The Fragile Left Slips Into Insanity

much more coming up. This is the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Mag No mistake, American, You're a great American Again, the buck Sexton Show begins. No, Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Everybody, great to have you here. I wanted to start with something maybe a little a

little different today. I want to start with a premise we often discuss here on the show, the ways in which I think the liberals, the progressives, the left in this country are detached from reality, that they have lost it in some way, that there is a mass hysteria

well extraordinary popular delusions. In the Madness of Crowds by Charles Mackie, which was published back in eighteen forty one, has a quote that I wanted to start off the show with today because I think as you hear it, you'll think, huh, so, it is possible for a large portion of a country's population to effectively lose it on an issue. Here's what he wrote. This is the nineteenth

century Scotsman. In the reading of the history of nations, we find that, like individuals, they have their whims and their peculiarities, their seasons of excitement and recklessness when they care not what they do. We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object and go mad in its pursuit. That millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion and run after it till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first.

Sober nations have all at once become desperate gamblers, and risked almost their existence upon the turn of a piece of paper men. It has been well said, think in herds. It will be seen that they go mad in herds while they only recover their senses slowly and one by one. Yep, doesn't that sound like the modern Democratic Party to you? They've gone mad in a herd, and we can only

bring them back one by one. But they are in the grips of a total delusion, a delusion that Donald Trump worked with the Russians, even though the evidence now shows them. They have been presented with over four hundred pages of evidence and two plus years of feverish speculation and unbounded analytic craziness from all the major newspapers and networks, and with a few left out of that about how this was just going to be a day of destruction

for Trump when the truth was fondly found. Now the truth is out, and guess what, they refuse to accept it as the truth. But I do start to think that liberalism has morphed because of all the different echo chambers that it can rely on, because of the minence that it has in much of American culture, and certainly the American media landscape is ninety percent liberal. Colleges are liberal. Increasingly,

the federal government is full of liberals. And with all of this happening, it seems clear to me that there is a real condition here, a kind of psychological medical condition known as liberalism that for a lot of people, it goes from being an organizing an organizing philosophy for different ideas and policy theories to something a bit more clinical. And if you think that that's an exaggeration, I just bring you that there is now for climate change, which

is another area of abject hysteria for liberals. I mean they think that it's okay they advocate for terrifying ten year olds into thinking the world will end in ten years, and they don't see a problem with this. And in fact, once they have successfully brainwashed those ten year olds, they will deploy them. They will deploy them to harangue you and me, to browbeat us into submission. And if you have any problem with this, if you say I don't think the world's really going to end in ten years,

this is crazy. They say, Oh, you're one of those Trumpsters, aren't you just always running around with your maga hat on supporting Trump. No, I'm just not somebody that has lost it. And that's the way you have to speak about this. Now, let me share with you a piece published today in CNN of all places, and it's about climate change anxiety. How this is now becoming a crippling

fear for otherwise functioning adults. They have been so propagandized, they have been so brainwashed by the left wing Democrat media industrial complex that they are terrified. They are literally losing sleep and crying because the world is going to end because of climate change. Kind of like the elderly people that couldn't sleep at night because they're worried they would have their last day on Earth before the Mueller

report came out. These are not normal thoughts. This is these are not the mental processes of people that are well adjusted. Something has gone wrong here. The synapses are misfiring. Here's this piece about climate change anxiety. You could also call it hysteria from CNN quote a student in Wendy Peterson Boring's climate change class said she woke up at two am and then cried for two solid hours about

the warming ocean. This is a computer science major, Boring said. Boring, an associate professor of History, Religious Studies, Women in Gender Studies of Course at Willamette University in Oregon, has been teaching about climate change for a little over a decade. In that short time, she has watched her students fear, grief, stress, and anxiety grow. Back in two thousand and seven, it was the mouse in the room, then it became the elephant in the room. By twenty sixteen, those concerns and

fears began to flood over. I'm just telling you what's being reported by liberals about their state of mind. They've got a problem. They've got a problem when it comes to Trump. They've got a problem when it comes to climate change. They are in the grips of what Mackie described in the nineteenth century as a mass delusion. And

people don't like to admit this. They don't want to unravel this in their own brains, because no one wants to think that they could fall for some silly conspiracy theory and have it overtake their their thoughts and their sense of well being and change their relationships with people. I see this happening all the time. I hear people say that, you know, oh, I came across another person who says, you know, he or she won't date a

Trump supporter. What kind of nonsense is that? What kind of narrow minded political bigotry has the left embraced while it's now pervasive. It's so pervasive that the American Psychological Association, Sure, that's an interesting bunch to go on a junket with the Vegas. They created a sixty nine page climate change guide to help mental health providers. That's right. Now psychologists are having to create documents to deal with the apparently

very real psychological condition of climate change hysteria. When are liberals going to tone it down and back off a little bit? How much is too much? I think it's only going to get worse. I wish I could tell you that I had a belief that they would finally recognize how counterproductive this is, how insane all of this is.

But no, that is that is not the case. You have this, uh, this species die off news cycle from earlier in the week about how you know, all a million species are at risk of dying a million species because because of us, because of human beings. And now we're supposed to dramatically change This isn't just stuff that is theoretical. We're going to change our lifestyle, change our economies, change our political systems to deal with the threat of

species die off because of climate change. You know, it's either Trump is going to ruin the world cause a nuclear war destroy America, or climate change is going to end the world. Can we just figure out like a better way to do drug pricing and you know, maybe make some more efficient choices in the school system. I mean, can we have normal political conversation at some point or is it always, oh my gosh, we're all gonna die

because Republicans or usually it's because Trump. I'm not the one putting out as a as a medical association guidance for how to deal with people that aren't getting their way politically. This is the Libs are doing this now. I'm just here to provide you with some refuge of sanity, and I hope you at least can look forward to that. You can come here. This is where this is where we approach things as they are. This is where where we approach reality and understand it as such. You had

back in nineteen eighty and this was fascinating. This is from a guy who's an environmentalist skeptic out of Denmark pull this together and he had all this great stuff today online. And this is from the Carter administration, Jimmy Carter's administration, where we were told that here let me read you. This is from the government report, the US government projections called the Global two thousand Study. This is from nineteen eighty and I'm just going to read you

some of what this is. The United States government under Jimmy Carter, the President United States. This was put forward the media launched onto this in nineteen eighty, almost the year that I was born. Here's what it says. If present trends continue, the world in two thousand will be more crowded, more polluted, less stable ecologically, and more vulnerable to disruption than the world we live in now. Serious

stresses involving population, resources, and environment are clearly visible. Despite greater material output, the world's people will be poorer than they are today. False, dramatically, demonstrably, clearly false. Let me go back to this global two thousand report from the US government. All the smart scientists working for Jimmy Carter, this is what they thought. Quote For hundreds of millions of the desperately poor, the outlook for food and other

necessities of life will be no better. For many, it will be worse. Life for most people on Earth will be more precarious in the year two thousand than it is now. In less the nations of the world act decisively to alter current trends, extinctions of plant and animal species will increase dramatically, hundreds of thousands of species, perhaps as many as twenty percent of all species on Earth will be irretrievably lost as their habitats vanished, especially in

tropical forests. All of this was wrong. All of this was wrong. This is the smartest minds in the United States government of the Carter administration forty years ago. Does anybody care that they were all wrong? Time Magazine in nineteen eighty there will be environmental nightmares as man invades their wild habitats and pollutants rained down on them. Five hundred thousand to two million species of plants and animals may die off in the next two decades. That was

nineteen eighty. We're now four decades after that, So they're saying two million species die off? Does anyone anyone? Just I know I can't hear you right now, but do you want to guess how many species have actually disappeared in the last forty years? And that includes plants, insects, everything. Eight hundred and seventy two eight hundreds? Is that two million? Keep in mind we're discovering new species all the time, too,

That is that two million, eight hundred and seventies. If you told me Buck, I'm gonna give you two million dollars and then you actually gave me eight hundred and seventy two dollars. I would be very disappointed, very very disappointed. Keep that in mind, all right, I've got more for you on this, on the liberal delusion and the madness of the left when we come back. I don't think last week's hearing was actually about having staff questioned the

Attorney General. I think it's as my colleague said earlier, I think it's all about trying to destroy Bill Barr because Democrats are nervous. He's going to get to the bottom of everything. He's gonna find out how and why this investigation started in the first place. The Attorney General said three and a half weeks ago in front the Senate Finance Committee, spying did occur, said it twice, Yes, spying did occur. Third, he said, there's a basis for

my concern about the spying that took place. And maybe the most interesting thing two terms he used, frankly, I find frightening. He said there was in his judgment he thinks there may have been unauthorized surveillance and political surveillance. Oh, yes, there was, And that is why the Democrats are a bit desperate right now. And that's also why they're going after Attorney General bar. I got some breaking news for you here. Oh, not of the kind that I particularly

want to share with you, but it is. The news is what it is. The House Judiciary Committee has voted twenty four to sixteen to hold Attorney General Bill Barr in contempt in the fight over the unredacted Muller Report. This is toothless noise and nonsense from the Democrat cry babies, overcome with their Trump's Arrangement syndrome, their climate change hysteria, their need for safe spaces, and for the destruction of their political enemies through any means possible. Now, they're both

very fragile and very aggressive at the same time. That's what you see on the left. But Bill Barr they're going after. Here's how this goes. The good news is that the only people who could prosecute the Attorney General for the contempt of Congress would be the Department of Justice. So I don't think there's actually going to be anything that comes with this other than Democrats looking like the

bunch of whiney cry babies that they are. Keep in mind, they want the Attorney General to release information that is under congressionally pass statute not authorized to be released to the Congress. There is such a thing. There are limitations. Congress doesn't just get to say I want this thing. Therefore I get this thing. That's not how it works.

But they want him to effectively violate that law. Who wants to guess if Congress would be willing to go after him if he did break that law by the way, I think that they would say, give us, give us the six e grand jury material or else. And then he said, all right, final, I'll authorize giving you that material and say, oh, look at it. Look at Attorney General bar willing to undermine the law itself by giving us the six e grand jury material. These people are

utterly unserious. They really are, these democrats. They don't care about how foolish this all this to anyone understands anything. They don't care that this is just going to go into a protracted court battle, and that their response to so much of what the administration has done here that has been transparent, that has been in good faith, that has been all right, we'll go along with this machinery of intended parts in destruction, that is the Mueller pro

will release the report. Bar didn't have to release the report at all. The only thing the Special Council Regulation says is that a report will be delivered to the Attorney General. Attorney General bar would have been completely within his rights to hold the entire report. I would have recommended that, but he could have done it. Instead, he released all but two percent of the report. And even CNN is befuddled by how stupid the Democrats look here

Play fifteen. I find it odd that the Democrats decided to use this as the thing to hold the Attorney General and in in contempt over. I mean, they have a lot of things to be mad at him over they accused him of misleading testimony. Obviously, he didn't show up for a hearing in the past week. So there's a lot of things that they can be mad about, and this one. This is a report that is ninety two

percent public. Only eight percent of it was unredacted the Attorney General last week, and this testimony said only two percent of volume two, which is the thing that the Democrats say they care most about, the obstruction part is redacted. So you know, it's kind of hard to understand how they went nuclear so quickly on this. It seems rather like they have started a constitutional crisis, not the other way around. Yep, the Democrats started this constitutional crisis. Don't

forget that too. For a few weeks now, I've been reminding you that Mother's Day is fast approaching. Now it's just days away. So one hundred Flowers is here to pick out a gorgeous bouquet for you that will show her she's loved. One eight hundred Flowers still has amazing offers on beautiful Mother's Day bouquets and arrangements starting at twenty nine ninety nine. Now that's an offer that Mom

would approve of. There's still time to have your bouquet delivered on Mother's Day, but you've got to get moving. With an amazing selection of sweet streets in bouquets. One in hundred Flowers has everything you need for Mother's Day, and she'll never guess how great of a last minute deal you scored. Mother's Day bouquets and arrangements starting at twenty nine ninety nine is an amazing offer, but you have to order today. Trust one in hundred Flowers to

make Mom feel loved. Order today from one hundred flowers dot com to order beautiful and vibrant Mother's Day bouquets starting at twenty nine ninety nine. Go to one eight hundred flowers dot com slash buck. That's one in hundred flowers dot com slash buck. Mother's Day is Sunday, so order today and save at one eight hundred flowers dot com slash buck. President Trump has a new favorite word, and every time he uses it, he is lying, and that is the word spy. His baseless claims of spies.

This is the president in the United States telling people don't believe what this federal government is doing, and that has very, very dangerous consequences. The notion that somehow the FBI implanted, planted someone inside the campaign to spy on the campaign is just not true. There's absolutely no evidence there was a spy. He wants you to believe that his campaign was spied on, and it's one of the worst things that we've ever seen from government. The media

is a total disgrace. Okay, So to start with that total disgrace, and you know, there you have just some of the usual anti Trump voices with the hysteria, the nonsense about how there wasn't spying. Here's a headline from twenty seventeen, and this is something I know quite a bit about because I was a part of the unit of the NYPD that was accused of this. The headline is quote after spying on Muslims, new York Police agree to greater oversight. Now, hold on a second. Here, I

was in this unit of the NYPD. I was working day after day in day out on these very cases with these individuals, working with the undercovers, working with the people that were confidential informants, and all of the stuff that was being done, all of it was memorialized in writing. There was a criminal predicate, there was a reasonable suspicion standard, there was I mean, we were going through we had

lawyers reviewing everything. It was all done within what we're thought to be the boundaries of legitimate law enforce And but because of political sensitivities, people are saying, well, you're you're looking for terrorism. What's all this stuff, what's all the surveillance of mosques that's going on. Most terrorist plots against the city of New York have a nexus in a mosque. Because most of the major terrorist plots against the city of New York, at least for the last

twenty years or so, have involved radical Islam. You know, we can get sad about this or we can be upset about that reality. But that's just the truth. I had friends who worked in the White Nationalist unit. There was a white nationalist unit of the NYPD. They were very, very bored, nothing to do. There was an anarchist terrorist unit there there. You know, there are different cyber terrorism

units that we had, all kinds of stuff. You know, who was really busy the hey, we have to stop guys who want to yell Allahu akbar blowing up Times Square. That unit, that was my unit. We were busy with things to do. But let me just get back to this headline here in the New York Times. After spying on Muslims, New York Police agreed a greater oversight. There was no spying. It was it was surveillance, you see, it was surveillance. It was legally predicated investigative work. I

could play these games all day. The word spying appears in this New York Times right up, over and over again. And do you know what they're really talking about in some of these cases. They are talking about reporting on stuff that is out in the open. We're not talking about FISA here, folks. We're not talking about using the most technologically advanced and invasive capabilities the federal government has.

We're talking about Hey, did you hear what that he mom said about how like we need to strike against the infidels and you know, maybe somebody should take up jihad. Yeah he said it in front of the congregation. But you know that's spying. It's in a public place, but that's spying, okay. And I just want to know where the boundaries are. I want to know what the real rules are supposed to be. I want to know what they contend. Here is now the new guide post for

we'll qualify as the spying. I mean the Democrats that they're just so it's hard to have a conversation with them because they're so delusional on all this stuff. And that's really the theme of the of the show today is just the Democrats have They've lost their minds on a lot of issues, on the climate change stuff, on Russia collusion. No longer able to have a normal conversation

with them. And here, if we're going to talk about how how crazy it can get, you might as well take a moment to hear from I just want to make sure I have the right guy. Oh, yes, that's right, Steve Steve Cohen play sixteen. We've got a man who has been suggested might be financially dependent on the Russians. Why would he be financially dependent on the Russians? Will we now know? He lost over a billion dollars in a decade in the eighties and nineties. He was broke.

No bank would loan him a penny. He was broke, and if it weren't for him being president, he'd be in prison with Michael Cohen today as individual one. And he obstructed justice, as the Muel Report says it. So we are in danger. We are in danger of hearing the dumb stuff ever uttered by any human being. That's what we're in danger of. What the heck is Steve Cohen talking about? I mean that is really that is

a if you were creating a symptom chart. Ever you're in the doctor's office, they have all like that, you know, if you have a coff or if you have and they walk you through some of they have these charts on the walls. If you had a symptom chart of Trump's arrangement syndrome, you could put Steve Cohen's little monologue there right on it financially dependent on Russia, and we are in danger. He lost a billion dollars and was broke. Where is the evidence of a financial dependence on Russia?

Where or is he getting this from? This is a member of Congress, my friends. This is not just some crazy guy who's ranting on the internet somewhere in some comments section, he's saying that Trump maybe still depended on Russia. There's so much of Trump's background, finances, everything, the Muller Report. Don't you think that Mueller would have been able to figure out if all of Trump's money came from Russia. Don't you think that we would know at some level

if that were the case. At this point, any same person would say yes. But we're not talking about same people anymore. We're talking about something else here. With these anti Trump lives. We are in danger of a political schism in this country based upon the reality based and the Trump deranged and crazy. We might already be there, and I don't know how we come back from it. But that's what makes me think we're in danger. But you have tens of thousands of FBI agents on the

front lines every day doing work to protect America. To keep this country safe. And when the Attorney General undermines the integrity of those agents by suggesting they're involved in spying against a president, what does that do to the reputation? Yeah, it's deeply concerning because ordinary folks will accept what the president says, what the Attorney General says, and that hurts our ability to be trusted as FBI agents in courtrooms

and at doorways. So it's a very bad thing. Sank to Comy here in full effect, with an assist from a mainstream lib reporter there, Nora o'donald now is going to be taking the Dan rather set at cbscving news. I wonder how long before she's engaged in her own massive fake news scandal. But sank to Comy takes that, takes what she's given them, and runs with it. This is a classic. This is the media has been doing

this now for two years. What they say is anytime Trump criticizes anything that's gone on with the FBI with regard to thus spying. We'll get into that in a second. The way this was handled, we've seen the text messages from Page and Struck. We know that there was bias against Trump. We know that they hated for President Trump, and they were working to undermine him, to destroy his candidacy, to destroy his presidency. We know that James Coomy, as a former FBI direct leaked memos to The New York

Times to get payback. I mean, this is not ethical, okay stuff to do. But when you point that out, when you say, hold on a second, there was bad behavior at the FBI, behavior that the Inspector General found. Why Why did Andy mccabbe get fired right before he was going to start collecting his pension. Why did James came get fired by the President United States? Why were these actions taken? You know, struck Page demoted from their jobs, from their roles. Why has all this happened? Because none

of them did anything wrong. But you see that the straw man that Nora Nora O'Donnell sets up there is well, there's all these tens of thousands of FBI and he's doing all this good work. No one's saying that everyone the FBI is bad. No one saying the FBI is not a great American law enforcement institution. Trump is merely saying that some of the people running it did really

bad stuff. And if it weren't hurting Trump. I'd promise you the Lib media who usually love to dump all over law enforcement, now this is the same Lib media, and I have not forgotten that under Obama were completely willing to go along. Cops are racist, not a cop, cops cops plural in general. Racist cops are not to be trusted. Cops engage in, you know, the racist hunting of minority men. Know all this stuff, there was there was no there was no effort at pushback from the Nora.

O'donald's a hold on a second. You know, vast majority law enforcement is doing a great job day to day across the country. Yeah, there are a couple of bad cops here and there, of course, but there's a couple of bad everything's in any large profession there. That wasn't it. It was no Black lives matter. We need to hear more from them, We need to hear about how racist

and terrible the cops are. And then people like me would say, you have millions of interactions between law enforcement and American men and women across the country every year, and you have less than a hundred law enforcement involved fatal shootings in the country. Three hundred and twenty million people in this country less than one hundred law enforce involved shootings, and we're gonna act like this is a

national crisis. That needs to be the biggest news store in the country, and that is going to justify, at least to the left, actions including people like neighborhoods on fire, looting, CBS's look what happened in Ferguson. Look what happened in Baltimore. You know that where was the media? They're saying, Hold on a second, law enforcement is doing a great job

in this country. It's not fair to tar them all with the same brush because of or paint them all at the same brush because of what's you know, gone on in a few places here or there. It's just not fair. They weren't saying that, but oh no the FBI. Oh every time Trump criticizes the FBI's seen your face who have engaged in bad behavior. Then you have this the media. It's an assist I mean, it's like she threw she threw the ball up in the air for Comby to dunk it. That's what that was. Don't you

think the FBI has all these great people everywhere? Republicans are the ones who like the FBI the Libs and Democrats, the ones who usually like, oh, law enforcement can't trust them. They enforce the law. The laws a disproportionate impact in a lot of cases on minorities. Therefore law enforcement must be racist. That's usually their position. Who are the ones, by the way, who want to do have been pushing harder for a criminal justice reform. It's actually the right,

it's not the left. But then we have the usual sank to Coomy nonsense here about about the FBI does not spy. Remember John Brennan said the CIA does not spy. I mean, so he's just an imbecile. Guys, the head was the head of a spying agency. I don't know how people show up to work there and not think what kind of bozos used to run this place? I think that, and I haven't been in the building and got it over a decade now. But here's the Komi version of what the FBI does and whether they're spy

or not. Play eleven. The FBI doesn't spy. The FBI investigates. We investigated a very serious allegation that Americans might be hooked up with the Russian effort to attack our democracy. The Republicans need to breathe into a paper bag. If we had confronted the same facts with a different candidate, say a Democrat candidate, where one of their advisors was talking to a foreign adversaries representative about that adversary's interference in our election, they would be screaming for the FBI

to investigate. And that's all we did. That is a lie. All of what he said there is a lie. Foreign who's wait speaking the foreign representative? So now we're going to now we're going to play this game, or we don't have the facts that we have? Is that what we're doing sankt to Komy because Papadopopolis was approached by somebody who was sent to him by the FBI as

a setup. So for who's the foreign representative of the country here, or we're going to go back to the meeting and Trump Tower, is that that wasn't what started the investigation, Folks that have nothing to do with anything. And that meeting that you know, if if that's a terrible meeting and that's illegal, then you have to explain to me why paying for Russian OPO research for the dossier is okay. If you pay for the activity, then it's fine. I know a lot of guys I would say, WHOA,

I didn't know that was the case. So homie though, saying the FBI does not spy and investigates, I mean, that's just that's just a lie. What the FBI does with the counterintelligence powers that it has. I mean you could always call that, you could call any spying investigating. If if I you know, if I task somebody to show up in a foreign country and try to get access to their sensitive information, they're investigating. You know, we can play these word games all day. The FBI engages

in counterintelligence activity. The FBI is considered a member of the intelligence community. Local law enforcements not a member of the intelligence community. Your state you know, your statees or your state state troopers, they're not members of the intelligence community. Why is the FBI a member of the intelligence community. Because there's a difference between intelligence and law enforcement, and

the FBI does both. I know because I've worked with FBI in their intelligence capacity and I worked foreign intelligence agency. This definitely isn't hard. But Comey's a clown and a liar, and his day is coming, folks. When we see what really happened here, we see what he signed off on what he was a part of. I mean, a lot of people saying, oh, hey, I guess I misread James Comey. All you really have to know about this guy other than the fact that he says stupid things like the

FBI does not, by it clearly does. Okay, the FBI spies. We have this this uh, And then there's an interesting kind of gray area and conversation here. In a lot of other countries, the primary federal law enforcement agency does, in fact do spying. Does in fact, uh, you know, do M I five like work? Right that you have? You have a domestic intelligence agency that is engaged in that. Here, the FBI does domestic intelligence agency work. But we still

call a law enforcement agency, you know, we don't. We have a slightly different system. But the FBI really doubles double hats on this. But if all you really up to know about James Comey's a following that he took the position that Martha Stewart, Okay, I know you're buck, what do you I know, I'm all hung up on the Martha's just trust me on this one, Okay. He took the position to the shock of his colleagues, some

of whom I have talked to. Okay, in the federal prosecutor community, that Martha Stewart saying she was innocent of insider trading was itself a form of fraud because it propped up the stock price of her company. The most convoluted, nonsensical legal theory imaginable under the circumstances. That was a comyism. And now he's here's probably a mullerism too. Muller would go for some nonsense like that as well. Comey is

not a good guy. He had a lot of people at the FBI apparently brainwashed with all of his Holier than now bullcrap, and we're going to find out more about what Comy really did, and it's not going to look good for this guy. We consider a report recommending that the House of Representatives hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt of Congress for defying a valid subpoena issued by this committee. This is not a step we take lightly.

It is the culmination of nearly three months of requests to cushions and negotiations with the Department of Justice for a complete, unredacted report by Special Counsel Mueller into Russian interference in the twenty sixteen election, along with the underlying evidence unredacted report. Madler is demanding, what is really going on with this fight that is brewing or it's actually underway, I should say brewing between the executive branch and Congress.

What are the Damns demanding? What is all this about? Our friend Shaun Davis joins us now. He's a co founder at the Federalist. You can see the Federalist dot com for all the fantastic work and writing that they do over there. But Sean also was chief investigator for Senator Tom Coburn, so he knows a thig or two about the infighting on Capitol Hill over getting the documents

and how all this stuff works. Good man to talk about us today, Sean, Thanks for making the time, Thanks for having me, all right, Sean, First off, the report has been released. Okay, the Mueller's Special Council Report is out there. I think two percent of it is redacted, over four hundred and forty pages released, and the Democrats are demanding what what is their beef here? Can you

just walk us through what are they claiming? The problem is? So, as best I can tell, Democrats are demanding a couple of things. They are demanding a full, unredacted report, which includes grand jury information which by law, the Attorney General can't share with anyone. And they're also demanding what they're calling all of the underlying evidence, all of the interviews, all the documents from the White House, all the transcripts,

all the White House staffers notes. And while I am sympathetic to them to their request when it comes to asking for, say, DOJ documents, kind of stuff that falls within typical congressional oversight of an agency they created, like the Department of Justice, the demands that they're making now they're silly and they're just not based in reality or based in law. I kind of laughed at that NAD clip when he says we've been demanding this report for

three months. Well, the report hasn't existed for three months. It's barely existed for even two if that. So I think I think he's a little out to lunch on this, and I think what's actually going on because a couple of things. Democrats are mad that there was no collusion and no obstructions, so they're trying to scramble and recover

from that, because that was a pretty big blow. I think they're terrified at what Bar is going to under uncover with the spygate and the improper and illegal spying, and so they're trying to dirty him up ahead of those findings coming out. And then I think number three, they're still all angry that the Republican House held Eric Holder in contempt for withholding Agency DJ documents on Fast

and Furious stuff. They had nothing to do with the White House or executive privilege, and so they're trying to get a little revenge here. But what they're not doing is engaging in any sort of good phase back and forth in order to get the information they say they want. I mean, they went in about a span of a week from saying that Bill Barr is a liar to maybe somebody should go maybe maybe somebody should tell the Sergeant at Arms and Congress to go arrest him if

he won't show up. I mean, this is just unhinged stuff now. And what you're seeing is generally what happens with a delusional person when the gravity of reality starts to set in. Okay, so they got out on a limb with this absurd Russian collusion theory for two years, those of us with a brain and common sense and the ability to follow basic facts kind of new from

the beginning there was nothing there there. So they're having a really really difficult time grappling with the fact that Saint Robert of Mueller came back and said, actually, there was no collusion at all, and by the way, even if there was obstruction, which we're not even sure there was,

I'm not charging him with it. So like to understand their behavior and how unhinged it is, you have to appreciate how badly they have been damaged by the fact that there was your Russian collusion number one and number two, that there was likely a whole lot of impropriety, both from House Democrats like Adam Schiff who is legally leaking information, as well as all of the shenanigans going on at DJ and the FBI and probably even the CIA regarding

the spying against the Trump campaign. So they've got a whole mess they're trying to get themselves out of. And they've apparently decided that William Barr is going to be the fall guy here and they're going to take out all their anger on him. And they're making this claim and we're speaking to Sean Davis from the Federalist Here Sean, they're making this claim that they want the unredacted report

to be available to them. But my understanding is that there are statutes, specifically statutes regarding grand jury information six six E information that Congress is effectively asking the Department of Justice to violate congressionally congressionally valid statute that absent a court order, they would be violating. So Congress is basically telling the Department of Justice to break the law or else they're going to force the law against them.

You're exactly right. So there was a couple of different categories of redacted information and what was made public by Bar in the four hundred forty eight page Moll report. There was classified information. I think there was ongoing matters which was related to I think ongoing Roger Stone litigation and litigation against the Russian hackers. There was some privacy stuff in there, like you know, people mentioned who never

had any charges or anything against them. They were tertiary characters and there's no need to drag their names through the mud. And then there was grand jury information. Now Bar has made available to Congress to a whole bunch of people. I think the entire judiciary. Some of their staffers said, hey, you can come look at every single

thing that's in that report. We've removed all the redactions except the grand jury information, which under the federal rules of Criminal Procedure I think rules sixty is why they call it sixt information, we cannot law disclosed grand jury information. And not only are Democrats demanding that grand jury information, they haven't even gone over to DJ to see the

rest of those reactions that were removed. I mean, they've been given like ninety eight percent of what they asked for, and they've been given one hundred percent of what's allowable on under law. And instead they've just decided they're going to have this long drawn out temper tantrum so they can make them feel self feel better about the fact that there was no collusion. What are they really trying

to accomplish? You're like, what's the if you if you were you know, behind enemy lines so to speak, in the office of you know, Jerry Nadler and Nancy Pelosi and all these different figures that are creating this ongoing really seems obsessive news cycle around the Mulla Report, as though we don't have a book length and a heavy book at that report with all kinds of information everything,

and it was very oppositional to Trump. It was a prosecutorial document, not a fair minded document, not supposed to take both sides. What do you think their game plan? What are the Democrats trying to get out of this? Is there a smart strategy at work here from their side or are they just a little crazy? Is this just a symptom of Trump having broken them in some way?

I think it's probably a little bit of both. So again, they're reeling from the fact that there was no collusion and they had really penned all their hopes on that they'd hoped they were going to be able to impeach him for either being a treason this Russian Asian or having a structured justice violating total law, and they didn't

get either of those. So they have a ravenous base, which has been told by both the members of Congress, Democrat lawmakers and their friends and media for years that Trump was a trees in Russian Asian and they're out for blood. And so they've got this issue where apparently for the moment, they've decided they're not going to impeach Trump.

We'll see how long that lasts. And so you have this base that's just frothing just once Trump's head on a pipe and they're told there's going to be no impeachment. So I think a lot of this is some space saving from Democrats trying to show that they really are tough and they really are going to get a pound of flesh out of the Trump administration, and so they're going to try and go to whatever links they can, probably short of impeachment unless they talk themselves into that,

to show how big and tough they are. So I think that's the first part, and then the second is I do think they are legitimately worried about what Bars and the Inspector General DJ's report on improper spying is going to show. And the best way they can blunt that because they obviously can't deal with facts and realities we've seem from the collusion narrative, but the best way they can deal with the bar spygate report coming out

is to just destroy the messenger. Attack the messenger before it does, so hopefully when it comes out they can say, oh, you can safely ignore this, this corrupt, lying, contemptible A Jorney general was behind it, and you don't need to pay attention to anything he says. So I think it's a little bit of base pleasing, a little bit of crazy, and a little bit of defensive preparation for the Spygate reports that are going to come out. Co sign that

sounds about right to me, Sean Davis. Everybody check out his latest at the Federalist dot Com. Also follow him for the wreckage of liberals that he leaves behind in the digital space. Sean Davis on Twitter, He's check him out there, and Sean, thanks for all your work and good to talk to you as always, same here, Buck, It's always a pleasure. Thank you for having me see him. We live in the age of the Kardashians, and the New York Times has managed to descend to that level.

The fact is less we clear Donald Trump is rich and this is not a shock. Apparently he was clever about what he was able to do with the tax code, and in fact, the other taxpayers helped make him rich because he did legally what he was allowed to do. I would love to see the Salzburger family release all of their records, show us all the different tax advantages that their companies have taken over the years. How did they do it? For example, when they sold the Boston Globe.

I think that this kind of one sided, dishonest attack is part of what is sickening American politics and making it harder to get decent people to write. I think Newt's stepping onto a pretty important, pretty important ground here with this new to loot. We gotta have new back on the show. It's been a while I having a nude on, like maybe a year or two now, Pruiser, Mike, let's make a no, let's get let's get nude on. I like new He was actually here the other day.

I'm talking to his people. They didn't know this, but I'm already talking to him. Let's see you look at that, dude. We're Mike. We we have like a mind meld here, my friend. You know, from from New York to DC. You can't even It's like it's like we're sitting next to each other. Um No, it's He's one of the voices in the in our current moment. I mean, I think new Victor, Davis Hansen, these are really important perspectives

on all things Trump. They bring a degree of wisdom and knowledge to the Trump movement that I think is really useful, really helpful. But on the Trump tax issue there is this is another manifestation of Trump's arrangement syndrome.

Today you had all these journalists trying to hyperventilate over Trump's tax returns, which I suppose this was just leaked from someone somewhere in New York State, his tax returns from nineteen eighty five to eighty six, I think, and it showed that he took losses, I think, the biggest losses of any taxpayer in the country. And it showed that he took loss carried forward, which is a one hundred percent legal acceptable in the tax code thing to do.

Now you can argue with whether or not you think that that should be the case in the tax code or not. I would note that, you know, if you want people to take risks and if you want to spur investment, you probably don't want them to Also, after they've lost a ton of money, gets socked with really high taxes on whatever money they have. But newt here is is also pointing out that you know, other people would not be able to handle this kind of assault.

I mean, there are so many individuals where if you went after their taxes back now we're talking, went back there almost thirty years. You know, this is what they'll They could not get the mainstream media could not and would not get Barack Obama's college records. I'm sure you know, they could have sued, they could have gone to court, they could have on something. They didn't even want them. They even want them. We've still never seen Barack Obama's

SAT scores, We've never seen his grades. You would say, Barkwell, who cares. Oh, we cared about John Kerry's. We cared about George W. Bush's, we cared about you know, but what taxes? Now, this is how sacro sanct Oh, we must see the person's side, not just the last ten years. We're supposed to see them now, back into the eighties apparently, you know, and I'm reminded of how they went after Romney on the tax issue. Romney, who I mean, talk about a guy who is just the most squared away.

You know, he's the guy that you feel like he probably pays more than he shoot in taxes just because he doesn't want to stiff Uncle Sam. You know, he's a very spit and polish by the book, by the rules individual and Harry Reid very famously, you recall, went on the floor of the Senate and said, mitt Romney hasn't paid taxes in ten years. Now, you may say, buck, a lot of people knew that that wasn't true, but plenty of people probably didn't know that, and it was

a real smear. And Harry Read later kind of chuckled about how Romney didn't win, and so who cares that he lied about? It was just a lie. It was just a lie. It was just defamation done from the sanctity of the Senate floor though, so there you can't bring any kind of legal challenge to it. There's no defamation from the Senate floor. That's just an exemption for it. So he was able to do that. And I'm just

reminded of how you know this is. This is why so many, so many people who saw Trump early on as an important political phenomenon and really as the start of a political movement. We need somebody who can withstand all this stuff. Romney couldn't take the heat, or at least maybe Romney could handle the heat, but didn't know how to fight back effectively. And if you if you lose, you still lose. You know, even if you lose gracefully. That has been the mantra for Republicans stretching back for

a long time. Well you lose, but lose gracefully. And you know, we eked out a win against al Gore in two thousand against al Gore, folks, guy's a clown, guy's a joke, and barely we're able to defeat al Gore. I mean, this is remarkable stuff when you think about who the Democrats have put forward, and then we you know, we finally Trump comes along and ends the Clinton dynasty at least for the foreseeable future. But they're going after him on this tax thing, acting like it's a big story.

None of this is new, None of this really is is information that is gonna change anything. But they're fixated on this. They are fixated. You know, the media does have an obsession. Of the obsession is to find the thing that will end Trump. Whatever that thing is. They've tried.

They thought it was campaign finance, they thought it was porn star payoff, they thought it was the Russia collusion, They thought it was his dealings with the Trump Tower Moscow that they keep going through all these different iterations of ending the Trump presidency, and this is an extension

of the mass psychosis that they have. It really is speaking about taxes, though, I gotta say, I'm I don't know how much longer I'm gonna be able to last in a blue in any blue state, whether it's DC or New York or his tax stuff is just out of control. And I talked to friends of mine, particularly friends that have moved to Florida in the last couple of years, and you've got some nice red parts of Florida, lovely,

lovely beaches, and way better tax treatment. Governor Chris new New had some interesting comments to make about these blue states and what's facing them in the tax situation. Play clip one. What you're do in Connecticut, I'd actually make them manage The problem with places like New York and Connecticut and California is they don't manage themselves. They don't put themselves in a position to be successful because they worried more about the politics and less about what actually

gets you know, better results. When businesses screened to the state of Connecticut, you need to get taxes, stop abusing us, or we're walking away. And then they did walk away and What was Connecticut's response. Nothing, it's insulting, so businesses saying, you know, we want to work with a government. We want to work with communities and administrations that actually listen to us. That's what New Hampshire does, Tennessee, Texas, Nevada, Utah, Idaho.

These are the states that I'm competing with to get business. It truly is an international market. There are the states that are well run and have decent tax climate and

states that are losing people because they don't. And I got to tell you, I think that these a lot of these blue states are kind of coasting on legacy and the wealth accumulation that they've had in the past, and the infrastructure that was put in place a long time ago, particularly the private sector infrastructure, meaning of the jobs and the companies that are there. I think you're going to see continued flight from New York, California, Connecticut.

There are just other places better, Especially if you're a young guy or galen. You think about starting a family, it's too tough to make it work in these blue states. They're too dysfunctional, the taxes are too darn high. It's also important that we stopped seeing religion use as a kind of cudgel, as if God belonged to a political party, and if he did, I can't imagine it would be the one that sent the current president into the White House.

Don't you love that Democrat tactic? That's Mayor Pete, who's supposed to be so areudite, so sophisticated, gold plated resume above the fray they say about Mayor Pete, he says we should stop using religion as a cudgel. So let me use religion as a cudgel here, let me use religions. Let's just not do that thing we're doing. But I'm gonna do it one more time when I'm asking you not to do it. If he did, he would hate If God belonged to a political party, he would hate Republicans.

I think that that's given that the Democratic Party is the party of death on demand with abortion, that right right there, right then, and there falls apart from me. I don't think that that's a serious argument that can be made. I don't think that that's a serious a

serious case. And I think what's so fascinating here is that the Democrats have done a bit of rewriting of history, and you're going to see this from Mayor Pete, where gay marriage is now viewed as something that the Democratic Party was all four and that they they were the ones that, you know, had this big breakthrough of how gay marriage should be the law of the land, when in reality, Barack Obama ran as a traditional marriage candidate.

This just gets completely wiped out of the history. Barack Obama ran in favor of additional marriage, and then, in a classic Democrat move, was like, yeah, I just did that to fool those fool those rubes who go to church in the Bible Belt, you know, enough of them that they would vote for me. I didn't really mean it. I wasn't really serious about it. We had our discussion about Democrat takeia earlier in the week. If they lie and it is a lie that benefits the Democrat Party,

then it's okay. Then it's not something that we should that they will look down upon. They think that that's fine.

We are going to have a very interesting Democrat primary going forward here, because you're going to see efforts to try to win over white working class voters, many of whom are are Christian and at least somewhat church going, and you've got a political party with the Democrats that not just abortion on demand, but thinks that the distinctions between male and female don't make any difference anymore, or at least they're willing to erase those distinctions on a whim.

Believe that the transgender movement is the new civil rights movement. Believe that it is in fact offensive to say things like men cannot get their periods or women are not the only ones who get periods. I can't even keep up with the lunacy here, the anti scientific, non scientific lunacy of the left. And they're going to try to appeal to people who, at least in some states, in some places have a more traditional view of society and

morality and just American public life. And the Democratic Party is an increasingly radical party. They have not tacked toward the center. They are not taking a more centrist approach at all, even though right now it seems to me that they are all in on Biden, which I gotta tell you, you know, maybe I'm out on a limb here because I've been saying this all along. I do not understand how anybody could think that this guy is really a serious contender. And I really appreciated this today,

I saw none other than Ronald Reagan himself. Folks, you know, if you don't want to take my word for it, here's what Ronald Reagan said back in trying to make sure I have this one set up the campaign to This is from the Campaign to Succeed Reagan and Biden launched his bid for the presidency. This is from National Review Today in June of nineteen eighty six. And here is what Reagan said about about Biden first meeting with

Ken d and the VP Howard Lake. Getting back from Tennessee, Reagan wrote on June fifteenth, this is what he wrote about him. Some talk about Senator Biden, now candidate for president. I saw him on CNN last night speaking to John F. Kennedy School at Harvard. He's smooth but a pure demagogue, out to save America from the Reagan doctrine. Ooom, smooth but a pure demagogue. A perfect, perfect description of Joe Biden from Rob Reagan himself. And who has been I'm

the one who's been telling you all week. I didn't even know about this Reagan quote until today that Biden is the quintessential say whatever he has to say at any point in time politician, no big ideas, no big thoughts, no core of belief or purpose other than the greater glory of Joe Biden. And say what you will about some of the and I will say a lot about them. A lot of these Democrats who are running right now for the nomination. I do think there are some true

believers among them. I think Bernie Sanders is a true believer. Unfortunately, he's a true believer. And Communism, baby, it's coming back, make it a comeback. I do think he's a true believer. Though. I think that Elizabeth Warren, as much as she is a phony, she's such a phony that she's even convinced her she believes some of her own bs. I think

that she believes it. I think that I think Andrew Yang he's a true believer, although I don't find him bothers him like I do some of these other candidates. I think he's an interest. I think he's wrong on some stuff, but he's earnest and he's You're like, who's Andrew Yang. I think he's at maybe one percent of the vote or something. But he has ideas. He's an ideas guy, and he'll talk about his ideas. I give Yang. I give Yang credit, and I Ernie Clinton interrupt you here, Buck,

did you hear Yang's policy or ideas on paying politicians? No, what do you say? I thought it was really interesting I read about last week. He talked about the salaries of the president and our congressman and senators, how they need to be greatly increased. If we paid them way more, then they'd be less likely to be reliant on um, you know, on payoffs and bribes and all that kind of stuff that you know that they give me too. I mean, we can debate, we can debate what the

lobbyist is. What I was trying to say, it's an idea. It's a real idea of folks. So you know, Yang's got some real ideas. But but Biden, as Reagan said, pure demagogue. Perfect description. Received a lot of feedback about a video I posted last week, and I want to provide some background. You see, I've lived across the street or next door to this particular plant parenthood, one of the most heavily protested plant parenthoods in America. For the

last fifteen years. I've seen men and women and teens try to go there for routine healthcare for checkups for PAP schmeres, for breast exams, for STD screenings, and yes, for abortions. I have seen firsthand the insults, the slurs, the attacks, and the racism that those protesters aim at, mostly young girls going there for clinical care. As an activist and an advocate, I know why pushing back against harassment and discrimination or an must even when they're uncomfortable.

But last week I wasn't a patient escort. I was a neighbor and a concerned citizen, and I was aggressive. And you're a jerk, Brian Simms, You're scummy. Apology not accepted, at least not by me, feeling not by any of

you either. You will recall that Representative Simms from the Great State of Sylvania achieved quite a bit of notoriety earlier this week when he really viciously harassed and harangued an elderly woman who was standing outside of a planned parenthood clinic in Philadelphia praying, and then did the same thing to a couple of teenage girls, videotaping them, trying to humiliate them, and really doing all of this in a very menacing, nasty fashion. He wasn't engaging with them.

He wasn't trying to have a conversation. He was trying to publicly humiliate them, not just public as in on the street in front of this planned parenthood, but then to post this like he's some kind of hero, posted to his social media accounts. He was proud of these interactions. And just to remind you of State Rep. Simms's tone and approach to teenage girls who are trying to convince women not to kill the babies in their wombs at a planned parenthood, here is what Simms said to these

young girls. Lay clip nine. Oh you've got here is a bunch of protesters, a bunch of pseudo Christian protesters who've been out here shaming young girls for being here. And so here's the deal. I've got one hundred dollars to anybody who will identify any of these three. So I'm gonna donate the plant parenthood. I'm gonna donate to plant parents. So look a bunch of white people standing out of a plant parents shaming people. There's nothing Christian

about what you're doing. Nothing Christians at all about what you're doing. Hi, nothing Christian or loving or godly about what you're doing. So I've got one hundred dollars to anybody who will identify one hundred dollars rich What makes you think that it's your job to tell women what's right for their bodies? And the truth is, I'm not really asking because I don't care. Shame on you. Notice how much wokeness and social justice idiocy this complete moron

worked into that very short exchange that we played for you. Says, there's nothing godly about what these girls say they're doing, which is praying for the babies that are being aborted in this clinic. I'm pretty sure that that's quite godly to pray for the souls of the deceased, because that is what is happening in this facility. He notes that they are white, as though that's and he kind of spits it out like that's a slur in and of itself.

These white girls standing outside there is there a problem with that representative sims are white teenage girls not allowed to protest, only non white teenage girls out of protests. I just it seemed like a very strange thing to note in his aggressive verbal assault on these on these girls, I mean, and then the one hundred dollars offer to

docks them to humiliate them. He should know that that could very well if that and and oh, there are so many social justice warriors online, so many people who work for despicable smear organizations like Media Matters and you know the Daily Codes and you name it, all these different websites. I mean basically a leftist website. As a website without any honor or integrity, you can start there.

Any number of them would be happy to docs meaning to share the private contact information home addresses of these girls. And where is the media on this? I would ask, where's the rest of the media. This has now gotten a lot of attention. People have been talking about the story.

I've obviously been talking about it for days because the same media that maybe a week or so ago, maybe two weeks ago, was telling us that criticism of ilhan Omar is immoral and reckless, because even though she's a public figure, saying stupid and immoral and reckless things by criticizing her, those of us on the right are giving oxygen to the hatred and the threats against her. So we were, in effect, if you criticize ilhan Omar, the

left was saying, you're putting her life in danger. That was the storyline, ilhan Omar is a public figure and her comments are not just fair game. It is necessary to push back on the anti Semitism and the stupidity

of somebody like an ilhan Omar. As much as the Left wants to protect her, and oh they're so, they want to just she's in a special category because of all the she represents all these different victim classes all put together, and that means that she's special and you can't hold her to the same standards of speech you would other members of Congress. That's what the Left is doing, creating and enforcing a massive double standard for ilhan Omar.

Where is that standard though, of criticizing somebody, whether you're right in the criticism or not, can put them in harm's way and therefore it's immoral for you to do so. Where is that standard when it comes to a number of teenage girls who a public official, not just a

public figure. Representative Brian seems states openly and really puts out a bounty on the privacy of these girls, asking for them, paying to pay for them to be docked, like it's the DNC paying for the dossier, and all of a sudden, if you pay for the bad behavior.

It makes it okay, huh not. The mother of the teen girls who were confronted by Representative Simms had some thoughts on how she, as a mother of young girls, a mother of young girls who were out there praying for the souls of murdered babies at a planned parentod clinic, how does she feel as a mom about this play eight. It was a shocking experience. What is not seen in that video was our first interaction with mister Simms. He approached us about twenty minutes before that came in. I

would say he came in hot. He came in yelling at us, and really was yelling very directly at the girls, very specifically at the girls. So I moved myself in between him and the girl asked him, you know, please talk to me. Let's let's have a conversation and the two of us as two adults. But he continued to yell at the girls, and then eventually he laughed in about ten minutes later, as when he came back videotaping us.

So after our first altercation with him, I went and talked to my girls and told them, you know, I'm really sorry this happened. I'm really proud of you guys for being here. Sadly, ironically, the two older girls looked at me and said, mom, that was nothing compared to what people were screaming at us at the March for Life. This guy is a maniac. You're hearing here from the mom of these young girls. This wasn't even a heat

of the moment thing. He initially accosted them. The mother steps and says, we're adults, why don't we talk, and he goes, no, no, no. Brian Simms wants to yell at a bunch of teenage girls. This guy looks to be maybe about my age, maybe a little older. I mean, I do have a youthful appearance, and I would never scream at teenage girls for protesting for any reason, because there's an inherent level of menace from a six ft tall adult male screaming and threatening a bunch of teenage girls.

That's just not okay. A decent person, an honorable person, an honorable man, a real man wouldn't do that. This guy did it, not only to do it once, then he came back to videotape it because he was so proud of it, and now he wants to claim in his non apology apology video, Oh, it's just because I've seen all the horrible things that are said. I'm sorry. The left likes to play this game a lot these days. Well maybe I was out of line with this, but there are a lot of other people that do bad

things and that just kind of makes what I did okay. No, sorry, you don't get to just muddy the waters on what morality is here, on what ethics are individual culpability is what matters, not what someone else did somewhere else that influenced your thinking at this point in time, for an interaction with the human being that had nothing to do

with those other things you're talking about. That some people may have been mean to women going into planned parented clinics at another time and another place does not justify this guy acting like a lunatic when women, young women are trying to pray outside of a parentered clinic this time.

But you see this, You know this is the lack of accountability on the left is astonishing, But it's the reality because they know that the media is not going to pick up the mainstream media is not picking up the story, not touching this story, and this comes the same week where you had a former city councilwoman for the City of New York saying that you know, it's

not a human being in the womb. I mean the stupidity on display from the left on these issues, the straw men they set up on the abortion issue too. It just tells you all you need to know about how morally decrepit the modern Democratic Party is and really how there's no coming back for them with all this stuff. They will never change their minds because their party has been degraded, ethically, degraded in a way where they would

have to form a new party. Once the final recognition comes in of what they've been doing, they'll have to form an entirely new party, and they're not willing to do that because they want power. We'll be right back. You are now entering the Freedom Hottital Operation Center. All sensitive programs MUSTY keeps strictly neat to know. Team Buck

is cleared and ready for the Buck Brief. Almost one year ago, after a drawing from the Iran Nuclear Deal, President Trump implemented the strongest pressure campaign in history against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The goal remains simple, to deprive the outlaw regime of the funds that is used to stabilize the Middle East for four decades and instead of iz Iran to behave like a normal country. Up to forty percent of the regime's revenue comes from oil sales.

It's the regime's number one source of cash. Before our sanctions went into effect, Iran will generate as much as fifty billion dollars annually in oil revenue. Overall, Today we estimate that our sanctions have denied the regime well north of ten million dollars. Our goal has been to get countries to see supporting Iranian oil entirely. Last November, we granted exemptions from our sanctions to seven countries and to Taiwan.

With this this to give our allies and partners to wean themselves off of Iranian oil and to ensure a well supplied oil market. Today, I am announcing that we will no longer grant any exemptions. We're going to zero, going to zero across the board. I'm a Secretary of State Pompeo letting everybody know that the noose is getting tightened around the Iranian economy and the showdown between Trump

and Tehran is heating up. Now you have the Iranians today threatening to end compliance with parts of the nuclear deal. The US is also threatening new sanctions. We've got a lot of movement here in US Iranian relations. We've got a great guest right now to help us work through it all. Jonathan Schanzer, Senior vice president at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Jonathan. Always good to have you on,

Great to be with you. Buck. All right, let's start first with what is the before we talk about the Iranian response thus far and what they're threatening. What is the change that's happened in the last week or so from the Trump administration position in terms of how we are approaching Iran. Now, okay, so a couple of things. Number One, we were issuing waivers. We were allowing certain countries to continue to buy Iranian oil. We have zeroed

that out. We're not really giving waivers on anything anymore related to Iran, not with its civilian nuclear program, really not with much of anything at this point. So we've done that. The Iranians are definitely feeling the financial squeeze. They're getting blocked out of markets. Companies are afraid to do business with Iran because they know that they have

a choice. They can either do business with US, the world's largest economy, or with the Iranians, which is a far smaller one that carries with it a good bit of risk. So the news is tightening. As Secretary Pompeo said, in the meantime, you've got people in Iran who are increasingly growing restless and unhappy with the way that the regime has decided to allocate the resources that it has. And now the US today actually just imposed news sanctions. So now you've got oil off the table, You've got

petrochemicals and other oil products off the table. And then just today you've now got iron, steel, aluminum, copper, all the precious metals that they sell that's also off the table. So all the major things that give are on cash foreign currency are just drying up, and you can just

feel the pressure mount. What's supposed to happen if some of these countries we had been giving a waiver two so that they could do business with essentially buy stuff from Iran, mostly oil, right, but other if those countries say, you know what, I'm sorry, We're not going to dance to America's tune on this one. What do we do.

So it really depends. You know, there are countries like China in Russia that will some of there knows that the United States and we don't really have a major response, But there are other countries, those that are a bit more plugged into the US led economy, or perhaps we have a little bit more leverage, we can start to sanction them or their businesses, or their banks or the people that are facilitating these transactions. And that's something that

people just don't want. You have to remember that we still have the most powerful banking system in the world, that the dollar is still the most ubiquitous currency, the one that everybody uses around the world. So people want access to our system. It's trusted, the dollar is still king, so uh, it's there's a real fear of engaging in

this kind of uh of transaction. But also remember that if we determine the risks because it's our system, it can really hurt other countries and other companies as they look to do business around the world. Now, the EU is still in the nuclear deal with Iran, do we have concerns that there are EU countries that aren't going aren't going to go along with the sanctions we have in place, you know, do we think we have the leverage to force them to keep playing ball our way?

This is I would say, one of the sort of tense things that are happening right now between US and the Europeans. It's not just NATO. Uh, there's this and uh and and really it stems from when the President left the nuclear deal. He did so right in the

middle of negotiations with the Europeans. We had been working our Dippo mats, were working with Theirs to try to find some kind of a compromise, and right in the middle of that, the President decided he had had enough that he didn't think that they were moving quick enough, and so he pulled out. So there has been tension really high. Sat in a meeting with British diplomats and I've never seen such tension before. They were particularly grumpy

about about the President's decision. So you have this tension that has existed. They want to try to keep a run in the deal. They want to run to continue to limit its nuclear activities and the United States and said, look, this wasn't working in the first place. Not only do we find out that they had all sorts of secrets

that they had kept from the IAEA. But on top of that, they've been spending money all around the world to disrupt the Middle East, to sponsor terrorism, and to engage in a bunch of other behaviors that we don't like. And so what the Europeans have decided to do to try to sweeten the deal is they've been talking about something called an SPV special purpose vehicle, which would be a way of maintaining trade outside of the normal channels that would impact the United States, so they could find

themselves sort of inoculated from sanctions. We have not seen any significant use of this, but it doesn't mean that the Europeans still won't think about using it. So we're trying to deter them and to keep them with us because a divided West is not one that's ultimately going

to get the Iranian regime to bend. And on the Iranian threat, now, the Iranians are saying that they are going to back out, even though the Europeans are still in this deal with them, because the Trump administration pulled

out of this deal. The Iranians are now saying that they will move away from some of the obligations under the deal, including enriching uranium, right, I mean, this is some pretty red line level stuff in terms of the deal, not necessarily red line in terms of a military strike, but this is important stuff that's in the deal. What do you make of this one? Do you think the Iranians will do it? And too? If they do it,

what are we going to do? I think there was always a risk that they were going to start to do this, that they were going to start to violate the deal incrementally, and I would expect that that's exactly what they're going to do. They're going to sort of raise the temperature slowly over time and probably not go for for, you know, large amounts of enriched uranium right away. And so now they've just said, look where you've been out of the deal for a year, we're not getting

what we want. We want more, you know, financial transactions with the West and US sanctions are harming that. So we're going to do what you know that that you don't want us to do, which is to enrich So I think they start off small and moving crementally. The question is how much will the United States put up with? How much before the Europeans actually join our side? And this is I think this is going to be the

interesting part to watch. Do the Iranians understand who they're playing with here and do they understand how to keep the Iranians with them while also preventing us from taking more drastic measures. Is this the right move, Jonathan? I mean, I see what's going on here at the administration, and I've we've talked about the Iran deal before here in

the show. It's clearly a very flawed deal. Obama administration was just desperate for a foreign policy legacy, and you know that that all still very much stands for me. But I'm hearing people say Bolton, who is a hawkish guy on a whole bunch of weather truck in Venezuela, or on a whole bunch of things and has been for a long time. This is these are the kind of moves that could lead to miscalculation and perhaps even

unintended military consequences. That's that's concerning to me. I mean, is this the right move to people who are just saying in the back of their you know, people are thinking the back of their minds, the Trump administration cannot engage in some kind of Mid East war, you know, we need four years here, preferably eight of no wars the Mid East. Is this Iranian stuff getting close to the line for you or is this what we have to do? You know, it's it's unclear to me, you know,

exactly what the Iranians next move would be. I think we actually just had an event today where hr McMaster said that there are two ways of challenging in the United States, and one is through asymmetrics and the other way is just to be stupid. In other words, if the Iranians decide they want to challenge the United States, the only way they can do that is, you know, is by way of insurgency or through terrorism. There there is no way for the Iranians to challenge the US

in a conventional fashion and win. The US would crush the Iranian military. So, you know, when we think about what does a war mean, you know, I think it's hard to define. Can we imagine a situation where the Iranians deploy their militias in Iraq, which is apparently one of the reasons why Pompeo went to Iraq just the other day to confer with Iraqi leadership because of specific and credible concerns yeah, we can imagine a scenario like that, or perhaps harassment of our navy, you know, in the

Strait of Hormus. We can certainly imagine that. But in terms of a full on war, it's very hard to imagine the Iranians deciding that they want to trifle with a powerful military like ours. But could you see a situation where we start having regime change conversations if you know, if they do miscalculate on the Iranian side, Let's say they do unleash the Shia militias in Iraq to go after not just the Iraqis, but our interest in that country too, go after the ambassy. There's a whole bunch

of war gaming. We could do theorizing, but based on reality, and all of a sudden, the US starts blowing up IRGC headquarters, there's air strikes. Is this that we break it we buy it situation. I'm just trying to gauge

your concerns about over involvement in Iran. Sure, and look, I think all those things are valid, especially after what this country has gone through over the last twenty years and the challenges that we've had in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to a far lesser extent Syria, and so you know, I don't want to discount those. But what you know, so far, we're not hearing anything from this administration about

an invasion or about regime change. What we're talking about, at least, what we're hearing is UH, you know, severe maximum UH financial pressure, trying to get the administration to or rather to get to get the Iranians, according to administration demands UH to change core behaviors. Right that, Pompeo laid out a number of things that he's just expecting the Iranians to do, but he summed it up in one very easy sentence. He said, I just want the

Iranians to be like a normal country. Right, so that means, you know, stopping terrorism and missile provocations and propping up dictators and murderers. It's that kind of thing that we're trying to get from them. And so far everything that we've done is is financial pressure. Now we have just

actually ordered a carrier group into the Persian Gulf. But as Ambassador John Huntsman's that, this is a one hundred thousand tons of diplomacy that ultimately we're backing up what we're asking for from the Iranians with the threat of military force, but we don't necessarily see anything where the

US is geared toward battle. And my hope is that it stays that way, that we're going to be able to avoid conflict and to get the Iranians to back down on the uranium enrichment, but also a lot of the other things that have caused us concern for quite some time. Yeah, having spent some time in a rock and Afghanistan, I just I just don't want anyone listening to this to end up, you know, walking the streets of Tehran trying to make sure that a bunch of

militias aren't shooting at each other again. You know. It's just I think we got to make sure we all learn the lessons of what we've seen is as you mentioned for the last twenty or so years, of what is possible and what is a good idea. But always good to talk to you, mister Jonathan Schanzer from the Foundation of Defensive Democracies, Thanks for being on the show, Thanks for having me. All right, team give you a

national security deep dive. Very interesting stuff going on with they wrong though, so I think it was important that we cover all of that, you're gonna hear a lot of whining from the press about how Trump is crazy when it comes to Iran. Not true, and that's why I like to bring on people who really know what's up, know what time it is when it comes to foreign policy, like mister Schanzer. We'll be right back. I worry that we're in the same position as the nuclear industry was

in the early fifties. We have an amazing new technology with real potential, but we are not being honest about the risks and our incapacity to store a wasteful and harmful byproduct. The pattern that I've seen in my industry is one of deceit. We're not honest about what we collect. The problem number one, it seems to me as a user agreement. Why don't we just require social media companies to write user agreements in plain English? Would that help

put the problem? I think that that user givement would just say we're taking all your data. Yes or Now that's a lot of honesty from the founder of board and internet company that he's testifying. The guy's name is Massi Edge Jaglowski. I don't know how to say that as close as I can get he was at a

Senate Banking Committee hearing. And you know, sure enough, people are starting to wake up to what we've been talking about here on the show for a long time, and that is that the entire Internet system, of social media and all these massive platforms, this is a surveillance system, folks.

They are they are taking all of your data and doing things with it, and you don't know what it is and the month you are the product as in your information, your personal habits, your likes, your wants, your needs, and you're giving it to a third party. Now, it's okay if you're okay with that, but it should at least be open and honest. The fact that Google's motto until pretty recently was don't be evil. I think Google doth protest too much. I think Google knew they had

a problem. But speaking of technology and evil, as some of you know, I think that robo calls are the most annoying thing happening in the world of technology right now. I absolutely hate them. Right it's Susie, Do you know that you've qualified for a new tour of the Bubba? You know, No, Susie, No, I do not qualify. This is not true. This is a lie. You've won a cruise. I have not won a cruise. Susie, stop it. Why are you such a doubter? Because I know you're lying,

Susie or whatever your name is that's calling me. There's now a new This is a safety tip for all of you out there. The Federal Communication Commission has been putting out warnings about this for robo callers who do what's called a whangeiri scam. I never heard this before. A whangeari scam is Japanese for one ring and cut. What they do is call you, particularly from a number in Sierra Leone or Mauritania. You can see the country codes from them two two two or two three two,

and it's at an odd hour of the night. They call once and hang up, and then you think, wow, someone's calling me at this hour of the night and they hung up like I missed their call. They must need to talk to me. You call them back and oh, that's right. It's calling into a toll number where you will get billed. You will get billed as if you're calling a nine hundred number. That's the scam. So not only are robo callers annoying and trying to sell products.

Now they're straight up thieves and people are Look, I would fall for this if I ton't know about it. People fall for this one all the time, calling you from a number you don't know it rings. Once hangs up, you figure this must be important. They're calling me at an odd hour of the night and you call and then they just try to keep you on the phone however they can as long as they can, and you for it. Robocallers, friends, this is a This is a scourge.

There should be a bipartisan effort to eradicate robocalls and to severely punish and I mean, like I want to get I want to get crazy East German stazi on these robocallers. Track them down, find him, punish them because they need to be stopped. This evening, we are in the presence of a true legend, an extraordinary athlete who has transformed golf and achieved new levels of dominance. Tiger Woods is a global symbol of American excellence, devotion, and drive.

Tiger endured knee surgery and four excruciating back surgeries. I know that you remember too. That's not good, but it ended up good, including a spinal fusion. In two thou seventeen, he fell from number one in the world rankings to one thousand, one hundred and ninety ninth. I don't believe that even if he had one leg, I don't believe that Tiger's injuries were so profound that for two years he could barely swing a club. As Tiger said, there was a point in time I didn't know if I'd

ever do this again, if he'd ever play again. But Tiger fought through the terrible pain, and he fought all the way back to the Summit of Gold. People love a comeback. Trump, I think, in particular, loves a comeback. I think actually the in the Art of the Deal, there's on the front cover that made me something about, you know, the way to make a great comeback, which ties into it's not a secret that Trump had tremendous financial difficulties back in the eighties and the nineties as

a real estate investor and casino operator. I will say, I don't know how it's possible to lose money running a casino. It's like a license to run a ATM machine. But he did lose money doing it. I guess there's stuff I don't know about the casino business right now, somebody who listens in, that's like bucket's very hard. You

don't understand. Okay, fine, but President Trump gave the Medal of Freedom to Tiger Woods and none other then Nobel Prize Laureate, which really makes you think twice about how important and profound the Nobel Prizes. Paul Krugman shared this quote. I'm old enough to remember when presidential Medals of Freedom were given for showing courage and making sacrifices on behalf of the nation in the world. Tiger Woods hits golf

balls for money. That's from Paul Krugman, New York Times op ed columnist and overall curmudgeon who's wrong about everything, you know, leftist curmudgeon who really hasn't had a good idea from what I've seen in the last twenty years. He seems to forget that the mental freedom went to Arnold Palmer in two thousand and four. George W. Bush gave that one, Jack Nicholas in two thousand and five, Charlie Seaford in two thousand and fourteen Obama gave that one.

So yeah, so you have people here who are getting the you know, getting the Presidential Medal of Freedom and they're golfers. In fact, there are other people. I think there's been some actors. And you know, here's my thing about this, I don't really care who gets the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I kind of think the whole thing is,

I don't know, like trophies for adults who cares. Really, it doesn't really strike me, especially when you're giving it to people of cultural note and people that are you know, civilians that are doing things that are entertaining interesting worthwhile inspiring whatever whatever it may be. But can we at least just have criticism of Trump that's based in some reality. Can we not have people saying that Trump is a bad guy and doing bad things because he does exactly

what his predecessors have done. Wouldn't that be nice if we could just have that as a rule. But the Paul Krugman's of the world, if they're going to criticize Trump and act like he unprecedented, Remember they used to say that all the time, They say it less now because they kept on finding out it. It wasn't unprecedented. Every president before this president has done something very similar.

I'll leave you with this. Here's Tiger Woods in a grateful I'm not a golf fan, but I like a comeback story too, So we can have a little moment of moment of zen here with Tiger Woods enjoying the experience that he had. I know this was a few days ago, but we didn't talk about it here play nineteen. I just want to say, this has been an unbelievable experience and to have the support that I've had for all these years, some of you from my entire life, and some of you for more than half of my life.

You've seen the good and the bad, the highs and the lows, and I would not be in this position without all of your help. In ninety seven, yes I won the Masters, and hugging my dad and my mom. My dad's no longer here, about my mom's here. I love your mom. Thank you. You know it was a nice moment for the guy. Look, he's he's made mistakes, no question about it. He's but he's paid some. He's paid the price monetarily and otherwise. Miraka loves a comeback.

Trump loves a comeback. I love a comeback. So I'm glad that Tiger managed it. And now we'll do some roll call rock and roll. Fellow patriots, we made ours go up to eleven. It's time for roll call. Indeed, it is it's time for roll call. Um, let's get

in to it, shall we? First? Oh Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton if you want to be part of the action, as you know, And just to reminder, folks, next week I will be spending some time in the People's Republic of China as opposed to the People's Republic of DC. So we are lining up a rock star group of guest hosts for you. But I'll be out for the week and we're gonna have assuming we get everybody slotted in properly and according to their schedules, we

should be having. Well, we don't know everybody, yets. I wouldn't say, but I think certainly Raheem Kassam, Harland Hill, Ben Wein Gardner. We got a whole bunch of folks, so it's gonna be fun. Rachel writes, Hey, Buck, you ask for a book recommendation. I have one. I know you like history and was wondering if you've heard or read the book The Silk Roads by Peter Franco Pan. It's a great read. I have not and that sounds awesome.

Rachel and I just wrote it down because that sounds like a perfect thing to read on the plane to China. You have a China. You have a China, drop mark. Don't be shy about it. By the way, if you ever want to throw, you've got it there. It's it's in front of you. There we go. Don't ever be during roll call. Don't be shy with those drops. Stetson, cool name, Hi again, Buck. You made me think of

something last night. Even if Congress succeeded somehow and impeaching and removing Trump from office, that wouldn't bar him from running in twenty twenty. The twenty second Amendment doesn't prevent it. In orders anything an article too apparently interesting. Huh well, Stetson, I I suppose that's true, but I think he would be very hard for a president who had his own party go along with removing him from office to run and win. But I think that that is I guess

you're correct. You could be removed from office and then technically run again. Lowell. All right, Buck, I listen into your podcast every day. You are, in my opinion, the most honest provider of the news of the day. Thank you well, Lowell. In my opinion, you have by far the most wise and excellent taste in podcasts. I drive a one hundred fifty two hundred miles a day and live deep in the country of northeastern Michigan. I'm out of the range of conservative radio here. But I also

quit listening to broadcast news ten years ago. Got tired of being told what to think. I just want the news one time and not all day long. I'm so much less stressed than happier in life in general. Tell everyone to turn off the broadcast news, just listen to your podcast. The hardest part of my day is when I'm in a customer's home and they have CNN or MSNBC on. Oh the horror. I get caught laughing at the stupidity that comes out of their mouths, or grumbling

under my breath a bit shields hie ps. I love the new web page layout and the Beard kudos. Thank you so much, Lowell. Appreciate it, my friend, and I agree with you that folks should just stop watching broadcast news and they should listen to the Bucks. Next in show that is That is the answer to the question that we are posing to ourselves here, Jeff writes, awesome radio book. Really like hearing your background experience applied to

current topics. Shields High, Thank you, Jeff. Yeah, I didn't go to like journalism school, and just I just want to be a journalist and I just want to report and be like a reporter. No. I I was going to be a government guy, and then I was going to be a private sector making money guy, and then all of a sudden became a media guy. So kind of just go where the wind takes me. Christopher. Right, So, I'm not sure if this is how you do roll call. Well, Christopher,

you're fighting out now. If you're listening that it is. I'm on the left coast, I know, but I'm a podcast listener. I'm upset about those god awful commercials that came out of nowhere. I know you need advertising, but can you do something about this? I would even pay to avoid them, Shields High. Well, Christopher, you know, maybe at some point we'll go to a paid subscription podcast model. If enough folks were interested in that, I'd be happy

to do that. I think that would be that would be great in a lot of ways, and do some extras. But we're We're working on all kinds of plans. I will it is duly noted and everyone listening to the show has certainly heard that. It has noted that the commercials are not what you are liking to hear on

the podcast, And maybe we'll do a subscription. I was thinking, and if I got enough people interested in this, I would just do a subscription that was specifically for a Shields High and that was like history and those kind of deep dives. It wouldn't need that many people that would want to subscribe to make it make it worthwhile from a production standpoint. You know, we got to I don't know, a couple of thousand folks. I think even

that would probably be worthwhile. Which is a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of how many people are listening to this. You know, it is less than less than a one That is less than one percent of who was listening to this show every day. So I got to figure that out. I gotta take a look and to see if that's a possibility. I like the digital world endless possibilities, although people have to get used to if you want certain content in the digital realm, you've got support either.

It's like artists, my friend. You know, someone had to pay Michelangelo's bills. You know Michelangelo needed pasta to eat too. Did I just compare myself doing history podcast to Michelangelo? I don't know. I leave that to you, David riots Buck. I'm Oss, been a fan since the beginning. I used to listen to you when I was serving as a US naval attache in Tunisia, and still do now that I'm retired and live in Jerusalem. Can you please do a deep dive on the Wigers and PRC re education

camps People's Republic of China. That is Thanks David, Well, David, thank you for being Oss. It's an honor. You know. I'm approaching now. We're not quite at a decade of the Bucks Exton Show, but we're getting into the in the realm of we'll have to have some real thought about where we'll do a live event for ten years of the Bucks Exton Show. I think we're at year eight now, so it's coming up on us pretty quickly.

And as for the Wigers and re education camps to the People's Republic of China, I like that idea as a topic. I just think that I probably should wait to do a deep dive on weager oppression until I come back from China. If that's okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna not poke that bear or the dragon if you will before I head over there. I'm just going as a tourists, just going to hang out, do some things, see some sights, you know, come out to the coast that a few lefts. That is the plan. But thank

you so much, David. Eric has written me this. This military officer was one of the best Air Force officers ever. He was instrumental in planning Operation Bolow in Vietnam, that Delta decisive air to air combat blow against the Miggs in Vietnam fighter pilot the Memoirs of legendary Ace Robin Olds. I will also write this one down. Eric. I've never heard of it, but it sounds cool and if you recommend it, I will check it out. In Rights WHOA Kevin? This is? This is long, so I'm not gonna get

to this right now, but I will read it. I promise. Here we go. Michael writes Buck, I'm sorry, my friend. I no longer believe that all these left wing politicians and bureaucrats will face justice unless something big changes and I don't think that anything is really going to change

shields High Michael, I agree with you. I don't think that there's going to be a reckoning in terms of consequences for the various Deep State actors and people that were working so hard to destroy, undermine Trump's campaign and then destroy Trump's campaign or his presidency. Rather, I don't think that those people are going to be held to account in any serious way. And I do not mislead you, and I do not need to leave this audience by saying things that I know who get people riled up

and get attention, but I think aren't true. Though. Who are OSS know that I was saying right away after Romney lost the twenty twelve election that you can forget about any real justice for what happened in Benghazi because the people that are responsible for it in charge, and that's just the way it went. I said this, people got mad, and he said no, buck the hearings and Trey Gaudy and it nope, nope. Hillary got away with it.

No real consequences for her didn't even factor into her twenty sixteen campaign all that much, which was pretty but that's because the emails. I think were Benghazi Hillary became lock her Up Hillary because of the emails. But I don't think that you'll see justice meeted out against the individuals responsible. But that doesn't mean that there won't be

some measure of justice achieved. If we find out the truth, then at least the American people know, or those in America who have an open mind to the truth will know what really happened and can maybe bring some electoral consequences to the party that was responsible for it, which as we know is the left and the Democrat Party. But no, I don't think I think they're all gonna skate. I even think somehow Andy McCabe lying under oath doesn't matter. They're gonna find a way to just stretch that out.

And you know, he's he's a martyr to the anti Trump left, so they'll let him. They'll let him skate, and they really will. We have Dave Writes got a question if a professional baseball player says he did not want to go to the White House because of what the President did not do to help Puerto Rico. FEMA can do so much. They're only allowed to bring it

back to the original state before the emergency. So my question is if a person has on a one time with the president chooses to boycott the sports dinner with the president, that does not make sense. He has the opportunity to talk to Trump and confront him about the situation. Why not take the opportunity, Oh, Dave, because people like to do a lot of virtue signaling, and you know, oh, they won't talk to they won't talk to this president. Oh no, not this president. Of this president so bad

and scary. Ah. Yeah, that's that's the basics of it. That's the more or less. Let's see we have here. Michelle writes, horse Racing Nation has a film of the Kentucky Derby. An angle work clearly shows war a Will's foot got in between Maximum Security's back feet and caused him to veer to the side. The stewards might not have had access to this angle. This proved it is war of Will that should have been disqualified. This is why the jockey of War of Will did not lodge

a complaint. I personally will never watch another horse race again. We need to all protest this until Maximum Securities win is restored. According to Bob Baffair for Baffort, I don't know he's the best bafforld in the Baffort. Thank you. Producer. Mike's actually an American, he knows these things. He's the best three year old in the country. And the disqualification was completely wrong. Mike. What do you make of Michelle's missive here she spot on and exactly what I said yesterday.

When mainstream media says that the day all got it right, that means that they got it wrong. And she's right, they got it wrong. He should have won. There we go. Now it's between Michelle and producer Mike. Now it's gospel. Now we know they got it wrong. Exactly. That's gonna be it for today's edition of The Buck Sexton Show. Please do a spread word about the podcast, and if you don't catch us live sometime on the radio, always know you can listen on iTunes. We will talk to

you tomorrow. She'll high Thank you.