Political Criminals

great American. Again the buck Sexton Show begins. Here's the story. Go back and look at the paper that Michael Cone wrote before he testified in the House and or sentence. It talked about his position. What he's trying to do, because he's a weak person and not a very smart person. What he's trying to do is, and it's very simple. He's got himself a big prison sentence and he's trying to get a much lesser prison sentence by making up

a story. Now here's the thing. Even if he was right, it doesn't matter because I was allowed to do whatever I wanted during the campaign. I was running my business a lot of different things during the campaign. So very simply, Michael Cone is lying, and he's trying to get a reduced sentence for things that have nothing to do with me. Perjury traps, perjury traps, and more perjury traps. Welcome to

the Buck Sexton Show. That's the President who is laying out a very clear explanation of really all that needs to be said when it comes to the latest today in the Russia collusion force slash nightmare, nightmare for the country, force for all people that can still put two and two together and have not been brainwashed into thinking that

putin somehow changed the election results. In twenty sixteen, Michael Cohen, the lawyer slash fixer for Donald Trump for over a decade, has come out and pleaded guilty to federal crime, to a federal crime, in this case, lying to Congress with regard to some questions that he was asked about his

about a Russian real estate project. Now, to give you a sense of what we're talking about here with the degree of the lie, he had said that he had limited discussions about a proposed real estate deal with mister Trump in Moscow, essentially for Trump Tower Moscow. That was the idea, but in reality there were more extensive discussions.

He said that the fall statements also included that he continued to talk to them after January twenty sixteen, when really those efforts continued through June of twenty sixteen, and then the deal fell apart, and the deal fell apart a month after Trump secured his claim on the GOP presidential nomination. Okay, everybody, let's just take a step back for a second. What does this really say about anything that any of us care about other than Michael Cohen

did something very dumb. I can't answer that question for you because the left is just gonna come up with, well, I mean, the answer is nothing, But the left is going to come up with some convoluted theory here of how Oh but you know, and that's why you know vessel as Skaya in Trump Tower. That happened right after

the deal fell apart. So maybe that was an overture. Okay, you know, so maybe the Russians are trying to, you know, tickle Trump's toes a little bit here and see if they could, you know, make all nicey nice with him in case he did. When I talk, by the way, talk about foresight, let me tell you one thing that came out of as I've talked to you before the KGB archives, the Metrokan Archive. Fascinating book, highly recommend you read.

You read about it when you get a chance. The Sword of the Shield, and it is clear when you're going through it that the Soviets had a incredibly poor understanding of American politics. You know, they really didn't know, you know, who was what and what was who when it came to different political parties, and you know, they had a very much an outsider's understanding of this. We

are really to believe that the Russians. The Russians had so much foresight that they were in this back and forth and then they sent an emissary to Trump Tower under the guise of Russian adoptions, saying she had dirt on Hillary, but actually talking about Russian adoptions maybe, And this was all so they could start a back channel to get Trump Tower Moscow going. Do the people who are saying this stuff out loud here themselves, do they

really think this through? And more than anything else, I just sit here and say to myself, the president wasn't the president yet he could still talk about deals here and there. He could do whatever he wanted to do in terms of real estate, transactions when he's running for the presidency. He's a businessman, you know, in a sense.

This is because we have become very used to just having politician after politician run for the presidency people that don't have business interests, really, people that aren't running things other than government agencies or institutions. That should change. That

should change. You would think that an individual who had more connectivity to the economy in a real sense, who weren't just living off the public sector or living off of their previous fortune and no longer having to really get involved in the day to day of the bottom line and profit and loss. That's not necessarily a good thing. But now we get into the whole what does this mean? Oh, now Cohen once again has flipped on Trump. That's what

they're saying. Well, they've been saying this for months, And what's the most that we've gotten out of it. Oh, maybe there was a payment made to Stormy Daniels and was that a campaign finance violation, which, even if it was, was a slap And there's this is the best they

can pull off. This is the most major stuff they have or are we to believe that they're just holding out to the very last minute to dropped the bombshell of all bombshells that you know, they have conversations between Trump and Assange or one of Trump's emissaries and Putin or whatever it may be. This is fantasyland. I mean, I really do believe that people are going to look

back on this period in time, and they will. They will just have a hard time believing what they are reading about this that the left could be so obsessed with this idea. But there are plenty of reasons to criticize Trump. There are plenty of areas to have disputes with him on policy. And I get it if they don't like his style. I mean, I think he's really funny and I like it most of the time. But

you know, but it's always this Russia thing. They have invested so much of themselves, the media in particular, into this that they it's like climate change. The problem with discussing climate change with libs now is that they've been so self righteous, so sanctimodious on it for such a long time that for them to go back on that now would would be so ego crushing for them that they would rather continue in the delusion than have to

grapple with the facts. Better for them to just keep on believing the fairy tale that have to live in the reality. And I think we're there on Russia collusion too. Doesn't matter what the Muller Report finally says, doesn't matter if no charges are brought against Trump, doesn't matter, if the House investigations that we know are coming turns up no new worthy information about this. They will believe it until the you know, the day they die left. They're

gonna believe that Trump did all this stuff. And then you get into how how much they are damaging. And I know this was what we talked about a bit. Yes, right, I interviewed Jerome course today and that will air air today, will let air tomorrow morning. I forget now, but it

will be on the Hill dot com. This idea that because they're all of these please that people are taking that there are so many, so many folks around Trump who've had to plead guilty, who have pleaded guilty to lying, that there must be something there and no, we're what we are seeing is a powermad prosecutor who is nailing people for minor inconsistencies, oversights, or lapses in memory in their testimony and doing this over and over again, not

just to self justify the investigation, which is a big part of it. Right, Oh, there's a guilty play. There must be something there, another guilty play. There must be something there. But each one of these individuals has been flipped to give information on Trump and it could save the years in prison. And I don't have to tell you this, but if somebody can shave years off their prison sentence, they got information, they're gonna share it. It has to be real, right, it has to be information

that they're not making up. They're got even more trouble if you lie in the plea bargain process at all, If you lie as part of your deal, the whole as metaphor it is apparently finding out your whole deal goes away, and then you're back to federal mandatory minimums. And so you don't want that. You don't want that. But you got like Senator Mark Warner, for example, is making this case. You know, he's he strikes me as a smart enough guy to know that what he's saying

is crap. And that's even more upsetting. You know. It sort of reminds me of how the anti Trump conservatives who are just turncoats and trojan horses, who aren't even really conservative anymore, who really want to see their own side fail. They bother me more in some ways than the crazy whackadoodle Libs, because at least the crazy Libs are crazy. The Conservatives are just cutthroat, self involved cry babies, the ones who have turned on their fellow and they're

not even conservative, right, they're fakes. The fake Conservatives are even more annoying. So Warner is too smart to really believe this, but I think he knows. He's got to say at play clip four. You've got all these closest associates of the president, one after another, pleading guilty, often pleading guilty about their ties to Russian and Russians, And what are they covering up for? And we also have a White House that still seems just obsessed about this investigation.

If anything the President has said is true that there's no there there, why are all as closest associates being found guilty of lying about their ties to Russia? Two very important smears lies misdirections from Warner there that I want to address, and I'll take these. I'll take these in reverse. Aryan first of all, the idea that because there are people pleading guilty to this, there must be

something to it. I asked Professor Jershwitz this today. We spoke about it at the Hill and he said, look, this is this is why you shouldn't testify unless you absolutely have to. I mean, this is why people plead the fifth because if you have a prosecutor that they're finding minor inconsistencies, they're fine, Well they text these people in lies. Usually you would lie so you don't get caught for a crime. These people, to a person with the exception I guess of metaphord, are getting caught in

lies about non criminal behavior. They never lie, and then oh, you lie because you were trying to cover up this crime. What that tells us, because this is a pattern, is that Muller and his team put people through very aggressive questioning, find it inconsistency, and then nail them based on the inconsistency. And remember you're being asked questions, you're responding as best

you can. But people forget things. This is reality. People forget things, and a part of justice is understanding that if someone is not intentionally lying to cover up a crime, if they're just misremembering a date or an event or a conversation, then that cannot be. There's no criminal mind, there's no men's ray to justify a charge. They don't care. They're nailing all these people. And anyone who's been around interrogations, as I have polygraphs, as I have law enforcement proceedings,

criminal cases, will tell you this too. Okay, if you really want to get someone for a lie, you can. It's just like going through someone's taxes. Imagine if the IRS was hell bent on getting you on a tax violation. I assure you they could do it. I assure you they could. Are you a tax cheat? Are you a tax cheat? No, you're not. Am I a tax cheat? No? I pay my taxes. You pay your taxes. But are your taxes perfect? No? So does that make you a

tax cheat? Well, if the I R S decided they were going to weaponize their power, I guess it could, but that would be unjust. And then you have this idea that the Trump administration is obsessed with this. How can the Trump administration not be obsessed with this? How can the Trump administration get past this? This has been the biggest lie perpetrated against the American people of my lifetime. They're trying to take down a president presidency with it.

The news outlets are obsessed with it. People of state, their careers on ending as president. See what this. This drives the news cycle night after night after night. But Trump is obsessed with it. This reminds me of when Kavanaugh defended himself there. Oh, look at him. He's angry, so he must be guilty. You're damn right, he was angry. If somebody lied about me the way the light about Kavanaugh, I'd be angry too. They are, They are unhinged. They

really have lost it. So as we work through more of the news of the day today on this case and Jerome Corsi and everything else, just keep that in mind. We'll be right back. It's potentially big new questions in the Russian investigation and the corresponding lack of answers from the White House and any kind of collusion with the Russians.

And then there's the Russia investigation. We know the Russians were involved in interfering with the election from Russians offering, as we know in the Trump Tower meeting some kind of dirt on Hillary Clinton. Russian hackers began to target Clinton's accounts. In fact, it's Russia who's obsessed with Russia again, I'm pretty sure not the White House. I think it's the people that no matter what happens, they're never gonna give this up. Though I've been saying that all along.

This never really goes away, This never turns into a moment of honesty on the left where they say, wow, we've really, we really jumped the shark on this one. They'll they'll hold onto whatever beliefs they want no matter what comes out about this. And you know, I agree with the dash about the drsh when he says that this is going to be a this is going to be just a political fight. That's where all this is heading. It's been political all along. Play six. Remember it's like

an indictment, even though it won't be an indictment. It's one sided. It's based on the testimony only if witnesses that the prosecution sought to call. And as everybody knows, an indictment can't be used as evidence of guilt. It doesn't undercut the presumption of innocence. It's just a charging document. It will not show balance. Anybody who expect balance fairness

nuance is looking at the wrong kind of document. You can't have balance when you haven't heard the other side of the story, when you haven't called witnesses who might be exculpatory, when you've only tried to put together a prosecutorial case. And that's why it's essential that the president's team be permitted to issue their own report at the same time the Mueller report is issued. Yeah, because there's no way you're going to get anything from Mueller other

than a very bias reporter. Muller is the attack dog. We all know this. This, this is. This can be anymore clear, right. He's out there to go and get it, go to track down Trump and all of his people and dig up dirt. He's not he's not there to take an honest look at whether there's innocent or guilt there. He is a prosecutor on the loose. He's not coming

at this from an even handed perspective. So that's why, because of special counsel has to make a report, although it can be kept confidential, I doubt this one will be. They have to allow, for the purpose of fairness, the Trump team to simultaneously release a report to robut what's going to be a lot of like, Wow, we couldn't charge him, But I didn't like to look on this guy's face when I talk to him, because that's pretty

much what Mueller's probe is turned into. What the special prosecutors asking me to do is accept a fraudulent plea, which I am going to have my attorney's file criminal charges on with the Department of Justice. My experience made it clear to me that the political criminals are running the Department of Justice and Mueller's prosecution. I was ridiculed. My testimony was laughed at, they yawned at it. They misbehaved, and they accused me of being a liar and a fabricator,

I think, which was an attack on me. They wanted to hear that I had a source connected to a Sange, or I did some way at a direct contact with Assange, so they could do the connection, which would go a Rogerstone Jerry Corsi Asange, and then they'd had their basis for collusion. It was complete nonsense, but they would not accept when I told them that, in fact, I never met Assage, I had no contact with Assange. That was

Jerry Corsi talking to me on rising earlier. Today, he's gonna have his lawyer file file complaint, a criminal complaint against Muller and company. Now, I don't know how far he'll get with that, but it's certainly certainly one approach certainly breaks some news. And this then gets to how this is all just about just lots and lots of perjury traps, the endless investigation that never gets us any real answers about anything that was supposed to get and

ruins lives and bankrupts people as it goes along. Corsie if what he is saying is true, which is that he said that he didn't contact somebody when he had forward in an email to them, and then he was allowed to amend that, and the prosecutors were fine with that, and then they came back later and charged him. Professor Dershowitz I spoke to Corsi and Dershowitz today. Pressor Dershowitz said that in his fifty years of legal practice, he

has never heard of that. Before working criminal defense attorney and as a as a legal scholar, never heard of a prosecutor doing that, allowing amended testimony and then only months later bringing a criminal charge for perjury about the amended testimony. When is it too obvious for even the leftist maniacs to withhold anymore the judgment that we should all come to here, which is, yeah, this Muller probe was out of control. Muller and all the angry Democrats

around him are engaged in a political witch hunt. It is true. The president is right on this one. Representative Zolden, actually, I think had some good perspective on this place. Sixteen Muller's star witness has now admitted to being a liar criminally, And I'm a former prosecutor, and you're looking for facts

and elements of a crime. I see so much that is missing about what gets alleged maybe in the news, or those who want to take down the president, who are desperate, who are praying to take down the president of his family. There's so much that is missing. Here is getting away from the heart of why this special Counsel was created in the first place, and that was for there to be accountabilion transparency with regards to whether

or not the Russians interfered with twenty sixteen election. And so much of the crimes that get pursued are completely unrelated to the Trump campaign. And a lot of what is taking down these individuals, like what we're seeing, say when Michael Cohen is with regards to lying. Yeah, this is a rogue elephant prosecution. Now. It's running all over the place, trampling people that have nothing to do with anything having to do with Russia, and it is completely

out of control and it needs to be stopped. But unfortunately, for political reasons, I don't think we're able to stop it. It's just going to keep on rolling with this horrific, you know, horrific decision to crush as many people as possible. Annie McCarthy spoke specifically about the Corsi situation Play eight. If there was a crime here, they wouldn't be asking Jerry Corsi to plead guilty to false statements. The prosecutors

here are not speculating. What they're doing is criminalizing Republican Republican presidential politics and camouflaging the fact that that's what they're doing by taking a few false statements. No good prosecutor builds a case this way. You don't build a case by pleading your cooperating witnesses to lying to the FBI. That's all they've got, though, This is such an essential point and it comes from Andy because he was a

practitioner as a prosecutor for so many decades. You get people to flip, and you get them to take a charge that supports the narrative of what you are trying to get them to flip on. Meaning, you know, if you get somebody in a drug case, you have them plead to conspiracy or something related to, you know, a criminal drug conspiracy. You don't have them plead to something

you don't have. You don't have somebody who is a part of trying to bring down a drug kingpin and you have that person plead to, yeah, I didn't pay my taxes ten years ago. That's not how this is supposed to work. That's just hardball tactics. That's weaponizing the law by acuters who are trying to get something else done. So that's what's really happening here. But a bit ultimately, I mean, on the on the where this is all going. You know, this is about this is about the investigations

and impeachment. And this is one giant temper tantrum from the progressive left. They've never accepted Trump as the president, they never will accept Trump as the president. They believe that Hillary magically, somehow did win the election even though she lost it and we all know that. And Ted Cruise, who, by the way, have you guys seen the Ted Cruise beard? John? Have you seen it? Looks pretty looks looks pretty good. Ted Cruise with the beard. I gotta say, I think

the beard is an upgrade. I yet another vote for possible. Have you seen it? Mike. Mike's beard, by the way, is and John's guys are both bearded. Yeah, I'm like the high school kid that can't grow the beard. And our whole freedom hunt trio here, I'm the only one that can't grow a beard. Guys, this is rough, but but Ted Ted Cruise, Yeah, before they start making fun of me on air, Ted Cruise said, this is going

to a certain place. We all know where it's going, but we might as well hear it from the man himself. Play that play that Ted Cruise Noise, John. Today is a deeply divided time in our country. There's an anger. There's a rage that I think isn't healthy. I think it isn't good for our country. In the House, I think the Democrats have unleashed some of the angriest voices on the left. I think we're going to see two years of investigations of subpoenas, and we may well see impeachment.

I think that anger and rage is going to have to burn out some more before we can come together and enact major legislative reforms that we should be doing. Yep. I worry though. My concern, and it's also my assessment, is that this gets a lot worse before it gets better. I think that before the left can burn itself out in terms of, you know, essentially the equivalent of you know, how a baby can cry itself to sleep, before the left can cry itself to sleep, they are going to

throw a massive tantrum. I think it's going to coincide with the election and things are going to get wild. I mean, the streets are going to be mayhem time and time again in many cities across the country. So that's where I think this is all going. Got foreign policy coming up also, Harland Hill will be joining to talk about Nancy Pelosi and the fight for leadership in the House. Stay with me for all that and more. Team.

We are now in the realm of possible impeachable offenses, and that is much more a political question than a legal question that shouldn't distract us from the fact that this is egregiously inappropriate behavior on the part of the president. It is all but an encouragement to tell to Paul Mattafort to stop cooperating, to don't get involved with Muller, to take your pun man. I will take care of you later. It's egregiously wrong. But is it something that

will lead to impeachment. I don't think so. Egregiously wrong, maybe leads to impeachment. I mean, CNN's chief legal analysts there tube and one of the worst legal analysts on TV. But he tells liberals, He tells libs what they want to hear, which is really what CNN is. It's not really a it's a news organization that pretends to be nonpartisan, so that the Libs think they're getting a nonpartisan message that's very partisan and exactly what they want to hear.

But that's the that's the neat trick that they pull over there, or at least they used to be able to. But on this idea of a Manaford pardon, I mean, they keep there are a couple of obsessions that the left has that we can't seem to ever get around. We can't seem to put them to bed. One of them is this idea that there's going to be a you know, that there's going to be a pardon for

men an Aford. The other one is, of course, that there's gonna be a firing of Muller by Trump, that Trump is gonna fire Muller, He's gonna mess with them all a prob And I look at this, I'm like, there's no why would he do that? Now? If they had the goods, any reasonable person knows this, If they had Trump nailed, this would already be out there. You'd have a very different tone from the people involved in the investigation. And you know, there have been some leaks

obviously about what's going on here. If they really thought they were about to bring down the president the United States, there's no way people would know about that, and they wouldn't be acting the way that they are. Why will Manaford get a pardon? The answers. I don't think Manaford should get a pardon. I mean, like I cheated on his taxes, you know, I think that that's as much as I think you know this country. I'll just say this, and I know This is a little bit heretical for

some in Europe. When you cheat on your taxes and a buck you're porting to Europe, what are you gonna do? Say that we should all drink lattes and walk around with scarves on our necks indoors in Europe, though, when you owe the government money, do you know what happens? The government takes money from you. You know they're gonna

get their money, but they take money from you. You know what happens in this country when you owe the government money, They lock you up in prison like you're, you know, a threat to people's children next door or something. I mean, it's really you know, we go to a whole other, a whole other level here on all this stuff. And I just think that, you know, when you finally look at what's happened with Manaford, you know, yeah, he's he's a shady guy. I've been saying that along, There's

no question about it. But would he be facing the rest of his life in prison if he weren't tied to Trump no soul? Would a pardon for Manaford be inappropriate? Yeah? I think a pardon would be inappropriate. Would a commutation, though, be inappropriate. I mean, his reputations ruined. He's remember that means that he's still a convicted felon. He's still suffers the you know, the consequences of that felony on his record. But it just means that he doesn't rot and sell

pretty much. I think a commutation can be really whatever the president decides to commute it to. You know, maybe he commutes a sentence to you know, a year or two. I think that's along the lines of what would be we're really talking about justice, as in giving each his due, as in as in fairness under or you know, under natural law and the law of the land. I think that that's much more along lines of what should happen.

But the left meanwhile spins this off into conspiracy never never Land, and the conspiracy never never Land just goes something like this, Oh well, here, David Axelrod is a perfect example. Play clip three. I think he's telling them to hang tough and that he will he will take care of them at the end. He's been sending these

messages consistently. Wolf. When Manaphort was convicted that day, he was convicted of tax fraud and bank fraud, the President praised him as brave for not breaking And Susan's point is an interesting one. I mean, you wonder now whether the whole entry into a plea bargain with the Special Counsel was a game that he was running to try and get information from the Special Council about where they were going that was then transmitted from his lawyers back

to the President. But there's no doubt that the President sending a very strong message to all these guys, do not cooperate, and with the intimation that there'll be some relief at the end of this, at the end of the saga. Yeah, this isn't this is an analysis, this is idiocy. On TV. People are cooperating against Trump left and right. We've been talking about how Cohen is now his own personal attorney, Okay, is cooperating against the presidents

of the United States. You've had person after person in the grip of the federal government flipped by the Special Council to go after Trump. And what have they got.

They got nothing. They've got nothing. And that's why all these different talking heads and you know, legal analysts and Democrat politicians, there's such an apparent desperation in what they're saying there's such a to me, such an an obvious and honestly very frustrating pattern of whatever new information comes in, they fitted into the whole, you know, rubric of whatever they whatever they want it to be. So when they don't have information about Russia collusion, then they say it's

because we haven't gotten enough information. When when they think that Julian Assange met with what was Julian Osange met with Manafort, and then it turns out that that's fogus, which it is, then they say, well, maybe that didn't happen, but we still know that there must have been something shady there with Wiki leaks and the Trump team, no evidence is ever evidence that goes against their theory. And

that's why you know you're dealing with zealots. You're dealing with people who aren't really interested in getting to the facts of the truth here. They're much more concerned, much more concerned with being right on this issue and taking Trump down. Now, now Trump Trump did say in fairness that he's not going to take a pardon off the table, but why would he? Why give that to the other side at this point? Why not let the process play

out as it is and look the president has. It is an awesome power to be able to pardon somebody from from federal law with the stroke of a pen. It is one of the most clear exercises of executive authority in our government. And here's what Trump said about Maniford and the pardon play ten. You know, the question was asked yesterday about partners with respective Paul Manaford, who It's very sad what's happened to Paul, the way he's being treated. I've never seen anybody treated it so poorly.

But the question was asked to me by the New York Post and I said, no, I have not offered any partners. And I think they asked or whatever would you I said, I'm not taking anything off the table. That was done as a question from the New York Post. Not taking anything off the table doesn't mean he's actually

going to pardon anybody. It just means that he is allowing himself, as the commander in chief and as the chief executive of the federal government, to leave it all, leave it all, and you know, see what happens, see where he wants to go with it. As I've been saying, I think I so you know where I say on this one now, and I'm gonna try to get a word to my people that know the people the White House that I think that a commutation for Manaphort should

be under consideration. Not because I don't think Manaphort's a bad guy. I think he is a bad guy, but I think that he's been he's been bankrupted, and the commutation doesn't mean that he shouldn't have to make financial restitution. But I mean they're turning this guy upside down and all around because he's associated with Trump. I mean this is a political targeting. So should he be a convicted felon the rest of his days, Yes? Should he spend

the rest of his days in a cell solitary confinement? No. If you want the best people in your workplace, people you can really trust, and you also want to make sure you don't have a liability that you don't know about in your midst you need to have background checks done. I don't care if you're a company with ten people

or ten thousand people. You want to have a company that you can work with to make sure that people you're bringing in are who they say they are, don't have a criminal background, don't have any problematic lawsuits or other issues that would get red flagged, and that's why you need Global Verification Network. Global Verification has been a great partner with this show now for a long time,

and I know the CEO, Mark Buckman, personally. He really cares about making sure that every single case that comes to his team is handled professionally, efficiently and discreetly. Go TOMGVN dot com again, that's my GVN dot com and just you'll see right there, it's so easy and ask them, reach out about how you can work with them for background checks for your company or call eight seven seven

six nine five one one seven nine. It is not unusual, unfortunately, for people who are estranged and either formerly married or just have a child together to become very destructive toward one another and to use children as weapons in that process of hurting each other and evening out the score. People that I know who are who deal with family court and have been lawyers who have been brought into these situations will tell you that it gets very very ugly.

But even with all of that as a background, this is one of the uglier situations that I've heard of in a long time that involves a child and parents. And it also goes right to the heart of why I talk about a very political issue on this show.

That issue is transgender ism, the idea that there are transgenders out there who need to be transgender individuals, who need to be accorded special rights and privileges under the law because their condition, or their preference, or their psychological state, however you want to define it, is intrinsic and worthy of legal protection, the same way that someone's ethnicity or skin color or is also worthy of legal protection and

protection from discrimination. In this case, though, with transgenderism, you're told that you have to be a party to falsehood, you have to celebrate falsehood, you have to engage in lies, and if you don't, by the way, you'll get kicked off of Twitter, you'll get kicked off of other platforms. Now, mis gendering, as I've told you, is now officially officially punishable in some precincts of corporate America, some very powerful ones.

But here's this particular story, and this courtesy other Daily Wire. This is in Texas, of all places. A father is fighting against his ex wife's claim that their six year old son six years old is a trans gender girl. Now the court documents have been have been reviewed here. The Federalist also has done some very good reporting on this one. And the mother claims that this first grade boy is really a female named Luna. The father, however, says that the son is is wearing you know, boy's

clothing and identifies as a boy all the time. His name is James, and that this is just the mother is essentially concocting this whole situation. And and look, a six year old is very impressible. So whatever the mother tells a six year old, you know, is very likely to be reflected in that six year old's behavior. But the mother is now in court accusing the father of

child abuse in this divorce. And you know where this is going because little James, little six year old James is not being affirmed as transgender by his father, and on that basis, this dad is being told that he should lose all parental rights. This is stunning, This is honestly horrifying. The ex wife in this case is trying to get the husband to pay for the child's visits

to a transgender affirming therapist and transgender medical alterations. That's right, this mom who is clearly having some serious issues here. I mean just I don't care. I don't care what anybody says. To do this to a six year old is child abuse. It is child wild abuse. And this mom trying to use this newfound cultural phenomenon of child transgenderism is the most exploitative and vicious thing I've seen in this kind of a custody dispute in a very long time. But why do I bring up these stories

on air about about transgenders? You know, you start to you start to think, after a well, why do we even have to talk about this? And less than one percent of the population identifies as transgender, and I think it's more like one tenth of one percent. It's it's a very small percentage of the US population identifies as transgender, And so this is an issue that is much more in conversation then you come into contact within your day

to life. But we have reached the point now where this is resulting in in policies and law and that there are things happening to people in their day to

day lives because of this. And I think we set a very bad precedent when we have laws and policies that are fundamentally built on a falsehood and on a kind of moral bullying that in this case as a result of people not wanting to seem like they're not accepting enough, or they're not you know, they're not open minded off and so sure, you know, I'm fine with transgenders, and really for six year olds, this is the left pushing the outer boundaries of how far it can take

its cultural power. This is a left that no longer has a real civil rights struggle to wage, and so they are creating artificial ones in order to mobilize the leftist collectivist mind. Because, as a Lynsky will tell you, once you have people mobile realized on one issue, you can use that mobilization for any other issue you choose. Once they are organized, now you have an organized unit

that can be deployed. This idea that a child who is six years old could, at the age of eight, go through hormonal therapy that would unalterably affect the rest of his and that's right, this is a him. It is a six year old boy. The rest of his life is appalling. And this is why people like me, who are you know, I try to be as accepting and I know you feel the same way. We take people for who they are. We take people as individuals, you know, and our first obligation to each other is kindness.

Some of you would say our first obligation to each other is you know, decency and honor. Okay, fine, One of our main obligations to each other is kindness. And I don't think it's kind to allow children to be sterilized by parents caught up in an emotional moment and

what is clearly a cultural fad. The reason that the academic report that was published at Brown University on transgenderism as a contagion in society, that's right, people are more likely to become transgender when other people around them are transgender.

The reason that was so upsetting to the left was because it goes to this as a psychological condition that some may have a precondition toward, and once you establish it as that, it is something that needs to be treated as a condition, not celebrated, and as they say, affirmed through surgery and hormones for a little child, a six year old kid. This is when I say things like the left has lost their minds. When I say

things like they're you know, they're delusional. This is the kind of stuff up because if we had right now, we could set up a debate between yours truly and a whole bunch of left wingers from MSNBC and HuffPo and Daily KOs and only they would all say that the mom is right, that the mom who wants to do the gender affirmation surgery on the six year old boy that everybody else thinks is male, and that and

the boy says that he feels male. They would side with her, because not only is this a fad for the people who can catch on to it and decide they're also transgender, it is very much in vogue on the left to support this issue as a form of tremendous virtue signaling. A lot of these progressive mega companies are run by lefties who don't share your values, don't share anything with you really, and oh, by the way, they also like share your information with third parties. They

make money off of this. I've got an idea. Try an email service that fits with your ideals and your worldview. Ipatriots dot Us. Ipatriots dot us is a new conservative alternative to liberal based email services. I patriots dot us is secure, private, and includes more of what you want without all the ads and spam, thirty gigs at cloud storage, larger attachment sizes, and your files are safe with ipatriots

anti virus encryption. Ipatriots dot us won't sell your information or support liberal agenda items like most free email providers, show your a patriot. Go to ipatriots dot us now. It's compatible with almost all mobile devices. Choose your membership program, input your desired ipatriots email address during checkout, and enter promo code buck that's buc K for a ten percent

savings during your first year of membership. You want to talk about undocumented and the way they torture the DOT children. I'm an Italian American. I came from poor Italian Americans who came here. You know what they called Italian Americans back in the day. They called them wops. You know what whops stood for without papers. I'm undocumented. You want to deport an undocumented person, start with me. Because I'm an undocumented person. I am the Governor of New York,

and I am a moron. I am trying to make a political point, and in doing so and saying something very stupid and untrue. I also deliver all speeches in this tone of voice because I'm assuming that most of you are hard of hearing. No, you're not undocumented. And

that's a nonsense term, a nonsense term. Why can't the left just have an honest discussion with the country about what they really want with immigration, which is just if you want to come here and you're poor, you don't speak English, you don't have any skills, we'll take you. No more limits, nothing, just you gotta stop and check in. Oh, I know it's not technically open borders if you have to check in, right, what is the limit? We taken a million a year? Why not make it ten million

a year? Oh? Is that going to fundamentally transform the country? Gray, Let's just go for it. Let's just open it up. Man, anybody wants to come here. What's that going to do to our welfare state? We've got a trillion dollars a year taxpayer supported welfare state in this country. Do we

have to take in all the world's poor. Let me ask you this, if in fact, somebody in any part of the world, anywhere in the world knows they can come to America legally without going through any process whatsoever, and just start signing up for food stamps and housing, would they do it. I think a lot of them, would I think a lot of them. And are you excited about paying for that? I don't know. I'm gonna guess not. I know I'm not excited about paying for it.

But here we have Cuomo who still thinks perhaps he will run for president, even though I'm pretty sure there's not a single person, including his own staff, who could handle the thought of four years of Cuomo's dumb speeches. No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer. Nobody needs to listen to Cuobo to know how dumb he is. It's just crazy, man. I can't. How is this guy the governor of one of the biggest states of the country. Well, it's his last name. It's a family thing. I hate.

I hate political nepotism, I really do. I can't. I hate it on the right and a hit in the left. Yes, I know Bush, you know, I think we could have done better than Bush. All right, let's just say it. It was okay, he was okay, he had the political connections to win, so we kind of went with it. But Cuomo is really not somebody who not somebody who should be in any position of authority whatsoever. Even Democrats I know, don't really like this guy, but this is

what I mean. No, they're all saying undocumented now, and that is just you'll notice that they've they've changed the language that we use because undocumented, just like unauthorized. All it takes is a little action by the people in power, and oh you'll get authorized, Oh you'll be documented, No problem, no problem. We should be very wary of this and don't allow them to bully you on the issue of what language to use. I've seen people and I'm always like,

bring it. I've seen people who the moment that I say illegal alien, I can tell they want to correct me, and I just look at them, are like, don't don't think you're gonna bring that weak sauce in here. Don't bring that JV nonsense. My way, the legal term in the Federal code is illegal alien. If the Democrats want to change what the Federal Criminal Code says about people who are in the country illegally to unauthorized, fine, they have to do that. They have to actually go through

that step. Until then, I'm going to refer to what the law says. I'm not going to go with whatever make believe terminology. The Left embraces really as a form of moral blackmail, which is what is at the heart of so much of what they do on all of these issues. Right, They're engaged in a form of moral blackmail, and I just wish that we can have more of blackmail in the sense that if you don't agree with them,

you're mean, you're racist, you're heartless, you're bad. We never really get to have a discussion about, well, what's what's the right thing to do here? What should we do? What would you say you do here? All right, so we've got the G twenty coming. I'll get into some more foreign policy in a moment. Saudi Arabia, Russia, Ukraine stuff. The single for me, the single biggest possible outcome from the G twenty, and I think it's it's clear. I think this is by a mile. Is the conversation between

Shiji and Ping of China and President Trump. Trump is sounding optimistic on this. I am hoping that they can make some headway. I am not cautiously optimistic. I am pessimistic. I think that the administration might be underestimating how central Chinese predatory economic policy is to the Central Committee's overall strategy there or the Standing Committee is actually what you call their version of the Central Committee, the Standing Committee,

which is where the real power in China lies. I think that they're going to be slow, if not impossible, to move off of this until they really feel like they have absolutely no choice economically, and they're just not there yet yet. China's market down somewhere in the twenty to thirty percent range this year. It's been a bad year for China, and I know because I'll tell you I'm I've been a little invested in China, I mean monetarily, not emotionally, and it has not been a good year

to do that. So this is why I do not share with you any of my I do not give financial advice about stock tips on air, because I got my own problems. But Trump and She at the G twenty, which is really just a photo op for a lot of these world leaders and a chance for the international press cord to do a lot of chin wagging and preening. But this is where it'sentially. Here's what Trump said, Play eleven.

I think we're very close to doing something with China, but I don't know that I want to do it, because what we have right now is billions and billions of dollars coming into the United States in the form of Paris or taxes. So I really don't know, but I will tell you that I think China wants to make a deal. I'm open to make it a deal. But frankly, I like the deal we have right now.

I'm hoping that that's a negotiation ploy. Remember Trump said he's a great negotiating and negotiations are a form of intellectual combat. Whether you're negotiating on the price of a house or an apartment you're going to rent, or you know, there there's an aggression, and there's uh, there's acting in ways that you know, overstates or understates your position, and there's a lot of you know, there's feints and maneuvers

and head fakes. I mean, you know, negotiation is not just sitting down and yeah, let's just all agree on everything. So I'm hoping that Trump is able to use you know, deception. Deception is a deception, and theatricality are powerful. Remember that from from what if that Batman begins the first one, which was the best of all of those, by the way, and don't even get me started on how overrated the second and third Christopher Nolan Batman movies are or we

will be here all night anyway. You can come at me on this one. Everyone can come at me on this one. I know, I know, I'm I'm like standing alone on the hilltop here yelling that the third Batman movie is bizarre, makes no sense, The writing is corny, and it's just a discombobulated mess. But that's all right, everyone, can you know, tell me, well, we made a billion dollars book. You don't know anything whatever, but Trump she China. This is where there could be some Well, I think

the news is gonna be bad. I'll tell you. I think he's gonna come back and say, you know, we'll talk again in the future. And you're gonna see even more disruption in the markets because of it. Chinese market's going to take a bath. American market's going to be feeling the heat on this one a little bit. So I wish it were not so. But we're in a we're not in an especially strong place in dealing with dealing with this whole situation. We're not in a great

position right now vise of each China. But more on foreign policy. In just a moment, Oh, we're at all comfort, and we need American energy. And by the way, American energy production they went up every year I was president, and you know that whole suddenly America's like the biggest art producer and the biggest guy that was me. People. I just wanted, you know, we could also go back to when Obama said that under his under his you know, plans, price of coal coal plan, energy would or energy in

general would just skyrocket. Rememb remember his words when we said that. But I, you know, of all the things for Obama take credit for. This would be like if there was a huge reduction in CO two that for

some reason naturally occurred over the next ten years. I mean, let's say CO two levels in the atmosphere went down to you know, half what they currently are, which wouldn't matter, and I know it wouldn't matter, but hey, just say that happened, and then President Trump is walking around like, yeah, I could all the CEO two. Could you imagine what the left would say, because you know, he's he doesn't

really believe in climate change. He's he's an opponent of this very thing, right, He's an opponent of it, or at least they say he is. And Obama was openly an opponent of this. It would be like Hillary Clinton if the coal industry had had a big comeback, which coal industry is still doing really really poorly unfortunately, or West Virginia's in bad shape and they're still shedding jobs there. But this is the natural progression of the energy industry

is creative destruction. I mean, there are some energies that are some energy sources that are becoming more efficient, more affordable, that are just better. And as I've been saying, if you look at we have been getting more our energy sources have become more efficient, less polluting, and just better over time, just like all the rest of our technology, right, just like all the rest of the of the scientific exploration that we're we've been embarking on. We move the

football field down the ball. No that's not right. Up, we moved the ball down the field. There we go. Well done, Well done, son. But the former president of Shell Oil and Producer Mike found this one. I love this, he responded. You know, Obama was not just taking credit for the booming oil production, but was smug about it. You know, it was really you know, ha ha, I'm so great. Look at me. I'm the one that's I'm the reason that all this has been going, you know,

your way. And the former president of Shell, who I think knows a thing or two about oil, as Shell is one of the largest oil companies in the world. Here's what he said in response to Obama taking credit for increased US oil production. Drop it eighteen. The facts are the facts. And yes, the production did increase throughout his term, but frankly, he had nothing to do with it.

This was production in states like Texas, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado, North Dakota in particular, and these were all state decisions made with industry applications for permits. The federal government had no role, and if anything, he was trying to frustrate the efforts by taking federal lands off of the availability list, putting them out, you know, just no more drilling. He shut down the Gulf of Mexico for a period of

six months, changed the regulations. He also never approved the Keystone XL pipeline after dangling all the potential customers for eight years, and it was in the eighth year when he said no, no Keystone pipeline. And so I would say that he was not a leader when it comes to energy. Wrexed. Obama got wrecked in that one, as the kids would say, just got a ride on the school bus from the former president of Shell Oil, just

because he knows, he knows he goes down. That was why so many of us were just all hitting the table yesterday when Obama came out and said that, like, come on, man, I've all it's one thing to be Oh, I've taken I'm gonna take credit for the Trump economy. Yeah, we know it's kind of a standard, dishonest but expected political move at this point. You know, try to take credit for the Oh why is it the GDP is

so much stronger now that it was under Obama. Well they don't want to answer that one, but you know, try to take credit for things that you obviously were insufficient in promoting in your own time. But to take credit for oil. It's just though, it's so indicative of how there is a widespread delusion, and it's from the top down. It's from Obama himself through all of his supporters about the greatness of the Obama presidency. Now, it used to be for me that I could say conservatives

aren't about individuals. They are about ideas. I think that Trump has created a shift in that thinking politically speaking, I think that that is a shift that has happened and we need to accept and understand it. We don't necessarily have to embrace it. You do whatever you want, but it's definitely there where you know, we used and I don't think anybody who voted for Bush. I mean I voted for Bush gosh back when I was a

soft more freshman in college Camera of the year. Now, I never thought that I was voting for somebody who was a movement unto himself. I thought that, you know, he'd be pretty good in the role, and I liked the policies and he was a vessel for the policies. With Trump, he is really the vessel of the ideas

themselves in many ways. And also we support President Trump, those of us who do, I know it's most of you listening to this show because of the effectiveness that he has in the political fight to get these policies done. And by the way, part of being effective is stopping the other side. So you know, every day when I feel like I'm gonna get a little too hard on the Trumpster and say where's my wall? And what happened.

I say, well, you know, there, this isn't an excuse for everything, and this isn't a panacea for my political frustrations. But I do have to say it's not Hillary, you know. I do have to say, hold on a second. What happened is that she didn't become president. So I'm thankful for that. I believe it. That is something that we need to we need to keep in mind. But yes, we understand that it shouldn't be about you know, it shouldn't be about individuals and a cult of personality around them.

That all said, the cult of personality around Obama is still in full effect, and it is impervious to facts and reason. On every you cannot criticize Saint Obama to a leftist without them looking at you not like you're being unfair to his legacy, but that you are crazy.

Saint Obama was perfect? How could you think these things? Meanwhile, as much as I say that conservatism has now or the right has now galvanized behind Trump, you're not going to find at least I don't think a lot of people who would say, yeah, Trump, I love every tweet. I think everything he does is perfect. I love that he hired his family members to be senior advisors in the White House. I think it's great that he occasionally makes fun of people in a way that is demeaning

of them and not their ideas. You know. No, I think a lot of Conservators would say, look, it's he's imperfect. He is an imperfect vessel. But we take the bits of bad with a lot of good, and on balance we're for him. I think that's just a much more one mature and two realistic approach to these things. I really do. I just think that we should all expect that that, yes, we understand the ups and the downs of politicians and of political causes, and not create a

false reality. But the Obama oil thing, I mean, the reason this really got under my skin so much is because it wasn't He's not trolling. I don't think he's trolling. He really believes this. He believes his own you know what, his own bs about how awesome he was, And all of his supporters and voters that I come into contact with. I can't speak about every single one of them, but all the ones that I know, they believe it too.

They are fully on board for the mythology of Obama as the greatest president in the history of the United States, and everything he did was awesome, and that's just not healthy. It's not a good place for any sentient adult to be in. It's just not a position that I think is intellectually should be intellectually sustainable. But it's an emotional position more than anything else, and it's really a form of a virtue signaling, as we know. I saw a

little foreign policy here. For a moment, I'm wondering when the Washington the Washington class is going to get tired of um doing all this grandstanding on the Kashogie issue. When will someone tell me what is acceptable for for a response to this? I saw, you know, Rand Paul had had a big statement. You know, he's he's and I respect Rand Paul. I actually think that if we

could he'll never win. So it's a bad idea. But if we ever got to a place where Rand Paul would be president, I actually think he'd do a really good job because he does not want to meddle in everyone's lives and and I don't think he has the same level of just mega ego that many of these other politicians do. I think that he kind of yeah, he you know, he likes the sound of his own voice. All politicians do. But I think he also has a

certain innate humility about him. Anyway, that's just that's just my read on him. But on this Aaudi Arabia thing, he's starting to worry me a little bit because he said the you know, he's been saying that he thinks this is insufficient what the administration has done. Okay, well I need I need to start hearing about what is sufficient.

And I don't like hearing this kind of stuff from from Lindsay Graham, who Lindsay, you know, you were great in that one moment, And now I think he's I think I think Lindsay's just gonna he's gonna be like Buck when you niggas with me. I was there for you, you know, I was. Actually I can't do it good, Lindsay. Lindsay Graham impression. I gotta work on that one. That that one sounded way more like some other part of

the South or something I wasn't. And so many of you are actually Southerners, so you can break this all down pretty much better than I can. But what Lindsay, I was trying to have a little fake buck Lindsay conversation there. It didn't really work out, But yes, he was there for us when we needed him on the

Kavanaugh nomination, no question about it. And he threw himself in at a time when it was look he saw an opportunity to stand for what was right and to do it in front of twenty million people, and he did it. And I don't know why other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee in the Senate couldn't do it, but Lindsay did it. So but I did, you know, it's a little bit of a little bit of extra swagger and Lindsay step now because of that, and I I just wish that, you know, he would just back off

the interventionist, hardline foreign policy a little bit. Here here's what he says about Saudi Arabia support play twelve. I changed my mind because I'm pissed the way the administrations handled the Saudi Arabia event is just not acceptable. The briefing today did not help me at all better understand the role of NBS played in the killing of mister Consoti. Institutionally, we have a right to be briefed by the CIA.

How can I make an informed decision as a United States Senator about whether or not the Crown Prince is complicit in a murder. If I don't have access to intelligence that I read about in the paper, that's not acceptable for me. Senate has oversight and they should be able to see whatever they want. So I'm wondering how this is going to play out. That said Mattis, who's a Secretary of Defense who can see everything, and Pompeio, who was CI director and is now Secretary of State,

can see everything. And they've made it very clear that they do not believe there is a smoking gone or a direct causal link between Mohammed Ben Salomon and the Kashogi murder. ILO think that a lot of a lot of people in this country are kind of sick of making everyone else's problems are problems, and I think that that's a you know, that's not a popular not not a popular position to take right now, but it's one

that we need to be honest about. I don't think that we should upend our policy with Saudi Arabia because of what they did with a non citizen journalist in a foreign country. I'm sorry, but I just I don't I don't we've already put by the way, we've already put Magnitsky sanctions in place, the Magnitsky sanctions named for Saragei Magnitsky. By the way, Red Notice the book that was written about this by Browder. It's a very good book.

He talks about what happened to Saragey. The Russians tortured and killed him in prison, and there's a whole backstory to why it had to do with a dispute over money with a Browder's bill. Browder's fund that he set up in Russia's kind of an emerging markets growth fund. And I can tell you the whole story another time.

I've I've a voraciously read Red Notice and h But if Magnitsky Act is there so that you can take action against human rights abusers by hitting them in the pocket book, you know we're not going to drop bombs on everybody when they're engaging human rights abuses, but you

know we'll hit him in the pocketbook. They've already put Magnetsky sanctions in place, So it seems to me that the only thing that would be acceptable to them, the only thing that they would be okay with, is if somehow we took a position that, you know, we should punish the day facto leader of Sudi Rabia. That is not a good idea. That is not a good idea. And that also then brings me to the G twenty summit.

G twenty summit is about to happen. It's, you know whatever, it is some hours away, and the big news about it is that Trump has decided that he will not meet with Putin. Initially they were saying that there was going to be a Putin Trump tete a tete. Now we are being told that that is not going to happen. Let me just say I'm not nearly as worked up about this as a lot of other people. Okay, fine, I mean, you know, this is not because of Kashow.

Obviously the Russians have nothing to do. We can't blame the Russians for that one. This is about the Russians seizing a few Ukrainian ships. And I spoke to a Ukrainian ambassador today at some length and he said, first of all, Trump has been great, has been great on US Ukraine policy, which you know, you're not going to

hear that from other places. You're not You're not going to be told about how, you know, fantastic Trump has been on Ukraine policy from the media, because by being good on Ukraine, good on Ukraine, no, but by being strong on Ukrainian foreign policy, it's clearly showing that he's not in the pocket of the Russians because Ukraine is way more important to Russia as an issue than it is to US, way more important. And so for Trump to give them javelin anti tank missiles, which the Obama

administration refused to do, refuse used to take them. And you can say, oh, buck, what what difference starts a second hillaryism I've used this week? But what difference at this point does it make? And I would say he makes a big difference. It makes a big difference. And I was told that by the Ukrainian ambassador today. He says, we really needed those missiles. Man. Now, Russian tanks can't overrun our positions in the east, and they got to keep an eye on, you know, what they do with

their armor. It's been a bit of a game changer in this low intensity conflict in Eastern Ukraine. And the Ukrainians are getting naval training from US, They're getting all kinds of military assistance, and this is all in the Trump administration. But you know you're not going to hear about this from other people. They're not going to talk to you about it. They would much much rather lecture us all on how Trump is in Putin's pocket. And did you know about the Moscow tower deal? Trump is

worth billions of dollars. I mean, he's got business interests all over the world. When are they going to figure this out? Well, I think they have figured it out, but they've got anti Trump hysteria. Whenever you use public Wi Fi, you're putting personal information out there that the bad guys can pretty easily get. I've actually seen how

this is done. And let me tell you something. Once you realize how vulnerable you are online, especially on public Wi Fi, you're using someone else's service you don't know about, You're going to really want to protect yourself. That's why you need Express VPN. Express VPN protects your private information online by anonymizing your public IP address, and it encrypts

and this is critical, it encrypts your data. Express VPN costs less than seven dollars a month, so this is just kind of an insurance policy for all your online activity. That you need to have protect your online activity today and find out how you can get three months free at express vpn dot com slash buck. That's Express vpn dot com slash buck for three months free with a one year package. Visit ExpressVPN dot com slash buck to

learn more. Endorse a narrow politics of respectability that shames Palestinians for resisting, for refusing to do nothing in the face of state violence and ethnic cleansing. To commit to political action, grassroots action, local action, an international action that will give us what justice requires, and that is a free Palestine. From the River to the Sea. That last line there, that was Mark Lamont Hill. That last line from the River to the Sea has resulted in mister

Hill getting fired from CNN. He has been summarily fired. It was a pretty pretty quick turnaround on this one. Hill was giving comments at the United Nations there. I saw this before and and last night. This was just beginning to get, you know, just beginning to get a lot of attention because here's here's the truth of it.

From the River to the Sea is well known as a phrase used by Hamas, in particular to indicate that the only acceptable situation is that the Jewish state be eradicated and that Palestine be from the river to the sea. I mean, this would be something along the lines of saying, well, you know, we need to clear out a certain area of a certain country for you know Laban's raum. There are certain there are certain things that if you were to say, there would be an indication of, oh, you

mean something else. As some of my friends on the conservative side pointed out last night about this, I believe Charles Cook among them, or though it might have been Ben Dominic. I get some of my my brilliant conservative colleagues confused at times, but this is not a dog whistle. It's just a really loud whistle. Now, is it possible? Is it possible? Actually? I think that Charles took this,

took more this position, which I agree with. I think Ben was saying that it was just a straight up whistle. That Mark lamont Hill was in rhetorical flourish, and I believe that these were prepared remarks. He was reading them, but in a sense of rhetorical flourish. He has heard that phrase and maybe he used it without fully understanding the connotations. I'm I'm actually I would not find that

impossible to believe. And I am inclined as somebody who does three hours of radio Monday through Friday and has now, for gosh, guys, it's going on. It's going on six or seven years now. I've been doing this for quite a while. But I like to give people a benefit of the doubt and then and then some not just the benefit of the doubt, but you know, if there's any if there's any good faith reason to believe it

something was a mistake in error, someone misspoke. I like to give that leeway because one day I know I will expect or at least ask for that leeway in response. I also I don't like it when you have conservatives in particular calling for scalps. I do not like this. I think that it's a bad precedent. I think that it's it puts out there in a sense now it's

both sides do it. But I also understand the other argument here is, well, if we don't force the left to live by the rules they impose on us, this is never gonna change. You know. It's almost like a trade war. It really is. In the speech war is like a trade war. In a trade war, when somebody puts tariffs on you, You put terrors on them, and when you are trying to get them to stop, you are suffering. They are suffering. But if you don't put tariffs,

you just are the only one who suffers. Right So I think in this analogy, you know, conservatives feel like after a while, we're sick of being the only ones that have to pay a price for the speech police. We want speech policing to stop. That said, you know, I always have two minds on this one. You know, Mark Lamont Hill is a guy that I will say I know a bit. Actually I've done some I've done a fair amount of CNN in the past, as you may know, and I've appeared with him in fact, he

used to do Red Eye back in the day. And off camera he can be a very a very engaging and an actually charming fellow when he wants to be. I mean, off camera he can be h you know, pretty disarming, and he seems like a pretty good guy. On camera, I think he acts like a smug j K. He doesn't approach the other side with any sense of good faith. He's one of these people that goes on TV to humiliate and to destroy, But he doesn't really have the knowledge base and the expertise on some subject

matter that they put him on TV for that. All said, you know, CNN has been um, CNN has been uh in some of these cases taking action. They got rid of Reza Oslan, who is a huge jerk. Um. I've actually haven't I have not debated him, but Resa Oslan is a huge jerk. Mark Lamont Hill have gotten rid of him. They've had a rid of a few people for comments. My concern though, is that this doesn't then turn into a change in the environment. That now that the left feels like, well, fine, we'll all you know,

we'll all live under these rules of speech policing. But the then it turns into a war of attrition, and guess what, we're gonna lose on the right far more people than they are because the standard is not applied evenly. So all we have right now are conservatives saying, well, you know, sometimes when a leftist goes way out a line, yeah, they should be fired. And what that means in response

is conservatives are gonna say I'm sorry. Liberals are gonna say every time a conservative even gets close to the line, every time a conservative says anything but look which has happened in Mississippi with his election. I mean that you had Hyde Smith say that, you know, she loves some guys so much that she'd you know, sitting in front row with him at a public hanging. I don't think that when she said that, her thought process was, let me say something that's going to create a huge political

liability for myself right before. I'm trying to be a Senator from Mississippi, and I'm going to reach back into the very damaged and and tragic past of the state of Mississippi with regard to race relations and try to stir things up. I don't think that was your thought process at all. How many of these stories do we have to see of Twitter or Facebook and others banning conservatives before we all get the message we're not really welcome on those platforms the way we thought we were. Well,

what about starting a new platform? What about finding a place where you know you will not be subject to the whims and editorial decisions of the left. Snippy dot com is the answer. If you looked at snippy dot com in the past and left, you need to look again. Thousands of my listeners have joined snippy dot com expressing their opinions and stirring up lively conversations. You see, it's an unbiased social media platform that's all about conversation and community.

It's a place where everyone's free to express thoughts and share their opinions and by the way, totally free to join folks, Open to everyone. So go check it out, set up your account today, snippy dot com and let your opinion matter all right, no shadow banning, no suppression of thought. Now with an updated user interface and exciting new features, also available in the Apple App Store and now available for Android, Snippy your new alternative social media.

Harlan is in the house, everybody, that's right. Harlan Hill is with us now. He is a consultant for all things political. He's a GOP strategist, but he actually does strategy for the GOP. He's also tied him with the Trump campaign. You see him on Fox News. He is a connected man in the swamp, mister Harland. Great to have you, so la to be with with my friend, So we got we got a bunch of things I wanted to get to you today. First of all, you

know the the Pelosi speaker fight. Do you take anything from this because there's a lot of news coverage about this today, maybe kind of slow news cycle stuff. But to me, on the one hand, you've got all these people on the left talking about how they're so diverse and so young and hit, and then the other they trot out Pelosi and it's like, wow, you know, two thousand and six calls and they want their crappy legislative

policy back. Well, yeah, I mean, look, there's there's one argument for Nancy Pelosi, which is her ability to whip the caucus. And she's proven in the past that she can. You maintain control of a Democratic caucus that really represents a big tent party, and that's a small fee. As we saw in the twenty sixteen election, they're really multiple Democratic parties and they're very very fragmented, and they have egos and outside influences that are competing to take to

arrest control of it. And so what this represents to me is that while the establishment in the Republican Party has been vanquished by President Trump, the establishment the Democratic Party, the one that has been in control largely for decades, for decades, isn't going anywhere. That's what this means, and in terms of Pelosi's stuff. I don't know if you've

you've caught all this because there's been so much. It's been a saturate the airwaves Pelosi news cycle, but our whole you know, we're gonna we're gonna be a check on the executive branch. We're going to be adding balance to government. But we're going to do it with dignity. Do you is there any doubt in your mind? I mean I've been asking some folks actually ask the Republican congressman today, you know, are you sure she's gonna allow

for impeachment proceedings to go forward? And some people see them like they're wafflet on that I feel like Pelosi's gonna have to impeach. Yeah, you know what I'm gonna I'm gonna counter you on this one. I think that she's savvy enough to know that if we devolve into a fight on Russian collusion that they cannot substantiate for another two years. It's been a small doom for the Democrats from twenty twenty. I mean, they need the real

economic message. They need to demonstrate to the American people that this Democratic Party, you know, I have some underlying principles and they have the ability to govern. And if we don't see any of that, and all the American people, all the American voter sees is more Russian collusions that substantiation, they're gonna lose the Now. If there's some bombshell that comes out and you know President Trump's like paying off Russian hacklers or something crazy, well then you know it's

a different different questions. But yeah, but but what if? But Harlan, I mean, and I hear you on that. I go back and forth on this, so I'm definitely persuadable. And look, I'm asking you to predict the future, and I always say on this show, nobody can predict the future. But you know, I would also say this, I don't

think that it's necessarily going to be Russian collusion. I think that they may there may be a ground swell from within the the Progressive Caucus and and the sort of the whack of do anti trumpers in the Democrat Party to go for you know, paying off Stormy Daniels or or you know, the emoluments clause or just whatever. They'll come up with something. But you know, you may

be right. I mean maybe because I think that if they go, as you said, without something completely you know, like aliens landing, and all of a sudden, we've got a real problem. Uh, if they do go for impeachment without real ground to do so, I think Trump sails to reelection. I think it's not even close. Yeah, absolutely, I mean, and that's why I think that, you know, the Democrats at this point, I spook this a minute ago. It's a fragmented party and they're probably thirty to forty

Democrats that are hardcore up in arms. All they care about is taking a swing of the president. The rest of them really don't like the president at all. But they're a little bit more pragmatic. They're a little bit more moderate, and I and I hope that they're going to rise to the occasion and look to govern and look to demonstrate to the American people that the Democratic Party is Bible, because that isn't the number one criticism when you look at voters. They don't know what the

Democratic Party represents anymore. This is there a chance to rearticulate that. And I think Anti Posi is smart enough to know that if she wants to hold on to the House in twenty and to expand their reach. You know, they need to go beyond you know this nonsense, but I hear you. I mean it's probably if they do, it's not going to be Russian collusion. It's going to be something else obscure, which is exactly what we've seen

come out of the Muller investigation. They haven't been able to get anybody coression collusion or anything related to the campaign remotely. Right. It's it's about you know, cast evasion or you know, castium medallions. And there's nonsense that it's nothing to do with Trump um. But I think I think Pelosi's more savvy than that. She is kind of savvy, you know, I'll give it to her in terms of the way that she's been able to wrangle all these Democrats.

And you know, there's a lot of there's a lot of dirty fighters in the Democrat Congress, but somehow Pelosi she's the king of the dirty fight or the queen rather of the dirty fighters. I don't want to miss gender the regent um. But let's not get on to something else. I mentioned this yesterday. We didn't have you to give the first hat perspective, But who is who is this guy? Philippe Rains, why is walking around Fox

News in shorts? And we can't say what he said to you on aar Harlans, So just we gotta keep that in mind, but like, give us a flavor of what the heck happened between you and a top Hillary Clinton aide yesterday at Fox right, So it's just a pain a picture here. Filip Rains is arguably one of Hillary Clinton's longest and most influential advisors. She's been marginalized a little bit in twenty sixteen, but he's he's been omnipresent for a long time, and he's a big deal,

okay in Clinton world. And I was on an air with him with Trisrigan on Fox Business and it was a relatively tame today. Like I get heated sometimes with people, and I could understand why somebody might be mad off air about you know, how how do you think's got? But in this case it's relatively team Well, I get out of the studio and I'm walking back to the green room to get my code. Cold in DC, really cold in DC, and uh, he finds me. He's like he's like waiting for me as soon as I get asked,

and and I can't. I can't quote what he said, but he immediately started accosting me and following me through the newsroom, yelling and screaming like a buffoon. Like it was. It was unhinged. But what was this? What do you think? What do you think triggered him so much? I mean, he's got to be used to first of all, the guys showing up to the Fox News bureau in the middle of wintertime wearing a suit up top and shorts

down below like a crazy person. We start with that, but I mean to go, Look, I've been in some situations where after the segment, I think people at home don't necessarily know this. Sometimes it gets real like sometimes after the segment you're telling somebody four letter words when the mics get pulled off. But did what got this guy so set off? Well, the only thing that I can think is this. During the interview, Um, he kept interrupting Trigan and I got really tired of it. He's

very rude and he's gone too far. And this is the only thing guy I think might have seen him off. And I said, sleep, why don't you be quiet? And let Tris regan school you, and and I'm pretty sure that said him all. I'm pretty sure, you know what, Harlan, I think we might have found him, my friend, I think I think it was pretty team. It was teamed. Otherwise it was fine, you know. Yeah, well the other to come up to you, it's very yelling about that's

obviously maniacal. But by the way, you know, I was just talking before about how Mark Lamont Hill has been fired but kind of in a you know, he's summarily terminated by CNN because of his From the River to the Sea comment at the United Nations. Uh, well, first of all, what do you think about this? I mean, do you think pundit should get fired for that kind of stuff or do you think that there should be a pretty long leeway. Yeah, you know, traditionally I'm against

going after scalps. I don't really do it. I don't call for people to get fired. Um, there are some rare instances where I take on a different tone. If someone's acting legitimately racist or anti Semitic, or they've they've clearly crossed the line in their behavior deliberately they misspeak or wasn't misinterpreted or construed by people taking things out of context. If they if they've said something and they actually believe that this racist or anti Semitic or something otherwise. Yeah,

I kind of have a different feeling about that. And in this case, he was clearly saying some anti Semitic things. He Um, you know, the River to the Sea comment is not something that he invented. It has its own connotations, and it's about wiping Israel off the map. Um, you know, the call for for violence against Israel. There's no room for that. I don't accept that in the modern Democratic Party, with the boycott and the investment movement. UM, that's kind

of mainstream. And so I'm not at all surprised if he felt safe saying these things, because you could go on any college campus in America today that's mainstream. Like being anti Semitic and going after Israel and seeking to wipe them off the face of the earth is mainstream in that world. And so he felt safe saying it in an academic setting. And see it into their credit.

I can't believe. I can't believe they did it. But to their credit, they just this guy I didn't credit like credit words due seen in deserves some credit here. I know it's it's hard for you to say it. It's hard for me to hear it, but I guess I guess we got you know it is, it is

what it is, Gonna be honest about it. So there you have it, Harlan, anything else in your radar, And if you wants all the folks about before we let you get back to saving saving the Trump administration, Well, I'm just excited to see what comes out of the G twenty this week. Um, you know, the presidents got a lot on his agenda in terms of um walking down trade agreements with China, and it's going to be

in a really really important week. And Harlan, since we got you on air, so now you're on the hot seat. You know, it has come up that there have been requests for you to guest host perhaps over these holiday season on this very radio show. You're gonna have to say yes. This is like when the you know, the guy pops the question, like she has to say yes. Right, You'll you'll guest host once or twice. You could always rescind this later anytime, whatever you need. Buck. Absolutely, yeah,

that's the right answer. Good Man, Harland Hill, every buddy, patriot, political consultant, freedom fighter, all around great Guy and Harlan will Love. We'll have you back soon. We'll talk to you soon. Thank all right, team, we're coming stay with me. I haven't spent much time on the show talking to you about the First Step Act. Earlier today I had a chance to speak to Congressman Collins of Georgia. It's also an Air Force vet, but I got a chance to sit down with him, and that interview will be

airing on Monday. But the First Step Act where we talked about it at some length, so I think that'll be a good Oh, it'll air on Rising, my other show, so you have to go check that out. I got two shows. But the First Step Act that's supposed to be for what they would call back end criminal justice reform. Front End criminal justice reform is who gets prosecuted, how long do they get sentenced to right, And that's where most of the activism really is. But back end is

recidivism reduction. How do you prevent people from going back to prison? How do you stop repeat offenders from well becoming repeat offenders? And there's a lot of specificity in this First Step Act, including that women who are pregnant will not be shackled during pregnancy times or good time served will get weeks shaved off, or there's a particular formula for for the actual number of days per year,

but you'll get time shaved off your sentence. And also a little bit of a little bit of dealing with mandatory minimums. I mean, there's a whole bunch of stuff that's covered. Greater options in the commissary for people who are in prison, you know, more, more opportunity to speak to spouses and family, including via video chat, up to at least I think thirty minutes a day for for inmates who are on good behavior. And I gotta say,

I'm I'm for this. I don't understand why anybody would have vehement objections to it, the objections that I see so far, and this could get a vote in the next week or two. So the objections I see so far from people who either say it doesn't go far enough and really what they want is front end criminal justice reform. They want, you know, less mandatory minimum sentencing because because where the criminal justice system gets particularly politicized

or at least political, I don't know. We we can discuss if there's much of a difference there is on drugs and the drug war and how long people should go to prison for this. It's pretty remarkable. I've been watching Narcos, which, John, do you watch Narcos? Oh, my gosh, it's such a good show. You you've seen it, right, you've John, Gosh, darn it, John, you've got homework over the holidays. You've got to watch Narcos. It's the best thing, dude. I'll even give you my Netflix password if I have to.

Just don't make fun of me for watching reruns of Friends all the time. But Narcos is a great show, and it takes you from the Colombia Pablo Escobar phase into the Colleague cartel in Colombia and now it's in Mexico. But it all starts out. I mean, the cartels started out as in Mexico, at least, not in Columbia, as marijuana growing operations, and that was where they were making

most of their money. It was only later that they became the place for heroin and fentanyl and the transhitment point for so much cocaine and all these other things into the States as the monster of the cartels consumed more and more of well the population and created more carnage. But the drug war is where the real the real problem is in terms of sentencing and how long people

go away and first time offenders. So I understand that there's some there's some good faith arguments that we had there about well, are you really a non violent offender if you're at a drug deal with a weapon and you're working with people who will kill people who don't pay them for their drugs? Or you know, are you really a non violent offender then? Or And this is where you get into some of the other back and

forth over this. But but the White House has been really supportive on this, and Jared Jared Kushner has been one of the voices pushing this along with Yes, Kanye West and Kim Kardashian, President Trump himself. And here's one of the very rare things that you see happening in DC where you have a truly bipartisan action. So I'm trying a little bit of a little bit of an

uplifting story for the other of the day. Here a truly bipartisan action underway that is intended to help people have a second chance, intended to have and bither there's a whole category. I think there's fifty federal because this is only for federal federal defendants or federal criminals rather federal people who are serving sentences, and that that's a very small fraction of the overall prison population. Inmates is

the word I was looking for. There are federal people, federal inmates, but you know this is so it's it's for those those people that don't fall into I think fifty different categories of federal crimes. So if you do something really horrible, none of this stuff really counts you. But it's mostly the non violent drug stuff and other issues, other crimes. Because you know this is true. We put a lot of people in prison this country, and a lot of them for not hurting anybody, at least physically

and not necessarily even being a threat to anyone. So it's worth looking at. We'll see if this gets a vote through in the Senate. It could become law in the next week or two. And I think it's a good thing and it's bipartisan time to spread some freedom coast to coast. He's a lean, mean analysis machine. Team Buck. It's time for roll call. Can't wait to get to that role call every day Facebook dot Com slash Buck Sexton when you decide that it is time to get

in on this action. We'd love to hear from some first timers. I've got my a lot of my usual folks writing in and great to hear from all of you, but it's it's fun to get some some nubes in the mix. So I'll like to do is go on Facebook, fin my page, Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton and I'll be there, Sandy, right Buck. I just love how you do an impression of Hillary. It just makes my day. I love it when you do impressions. Your sense of humor is magical. I know it's depressing to talk about

what's going on in the world. There's nothing we can do right now. America will fall, and all we can do is prepare. It's in the Bible that it will fall anyway. I just had to tell you how much I enjoy these quips of humor. Your show is entertaining and informative. Sandy, Thank you, Sandy. That doesn't sound like Hillary. That's like Gilbert Godfrey or something. I don't know what that was, but you know, yeah, we gotta spice it up a little bit, gotta keep everybody on their toes.

Myself included, can't just be all about defending the Constitution and America and freedom and liberty. You know, there's a lot of a lot of talk shows where it's just people screaming about America and the Constitution and stuff, and yeah, yeah, I get it up. I'm with them on the substance. I just stylistically, I try to take a different way. There's only so much angry that I can also bring to a radio show. Some people like to be very very angry on the radio. Other people just like to

drone on and have a thousand guests. I always want to if I have to listen to radio hosts that has so many guests, why not just listen to those guests, you know what I mean. I mean guests should be added in, like you know, like like a wine pairing with the meal, but the guests should not be the actual meal on a radio show. Stacy rights buck Craftsy has some very inexpensive video core is, including sauces. You can be fully up to speed in a couple of hours.

Love your show. Thank you so much, Stacy. I've watched some good videos on sauces. I think my problem is I just need to do more and more of the the application of the heat and knowing when to you know, knowing what level the heat should be. And because one thing with the sauces, if you if you mess it up, it's just not worth it, right, I mean to throw like a burned sauce on your on your meat or

on your scallops or whatever you're eating. Uh, you know, it's it's better to just salt and pepper and go with the protein. Because the protein cooking I've got down now, but sauces for me is really the next the next level because I don't really eat well, I don't need gluten. Because I don't need gluten, I don't really bake. So I'm really a stove top and oven guy and not really getting too into any of the baking stuff. But

thank you, Stacy. I'll check out kraftsy Rick Rights, Hey Buck just Is Wednesday's podcast Epic Workers Always I got a kick from your cooking exploits. You're clearly past me if you're making your own sauces. Two things, though, putting sauce on steak is heresy. Good steak only needs salt and pepper or smoky Montreal seasoning and a butter finish. And have you tried su vied cooking. I only learned of it a couple of weeks ago, and so far I've cooked salmon filets and olive oil, butter and dill.

They came out perfectly done, super moist in tender, wonderfully yummy. Tonight I'll do a steak ribi, of course, finishing with a quick sear in the cast iron. As you were on record as a slow cooker ficionado, I think you'd enjoy su vied Bonapati and Shields high Rick Original Saturday Squad. Yeah, I agree with you on this steak in general, but

let me give you a few provis those there. For example, when I made my bourbon pepper sauce, it was specifically for a pretty standard sirloin cut that let's just say it was not. You know, it's like butcher steak. Some of these other thinner, a little bit tougher steak cuts, you tend to want to dress them up a little bit. I mean, if you've got a delicious, if you've got a really good porterhouse or ribi or filet, yeah, salt pepper,

you keep it very minimal. But you know, if you're somebody who's gonna cook a flank steak, for example, you probably want to throw some chimmy cherry sauce together, or maybe do a little bit of a Burnets. You know, I love by Burnez is my weakness. I mean, I turn into the fat kid in grammar school who doesn't care that the teacher's gonna catch him with like chocolate all over his face. He's going to eat his chocolate during lunch time because he's hungry. He's so hungry for

the chocolate. That's me. With Burnett's sauce, I'll just smear it on my face. I just love it. I think it's delicious, and I know it's eating fat basically, but it's delicious. I like it. It's awesome. My other weakness, my weakness is our French fries chocolate, and I guess now I've admitted Burnett's sauce. But there's only so many places you can get that fancy French stuff. So that's the good news, and not the fries. I mean, of course, I mean Burnetz. So yes, you're in general correct on

the steaks. I do think that sometimes it's fun to do a little bit of a sauce, and for slow cookers. Look, I'll tell you. We're heading in a wintertime here, and slow cookers in the wintertime are just incredible. If you get a good slow cooker recipe and you make a really good stew or you know, you really get a getting hungry, just getting hungry just thinking about it. I was frequently making a sweet potato chicken sweet potato chicken

stew essentially, and it was it was incredible. I'm just gonna tell you, so, you gotta make some good stuff in the slow cooker. It's not an expensive piece of equipment. Speaking of which, I should find a slow cooker company to rep here on the show, because I'm obviously such an aficionado. So if you know anybody that makes a good slow slow cooker, haven't reached out to the Buck Sexton show. Ryan Rights, Hey brother, no toll long, no

chat a long time. Can you do a short social post if your interview with Andy McCarthy he sums up all the bass perfectly by some driven by some insightful questions by you, needs to be easily shared in a buck Blast for delusional liberals to begin to grasp what the truth is of this whole case. Brian, I like the idea, but I think that. You know, it's just a question of what we can get get the team to do here. We get a lot of things going on.

We don't really do short short blasts of the show right now, but I do I would like to do that at some point. Um. You know, we're also revamping the website. I know we were doing at the beginning of the summer and then we had some some glitches in the back ends. Now we're going to be redoing it and hopefully for twenty nineteen, going to really relaunch the website with a whole bunch of new stuff and it'll be more of a one stop shop for all things freedom. Hut. That's the idea. Adam rides fuck in

response to the climate change advocates. I know none of them are serious, because none of them are talking about manufacturing diamond All you need is a certain strain of bacteria introduced to copper and it makes methane. Then you use a pressure vessel to microwave the methane into the plasma. The carbon falls down and makes diamonds, and you vent the hydrogen. It takes them no how, but it'll sequester

as much carbon as you can feed it. Feel free to use this and I can forward you all the relevant tech articles if you want to hit someone upside the head with it. Adam, it sounds like you know way more about this than I do. I don't even know how this is really relevant to the conversation about climate change. So help me out with that, my man, send me, send me a little more to sink my teeth into on this one, because you lost me in there. I was like, whoa who diamonds? Where? Who? What? What

is this? Velvet? Martin writes, Joe deja Nova would be a good guest host. Um, that is a good idea. That is a good idea. I think that's something that we could definitely get to Joe Dejanova. There we go. I know Joe a little bit and I'd have to have to reach out and see. So there we go. Thank you for that. Joe, different than Joe Dejanova rights, Ken Matthews WHP. Five eight would be a fantastic guest host.

He fills in for Rush here and there. Well, Joe, you're right that Ken's fantastic and I'm a fan and I know he's also a great guy, and I hope he's doing well in Pennsylvania. I know he's he's on WHP. He is a Rush fill in though right now, and you know we kind of believe it or not. The fill in hosts are kind of their own little separate team.

So I think that he's I think Ken's on. Understandably, he's he's going to be a Rush villain, and that means that I can't borrow him because look, there's there is no fillain like the Rush villain. It's just the truth of the matter. I can't even can't even begin to, uh, you know, to say anything other than that, because that's just the truth of it. John writes an actual oh the movie was This is for his action movie quote, you bring a horse for me. It looks like looks

like we're shy one horse. Okay. The movie is Once upon a Time in the West. John. Not only have I not seen that movie, I have never heard of that movie. So thank you for writting in. Kimberley writes Hibak Nightly Listener, You'll be missed over Christmas. Raheem is a wonderful guest host. Mark Stein would be another great choice. Well, Kim, the same thing applies for Mark. Mark is a Rush guest host. So I can't dip into that. I can't

dip into that pool. Um, you know, I can't reach I can't reach up and say hey what I bar you too. But Raheem I think will definitely be in the mix, assuming he's not he's not overseas, And I think we're also thinking right now about having Harlan hill On as a guest host. Raheem as a guest host. I think we may try to get Benny Johnson from the Caller and it's a guest host. I'd love to have a female guest host too. I'm not really sure who would want to do that. That's in our in

our shall we say conservative Baileywick. I'd have to ask around a little bit, but I'm thinking about it. So don't worry. The days that I'm out, they're gonna be You're gonna have great shows to listen to. So that that's the plan. But I do need to I just

need to get some sleep. I fell asleep on the couch when I was doing research, and I fell asleep like one of those people who didn't realize they're falling asleep and then had to You know, when you wake up and you're sort of slobbery and oh that you can't really breathe, and you make the weird like, you know, like it like like an animal that's been startled noises. That's kind that's kind of how it was. It was one of those A little bit of drool in the side of your mouth. I know it's this is a

sexy picture I'm painting here. But Kyle right shield hie buck caution, cheering, the use of tech to kill mosquitos, man playing god is how Zica was released, and killer bees and a variety of environmental disasters in Hawaii. Well, Kyle, I appreciate your words of caution, but I hate I hate them most squeitoes. Hate them, hate them, hate him. That's gonna be it for the Freedom Hunt today. Man, we got a Freestyle Friday coming your way tomorrow which

is going to be oh so much fun. I will see you, or at least speak to you then, shiels Ah. Sometimes people say, Buck, how do you do it? Man? How do you keep it going all day every day starting five am finishing nine pm on the radio? And I tell them, you know what, black rifle coffee, And there's no better gift you can give yourself or a loved one this holiday than a subscription to Black Rifle Coffee. That's what I have. I get my Black Rifle Coffee

delivered every month. I just get a whole package of it in the mail, and you know what, I'm good to go. I drink full black every morning. Lately. I haven't put a little bit of cream in it because you don't like to mix it up. But I also drink it straight up black because that's how delicious the coffee is. Sign up for the Coffee Club. Check it out for yourself. The best tasting, most energizing, most pro freedom, veteran loving first responder helping coffee you couldn't ever find.

Black Rifle Coffee is the gift that keeps on giving. Go to Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck fifteen percent off your order, Folks, that's Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck