The Lockdown Rebellion Grows

the buck Sexton Show begins. He's a great guy. Now, all right, everybody, welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Thank you so much for joining today. May or may we have much to get to. The big shift that we're seeing right now is away from the data, the day of the data, testing, test and testing. Well, they still talk about that, but they're now increasingly just pushing for what are obviously political goals in this whole process. And you can tell because they're going on offense against people

who want the country to reopen. Doesn't everybody want the country to reopen. The only reason that you'd be rooting against reopen is political. There's no honest person out there who thinks that this is a good situation for the American people, that this is a sustainable situation, and yet they keep wanting to drag it out. They keep wanting to drag it out. Doctor Faucci in the testimony yesterday.

I read through the transcripts of it. I didn't have time to sit there and watch Senator's grandstand, but the transcript of it was worthwhile. Doctor Fauci admits that the second that you start to reopen, there will be more infections that occur, and there will be more depths that happen. This is what we are facing now. It's not going to be overwhelming. I don't think it's going to be this massive second wave that people have been talking about.

But we got to be able to have a conversation as adults in this country about what the future looks like. Instead what you get from places like CNN, which I really have been thinking about this. I believe the country would be better off, happier, and better informed if CNN just became a DIY network that actually requires some skill. I was going to say cooking network that also a

network that also requires skill. You know, if CNN, I don't know, like rand music videos from the nineties or something. You know, There's just there's nothing that you get that's a benefit from this channel even existing, and the DNC has plenty of other propaganda networks. Nobody would miss it except for the people drawing a paycheck from CNN. But they have lots of other options, unlike conservatives. There are plenty of media outlets for them. But here's what you get.

Here's what you get from for example, Bro Cuomo, who is like, Hey, I'm in quarantine for a while, but I was still lifting bro still working up a sweat. Wait, but didn't you break quarantine? Oh that's right, you did, and you got into a fight with a strangers likes to get into fights with strangers. What a buffoon him and his brother, both the buffoon brothers really, or the Bro's Cuomo as we call them. But here's what passes

for discourse. Now you've got a national cable news show, and you can expect people to say really horrible stuff about anybody who wants to reopen. If you are sick of being locked in your home, if you're tired of this of dubious constitutionality, lockdown order of dubious scientific basis as well, Oh it's because you don't care about old people, and you're racist. That's the new that's the new addition to this play clip four. It's an interesting juxtaposition, Sanja,

that the president thing is about being anti elitist. His buddy's over on Fox State TV anti elitist. Ten thousand deaths are the price tag that their model puts on this talk about being elitist. If that's okay, who do you think those ten thousand people are going to be? Who's getting affected the most? The working class, the brown working class who's most afraid of reopening too soon, the brown working class who's getting sick the most, the brown

working class who's dying the most. They are is nothing elitist about that. It's everything that's elitist. Do any of you believe for one second that bro Cuomo, who because of his last name, got into certain academic institutions that he never would have otherwise, and because of his last name, has a job at CNN as a news anchor where he's entirely replaceable and deeply unimpressive. Do any of you think that he really cares about, as he calls it,

the quote brown working class. This is a guy who shuttles between a multimillion dollar apartment in New York City and a house in the Hampton's which, for those who don't know, is the fancy vacation destination within a couple of hours of New York City out on Long Island.

I mean, I really asked this question in earnest. Are we supposed to believe that, all of a sudden that Chris Cuomo cares so much more than everybody else about the minority working class and that's why he doesn't like the administration's plan for reopen, which the Administration's plan for reopen has been approved by and signed off on by the public health experts that are I think, having far too much influence in this whole process. But this is

where it all goes. You're going to see a series of emotional and moral blackmails occur in the weeks ahead, in the days ahead. It's already happening. But this is what the argument's going to turn into. It was you want old people to die, and now it's you want old people and minorities to die. If you believe that a disease that has a ninety nine point nine percent survivability rate for everybody under the age of seventy if you believe that that is the case, that we shouldn't

shut down the whole country. You don't care about old people, And now that they're saying, you don't care about minorities. As we know, the disease does not discriminate between minorities and anybody else. It's a virus. It affects human beings. But because of demographic distribution in play, particularly in New York City, and the density and the public transportation system

and a few other factors add it in here. Yes, it has had a disproportionate impact on people who live in some parts of the city that are largely minority, but it's also infecting people all across the country, and people of all backgrounds that ethnicities are getting this and

dying from it. Interestingly enough, I was surprised to see the numbers because I think that there was an anticipation that we had been thinking that one they were gonna be it was gonna be a lot higher overall, But smokers don't seem to be at as high of a risk for this. In the early day, smokers were, I know some. I talked a few about it, and they were terrified. It turns out that smokers aren't really as

high riskless. But but regardless, the moral, the moral blackmail attempt here should be met with, first of all, the disdain that it deserves. I mean, Chris Cuomo is being and this whole thing is disingenuous. What does he want us to do. We're just gonna stay locked down forever. We're gonna allow the economy. It's the damage that is

happening now economically. You won't really even be able to understand it for months to come, and it might even be years before we're able to see the full and long term impact of it, as well as the immediate damage of thirty million people unemployed of businesses that we keep thinking we're gonna come back, We're gonna we're gonna hit our stride, will be something close to previous capacity.

That's not true. That's not true for the two reasons of the regulations and the restrictions that are being put on these businesses. It's also not true because there will be there'll be much less demand. And then there are whole industries that I think are at risk. There's an expectation right now that the airline industry might might end up having to lay off one hundred thousand people this fall. What do we do, I mean, how do we get

our airline industry back before there's a vaccine? You know, you're going to start to see entire business sectors that are effectively collapsing. This is why we have bailouts of bailouts already, and bailouts of state governments and bailout of local governments, and you're gonna have bailouts of more companies and individuals. Now, the individuals aren't really getting a bailout. It's a rescue, and it's a rescue in response to

a government policy. But that all said, we don't have the money for this, So we can be honest about this and understand that this is not a solution, and no public health expert will go on TV and say it is to just keep our heads down, stay at home home. You know, I think it's so fascinating too. For all of Chris Cuomo's bluster here about the about as he calls it, the brown working class, who does

he think a lot of the frontline workers are. Who does he think a lot of the people who are still delivering food, who are still working for ups and for the postal service and working in grocery stores and working in pharmacies. There's a considerable contingent. I mean, I don't know what the percentages are, but plenty of them are minorities, and they're still risking their lives every day.

If you believe that being outside and conducting any kind of business is risking your life, which is what we're all being told. You know, it's always risking your life. Right you leave your house, and I've said this to you before. I'm always reminded of the line from the movie Heat with Appuccino where he says, you get killed walking your doggie, which is true, you can, and I walk the dogs several times a day, despite the fact that it is possible to get killed walking your doggie.

All right, we didn't know. And for anyone who's wondering, well, back, why are you okay with a two week shutdown? And why were you Because we were being told that this had a three or four percent mortality rate, that it could kill anybody at any age with equal at equal risk effectively or close to it. You know, we thought this was going to be a much more lethal which is I know right now with eighty thousand dead, how could you be talking about it being much more lethal.

But that's where we were led to believe by all the scientists. I mean, I don't. I wasn't conducting field trials and data and looking at what was going on in the hospitals in Lombardi or in Wuhan. We were told that this was going to be orders of magnitude worse than it was in terms of death. So yeah, and that scenario, we're going to have to take a pause here and see what's going on. But now we have the numbers, now we have the data, and we

can live through this. But you're seeing the game the left is going to play now, and this is for political purposes because they're not so stupid, well at least most of them. Some of them are so stupid, but they're not so stupid in general that they really think that you can just stay in lockdown indefinitely. There. I don't think they're they're that dumb. Some of them maybe,

but most of them aren't. What you're seeing is using this as a moment to pretend that they care so much more about life and therefore they're the good people, the better people, when also at the end of this they view an enormous benefit to a continued Now, when I say continued shutdown, maybe it's a series of shutdowns. Maybe it's keeping us all in phase one or phase two of the reopened. They want this to go as slowly as possible before the election because they want Donald

Trump to lose reelection. That is a major motivation for them at this point. The left, the Democrats, that is at the top of the list. Let stop the list. They also never even grapple with what the projections are for global fatalities, because the truly poor around the world are going to be horrifically, horrifically damaged. Many will lose their lives as a result of this decision of the economic shutdown. I'm also going to need people to explain

who do we blame? As I told you yesterday and we were talking to doctor Scott Atlas here about it, who do we blame when we start seeing in three, four or five months, just how many people have terminal cancer that was allowed to grow and continue uncaught for

months because of the shutdown. How many who do we turn to and yell at when we find out that people who stopped chemo for a while now are in a much worse position and may lose their lives to the disease because the chemo was stopped so that we could fight all hands on deck against COVID, including in places that barely had any cases across the country. Who do we blame for that? Do we get to call

up the bros Cuomo? If you listen to the media, you're not allowed to blame Governor Cuomo for decisions that seem horrifically bad now in retrospect across the board and a record that is appalling, appalling us. If he's in charge of the health of New York State and has all these agencies and has all these people that are experts advising him, he did a god awful job, he really did, but you won't hear that from the media.

That's where we're heading, my friends. It's just going to turn into political trench warfare for the next few months. They're going to try to make this as slow as possible, and they will justify all the economic pain and destruction of themselves with two things. Oh, we care so much about them. We care so much more than Republicans about the minority working class. That's what they'll say. And they'll also say anything to defeat Trump is worth this price, right.

I mean, anything to defeat Trump is acceptable over the long run, because he's an existential threat. Who are democracy, as they've been telling us for years. So this is going to be tough. The rebellion is going to have to grow against the lockdown state by state and across the country, and we all have to be a part of rebelling against it in our own ways. You're in the Freedom Heart. This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast. When you wear a mask, you say I respect you.

That's what the mask says to everyone you walk past. I respect you. I respect you, I respect your health, I respect your privacy, I respect your space, I respect you. I can do anything I want with myself. This is America. But I respect you, and out of respect for you, I wear this mask, and I respect the nurses and the doctors. So I'm not going to infect anyone or allow anyone else to be infected unnecessarily, so I don't cause more stress on the nurses and the doctors. This

mask says, I respect the essential workers. Notice how insidious this construction, this construct of the mask wearing becomes. It's no longer about an individual choice. It's not about your risk, it's about all the people around you. This is all. This is really just becoming a stand in for you. No longer have any rights, you no longer have any

say in anything, because it's about saving the people around you. Remember, saving the people around you from a disease that over ninety nine percent of people will be fine from, but because of that less than one percent risk. And there by the way they're treating this now, if you if you have a psurology test where you have antibodies, are you still supposed to wear a mask, that's anti scientific.

If you're still supposed to wear a mask out in the open air where there's effectively zero risk of transmission to somebody, that's anti scientific. We have a data, we have the studies on this. The evidence does not support at least some of what the implications are here of what starts to sound like mask fascism. You know, you better do this or else because everybody else, because the

collective needs it, they demand end it. Oh, don't even get me started on the peer reviewed CDC published study that said that masks in influenza season don't really do all that much. I know, I know people you know, I did a little bit of research this week back into the Spanish flu of nineteen eighteen, and it is kind of wrongly named in a sense, but they don't know where it came from. There are a couple of

different theories. We know that the Spanish press wrote about it during the First World War because Spain was a neutral country, so they didn't have true propaganda restrictions on what their journalists were able to say. There were a lot of infections. In fact, there were battles that were determined in part because there were so many people on the front lines in World War One at different periods who did have influenza, and so we're completely combat ineffective.

And it's not helpful to go back really and read about because that disease. There was a whole lot of stuff that happened with that one that we're not seeing here. One of the more notable ones is that it went after people, particularly twenty to forty so people who were a lot of them who were parents of young children, and you would think at a at a healthier stage to fight off a disease, but no, that didn't end up. That didn't end up being the case at all. But

the government. This is why it's so notable. The government failed at effectively every level in this and you just had a rolling series of collapses of different healthcare initiatives. You had politicians who made the wrong call. You know. Ultimately, what you take from the Spanish flu of nineteen eighteen, the history of it, You look at it and you say, our public health experts and our government were effectively worthless. I mean, the disease just ripped through all over the place.

They weren't able to really there was like one exam There are a couple of islands, you know, the South Pacific where the okay, we don't live on a tiny desert island in the South Pacific, or tropical island in the South Pacific. So the real lesson you take from it is that the government was coming up with all these different things, and you know, they were setting up these they were setting up different medical facilities and putting

out tribunes. First of all, they didn't have a real treatment for it, so I don't even know what you know, they were just giving people stuff to give them stuff. You know, at some level, the government's panic turns into just more and more regulations, the same impulse to always write more laws to deal with every problem. The government has just laws upon laws. We're also being given all of this advice from the government or what to do here, and they've really shown us already a legacy of failure

in preventing and then combating this virus. Thanks for listening to the bus sets and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Is anybody this is administration ever asked you or any member that they take the foot off the gas and try and find or any type of counter measure. No, nothing at all. As a matter of fact, h as you know, have me right from the very beginning, put off foot right on that accelerator in every aspect,

including the development of vaccines and therapeutics. And as I described my opening statement, we actually started that in January, literally days after virus was known and its sequence was published. So no, I have never been followed by anyone to pull back on the development of any countermeasure or any basic and the research project that we've been involved in.

You won't hear much coverage of the more praise of the parts of the testimony yesterday that were praiseworthy for the administration or where they were saying, you know, the Trump administration hasn't stood in the way of anything we've tried to do. We've been hearing this montra of they don't listen to the experts. They listen to the experts all the time. Unfortunately, experts have been wrong on a whole bunch of stuff. And this then makes me think

of where we are in with California. Yesterday, it broke in the afternoon that California, according to its public health director, I'm sorry. Los Angeles, according to its public health director, was saying that they were expecting to probably be on lockdown for three more months in Los Angeles County. They've had fifteen hundred deaths from this. You're gonna lock everybody down, you know, no more, no going out to shop and

live life. He can't go to restaurants, you can't go to bars, you can't buy things in most stores for three more months. I mean, are these people insane? This is what the experts the public health because look, there's no there's no down. First of all, they're getting a paycheck. There's no downside for them to say, Yeah, I mean, let's keep keep locking down. They don't want to deal with the heat of people like Cuomo. Oh you don't care about the working class and minorities. No, it's that's

not it at all. Actually, you know who's going to get hurt the worst by the destruction the US economy, poor people and disproportionately poor minorities. That also will really affect them, the health implications of the long term for preventing people from doing any preventative medicine, from being able to treat chronic conditions, and then also on top of it all, all of the health effects of just being

effectively forced to be largely sedentary. I mean, I know people say, oh, you can get out of it, but yeah, it's different, you know, and you can't see people, you can't meet up, you can't go to classes where you would you know, you work out, you can't go to the gym. You drink more than you've been drinking before. A lot of people are going to develop alcoholism, a lot of people are abusing drugs. Huge consequence is huge cost to all of this. Los Angeles like, yeah, let's

do this for ninety more days. I mean, I hope there is mass non compliance. But the problem is now, the closer we get to November, and now you have to start seeing it this way, the closer they can push it to know, the better off they know Joe Biden's chances will be. And I know we shouldn't be thinking about it or we shouldn't have to think about it in those terms. I think Matthew McConaughey released some let's not make this political ad nice idea of a

little too late, buddy, it's very political. They view this as just how much runway can they take away from the Trump administration to get things back on track and to improve the economy. So the more they extend, See, they are incentivized now to extend the lockdown to get that as close to November as possible. I'm not really all you have to do. I mean, if they can keep us in a state of even semi lockdown until August,

they think they must know that the economy won't. First of all, the damage will be enormous, the damage gets greater in time, but also the pull out of the ditch, so to speak, right, the removing ourselves from these these difficult circumstances that will not be able to occur quickly enough for people to give the administration any credit or any any faith. And that's how you get a Joe

Biden presidency. You know, they're they're just gonna, you know, take the little blankie off his shoulders and take the little thermis of warm milk out of his hands and trot him on up to the victory stage, yelling because I don't know what's going on, and we're all suppois, Yeah, this guy, he's really got it. He's really going to

run the country great. But it's just a figurehead. It just it's it's not about you have to remember this because I know I like to point out what a horrible candidate he is, but it's all about the mythology they've created around him, the continuation of the Obama legacy. And it's not really about Joe Biden. For the left, it's about all the people that then are in positions

of authority. It's about who Joe Biden appoints to be head of HHS, who Joe Biden would put on the Supreme Corps, who Joe Biden has running the White House. Who That's what really matters to them, and we all those people will just be the Democrat, the Democrat power and control echelon. You know, they're all already waiting in the wings. This is also why the Bernie Sanders thing, they're like, ah, the people that really call the shots, they're saying, okay, well, Biden, we know, we'll do what

we want him to do. I mean, he's effectively a puppet of the left wing political apparatus in this country now, you know, of the Democrat establishment, which is the same thing. The left and the Democrats are obviously synonymous. Now, so that's that's something to remember as we go through this.

But also, you know, with California thinking they might extend their lockdown ninety days, I think it is worth noting that we're talking, we're starting to see schools claim already that they're not going to be reopened for the fall. Universities some universities have said they're going to be taking teleclass only, so you know, virtual classes or teleclass or whatever however you call it. People are really going to be paying sixty thousand dollars a year to watch classes

on a computer and sit at home. I don't know how. You know, university's got so fat and happy in the in the last thirty or forty years. It's just been an it should have been outrageous, this arms race of the you know, the fake credentialing system that they all have set up. There are too many schools for it to even really matter anymore. All the schools are great, and the elite schools bring in Bozo's by the truckload too, for all kinds of reasons, whether it's rich mommy and daddy,

or social justice or athletics or whatever. Not. The whole university system as the preparatory ground for the leadership of the future, that's all garbage. Now. If you want to look, I mean, you really need a you need a baseline level of educational tools and skills which you can get and people are finding out you can actually get it

at home. But you can also you get this by the time you're you know, if you're in a pretty rigorous program midway through high school probably and then after that just self directed study, apprenticeship, hands on learning, working at different things and jobs. That's going to become much that's going to become much more important. Sitting in a lecture hall and writing two completely monotonous research papers a semester and doing this over and over again for a

whole bunch of different classes. This is not No one is impressed by, you know, someone's psyche degree from Oberlin, no one. No one cares anymore if they ever did. So that's going to be a change that comes out of all of this, I think. I know, I always pick on Overlin down. There are some schools that get picked out a lot. Oberlin's definitely one of them. Brown University too, you know, yeah, an ivy without grades. That sounds really rigorous, sounds like people are really working hard

there and getting getting a great education. Sure, I digress. So here's the other part of the opening school though. This is where we get into the you know, I'm focused in on this with testing because I can only make so much noise. I can only tell so many people, you know. I mean here, here's a perfect example. I mean, this morning, I woke up and I just thought, okay, just so we're all clear here, we should be out of lockdown. This is nuts. Just a reminder, that's what

I tweeted up. I'm just gonna keep telling everybody this. This is crazy. Now New York should in two days, New York should allow a phase one reopening the metrics were pretty close to it, but they're going to delay another two weeks, and then if we're a little bit behind the metrics they have, they might delay in another

two weeks. Well, we shouldn't burn a month because of arbitrary metrics about leaving thirty percent of hospital beds open for COVID patients when there's no way we're going to have that kind of a surge going to the summer right now. It's not going to happen. You know, we haven't. We learned our lesson from the terrible models that they used and how far off they were. They were so wrong on ventilators, they were so wrong on ICU beds,

wrong at all this stuff. But now we're supposed to you know, they keep getting the numbers wrong, the projections about the numbers are wrong, and we say, well, hold on a second. They say, oh, don't worry about that. That's water under the bridge. We see, yeah, But now today you're saying, based on this new set of projections,

this is what we need to do right now. And we look at this and go, well, hold on, don't don't we get to you know, aren't we in the trust tree and the nest can't we Nope, Nope, not allowed, not allowed. You're supposed to listen or else listen or else they don't want to hear it. So yeah, the CDC director Robert doctor Robert Redfield, who was talking about testing.

As you know, I'm very focused in on this testing part of it because there's it's really easy to say and remember, government never will tell you we don't have we we can't fix this for you. That the government won't really accept that. That's just not in their mindset. They think if they just have more control, they can fix anything. If you give the government more power, it is a belief of government that it will be able to handle whatever the problem is. And this is an

enormous miscalculation of misconception. And really our entire system of government is premised to prevent that creep, right, but we've been losing that battle really for the last hundred years or so now where the federal government's is getting larger and more powerful all the time, but the federal government believes that it can fix the problem. Well, we'll hold on,

let me come back and we'll talk about testing. And yes, there's all these numbers, but there are some things that they're not telling you as they're telling you the numbers. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. All right, So what's the truth of testing? Mid Romney was there during the briefing yesterday to clarify that when they said we've done more per capita testing.

The President said it, and it was also brought up by Admiral Jerwar during his testimony that we're doing more per capita asking that Romney's like, well, we weren't doing more per capita testing at the beginning of this. Okay, that's true, but that's not what they said. Thanks to Mit. Always good to have Mit Romney way and tell us that, you know, he's he's on no one's team. He's on team Mit. And so that's the kind of loyalty you wanted a public servant, a guy who only cares about himself. Oh,

I know there are others. There are lots of others. We could name them, but we don't have time for that right now. So here's here's what they're saying about testing and how essential it is. Play clip six. Rapid, extensive and widely available timely testing is essential for reopening America CDC's role in testing continues to support diagnosis and contact tracing, surveillance, and outbreak. Okay, testing is really important, right,

Here's what they're not telling you. We're already We're already at a point we have excess capacity for the testing that we have in most states, meaning that people aren't getting tested all the time. And for what they're envisioning, they're looking at creating a capacity where you have tests that are so ubiquitous that they're all across the country and people will constantly be getting them. You know, what's

going to have to happen. And they're not talking about this yet, but I'm telling you this is the next phase mandatory tests for all kinds of things. People aren't just going to show up and get tested for coronavirus, and you're gonna have to get tested to really know. And they've the health experts have said this. You're gonna have to get tested every every two weeks. You can get tested and you're negative, and the next day you

get infected. So what is the expectation. They're talking about doing fifty million tests a month by the fall, it's one in six Americans getting tested. You know, over the course of the month, getting tested in the fall. How is this going to happen? Well, you look at the South Korea model, which I've brought up with you in other places, and there's a lot of you will get

you know, you have to get tested, You will be tested. Okay, So we're going to trust the government that didn't see this pandemic coming, that essentially closed the barn door after the horse has left with the spread of the virus. Now we're going to trust them to determine how often we all get tested and what the ramifications of that will be. My friends, this is this is a mess.

This is a mess, and it doesn't even have the intended If you test, you know, fifty percent of the US population, you know, in one month, there's still one hundred and sixty million people out there who could get infected and could spread this disease to other people. So what do we think that. Yeah, I'm not saying it's not help, of course, testing as a role of course, but we have let's just look at something that we can all understand. We have testing right now for the flu.

And I brought this up i think yesterday on the show, and I got the flu a few years ago, and I took the test and they said, oh, yeah, you got full blown influenza. My friend, the whole thing it was very there. Okay, I had been kind of sick for about three or four days by the time I went in, and I had been around I'm sure plenty of people having no idea that I was sick even before I had any symptoms. So what's the huge Okay, so now I know that I've got the flu, which

I pretty much knew anyway. Do you think that all these asymptomatic people are going to be going in to get tested? I mean the trace part of this too, This is where, oh my gosh, there's all this focus on how we're not up to where we need to be on the trace system memory. Yesterday we're talking to doctor Atlas and what he said about how the tracing. Oh here you go. Here's Senator Doug Jones harping on

this one seven play it. Are you saying that you think that the federal government and or state governments are capable of doing the level of contact tracing that we will need. They are capable? Are they capable at this very moment? Absolutely not. We've got to get more money to him, we've got to figure out this plan. Doctor Redfield testified yesterday that he's with the states. I believe that. I think that the state, I know in my state,

they're looking at trying to ramp up all this. We are not capable of doing that at this very moment, but I think we've got the time, We've got the opportunities to do that. We've got to get more money, we've got to get a plan. Those plans are being developed, but they need to put that urgency on those plans. I think by this summer, I think we can do that. You know, look, we've got the opportunities to learn from

these lessons. We've got to seize those opportunities. Or as doctor Fauci said, there's going to be more needless suffering and more needless deaths. There is absolutely no way that this tracing army of one hundred thousand people that the lockdown consensus is pushing for is going to be formed in time. And even if it is, to think that this is going to be effective, I mean, you've got to be kidding me. More than half the people, by

a lot of studies that have this are asymptomatic. So you're going to have some government employee that comes and visits with you and tells you you know, and you to tell them everyone you've been around, everyone you've been near. Then they're going to go talk to all those people.

Think about how I went through a federal background investigation, which was a incredibly slow and grotesquely incompetent process that involved countless useless man hours, and that was in the just the elite echelon of trying to get a t S clearance to go in to the CIA. You really think this army of tracers is going to be efficient? What's their training? What do they know about anything? One hundred thousand people, you're going to have TSA agents, so

to speak, no offense TSA. I know some of you love the show, and I appreciate you keep the plane safe, but you're going to have people who are newly minted federal employees who are going to be showing up and saying, guess what, you have to stay home for two weeks, and so does everyone your family, and so do all your coworkers under pain of fine. Oh yeah, that won't be a problem. Folks. Thanks for listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the

iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. It has become an article of faith that the Russians wanted Donald Trump to win the twenty sixteen election based upon an intelligence community assessment from years ago. What if that wasn't true. What if, in fact, there was contrary intelligence and it was suppressed. That's a bombshell, and it's one that has been raised by a man who knows what the heck he's talking about. What it comes to all this, Fred Flights.

He is the president for the Center for Security Policy. He's a former National Security Council Chief of Staff and CIA analyst. Fred. Great to have you back, Hey, Bud,

good to be here. All right, start with this. You wrote an article on I think it was Fox news dot com where you raise the possibility or you raise that your belief that John Brennan, when he was CI director may have done what when it comes to the Russian narrative, But it was a very strange intelligence community assessment that came out in early twenty seventeen that said the Russians meddled in the twenty seventeen election and did so to help Trump win. This is a very strange assessment.

It didn't follow the rules. Only three agencies were involved, Only half a dozen analysts of those agencies were involved. And you and I know that when you do these assessments, you're bringing all the experts and you extensively vetted. But this one was rushed through. They didn't follow the rules. There were no dissents. It was just strange. And I've

been talking about that for a long time. Well, I learned in the summer of twenty eighteen that there was a House Intelligence Community report that found that this assessment was rigged in that there was intelligence that the Russians wanted Hillary Clinton to win that John Brennan suppressed over the objections to CI analysts, and instead very weak intelligence that didn't meet CIA standards was included that the Russians wanted Trump to win. Brennan had that included, also over

the objections of CI analysts. I think this goes to the larger narrative that there was really an all government effort by the Obama administration to destroy Donald Trump during the campaign, during the transition, and to destroy his presidency by weaponizing intelligence. This was just a piece of that. I mean, let's just put on our CIA hats for a second here, Fred, and think about if you're Vladimir Putin Hillary Clinton. The Democrats traditionally have been very malleable,

very willing to play ball, did not view. I mean, you look at what Obama said tomit Romney about how nineteen eighty call they want their foreign policy back, did not view. Russia only became a problem two Democrats after Hillary lost the election. So if we just were to work backwards here, we'd say, hold on, why would it be so clear that Putin would want Trump to win?

You would only believe that if you also believed all of the now entirely discredited nonsense, including you know, the Pea tape and the dossier and all this craziness which we now know was totally fabricated. If you were working backwards and you look at this from a more reasonable perspective on foreign policy, there's at least an argument that you would think that Vladimir Putin would have wanted Hillary to win. So why wouldn't anyone come to that conclusion?

I think in the intelligence communities is an interesting question in and of itself. Well, the president's critics have tried

to said, well, the Russians didn't like Hillary Clinton. I think that's true, but they walked all over her, and they walked all over Barack Obama and the House and tells the Comunity staffers said they wanted her to win because she was a known quantity, and they didn't want Donald Trump to win, accorded to the same staffers, because he was an unknown quantity and they were worried he was going to bring anti Russian hawks into his administration.

So it's possible for the Russians not to like Hillary. But still they wanted her to win because they knew they could walk all over just like they did when she was Second of State. Now, Fred, we're speaking of Fred Flights. He's the president for the Center for Security Policy, former NSC, former CIA. Talk to me about the Obama administration.

I'm sorry the Obama himself role in what we've seen here, given given this meeting that happened in January and the request to be kept in the loop about everything going on, and then the Susan Rice memo saying written to herself on her last I think her last hours in her role, send herself an email saying, oh, we want to make sure everything's by the book, why should we believe? Why should we believe that Barack Obama was not personally involved

in the targeting of General Flynn? For example, given what we know well, Susan Rice wrote an email to herself about a January fifth meeting that she had the President Obama and Clapper was in there, and Komey and Sally said. During the meeting, Obama said, do we have to turn over everything to the income Trump administration on Russia? This was really an appalling thing for a president to say, because there's a very important principle of our country called

a peaceful transfer of power. The outgoing administration fully cooperates with the incoming one. They turn over the keys of the officers. They tell them about foreign policy initiations that they're launched in, they tell them about intelligence has been collected. The idea that the outgoing administration wanted to with not just withhold intelligence that they had collected, but to task career officers like Komey and Saliates to continue to investigate

Donald Trump and his staff after the left office. It is such an appalling violation of this important principle of our country. This is what distinguishes us for ten pot dictatorships. When the election is over, the losing party submits to the will of the American people and cooperates and wishes the next administration well Instead. Barack Obama clearly, by that question in that January fifth meeting, directed his staff to withhold information and to continue to undermine Trump even after

inauguration day. Now there's the unmasking controversy that has gotten a little bit more attention, in part because there have been these reports that the Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grinnell, has been saying, Look, I'm going to release a list of the senior administration officials now and just to review for everybody. I think this audience knows as

quite well. But unmasking refers to getting information about what had been covered up US personnel names, essentially in surveillance intercepts. You unmask him, it means, well, instead of US person number one, it's Fred Flights, right, instead of US person number two, it's Buck Sexton, and they can find out who the person is having in the conversation. That's a very sensitive tool to use because you're talking now about

surveillance on American citizens. Fred Oh, Where does this unmasking issue stand what's Grinnell's position and why does it seem like it's been held up. I'm not sure why it's been held up, but it's an important principle that in foreign intelligence reports, the names of Americans are redacted because we're not supposed to collect against them. I've been involved in unmasking. It's very unusual to have to be a very good reason to do it. Now. Democrats run around saying, oh,

it's done all the time. It's not done all the time. I was John Bolten's chief of staff for four years. He made ten such requests. Deputy Secretary of Armatage in four years made four, but Samantha Power, Obama's ambassador to the UN, made two hundred and sixty requests, most of them in late twenty sixteen. Buck, I don't understand why the ambassador to the UN would need so many requests, reportedly of Trump campaign officials. I also don't understand why

the names of these requesters hasn't been made public. It's not sensitive. I want to know specifically who asked reports massed Michael flot to be damasked, and what was the reason that they did it. I think we need to know that it's pretty clear it was an effort to destroy Flynn as part of their effort to destroy Donald Trump. And on this and look at it for me, and we're speaking to Fred Flights, the president for the Center for Security Policy x NSC and CIA Fred on this

issue of basic transparency. Are we going to get this list of the maskers? And are the unmaskers rather? And you know what the number of requests was it It It seems to me like this is executive branch information or how can they stop us from knowing if we go through proper procedures. I mean, D and I Cornell seems to want to get it out there as of at least yesterday I saw there's some kind of a hold up.

Are you confident we're going to find out? Because yeah, what you just said Semantha Power unm maaster, there's basically zero reason for her to be doing this. I mean, you know, you and I have both seen a lot of class wider reports. I remember when we would talk about anything that would touch on us personnel. They're like, if you abuse any of this and we find out you messed around, you're out and you're going to leave

in handcuffs. And that was the attitude. But with these Obama administration officials, let's say, you know whatever, it's our power, it's our prerogative. Are we going to find out? Well? I have not discussed this with mister Grenell. He sent the list of the requesters of the unmasking to the Justice Department. The Justice Department said, it's not an our authority to demask them. Now, my understanding is Burnell has the highest authority to demask or to declass by information

aside from the President, that he can release it. I wonder whether maybe Gurnell sent this to the Justice Department so to make sure that his actual would not interfew with John Dorham's investigation of misconduct around the election. But the president can demask, I mean, can reveal these names immediately, they're not classified. It's under his purview, or he can direct Gronell to do it. There's there's there's no lawsuit, there's no right of these people to withhold this information. Yes,

and they should should be fine with it. I mean, this is you know, the other problem here is there's there's no reason to believe that the people that were requesting these unmaskings, we're not askings, you know, we're asking how many times and who were the officials who asked for the unmasking? That should be information. I mean you just said, you know, Bolton asked for ten times. That

doesn't set up any red flags, right. But if we found out that Bolton, before a Democrat was about to be president, and all of a sudden asked for you know, three or four hundred unmaskings in the last weeks that he was in the job, and there was an effort to destroy a Democrat official who you know, then people would want to know what's going on. So it seems

pretty clear here that they're playing games. Are you just before before we let you go, Fred, are you confident in the look I've been very cynical about On the one hand, I've been I've known how bad a lot of the deep state as you have, too bad a lot of the deep state machinations have been, and the lies about the dossier and all this other stuff, which we've now we've been proven right, So high five you and me and along with any others. But we've been

proven right. Okay. I've also said, don't expect any of these people to go to prison or even face criminal charges. So far, I've been right on that too. I don't feel good saying that, but I've been right. Do you think the Durham probe, if they've got the goods, would actually put the cuffs on somebody like a Clapper, A Brennan, etc. Because I think the answers now. I'm sort of concerned

that will never happen. But I'm holding out hope that Michael Flynn will be able to sue for damages for this prosecution to him, I think was completely groundless, manufactured by multiple Obama officials. That that isn't full justice. But I think we'd all feel pretty good if he got back his legal fees and some fees for the emotional

damage to discress he was put through by this fraudulent investigation. Yeah, he might be able to do a Bivens action, I think is what is called against for civil rights violations from the federal government. Those are very tough to win. So we'll have to see Fred Flights everybody, President of the Center for Security Policy, former NEC and CIA. Fred always appreciate it. Man, come back soon. Thanks, You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast team.

If you recall last week, I said that we had found out finally the truth of the ambush and the effort to destroy General Flynn. Now here we are, and I mentioned to you that we got to see what the judge does because some of my savvier legal eagle friends and minds out there had had brought up to me behind you know, behind closed doors or on various communications that we had. You don't know until this judge

actually says, okay, we're done here. You know, the case is dismissed, and we got a problem because Judge Sullivan, Judge emmetts Van has decided. This happened yesterday, and people are stunned by this. I was not stunned, as you know. I was saying, Okay, we gotta wait to see what the judge does. You go back, you check the transcript last week. I was like, we gotta see what this judge does. It's got can be a little crazy sometimes.

And now he's allowing third parties to submit amicist curier briefs, friend of the court briefs to allow effectively to allow all these left wing interests and these groups that hate Flynn to you know, sound off on how awful he is and how this is the wrong decision. What do third parties have? Who the heck? Who the blank cares what some other person thinks of the Department of Justice dropping the case against General Flynn. Why is that relevant? I mean, now, the judge can do this. Obviously he

is doing it. But what this shows us and know usually this only happens in civil cases, and it's to give buddy the opportunity. It's to give outside interests the opportunity to have their voices heard in a trial that maybe touches on, you know, issues that are sweeping and that a lot of people have a stake in this

is This is not a good indicator, my friends. This is looking like he's giving a voice to left wing anti Flynn activists so that then he'll have backing for when he says, yeah, I don't care that the deal and he can do this. He can do this, Judge Sullivan. He can say I don't care that the Department of Justice has said this case never should have been prosecuted and we do not wish to continue its prosecution. Here's the problem. He already Flynn, as we know, already pleaded

guilty because they stacked the deck. They essentially falsified evidence. Against him. They changed the FBI three zero two, and now the judge could just say, Okay, guess what doj I don't need you to prosecute this case anymore. I already have a guilty defend didn't who has pleaded guilty, and I'm going to sentence him. And that means he's the felony stays on his record, and you know, maybe

he sends him to prison for a few weeks. I mean, the judge could theoretically send m to prison all the way up to the top of the guidelines, which I think would be a couple of years. But if he did that, and maybe you will if you did that, and then we I mean, we know this guy's completely out of his mind. There was cooperation with between Flynn and the Muller probe, so you would think that he

was facing zero jail time. This was an issue of the man's honor, his integrity, getting back his reputation, the financial and psychological damage done to him. These deep state judges. I mean, you go into Washington, DC, you know the DC circuit. You got a bunch of Obama appointees. This guy's domn Obama pointee, but you got on a bunch of Obama appointees. You have a far left jury pool. They've all been watching too much of the you know, the idiot show on MSNBC and CNN, especially on Russia

collusion stuff, and there's no accountability. Really, so a judge, I mean, this judge, If this judge does do what I think he may. In fact, do my friends think about this, that we would have gotten to the point where the evidence was so overwhelming of the entrapment and the setup of the Trump National Security advisor General Flynn that the Department of Justice had a career officials say even after a guilty plea, we're sorry, we messed up. We withdraw our case, and a deep state judge, activist

judge decides that doesn't matter. He still he still thinks that the person should go to prison or should be ruined. Come on, this is this is absurd, But this is what we are up against. Now you're seeing it. He may force the president to pardon a in this It would be a convicted you know, a convicted felon. That's what he will be if the judge allows it to be. So that the judge's pronouncement is, you know, this is what happened, and he will. He will force the President

United States to pardon Flynn. You know what that does. Then the left turns around and says, ce justice was served. It's only the president who had to bail him out, one of his political cronies. They'll forget all about the new information. They'll forget all about the do we get Flynn a lie or do we just get him fired? That's all you have to know here. The FBI never has a motivation to set up a meeting with you so they can get you fired from your job. That's

not a criminal matter, that's not a criminal sanction. We don't want you to be in this position of authority anymore, so we're gonna try to mess you up. That's like a high school prank, but conducted by the most powerful law enforcement agency in the country, dudes with guns who can lock you up in prison and ruin your life. This judge is going to allow that to happen, hasn't we We don't know yet, but it's looking more and more like, yeah, yeah, he thinks that's justice. Disgusting. Thanks

for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast. The iHeart radio app or wherever you get your podcasts. I wanted to talk for a moment about something that occurred on Sunday's edition of Meet the Press. During the program, we enter sound bite from a CBS News interview with the Attorney General Bill Barr.

In the bite that we aired and commented on, mister Barr was asked how he thinks the history of his decision to end the prosecution of the former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn will be ready. Mister Barr answered, quote, history is written by the winner, so it largely depends on who's writing the history and the full version of the interview and transcript. He went on to say, but I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law. Now,

we did not edit that out. That was not our edit. We didn't include it because we only saw the shorter of two clips at CBS did air. We should have looked at both and checked for a full transcript, a mistake that I wish we hadn't made, and one that I wish I hadn't made. The second part of the Attorney General's answer would have put it in the proper context and had I seen that part of the interview, I would not have framed the conversation the way I did,

and I obviously am very sorry for that mistake. We strive to do better going forward. Chuck Todd with a full on I was wrong, but like kind of it was CBS's fault for putting out the shortened clip. But do we buy that one? And we have so many other things to talk about. With our buddy David Harsani, who joined us now from National Review, we'll also talk about his latest excellent piece there David Chuck Todd saying, yeah, okay, we got this wrong, but you know, CBS put out

a short clip and we just went on that. I know, I actually, I actually don't think this was an error. I think they just thought they'd get away with this because it's so egregious and so clear that there's just I don't know, what do you think? Yeah, I tend to think that he did that on purpose to make a point that was something that a lot of the media was talking about at the time. But you know, the problem here, I think is that there's never any

consequence for this sort of thing. I'm saying, Chuck Todd should be fired. But I mean, you know, in the old days, you are a newspaper and you cut a quote in a way to make someone seem like they're saying something they're not, there would be some kind of consequence I think for it. Even today, I saw the New York Times had a quote from Jared Kushner where he says, you know, I'm you know that the elections

will be delayed. But when you look at the whole quote later on, it actually says he says I am not in charge of that, you know, which is an important part of the statement which was cut out. So then you know Hillary's repeating it. It It becomes like embedded in the conversation that we're having. Tons of people believe it and we just move on. Every time it happens every week, at least once a week, where you have someone mangling a quote, it's got to be on purpose

because it always views in the same exact direction. It's just as it's impossible that they're always getting things wrong in the same direction all the time for a year after year. It's it's not plausible. Now, we were just talking before you came out about the judge Sullivan who looks like he's going to give the opportunity for amicus briefs to be filed out. What's gone on here with the DOJ dropping charges against General Flynn. I was worried

about this last week. I brought it up on the show so the audience would be prepared for the possibility of something weird happening here. I didn't know how bad it would get. There is the possibility that he still sentences Flynn as if the DOJ it doesn't matter. I mean, he could. I've discussed this with a former DJ friend

of mine. That is absolutely something that could go on here. Somehow, it looks like people are just planning to move past the targeting I mean on the left and the meeting in particular, to move past the targeting of Flynn and the trove of new information that I think everyone would have to agree is really relevant about what happened here. I mean, you wrote a piece Obama Gate is not a conspiracy theory there, and you say that there's more.

This is up on National Review right now. There's more evidence for the targeting of Flynn and for Obama Gate, meaning Obama being directly involved in this in some capacity, than there ever was for Russia collusion. But we're just the media just wants to move passes. I mean, Brian Stelter, who's a joke in a clown, was saying that the right is obsessed with this story. Now it's so hard to even push back against what they're doing because it's gaslighting.

You know, they pretend that it's a conspiracy theory, even though you ask them a slew of questions. There's a ton of evidence, a ton fies of a warrant applications over ninety percent of them in this case had fraudulent evidence and were riddled with errors errors, and you have, you know, tons of stuff that we're learning about Adam Schiff and how he lied about having evidence of collusion and so on. I mean, there's so much, and they

never answer any of those specific questions. They just quickly jumped to some you know, over the top comment the Trump made, or you know, some exaggeration he made, and then sort of revolve their argument around that and ignore the massive evidence we have that something wrong had happened here. So it's difficult to push back against it. But it is not a conspiracy theory. Perhaps it's you know, perhaps Obama and I mentioned this in my peace. You know,

people jumped all over. Perhaps there's no specific crime that Obama you know, engaged in that we're going to prosecute him for. I think you shouldn't think that. People shouldn't think that's going to happen. Clearly he knew what was going on, and clearly there are abuses of power here. And it matters because Joe Biden and a ton of the people involved in that are trying to take power back, right, and they used that investigation to undermine the administration here.

It's an abuse of power. Yeah. And if you had heard about a European country, for example, where during the what's supposed to be the peaceful transition of power, you know, if in the UK, one outgoing prime minister had had you know, the head of m I six and m I five in a room and said, hey, let's let's pull all the phone calls and emails of the top natural security advisor to the incoming prime minister and the incoming government. Now they have a different system out of

the transition doesn't work. But you know, you know what I'm saying, we would all look on this with horror. We would say, oh my gosh, what's going on in that country. I mean, that's really scary stuff here we're supposed to move past. You know, when you put it in very basic terms, I think it's it's helpful. The Obama administration elicitly spied on the Trump campaign, senior Trump officials. They lied, they covered it up, and then they actually

used the lies to target people. That that is a fact. Now that did happen. No one seems to care, though on the left, its worst than that. They used concocted evidence, paid for by the Democratic Party to launch this investigation. They withheld contrary evidence in their warrants when their initial warrants on people within the Trump War of it. They then some of the agents said explicitly said that it was an insurance policy in case he was elected. I mean,

there's tons of evidence. And let me just quickly say this too. Everyone's always like, you know, they'll call something a conspiracy theory because it's not plausible within their worldview, Like Obama worked tan suit. That's the worst thing you could possibly have done. Obama spied on the American people and his his you know, Clapper light about it in Congress. Brennan spied the Congress they spied on Iran deal, you know opponents, They spied on AP journalists, they spied on

a Fox News journalists. They were they normalized and weaponized spying for political reasons long before they did this. Why does anyone believe that they wouldn't do this when they were doing this kind of thing for years. Well, and I look, I think a big part of it is

that they also knew that. And I mean one of the biggest jokes of the mainstream media is that they you know, they would on some of these issues, they would hold Obama accountable writing one kind of milk toast editorial or having like fake Tapper over at t and be like this raises troubling questions. That's what they do. What a democrat essentially shreds the constitution. When Trump theoretically could do something, they're calling it fascism and saying that

he should be kicked out of office through impeachment. I mean, that's the I mean, journalists are saying this. That's the difference. So there's no accountability Trump had done or the Trump at administration had done any of the things I just mentioned in relation to spying, especially on journalists. You know, they would have melted down. It would it would be never ending and rightfully, so you know that's the thing. It's the same thing with the Biden sexual assault allegations.

It's not that you're acting wrong, now you know how you're covering these things. Maybe it's that you don't do you don't cover the other people with the same tenacity, and you don't care. And that's the problem. And I'll give you a good example of why it's a problem. David fromm who's you know, everyone knows David from is He He says, this whole conspiracy theory about Obama Gaate doesn't matter because no one is covering it and no one cares. So you see, they can cover the Russia

collusion thing that turned out to be. And I think hoax is too light a word for what it is. It's a dangerous conspiracy to tried to undermine the transition and the legitimacy of a presidency. But then when we prove that it's it's, you know, this corrupt enterprise, we don't care because no one pays attention. Well, no one pays attention because you're not covering it. That's why no one's paying attention. So the media matters and how they

cover things I think really matter. And this is a good example of why we're speaking to David Harsani, Senior International Review. He's got a great piece Obama Gate is not a conspiracy theory up on National Review dot com. Now, David, I want to I want to transition to something that i've I've sort of talked you about offline. I have tried to be slow because I do think and I was especially somebody here in New York and you know, I've got you know, relatives, they're in the high risk

age group. And you know, in the early weeks of this, well, from the information we had, it looked like this was going to be It looked like it was going to be nineteen eighteen in a sense with the with the Spanish influenza, We're going to have a three to four percent fatality rate, which people thought talk about fifty million dead from the Spanish flu It was a five percent

fatality rate. Actually mean, that's what it was, and that gets you to fifty million dead around the world at that time when they had a much smaller population to be much higher. Now it turns out it's much much less than that, and so you would think that there'd be a ratcheting down of concern and also an elevation of the economic concerns. This is just a way of saying, I'm now at the point where I think that most of the opposition to reopen and to individual and economic

freedoms has become political. It's actually not fear based. Where are you on the spectrum and what's changing your mind one way or the other about this? Well, look when you see folks writing pieces about how, you know, Republican governors want to kill their population, but then they conveniently leave out Colorado or places in California, you know, mayors, things like that, and just focus on Georgia or someplace, you know, some red place, And obviously they're just using this,

you know, for politics. And I think that I don't think it was a hoax that this was coming and people were legitimately scared, and they legitimately tried to close down and flatten the curve and all that stuff. I think it was legitimate. But I think since then a lot of partisans believe that they need to keep the economy closed until November to win the election. And that's you know, I mean, I think there are a bunch

of people like that. And because of how partisan everything is, you know, you can't really have a debate about economic trade offs and the trade offs and lives and all of a sudden if you you know, if one person is dying, we can't open it up. It's such an inane position to take that we don't take for any other thing we do in life. It's like, I wonder, though, like as you mentioned, individual freedom, like what number of deaths allows and powers of governor to just buy fiat

make make decrees without government proper government channels. Because sixty thousand people dive the flu, I'm not saying this is like the flu, but why wouldn't they be able to save those lives as well in the same exact way. In fact, if there's twenty thousand dead, why why do you want them to die? It's the argument doesn't make sense. It's too wide open. So um, here's my position is that, Yeah, I mean, I'm against any kind of course of effort by government to tell people how to act and to

limit their movement. I personally pretty much follow all the roles because I'm kind of a coward. But um, for other reasons as well. But I just don't see why the Maryland governor where I live can tell me that I can't go shopping. So but see, here's here's here's the point. And I appreciate that you admit that you're taking you know, you're taking those personal precautions and so you're not telling But you know, I think people that are advocating and I would assume you're finding yourself in

this group too. It's that if you want to continue to take individual precautions for yourself, No one's saying don't do that. What people like me are opposed to is you know someone recently, I just saw this today on social media. A couple of guys like got together, some bikers got together to have some drinks somewhere or something, and twenty police cars show up and are like, you better break or we're going to rescue because you're breaking

our COVID ordinance. That's a problem. I I mean not to get too into it, but you know, I have someone in my family as them, you know, compromise or I want to keep them away from this or even the flu or anything like that, you know, so I do my best to do that. That's a personal decision. There's a zero reason why the parks here are closed. Right,

There's zero reason why a beach should be closed. There's zero reason why the government should be able to tell a bunch of bikers not to get together and have a Beer's just know what constitution doesn't say except if things are you know, some people are dying from a virus. Well, I think I take it serious. Yeah, well, ultimately, ultimately I also view this as if the government can say

your actions could theoretically have a negative health consequence. Er I mean when I mean your actions, you are normal day to day actions, just you being a human being who's going about your life, can have negative consequences for somebody else. And they can tell you that, you know, you can't open your business. How far are we from China where they say no, you cannot leave your home, you cannot leave, you cannot go outside, and if you do,

we will either find you or imprison you. Don't. I don't see how there's a where's the where's the check on that authority? I don't see where it is. I think they could declare that and some people say okay. Yeah. I think some people would say okay, But I think it's also important to remember that in general, I stay home despite the rules. You know that the governor telling me I have to, I don't do it because of that.

I think most Americans would act in ways that are responsible, you know, considering the information they have, without government telling them to do it. And I think that's what happened initially in Florida and other places. People locked down because

you know, they took it seriously. But as I'm sure you've mentioned many times, you know, this was about flattening the curve, and we've done that clearly, so I don't understand, you know, the argument changed while we've been locked down, and we should be allowed to be upset by that by them. We should be allowed to note that and say, hold on a second. Yeah, the point was we didn't want to overwhelm hospitals is a very decent point to make, and New York really suffered and there was a potential

of that happening. But you have other places, your hospitals going out of business, en firing people because no one's showing up for the other ailments that they have. Obviously, there's been a spike in in people calling suicide lines things like that. There are other costs, but we're not allowed to talk about those things, and that makes me suspect that it's because there are underlying partisan reasons they don't want us to talk about it. David Arsani, everybody

check them out at Nashville. I'm sorry, go ahead, David. I don't know if we're done. I don't want to team. No, no, you got we got another minute. Go ahead. I was just gonna say, I mean, I think that people protesting and stuff like that reflects well on American life and Americans in general that they don't just meekly listen to the state and you know, follow all those orders that are you know, to me, seem unconstitutional in some sense.

But yeah, all right. David Arsani of Natural Review. David, always great to see you man. Thanks for your time any time. Thanks for having me. You're in the Freedom High This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Just when you thought CNN couldn't get any more ridiculous, they up their game and get more horrible. It's amazing what they're able to do. Really, It's like they sit around in a room thinking, how can we be a bigger fake news network and more awful in what we do? The

decisions we make the coverage we have. CNN has decided that they are having an expert panel come together on coronavirus. And guess who they're including in their expert panel. Seventeen year old Greta Thunberg. That's right. Remember, how dare you remember Greta Thunberg. She is an expert in nothing, she is seventeen years old. But CNN, while they're lecturing everybody about science and expertise all the time, CNN is putting her on a televised panel of corona virus experts. These

CNN morons are beyond parody. They really are. I can't even think of a effective ways to mock them anymore. They debase themselves so much more than I ever could. Thanks for listening to The bus Essence Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Collectively, we already spent about in the process of spending about two point eight trillion dollars, we now have a debt the size of our economy.

So I have said, and the President has said as well, that we need to take a pause here and take a looking what we've done. See what's working, see what isn't, and also begin to encourage the governors around the country who have the decision making ability to begin to open up the economy. Gotta stop spending money. That's a Mitch Mcconnought's a cocaine Mitch way of saying, look, we got

we gotta take a breather here, guys. We can't just be throwing trillions out Even the US federal government can't just be thrown and trillions out the window like they're you know, candy corns or M and M's or something. So, by the way, producer Mark, what are the best of all eminem flavors that are out there? What is number one? Oh? That's tough. Um, definitely, I mean regular is the goat

the greatest of all time. I do like the caramel and I saw some sort of fudge filled one recently I discovered recently for the holidays, I discovered hazelnut Eminem's, and let me tell you, they are fantastic. They weren't as good as I wanted them to me. I still like them. I wanted them to be filled with nutella. Yeah, but they weren't. I find peanut Eminem's very disappointing. Yeah, I'm not a big peanut. Peanut, butter and butter, amazing peanut. It's not worth it. It's not worth it. You know,

I'm not into it, not having it. So Mitch McConnell saying, no more M and m's for you, America, or at least we got to stop throwing M and m's. We gotta stop doing this. We can't keep showering every problem with money when our is working at a fraction of its normal capacity. I mean, this would be bad to be spending at this level even if the economy was really good. But we're going way beyond, way beyond what anybody thought would be possible. And you know, we've now

reached this point where it is deeply political. In this new Pelosi, Pelosi's pushing for a oh well, here she's telling us what she wants to do, which is to transform America. This has going back to the Obama idea and the progressive's idea for the last a hundred years. I'll just keep changing America as radically as you can and do whatever you got to do to get the power necessary for that process. Here's Pelosi is saying that, you know, this COVID nineteen situation, it's an opportunity play

play nine. We must all take an extra moment to understand the numbers who are seeing, which show the most overwhelming in our lifetimes. These numbers require action that we've never had to take before. There are those who said, let's just pause. You have the families who are suffering, though that hunger doesn't take a pause. The rent doesn't take a pause, the bills don't take a pause. The hartship of losing a job or tragically losing a loved

one doesn't take a pause. This is an historic challenge and therefore momentous opportunity for us to meet the needs of the American people to save their lives, their livelihoods

at our democracy. Let's understand this, friends, We are in the early phase right now of what unless we stop, it will be the most massive momentous expansion of government at all levels that we have seen in this country in a hundred years, and it may in fact be the most massive expansion of the government that has ever happened.

It certainly is the biggest expansion of the debt based on numbers, and even if you were to even if you were to look to control it, for you know, the value of the dollar then versus the value of the dollar now still even if you were to adjust it would be We've never seen anything like this. I mean,

the Democrats. This is the biggest opportunity that they have had in my lifetime to transform the American government into being the mega state that they that they ideologically and really emotionally and at some levels spiritually are attached to. That's what's happening right now, and we have to see it for what it is, because otherwise we're just going to be in a position where we are engaged in what you could call and the financial markets people are

for to repeat surprise. You're just gonna say, oh, wait a second, you mean that one? You here we are we were going forward and they're using this. We knew in the beginning, they said it was a crisis they were going to use as an opportunity. And now they're expanding the government and they're going to keep expanding government, and they're doing all the things that we would have assumed, if we had taken a step back, the left would do in a moment like this. Yes, that is exactly

what is happening right now. But it's hard to see it in the moment because you want to believe that Democrats can put aside their part is in wishless, their part is in fantasy. Just while we're dealing with this problem. You want to believe that that's happening, But it's not.

They are using this now for political purposes and their primary motivation in the policies that they're pushing, because they've bought into this false, this false narrative of if it saves just one life, just like they do with gun control, that is a recipe always for government absolutism. If my policy can save just one life, it morally overrides any objection you might have, any right you may have. There's no outer limit to this, there's no boundary for this,

and they've established this. This is now the position. If more people will die from COVID nineteen, and who knows even over what horizon, I mean, maybe in the aggregate more people we won't die if we were to just open and just go about on normal lives. Because if we're going to her immunity right now, guess what that means. People are getting infected no matter what the government says or does and it just changes the speed, but it

does not change the overall pool of the infected. If in fact that's now I'm not saying that's true, but increasingly it looks like that's He's still a lot of infection. Three hundred thousand infections a day under lockdown. That's the best guests they have right now. So every ten days, another three million people will have been infected in this country with COVID nineteen during lockdown. So what do we think we're really accomplishing here. It's a political motivation, not

a health not an epidemiological motivation at its core. But they use this premise, this false premise of if a government policy can save just one life, you cannot object to it, in order to shut down all opposition. This is also why Pelosi is, she understands this, and that's why it's very hard to get through. It's very hard to push them. You know, if people that are writing into me on social media, oh, you want old people to die, the horrible things, it's a it's a total lie.

These people are morons, but they're leftist, so they already believe an ideology that is godless, hateful and stupid. They've already, and there's no escape from that as long as they believe that ideology. That's what they think and that's who they are. But they use this to shut down any objection that we have to what they're trying to do. And you can already see it. I mean, Pelosi's pushing this three another three trillion dollars in spending. You know

what they want to do. They want to extend the federal six hundred unemployment sweetener. Well, if they extend that to twenty twenty one, which is what Pelosi's bill looks to do. Right now that she's already unveiled this bill, you have effectively achieved a stell fifteen dollar plus minimum wage. You know, based on how much money people will be making into twenty twenty one. You're not going to get

these workers back. And then Pelosi would just say, maybe we extend the employment benefits another six months and another six months. And the only way you get people to want to go off unemployment at that rate, given what the state benefits will be, and the government keeps, you know, refilling the coffer. Refilling the coffer is if you're going to offer somebody considerably more money. So now you're looking

at it again. Fifteen dollars plus you might have small business owners will be faced with you either pay a twenty dollars minimum wage or people would rather be unemployment into twenty twenty one. This is real, folks, This is happening right now. This is what your government is doing in your name. It's a disaster. We have to rest control back. We knew. I knew, I said it to you, you said it to me. We knew that they would seize too much power and they would not relinquish it.

They would use the emergency to take the power into their hands and then their greedy little fingers. The government would not release the authority that they have just taken it upon themselves to have in this crisis. We saw it coming and we didn't stop it. Now we have to push back, and it's going to be a fight. Government likes power, doesn't like to give it up at any level at any time. You're in the freedom hud.

This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Look, before the Me Too movement, women were not listened to whom we're telling what had happened to them. Since Me Too, women are listened to. Now. I've heard Joe Biden's explanation. I think it's sufficient. I think he will be a great candidate. I think he will be a great president, and I think he'll take us to help us take back the Senate. Ah, Chuck schumerway's in here with Before the Me too movement, women were not listened to. Now they are listened to.

But I mean, we've heard enough about this terror read person. Let's move on. Oh man, he is he is always so predictable, consistent, at least in his sliminess. But let's talk about where the terror read allegations currently stand, and also the Biden candidacy overall and the politics of the moment. For that, we are joined by our friend Tiana Lowe. She is a commentary writer at The Washington Examiner and

also a contributor to The First on Pluto TV. Tina, thanks so much, Hi back, thanks for having me so. Chuck Schumer says, yeah, no, everyone's listened to now, but tera read's been listened to, and he believes Joe Biden. Well, so, how do we describe the standard now that Democrats are using? Is there a standard? They can they define what the standard is? I mean, the only discernible standard, right, now is whether or not you been d next to your name.

Quite frankly, let's just let's just add short summarize the evidence differentiating Christine Bausi Ford and Tera Read. With Christine Bazzi Ford, you had every single person who she named it being at the party for this assault allegedly happened. They denied is such a party of her existed. The earliest corroboration we have of her telling anyone about this alleged assault is in twenty twelve when Capitall was back the news because he was on wrong these shortlist before

the Supreme Court. If you look at terror Read allegation, you have multiple people with a few cooperative problems, who say that she alleged that Biden had assaulted her at

the time. But you have at least one person on the record, her name or Linda Lcast, who's willing to say that she said so two or three years after the fact, as well as an official document submitted by her husband in response to overstraining order in nineteen ninety six, So it's three years after the illegitisal claiming that Reed had undergone some traumatic harassment. At the very least, it's

clear cut that red faced harassment from biting. The assault Thoughever has so much more corroboration than the Ford allegation ever did. And the fact that Democrats are simply they're even saying that they think that the evidence is insufficient, they're outrighteous saying that they just don't believe her. It's truly gross and it just goes to show how manipulative and nasty this specific strain of so called feminism is, and just more general point of who the Democrats put

forward to lead the country. You know, they wanted to make the case that Donald Trump was super and put it put aside. We've all heard all the criticisms of Trump plenty in this regard and many others. But they wanted to make the case to us that Trump was deeply unethical, and they put forward Hillary Clinton. And then they made the case that along with also that Donald Trump,

you know, the Billy Bush tapes and everything else. And now here they are they have another chance to put someone forward to a post Donald Trump, and they put up a guy who Joe Biden, who has corruption problems with Barisma and Ukraine and his son. Whether it's illegal or not, it still looks really gross. It's very obvious

what happened. There has a credible allegation of sexual assault against him, and now it seems pretty clear the Democrats plan is to keep Joe Biden hidden away in the basement until election day, Tina, is that is that their best move given the realities of what we're seeing about Joe Biden, who's being tested in ways that he's never been tested before. I mean, the scare thing is that probably is their best move, just keeping him off the

campaign trail. You know, I said at the outset that in the long run he would be best served by radical transparency and addressing the read allegation to start with. Honestly, the Barisma issue, the Hunter Biden stuff. I never thought that was going to stick. No one thinks that Joe Biden lacks any corruption. But he was supposed to be the personal decency candidate, whereas Trump ragged about grabbing women by the you know what, Biden was supposed to be

the family man, the respectable man. That he didn't address this head on for over a month made it look like he has something to hide, and now that he's not opening up his University of Delaware archives, it still looks like he's something to hide. I don't know if he does. I don't know if Para Reid is telling the truth. But right now the evidence is quite disturbing, and he is not acting like someone who wants to be immediately exonerated. So what's his best bet? Right now?

About one third of all voters tend to believe that Tara Reid is telling the truth, and that includes a fifth of old Democrats. But still, you know, a lot of these people are going to vote for Biden anyway, but you know that might not be great for them, but it does mean that Trump in a way is kind of inoculated from one of his biggest deficits, which is the character perception deficit. He no longer really is

to worry about. Oh now he's running against this moral paragon with women, because quite frankly, I think that terror read allegation has tainted Biden's candidacy in a very serious way, especially among the suburban women who were crucial helping Democrats win the House in twenty eighteen. Yeah, and this is also coming amidst a whole lot of other stuff about Biden that is not in question. I mean, the photos

of him sniffing people and kissing women's heads. And I mean, he definitely is a grabby, weird guy with women and has been for a long time. I don't think there's really any dispute about that. I was told by a Secret Service agent who was present about what had been written about Biden. I mean, I can ask you as a as a woman, if you were in the Secret Service and your protectee in this case, Joe Biden found it to be a normal routine to go old man Biden.

By the way, I'm just saying, I mean, you know, I can't prevent people from visualizing because I got to describe a situation. But he would go swimming naked in front of not just the Secret Service details its detailies, but female Secret Service detailies. If that were my wife or my girlfriend, I wouldn't think that's okay, that's just

a matter of record. Now, No, it's absolutely not. And again this is what I said last year when the initial Biden allegations, if we can really call them that, but you know, with the hair sniffing and the touching, we all know that's wrong. If we saw our grandparents to that, we would correct them. We would not let our dads, sneak random women's hair. But no, it is just a classic person in power. We just got away with all of it for so long. Yeah, I mean,

he's the he's the class. It's interesting because the Democrats, the woke leftist put forward the classic you know, the the the sort of stereotype really of the um, you know, power hungry, power mad white male who grabs it people and abuses his position specifically for you know, gratification with with the opposite sex. I mean that that's this guy. Is This guy's like the you know, looking like the Matt Lauer of the political world right now, and you know,

there's really they're just gonna you do. I'm sure you saw the editorial in the New York Times, right I was like maybe a week or two ago where a woman was like, oh, I totally believe her. I'm voting for Biden anyway. Oh so now you're just gonna vote for a guy he's a sexual assault you know, I actually don't believe like the allegation against Trump and Bergdorf Goodman, Like, I just don't think that the evidence was on that woman's side. I forget her name now, the one who

wrote the book and came forward. But to say that you believe it and you don't care, that's a whole other level that Democrats are hitting. Yeah no, I mean I seem to recall a big, huge hashtagging movement that he had to talk about how you know, rape is bad and we shouldn't reward sexual assailants with positions of power.

I mean, it was a whole thing, but apparently that was a very long time ago, and apparently it was just to make sure that we could say Orange Man bad and pretend that we had a reckoning about Bill Clinton. But you know, apparently it's over down, So that's it's quite unfortunate. Why are you gonna have we gotta have you have a zoom throw down with some radical left wing feminists on this issue. That would be some really, that would be a good debate. There's never good debates anymore.

It's everyone's just you know, preaching to the choir. Nobody will leave because this would be really interesting. Yeah no, And I think that someone who's been pretty fair and pretty sympathetic to not only Biden just but but specifically conservatives entertaining Biden's candidacy. But the Tea read thing, I mean,

that's kind of the last strong. If you're going to vote against tax cuts and judges and an agenda that you like because you want to vote any referendum against Trump's character, you don't do it for the guy who's running away from a credible sexual a solilogy. Fair point, Tiana Low. Everybody check out her latest at the Washington Examiner dot com. Also look for her here as a contributor on the First Tianna. Thanks Tina, thanks so much. Thanks thanks for listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast.

Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. The show ain't over yet, folks. Keeping it real, It's time for roll call up, bad at Up. I haven't done that for a while. I thought producer Mark might miss it, so I wanted to bring back when I sing along with the roll call. One thing I will not thanks for the clarifications with no problem um. One thing I will tell you about

having a dog that's your main companion. I do get to see this, no princess sometimes during the week, but not all the time. Those probably go nuts having to deal with me twenty four seven and close quarters like this. Oh, I guess that's called for some people. That's marriage, is it? You live together, that's the whole thing. But yeah, when you have a dog run you all the time. I find that you start you come up with new names for the dog, and then you also start singing stupid

songs to the dog. And I wonder if at some point the dog is like, what what has happened to my human? You know they do have I'm telling you, this dog, this little French bulldog, has got at least the cognitive ability of like a like a two or a three year old human. I mean she she understands words, She knows her name when it said, I mean she can she There's there's thought process that goes into this.

If I ever, you know, tell her no or naughty or something, she punishes me by staring into the corner and not wanting to hang out for a while. So you know, you learn things here, you did say a producer market know there's been a big surge. I just looked this up yesterday again. Um, this the one. You know, we look for those little silver linings as such as they exist in this current debak goal and you know,

catastrophe as it plays out across the country. But a lot of shelters are have seen a huge increase in adoptions of dogs and cats, which makes sense. And a lot of people are fostering animals right now just because they're gonna be home now, but they won't be home in the future. Yeah, yeah, And so instead of animals being in cages, they're home with people and they're getting you know, better, better access to care and cuddles. All right,

Kevin kicking us off in roll Call. Remember if you want to be a part of Roll Call, we always hope you do. We'd love to get some new voices in the mix too. First time, you know, you can put in the subject line instead of I love producer Mark or producer Mark, you're hilarious, which will usually be a good way to get yourself into Roll Call. You can also write in the subject you know, first time,

first time roll Call. And then we'll try to make sure that people that have never gotten a chance to have their voice on the show will be on the show. So Teambucket, iHeartMedia dot com or Facebook dot com, slash Buck Sexton and like I said, some of you have found me on Instagram, which is great. It's just Buck Sexton. Just remember that if you send it a message, you got to say, you know, four roll, you know, roll call, and then your name and then you can write your message.

Otherwise you know, it's it's you know, cat cat lover five two five nine or something sending me a message And I'm like, is this a person or is this some is this some Russian bott The election all right, Kevin Buck, The people elected Donald Trump. The Democrat coup failed. Now the DNC strategy has shifted to making we the people suffer until we throw him out? How far does this go? The left is evil wolves in sheep's clothing. Speaking of clothing, where's the buck sex in apparel line?

I went to BUCKSX and dot com hoping to find a producer mark T shirt, but no joy shields eye. Um. We we're we are hoping to do that. We have a limited bandwidth because of all the content we currently do, and and that's just a big way of saying we need more staff. I mean, right now, it's we're we're already running on a on what you would consider for a nationally syndicated show with as many listeners as we have.

We're at a skeleton crew every day so uh yeah, although I don't feel like a skeleton these days with all the mac and cheese I've been eating, and with the and with the big bowl of carbonara. That's no princess made for me from scratch, gluten free. I've been eating it for breakfast. I gotta tell your producing mark carbonar pasta for breakfast. It's got bacon in it makes perfect sense. Have you finally started heating it up? Yeah? She was like, she looked at me, and she's like,

it's kind of savage. You know, you're eating it out of a giant metal bowl from the fridge. Cold is one word for it. I was gonna go with sad. I mean it was delicious. What do you mean sad? It tastes fantastic. I'm kidding me. Cold pasta is a great Oh, it's amazing. I get into it. But yeah, I did start heating it up. I'm a little more civilized now. But have you I will? What did you tell him? What is the favorite pasta? What's the number?

What does your go to producer? Mark? Pasta? Mac and cheese? Okay, but like you're an Italian restaurant, you can't order mac and cheef. I mean you never know. I mean, I guess if I'm in an Italian place, Penny Allavadca. It's funny, said I was. Actually I watched a video on how to make that reason I want to I want to make it from scratch. Not that hard, not really that hard. So yeah, it's very easy when you go and get a jar of sauce from the grocery store and pour

it over some buzta. Just you know, Producer Mark, we're gonna get you cooking. We're good to get you cooking. And Missus Mark, Missus Mark is gonna come home from from her work in the healthcare industry, and you're gonna have laid out like a beautiful from scratch Penney Alivadka feast, and you'll even have, you know, like a little guy playing the guitar like a lady in the tramp. You know, I don't think any of that's gonna happen. Considering she's

a much better cook and she enjoys it. Well, then you're a lucky man. And there we have it. So I'm saying, if you want a surpriser for the birthday once Producer Mark's birthday, we gotta get this one. It was a month ago. Well, happy birthday from a month ago. You literally did a minute on wishing me a happy birthday. I do a lot of radio. Really have the memory of a fish. Sometimes it's all just just cram. Now

I realized I did. I the whole thing. I can tell you like, oh yeah, my birthday is tomorrow, Buck, and you would have believed, Oh my god, I did. I have the cram so much information, and it's like I'm doing final exams every day and I got nothing. I got nothing left the snow Princess. Sometimes it is like, you know, you told me that story yesterday. I'm like, I don't know what stories I've told. I don't know what I'm saying. I just so much radio, all right,

John Buck. I don't know how involved Obama was in the whole Russia conspiracy. I don't know how involved he was with Flynn, But at this point, no one can convince me he wasn't involved. I believe he was in the background, often possibly even calling some of the shots, but there would be more evidence leading back to the White House if he was hands on. But there is no way, especially with all that we know now, that he wasn't involved to some degree. John, Yeah, that's you

and I. You and I agree on this one. There's no way that Obama wasn't at least aware of this and that this didn't set off enormous alarm bells and all kinds of red flags. You're gonna you're gonna have your people go after the incoming You would operate under a we can't share all the national security information that we have with the new national security apparatus of a duly elected president and his administration. That's that's stunning. That

is coo like stuff. I mean, that's not the coup itself, but that's if you're preparing for a coup later, you would do that, or if you had been preparing for a coup before, you don't want him to find out. Soft coup using the law. But that's you know, using some variant of legal interpretation. Oh, you know, Trump colluded with Russia. He's a trader. He can't be the president.

You know, let's go have the sergeant at Arms of Congress arrest I you know, whatever crazy dream the libs we're thinking they were gonna, or just have the Obama administration say sorry, we have to hold a new election. And who knows what they were really thinking. They sit around talking about Trump's not going to willingly leave office all the time. There's been no reason to believe that. They also said that he was a fascist for the first two years. And now here we are where you

have a situation. You could not dream of a bigger opening for fascism in America than what we are seeing happen right now, where if you disagree with government policy, you're literally killing people. By wanting to go outside and live your life, you are literally killing people. That's what they're telling you. Biggest opening for fascism you could ever see. And Donald Trump is like, okay, let's work together. Let's

give the states autonomy. What are the experts saying, let's inform the public, you know, let's get reopened, let's get people up and running on the economy. The opposite of a fascist approach. But do you think any of them apologize for that or say I was wrong. I shouldn't have said that about the president? Of course not. It's people. It's these lib journals that trash trash, I tell you,

Oh wow, here we go, Scott rites, dear buck. I'm an essential rider in the share ride driver in the Denver metro area, and as happens, we sometimes hear how life is treating our customers well. First off, thanks to ninety three seven Freedom FM in Denver, one of our great stations we do. We are number one on our time slot there. We're doing so well. Thank you to team Buck in the Denver area for listening to the show.

You guys are making Mark and Me look good to our bosses all the time, So thank you for tuning in and making this a such a hit show in that area. I picked a man up and when I asked him how life was for him during the lockdown, he proceeded to recount his recent financial status. He said he got laid off from his restaurant job, but received his tax refund and his stimulus check, so he was

feeling pretty secure. He started receiving unemployment, which was more per week than he was making while working at the restaurant. Just when he thought life was good, it got even better. His old employer called and asked him to come back to work and said that he would receive back pay, but he had to say he had been working all long if anyone asked, oh, and they were going to pay him for forty hours, but he only had to

work twenty At that point. With a nice raise, he was making more than his unemployment compensation, and he was happy to be contributing to society again. He was happier still this week when his boss told him that not enough of his former workmates wanted to come back to work, so they had to give him another big raise. To his credit, the young man said he's making more money than he ever has in his life, but he didn't feel great about it. Shield's high, Scott. This is working

the system. This is what's going to happen. People are going to work the system, big companies, individuals, you know that everyone just feels like the federal governments now that the piggy bank has been broken open, how many coins are you going to get for yourself? That's the attitude. It's a free for all. You're going to see a

lot of this. And as far as the Democrats are concerned, as long as their constituencies are getting paid off, and as long as this is enlarging government, increasing the debt and making they're you know, effectively making the government's authority feel like it's permanent in this regard that they can just create what would be a universal basic income. I mean, if we can do this for six months or a year, giving people money to stay home, why can't we give

people anyone who stays all money. Why not just give everyone direct payments? Fifteen thousand dollars a month, fifteen hundred dollars a month. We're running up so many trillions of dollars in dead and it's all going to the corporations, they say, So, what is the response to this? Yeah, Michael hey Buck, I have two questions related to Governor Cuomo labeling the WU flu as being caused by a

European virus. One, when the President refers to the virus as a Chinese virus he has labeled as racist, So wouldn't be labeling that European also be considered racist? I'll answer that first. No, because it's not possible to be racist against Europeans, the left would say, or at least not possibly racist against white Europeans. There is no such thing as anti white racism, the left says, And there's no such thing as anti white European racism. The left

also holds to that. Yeah, that's what they believe. So what is animus against people for white skin called we don't really have a word for it. They don't believe that it can even even happen, which inherently means they must think that animus against people for being white. The left has to believe if you just logically work this problem through that animus that any person has, including really a sort of self animus, right, the people that have

white killed. But anyone who has a problem with somebody else because of their white skin, or thinks less of them, or thinks that they have benefited from society in ways that they can't. That belief against white people has to be inherently justified by bye history, by current systemic oppression, and raise whatever it is. But they don't believe that it's possible. And I'm serious, this is a belief on the left. They don't think it is possible to have

anti white racism. That's not possible. Now that gets tested sometimes in the courts when you have attacks on individuals who are or white because they're white, and is that a hate crime? Can that be a hate crime? The answer is yes, although authorities are usually very slow to charge that one. All right, Number two, since it is racist to mention the source of the virus or a pandemic.

Can we celebrate Columbus Day this year, especially since the greatest minds of the fifteenth century had no idea how viruses and bacteria were transmitted and how they not bad vapors cause disease. Only hoping we can regain some sanity and our discussions masks high. Um, since it is racist, Oh, because Columbus brought the explores you kind of mark, You're right, this was a little bit of a couple of leaps here, right.

So it's because Columbus and the Europeans brought brought you know, virus and flew and other things into the New World, which decimated the native population here. We're not allowed to talk about that because it's racist kind of for them, right, Yeah. I mean you're the history guy, so I would just say yeah, but that's that's what he's trying to say, I believe. So, yes, yeah, a little bit, Michael, I see what you're saying. Creative, A little bit of a stretch,

A little bit of a stretch. Um. You know, Columbus Day in Italian on behalf of the Spaniards. But you know that's uh, I actually you know I'm not I'm not too far. I can. I can get to Columbus Circle pretty easily. And I think it's gonna tell you one day, they're gonna pull that statue down. They're gonna manage.

I don't mean they're gonna actual just destroy it, although they might do that too, but they're gonna get rid of it, and they're gonna want to rename the circle Columbus is marked for is marked for history book extinction. They're they're going to find a way. You're in the freedom hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. More roll Call rolling through here. Um. TJ writes Buck, there's

no doubt that Flynn should be further vindicated. Do you think Trump may be holding that vindication to campaign on I e. Trump speaking, if re elected, I will appoint wrongly accused and set up by the administration Obama administration General Flynn to such and such a position. Just a thought, Um, I mean, TJ. I can't. I can't tell you that

that won't happen, but I think that's pretty unlikely. I don't think that that's the case, although I will note that it feels like they've been very there's been a real slowness for the release of information that we should we should have here, you know that we should be we should have known. You know, That's what I think. You know, the release of classified stuff that should have been declassified and released the public should have been faster.

Murtrump was going to put out the FISA applications declassify them a lot earlier than he did, and by the time they got out, I don't think they had the same impact they would have if we had known about it sooner, and the Democrats were able to run around and say they're crazy stuff for quite a while. We got another sea another from ninety three seven FM Denver, You know Freedom ninety three seven, Hey Buck, Hello from Denver.

I just wanted to say that I find it funny that the Democrats refused to give any type of temporary tax cut and at the same time they want to give every American two thousand dollars a month through the election. Obviously something stinks here. They want everyone to know that they are giving you back your tax money for November election purposes. Just a thought, thank you for your voice

shields high well, thank you, Greg. And Yeah, Democrats like to hand out goodies that are really just things they've taken from other people, and they pretend like this such they're so great and generous in the process. That's a common theme. Glynnette, Hey, bucking producer, Mark, My name is Glennette's. We've figured that one out. I've just been listening for a few months, but really enjoy the show. Well, thank

you so much, Glennette. We appreciate you listening. It's refreshing to hear a conservative viewpoint, and it's the sea of liberal propaganda. I also laugh out loud every time I hear your Nancy Pelosi imitation. A little while back, Hey, how do you pay up? A C. S. Lewis quote? I have been reading his book Mere Christianity and thought

this quote really describes the liberals at this point. It says, the most dangerous thing you can do is to take any one impulse of your own nature and set it up as a thing you ought to follow at all costs. There is not one of them which will not make us into devils if we set it up as an absolute guide. You might think love of humanity in general was safe, but it is not. If you leave out justice, you will find yourself breaking agreements and faking evidence in trials.

For the sake of humanity and become in the end, a cruel and treacherous man. That's a really interesting quote. That's very good. Thank you so much for sharing that. Keep up the good work. Come to Colorado when you can escape New York. Shields high. Well, Glennette, I might have to move to Colorado then. Verse sounds lovely this time of year. We'll talk more about that another time. Team, it has been real, it has been fantastic. I'll be

back with you tomorrow. As we do every day, keep yourself safe, keep yourself positive, Shields High.