Smollett's Lies Collapse

Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again the buck Sexton Show begins. Remember the actor and musician Jesse Small from the hit show Empire was attacked and beaten early this morning in Chicago, where two individuals yelled out racial and homophobic slurs. Investigators say one of the offenders wrapped a rope around Smalett's neck with a noose around his neck and hospitalized. Empire star Jesse Smalett was the victim of a vicious racist and homophobic attack and his

attackers hurled racial and homophobic slurs. Not only homophobia, We're talking about racism, We're talking about hate with steroids. The offenders uttered this is anaga country, and Senator Corey Booker said the vicious attack when actor Jesse was an attempt at modern day lynching. Kamala Harris calling the attack and attempted modern day lynching. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tweeting the racist, homophobic attack on Jesse Smollette is an

affront where humanity. I'm so shaken by the story. This is horrible to report. This is a horrible story, rendous and unacceptable, absolutely despicable. Whom this is America in twenty night Taylor Oh, looks like the media got this one wrong too. Folks, Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. My we have a lot to talk about today on President's Day, and I'm, for one, I'm very much looking forward to it. Now. I'm gonna try to limit the amount of end zone

dancing that we do today on the show. But those of you who listen daily know that we have been on this Jesse Smollett fiasco from the start. That as soon as I heard the details of this attack, I said, I don't buy it. And then as soon as we heard his reaction, Jesse Smollett, this actor from the show Empire to the police, didn't want to give them his phone, give redacted Ragger I said, no, I'm sorry. This is just no. This is not credible, This is not believable.

This is one of these instances where we should all take a step back and say, hold on a second, does this make sense? But did the media do that? No? They did not. They did not. They saw an opportunity to run with their preferred narrative, and they decided to take it. The narrative, of course, being that Trump has made this country so much more racist than it was previously, that he's such a terrible person, and that Trump's supporters.

Remember this was really about his supporters as well, Our vile bigots, anti gay, violent, nasty, horrible people and so weird as to be walking around Chicago at two o'clock in the morning with a noose to throw around a black actor's neck while they yelled this is maga country. I don't think so. I didn't think so. In fact, as you know, I've been doing updates on this, stretching back now for a couple of weeks, saying, mmm, something's

up here, folks. Maybe I remember I told you, Maybe there was an exchange of some kind, Maybe he did have some kind of a fight, but or he just made the whole thing up, but it seemed to me a little bit much for him to just wholesale have had nothing to base this on. So what we find out now is that two brothers who just came back from Nigeria. I believe they were born in Chicago. I believe they are US citizens, just came back from Nigeria, their weightlifters. One of them had been on Smallett shows

as an extra. They wanted to break into acting. And the reporting, now this is not confirmed by the Chicago Police Department yet, but the reporting says that Smallett paid them a few thousand dollars to engage in this faux hate crime against him, and that the rope that was used, and this was always we can go through what some of the tells were here, how do we know this

was crap? Might be a worthwhile exercise to go back and look at some of it, but that the rope was bought at a Chicago store at Smollet's behassed by these two individuals, the two brothers, for him, and that this was all it was all a hoax, It was all a put on. It was a plot for attention, for sympathy, to raise his profile. And now here we are, with a few weeks gone by of bashing Trump, bashing his supporters. Look at how racists they are. Look at it,

and it's a fake. It's a fake. And then, without any any shred of decency or honesty, the media trends around and says, oh, no, we yeah, we handle this one right, We did this one the right way. And oh, the people who are running around and celebrating that this is a hoax, they didn't understand how terrible it really is out there, all these hate crimes that happen, and they don't understand how awful it is in this country,

all these victimized groups. I like crunch the numbers over the weekend, and let me tell you that the desire for there to be hate crimes to report on them in the media obviously greatly outstrips the number of real hate crimes that occur in any given year, because there are lots and lots and lots of high profile, very fake hate crimes that are reported, as we know, and Island fact go through and give you a whole bunch of them later on this hour, just just to give

you a taste, just just to jog the memory of you know, how many fake How many fake robberies do you hear about? How many fake murders do you hear about? Very few? How many fake hate crimes you hear about? A lot? A lot. So we have a society now that is obsessed with victimhood and with victimhood as a means of hurting other people, right, using that victimhood, wielding it as a club, as a weapon against people that you don't like or that you disagree with, and seizing

power for yourself in the process too. Victimhood is not just a passive thing. It's not just for sympathy. It's in the pursuit of power. Right. When people claim victimization, they want the state to act on their behalf. They want the state to pass laws or to take action

against those that they say are victimizing them. And when you're talking about the victimization of a group at the hands of another group, whether it's white males or conservative or whatever it may be, your lack of individual culpability is no protection. Right. You know, no one is saying that you or I would have to, for example, pay

reparations because of something that we had done. It is because of our existence in a class that under the logic of reparations, had previously and historically oppressed another class, and so therefore you and I today must pay for this. We've done nothing wrong, but it doesn't matter because it's about the collective, not the individual. This is obviously very

disturbing stuff. But even though the media should feel utterly humiliated, this coming after the BuzzFeed fake news debacle, which came right before the Covington kids mess, where the media or saw an opportunity to tell a story about Trump world, I mean, they are really they are delusional. They have lost it. They're not reasonable, rational people anymore. They see a maga hat and they don't have any ability to reason through things. Anywhere. It's always, oh my gosh, this

maga hat. It is truly triggered for them. It drives him into fits of rage or fear. They view the maga hath the supporting garment, if you will, of this administration, as as some have said on TV, almost like the almost like a white hood for the KKK, or or a Nazi symbol, a swastika. That's the same kind of emotional reaction that they give to it. And it's appalling and it's stupid. That it's unfair and it's destructive. But

this is what we are up against. This is how the other side views it, and we should at least know that much as we talk about it. I mean, you had people blaming Trump for this. I mean, here, here's Maxine Waters play seven. We'd have to understand this is happening. It's coming from the President of the United States. He's dog whistland every day. He's separating and dividing, and he is basically embolding those folks who failed this way.

Does she apologize to Trump now for that? I want to know is how is Trump responsible for a lie? A thing that did not happen? How can Trump be responsible for a non action? You know, am I responsible for the nuclear war that did not happen on the Korean peninsula yesterday? I don't know how it could be held responsible for that. It didn't happen. Is it my fault? This starts to feel like we're walking around some kind of you know, an insane asylum. Lives are the ones

just walking in circles muttering to themselves? What are they talking about? I would note that even though they're wrong on this, you know where they're gonna go with it. Oh, it's raising awareness. Oh it shows us while this one may be untrue and I'm being This is what the

meeting has been saying all day. People have come at me on Twitter about this too, that what this shows us is that there are some people who just don't want to believe in all that there's all this hate and racism that occurs in the country all the time. And to that, I say, no, I just didn't want to believe that this was one of those times because it wasn't. And I was right with libs though being right doesn't matter, it's about the narrative. Being right isn't

a defense. I think that I obviously thought Jesse Smollett was lying all along. I was right. You know what that proves to libs that I don't see how racist and bad America really is and there must be maybe I'm some alt right bad person myself. There must be something wrong with me. Meanwhile, I'm right, they were wrong. Does that factor into this at all? And I've known I was known I was right all, you know, for days and days and days now, And it's not like

this was some big surprise. I was on Fox on Friday saying This is not believable. This is implausible, I think was the word I used. It just doesn't add up, does not make sense. Now, now there's this effort to try and protect us. See, they don't want to they

don't want to go there. The media doesn't want to have to reckon with the fact that they are an ideological monolith, that they all think the same way, that they all have these biases that they bring to these this subject matter, and that they're desperate to have the in group, to have their fellow journalists think highly of them.

And they all have internalized this wokeness, this social justice crap that is intellectually garbage and that hurts the country, that hurts relationships between normal Americans day and day out. This idea that we're we're all just this big intersection of different layers of oppression, and this is how they approach it, and that the only way to self actualize, the only way to reach one's potential is to tear down other people who are outside of the preferred victimology narrative.

There's no honesty now around this. There's no effort to try and fix in the media what's been broken here here here's one of these from from Vox, which is a laughing stock as as a site. I mean, it's just the most left wing garbage ee garbage you could find anywhere. And one of their one of their explainer people or whatever, goes on CNN and just says things that aren't true. But it doesn't. See, the truth doesn't

really matter these people. They want to always tell us, oh, Trump lied about this little thing or that little thing. These people don't care about the truth. They're propagandists. Here's what they said. Here's what one of the Vox propagandist said about smaller play for the MAGA quote. I remember reading about the story and looking for a real reputable media outlet reporting on that, and I could not find one. Right, the people who were repeating that quote, we're not news outlets.

We're not media outlets. It was repeated by sure people who maybe had good intentions of wanting to spread the story and had empathy for what they thought was, you know, a real story. But we can't confuse celebrity tweets with the media and the press. And you know, so you're saying actors and activists, yeah, who were rushing to his side, they're friends with him, and they support him, and they're

concerned about a pots blake. Are not the same as Chicago reporters who are trying to find out what happened exactly, And it is different. And look, we don't know what happened to Jesse, but what we do know is that racism is alive and well in this country. Homophobia is alive and well in this country. Oh, there we go, that's what we know. So this was all, by the way, we do know. That mean that this guy's a liar, you know, to what extent and how much and on

what issues? But smallest line. Okay, now we're at the smallest lying part of this unless all the reporting out there is unless that's a lie, which I now we're getting into conspiracy territory. No, smallllet's not telling the truth about this. So but notice the transition into there's nothing that the media should learn about this that they believe this ridiculous story the whole line. And oh and she's she's wrong. By the way, he did and see Ann

reported on this. He told police in the initial that yes, they yelled, this is maga country. So whether he heard somebody else say that, and he goes, yeah, that's a good line. I'll lie about that too, or that was in his initial you know, initial telling to police of this fable. Doesn't really matter. But this is maga country, is what somebody who hates Trump supporters but doesn't know any would think that a Trump supporter would say this is maga country in Chicago at two o'clock in the morning.

Nobody would say that. It reminds me of the UVA that fake gang rape that was reported on by Rolling Stone, and you know, the media leapt all over it. You'll remember that the young woman who allegedly was gang raped and had glass in her back from being thrown on a glass table and ran out of a crowded party at the University of Virginia bleeding after being horribly and this was all, of course a complete fabrication, a total lie.

But afterwards her friend said to her, you better not tell anybody about this because quote, it will ruin your social life. No normal human being on planet Earth, never mind at the University of Virginia, is going to tell their friend who has glass in their back after been brutally attacked. Don't tell anyone because it ruined your social life. These are tells about fabrication. These are lies. This is how we know, and this is Maga Country is a lie.

We'll be right back. And then I see the attacker masked and he said, this Maga Country punches me right in the face. So I've punched back. And then we started tussling. You know, it's very icy. I noticed the rope around my neck and I started screaming and I said, and there's a rope around my neck. I want them to see that I fought back. And I want a little gay boy who might watch this to see that I fought back. And it does not take anything away from people that are not able to do that, but

I fought back. They ran off. I didn't What a nutbar that guy is. What a loon? First of all, the whole no one ever said that he that that the this is Maga Country line. Well he said it, So I think we can dispense with that, right because now in retrospect, everybody says what I was saying all along, which is this is Maga country. Nobody's gonna say that this is you can do this tell It's like, this

is Maga Country. Yeah, you know, it's like, that's what somebody who's an actor in Chicago thinks that people who vote Trump sound like euge Maga country. Yeah, you know, what is that all about? It's just bizarre for him to say that there's there's no basis in but people believed it. They believed it. They gave him the puff piece interview over at ABC. You know, I want to see that I fought back. How crazy do you have to be to go on a national TV interview and

lie about something like this? I mean, how how whackoed do you really have to be as a person to do that. This guy's got got problems. But I'm just gonna say, a team, we were right all along. We saw this coming, we were correct, We did all of our updates. And while the lib media is not going to give us any credit for it, you know what, it's nice to be right. It's nice to be correct. I'm pissed off. What is it that has you so angry?

The attackers? Attackers, But it's also the attacks. It's like, you know, at first, it was a thing of like, listen, if I tell the truth, then that's it, because it's the truth. Then it became a thing of like, oh, how can you doubt that, like you, how do you not believe that it's the truth. And then it became a thing of like, oh, it's not necessarily that you don't believe that this is the truth. You don't even

want to see the truth. I don't think he wants to see the truth because he's not a meeting with cops today in Chicago, So you can take that for what it's worth. Jesse Small at what a what an incredible hoax? This whole thing has been incredible the sense of not believable and amazing at the same time. Andy no is a writer for Quilette. We've had him on before. He's done a lot of great work on Antifa and just exposing the looney left for what it is, and

he's pulled together a threat. It is an epic threat on Twitter that I want to share with you on just all the hoaxes out there in the Trump era that are it's always the same story, Oh my gosh, Trump, all the hate, all the hatefulness because of Trump, and then we go, oh, no, what happened, And well it

turns out nothing happened. But we're not supposed to take this as meaning anything, right that there are all these hoaxes out there doesn't mean anything, is what Andy writes the following Right after Donald Trump's election, the Southern Poverty Law Center really stoked panic. A pro gay Episcopal church in Indiana was vandalized with hile Trump, a swastika, and an anti gay slur. Turns out it was a gay Oregon player who did it. He was only charged with

a misdemeanor. Days after the Pittsburgh massacre, Trump supporters were blamed for Nazi vandalism at a Brooklyn synagogue and fires in a Jewish community. Turns out the perpetrator was a gay black man who had worked with City Council on Initiatives to fight hate crimes. One week before the presidential election, a black church in Mississippi was burned in an arson attack. Vote Trump was written on the building. After much panic, an investigation revealed the man responsible was a church member,

Andrew McClinton, who was himself an African American. In November twenty sixteen, a Muslim student at the University of Louisiana said two white racist Trump supporters brutally assaulted her, ripped off her her job, and robbed her. The story went totally viral it was a lie. Media never identified her by name after the hoax was revealed. Trumpet his supporters were blamed for a spate of anti Semitic KKK and Nazi graffiti on the campus of Nassau Community College in

Long Island in twenty sixteen. The student responsible a left winger named Joskirat Sainy from South Asia. In December twenty sixteen, a Muslim woman said she was attacked by three white Trump supporters in New York City on the subway. She said they try to rip off her her job. Yasmin Suade lied but care. The Council on American Islamic Relations said Muslims are under tremendous stress and pressure, which results

in incidents like this. In September twenty eighteen, a black woman in Long Island said Trump supporters confronted her and told her she didn't belong here. Her car tire was slashed the next day, and a hateful note was left behind saying go home. Turns out she made up the whole story herself. In November twenty eighteen, students at Goucher College demanded social justice training and safe spaces after racist, Nazi and KKK graffiti was found on campus. Someone even

wrote the names of black students. Trump was blamed for this right away, but Flynn Arthur, a black student, was responsible. In twenty seventeen, at Saying Olaf College, it was royal by mass protests in response to anti black notes found across campus. Class was canceled at administrative administration's cave to demands. An investigation found that Samantha Wells, one of the alleged black victims, who was herself black, fabricated the entire incident.

In November twenty sixteen, a Philadelphia and neighborhood was rattled when property was vandalized with pro Trump and anti black messages. William Tucker Black was identified as the vandal through CCTV footage in November twenty sixteenth. Okay, you know what we could do. I mean, this is an incredible threat that and he pulled. It goes on and on and on and on. I could do a whole hour of the show just reading off all these are all hoax hate crimes.

Folks that received national le These are all reported on. These aren't just in the deep and the FBI statistics somewhere national level attention, big news story hoaxes, people lying about it. If we're in such a hateful, awful country, if the environment right now is so destructive and evil and anti gay, and anti black, and anti women and anti minority because of Trump, why do we have so many fake hate crimes that are occurring that or what we're basing this narrative of, oh, there's a rise in

hate crimes on in the first place. When do we get to take a step back and say, maybe the left's got it wrong here, maybe they're being yeah, ideologically blinded. I ran the numbers, by the way, you know what, the you know what the hate crimes which include mean comments, which the whole other conversation. But where the First Amendment stops and hate crimes begin. But hate crimes, according to the FBI, about one and forty thousand people will will will be a victim of or could see a hate

crime on any given year. One and forty thousand. There are eight thousand total reports of hate crimes in any given year. This is not an epidemic, my friends. Most of those crimes are to property. It's vandalism, it's people

saying and writing things, We'll be right back. It confirms what I've been arguing for a very long time, which is that the investigation was always about President Trump, and it was going on for many months before May of twenty seventeen, the Bureau went overt in its case filing system to say that they were opening a case officially on President Trump, But they had been investigating him for a very long time before then under the auspices of counter intelligence, hoping to be able to make a case

on him. Sir, friend Andy McCarthy saying what absolutely needs to be said now, Some senior officials at FBIDJ were going after Trump. That's all. This was all the Russia collusion. Sanctity of our elections. Mumbo jumbo is just that. It's garbage, claptrap, nonsense, malarkey. People were trying to cover up for what their real

agenda was. They don't care about the harm done to the faith and trust that the American people are really required to have in these institutions of justice and law enforcement. They thought they had a bigger, more important mission stopping Trump and getting vengeance for Hillary Clinton. That's one part of this too. You'd be one thing if Trump had defeated some really wonderful and worthy person you know, I'm sorry,

but I can't just let this go. It would be at least a little bit more understandable to me that they would violate their oaths, that these fbidj stooges would do the things that they've done if the person who was running against Trump was, even if I disagreed with him or her, a really good person. I mean, Hillary Clinton's a nightmare, all right. The Clinton's, the whole Clinton dynasty is a nightmare of corruption, lies, self dealing, just

the worst in the contemporary American politician. I mean, it's all encapsulated in the Clintons, both of them. What book, Why are you being so mean? I'll just you know, I just want to give ladies a little high five, maybe a little squeeze, and see what's going on, you know. I mean, everyone makes all these excuses for Bill Clinton, for Hillary Clinton. Why, I've got a big country, three hundred twenty million people. That's the best that we can do.

And these f behinddo ja guys, they're so upset because they want a Hillary. They wanted Benghazi Hillary to be the one who was in charge, so much better than Trump. What are they smoking over there? But it was always about getting Trump, and they use counterintelligence as the open doorway to get where they needed to go. That was it.

They abuse the discretion that they have, and I want you'd always remember this, you know, if Pete never that the whole thing about how a prosecutor can inde a ham sandwich, I can tell you law enforcement can investigate anybody for anything. I mean, it's really easy to do. I've been there. I've written the justification statements for counter terrorism investigations. I've created the legal record for this in

my past. Okay, where we got to look at this guy for this reason and this reason and this reason. Now it was counter terrorism, So the stakes were high, and I was always trying to be ethical and legal in all my acts. I had no interest in investigating somebody who I didn't think was a threat. I had no interest in investigating somebody that there was not a real predicate to look into. But if I had wanted to, if you wanted to just go after somebody for a

certain reason, it's not hard to do. And when you add into it all this stuff seis confidential informants and you know, all these different ways that they can create these investigations. The moment you have account our intelligence component to it. They have built in cover ups. Oh that's classified. Can't tell you about that. Oh we can't show you what we told the fire as a chord. Oh they're using the dossier, They're using opposition information as the justification

for this. How much more transparent can it be that this was a political hit? So you know, Andy McCarthy is just saying that this is telling us more we already know, which is absolutely true. Even the dish hey thirsh even he waited on this whole notion of the twenty fifth Amendment and removing Trump from office. And how you know these these FBI guys, their stories don't add up. Parts of this are are a problem, Parts of this are missing. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense.

Play clip fourteen. I think McCabe and Rod Rosenstein really believe that the President had obstruct to justice. I think they were wrong, but they honestly believed it, and they were looking for a way short of impeachment to remove him from office. I think any law enforcement official who thinks that the twenty fifth end and operates in a case like this is disqualified from serving in government. Absolutely true. Rosenstein should be fired. He should have been fired a

long time ago. The only reason he can't be fired is if he got fired. The Dems have created this whole Oh my gosh, Rosenstein, he's the Mueller Probe, He's the saint of the Mueller Probe. They'd act like, oh, Russia collusion. This is all narrative building. They've set this up all along. There can be no accountability for Rosenstein.

There can be no responsibility for these actions that he's taken, because the moment you do anyth against Rosenstein, they view it as a strike against the Muellerprobe, the heart of the Mueller Probe, because he's there, watching over it, making sure that it goes on without the smaller probe. I've told it it's gonna end soon. I have it on good authority. It's gonna end soon. And it's got it's got nothing. It's going nowhere. Unfortunately, because the Democrats are insane,

it doesn't mean that the Russia collusion delusion stops. They'll just come up with new investigations, new ways to approach this, new rationalizations for what should be a deeply a deeply embarrassing episode for the FBI and the DOJ. But which Democrats are gonna just grab onto like a dog with a bone. They're gonna think this is great, let's just let's go over They'll go over all the same material too, because they've brainwashed their side. I speak to Democrats about this.

They really think that there's some there was some plot the hack and the emails with Trump, and they don't understand how crazy they sound, and that that could be done with out there being any hard evidence of this emerging at this point, with all the emails pulled and the phone records, and never all these people under oath and being prosecuted for even the slightest misremembering or deviation from the facts or lying or whatever you want to

call it, they still have nothing. And yet the Democrat line on this doesn't change at all. Oh well, he still must include it. We just haven't found it yet. They'll never stop this because it was never about getting to the truth. Unfortunately, it has been successful. As I have said so many times here because it does bear repeating, this was always about slowing down and hurting the Trump administration. This was always about an opposition. This was hashtag resistance

to what Trump was trying to accomplish. And there's no way to fully gauge just how damaging this has been. There's no way for us to really know what it is. Is that the full, you know, the full drawback of this whole investigation has been for Trump in terms of

policy and what he's been able to accomplish. They just figured that, you know, they knew that it would be bad, It would be sand in the gears, it would slow things down, it would hurt Trump's agenda, it would make his life as president more difficult, and that alone, in their view, was sufficient. That alone, as the left sees, it,

was enough to justify all of this. So unfortunately, there's not going to be that much of a haha moment, even though a lot of us, I think would like one when this whole Muther probe goes nowhere, because it's gone already far enough for them just by hurting Trump's presidency, just by creating this whole apparatus of irritation and anxiety and obstruction, I mean, this was an obstruction effort of all things Trump, and unfortunately, in that regard, the Libs

have been pretty successful. It is upsetting, to say the least, But then you look at the other side of this and where the Libs are going to have to go here? I just thought this was kind of this was this was quite a thing during campaign stopping because you got all these Democrats now that they're running. Elizabeth Warren was at a rally in Georgia and somebody was holding a one, two and twentieth sign and this is how that went

and play nineteen. Yes we're gonna do this. So I thought, what we do today, I'm just so glad you're here. I thought, what we do today is that I talk a little bit, just kind of introduce myself who I am, a little bit of my story. Well, we'll make this happen, and then we're there. We're there, hold on, hold on, We'll get to lots of policy. I absolutely promise I have a little They promise, can we can we turn her off for a minute? Who thinks that this woman

is someone? Yeah, I'm gonna get me a beer. Who thinks that this is a person that anyone wants to vote for? Piera? I am Massachusetts Libs? What is up with you? I'm not talking about Massachusetts conservatives in the House. Thank you for all you do. Massachusetts Libs, what is wrong with you? This is where you want to be your senator. I just want to talk and be really annoying and loud all the time. And oh it's horrible,

isn't it. So the good news is Democrats are going to keep doing what they do, and they're not very good at it. Discussion of the twenty fifth Amendment was simply Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort. Rosenstein was actually openly talking about whether there was a majority of the cabinet who would vote to remove the president. That's correct, counting

votes or possible votes. What seemed to be coursing through the mind of the Deputy Attorney General was getting rid of the President of the United States. Well, one way or another. I can't confirm that, but what I can say is the Deputy Attorney General was definitely very concerned about the president, about his capacity and about his intent at that point in time. The CABE is a slimy, a slimy loser, folks. Bad guy. Bad guy came across

in this interviews. Well. Notice how when asked about Rosenstein bringing up the twenty fifth amendments to remove a president from office. He goes, well, you know, I can't confirm it, that's what he of course he could confirm it. He's not an idiot, but he just doesn't want to admit. He does not want to admit what is planly obvious. What he really doesn't want is to have to answer some questions like, oh, were you hoping to engage in

a coup against the president United States? Using the law as a pretext, using the constitution, abusing a an amendment of the Constitution as a pretext to remove a president. Their plan is a stupid plan. Rosenstein's gonna wear a wire to get the president? What, oh, they're gonna get him saying that he fired Coomy because of Russia. Guess what, even if they did that, that's not a twenty fifth Amendment thing. Comy was a lanky clown, a self righteous,

self interested clown. I mean, so much of what McCabe says, I watched the whole thing, by the way, all of it. So much of what McCabe says here just confirms what many of us have known all along, which is that there really was, there really was a deep state effort

against the president. That's real. You know, we keep being told by the media, Oh, that thing that you think that we were doing or we were saying about Trump, or that the government was you know, at the top level of the bureaucracy trying to do about Trump, that you're crazy, that wasn't happening. We weren't doing that. And then with the passage of time and more facts coming out, Oh no, they were doing that. Yeah, no, that's actually a thing that they were doing, that was happening. Sure

we were surveiling the Trump campaign. Sure we were, you know, thinking about wearing a wire against the president and said, sure, we were thinking about invoking the twenty fifth Amendment. Was it long ago or they were telling us that that was absolutely not the case. This should be investigated as this. People keep comparing this to Watergate. This is way worse than Watergate. And I don't know, people say that about all worse than Watergate, you know, it's an alliteration. But

this is way worse than Watergate. This is using the intelligence community to try and drum up a criminal investigation, criminal prosecution of the president and his top people, maybe go after the president's own family, his own children. Utter disgrace, that the media sits around and goes, oh, well, I guess yeah, they did want to just remove the president.

Could you imagine if somebody had had a discussion and not just anyone the Attorney General for all intents and purposes, the acting Attorney General, and wanted to have a discussion about or you know whatever deputy Attorney general about removing the president the United States because they think he's crazy. If anyone had said that about Obama, I mean, I

think that person would have to leave the country. I don't think that they'd be able to, you know, go and buy a gallant of milk and piece the rest of their lives. But with with you know, with Rosenstein McCabe, you know, it's no big deal. Rosenstein comes across to me. He's one of these guys who you know, he's he's played the game. There's something there's something wrong with him. There's something wrong with them. And the same thing with McCabe.

These are guys who have been bureaucratic in fighters for a long time and they've they've made compromises in those in those organizations to get where they are. Can tell you that it comes across and all this information and that they would be so sanguine in talking about the possible removal of president United States. Could you imagine what

that would do to this country? Could you just just theoretically for a second, think if they managed to get like Tillerson and this guy and that guy and a few other cabinet officials, they convinced them, yeah, we're going to remove the president because we think he's not of sound mind. When you have ninety percent approval rating for this president Republican Party, this is the kind of thing. I'm not exactly. This is the the kind of thing that

pulls a government apart. This is the kind of situation that undermines the legitimacy of a governing system in a way that it maybe never recovers from. You're gonna have some elites just be yeah, you know, sorry, you're not the president anymore because we say so what? And notice how they never stop and think, maybe we've got this wrong. If it can't be the twenty fifth Amendment coup maneuver, then it's got to be the criminal investigation with Muller.

They were doing everything that they could possibly think of to take down this president. And I keep trying to remind everybody who will listen. What do they have to show for it? What proof can they provide us that there was anything sufficient to justify what happened here? All this concern that they have, all of this, Oh my gosh, the president's crazy, he's a criminal, he worked with Rush, all this stuff. What have they been able to find? Nothing? Nothing?

I just I can't tell if if they're just not very if they're the main driver of this is that they're not very smart, or they're just deeply unethical, or you know, there's a lot of different ways that we

could go with this. How could the FBI acting director, How could Komey and McCabe and Brannan and Rosenstein, all these different figures have been so wrong unless they were blinded by ideological hatred of this president, unless they really believed all this propaganda that the president was some monster who's going to destroy America, a clear and present danger

to the future of this country. And how embarrassed should they be now that, after all that they've tried to do to this president, not only do they have nothing on him, the country's actually doing well. He's actually a good and pretty effective president. All the decades of service that these men and women, Sally Yates, and there are obviously some women involved in this. True all of that, and what wisdom did they bring to bear with these decisions?

They have forever tainted, forever tainted the reputations of the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Justice. So many of the people that are the most vocal critics of the Trump administration have always been holding out that the biggest problem with Trump, you see, is that he undermines institutions. He

undermines these institutions. What could undermine these institutions more than having the senior bureaucrats of the government who are employees of the president, trying to find any excuse, pathetically desperately looking for an excuse to get read of this president based on what that they don't like him. Lindsey Graham,

Jesus for what it is, Blakelift twelve. So through good reporting by sixty minutes, there's an allegation by the acting FBI director at the time that the deputy Attorney General was basically trying to do an administrative coup take the president down through the twenty fifth Amendment process. The deputy Attorney General denies it. So I promise your viewers the following that we will have a hearing about who's telling

the truth, what actually happened. Mister Kabe, you remember, was dismissed from the FBI for leaking information to the press, So you got to remember the source here. Yep, that's right. Why hasn't McCabe faced charges yet? I've heard from so many people last few months, in particular, whether it's dealing with Stone, Roger Stone, or pop adop lists or all these.

You know, if you're tied to Trump and you lie even about what you had for breakfast in the morning, you lie about anything, and Muller gets you, that's justice, That's what they tell us. Why is it not then justice for McCabe to face criminal prosecution? You know, I wonder how many people Andy McCabe has sent to prison because his handwritten notes of a meeting were different than their recollection of the meeting. I wonder. I bet the answer is a lot. Put a lot of people in

prison for that. You know. This is why you know, we ask a lot. We expect a lot of senior law enforcement officials because they have a lot of power, a lot of authority, and the most dangerous place of interaction for citizens with their government is law enforcement. That is the most dangerous place for your average American in terms of where there could be abuse, where corruption and politicization is truly terrifying. It's the IRS and law enforcement.

Although you could argue that IRS is essentially an agency set up to enforce the tax code, so it does have it an enforcement mission. But law enforcement overall, that's where if you have political activists, people that really view their mission not as enforcing the law, but as enacting some kind of ideological agenda and collecting scalps along the way, destroying people, destroying the opposition along the way. That should be deeply disturbing to anyone, regardless of where they fall

on the political spectrum. But but don't view it that way. Libs know that just as they have an ideological hold on the academy, so colleges and universities and schools, on Hollywood, on the national press and the media, they also have taken root at the highest levels of the federal bureaucracy, just how Libs have overtaken law schools now and the legal profession is increasingly, not entirely, but increasingly a province of the progressive left. The legal profession. Mind, not even

just law schools. A lot of lib lawyers running around. Same thing is true of the federal bureaucracy, and that's what was in action here with McCabe and Comy and all the rest of them. But you know, the question was never even asked in this whole sixteen minutes a long interview, in this whole sixteen minutes interview. You know, mister McCabe, why do you think that any of this was justified? What do you have now? What can you tell us? What can you show us to justify all

of this investigating the answers? He's got nothing. What I'll tell you is that if somebody really wants to investigate you, trust me, they can find a reason. So if they don't have to explain why they're investigating, it just becomes a weapon. Global Verification Network is the only dual certified,

veteran owned background investigation and adding company. Okay, this is a company that you can trust because I trust them, I know them, and I know that in this area of having background checks done, Global Verification Network is second to none. You should check them out to headquartered in Chicago, but they have risk mitigation experts across the country and whatever size your company, whatever industry you're in. You could be a huge four to one hundred company or all

the way down to startups. Global Verification Network. Make sure that they tailor their programs to your needs. Call them yourself and see make sure you tell them you heard about them from Team buck eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine. That's eight seven seven six nine five one one seven nine. Or go to my

GVN dot com again, that's my GVN dot com. We're going to be signing today and registry National Emergency and it's a great thing to do because we have an invasion of drugs, invasion of gangs, invasion of people, and it's unacceptable. I could do the wall over a longer period of time I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster, and I don't have to do it for the election. I've already done a

lot of wall for the election twenty twenty. And the only reason we're up you're talking about this is because of the election. So the President did as I as I had thought he would declare last week, and I know I was out Friday, so I didn't get a chance talking guys about this, But the presidents declared the national emergency, which is not nearly as as big of a big of a deal, big of a shock in terms of the process here as a lot of people

are pretending it is. I do think that we need some context, some understanding of the history of just how many times this has happened in the past. The answer is many times, and also the need for this right now.

I mean, there should be a real understanding that the President of the United States has tried to do everything that he can in order to get a wall built on our southern border, get barriers put in place, and that there's such opposition from Democrats on this, that there's such a they think a political win here for them to oppose all of this. It just strikes me as as the height of dishonesty that you have all these Democrats who are acting like this is such an unthinkable,

unthinkable maneuver. How could he ever do this? Why would he ever do this? Meanwhile, he's gone out of his way, out of his way to try and bring them in on this. You know, eighteen times, by the way, Obama used emergency declarations to appropriate to unilaterally transfer funds that were not appropriate by the Congress from and for I'm sorry, other presidents, including Bush and Obama used emergency declarations eighteen times. That was the number that I was looking for. That

seems pretty simch. And now you sit around you asked cold on a second, what are those eighteen Well, well that's isn't that the point? If it were was this terrible Oh no, If it was this terrible decision the president had made, then what about all the other emergency declarations? Right? If it sets this precedent, did the other eighteen time setup precedent? This is within the president story statutory authority,

and people cannot like that. People can take any number of different positions about how they disagree with it, But to say that it's lawless is to say that the law has no meeting. President is going with a duly declared statute here. There's nothing about this that is that

is unacceptable. And I just want to remind you that remember in Trump Trumphy Hawaii, Trumphy Hawaii, we were told by all these legal member that was the Muslim ban, right, all these so called legal experts, all the Muslim ban. It's it's unconstitutional, it's terrible, it's wrong. Oh, actually the Supreme Court upheld it. Trump was right. Did you have any of the journo firefighters for our democracy come out

and say, Wow, we got that one really wrong. Maybe we should, maybe we should have a little introspection, Maybe we should be a little bit more willing to think about why we get these things so wrong. No, no, no no, none of that, and none of that, no interest whatsoever in that. They just move on to the next area of their so called expertise. They move on to the next issue that they supposedly have such a deep understanding of.

And you know, I just have to say that I'm I'm really, I mean I am in case you have a notice running out of patience with all the media's lies. You know, I've I've gone now to a place where I think the only way to deal with them on this stuff, whether it's the border, any number of other issues, is just to call them out and really and really fight them on it. You know, not just say that they're wrong, but point out that they're dishonest, that they're

a disgrace. So I think the President is right here. I know. I didn't get a chance to talk about this on Friday, when the declaration initially went down, I obviously was covering this, or rather reading up on this and watching the video again and everything all weekend. So I'll give you my thoughts on where this all stands. You know, I am a little bit disappointed that it came to this, that the President wasn't able to maneuver in a more adept fashion so that this one was

not necessary. But I also look at this as I think the president's doing what he doing what he should do, and I give him credit for being willing to fight on this issue. You know, there is if you really dig into this, there is funding for the creation of new wall, which means that that it is happening. It's

just happening more slowly. And I think it sets up twenty twenty for a kind of showdown over immigration and the wall that the president, especially given where the national conversation has been on this, I think the president is likely to win on that issue. I think the President's likely to get his way on the issue of the wall, which is which is a good thing, and to win four more years in office as a result. So while this is imperfect, it's not it's not a total loss

and it could over the long run. I think actually work in the President's favor more than we realize right now. But I've got more on that coming up in a moment. This is part of a national security who's never done this under a national emergency where president but we declared national emergency to promote democracy in Belarus, to promote democracy, and is involved. But it didn't affect money that Congress

refused to appropriate. They didn't affuse to appropriate it. They passed a law specifically saying the president could have this authority. It's in the Plane Statute. That's a decision that Congress made. And people don't like that, they can address it. I

guarantee you this. If Donald Trump had said he's invoking the National Emergency Military construction authority to build a security perimeter in Iraq or Afghanistan around a military installation in Syria, there would not have been one word of objection from Congress. This is defending our own country. Stephen Miller is not exactly a warm and fuzzy guy, the president's advisor, mostly

on immigration, but he's sharp. He says a lot of very astute stuff, especially on the issue of immigration, and he's correct. You know we have all of these people, and I gotta tell you, I find some of the conservatives and conservatives on this issue a little annoying, a little preachy, without really understanding the full context here. National emergencies have been declared many, many times before for much

lesser issues than this. Congress gave the president the authority to do this, as as Miller says, it is plainly in the language of the statute. So for people to say that this is wrong, that Trump shouldn't do this, even if it's in the statute, what they're really saying is that the Congress was wrong when they gave the president this authority. But that doesn't mean the president's wrong

for using that authority. As I've been saying, and others I think have picked up on this a little bit more in the last few days, this idea that we really need to be careful with how we go forward here, because we don't want to set a president that Democrats

will abuse. Democrats have already been abusing the authority of the president on issues of immigration, on a whole bunch of issues, Obama said dozens of times he did not have the unilateral authority to prevent the deportation of people that were in America illegally, and that the Congressional statutes on illegal aliens in this country must prevail. Guess what he couldn't get what he wanted from Congress, changed his mind, said yeah, now we have dhaka, and not only do

we have it the hashtag resistance. Judiciary Ninth Circuit, among others, refused to allow the current president the discretion to undo the discretion of his predecessor. I mean, this is the last president says I only want strawberry ice cream, and this president comes along and says, no, you know, I'd actually like you know, I'd actually like mint chocolate chip ice cream. Oh, if you can't do that, the last president said he likes strawberry ice cream. Well, hold on

a second. I thought the presidents allowed to decide one way or the other. Of course he is. But judges view themselves as political actors the same way that the head of the FBI or the head of the CIA. You know, all these different institutionalists that hold themselves up as the guaranteurs of our democracy. What we're seeing is that they're really just people who can't separate out their role in the government from their partisan ideology. But but

Miller here is correct. I don't find the argument about overreach from Trump compelling because Democrats are definitely not. There's no serious person who's going to say, well, if you have a President Sanders, you know, fine, fine, have President Sanders declare an emergency on trying to take all everyone's guns, or have a President Kamala Harris say that, you know, climate change means that we have to have an additional dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline or whatever, twenty

five percent than every gallon of gasoline soul. It'll go into the courts and she'll, hey, you know, she'll she'll winner, shall lose, just like what we have now. Don't think for a second that President Trump's decision on his own to hold back his own and to hold back his hand, that that's going to result in good faith from Democrats. I mean, that's just that's an unserious position. That's not a perspective that any person who knows the Democratic Party

should be taking. And remember that, you know, the way that Trump has set this whole thing up. We finally are having a conversation about this. If nothing else, there's a greater awareness of what the Democrats really believe in what they really think about the border, and that's a part of this that I have to say as I

go forward. I'm not a fan of the bill that the President signed, but that said, at least now I think there's an awareness of the American people that could be a major determining factor the next election for what everyone's going to think about how this is going to go. That's, you know, I'm hopeful, at least I am hopeful. I can't say that I have an answer here to all this.

You know, you also have the data. You know, Democrats always talk about data like they care about what the realities of the border, whether it's you know, somehow every data set supports they're thinking on how illegals are great, illegals aren't a problem, the border secure. You know. The dumbest talking point you hear is, oh, the border crossings are actually at record lows, well record low compared to what, let me put it you this way. New York City

had over two thousand murders in nineteen ninety three. I forget what the exact number is, but New York City over two thousand murders. A couple of years ago, New York City had roughly three hundred murders. If the number of murders doubled in one year, would people be able to say, oh, that's no problem, because in nineteen ninety three, nineteen ninety three, they had two thousand murders. So you know, then the murders double in one year, there's nothing to

see here. This is idiocy. This is what democrats are doing. They're saying, well, because the country was just straight up being invaded by illegals every day at some point during the nineteen nineties the early two thousands, that there's not a problem anymore. No, in fact, the problem is even worse, given that the illegals already in the country are a huge issue, and adding to that number makes it even

more unsustainable, makes our immigration system even more burdened. It's a it's a bigger catastrophe in that is unfolding right before us. Because you have twenty million illegals in America. So the extra five hundred thousand, you know, we are at a tipping point, we are at the point of no return. But you hear this talking point, Oh, you know, it's historic lows across the Gether border. Fifty thousand a month. Does anyone care? What what the what the number was

twenty thirty years ago. You know, it's already too many. If I have a rowboat, okay, and and the rowbot, rowboat's not a good idea, you know, if I have a boat and it can it can take fifty people. And you had in you know, and a couple of days ago, I had forty people come on my rowboat or on my boat, and now it's at ninety. Now it's way over capacity. And then we every day now another person, another person, another person. It's a crisis that

my boat is overloaded. That a lot of people came a few days ago and only a few people coming now. It doesn't change the fact that the boat is overloaded. And if you don't stop, the whole thing's gonna sink. That's the way to think of the illegal alien problem in this country. They, of course don't view it that way. Tom Hooman understands that they're ignoring the data. They're ignoring the data on drugs, on illegal immigration, on all of the place sixteen And look, if you look at the data,

they're all ignoring the data. The data is clear. Every place a war barrier has been built, has resulted in decreased illeg immigration to increase drug flaw. It's proven. So they're ignoring the data. And if they want to run for president, they need to understand their first their first order business to protective country. So another thing they talk about, what most drugs come to the port of entry, Well, no,

that's not true. Most drugs are seized data port of entry because every vehicle stopped, every person's talked to, so of course they're gonna find more drugs there. So again using the data against this president. This is about political hatred for this president and not about national security of public safety. It's all true. What he's saying is true. They hate this president. They oppose this president, and they

also are the Democrats are favorable toward illegal immigration. They believe in illegal immigration as a good thing for this country. They want more of it. And I think that that's very dangerous for a number of reasons, you know, And if they disagree that it's dangerous, then I want to know why shouldn't we You know, they can't have it both ways. I want a legal and orderly immigration system. I want people that obey US law to come into

the country. I want our laws in the interior the country to be enforced when it comes to legal aliens, because my expectation is that everybody, everybody is subject to US federal law on our soil, and that the laws have meaning. You know, otherwise I don't want to pay my taxes. Okay, if the laws have no meaning, because it's not a big deal if you break them, then I don't want to pay my taxes. So I just

want clarity from the federal government on that point. But if it's no problem for legal aliens, if it's no problem for legal aliens to be in the country more than to be coming in more people to be scamming the asylum system, then I need an explanation of why we shouldn't be open borders, Why why we shouldn't be in a position where we just take as many people as we absolutely possibly can. You know, there's there's no You get no answers from a left about this. They

never explain what the downside is. They only jump down your throat when you say there's a downside, but they never they never explain what the downside is, So which is it? They cannot answer my question about if there's nothing wrong with illegal immigration, which is their position de facto. Why don't we want more illegal immigration? Why shouldn't they be pushing for more legal immigration. They'm telling you they

don't have any answers to this. They have no response when pushed on this, And if we had an honest press corps, they would be hammering this point all the time. But we do not, as you know, have an honest press corps. We have a bunch of left wing activist hacks. Much to my chagrin. Everybody says, well, less people are coming and came, you know back early when there's a million people a year, But they got to understand the dynamics of who's coming back. Then I was a board

chol agent. If there's a million people, most of them were arrested and removed the same day because their Mexican nationals. Now we have a cartel members are that are are planning what's happening because they're using the loopholes to move people in the country to claim asylum. To the loopholes, they don't leave. I mean, ninety two percent of them loser case in front of immigration judge and only two

percent leave. So it's a whole different dynamic That's why the numbers that the total numbers come across isn't as important as who's coming across. I don't even know we pulled out a brake. I don't even know that that. Tom, their former ICE director, Tom Homan, was going to wait on that one too. But sure enough, there is right right right where I needed them on that because you hear this, Oh, the number is not that high compared

with what the number used to be. Yeah, but every fifty thousand that comes and now is staying for ever they're going to stay. That makes a huge difference as well. So you already have a huge, as I pointed out, illegal alien population. But beyond that, whoever shows up now under the current system and claims asylum, they're not going anywhere. And there is an amnesty on the horizon if Democrats get back in power. We all know this. We all know this. There is a there is an absolute Democrat

mandate to get a multi million person amnesty done. And keep in mind, whatever whatever the number is that they tell you, whatever the number is that they tell you, that's just going to be a fraction of what the overall number is. Who either officially or unofficially get asylum because they stay in the country forever. It'll just be a if they say at three million, it'll be more

like six or ten. Don't believe them. They don't don't want you to know the truth here, just like how they're telling you, oh, there's no crisis the border because there used to be more people legally coming over. Well, we didn't have twenty million already in the country illegally. And on top of that, as home and points out here, a lot of the people that were coming in illegally back in the nineties, as soon as they were caught,

they were deported. Now, deportation is supposed to be if you're a Democrat, you think deportation is reserved for really really bad MS thirteen guys, and that's pretty much it. Nobody else should get deported. Nobody else should get sent back to Mexico or in this case, you know a lot of them will be from Honduras or from wherever. We have on the books right now a law that we can deny visas from countries that don't take back their four nationals that come here illegally. We don't use it.

We're not willing to use it any By the way, here's a story on immigration that you're not going to see covered very widely. You're not going to see a lot of people who have interest in this. But I certainly care about it, and I have a feeling all of you do too. Dozens, This is the Washington Examiner. Today. Dozens of demonstrators occupied and vandalized a privately owned US

Border Patrol museum near El Paso, Texas. Museum director David Ham told The Washington Examiner his staff and guests worried for their safety Saturday when a group of about fifty protesters entered the facility, defaced property, and refused to leave the ground. Quote say it loud, say it clear, Border Patrol kills. Group members standing inside and outside the facility yelled.

Security cameras set up outside of the private museum and captured protesters pulling into the parking lot and putting on face masks before going in around two fifteen pm local time. It was really intimidating to our staff, plus their kind of aggressive attitude of museum officials said. The museum is a nonprofit, it's a political So you had a bunch of as we know, left wing Border Patrol, left wing antiboard patrol, lunatics storming a border patrol museum and saying

that border patrol kills people. You know, this is this is the true left is anti law enforcement in this country. You have a little bit of a break in that tradition on the left wing right now because they're so they're just all given the FBI a foot massage all the time. Oh, the FBI is so wonderful. All the Muller probe is amazing. You know anything from the Muller probe. Oh, it's just partisan politics. I mean, they're not really in any way concerned with bolstering the reputations of these law

enforcement agencies over the long term. But but Democrats in the left, they think the cops are racist, that the cops are far often they are too violent, you know, all this stuff. And yet and yet the FBI is beyond border patrol. Those here, border patrol is terrible. They hate border patrol. You know, the Border Patrol is aware of this too. I spoke to a lot of those guys when I was out in San Diego visiting them a few weeks back, and they're aware of the politics

the Democratic Party plays here. They're aware that the same people to chant abolish ice, would really like to abolish border patrol, and they would like to abolish any local law enforcement or sheriff's departments that are helpful to immigration and customs enforcement on this issue, that are that are helpful to the enforcement of our laws. This is a battle for the future of the country. This is why I find this topic so important for this show, so

we spend the time that we do want it. This is a battle for the future of America, make no mistake about it. And the Democrats are not on the side of the rule of law here. They're not on the side of truth They're not on the side of justice. They're on the side of power lawlessness that leads to their power. And they don't really care about all these legal aliens either on some deep personal level. That's just

virtue signaling from them. They really just care about being able to hashtag how much they care about them, which is not the same thing. Some of you may recall Lara Logan, she was a CBS reporter on the Rise, I mean, somebody who I think was the heir apparent to some of the the bigger platforms in the legacy media.

She says, I believe South African incredibly beautiful and a very sharp reporter, and she was reporting on the Terrier Square protests early on in the the Arab Spring Revolution, and the reporting on this was always a little bit for those of us that were following it closely, there was always just effort to not really say exactly what had happened. But later on it came out that she was she was sexually assaulted by a by a mob.

She was gang raped in the middle of Terior Square by a bunch of Egyptian protesters, separated from her camera crew. Just just the worst kind of vicious mob activity. And because so many reporters, I think were very invested in the narrative of, oh, this uprising and it was this flowering of democracy in Egypt, which we know was wasn't

really what's happening. It was actually really an Islamist uprising in many ways, but they they didn't they didn't want to tell this story the way that they would have otherwise.

There was a muted rage from the press, even when one of their own was violated in this way, because they didn't want it to taint the whole movement in Egypt, which would show itself to be largely a movement of Islamists, and you know, the Muslim Brotherhood came to power and a lot of very bad stuff bubbling up from from under the surface there. But the media's treatment of Lara

Logan after this, I think was disgusting. I think the way that they've never really come to grips with what happened to her as a colleague of Theirs, and how they failed to really report on this, failed to really

talk about it. And she was very critical of Islamism and out of radical Islam after this and saying that the press was essentially blind to this, and she's right, I mean, the mainstream media in America takes this position of you know, Muslim societies and Islamists in those societies are every bit as moral and ethical as what we have in Western democracies. No, that's just not really true.

You know, Islamists are contrary to liberal values. Islamists are not feminists, right, I mean, this is where you get into this debate that's fallen out of the public eye for a while now. But you know, the left wing media likes to treat Islam is much more progressive and open minded than it is. So she has said some very interesting things about that. I've actually always wanted to have her on radio. We're gonna reach out to her again. I don't know if she'll come on the show or not.

But she recently gave an interview where she was talking about where they remember she was CBS. She was doing I think it was sixty minutes sometimes a correspondent. It's a big foreign core, big foreign core for them. She's a big deal. And then this terrible thing happened to

her and the media. I was like, oh, well, you know, her story doesn't really fit in with and this this is the you know, in an era where me too is such a I mean, this woman was was brutally sexually assaulted by a mob, but it was a mob that the press did not want to demonize. They didn't want to demonize them. That's just what it came down to.

So there was a muted reaction about this. And I remember this, and I've covered I've covered Lara Logan's story on this show, stretching back now I think twenty twelve, for so many years ago. But she talked recently about this media that she knows very well, and she knows as somebody who was once an insider with them and has now been because she's spoken truth on a number of it she was, including Islam. She's kind of an outsider with them now and has seen that they're willing

to push her off the island. You know, she's no longer a member of the family. And here's what Lara Logan of CBS News had to say about this play twenty two. How do you know you're being lied to? How do you know you're being manipulated? How do you know there's something not right with the coverage when they simplify it all and there's no gray's no gray, it's all one way. Well, life isn't like that. If it doesn't match real life, it's probably not. Something's wrong, right.

All the coverage on Trump all the time is negative. There's nothing. There's nothing, no mitigating policy or event or anything that has happened since he was elected that is out there in the media is that you can read about, right, Well, that tells you that's distortion of where things go in real life. Because although the media has always been historically always been left leaning, we've abandoned our pretense or at

least the effort to be objective today. The former executive editor of The New York Times has a book coming out, Jill Abramson, and she says, we would do I don't know, dozens of stories about Trump every single day, and every single one of them was negative. She said, we have become the antique Trump paper of record. Well, that's not our job. That's a political position. That means we've become political activists in a sense. And some could argue propagandists, right,

and there's some merit to that. Absolutely true. Everything she says there, and you know, she's a she is an insider, and the sense that she worked at CBS. She works at CBS and was very highly regarded for a while inside the mainstream media. Everything she says there is true. You know, it's not possible that the media is unbiased because everything they tell you about Trump is that he's horrible. You look around and you see what's happening in the country,

and you see what's objectively going on. You say, well, hold on a second, everything's not horrible. So how can every story about Trump be about how terrible he is? You know? And then for those who say, oh, buck, there's it's not a bias they're just reporting what's what's there, what the facts are. Well, how is it that half the country doesn't view this president is terrible? But all of the news coverage you see for most of these outlets reflects on him as absolutely terrible. You know, you're

being lined too. And she said I think also in this interview that she thinks that you know that there is a sense of committing professional suicide here and that she recognizes that this is going to be held against her. And it's true the lib media never forgets. She even says, go look at things like Breitbart to get another get the other side of the equation. You know, I read lib stuff all the time. I know what they think.

Libs don't know what I think. I had idiots today trying to tell me what I think about this or that because I didn't believe Jesse Smallett. I didn't believe Jesse Smallett because he's an imbecile and his lie wasn't even clever. I don't not believe Jesse Smallett because of you know what my white privilege or be. You don't know, But the Libs don't even know what you and I think. They don't even care to familiarize themselves with the other side of the argument. So I mean, I give Lara

Logan credit up. I've always thought that she was a particularly interesting voice, and I think that she's been marginalized by the left because she's not as useful to them now and because she'll speak the truth. But Mike, let's get her on the show. Let's reach out. It reminds me, we gotta also talk about this Amazon aftermaths or and I was up. I was up in New York over the weekend, and you know, I gotta tell you, for the first time in a while, I'm a little worried

about my hometown in terms of where it's going. I think that it's I think that it's glory days are behind it. I really do. And I think that it's just going to start to turn. It's on the way now. I really feel that the Amazon situation is kind of the Canaria in the coal mine, because you know, Wall Street's not really based in New York anymore. It's Wall Street is the financial industry. In fact, there's very few

financial financial institutions that are even on Wall Street. But I think that the city and the social justice left and the democrat control. I think that it's now on the glide path downward toward not quite Detroit status. But it's going to start looking more like La with all the dysfunction and all the problems. Well, I'll explain why with this Amazon thing coming up, I seem to blame Amazon for walking away. But let me ask this. You

also argue that it was a fair deal. Why did fellow progressives not trust you that you had come up with a good, fair deal? You call it on solid foundation, chuck it said democracy. I have no problem with my fellow progressives of critiquing a deal or wanting more from Amazon. I wanted more from Amazon too. But the bottom line is this is an example of an abuse of corporate power.

Amazon just took their ball and went home. And what they did was confirmed people's worst fears about corporate America. Here's the one percent dictating everyone else, even though we gave them a fair deal. And I think it's going to frustrate people all over this country to see a company treat a neighborhood and a city like that. Everything that Kaiservillehelm Deblasio formerly known as Varrenville Helm, don't forget

it changed his name as an adult. Yeah, because it's hard to run as like mister blue collar union guy in New York City when your name is Varrenvilhelm. Much better to be Billy Dublasio. Oh yeah, Billy Deblasio. Like I on a pizzeria was they put the pepperoni in all the perfect places on the pizza. So he changed his name, isn't it if you didn't know? That's true? Story? Actually did change his name as an adult, Warren Wilhelm.

I think I was on I was guest hosting Rush Limbaugh Show years ago when I said I talked about Kaiser Wilhelm and people thought that I was making it up, and no, no, they checked it out. It turns out it's true. But this is amazing. Libs managed to scare Amazon away, and that is what they did. They scared Amazon away, and yet now they want to blame Amazon for this. You know, you have people like aoc Ocazio

Quartez who are so deeply and shockingly ignorant of everything. Really, I mean, it just has no knowledge base to to speak of. It's like it's like we have an actor. She sounds the part, she looks the part. They they like the optics of Ocazio Quartez. But the substance is all just blather and I'm not gonna I'm not gonna, you know, beat around the bush here. It's kind of

true about Bernie Sanders as well. You know, they like here, I sound like I kid about the people, and I want them all to have more stuff, and I want them all to have the free things. And you know, the billionaires and the millionaires, they're gonna pay all the stuff and you're not gonna pay anything. They do this, and well then when you get into the math and the reality of what the programs are that these people like Sanders and Okazi Quartez are push doesn't make any sense.

But I would just know that, or rather I would note that the Amazon situation is a is a disaster for progressives. I mean, here is a digital company, right, an internet based company that is a monument to successful online capitalism, and it's going to bring tens of thousands of jobs into New York and it's going to and people say, oh no, the jobs are already there. Just

means people are going to relocate there. Look, I've seen what parts of New York are like when there are jobs in the area and there are restaurants and their services that cater to the people that are in the area now because of the jobs and the homes. I've seen it. Okay, so this the pretense that some are going through that oh it doesn't matter that Amazon's not going to be there. That's just these people, you know that they don't know anything. They're just making stuff up.

The same way that Occasio Cortez this is it's hard to believe that anybody in a position of authority could be quite this stupid. But it is true that she believes that the money that they were going to give in tax incentives, which means we're going to, if you come here, take less of your money in taxes as an inducement to get you to come here. She seemed to think that now that money is just money that

we have, right. So, so Ocasio Cortez math is, Hey, if you buy this sweater from my store, I'll give you twenty percent off the hundred dollars that it costs, so it's eighty dollars. She thinks, oh no, I'm not going to sell that to the customer. Now. I just happen to have twenty bucks and a sweater. She doesn't get it. She doesn't understand how the very basics of economics or just the basics of an economics transaction works here,

but they don't care. I find it fascinating that the same people who are telling us that Trump lacks intellectual curiosity and knowledge, they think that Okazia Cortez is just wonderful. They think that she's just fine. And whether it's Deblasio or Kazio Cortesi and all these socialists, this is what they are. These are socialists. They are socialists. They think that money is not really yours. Private property is not yours.

Whatever you have as whatever the state dames to let you keep, whatever the state feels that you should have, that's what you have. All property is collectively owned, and therefore the state determines what you should and should not have. That this is a fundamentally inverse view of your relationship with the states. That's at the heart of all this collectivist rhetoric from the Okazia Cortez is the Deblasio's, the Sanders. They say it's just a little bit, just a little

bit more to redistrut and spread around. But when you really push a little bit deeper into what they believe in what they say. They think that, you know, seventy percent tax rate, ninety percent tax rate, it's all fair game, that whatever the state decides to take from you is fine. I take the position that the state should be at being an absolute minimum and that we should have a flat tax, and that all this other stuff is just is just nonsense. But you know, we're nowhere near that

right now. And unfortunately the Republicans are somewhat complicit in this because we're still spending too much money. We're still spending too much money. We're twenty two trillion dollars in the whole. No one wants to talk about this. What they do want to talk about is Okazio Cortez and the depth of her stupidity is some is a site to behold. It's it's remarkable. She, for example, over the weekend on a one of these ask me anything. I mean,

she's like a social media politician. I mean, she's now a quick She's the Kardashian of left wing social justice politics. Just lots of photos, lots of Instagram, all this stuff. She said that the wall is immoral, like another wall play clip twenty here, John, No matter how you feel, about about the wall. You know, I think it's a moral abomination. I think it's like the Berlin Wall, a

moral abomination. It's like the Berlin Wall. She should have to defend this statement any time that she goes out in public and the reporters there, any time that she's going to debate any Republican that a wall at our southern border is like the Berlin Wall. This is like saying that a wall at a prison is immoral because it keeps people in. And you say, well, hold on a second, isn't isn't the wall there it's supposed to

protect us and doesn't have a legitimate purpose. You know, if I built if someone if the government built a wall around my house and wouldn't let me out, yeah that's immoral. But if somebody builds a wall around a prison so that let people out, well that's not immoral, that's just common sense. They're both walls, though, so I guess you can make the case that it's all immoral. Right, A wall as a wall, doesn't matter why it's there. These are inanimate objects that people are imbuing with their

own politics and with their own political proclivities. But o'kazi Cortez. Is the wall or southern borders like the Berlin Wall, first of all, is a It's just a slap in the face to people that were trying to escape communism. And what that wall in Berlin really represented. It wasn't that we It wasn't the West didn't want people to commit us that the East didn't want to let people out. We have a very different problem here. We have a country that we're trying to prevent people from flooding, and

they are open borders, folks. This is what the Democrats. They don't want to say it, even though they support it. They support open borders, now, no question about it. They just don't like the title. They don't like the wording because they know that it won't play well in the Heart and they know that it won't play well in Pennsylvania and Ohio and Michigan and Wisconsin and Andy, and

they want power. So they're dishonest. The Democrats are fundamentally dishonest about their view of capitalism, as we see with Amazon, their view of boorders, pretty much their view of a whole lot of public policy these days. I saw not one but two movies team over the weekend, which I know, I know some of you are who you gotta catch your breath for a second, Buck, that's crazy, you're a

wild man. Two movies over a long weekend. Not only did I see two movies, one of them, I will have you know, I saw in a theater like a normal American human, that's right. I went to the movies, actually the movies, and I saw Into the spider Verse, the new Spider Man movie. Miss Molly really wanted to see it. I said, all right, honey, we'll go see it. And a few things to say about this. First of all, I've seen so many these Spider Man movies. I do

like comic books. So if you're somebody who doesn't like comic books and comic book stories, obviously you're never gonna like this stuff. But as somebody who thinks that generally comic book movies are comic book rather turned into movies are terrible, this was actually really creative and really well done. I'm not a big cartoon person. I didn't care. I thought it was very The visuals are very creative, the music was good, the storyline moved. I thought it was

pretty excellent. And people said, oh, Buck, the director's left wing Guys, if if you're gonna not look at movies because the director's left wing, you're only you're gonna have one Clint Eastwood movie a decade to watch. Okay, You're not gonna have a lot of stuff to tide you over. So that's one part of it, I mean. And another thing is I saw the movie, and I didn't know this. We were able in stadium seating now in this New York theater, so you don't have to stare at somebody's head.

You know, if somebody has a hat on or something, you can't see it. And I got a giant head, so I know, right this is a pot calling the kettle black. But I could see everything clearly. But also they allowed for you to reserve your seats. Now, when you go into check in, you actually pick your seats and you reserve your seats. It's a far more civilized experience. And I assume, and I didn't even know this, you

could probably reserve your seats in advance. So I'm not saying that I'm sold on going to the movies anymore as an activity, but I'm saying that I no longer despise it with the fiery heat of a thousand sons. I'm open to the idea of going to movies when you can have stadium seating and you can pick your

seats beforehand, makes it a more civilized experience. And as I said, the movie itself was good and I think it's good family fair, so if you wanted to go see it with your kids, a good movie to see. There is some really funny stuff. And the way that I read about how they did this, I was so curious afterwards. I think they use one frame instead of two frame per second for the cartoon and a lot of places to make it seem more like a comic book brought to life, and I think that that visually

worked pretty well. The other movie I saw was Miss Molly and I on a rainy night in New York City decided we were going to watch something, and we watched this movie, The Witch. Not to be confused, there's a South Korean movie that came out pretty recently called The Witch, which isn't that. That's not this. This is more or less if the Salem Witch Trials had an origin story, and I will tell you it's it's a

little bleak and a little relentless. There's no there's nothing uplifting or beautiful or sweet or kind or you know, so just know that it was. It was creepy. Man, it was well done and really disturbing for what it was. Do not watch this obviously, with the first ten minutes there's a scene that is going to haunt you, and I think it actually kind of crossed the line. I'll be honest with you. I think the scene was a little know some of the actors in it, they're British actors.

One plays the wife of or not the wife the sister of Katlan Stark from Game of Thrones. She's the Queen of the Veil. Those of you who are Game of Thrones people, she's them the wife in this movie. I've seen the guy who plays the lead actor or a million times a different thing. I can't remember what he's in there, but I've seen him a bunch of things.

But man, this this whole New England wilderness, which thing they really if you want to be I think it's super spooky because there's also a demonic and satanic possession component to it. So if you're like me and you think that the that the the Exorcist, it's a little bit of The Exorcist meets The Blair Witch Project. If you like scary stuff the which I think it's on demand now you can get a lot of a lot of different cable riders. Really, you know, I had nightmares.

It's really scary. It'll it'll put you on edge if you're if you're somebody who likes that kind of stuff, if someone who wants to be happy and think that life is you know, life is good and fun. And I would say go to the Into the Spider Verse. But two movies, both of which were what you know,

they gave you what you wanted. I mean, if you want to be freaked out the which definitely did the job, and if you wanted to have some fun and see some cool visuals and a pretty good take on the Spider Man stuff, then I think Into the Spider Verse was also very good. Now I have to see A Star is Born and maybe that Roma movie just so I can well the Stars. A Star is Born and is supposed to be pretty good. But the Roma movie, the critics love it, but nobody's seen it, so that'll

be a good one to see. It's kind of like Beto O'Rourke in that the intelligentsia says it's amazing, but the rest of the world is like, who who cares? Hasn't want anything? No one, no one even wants to see it. But anyway, more coming up, teams, stay with me, seeing Bucking. It's time for roll call. All right, roll call Tom, everybody. I hope you're having a good President's Day. I find the whole President's Day holiday to be a little weird. He totally honest with you. I don't know

why we have a holiday celebrating our presidents. It strikes me that this is not necessarily something that we should be nationally mandated to celebrate it. Look, we've had some good presidents, we've had some bad presidents. Nonetheless, people seem to like getting the day off, so nobody really cares about it. I hope you are having an excellent President's Day,

and I am certainly happy for the long weekend. I was up in New York, had a lovely time up there on this Molly, and now I'm back in the swamp in DC so I can bring you all of the information from the front lines of liberal insanity. First up in roll Call, Facebook dot Com slashbuck sex that if you want to be a part of the roll call bonanza. Dale writes, Hey, Buck, you have proven once again that you are a smart guy. Right from the get go. You called the Jus Smollett incident for what

it was. You courageously spoke up and addressed the obvious holes in the story while the other media entities rallied behind and then prompted mister Smollett up with his tail. And as with the Blasi Ford testimony, you face warnings and rebuke, but you had it right all along and weren't afraid to speak out on it. Thanks again for all you do to advance the conservative cause, and from team Buck, big time shields high well Dale, you know,

thank you very much. Man. I appreciate when somebody like you, who's obviously a very valued and much appreciated listener to the show, gives me a little shout out for Yeah, I was not somebody that waited on the sidelines on this one. I was not somebody who was afraid of the possible backlash. I came out early and often, and you just go back and listen to the show saying, ah,

this story doesn't make sense. This story doesn't make sense. Now, I didn't want to go so far as to say outright that he was entirely lying or a fabricator right from the get go, because now we see that maybe there was some kind of an attack, but it was orchestrated by him, right. I couldn't say that it was entirely made up or what aspects of or made up. I just knew it wasn't what he said it was very obviously and was consistent on that and did the how many times did we talk about it on this

show in the last couple of weeks? I said, all right, we're gonna Jessie small Att update. You know, I just said, we knew where this was going. Seth right, digging Ben Weinarten as a guest host, Well, Seth, you were not alone there. I know. I know my man Ben did a great job, as he always does. And we go way back. Ben and I where colleagues and buddies back

at the Blaze many years ago. And I'm very pleased that he's willing to take the reins when I have to be out and do a fantastic job guest hosting the show. Oh, speaking of, well that's not guest hosting, but appearing as a guest I will be on Shannon Bream's show for those of you who are hearing this tonight around eleven pm Eastern on Fox News. I'm guessing talking about Jesse Smollett because some folks know, I, even among conservatives, have been saying very loudly and for quite

some time that this whole thing is BS. So I will probably get a chance to talk about that tonight. Andy Right, buck Love the show. It's not a coincidence at the Center pass to bill introduced by centers Kamela Harris, Corey Booker and Tim Scott making lynching punishable as a hate crime. This needs to be investigated. It connects the deep state, the DNC, the MSM, and Hollywood all working together. If we get to the bottom of this, we'll expose

the swamp and open a lot of eyes. Andy, I don't know what you're talking about, man, I'm gonna have to Lynching is already obviously a heynous crime, So I don't understand what you are what you're going for here, but I'll look into it. Taylor writes Buck All, my favorite, my all time favorite country artist is Chris Leedieux. Close second is the tie between George Strait and Garth Brooks Taylor.

Thank you so much. I will add that to my Spotify country playlist, which I now am going to be playing in the background during some of my cooking sessions at home. Patrick writes roll Call, asking for a friend. If those who claim the US is attempting to support a coup in Venezuela by supporting the duly elected president will also deny that. McKay, the FBI, Rodenstein, and the DOJ, We're not attempting a coup against our country's president. Shields. I I'm a dog trainer, and you are one hundred

percent correct about Dalmatians. Patrick says, well, thank you, Patrick. I like being correct, especially being one hundred percent correct, so appreciate that. And as for your comments about the coup, Yeah, I think it's interesting that a lot of a lot of people who are worried about the US being involved in a coup in Venezuela think that the term coup for what happened with McCabe and some of these senior DOJ and FBI officials is just completely unthinkable. Meanwhile, I

think it's completely applicable. I don't think it's unthinkable at all. I think that they were trying to find a way to put a thin legal veneer atop what was the removal of a duly elected president, mostly because of what had already happened. I think at the FBIOND the DOJ, they knew that if we ever got the answers, if we ever found out what they had done during the campaigns, during the general election, there would have been held to pay.

So they had to keep doubling down and going further with their rogue investigations in order to justify the previous rogue investigations and politicization and all the grotesquely unfair behavior we saw from McCabe and Combe and all the rest. Richard writes, I have a theory about New York and California. The Democrats are purposely destroying those states to force the

residents to flee to the prosperous red states. Their national base is concentrated in blue state enclaves, and they recognize that they'll be doomed as a national party unless they can spread out the stupid people across more states. If you talk to people in Texas, many will tell you the reason Ted Cruz had a hard time against O'Rourke is because of all the Democrats moving there from California.

We know, Richard, I am familiar with this phenomenon of people leaving states like New York and California, and then, even though they often leave four reasons of Democrat mismanagement, incredibly high taxes, bad economic policy, overregulation, all these things, when they get to their new state of residents, whether it's Florida or Texas or Nevada, they are happy to have the lower tax burden but want some of the same liberal economic and redistributive policies that they had fled previously.

So I guess this just goes in. The Libs won't learn their lesson category, but this is something that we have to keep an eye on it. It is definitely something that occurs. And I just wish that the Libs out there would stop constantly trying to impose their failed policies and failed ideas and all the rest of us. But they won't. They do not learn their lessons. Michael, All right, So let's say the cops believe Smallett and found two guys in the area that fit the description.

Would Smallett have let them go to prison for a hate crime? I bet he would have, because you know, Trump supporters deserve it anyway, even if they didn't actually do anything, he should face the same sentence that they would have. Now, Michael, I think that you raise a

couple of interesting points here. One is that I do believe that when people are willing to make fake allegations, it's not much of a leap to think that they'd be willing to let an innocent person go to prison for those allegations, especially if an innocent person going away would prevent the fabricator of the allegation from having to face justice himself or herself. So I can't say that's happening in this instance or that did happen, but it does not to me seem to be much of a

leap to suggest that it could very well happen. Now. Next on the list, here is the punishment for being a fabricator of a hate crime. I've always said that people who are willing to ruin someone else's life with what is demonstrably in bad faith allege, Right, So this is where you're you're gonna run into interference on this one,

or where people are going to disagree. They're gonna say, well, if you punish people for let's say, making a false rape allegation, then people who have in rape will be afraid to come forward. And what I say to this is, you're not punishing people because a rape allegation cannot be proven. Obviously, that would be unjust, unfair, that would not be right.

What you are saying is that for a false rape allegation that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been false and maliciously leveled, then yes, you obviously should have consequences for that, and I think the consequences should be severe. I think the consequences for somebody that is alleging a felony that could ruin someone's life should be felonious and severe. In return, the same thing about

a hate crime. If you try to destroy somebody's life by lying about their involvement in a hate crime or lying about their committing a hate crime, you should face a severe penalty, not just a false statement. Okay, they shouldn't just be walking into the police and saying, you know, I lost my iPhone, I want to collect the insurance on it when you didn't. When you're just trying to engage in an insurance fraud, right, which that part of it's probably very illegal, but the lying to the cops

would be a misdemeanor. I think if you lie about someone else's conduct to implicate them in felony behavior, and it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that you've done so, then you should face felony consequences. And I

don't really see a serious counter argument to this. You're gonna remember, we've had all these libs telling this now for two years, that process crimes are real crimes, that lying under oath to the FBI or lying to Congress even on about non criminal behavior is very serious, should be taken very seriously. Well, lying about somebody else committing a rape, or committing a hate crime, or any number of different things that are felonies that should be treated

as an incredibly serious offense as well. And I do not believe that those who are taking the other side of this argument interacting in particularly good faith, because I think that the argument is quite clear. I think that this should be it should be punished severely when you were lying about somebody else's conduct to get them severely punished, whatever the issue, whatever the crime may be. All right, seeing that's going to be it for this edition of

the Buck Sexton Show. Be with you every day for the rest of the week, looking forward to it. Talk to you then, Shields Tie. You're probably familiar with the AARP, you were someone you know might be a member. But did you know that the AARP is all about left wing politics. They often lobby for progressive causes, and they fought tooth and nail for government run healthcare. So I

recommend you check out AMAC for a senior's organization. Why AMAC Well, AMAC was founded by an Air Force veteran and advocates for the America that you want to see as well advocates for border protection, fixing, solar security, and all kinds of policy that is conservative and good for this country. Also, AMAC gets value for its members with discounts on car insurance, hotels. Roadside assistant said, more so,

stand with AMAC as they fight the good fight. Become a member today, Join right now at AMAC dot us slash buck. That's AMAC dot us slash buck. Tell your family, tell your friends. AMAK is better, better for you, better for America.