The NYT Bedbug Debacle of 2019

up all the bucks Sexton Show. This is the buck Sexton Show where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American Again The buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst, remember the sex no your Twitter account after a controversy that involved someone calling you a name. Would you like to comment on that? Yeah, I'm going to be careful with my words because I know these are going to

be examined carefully. So I think Twitter brings out the worst in its users. It tends to bring out the worst in its users. And yesterday a professor George Washington University described me as a bedbug or a metaphorical bedbug, just in the context of the New York Times having a bedbug problem in our building, and I think that kind of rhetoric is dehumanizing and totally unacceptable, no matter where it comes from. So I wrote him a personal email.

I didn't go to Twitter. I wrote him a personal email, which I think was very civil, saying that I didn't appreciate it, that I would welcome him to come to my home in New York, meet with my family and see if you would call me a bedbug to my face, because a lot of things people say on social media aren't the things that are really prepared to say in well, welcome everybody to the Buck Sexton Show. It's late in the summer, so we're gonna do whatever we want today

or talk about whatever we feel like talking about. So that is in case you don't know that we're like Buck, why are you leading? Do? We're gonna get to China immigration, very important settlement on the opie what You've got important news stories to get to you, as we always do.

But I just thought today we could have some fun with the fact you have a a New York Times columnist pretty well known at least in New York Times reading circles, formerly of the Wall Street journal, a never Trump stalwart, someone who has said that if you don't think Donald Trump is deplorable, you're deplorable. I mean that, I forget what exactly the exact word to use was. It was something like that. And if you don't think

Trump is awful, you're awful. That was a Columny wrote as a so called conservative, And here he is showing us once again that the leap journals and he's not even a lived journal he's a never Trump rooting for the Democrats now former conservatives, so whatever you call that. But the journals in general, the journalist class really doesn't like when what they do to others is done to them, because they will go after people, they will dive into

their into their public and private records. They'll publish stories that are to say that they're of questionable news importance is an overstatement. But when people call them out, you find out they're actually quite thin skinned. They're quite thin skinned. I mean, you know you know that. I've mentioned it before.

Jake Tapper, for example, is almost like pathologically thin skinned about any criticism on Twitter and public and he'll go after you and he'll call you know, he's crazy, right, He seems like he's put together on TV, but in reality he's very thin skinned. Other journalists same thing. And I mean, if you if you go after you know, Don Lemon, if you go after Fredo Cuomo, we are treated to a perfect example of this, right, you know, saying completely Cuomo, broke Cuomo as we call him, because

we're respectful. We don't call him Fredo, We call him bro Cuomo. Uh. We see that Broke Cuomo was threatening physical harm against someone for calling him Fredo, a reference to The Godfather Part two, which is a quite excellent movie, unlike god Godfather Part three, which I will save you some hours of your life, give it back to you

and you'll be fine. Trump tweeted out no bedbugs at dral The radical left Democrats, upon hearing that perfectly located for the next G seven was under consideration, they spread that rumor. Not nice, that's a Trump tweet, No bedbugs at the deal. I mean, so bedbugs today, I'm just telling you. Bedbug was the top rending and Brett Stevens top trending item on Twitter all day. This is just

a look, it's a late summer story. People are you know, the politicians aren't really in DC and ever a lot of the journals or in the Hampton's or Nantucket or you know wherever they hang up. And so all of a sudden this story has gotten a whole lot of attention. But it is a reminder that journalists do tend to be a very thin skinned bunch. They take themselves quite seriously. And the best part of this was, well, there's a

lot of great parts of it. Is that Stevens instead of just saying so, remember he wrote a letter to a professor, an email to a professor at George Washington University, because the professor this is what he wrote. Someone wrote about the New York that the New York Times has a bedbug infestation, which is gross. By the way, Man, I have a friend who told me, and I hope none of you were eating right now, who told me years ago. When someone will tell you about their bedbug infestation,

that's a that's a level of trust, right. You don't want anyone to know you have ever had bedbugs. This is like it's like given out your personal medical history or something, and people don't want to ever talk about this. Usually I had a friend who had a bedbug. Now it sounds like, I'm like, I've never had bedbugs. I had a friend who had a bedbug infestation years ago, and he told me about what it looked like and what he had to go through. And it is traumatizing

if it happens in your home. This is of course in an office, but it's it's a traumatizing experience. But the story is that the New York Times has a bedbug infestation. And then someone joked on Twitter. And these are not people with big Twitter followings. When you someone joked on Twitter that the bedbugs are a metaphor, the bedbugs are Brett Stevens, that was the That was the line.

Now I can tell you, as somebody who's been on Twitter for a number of years and has been the target of plenty of very nasty left wing attacks, that that line is PG for Twitter. It's it's actually rated G. Do they still have rated make rated G movies? It's like what you could take your five year old to see? The bedbugs are Brett Stevens is about as docile, about as tame as a Twitter insult is going to get

Bret Stevens indicated. Commas been in the game a very long time, hates Trump, of course hates hates hates Trump, very vocal about that, and I I've bumped in him once twice in Greenham. Not a friendly guy, so I don't have particularly much of an issue here by having a little bit of fun with the situation. He wrote a letter, as he stated in his in his little monologue there that we played for you. And see this is the part of it that I got a problem with.

He wrote a letter and he looks like a big baby, obviously because he is a big baby. But he wrote this letter and he cc the provost of the university, which is basically like I'm going to write a letter to you and CC your boss. He went to ccs. And other journalists do this too. I won't name them name, won't name them right now, but they've done to people

that I know in the media field. They'll they'll call out the person and say, oh, you know, I'm also sending an email to your boss, or they'll cec the boss try to get them in trouble. That's just a lame, crappy thing to do. It is, especially for an insult that's barely even an insult. I mean, I've I've been called worst, I've been called worst things my friends of

mine in the last month a bed book. And then he tried to say Stevens tried to say that he didn't actually want there to be any real consequence for him. He just cc the provost of the university that employs that professor because he just wanted him to be aware

of what kind of public discord. I mean, please, if you're a little monk, if you're a snide, thin skinned baby, who's going to try to get someone in trouble with their boss because they said something about you that's not even that mean at all on Twitter, own it own what you did. They don't try to just compounded to make it even worse. This is one of the news This is the conservative so to speak, that the New

York Times employs. This is a conservative who, I'll also note for you was defending a colleague, I believe her name is Sarah Jong, defending a colleague who said very racist things about white people, like basically, white people are the worst, white people are terrible, all kinds of stuff like that, said that, oh, you know, she's learned and she's grown and let's not But he was another guy who's like Rosanne needed to be fired right away for

what Roseanne did. My friends at the Federalist pointed this out today with his his you know, his double standard on well, some people can be racist, but other people can be racist and get away with it. That was the double standard that he had said there. And Brett Stevens, you know, says that the proo we got more from him. Actually here, let's hear this is his He's going on TV, folks too, because this is the biggest social media based story in the country today by far, trending on Twitter.

The President is tweeting about this bedbugs. I also copied his provost on the note people are upset about this. I want to be clear I had no intention whatsoever to get him in any kind of professional trouble, but it is the case at the New York Times and other institutions. That's a lie. Okay, So that's it's annoying

that he would go on TV. You know. I look, I have had the feeling so many times where I want because I, as I've admitted to you, in case you know, anyone ever meets me on the street or you know, you hear a video of me from my off hours or something, I use salty language. I am. I am not somebody who shirks from profanity in my

private life. But for him to have done what he oh, and then I wish that I could say that to people on Twitter, you know, But I can't because I have an obligation to present a public, a professional face to the public with these issues. But I trust me, there's so many times when I would love to use a lot of very colorful words for people that say things that are either untrue or that, particularly when it gets personal. But I don't do it right. But I

understand that impulse. So if he said, you know what, it just robbed me the wrong way. But I was like, okay, that's one thing. But no, no, he wants to tell us now that he isn't even worse because he tried to get him fired. It's just a lie. That people should be aware. Managers should be aware of the way in which their people, their professors or journalists interact with the rest of the world. That's certainly the case with

me at the New York Times. My editors are always aware of what I'm saying, and I've sometimes been called to account rightly. So he then posted my email on Twitter, so people are free to go and look at what I had to say. All I would say is that using dehumanizing rhetoric like bedbugs who or you know, analogizing people to insects is always wrong. We can do better. We should be the people on social media that we

are in real life. I would agree with that. Final statement for sure is that the worst thing that you have ever been called on social media. There's a there's a bad history of being called, of being analogized to insects. That goes back to a lot of totalitarian regimes in the past. I've been called worse. I wrote this guy a personal note. Now it's out there for ague. Oh my gosh, he did it, he went there. I you know, it's someone said I was like a bedbug as a joke.

But a bedbug is a type of vermin, and vermin are dehumanized because they're not people, and totalitarian regime jeemes have used the rhetoric of vermin to dehumanize groups in the past. Therefore, the guy is basically an you know, basically being a Nazi who said that I was a bed book. I mean, you could just see the whole logic loop going on. There. Look, Bret Stevens is getting everything that he deserves to this one because he just

made it worse. It is a It is a lie when he says that he did not want the guy, that that was not his intent. Whether he wants him to a now or not is irrelevant. It's a lie when he says he didn't want him to get in trouble because Bret Stevens a big New York Times columnist. This guy some professor, no one's ever heard of. Guy has like fifty followers on Twitter. So he's lying to the American public about that. And but then also to

go there. I mean, this is just what Chris Cuomo did with what he said about Fredo, comparing it to an ethnic slur, when no one thinks it's an ethnic slur. They've called Donald Trump Junior Fredo countless times on CNN. But what is the real moral of the story here other than it's just a very amusic little a little vignette of what are journal elites early like, what is

the ball of a story here? These are the individuals who are going to be presenting you with what they say is objective reality going into a very contentious election.

These are the people that are going to be presenting to you what they say is the truth, and their judgment about what to tell you, and as importantly, what not to tell you is something you can either trust or very thoroughly scrutinize, or perhaps distrust entirely because you know that the individual involved is not somebody who is honorable and has good judgment. Brett Stephens showed a lot of people who he is over the last twenty four hours, and I can tell you this, my friends, he is

not the only one at the New York Times. In fact, he's probably one of the much better ones over at the New York Times. So maybe the only way that we get reform in the world of journalism is to insist that journal at least have a standard human beings approach to being mocked or ridiculed and not think that it is a five alarm fire that everybody should freak out about. We will get into some actually important stuff here in a second. We have some immigration discussion to have.

We also have the possibility of charges. Actually, let's get to that. The charges that may come against Andy McCabe, former FBI and now CNN contributor. Former FBI acting director. Here's a prediction for you. I do not think they will charge him. Why, well to hear that, you gotta stay through the break. So we're going to find out very soon whether the justice system in this country is entirely rigged by politics. We're going to find out very soon.

We are told that it is a matter of days before we find out if they're are charges against Andy McCabe, who was the acting FBI director at the well after the firing of James Comey, who was very tight with James Comey. McCabe, it has also since come out, is a very self satisfied and sanctimonious bureaucrat, a deep stater extraordinaire.

And here's the problem that we face right now. Andie McCabe, according to the FBI's own internal investigation, lied four separate times LID this is about the disclosure of information to a reporter about the Hillary Clinton Clinton Foundation investigation. And he said that he didn't know anything about this, and it turns out that no, he does. He in fact, I believe he was the one who disclosed the information.

And he even called subordinates in New York. He yelled at them about the leak saying who would do such a thing? This was all in the Inspector General report. So now this is a very straightforward application of the law. Either the acting FBI director, whose wife, as we know, was going to run as a Democrat and who hates Trump and who was involved in a discussion about an insurance policy in case Trump won. Right, remember this from the Lisa Page and Peter Struck text messages. Annie McCabe lied,

according to his own FBI. He lied in a legally binding context where he broke criminal law. This is what happened. And now this is a guy who I can assure you. I can assure you sent lots of people to prison as an agent and then moving up the ranks as a manager, lots of people to prison for doing exactly that, lying about something that's not even necessarily a crime. James Comey, McCabe's mentor and friend, was a pioneer in the realm of throwing people in prison who didn't break any laws

but maybe misremembered something irrelevant. And then you know, this is like the Martin Martha Stewart. That was all James, call me, Do I think that they're going to press charges against McCabe. I think the answer is no, even though he very clearly broke the law. I will tell you why in a moment. So why is it that I'm so confident? I could be wrong? But let's be honest. How often does that happen? Why is it that I'm

so confident that Andy McCabe will evade prosecution. There'll be some stern words about how he shouldn't have misled the FBI investigators. I'm so confident about it because I understand what we are up against. I understand how the other side, how the left thinks, how they approach power, how they wield power, and they know ultimately, they know that. This is a very important moment for the hashtag resistance because it is an opportunity to show that if you are

anti Trump, you are in fact above the law. If you hate this president, the libs in whether it's the jury pool, the prosecutor's office, or the deep state, will protect you. All you have to do is despise this president and work openly against him, which is what we know Andy McCabe was doing. Hebe hates the president, and oh he's now a CNN commentator. Well, isn't that interesting? Isn't that special, CNN commentator Andy McCabe. Will he be indicted?

Probably not. What do you think George Papadopolis thinks of that they send Papadopolis to jail for a couple of weeks. He didn't commit any other crimes. He wasn't some mastermind of a criminal conspiracy. And they could only get him on lying. You know, this is an al capone. They just got him on tax evasion because they couldn't get him on all the murders and racketeering and everything else. But why should Papadoppolus suffer a punishment that a person who was at the very top of the federal law

enforcement hierarchy would escape for doing the same thing. I would need someone to have a really good explanation for this. George Popadopoulus here, this is from our friend Andy McCabe. Quote the date of a meeting, that's all the lie was about. George Papadoppolus claimed that a meeting he'd had with the mysterious Maltese professor Joseph Miffsud happened slightly before the Green is Grass twenty eight year old was recruited into the Trump campaign in reality, it was slightly after.

It wasn't a very porton lie. It was of no consequence to the FBI or the Special Council's investigation. Papadopoulus was such an afterthought to the Bureau that it did not bother to interview him until late January twenty seventeen, about ten months after he met Miff sud By the time Papadopoulus was charged, the Trump Rush investigation had been ongoing for well over a year. It was already clear

there was no conspiracy. Yet that didn't stop Muller's staff and Rod Rosenstein, their Justice Department superior, from indicting Papadopolis on a felony charge, nor did it stopped them from exhorting a federal court to impose a sentence of incarceration. That's right. Not only did they want him to have a felony record, they learned him to sit in to sell because he lied to them about the date of a meeting that didn't matter in any way, shape or

form to anyone other than the investigation. That shouldn't have been happening in the first place, because it was all a deep state witch hunt. We know this. It's over they tried, they took their best shot and they missed. But why should Popadopoulus have a felony record and see the inside of a prison and not Andy McCabe. Don't we expect more of the FBI director? Don't we expect more of somebody who sent lots of people to prison

for offenses that were offenses against the States? You know, no one ever questions when you send people along the lines of you know, a murder or a kidnap or any of that too a prison. But what about when you send somebody who is caught lying and about no underlying criminal conduct. FBI Andy McKay put plenty of people. It's US code one zero zero one. He put plenty

of people away for that. If the felony charges that the Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Brier Investigation drops against people on a regular basis for minimalize, which I oppose, But I think that we need to get a grip on this whole thing. I think that unless it's a material, unless it is a truly material lie that you are absolutely certain was willful and knowing and malicious and intended to throw off the investigators. If it's minor This reminds

me of the member Scooter Libby. In the Scooter Libby trial, the whole case turned on whether or not Tim Russer said the name of a person to a CIA officer to Scooter Libby Lewis Libby and we all call him Scooter, or whether Libby said it to him first. Do you know what the proof was? The proof was Tim Russer's word. That was taken as the proof. They believed Russer. They didn't believe. They didn't believe Libby just because that was all and they wanted to send Libby away. It goes

for eighteen months, your federal president. He didn't leak anyone's name, folks. The leaker was Armitage, and they knew that, and they pressed charges against Libby. Anyway, you're noticing a pattern, aren't you. If you're attached to if you're on the right, if you're involved with the right, you do not get the benefit of the doubt. If you are on the right, you're a target. If you're a leftist, if you do the bidding of the Democrat Party, if you go after

the Democratic Party's enemies. Somehow, you just always look the best example of this is Bill Clinton himself. Bill Clinton committed a felony. Bill Clinton lied under oath. That's it. People can can dance around it, and oh this, and then he lied in the oath, and the Democratic Party circle the wagons and said, sorry, the president's this. President's

allowed to commit a felony. It's too important to the Democratic cause, just like Hillary Clinton with her misuse and a reckless treatment of classfied information, which is also I would note, can be a felony charge depending on the circumstances. But they just said, you know what, it's clear she broke the law. It's clear what the law is. We just don't plan on holding her responsible for it. And I think you're likely to see the same thing with McKay.

There'll be some some kind of you know, mumble mumble served as country good man everything. Okay, Why didn't General Flynn get the benefit of that doubt from the Department of Justice? You know, he didn't. They hit him with a felony, want to ruin him, bankrupt him. He didn't lie, He didn't. He lied about a conversation, according to them.

I still think it's interesting if he even really lied or not, whether he misremembered, but he lied about a conversation that was in no way criminal put him in any kind of jeopardy, but they just decided that that's what they were going to do, that they were going

to charge him. Who gets charged and who doesn't is one of the most most important areas of government action to watch because it tells you who's really running things, and when one side keeps getting a pass, when one side keeps getting the the the Bill Clinton treatment, the Jusi Smalllett treatment, the Hillary Clinton treatment, you'll notice this, but the other and this is this matters in politically charged cases. This matters when there is a a political

foundation to all of it. What is the other spot side supposed to think? What are we supposed to believe? You know, they're they're right now already analyzing how because Trump is so hated in DC, the Swamp where I was formerly a resident of the Swamp is after San Francisco, the most left wing Democrat heavy affiliated, Democrat heavy by registration major city in the whole country. And they think that maybe mcay will get off if he takes it to a jury trial, just because people hate Trump so much.

That's right now, you're gonna have jury nullification of federal law because hashtag they hate Trump and they'll feel righteous about that too, so somehow, now, but that would only be if we see charges. I don't think you're going to see charges. And they'll just sweep the whole thing away. They'll say, oh, well, it didn't look like it was a slam dunk, so they just and then we'll move on. They know we'll move on. Nobody will really pay how

much attention. But here's what I mean. I'm here to tell you the game, the criminal justice game is fixed in favor of the left from the very top, from the very top, even when you have a Republican president, because the justice system is really run by the permanent bureaucracy, and there are all these rules that only are used against the right about oh you know there's you can't you know, involve yourself an ongoing investigation, and well it's amazing.

People will say this, Oh look what Trump did involving himself an ongoing criminal investigation of him with his tweets. And I said, you know, Obama said that, you know, involved himself in the Hillary Clinton email investigation while he was president, said there's nothing there. How is that not in oh I've said this, people to say, well, that doesn't they don't think this stuff through, and that's that's so that's what I think is gonna happen with in

the cave. I just one more criminal justice story to get to today. And I don't want to be I don't want to blur these lines between analysis and conspiracy. But sure enough, I saw today reported in numerous places that some portion of the Stein surveillance video from the prison is in fact considered unusable, unreadable, whatever it may be. I mean, you can't really see there was a malfunction of what is considered essential footage to the investigation at

one of the security of Prouser. Right, I can see this today. I'm not imagine this, right, Oh yeah, I thought. I mean, I just wonder, at what point are we allowed to say that there are too many coincidences here that would all line up as coincidences in this way if if the whole purpose was really to prevent certain names, certain information around Epstein. I know, Epstein's gone, but there are a whole bunch of other people around Epstein from

getting out there. I mean, how much more do we have the stomach of this stuff before we can say that something's really wrong here, right, Yeah, it's beyond conspiracy. It's common sense. Now it's turned into common sense. I mean, you know, I tweeted out today and I'm really curious

people to think about this. Are we still supposed to say the words conspiracy theory if we're told in a couple of weeks of there was a malfunction in the FBI, you know, evidence process, and some of the some of the hard drives and things that they took from Epstein's house just disappeared or was lost in a fire, or was accidentally erased by a wayward you know, computer technician,

you know what? Is too much for us to think that all of this just happened the way that it happened because two guards asleep, Epstein left alone, Epstein taken off of suicide watch three weeks after he tried to commit suicide. Epstein allowed access to materials that could that could be used for suicide, even though he never should have been. Haven't heard anything yet about these raids of his properties? What do they take from his properties? When?

When do we get to find out about that? And for those of you who probably think we'll hold on a second buck, unpack, unpack your worst case scenario for this for a moment. How could anyone in the currently in the system, whether it's Bureau of Prisons or DJ or anywhere, How could anyone in the system do anything that would help hide the truth about Epstein. It might not just be It might not be about Epstein at all. There are people who think that they are doing the

right thing. I have known them in the federal bureaucracy by protecting the bureaucracy. And the way they justify to themselves is this is such an important institution. This matters to the American that belief in this institution matters to the American people so much that even if we have to lie to the American people, even if we have to hide things to the American people about the truth of what has gone on here, it's for their own good.

Someone pressured a Costa to take the deal. Someone pressured a camera. The guy's name, the state's attorney in Palm Beach to give an insanely favorable deal. There was pressure brought to bear who did that. If we find out that it was someone very high up the chain of command, it would rock our faith in the Apartment of justice

in the justice system itself. A lot of people out there could justify to themselves hiding that kind of information from the public because our institutions are just too important. That is something that I want you to remember as we keep getting more information about how we never get any information. They're not going to present you with any indictable, smoking gun evidence from Epstein's Cash of what had to be blackmail information on some of the most powerful people

in the world having sex with underage girls. Had to be no information about this, no proof anywhere, even though this guy set up what is essentially a proof factory to blackmail powerful people. I will not give up on this. We will keep following this. We all have limited attention spans. We have limitability to address any problem any you make any decision. Our energy, our resources are not endless, and that matters when you start to think about what the

media focuses on. You Compare, for example, the hysteria around climate change, which we'll talk more about later in the show, with the lack of real emotion, the lack of focus, the lack of attention on the opioid crisis, which is and orders of magnitude more important, more real, more devastating problem. One of these things is a liberal fantasy that has nothing to do with anything really other than government control,

and the other is a national emergency. Seventy thousand people a year in the last few years on average dying dying. These are people who are now dead from a drug overdose. And yet liberals have far in the media, far less outrage to use on this issue that they're spending much

less time. Well, that made change at least for a few days here, because the maker of Oxyconton, the most well known opioid Perdue Pharma, and its owners, the Sackler families, supporting the NBC News today, are offering to settle more than two thousand lawsuits against the company for ten to twelve billion dollars and this would be this is a

huge class action lawsuit obviously. Now, the truth is this won't bring anyone back who's been lost the opioid crisis, but it will at least give some measure of justice, perhaps to some of the families. And it also is a reminder that pharmaceutical companies do have ethical obligations, and modern medicine has ethical obligations that it failed in dramatic fashion to keep keep going. When it comes to the opioid crisis, someone hal with oxyconton among other drugs. We'll

keep an eye on this. So what do you say to the governors of those nineteen states that are suing the Trump administration? I ask them, do you really care about these people? Because when you when you entice people to come to this country by guaranteeing they won't be detained, When you when you vilify ice trying to carry out the judge's orders and you don't want them doing that, you entice more people to come to this country. Thirty one percent of women are being sexually assaulted at making

that journey. Children are dying, Cartels are getting rich. The same cartels are a murdered barbitual agents. At what point, there's the laws in this country that we're enacted by Congress need to be enforced. We got to stop ignoring it. So again, this isn't just about enforcing law. This isn't just about securing the Border's about saving lives. There's no downside on securing our border. There's no downside unless illegal

immigration at bank rows criminal organizations. There's no downside unless illegal drugs from this country. Well that's let's secure our border. That is our job as a nation. That's Tom Holman, and I gotta tell you he is a national treasure on the issue of immigration. And he's somebody who knows that issue as well as anybody you'll find. You know, whatever, Tom and I see each other in the green red Fox were always just exchanging thoughts on the latest here

with the crisis and what's going on. And notice the way that he frames it, it changes so much how you would have a conversation about immigration. The magnet has to be shut off that people believe by violating our laws they will receive a benefit and they will not be punished in any way. That then promotes the mass immigration, that's the invasion of migrants from Central America in violation of US law into this country because they think it

will be good for them. If you stop that process, if you turn off the benefits, you also then make it much less likely that all of these very very bad things will happen as a result of their decision to try to entery that it's legally. He brought up thirty percent of women being sexually assaulted along the way, children who are exposed to all kinds of risk, including some children who have died because they have made the journey. They did not die because they got to US custody

in an hour later were taken to a hospital. They died because of the journey that adults decided to take them on. Or in some cases, you have miners who are assaulted, who are sexually assaulted, and who are having put a tremendous risk sent alone to the border. If you want this to stop, you have to convince people that this is not a good idea for them to

take the risks involved. No one. No one is going to go bankrupt at the racetrack if they can't win any money, right, I mean, if there's no chance that there's going to be anything good that happens. If you're not gonna pay, no one's going to take those risks. You have to eliminate the incentive. This is essential in dealing with the immigration crisis. It is absolutely a first step. This isn't something down the line if you're at it's

the first step. And that is why when you see how the left acts on this issue, it's clear that they don't want this to stop. That's why they fight against the enforcement mechanisms at every step of the way. They fight against deportation, they fight against detaining people until they're hearing that's what the big argument is. Now, Okay, we're going to keep the families together. Families will stay together. No family separation. All right, fine, Democrats, you've won that argument.

No family separation, which now means that we're creating a special carve out with an immigration within criminal immigration enforcement that does not exist in the rest of criminal law. Because if you are drunk driving, folks, if one of you, you know, obviously don't ever do. It's a very risky, very stupid thing to do. But if you're drunk driving and you've got a kid in the back seat and you don't have a relative that can take custody of that child, that child is going to be the custody

of the States. You get out of get out of prison, you're going to be separated from that child, at least for the processing phase. It's going to happen. So now we have a separate set of law for the enforcement of immigration statutes. And Democrats show us who they really are on this, which is a party that wants this lawlessness to continue. And that's why now that the Trump administration has said, you know what, we're just not going to We're going to change. This is really an internal

mechanism within the federal government. The Flora has consent decree. This is not a congressional statute. This is a federal judge telling the government that you got to do this and this is how we should go. And the government agreed to it. Well, okay, and now we're going to

agree to something else. And again Tom home and waited in on this one specifically on Floras and why this is such an important change, and Democrats know it's an important change, which is why they are completely freaking out over this. No, we did this back in Uplay fifteen. It took about forty forty five days and said them to see a judge. And when the Flora recent decision came out a couple of years ago, say you're gonna only home for twenty days. We warn the court. I

personally didn't have to. David warn in the court if you do this, if you make us release them before they see a judge, you're going to see a surgeon. Family unis that you've never seen before. And of course I was called a fear monger. I didn't have evidence of it, and look what happened. So holding them in a family residential center for up to forty five days it's not that bad since it's a facility built for families,

it's not a jail cell. And also, if they're really escaping fear and persecution and death from their homeland, I don't see the downside and detaining them for a couple of weeks longer to see a judge in a family residential center, they're gonna be well taken care of. See, that's what we're really talking about here, folks, a couple of weeks more so that they can be processed and see a judge. All along we've been told, oh, they're just seeking asylum, they're just seeking a song. Why won't

you let them lawfully seek asylum. Well, they've illegally entered the country because they've overwhelmed our processes. So at ports of entry we say, sorry, we can't take you in right now where there's too many. You're gonna have to wait. They said, I don't want to wait. I'm gonna surrender.

I'm gonna I'm gonna walk across the border, break the US law, violate sovereignty, of the United States, and then I'm gonna want to go through my legal process, you know, then I'm gonna want to tell people that I need asylum. Well to Tom's point here, if you really want asylum because you have a credible fear, and this is the this is what it all turns on. You have a credible fear that you will be subject to violence if

you return to your home country. Then is the prospect of thirty or forty days in a US family detention facility men for families, or you will be fed, clothed, housed, receive medical care, all a taxpayer expense. Mind you, no one's paying any money for this other than the taxpayer. Is that so unthinkable? Does that make us such a such terrible people? I mean, look at what other countries

do when they have an illegal immigrant population. They detain people, they hold them in facilities that this is standard everywhere. But Democrats that they'll point to the rest of the world when it suits them. On Oh, look at you know what they do in healthcare here, or look at the very high rates of taxation in this quaint European country with nice lattes and some cobblestone streets. You know, but when it comes to sovereignty and in in the rest of the world, you know, try showing up in like

Japan and saying, yeah, I just want to stay here. Thanks, It's just not going to happen. It will not happen. You will not be successful in that process. Most countries around the world are far stricter about immigration than we are. And no country in the world takes in as many legal immigrants every year as we do. And what do democrats do now when we have a fix to the loophole, They complain about the fix. Well, if you both agree that the loophole needs to be fixed, you don't complain

when that actually happens. They never wanted this to be fixed. And that's why you have these states, nineteen of them, including the district of Columbie. They're all suing the Trump administration saying that twenty days is that that's what it has to be. It's an arbitrary number. Why does it have to be twenty days, says who? Why not twelve days, Why not fifty days? Twenty days? Why just because some judge twenty years ago plus over twenty years ago decided

that twenty days sounds about right. These days for supporting the magnets of illegal immigration. The reason we're being overrun is two reasons. If you come here and claim asylum, you're hearing these three years away, and you never show up. We don't hold people for three years, so all they got to do is ask for asylum. If you're bringing a minor child, we can only hold a child for twenty days. We turned the child over to a labor HHS. Since you don't want to separate families, will let the

entire family go. So they're continuing a bad practice. Shame on these dates. Shame on the district coul Yeah, the Congress should change our laws to allow you to hold minor children and their families long enough to process their claims so you don't let them out into the interior of the country. See, folks, The real point here is that all a long Democrats have been pretending that we're working toward the same goal and immigration. You know, they

just want to be humanitarian. They want to be considerate of the children involved as its. Remember it's always one of my rules whenever someone says that they're doing it for your your safety, or for the children, be suspicious in the government, be suspicious. Now we've got a fix to that problem, and they're saying, well, now that that's unacceptable.

They are all these states are suing, and I'd be very curious to know in what way are they even going to claim standing here because they have they have residents that want illegal aliens to come into the country. I mean, how exactly are they all going to claim it? Well, we'll have to see what the specifics are of the suit. M But you know, Lindsey Graham, he goes for me. He goes back and forth in immigration. Sometimes I feel like he's pretty squared away and other times he's a

little too squishy for my taste. But here's lindsay on how we can fix this. The Democrats do not want to hate Trump. Well, yeah, exactly, I hate Trump. We get that. But at the same time, this is a humanitarian crisis at our southern border. It would seem that, you know, you've been working with other Democrats. I know they hate Trump, but they've got we send you people to Washington to fix stuff, and you're not fixing it. Send people to Washington who don't hate Trump. I have

been working on immigration for ten years. I'm willing to deal with a DOCCA population, give them a place to stay in our country at pathway to citizenship. I'm willing to spend money in Central America to make life better. I've done everything I know to do. I've talked, I've turned blue in the face. I can't get one Democrat to agree with me that you should apply for asylum

in Central America Mexico, not the United States. This tells you everything you need to know, because if they had to apply for asylum Mexico not the United States, they would stop coming. And you know what that would mean, because they're not going to get asylum. Vast majority, ninety percent plus won't get asylum. Oh what that means is that all along we've been lied to, we've been played

if all of a sudden things. So this is like my test for the Clinton Foundation, which I turned out to be right as you know, I said, Okay, the Clinton Foundation, if it's really about charity and not about buying access. When Hillary Clinton is no longer going to be president the United States, the donations, especially from from abroad for the Clinton Global Initiative, they should stay exactly the same. It's about a charity, man, It's not about buying access. Oh what did we find out? I think

it dropped pruser Michaels about forty percent. Is that sound about right? I think thirty five forty percent year one? And now when they shut down the Clinton Global Initiative so they could they didn't even want to wait and see how much would drop your two, So they shut it down because I guess what we were right. There was influence peddling. There was access selling going on by the Clinton Foundation. Whether you know whether it was a quid pro quel or was just perception of access, that's

what was happening. It wasn't just about charity. All along the media the Democratic Party have been telling us that the people showing up at our southern border have done so claiming asylum, have done so in good faith because

they fear for their lives. Well, if all of a sudden they can't just say that and get into the United States and then never show up for their hearing, if they have to go through the real asylum process and then be subject to deportation because they are not in the United States, they just get taken to a judge and then they get expeditiously removed afterwards because they're staying in Mexico. Guess what, they weren't really asylum seekers all along. Democrats want to avoid They want to avoid

that recognition of reality. They also want to avoid angering their far left radical base that does want an open border, that wants these loopholes to continue as is, does not want to see any change because this creates what is a de facto open door for anyone outside of US borders to come into America. And then one political party, the Democrat Party, is going to tell them, you have a right to be here. Don't worry that you broke

our laws. In fact, we owe this to you. And the only people that you need to worry about are those big, bad, mean Republicans. So vote against them, vote for us, and all will be well. This is the game. It's the California model for the whole country. Flip the whole country blue through illegal immigration from the developing world. That's the plan. We can all see it. We've got

more coming up, all right. So I know I mentioned to you that because we made this prediction on air before Hillary laws the election, that if she, if she in fact was not the president, that the Clinton Foundation donations would all all of a sudden it's a charity, folks shouldn't shouldn't matter, nobody should care, But all of a sudden there'd be problems. Rooster, Mike, what happened around

that time? The Clinton Foundation? So throughout Hillary's ten years secretary of State, the foundation pulled in on average two hundred and fifty four million dollars a year. Ayay, so a lot of money. That's who yeah, look good, trying to change. So they dropped from two hundred and sixteen million in twenty sixteen to just twenty six point five million in twenty seventeen. Quickmath, I'll tell you buck, that's an eighty eight percent fall. Only down eighty eight percent, man,

I mean, you know who could happen to anybody? Wait? I thought that was a charity. So if it were at charity, all of a sudden, the whole world got a whole lot less charitable. Oh maybe it wasn't about charity. Maybe it was a way to write checks to somebody who was going to be the most powerful individual in the world. And people were trying to buy a little bit of favor, a little bit of gratitude, a little bit of what for what? You don't here you don't

hear a lot of stories over at CNN about that one. No. Right now they're freaking out because Attorney General bar my main man, showed up at my going away party in DC. If you guys haven't seen that because you don't follow me on Instagram, Buck Sexton. You should all follow Buck Sexton on Instagram if you like. Please. It's really just me now tweeting out things that wreck libs and where

I post tweets where I wreck libs. And then also occasionally me and Tallula, my parents, French bulldog, you know, got to pose for the pup photos and some stuff from different media appearances. But now the CNN folks are all angry because my man, Attorney General bar has booked a DC at his book, Trump's Hotel in DC, the Trump Hotel in DC, which is a great hotel by the way, or thirty thousand dollars for a holiday party. Now the thing about that is that he's paying out

of his pocket. And now they're saying, oh, well, this raises questions about ethics and DJ independence, and you know that they're doing all the stuff the usual, like oh my god, Trump, Trump can't do anything. Trump can't buy a sandwich without people saying, oh, there's a transaction, here's paying people off, and there's gonna be favors, and he can't do anything without. This is just this is like a lib hysteria over this thirty thousand dollar party about

it's not even a very expensive holiday party. I hate to break it at a hotel that's not that's spent a lot more money than that for different companies in corporation. But he's paying out of his pockets. Now they're gonna say, oh, well, he can't be independent as Attorney general. No. I think he can throw a party for the Department of Justice at a hotel that is owned by the president and that's not going to all of a sudden mean that he doesn't understand the law and he doesn't have any

ethics and nothing matters. I think that's quite an exaggeration. And then there's the other part of this that you won't hear from any places. But I know this to be true from other situations like this in DC. Guess what, I'm sure many many, many DC hotels turned down the Attorney General of the United States. I'm sure that happened. I don't even know. I haven't even seen that in a new story yet, because it's just broken up. But I'm sure that's the case. I had a friend will.

I don't want to name it because I don't want to. You know, I knew this from behind the scenes. I knew somebody who was doing a conservative show in DC from a venue, and some people the venue found out about his politics. And guess what, the venue, even though they're paying money, and they head an agreement, kicked them out. Sorry, none of that Trump stuff here, not in our place.

You know, you could probably recite the Communist Manifesto in most DC hotels and it said, oh, this is brilliant story, this is great, we should try this. That really makes a lot of sense. But if you are supporting the president and the party that he leads that is in power right now, you are a bad person. That's what they want you to know. You're not an allowed to

have a holiday party without this being a problem. There is nothing that is too petty, too minute, and too unimportant for libs to freak out about when it comes to Trump. There's nothing that is beneath them. Nothing is allowed to just be not that big a deal. If Trump is involved, they will make it a big deal. They will make it an issue of national security of tremendous importance to the American people just because they are

suffering from Trump's arrangement syndrome. These people are nuts. They have a mass delusion, a mass mental health disorder. Due to the presidents of the United States being who he is. He can't help. But that's how Trump is. By the way, Trump Hotel party, I might have to go. It's going to be great. Just so you understand, Tena wants to make a deal. Now, whether or not we make it deal, it's got to be a great deal for us, you know.

And I told this to President She. You're starting up here and you're making five hundred billion a year and stealing our intellectual property. Went down on the floor lower than the floor. Should make a fifty fifty deal. This has to be a deal that's better for us. And if it's not better, let's not do business together. I don't want to do business. Forget about tariffs for a second. We'll take an in tremendous amount of money. Forget that.

I don't want to do business. Now. When I raise and he raises, I raise, and we can never catch up. We have to balance our trading relationship at least to an extent, and they were unwilling to do that, and we'll never have a deal if that happens. But it's going to happen. Trump says we're never gonna have a deal as the Chinese bend to some demands, not just to meet us halfway. But it sounds like he's saying, deal's got to be kind of sweet for us to

make up to balance out what had happened in the past. Now, maybe this is just his negotiating posture put out in public. But this is where I can tell you, my friends, there is not going to be a major, a sweeping trade deal with China before this election. Which brings me

back to what I said to you yesterday. I really do believe that the president holds the even if it's just a temporary, uh you know, cessation, if it's a pause in the trade war, he holds that in his back pocket as a way to just create all kinds of optimism and a bulliance in the economy right when he needs it. Um, it's it's an you know, this is I think, isn't it. In racing, sometimes you know you'll you'll get in the NASCAR. Don't you get him behind the lead car and you can that person, then

there's like some technique. I don't know anything about racing. I'm totally going off, but he's essentially staying there, keeping it for the right moment when he hits the afterburner, which is what you do in a plane, not a Are you get what I'm saying. Trump's holding in his back pocket. He's holding an economic bazuka, so to speak, in his back pocket, and he's ready to use it when he needs to. That's what I think is happening here with China because he's not gonna get a deal.

There's no way the Chinese will concede on this deal. But he has also changed the entire conversation about our trading relationship with China. No serious person really believes that we are unable to weather the storm so far, and also no one thinks that we should have had a relationship with China continue as is. I mean, the trade

war hasn't been that bad. And also everyone now understands that the trade war is more of a of a necessity, or at least standing up at China on trades, more of a set necessity than it was in the past. The President says, the Chinese are incident dealing. I think they want to make it a deal, and I think they should make a deal. And I think if they don't make a deal, it's going to be very bad

for China. And I very much appreciate the fact that they came out last night, very late last night, and they said, you know, they want to make a deal. They wanted to be under calm circumstances. It was a little different kind of a statement. I thought it was a beautiful statement. A beautiful statement. He says, well, we shall see. Trump is sticking to what he thinks is best on China. And that's I got to say that

there is a lead. There's leadership on display here. I mean that Trump is leading on this issue of the China trade deal. It is the signature, really the signature economic and trade and foreign policy issue of his administration all in one. And that's why the stakes are very high. But the issue is of tremendous importance. But here's on the other side of things. And I know I've said I've been way too nice about this guy on this show. So here we go with him talking about all kinds

of nonsense. Here's the other side of it, which is that, oh, Trump's trade trade policies not only are they bad, but his trade policies are tied into climate change and deforestation. And therefore, see, once again Trump is bad on the environment because they say so. Here's John Delaney talking about the Amazon the fire. Whenever in things of Amazon, they not think of the company. But there's also the big place,

you know, Amazon river base, in the Amazon rainforest. Delaney is saying that Trump's trade with China is the cause of the fires in the Amazon. This is some wild stuff like this notion of being kind of an isolationist like the president is. I mean, a lot of Democrats are talking what's going on in the Amazon? You you opened with it, and reality that's directly related to trade.

You know, the fact that US farmers can sell soybeans to China has created an opportunity for Brazil to sell soybeans to China, and as a result, farmers are tearing down, you know, the Amazon to grow soybeans. And so what democrats have to understand is that an isolationist approach to the world is not the right answer on any of these big issues that we care about. How is it an isolationist approach to stop the predatory trade practices, or at least to try to fight back against the predatory

trade practices of the Chinese government. How is that isolationism? So is it now isolationism if you just don't want to be ripped off? Am I being an isolationist? When someone calls me on the phone and says that they're going to offer me a free cruise and I say, you know, I don't want to give you my credit card to just say you have the number because I just want a free cruise. I don't think I believe you robocall, or person or person that's trying to commit

that fraud against me. I don't. I don't think that anyone should believe in these things. But nonetheless, hopefully the rubble calls have been less recently, but they're still they're still bad. But this is the perfect approach to everything that Trump does, which is that whatever he does is not just bad in that thing, it ties into all the other things that the Libs say Trump is doing wrong and where he's terrible and he's such a whether

he's an idiot, he's a nightmare, he's a fascist. You know, Trump is either incapable of doing anything or in charge of everything, depending on the day you ask lives about it. By the way, this Trump's trade war linked to Amazon rainforest destruction. This is from the Oh, what a big surprise, the Huffington Post. But there was already a huge soy market in a soybee market rather in Brazil before this, So you know, here you go. I mean, they're just

gonna always, they're gonna find a way. And by the way, it's up to Brazil to determine, you know what they gotta Those farmers in the Brazilian economy could use a little bit more trade. It's it's really not for us to determine whether or not that they should be in a position to trying to benefit off of this economically. But you know, the Libs always, they always have a reason to complain about this the globes. The Amazon rainforest is the biggest rainforest in the world. Obviously, it's home

to three million species of plants and animals. And last week the Group of Seven said they're going to provide twenty two million dollars to help with firefighting. Bulsonaro, did you see Bulsonaro clapped back pretty hard at mccrall on this. Wilsonaro said, why don't you worry about like the preventable fire in your country. He took a he's got a Notre Dame cheapshot at him, which was a little bit of surprise. I think people like whoa Raine is hot?

That was serious stuff. But yeah, everything that Trump does has to be tied into every other liberal talking point in some way. And the deforestation issue in the are we is the world a lot to tell Brazil that they cannot they cannot cut down trees in order to make room for farmland. I mean, is that up to the rest of the world. I have to wonder at some point, soy shipments from Brazil, according to this article here, jumped twenty seven percent from twenty seventeen to twenty eighteen.

Oh wait, but there's one other trade issue that I wanted to point out to you, and that is the US Mexico Canada agreement. Guess what, he was right on that one, and that's actually coming along quite nicely. Play three, So we're go ahead to be significantly expanding our trading relationship when the USMCA gets done. He completed our farmers love it, the unions love it, the workers love it,

manufacturers love it. Everybody likes it. I think most Democrats like it, so hopefully that'll be particularly worked fairly soon. It's got tremendous support, Broth. I believe Democrat and Republic end It has been signed and finalized essentially by Canada and essentially by Mexico, so we're waiting for that from the United States, and we have really great support and it's something I think it's a very special agreement. They

said that Trump was going to ruin NAFTA. That's what they used to say, It's going to ruin NAFTA until they realized that NAFTA was over twenty years old that needed to be updated. They said Trump was going to ruin NATO, and now it turns out that there's more funding from Allied countries going to NATO and alliance is

as strong as it has ever been. They just keep saying things that aren't true, and then they get mad at us for the Libs get mad at us for not believing us when they're wrong over and over and over again. They're wrong on trade too. In the midst of white supremacy, white nationalism, and what I said a few weeks ago that racism is a national security threat.

This commission would have a immense authority. I think America is ready for this because of what we have been going through in the last couple of weeks, because of the attitude of our commander in chief, and because of what we have seen the dastardly impacts of white nationalism, white supremacy, and outright racism that has impacted others, but certainly has impacted over the decades and centuries African Americans, the descendants of enslaved Africans. We're going to have more

discussion going forward. That was a representative Jackson Lee talking about reparations. You're going to have more of a reparations discussion in the future for reasons I'll get into in a moment, but let me say first this is another topic that came up when I was doing Bill Maher a few weeks ago, because Mary Ann Williamson is very pro reparations, and it's a huge applause line on the left, and it's an idea that to liberals and even to some on the right, sound good. It sounds good until

you think it through. You understand the implications, and you take actions based on policy, based on the the the doing of what you say you're going to do, which is which is institute these reparations, you have to implement it. And I've just got to say, you know, you look at America right now. You have fifty million Americans or permanent residents citizens who were born outside the United States

who live in America right now, fifty million. So you're going to have somebody who is you know, You're going to have someone who's a you know, working really really hard, doing you know, doing We always here about people doing two or three jobs, working two or three jobs, who's from let's say Bangladesh or China or you know, gone anywhere, and their tax dollars because right, taxes come from all of us. I mean, the money they're paying into the

system is going to go toward paying reparations. And you're going to have people who are receiving money who nothing was done to. But the claim will be that things were done so viciously and for so long that I suppose we never we never get beyond what was done in the past. Will there be an argument for reparations

in a hundred years, in three hundred years. I wonder you know, at what point do you do you pass the social the psychological statute of limitations, so to speak, on this issue, and then you also just have the underlying injustice of taking from people through no fault of theirs and giving to people who were not wronged themselves by the individuals who are having to pay up. This is a historical collective guilt in position. Now it's not

going to happen. I do not believe that there will be reparations in this country, but it will continue to be a big talking point on the left, just like voter suppression, which anybody who looks at, for example, the Georgia the Georgia gubernatorial race knows that Stacey Abrams talks about voter suppression. And it's not it did not happen. It's that she has nothing there. She just claims, well, you never really know if you know, people would have

voted who couldn't vote for some reason. Just like the pay gap, we keep we'll hear about the pay gap all the time, even though the pay gap is a myth. If a business could hire the same level of employee for the same work for twenty or thirty percent less, No capitalist would ever hire an anything but women. The pay gap is a myth meeting. It is a lie, but it's a very useful lie to the left. People

want to believe it, so they do believe it. People on the left want to believe that there would be a positive change that would come out of reparations, when that's just completely unrealistic. If they don't do the money out to the descendants of those descendants of those who are held the slaves, then what are they going to

do with the money? Oh, it's going to go to some institutions on the left that will be controlled that what become the sort of equivalent of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is supposed to be watching over our civil rights and our morality as a country. The SPLC, I know it had a very important mission, But the SPLC has turned into a left wing pack. It's a

left wing political action committee. Does anyone really think that if there were reparations that would not be the future the institutions that would be funded with that money, of course, it would be Why are we hearing about it? Why is it still coming up? Well, Elizabeth Warren has been making a real run in the polls lately, Elizabeth Warren is right up there with Bernie and Biden. What is her weakness? Where is she unable to get the support she needs to be the Democrat nominee. Answer is the

African American community in this country. She has very low numbers. Biden does very well with black voters. Elizabeth Warren it's like barely even registering. So how do I think she's going to try and prove her bona fides, prove her good faith to the Black community in this country? Oh, well, she's going to talk about reparations. Reparations by poll by polling numbers is about sixty percent. I don't know. I'm sorry. I think it's much higher than the and might be

as high. Seventy five percent of the African American community is in favor of it. So if you can appeal as a Democrat primary Canada seventy five percent of the African American vote on this issue, you're gonna do it. So you're going to see some shameless Elizabeth Warren pandering, that is for sure. And just like you saw her appear with the what was the Native American I believe she appeared with the Native American tribe a while ago in order to apologize for the mistakes that she had made.

And that's really easy. She didn't make mistakes. She made a mistake, which was engaging in a multidecade long racial fraud and racial appropriation to advance herself. But the left will forgive all sins, even sins of racial fraud, for Elizabeth Warren, as long as she appeals to the right demographics as a candidate. Who is the worst Democrat candidate? I don't mean who has the least chance of winning, because that's that's hard to assess because there are so

many that realistically are not realistic candidates, right. I mean, we know there are all these different candidates out there that are doing this for the attention. They're doing it for the brand value, the brand building, all that stuff. Okay, fine, I don't mean who is the worst Democrat candidate as a function of the polls. I mean who bothers you the most producer, Mike, Who's who is the worst of

the Democrats running for running for president? Right now? It's tie between Jilla Brand and her bad dancing and Kamala Harris and her horrible laughing. I don't know which one bothers me more. I dude, I think those are very solid choices for the worst, and in fact, with Jilla Brand specifically, I think that that for me, it was a it was a it was a neck and neck race between Jilla Brand and Kaiser Wilhelm de Blasio for

the worst. And as I'm here in New York City, I do feel like I don't even consider the Plasio a candidate. I don't think the Blasio considers de Blasio a candidate. I mean, it's just he's just yeah, how I am. I'm just gonna it sounds like my shelter. I can't. I don't have a de Blasio impression yet. It's just it's like a big worthless clown whatever that sounds like. That's what de Blasio sounds like. Starts snoring.

That's right. Just wake up at like ten, drive forty five minutes each way to a gym where you get after that elliptical for about five minutes. You know, de Blasio would be a five minute and that's all elliptical. Guy, Wow, I just want I gotta sweat up and uh yeah sure. But here's what a producer, producer mark the worst. If you cared away and who's the worst of the Democrats? Easily de Blasio is a New York are just watching him be the mayor. That's what I mean. He's terrible. So,

I mean, you guys are right on. You guys are right over the target, right, I'm not I'm not gonna. I can't say that you're either of you are wrong. I would just add for consideration because for me, he was an outlier candidate or the worst beto maybe in my number one spot. Now he he just keeps getting more annoying, more sanctimonious, and you know, there's a there's a desperation in this guy now because he was held up. He was supposed to be a top five contender. Now

he's just like going around. But it's like, I'm more woke than the wokest of the woke. I'm like a super woke star, and I just and he says things that are utterly and completely indefensible. Um, He's saying stuff that even smart Libs should know. It's just just insane.

Here he is, for example, uh claiming because you know, one of the important narratives for the left on immigration continues to be that we are responsible for the central American migrants that have been surging to our southern border. You and me, you listening to this, Andy, we are the reason they are coming here. And you might say, but Buck, that's crazy, and I would say, correct, it is crazy. But why are the Libs saying this or what are the ways in which they make this case?

One of them is that we because we try to spread stop rather the spread of communism into Central America. A very short version is YadA, YadA, YadA, Reagan Iran contra Central America, Sandinista kamis commies, commies, and it's all our fault now, which can't explain to me. For example, why Panama has a murder rate, which is a Central American country or Costa Rica, let's say, has a murder rate of I think about ten per hundred thousand, and Al Salvador is five times and was ten times that

until a couple of years ago. So if it's just a Central America geography thing and we've messed it all up, I'd like to know why some countries in Central America have been doing okay when we have these other countries like Honduras, Guatemala, Honduras Guatemala at Nicaragua, and Al Salvador have really all been in rough shape. So there's the geopolitical Oh, it's our fault, which you now you're going

to hear from the Libs. And then there's the climate change, Oh, it's our fault, which is an even more bonkers version

of this narrative. And here's what Beto, just like, I don't understand science, and I don't understand really anything, but I do know how to sound really sanctimonious and earnest with the people of Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador reduce violence in their home communities, violence which we are somewhat to blame for the civil wars that we've been involved in the drug trade, that we facilitated, the war on drugs that has militarized and hollowed out their civic

institutions in their home countries, and Guatemala suffering one of the greatest droughts in their recorded history, caused not by God nor by Mother Nature, but by you and me and all of us and our emissions and our excesses in our inaction in the face of the facts and the science and the truth. It's like I'm like an idiot religious preacher. But the religion is the religion of Betto, And I just want to tell you all, like, oh my gosh, oh m g we are totally a fault.

We're told it's like all on us. Yeah, it's not our fault, Betto. In fact, these countries all get a tremendous amount of benefit benefit from America and have for a long time. We give on a I'm trying to find the exact numbers on an annualized basis, but do Guatemala specifically, we have given hundreds of millions of dollars of eight and we are treated like we're the bad guys. At least the Libs want to act like we're the bad guys all the time. Guatemala has problems that have

nothing to do with us. Corruption, lack of durable civic institutions, lack of infrastructure, lack of a viable economy, low educational standards. I mean, they've got a lot of stuff that no sane person could say is our fault. But for Beto, because of the narrative, it is in fact our fault. It has to be our fault that Guatemala is having all of the problems that it is say it has gotten since two thousand and one, I think is this ranking,

it's gotten two hundred and fifty seven million dollars. That's not a very big country about We're talking about a country that doesn't have all that many people, but we don't get any credit for at all. But so bet Beto's in hibecile. That's this is why he's really he's making a run in the polls for the worst of the Democrats, which I think had been it really was a jilla brand. It was a jilla brand Deblasio race

until recently, and for the worst, the absolute worst. But then Betto was asked by a man at a town hall about abortion. Up this is to be fair to Betto, let's roy it be fair to me. You have to

be fair. Uh. He gives what is the standard liberal talking point on this, but the way that he does it is just particularly disingenuous and annoying, because at first he makes it sound like this is he makes it sound like that's a silly question, and then he says, well, of course, of course I am going to answer the question in a way that no moral human being could answer it. Specifically about th third trimester abortions. And you said that's the decision left up, left up the mother.

So my question is this, I was born September eight, nineteen eighty nine, and I want to know if you think on September seventh, eighty nine my life had no value. Of course I don't think that. And um, of course I'm glad that you're here, but you you UM referenced my answer in Ohio and it remains the same. This is a decision that neither you nor I, nor the

United States government should be making. That's a decision for the woman to make when we want her to have the best possible access to care and to a medical provider. So notice what he did there. He says, no, of course your life has value. But then he says, well, I'm missing a beat, But I mean, you know, your your mother could have decided your life had no value.

That's that's up to It's solely up to her. So yeah, you could have you could have been aboarded the day before or you were born, and that would be to that that Betto is totally fine with that. If that's the mother's choice, there's no problem with it. Doesn't even say we certainly hope the mother wouldn't do that, doesn't say that at all. It's hurt choice, totally hurt choice. Nothing else to think about here. This is depravity, my friends.

I mean, this is it's intellectually flimsy. You can't say that somebody the question is does a life have value? The day before the baby is born, does that life have value? You can't say yes, that's value. But we leave it to women to determine whether or not the life has value. I mean, this is, this is This wouldn't work in a ninth grade debate tournament. But this is betto Rourke for you. This is who the Democrats until a few months ago were acting like he's the

second Coming. And I'll tell you the consequence of this, this attack on women's right to choose, and and and I'll listen to you. And I heard your question. I'm answering it um and the attack on roe versus weight, which we thought was the settled law of the land. And unless we had an illusion that the achievements that we can we just jump in for a second. Liberals say that this is a moron talking point. This is not even a thing that anybody should say. The settled

law of the land. I mean, it's settled until it's not settled, So what is it. You know, same sex marriage was illegal until it was the settled law of the land via the Supreme Court. Right, I mean, you look at any number of things. This is the way, you know, this is the way that the system we have works. And no serious person really thinks that rowe even people that believe that abortion is a right that women should have. No serious legal jurist, legal analyst thinks

that Rov. Wade is good law, but keep going with the betto made or protected forever, or that progress is inevitable that has been shouttered right now, and I don't want to tell you some of the consequences of this. In my home state of Texas thinks to these trap laws that make it harder for providers to offer the full spectrum of reproductive care more than it paused. I was like, this is where I want to know the full spectrum of reproductive care. Well, what are we really

talking about here. I've never heard a politician in my lifetime being like, we don't want women, do you know, we want to prevent them from having access to prenatal care or you know, obstetricians or well, what is it? What is this full spectrum of of reproductive care? I just say abortion, dude, just say what you're really worried about. It's it's not impossible. A lot of people listening to

this are from Texas. If you're a woman is going to have a baby in Texas, there are plenty of places to go where you can get the care you need to have the baby. Right, there's hospitals and doctor's office and all that stuff. The only thing that's missing in the equation while he uses these vague phrases to disguise,

the only is missing is the abortion component. That's the only thing that anybody has a problem with have closed, and it has made us one of the epicenters of this maternal mortality crisis, because not only can you not get safe legal access to an abortion, you cannot get access to a cervical answer screening, or a family planning provider, or in a state that refused to expand Medicaid, any provider at all. And we are losing the lives of women in our state as a result. I don't question

the decisions that a woman makes. I mean, only she knows what she knows, and I want to I've had a I mean, this is the pandering can only go on for so long. I don't question the decisions a woman makes. Really that's interesting, Well what does that extend to? I mean to say that and think it's an intelligent statement. He's really a statement about the lack of intelligence of Beto O'Rourke. This is a this is a completely fluff,

worthless nonsense talking point from this guy. But you really figured out about Beto and what we've seen is that this guy was always flimsy. It was always just all smoke in mirrors. He is a candidate that the media was in love with. They propped him up. He was the anti Ted Cruise for them until Ted cru beat him. And now we see that this is the person. This is a person that the media was doing front page

Oh vanity fair covers all this stuff. Guys just kind of a loser, you know, It's just not somebody that you would be inspired by in any way, shape or form, and also makes really crappy arguments. So it's Bettel the worst. It may be my number one right now. It turns out what we put on our plates matters a lot. About twenty five percent of all the global climate change problems we're seeing can be attributed back to the food and the choices that we're actually making about what we

eat on a daily basis. This is greater than all the cars on the planet. In fact, it's about twice as much global warming pollution as the cars. If you really look at everything that went into making a single serving of beef, you end up emitting around three hundred and thirty grams of carbon. That's like driving a car three miles. Livestock accounts for a little over fourteen percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. If that sort of seems

low to you, contribue it's about quote to transportation. We're talking all the cars, trucks, planes, trains, and ships on the planet combined. That's from vox dot Com. I can just feel my testosterone levels dropping from listening to Vox. At any point in time, Vox appears on my screen and all of a sudden, I'm just like, I need a safe space. I don't know if I can handle. Oh, I'm so worried all the time. Vox is very whimpy,

that is for sure. But whenever I say things to you on this show, like the Left wants to control everything about your life and do it via climate change. This is a perfect example. They are telling you. This is not an exaggeration, this is not taking out of context. This is a becoming a more widespread belief on the left. And get ready for it's already been happening. But the meatless meat movement, which producer Mike, we both know that is not a thing. There is meat and there is

something else. There is not meatless meat. If you bring me a ribi made out of tofu, it is tofu in the shape of something that actually tastes good. There are only two genders, and there's only meatless meat. I think we got I think we gotta make a T shirt. There's only two genders, and meat is meat. This is where you see though they really do believe that they have license, that they have a think about it. Take their thought process to its logical ends, look at their

argument and draw it all the way through. They believe that we are in a moment of They call it a climate crisis, a crisis that could end the world. And if you're not willing to go along, they want to force you because it's for all of our good. This is about our survival as a species, they will say. And then everything that goes under that very broad umbrella

of the climate crisis, they have the answers. They don't have to have any science background, they don't have to know, and they don't have to make any changes themselves, which is another fascinating part of this, and this is the Leonardo DiCaprio move of flying on his private jet to climate change conference after climate change conference. You know, ultimately it's just people who believe in climate change. They can be intelligent, they cannot have good judgment. That's the truth.

They'd be very smart, but not wise. It's not possible to think the world is ending in twelve years based on this crap that people are peddling all over the pace and think that and be wise. It's not possible. So it really is a wisdom test. It's also a bit of a history test, because if you look back

at these predictions in the past, they're always wrong. And I guarantee you, I promise you the chances of you listening to the Buck Sexton Show in twenty years, which at that point it will be a hologram of me hanging out in your living room. Hello, welcome to the buck sexton, and I'll be like right there next to You'll be a little creepy. Well, have fun though the chances that I'll be saying, I'm so sorry I was wrong about climate change. Zero zero. That's how sure I

am about this. But they are so sure in the opposite direction in their minds that they want to tell you what you can eat. They want to tell you what you can drive, where you can go, how you light your home, how you heat your living room, all these things. This is a it's a crazy religious belief, my friends. I mean this, climate change is a cult. The climate change crisis mentality is a cult like mentality. It is impervious to reason and facts. They say things

that are hysterical and think that that's acceptable. The world's going to end in twelve years. No, it's not. Well, it's not going to add in twelve years. It's just not. I can say it as much as they want, but they better not try to take my burger out of my hand. I'll tell you that right now. Meatless, meat, profane, the very word meat they do show. Ain't over yet, folks, keeping it real. It's time for roll call. Oh, it's the roll call time. Everybody. You know how that is.

Roll call for me, roll call for you, Facebook dot com, slash Buck Sexton and let's see what you have in store for us today, all of the latest and greatest. I'm I'm pulling it up. It's happening right now in real time. Brandy, right, Buck, please go over the origins of Labor Day? Will you? Thanks so much? Well, Brandy, I have done that in the past on the show.

So that's that's something that would definitely come up, I think again, and I'm happy to do it if that's what people would like a little bit of history of Labor Day. It's essentially Commy Day. Well that's technically May Day, but it's a little bit of a commie holiday. I'm just saying, you know, you can get mad at me, but it's about unions about labor. Because remember, if you're a union guy, you can't say labor. You have to say Labor Local two seventh to labor. You know what

I mean. We're here in New York, we know, we know how it is. Scott Rights, Hey, Buck, the left is losing their minds Trump blowing off the climate change form of the G seven and are equally apoplectic about

the China tariffs. In the interests of stirring up maximum havoc with the progressives, I think Trump should announce that the tariffs are to punish the Chinese for being the largest polluter on the planet, and that shipping billions of tons of Chinese goods to America is doing irreparable harm to our ocean, which is undeniable. Trump can also roll in the rule and that the US becoming energy independent has reduced carbon production by having dirty supertanker steaming oil

halfway across the world. He can call it the best biggest green deal ever. Schilzai Scott, Well, I think I got all that. Thank you for sending this to us. It is true that whenever people are concerned about plastic in the oceans, whenever they're concerned about the CO two in the air from climate change, all of these things, they must, first and foremost, if they are serious, be concerned about what is going on in the developing world, in China, in India, because they are polluting a whole

lot more than we are. And unless you're going to get them to stop, And does anyone really think we're gonna get the Chinese government the same government that until recently was enforcing a one child policy, the government that will make anyone who speaks out against the Communist Party thug accracy there disappear. Any think they're gonna start saying, yeah, you know what, we're We're gonna take better care of the planet. We're going to be better stewards of the environment.

I think the answer to that is most certainly no. Brock not to be confused with Buck, that's kind of close. Definitely watched The Shield first. Keep Up the Great Show? Was that a play on words there, Brock? See, I see what you did there, Keep Up the Great Show? I think The Shield is gonna I've heard it's a little bit dated, but it's still worth seeing. Um. I kind of want to go back and watch, you know what. I never watched producer Mike the X Files. Hey, were

you an X Files guy? I'm gonna I'm not gonna lie. I saw previous for it back on Channel five in New York when I was a kid and I was scared. I was like, I don't know if I can watch this. It wasn't in the beginning, but I watched it when into syndication. I didn't think it was. I think it's pretty good. I like it. They did they do a reboot, they did a reboot, or did a movie they did in a movie without a reboot. I don't think they did. I know they didn't. They did. It wasn't It wasn't

very good. So there's not you know what, there's not a great show out there right now that has captured the imagination of the public the way things like The Sopranos and Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones. You know, there's all these there's all these shows that are really in the in the zeitgeist that everyone's talking about it right now. And maybe it's late summer, so there's no new stuff. One of those shows you just message it is about to drop a movie. Do you know which one? Uh?

Breaking Bad? Right, I saw it. I saw a little clip. Yeah, Breaking Up October first. I think. I gotta tell you, I watched some of the Better Call Saul show, and I hear that if you can push through, you're happy with the decision. But it's so slow and weird in the beginning. It's like watching a bunch of lawyers talk about billable hours. Keep going. It's amazing. Yeah, it's good. Really, Yeah, I even thought it was good in the beginning. Oh, get out of here. It's crazy talk, but I will

keep going. Jim, well spoken as usual. Buck. My girlfriend is a Division one soccer player in college and she's had multiple head injuries and can no longer head the ball due to this. It's definitely a real thing on point as usual, shield, Hie, It is a real thing. As somebody who I probably should admit this used to play organized soccer at the high school level. You know, if you head the ball the wrong First of all,

the ball has too much air in it. It actually really hard, and if you head it the wrong way, you'll give yourself a headache basically or instantaneously. I know it sound like a huge whimp, but people are rethinking some of the sports stuff. Folks. We talked Yester about Andrew Luck. I've been reading a little more about this, and that guy was dealing with all kinds of chronic pain.

You see Gronkowski, who looks Gronkowski. I don't know much about football, except I know that guy looks like he was built in a lab to be a football player, right, I mean, he's like six six or six seven, two hundred fifty pounds, you know, probably seven percent body fat or something. Probably runs a four to five forty And he did you see this producer Mike he was he was talking about how he's like, I had to retire because I just was in pain all the time. And

now he's really into CBD. Actually he's into CBD, which I also I agree that that's an interesting area. Yeah. Yeah, he's actually talking about maybe coming back today too. Really. Yeah, he didn't rule it out. We'll see. That's the thing though, you know that there's a high cost, but it's also high reward. I mean, if I could, if I could be any professional am wonder what the audience would feel about this, if you could be any level of professional

athlete in any sport in the world. I mean, realistically, I would probably say being the number one tennis player in the world for me would be the coolest thing because you have a very long career, you don't really have injuries, You get to go to like all these fun places, you know, although it's grueling because I think you played pretty much year round. But I think and being a quarterback on you know, basically the Tom Brady model, that's the ultimate I think, Yeah, you want to make

the most money and have longevity. You have baseball really man guarantee contracts number one. You can't take your money away from you like the cannon football and it's you know, no, I mean you get incussions if you're a catcher maybe, or if you get unfortunate and get hit in the head, but you don't get hurt, not the same way. Not the same way you get like over us or not. You don't get concussive force injury. And on concussions. It's as looked up real quick. Um, your concussion injuries are

just as likely in soccer. They're equal soccer and football. People make all these jokes about soccer. The truth is that at out of the audience right now, everyone listening is like, come on, it's true. Heading the ball, especially near the goal, if somebody whips their head back, I mean I've seen this happen. It'll shatter your nose. I mean it'll be you know, people get messed up because

you have no protection. And these are you know, these are big athletic people who are jumping around trying to head it, trying to you know, use their know your forehead. Just ask anybody who's adept at Scottish bar fighting. Forehead is a weapon, my man. I mean, if you get some momentum behind that, you will mess somebody up. I always thought it was. You know, you see these European players in the in the soccer League. This is true.

I know you're gonna say this sounds crazy, but you'll notice that they often go to the headbut or the kick before the punch. Americans go for the punch. Soccer players like as Zidan very he's one of the most famous players of all time. He headbuttered a dude in the chest. Like that's a whole other level of headbutt, right. And also Eric Cantra famously did a fly kick to a fan in the stands. Not a punch, not a push. He ran up, jumped and tried to kick him with

a cleted foot. I just feel like that's in America. You throw a punch like you look at what's remember ron Our tests ran up into the stands. He's throwing punches. Yeah, yeah, a different deal. Say. Also, by the way, you know this is a real thing. It actually came up in the Second World War. The reason the Germans had I forget what the technical name for it, but people are soldiers would call them potato mashers, you know, those old

school from the army men. You could see them. It looks almost like a squat rolling pin as a grenade, but we could have little pie apple grenades. You're the ones that are around because we all knew how to throw baseballs. You take this for granted, but you go to other countries. They don't know how to throw when

they don't learn the throwing motion. So that's why, you know, the Germans had to do this whole like over over the head circular thing, and they had the special it's like they're throwing a rolling pin instead of rolling a circular object, because when they throw a circular object, you know, foreigners tend to look like the apparently don't teach the throwing motion. Actors either either. You ever see an actor try to throw a baseball like it in a movie? No,

it's hilarious. I'm always amazing at how unathletic actors are actually okay, like they can't even fake it for the purposes of the anyway. You know, google Tom Cruise trying to throw a baseball. It's it's quite funny. Oh yeah, I'm sure I saw the movie The Skulls, and they're a bunch of kids in that movie who are supposed to be in a very elite level rowing race like D one Ivy League, which for rowing is like a big deal. It's not, you know, obviously, for football, it's

a joke. And they're like talking and in the boat and stuff, and I'm just like, this is the most this would be like if you're doing if you had dudes who are sprinting on a racetrack looking at each other like hey, like I'm getting ahead of you, you know, like no, like you're running as fast as you can. There's no like people looking at each other on the boat having a conversation. You're not on a rowboat. You're

not on a boat pond in Central Park. Darn it, all right, I've taken up too much of your role call time with my blabberings. So we're gonna hold on, hold on, We're gonna come right back. Stay with me, and we're back with roll call Part Deal, Facebook dot Com, slash Buck Sexton and that's how you get on the action. And yes, it's pretty straightforward. Dora economy is great, Buck Barack, who's saying Obama just bought a fifteen million dollar mansion

in Martha's vineyard. I just think it's interesting leap journals, in particular, if you say Obama's full name, they think that that is some that is some slights you're not allowed to say. Brock who say in Obama, which is in fact his full name, and that that gets that gets people upset. But yeah, he bought a fifteen million

dollars mansion Marthin. Remember to buy a fifteen million dollar mansion, you have to have made I mean, if you're assuming you're gonna pay for it without a mortgage, which people of fifteen million dollars homes usually don't don't get a mortgage. You gotta make about twenty five million or so that buy that fifteen million dollars mansion. And then I'm sure the taxes for beachfront property and Martha's vineyard year in a year out are mind boggling. So it's good to

be Obama. Guys made plenty of cash. Mister and missus Obama have made a lot of money. Sean Right CNN. Allowing Trump to be compared to Hitler, Stalin and Mao is tantamount to incitement of violence against the president. This is exactly the same mindset that antifa, you is to justify punching Nazis. I don't know, Sean, if I could go as far as I say it's incitement against the president.

Although although when you have the entire media apparatus parroting things about how Trump is a fascist and we have the rise of fascism in this country, all this stuff, when you start to have enough people echoing that message, I've said this to you before. If there really was a fascist government in this country, if I believe that the country was run by a fascist and we had fallen into some form of authoritarianism, would I take up arms against the government. Of course, that's what the Second

Amendment is for. So saying that the government right now is fascist is a grotesque overreach that some person without the judgment to understand that this is just now the way politics on the left are done, may take that literally, as has been the case with other other people in the past who have gone to violence because of the dominant political narrative. Julia rights Buck just started listening to

your show and I absolutely love it. Please work on your Brian Stelter impersonation, because it sounds like Cartman from South Park. I think my Stelter's pretty good here. I had to do a show because Jeff Zucker has completely approved it, and I do whatever Jeff says that here I am. I mean, I'm telling I think that's pretty close reliable sources. That's what the show should be called,

Adam Buck with the latest Ruth Bader Ginsburg headline. The next fight will make the last one look like a warm tropical breeze shields high, Adam, if you do have a Supreme Court vacancy that opens up, perhaps because of rgb's retirement, if that were to happen in the election year, I don't know that we have a different I don't know that there is a higher outrage gear for Libs, for leftists right now. I mean, they already think that Trump is basically Hitler, already think that that's worse. So

can you get worse than basically Hitler? I don't think so. But you're correct that that would seem to add a whole other layer of just insanity onto the way that the left currently views all this stuff. Because the Supreme Court has given the left some of its biggest victories in the Culture War and in American politics for the last forty years. You know, the biggest wins that the left has had on policy have more often than not come through the Supreme Court. I mean it has been

their super legislature, not just Row. And however you feel about same sex marriage, Ohberg fell, and you know, you just go through all these different all these different cases. What the lib would point too would be Bush v. Gore, which really isn't a complicated case at all. Gore lost every count of votes that ever happened. Gore lost. They could keep trying to come up with some way to only count some you know, some sometimes and not a Gore lost. I will say one one hole in my impressions,

I do not have an Al Gore. I do not have it. I sound like or when I do Al Gore. And so I've got to get better at my Al Gore impression. It's not good, it's not I need to work on it. He's kno, No, I can't do it. Can't do it. We'll do it live, uh, Sean Buck. The Shield is a way better cop show. I started watching it while in the military and started the third season when recommended by a co worker. Binge watched the first two seasons in a weekend, Vic and the crew

will rivet you to the television phenomenal shields high. Let may have to check that out. You know. I remember when I was in Iraq now over a decade ago, and we had a bunch of a bunch of door kickers that I was hanging out within the what is it the the MWR mental Wealth and Mental for gosh, I can't remember what this the rec room whatever they call the rec room in the military. Now I'm forgetting sorry. I was never in the military, so why would I know. Well,

I spent a lot of time on military basis. But they were watching the show and I was like, so this is like an ancient Roman history show, except with like a lot of violence and nudity and things like that. Sign me up. And that show was HBO's Rome, which I still sad to this day only went two seasons. I thought, that show. Do you ever see that? That show is awesome? You should watch HBO Room. It's only two seasons. They said it was too expensive to continue

with another season. It was a very expensive show to produce. That was what you know. The guy who was the showrunner for that went off and made the mentalist later on all Right, great show coming tomorrow from New York. She'll tie