No Shame In Democrats Gun Game

You're a great American. Again. The Buck Sexton Show begins. What happened this weekend or acts of pure evil? And we press our deepest condolences to the families of those who lost their lives, and we join every American praying for the injured and their families in their hour of need. Hate has no place in America, and the sinister ideologies of racism, bigotry, and white supremacy must be defeated. Justice

will be swift and certain. We're developing legislation to ensure that those who commit mass murders face the death penalty swiftly. The American people can be assured we will confront this evil in our time. We will work together to advance policies that make our families and our nations safer while protecting the constitutional rights of every American. Welcome to the Bucks Accident Show. We will confront this evil. Vice President Penn says, for that is what we were up against.

It is evil. That is the most clear, the most precise, the most straightforward description of this that anybody could ever come up with. The administration understands the pain, they understand the loss. They understand that people want action, and they're willing to consider whatever is sensible, whatever is prudent, in order to try and prevent the next tragedy. What do we see though, a coming together of Democrats and Republicans.

Are elected leaders deciding to put aside their political differences, even for a few days, maybe a week, to allow for some unpoliticized grieving, perhaps a bit of unity among Americans who reach out from their hearts and yes offer their hearts and prayers, their thoughts and prayers to the people of El Paso and Date in Ohio. We come together in moments like this because we do care about each other, because we are good people, because the American

people care about one another. And yet, what are we up against in the new cycle, the most horrific, insane, unfair things being said about the president day in and day out by people who not only should know better, I believe they know better. They're just trying to capitalize on this moment. They are playing to the rage of the mob against this president. And as they do so, they claim to be concerned about the way we talk to each other in discourse, about politics, about issues that

have sensitivities, and it's just stunning. It's just wrong what they're doing. It's unfair. It's unfair to the rest of America. It's unfair to a country that should be allowed some space to process. Instead, what we have are just the worst venal demagogues imaginable, running around saying all kinds of crazy things about the president. If what they say about this president is true, what are people of good faith

and goodwill supposed to do in this country? What could be more reckless than saying you believe the president is a white supremacist. This is now mainstream among Democrats, and in terms of the media, we've already seen with the New York Times changing its headline from a straightforward this is what Trump said in his speech to Well he said something, but he didn't condemn guns because the New

York Times readership was complaining about it. Because liberals in this country have been feeding each other a steady diet of anti Trump hatred for years now, and they can't accept anything else. They don't know anything else. They become a hostile to the notion that Trump is not as evil as they have told each other and now they themselves usually believe. Then we also see a disparity emerging.

A tremendous amount of focus on the El Paso shooter, on his manifesto, on the political motivations behind this, and so little attention seemingly paid to the horrific shooting in Dayton, Ohio. Never mind also the shootings that occurred in Chicago over the weekend, which killed I think six or seven wounded dozens. That's a far less political utility to Democrats, so we hear much less about it. And yet those people, those innocence gunned down every bit as dead as anybody in

El Paso or Dayton, Lives taken away, families crushed. See, it's all about the narrative for the Democrats and their allies, the mainstream media, and that's why Dayton, Ohio seems of less interest to them. They don't want to talk about that one as much. They don't want to talk about that shooter as much, that's for sure. Why is that?

You might wonder, well, because when you look at his social media presence, and we'll have more information about this in the days ahead, there's certainly plenty of preliminary reason to believe that he was a leftist. He was a Satanist who supported Elizabeth Warren, who supported Bernie Sanders, He was pro anti he hated police officers. Does that sound like someone that's responding to Trump's rhetoric to you. I'm not saying it's impossible. We don't yet entirely know what

the situation is. But they were willing, the media was willing to draw very fast conclusions about everything in and I understand a manifesto does make it hard to miss what a person is trying to do, to miss their intent, although I do think that these manifestos are also being left behind as an ad on to make us tear

each other apart. They leave this behind, it's like lighting a fire as they walk out the door, knowing that it will burn the house down long after they're gone because we point fingers at each other and say, see, it's your side. No, it's my side, No, it's your side.

I'm old enough to remember when there were Democrats under the Obama administration, when we had a number of mass casualty shootings that tributable to ISIS inspired attackers, and you had the Pulse nightclub shooter saying that he's doing this for ISIS and he's doing this for Allah, and the FBI thought why not exercise that from the transcripts, and the media went along with this, like, Yeah, that seems normal, that seems like that makes sense. So I'd really rather

not have to pretend that we don't know. There are political agendas at work here with the way the mainstream media reports on tragedies and the way that Democrats frame them politically. As an individual in Dayton, yes tremendous red flags. There's interviews being published with an ex girlfriend of his who said that he showed her video of the Pittsburgh shooting massacre and that he clearly had a fascination for this. He was obviously mentally ill, and no one stopped him.

He had a kill list on a bus, no one stopped and that he was taken off by police, no one stopped him, makes you wonder what really has to happen for us to finally reach that point where someone

will take action on this one. But the separation between these two shootings that as purely a result of politics, just goes to show us all that even in the most the most tragic and sad moments that this country faces, there are people who would rather stick their thumb in the eyes of an opponent who has nothing to do with this, in this case Donald Trump, then take the opportunity to try to make things better, to come up with real ideas or real solutions, and work as Americans

to stop the next mass shooting. They just they don't have any interest in that. They want to They want to demonize people like former colleagues of mine who are advocates for the Second Amendment. They want to humiliate people who think that they should be allowed to enjoy Second Amendment rights. It's about other rising people that believe the constitutional right to defend one's self and the check against tyranny the Second Amendment gives us all is some kind

of anachronistic joke. They want to make fun of us. There's nothing funny about anything that's gone on this week. But Democrats seem to think that we're funny because we take the right to bear arms seriously, and they think we're evil. Of course, at the same time, I mean, they mock us, and then they think that we're bad people.

This is what we were up against. Oh, and people like Corey Booker running around trying to sound tough, trying to just make some headway in a very crowded Democrat field. I mean, here's here's I Am Spartacus himself joking about what he wants to do to the President of the United States, Play nine angry, what's important? And so I've definitely if making jokes about, yeah, some guy wants to

punch Donald Trump in the face. Yeah, this is what we This is the Democratic Party that pretends to be the serious part of the party that wants to end violence, it wants to make things better. I haven't heard us a a single takeaway from Democrats that would do anything.

First of all, it's none of it is new. We've been through this all before and I have not heard one thing from them that I thought, Wow, that's that's a real effort to reach out across political boundaries, to reach across the no man's land that separates Democrats and Republicans these days on any major policy issue and say

let's try this, let's work together on this. No, Instead, you have prominent, prominent on air talent at places like CNN and MSNBC saying that the president is a white nationalist, the white supremacist, that he has blood on his hands because of this. You have a guy who had his own show at SEEING I mean, CNN is a joke, it's a trash heap now should be ashamed of itself,

but it's not. You had a guy at his own show at CNN until pretty recently and was held up there, Reza Oslad held up as some kind of international expert on terrorism and radicalization. The guys are the guys are awful person so start with that. And he's cursing at the President's daughter on Twitter, openly saying horrible things to her and her whole family and directed it at her

whole family as well. I mean, the left is just full of these these lunatics, these maniacs who think that, oh, there's been a mass shooting, Now is my opportunity to unleash all the bile. I have stored up all the darkness in my soul. I'm just going to fling it at every prominent Republican that I disagree with about the tax rate and healthcare. They need to get a grip,

they need to get a handle on things. Neil de grass Tyson put out a list in trying to calm people down, a list of how many people die in this country a day from different things, to show that, you know, really, in the grand scheme of things, gun violence is actually a very small slice of the mortality problem in this country. It's I mean, for example, medical errors is meant orders of magnitude larger daily medical errors. Obviously, cancer and heart disease accidents. Many more people die from

accidents every day than die from gun violence. Now this is not to say that gun violence is not a problem. Clearly is. But he was trying to contextualize it, and oh my gosh, she's a liberal. Oh my gosh, they completely turned on him, freaked out. Can't have a conversation, can't be rational about this, just have to play into the moment of politicized anti Trump frenzy. It's appalling, But let's wade through some of this together, my friends, let's

look at the latest data and information. We'll talk about whatever are being put forward as possible. I shouldn't even say solutions as approaches, as ways forward in the aftermath of a tragedy like this. Well discuss that together and much more coming up here on the buck Sex and Show. Stay with me if you wait. The president he talks if he were a principal in your high school, and they talk that way, they talk to have the people, the parents should be coming insane fire him. It's outrageous

the way in which we characterizes people. It's the thing that brings all the hatred out in the open. They think it's legitimate now to come out and do the things they do and talk about. It's about white nationalism and white supremacy against minorities. There you have the top Democrat contender saying Trump is a white nationalists. I mean they the slander will not stop. They will not stop. But they want to make things better in this country.

That's what Democrats want you to believe. They would like the temperature to come down. They just wish that Trump would be a little more civil and then and then perhaps they would beat him halfway at least that's the ruse, that's the Cohn. Joaquin Castro. You know he is right, he's running for president. He tweeted this out today, sad to see so many san Antonians as twenty nineteen maximum

donors to Donald Trump. The owner of a he names the barbecue, the owner of he names a restaurant, He names a realtor by name, and then he writes their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as invaders. And then there's a list of forty four San Antonio donors who contributed the most you can under federal law to Donald Trump's presidential campaign. Folks, this is essentially a target list for social shaming, if nothing else.

This is why Democrats there's such snide little liars about this. We just want transparency, to get the money out of politics. No, because they're they're the little hysterical jerks that like to do these name and shame campaigns. They're the ones that want to present all the different donors for you name it, a conservative think tank, a Republican candidate, anything, and then they want to organize boycott's and harassment campaigns. They want to show ab outside your house like they do to

Mitch McConnell, which we'll talk about later on today. What happens if somebody on this list gets attacked? What happens if somebody on this list has their home broken into, burned down, their business destroyed. Do you think that Joaquin Castro is gonna feel bad for saying that they're funding hate?

Do you think walking Castro, who's an elected official, is going to have a moment's a moment's remorse for essentially doxing I mean, I know this is public information, but he's compiling it and he's contextualizing in a way that he's saying, Hey, these are the enemy, folks, These people are the enemy. Go get him. That's what this is. Trying to hurt their businesses, hurt their reputations. I keep saying it because you must remember this is who we

are up against. I would never advocate for this, And notice of Republicans don't do this. This is on their side. They feel just fine ruining you, destroying your business, putting you in a dangerous position, so your family is threatened because of who you donate to or support politically. They feel completely justified because, after all, they say you're supporting a white supremacist, So why shouldn't they feel that way

in their minds? You're getting you deserve, And they have the brazenness to tell us that they want to have more civil conversations. They are appalling the Democratic Party has collectively abandoned honor and decency, and they want to lecture us on the same. I'm sorry, not today, not on my watch, and I'm damn sure it's not going to

happen on my show. We've got more the presidents, the president of all the people, and what he wants to do is go to these communities and grieve with them, pray with them, offer condolences, and quite frankly, offer thank you an appreciation to those who are first responders and put their lives on the line, and we're able to take out this shooter so quickly, those American citizens who put their bodies in harm's way to protect their loved ones.

And he also wants to talk about potential solutions and how we keep this from ever happening again. That all seems completely reasonable, doesn't it. That was the White House Deputy Press Secretary of Hogan Gidley saying, Look, the President wants to go and do the following things with his visits, his plan visits tomorrow to Ohio and Texas. He's going to Dayton and El Paso. And there are people out

there who are saying that he is not welcome. Now, citizens have a right to say that whatever they want in terms of the president being welcome or not, that's fine. There are politicians, however, there are leaders who are saying, no, we don't want the president here. Sorry, that whole not my president thing doesn't fly. It's not true. He is for anyone living in America your president. You can pretend

he's not, but that does not change the reality. And after a tragedy like or a double tragedy like what this country has just suffered, that any mayor or anybody at all in local government would say that the president of the United States is not welcome to come and do what he can to promote healing, to promote unity is just indicative of Trump's arrangement syndrome. That's what this is. Someone like Tim Ryan who does look like he's constantly in a state of surprise and and like like a

he's got flop sweat going on. Oh gosh, what's going on? You know, Tim Ryan thinks that he's going to make his way up from zero point zero zero zero zero zero one percent of Democratic primary voters to maybe point zero zero zero zero two percent of them. You know, that's the Tim Ryan plan. He's just he's cursing on TV. This guy's a congressman from Ohio, and you know, saying all kinds of just nasty stuff. The President is willing to push forward initiatives that he thinks would be helpful

in trying to prevent the next tragedy. And this is the kind of meet him halfway approach he gets from Tim Ryan. Play eighteen. It is so disingenuous for him to step up to that podium yesterday and talk about mental illness like he cares because he has a lawsuit and out the repeal coverage for twenty million people who need it. So don't give me this blogny that all of a sudden you're for mental health coverage and you're for treating mental health in the United States. I don't

believe you, Donald Trump. I don't believe you Belogney. Huh. I mean, no one should really care what Tim Ryan thinks, except for the voters of Ohio. Who pulled the lever for this guy? What the heck are you folks doing. I don't care who the other candidate was, had to be better than Tim Ryan. But yeah, he doesn't want to He doesn't want to have a bipartisan conversation. These people aren't leaders. These people are hacks or demagogues, panderers.

If we're going to speak about demagoguery and pandering, I think demagoguery is actually not a fair word for her. It's too big and fancy a word just be just being a total phony and a fraud and saying whatever she thinks she has to in the moment to get the most support from the immediate people around her. You gotta think of Kirsten Gillibrand when that stuff comes up. I mean, she she's really in a class by herself.

She's she should be an embarrassment the Democratic Party. I mean, she's just nothing but stupid talking points from her all the time. It's it's like MSNBC built her in a lab somewhere and unleashed her on the public. Here's here's her take. Remember the president is going tomorrow to He's given speeches, he's talked about it. The evils of white nationalism. He outlined different approaches that he's willing to to look into in order to try and stop the next mass shooting.

He's all these things exactly what the Democrats pretend they want him to do. And here's the response he gets from someone a Democratic presidential candidate, no less like Jillibrand played twenty and unfortunately, President Trump is unwilling to take

responsibility for his own actions. He's unwilling to recognize that he's spent four years demonizing the most vulnerable, being racist in his rhetoric and his language, calling Mexicans rapists, talking about people at the border invading this country and infestations. What does he think is going to happen. He has emboldened white supremacists, he has emboldened white nationalists, and it has all now come home to roost. And so he

needs to take responsibility. I mean, she had moron. Of course, he's not going to take responsibility because he's not responsible for any of this. He needs to take responsibility. Why do you know what. The most amazing thing about that utterly insipid nonsense from Jillibrand if the President did stand up and say, you know what I've been I am

too harsh in my language. Sometimes I'm going to I'm going to try and be more cognizant of the sensitivities that are out there when it comes to issues that touch on race, and I'll be more precise. And i just want all all people in the American family, and everyone of all of all races and ethnicities and religions to know that I hold you in equal regard and I'm a president for all of you. You know, if he gave the Gettysburg address of you know, maya culpas,

I don't think he should do. But I'm just saying if he did do that, you know what they would say to Moor. They wouldn't say that was a great speech. And I'm glad we finally got through to the president. I hope he can work with him going forward. They'd say he's still racist, he's still a terrible person, and you need to vote him out of office, and maybe we should impeach him, and maybe we should send him in his whole family to prison. These people are nuts.

They have brainwashed themselves and each other on the left. They no longer have a rational area that you can engage in when it comes to Trump, they've completely and utterly lost it. And they're also a bunch of just total phonies on this. Though the whole first day's criticism was Trump isn't denouncing white nationalists, and now it's well, it doesn't matter because he's not taking responsibility for all the hate that he's created. Even though he's denouncing white nationalists.

You know, tomorrow it'll it would be something else. None of this is helpful, by the way, Democrats have no plans that are going to help any of this. That's really what bothers me about this more than anything else, is that people lost family members, they lost loved ones. This is it is a terrible tragedy. It's evil, it's

just wrong. They're suffering. Man, These communities have been ripped apart, and Democrats don't have the common human decency to just focus on that problem for a couple of days first before turning it into some political circus. They pretend to care so much about those who were killed in El Paso and dating, the Democrats go out of their way to make us all think that that is more important than right now than anything else except for fundraising off

of it. I mean, that's really important for Democrats too, except for slandering the president of the United States. I mean, that's that's really important. Also, you know, just lying about the issues, lying about what they've said in the past, lying what the president said in the past, all for

political advantage. That's maybe more important to the Democrats than solving the problem, than addressing the issue, or then even allowing people to heal and recover with the dignity of their elected leadership, giving them support instead of giving them a lecture all the time. Here's the thought. I'm sure there are people that lost loved ones who are Trump supporters.

What does Jillibrand have to say to them. Two gun owners out there who say, well, a Biden administration means they're going to come from my guns, bingo, you're right. If you have an assault weapon, the fact of the matter is they should be illegal, period. Look, the Second Amendment doesn't say you can't restrict the kinds of weapons people can own. You can't buy a bazuka, you can't have a flamethrower. The guys who make these arguments are the people who say the tree of liberty is water

with the blood of patriots. We need the protection against the government. We need have fifteen for that. You need something well beyond whether or not you're going to have an assault weapon. So Biden is a moron. No, I really mean that. I mean he's not a smart person. I know he's been the vice president, and the Democrats they all secretly know that he's just not very bright. He does a good imitation of a smart person. It's like he's an actor who has studied politicians his whole life,

and so he plays a great politician on TV. But the moment you dig down beneath the most superficial, grinning, smiling, backslapping talking points, prepared speech is nonsense. It's a guy who doesn't know you know what from you know what? I was gonna say something else, but I couldn't. It doesn't know something from Shinola? Producer, Mark, what is Shinola? By the way, is that really a thing? Never heard what the other thing is? You don't know blank from Shinola?

You've never heard that before? I know blank from blank? Oh okay, well that probably is another way to do it, all right, So anyway, let's break this apart, shall we. Let's break apart this stupidity. Okay, let's do this. You have Biden saying that there should be an assault weapons ban. We've already been through this. We've all read had an assault weapons ban back in the nineties. No person who looks at the stats, looks at the numbers, comes away from that and says, you know what, this was a

good idea. This really stopped a lot of violence. It's just not true. You have a couple of hundred people total in the country killed by rifles each year, A couple of hundred. It's a very, very small overall part of the gun violence in America. So let's start with that. Why do they want to ban assault rifles? Because it makes the people who don't like guns and don't like gun owners feel better, makes them feel happier about themselves. It makes them feel like, well, you know, there's something

that we're getting out of this whole thing. Those silly gun owners can't keep their crazy weapons of war anymore. They mean, I suppose the millions of people who currently own completely lawfully with no threat to anyone else, the millions of my fellow Americans who own so called assault rifles or what would fall under the and you know, people don't need to be pedantic about this. Okay, I love it when I get other conservatives with Buck. There's

no such things as an assault rifle. Yeah, guys, I know, but there is such a thing as an assault rifle if they write a law that says X, Y and Z equals assault rifle, and we're gonna take it from you. So you know, people can keep telling me there's no such things. I know, there's no such thing as an assault rifle, but they will designate rifles as assault rifles and then take them from you. And it is based primarily on cosmetic features, but so be it. As far

as they're concerned, that's what they will do. So Biden's hold, I'm gonna take your assault rifle. This is because he's trying to just play to the left wing bass and he's not. He's not losing any votes because of that, and he knows it. So it doesn't do anything, though. I mean, anyone who says that an assault rifle van is going to stop mass shootings just doesn't know what the heck he or she, assuming those are that person's preferred pronouns, is talking about. I know, I can't assume

the pronouns these days. Hi, my name is Bucks X and he him. I just want to start doing this all the time. Producer Mark, do you do you stay? Do you like to stay your preferred pronouns or do you like to leave us guessing? I like to make everyone guess right, because that way, if you're having a bad day, someone steps out of line, you're like, I prefer z XE. I do not like gendered designation to

be guessed right. And then people will have to immediately grovel at your feet, producer Mark, and say we are so sorry, all hale, Producer Mark. I should do the same thing then, right, I could keep people off balance. I walk into a job interview like, hey, how you doing good to meet you? So excuse me, sir, No, no gendered language in this job interview, Thank you very much. I could probably scare them with a lawsuit. You know, I'm just saying. Somebody comes in says, hey, Buck did

a great job. He's really doing well in this interview Europe. Next, excuse me, sir, All right, now back to back to this. Sault rifles. Sorry, I know gendered pronouns. I got a little digression going there, So assault rifles. Banding them doesn't do anything. We know this, But then you get to this other point. And I hear Libs say this all the time, and it says though they don't know anything about state control, about history, that they just don't know anything.

They say, Oh, Piers Morgan, Who's I'm Piers Morgan. I'm gonna have a show on politics in America because I can sound fancy to people who don't know any better. He said something like, you know they're gonna have five thousand nukes to fire at you, So what difference does that make you? Even an A or fifteen? Really, that's I guess that's why we so easily triumphed against the

North Vietnamese, and why Afghanistan was so easily pacified. And I mean, name a country where there was a miss smatch between the insurgency and the government based only on large conventional weapons and nukes, and I'll tell you, And if the population was well armed, I'll tell you a country they had a really hard time suppressing an insurgency, or perhaps even weren't able to and lost. To control

a population, you need more than nukes. You need a population that is incapable of defending itself door to door, house to house. All one needs is a passing familiarity with recent history to understand that this is really not that complicated, right, It should not be a surprise to Joe Biden that you don't need f sixteens to prevent

government tyranny. If every government stooge, if there was a tyrannical takeover of the federal government in this country, if every government stooge who went house to house saying, you know, give me give me your you know, your firstborn child than all of your money, and that person might end up going to millions of You know that that government agent is going to millions of homes where there's a realistic chance that the inhabitant has some decent firepower, weapons

and common usage. That changes the whole calculation. This goes back to I believe it was a Japanese admiral, although some people have told me this quote is apocryphal, but there's this quote about from a Japanese admiral in World War Two that they never could have invaded the US mainland because it would have been a rifle behind every blade of grass. True of the Japanese invading. It would have been true if the Japanese had invaded the US mainland and guess what it would be true if any

government authority went tyrannical. So it is a check on tyranny. It's a lot easier to enforce tyranny if you can go a house to house and all the people can do is try to, you know, stab you with a knife or hit you with a rolling pin. You can clear out rooms, clear round houses pretty easily. When that's what you're up against. Somebody's got an aar and a couple of hundred rounds. Government's gonna have a much tougher time unless they're just gonna blow up the entire house.

But remember they want to control the population. They don't want to just eradicate the entire population. Governments want to be in control of citizens. So anyway, it's just a it's a foolish argument. They make it all the time. We're not expecting to go nuke to nuke with a tyrannical government. We're expecting to be able to put up a fight, because that is all you need to be a check on tyranny. Maybe somebody should tell Biden that,

but he won't care because he's just an imbecile. The shoot her in ol Passo posted a manifesto online consumed by racist hate in one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America. Now I've heard the critique. Oh, he didn't write that, he's fair enough, but he said the words, and he did say white supremacy is hate

and should be treated as domestic terror. Important for you then to say that this is the same man who called white nationalists and klansmen and neo Nazis very fine people who ask for more immigrants who look like those in Sweden and Norway that the whitest places on the planet, while describing immigrants from Haiti as full of aids, describing the people of this community as rapists and criminals, talking about people as though they are animals or self human.

This necessarily results. You saw that manifesto. The words that he was using were many of the same words that the president has been using. This necessarily results in what betto? What does it result in? Interesting? He trailed off there because you know, now we do have a shooter in Ohio that is left wing, and as a fan, I just I'm curious what Beto was going for there, he just changed in the middle. This necessarily results in in what people acting out or people calling out the president

could be either it could be either. I just don't know how crazy Betto is willing to get because he already blames the president for something that no same president, I was, no same person rather could blame the president for. He's already put this on the lap of the commander in chief as though this is something that he bears responsibility for. And if you don't agree with that, you're clearly a bad person. And Betto is just full of lies here. Trump didn't say they're very fine, that that

white nationalist and clansmen are very fine people. He said when it came to the dispute over monuments Confederate minumes and taking it down there, there are fine people on both sides of that issue, was what he meant to say. That's what he was trying to say. He had already condemned white nationalists. Trump doesn't like any of those tiki torched losers. Come on, man, everybody knows that. And then his whole thing about calling people of this community rapists

and murderers. He's never called the people of El Paso rapists and murderers. Trump, in a sweeping statement, said that you know, Mexico is not sending us their best and some of the people they're sending, you know, he says they're sending us rapists and murders, and some of them are very fine people. What he's saying is that there are people to come across through illegal immigration that are criminals.

This is a fact. Just go type in MS thirteen and illegal illegal alien and see all the news hits you get. There are rapists and murderers who come across the border illegally. And Trump was the first president to come along, or first Kennedy to come along and be willing to say that, which is a fact. Of course, he doesn't think that all of them. That's why he said there's some that are very find people. No one thinks that he really believes that all of the good

would be more atic beyond belief. In fact, we know a very small percentage of the people that come across the border illegally are criminals of any kind. But if we're going to talk about the Valedictorians and say, oh, look at this, we should just you know, the more of the merrier, more illegal is better. We should also be able to say, well, there's also a downside to this. There are criminals who come across as part of this surge.

There are law enforcement problems that in fact, there's a lot of them, but they still misrepresent what Trump says, if what Trump. If Trump is so terrible, if his beliefs are so awful, then why do they always have to lie about what it is that Trump stands for and what he says. I think we all know the answer to that. You know, he says all this, all this horrible stuff out the president the United States, far beyond anything that you heard Republicans saying when they were

running against Barack Obama in twenty eleven. I mean, they ever spoke in such defamatory terms about Barack Obama. And oh my gosh, good heavens, if you said anything about Saint Obama, people just jumped all over you. But it's not just betcha, I look better as a desperate man's His candidacy is a joke. He probably should have dropped out yesterday. He's probably should be long gone as a

presidential candidate. He can't get any any wind in his sails at all, Despite all this media love for him, and they treat they treat him like he's a serious person, a serious candidate, when he's neither. But you know, Joe Biden is out there doing the same, Joe Biden's taking taking cheap shots at the president and his record on

this one right now and play clip six. There's no question that his reddick has contributed to at a minimum, at a minimum of dumbing down the way in which we as a society talk about one another, the way we've always been looked. We've always brought the country together. We've never you know, we the people we hold these true self. He flies in the face of all the basic things that we've never really met the standard, we've never abandoned it before. He looks like he's just flat

abandoned the theory that we are one people. Based on what I mean again, this is a really terrible thing to say about a president. He's abandoned the theory that we're all one people. No's he just believes in the theory that people who are in the country legally should be treated differently than people who are not in the country legally. That is a novel. That is a crazy statement.

Now to the modern Democratic Party, that there's any difference, that there should be any differentiation between those from the country legally and those who are in the country in an illegal status. Those who are citizens or who are permanent residents, a part of the American family forever legally should be treated in any way differently from those who just show up and say, I want to be here now, sorry, broke your laws. Don't care. Give me welfare benefits, give

me access to jobs, give me free school. You know, that's it's a it's an amazing thing to watch. It's a really disheartening thing to watch how the Democrats are all trying to outdo each other. It's a race to the bottom for who can say the nastiest things about the president. You know, you had Betcha responding there to the President calling out white nationalists and saying that they're that they're disgusting, that they're horrible, that you know that

they have no place in America. That does that even factor in now, bet I was like, oh, no, he's still a terrible racist. He's still the worst. He's still awful. You know, Joe Biden's running around, uh saying that this is the first time that he's ever heard Trump condemned

white supremacy. That's that's his take. I mean, look, Joe, Joe gets away with more than anything else just not being very bright, and the media constantly, constantly covers for him for just being an intense, an intense mediocrity because look, Biden is staking strong in the polls. I'm my my prediction of Biden may have been wrong. All we'll see. But here's what he says about Trump and condemning white nationalists.

Play eight and for the first time today, the first time I've ever heard him say he condemns white, white supremacy, white terrorism. When prisms do I have to reject, I've reject David Duke, rejected David Duke. I've rejected the KKK, the lu klux Land from the time I'm five years old, I rejected them. I put it on Twitter last week how many times. You know what, It's an amazing got the neo Nazis and the white nationalists because they should

be condemned totally. Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, Neo Nazis, white supremacies, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as American. For the first time today, the first time I've ever heard him say he condemns white, white supremacy, white terrorists. Maybe Joe

should just listen. Then, those are all different instances of the President publicly from his platform as the leader of the free world, just saying what we all know, which is that white supremacy and racism are terrible things. They are evils to be fought and to be destroyed, to be annihilated, to be pushed out of society at every turn, at every possibility. How many times does he have to say it before they'll at least stop saying that he won't say it? I mean, can they can they just

give Can they just give him credit for that? Can they just stop pretending that he won't say Oh, he won't say it, He won't say it. Can they stop doing that? Please? That's just a lie. He says it many many times, and they must know. I don't know Joe Biden so out to lunch, who knows what he really thinks? And then you've got I mean, it's it's it is so frusting. You got Corey Booker running around

saying the crazy stuff that that he says. I mean, you have so many, all these candidates who just don't care about the damage they're doing to discourse in the country while complaining about how our discourse has coursened, about how we're not civil to each other, or when we're talking about politics and we're gonna talk about Mitch McConnell and how they've got you know, they had protesters outside Mitch's house calling him myrtle, murder turtle and hashtag massacre

Mitch putting that on placards. These people are acting like total lunatics. They're all Democrats, they're all left wing supporters. Well, we'll talk about that in a moment. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. Democrats love to talk about civility and politics, and yet we know they're deeply uncivil on a regular basis. We know that they say horrible things about our law enforcement community. We know they say terrible

things about Republicans. They like to call the President of the United States a racist, a white nationalist, more or less a member of the k k K. And last night you had protesters that had gathered outside of Mitch McConnell's house yelling death threats and hashtag massacre Mitch, which yes, I know can be construed as a double entendre. But massacre Mitch was what they were showing on social media

and sharing on placards outside. I mean, they went to this guy's house in the middle night, folks, Who does that? What kind of lunatic thinks that showing up at a senior citizen who just broke his shoulder, by the way and is recovering at home, showing up at his house to chant about how he has quote murderle sorry, murder turtle and yelling things like out come out wherever you are. And then a woman was yelling I can't even read it.

It was blank, don't give nobody a blank. Blank your thoughts in prayers, Mitch, blank, you blank, your wife blank, everything you stand for. This is all on video. I mean I heard the video last night. It's just it's just lunatic outside Mitch McConnell's house, screaming and threatening him in his family, and no surprise here. Do you think the Democrats say that they're going to back off now? And maybe they're Maybe their rhetoric can cause nasty things

to happen too. Maybe it's not just a Republican problem, as they say, it is when someone can act act on their own to engage in violent behavior because of contentious politics. Mitch McConnell trying to sleep last night, I can't, trying to recover from a broken shoulder, which I'm sure it's very painful at his age, and I really mean that. Meanwhile, AOC who has been calling out Mitch McConnell on Twitter for quite some time, she decided to make a huge deal of some guys at a I forget what this

event is. It's in the it's in Kentucky, I forget what it's called. But it's some kind of a fair or something, and they they had a bunch of young people who are wearing you know, young men, white men, who are standing around a cutout of AOC and they all have Team Mitch t shirts on. Okay, and it's a cardboard cutout. Folks like, it's not a real person. It's a cardboard Cutout's very obvious. But some of these guys, and they look to be about high school age, they're

they're doing thumbs down one I'm sorry. One of them has his hand kind of like he's grabbing her throat, and another is hugging and kissing her on the cheek. This is like the definition of you know, childish, dumb teenage boy stuff that you shouldn't do, but they did. And you know it's Look the guy that's doing the grab the throat thing, I mean, that's a but hugging a cardboard cutout and kissing it on the cheek. I don't even know if we're supposed what we're supposed to

be upset about. That's not actually, you know, it's not actually assaulting any water, doing anything terrible. It's not violent. It's a hugging, a kiss on the cheek to a cardboard cutout. So oh, but do you think that Ocasio Cortez, who has millions and millions of followers in social media, do you think that she takes this in stride? No, she tweeted out, Hey, Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, these

young men look like they work for you. She tweeted again, just wanted to clarify, are you paying for young men to prac dis groping and choking members of Congress with your payroll? Or is this just the standard culture of Team Mitch? Okay, folks, these are high school students that just are wearing T shirts that say Team Mitch that has nothing to do with Mitch McConnell, with his office or anything else. And you know, this is just obviously good.

Are these kids are? Their lives are probably never gonna be the same. I'm sure they're already getting all kinds of death threats and people are saying horrible things about them, and they may if they're applying to colleges, their colleges may pull their oh you know all this stuff right because essentially, you know, doxing all these kids or pushing them out into public view where AOC is trashing them and making a big deal of this. That seems to

be an overreaction to me. That seems to be a bad thing for anybody in a really powerful position to be doing. Mitch McConnell said that these people have nothing to do with him, and you know this is not there. They don't work for him, they're not affiliated with him. And you know, but does AOC worry about you know what this might mean that these kids wearing Team Mitch t shirts in this viral photo. Now, look they did have in the caption I see here break me off?

A piece of that. Look it's I'm I'm not saying what they did was was okay. I'm just saying, look, they're they're they're dumb kids. They look like they're about fifteen or sixteen years old. Quote, this is what the Mitch McConnell spokesman said. These young men are not campaign staff, they're high schoolers, and it's incredible that the national media has sought to once again paint a large target on their backs rather than report real and significant news in

our country. Yeah, why is this a news story? How is this a news story? Well, because AOC tweeted it out and may have ruined these kids lives because one of them hugged, hugged a cardboard cut out of her and kissed it on the cheek. I mean, they're not even they're not even doing anything pornographic or you know, this is not stuff that you know is way way. I mean, the guy with the throat choke thing is that's a stupid thing to do, and that's over the line.

But the hug of the kiss on the cheek thing is you know, it's it's immature, stupid kids stuff. But now all these kids in the photo, even the ones that are just doing thumbs down. They didn't know. I'm sure they didn't know their buddies were gonna at the last second in this photograph, you know, grab and h But this is what happens. You know, AOC has way

too much power and very very little wisdom. And does she get called out for her supporters going after Mitch McConnell in the middle of the night, you know, for to do Democrats and their rhetorics saying that Mitch McConnell refuses. I mean, this is how this all start at AOC was saying, Mitch McConnell refused to take action on background checks. Now that's why people are dying. Does that ever get talked about? Is maybe a little too intense, a little

bit unfair to the geriatric Republican House Majority leader? Nope, of course not. This is always a one way street, folks. Republican rhetoric can lead to bad things. Republicans are responsible for what anybody who's even vaguely associated with the right does. Democrats just have to get out of jail free card on this all the time. They get away with it all Scott free AOC and all the rest. They can say whatever, they will look at the horrible stuff they've

been saying for days now. They have no shame whatsoever. Get pulled off the bus after school one day and apparently he had made a kill list, and I happened to be on it. I don't know why. I look up and there's two police officers standing on the bus asking him to get off the bus and go with them. David Partridge was an other former high school classmate of the government. He says when a friend told him about the kill list and disturbing text messages about hurting people,

they both went to the police. This guy could go to the school, he could kill people, he could hurt my family, he could hurt you. So you were concerned he was a school shooter back then. Absolutely. She contacted the police along with her parents. I got off the phone with her. I contacted the police along with my father.

There you have students who alerted police about the Dayton, Ohio mass shooter explaining what they're what they're very understandable concerns were and that they did take action, that the police were notified. Now we get into a difficult part of the conversation when we are trying to rely and when we were returning to police. At this stage, there was already been a societal failure. There's already been a

failure of parenting, of community, of you name it. I mean, I don't know if it's if all of the above

were just some of it. But once you have a person who is of high school age who is making lists of people he says he wants to kill, there's obviously already been a whole lot that has gone on that was very damaging and that has not sufficiently addressed this person of this person's problems, whether they are mental health related or you know whatever, you know, they're ideologically based, whatever it may be, because now you're going to have everyone say, well, what what can we do? What should

police do? Next time around? This came up also, and with the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas shooter. This has come up with other shooters who weren't just putting red flags out there. There were more or less standing on top of a building waiving a red flag and yelling over a bullhorn,

I'm a threat. But when you pass legislation that allows for what, the incarceration of somebody who has not yet done anything, they'd have to have the ability to prove the law enforcement would have to be able to say that this person was involved in a conspiracy, a conspiracy to involve, you know, to take life, a conspiracy to

conduct a mass shooting. And you don't have to be a brilliant lawyer to think of the ways that you would defend against that, and you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that that could very easily be abused. And this has become a way that people settle scores with each other. That it also will limit the willingness of any one individual to seek certain mental health treatment for fear of being handed over to the hand it over to the lease and treated like they

are a threat when they should not be. I mean, these are all the very This is why the mental health component is very complicated. But even the policing part of this is very complicated. There's a study that's in the National Institute of Justice that you can you can pull up if you like, you can read where they looked at all of the different mass shooting cases stretching back I think for about ten years and more or less crunch the numbers on it, and they created a

model of radicalization to terrorism among lone wolves. Here's what's on it. Personal and political grievances. Affinity with online sympathizers or extremist groups comes next. Then it is finding an enabler. Then it is broadcasting intent, followed by triggering event, and then terrorism. Those are present in a majority. In some cases, a vast majority of lone wolf radicalization case is irrespective

of what the specific ideology maybe. But I look at this and it reminds me very much of the geehotization chart that we used to work from at the NYPD Intelligence Division that had self identification, pre radicalization, radicalization and in doctrin indoctrination and then geehotization, which is really just all a fancy way of saying someone is aggrieved. Someone finds people that make them feel like they're able to be powerful, and that tell them who the enemy is

and that they want to take action. They learn more about it, they become ideologically brainwashed, and then they become violent based on the brainwashed ideology that they have inculcated in themselves. Now that's all well and good, I mean, this is a framework for understanding these things. The problem is that it's very hard to tell when someone's going from one of these steps to the next, And what action can you really take even if you think it's going to happen. We do not yet have a pre

crime unit in this country. We don't have the ability to lock somebody up for what we think they might do. And the moment you start involuntarily committing people, that sends a signal across the mental health community that you know, you better watch out how much you tell a psychologist or psychiatrist about the problems, even if you're constructively trying to deal with it and don't pose any imminent threat. Perhaps the state of you name it disagrees wants to

take away your freedom for a while. And how do you prove that you're not crazy once the state has said that you are absent any wrong do or actual proven threat. This is why you have to be very there's a lot of nuance here. There's a lot of competing goods. This is not just oh, there are evil

psychopaths running around, let's just lock them up. Yeah, we could all agree on that, But how do we determine who's an evil psychopath and who's somebody who's just crying out for help, somebody who just wants attention needs, mental health resources needs, time with a therapist, time on medication,

whatever it may be. And this is also where people would point out that those who have some form of mental illness, the numbers would show you, and I'm making up the number here, but it's something like, you know, point zero zero one percent of them are a danger to the public because of their mental illness, or you know, it might it's probably even less of a percentage than that. It's a tiny, tiny fraction of people with mental illness are criminally insane as how you could describe them, or

criminally mentally impaired. It's very very, very very small percentage. So you're going to pass laws now to try to get at that tiny percentage. There are risks here, folks. There are problems that come with this, and we ask a lot of law enforcement to be able to sort through this, especially at a time when I will point out law enforcement is not exactly being treated at all that well, especially by the Democrats unless you're an FBI or Intel person who was trying to trash Trump. Democrats

don't like you if you're in law enforcement. They don't like local police, they don't like local sheriffs, They think they're all racist, they don't like border patrol, their Nazi prison guards, Democrats say crazy stuff, and yet you have Governor Cuomo up in New York. You know, New York is one of the places where you've had these videos of young people throwing throwing water at police and then laughing about it and really just being disrespectful and creating

a hostile environment for law enforcement on the streets. Here's what govern Governor Cuomo says about this about the waterdowsings play clip one. The police officers walked away and got back in the car. That is wholly unacceptable. I don't know how we're training police officers. How when you are

basically assaulted, and that's an assault, you retreat, okay, Governor Cuomo. So, now, if somebody in the YPD tries to effect an arrest on a bunch of kids who are a bunch of teenagers, youths, whatever, who have thrown water at them, you're going to back them up when they have to wrestle one of them to the ground and maybe one of them gets a

scrape on their forehead. You're going to back them up when maybe they have to pull out pepper spray because they're mobbed by other people that are yelling and taunting them, yelling at them and taunting them. If I were in the NYPDI, I wouldn't have faith in Governor Cuomo. Nobody needs to take water dowsings in the face without reacting. Governor Cuobo would like you to take action against the water dowsers. I don't know if that's really a word, but Fuomo thinks it's a word. Yeah, we ask a

lot of law enforcement. We essentially asked them to protect us all the time, to take a tremendous amount of criticism from the Democrats, and to sometimes be left high and dry if they make a mistake. Sometimes I think we ask a little too much of our law enforcement this country, or maybe we should just be Remember Jeter Struck, he was the kind that gave testimony on Capitol Hill.

Sounds kind of like this, and he sends that he did nothing wrong when he was in the f mey and he was trying to stop Trump from being president. But yeah, remember that guy with the he had the whole Lisa page as lover who was an FBI senior FBI lawyer, and he had those text messages about how Trump is disgusting and how he could smell the Trump

supporters and he did all of that on official FBI devices. Wow, let me tell you that the folks that I used to work with in law enforcement always knew and it didn't really have to ever get talked about that. If you want to vent about the bosses, or if you want to vent about anything, you either do it on a private device. But even then, I wouldn't put it in writing. You call from a private phone and you

speak in real time, you don't write it down. You certainly don't write it down on government property, which is what these two did. I mean, it was astonishingly bad opsec. I mean the operational security here. It was terrible. And this is an individual who, Peter Struck specifically, was involved in three of the most politically sensitive FBI involved incidents

of the Trump era, really of my lifetime. Okay, Peter Struck was the guy who was involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation, was involved in the what was one of the agents who sat down to speak to General Michael Flynn on assignment from Sally Yates in a in a left wing just a left wing partisan attack maneuver, which is what that was. Just find some way to mess up Trump's people. I mean, Sally Yates is the worst. I mean, these these people are the worst abusing their

government power because they have Trump's arrangement syndrome. And you know you've got Yates, uh, you know, sending him to do the interview you with Michael Flynn, and then you have Struck also involved at the latter stage or at the at the stages of the investigation, the FBI investigation of Russia collusion. So this guy isn't just someone who happens to work at the FBI. He's someone who is, like Forrest Gump, involved in some of the most important

events in events in the history of that organization. Just happens to be there, right, just happens to be involved in these different things, and we're told that it's not a big well. Rather, he's now filed suit claiming that he should be reinstated, that he should have back pay, and that the only reason he was fired was the political pressure brought by Trump and his allies against him. One he's at the FBI. I just have to say, you know, the FBI really needs a serious, serious house cleaning.

And there are there were deep state folks at the top, Komy and Struck and Page and McCabe and you know who very obviously are are not chastened at all by what they did. That they do not feel any any remorse or regret for their hyper partisan abuse of power. In fact, they're self righteous about it. Look at Komy,

they're sanctimonious about it. You know, they just decided, Oh, that's right, the the ohso evil Attorney General Bill Barr decided, who I think is great and fantastic in the role, that they weren't going to bring charges against Komby for leaking that memo, giving him effectively the benefit of the doubt. And then some remember, even the decision to charge would be smirched Komey's character, and and that would be a black mark on his reputation, even if he beat it

in court. You know, the decision to charge is in and of itself damaging to somebody. So they're not charging him. They're letting comee me off. Oh, because I thought that Barr was so unfair and he would just do whatever Trump's bidding was, No, Barr looked at the law and he said, all right, on balance, we've got to give him the benefit of the doubt here with the leaks. Would I have done that, Probably not. But I think Barr understands the way the law applies, and I was

trying to be honest about it. But now now you see that Struck wants to get back in action, and there's also he wants to go back to the FBI, wants reinstatement. And there's also the Judicial Watch report that came out of all of these leaks, lots and lots of leaks in twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen and into twenty eighteen, many many, many people people that were unidentified but were fired or were put on unpaidly for a time, or you know, getting serious slapdowns for leaking to the media.

I have to say, I would wonder what those leaks were really about. Hmm. What was going on in twenty sixteen and in twenty seventeen that would make somebody risk their career and possibly even their freedom just to tell the media something. What issue would be so high profile and so contentious. M I wonder if there's anything going on politically in twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen. Ah, I

think we all know what the answer is. This Inspector General report that's supposed to come out next month better be a just complete hot wash of all this nonsense that's been going on over at the FBI, because clearly what's happened so far, they don't accept that they're still fighting back. I mean, whatever accountability there has been, now, these whether it's McCabe or Struck or Comy, they all claim to be victims of Trump. They don't say, they

don't say they failed, they don't say they apologize. Maybe they say they use some bad judgment and then victims of Trump. You know, I would just note that whether it's McCabe or Struck, they didn't want to give General Flynn the benefit of the doubt. You know, he gets ruined, he gets he faces criminal sanction, he faces the destruction of his reputation, loss of his job as National Security Advisor. I don't think these senior FBI officials should be getting

the special treatment that they've been getting. Decades of Chinese misbehavior, decades of China not living up to its commitments, fundamentally stealing our intellectual property, engaging in forced technology transfers, discriminating against American and other foreign companies, and this behavior was accepted by the United States for far too long. We're planning for the Chinese to come here next month, and if there's a good deal or good progress, he may

reconsider some things. But similarly, he has also said if there's no good deal in no progress, he may also reconsider some things. On the other side, the president would like a big win before the election. Doesn't have to worry right now, but the idea that it will be let's say anything more than one kind of win. I think it's going to go on until twenty twenty one, when I think that she's reign may be over. That's the hundredth year of the People's Republic of China, the

Communist Party. And I think that this whole notion of invincibility was she is a little bit more made up by the Western president, and I think it's tiresome. I'm listening mister Wonderful, and I think mister Wonderful is dead right on everything because it's factual, it's empirical, and thank you for speaking the truth. I don't know how, why aren't you more fearful that the media will hate you? You know, Jim, I just have to fight it every day and I'm really tired of the last fifteen years.

Finally an administration that's batting for the guy that puts his capital up there and gets screwed over over and over and over and over again. Enough already, let's fix it. I couldn't agree more. And that's exactly what's going on. Thank you for speaking the truth. It's really refreshing. A lot of different voices weighing in there on China. So you probably recognize Kramer from Mad Money, mister wonderful who am?

I have an interview before, and I gotta say I found it to be a very very affable guy and smart than you had Bolton weighing in on this issue. You had Larry Kudlow, who's also very affable and smart guy. By the way, Bolton and affable, I don't know, I leave that to you. Does have a great mustache, however, I mean that is a that is a Walrus level ten. That's a serious mustache. But the Chinese are digging in for what looks to be a long term showdown over

this whole trade war issue. And this means that if we have any real economic disruption in advance of the election of this could get this could get tough pretty quickly. Things could go south on us. We had one of the worst days in a long time the stock market earlier this week, and now there have been additional Essentially both sides have fired more shots across the other sides bows, so to speak. I think Kramer there said one hundredth

anniversary or the People's Republic of China. That's actually the seventieth, So I think he just got a little it's all right, it's all right, Kramer. That's what Buck's here for to get the facts right. But he's referring to how Shijin paying the Chinese premier's planning a huge celebration for the seventieth anniversary of the People's Republic of China in October, and that means that he needs to show himself standing strong against any US or any Trump effort to try

and bend him to America's will. So he's not going to want to budge on this. And as a result, you have some US measures going into place here, like the designation of China as a currency manipulator that just happened earlier this week. You also have the farm belt in America feeling the pain of China's tariffs on our farm products. You know, imports from China are getting hit with more punitive tariffs. I mean, you have a lot of back and forth here, but one thing that I

have to say is and there are risks. There's no question there are risks here in folks. I mean this. I think this could be the issue that decides and I'm not sure in which direction, but that decides whether Trump gets four more years as president. I think this could be it. You may see a Chinese trade war be the determining factor because if things if we have a big essentially a recession, I mean a correction in the economy is a nice way of saying our recession.

If we had into a recession here and the global economy starts contracting, then it's going to be much easier. Right now, all these all the Democrats have is Trump is a racist. Trump is mean, he's orange. You know, they don't like his hair. That's really what they resolve themselves too, because what are they going to say? All this prosperity and an economic dynamism is just is bad. I mean, they're going to root against the American economy

because the American economy is doing very well. But if that were to change, then I think you're in a real position where you could see all of a sudden, this is the issue that over everything else. Because Trump also has pushed for this, this this isn't just a cyclical economic matter. Trump decided that he was going to hold the Chinese to account. Finally. Now I think that he's right, and he should get credit for being right on the merits the Chinese. And this is what mister

Wonderful's talking about. The Chinese have been ripping off American companies and American investors as a result. Right, I mean the companies are funded by investors, So the Chinese have been ripping us off for a long time. There's really no question about that. The Chinese have been currency manipulators for a long time. The Chinese have been stealing intellectual property. They've been engaged in, you know, these forced transfers of

intellectual property. That's when you partner up with them in China and to do for your business, to do work there, you have to give them your proprietary technology and access to it, and then they either just take it and use it or reverse engineered for their own purposes. All the cyber theft, the industrial and intellectual property espionage that has been going on for years, for decades now, without

any serious pushback from the United States. This is now the first time where it seems that this is We're going to do something about this. But keep in mind some of the possible outcomes here you have the and this was discussed. I remember in the movie Not the Big Short, what's the other movie, Too Big to Fail?

When we had the US economic near collapse in two thousand and eight, at least near collapse of the banking sector, the Chinese premiere there's this scene they play out where the Chinese premier says to Hank Paulson, who was the Treasury Secretary, that China and Russia were considering selling US treasuries at the same time on the market to essentially collapse the treasury market and send the US economy into

into a spiral. Right, But that didn't happen. There are some who weren't wondering if the Chinese though, we'll do something akin to that going forward, even if it hurts them, They think it might hurt us more. You know, it would drive the yuan up. But that doesn't mean that they wouldn't be willing to do that. So that's one extreme approach that could happen. And keep in mind, there are also other possibilities. There are other outcomes here that

we can't necessarily foresee. You had in this Wall Street journal piece today, she Yin Hang, a professor of international relations at Beijing's Redman University, give them this quote, which seemed a little bit on ominous. China is not just preparing for a protracted trade war, he said, but also an escalating conflict. Trump's actions have seriously agitated the Chinese leadership, who now realize there's no chance of reaching a fair deal with the US. Well, of course that spin at

the end, But what is an escalating conflict? What does that mean? Nobody really knows. But Trump has taken this issue on. This is I think in many ways, this is on foreign policy and certainly on trade. This is his signature issue. North Korea, the missiles, the short range missiles, that missiles that were fired off. Look, I don't think Trump's going to end up getting a nuclear deal with North Korea, but we've traded nothing in the process. With China.

We're facing down the number two power economically and militarily in the world, and we are suffering as a result of facing them down. If Trump doesn't come out on top of this at the end, there may be a political price to pay. I think that much is clear. Team. We haven't had bucks books in a while here to talk about. Not books that I've written, although that's coming up too. I have a book on the Democrat project

to drag us all into socialism. That's the book. So it is in the process of being written, not as in I'm going to start writing one day, I promise, as in I think I'm about forty pages into it right now, so it's moving. It's moving along. We're gonna get to two hundred that'll be the first draft, and

then we'll see where we go from there. But I've got another book that I wanted to talk to you about, and I will say this is the fastest that I have read a non fiction book in a long time, although I think Molly Hemingway and Carrie Severino's Justice on Trial book will be another one that I probably finish in two days. But this book is it's a little bit, a little bit older. It's been out for a couple of years now, and I knew a bit about the story,

but I didn't know it in its entirety. The book is Bad Blood, not to be confused with the Netflix show Bad Blood, which is about the Risudo crime family Sicilian mafia crime family in Montreal, which is actually a pretty good show, as I've told you, pretty well done. The guy who plays the character who's really almost feels like a second coming of ray Leota from Goodfellas. He doesn't really excellent, He's got kind of an unusual name. He does a really excellent job. But Bad Blood the

book is about Thronos. Now, this was very big in finance circles and in Silicon Valley startup circles when the story happened, and it spans about a decade or so, the whole tale. But I'm telling you it is remarkable. This woman, Elizabeth Holmes drops out of Stanford and says that she has this patent that she's writing and says that she has figured out a way to do blood testing on just a few drops of blood from your finger instead of a venous draw. You know the old

what you think of the blood test? Right, you go in and someone sticks you in the arm with a needle. They draw blood out. Usually they draw a few tubes depending on the tests, and that's how we do it. Well. This would just be a little a little prick on the finger and then a home test that you could do.

That was the initial theory. And what you read about in the book is that this woman then manages to essentially fake it until she thinks she's going to make it because the technology never existed, she never had it. And she brings on board these huge names, including George

salt Schultz, the former Secretary of State. She brings on various Silicon Valley royalty, the best lawyers from Silicon Valley, the best you know, the best venture capital people in Silicon v She brings in all these different individuals, nobody with any expertise in healthcare though to be on the board or be an overseer position. She sells all of them on her vision and how this is going to

change healthcare. This will help people live longer. You won't have to say goodbye to loved ones so early in life because these drugs, these tests will allow the drugs

to be administered early enough to save lives. Quite a pitch, and she is a sociopathic fraud and it is amazing the stuff that she does, Elizabeth Holmes in this book, and she's a couple of years younger than me, and she's essentially my contemporary are close to it, and maybe even quite a few years younger than me, But she decided, yeah, she would have been what I think she dropped out in oh six, so yeah, she's four or five years.

I mean, she was at one point a self made billionaire, a self made billionaire worth between four and five billion dollars on paper, never had a working product, never even had a working prototype of a product, and raised eight hundred million dollars from investors eight hundred million, astonishing. How

could she keep this secret? Well, she claimed that it was proprietary technology, and she hired very aggressive lawyers, including David Boys, who was on the board of her company and was brought in as the hatchetman, to threaten anybody who was going to tell the truth about this company. And you might say, well, Buck, what's the big deal? You know companies come and go, rise and fall. Well, this wasn't a software company where they could fix the glitch.

They were faking blood testing technology and giving people false positives, false negatives, knowing that their results were entirely unreliable. They convinced Walgreens and Safe Way to put all kinds of money forward for these testing centers. And at one point, and this is the real I don't want to give away all the best parts of the book. And her boyfriend, who is also the number two in charge of the company,

who comes across like a sadistic lunatic. You know, a guy who got essentially won the lottery in the dot com era by being a part of a startup that had all this money that completely collapsed after he left, because it was just it was a fake. It was an inflated fake company, really, But what they decided to do was at one point hide all the results, sue anybody, threaten anybody with bankruptcy who was willing to speak about

what was really happening. And they were going to run HIV tests with a technology that flatly did not work. Think about that, you're going to give people a false positive on an HIV test and not feel and knowing that you may be doing that and not feel absolutely horrible about it. It's an amazing book. And the people that gave her money, Oh, she was close with the Clintons, of course, Oh, her and Chelsea Clinton buddies. I mean, oh, of course, she courted all of Silicon Valley and Democrat

Party royalty. It's one of the reasons why I think the federal regulators were so slow to act against her company. There's so much it is. Look, it's written by this Wall Street Journal reporter who's the guy who basically brought down the company by exposing it, This guy John Carrrew. It's the best book I have read in a long time, and so I would highly recommend it to you. But

there's just so much in it. It's such a reminder of how people you know, you know everything you need to know about, accompanyed by how it treats, by how the boss's treat employees. You know that there are all these people that are held up as being so brilliant in society, and look, General Madis went to bat for Elizabeth Holmes. Saint Maddis of the Pentagon looks like a total clown in this book. I mean, Joe has no

idea thinks that this woman is brilliant and awesome. I mean, that's another part of this that I just can't get past. She wears black turno X and black pants to mirror Steve Jobs, and she's effectively doing a copycat thing of Steve Jobs. She has this voice that people who worked with her claimed to know what's fake. Oh, I bought

her as Elizabeth Holmes, and my voice's down here. So I mean she had this whole and people were transfixed by her and giving her millions and millions of dollars for a company that never had any peer reviewed data, a company that never had a product, that never had a patent. That this was a fraud. Now it's facing all kinds of it's facing a criminal fraud for criminal fraud charge, has already faced all kinds of sec sanction. But it's just an amazing book and that this could

happen in this day and age. You have to really read it to believe it. And it's so thoroughly sourced and well done and well laid out for you. So Bad Blood by John carrierew It's been out for a couple of years, but I like to give you recommendations when they're really worthwhile. It's one of the best nonfiction books I've read in a long time. I've already recommended Justice on Trial for you with Carrie Savorino and Molly Hemingway. But Bad Blood is really excellent. I read it the

flight out to la and the flight back. I finished the whole book. That's how much I liked it. So

that's probably tells you something. I'll be right back. I wanted to do a quick update here on the Jeffrey Epstein case, which has completely disappeared from the headlines for understandable reasons, but nonetheless, my concern all along has been that somehow there won't be a full accounting, there won't be any real justice for not just the young women who were abused here, it's also a question of the American people understanding how our justice process was also undermined

by all of this. There was clearly bad stuff going on behind the scenes. There's no way that Jeffrey Epstein should have gotten the deal he did, and so that's why I found it interesting to see today that Florida Governor Ron de Santis has ordered a criminal probe a criminal probe into the Palm Beach sheriff and state attorney's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case from two thousand and eight. This is where you find the most inexplicable so far.

Maybe we'll find out what really happened here, but inexplicable dealings by public officials, the Palm Beach County District Attorney, who was a Democrat. By the way, as much as we know that Acosta had to resign from his position as Secretary of Labor, there have been there's been far less attention on what should have been the slam dunk case of the Palm Beach County District attorney who decided not to push not to push charge. Look, I'll even

say this right now. I'm actually and I could google it and look it up right away, but it's indicative of how much less coverage it gets that I don't have that district attorney's name in mind right now. I can't think of it off the top of my head

because it's covered so much less. It's been such a smaller part of this, and he's the person who decided to do the that district attorney decided to do the work release to do the to not bring I mean the sheriff, the Palm Beach sheriff handed him what he thought was a slam dunk case of sex with miners child pornography, sex trafficking, all kinds of just horrible, heinous crimes.

And for some reason, the Palm Beach County DA decided to or state's attorney whatever his designation is for Palm Beach County, but the prosecutor decided at the state level not to push charges. Why is that, folks? Yeah, I mean, Epstein's a big Democrat donor, but that's a lot to

make go away. That's this is somebody who was willing to risk his career and certainly his good name and obviously at some level his integrity and maybe his soul in order to keep Jeffrey Epstein from facing real justice. There are reasons for that. Something happened. People brought influence to bear as is not conspiratorial, This is just obvious.

I think someone brought against this Democrat prosecutor a lot of leverage, somebody who really had access and power and influence and was able to make this go away, such that if Epstein, you know, if you hadn't had a few things like the Miami or if you hadn't had the attorneys that unsealed some of this because the victims' rights law that was violated in this process, and then the Miami Herald investigation. Epstein would have gotten away with it, folks,

he would have. He this guy almost got away with running an underage women human trafficking ring and pedophile ring. It's outrageous. So I hope Ronda Santists could get some answers here. The show ain't over yet, folks, keeping it real, It's time for roll call. All right, team, let's get let's get into it. Shelley Facebook dot com, slash buck Sexton. Let's jump into the latest roll call here, Hunter starts it off. Your segment on Fox News about guns and

gun control was a refreshing take in today's climate. Thank you, sir, Thank you Hunter. Yeah, I was on Fox this morning and I did Tucker Show tonight at eight thirty. If you missed it, you can watch the replay at midnight Eastern time. So I'll be on at twelve thirty am Eastern time tonight if any of you happen to be up or if you want to set your DVR. But yes, indeed, Alicia Rights. Wow, first time I've ever been really disappointed in you. Oh do process and innocent until proven guilty

are the basis of our country and our freedom. Red flag laws are the most egregious assault on the Constitution I have ever seen. It's seizing property from a law abiding citizen based on someone else's word without consequences for them for lying, and then the person has to prove that they weren't going to do something that they haven't done. Aren't you always going off? But how you can't prove a negative? So Buck, when was the last time you

beat your wife? Question Mark? Isn't that always your example? Shame on you. My husband is a combat veteran with a diagnosis of PTSD after serving seven tours deployed with seal teams as an EOD tech. You know what terrifies him having his constitutional second member rights taken away because of his diagnosis a PTSD, which is exactly what people at these laws would do. I never thought i'd hear an anti constitutional position from you, all right, Alicia? First

of all, see I do read. I think some of you think that I don't read the criticisms on this show, but I do as well. I read them on air as well as read them when they're sent in a few things, Alicia, First of all, I did say yesterday on the show that my concerns would be that somebody

would have their Second Amendment rights truncated. And when I just say concern, it's a red line for me that anybody, for example, who had served in the military and had PTSD would have any rights a bridge you're taken from them. Just so you know, there are there are places already in federal law when you apply for a background check, for example, if you have you know they don't when

they ask about mental health for background check stuff. My understanding is at least that you if you have a PTSD treatment, that's not something that is that is listed, or if it is listed, is not considered in adverse circumstances in any way, as it shouldn't be for somebody who's applying for your clearance has nothing to do with

your trustworthiness or anything else. As for your concerns about red flag laws, look, red flag laws already exist in a number of states, and it's not due process free, or at least it shouldn't be due process free. You have to go before a judge, and the judge then does what's the equivalent of a preliminary injunction. Effectively, you

would have to turn in your weapons. If a judge decided that you were a threat, and then you would have an option to try and get that overturned, or perhaps there would be a thirty or sixty day period where the order was an effect and then it would pass, and then that would have to be renewed. So there's a process involved here. Now I share your concern that

this will be abused. And one of the problems that was raised yesterday, I believe by our friend Charles Cook, is that many of the states that have red flag laws are also very anti Second Amendment in general, and so they will use red flag they will abuse red flag laws. Keep in mind, though, Alicia, that there are already a lot of states that abuse restrictions on the Second Amendment in general. I mean New York, a state who's gun laws I know pretty well is one of them.

I mean, in New York City, for example, you have to pay hundreds of dollars to get a premise permit for a handgun. It takes somewhere from three to six months to get it approved. You have to get fingerprinted at one police plaza, you have to go some other place to get the paperwork. They make it as difficult and annoying as possible just for a premise permit that's not for concealed carry. So there are abuses all over

the place. Look, if you're asking me, what do I think really should be done in response, if I am in charge of everything, what do I think should be done in response to these two shootings? A thorough review of both cases, and then I'm open to hearing what could have been done to stop either one, and if there is an applicable law from that, that would be

the law that I would want pass. But if there is no applicable statutory or law enforcement policy change, then I don't want anything to change, because we can't stop everything. And my position on this tends to be bad things happen, and there are evil people in the world. There's only so much we can do to make each other safe, and it is incoming upon us as individuals and as citizens to do what we can to keep ourselves safe.

But the state is never going to grant you perfect security, and if you try for perfect security, you'll give up too much of the process. So I'm sorry that you were disappointed, Alicia, but I do think that you are oversimplifying or perhaps going much further with a position than I would. And keep in mind that President Trump himself has been supportive of at least considering red flag laws in different states, and the mental health component of this problem.

So there's there's a tremendous pressure that we all are aware of to do something. But I do not agree that doing something for the sake of anything is a good idea. But see, Alicia, you can write in, you can light me up. You need to get hold me to account. That's fine. The buck is not perfect. I mean, for heaven's sakes, he speaks in the third person sometimes, what else do you have to know? Guy's got issues, Misty.

President Trump will not be eligible for California's primary ballot unless he releases his tax returns under a new law signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on Tuesday. Can he really do that? What recourse do Californians have, Misty? I don't have a legal answer for you on this. I would like to just say no, of course you can't do that, but I'm not sure that's true. And I never want

to tell you something that's not accurate. I can tell you that Gavin Newsom, who is such a slippery, slimy operator, said on TV well, I saw the clip of him today at least saying his law is not about stopping any one individual. This is about transparency for candidates for the state of California. You know this whole Gavin Newsom thing, and that's just a laughable that's a laughable lie. Right.

We all know why California is doing this. We all know that they all have an obsession with getting Trump's tax returns. So yes, indeed, yes, indeed, let's see what we have here next. Greg writes Buck, I recently got married to a socialist whoa Greg. Best of luck to you, my friend. About a month into our relationship, we started talking politics and realized we were on totally different sides.

Long story short. We have constantly hours long debates, but they always have been civil, and I promised we never get heated with each other. And with just basic facts and data, I have led her more to my side and have gotten her to denounce socialism and Bernie Sanders. Not all hope is lost Shields time, my friend. Well, Greg, first of all, I'm seeing a photo here of your new bride and a big pup, and both are absolutely lovely and adorable. So you've made great choices, my friend.

And it's look, I have dated liberals. In fact, i'd say half of my girlfriends in life have been liberal, so I am no stranger to dealing with that. And I can tell you that as long as you're willing to have conversations with people rooted in respect and honesty, you can talk about anything, respect, honesty and the facts as much as you can. You can talk about anything, you just have to keep it in that place. And

I think people can really grow together. And I will have you know that there are numerous people in my life who I haven't sought to convert them to conservatism. But I have some very close friends that, just over the course of knowing me and being around me, and I don't know if they would give me credit for this, but I will give myself credit for it, they have

become much more conservative as a result. Some of them were liberals that are now that are now pretty center right, I think you could say, so I'm proud of that, to be honest with you. Scott writes in rather than wanting to know what kind of weapon these monsters are using, shouldn't we take a look at what kind of psych

medications they're on? The CDC says the thirty eight percent of people in the US are taking some form of drug that can cause suicidal ideation, and young white boys are being prescribed rittlin, which is an amphetamine on a horrifyingly regular basis, which the CDC says will make them nine point six times more likely to have violent outbursts.

While big pharma is a frequent target of Democrats, big education is literally given the power to demand young boys developing minds be author with rittlin simply because they don't

behave and learn the way that teachers find easy. Love to know your thoughts on this, Buck Shields High Well, Scott, I'm not a psychopharmacology expert at all, so let's just start with that I know about these issues just from reading and from people in my life that I know that have had to deal with different mental health problems and issues that are on these drugs. I think that overwhelmingly these kinds of medications are They're really life saving

for a lot of people. They give people their lives back, and I think we lose sight of that. For those who have extreme bipolarity, OCD, schizophrenia, many of these drugs let them be completely functional, normal and even happy fellow human beings, you know, in their day to day they're

not stuck in misery. So that often gets lost in these conversations now when you're talking about putting people in the tens of millions, which is what we're talking about in this country on and of course there's a huge span too, right. I mean, some people have a little bit of anxiety and they take a little bit of something to help calm their anxiety, and it really has a pretty limited psychological effect beyond the neurological impulses of

stress and suppressing that. But we are putting tens of millions of people on these mind altering drugs, you know, ssry s, NRIs and and those are just a couple of classes of them, and there's a whole bunch that I'm not even really familiar with. Are there going to be just like with any drug, with any pharmaceutical, are there going to be terrible side effects that affect some person or some people on the way, Yes, absolutely do.

I think that on the whole these drugs are probably for ninety nine percent of the people who are taking them who need to be taking them. And I think maybe Scott that's where your particular concern is that we're over prescribing, right. I think that there. I think that that does psychoactive drugs, These these different medicines out there for antidepressants and things like that are our life saving for a lot of people. But do we are we

over prescribing things like riddling? Possibly? It certainly seems reasonable to me. And remember there's really only a couple of generations to even study on this, so and there's more of these drugs in circulation being prescribed than ever before. So my answer, Scott is it's worth thinking about. And I don't have a clear, you know, irrefutable answer for you on this one. And unlike other people that do radio or podcasts, I don't pretend to know definitively everything.

I always think that's so funny when I occasion I'll catch some other show where someone just like thinks they're a little a little answer machine for everything. Who really goes through life like that? I just think that's affront. I think there's a dishonesty to that, But it's okay to say you don't know. That's one thing I hope everyone learns from from this show, because something that I've

learned sometimes the hard way. All right, team, we're gonna have a great show tomorrow because we have a great show every day. Please tell somebody about this podcast, The Buck Sexton Show on iTunes. Do me a favor. Talk to you tomorrow, shield Hie