Mueller's Unholy Alliance

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. SECTI no gree names, my friends, my fellow patriots. Another day down here in this swamp. I feel like I need one of those boats that has the big fan on the back. You know, I don't know if you call it a fan boat or whatever it is. I've actually been on them. They go very fast.

But I need one of those to get around the swamp. Um. But it is another day of back and forth between Trump and Muller. We have all these questions that were released that are purportedly leaked to The Times, purportedly about what Muller would ask Trump if they were to have a sit down. Now, I don't think there are much

in the way of surprises here. Um. The questions run the gamut of what you would expect Muller to ask Trump if he was trying to just ask him everything, which is really what's the best description of it that I can think of. Um, they're looking into a lot about the possible obstruction, and then some questions dealing with Russia, and you know, Mueller wants to ask him everything. He wants to ask him about everything. Um, I have to think that Trump is not going to do this sit down.

But the more it becomes a possible showdown between Trump and Mueller a kind of mono amano vibe, then I think, you see, there's the possibility that Trump will do it, but he's not going to show any fear here, that he is not afraid of it. And I just bring myself back to this repeated thought on it time and again, what a giant waste this whole thing is. They're not going to find any inclusion. We've known that for so

many months. There only doing this because of this holy alliance between Mueller and Komy and Patrick Fitzgerald, these head hunter prosecutors that have really thought they were able to play God at different times in our political process by nailing one person or another in obvious partisan ways. And yet we can't seem to get past this. We can't

seem to get beyond it. The Mueller inquiry, as I see it, is intended to do exactly what it is doing, which has grind away at people, the processes, the punishment cause them to spend untold millions on legal fees and lost night's sleep, And it's just part of the obstruction effort. Really there, there is a big collusion that is going on. It is the collusion of the mainstream media, the Democrat Party, the judiciary to obstruct Trump in every way possible that

they can. That's why, as I see this, I just get so very frustrated that we even have to waste time in it as a country. Uh, it's not even really possible for there to be obstruction when it comes to the president firing somebody who works from because the president is just allowed to do this. The president has the right, the constitutional right to fire. Uh. To fire Comy for no reason or any reason. So how can how can we be in a place where the Special

Counsel is looking into this? It's just a waste. It's all premised on a lie. And the lie is that this is about protecting our democracy and finding out what's that the you know, finding out how we could stop the next one. By the way, have we is there anything that's really been raised on that one? Oh? Well, we're gonna have Facebook now put a little more information

out there about what ads people are buying. Oh, let us how Facebook is now also asking a lot of people to self identify if a post has hate speech in it. It's kind of a weird thing to ask. Talk to you more about that one later. Uh, But you know, I just see this as an obvious political fight that's playing out through the very top end, meaning the Mueller probe and the Special Council, that's playing out in front of all of America day in and day out,

and it's just going to nowheresville. It will eventually be a nothing burger on the substance. But the process of getting there in this case, the cooking to sort of take the analogy and stretch it out a little further. Is meant to be crappy, it's meant to be painful, It's meant to make people not want to work for the administration. You know, I look at how the lack of lawyers lining up to defend Trumps just indicative of

what they've been able to accomplish at this point. On the other side, which is to scare good people away from the administration. They have this whole Oh look at the big ORG chart. Look at all the people who have left Trump's side don't want to work near him anymore. And I come at this and say, that's because of what they do to people. Look at how they go after Scott Pruett. Look at how they go after Ronnie Jackson.

Ronnie Jackson, a guy who everyone that I've heard, who I trust in the media says and who knows him says, is a guy of tremendous character. And it's just a good a good dude. It's a good dude and a professional. But they ruin people's lives and you don't want to

be around that. And I can understand why people who are happy and you know, you only get to go get to go through this whole thing once it's tough to want to sacrifice yourself if you don't even feel like you're gonna be able to make that much of a difference in the machine now, or how much you like Trump, no matter how much you think the agenda is important, it's tough to make that decision that you're gonna just sacrifice your own well being in happiness and

give it everything that's going on. You know, it really is. So I look at this now and I just see the continued, slow grinding gears of this whole Mueller probe, and uh, and I see that when it's all over, you know what's gonna end up happening. The people that have been telling you for the last two years, the CNN's, the the MSNBC s and all the like, all the rest,

they're gonna act like they haven't been doing that. And this was necessary to get to the point where we can all, oh, that's right, start thinking about what what Democrat we're going to elect or place Trump, because I think it's gonna stretch well beyond the midterms. This is gonna be I would not be surprised at this stretch into Trump's third year in office. More on a special Council or on the Special Council look ing at this now for obstruction, think about what that would do to

the country. Imagine for a moment, Muller tried to bring obstruction of justice charges against the President United States for firing sank to Comey. That's what we're really talking about here. You fire, you fire Sancta Comey. And there's there's a big problem, says who how Why there's a guy who

is a political infighter who plays dirty. We all know this now, never mind the fact that he's really the opposite of charismatic and confidence inspiring and does not It should not sit well with all the patriotic special agents out there for the FBI across the country that this was the guy who really tied himself Comey, really tied himself into being the FBI. You know, louis the fourteenth, Late tat Lata six and late Tad. I know you're like Buck, you're americanizing it. The state is me, uh

for call me the FBI is me. And that's the disgrace. And it's not true. It's first of all, it's not true. But also it's not helping. It's not helping the FBI to have us be the case. But but all these different questions that Mueller wanted up allegedly as assuming this is correct, all these questions um would get us nowhere as a country, doesn't help us, doesn't prepare us for the future, doesn't do anything. It just plays into the mania that the anti Trump forces have and that guide

so much of their decision making and their thinking. Uh And and this is a fixation. I mean, they really have a a Trump debasement addiction. Right, Anything that is a slam on Trump, that hurts Trump, that goes after him, they are in favor of. Sarah Huckaby Sanders was asked about this League of questions, by the way, and here's what here's what she had to say in place seventeen

that the league was just graceful. But a former assistance to Special Counsel Robert Mueller has suggested that the White House was behind them any wrong. Once again, I can't comment on anything regarding those questions, and I would refer you to the presidents As a question about about specifically the White being involved today, it was actually specific to the president and that's why I'm referencing and referring you

to the president's personal attorneys who can speak on that better. Uh. Who leaked the questions is much less important than why are these questions even in play? Why are we even at this point? This is all just going to turn into another partisan spat at other partisan dispute, And I will never forget what's going on here. I won't forget the journalists who salivate, who get just so excited at the prospect of you know, Paul Man of Work going

to prison for thirty years. Oh, we'll all sleep better at night now, who have no problem with the damage that's been done to General Michael Lynn, that he faces prison time, that he's gonna be a convicted felon. They think this was all great over what over nothing? How I would not McCabe could not face prison time FBI acting director for what he did, but Flynn is facing prison time for what he did. Is just it's just

beyond my comprehension or I understand it. It just makes me really mad and makes me want to use some some foul language, which of course I will not do. But on another day in the news cycle, it's just, you know, let's see how much we can talk about how they're gonna get Trump. You know. There's other stuff that I want to discuss with you, though, like what's going on with these assi lees, those who are requesting asylum as they're now being processed. What are we finding

out about them? We'll talk about that at the border. Also some follow up to the bombshell Net and Yahoo presentation on Iran's nuclear program and how the the left, how the Democrats are reacting to it. A lot of Oh, is it wrong really better than rather? Is Israel really better than Iran? Yeah, it's really better than I wrong, Democrats, that is That is the case. We'll spend some time on that there, and then just Marxism and may Day.

We've got that coming up too. So I would love to hear from any of you out there that to have some thoughts on whether the leaked questions are going to affect I think they won't really one way or the other. I don't see how this changes anything, but you have a theory on why the questions were leaked, who leaked them, and what it will do now that

they're out there. I've got to assume that anyone's got to look at this and think that it would be completely insane for for Trump to sit down with Mueller, because I just see it as all. I see it as all one big perjury trap. I really do. But if you have thoughts on any of that, I would love to hear it. Eight four four eight to five eight four buck quick break and we'll be right back.

Give me reaction to the news that certain members of the House Freedom Caucus have talked about drafting up articles of impeachment. Despite your best efforts to comply with their document requests, they can't even resist leaking their own drafts. I elaborate on that. I saw that draft. I mean, I don't know who wrote it. It really does illustrate, though, a really important principle about the rule of law and a distinction between the way we operate in the Department

and we make mistakes. That's not to say we're flawless, but the way we operate in the Department of Justice. If we're can accuse somebody of wrongdoing, we have to have admissible evidence and credible witnesses. We need to prepare to prove our case in court, and we have to fix our signature to the charging document. That's something that not everybody appreciates. There's a lot of talk about PISA applications, and many people that I see talking about it seemed

not to recognize what a pies applicat. Well, I think Rosenstein uh departing would be a good thing, but he seems very confident that he doesn't have to worry about getting impeached. There we have it. Um, that was Rosenstein obviously top d O J official now that in this matter because Jeff Sessions has recused himself. Mark in Ohio, get to talk to you, sir, good hey, listen, I've been practicing law thirty years, uh fourteen is the litigator

in Los Angeles. Um, lawyers do not write questions like that. They don't use words of thinking and how did you react and how did you feel? I mean, if that's if that's the experienced lawyer writing questions like that and the Justice Apartment, then we got even bigger problems because that's that's written by a first year law student or just my feeling, there's no way that could have come

out of Fueler's office, I mean Muller's office. I mean that that's just written like such a first year law student that um, you know, it's just it's just nonsensical. I mean, my my conclusion, and nothing's crazy at this point? Is this here at times or somebody just dropped them up and throw them out there and keep this issue a lot. But I cannot imagine I came from Mueller's office. I could promise you that that's shame that how it's

simplistic and that's written written like a lawyer. Yeah, people said that. And also I know even on up on the Drudge Report, they were saying that the the grammar was was a big issue. Right, yeah, it's just it's just he's just reading it. You can tell HER's not written by an experience litigator. I mean, they don't write like that, and and they're not gonna accomplish anything with it. But but why so, why would the New York Times go forward? Let's let's assume it is a forgery, right,

let's meaning that it's just somebody made up questions. What's the what do you think the purpose of of releasing it is? I mean, you know, because from my angle, it's it shows that they want to ask Trump a little bit of everything. So maybe he shouldn't sit and talk to them. Oh no, way, she didn't talked to him, absolutely not. I mean, incredible evening even have him sit down to talk to anybody. I mean, show us that evidence first, and then then maybe he'll talk. But now

he'd be crazy to do anything. I mean, and uh, but yeah, I don't know. Maybe New York Times are still trying to phone newspapers. I mean, it's allays been doing the whole time anyway, and whatever the hell they want up there. So that well, what do you say, Marks, And since you seem to have a handle on this one, what do you think about the allegation that Trump himself leak or not himself, but someone on the Trump team

leaked this out there? Well, yeah, I heard that too, I mean, you know, I mean that would you know that? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know that that one. I just don't see how that benefits Trump. I don't I don't really get. Uh, yeah, I have no Yeah, I mean, it wouldn't be it wouldn't be in the direction of Trump certainly. And how could you get how could you get the New York Times. By the way, if you're a Trump surrogate, you get the

New York Times to run with this. I find that hard. Yeah, yeah, exactly, I'm sure he'd be stipped out immediately. You know, only a few people can work on that document, So I think that's bs. Be honest with the guy. It it seems nothing more than just you know, somebody trying to you know, can't create this. We're getting close to a union. You know. If he doesn't sit down, then therefore he's goody and they don't know what they're playing. He shouldn't.

He shouldn't sit down and do it for sure. Thanks for calling in, Mark Matt in Pittsburgh. Hey, but great show. You're a great American. I actually worked in law enforcement, and key point that I'd like to make more public and people understand is when they went after Trump, they used search warrants, and they violated what attorneys never do

and go after their own attorneys. But they used the search warrant, not when to win at When they went after everyone else on the other side, with the Democrats

and Hillary and everything, it was always administrative subpoenas. And how I'd like to make people understand it if they don't know the difference, that is, if you have a sex defender who has kitty porn on a computer or phone or device, all law enforcement uses a search warrant, nobody sends them a letter in the mail and says, hey, we're coming to see on the fifteen because that evidence will be on But that's exactly what they did on

the other side with this. Wait, it did it on the other side, meaning how the Democrats when they went after Hillary. Oh yeah, Hillary, okay, yeah, not with not with not with Cohen and the Trump side. Yeah yeah, sure of course. Yeah, they gave Hillary every advantage in the process. I mean, that's I think been well well documented. Not just every advantage. I think they've been over backwards to make sure it was basically impossible to indict her. Um.

But I look, I appreciate yeah started it. Yeah, they had already decided it. Matt. I appreciate you calling him man, but we actually gotta run a new quick break. Thank you, sir. Um. When we come back, I have well, we definitely talking about the border, but I've got some of the thoughts view on the Proud situation too, So start right there. He's holding the line for America, Buck Sexton his back. People think of border security in very different ways, but

to me, it's very simple. Border security as national security. We see fifteen terrorists either planning to travel or actually traveling to the United States each day, known as suspected terrorists. So that means they're coming through our legal landport and uh an air that they could be coming across that border. The border is a national security issue, that's for sure. It's a lot more of that. It's also an economic issue, a political issue, cultural issue. It touches in so many

different parts of our lives. And the administration says a lot of very good things on immigration, on particularly illegal immigration and border security, but I can't say that we have really seen the results yet, and I think that the rhetoric is starting to really outpace the reality. And that's a problem. You have this caravan, which you will note I've been telling you it's not going to stop. It might dissipate a bit, as it has. But this

caravan now at the UH Tijuana San Diego border crossing. Um, you know, you have this caravan that's gotten there, and now you have some of them that are already being processed. Now there's a there's a lot of different angles I want to come out here, but one of them is just this. Just think about this for a moment. The way the media portrays this, it's people who are fleeing their country of origin because they just have no choice.

Asylum is not supposed to be for Hey, the country I come from is in is in a pretty crappy condition right now. Things are bad, So I just want to be an American instead. That's called an immigrant. It's happened millions and millions of times over long period in our country's history. Fine, but that would be people going through the immigration process. The asylum process is a separate wing if you well, it's it's a separate entry pathway for those to come into this country, and it's not

supposed to be. Well, the country I'm coming from has a lot of crime and it's a bad, a bad place right now. Because that's true of way too much of the world that can get here um either on foot or even coming to one of our ports of entry by boat or plane for us to be able to handle. Right, if it were just my country is not a place I want to live. I'd rather be

in America. We would be inundated. And what's the point of the legal immigration process then, you know, well, what's to stop somebody from saying, well, you know, yeah, I live in You know, I don't know Russia. Russia has got a high crime, right, all kinds of corruption. Oh, I can't go back to Russia because of all that stuff. If you think that I'm just assuming that people are gaming the system, I can. I can give you some

statistics courtesy of the Washington Post. Here the number of foreigners making a claim of quote credible fear rose almost nine hundred percent between two thousand and eight and twenty x twenty times more people are now coming to the country saying I have a credible fear of going back. This is a learned statement. This is what you say when you want to be in the process. And now

another way that they lie to us about this. And remember they're processing some of these asylum requests already from the caravan. Another part of this, though, is that you have those who are given asylum status, and then you just have those who get into the country and then just kind of disappear into the system. We have an enormous backlog of immigration cases in this country. No one is gonna be chasing down someone who just got denied asylum.

So that means that if you can get into the country at all, Uh, then you can in fact stay in the country. And this is why interior enforcement is so important. This is why e verifying the workplace is so important. You need to have a multifaceted, multi pronged approach to immigration, or else it's just one big con. You will have so many different ways to exploit the system and exploit all the different points of entry in it, literally and figuratively. Now, I know that the Justice Department

is highlighting that they are doing some enforcement here. That d J put out a release today that they have filed criminal charges against eleven different suspected members of the so called caravan. According this is Jeff Sessions today, and these are people who have entered illegally in violation of eight USC. One of these guys was previously deported and

he was charged with illegal reentry. So I just want to note that, you know, part of the caravan are people that have already been told you are not allowed to be in this country, and they are coming back. Why do you think that's happening? And this is just the one that we've heard about. Oh, because there's this moment now where people realize you show up and you convince somebody you have a credible fear and try to

play the system. And I would note, is there anyone in al Savador, for example, which has an astronomically high per capita murder rate? Is there anyone in UH Honduras that cannot claim credible fear? You know, I actually had a very interesting UH drive when I was in San Diego a few weeks ago. I know this is this now now I'm pulling a page from the Tom Friedman book. I was talking to my cab driver, but I was speaking with my uber driver, who was very eloquent and

talk to me about the neighborhoods of San Diego. And we did quite a drive around because I wanted to see it, and I think San Diego is very lovely. And I was talking to her and I could tell that she was of Latina extraction, and she was the Spanish speaker, and I didn't jump to any conclusions, but turned out she was Mexican and we we we had

a chat about it. I thought it was really interesting case I said to her, you know, so is it because she was surprised that I knew as much as I did, of course, about the levels of violence and cartel activity in Mexico because it doesn't get very much attention here anymore. And it's, as I've been telling you, as bad as it's ever been, seventeen worst year ever

in Mexico for murders. And I said, well, is this something where if you're in certain parts of the country you feel like it doesn't effect you, it's not really your problem, because you do see this in some major urban areas of this country with regard to crime within the city. I know people who live in Chicago, for example, and they say, well, yeah, Chicago has a really high murder rate, but it's all in the south and some

I think somewhat in the west of the city. Um in New York City, place I know very well from living there but also from working from the for the m y p D. Vast majority of the violence there is clustered in the South Bronx and a part of what is essentially central eastern Brooklyn. That's where you have most of the homicide still. And and so people who live in Manhattan, for example, or Staten Island, they don't they don't go to those areas, and so they don't

really pay much attention to it. So I asked her, I just wanted to test out the thesis. I said, well, so you know you you come from She told me she came from a pretty middle or upper mineral class background in Mexico by Mexican standards. I said, does this really affect you? What's going on there? As we were

talking with the violence? I said, or is it just if you don't live in uh Guerrero or I'm trying to think of some of the Uh yeah, some of the rougher areas right Tijuana actually, I mean you go down the Baja Peninsula, uh and Cabo and that whole area. Tremendous amount of violence there and uh I said, you know if you stay out of those areas, She said, oh, no,

it affects you everywhere. What do you mean that, Well, one of the things that goes on in Mexico I've never even heard of this before, is something called well, actually forget what the term is that you use, but

it's essentially speed kidnapping. What's that? Well, imagine that you get a phone call and they have to do they can do very minimal surveillance on you to get this information, right, I mean, think about how many people would know this just your number and that you have kids, your phone number, that you've got kids. Not hard to do. And they call you and they say, well, um, uh, you know

MS so and so. If you don't go to this sight and deposit five thousand dollars into a bank account in the next five minutes, uh, you'll never see your daughter again. Now, you might say, well, the person could just call it up, but are you going to test that theory out. They don't want a million dollars, they want five thousand dollars. You know, we've got her, she's across the street with us right now. We'll let her

go if you give us five thousand dollars. If you don't, we're gonna you know, we're gonna cut her hand off. Or if you don't, you're never gonna see her again. A really insidious addition to what we know of is kidnapping, which has been a terrible plague in Mexico for a long time. And she said, this has been happening, And I said, well, you know, I've never even heard of this. The idea of being they haven't kidnapped, they actually haven't

kidnapped anymore. But kidnapping is such a credible, credible threat we'll get back to this in a second credible thread in Mexico right now that if somebody calls you and says, look, just give us five thousand and everything, will you know we'll give you back your family member, I said, daughter, could be your husband, could be anyone. Be well, just in a panic pay it. It's just a scam. It's a particularly evil and vicious scam. But it's just a scam,

and that's how bad thing. And then she also told me that you know, you'll see that she saw people in broad daylight who were in fact abducted, were kidnapped, and you see dead bodies. And this happens in some of the major cities of Mexico. It just happens, and it's a part of a of an day to day life there that I don't think it is nearly reported on enough, and and in our country, so I try

to tell you about it here. I find it very interesting that I think that most Americans know a lot more about this scale and scope of violence in Syria, for example, then they do about what's going on in Mexico. Now I'm not I know Mexico hasn't had five hundred thousand people killed in the last six seven years, it's had probably close to a hundred thousand though, and it's

right next door. And it's a problem for us, a national security and economic and h and and cultural issue in this country that we don't see them able to really grasp the full extent and weight of UH. I bring all this up one because I just want to share that with you. There was eye opening to hear that from somebody who had just been living in Mexico until I think about six seven months ago, she said.

And also because can anyone in Mexico now, I know there's designations and right now all Salvador and Honduras is under some designation that you know Central American countries are, which is why they're moving in these caravans through Mexico. But if it's just really about my country has a lot of violence and crime, and I don't want to go back. Can anyone in Mexico credibly claim that they can? You know, they shouldn't have to go back credible fear.

I have a credible fear of the cartels. I don't want to be a Mexican anymore. I'm just trying to look at this from the perspective of what are we really doing right now with our asylum policy and what is it really based on. You can leave the Central American countries because they're really bad shape. There are a lot of places that are really bad shape. Why is this the designation that's being used right now? And Trump made a lot of noise and talked a lot about

how he wasn't going to allow this. And now I look at the processing of these immigrants and you've got to think, are these asylum seekers? Notice that they always call them migrants. I don't think that that's an accident. I've always thought that the term migrant was made to make it seem like, you know, they're just moving from

one job to another. You think of migrant workers. No, these are people that are trying to come into the country through, in this case, a legal process that I think they're scamming, though many of them are scamming the legal process. Uh. And it's a a loophole. It's the exploitation of a system that needs an overhaul and that

Congress just won't touch. I think the cowardice in Congress on immigration is only superseded by their cowardice on spending and the debt, which nobody's really serious about dealing with it all. It's just a complete joke. I mean, one day I'll be sitting here doing a radio show for you when the stock market has plaunged thirty in a very short period of time and everyone's freaking out because of you know, rising interest rates and what are we gonna do about the dead? And how is growth gonna

make uh? And then then we can actually talk about the Until then that nobody wants to hear about it, right, No Republican is serious about cutting spending, and Democrats feel like spending us into oblivion is a good idea. But immigration is a close second for just complete congressional cowardice. They don't want to deal with that, they don't want to talk about it. And the asylum process, as you see it here is just another way to get around

the system. Alright, eight four, eight to five, Stay with me, team. We got David in Allentown, Pennsylvania wants to get on the action. Hey David, what what obligation does the United States have to grant asylum If they haven't asked Mexico for it, shouldn't they be asking the first country to come to form for asylum? Isn't there an interesting point.

It also came up, by the way, when you had all of these refugees leaving Syria who were making their way through Turkey, which is a pretty developed and reasonably well off country itself, and wanted to go not just to Europe. But they were like, no, no, no, we don't want Greece, we don't want Bulgaria. Uh, we want Sweden. You know, they're they're like they're picking, like from a catalog. I want asylum in either Germany or Sweden where they have a really nice, cushy welfare state. That was the

decision that was being made in many cases. Well, would be interesting to note the international law is um in this case. Yeah, I can't. I can't speak to the

international law. It's a it's a very good question. I mean I would I would assume the Mexican government would say, well, I mean, who knows what they're gonna say, but I would guess they'd say something like, uh, you know, we we don't have a program in place for central I mean that they try to keep and they have for a long time, try to limit the entry in New Mexico,

particularly of Guatemalans. And there's been some tension because the Mexican UH, Mexican authorities have been trying to keep Guatemalans out of the country. And I think you can actually do a pretty you can do a pretty long stint in Mexican prison if you are called in the country working illegally as a Central American. But if you're just

passing on through to go to America, no problem. By the way, if if Mexico was really trying to help us out, think about how different the border security situation would really be. Sure, well, I wouldn't hang a big fox to be you sign on the border fence and say turn around and ask ask the guy behind you because we have no abligation. Well, right right now, we have this law in place, and thank you for calling in, David. We got this law in place. Until that changes, Um,

you're gonna have more of this. Remember it starts with a caravan of a hundred getting a lot of news coverage. The next caravan could be thirty thousand, who knows. Remember when the unaccompanied minor surge happened some years ago. You had a huge spike and all these quote unaccompanied miners showing up at the border. Um, I wanted to. I gotta talk you about Iran because that got so much

attention yesterday. That'll be coming up in a second. But first, just I was happy to see that Matt Groening, who is the creator of the hit multi decade. Uh, I was gonna say, I don't know, cartoon. There you go, the Simpsons multi decade extravaganza, There you go, the Simpsons. Uh. He's saying over the whole controversy that, you know what, people just like to quote pretend they're offended. Nice to see somebody who's who's clapping back here, you know, who's

had enough. I'm glad that the Simpsons is not completely you know, after that whole Hankers area thing where look, he's an actor. I get it, he doesn't want the heat. But don't throw in the towel on on a beloved Simpsons character just because of some social justice words. Total nonsense. So uh, high five for macroning of the Simpsons. Global Verification Network is the best in the background investigation and vetting business, and on top of it, they are dual certified,

veteran owned. Global Verification is all headquartered here in the US, so unlike a lot of the other guys in this business. They don't outsource your data, and they don't outsource the work on it either. They keep it here on US based servers, and they have US based personnel headquarters in Chicago and spread out throughout the country that will handle your case. Whenever you're talking about working with risk mitigation experts, you really want people that you can get on the

phone and that will handle your case with care. That's Global Verification comes in. Go to my g VN dot com. That's my g v N dot com or call eight seven seven six nine five nine. That's eight seven seven six nine five eleven seventy nine Global Verification Network. Leave no stone on turn. Buck Sexton Mission Decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Mag Noor mistake, American, You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show.

Activit analysts. Sexton No. A lot of fall out after yesterday's uh NET and Yahoo presentation hit the air waves. People are saying that the US has verified a lot of this and ports are it is. It is as we thought that the Irans are very much in the let's wait and get nukes when we can business and have been for a long time. The Obama administration was interesting.

Some of you say, I remember our caller yesterday that the whole intent is to create a pathway, really in a pathway that can't be altered for Iron to get nukes, Which isn't that crazy when you read some of the scholarship on the left on this issue, didn't you have? I think you had Chris Quota today. Guys, see if you can pull this for me. I think he was pushing I forget if it wasnt Yaho. I just saw the headline as I was doing all my reds today

for whether Israel has nukes? Didn't that happen today? Am I crazy? I think that might have happened? Maybe I imagine it. Producer might tell me if you see that. But here's where we are with this whole thing. You got, obviously Net and Yahoo, who's trying to push as much as possible to get United States de certify the Iran nuclear deal. Play three. Iran is gobbling up one country after after the other. It's threatening to annihilate as well. It's trying to put its army in Syria UH in

the service of a tyrannical regime. It's putting the precision guided munitions in Lebanon. That means that they can fire rockets into Israel that can hit the office I'm speaking and everything else. Uh, they're trying to foment terrorism in Gaza. They're firing rockets into Riyad, into Saudi Arabia right now from Yemen, which they are also seeking to conquer. This tyrannical anti American regime should not have nuclear weapons. You're familiar with the b B point of view on this, clearly.

I would want to note that Obama chief National security propagandist Ben Rhodes responded earlier today to all this hullabaloo with the following quote by reminding everyone of the well known pre Iran deal, Street Net and Yahoo inadvertently made the case for why the Iran Deal needs to stay in place. Without it, all the restrictions on Iran's program and the inspections regime that verify compliance go away. A

few things here. First of all, the pre Iran Deal history UH is not well known in the way that he's suggesting it is. And the notion that UH violating right, violating the initial terms of the agreement. Let me put it this way, Here's the way I think about this. Iran had to come clean in order for this agreement to be complied with, and what we now know from the net and Yahoo presentation is that they did not

come clean. This is kind of like if you've got a job and you lied on the resume for the job, and then after you'd had the job for a few months, somebody said, hey, hold on a second, you you lied about all your previous work experience. He said, yeah, but doesn't that prove that you want to keep me in this job though, right, because otherwise some really bad stuff

can happen. No, that doesn't really make sense. Right. We are here under false under a false premise that there has been an honesty in the case of the job, and now in the case of the Iran nuclear program, that j c p O a Joint Comprehensive plan of action most boring acronym. Ever, and I know some boring acronyms.

Let me tell you, UM so I understand the need to or the the desire to include some parts of this Iran deal um that weren't included, to turn up the heat, the pressure, and to try and uh, remember, I don't just want better Rannie behavior on the nuclear deal.

I think we should be pushing for Iran not to do the things that it's doing across the Middle East right now, that that's where the real problem lies in the short term, Iran and Yemen, Iran and Syria, in Iraq, in name a name a country right now in the Middle East, and you'll be able to find some destroy the Irani in hand or intention at work. So that's all parts. But then I also get this other You hear this other point of view here, and you had you had Pat Buchanan, I haven't heard it. I feel

like Pat hasn't really gotten much attention a while. I haven't really seen much of patting the headlines, you know. But Pat Buchanan's out there, and he's making the following case play six. Maybe has been crying wolf for decades, and US intelligence agencies in two thousand seven and again in two thousand and eleven said with high confidence quote that they have no evidence of a nuclear weapons program

in Iran. Subsequent to that, we had the deal. Now, if Iran has a nuclear weapons program and is working on it and it's secret, that would be an abject failure on the part of American intelligence Natanya who would respect wants the United States to fight a war against Iran on Israel that he's talking about fighting a war my country, getting into another world. It was Buchanan. I

didn't realize I was actually on Shawan show earlier. Um, I gotta I agree on the point about how we're not, you know, unless unless we think Iran is about to hit us with something, and I mean like in a matter of hours or days, maybe we cannot get involved in a war where they're on we We absolutely cannot. I mean, you see the way this is played out Iraq, Afghanistan. It is a it is a nightmare scenario. It's a

terrible idea for many many different reasons. And and I do not want to get dragged into it a fight with her on either now. I think that's many many steps down the pathway, right, that's not something that we're talking about right now with the nuclear certification issue, because there was a false choice offered by the Obama administration, which was this deal or war? What about the status quo before of sanctions and international isolation on Iran? Why

wasn't that an option? It was, but the Obama administration decided to throw throw it aside um. In part for ideological reasons. They want to bring Iran into the community of nations. They think Iran was uh the victim of some bad American foreign policy in the past, you know, pre seventy nine pre Iranian Revolution foreign policy. And you know, I think that they also obviously wanted a very clear legacy, as I've been saying, we were all in the legacy item for Obama. That was a big reason for the

push here um. But you know, I don't think I don't think that the choices here are continue with this rewar that all said, there cannot be a U. S. Military incursion, invasion, any of that stuff into Iran. It just it cannot happen. And we need to be very clear that we don't get pushed closer and closer to that in some way. And that's I do feel like that needs to be said. So in that sense, I think of Buchanan is making a valid making a valid

point um. But it may be a bit early. But is it really ever too early to say, hey, we're not going to war in that country. We're just not doing it. We've been through so much already. I mean, you see what happened in Afghanistan earlier the week. It barely gets to mention in most of the most of the major news sites. But you have a massive double suicide bombing in Cobble, nine journalists killed. Afghanistan. I think

I started that. Trump said we're getting out. We should get out, we should go leave behind what we have to leave behind in order to support the obligations that we've already made. But this, this has gotta this has got to come to a conclusion one way or another. Uh And, And I'm just being honest with you. There is no strategy to win an Afghanistan that has not been tried five times before. Under preview is leadership in country,

There just isn't. So what are we doing exactly? What what's the purpose of of this continued mission in that country? And I think people would start to I've heard this all. I've heard this now for almost a decade since the Obama administration did its first Afghanistan interview. I know I'm getting down a rabbit hole here with Afghanistan. Maybe I'll spend more time on that later in the week, but

it's time to go. It really is. I know people are worried about what happened in the rock and the vacuum. And at some point, though, we can't be we can't be all that's left between complete chaos and collapse in the country. And Uh, I think we've reached that point. I think it's time for us to really think long and hard about withdrawing any considerable US military combat presence from Afghanistan. I think we're at seven or eight thousand right now. So on on Iran, though, I think the

Trump administration is do I make a prediction today? Um, I think you got a figure at this point they're gonna de certify the deal, right otherwise, what's all this noise about. And I'm just gonna say this now, so I'm on the record with all of you listenings. I try to keep it real, try to keep it one. Uh. We've seen now on immigration on the dead on a number of issues. On this omnibus bill, great stuff, great talking from the administration, but the action is not exactly

followed the rhetoric. And on this Iran deal, you know, we've got everyone saying it's the worst deal ever. Uh. Trump saying it's the worst deal ever, should never been done. That means he's got to de certify, right, I mean that the time has come because you know, Pelosi thinks she's gonna be Speaker of the House starting in the fall. We're gonna beet a whole different political world this time

next year, as we're talking whole different universe. So the presidential or or the the political power the president has a mass needs to be used, needs to be used now. Condi Rice, by the way, way in on this one. Uh, you know, we don't hear that much from former Bush administration officials. Here's what she said about a play five. I wouldn't have signed this agreement to begin with. I've said that before. I think it was a weak agreement,

particularly on verification. Uh. It allows Iran to break out after a specific period of time. I probably would have stayed in for alliance management reasons more than anything else. But I don't think that it's the end of the world if the administration leaves the agreement. Clearly right, trying to the end of the world. You got a lot of people out there saying the sky is falling on this if if we were to have a change in the policy here. But I just I just don't buy it.

I really don't I think that if we were to decertify, Trump will be in a position kind of like what he's in with Kim Jongo. Now, which is our right. Let's really talk this through. Let's really negotiate this one. What are the Iranian's gonna do? Send missiles to bad actress throughout the Middle East? They already doing that back up the Assad regime creates greater secturnal strife in Iraq, be the the silent hand and the the arm behind

the who the militia and Yemen. I mean, you know, they're already doing all that, folks, training, equipping, subsidizing, Hesbellah, They're doing all that, and they're doing it in a way that shows they do not have any regard for what we think about what's going on in that neck of the wood. So I think it's probably a good idea. I think that this is it is. It is time. Um, but we will have to We'll have to see. But yeah, no,

no war, no wrong. I'll tell you this. If I had it, let's say it was five or ten years down the line and I had well, now that wouldn't be enough time. Oh gosh, I can think about this. Uh, if I ever have to sit down with Buck Jr. My as yet imaginary son, and he says, you know, Dad, I want to sign up. I want to go fight in Iran. I'm telling you right now, I'm telling him no, no fighting, No unless Iran has attacked this or something. But you're not going over there to try and topple

the top of the Mullas and rebuild that country. Because my youth was changed and my life, the course of my life was changed by trying to help deal with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that we had, and I would say none of this going over there and trying to make a better country for people that aren't making it for themselves, just not having not having our young men and women from you know, Florida, Virginia, Maine, Kansas, all the way out to California north and south down

and around. Nope, not doing it. So I do think that there's a need to at least voice that concern in the interim. Uh, if you want to give us a ring eight four four eight to five eight four four, Buck, we'll talk to you about Roseanne on the flip side here,

I'm not sure yet. I'll sort of sort of do a grab bag coming up here to but I do want to know the third hour, we're gonna talk about may Day, a deep dive into uh the history of may Day and also how you still have why the the left still plays this game of you know, maybe socialism, maybe it's kind of a good thing because they do it um and and then I have an update for you on the bro coll story. That actually was Brian

Williams home broke Call. That's broke call. There's Brian Williams who's kind of up there, and there's home broke Call who's down here. And then there's Adriana who's like over here, very different sounds from the brock car and the Brian Williams say, we can get we move all over the place here, We'll be right back. I mentioned before that there was an exchange between Mean Chris Cuomo CNNs bro in Chief, Hey Chris Cuomo to bro uh and Prime

Minister net and Yahoo of Israel. Here's how it went played. Yes, no question for you. Does Israel have nuclear capabilities and nuclear weapons? Yes or no. We've always said that we won't be the first to introduce it, so we haven't introduced it. But that's not an answer to the question do you have them or going to country? It's as good and answers you're gonna get. But I'll tell you one thing, Chris, and I think it's important. You know,

Iran signed MPT. Iran signed all sorts of commitments. Iran said that they don't have this nuclear weapons program, and Iran calls daily for the annihilation of my country. First of all, Cuomo here, this is amazing. It is known that Israeli policies they will not discuss the issue of their nuclear program. They want to talk about it. So what does he think he's gonna accomplished by doing that? Hey, you got nukes or what? Hey, I want to know you got like the missiles with the the go boom,

with the mushroom cloud or what. But he didn't get an answer because of course he wasn't going to get an answer because we already know where's Reel stands on that. But I think the mentality forget about the stupidity of the question for a moment. I mean, look, you can ask, but we just know that the Prime Minister is not gonna answer. So this is like you know, asking any number of questions where you're you're sure or not so so. Israel is already the record saying they won't the government

will not discuss this. But yeah, ask anyway, just to remind everybody that they won't discuss it. I mean, he's allowed to do it. I just think it's pretty pointless. But then there's also a mentality beneath the two, isn't there Like, hey, like, well, Israel you got nukes, maybe Ran should get nukes too. Seems to be to me, at least what he's trying to get at there. Um. And this is where you start to see some of

the ideological reasons behind the Iran deal and urging. They meaning the left, the Democrats, and the so called progressive intelligentsia. They think that really all nations are morally morally equivalent. Yeah, we all have our good stuff and our bad stuff. We're all basically pretty close to the same. Is this a smart thing? No? Is it true? No? But they kind of think this, and they are much closer to thinking that there's a moral parity between Israel and Iran

than they're willing to admit publicly. The left in this country thinks that Israel is. They will say things like Israel's that apartheid state Israel should be. Uh, there's the whole divestiture campaign to divest Israel of of you know, trying to find waste wage economic warfare against the state of Israel. So don't those are just the the symptoms of the larger disease among on the American left side of things, thinking that Israel's inn a press or state,

a vestige of colonialism. All of this is churning, believe, beneath the surface. And so that's how you get to a point where the Israeli uh nuclear program in the eyes of some journalists, and a possible Irani nuclear program or in any way, shape or form somewhat similar equivalent. You know, maybe they should get nukes too. Is at the end of the day that the real which I would notice what some of you have been telling me, You think that Obama wanted to make sure that it

was impossible to prevent Iran from getting news. Um, I don't think that's I don't think that's the case, but I'm I'm open to being persuaded that somewhere in his head that might have been the thought process, because I know it's true if some leftists, I know there's a piece in the Council on Foreign Relations Foreign Affairs Journal. Now, I know I'm getting wonky here about exactly that, Yeah, Iran should get nukes, and then there'd be strategic parody

with Israel. This is believed by many more people on the left than you will hear about. And I think with Cuomo there you've got a little tap, a little a little sense of a Ron's got nukes, Maybe Israel get nukes? Do The American left is defined by hypocrisy as much as anything else these days. We know this, you know this. And on the issue of school choice and just our education system in general, it's hard to

look at these people and take them seriously anymore. You have these mantras on the left about well, you need more money for teachers. Teachers are our future. Yeah, yeah, teachers, And what they really mean is that there needs to be more tax dollars going to teachers, unions, UM and the various bureaucrats who sit atop the educational system who have great gigs by the way, because they're basically unfire able. They're paid way more than they would make for comparable

hours in the private sector. But it's always you know, oh, don't you care about the children, Well, I care about the children, but not making administrators more money and giving them bigger pensions than everything else. And we're just lied to constantly about the education system. On top of that, we are lied to about what people really do when it comes to their own children and the school system

and school choice. There have been some excellent examples of this, I mean, really amazing stuff in recent years, and one of them had to do with a plan in a part of Brooklyn, New York. Now, for those who don't know, Brooklyn maybe the most left wing, hipster part of any city on the East Coast. I mean, you know, there's a reason Hillary's campaign headquarters was in Brooklyn, right And there is a part of Brooklyn called Dumbo, uh down

under Manhattan Bridge overpast. I believes what it stands for because I'm a New Yorker, so I know these things, although I'm a swamp dweller right now in d C. And there are only two high schools there. One high school was majority minority and I believe majority black, and the other majority white. One high school had very high

test scores, the other very low test scores. Well, if you're a leftist, if you're a Democrat, don't you think that the obvious answer them would be to do what Democrats say should happen all the time, which is, well, let's further integrate the schools. Let's let's push for diversity. They were screaming bloody murder in Dumbo. This is maybe

two or three years ago. Over this, we have another incident of this, and this time it is in really the heart of the Democrat wealth and power structure in Manhattan, particularly with regard to the media, which is the Upper west Side, I mean the Upper east Side, which is you know, look, I actually grew up on the Upper east Side, so I not really well, but the Upper west Side is where you're gonna find the people who are UM running CNN, the people who are running ABC,

the people who are making these decisions about what's going on the news and everything else. Uh, because the bureaus CNN, ABC are on the Upper west Side, are close to it, some of them are kind of in Midtown. You think though, that this absolutely blue is blue can get and very wealthy, very elite part of our largest city would be really open to the idea of increasing Yes, that's right, diversity

in the school system. On the Upper West Side. You would think that, given how devoted they are to diversity for everyone else and how much lip service they give to the need for diversity in schools, the need for diversity in hiring, that they would love the opportunity to

lead from the front on this issue. But recently, uh, some audio made the rounds or video actually too, made the rounds of what it was like at a at a school board meeting when the topic of increasing diversity in some of these Upper West Side public schools came up. Here's how some of the parents reacted. Play clip eighteeneral you were and you didn't get that what you needed? Or like you're telling them school it's not going to educate. You can just say you've been educated. Sucks? Is that

what the deal wants to say? Now, I'm sympathetic with this woman in a sense, right because, yeah, I think that people should have vouchers. I think there should be school choice. I think that there should be uh that you should have a much greater say than just you live in this district, this is what your zone for, this is where you're going. But I would I can't help but note that most if not all, of the parents that are at these teacher these not teacher conferences,

but these school board meetings. Parent teacher conference is something else. Are Democrats just based on the party registration of the Upper West Side? Okay, it is. It is the stronghold of progressivism in Manhattan, in New York City, And yet here you are and there's by the way, that was just one bit of audio we played. There's tremendous pushback now and they're covering it in local news there, but they don't want to cover it too much because it

shows the hypocrisy at work here. The same people who will vote for Democrats, who will say that the school system should just always be pushing for diversity. I mean, diversity is one of the primary talking points you will hear among progressives on any issue. But when it comes to their own kids, all of a sudden, when it comes to their own children, it's a little different. When it comes to how they feel about their own kids being in an environment with increased diversity, there is far

less enthusiasm for this, all of a sudden. And I have to note that the one of the principles or chancellors or whatever is I think the superintendent it was he whatever. I think. He's a superintendent of this school system. See, there's it's tough to keep it straight. Principal, chancellor, superintendent, you know, school board, advisor, etcetera. I mean, there's all these people that are getting paid by the taxpayer to shuffle a lot of paper out and say it's all

about the kids. But here's his response to this room full of parents on the Upper West Side who are worried about diversity in there in the schools for their kids. Right, they're suggesting, and let's just be very clear about this, these parents who are so upset, are saying, WHOA hold on. If you make my school a greater proportion of or my kids school a greater proportion minority, the school is going to be worse academically. That is what those parents

are saying. That is their fear. That is their statement. I'm just pointing it out, but they're saying, whoa whoa more diversity meaning more non white students at the school in the Upper west Side means a worse academic environment. That is what they are claiming. Here is what the

principle or whatever he has said to them. Nineteen. There are kids that are tremendously disadvantaged that I would love to be able to offer somebody mentioned five thousand dollars worth of tutoring for to raise their test course, and to compare these students and say, my whole already advantaged kids eats more advantage didn't to be kept away from

those kids is tremendously offensive to me. Tremendously offensive, he says. I. I know what this principle, who I'm sure is a died in the wool deep blue progressive, I know what he's saying to these folks. He's saying, Hey, guys, come on, step up. You know, now is your chance to atone for your white privilege. You know, you're a bunch of Hillary voters, probably a bunch of Bernie voters. I'm sure they all loved Obama in that room, all voted for Obama two times. But now is your chance to really

put your money where your mouth is. And their mouths are saying really, really astonishing things like, oh, I don't want diversity in my child's school. They say, we've got enough diversity. Maybe a little less diversity would be good. We'll hold on a second, folks. I thought diversity was always a good thing. According to Democrats. I thought that they love diversity. They wanted for you, They wanted for

your children's schools. They want the Department of Education in Washington, d C. To be making policy that affects you wherever you are in the country. Now, if your child goes to public school and diversity is you know, the strength of the school system, they will tell you, Oh, but no, they they seem to have a problem with this. We've all been told so much about our white privilege and the need to check that privilege. But the parents in that room that they seem to want to hold on

to that privilege, whatever it may be. They're they're not willing to give that up. And this is an experiment that I can tell you plays out time and again in so many ways across the country with Democrats who talk this big game about how they want diversity and they want uh, multiculturalism in the schools. You know, they want English as a second language, they want as many oh my gosh, the more refugee and asylum claiming families and students into the country the better, just not in

their neighborhood. I think we all see what's at work here. I think we see the hypocrisy, and we see what in if other people were doing this right, if you listen to this wherever you are, though I know a lot of live in cities that are very blue. But if you were saying this about diversity in the school these parents on the Upper West Side or in Dumbo, or I'm sure in l A or Chicago, you name it, they would say that when you were claiming was racist.

But for them, it's just they don't want to cheat their children out of the best education possible. They're just doing the best for their kids. Oh, maybe other people take that approach to Maybe school choice would be better for everyone. Maybe empowering parents of any ethnic background, minority students, white students, anybody to make choices about where they go to school would be better for everyone. It would force

the schools to be better. Maybe that's one solution. That's instead of sacrificing other people's kids for the diversity worship that has been that has become such a central feature of the Democrat party. That would require some honesty, right, That would require looking at the situation for what it is, not as Democrats wish it to be. But you gotta I'm telling you go and check this out. Um, you had seventeen middle schools, uh that we're supposed to be

reserving their seats for low scoring students. That's that's one way they're going to do this and uh to try to increase diversity. And the parents at these schools were freaking out and their Democrats no surprise. In a few minutes, team, I'm gonna give you the background of May Day, which is a history that I like to tell here on the show. Take you back to the Haymarket massacre, the origins of the workers movement in Chicago, and I think you'll you'll enjoy some of that. Will do a bit

of a deep dive into it. I just first wanted to note though, that while here May Day is kind of a wawaw situation, the news from the day shows you that overseas it is it is still very much a thing that gets the radical left out and mobilized. You had May Day protesters that we're marking International Workers Day, which, as we will discuss, is what it's called in the rest of the world. Um, it's and it's it is a socialist holiday. And you had marchers that were holding

banners of of stalin. Now you know that there's there's a part of me that that initially sees this and says, perhaps this is just the result of tremendous ignorance, historical ignorance, not knowing, not understanding what Stalin really did. I would be willing to bet that none of these Brits. Oh and in Paris there were also riots today, so it's not just it's not just Britain. There are other countries too. There's all over the place. You had anarchists smashing windows,

looting and rioting in Paris. So I don't think that that this is limited to any one place. It's all across Europe. But there's this historical ignorance that I would assume is the result of well, a lot of people holding up Stalin photos and banners who don't read much in the way of books, and haven't read very much, don't know things. Um and sure that's true. I doubt any of these people in London, in Paris, or any of the little kind of piddley, unimportant marches that have

occurred in this country today as well. They haven't read The Great Terror by Robert conquests. They don't understand the full depth of Stalin's decool accusation policy, where there was the liquidation of farmers really as a class that occurred.

The cool Locks were kind of the peasant farmers, how that was an official policy of the Soviet state, and the mass executions of of peasants that occurred during the Great Terror, and then the purges that occurred within the Soviet regime and the military more specifically and then amounted to millions of people, millions and millions of people killed

by Stalin Um. There's a part of me that would like to think that these imbeciles in London and Paris and elsewhere marching with Stalin banners with Soviet flags just don't know this. But there are these radicals that you'll see, and I'm gonna talk to you in a few minutes about the yes, the backstory, the history of May Day in this country. But also there's a New York Times

piece on how Marx was right editorial piece. But there are PhD s, There are ostensibly really educated people out there who still cling to this and who must know the history, at least in broad strokes of what happened in the Soviet Union, what happened in China. Uh Mao's Great Leap Forward was one of the greatest man made disasters. In fact, some argue the greatest man made disaster by any one government to its own people in history. Uh sixty million dead, they asked him forty to sixty They

can't really intract. But but that's like the number that died in all of World War two, and many of them died through starvation. And if you go back and read about the Great Leap Forward, under how there was a tremendous amount of a violence that occurred. Because when people are starving, they get desperate. And when the Party apparatus was dealing with millions of starving peasants in the in the countryside, what they did to maintain order was

just the height of brutality and savagery. I have to think that these PhDs that are pro marks, that are pro communism know about this stuff. So then I guess the only way to explain their thinking is that they think that that cost was worth it, that at some point there will be a glorious and beautiful future for us. All that will only come through I suppose, more bloodshed, more loss, more starvation, but at some point we will reach this worker's paradise that was promised by Lennon and

Marx and others. This utopia, um the you know that the the proletariat's paradise will be awaiting or I don't know. It's a fundamentalism. Really, it is a a delusion that relies on all kinds of blindness, and the blindness of what's going on today too. I mean, Venezuela is a country that I think is such a clear marker of what happens when people take a redis a redistributionist view and a status view. And remember, Venezuela had good intentions.

It was a social justice warrior run country, and it was run right into the ground and now right into the sewer beneath it. It is in desperate circumstances. So we don't even have to look back into history. You can just do a Google searcher. Look at the news today. How is it possible that you have these idiots marching in praise of the Soviet Union and pray, and not not a handful, not a couple here, and there thousands of them breaking things. This radical left element that I

would note also exists in this country. In Antifa, you have the the great irony of antipas. Of course they use fascist tactics to oppose fascism, but um Marxism has killed so many people over the twentieth century, and we'll kill so many more of thee unless we actually stand up to this. I'm gonna tell you about the history of May Day though when we come right back. Welcome to our three of the Buck Sexton Show. And I

would say happy May Day to all of you. But once you know more of the back story of how we got may Day, how this became something of a holiday, you feel a little different about it. It is in fact a socialist tradition, socialist holiday. But before I get into that, some more necessary history of of this whole thing. First of all, uh, may Day is also an international distress call, and I always know people say, well, does

that have to do with May one? The answer is no. The call out so when someone's in a plane, may day, may Day that comes from the French vine a day which means come and help me. And as you know, this is repeated three times if a plane is going down there's any any problems. Back in seven the International Radio Telegraph Convention of Washington made may Day the official voice distressed call So that's when things are really really bad. The most serious call out you can put out there

is May Day may Day. But let's talk about Socialists Workers Day, the May Day that we're currently in. And before we even get into that, I want to give you a little bit of a of an additional history of how we got to the the one incident, the Haymarket affair, that led to the commemoration on May one of May Day. See it happened back in Chicago. It

all started in Chicago in the eighties. Chicago was a totally booming city, but you can go a bit before that to get a sense of how quickly the workers struggles of Chicago came to be based on the incredible growth of the city of Chicago itself. The ways, Chicago is the French version of the Miami and Illinois tribes word Chicaqua, which means stinky onion, not to be confused with millie woke, which means the good land. So that's

because of the plants along the Chicago River. So for some of you, Chicago really means uh, stinky town in the Native American tongue. Initially, but there were only some small settlements there. It was a military post called Fort Dearborn. The Brits destroyed that one back in the War of eighteen twelve, but it was an eighteen thirty The Illinois legislature set up a town that by eighteen thirty three only had three fifty residents. And that's remember Chicago's now

America's third largest city. But as it's true in real estate, only three things really matter. Location, location, location, Chicago was on a great piece of land, and so the boom happened with incredible speed. There. They already had the lake traffic because of the opening of the canal in eighteen

forty eight. So the Great Lakes traffic that connected the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico with Chicago at the nexus meant that at a time before automobile travel, when things could really only go over river, at least in bulk, it was a phenomenal time to be in in that region of the country, in that particular portion of the country on the Chicago River. So in eighteen sixties he had a city of a hundred nine thousand. By the n eighteen eighties it was at a million.

See what a ten x increase in about thirty years in the city of Chicago. Back in eighteen seventy one, there's a huge fire. It burned actually from a Sunday until a Tuesday. This is bad when things were all made of wood, most not everything that is are mostly made of wood. So you had a quarter of all the homes in Chicago burned down. And that's what allowed, though, for the city planning to occur, where you've got all

these parks now along the Chicago Lakefront. But then the railroads came along, and that's when things got really really intense. The boom really hit hard in Chicago because Chicago was the hub of the railroad network that reached the Pacific in eighteen sixty nine. So you had all these raw materials from the newly open West that were being shipped

to the East. And guess what, where you have raw materials and the transport of them, you have a need for manufacturing, or rather you have an opening for manufacturing. So you had all these factories that popped up in Chicago with just vast amounts of new workers, and a

lot of these workers were in fact immigrants. So the immigrants to Chicago in the eighteen seventies eighteen eighties were first Germans actually, and then you had a lot of Irish Catholics during the Potato famine, and then you had Scandinavians, and then you had Polish, Italians, Jews, and then it was after the First World War that you had the great migration of African Americans to Chicago. But this is why the city of Chicago became a major center of

the labor movement. You had all these factories, and you had a lot of new immigrants showing up, and those immigrants came from countries where oh yes, indeed, you had already had the spread of some Marxist socialist, redistributionist ideas, and they brought them. They brought those ideas with them. Now, I'm not saying that it wasn't a hard time to be a worker in Chicago. Back in the eighteen eighties, you had a sixty hour, six day a week work

week was pretty standard. So there there was a labor and management conflict that was constantly flaring up. There. You had firings and walkouts and workers would be blacklisted, and newspapers fake news no surprise here, played a big role in all these tensions. Most of the papers, though, because you know who's buying papers and who owns papers. We're always taking the side of the capitalists. And so you had radical leftists and this is a part of the

Chicago history. I think it's really interesting radical leftists that began producing their own publications. So they created these underground workers newspapers which really basically commy ish uh. And you had one in particularly our Bitter Zeitung, which was edited by August Species. Looks like spies, but I think it's species, although I don't know where they would write about this workers struggle. And remember we think of the major threats now against us, well, we are in an era of

concern over ge hottest terrorsm and infiltration. But back in the eighties eighteen nineties, it was actually anarchists who were very closely ideologically tied to radical socialists that were the big bad guys on the block. Remember nineteen o one, you had the assassination of William McKinley that occurred on

September six, nineteen o one by Leon Chaw Goosh. And you know, Theodore Roosevelt went and said that after the assassination, he said the following, when compared with the suppression of anarchy, every question since sinks into insignificance. The anarchist is the enemy of humanity, the enemy of all mankind, and his

is a deeper degree of criminality than any other. No immigrant is allowed to come to our shores if he has an anarchist and no paper published here or abroad should be permitted in circulation in this country if it propagates anarchist opinions. That was from the White House back in eight Teddy Roosevelt. So just remember the Some people say, oh, you know, we can't have any we can't have any

ideological tests, we can't have any test for immigration. Well, actually we've had numerous ideological tests stretching back to periods in our history when we really didn't want the infiltration of communists and socialists into this country because of the very real subversions they were engaged in. Uh And there was also a couple of very big anarchist bombings that came after that. Los Angeles Times was bombed in nineteen

ten of that that killed twenty one newspaper employees. Although people weren't really at the time sure about it, um they were labor radicals, anarchists, socialists, wasn't really it wasn't really clear who was behind that at the time. And then in nine twenty you had that big bomb on Wall Street twelve o one pm on September six, a horse drawn carriage kind of the I E D or the v I E ED of its day, pulled up

a five hundred pounds of dynamite cast iron weights. Those were used as a shrapnel, and it was an enormous I E D. And that was anarchists that killed thirty people and then eight died of wounds thereafter, and damaged the stock exchange pretty badly. And that was carried out by a faction of Italian and anarchists called Galleanists. All about they were all about labor struggles and anti capitalist agitation. So the Convention of Labor, now why am I telling

you about us? Well, the Convention of Labor Movements in eighty four decided that May one, six would be gay would be the beginning of the eight hour work day. They also prepared for a general strike, which happened in cities across the country. And this is where then we will get into what happened in Chicago, and therefore more of the backstory of how we got to the celebration

of May Day. That became a thing that's kind of faded, but people still talk about it now, certainly in socialist circles. I will give you that and uh and more, what was the violent incident commemorated on May one? And what what does it mean when we think about socialism today. We'll get to that coming up. All right, we're back with our discussion of the history of May Day. My friends and I wanted to just you know, I think it's important because you've got pieces getting published, for example,

in the New York Times. Here's one Happy Birthday, Karl Marks. You were right, that was obviously meant to coincide with the May Day anniversary here. And while you and I are kind of like who cares about May Day, a lot of socialists and uh an anarchists and other folks who are of the of the far radical left think

that May Day is still a pretty big deal. In fact, the Occupy All Street movement not long ago made sure that Maydea was something they commemorated with some big rallies in New York City, thousands, tens of thousands of people at rallies across the country. I was at the covered them for the blaze at the time. So but back

to the Haymarket affair and May Day and what happened there. Um, you had striking workers in Chicago that gathered near the McCormick harvesting machine plant where there were strikers and strike breakers, and there was a face off, and there were hundreds of police brought in and this then led to some some violence. The police open fire and killed two people.

And the anarchists in Chicago back in the eighties figured that this was gonna be a good time to start making noise about how they need to fight back against these rapacious capitalists. So he had spies, Albert Albert Spies, however, writing the arbiter Zeitung, the radical left paper of Chicago, that blood has flowed. It had to be, and it was not in vain. Has order drilled and trained its bloodhounds. It was not for fun that the militia was practiced

in street fighting. The robbers, who know best of all what wretches they are, who pile up their money through the misery of the masses, who make a trade of the slow murder of the families of working men, are the last ones to stop short at the direct shooting down of working men end quote. So there you go. Oh, but he finishes this with but the working men are not cheap and will reply to the white terror with

the red terror. Huh. So things were getting a little intense, obviously, and then we get to the Haymarket affair, which actually happened on May four. But you had a group that gathered, uh and a series of speeches were given to them, and the police showed up. Remember this is all about striking, strike breaking workers movement, and the police ordered everyone at

this rally to disperse. And this came after the previous violent incident I mentioned to you where you've already had some workers get killed in exchange with the cops and a bomb was thrown into the the path of these officers um so and people then later called this the Haymarket riot or the Haymarket massacre, and a dynamite bomb, dynamite bomb was thrown into that group. It killed uh seven, and there was gunfire from the police in response. Scores

of people were wounded and three workers were killed. And from that, obviously, and now now you get a lot of attention and people started referring to these protesters the left started ferning these protesters as Haymarket martyrs, and uh. They they were obviously very very upset about this. The eight anarchists eight anarchists were convicted of conspiracy and seven were sentenced to death. One was only sentenced to fifteen years. This is all about the Haymarket affair now, and nobody

knows really who threw the bomb. To this day, it is not really known who threw the bomb, but there are a lot of conspiracies about conspiracy, theories at least about whether there was any infiltration of the group, and on all the rest of it. The governor ended up coming in and pardoning some of these. This was Governor John Peter Altgeld. He came in and pardoned some of them, and uh. In eighty nine, a FL president Samuel Gompers

wrote to the first Congress of the Second International. They were all having a meeting in Paris, and he said that the World Socialists planned to propose an international fight for universal eight hour day. And also, oh, by the way, the International then decided to adopt May first, eighteen nine as the date for the demonstration. So you had kind

of some back and forth over this. So you have the International Workers Day and Socialist Communists of the Second Internationale to commemorate the Haymarket affair in Chicago, UH commemorated this as May Day. Um. So there you have it there, you there there, you have some of the uh, some of the back story here, and you had the americanization of it that has occurred to this point where they

called it. They started calling it loyalty Day, right because they realized and we shouldn't really have a commie holiday, so they started calling it Loyalty Day for a while,

but that didn't really stick. So May Day is not something that you and I can get all that excited about, because it's really about international labor movements, socialism and Marxism, and the Haymarket affair in six is what got really got it on the map, um, because the movement then had their martyrs in a sense, right, the movement then became something that could point to bloodshed and say, see and now you know why we have a have have made day on the schedule, you know, on your calendar.

But I just want to mention this New York Times piece on Karl Marks since it is May Day, since the international and all that is part of this history. Uh, this is how the piece ends the transition to a new society. So this was just published New York Times, I think yesterday the day before. The author, right, Jason Barker,

who's a professor of philosophy New Surprise Rights. The transition to a new society where relations among people, rather than capital relations finally determines an individual's worth is arguably proving to be quite a task. Marks, as I have said, does not offer a one size fits all formula for enacting social change, but he does offer a powerful intellectual

acid test for that change. On that basis, we are destined to keep citing him and testing his ideas until the kind of society that he struggled to bring about and that increasing numbers of us now desire is finally realized. Um. You see among academics it's it's still that Marks is right.

He just we just haven't gotten Marks right yet. A pretty scary way for those who are supposed to be studying this and and have some knowledge, it's pretty frightening and terrifying that this is where they are on it. But they will never learn on this one. Um. They don't seem to understand that as much as it would be nice if we could all just share or have the government share on our behalf. It goes against human nature that if you try to order a society absent

self interest, which is what Marxism is based on. Right, If you're trying to order a society where your own pursuit and destiny is not the central characteristic of how individuals interact with each other, you are you are going to fail because that will overcome whatever system you put in place. Whatever you know, revolutionary proletariat you think you're going to have, or or profession revolutionaries in the case of communism, who will do things on behalf of the proletariat,

it is destined to failure. But even to this day, a lot of people on the left in this country, I think that Mark's got it right. We just haven't figured out how to do Marxism right yet. So that's my May Day message for you, how crazy and wrong they all are. I'll be back with you in just a second. So I wanted to follow up with the latest alagons about Tom brocong Now I'm gonna make fun of this guy. Um, I've never thought that Brokaw was impressive.

I've never found him interesting and whenever I've heard him on a panel or when he when he goes off script to share his thoughts, it's just pabloments. Most contrary from on Bolger Shon to drag the bush snow journalism, and uh sure with the American people, it's just not good. Bro bro Call is just not impressive. He's a lucky, very lucky guy, and sometimes better to be lucky than good a lot of industries. Um So I don't have any reverence for him whatsoever. I know a lot of

other people in the news business do for whatever reason. Um, I think that the news business has changed so much since people like Brokaw could make enormous salaries and were celebrated all over the world. Um that I don't even think bro Call would would like get a job in the BuzzFeed newsroom if he were on the scene today. You know, it's just so different. You have to be able to do so much more and anyway. But but bro Call rong. Here's don some trouble. As you know,

he's been accused of of assaulting two women. Now, whether it was it sounds to me more like sexual harassment would be the claim. Although she said that try to kiss her and then try to use force. You know, so we're getting into ah, is it just sexual harassment

or does it actually cross the boundaries into sexual assault? Um. But what I think is interesting about this case, because I initially came to it, as you know last week and want to follow up on it, was I said, well, you know, what are we to do about an allegation from the nineties that there's no proof about and cannot be proven one way or the other. And this is somebody who is a luminary on the left right, Broke brow Call. I'm gonna stop now or stamp and bark

it's not nice. But Broke Call is a guy who you know, is celebrated by Democrats for a long time, was carrying water for the Democrat Party for a very long time. But they have this whole thing about women are to be believed? So what do we make of this?

What are we to say about this? And it was interesting that NBC, which remember is the Matt Lour network and also the let's not have the Weinstein story break on our network that Rodan Farrow was doing doing because we have too many people that have connections to Weinstein. And I guess at the senior level. Um, Now, you had a lot of people signed this letter defending Brokaw, which I would note, I don't really know how you can defend somebody about an allegation that you weren't present

for that you know nothing about. Well, what does that even mean? Right to say that you're gonna you're gonna sign, You're gonna say that he was overall a great guy other than this, Okay, that doesn't really matter though, it's you know, this, this whole notion of all these people rushing forward. And by the way, they're big names, Andrea Mitchell, Meeka Brazinsky, Rachel Maddow, A lot of people signed. I think over a hundred people signed this letter that they

were supporting bro call. So I guess women are not to be believe, even if it's a big Democrat target, that you can't proved anything wrong. Right at that point they gotta draw the they're drawing the line there. I think we all know that if this were somebody who was considered a conservative or unfriendly to the cause, there would not be this push to sign some letter that would be intended to I suppose call his accuser a liar, which is I don't know what what else do they

think they're accomplishing by writing this letter. Um, they have no knowledge whatsoever of this incident. Question. You have one named woman, one woman who has not been named but has as an anonymous source that she was also assaulted by Brokaw. I find it completely plausible that Tom broke All, who is a pompous wind bag, thought that it was a little additional perk of his power and his job to be able to, you know, come on to females in his business without any without any problem. Right, So

I'd say I find it plausible. I wasn't there. I don't know, but I just find the hypocrisy from the left here to be really illuminating. Uh And and I have to say that now the news that is being reported on hereby our friend Emily's anati over in the Daily Wire that a lot of these women have now come out. Women who signed this letter said they were pressed into service to defend Brokaw. Oh gosh, here we go.

We're pressed un to serve us. I mean that they were told, or they they felt at least that they had to sign this. If they didn't sign this letter, they would be on the wrong side of NBC management. So well, what does that tell you about the culture at NBC right now? By the way, just putting that out there that for some people, they're gonna put out this notion of a well, well, you're seeing this all over the place. See with MSNBC enjoy read, you see it with with NBC, Big NBC in the way it's

responding to the allegations against Tom Brokaw. They're just some people who were kind protected who get the benefit of the doubt. And there are other and they are on the left and they're useful to the left, and then there are other people who have to get fed to the lions. Whether they're guilty or not, it doesn't even matter. Right,

they're toasts, they're gone, they're out, they're fired. And uh, I just think it's so interesting that NBC is now being accused of of pressuring women in designing a statement meant to undermine a claim made by a woman pressured by the biggest name at NBC for decades. That's what's really going on here, isn't it? Roll Call up? Next Day two of my Swamp visit extravaganza is underway here. Team very much enjoying my time here, even though it's

a bit boggy. It's a bit of a of of a dense fog around this city of all the self congratulation and inside dealing and and all kinds of puffery and income poo bury. But I wanted to get into our roll call here straight away. And by the way, if you want to be a part of the wonderful thing known as roll call, you just go to Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton and send us a message there. Tomorrow I'll try to remind try to remind producer Mike

to send me the emails as well. I know, I feel like the emails don't get as much love as the Facebook account does. But then again, Facebook these days is making me sad with its nonsense, Like is this hate speech? On all these different posts that you can put up there. My guess is that most people who would be writing hate speech would click no, is this hate speech? But perhaps I'm perhaps I'm missing something. There's always that possibility, all right now, we have all kinds

of wonderful messages here. We got Paul up here, rights Buck love your show. Don't let April go by without remembering the minute men at Lexington Green and conquered Bridge. People talked about the Oklahoma City bombing and don't name the bomber. Talk radio talked about him, but nobody talked about our real memory of April the nineteen when the patriots that took the shot around the world was heard. Uh,

thank you Paul from Michigan. All right, Paul, Well, I appreciate the feedback and the thoughts on things so great. Oh look at this Kiara, who has a very intricate spelling of her name, which is which is fun. Kiara writes Buck, I just got this shirt from my best friend for my birthday. I was so excited when I opened it that I jumped up and down. Go Team Buck love your show. She sent a purple Ladies Fit Team Buck t shirt photo, which you can indeed get

on buck Sexton dot com. So check that out please, and Kiara, thank you so much for your support and I'm glad you enjoyed the tea shirt. They're very comfortable, they're very well made. I will say I I wear I wear them, ms Molly wears them. I tend not to wear Team Buck t shirts out of the house because I think that if you're if you're in the band, you don't. There's there's a special rule. If you're in the band, you don't wear the T shirt of the band.

But you want everybody else who likes the band obviously wearing the T shirt. Right. But if I if I wear my own gear outside the house, I wear it around the house. I wear to work out into. But I think that people would maybe make fun of me a little bit for that. But the T shirts are great. Please do check them out buck sexton dot com if you have any interest in seeing for yourself. Sean rights. Wait. Cultural appropriation is not okay, but gender appropriation is fine.

I'm getting confused. Well, you're not the only one, my friend. As I have said in the last twenty four hours on Twitter, cultural appropriation is an indefensively stupid concept that cannot be defined, enforced, or understood. You can't get people to explain to you what it is. You can't get people to offer up when it is appropriate and not appropriate for someone to quote borrow part of a different culture.

And also, anyone who has even the faintest understanding of what a culture is knows that there aren't clear boundaries. There aren't in fact, borders between cultures. All cultures tend to spill over. I mean, think about this. If you live in uh parts of let's say, Arizona or New Mexico and you uh you you have uh you're you're wearing a sombrero, for example, are you appropriating culture or is that just something that people and you're part of

the world do. Right? If you are wearing any number of different garments from around the world outside the boundaries of whatever the specific country is, are you appropriating culture or is that just something that you guys have adopted over time? Right? You know, you think about this. There's appropriation of weapons, there's appropriation of food of and that's another thing. Am I not allowed to eat Indian food now? Or Vietnamese food or these are some of my favorites.

I don't need a lot of Chinese food. But that's beside the point. Is that now appropriation that I'm supposed to feel bad about? Who do I ask for permission to be able to eat ethnic food now? As a white guy? Oh? I guess it's okay because I'm paying for it. So does that mean if I pay to rent a costume of another culture and wear it for whatever reason is that is that Okay, I also want to know who gets to wear three piece suits and a necktie and who doesn't comes from Western Europe, but

it's common around the entire world. So was someone now going to tell me that any businessman from Shanghai who's wearing a several row suit, those you who are fancy and booge. You know, what I'm talking about? Is that cultural appropriation? I know, I'm running in circles. He and it almost feels incoherent. But that's the point. It isn't coherent. There's no such thing as cultural appropriation. No one really

knows what it is. It's just away, quite honestly, of finding and not Yet another means to criticize what is supposed to be the or what is alleged to be the dominant paradigm in this country, which is white males, and how and in this case white females too, and how they adopt other cultural traits or other treasures from other cultures without bending the knee and asking for permission and or forgiveness. But it's complete and utter nonsense. It's

a nonsense concept. So next up here we have Stephen who sent a photo of a baby over hoshly goat. Very cute, Stephen. I'm assuming this is out a farm where either you work or own the farm. The baby goat is adorable. Jeremy writes, hey, bok got a photo of our family corgy Walter when he was four weeks old. Jeremy's, uh, Corgy is adorable as well. And we're gonna have to take some of these and put them on the Facebook page so people can can hear them. I'm sorry, I

can see them. Hearing the photos would not be all that much fun. And now we have a guy we got William who writes, uh, this is the fastest egg cracker from Nick's delhi uh seal beach and los alamitos. Okay, yeah, this guy's cracking eggs super fast. William is telling me here, go sit in the corner. I didn't say, William that I I cracked eggs faster than anybody else. I just said that I can do it one handed now and not get shell in the omelets. So the joke's on you, sir,

or something like that. Just kidding William, thanks for writing, uh randy rites. I've heard time and again that Obama wanted the Iran nuclear deal as a major foreign policy the legacy. What kind of legacy did he want? Was he trying to outdo Neville Chamberlain's Well, Randy, the left

sees this, you gotta you gotta remember. The left sees all Obama foreign policy maneuvers in the context of what the George W. Bush foreign policy was before it, And so they were always operating from a premise of not Bush is a great thing, and so whatever you do that is not Bush is in fact something to be celebrated. And they would argue that by Obama not doing anything in Syria, uh, that's a brilliant maneuver. Libya as a disaster of the Obama administration's making, but the media just

kind of cast that aside. They don't really care. But not Bush was the Obama foreign policy mantra. And also, and this was literally the case, don't do stupid stuff, except they didn't use the word stuff. Even Hillary Clinton herself said that that was not an organizing principle for foreign Polessey, So what does that mean? Means the Obama team was not nearly as clever as they thought they

were on the world stage. But Obama like to think of himself as creating peace in or the long term prospect of peace in the Middle East via an Iran deal, and that was what they were going for. It was a failure, but that was the that was the plan. Hank writes, Wow, he's got a lot of stuff here. My Peruvian long hair guinea pigs mom and baby. Mom's head is to the left, and then another pick of my three week old Peruvian guinea pigs. Uh. Check out

my Facebook page Hank's Piggy's for Peruvian guinea pigs. These are some funky looking little dudes. I have never seen a Peruvian guinea pig before, so yeah, go check out its photos. It's kind of tough to tell what they are when you look at them and like, what is this. It's a little bit like if you took the Abominable Snowman and shrunk it down so that it was able to fit in the palm of your hand. I think that's a pretty good description. They're like this big furry ball. Um.

But yeah, thank you, Hank, Very very cool, very cute. Um. Monica rights in with hey, Buck, you said, send small pet pictures. This is what a rabbit looks like in Japan. Husband of Monica delivers as always from Monica. Yeah, this is rabbits in Japan. Look quite different. Actually, looks more like a cross between a hair and your traditional rabbit. I guess not that I'm a rabbit expert, and you're probably like, bucket hair is a rabbit, schooner is a sailboat.

I don't know. These are things that you need to I need to do some more research on. Roberto. Also in here with a photo of Sasha four months old. Looks like a Chihuahua, maybe a Chihuahua mix shields high. Roberto writes, Sasha is very cute, all right, Team, I've got so many cute photos here, but describing them on radio doesn't do them justice. So we'll have to take a whole slew of them and post them on the Facebook page. Will be Team Bucks Cute Pets, and this

will get We'll get a thread going on that. And with that, I'm gonna have to close up the doors to the Freedom Hunt Swamp edition today from down here in our nation's capital, My friends, my extended family, my fellow patriots. Always an honor, privilege, and pleasure to be here with you. I will see you tomorrow, same time, same swampy place as always Shields High. Well, my friends, it is getting swampy here in Washington, d C. They're saying that it might be up in the ninety degrees

area in just a few days. Uh. Now that's not something I like. I'm more of a cool weather guy. But at least I can cool off with the best tequila on the market right now, G four Tequila. G four taste incredible and once you understand the backstory, you know that this is a company that is multi generational. The agave that they use in this process, the water they even used in the distillation, and all the different steps make sure that this is an artisanal liquor that

you are going to absolutely savor and enjoy. You can mix it to market reads, you can drink it straight or throw some salt on the rim and some rocks in the glass. However you like it. Go to G four dot life G four Tequila dot life. That's G four tequila dot life for more details. Also, you can give them a like on Facebook at facebook dot com slash G four Tequila's