Post Mueller Meltdown

You're a great American. Again, The buck Sexton Show begins analyst, he's a great guy. No, So, we had a very good day today the Republican Party, our country. There was no defense of what Robert Mueller was trying to defend. An all fairness, Sir Robert Mueller, whether his performance was a bad one or a good one. There's no defense to this ridiculous hoax, this witch hunt that's been going on pretty much from the time I came down on

the escalator with our first lady. It said disgrace what happened. But I think today proved a lot to everybody. In fact, some of my biggest opponents wrote things today that I wouldn't have believed they would have written, and I appreciate that they did that. Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show.

President Trump taking a little bit of a victory lap, some bit of a victory dance, certainly merited yesterday after we learned that the biggest single takeaway, which is that Mueller was a figurehead, that this was all a cover, It was a front for a highly highly partisan Get Trump operation to be hidden behind this man's esteemed public career.

But I knew it was. I knew it was all smoking mirrors because they said the same thing about Comy and Comey is a total jerk, Comey is a comiist, and Mueller was just just there to provide a shield against criticism and make this thing look like it wasn't that dirty, you know, this was this was just you know, when you're in the kitchen and if you're feeling really lazy, you instead of sweeping, you just kick everything under the

under the stove and the fridge. I mean not that any of you do that, but that's that's basically what Mueller's job was, just make it seem like things were okay when you're really just moving all the dirt around, making sure nobody sees it. You'd think that after yesterday, Democrats would at least take a day or two off. You don't, probably move to their other favorite their other favorite pastimes, like just trashing America. Why don't Democrats just

do that for a day too. You know, let the stench of the of the stink bomb that Muller dropped on Capitol Hill waffed away, and you know, let AOC explain to Americans how much he hates America. We've strathed so far away from what has really made us powerful and just and good and equitable and productive. And so I think all of these things sound radical compared to where we are. But where we are is not a good thing. And this idea of like ten percent better

from garbage is shouldn't be what we settle for. Ten percent better as America from from garbage. Huh. Made It's so weird why people who aren't anti American radicals feel a little uncomfortable with the left wing Democratic Party today. It's it's so weird, is it? Where do we get these ideas that maybe they don't like America so much, maybe they maybe they've got some problems with this. I mean, they want to control it. They want to pillage it, they want to pill for it. They want to be

in power. But that's not the same thing as liking. You know, you don't necessarily if you are brought in to run a company and you think the company has been run like crap and you want to fire everybody and you want to change how it does business and you want to you know, do you love the company that you're taking over. No, but you might still want to do that because that's how Democrats have view America.

They think we're a failing corporation, even though they don't understand corporations, and they kind of hate corporations except for them huge ones that give them a lot of money. So there's this whole cognitive dissonance. Right, Democrats hate big business except for like Google, right, and ge and NBC.

But no, no, they're not going to switch to AOC dominating the news cycle again with how much she hates America or ilhan Omar saying, as she said, I played the audio for you yesterday, we need to be more scared of white men. That that's what she was saying. I'm not making it up. Sitting Member of Congress on the Foreign Relations on the Foreign Relations coming the House. Democrats will go to the mat to defend every stupid anti Semitic utterance she makes. In this case, it seemed

to be an anti anti white male utterance. And no, no, Democrats are still trying to do the whole Oh no, we won thing from yesterday. We got what we needed to get out of that to move on to impeachment. This is this is where I start to wonder how much longer we have in this country, or we can actually all live in the same country together, Like we might have to consciously uncouple from Democrats if they stay with this, like we'll divide up the country in half

or something. They can have their half, we'll have our half, and they can you know, they can turn their half of the country into you know, the streets of San Francisco right now, with you know, the poop patrols and the needles everywhere and all this other stuff. They can run it, all right, they can run They're part of the country. That way we'll run. We'll run a country where you have rule of law, contracts are enforced, individual

responsibility is still expected. Um. But no, no, they they still think that they got pretty close to what they need for impeachment, at least some of them do. And I sit here and I just wonder how much worse could it have gone. What you realize is that they doesn't matter what happened yesterday. Bob Muller could have stood up and said, I was I was totally used in this process. I knew Trump didn't collude. Within the first

month of taking this job. I was, you know, told to go fly fish, while they would just use my name as a battering ram against anyone who tried to criticize what was going on. And I think what's been done to the president is unfair and this never should have happened. If Muller had said all of that, I assure you. I assure you, Adam Schiff would still be running around talking about impeachment. Twenty is unquestionably the only way he gets removed from office, So we can never

lose sight of that. I have tried to put the political question out of my head, that is, does an impeachment help us in twenty twenty or does it hurt us politically? Because I don't think it's the right question to ask. But we do need to be realistic, and that is the only way he's leaving office, at least at this point is by being voted out. And I think our efforts need to be made in every respect

to make sure we turn out our people. But on the policy question, what's the best thing, what's the right thing for the country. Should we put the country through an impeachment? I haven't been convinced yet that we should. And going through that kind of momentous and disruptive experience for the country I think is not something we go into lightly. But he hasn't been convinced that we shouldn't. You notice the door is still open. I mean that

is such a shifty shift. You know, Well, clearly, the only way that Donald Trump is not going to be president at this point is going to be if he if he is elected out office. That's not shift being reasonable. That's just him recognizing that Republicans have a majority in the Senate. Folks. He's not saying, oh, you know, well, this is a very reasonable position. I'm thinking he's trying to make it sound like he's being reasonable. Well, let's let's be adults here. I mean, the only way is

is he's going to get removed from office. Yeah, that's because of Republicans having a majority in the Senate and they would need two thirds to remove him from office anyway, which is never gonna happen. Meanwhile, he goes, oh, I'm not sure about the impeachment or whether we impeachment is not about what it would do for our political fortunes. In twenty twenty, he's presenting, it's really about whether it's the right thing to do. Okay, Well, they've been saying

to the president, committed treason. He's basically hitler. He's running concentration camp. So if it's about right and wrong and he's really wrong, don't you impeach him? You know what else do you need to know? They're they're just they don't have the courage of their crazy convictions. They're not even sure what they want to do, but they want you to believe that it's not all a cynical political calculation. It's about what's right. I mean, these people are this

is bonkers. This is bonkers. Oh, let's hear from a Is it really is Andy McCabe winning this one, lying under oath to his own FBI McCabe leaking and then yelling at people pretending that they leaked when he's their boss at the FBI. That is it that Andy McCabe here we're talking about. Is it a different Andrew McCabe.

I don't know. Let's let's hear from him. It's at the very beginnings of this invest instigation, we confronted some very hard choices, choices that we knew would have negative repercussions on our organization and on us personally, and we made those choices anyway because it was our job and our duty to do so. I feel strongly that that's the same position Congresses in now, and they should step

up to the plate and do their job. It doesn't mean that the president will be removed from office, or should be removed from office, or will be impeached, but it is absolutely clear to me that the time has come for Congress to pursue a dedicated impeachment inquiry. I think it would solidify their position legally as they begin the process of going into court to fight over access to witnesses, and it would provide a more coordinated and

coherent approach to having other witnesses come in and testify. Oh, okay, an impeachment inquiry now, by the way I want. And that was acting FBI director now disgraced and fired acting former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe. I want in Andrew McCabe lying under oroath inquiry? Where's that? I want a felony commission while in the employee of the FBI inquiry about Annie McCabe, the guy remember who had struck in page in his office talking about the insurance policy. That's

the same guy, Folks. Do we ever get to find out more about that or do we just get to find out if he's above the law? We always here, Oh Trump's not above the law? Is Annie McCabe above the law because he lied under growth? Which how many people in the much touted list of prosecutions that Nancy Pelosi was putting up yesterday for everybody to see, how many of them were caught for We're nailed for lying under oath or maybe just misremembering, or maybe not even lying.

I mean, I don't believe a General Flynt intentionally lied about anything. I've gone over this one hundred times with a lot of people, including people who have talked to one of the FBI agents who was in the room, and I do not believe it General Flynt and actually lied about anything. I think that they tripped him up. I think that he might have forgotten what he said, or he you know, you know, he's talking to people

all the time, and who knows. But you know, if you're Hillary Clinton, you can you can delete emails under subpoena and they don't treat that as destruction of evidence. If you are General Flynn, you forget about a completely legal and legitimate conversation you're having with an ambassador. And Sally Yates, that evil little partisan hack from the DOJ trot's out something. Maybe he violated the Logan Act theory so they could send over I mean, the whole it's

all so dirty, folks. These people are horrifying, horrifying the way they've abused their power, abused everything because they because Trump is such a threat to them. He's not really a threat to the country. He's a threat to the people that you have seen this process, whether it's McCabe or the Democrats or the media, their sense of how important they are, of how meaningful what they do day in and day out, is, of their world view, of

their approach to things, of their virtue. Trump is a threat to all of that, and that's why they're so hysterical about all this, and this is why you've seen them just living in this fantasy, this alternate reality where they can come up after what we saw yesterday, which was a complete debacle for those who believe that the president was, you know, going to be shown to have been a horrible lawbreaker and this was gonna start off

impeachment a total debacle. And yet they're still coming out of it saying, oh no, we we got what you know, we got what we wanted. Oh my god, now let's go to the impeachment inquiry. Like Democrats are a guy that just has no grounds to sue you, but it'll just keep filing frivolous lawsuits to sue you and sue you and sue you and just harass you. I mean, Democrats have turned into Trump stalkers. If you have anything to do with Trump, his family or the administration, they're

gonna drag you. They're gonna send you subpoenas, They're gonna drag in front of Congress. They're just gonna harass its harassment. It is harassment. There's no good faith, there's no decency, there's no ethics. These people are a bunch of hysterical nincome poops and instead of feeling a little ashamed after what we saw yesterday, they're emboldened in some cases today, which is just wow. Doubling down on the crazy weem we have more. We're gonna have my friend Annie McCarthy

join us later on. I haven't I wanted to get some of my favorite voices on this top again. So later on the show, probably closer toward the end of the show of Annie McCarthy, will have Sean Davis, also from the Federalists joining. He's been I mean, I've been spitting some fire on Twitter. I need more of you on Twitter. Darn it. I need more Team Buck to actually have Twitter accounts. But I've been spitting fire on Twitter. You should check that out. And h man, we have

so much show, stay with me. Is it true? The evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved in the underlying crime related to Russian election interference, as stated in Volume one, page seven, we found insufficient evidence of the president's called culpability, So that would be a yes without partner, that would be a yes, yes,

thank you. Isn't it true? The evidence did not establish that the president or those closed him were involved in the charge Russian computer hacking or active measure of conspiracies, or that the president otherwise had unlawful relationships with any

Russian official, Volume two, page seventy six. Correct. I leave the answer to the report, so yes, is that any true Your investigation did not establish the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russian government and the election interference activity. Volume one, page two, Volume one, page one seventy three. Thank you, Yes, yes, thank you. Couldn't prove it, can't

prove it. And given the attention, the resources, the time spent on trying to prove, including particularly stretched theories of the law to get us there, still couldn't prove it, still couldn't come up with Trump actually worked with the Russians. Well, part of this has been what I've been saying along, which is this was not even a good idea, It's not even a good plot. If Trump were willing to do that, it wouldn't make any sense to do it. And yet here we are being told that nothing, nothing,

can ever make this stain against administration go away. I mean, you've got Chris Coon's running around saying that this is not a hoax of course not, of course, not Congressman Coons. I do think an important part of Muller's testimony was that he detailed a number of ways in which the President and his senior team attempted to interfere with the investigation. I don't believe it was a hoax or a witch hunt.

I think it was an important and appropriate investigation, and I think the fact that Special Counsel Muller was able to complete his investigation is something we all should be proud of. Oh yeah, after yesterday, we should all be real proud of what happened here. I don't know how they. I don't know how these people go on TV and say these things and just don't feel like complete idiots all these different I mean the Democrats yesterday. First of all, why does Nadler I mean not that I'm some some

fashion plate or or fashion critic. Why does Nadler walk around with his pants up to like his like the middle of his chest? Am I the only one who's I just noticed this yesterday? I've heard of the people talking about this. It seems like a strange anyway, it doesn't matter, but I'm just Nadler seems like a weird dude, yea. Pelosi and Cummings and Chiff I guess they're willing to say anything that makes their rapidly anti Trump constituencies feel

like it's all gonna be okay, Orange Man Bad. Don't worry. These beliefs that you that you have been indoctrinated with over the course of the last two plus years. It's not indicative of a weak mind or an emotionally fragile person. Trump really is the worst thing since Hitler in the universe, according to Lips. I mean, they don't move away from this that you cannot unconvince them of this, and Pelosi and the rest of them have no interest in bringing

the truth out here. So this is where we're up against. Folks. Oh, we've got more. And I'm not saying they have to conclude that impeachment is JUSTIFI, but commencing and impeachment proceeding is what the Justice Department thought this report would elicit that they were expecting to have to turn over grand jury evidence, to have to turn over underlying ever, in the course of an impeachment proceeding being commenced. And I think that if Donald Trump is reelected and in the

second term, maybe a reporter ends up in jail. Maybe one of those investigators being investigated for the third time now ends up in jail. I think that every Democrat that blinked when this document came out will have some explain Engineer Muller, what what is MSNB season, Nicole Wallace, what is she talking about? It doesn't even make sense. No, I think that what a reporter is arrested and from second term and the thing in the what reporters arriving?

If you were to talking about arresting reporters. You know who was really scary on that front. Barack Obama. You know, he used the Espionge Act more than every president before him, combined Barack Obama's Department of Justice HM who listed a Fox News reporter as an unindicted co conspirator in an espionage case. Barack Obama, you know, I just oh, but but there, You know, I think Jake Tapper asked him a hard question once about this one, so that that

then balances it all out. Oh yeah, they took Obama to task. They were outraged. There was a There was a sternly worded editorial one The New York Times about how Obama was a true threat to press freedom. But you know, they forgot about that after a day. It wasn't that sternly worded. Trump is going to jail. A reporter is whining about the Muller report. It just she doesn't make any sense. Well, one thing that, you know, I've got a couple of New York though. I'm here

in New York City, decks my dad's birthday. Happy birthday, Dad. I got great parents and a great family. It's one of the biggest blessings in my life, probably the single biggest blessing I have, you know that, and being relatively healthy and above ground, and then having having great parents and great siblings. So I'm here in New York City, So I got New York on the mine. I just there's another video out there of youths throwing buckets of

water at police officers on duty. At this time, it was two female police officers and people are laughing and they're videotaping it. And this comes after a similar incident where they're you know, they're throwing water, throwing buckets of water at cops who are trying to make an arrest. This is gonna get out of hand very quickly, and

you know, that the left. You know, if all of a sudden people are throwing stuff at cops and then someone instead of throwing a you know, a water balloon or a bucket of water, all of a sudden a brick hits a cop in the head, and the police feel like they're you know, have to defend themselves, and things get things get violent. Do you think that they're gonna say, oh, maybe we should have tried to instill more respect in young people in their interactions with police.

Maybe democrats shouldn't. With the exception of Komi and Muller, who are the super cops, you know, they should have capes. Guys are not just cops, they're super cops. That, by the way, is a slide movie reference. And I wonder who will get that mark? Do you have anything for that one? Yeah, that's right, this is next level. This is next level movie quote and Ninjura, these guys are not cops, they're super cops. They should have caps. Don't

google it, don't cheat. But back to a real subject matter. Here for a moment, they throwing of water at cops and they're laughing about it's just indicative of the district. Look, I know it's just water, But okay, what if what if it's something other than water? What if it's not just water? What if they stre throwing other things at cops. It's indicative of a lack of respect for law enforcement

that people would laugh about this, find this amusing. I think is is troubling, and I think this is going to go into a a very bad place very quickly. And it's indicative also of you know, de Blasio, who's going to be in this Democrat Democrat debate, you know next week. Guy doesn't know anything, has no idea what the heck he's doing, but he somehow runs the largest city in the country, and he also has a police force that is largely turned against him. Just just one

more note here. I talk about things how Democrats have gone crazy, and I know that. And we're gonna talk a little more about climate change because oh guess what, it's hot, so that means that there must be evidence of catastrophic climate change. It's also known as summer. We'll get we'll get to that in a few moments. How

whacked out are the Democrats right now? I mean, how how desperate are they to out looney each other in order to get the votes of leftists who it's hard to overstate the bonkers, the degree of bonkers that we're talking about here, Kirsten Gilliban, They're really they're testing out.

I feel like I have to be human thesaurus here on radio, because there's how many different ways can you think of to say someone just is not dealing in reality, that they're crazy, that they're insane, that they're looney, that they're I'm running out of ways, but that's what we're dealing with. I mean. Jillibrand put out today what she's calling a quote climate change moonshot plan. Who wants to take a guess how much the climate change moonshot plan is going to cost? Who wants to take a guess?

Ten trillion dollars? There you go. She's gonna mobilize quote ten trillion dollars in public and private funds over the next decade to achieve her goal. Senator Jillibrand called for an excise tax on fossil fuel production, hoping to generate a one hundred billion dollars a year to come back climate change. She also said she would put a fifty two fifty dollars per metric ton price on carbon to

detercompanies from using fossil fuels. This is a massive tax increase on everything that is productive and worthwhile in our economy. And for what spending money to come back climate change? We don't even know how to do that. How we would do that, spending money to come back climate change? And with what mechanism? And this this, we'll get back to this because of course it's it's hot outside, so

we're hearing now about the climate change thing. But they write about spending trillions of dollars as though it's, you know, no big deal. Yeah, what's what's another ten trillion to add into the mix here? And I know Trump, I haven't I'm not skipping, and I had to. I want my friend Maddy, Maddy Duppler, whom I called Dupples. I've known her for ten years. She couldn't come on today.

I want to have her come on, probably to Marrow, talk about the budget deal, because she's all she does look at budgets and numbers, and this budget deal that Trump's gonna sign, it's a bad deal for it's too much more, spending too much money. I know, I'm the Ebenezer Scrooge of the federal government. But I will not forget that. I came into conservative media at a time when the single biggest concern of our political ideology was overspending and debt, and it has only gotten worse since then.

And nobody seems the care. And I know that Trump right now is riding high in this great economy, but in how we're going to feel in a year if all of a sudden there's some real not just shakiness, there's a real correction from all the debt out there, from all the all the promises to pay that are going to have to be met, and we did nothing. Now I know, I know no one really wants to hear about it. Everyone wants to just add let's let's get the party going. The left is nuts. Pelosi and

or old crew can't can't figure anything out. So Trump is gonna win. That's the good news. The bad news is that the economy craters and another Republicans watch, We're gonna get socialism, folks, That's what comes next. Trust me. In the month of August, our members will accelerate a drumbeat across the nation. We will make won't own August for the people. We won't own August and make it too hot to handle for the Senate not to take up our bills. I guess what, Nancy, the Senate's not

going to take up your bills. So you can talk about that as much as you want, and I know it's issue. Looks she was trying to be a little funny there, I see. Unlike libs, I hate just just eradicating joy and humor as a as a matter of course, I don't think that that's something we should all strive to do. Libs like to eliminate humor and joy. That's they they they wanted because it's that way they have

tremendous control. You know. The most interesting part of the conversation we had with Kevin Williamson yesterday, who, look, I know some of you probably like Puck. Kevin Wimson, very talented writer, really want to I'd say he's one of the ten best columnists in the United States right now for pure writing ability. I'm not saying I agree with everything you write, so I do agree with a lot of it, but for just pure skill with the pen, so to speak, or with the keyboard, he's top ten.

But his point about how the Libs want to just control they want to show that they can control these institutions. That is that is an important insight. It's not so much about the individual necessarily, although there is a messaging that comes from that. I always say, you don't have to burn down every village. You don't have to burn down every house. Sometimes you just burned down one with

everyone watching, and the point is made. But what you see here is that they also want to be able to dictate what is acceptable at these institutions in general, and then the institution though, So it's not just to punish the individual that they're going after. It's to make sure that that institution is kept within the certain boundaries of the Left sets for it. Yeah, Pelosi saying that there's going to be a drumbeat across the country, that's

that's definitely not going That's not going to happen. It is not going to be your reality here. But I do think we have to remember that this is not going to stop. This is not going away either. There's just going to be a Democrat effort to smear the president, to keep this in the headlines, to make sure that everyone continues to think about this and talk about this. And you know, you can't You can't let them set the narrative because then they're just going to be focused

in on he was not exonerated all the time. There's not exonerated. And this this is crazy, right, this new standard that has been set up. Um Tree Gouty spoke about this, and uh, and I think that the Trey pretty much hit it on the head. You have no duty to prove your own innocence. In fact, you can't prove your own innocence. And then you you factor into this, John that sixty Democrats wanted to impeach President Trump before

Muller set a single solitary word in his report. I mean, how would you react if you were accused of a crime for which you could be hanged? What would your reaction be? I mean, I think your defense would be pretty vigorous. Yep, you would be pretty upset about that,

wouldn't you? If you were accused of treason. I think any one of us, anybody listening to this, if you're accused of treason and then the response you got from your inquisitors was well, we couldn't prove it, but we're still gonna say that you're guilty because you couldn't unprove it. And that's why this never never goes away. In Tyler, that's why there's really no no end in sight to the insanity from the left here, because they've managed to

create a storyline where there's no it never goes away. Okay, we don't have the evidence yet, but we might, so let's just say that it's any day now, we're gonna have the evidence. Just like you know, they say any day now, Trump's gonna go to prisoner. He's not going to be an office anymore. This is they're they're trying to wish away this presidency, and that's why they're gonna They're gonna stick to this no matter what happens. They're

gonna keep going. In fact, today in the Oversight Committee, in less than an hour, we're gonna start and they're gonna they're gonna issue subpoenas for Jared Kushner Ivanka Trump's emails. I mean, they're never gonna stop going after the president, in the first family and anything associated with the Trump administration. So we know that's going to happen. But remember this, most of the country knows the truth, which is there is no basis for impeachment. There is no basis for impeachment.

Democrats have not accepted that yet. In fact, I think there are a lot of Democrats who are are gonna right now. They're a little uncertain about how to make it seem like yesterday wasn't so terrible. But they'll be right back on the same talking boys next week. It never stops, you can't. There's like a shield of perception that you can never pierce with these leftists, with these libs,

it will never really go away. You're you're unable, You're incapable of making them understand that there's just not there's just nothing to support what they're saying anymore. I mean, here's a perfect example of this. I mean, this is the the Chuck Todd, the Chuck Todd response after yesterday. That Chuck Todd, it's a he's a very lucky guy. D the job he does do it, let's all tell you, a very lucky guy. But here's what he had to say about the Muller hearing to our panel. I asked

the question, is it mission accomplished? If that was the goal, If that was the goal, that's his complete failure on that front. Look, I think on substance Democrats got what they wanted. They got him to confirm that that he didn't make a charge because of the of the Justice Department memo. He confirmed that you can still indict him on these charges after he leaves office, and he seemed to confirm the idea that under any other circumstance he

likely would have filed some charges. So they some substance of what they wanted him some of that, but he provided such what do you call it uncomfortable clarity. It would he as they were using him for clarity, he'd somehow fog it up. But he doing how he would do certain things, and so look on optics, this was a disaster. But he directly refuted the president's notion that he had been Again that's what I mean on substance.

They got what they wanted out of him. But because they were looking for this traumatic moment that would capture the imagination and I think for those members of the Member House Judiciary Committee, Democrats do believe they should start impeachment. I mean, this is just delusional. It's just delusional. They got, first of all, what he said about how it didn't make a charge because the OLC. Muller specifically after the hearing was like, no, No, that's not what I was saying.

He chose not to choose. That is that is the Muller position on this. He chose not to choose to indict or not to indict, which is bizarre. But then when you know, seemed to confirm, he didn't seem to confirm anything. This is Democrats saw in that hearing what they wanted to see, irrespective of what the actual hearing was, which was a meltdown of the whole mulleris America's top cop. You know, this guy's indefatigable. You'll never be able to corrupt him. And he's being totally fair to Trump and

he's all squared away and he knows exactly what's going on. No, this is Weissman and his little Democrat band ruining lives, bankrupting people, threatening people, destroying people because they're left wing partisan hacks, because they are vile, dishonorable lives in power. That's what the That was the real takeaway from yesterday. But the takeaway for like Chuck Todd here, I don't know, Chuck, I don't know what hearing he was watching. The optics

were a disaster. It wasn't just the optics, dude. It was the recognition, the moment of of understanding that we all came to that, oh, this whole thing was a fraud, was a scam, meaning that it's not the Mueller Report, it's not the Mueller Commission. It was just put somebody there as a shield against criticism and to give a false sense of credibility and gravitas this whole thing so that it has a better chance of ruining trumping those people around him because we can't create the outcry and

the political pressure to shut this sham down. But that's not that's not optics. That's the very heart and soul of the whole thing. Yea. And in fact, that the fact that I mean this hour, we still have Democrats saying maybe they're gonna peach anyway. I mean, so we go through all this for what what was the whole part of the Mueller probe. They're gonna they're gonna peach him now, even even after everything we've seen, the I means they're gonna peach in the beginning, by the way,

I say, go for it. They should try. I think they'd be delivering the president. I think they'd be delivering four more years the president. I really do, but we'll see more coming up. And we put together a commission where we had every angle person in Europe running for office in any one of the NATO states take a pledge.

A pledge, a public pledge that I'm the only one I'm aware of has taken so far that if, in fact I find out anything at all that is going on in terms of trying to all the election, whether it's helping me or not helping me, I will immediately go to the intelligence community, the FBI. This president said he'd accept that information is outrageous, it is un American, and it's close to treason us. I mean, this is supposed to be virtue signaling from Biden, but it's really

idiot signaling. He's showing us all that he's an idiot and he hasn't known anything. This is also one of those This is a point a narrative that I can't seem to pierce with logic. I can't get leftist to understand this. If you think that information about a political opponent that comes from a foreign source is somehow illegal and treasonous, I need to know how Christopher Steele giving Russian subsource information to the FBI and to journalists on

behalf of Hillary is not treason US. That's point one point two. If a campaign was being told let's say by a by Russia, I mean, oh, Russia, Russia. We've all been made to think that Russia is about to invade herself. It could be any foreignunt. You could be if a Chinese source in Beijing said, hey, we've got video of Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State, straight up saying, you know it's gonna you know, give Bill half a million dollars and I'll make sure that trade,

that trade agreement goes through. You give Bill a half million dollars for one of his speeches that are so good. I'm just gonna go to Beijing and give speech. You know, eat some wan toms, talk to some ladies. You know. If that video existed and the and the Chinese offered that to the Trump campaign in twenty sixteen, is the expectation really going to be that you'd say, oh, I don't, I can't, I can't see that video. This is idiocy.

Of course, you'd say, let me see the video. Of course, evidence of corruption overseas by your political candidates fair game, of course it is. Okay, let's do the true thought experiment away that even libs would have a hard time slithering her away from. What if Donald Trump? What if the videos, the so called Golden Shower videos. I know

it's gross, but what if it really existed? And what if a Russian official had sent those videos to the Clinton campaign something he was saying, hey, guys, delivering you the election. Here's Trump with up which you know, who knows that this would have even changed the election result? But here's Trump with a bunch of Russian prostitutes doing

some very unspeakable things. There you go. Does anybody think that the Hillary campaign would sit on those and say, oh no, sorry, we're not going to run that it came from a foreign source. NBC sat on a tape that was from an open mic from what ten years ago, you know, offset on a show and classic October surprise. I mean, the corporate media was in the bag colluding

with the Hillary campaign. You think that they would have been too too ethical to use the video of the Golden Shower videos if they had, if they had existed, which they don't. But I'm just when you when you play this out This is such a stupid point. I can't accept a thing of value. Okay, if you see something reported by the BBC, does that mean you can't use it? What if it's reported by the BBC and then it's picked up by the New York Times? Is that a thing of value from a foreign source that

your campaign can't use? This is idiocy, folks. It's a non point point. And that's why Biden's virtue signaling is really idiot signaling. But that's not surprising. Bombshell. Today is a turning point. Today was historically bad for President Trump. Today was a turning point. Rumblings of the word impeachment, breaking news, the bombshell out of the White House. I believe this is the beginning of the end. All the walls closing in on him, the walls closing in on him.

You think this is a tipping point. December first, twenty seventeen, you can mark it down. This is the day that everything changed. Donald Trump is in a lot of trouble. Trump is in trouble. The president will resign another hour, another bombshell. This is a tipping point. Trump's going down. This president could be impeached, resignation, resignation. I don't think this president is going to serve out his term. Mister Trump will not serve out his term. He will not

serve out his term. No way. Donald Trump is out and he's done, and it's over. It's over. Oh but it's not over, is it. I love this. The walls are closing in. It's the beginning of the end. For that's like over the last two years there you just hear this stuff all the time, just constant nonsense from all these different journals who are wrong and wrong and wrong again, and they never learn the lesson. They don't care that they're wrong, They don't care that what they've

been saying is untrue. They say it because they want it to be true, and more importantly, their audience wants it to be true. And this is where you have this enormous disconnect in the media right now. And here's the basics of the disconnect. You have many different channels that are offering trying to present this as as as traditional journalistic enterprises, which they are not. They are advocacy organizations. They are propaganda machines fighting for one side of the

ideological spectrum under the false flag of journalistic neutrality. But they keep doing this, they keep on being wrong, and it's because that's what their audience wants to hear. It doesn't matter. That's why there's no accountability for the wrongness. Really, I mean, yet some people figure out that CNN is a sham and that it should be I mean, CNN really should be scrapped and restarted, and then they should

basically fire all the prime time hosts. They should get rid of half of the editorial staff they currently have, bring in people who don't approach their jobs, like Democrat Party activists. Maybe bring in some conservatives at least you have some balance to be off camera on the producers side. And then, but you know, they would say that that's not going to work because there's really no need for a twenty four to seven wire service anymore, which is

effective what we're talking about. I mean, if you're not going to do opinion, how much news is there really on any given day that people want to hear? Not enough to fill twenty four hours if you're just cutting opinion out of it entirely. But CNN is a joke, and it still makes a lot of money. It's very influential,

it's a very powerful corporate brand. People will advertise that, you know, CNN is considered very safe because it's been around for a long time as an advertising play, even though they've got hosts who are every bit is controversial, every bit is risky is what you'd see on far left stations these days. And there was one moment of honesty though that came out on this last last night, and it came from a buddy. You know, we haven't

heard from him in a while. We haven't gotten a chance to hang with our friend gurgling with Gurgan or David gergens Arch. The girls are on Jever Talks for there's Rick Niction Reagan back in or dayson you know, you know, he goes on TV. I used to do panels with him. I was like, what is this guy mumbling about the niction Reagan for White House or Watergate? And but you know, he's old and he mumbles, and he's apparently worked for every president stretching back to Abraham Lincoln.

So they like to put this guy on TV. But he did say something somewhat astute last night, maybe by accident. And occasionally he's just gonna hit a bull's eye because he fires enough rounds right here you go gurgling with Gergen actually hit the center of the target. You know, they presented things. Frankly, we haven't talked about much on CNN aspects with this that are on the right, but we don't you know, we haven't visited because we don't put much stock in a lot of what they're are going.

But nonetheless, I did not think it was a disaster. Brought up rings we were talking about. Yeah, that's right. You don't talk about it on CNN because you don't have any conservatives on seeing anymore. You don't have any Republicans who aren't never Trumpers and never Trumpers are doing the work of the Democratic Party. That is. That is a fact. It's just a fact. It's one thing. If you want to just you know, step aside and make arguments about but you know, make arguments about different policy

issues and still be conservative, you don't. I'm not saying you have to be a cheerleader for Trump, no, of course not. But if you are actively trying to tear down the administration even when the administration is pursuing conservative policy, because you're never Trump, of you have such principles, guess what you're doing the other sides work for them. There's no other there's no alternative reality or that's what's happening.

So they don't have anybody on CNN who presents the point of view that at least half the country has that the Mueller probe is a sham, that this whole thing has been shown to be a politicized get Trump operation. To make the case, you know, I had, for example, some of you may have seen this clip. I wish we had. We don't have it handy right now though,

has that planned for you? But I know I had this this moment where a guy who's at Democrats Ratus was on my show at the Hill when I used to be at the Hill, and I said, you know, he came at me with the whole Russia collusion thing.

You know, well he donald Trump was willing to take foreign you know, the storyline is basically Donald Trump is willing to take foreign opo research which shows a willingness to take a thing of value from a foreign government, which is in itself a violation of campaign finance and

you know, undermines our democracy. All this stuff. And I said to this guy, Okay, back up a second, buddy, Hillary Clinton through you know, her campaign, through a law firm, hired a foreigner to go ask a bunch of other foreigners, Russians, no less, for information to destroy Trump, and not only ran that in the press as a thing of value, if that is in fact what you would call information like this, but ran it through the intelligence community and got the FBI to try and legally take down the

Trump administration with their opo. How is that not a thing of value? From These are Russian government officials that were the subsources for the Steel dossier. Folks, Russian government officials. They didn't walk around, you know, a village in a you know, outside of a lot of astok and say, hey, anybody got any dirt on Trump? They went to obviously, Christopher Steele is going to go to Russian government officials, which what he did, and probably Russian government intelligence officials

and said, hey, what have you got for me on Trump? Why? Why is that? Okay? I still I never get to hear an explanation of this. I've never heard anyone explain this. Oh it's not really you know, they hired it, hired. They just get all huffy, but they never have an answer. I never get told what and there's so many different areas of this whole thing where you just don't ever

get answer. I mean, I look at people now. I've tried to tell Democrats that I think are somewhat reasonable, though there's very few of those these days, especially on this Russia collusion stuff. And I say, you really think that the three FISA warrants on Carter Page was legit? Does anyone ever, you know, all these serious journals on an MSNBC Gurgle and Groan Carter Page or Russian spar does anyone ever try to defend how? I mean, that's so stupid. He was never even not only was he

never charged with a crime. My friends, they never knew theoretically what crime he may have been committing, other than the crime of talking to Russians, which the FBI knew he was doing for years before that, and in fact, he had helped the FBI. If the new standard for we can open a fives A case on you is you talk to foreigners sometimes and travel to foreign countries, then any person in the United States can have their four with the Amendment rights just stripped from them the

moment that there's a political incentive to do so. I talked to foreigner here, I've talked to I talked to foreigners all the time. I do foreign travel, I have foreign friends. Oh man, I know people not just in the US, but intelligence community all over the world. So you know, I've got intelligence contacts. So I guess if I were going to work for a campaign, the FBI could just open up three fives a warrants on me based on what we've seen here. That's that's totally what

goes on. So I mean Gurgan's pointment, things are right discussions or we don't even talk about here, and she and yeah, no, duve, it's gonna say something else, but no, duh, it's on radio. So that's the best I can do right now. They don't even know what the arguments that the right makes are anymore. There's no representation. When was the last time you saw a real debate. And I don't mean some of my favorites, like you know, my

buddy Dan Bongino, watching him crush libs is fun. I mean, you know that there's there's other guys out there that some libs, But I mean two people who are somewhat intellectually evenly matched on the issue of the dossier. Do you ever see this debated by two people who know the facts? Never? This has become a completely polarized separate uh, you know, because because I'm sure that there are plenty of conservatives. I called out the guy publicly who's the

author of proof of Collusion. I forget his name. He's some professor from like the University of Weed Smoking and somewhere in the in New England. And he, you know, I said, why don't we debate this? I said, Dave Rubin will host and we can actually debate this year's you. Oh, I would never anybody who thinks that there's not proof of collusion. This was the guy wrote to me. And

he who thinks that's not worth talking to? Okay, Well, here we are two years in and with more information the trend here is a very important thing to keep in mind. With more information, their side looks worse all the time. For the last twelve months. That's been the case. The more we learn, the more obvious it is that they have no interest in getting to the truth, and that they've been lying about what happened in this investigation all along. It really, it really is stunning, I'm you know,

and today the day after this whole thing. The the clinging to the narrative that you've seen is just astonishing, it really is. It's just amazing. But they won't they will not give it up. They will not change their their view on this thing at all. I just want to you know, we got Sean Davis joining us later. He had a great tweet storm today. It's one of the reason why I want to have Sean on the show,

just to get his take on things. You know, Sean's over the Federalist Eat a great teet term Brich about how much we've been lied to and all the stuff that's gone on. Here here's what Sean wrote. Quote. We were told Trump inquisitor was a calm, even handed Republican with impeccable credentials who was trusted by everyone. What we learned yesterday was that the inquisition was run by the Democrat lawyer for Hillary Clinton's aid, who destroyed evidence with

a hammer. We were told that the evidence of alleged Russian collusion was rock solid the work of America's top intelligence agencies. In reality, it was pure fiction, cooked up by a Clinton funded foreign contractor on the payroll of a sanctioned Russian oligarch. We were told the Trump campaign was never spied on or wire tap by US by agencies.

We now know the campaign was indeed wire tapped, that honeypots were deployed to entrap campaign affiliates, that overseas intel assets were used to set up meetings as pretexts for more spying. We were told our nation's intel agencies would never use false information to justify secret surveillance of American citizens. In reality, the FBI pedaled lies to the fis A court that were cooked up by a foreign spy and

a EOJ official's wife, both funded by Clinton. We were told that our government's top secret keepers would never lead classified or confidential information to the media. What actually happened is that top intel officials repeatedly leaked, often illegally, to cement a false narrative to support further spying on US citizens. Finally, we were told that America's top cops and spies would never foment a coup to overturn election results they didn't like.

We now know the most powerful unelected people in government cooked up lies as part of an orchestrated scheme to overthrow the duly elected president. Those are just some of the points that was all from Shawn. He'll be joining us later in the show. Those are just some of the points though, that you will never hear represented on CNN from anyone. No one ever gets to make the

case there or on MSNBC. That's why Gergan's don't even talk about yeah exactly, because that audience would start to melt if they were presented with the facts while we are doing this, while we are sitting here, as I pointed out before, or for the hour we're going to be debating this another one hundred million dollars of debt it's been racked up another how many thousands of people

are poured across our border? How much more control have we yielded to cartels who truly control and run our border. All the agencies that are helping if they're doing detention, security, hospital watch, sandwich making, handing out hygienic items and milk, and transportation, we're building new detention facilities of the border. They're not controlling the border. We're not doing anything to stop and deal with the problems that we've got with

cartels managing the border. And we're sitting here in a fishing exhibition for emails alleging that we're trying to do down in compliance with the law is being complied with? In what universe? Is this what we're supposed to be doing for the United States of America, for the people of this country who are watching their country racking up mountains of debt three hundred and twenty billion dollars over existing spending levels, which would still give us a trillion

dollar deficit. Well done, Congress, it's well done. And you're going to have that kind of level of spending while we've got wide open borders. What are we doing for the people of United States? Congressman Roy's got a point, doesn't He's actually got a bunch of points. Our immigration system is supposed to be run for the benefit of the people who are already here. Our immigration system is not an open ended charity. It is not a soup kitchen with endless soup courtesy of you, the taxpayer, and

to the political benefit of the Democratic Party. That is not what the immigration system is supposed to be. But Democrats have conflated illegal and legal immigration intentionally. They have lied about this at every stage. They've lied about the crisis of the border over and over again. There was no caravan. The caravans won't get there. This isn't a systematic violation of the law. They'll show up in court. Okay, Well, even if they don't show up in court, we shouldn't

deport them, you know. Now it's all about the focusing on the conditions of the border and is a messaging loss for the Republicans. Every time that we're talking about whether or not we're doing enough for the children of the border, the Democrats are getting their way because then that becomes the focus instead of we are in the midst of an illegal alien invasion of the United States. That's what's happening. It is intentional. Hundreds of thousands of people.

That's a lot of people. In addition, by the way, to the million legal immigrants that we bring in each year, which I will note is a lot, and a country should be able to have a conversation about going forward. Maybe it should be a half a million. Maybe we should have a merit based instead of a chain or family based. They would say family reunification. Now they're changing the terminology used to be chain migration. But instead of a family based system, it should be a skills based system.

These are the conversations we should be having an immigration but instead it's always all, look at what's going on to the border. Oh Democrats, the ones who care so much, they're the ones who care about the children of the border. The big mean Republicans they don't care at all. AOC continues to get away with saying stupid, nasty, defamatory things about border patrol about it. This is the woman who can compare them to concentration camps and still is treated

with seriousness by her fellow Democrats. They think that she's somebody who we should listen to, which tells you really all you need to know about the Democratic Party. Right now, here's AOC. I know you haven't heard from in a while. You probably were enjoying that, But here's what she has to say about what's going on along the southern border.

Because right now, what the administration is doing is that they are using the for profit suffering of the children as a bargaining chip so that they can continue to slip in more negative provisions that will ultimately cause more KAM And how do you respond to Republicans who are talking about the physical barriers being part of any package that deals with the actual crisis in terms of the traffic coming across. If they want to do that, that's fine.

Have them negotiate in appropriations, have them make their case, but they should not be using a humanitarian crisis as a bargaining chip to make sure that they pursue their little torture project, A torture project, she says, I've got to tell you if I were a member of border patrol who had been working over time in all senses and trying to do everything possible to get food, clothing, shelter, medical care for the migrants coming to the border, completely overwhelmed.

The migrants know what they're doing is wrong. They know they're lying, they've been told, they've been scripted with the words they're supposed to say. The whole thing is a scam. But Border patrol role is doing their best to make sure that everyone's safe and okay and they're being processed, and AOC is running around saying that they're running torture chambers,

torture chambers or torture project. I mean, this is why when the Democrat media says that their job is to speak truth to power, why doesn't someone why doesn't somebody challenge her on this. Does she really think it's it's the process, it's the intent of those at the southern border who are working for the federal government that they're

gonna they're torturing children. That's a horrible thing to say, an utterly horrifying thing for them to say, for her to say, And she continues to get away with this. I know one more note. I think immigration is the most important issue in the country right now. The economy is doing pretty well, but immigration is going terribly. Okay, this is Trump is failing on immigration, but it's not his fault. So that's you know, if the buck stops

with him, it's terrible. But when I look at the when I look at the buck, this is starting to sound weird. But when I look at what's going on, you just had another case, another instance of a judge, a federal judge, who has decided that he is going to overrule the executive branch of the government and say that, sorry, you can't make enforcement decisions about immigration. You can't have

new regulations via executive executive authority or prosecutorial discretion about asylum. Now, what's interesting is that you already had a district judge in DC. Look at this. Remember, the Trump administration's new rule was going to be you have to apply for asylum in the first country you get to, which would mean for all these Central American migrants Mexico. The fact that Beto O'Rourke says it's inhumane to tell people from Guatemala that they need to wait in Mexico. I didn't

realize that Mexico was a torture chamber. It's actually a pretty well off country with a lot of nice stuff going on and good food. And I did have its highest murder it ever the last six months, but still over one hundred million people lived there. Okay, it's it's not a war zone. Plenty of people are fine. I

was just there last week. But the new Trump administration rule is going to be you have to apply for asylum in the first country you get to, instead of effectively jurisdiction or a country nationality shopping as an assilee. And now you've got a federal judge. One federal judge looked at in DC and said, no, the administered Trump administration can do this. So I guess what happened. Another federal judge in California and Obama pointee has shut this

thing down universal nationwide injunction. So the Trump administration comes up with a way to stop the crisis, They this would really make a huge difference. And then what happens a federal judge comes along and says, sorry, you're not allowed to stop this crisis. So who are we really to blame it? How much accountability can I really put on the shoulders of Trump and his team when federal judges who are Obama appointees, who are leftist activists that

the bench was stacked with over the eight years of Obama. Unfortunately, Mitch McConnell's starting to balance that out with more and more conservative constitutionalist judge is getting on the federal bench.

But if a federal judge is going to stop Trump from doing anything about the border every time he does anything, it isn't a convenient, folks, that every time the administration does anything to enforce our laws and to get a more secure border, the responses some Obama appointed federal judge says, you can't do that. So the borders a disaster right now? Who's to blame? It's happening on Trump's watch? But is it Trump's fault that the federal judges appointed by Obama

think that their president, I don't know. Each passing week brings another proofpoint. The climate change is happening right now, reshaping our planet for the worse, moving so quickly that at some point we will not be able to recover no matter what we do, and the world will be so much worse for our children and grandchildren. Carbon levels in the atmosphere are at the highest point ever in human history. Just days ago, NBC reported this will be

the hottest July on record. Last month, June was the hottest June on record. We all know the consequences are going to be devastating, just devastating to our planet. It's summertime, chucky, it gets warm in the summer. Everyone listening to this knows that even the little kids, the toddlers that listen to Buck Saxon Show, Buck Saxon Show, Toddler squad, Yah, what's up. There's probably a few of them that listen to My mom and dad are making dinner or something,

you know. They all though everyone knows it's summertime, it's hot. How do we take these people serious? Oh my gosh. There are a few ways to be more intellectually lazy and to engage in more base demagoguery than to just be a climate change catastrophist. I mean catastrophists in general tend to be people that really just want attention and power and don't care about the consequences of what it is that they're saying. And it's just an easy way

to get attention. It's an easy, relatively lazy way to get people losing all. The world's gonna end tomorrow. You know, it reminds me very much of the Parks and Recreation show, the group called the Reasonable Lists. So I've brought up before the Reasonable Lists named themselves that, because how can you how can you think the Reasonable Lists are crazy? And their thing is every year they haven't and the world's gonna end every year, and then they're wrong every year.

But then they realize that, oh, it's going to end next year, and people keep showing up for their end of the World party, and you know this is Chuck Schumer is throwing an end of the World party as long as you give in power and donations and attention, and we know that there'll be no accountability for him

being wrong. I just want to sit down and look at people in the eyes who think that they have a grasp of what is really happening in the world, and have them tell me that despite decades of being just wrong on this and always having always having to redo the data, always having to go back and look at this again, despite decades of being wrong, now they've got it nailed to the point where if they if we don't make dramatic changes, dramatic changes in the way

that we live our lives and essentially put the Democrats in charge of more of our lives, the left, the statest authoritarian left, in charge of more than ever before. If we're not willing to do that, the world is going to end. It sounds so stupid when I even say it. But this is an article of faith. They believe this. They think it's true. They think this is or at least they convince other imbeciles that it's true.

And they're they're manipulating them, they're they're abusing them. I mean, Mark, can't they just accept that it's hot because it's summertime. We really have to go this is the same idiotcy and we can't when there's a big, a big snowstorm in the winter, they'll go, oh, climate change just causing the wets are wetter and the hots are hotter and

the colds are colder. And no, folks, you know, this is not this is not happening, and there is believe it or not, there's no constituent that there's there's nobody out there who's saying, hey, I just want Big Oil to send me a check, and I don't care if that means that the world ends for my kids. That that doesn't exist. I I it's such a it's such a mass hysteria that we're in the middle of with this, and that this has become attached to signs keep on.

The scientific community has been thoroughly corrupted. I mean, I would say that environmental science and biology are now getting pretty close to where the humanities are, which is just overrun with left wing groupthink. They've tried to appropriate, they've tried to take over, and they really have taken over climate science, environmental science, and think about the incentive structure.

And it's not hard to find people in the climate in the climatology community who are going to stand up and say climate change is really important, because one that means they're really important. You know, what do you want to be. Do you want to be the guy who's like, hey, look at weather patterns and try to determinate how it'll

affect crap yields? Go or the guy who's like, I am here to save the planet from the warming that will be catastrophe can destroy us all, And I'm a scientist and you must listen to me because I'm going to save us all. I think most people would opt for door number two there. And then when you add into that the money that's attached to you, I mean, if you want to grant right now, do you want to tell corporate because there's a shakedown of major corporations

with us too. They have to they have to donate to these they'll donate to these different nonprofits that are doing climate research and all these different science science affiliations at universities. They'll they'll get money from the government to do more climate research. So you can either be really important and have a lot of money and say the world is going to end and only you can come up with a way to stop it, or you can be a glorified weatherman, and in fact weatherman are much

more useful. I feel like I'm actually unnecessarily or unfairly disparaging weather men and women because what they do, they're usually right, and they provide a useful service. Climatologists do not. They do not provide a useful service. They have just become this echo chamber of lunacy. And you even hear it now from from Democrats in the Senate in a way and in the House of Kasia Quartesse at twelve years really not thirteen years, twelve years until we can't

turn it around. I remember seeing, Uh, I'm let to say what it's not Fahrenheit nine eleven an inconvenient truth. Al Gore was saying that by now it would already be irreversible until you get China and India on board. All this is nonsense until you get the major other developing, massive industrial countries to take huge steps that would be wildly trillions and trillions of dollars of wealth just evaporating because of this craziness. Do you think any of them

are gonna do that? And they think the Libs think that you and I are the crazy ones. We're the ones that just don't get it, We're the ones that won't obey the science on this one. I just look at them and think, how is it, how is it possible to have been so swindled, so bamboozled, brainwashed so that you will really believe that in last week they don't even have a plan. They get all upset and hysterical when you point this out, Okay, what are we

really gonna do? AOC's Green New Deal is stupidity, that cow farts and rebuilding all the buildings. Thing wasn't an accident. That's what you'd have to do if you were really going to stop enough CO two from going into the air to turn this thing around. As they think, so what is the plan? If that's not really the plan, but we have to have a plan. What is the plan? They don't even know. All they know is they want the power to do absolutely anything under the rubric of

defeating climate change. And that's what ultimately this is about. It's about control. It's definitely not about saving the planet. Bunch of loons. Bob Muller was trying to defend the indefense that report was incoherent, is written, and it was worse as played out on Live TV. No Nancy's Pelos, who was trying to put on a happy face yesterday

with the press conference. But it was surprising to me that even members of the Democratic Party were last night recognizing that this was, as one commentator called it, a train wreck. Its charges, as has been demonstrated today in the hearings, are could be indictable of senses by anybody else, not the President of the United States and the President when he's no longer president, but the American people. I think that if we go to down that path, we

should go in the strongest possible way. And that's all I'm going to say about the subject impeach or not question that Democrats have somehow not come to a conclusion about. Yet there's still there's the possibility there may be. Well, who knows. Let's bring on our friend Sean Davis, who has been spitting fire on Twitter in the last twenty four hours. Some fantastic stuff. My friend Sean. He is co founder of the Federalist. The Federalist dot com, one

of my favorite websites out there. Mister Davis, good to have you on, sir, good to be on. Thank you for having me. I gotta say, after the huge debacle yesterday, I had thought that maybe there would be a little more just keep the heads down from the Democrats and

wait to start calling Trump a racist again. But I'm seeing the Pelos, Sas and some others that are saying, do you think they're really keeping impeachment open as an option in their minds or they just saying that because to say impeachment is closed is an admission that the debacle yesterday has ended that. Oh, I actually think it's a little bit of both. I think they have worked themselves into a corner, having worked their base into this fever, that there's a good segment of the party that they

can't let down. They can't just say no more impeachment, So I feel like they have to keep that option alive just for their own political survival. But I think they also understand, at least the smarter heads in the party like Pelosi, that impeachment was going to be a disaster for them and it was going to be a guarantee for Trump's reelection, And they understand that the sooner they can take this train into the station and get

everyone off, the better for their own party. So they've got a real problem here because they're stuck between their base and a hard place. Yeah, I feel like yesterday, in a sane world, should have been ironically helpful to the Democrats because it was so clear that Muller was a figurehead that this was really it was really all a con right. I mean, the whole purpose of Mueller being assigned was so that we couldn't criticize him. He was Saint Muller. He was going to save America from

the scourge of Trump. Turns out that just a bunch of very clearly partisan Democrats were given effectively an unlimited budget and mandate you just destroy Trump and everybody in his orbit everything they could, anything they wanted to, and they couldn't even pull it off. But you would think that in a normal world Democrats would say, Okay, so I guess we're not going to impeachment and that would

be to their benefit. It sounds to me like they're still thinking maybe, oh, they're still playing footsie with it. And that's because for them, I don't think impeachment was ever actually about the facts. For them, impeachment was about getting the orange bad man, and he will always be the Orange bad man no matter what happens with collusion or obstruction, and they have always wanted to get rid of him because he committed the unforgivable crime of beating

Hillary in twenty sixteen. So it shouldn't really be all that surprising that the total collapse of Mueller in his investigation and the whole collusion thing didn't really save their desire for blood. All they care about is getting rid of Trump, and if they have to use Mueller to do it, great, and if they don't have to use him to do it, great. He was just a bit player in a much larger passion play against Trump. For the Democrats, what do you think their next moves are?

I mean, is this thing? They don't have anything left really on collision unless they go the impeachment political route. I mean, it seems like they've exhausted. I do you see something else? I mean, you were an investigator up on Capitol Hell, you know how this stuff goes. Do you think the Democrats have another hand to play here or are they just going to have to batten down the hatches for this IG report when it comes out in allegedly September. Oh no, they have all kinds of options.

And again, their whole goal has been to paralyze and get rid of Trump in the Mullar investigation and the whole collusion nonsense was just a means to do that. But remember they control the House, they have subpoena power, So now they're going to use what Pelosi euphemistically called accountability investigations. They're going to try and paralyze the White House by investigating every single little thing they do, whether it's subpoena in the White House or every agency or

leaking stuff about different Cabinet secretaries. Their war is going to continue. So no, I think impeachment proceedings maybe off the table because of how poorly Muller's chest stimony went. But their inquisition against Trump, they've got a you know, another eighteen months. They have to run that thing until they get to twenty twenty, so they're not going to stop. What should Trump do in response to all this? How if you were advising his White House in this fight,

what would you tell him? That's a good question. The first thing is you have to you have to clear the air on all the Spygate stuff. Bar needs to finish his investigation and make all the public Durham needs to announce indictments because somebody's got to go to prison for what went on there. The IG needs to finish up.

The documents need to be classified. But I also think Trump needs to just focus on the stuff he ran on in the recent people voted for him, which was securing the border, securing the economy, making sure trade deals make sense, making sure people are able to keep more of their money instead of it going to the government, and trying to fix the healthcare system. I think that's what people actually care about. The Russias spygate stuff is interesting to us, but it's not the kind of thing

that affects your everyday life. And it says everyday life issues that affect you, know, how much money you have to spend on a mortgage or school. That's what people vote on, and that's what Republicans in the president should be focusing on. Is there any mechanism that the White House could use to try to get some of this stuff going in the opposite direction? It just feels like our side, it feels like the White House feels like

the Republican Party is always playing defense. There's only defense. I mean, except for Trump's Twitter and his public statements. But I mean, in terms of the mechanisms of the bureaucracy, is there a fight fire with fire option here? Oh? I mean, yeah, that's more of an existential question. It makes our lives as conservatives a lot more difficult when we're constantly going to war against a bureaucracy that's run by liberals, a media that's run by liberals, educational establishments

that are run by liberals. We pretty much are always going to be reactive rather than proactive, just because of how the power balance in these institutions are. But I think Trump can do a lot to turn the tables, and in the smaller stuff is a good example. They never expected a president to do what he did. Comee. Never expected that he would get fired for trying to blackmail and extort the president. You know, Mueller never thought this guy would actually say, no, I'm not going to

meet with you. I'm not playing your little perjury trap game. They certainly never in a million years thought that Barr would come in and get a declassification authorization from the President and then appoint his own prosecutor to go after the investigators. So Trump has a lot of ways where he can seize the initiative and force the other side to play on his terms rather than doing what we regularly have to do, which is play on their terms do you have faith in. I mean, I've I've been

saying along and I think that Bar. I mean, my two favorite in terms of their competency. It's not like a personal favorite, but my two on the level of competence a competency favorites in the administration are Bar and Pompeo. I think Barr showed himself to be both unflappable and really on his game and knows and knows what time it is, so to speak, this guy from Menneicet that Dave assigned. I mean, what's your sense of whether this

IG report is going to actually get the goods? Because the last IG report seemed to be nothing but political bias and then somehow the IG comes out with a conclusion that's, well, there's no actual political bias here. Yeah, So we got to separate two things. There's the Durham bar investigation. Durham's the prosecutor from Connecticut, and then there's the IG report. I expect the IG report to be a total dud. The IG does not exist to root

out corruption within agencies. It exists to investigate things and then tell the world, don't worry, it was just one or two people here doing some isolated bad things, but the agency as a whole is safe and protected. And don't you worry, I got it locked down. And that's exactly what we're going to see when he comes out with his report on the FISA stuff. As far as Durham and bar are concerned, Durham is the real deal.

This was a guy who rooted out corruption as a US attorney at the FBI when it turns out the FBI was framing innocent people for murders committed by FBI informants, and in fact, it was Mueller's own FBI that was hiding evidence from the courts during that and it was something I think back in two thousand and two or

two thousand and three that was so heinous. Several of the men who were in prison for life were freed and granted something like one hundred or two hundred million dollars settlement for the wrongful convictions based on falsification and lies by FBI agents. So Durham went up against the mob, and he went up against the FBI, and he came

out clean. So I think, just character wise and experience wise, he's the perfect person to be doing this current job of rooting out the corruption related to Spygate before we let you go. Sean, just wondering watching that thing happened yesterday on Capitol watching finally Muller have to stand up and present the truth, in some sense, right, the truth of who he is and his role in this investigation. Were you. I gotta say, I didn't really see it coming.

It was a little I was taken aback by how utterly convincing, and then in a sense how much I felt like a fraud had been exposed after two years, the fraud of the investigation, which is that this guy was a figurehead and that it was never this honest, bipartisan,

good faith investigation at all. You're exactly right. We got a little glimpse of it at his bizarre May twenty ninth press conference, and I remarked in an article at the time that he looked more like a dottering octogenarian senator out to lunch than he did this commanding former

FBI figure. And I wondered, coming into the testimony yesterday, maybe he was just having a bad day and we were going to see the Bob Muller of old show up and really put on a tour to force performance I was shocked at how feeble he was, how little command he had over even the simplest of details, and

it was shocking. I think that's why you saw the response you did from pretty much everyone left and right, and it showed that his name was used and abused by a bunch of people who just wanted the veneer of his credibility to be wrapped around the witch hunt that they had planned to do from the very beginning. Sean Davis everybody co founder or the Federalist read his latest at the Federalist dot com. You can also follow Sean on Twitter if you want to see how you

can get after the libs on Twitter. Sea N M. Dav Sean Davis, Thanks so much, Sean, appreciate having you any Buddy's always fun. Thank you, Buck. All right, we'll hit it in the sect team. We'll be right back. The Mueller Report was not written by Bob Muller, and that a lot of the findings and conclusions that were in there were written by a bunch of lawyers that didn't like Donald Trump, that had supported and in some cases represented Hillary Clinton. So I think that that was

a fact that came out. The other big winner if you will as Attorney General Bill Barr, because if Bob Mueller didn't answer those questions, Bill Barr needs to people need to know the answers to the questions. That's Congress In Ratcliffe giving his assessment, his his after action report on what yesterday on Capitol Hill. With that testimony by Bob Muller. I wanted to hear from the man himself, Andy McCarthy, on this, so we got him in the

mix today. Andy's, of course, formerly of the Southern District of New Yorkers, a federal prosecutor. Now he's with National Review where he is a senior editor, author of a whole bunch of books. Fox News contributor Andy, Great to have you back, Great to be with you. All right, I just want your your top line. I mean, you

know you're you. You finished watching that whole thing yesterday, and the first thoughts that are coming out or you know, first thoughts in your mind, first words out of your mouth, or what. There's no way that Bob Muller either ran this investigation or had anything to do with the report. You know, I just think he was I had always thought Buck that he was staff driven, just because I thought that we could recognize those of us who have

watched some of these guys over the years. Some of the legal theories and investigative tactics that were used are sort of notorious linked with some of the people on Muller's staff. So it was clear to me that he was given his staff free reign. But you know, I kind of pooh pooed what a number of people in the Trump camp told me about, you know, that Muller had kind of lost his fastball. I figured, you know, you're getting spun a little bit, which is kind of

what happens. But it sure looked at me like that was true yesterday. Yeah. How I mean, you Andy, you worked in the prosecutorial arm of the federal government. I feel like the American people must have those who were approaching this not even necessarily completely fair minded, but just being objective at what they saw. It's hard to come away from this enough feel like this was there's a dishonesty in attaching a you know, a high profile individual

like I mean, it was called the Mueller Report. We've been referring to this all along, and you know, his credibility was used to sell this. You know, it's it's like I signed, you know, I I signed a star pitcher for my baseball team, and it turns out that when I show up, you know, to watch from the stands, it's actually like a bunch of triple A guys. I'm like, what happened here? I mean, it's just it just felt like it was not what was advertised at all in

a way that was fraudulent. Yeah, and it's then the consequences of that book, which I completely I agree with your point, but the consequences of it are even deeper,

I think in this sense. You know a lot of us have complained from the beginning that Muller was tin eared in assembling his staff, to put it mildly, and he had a lot of activist Democrats on a staff that in an investigation that was fraught with politics, and the comeback to that always was well, but you don't have to worry about that because the Rock River Republican Bob Muller is the guy who's at the Helm, and he's not an activist Democrats, So what are you all

worrying about? And of course, you know, it's turns out that he hasn't really been at the Helm at all, except in name only so you know, number one, he really was not running the show. It was these activist Democrats who were doing that. And secondly, Buck, you know, you're not supposed to have a special counsel unless the Justice Department is so conflicted that it's necessary to bring

somebody in from the outside to run the investigation. Well, Mulla was the guy from the outside, and who did the recruit not just activist Democrats, but activist Democrats who had high ranking positions in the Justice Department whose conflict was the reason we supposedly had to have a special counsel in the first place. Annie McCarthy, everybody check out

his latest at National Review dot com. And you know, Annie, to me has been such a fascinating component of this whole saga because you know, those of you who listened to this show and have for a long time know that he was very fair minded. In the early stages of the investigation, he said, Okay, we got a special counsel, we got to look into this, see what they do. And he is now right along I mean I read all of his stuff and I obviously have him on

the show on a regular basis. We're right alongside each other in terms of what an outrage we think this is and how ridiculous we think this is. So it's just it's frustrating because I really don't think there'll be any justice here. The only accountability that will really matter is making Democrats stu in four more years of Trump as president. I mean, just that's the if you want to feel like all has been set right in the world, or at least there has been some payback for what

has been done that is wrong. Trump for four more years as president will melt lib minds, and that will mean that all this stuff that they've done, all these deep state which hunt nonsense efforts, it was all for naught. They were unable to achieve what they sought out to do, what they were so willing to debase themselves to do, which was to find anything, anything that they could to destroy Orange Man Bad Trump. That's what this wall was.

So if they fail in that objective, because he wins four more years as president, that's the only way to repudiate all the underhanded, disgusting tactics that they've engaged in. And so that for me at least raises the stakes a bit for the next election. It's not just about Trump and all the policies. It's also about justice. Dare I say, I'm not going to answer that. I'm not going to engage in discussion about what happened after the production of our report. That's in my purview. I am

not going to get into that. I don't want to speculate. I don't necessarily credit what you're saying outside our purview, and I'm not going to answer that question, Sir. I do not accept your characterization what occurred, and I am not familiar with that. I don't know when I found that out. Yeah, I'm not gonna talk about that. I'm going to pass on that. Yeah, and I'm curious as to why, well I can't get into it. Did he

lie to you? Guys too can't get into that? Did you interview mipson can't get into that is MIPS and Western intelligence or Russian intelligence can't get into that. A lot of things you can't get into, that's for sure. I want to I want to start pulling the it's outside my purview whatever that's now a thing. Whenever somebody asked me a question, I don't want to answer it. Just say, ah, it's outside my purview. Hey, Buck, did you did you take out the trash and clean the dishes? Uh,

it's outside my purview. Yeah, did you did you do the work last night that you're supposed to do in preparation for today? That's outside my purview. That's that's gonna be a fun one. Uh. Just just a note here, because I am in in New York City. You've got a de Blasio bike lane project. I mean, I think the Blasio might be the dumbest mayor in the United States, in any city with over one hundred thousand people, or maybe just in any city. I do think that he

may he may be the least competent mayor. And the I shouldn't say the dumbest, the most incompetent is really the way I think that the city would function better. This is this is really true. The city would function more efficiently if in fact, you did not have Deblasio and there was no mayor, like it would be a better thing for the largest city in this country. Of Deblasio wasn't even making any decision whatsoever. But you you have this big fifty eight million dollars bike safety plan

that's going to be coming out. Mark, do you ever bike? Are you a bike guy, I don't feel like getting murdered. You know. They have had seventeen people die this year on bicycles alone in New York City, and I think, look, Libs are obsessed with creating bike lanes in very, very crowded cities. They're obsessed with it, and I think it's because of their climate change mania. They view this as the way that you know, Europeans live there, very stately

and unordered lives. And there's a lot that when you add it all together, you look at it say, Okay, I understand why the Libs like when people are cycling places, because your CO two emissions from cycling are pretty minimal. But all I can tell you is that a lot of people I come across who are in major urban areas on bicycles, at least a lot of the ones that I remember, are just nuts. I mean, they're going twenty five miles an hour on those things. They're going

the wrong way up and down the street. There was a character created for the show Portlandia who is a militant bicyclist who's always yelling, you know, on your left, on your left, you know. And if you dealt with some of this stuff too, the people that think that they can just go any way they want in traffic on the bicycle as fast as they want to go, and all they have to do is in the last two seconds before they run over some granny yell you know,

on your right and that's enough. The worst is cars versus bicycles because I live in Long Beach, New York, and they don't observe stop signs, They go the wrong way on the streets. They just act like there are no cars, yeah, no bike lane. So it's not like they should be riding in the street and getting in my way. Now I know that they are. Some of you think they're nerdy, probably a lot of you. But those electric scooters are far safer. People are in much

better control. They're much more comfortable because you can just step on and then take off. You don't have to you're not exercising, so it's not like going to help your heart anything. But that means you also don't show up to a work meeting because if you're a man wearing a suit on a bicycle, that just can't be fun. I see these guys who do this. They're in a business suit and they're on their bike. Here in New

York City. I just don't see how that. You know, don't you have to also do the thing where you take your pant leg and you roll it up. It doesn't get caught in the gears, all right, think so yeah, yeah, it just doesn't mean what you smell when you get to work. Of course, do you think it to be some smelly comie and you're saving the earth by not taking a car or the subway or a bus. Sorry I'm not I'm not into it. I mean, sixty million dollars on a safety program that is going to be

dubious at best. But then again, to Blasio's wife, I think, spend eight hundred million dollars on a health a mental health initiative that nobody can point to anything that has been done of benefit. I mean it takes some it's real special to spend eight hundred million dollars on nothing, or or to spend eight hundred million dollars and have nothing to show for it. That's that's almost a skill in and of itself. I don't know how anyone could do that. But that's what's going on in the city

and at Blasio is still running for president. It's the craziest part. We got the Democrat debates next week. We got two nights and debates. What is Wednesday Thursday? Is that remark? No, it's Tuesday, Wednesday. I mean, none of these Democrats seem like serious people to me. It's it's really so far an absolute clown show. But maybe one of them will break out a deside. I think the first Democrat that starts to look like he or she is in some command of reality, we'll be able to

break out of this pack. But those that are raising their hands for things like health, you know, medicare, Medica, not just Medicare for all, Medicare for all for illegal aliens, there's just no way that there's no way they can win doing holding the positions that they hold. And I'm sure they're going to bring up that it was one hundred and eight degrees in Paris today, and you know

climate they love to talk about climate change. It's it's been a hundred and eight degrees in Europe before, folks. This is none of this stuff is really new. I just wish that there were some I don't know that there's not even a way to have a conversation with these people anymore, but Yeah, the cyclists in particular are you know, you get a lot of a lot of

Sandernistas in the cycling community in the urban. So I'm not talking about those of you that ride your bicycle on the weekend you're in your hometown or that's not I mean the people that want to go into the biggest cities in the country and they only want to ride their bikes and they want to do whatever they want on them, and it just makes it's such a hazard. Man.

I've almost been clipped several times by and they're always going the wrong way down the street, because that's I'm a New Yorker, right, I'm always looking and looking, but you know it's a one way street. There's no car coming, and you know there's double park cars though. Sometimes I'm telling you it's a dangerous world out there. Mark, keep your head on a swivel. Roll calls up next. Ain't no party like a Team Buck party, because a Team Buck party, don't stop. Yeah, we got Buck turned up

to eleven. It's time for roll call. They did a red I guess it's called a reskin of Twitter. You know, it's a re a rebrand of Twitter. I don't know what you necessarily call it, but they do a It looks different now and I don't like it. I like the old version. I haven't seen the yet. Very few of you. Yeah, the desktop version stinks. The phone's the same. Yeah, that's good news. He's the same on the phone, same on the phone. All right, Right here we go, roll

call Facebook dot com, slash buck Sexton. That's how you send me your thoughts, send me your messages. Let's get to it, Brad hey Buck. On Tuesday's podcast, you talked about the left and how they'd like to get Al Frankin back in office and even possibly even possibly run against Trump. I thought I was going to wreck my car laughing when you said it. You think watching Biden versus Trump as a train wreck, watching what Trump would do to Al frank And during an election would be

too enjoyable. I'm still trying to figure out how the Dems went so crazy so fast. They seem completely clueless about the American people and our values. Thanks for all you do, shield time well, Brad, thank you so much, my friend. I do appreciate it. So Yes, indeed, that's I think you're probably right that Trump would defeat Frankin rather easily. But it's not an experiment where we're going to get to really play out. So it's just theorizing

right now. Van, hey Buck, I don't usually rush, but I was listening to him today while driving and I heard a Buck Sextant Noble Gold commercial. I was much more excited to hear the commercial than the show. Keep on breaking through Shield's eye. All right, Van, thank you, my friend, appreciate that. Yes, Noble Gold's a great sponsor, a great company, and it's nice to have my voice get to a few different places like that. Let's see here,

John rights, Hey Buck, No one's cutting mustard. The correct phrase is cut the must really think of eighteenth century conscripts being mustard into formation. If one was physically unable to muster, then that individual could not cut the muster. I've been listening ever since you're interviewed on Glen's show. You should work with YouTube history channels like Kings and

Generals to produce more history shows. Well, thank you so much, John, I mean, I do love doing the history shows, and you know, I'm probably gonna move to like a tropical island at some point and just do history podcasts and like write, you know, books, and that may be where life is heading. Wow, is cut the mustard? Wait, hold on a second, Where does the phrase cut the mustard come from? This is what I just looked up on

dictionary dot com. To cut the mustard is to reach or surpass the desired standard performance, or more generally, to succeed. For instance, Beyonce I really cut the mustard in her new song. When don't we start saying cut the mustard? What is the origin of it? The word mustard goes back via French the Latin mustum, which is an altogether different substance. This is all on dictionary dot com. It was the juice squeeze from grapes before it was made

into wine. Mustard is so named because the condiment was originally made by making mustard seeds into a paste with must What does mustard have to do with excellence? It's not exactly clear why we say cut the mustard. Some have provoked proposed literal derivation, such as cutting down mustard plants. Others suggest a connection to the phrase passing mustard. When a soldier gets approval after troops are assembled. It sounds like, my friend John, you are teaching me a new phrase.

But I think that cutting the mustard is in fact still Mark, what do you think isn't cut the mustard a phrase you've heard before? I have. I prefer cutting the cheese, though, Yes, well that's a different, that's a different I know what that is. So I apparently dictionary dot com says cut the mustard is a phrase, So I'm not. I was about to eat a little bit of humble pie with some mustard on it. But anyway,

all right, let's see here, Ricky, Greetings. We aren't acquainted, but I just wanted to say, keep out the good fight, and if you have any sway at all with poetas, ask him to consider being more strategic with the tweets and do not cause the dams to close ranks. Again to him, that is bad. Well, I wish I could say that I had that kind of sway with Potus, but I've only I spoke to him. I haven't spoken him in a year. But I do know people around him in the White House. I don't think they could

listen to me on this one. But I'll do what I can. I'll do what I can. I do it. I don't I do what I can. Taylor, right, someone obviously forgot to tell Epstein that you can't hide from the Clintons, not even in jail. All right, So Taylor, I assume you're referring to the fact that Epstein was found in a cell last night with some marks, some bruises or is it clear? Mark? What was it a suicide? At temper? Was he attacked? It wasn't clear from the headlines I saw this morning. Do we know yet? I

did not see the story. I'll look at them. That's all right, you know. But this is what I'm gonna tell you. If for some reason Epstein does not live to see a trial, then I got to tell you. Wait, jailed killer. Here we go. This is in the New York Post jailed killer cop. Question about Jeffrey Epstein's injuries. Investigators suspect that Epstein was assaulted in a Lower Manhattan lock up and questioned a hulking X cop who's housed

in the same unit. Holding to law enforcement sources, he was placed on suicide watch after he's found sprawled on the floor of his cell, nearly unconscious and with injuries to his neck. Authorities are leaning away from the idea the convicted pedophile did it to himself, either to commit suicide or merely get transferred out of the infamous Metropolitan Correction Center. The marks are more consistent with being choked. Epstein,

sixty six, has refused to cooperate with investigators. Huh Nicholas Tartalioni is a former Briarcliff Manner cop who faces the death penalty and for drug related killings upstate. He was wearing earbuds when investigators went to ask him about the incident. People are looking at this guy. Wow, folks, Let's just get this clear right now. If and I think that's what my friend Taylor here is going for, Jeffrey Epstein

does not live to see trial. It's because this is a cover up and they let him die in prison, meaning that they did not keep him safe. This guy, he's got dirt on people he was. There's all this evidence that's, you know, testimony that's been given by his victims. So there's no reason for them to lie about how this guy liked to make videos of people in sexual acts with underage girls. Well, you know, have you heard any names coming out of that? I mean, well, there

have been some people that have been publicly named. They very much claim that it's all a lie. But according to some of his victims, there were other, you know, grown men who were caught up in this process, and we have not heard who those names are. So if all of a sudden it comes out that, you know, Epstein is dead, I think it's pretty clear that someone got to him in prison. It would be like a mob hit in prison. Look, this is people want this

story to go away. Nobody gets the deal that Epstein got. Nobody it does not. That is not something that happens in the justice system. No one prays on underage girls, systematically, has a mountain of evidence against him, and essentially gets away with the most minor slap on the wrist. It's just it just doesn't happen. So there must be some reason for it. And the pressure that was brought to bear on someone. We haven't found out who it was.

Acosta lost his cabinet position. There must have been something going on here, folks. There was someone that gave the order to make this Epstein case go away. Somebody was doing that. So I'm just saying, that's what do you think? Mark? And I just wanted to let you know. NBC New York is reporting that sources say it was a suicide attempt or they might be a suicide attempt, and who's placed on suicide watch? He I mean that's possible too. Okay, good to know, but I'm just saying if he has

taken out in prison, it is not a coincidence. Yes, And I just want to say that before anything happens. This guy does not make it to trial, it is not And if he manages to evade justice because of some double jeopardy protection, then you know the fix has been in all along. So I'm I've got concerned. I have very real concerns about where all this is going. I'm not sure we're gonna see just a stard team. I didn't get into as much roll call today as

I meant it Tomorrow It'll be Friday. You know what that means, double roll call. So well hear more from you then, Facebook dot com Slashbuck Sexton, please do send of your thoughts, sen of your well wishes, your your high fives, your prayers, all of the above here in New York City. Because my dad's birthday, I want to give a shout out to my dad, the patriarch of the Sexton family. He is a man who looks twenty years younger than his age, and we love you dad, Happy birthday, and she'll tie