men and women are not even are not going to be treated as distinct for the purposes of sports, for the purposes of bathroom segregation. I mean there, we're just all these things. Why why is there such an investment in the left? One is

they're drunk with social power. Because the left is very successfully harnessed victimization as a tool to get compliance from their political opponents. So they claim victim's status, and victimization is very effective, particularly against people who are moral and considerate and decent, meaning you know, I don't want anyone to feel bad. I don't want anyone to be discriminated

against or attacked. And so if somebody comes to me and says that they are oppressed, well my initial instinct is, well, we want to make sure you're not oppressed. That's not right. Well, then that that is abused. They pull even more on that thread until eventually it's not I'm oppressed, will you help me? It's I'm oppressed, do what I say. And that's the transition that we've seen with the left. Right

now it's I'm I'm oppressed. Therefore I get to dictate to you, the oppressor, what will happen now going forward. It's a way of shifting the balance, the intersectional view of the balance of power in society. So this is how you have people who otherwise seem sane and normal saying, yeah, men should be able to biological males. We have to say that, right, men should be able to compete in women's sports. I know, I'm that wasn't some super athlete,

but I could tell you. I mean, having played sports. We sometimes would do mixed athletic teams male and female when I was in college, including the different female varsity athletes, and we would have scrimmages and things. And you know, everybody knows that men are generally bigger, stronger, faster, Right, This is a it's a function of biology, not every

man against every woman. But you know, we we also have to understand that at some level society is built with policies in place for what is true in the vat in the vast majority of cases, you know what is true in the in the aggregate. You know it's at some point you're just going to we have to understand that these are these rules are going to be somewhat in perfect, but it doesn't mean we have to

get rid of all of these rules. And this is where, for example, the issue of intersects comes up, where somebody does have biological a biological lack of distinction between mail, but even intersects people by the way, I mean, I'm not I've read about this a bit. I'm not a super expert on this, but none of the people making any of these policies are either. I would just know.

It's like the people that yell at you about climate change and you're like, explain the process of photosynthesis, super scientists, like, just walk me through that one. Oh what temperature? Excuse me, climatologist, waterbes out there? What temperature does water boil? That? Can we start with that before you start lecture? As all all the science so I don't want to tell the

climate change alarmis all the time. Read a book. Read a book, and not an al Gore book, like a real, a book written by somebody who knows something, that would be a good place to start. But this propagandizing to our children is only going to get worse, and it's going to become it's going to become official policy from a Department of education on down. And you're going to be fighting about this in your school boards for a

long time. Why children who in many cases, in many cases know very little about sexuality and you know, the human body in terms of being instructed on this, why they have to be lectured literally be lectured to in a classroom about intersects and all the different genders and

gender identity. And they're just propagandizing to young kids. You know, just give it time, they'll they'll be The Left will will create a somebody who is like a Gretta Thornberg in the elevation of a very young person to be a global icon for a political issue. They will have

that soon, for they're looking for it. I believe right now somebody who's you know, fourteen, fifteen years old, who is going to be the spokesperson child for transgender issues that if you criticize what is being said or this person is your child bashing anti trans bigot. They will do this. Just give it, just give it some time.

They're preparing for that next, I think. And here it is the statement from Dean Charles Whittaker of the Northwestern University on what has transpired here where Northwestern, the college paper that they have their the Daily, had to apologize for the crime of committing journalism. I'm serious, that is why they had to apologize, being a bunch of journals who actually did their job by showing a protest at a Jeff Session speaking event. Here we have the statement

from Dean Charles Wicker. Journalists have a heady responsibility performing the role as authors of the first draft of history, the term that the late Washington Post president and publisher Philip Graham's credit with coming to describe our work. Journalists often put themselves at great risks, not only to expose malfeasance and injustice, but also to hold the mirror up

to society. Let me be perfectly clear, the coverage by the Daily Northwestern of the protests coming from the recent appearance on campus by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was in no way beyond the bounds of fair, responsible journalism. The Daily Northwestern is an independent, state run, sorry, student

run publication. As the dean of McDill, where many of these young student journalists are trained, I am deeply troubled by the vicious bullying and badgering that the students responsible for the coverage have enjured for the sin of doing journalism. One interesting point to throw into the mix here, because the editor in chief and all the people work for the paper were given a lot of grief, I mean,

rightfully so about their message. It turns out that one of the reasons, one of the reasons that they wrote that groveling We're so sorry we did the journalism thing letter is because they were being threatened by maniacs. That's right, my friends. One of the reasons that they had to say, sorry, we won't do that whole we're journalists who won't do that whole journalism thing again is that their fellow students were coming after them and in some cases threatening violence

against them and just being completely insane. So I do think that's additional context that's good to know here. Like soft butter on warm toast, time to spread some freedom coast to coast. It's time for roll call Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton for all your roll call needs or team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com. Great to get a chance to talk to all you folks on the roll call. You know you know I love how the roll call rolls.

Let's start with my man, Derek. Hey Buck, I just want to say that I'm an African American who voted for President Trump in twenty sixteen and will again in twenty twenty. I'm doing this in good faith that I won't let my great grandfather down rest his soul. He was a civil rights era minister. When Hillary Clinton, not that I've ever voted for her, said fall in line, that was the last straw for me to ever consider

myself a Democrat. I walked away, and I've not been happier as a deplorable Shields High All right, man, Well, Derek, I'm glad you're gonna vote for Trump again. It's good to hear from somebody from from your background that feels so strongly that way. So thank you so much for writing in. I do appreciate it. Hold on a second, um, let me see Michelle. Right, Dear Buck, I up put on your take on the Atlantic article. I thought it

was important should be widely distributed. Shield time, Michelle. Thank you, Michelle. I appreciate that. Yeah, that Atlantic article, it's really worth reading. I did post it on Facebook. I know. Sometimes I say that and then producer Marcaster remind me of a a day later. You know, you promised the audience you're gonna do something, then you didn't do it. I'm like, damn it, Buck, get it together, Buck. But we did do that. Actually, so that is important and I think it's really worth

listening to for all the folks out there. Debora. Hey Buck, I enjoy listening to your show in the evening on WCBM in Baltimore. I just wanted to say that I'm sort of surprised you talk about Netflix so much. I gave mine up because the company hired the Obamas to provide programming content. They also hired Susan Rice for their board of directors. So Netflix and I got a divorce. Shields high. Keep up the good work, Debra, Thank you so much for listening. Great to have folks from WCBM

Baltimore to be joining in in the mix here. Look, Netflix has some good programming. Netflix is a platform in a lot of cases for already done programming show. For example, I watched the show Friends sometimes I know, I know, make fun of me. I deserve it, but that's just a license that Netflix has to have that show on their platform. They don't create it. Some of the Netflix specific shows have been good. I will not I will not take credit away for that. The Narcos show is

very good. There's other stuff that's been very good. But yes, there's a clear left wing Netflix tilts, no question about it. You saw this with the Bill Nye the Science Guy Show, which was unwatchable. And I don't mean like I disagree with the Poleman that's a given. I mean just it was terrible. It wasn't good. You know, John Stewart was a left wing propagandist at The Daily Show. No, I mean,

that's obvious, but he was good at it. He was an effective left because he was kind of funny, and he was kind of entertaining, sometimes very funny, even though he was always he's pushing an alternate reality of Democrats are always so wise and smart and great for the most part, and you know Republicans are are evil, racist idiots. So yeah, I mean Netflix is biased, no question, but it's not It's not easy to just get around it. Entirely, and a lot of Look, a lot of the cable

channels are very left wing. HBO is very left wing. HBO is very very left wing. Pablo hey Buck, I was watching the impeachment hearings. I realized all they have so far as two guys that had an opinion of what happened between other people in the administration. I really believe they feel left out. I stopped watching for the Republicans got to question, but I really think Haraldo found more on al Capone's safe shield's eye. Yeah, man, just

wasn't that much. I mean, and people are going to try to make a big deal of it, because they the leftists who hate Trump are going to say, oh, this is proving that, you know, everything we've said about Trump is true. Blah blah blah. Nope, it's not. It's not proving that they're they're gonna say that no matter what,

it doesn't matter. You could have every witness the Democrats call I'll get up there on the on the stand and be like, you want to hear the most annoying sound in the world, And I just do that the whole time. They say, oh my gosh, it's brilliant. It's brilliant what the Democrats have been saying about All right, what these witnesses rather, they're Democrats, But what they've been saying about Trump. Remember, my friends, the State Department has

pretty similar politics to your average university faculty lounge. Left wing, very left wing place. Let's see here, John Buck. I voted for Trump in twenty sixteen for many reasons, not one of them included being influenced by Russia. I've loved the job he's done so far. There have been a few shortcomings, but overall, he's done a better job than

most presidents have done in decades. After hearing Shift this morning blabbering with his incoherent thoughts on impeachment, I became very enthused, more than I was in twenty sixteen to vote for the president in twenty twenty. I wish the election were today. The Dems have sunk their own ship with this unjust impeachment battle. Can't wait to see how many House seats we pick up next year. Love the show, shields, Hi well, John, Love hearing from you, my man. Thank

you so much. And uh, I mean, I hope you're right about how this is gonna backfire on the democrats. I can't say that. I'm entirely confident that that's the case. I think so, But I don't make I don't like to make promises to this audience that I I can't keep. I don't want to write checks my body can't cash. Well, movie producer, Mark no idea? Are you kidding me? Dude? I'm really bad at movie quotes. I mean you've seen Top Gun though, right, you've not comment? You have not

seen Top Gun? Are you a Soviet spy? How did you sneak? Yeah? I haven't seen. Yeah, they sent a spy to infiltrate the buck Sexton show. Well it would make sense, wouldn't it, because we're single handedly defending the front lines of freedom here obviously. Yeah that's right. Um, all right, wow nor Top Gun? Have you seen Ghostbusters? Yeah? Of course, Okay, I just want to make sure. I got a little worried there for a second. It's like, I mean, you might we might have to go right now,

like go do a viewer right now. If you have not seen you've never seen the Mighty Ducks. But would I like the Mighty Ducks? Come on, it's Amelio Estevez, So how good could it really? Be. That's when he was great. That was at his best. Yes, I mean I guess maybe, um, but the Top Gun remake does not. I don't know. I think it's coming out next year. I'm not really sure when it's coming out. But Top Gun is a movie that should not have been remade.

Richard Happy, Who's your Hellos? Disney Plus is great. The Mandalorian Show is so much fun. As an animator, the animated film of the best two D animation is The Song of the South. I look past the insensitive parts because the animation is incredible. I've never even heard of this thing. Still, check out The Mandalorian and read Harry Potter Shields High. All right, I never heard of that before. But fair enough. Let's see here. Have been watching Kelly and you on the first It's great to see you

back on the tube. One more thing. I've been listening and watching you since The Real News on GBTV days. Thank you so much, Kelly. I appreciate that. That was a great show. I Missreal News man. We should I like there was. The discussion on that show among conservatives was very It was just very high level and they had we had great guests and a lot of them going on to be big deals in conservative media. But that was a lot of fun, Danna, right, she sent me a link. Okay, so I'm not gonna get to

that right now, Jason. Here we go, hey Buck. I'm thirty six years old, and as long as I can remember, the left have been trying to divide this country by race, ethnicity, religion, gender, ideology, and so on. And now they're shocked the country is divided. The left talks about a possible coming civil war, and they blame the right. My biggest fear of their actions has been the very real possibility of Valkanization of the country. And we divide the people up that much, then yes,

political violence is far more likely to happen. They've slapped at the non leftist for so many years, and now that people are pushing back, but they lament the lack of civility. I don't know how the nation starts to come back together. I just know won't happen under democrats who are destroying our common history, symbols and bonds, the ones that the citizens of this of this nation were united on. All Right, here we go, Matthew. Hey Buck

just had to reach out and to tell you. The last ten years of traveling salesman, I found myself consuming day in and day out hours of live talk radio. I started a new job in construction. Unfortunately, cannot listen to the same amount of time I used to. The Freedom Hut, though, is how I start each one of my days now when I rise and shine at four am due to my household chores. I'm glad to have found you, to be honest, I've only been a listener

for about a year. However, You're straight forward, logical way of describing the day's events cuts through a lot of hyperbole that other talk shows have. Keep up the good work. I try to spread the buck squad as much as I can. Shield's High, Matthew. Matthew, thank you so much, Shields side of you too. I really do appreciate that. It's very kind of you, and I am honored to keep you company during your chores. That's you know, that's an important thing to make sure that's as fun as

it can be. All right, let's see what we got here. I've got to I want to get to the Let's get to some of the emails, shall we. All right, now we're back, and now we're getting into the email inbox, so we we have Andre's You're right, thanks for keeping us safe and warm in the past. Your pronunciation of my name has been spot on. What you've been reading is the phonetic spelling of my name. The actual spelling

is Andre's a Latvian name. All right, cool, being genetically German and Mexican having a Latvian name, resulting in many asking where are you from? My favorite response my mother shields high. Andre's all right, man. Thanks, Yeah, good, good stuff, Terry writes, testing the email, Terry test successful. Put more in the next email. Don Rights, Yeah, it's done from Lower Alabama. Thanks bucking Mark, Well, Don, thank you for writing it, even if just to say thank you, We

we appreciate it. John Wright, Buck, I love the show, John, the show loves you. Can't wait till the swamp is drained. That makes two of us. David Rights from Baltimore, Maryland, where the president of the whole USA is hosting the

only loyal opposition left. Keep the faith, keep fighting. Um, all right, Dave, I don't really know what's I don't really know what that was all about, what that's going on there, but fair enough, Phil, Hey, Mark and back you both are mighty good right up there, the best of all in my listening time, I do want to mention the last week there's a message about General Maddis and his books. Blah blah blah. Okay, Sember five, Phil,

thank you, Phil, appreciate it. And then I'm sorry, but I think I'm stepping into some of the older emails here Brackton, congratulations and getting a grown up email. Yep, that's a really old one. All right. So somehow I've like uploaded the wrong the wrong email. I gotta do a whole producer Mark, fix it, Producer Mark, I gotta do. I really need to teach you how to get to the unready emails. No, because that would mean that I'm an incompetent host to scroll to the top of your

email in battle that some problem. I have to like reset the computer thing you whatever. All right, back to the Facebook emails, Producer Mark will fix this later. That's whenever, whenever anything goes wrong, it's go producer Mark help. All right, here we go, Robert hey Buck. If mass shooting victims can sue a gunmaker for legally selling a gun to a woman, so her who was murdered when her mental

her mental health impaired son could steal it. Can I sue GM when a drunk priest runs a red light in his car and mangles my mother in a crosswalk? Can I sue Pepsi and Briar's ice cream for obesity when I never measured out a normal recommended serving? Backdoor? Gun denial is tyranny, Robert, look, man, it's it's it's it's wrong that they are going to sue gun manufactures

what people illegally do with guns. It's wrong. Remember that there's something different about the pharmaceutical companies in the opioid epidemic. The opioid epidemic, they were putting out information that was false to people. They were falsely telling them that these are not addictive. Oxyconton's not addictive. That is a huge lie, a very dangerous one. Gun manufacturers aren't saying a gun can't kill anyone, don't worry about it, you know, or

criminals don't use guns or whatever. So it's it's completely wrong. But the anti gun hysteria, as you know, is a very strong force on the left, and unfortune, that's not going to change anytime soon. Brian rights Hey, bucking Mark on hundred percent agree on Lady in the Tramp and Robin Hood see Brian's a Very Smart Fellow, being some

of the best animated movies of their time. So sad on the cancel culture would love to see the scared Northwestern students who are triggered by Jeff Sessions have to sit through the classic Police Academy movies. My favorite one's Growing Up or Airplane. They may have to be committed afterwards. You still have to watch Disney's Coco. It is the best since Beauty and the Beast, all the best, guys, Mark, do you know this Disney's Coco? Is that a that a movie? Yes, I've heard of it. I have not

seen it, though. I think it's the latest in like the Disney Princesses, I want to say, like a newer one and there's there's there's uh what was that? There was Mulan which was in China. Yes, Muana was fairly recent. That was with the Rock And what was the one that was in Hawaii that was Muana? I'm pretty yeah, yeah, that's the Okay, yeah, that's from all. Okay, I haven't seen it. I've had to seen that. I haven't seen that I might have to, just so I can understand

the cultural references. Frozen. I haven't seen that either, but Frozen two's coming up, and I know I'm gonna be forced to go watch that. Yeah, so I'm gonna have to go see regular Frozen. So I get a little mini Marks running around. It's gonna be married, buddy. Watch all of these again. We're gonna be going all the little, you know, kid movies. I'm gonna be going to Disney World, but not for fun. We don't even know what baby

Shark is, do you? Oh? I know, and I hate it now now that you just saw those two words, it's gonna be stuck in my head. That's right all day. Thank you get inside producer Marks. That's right. But yeah, you're gonna have to actually sit there while your kids are singing the baby Sharks. That's all right, And I'll be Uncle Buck, which thank you John Candy for ruining that for me forever. There's no coming back from the We have to be Uncle James. I think it's got

to be Uncle James. James is my first name. For those who listening, you didn't know that Buck is part of my middle name. So there is that let's see what we have. We got a little more coming our way. Jay I was speaking of James. He writes pretty sad and left, tells us to get an education, but get all upset over the former ag Jeff Sessions and photos. Education is not what it seems to be nowadays. Seems to me they teach you how to be offended about everything and be weak minded. I'm glad I did not

go to college. I don't want to be offended over everything and not weak minded. You are my education and a few other conservative commentators. Shields High from w g Y Albany are a wonderful affiliate up in Albany. Will James thank you so much, man. I'm very honored to be part of your education, your day day education process and it is an honor and a team that's going to be it for the show today. Hope you're enjoying it if you're watching it on Pluto channel two forty

eight on the Pluto TV app. The first is the channel Bucks Exton and Jesse Kelly and assorted other amazing people coming in just a matter of months, so please start watching us on Pluto TV. Also the podcast iHeart Media, iHeartRadio app rather or on iTunes. Tomorrow we talk more Shield's Hot