Trump Slams Crazy Pelosi

actionable intelligence. Make no mistake, American, You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show. CIA analysts I can speak to three hours without a phone. We'll try doing that sometime. But we want to be very transparent. So as you know, I declassified everything. Everything they want. I put it under the auspices of the Attorney General. He's going to be a charge of it. He's a great

gentleman and a highly respected man. So everything that they need is declassified and they'll be able to see how this hoax, how the hoax or witch hunt started, and why it started. It was an attempted coup or an attempted takedown of the president. Of the United States. It should never ever happen to anybody else. You're gonna learn a lot. I hope it's gonna be nice, but perhaps it won't be. Welcome to the Buck Sex and show everybody California Edition out here still in Los Angeles. I'll

be back in the swamp next week. Not to worry. I'll be back to my swamptastic self next week in our nation's capital, Washington. See, I feel like they need an injection of freedom. I'm going to show up to the district, the People's the People's Communist Republic of Washington, DC, and I'll certainly certainly have lots of folks to catch

up with there. But the President is dropping a little bomb, so to speak, right before the long weekend by giving the Attorney General the discretion to release whatever he deems

fit in from the Russia investigation, anything and everything. Now, let's let's just The press is obviously try to do everything they can to shape the narrative around this, to prepare the battleground so that nothing really bad will come of it for them, as they have all been complicit in the Russia collusion hoax, not all of them, but vast majority of them as they scramble for some story that can cobble together of how there wasn't a deep state coup to take down this president, how there was

not abuse of power, abusive authority, spying, big spy spying on a presidential campaign by Obama appointees to help Hillary win. Folks, this is if you wrote the novel, people would say it was too unrealistic. Here we are. So the president is doing what I've been hoping he would do all along. In fact, the president is doing what he told me in the Oval Office he would do back in October. He's declassifying the documents, or I should say a little

bit of a tweak to that. He has given a duly empowered and entirely appropriate government official, the Attorney General, Bill Barr, has given him the full executive blessing to go through and release whatever should be released in this process. Now, let's just keep in mind that yesterday when news of the Asange indictment broke, and you see the journalists are saying, oh, it's it's it's an assault on journalism. WHOA. They're not

that upset about it. They can't help it. They feel like a sane sold out Team Hillary and Team Hillary to the Lib journos is more important than the First Amendment. Just is Team Hillary is what they were really rooting for, and Asange crossed them on that one, and so they can't bring themselves to really get fully and totally fired up on behalf of Julian Asange and the fact that I will say this, I don't like what Asange. I don't like the way Sane goes about what he does.

But I think that if you're gonna if you're gonna tell the New York Times they can release classified information, you cannot tell Julian Assange he cannot release classied information. I'm sorry. That's this is a matter of law. This is matter of principle. Just because people like the New York Times who make big decisions in government doesn't mean that they get to live by a different set of laws, or the Washington Post or any of these major outlets.

So what does Trump do now? Though he says Bill bar now can go through this released documents, the Attorney general is empowered. Yesterday the journals, the Lib journals were all saying, oh, okay, so you know, we like Asane kind of not really but kind of, but radical transparency is a good thing, and Trump is being a tyrant by and then they barely have time to write their editorial saying so much. And now today transparency is a

bad thing. Today you have people who are former employees of the security state, some of whom were directly involved with, or new individuals who were in these cases, making these decisions about Russia collusion, about the surveillance, and they're running this whole game they always do. Oh, it's going to endanger our national security, and sources and methods would get it. No that the Attorney General is going to go through

the process. This is all a question of discretion. This is all a question and it always is with classified information. You know, there's there are gray areas, and there are judgment calls that have to be made. And here's the way I see it. If the truth is that what happened here is what I believe it to be, and if we can get the names to make it so that it is irrefutable, the Libs will still deny it. They'll deny it no matter what I mean. They would

deny it. If we had a recording between Brennan and the Hillary campaign and James Comey all concocting this thing in real time on a phone call. I mean, they don't have that. But I'm saying, even if they had the most smokey of smoking gun evidence, you'd have plenty of libs that are like, oh, no, there's nothing, nothing wrong happened here, nothing to see, no problem. Trump's the problem. Wait, but what about up the deep state coup against the president?

Isn't that Isn't that unsettling to people? Doesn't that doesn't that concern them? Doesn't that make it more likely that they're going to be, you know, more of these going forward. Isn't this Don't we have to address this? I would offer to you the following. If we are balancing out as a society, and we always do when it comes to national security information versus the public's right to know.

If there was a deep state coup effort against the president, as I believe very clearly there was, then the imperative the need to get that information out dwarfs the apparent need for some secrecy in some of the investigation dealing with Russia collusion, because it was all crap anyway. You know, the names of some of the people who are involved in this they're already alleged to be different government informants and agents, and we really think they're going to be

in jeopardy. If it comes out that it's just confirmed what everybody already thinks about some of these people, then they're gonna be in great now. They're gonna be Grea Dander, they're gonna get a professorship at Harvard, and they're gonna be on MSNBC every night. It's all sources and methods

thing what we're supposed to protect. It's more important to protect somebody who try to, you know, entrap George Papadopolis over a few drinks wherever this occurred, and whichever individual we're talking about, because there are a few of them that seem to go this route. More important to protect that person's backstory or whatever than to know if the FBI and perhaps some foreign intelligence agencies or whomever was trying to destroy a presidential campaign because they couldn't stand

the thought of Queen Hillary losing. Don't let them obscure what is important here. What's important is the truth. What's important is that we don't just have transparency for its own sake, but that we can get answers and the way to get answers here is to release information. This is obviously what the president should do. This is the right move. And yet who wants to think or who wants to guess what the left's view of this is. Do you think that they take a fair minded and

bipartisan country first approach? And of course not. I mean, you've got n Adler, who's just a babbling buffoon running around saying that he's this is this is all to everything that they do for the sake of transparency, is now dirtying things up. Yesterday it was a cover up. Now it's an uncovering. That is a dirtying. It's dizzying.

You can't keep up with all the Democrat contortions, the way that they stretch and abuse and manipulate and distort logic to uphold all these positions, these these contradictory positions, these nonsensical positions. Oh well, he's they're not transparent enough. Oh no, now they're being too transparent. It's not fair. Oh there's a cover up. Oh no, they're uncovering things. Stop all that uncovering. You can't show us that it's because here is I often say Democrats don't have principles.

Here is their principle, destroy Trump at all costs. Whatever hurts Trump is good, whatever helps Trump is bad. That's that's where they operate from. That is how they approach every aspect of their job as Democrats in the Congress, every aspect of their job as lib journalists in the media. And that's how you get guys like Nadler who are

suggesting that this information being declassifies some terrible thing. Rumor you know, Obama declassified the you know, interrogation techniques over the objections of like the whole defense and intelligence community. But you know, Obama said, we have we have to know, you know, we have to get to the truth. This is a much bigger deal, a much bigger deal. And they're like, oh, no, we can't know this stuff. Gotta

protect gotta protect the sanctity of the Fiser Court. I think that we may be heading for the abolition of the fiserc court. My friends, Yeah, we may have to start from scratch, build it anew. The whole process. Tell me about we need to protect the Fiser Court. Here's what Nadler says, though, because he's a clown to play seven.

It's part of the Trump and Republican plot to dirty up the intelligence community, to pretend that there's something wrong with the beginning of the Muther investigation, and to persecute and bring into line the intelligence agency. You know, in a sense, he's right. In a sense, he's right. This is this is an effort to dirty up the intel agencies that were a part of this, to dirty up the Democrats and the media are all working together. But

here's the problem that he doesn't deal with. It's dirtying them up with the truth. It is dirtying them up with facts, trying to release information that is essential to our understanding of what really happened here, trying to get it out into the public sphere so that we can know instead of either guessing or analyzing and surmising. Any good faith person in this whole process who cares about this should welcome this. But what do we see from Democrats.

There is no good faith at all. All they offer is politics, politics in pursuit of raw power, destroy Trump at all costs. That's the only principle. Everything else is secondary or non existent. Declassifying information about a coup against the president of the United States operated from the top reaches of our own security agencies. That's something that if it happened, we need to know, and if it didn't happen, we need to know. Although it happened, I want the evidence. Now.

Trump has made a move in that direction. Let me just say this before we've got more on this. But you know, this is also very important timing because by allowing the Attorney General discretion to declassify things that deal with the Russian investigation, it means that there will also be a greater latitude for him, perhaps to have information that the Inspector General's report which is coming out soon that looks at the Russia investigation, there might be more

information that can be included very important information. Classification is not and this is from the regulations and I know because I used to have a top secret clearance. Classification does not exist to cover up, obscure or excuse government misconduct. Classification is not a political tool. It's not supposed to be at this point. Anyone who claims that we should not know exactly what happened in this Russian investigation to

get Trump is absolutely playing politics and nothing else. To pay attention to all these former this person and that person from this agency or that agency going on TV saying, Oh, this is so terrible. They just don't want to be humiliated publicly because they will be humiliated when this information gets out because they've been playing for the wrong team. They've been lying, they've been misleading the American people intentionally for years on this issue, and now it's time for payback.

And all you need for that payback is the truth to get out. And that's why they're so opposed to it. I'm much more coming your way, team, stay with me. You know, James Coby has changed his story a number of times. Originally it was we didn't spy and we didn't wire it's out. Well, he's going to change it again. Now he's gonna say, well, didn't break the law when we spied in wired tap, because I think the American

people will see that very soon. Additionally, what we've got to find is the additional documents in terms of what they knew when they knew it, And I can tell you I've seen some unclassified documents that would indicate that the FISA warrants, the very first PISA warrant, was predicated on something they knew was false, and they knew that

before they made the application. You see. It's not that people are going to get frog marched down to the station because of what happened in the Russia collusion investigation, although that there could be some If were Komi or Andrew McKay, I'd probably want to have very good legal representation right now. But it's more that it will show, I believe, especially when these documents are released, beyond any reasonable doubt, there will be unreasonable doubts. The Libs will

conjure up unreasonable doubts of all kinds. Make no mistake about it. They You will never There are some Libs who still believe the Trump took orders from Putin on the election. I mean, you'll never change their mind. It does not matter. It is an article of leftist faith for them now. But for the rest of us, we're

trying to operate in the real world. What you will see is the very senior officials that it's beyond just Democrats and leftist it's it's really also the establishment people that had been at the top reaches of the federal bureaucracy for a long time and think that they're the kind of praetorian guard of the Republic, you know, But the way they do that is, by putting their thumb on the scale when need be to make sure a threat like Donald Trump can't get elected by the American people.

What you'll see is a pretextual, pretextual decision making, you know, the equivalent of as I've told you, if somebody walks walking into my office when I was in the CIA and said, I know or Bin laden is he's hiding under my bed, my my first instinct would not have been to say, we need to get a work up on this guy. We need to you know, I mean, assuming that this happened to me and you know, the DC area, and the guy's clearly crazy. You know, this

isn't like overseas somewhere where maybe this is true. But my first instant wouldn't be to say, we need to tap his phone, we need to bring in all of his relatives. My first inste would be, we need to

get this guy some help. Not too unlike this circumstance when somebody has a dossier that's completely unsourced and unvetted and just or I should say unvetted, they'll say, well, of course there are sources, but single sourced in so many different ways, and who knows how good the sources are, and that they would base major investigative steps on the dossier.

I could write a dossier right now about anyone and send it in the FBI and say, well, this is what I heard, but I can't tell you who my sources are if they what if I did that about Hillary Clinton? I said, I've got a dossie and Hillary Clinton turns out and I wrote all this crazy stuff down and I say that someone told me, but I can't tell you FBI because those are my sources. And if the FBI then started wire tapping Hillary Clinton or going after her top aids, would people think that that

was okay? Oh well, the FBI they had a dossier. That is the level of stupidity that we are talking about here from some of the most powerful people in the government under the Obama administration. And once even more galling is they expect you to swallow that nonsense. They expect you to say, oh, yeah, that seems normal to me, that seems fair. This is going to have them running Scarrett. I'm telling you this, this is it is the biggest political scandal of my lifetime. Many others have said it.

It is true. We've got more because like you said this was something that was overwhelmingly ordered both. She's an American icon. This is not a Republican problem. This is Trump if we can't could humble together on a woman like this, And I think that for him and for the administration, as he said, which is is halting this for reasons, I don't understand. It would be a way to unite the country and celebrate something good. So I don't understand why for that reason alone, Well can't put it.

It could well dog whistle to his base. I don't understand it. I don't think so. If you do racist things and say racist things, the question of whether that makes you a racist is almost academic. The problem with the president is that he does and says racist things and gives cover to other racists. I mean, it's not an accident that hate crimes rose disproportionately in places that

his campaign visited. And there's no question, without having to examine his heart, there's no question that we have to respond to the racism that is emanating from this White House. Oh Trump is so racist, racist, racist, They say, that's that's what they're telling us all the time. I mean, there, and we'll talk more about later in the show, how ridiculous this claim is that you know, Trump there's a delay in putting Harriet Tubbin on the twenty dollar bill

because of racism. But let me let's put stop that firm and we'll get to that later in the show, something that we can look forward to in our discussions later on. But there you had a mayor, Pete Buddha judge who's saying the same thing. But it's just, you know, Trump is just so racist. This is what we're always told. Meanwhile, didn't get a lot of attention, But there's an academic study out this week. You know, I don't know how you know how much you can take this to the

bank or not, but it's out there. There's an academic study that shows that the country is now considered less racist, that people have less of a racist attitude about things in this country during the Trump presidency, that race relations. Basically, this is the first time you will see anything out there about how the country is becoming less racist under the president that were always told as a racist. Now the way that the Libs are already positioning themselves on this, Sorry,

this is university. I was trying to find the studies I was talking University of Pennsylvania sociologists who have said that quote. Contrary to mainstream reporting, America is less racist under President Donald Trump than more racist. Sociologist Donald Jay Hopkins and Samantha Washington gathered a randomly selected panel of twenty five hundred Americans whose changing opinions have been understudy

since two thousand and eight. The two expected to hear an increase in prejudicial remarks this is from red state, especially from the Republicans in their group. However, they found the following quote. The study found the opposite. Americans have actually become less inclined to express racist opinions since Donald Trump was elected. Anti black prejudice, they found, declined by a significantly significantly statistically insignificant degree between twenty twelve and

twenty sixteen when Trump was elected. But then after wait, between twenty twelve and twenty that's that's wrong. But then after twenty the date there is wrong. Sorry about that, guys. But then after twenty sixteen it took a sharp dive that was statistically significant. They meant, when Obama was elected twenty twelve and twenty sixteen. Moreover, contrad of their expectations, the fall was as evident among Republican voters as it

was among Democrats. There was also a general fall and anti Hispanic prejudice too, although this was more evident among Democrat voters. Ah, yeah, folks, here we are here. We are dealing with numbers, not not the perceptions of people in the media, not the not folks who have a very clear and vested agenda in the could continuation of the narrative that Donald Trump makes everything so much worse and so much more racist than everything else Here they

actually looked at it. Sociologists tend to be tends to be full of leftists as a academic discipline. They looked at what's going on in the country and what did they find. They found that the country is, at least according to the sample sis, getting less racist with Donald Trump as president. What are we going to take away

from that? Now? The Libs are going to say that this is because Trump has held the mirror up to racism in a way that people see how repugnant it is, and therefore they're less okay with sharing their own You know, they can try to dance around this as much as

they want. At the end, At the end of this discussion, would you take away from it, it is at least here's one study that's saying the country is in a way less racist than it was before, or racial attitudes have become less prejudice, which is a great thing, by

the way. I mean, one of the problems I think that conservatives run into when we talk about race is that we truly, we truly are not racist, and we're called racist for our policies all the time, but we aren't in our hearts in any way prejudice against people based upon skin color or creed. And we know that that's in direct contradiction to the core tenets of conservative belief, which is the dignity of the individual and moral agency

and an individual freedom and liberty. I mean, you can't have these things if you're judging people by their skin color. You know, you are in a state of self contradiction if you think that individual dignity worth or you know, legal rights can in any way change or should change, based upon someone's skin color. So racism is anti conservative.

So it's not surprising at all that when you have a Republican administration, at least from my perspective, you would see a decline in racist attitudes but the media is like, WHOA, what's going on here? This is crazy, this can't be happening. Trump is the most racist, racist president ever. This is this is what they've been told. This is what they tell themselves. It turns out that the data we prefer eight or data, the data goes in the other direction.

Talk about some immigration stuff, Pelosi. I've got some fantastic guess that'll be joining in the third hour. We're going to discuss a possible a pardon request from the sister of a soldier currently imprisoned for what his family says is a crime he did not commit. We'll also be joined by someone from the R and Sets to give us a little bit of an update on election stuff.

That and more coming up. Team can side because, like you said, this was something that was overwhelmingly recorded on both She's an American icon who This is not a Republican problem. This is Trump If we can't could put hum together on a woman like this, and I think that for him and for the administration, as you said, which is is halting this for reasons I don't understand. It would be a way to unite the country and celebrate something good. So I don't understand why for that

reason alone, Well can't put it. It could well dog whistle to his base. I don't understand it. So I don't think so. If you do racist things and say racist things, the question of whether that makes you a racist is almost the academic. The problem with the president is that he does and says racist things and gives cover to other racists. I mean, it's not an accident that hate crimes rose disproportionately in places that his campaign visited.

And there's no question without having to examine his heart, there's no question that we have to respond to the racism that is emanating from this White house. Oh Trump is so racist, racist, racist. They say that's that's what they're telling us all the time. I mean, there, and we'll talk more about later in the show, how ridiculous this claim is that you know, Trump there's a delay in putting Harriet Tubbin on the twenty dollar bill because of racism. But let me let's put stop that from it.

We'll get to that later in the show, something that we can look forward to in our discussions later on. But there you had a mayor, Pete Buddha judge who's saying the same thing but it's just, you know, Trump is just so racist. This is what we're always told. Meanwhile, didn't get a lot of attention, But there's an academic study out this week. You know, I don't know how you know how much you can take this to the

bank or not, but it's out there. There's an academic study that shows that the country is now considered less racist, that people have less of a racist attitude about things in this country during the Trump presidency, that that race relations basically, this is the first time you will you will see anything out there about how the country is becoming less racist under the president that we're always told as a racist. Now the way that the Libs are

already positioning themselves on this. Sorry, this is university. I was trying to find the studies. I was talking University of Pennsylvania sociologists who have said that quote, contrary to mainstream reporting, America is less racist under President Donald Trump than more racist. Sociologist Donald Jay Hopkins and Samantha Washington gathered a randomly selected panel of twenty five hundred Americans whose changing opinions have been understudy since two thousand and eight.

The two expected to hear an increase in prejudicial remarks. This is from red state, especially from the Republicans in their group. However, they found the following quote. The study found the opposite. Americans have actually become less inclined to express racist opinions since Donald Trump was elected. Anti black prejudice, they found, declined by a significantly significantly statistically insignificant degree between twenty twelve and twenty sixteen when Trump was elected.

But then after wait, between twenty twelve and twenty that's wrong, But then after twenty the date there is I'm sorry about that, guys. But then after twenty sixteen it took a sharp dive that was statistically significant. They meant when Obama was elected twenty twelve and twenty sixteen. Moreover, contrar of their expectations, the fall was as evident among Republican voters as it was among Democrats. There was also a general fall and anti Hispanic prejudice too, although this was

more evident among Democrat voters. Ah, yeah, folks, here we are here. We are dealing with numbers, not not the perceptions of people in the media, not folks who have a very clear and vested agenda. In the continuation of the narrative that Donald Trump makes everything so much worse and so much more racist than everything else. Here, they actually looked at it. Sociologists tend to be tends to

be full of leftists as a academic discipline. They looked at what's going on in the country and what did they find. They found that the country is, at least according to the sample size, getting less racist with Donald Trump as president. What are we going to take away

from that? Now? The libs are going to say that this is because Trump has held the mirror up to racism in a way that people see how repugnant it is, and therefore they're less okay with sharing their own You know, they can try to dance around this as much as they want. At the end, at the end of this discussion, would you take away from it? It It is at least here's one study that's saying the country is in a way less racist than it was before, or racial attitudes

that become less prejudice, which is a great thing. By the way, I mean, one of the problems I think that conservatives run into when we talk about race is that we truly, we truly are not racist and recalled racist for our policies all the time. But we aren't in our hearts in any way prejudice against people based upon skin color or creed. And we know that that's in direct contradiction to the core tenets of conservative belief, which is the dignity of the individual and moral agency

and an individual freedom and liberty. I mean, you can't have these things if you're judging people by their skin color. You know, you are in a state of self contradiction if you think that individual dignity worth or you know, legal rights can in any way change or should change, based upon someone's skin color. So racism is anti conservative. So it's not surprising at all that when you have a Republican administration, at least from my perspective, you would

see a decline in racist attitudes. But the media is like, WHOA, what's going on here? This is crazy, this can't be happening. Trump is the most racist, racist president ever. This is this is what they've been told, This is what they tell themselves. It turns out that the data we prefer data or data, the data goes in the other direction.

Talk about some immigration stuff, Pelosi. I've got some fantastic guests that'll be joining in the third hour, we're going to discuss a possible a pardon request from the sister of a soldier currently imprisoned for what his family says as a crime he did not commit. Will also be joined by someone from the R and C Scius a little bit of an update on election stuff. That and more coming up. Team. Are you worries that these investigations

are hurting your reelection chances? If I don't know, my Paul numbers are very good, you know, like the reporter, but my Paul, I guess we have a forty eight today we have a fifty one. We have very good Paul numbers. Considering now, I have to tell you, if you people would give straight news, I'd be at seventy. I'd be maybe at seventy five. But you don't give straight news. You get faith dws with fake news. I'm

still winning the election. But if you gave serious good news the way you're supposed to, I'd probably be at seventy or seventy five based on the economy alone. I mean, I think Trump has a point here. I wouldn't be at seventy or seventy five because you got too many lunatic Democrats who just won't change. It doesn't matter, what doesn't matter what Trump does. Trump could wake up tomorrow, walk to the podium in front of American people say

I have cured cancer single handedly. The stock market has doubled, and all of our enemy states have agreed to have elections next month that will be fully democratic and transparent, and they all want to be just like America. I mean, conjure up your dream scenario for what the world looks like tomorrow or next month or next year. And if Trump got us there, you would still have about forty to forty five percent of the country. That's like, No, I hate Trump. Trump is terrible. He's a racist. I

don't like him. Wouldn't matter, wouldn't matter what he did. I've said this before to you. I was cheering for Barack Obama the day that the Bin Lauden raid was success. I was like, you know, he's my commander in chief. Two. He gave the order. I know we could get into the They waited, and but he gave the order. He gets the credit, folks. That's just that's the truth. Okay. You know, maybe Hillary was the one who really want to give the order. There are just because Obama did

it didn't make it bad. Right, Just because Obama did something didn't mean that I thought that that was the wrong move. I thought he made a lot of wrong moves, but not everything was wrong. Not everything he does is bad. There are so many people who take that perspective about Trump, and that is largely a function of the media propagating this narrative every day and every way that they can

that Trump is literally worse than Hitler. If you hear that enough, I think it starts to seep into your brain. You start to reach this point where you figure, you know, there must be something terrible about this guy. I mean, there are adults that seem like they're they're functional human beings that have completely lost their minds over. I mean, there must be some thing to this. They can't be that crazy with no reason. Oh no, oh no, they

are that crazy for it no reason whatsoever. This is this is where we are, folks, that that Trump is polling as well as he does. Oh look, he's a salesman. He's got a little he's a little braggadocious, little braggadocio. He's I don't know why I got Italian with that one, but I guess I think it does come from it. It looks Italian. That's a word. Hey, who is the braggadocio. He's a guy though, who's got plenty a swagger, no question, and he likes to he pushes it a little bit

on the numbers and on the estimates. That said that, all said, I do think that the Trumpster has been able, and I say the Trumpster with affection. The Trumpster has been able to keep a solid number even from the polls that are the most negative toward him, because the economy is as good as it is. Could you imagine if we were in the midst of a recession. Could you imagine what they said about Trump starting a war with North Korea or a trade war with China that

would cripple the stock market and destroy housing prices. And if any of that were true wherever we be, then no, the opposite of all that has been true. And yet they still act like Trump is the is the apocalypse man. They really the the dishonesty at work with the media. Trump Trump knows it though he's right anyway, I want to do well. Ultimately, he understands that they're just they have not yet gotten over and they I shouldn't say, they have not yet gotten over. They will never get

over this. They will never get over that Trump won in twenty sixteen. It's it's never gonna happen. There will not be a day here when we can look at the media and they'll say, you know what, We've finally come around on this. We understand that our positions in the past were rooted in a kind of irrational animus, and we're not We're not going to do that anymore. We're We're we're gonna give the president his due on all of this. We're gonna make sure that President Trump

is treated fairly by the press. You know, would you even know how to how to react if that were the case, I would think that something bizarre had happened and maybe the apocalypse was nigh. I mean, the media is so biased. Later on, I'll talk to you about I got quoted ida kicking some stand in the faces of people over at CNN, but they deserve it. I got quoted in a media itte, which is really only red I think it's kind of a trade journal online for media people. But I got quoted about about CNN

today and I'm look, I'm just telling the truth. I'm just telling the truth. I'm because I'm keeping it real. Because I'm keeping it real. It's what I do. It is what I do. By the way, Mark, do you have Trump saying they're never gonna get over the the election? Please do? What do you want to accomplish with your first full attack? Bob? Excuse me? This just shows how fake you and the news are when you say when you say a personal attack, didn't you hear what she

said about me long before I went after her? Did you hear she made horrible statements. She knows they're not true, she made, she said terrible things. So I just responded in kind. Look, you think Nancy's the same as she was, She's not. Maybe we can all say that, but I think I think, frankly, I think right now we are. I'm only speaking for myself. I want to do what's good for the country. I think Nancy Pelosi is not helping this country. I think the Democrats are obstructionist. They're

hurting our country very very badly. They are hurting the country with all this lawfare against the president. But don't you like Trump is once again he sees this for what it is. You got a bunch of you know, live reporters here, which is basically all almost all reporters who were asking him about why he's being mean to Pelosi.

Pelosi is calling him a criminal. Are they going to ask, have you seen a single reporter ask Nancy Pelosi if she thinks it is beneath the dignity of her office to not just insinuate, to outright accuse the president of criminal conduct, to suggest the president is mentally unfit for office, to continue to preside over this machinery of lies about Russia, collusion and obstruction and all this stuff. I mean, if we had an honest press corps, wouldn't they ask that

question at some point, wouldn't that happen? Nope, doesn't see him to happen. No, their activists, folks, their activists posing as journalists. Journalism has been destroyed. These people have corrupted it beyond recognition. They might as well all just walk around with little DNC stickers on their chest. That's what they do. That's how they see themselves. At the end of the day, when all said and done, they say otherwise.

But they know that they're playing for a team. They know that they're engaged in pushing an agenda, and it's just you know, some of us have We've had enough of it. I think I'm sick of all the crap from these journos. How about that. I think Trump's sick of it too. Yeah, I really do it. It gets me fired up, all right, it gets me. It gets me a bit fired up. What can I tell you? Oh, speaking of democrats and crazy things that they say, Well, we got a lot when it comes to democrats and

crazy things. We have to hit a quick break here. We'll be back. This is the third time I've been in a leadership role during a migration surge at the border of families and children, both in twenty fourteen and twenty sixteen at the end of the last administration. We have more than doubled those two crises combined in the first seven months of this year. And we are still in the middle of that effort. Well, even though we provided solutions to Chiras, We're not going to just wait

for them to act. I'm going on Monday to Guatemala. I want to take this fight to the cartels that are smuggling children. Starting at the Guatemala Hunter and border. We're bringing HSIH agents CBP officers Borbauing is to embed with the Guatemala enforces and trying to interdict this flow. At the beginning, we're working with the government in Mexico and the same thing, sharing intel on the people profiting from human misery. We can't allow that to go on anymore.

And then the steps were taken at the border, trying to get judges down there to adjudicate hearings more quickly, get people repatriated and change this dynamic. I like what I'm seeing from this guy, Kevin mcaleen, and over at DHS, he's he seems like a no nonsense, no nonsense dude, and it seems like he's taking the reins on this and deciding to tackle the problem of the border. I mean,

you heard that. He's saying, we're already beyond what we're considered previous crises, and the media would admit then that they were they were crises, because remember, a crisis under when it comes to immigration, a crisis under a Democrat president is always an excuse for a conversation about amnesty. A crisis under Republican administration turns into something else because Republicans say, hold on a second, we need to stop these people from coming in. Well, we need to take

take a different approach from the executive branch. Remember Obama, there were crises that happened to the border of these unaccompanied miners, these surges, and what was the Obama administration response DOCA and what came after Doc DAPPA not just deferred action for child that arrivals, but deferred action for the parents of child. You know what's gonna come after that? Dog PA for deferred action for grandparents of arrivals, right, dagpa,

I mean you? Or for the ants and uncles of arrivals dah two, a's there and uncle you know whatever, there's gonna be all these different versions of the same thing, which is just a rolling system of amnesty. That's all that was. That was the whole big trick under the Obama years when dealing with the border, when talking about the borders, that everything just immediately became a conversation about

how quickly we could get to amnesty. But under this president, we at least can discuss that there's a downside to this. Remember that's where the leftists completely fall apart of immigration. They do not accept that there's any downside to illegal immigration. That's we're focused here on illegal immigration. They do not accept it. There's nothing about illegal immigration that's bad. They

just want to control it a little better. They just want more of a sense of who's coming across the border scamming our system, staying in this country accessing federal benefits. You know, before we had that, we had Trump talking about how high he thinks his numbers would be if he, you know, didn't have the press corps completely against him, if he wasn't in a position where everybody around him, in the in the media was just on it, on a crusade or perhaps the jihad to take him down.

If that wasn't the case, what would public perception of his presidency be? You know, would he be well above fifty percent in the polls. I mean, here's a perfect example. When he accuses them of being fake news. There's a lot of reason to believe that he's he's correct on that. I mean, there's a lot of there's a lot of stuff you can point to that shows that, yeah, in fact, the president is is the target of of fake news. I Mean, here's a here's a perfect case in point

on calling uh MS. Remember he called MS thirteen members animals and the media for they lie bout the this or they they approached this in one of two ways. One is they say that President Trump preferred to Mexican immigrants or just immigrants from south of the border as animals, which is just a lie, a capital lie. Lie doesn't mean they haven't told it. They've said it. Beto O'Rourke, until very recently was still saying and he hasn't taken it back. He just he's been saying that publicly, but

he's been lying his face off about this. But then the media also takes this in some ways even more position. It's one thing to lie about what the president says. It's another thing to take a position that you'd think they can't really believe that. And there's this, oh, we shouldn't be so mean about MS thirteen a gang rape control kill or is it rape rape control torture? I

can't even remember. Now, you know that that's its motto, and they are fond of hacking off people's limbs, and it is founded with an eye to devil worship, all right, that's where that's what the origins of the group are are rooted in. I've talked about that before and now we're being told things like this is how some of the media talks about MS thirteam play fourteen. He basically seems to assume that everybody is part of MS thirteen. Very strange to hear President United States speak in such

dehumanizing terms. Is it appropriate for a president to ever call anyone an animal, even if they are statistic gang members. Yeah, I think that's something to watch out for. The history of political leaders dehumanizing opponents, even criminals, and using animal metaphors is a dangerous one. That is not something that

we should accept from an American president. I do think there's a serious problem with the president the humanizing inning group of people in the United States, even if they are hardened criminals at a little okay, if they're sadistic gang members because of animals day, you know, I think we got bigger problems. We got bigger problems than that. And also that I didn't even know who that was

the beginning of that. I think those are all see then commentators there at the beginning of a little montage. But the person who says that he calls them all animals, or he indicates that, oh, sorry, that he calls everybody a member of MS thirteen. I mean, that's just a lie.

He obviously doesn't do that, He's never done that. But you see, this is where the Democrat media has a problem, especially on a week like this, when you have two people who were arrested supposed to be deported, two teenagers members of MS thirteen, and Brewley murdered young girl. You know, there are bodies that pile up as a result of the bleeding heartlib approach to dealing with illegal immigration. There are bodies as a result of this, and they should

be forced to answer for this. Their policies have led to this. They just pretend that this is not the case. They act like this does not happen at all. I mean, I couldn't believe it. I saw A Tucker's show on Fox earlier this week and he played that montage and he said, you'll look back at this and say, there's no way that this could really have been real. There's no way that this could be what really would really happen. There there are, in fact people and voxed this whole

splainer on how MS thirteen they're just like you and me. Yeah, MS thirteen, you know, they're just like the kidnext door. You know, I'll get but they get mixed up in some bad things. No, I'm sorry. I mean, if you're joining a gang that has built its entire reputation on horrific and sadistic brutality and murder, you know you should have to answer for that in reputation as well as in the criminal justice system. But they just they have this. It's the same loop from them. What do you hear

from Democrats on on how to solve the border crisis? Nothing? All year from them is family separation and Trump is mean about immigrants. What do they want their policy to be? How would they like to fix it? So here's the thing. They don't think of it as fixable or needing a fix. They think that the situation right now is completely sustainable. In fact, the situation right now is preferable in many

ways to a secure border. It benefits them politically, It does all kinds of things for the Democrats that over the long term they like. They see it as votes, they see it as building the ranks of identity politics. They see it as the necessary enlarging of the state in order to administer to these new illegals who have crossed in the country who in an increasingly information based economy, are not going to be able to compete. We know this,

but it's all slogans, it's all chance. It's all like the people that I come across here and the fancy precincts of LA who don't want to deal with the reality. They just want everyone to think that they're really they're really caring and really like totally smart. We'll be right back. We now have a list of the numbers of children that have died in custody. We should all be outraged. The evidence is really clear that this is intentional. It's intentional.

It's a policy choice being made on purpose by this administration. Why do people think this administration is intentionally harming children? Look at all the lies, Look at the harm done to children the administration. They say, a bunch of libs there claiming the administration is intentionally hurting kids, and some even go as far as to say publicly elected officials, democrats, that the administration is hoping that children die as a result of the border policy. You even had, You've had

so many libs. I mean, this is one of the great areas of virtue signaling. Who's going to argue. This is the way the Libs like to frame any debate. You want to have a gun control discussion, you don't care about the dead kids that get shot. You want to have a border discussion. You don't care that kids go into custody. Keep in mind, they're not dying after five or ten days in custody. They're dying within forty eight hours in custody because when they come to the border.

By the time they get to the border, hundreds of thousands of people were talking about here. In any population of hundreds of thousands, you will have individuals, just as a function of numbers, who have a serious illness and young children who are being forced to travel under difficult circumstances, under dangerous circumstances, and who show up at our southern border, and who just by virtue of the resources at the border and the overwhelmed border patrol, can't get medical attention,

don't get medical attention within necessarily the first hour of showing up at the border, they have a fever, they die. That's what is That's what has happened. I mean, this is the situation of the border. And I spoke in a border patrol about this. I mean, they feel terribly that any kids have lost their lives. There's absolutely no sense whatsoever that you get from talking to the medamin A border patrol that there's anything other than sympathy for

the individuals who show up with kids. But they also are law enforcement officers and they have a job that they have to do. They are not the Red Cross. They're not there standing in front of tents waiting to give everybody medical care. And you know, you have to ask at some point you should ask the Democrats, is that what should happen is that there is that what their preference is that we just tell everybody, come here, free medical care and you get to stay. If that's

not open borders, what is open borders? You know Mika Brazinski's running around on her show, which I mean Joe Scarborough, does he still call himself a conservative? I mean, the guys policy agenda right now is identical to who's that guy who, you know, the worst person in the world, the biggest clown to have ever been on MSNBC, which

is saying a lot. By the way, Alberman, I mean Olberman and Joe Scarborough seem to have pretty much the same political outlook, but but Scarborough is a conservative at MSNBC, so Meek is all hysterical about this, and because it's so easy to down there saying I'm the one who cares about dead children and the Trump administration doesn't care, and there's so many and terrible Kevin McAleenan, he's like, look, what they're saying is just not true. We were not

trying to punish kids and families of the border. It's not happening. Playclip thirteen. Happening. We're separating children in maybe one case a day out of the three thousand families arriving. It's very rare as for the safety of the child, prosecution for a serious criminal offense, it's a threat to the child, it's communical disease, or it's someone who's presenting a family relationship that doesn't exist. That's when that happens.

For that not to be the case, let's be very clear what they're talking about here is the rare cases. Now there is still family separation that can occur at the border. And that's why the Libs want to tap tap right back into that because over the summer they were able to seize the moral high ground at least in terms of the media battle by saying, oh, the

family separation is terrible and they're separating children. It's so horrible, it's awful, and it's skipped They skipped right past the discussion of Okay, well, what do we do about in the border. They've got no answers on that. They just want to tell us how terrible the family separation policy is now. They want to go back to that. Well, because one or two people a day children are being

separated from their families. But as it's being pointed out, it's because there's either a serious disease and they're trying to save somebody, or there's a serious threat to the child. You know. For that not to be the case, you would have to have a special set of accountability, a

special law in place. Because an American citizen, people that are supposed to be in this country and supposed to be able to count on federal services when needed, an American citizen who posed a threat to a child can be separated from that child. Happens every day. Americans who are you know, caught drunk driving and have a kid in the back seat separated from their kid. Happens every day. So what's the what's the desire here of the of

the left owes? What do they want to happen? Do they want do they want the situation to be that even if the adult that is accompanying the child, And remember I told you about that story, um a few days ago. We're a pilot program that suggests thirty percent of the children that are showing up with different illegals are not actually their kids one and three. That's a lot.

That means we got tens of thousands of kids who are being either cycled, or being abused, or being Now I'm not saying that that study is flawless and that that's but that's an indicator board and on by the Washington Examiner. I mean, it's a real thing that's out there. But are we now going to have a situation where the the the government, our government is going to say, Okay, we're worried that this child maybe part of a human trafficking scheme and could be sold into a kind of slavery.

I mean, you know, horrible things happen to kids in the hands of the cartels, and we're not we are We're going to tell border patrol at an Immigrations Customs Force them. No, No, you can't separate this person from you can't separate this this child from the person who's claiming to be his father or mother or whatever. That's

that would be a deeply immoral position. But you'll notice that they won't get into the leftist who criticize this, who are so upset over it and have all these problems, They will not they will not get into to the details of it, because all they want to say is, just like with Russia interference in the election, all Russia interfered, Russia interfered, Okay, but how much do they interfere? Did it matter? Did the Trump administration if anything to do

with it? Oh, Russia interfered. It's just a talking point. Family separation that still occurs at the border. Yes, it is true that there is family separation that still occurs at the border. Why And when you get to the why, it's very clear that a family separation was not occurring at the border, our border patrol would be derelict in their duty and the federal government would be acting in a clearly immoral fashion. And yet this is where Democrats

are on this. They have no answers on immigration. All they have is demagoguery, grandstanding. Oh, we care about the kids. Republicans don't care about the kids, like everyone cares about kids, all right, But there's also this problem of having an open border and having the erosion of American sovereignty, you know, which started out like a trickle and is now becoming a tsunami because of the laws and because of the way they're being enforced at our southern border. This is

a real problem. This has to be addressed, and it does not get addressed by people who stand around thinking that they're just so morally superior to border patrol and law enforcement for doing their job. And now this time another temper tantrum again. I pray for the President of the United States. I wish that his family, or his administration or his staff would have an intervention for the

good of the country. And I do think that impeachment is a very divisive place to go in our country, and what we can get the facts to American people through our investigation that may take us to a place that is unavoidable in terms of impeachment. The White House is just crying out for impeachment. That's why he flipped yesterday. This is not behavior that rises to the dignity the office of president of the United States. What is going on with Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, third in

line for the presidency? Everybody, that's right, You gotta remember that as we talk about this president's calling her crazy, Nancy got some things to say about her. Well, is this indicative of the Democrats in disarray? We got Liz Harrington joining us now she's the rnc's national spokespersons. Tell us what she thinks about this early stage going into twenty twenty and also impeachment, all that good stuff. Liz, thanks for making the time before the long weekend. Absolutely

thanks for having me. All right, so let's let's start, shall we with impeachment. To impeach or not to impeach.

I can't seem to figure out if Democrats are sure that Trump should have been impeached one hundred times over or if they're not sure and they're in kind of wait and ce mode because they apparently change their mind every few hours, right, and Nancy Pelosi's behavior, quite frankly, is the Niza dignity is with the Speaker of the House should be doing, and right now she's trying to have it both ways and trying to appease her really rapid radical base that's been dying for impeachment from day one.

We know Rashida to leave what she famously said after she won her election, which is also beneath the dignity of behavior of congress people. But neither here nor there, they wont impeachment. She has a radical left wing base that she's dealing with, so she's trying to appease them on the one hand and throw them in a peach fit bone, and then on the other go over to the White House and say, oh, yeah, that's just nonsense. Let's make a deal on infrastructure. That's not how it works.

You can't accuse the president again of a baseless crime, saying he's covering up a non existent collusion. However that works. You can't go in the front door after laying down that bomb and then expect to work to others. They're not interested in working for the American people. If they were, they wouldn't have dismissed the immigration plan that was laid out just a week ago before they even read it. So she I don't think I don't think she quite knows what to do or how to handle her caucus

right now. That's why she keeps going is very incoherent on the impeachment question. Incoherent for sure. I think incoherences the order of the day for Nancy Pelosi. Ya, I need a little bit of an insight into this one list. If they want to impeach you, why not just impeach them? They have the votes. The Democrats would go along with it. What's with this back and forth, this kind of impeachment

footsie they're playing. I think Nancy Pelosi knows that the reason that the Democrats won the House in twenty eighteen wasn't the far left face. It was more moderate Democrats. It was more moderate voters who do not want impeachment. And so if she wants to hold onto her speaker's gavel, she knows the American people don't want it. They don't want to talk about Russia anymore. They're sick of it after more than two years when there was no there there,

they don't The American people don't want it. They want them to work and fix the problem. So that's why I think you're seeing this incoherent concluding, like she wants to dangle it out there and have you know, the the air of suspicion, but she doesn't want to actually go through with it because that's going to backfire big

time on the Democrats because there's no crime. There's nothing there And I love they're accusing the president of a cover up, who just declassified everything so he wants everything out there. Uh, and yet he's covering up what exactly. It's so easy, but they're grasping at anything because they have nothing. They can't win on the issues. He covers it up by uncovering it. Apparently this is this is what we've come to with the with the Democratic Party.

We're speaking to Liz Harrington, rnc's a national spokesperson. Lee, how, how are you guys feeling right now about your your chances against the the whoever the Democrat, whomever the Democrat contender may be, when when it all is said and done, How are you guys feeling about the race right now? I know it's very early stage, but what dynamics are you seeing play out that are either favorable or challenging or what? Sure, We're very optimistic. We're feeling very good

because the country is feeling good. We just had a record numbers of optimism again in the country at over seventy one percent or feel good about the economy, and that's incredible news. And it's because of the policies of this administration and a strong Republican agenda put forward by the President. And we've seen the effects in ever in your daily life. With the tax cuts and the deregulation. We've got the economy actually booming again. It wages are rising,

unemployment at historic lows. So we're really proud of the record. We think it's a strong one on a continued every promise the President is really brought up in twenty sixteen, he's delivering on and and the ones that we're still working on, like the borders because the Democrats refuse to come to the table. So we're looking very good right now. We're very excited about the record we now have to run on. It wasn't just promises, it was actually results.

And any of the Democrats, I mean, so early, what do you think of Mayor Pete? May Or Pete's making a surge right now. He's got you know, he's a vet, he's got an impressive resume. Is he one you know who worries who worries you the most, Liz, I know you're gonna say none of them because Trump will win. But if you have to pick one, who's the most

concerning right now? Well, I think the concerning thing is the normalization of really radical policies that not only Mayor Pete, but Joe Biden is getting on board with a lot of radical policies as well. They all are. They're talking, they're following the Bernie Sanders wing as a party, which is a towards socialism. So that's what I'm concerned about. Mayor Pete can try to put a nice face on socialism,

but it's it's a devastating political philosophy. And he's endorsed Medicare for all, he's endorsed packing the Supreme Court, getting rid of the electoral college, which would give no voice to states like New Hampshire, in Iowa, all these early battleground states that they're they're having a lot of face time there right now. Well, they would never go there if the electoral college didn't exist and it was a national popular vote. They are the Green New Deal, all

of them. Joe Biden says he wants a climate revolution. I mean, they are talking about radical policies where the government, not you, decides every aspect of your life, whether what you drive, what you eat, how even they're even telling you not to have kids anymore because the climate change. They're adopting really radical, one size fits all policies that we know don't work, that hinder individual freedom and would ruin wreck the economy. I mean, never mind how you

pay for it, every single policy they're proposing. Elizabeth Warren I should say as well, because she's right there with proposing these radical policies, you would have to double taxes, and that still wouldn't pay for Medicare for All, which is really socialized medicine. So that's what's concerning to us. But we think we can make a good contrast to look look at the individual freedom that's been restored just in the past couple of years, with more freedom to

get a new job. I mean, we have a million more job openings than unemployed people in this country right now. That means you have more economic freedom in your life to move, leave your job and find a better one. And it's great. The policies are working to give you more freedom, more money in your pocket, and we're going to continue that progress. We don't want to go down the leftist path at the Democrat Party wants to take

us down. All right, Liz Eric and everybody RNC national spokesperson here and from the HQ there in DC, have a fantastical day weekend, and thank you so much for joining you too. Happy Memorial Day. All right, team, we got so much more coming your way. Please stick around because the show is just getting going. Team. There's been a lot of talk this week from people around the president, and there's been some reason, believe from the President himself.

There's a consideration of pardons for some former military US military members who are accused of crimes, in some cases convicted of what are classified as war crimes. We now have the sister of one of those individuals right now, and she wants to tell us the story of Nick Slatton. We have Jessica Slatt and his sister on right now. But Nick was eighty second Airborne deployed twice to Iraq and then got caught up in a very deadly incident

years later and is currently convicted numerous counts as a result. Jessica, thank you for joining us. Thank you so much for having me on the show. Book and letting me have the opportunity to talk from about my brother Nick and why he's such a prime candidate for our presidential party. And the bottom line is, as a proud American, I agree with those around the country who are speaking out to say the prosecuting veterans for split second decisions in

war zone incidents to further political agendas is wrong. But as a sister of a wrongly convicted, innocent combat veteran who is sitting in a cell right now and may die in prison for someone else's shot during one of those war zone engagements, I really want to dispel some of the some of the false statements that are out there in the media about my brother. So I really thank you for giving me the opportunity to do that today. Well please, people may not remember this, but this was

in Baghdad. Was this the Mansor traffic circle incident? Mister Square? Yes, so basically square, sorry, yeah, NICs square. Where it started out was a car bomb blew up in the Red

Zone where a US diplomat was unseen. Nick and his team went to the traffic circle in the sirsquare to lock that down to help that diplomat get back to safety and when that happened, a white Kia came out of stop traffic and headed forward the convoy, and one of Nick's teammates made the decision to shoot and stop that threat, and he did that because he feared it was a secondary car bomb attack. And my brother and then that person who my brother's teammate who did this,

confessed four time to doing it. All of the eyewitnesses to the shooting say that it was my brother's teammate. The physical evidence that exists is consistent with the fact that it was my brother's teammate. We know from trajectory analyzes that it would have been impossible for my brother to make the shot. And yet my brother was wrongly prosecuted and convicted for killing that person. And so Nick is an innocent man sitting in prison today for shots

that were not his. Another thing that's so incredulous about this is the stuff that isn't out there in the media, which is all the stuff I just said, Plus the fact that when the FBI asked the driver's father to travel to the United States to testify against my brother, that man refused. He told the FBI that American agents had told him that Nick's teammate, the one who confessed had killed his son, and that changing the charge to Nick was dishonest. Not only that, my brother has been

completely honest throughout this process. He even passed a polygraph by a former FBI examiner that included that concluded Nick was truthful when he denied shooting the driver. So I don't know how we are possibly here today, but we

are now. Wasn't there also a decision made to prosecute your brother based on the usage of an automatic weapon as an enhancement to the crime, which the statute, as I understanding, is there so that if you are, you know, a gang banger in the States, or you know, if you're engaged in organized crime or something and use an automatic weapon, they can have an enhancement. But your brother was given the automatic weapon by the United States government as a and was serving as a contractor for it.

So that's actually a charge that was levied against the other men who were charged and convicted in connection with the shooting, not my brother. The government did not. His charge is only with respect to the driver of the Kia, who he did not shoot or kill. But you're absolutely

right that three other men were charged. They were convicted of that, and you know which is and they were but the way, but they were also government contractors given their weapons by the United States government, and then they were additionally charged for using those automatic weapons in the commission of this crime, yes, exactly, which is outrageous because those were the weapons that our government gave them, told them to use, they used them, and all of those men,

you know, did what they thought was right under the circumstances, and they used the weapons that the government had provided them to do their jobs. I mean, I think everybody needs to remember, these guys were out there responding after a car bomb exploded, so we're not talking about you know,

they were out there doing their jobs protecting diplomats. Yes, now, Jessica, from what you've told me, it sounds like, how could it be possible that if somebody else has already stated on the record and under oath numerous times, another member of the team that your brother Nick Nick was with that, how could he still be in prison for this. It seems impossible to people that that could be the case, given the system that we'd like to believe is more

competent than that. So, I mean, what do the prosecutors say about this. Do they just believe that the other guy's lying. Well, they can't point to a single case ever. This is unprecedented. They can't point to a single case ever where they have prosecuted a citizen for first degree murder when someone else confessed to the killing and there's so much evidence that this other person did it. So,

I mean, what they are is embarrassed. They were unable to prosecute my brother for lesser charges and then vindictively prosecuted him for murder, so he couldn't come into court and say what he actually did out there that day, which was shoot someone who was taking aim at the convoy, completely different person. The Department of State went out and found enemy shellcasings in the precise location where Nick had

told the teammates that that happened. So they couldn't see what they needed to do with paint this case as black or white. They needed to say this was a good shooter, it was a bad shoot. Nick is someone who's can come in and give evidence that it's a

good shoot. And so what they decided to say was, while our theory is anyone who shot out there that day basically committed excessive force, essentially and then they dropped Nick from the case many many years ago because the evidence was weak that he didn't anything wrong, because obviously what he was doing was, you know, his job. He fired two shots during an engagement when hundreds of rounds

were fired. And then later during the Obama administration, when they tried to put Nick back in the case after Joe Biden went to Iraq and promised them that they would pursue the case, the statute of limitations had a run. The prosecutors had to be told by the appellate course that you can't prosecute somebody for time bar charges. So then they've vindictively charged him with murdering someone they know

he didn't even shoot. That's how this happens and how he gets convicted is he has a civilian jury and the prosecutors are allowed to make Nick's case about everything else that happened and all the other shots that got fired that have nothing to do with Nick. That's how the right and for everyone listening, I mean, there were a lot of civilians who were killed in the exchange overall, but that, as you point out, is not the result of the shots that you're brother fire. That is correct,

That is correct. And also, you know, I do want to point out for your listeners that you know, there's a lot of things that aren't reported in the media obviously about this case. And you know, one of the things about the count and the number of people who were killed or injured in the incidant that was largely created by an Iraqi official who we now know has

suspected ties to terrorist groups. We just got that information disclosed to us during my brother's third trial, second and third trial, which happened last year, and so you know, it's really sketchy how our government relied on this person to help build their case. He's the one who collected the victims, you know, the alleged victims. He collected all that information. He gave that to the FBI when they

finally showed up like weeks later after this happened. And you know, we have there are witnesses who have said, hey, if this guy tells us to go left, we'll go left. Did they tell us to go right, We'll go right? And you know, it's it's very sketchy. I'm not denying the fact that you know, as innocent people were killed and wounded. That's tragic, but that has nothing to do

with my brother number one, but number two. People need to know that there's more story, more to the story behind that as well, and have serious questions about that.

What is the current status of your brother. My brother is sitting in a cell in a jail after having been wrongfully convicted by a civilian jury last December, and we have post verdict motions to legal team has filed um seeking his full acquittal based on a ton of rights violations during his trial orm and also the fact that the evidence is just legally insufficient to support a murder conviction in his case. Or what degree of sentence

is he currently serving? Oh, he doesn't have a sentence, but he will have a life sentence if the judge doesn't grant him a new trial or throw the case out entirely. And we're waiting to see what's going to happen on those motions right now. But you know, I want to I want to impress that upon the listeners that you know, my brother may very well die in

prison without a political intervention in his case. And because it was such a political prosecution, I think it's a perfect case, a primary case for a political intervention, all right, Jessica, if people want to learn more about this or if they if they want to help. I mean, I know you want the president to pardon your brother. Is there is there a petition? Is there anything that people that want to get involved in the case should look at. You know, I know our president listens to the media

and also has a great presence on Twitter. So I just hope people will get out on Twitter and social media and just like tell him that my brother should be pardon pardoned, Nick Slatton. Tell him, you know that this is wrong looking look into Nick's case. I you know, I want people to look into I want people to send the message we want him to look into this case. And we do have every reason to believe that he is.

And if he is, I want to thank him on behalf of my entire family, and I want to tell him that we are an American patriot like him, and I'm hopeful that he will be the one person in our government to finally say that the truth matters in my brother's case and not let a decorated combat veteran get discarded for politics. My family wants to get back to fighting for the country we love instead of fighting against it and I hope that he'll help us do

that by sending my brother home. Nick Slatton is the former member of eighty second Airborne Folks who currently sits in a cell. His sister, Jessica Slatton tells us he was wrong, wrongfully convicted and it's hoping for a pardon from President. From Jessica, than you so much for your time, The best to you and your family, and I hope you have a blessed Memorial Day weekend. Thank you so much, Buck you as well. All right, team, we'll be right back to be honest with you. Any changes with paper

money are very slow. For example, in nineteen thirteen they started talking about the idea of reducing the size of paper money, which at that time was much bigger than it is today, large sized notes, and also changing the designs, and that took from nineteen thirteen all the way until nineteen twenty nine. Okay, so but that was one hundred years ago and things are just as slow. But really like even in today's day and age, it should take twelve years to get a new its currency, a new

bill up and running. You think that the delay is legit. It is a slow process. And the other problem that he brings up is the security, which he is right about. We are very behind the times on security for our paper money. So you have CNN with Donna Bash, don't it's not Dana even though it's spelled in it's Donna Bash. So that's how you can you know if someone's a CNN insider or not if they know how to pronounce

that name. She's asking a currency expert about whether the delay in getting Harriet Tubman on the twenty dollar bill is legit or not. You know what, what what's going on here? People have been saying, you know that this must be racism or it must be racism, because Harriet Tubman on the twenty is delayed until after Trump leaves office, according to Treasury Secretary Manuchin. And now I'm saying that

people are replacing Andrew Jackson's face on some bills. This is the Washington Post with a what is this a stamp that they've used of Harriet Tubman there, there's effectively taking it into their own hands to replace Harriet or Andrew Jackson with with Harriet Tubman. But you'll you'll know, notice in the tone of voice with with Donna Bash there, it's fun to say Donna. You'll notice that the answer

she wants is that this must be racism. I mean, right, it has to be racism, right, there's no other reason. And now, because we've been told that Harriet Tubman on the twenty isn't gonna happen until twenty twenty eight, and yeah, here we go, A three D stamp has been created by Donno Wall, not to be confused with Donna Bash. I'm not making that up. This guy's Donno Wall that can superimpose a portrait of Tubman over Andrew Jackson Jackson and he's already sold out of these, and he's telling

people to just stamp the currency with this. Um I believe. I don't. Look, I'm not trying to be a stickler for rules here. I believe it is illegal to de face US currency, so I cannot I cannot think. Yep, wait, he says. The basic gist is if you can't you can't render a bill illegible, you can't cover any text or numbers. Anything outside of that is fine according to Wall, But according to the Earth Bureau of Engraving, defacement of

currencies prohibited under federal law. Currency defacement is generally defined as follows quote whoever mutilates, cuts, transfer disfigures, not transfigures. That's something else. Perforates, unites or cements together, or does any other thing to a bank, build draft note or other evidence of debt. Okay, and you can be fined and imprisoned up to six months. So it sounds to me like you're probably breaking the law here by by doing this. There, my friend, I cannot, I cannot give

this the all clear. I think this is probably a very very bad idea, the stamping. I mean, I don't know how people feel about replacing Jackson with Harriet Tubman. I'm I mean, if the idea here is to have a greater diversity of representation of Americans history on our currency, I mean, I look, everyone can have their own opinions on this, and that's fine, but I would think, why, you know, I would think Frederick Douglass or Martin Luther King ahead of Harriet Tubman if we wanted an African

American representation. Um, you know, an individual represented on our currency. I just I mean me personally. I mean, you know, Frederick Douglas is incredibly eloquent and so important in our history. So anyway, but look, I'm fine with Harry Tubbin thing. I'm fine. I don't have an issue one with the other.

I just think it's interesting that libs here are so surprised that one the answer is that it's not actually Trump's fault, that's what seeing now, what's going for the answer is that it's not Trump being a big, mean racist that's stopping this from happening more quickly. And also I think that they they really don't understand how inefficient and slow government is like that. That is, even at

this stage of life. You have news anchors who have been in the game for twenty or thirty years working at a place like CNN, and they just don't understand that government is highly inefficient, is a bureaucracy that does not function the way that we are told it will, and that there's no really, there's no really sound way to speed it up. Government just isn't that good at stuff. Changing currency is one of those things that government's going to be very slow at doing. And also, you know,

our currency is important too, folks. Something you want to get right. Let me tell you. When I was over in China and seeing all the fro lexes, fake rolexes and all the fake handbags and all that stuff. You know, counterfeiting currency is not that hard either. It's an active war, I believe, for a nation state to do that. So it's a very very big deal. But we want our currency to be with all the different security measures and

everything we've got. I mean, currency is a pretty complicated thing. Nonetheless, Trump's it's not Trump's fault. It's not racism. It's just the government is slow. And once again it's that's that's a surprise to the journals because journals just don't see them able to comprehend that. You believe it or not, there are people out there in the government who are not working overtime all the time to get things done. We'll be right back. The show ain't over yet, folks.

Keeping it real. It's time for roll call. Yeah, role call. Everybody in a holiday weekend coming up, looking forward to it. Out here in Los Angeles, La La Land. I'm actually heading to the beach tonight, heading to the boo as it were, which, as I understand it is what the cool kids call Malibu. So if you see somebody drinking a zema, dancing around in you know, aviator sunglasses with some flip flops on probably any person in Malibu right now. I don't think you'd be able to know that that

was me. That wasn't a very good description. But I'll be there hanging out, running around the Beach'd be nice thinking about kind of house i'd buy in Malibu if I had a spare ten or fifteen mill lying around, Or forget a spare ten or fifteen mill, how about just a mill. That would be nice. That would help things out quite a bit. All right, your thoughts via role call Facebook dot com, slash Buck Sexton. That is where you go for your role call action Woody Rights

Shield's high Buck. I see you went to China with SUG. You can stay engaged with any media source you wish via your sponsor Express VPN. Oh really, I fly as a pilot there all the time and stay engaged with appropriate news sources, including one American News. It is appropriate for you to call out that you only get seeing an international garbage at most hotel, but as a world traveler, IM my fellow conservatives make our wishes known to the

hotel staff, which has produced positive results. I have on many issues gorged on issues you have brought forth. I think it says gorge. There you wrote, you wrote gouge, but I don't know what that really means. Reach out, brother Woody, well what do he? Thank you for the heads up, man, And yes, CNN International is anti American propaganda that our own country puts out, so I wish that is not the case. Turns out that I also got quoted today in an article on Mediaite about CNN's

bias a couple of times. So there's that. There is that for sure? All right here, Dwayne Rights, Oh yeah, that's right. Go to media you'll see CNN claims balance coverage, but former pro Trump contributors disagree. Quote, we're squeezed out involuntarily. That's not what I that's not the one that my quote Buck Win. Actually, you guys, you know what, fine, fine, I should tell you. So this is about how CNN doesn't pretend to be a journalistic enterprise but doesn't really

have any actual pro Trump conservatives. I mean, there's a couple, and I don't mean to be mean, but they're not exactly the first ones that come to mind for the biggest names in conservative media. Here's here we go. This is what I told, This is what I told media about CNN. Quote, CNN used to pretend it accepted right wing voices for balance, but now it openly despises conservatives

who are a pro Trump. Today, the entire enterprise clings to a fundamental dishonesty that it has no political agenda. Taken down, Trump is obviously the agenda. And in this regard, some of CNN's hard news anchors, Temper Cooper are the biggest journalistic frauds of all. When asked, and then that was the end of that quote. And then when asked if Sexton would ever consider working with CNN again, he responded, quote,

this is interview today. Quote what I go back? Sure, if CNN stopped being crazy good times, good times, this has already got I think it's got close to a thousand comments. People. People are enjoying this, Uh, this back and forth quite a bit, I think. So I'm sure I'm gonna get me some mean former CNN people or former colleagues of mine, I suppose from CNN. They're still there, going to creep into my DMS and say, how dare you, sir? What say that CNN is completely biased and unbalanced left

wing propaganda? Because it is, I mean, we can sit around and pretend like it's not, but we all kind of know that it is. So that's what I've got for you on that. Okay, Okay, I know I got a little sidetracked there, Dwayne Rights. Democrats don't break ranks for the same reason scientologists don't leave the church. They'll get destroyed by their quote friends. Well, Dwayne, that that may be true. I don't know if your take your word for that one. Indeed, let's see here. Well, no,

actually that I do know that is true. Democrats will destroy their friends. I just don't know about the scientologist thing really, But now that to think about it, Yeah, that's right. Scientologists really mean if you leave the church, right. Indeed, let's see John Right shields high fan from the real newsdays. Nancy Pelosi calling for Trump's family to have an intervention for Trump because he won't bend the knee to her

is the ultimate Democrat projection. They can't stand the president hasn't resigned yet, or perhaps it's a cry for help. She sounds like she's got a case of dementia. She's slurring and she has to pause and think about her words. COMMI better lives, John, I think one of those videos that's circulating, I haven't seen them all. One of them I do believe is fake, and one of them is

just edited, so edited is not fake, it's edited. But one of them I believe they actually change change the speech patterns in it, although you know, I don't really know. So there you go, down right, Welcome back, buck handangdee shoe fa, which in Mandarin means great show, great hair. On yesterday's show, you call Pelosi crazy like a fox. Please never use the word fox in any context near

her name ever. Again made me ill have a great holiday weekend, Steve, I think I said, or at least I meant to say, that Trump is crazy like a fox. I don't think I said that about Pelosi. If I did, I I misspoke, which does happen sometimes when you speak for three hours at a time, which is what I do here every day every day. What a due I speak? Okay? Sorry, Andy writes buck Love the show that Amash his family owns a tool company that stamps its name on Chinese goods.

He is going to lose money when trade Trump makes his trade deal. Andy, I I don't know anything about that, but thank you for raising it to our attention here, Phil, Phil, what's happening, Phil, Phil? Welcome back? All fair guest host feedback top to bottom, best to worst best The Godfather knows how to host, has great guests and is very entertaining. Number two Ben Winegarten doesn't proontificate, has excellent guests and

allows him to speak after he asked great questions. Number three Raheem knows how to host less interesting guests interesting and then I will not Okay, I will not get into the bottom of the list of out of respect for my guest host. But at least his top three here, that's interesting. Let me know if you agree with this team Phil, Phil thinks for his guest hosts, he puts The Godfather Michael Pelica number one. Number two he puts

Ben Winegarten. Number three, puts Rahim Kassam. Look, the good news is this is like picking your best all star. And you know, everyone that I have guest host this show is hostworthy for you know, for their own shows. So I always knew know that when I'm not here, we're gonna have a great a great person in. I mean, obviously it's not the same show without me, but it's still a hopefully very enjoyable listening experience. Let's see here, Trisha rights, whoa were we go? Not all of us

in California. People are crazy libs. We know how we know the facts and laugh at how dumb the Democrats act. Oh, Trisha, I know some of my favorite people in all of conservative Conservativa are out here in California. Nor are we millennials all against Trump and wants socialism in free healthcare for illegals. Maybe a late end of millennial worries mean that people say there for socialism. Topic for the show.

I'd like to suggesta ran about how absorbed California Congress and governor are waiting to give free healthcare to people here illegally. But I'm an American, I live in California. I have to pay for my own health insurance along with the outrageous hospital bills I have from my illness. I've never published a writing piece, but I'm considering writing a piece and trying to get it out and express

how outrageous this has all become. It is. I feel an itch for speaking out and wanted to express myself. I can make money doing it, I feel like I would go for it, etc. Thanks for listening llol and indulging my rant. Tricia, I hope you feel better. Sorry to hear about some of your medical challenges. And I totally understand what you're saying. It's like, well, people struggle

so much to pay for their healthcare. They struggle to pay for their healthcare, but then we're told that people that are here illegally shouldn't have to pay anything for their healthcare. Wow, that doesn't seem that Dare I say that does not seem fair? Probably because it isn't. Let's see Kirk, hey, Buck, good to hear your back. Sounds like you had a great trip today. I've seen in the Nancy Pelosi talking up. I think the only coverup should be the Nancy being covered as the fool she is.

She speaks when she sounds half drunk. She can't lie on camera very well. Wow, you really get you really good after here, Kirk? All right, Kirk does not like Nancy Pelosi. Kirk does not like Nancy Pelosi, that is for sure. Let's see what else we have here? Shan't we? Chris rights Buck? Am I the only one experiencing this third hour? Every show has been replaced with some podcast A show called Sleepwalkers, a tech show listen on AM

radio in Mississippi. Check the iHeart app. All right, So Chris, I did look into this, and it turns out it turns out that they are now on some stations just to try it out. They're running some podcasts for about an I think an hour a day at different times. We have I have no control over it. It's it's just a thing that's a sort of a top down. So for some reason, part of the show gets cut to throw a podcast in there. You know, let's um listen to the listen to the podcast of my show.

That's the best thing I can tell you, because I can't. I can't turn this spigot off right now. It is what it is. We got more, speaking of the spigot and the Fawcett got more roll call coming up stairt there, rock and roll, fellow patriots. We made ours go up to eleven. It's time for roll call. Michael Buck. I'm mean to say thank you for the scrambled egg tips. My scrambled eggs have improved exponentially. My son loves them.

You truly are a scrambled egg connoisseur. However, I cannot go down the same road as when it comes to bacon, give me thin, crisp bacon any day over chewy fat strips of bacon shields high. Well, Michael, you're half right, so that's better than being a whole wrong, you know what I'm saying. Buddy, Hey, hey, you know what I mean. My scrambled egg tips are fantastic. Look, if you prefer thin bacon, that is fine. I mean that's you know, some people like wine out of a box, and that's

cool too. I'm just trying to tell you that if you start getting in the habit of drinking some really nice vintages, you might prefer that and a nice vintage. When it comes to bacon, is thick cut slab bacon that you get from a butcher. I'm just saying, I'm not trying to be a bacon snob. If I go into eyehop, what am I getting a plate of super thin cell of fan looking bacon. It'll still be delicious. All bacon is delicious. It's like chocolate pretty much. All

chocolate's delicious. But give it a shot, my friend. If you haven't yet, Alright, I'm glad you're on the egg train with me because that's a good a good train to be on. Remember, folks that the biggest things take Take it off the heat. Don't just adjust the heat. Remove it from the heat source as soon as it starts to cook too quickly cook it low and slow. Eggs do not need to be cooked fast. They cook fast on their own medium low heat for scrambled eggs.

And break the egg on a piece of paper towel on the countertop, and then pour it into the pan. Do not break it on the edge of the pan. You will get shell ejected into the pan. You don't want that, all right, Let's see Kristen Buck I'm patiently awaiting the post China podcast. Oh, Kristen, hopefully you've gotten them. I know this week we've had some technical issues with the pod, So yeah, I am on it. Let's see

what else we've got here. Adam ran across this article planning on gene editing wheats so it's safe for you to eat shields high crisper Jean editing could make gluten safe for celiacs. Well, that would thanks Adam for sending us to mean that would be fantastic. I don't really like to be able to eat bread again. And maybe drink beer. Again. These are things that I would I would really very much enjoy. I would like that to

be the case. So if there's a way that science hashtag science can make that happen for me, I am all about it, my friend, all about it. Absolutely. Let's see here. We have so many messages today, trying to pick them on the fly, Richard, your Tuesday show on Stitcher was posted about three hours before your Wednesday show. The Chinese must be targeting you. Keep up the awesome though shieldside your producer, Mark Man, what is are the Chinese hacking us? Why are the podcast not going up?

I'm gonna go ahead and blame the Chinese. Okay, gosh, let's I mean it used to be sorrows now I think the Chinese are hacking me exactly, Marcus, My first thought when Beto Rock's campaign started tanking was, no, if he drops out of the race, Buck Saxon might stop doing his awesome Beto impression. That would be terrible. I can't get enough of that impression, mister Saxon, not only Senior O'Rourke's voice and affectations, but also your parody of

his uber PC ideas such as they are. If Amigo O'Rourke's campaign flames out, I humbly make the following request, Could you please please please keep doing your ombre O'Rourke impression. You can use whatever you want to satirize it typically woke progressive Democrat shields High from Winnipeg, Canada. Yeah, baby, some of our Canadian brothers up north. Listen to the

Buck Saxon show. I love it. I love it well totally, because when Patio doesn't win the presidency, then the next stop for him, we'll be running for the Prime Minister of Canada. Because while Betto isn't from Canada, he's also not Hispanic or Latino. But he appropriated a name, so why not just appropriate a citizenship? Amazing? I like love maple syrup and Molson's beer and ice hockey, so I can totally be your prime minister and bring our hearts

together as a unified one. There you go, there's some Betto to send you off for your weekend. I should talk like that in Malibu. I'd make more friends. Malib is so beautiful. Can we Conservatives? Can we take it over? Please? Can we just like set it up so we buy all the land there? And it's very expensive. There's there's a lot of rich conservatives out there. Though. You got

all these business owners to listen to this show. People are like, you know, just quietly have a master of fortune through hard work and doing it right over many many years. So you know, can you guys all get together? Can the can the wealthy members of Team Buck please buy up Malibu so we have a little enclave of conservatism on the beach. That'd be fun. Right now the Libs own the beach, all owned by Libs and enough.

Let's Oh, this is very long and I do not have time to get to this one on today's show. I'm hoping everybody will be able to download the podcast that wants to I guess this is kind of late to say that because by the time they hear this all other or not. No, but please do tell us somebody. This weekend people are gonna be asking you what podcast should I listen to? You who's a smart, young conservative who can lay it down for me while also keeping

it entertaining. I'm hoping you'll say that is the Buck Sexton or just Buck Sexton. You don't have to put an article in front of it, have a fantastic weekend. Everybody have it blessed and Memorial Day. I will talk to you Tuesday. She'll tie