When Is A Lie A Lie?

This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American Again. The Buck Sexton Show begins the Sectimics, No, Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. We are in a freestyle Friday mode now, which means we're about to kick off the weekend. Those are listening live, I know, we're all excited. We're about

to go have a couple of days off. Hopefully some of you probably work weekends, but hey, you know, at least at least we get to hang out on Friday. That's nice. And if you're listening on the podcast Letter On, obviously you're probably already I was gonna say, sitting by the pool, but not too many places in the country where you can do that right now, Maybe you're I don't know, is there any snow anywhere, producer Mike. I feel like there's not any snow anywhere RelA right now either. Well,

there's always snow in some places. So let's get into it, shall we. It's been quite a week, been a tough week for the administration. A lot of people are doing an early victory dance that it's just a matter of time here, just a matter of weeks perhaps before that that final revelation comes out that's going to prove the Russia collusion conspiracy. Theorists were right all along. It's not

gonna happen, So don't don't worry about that. It's just not But we have been shown definitively, in my view, that there is a very real bias in this country when it comes to how lying is treated, and I mean how it's treated at the upper reaches of the government. We have an entire judicial system, right we have a legal system that has premised upon finding the truth as a means of achieving justice. But justice is the ultimate ends.

It's not just the process for its own sake. All the processes, the legal processes that we have in place are geared toward geared toward justice. That's that's why they call it the justice department. Right, they don't call it the process department, although they probably should. But that's why when you have somebody, for example, who technically violates a law but did not have intent, or it was an accident,

or all these things are taken into account. And on the issue of lying, especially lying in testimony, yes, there has to be enforcement of this. You can't. You can't say things under oath that are not true without consequence, because then saying things under oath has no legal meaning. Really,

but there are gray areas here, there is discretion. And what we know from progressives because they are they are ideological hardliners and believe that whatever they have to do to achieve power and for their side to win is inherently moral. I mean, I want our side to win, but I don't want our side to do anything and everything to get there. The left doesn't have the same compunction. Really, they don't have the same problems with this. And we see this with lying and what has gone on this week.

You remember when James Comey speaking about people who are full of it. James Comey a while ago admitted that there was a fair amount of lying. Go on, flip forward, John, your second in McCann McCabe in command. McCabe was fired for lying multiple times within the FBI. You defended his character on Twitter. That's okay. Lying is okay internally, No, it's definitely not. In fact, the McCabe case illustrates what an organization that's committed to the truth looks like. We

investigate and hold I ordered that investigation. We investigate and hold people accountable. Good people lie. I lay out on the book. I think I'm a good person. Where I've lied. I still believe Andrew McCabe is a good person. But the Inspector General found that he lied, and there's severe consequences in the Justice Department for lying, as there should be throughout the government. Yeah, what are those of your consequences? McCabe going to prison because he lied under oath, he

lied under sworn testimony, under penalty of perjury? Is he going to prison? Who wants to bet that former FBI director McCabe is not going to prison? Anyone plays bets on that one Now, how do I know that, do I? I mean, yeah, I've got some DJ sources. We'll talk about that at another time. But do I have any side information on that? No? I do not. But I know that McCabe's not going to prison for this. I

know he's not. Why because he's on team left wing doesn't mean that he's left wing ideologically, but he's on team left wing on this one. He's anti Trump, so he's gonna be fine, just like I know that for example, Brennan, Brennan's not going to prison for lying. But hmmm, hold on a second, what did Brennan say to Trey Goudy under oath in Congress play clip three? Do you know if the Bureau ever relied on the Steel dossier any as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings. I

have no awareness. Did the CI rely on it? No, it was not in any way used as a basis for the Intel's community assessment that was done. Huh. So the Steel Dossier was the Steel Dusty was part of the FISA, A big part, probably the biggest part of the FISA request. But the entire community didn't you know about that? Hmm? That doesn't strum. That doesn't strect me as believable at all, does it? And then there's a

clapper and Comy talking about well, two different issues. One is spying on Americans and two whether Comy is ever an anonymous news source, both under oath play clip two. Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans? No, sir, it does not, not wittingly. Director Comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating

to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? Never have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? No? Okay, So those are both lies to Congress. Now that's particularly worth pointing out this week because, as we know, Michael Cohen Poles, who's Poles.

He just pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, a felony, which maybe added on top of his already I think eight felony charges that he pleaded guilty too over the summer. I mean, you know they're they're they're lining Cohen up to send him away, you know, like he's a mafia don here. I mean, he's he's going away for years, and you have to wonder. Okay, well fine, I'm I'm all for it. Congress. You shouldn't lie to Congress. You

can't lie to Congress under oath. But if Congress asked me, you know, when was the last time that you spoke to you know, you spoke to your uncle, and I said it was I think it was two weeks ago, you know, Congressman so and so. And it turns out it was, well, technically two weeks and three days, which is really three weeks ago. Should I go to prison for that? I mean, that is that a lie that matters?

I think most fair minded people would say no. It has to be a material a lie about a material fact, an issue of importance, and it has to be done willingly and knowingly. But that hasn't been the standard that's applied to some of the people caught up in the Muller pro They all get sent away for minor things related to non crimes. They all get sent away for how they or rather they have to plead guilty. Some

of them haven't. Although I think Papadopoulos is in prison as we speak, that's not fun, but they end up getting. And remember it's not even just the prison sentence, it's the decision to charge or not. One of my biggest objections to the obvious double standard in our justice system was it was that it's not that Hillary Clinton didn't, you know, with the whole locker up thing and all

that locker up. You know, it's not that she didn't go away for decades, because I don't think she was going to get time, you know, in a fair system where she wasn't Hillary Clinton, based on what other people have gotten. She wasn't gone away for long. She might have gone away for a little while, but I wouldn't have been a long sentence. But the fact that she didn't even have to face charges, and that's a huge

part of the punishment in itself. That the decision to prosecute is the decision to destroy, or at least the decision to harm. And so a non prosecution decision is a is an enormous stroke of good fortune for somebody. And yet you'll see a clapper Combie Brandon, you go to this Listen, these guys are lying about things all over the place under oath to Congress. They're not gonna

get charged. McCabe lied multiple times under oath during the Inspector General investigation the FBI, and he's not He's not going to prison. It is not going to happen. Maybe he'll get some sweetheart, you know, plea deal where he did, but he's not going to spend it. What I mean, he's like, he's not gonna even get the Popadappolis deal, you know, a week or two in prison. Nothing, He's

I'm gonna go to prison. Why is this? The Left likes to lecture us with tremendous sanctimony about how important the truth is and then turn around and say, well, Bill Clinton lied about sex, so he shouldn't have been prosecuted. I'm sorry, but they have no ground to stand on here. There's no principle that they are defending or forwarding. This

is just what they want when they want it. Muller is using many minuscule lies about unimportant things in order to create the appearance of a worthwhile prosecutorial effort and to try to build more and more witnesses to take down Trump. And it is a disgrace because we know that the Democrats who are getting caught up in this, or rather Democrats who should be caught up in all this, aren't.

We know that they didn't take this approach, that Komy and the FBI didn't take this approach when Hillary Clinton was being asked about her emails. They've ben over backwards to avoid perjury traps. Just like you know, who gets prosecuted and who doesn't, Who is putting in jeopardy for perjury and who is not. These are decisions that are being made at the top level with politics in mind, and it is undermining our faith in the American judicial system.

It's undermining our faith in the legal system in prosecutors. That's what is happening. And the left doesn't care because if it helps them get Trump, they'll just burn the whole thing down the dish. By the way, I think made a very it has been making good points about this all week, and I look, I give him credit for being willing to stand up. And you know, he's

he's a heavy hitter on the legal scene. Whether you like him or not, he is and he's saying what's true here, which is that you know, mull what Mueller's doing is really just unethical, and the Left doesn't care about it because it allows them to get to at least increase pressure on Trump and those around him, so they don't care about the damage that's being done to the whole system. These are the same people who tell us all the time, oh, Trump is undermining our democracy

and he's undermining the system. Oh my gosh, this is destroying our system, this is throwing our faith in it. To be sure, I don't talk about undermining institutions. I don't think that as a conservative I would get fair treatment now if I ever came into the cross there's the DOJ. I do not believe it at all. And I could cite Chapter and Versus to why that is what the precedents are here. I don't think denish de su as it thinks that he got fair treatment from

the Department of Justice, because he didn't. And here's what the dirsh is saying about how Mueller has been conducting himself, about the truth and about lies. Play six And when prosecutors offer incentives to witnesses, they're bribing them. Prosecutors offer bribes. If you offer to bribe and go to j Lee. But if a prosecutor off as a bribe, it's regarded as good conduct. It shouldn't be legal. Tragically it is. But what we're seeing now is case after case being

built against people simply for lying. These are not crimes that occurred before the special prosecutor camped office. He's supposed to have uncovered crimes that it occurred in the past. Instead, he's facilitating and incentivizing the crimes by creating these perjury traps. Virtually all of his indictments and please come from people who he got to lie in front of investigators by setting perjury traps for them. Where is the crime? Where

is the crime? Laverunty Barrier, secret secret police chief in the Soviet Union KGB guy, he said, you show me the man, and I'll show you the crime. That's exactly what Muller's been doing all along here. And the man is Donald Trump and all those around him. They are manufacturing a criminal justification here, or rather a justification for taking action against Trump and those around him as though they are criminals. And they're tearing the country apart over this,

and liberals should really be ashamed. But I think unfortunately, especially the ones who are cheering this on, they're incapable of shame. But lies are not punished equally on both sides. Just like the media is biased, just like campuses are biased. There is now a bias in how we are to treat lies under oath in this country. Lies under oath made by those who are on the left, who are anti Trump. They're given the benefit of the doubt, They're

given leeway, and they get by without any punishment. Lies that have anything to do with Trump or defending Trump or in Trump's vicinity. The full weight of the prosecutors weaponry is brought to bear against them. This is what keeps happening. We see it happening. Lies are not treated as bad equally on both sides. And this goes to a fundamental lack of fairness and lack of well lack of truth that's occurring right now before our very eyes

in the justicepartment with the smaller probe. It is appalling. We're gonna talk a lot about speech, by the way on the show today and the fight for free speech, because there's a bunch of new stories ranging from treating immigration criticism has hate speech to more social media platform censorship of conservatives. So we're gonna get really get into that, and then also how the left is attacking Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer because he's not woke enough. We'll get there.

Stay with me. Sorry to spoil the surprise, but if you're getting gift from me this Christmas, you're getting coffee from my favorite coffee company, Black Rifle Coffee. Every morning when I go into the hill, I have a steamy, hot, delicious cup of Black Rifle, just black, and that's also how I drink it. And the name of the coffee. By the way, it is delicious, Okay. The aromas, the

different taste profiles that come through are incredible. Oh and by the way, this is a company run by and four veterans, including veterans of the United States Special Forces. These guys are amazing. Black Rifles Coffee Club makes things so easy. Just pick your blend amount you want and they'll ship the coffee right to your door. Check this out for yourself. They offer three, six, and twelve month

prepaid and pays you go subscriptions. The best tasting, most energizing coffee imaginable, and they help veteran first responder causes. Black Rifle Coffee is the gift that keeps on giving. Visit Black Riflecoffee dot Com. Slash buck for fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Riflecoffee dot Com slash buck for fifteen percent off. It's Shakespearean because somebody who said he would take a bullet for Donald Trump yea, is

now pointing the gun of them. Michael Cohen could be the most single most terrify fine person for Donald Trump, the single most destructive person for Donald Trump going forward. Everything is aiming right at the President personally, and that's got to be very unsettling for them. Today is a good day for Donald Trump to resign. I really believe that the President's reaction to Michael Cohen's the news about Michael Cohen today was exactly what we as prosecutors always

hear from mob bosses and drug kingpins. That is that the cooperators lying. He's just saying these things about me that aren't true to get a lighter sentence. And so this is kind of playing out exactly like a significant, complicated organized crime prosecution would play out. Yeah, that's right. These people are nuts. None of what they're saying is fair or true, and that they just get they can't help themselves. But there's one there's one one component of

all this that. I feel like we haven't really spent much time, you know, we haven't talked about in a while, maybe ever. That is, do these people realize how grotesque they sound when they celebrate what they think in their minds just going to be the complete destruction, humiliation, and incarceration of a human being who you know as a father, as a wife, as kids, and and and really is trying to trying to help the country. Donald Trump didn't

need this job. He's not a Clinton. This wasn't Also he could get you know, a big book deal and do expensive speeches afterwards. You know, he's not a bad guy. And yet they just just want to see him completely and utter the humility. And I'll say this, I never once in all the years, and I was a very outspoken critic, as those who've been listening me now for almost eight years, no of the Obama administration, I never

fantasized about Obama going to prison. I never sat there and gleefully hoped for the day when an Obama family member would get locked up for something, you know, get get get locked away in a cage somewhere in some federal prison. I didn't like Obama on policy. I thought he was a bad president. I think he's arrogant, I think he's overrated. But oh, he's a guy who's got a nice family life and he's got cute kids. And you know, I wasn't wishing incarceration. I wasn't wishing imprisonment

on my political enemy. The left is just and the media has completely embraced us with Trump, and what is wrong with them. It's not enough to just hope to beat him an election. They really want this guy to get sent to prison. Well, the good news is, I'm not going to assure you this. They're going to be a bunch of cry babies who are very disappointed in that hope. The president is right to be nervous right now because it appears that the time is running out

when he can hold himself above the law. And obviously the development's help with that. The significance of the developments this week is that one of the central focuses of of the investigation is we have known it's become very clear that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians and trying to subvert the election. The question has been was the president? The question has been, how is that? How

can you say that? So definitively that they've colluded. Well, the fact that the fact that the Manafort and Trump Junior met with Russian agents who told them that they wanted to give them dirt on Hillary as part of the Russian government's attempt to help them, and that they said fine. I mean, it's it's clear that the campaign colluded. There's a lot of evidence of that. Get ready for this, Get ready for it. I'm here to tell you to

prepare for what's coming on this whole Russian investigation. There's not going to be a bombshell. They don't have Trump because Trump didn't do anything, and they can't they can't, you know, go after Trump with some criminal charge that they fabricated because it would be too obvious and Trump can fight back, and then it'll be clear to everybody the whole thing is just a scam, right. There won't even be a facade of honesty and legality for this

Muller witch hunt. But what Congressman Nadler just did there is what the future of this is going to be, which is even when finally, and I don't I know, I'm kind of maybe taken away from some of you that we're all waiting for that day when this thing ends and we can look around and say, what a bunch of crap, this was, what a waste of the country's time, what a waste of the taxpayer's resources, all because Libs are a bunch of cry babies who can

handle that. Hillary lost because she's a corrupt, venal, self dealing, quasi evil candidate, and so they had to put the country through this. We had to have all these stories, you know, the news media essentially lighting its credibility on fire, all in the hopes of propping up this narrative to take down Trump with this. Right, we've been through all

of this, and you know what's going to happen. There's never going to be and I'm here to just be honest with you about this, There's never going to be that day when we get to say, you know what, Trump has been cleared, it's all over. Because what Nadler let out there is the line collusion has already been proven. It's just a question of can it be proven in

a quart of oh oh okay. So what we're waiting for now is not the information that I mean, they're gonna keep saying it's a bombshell, it's a bombshell because they want to get themselves excited about it, and they think that it creates pressure on the administration. It justifies this continued joke of a special counsel, highly politicized hackery on display. It justifies all of it. But when we actually get to the end of this path and there is no pot of gold, I guess that would be

a rainbow. I'm kind of mixing metaphors here. You know, yellow brick road, rainbow, pot of gold, you know all that stuff. But there isn't that administration destroying revelation that they're all sitting and waiting for. They're not going to apologize. They're not going to scale this back and say, you know what, maybe maybe we got a little ahead of ourselves here. May maybe this was a bad idea, and we should opposed Tromp on policy. We should make arguments.

We shouldn't just try to hold out this hope that we're going to have a couple of pro Hillary lawyers come in and, with the help of the media, nullify the twenty sixteen election. No, they're gonna say that it's already been proven. They're gonna say that this is the facts. We're already in it's just what could be proven in court. So we will never have the satisfaction of looking at the left and have them say, hey, you know what,

you're right, You're right on this one. They think they have enough to go on right now, They think that they're they're basically already there, and that's it's going to be frustrating. But I cannot I cannot tell you this is going to go any other way. There's gonna go any other way. You know, they're going to forget about, for example, what Rod Rosenstein said on July thirteenth, year play fourteen. There's no allegation in this indictment that any

American citizen committed a crime. There's no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result. That was about indicting those Russians, you know, all those Russian Facebook sock puppets, none of whom have seen the inside of a US court, I would not right, None of whom have actually and never will face any kind of justice. But that had to do with election interference, very minimal, ineffective, ridiculous election interference. But that that's what

that was all about. All all the things that they're pushing for now have to do with process crimes, process crimes that have been incredibly aggressively pursued by Special Counsel Muller, And that's what's been that's what's at the heart of all this, that's what's really going on here, and I just I find it very, very troubling. You also, I find troubling the rise of these progressives in Congress who are are in favor of of us essentially a false socialism.

They really are trying to convince as many people as possible that the government could pay for all these things that people want, free college, free healthcare, and it's not going to hurt the people that have to pay the government, which is the taxpayer. They don't have a very basic understanding of economics, but then again, a Barack Obama didn't have a foundational understanding of economics either. But I think there are a few who are on this and who

are more egregiously ignorant than Ocazio. Quartz playclibate every moment when our country has reached the depths of darkness, in every moment when we were at the brink, at the cusp of an abyss, and we did not know if we would be capable of saving ourselves. We have. We've done it. We've dug deep, and we've done what we thought was impossible. We went to the moon, we electrified the nation, we established civil rights, we enfranchised the country. We dig deep and we did it. We did it

when no one else thopped that we could. That's what we did when so many of us won an election this year. Yeah, that's right. Ocazio Quartz winning a congressional seat in very very blue New York City is like the civil rights struggle and going to the Moon all in one. Man. Now, I know that there's going to be a moderating, a moderation in the tone of some of these progressives when they get into Congress, because Pelosi, Pelosi knows the country's not ready to vote for full on,

full on liberal whackados right there. They know that the country's not ready to go all out socialism, but they're gonna try to take us there in baby steps. And someone like in Okazio Cortes, who is you know, the left is so incredibly enamored with anything sort of said running what is this based on? What? Okay, she ran a campaign and beat a very non charismatic. I mean a politician that quite this guy Crowley, unless you were really following Congress close and you didn't know how this

guy was. Shouldn't it matter more that that Okazio Cortez hasn't really done or accomplished anything and doesn't have a a very very basic understanding of economics or even the policies in general that she described. Oh no, because she sounds the part to the left, She looks the part to the left of reformer, of social justice hero and that's all that really matters to them. Is this president trying to impersonate Hugo Chavez? Rest up, tie up, urawan,

Vladimir Putin? What a great case officer Vladimir Putin is. He knows how to handle an asset, and that's what he's doing with the president. When do we see almost a shadow government come out and say we cannot side with the government. Why is President Trump showing sympathy for white nationalists and other hate groups? What does that tell you in America that one that in one generation called you, What does that tell you? Don We can surely say

his words have absolutely emboldened white supremacists. Sixteen tweets today to start the new year. Some of them deeply disturb it. These are the messages from a person who is not well, from a leader who is not fit for office. Now he's president, snowflake, okay, everything he's a Oh, they're mean to me and they don't like me, and I just don't understand it. And it's not just there. CNN is a filthy dumpster fire of idiocy these days. It has been for a while now, but it keeps getting worse

and worse. I mean, we just want to share these some of the worst stuff that has been said on CNN, for example, about about the president. You know, the president is effectively supporting Neo Nazis. The president is you know, he's a terrible human being. I mean, they'll they'll say all this stuff all the time, and then they'll turn around and they'll be like, well, but we're an objective news network. And I feel badly for the delusional people

in CNN's I suppose loyal audience. I don't know anybody these days who still watch the CNN by choice. I mean I don't know the other people I know watch I know people watch MSNBC. I'm not saying I know a lot of libs. I just feel like, I don't know who watch the CNN, because it's just liberalism without the without the honest about it being liberalism. At least MSNBC says what it is. But they say terrible things all the time. And I think that's why there's some

surprise about what happened with Mark Lamont Hill. And you know Charlie Cook. Remember Mark lan Hill was a CNI contributor who went before the UN and he's very pro Palestinian. We actually debated radical Islam once on CNN and he got I mean on I wouldn't say he got smoked, but like I am better on the issue than he is. There there you go. But you know we, I mean, others have gotten totally smoked. He just got. He just got defeated. But he he's an adept debater. I mean

he's he's not. He's not some joke when he's arguing with people. And he'll get dirty too, he'll fight dirty when he wants to. But he was at the UN and he said this. They remember this was the rant that got him. It wasn't even a ranch. I shouldn't even say that. This was what the prepared remarks were that got him fired at this un pro Palestinian thing. Play ten. If we are standing in solidated with Palestinian people, we must recognize the right of an occupied people to

defend it. We must prioritize peace, we must, but we must not romanticize or fetishize it. Commit to political action, grassroots action, local action, an international action that will give us what justice requires, and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea. And Palestine from the river to the sea means no Israel. So I mean he's he's calling for the I mean, he's calling for the eradication of Israel. I mean, this is this is

what Hama says. And I know that I talked about this yesterday, but you know, and I had this feeling of, well, you know, I don't like people that can fire for what they say. But you know, I also look, you know, I have limits, right the First Amendment is not as not a it's not a free speech suicide pact either. I mean, you know I have my limits too. But you know, Charlie Cook over at a National Review, who's like I talked to him there day. By the way,

he's living down in Florida. He's you know, married got a cute kaid. He's doing well, He's doing really well. I'm glad Charlie was in my real news day. Is such a nice guy. Charles Cooking such a talented writer. And I know some of you probably aren't that big in a national review, but Charlie stuff is worth reading just because of the skill of his writing. But Charlie, Charlie wrote a piece on this, and he he pointed

this out. I didn't even really know this. I kind of remember this about Mark lamont Hill, but I didn't know some of the details. Mark lamont Hill is one of the worst offenders for the Oh that guy's doing a dog whistle, so he's you know, go after him. So there is some there's some particular justice in this and the firing of Mark lamont Hill for saying what

he said. You know there there is some uh, you know that there is some degree of he finally got his come upance here because, for example, when when Ron des Santis said about this about socialism in the state of Florida, that quote, we don't want a monkey it up, speaking specifically about socialism, I would note that there were a lot of people that said that that was you know, that was a racist dog He wasn't speaking about Andrew Gillham, he wasn't speaking about that person, but he was speaking

about socialism in the state of Florida. And there were a lot of people who jumped onto Santis for that. And you know who was one of them, Mark Lamont Hill. It's you know, it's it's obviously a racist dog whistle. Mark Lamont Hill said, So, while I I, you know, I think there's a lot of complexity in this discussion about how do we how do we foster and how do we I wouldn't even say maintain, how do we recreate a robust culture of free speech in this country?

How do we do that? How do we go about it? And you know, because the left, now the left has abandoned it, the left is no longer trying to achieve the same ends. And I think that people who in particular, people who used language like oh that's a dog whistle, Oh that's racist, even when there's no racist intent, that's subconsciously racist, I think they have to be held to the same extreme standard as individuals that they try to hold others too. You know, if you have no good

faith and no grace in dealing with others. I think it's a lot harder to ask for good faith than to end grace yourself when you run a foul of these ever changing and ever tightening speech codes. Just speaking about CNN being a dumpster fire of crap, lousy idiocy, Jim Shooto actually went to my high school. I could tell he didn't really like me. We never really, never really saw it. I I'm not gonna say that I was ever sad about that. This guy would I used

to work at CNN. Always struck a little pompous and a little a little full of a little full of of bull crap. You are a rude, terrible person. Yeah, thank you, John, exactly. That's right. Shooto said this on climate change, you know, because because I talk about climate change and I say the left has lost their mind, that I used some pretty strong, strong language on it. Here is former Obama a pointee, by the way, who is allowed to now just be a journalist at CNN.

Former Obama pointee Jim Shootout Plate twelve keep saying, well, we have record clean environment. Doesn't get to the temperature we got kids. We don't want to be, you know, slowly burned to death. On our own planet here, we don't want to be I mean, speaking about climate change, we don't want to be slowly burned to death on our own planet. Is Jim Shooto Is he just incapable of reading anything from history about how wrong all the

predictions about that have been? Or is he pandering to an audience full of the worst kind of idiots, which is what you get on the left. On the left, you have people who think they are really smart but are actually idiots. That's that's the tough kind of idiot to deal with, because they don't believe it they have There's no humility, there's no desire to learn more or

to learn anything. They think they already know all they have to know about everything because they take the positions that are that are dominant on the left, that have become that have been held up throughout our culture as

what the smart, nice, good people think. But that's how you get to a point where an adult, you know, ivy league educated male like Jim Shudo will say something on air that is just so dumb that it really forced me to to just stare at the ceiling and say, I don't understand how these people even tie their shoes in the morning. Just this week, I have grilled up a couple of surloins. I've made some delicious burgers, all from Omaha Steaks. The quality is incredible. I've got them

in my fridge right now. I love it and right now, Omaha Steaks is given an amazing limited time offer to my listeners. When you go to Omaha Staaks dot com and enter code Buck into the search bar, you'll get seventy four percent off Omaha Steaks Family Gift Package, originally one hundred and ninety five dollars, now only forty nine

ninety nine. With this Stakes Family Gift Package, you'll get four handcut top sirloins, two savory Premium pork chops, four chicken fried steaks, four Omaha Steaks burgers, four snappy Kilbasa sausages, all beef meatballs, four perfectly brown potatoes, oh grats half four made from scratch caramel apple tartlets, plus four more burgers free. It's a fifth generation family owned company, Folks, Omaha Steaks is the best that delivering perfectly aged beef

handcut by master butchers. Go to Omaha Steaks dot com type Buck in the search bar to send the Omaha Steaks Family Gift package today only forty nine ninety nine Again Omaha Steaks dot Com. Type buck in the search bar. When free speech is censorship and censorship is free speech, this is this is quite orwellian. People overuse that term a lot, but in this case I think it is apt. It was only a matter of time before we got here. The left's desire to shut down free and open debate

and discussion is now. It is unavoidable. No one can pretend that this is not happening. It is, in fact happening. We are seeing it happen before our very eyes. And whether it's the social media platforms, college campuses, this is just a part of the culture. There's one side that wants to tell the other side what terms can and cannot be used, to change terms that have been in

use for a long time. And they know that Americans, in particular, the left knows that we have of a fondness, a cultural affinity, a deep and abiding connection to and respect for free speech. We understand that. You know, yeah, you need the second Amendment to give you the first, but you need the first for all the other ones. You know what I mean? You need to have an ability to share ideas freely, to live in a free society.

This is every kid in school needs to be taught this and needs to forget just being taught it, and needs to understand it, needs to believe it. What is really different about America from all these other countries? I mean, yeah, you know, we've got a lot of resources, and you know, our rule of law is pretty good. But quite honestly, you know, Japan has better rule of law in terms of obedience than we do. Now some European countries have better rule of law adherents, right, I mean, fewer people

breaking laws than we do. What really separates us is our focus on individual rights, the right of the individual, and our cultural and legal and and you know, spiritual connection to freedom. Without freedom, what do we have. We are all just living at the whim of the state without freedom to express ideas. The state is determining what

our freedoms are. And that's why I find it troubling, to say the least, when you see this argument being made the New York Times, and you know, I'm glad the arguments at least being made of the open Now, there was a time when they would have tried to avoid this. But essentially the argument they're making now is that by banning certain speech that the left does not like, they are promoting free speech. That's right. Censorship encourages discussion.

This is where the left is now because they can't they can't avoid the reality that they want to stop you from being able to say certain things. They want to stop me from being able to tell you certain things. And they can't win the arguments on this. I mean this is we're about to talk about transgenderism here. They can't win the argument on transgenderism. They're just wrong. They're wrong on the science, they're wrong on the ethics. They

are just wrong. And so what are they doing. They're trying to the same way that the left never won the debate on abortion. They never convinced the country, They never convinced fifty one percent of the country that abortion for all nine months of a pregnancy should be a considered a constitutional right. They just rammed it all down our throats with the force of a politicized and activist Supreme Court, and then they act like it's sacred, always

in forever. They're trying to do the same thing with transgenderism. They can't win this debate. They can't win this argument, so they plan to use the force of the state to just jam it down our throats, and we cannot allow this to happen. I don't want to be a party to a fraud. But more to the point, I don't want to be forced into falsehoods by the state on false pretil on false premises, essentially me being told by the government you have to refer to somebody who

is female as male or else, really or else? What I get fined? Well, if I don't pay my fine, do I go to prison? If I don't show up to prison voluntarily, do you send people with sticks and guns to physically force me? To Remember that behind every dictate of the state there is at least the threat of the force of the state, and then ultimately the

state is built upon a monopoly of violence. All right, let's get into this New York Times piece how twitters ban on dead naming promotes free speech, written by a transgender named Parker Malloy. Miss malloy. New York Times refers to miss Malloy. No, it's it is, in fact not miss Malloy. This individual's name. Can you know he can call himself whatever he wants, but that doesn't change the reality.

It does not change the reality. And if we're going to then base government policies upon gender, which we do. There are many government policies on gender that are gender related, then we have to actually deal an objective reality. But here's what the reference is to Twitter. How Twitter will now look. I might get I'm just telling you this in advance. Twitter may kick me off at some point

because I will not go along with this. Quietly, I'm not going to go along with being told that a mail is a female and as a female's a male, and I just have to accept that. I'm sorry, I do not accept that. But here's Twitter's new policy quote. We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes, or other content that intends to dehumanize, degrade, or reinforce neg or harmful stereotypes about a protected category. This includes targeted mis gendering,

or dead naming of transgender individuals. Now, as I've told you, dead naming is when you refer to someone by their previous name, which I would note as a journalist, for example, or as a government body. You are going to have to do this in certain circumstances. Right, the charges were brought against Bradley Manning for leaking of vastrove of classified information. Charges were not brought against Chelsea Manning. Okay, his name

at the time was Bradley. Now that Bradley wishes to be called Chelsea now was fine, I'd go by Buck. Buck is short for Buckman, which is my middle name. I've always been called Buck, but that's really just kind of a courtesy. If people really wanted to insist, I guess they could call me James, but that would be kind of jerk like. So I'm not about to tell

somebody what their name is. Chelsea Manning. I always refer to Chelsea Manning as such, but I will not refer to Chelsea Manning as her, because Chelsea Manning is not a her. But Twitter is. Now Twitter is telling us that their policies. I mean, this is a very political decision. By the way, this is as political as the decision gets. So now we know that their terms of service. This is a social media platform and the president uses them, and this is increasingly becoming a center of public debate

and discussion. They are weighing in on this in a political fashion and doing so in a way that will punish conservatives. That's what this means. So dead naming, I would note though, isn't just refer Rather, it isn't just intentionally. It wouldn't be just me saying Bradley Manning Bradley Manning when today he goes by Chelsea. They say that even bringing up the person's previous name. So if I said formerly Bradley Manning, Comma now Chelsea, that is dead naming.

There's a huge no no. This all just comes from the transgender community, which is a very obviously a community that has a lot of very fragile people who are delusional. So they don't like it when you bring up, just again a fact, which is that they used to be called something else. I don't get offended when someone says my first name is James. I say, yes, you're correct, that is a fact. My first name is James. The

irs knows me as James. You know, if somebody really wants to call me that, fine, it's kind of weird, but now you know that's it is what it is. But this has led to some bizarre This new Twitter policies led to some crazy stuff. I actually have Megan Murphy, who's a huge feminist, and I'm sure we agree on nothing, just based on what left wing feminism is these days. But Murphy was kicked off of Twitter entirely because she calls transwomen he and him and did that referring to

a journalist, so they kicked her off. They kicked her off of Twitter. So now the left is having to live by these rules. But the way they're getting around what is obviously politicized censorship, or rather this one person who is a where does where does he work? Oh? Media Matters, park A molloy works for Media Matters, among the most distasteful, disgusting, stupid loser organizations in America. I mean, Media Matters is a grotesque, festering, oozing boil on the media.

So start with that. But this, this individual, Parker malloy goes at length this article to say, well, because it's so mean to dead name or misgender just means you refer to them by somebody by a different gender than what they want to be. You're hurting debate and discussion because you're shutting discussion down. So now you see free speech to the left, they're trying out this new argument.

I mean, this is. It's intellectually flims. It's garbage. But they're trying, right, They'll throw anything at the wall and see what sticks. Free speech is premised upon not taking a position that the other side finds offensive from the from the outset. But if we continue with this, if we were to agree to these terms, let's just all understand that it would also mean that you'd have to

use terms like undocumented. Well, I can't have a discussion about I can't have a discussion about immigration if you're going to say things like illegal alien. They say, because that's just so rude and dehumanizing, you can't be dehumanizing. Well to that, I say no, because illegal alien is the legal term, So that is an issue of fact.

I'm not going to use some make believe language that the other side comes up with, because in doing so, I am conceding their point that this is merely a question of a lack of documents, not a question of violation of law. Take that same logic and apply to transgenderism. The moment that you start to say that somebody didn't have a former name that they did have, and that somebody should be referred to a pronoun that is a

factual issue of he or she not a preference. You've already conceded the argument the other side, and that's what this is really all about. They will censor, they will bully, they will verbally bludgeon until they get their way, And that The New York Times would print something like this just goes to show what an intellectual abomination The New

York Times has been for decades. It really, I think ever since the nineties, you could argue that The New York Times has been essentially just, you know, the intellectual equivalent of Media Matters, just with better writers, at least people the New York Times can write. I'll give them that. They're skilled writers. Media Matters just a bunch of idiots. We'll be back Google, Facebook, Twitter. They're all bunch of progressive, left wing monopolies. My friends. Do you want to that monopoly?

Go to snippy dot com. If you've looked at snippy dot com in the past and left, go back again and check it out for yourself. Okay, Snippy is an unbiased social media platform. It's all about conversation and community, and then not only encourage freedom of expression, but they guarantee users the ability to discuss topics freely without suppression

from administrators. Snippy is a place where everyone's free to express their thoughts and share their opinions and tell the world what makes them maybe a little snippy all right. Discussion is all about openness and that's what's valued at Snippy. No shadow banning, no suppression of conservative thoughts. Ever. Snippy dot com now has an updated user interface and exciting new features, also available in the Apple App Store and now available for Android. Snippy dot com totally free to join.

Check it out yourself. Snippy dot com is your new alternative social media. Continue on with our discussion here of bias and censorship and how the after just playing the game these days really interesting report out of the out of the Daily Caller. You know, we had Benny Johnson over this week. Daily Caller is great. I mean I would beat any of them in ping pong, and I keep I'm trying to talk enough smack that they finally they Daily Caller allegedly has a ping pong tournament every

year for all of its employees. And I'm not an employee Daily Caller, but I just want to go over there representing the hill where I work, and take you know, I want to take the belt. You know what I mean? Isn't John right like the WWE belt, there's a big belt. I want to take the ping pong belt from the Daily Caller. Do you support this idea? Whatever makes you happy? Thank you? All right, whatever makes me happy, I'll take

that for now. So, but but the Daily Caller had had this story they broke today, and let me just let me give you some of the some of the details or some of the headlines, and then well then we'll get into the nitty gritty of why this matters. Although I think it's pretty obvious. Google and employees debated whether to bury conservative media outlets in the company's search function as a response to President Donald Trump's election in

twenty sixteen. Internal Google communications obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation reveal the Daily Caller and Breitbart were specifically singled out as outlets to potentially bury the communication to burry rather. Trump's election in twenty sixteen shocked many Google employees who had been counting on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton

to win. Communications obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation show that internal Google discussions went beyond expressing remorse over Clinton's loss to actually discussing ways to show them up from showing in search results. That's what they're This is what they're doing, folks. This is what they are up to. This is not surprising at all, is it. We think of these platforms as just that. I mean, I'm even

using the term platform. These are media companies. These are massive, massive distribution platforms for content, and they can make minor, minor changes to the way that they do business that could have a massive, massive impact on just how well, honestly, how issues are discussed in this country and and going forward, what the future of the country is going to be like, because they can change, you know. Bripe Art used to say, and he was right. The politics is downstream from culture. Well,

cultures downstream from media platforms. Culture is downstream from social media now because the social media outlets that we have, especially for younger people, influence so much of their thinking and how they approach topics and what they see reflected in their peer group and how they see people around them talking about things. This is the biggest media challenge

that we have now. I mean, the fact that there is not a single right of center major social media platform is a huge problem because you see on our This would be like the way that we have. You know, there are conservative judges, but to be a conservative judge just means that you apply the law as it is. A conservative social media platform wouldn't be what the libs have, meaning that they are trying to stack the deck all

the time. You could have a right of center version of let's say Facebook, a right of center version of Google could entail just we're going to be a platform. We're not going to manage the content unless there's an imminent threat or there's you know, or you know, pornography or profanity or something that's an objective standard that can be applied to content. We are not getting involved in any kind of political speech policing. That would actually be

a right of center social media company. Now, that would be a place where you could go and say and look, we've obviously partnered with one on this show. I mean, they're starting to this is starting to happen now. People are realizing this. But we can't live we can't live at the whims of the progressive left online anymore. We're just gonna keep losing. We can't allow them to dictate the terms the actual I mean literally the terms of discussion. Can't do that. We're never gonna be able to turn

this around. Think of the advantage that the left has going into elections. When every time somebody does a new search, let's say, for caravan, do they get the stories about how there are guys with MS thirteen faced tattoos walking around in the caravan? No, they don't get those stories.

What stories pop up at the top? Oh, women were women and babies were tear gays, These big mean border patrol, all these quote racists in the border patrol who are almost half Latino themselves and about twenty five percent military veterans. So you've got a lot of Latino military vets trying to defend our country at the border, and the left is essentially spitting on them. They're they're, you know, rhetorically spitting on them while the caravan people are throwing rocks

at them. And if Google can, under the auspices of trying to, you know, defend migrant identity or something, If Google is able to make sure that the only stories that the average person wants to learn about the New Seas are left wing propaganda New York Times, Washington Posts, etc. They're gonna start. They're gonna even though they're losing these arguments on the merits, they're going to win them in

terms of popular opinion. That's the power. These platforms have some big stories this week, including the reality of Twitter's terms of service and how it is weaponized against conservatives. Also, more and more of this feverish delusion from the left. But they finally got not just Donald Trump, but maybe even his family. To address this, we have with us the great constitutional and conservative enforcer in the social media realm, the one on only Sean Davis. He is a co

founder of the Federalists. You all know I plugged the Federalist dot com here on radio on a regular basis. Sean, great to have you back, man. How are you doing great to be here? I'm doing great. How are you? I'm good mane. So tell me what happened with the way NPR is running this story on Don Junior's testimony and you're just calling out, You're saying it's a straight up lie. Well, what's going on here? Yeah? They lied?

So this morning NPR breathlessly reported a piece claiming that Don Junior had lied about the Trump organization's business dealings in Moscow, in twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen. Specifically, NPR claim that when Don Junior was asked whether these business feelings were ongoing in twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen, that he said, certainly not in twenty sixteen. It had ended

way before in twenty fourteen. And they claimed that this contradicts testimony from Michael Cohen, who's engaged in a plea deal with Mueller, and proves that Donald Junior committed a

felony by lying to Congress. The reality is the NPR lied to its entire audience, and that if you actually look at his transcript, he was explicitly asked, Hey, were you working on a Trump tower deal or was Trump or working on a Trump tower deal in Moscow in twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen, and he said yes, absolutely. He told them about the letter of intent that the president had signed, he offered to give that to them.

And it turns out that the question that he was actually asked the NPR mis characterized was not whether he was doing a business deal or whether his organization was doing a deal in Moscow in twenty or fifteen or twenty sixteen, but whether he had been working with a specific individual on that deal, and he said, no, I worked with that guy back in twenty fourteen. NPR blatantly

mischaracterized it. They clipped out all the context, they butchered the actual question, and then they made sure that nobody saw in their story that Trump Junior had actually admitted to the very thing that they claimed he was lying about. It was shameless, deceitful fake news from top to bottom. What's your sense of the Cohen situation from this week? I saw a little bit of that glee returning to the eyes of some of the most fervent Russia collusion

fantasists out there. Do you have any does any of this strike you as really concerning for those of us who are supporters of the administration. Is there anything that we need to be aware of here that we're not already seen? Or is the left is completely insane? Well, so, the news on Cohen this week was that he pled guilty to one count to lying to Congress. Now is somebody who believes very fervently in the importance of constitutional

congressional oversight. If he lied to Congress, he should get rung up. But as to your question, should anyone be disturbed we should be disturbed that that there seems to be a real dubber standard when it comes to lying to Congress. For example, Glen Simpson lied to Congress. He told him that he hadn't spoken to Bruce Orr at a certain point in twenty sixteen, when we now know he had. James Clapper lied to Congress about master valence

on Americans. John Brennan, the CIA director who cooked up this entire Russia conspiracy hoax, he lied to Congress about spying on Congress. So to the extent we should be concerned, it shouldn't be that Michael Cohen might get rung up for lying to Congress. It's that all the other people who lie to Congress with impunity can somehow do it

just as long as they have the right politics. And that's a really, really dangerous place to be in in this country where you have one system of justice for people who share the political beliefs of the elite powerbrokers, and another system of just for the rest of us. You know, the Comey attorneys who are arguing that Republicans had abused abused their powers with selective leaks, right, This is because Comy's asking a judge to block GOP efforts

for closed door testimony. This is just more sancticomy wanting to grandstand, isn't it. Oh No, I think it's I think it's a lot worse than that for coomy. So he was subpoena to come testify and to clarify some previous testimony he gave to Congress under oath that seems to have been contradicted by a lot of things he

said publicly. Since the box that Comey's in is that when he goes in there, if his answers this time don't match up with his answers last time, or match up with his answers that he's given on TV during

his publicity book tour, he is in real trouble. So I got to give his lawyers some credit that their guy, their clients, who by the way, stole government records, leaked them several which were Class of five, and then had a buddy of his give them to the New York Times so he could get revenge on the guy who fired him. Now says he can't comply with the congressional subpoena because he's worried people might lead his testimony like

my irony meter just exploded all over the place. Also, I don't think that that is a really valid you know, like, if I were called to testify, let's say, in front of a grand jury, I couldn't just say, well, I'm concerned that the sealed grand jury testimony he may leak to the public. So I'm just not showing up. I didn't know that there was an exemption for that. There's not. In what Comy is very trying to cynically do here while posturing is this boy scout, this ethical power ranger.

He's actually trying to run out the clock. He knows that whatever crimes he may have committed aren't going to come to light. His buddy Bob Muller is not going to do anything to him. His buddy Rod Rosensen's not going to do anything to him. His only risk right now is a Congress that actually cares about doing oversight on abuses of power, ADA, jn FBI, and those guys are about to get bounced from power in the next

month or two. So all Coomy is trying to do right now is run out the clock and get to a Democrat Congress, because he knows once that happens, he will never be accountable for what he did during the twenty sixteen election and afterwards. What's your take on this idea that the Senate should Now I'm going to guess that you're like me. You think that it's a stupid idea and they shouldn't do it. But just on the

constitutionality of it. I've been hearing people all week talking about how there needs to be this and when I say people, I mean senators and people on TV. There needs to be this protect Muller Act. I don't understand how they think that the constitution works. If the Senate, if Congress can just say, well, this thing that the president has power to do, we're just going to say he can't do anymore. I mean, could they pass a law that says the president no longer has pardon power

because they don't want him to pardon anybody. I mean, they keep talking about constitutional crisises in a crisis in other circumstances where it's clearly not constitution To me, this actually is a constitutional problem. I don't think you can pass laws that say the president can't do what he's constitutionally allowed to do. No, we have three branches of government in this country. The judiciary, the executive, and the legislative.

What people in the never Trump resistance are wanting to do is create an unaccountable fourth branch of government, which

is what they think they have in Bob Mueller. And it's interesting to me to see people say that somehow Acting Attorney General Matt Whittaker's appointment is unconstitutional even though it's temporary because he hasn't been Senate confirmed, when Bob Mueller, who has been confirmed by the Senate to do absolutely nothing right now has the full powers of the CIA director, nigh close to the Attorney General and the FBI director.

After all, this is a man who's been running a counter intel an FBI investigation by his lonesome for the past year and a half. So you can't come and say, oh, the acting AGA, he's unconstitutional. But Bob Mueller, he needs to have permanent, untouchable powers that make him accountable to no one in the Senate doesn't have to confirm him at all. That's nonsense, and it just proves that the only constitutional crises were actually seeing are those deliberately created

by the Never Trump resistance left. You know, there's been We're speaking to Sean Davis everyone co founder of The Federalist. You can read his latest and the many other talented writers there at the Federalist dot com. Sean a lot of stuff on Twitter, really starting last weekend when Jesse Kelly, who's a buddy of mine, I know he writes for you guys the Federalist, when he got temporarily banned. Then they said suspended. There's also a feminist I can't remember

her name. She was suspended or banned whatever it was, for saying that a man is not a woman. That's apparently now a kind of firing offense from Twitter, or at least from getting fired from their platform. And then there's this Laura Lumur thing too. Before I ask you about Jack Dorsey and what's really going on Twitter? What do you know, Laura Lumer? I feel like I'm a guy who works in conservative media and I don't really, Well, who is this person that's been kicked off on Twitter

who's chaining herself the Twitter headquarters? Are you know any about her? Yeah, she's I'd say she's a right wing provocateur. I don't agree with what a lot or what she does. I didn't agree with a lot of what Alex Jones did either. But I do know that nothing that Jesse Kelly or Alex Jones or Megan Murphy who's the Canadian feminist who is banned. There we go, yeah, Megan Murphy, yeah, man or Jesse Kelly, they didn't do anything that was

actually against the rules. Okay. And that's the problem with Twitter is that Twitter wants to have it both ways. It wants to have a complete stranglehold over the content that shows up on there. It wants to control what people can say. It wants to control who can say it. Yet on the flip side, it doesn't want any accountability for the things that it decides can be published on

its own platform. And that comes under the purview of a law called the Communications Decency Act, which gives a third party tech service providers why the immunity from liability for things that are published on their site. But what Twitter wants is they want to be a publisher. They want to control who can say things and what things they can say, but they don't want any liability for it. And that's the problem here is that there are no standards,

there are no rules. It's Calvin Ball all the way down. But Twitter won't just own up and say yep, we want to be a publisher and we want to be in control of what people can say. They can't have it both ways. I think that there's just too much social pressure on the people. You know, we could say, oh,

but they're so powerful and wealthy. I mean, these guys who are either running or or just early, you know, early involved in some of these massive platforms are obviously incredibly rich and very influential, which sean at the end of the day, I think that they just can't they can't stomach not having the you know, New York Silicon Valley DC industrial complex embrace them. I just think that they have an issue with it. Well. I think that's

probably the most generous explanation. A less generous one would be that they're actually pushing for it. That these are all extremely ideological left wing social justice warriors who think that if you have wrong thoughts in wrong words, that you don't deserve a place in the public square. That

that's increasingly where we're going. Whether it's Google contemplating centering Brightbart and Daily Caller, whether it's Twitter banning people like Jesse Kelly, or whether it's Facebook going out of its way to spike conservative website results in its trending sidebar. We are seeing this across the board from these monopolistic tech giants, and it's bad for America, it's bad for discourse,

it's bad for all of us. It really does feel like we've we've reached almost a correction, like a stock market correction, in terms of freedom of speech and the dissemination of information that the Internet unleashed. You know, originally it was so much information show, so much communication and

freedom from the restraints of the past. You know, you don't obviously need to have a printing press, you don't need to have a radio station or a TV channel to get your information out there or just to get information. Now it's we're entering a new phase where they really are clamping down on things and acting, I think, to tilt the deck. And when you look at something like even the twenty sixteen election, there's been so much focus on, you know, how Russia has been involved in the election.

One thing that I always want to know is how much did like Facebook and Twitter decide to help Hillary in a way that okay, maybe it's legal, but we don't even know about. No, you're you're exactly right. We are in a place now where the public square isn't so much public as it is controlled by four to

five major left wing tech monopolies. It's not good. And what we've had started with i'll say fifteen to twenty years ago, was we had this massive democratization of the Internet, and what that did was it removed the power of controlling information from the gatekeepers. And the result of that was that it empowered conservatives, especially because it was liberals who had all ways controlled the information gates. And I think the left wingers in the tech world realize, wait,

the democratization of information. Yeah, in theory it looks kind of good, but in practice, all it's doing is leveling the playing field with our enemies, and we can't have that. And so now they've dedicated themselves to making sure that can't happen going forward. Yeah, you're right, I completely endorse all that's absolutely what they're doing. Sean Davis. Everyone, if you're not already following them on Twitter and you're on Twitter,

you're missing out and check out his stuff on The Federalist. Sean, have a great weekend and come back soon. Thank you, sir. Take care all right, team. We got more on the way on our freestyle Friday. They stay with me. I have leverage because we have a narrow majority on the Judiciary Committee, and so I'm using it. You use leverage to get votes to the floor that should be on the floor. You use them, but people often use them

most when they're not running again. And I will never forget your interview recently with sixteen Minutes Ever with Center Coon's where you said I couldn't have done this. I couldn't have reached across the aisle if I were running again. Could you have done this with the judges if you were running against Senator? Probably not. But it's not that it shouldn't be done. I just felt that it was important to do. You have to take a stand, and we've got to protect the Special Council. We don't want

to provoke a constitutional crisis. Flake is an idiot. I don't know who votes for this guy. I don't know what they were thinking. I don't know how Flake managed to fool people into casting a vote for him. But you know, the one good news after the mid term is that the Republicans still have a majority in the Senate, and we'll have a majority in the Senate going forward now, and Flake is trying to take away the most important thing that that can do, which is continue to get

conservative judges elevated onto the federal judiciary federal bench. And this week you had one of Trump's nominees managed to manage to clear this one man, a judge Farr, I believe is his name. He managed to get through, Thomas Farr. He's going to be a district court judge North Carolina. The seat's been Vagasin's two thousand and five. The only way he got through was a tie breaking vote in the Senate from Vice President President of the Senate Mike Pence.

So because of clowney mcclown, clown Jeff Flake, we've gotta have the VP step in and be a tiebreaker. It's just, you know, what does he think he's doing. First of all, he says he's worried about a constitutional crisis. The constitutional crisis is the idea that you can pass laws that tells the president how he can and cannot use his constitutionally constitutionally afforded discretion. Right, the president has the right

to make certain decisions. Right the president shall, the president may, The president ken that doesn't mean the Senate gets to just take that away. These are independent and coequal branches of government. Right. What would happen if the President all of a sudden just said, you know what, I'm gonna just write a budget. Thanks, guys, don't need you help anymore. I got my own people. Everybody'd say, oh my gosh, it's so unconstitutional. Well, guess what when it comes to

whether the president's going to fire an employee. Because as much as the Left doesn't want to believe this, Muller is an employee. He works for the executive branch. His authority comes from the executive branch. To tell him that he can't fire him is blatantly unconstitutional. It's just bonkers. It is just simply bonkers. But this is what they do. There's no principle, there's no consistency, and they know they can count on getting flaked out here my people, like

Jeff Lake. Democrats never do this. You know, a Democrat never defects at that key moment from their side. It's only our side that just has all these political cowards, so called moderate Republicans. Christmas came early this year from my crew at the Hill because I gave a bunch of them some of my Black Rifle coffee today. That's right. I got an extra case of it, and I wanted to hook some people up. And they're like, Buck, what

do you drink every morning? And I tell them Black Rifle coffee because it is the most delicious, freedom loving, pro veteran, pro patriotism coffee you can possibly drink, and the quality of the coffee is amazing. Have it delivered to your door every month. It's so easy. Just joined the coffee club. Black Rifle makes the gift of great tasting coffee easy by offering three, six, and twelve month prepaid and pay as you go subscriptions and you can

gift them. Okay, so try this for yourself, folks. Easy, great gift going to the holidays, for anybody out there. The best tasting, most energizing, most veteran America loving patriotic coffee ever, Black Rifle Coffee. Go to Black Riflecoffee dot com slash buck and you'll receive fifteen percent off your order. That's Black Rifle Coffee dot Com slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Riflecoffee dot Com slash buck. And although

this joint agreement isn't binding. It's still meant to be the legal framework on which the participating countries commit themselves to build new legislation. And one basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech. The agreement want to criminalize migration speech. Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense, and media outlets and that also concerns you that give room to criticism of migration

can be shut down. The compact for migration is legalization of mass migration. So that's EU bureaucrat there and a meeting. They're talking about a compact of EU nations that are going to be taking up this idea of well, criticizing immigration is a punishable offense. This has been gaining steam for a while among the internationalist, cosmopolitanist left, this notion that criticizing immigration policy is a form of hate speech.

This is why I would just say I've always been very against the idea of hate speech in general, because the moment that you establish a precedent that there's such a thing as speech that is just so distasteful, because remember that's not hate speech, is not the same things as speech that puts somebody in imminent danger. Right, hate speech is not the same as telling an attack dog to go kill someone. That that's just murder, right, But that's you can't say, well, I just use words, no,

of course not. You know, hate speeches is not prevent rather not what you would use as the prosecutorial tool for a mafia boss who calls on the phone and says, you know, take care of that thing with that guy. You don't get to say, well, I just said to take care of a thing. No. If if that means an assassination and that's what you just ordered, well then you're you've ordered a murder and you should be punished accordingly hate speeches. I don't like the thing that you said.

It's really mean and degrading. Therefore, I'm going to use the law to prevent you from saying it, or to punish you after you've said it. And this is a precedent that the left was. It was inevitable that they were going to abuse this, and they've been abusing it for years. But now it's gone even beyond just protecting favorite groups to now hate speech is a categorization that the left is using in order to protect favored policy.

You see, so now it's if you criticize immigration, you are engaging in hate speech, which is interesting because baked into that premise is the idea that immigrants and immigrant flows are going to be non white. So I suppose they would considered hate speech even if let's say you had a lot of refugees from a possible war in Ukraine, which I will tell you is increasingly looking likely with Russia at least has been looking very likely the last

few days. If you had a refugee inflow from Ukraine because of a terrible war with Russia, haven't forbid any of this happens. I guess that would still be considered hate speech if you're criticizing it, because they've established this principle. And then you just say, well, hold on a second, our immigrants a protected category now on the left, and the answers, yes, immigrants have become migrants. Refugees are a

special and protected category. There are additional laws that are in place specifically because they want to make sure that you not just treat immigrants a certain way. We're not talking about conduct, that you speak about them a certain way.

And this is why you've had this rise of yes nationalism in Europe and also here in America, because the elites in our societies have, by and Lars decided that immigration is not something that the people in a country are allowed to have a say over, that the elites know better than us on this issue, and they don't understand that there is in fact a social cost to all of this, a political cost to this, and that

ultimately a nation state is just an idea. Yeah, there's enforcement, and there's there's a military, there's police, and there are there's the apparatus of the state, but it really is just a concept. And the concept falls apart when you have people who are able to become a part of that state without respecting its laws from the get go, and also when you are overwhelming the processes of assimilation.

You know, we've seen this many times throughout history, where if you have a large enough a large enough group of people who have a culture and identity, and particularly a language that is distinct from the overall culture and language, you often have separatist movements, and yes, violence breaks out. This is the case throughout history. You know, unless you have common bonds among people of culture and language and rule of law and an understanding of what that means

a country will eventually dissolve. This is what the history shows us. I mean, the left thinks about this like it's oh, it's just so funny. They think of states as being static, you know, once a state is established then or maybe they don't. I mean, some of you're probably yelling right now wherever you're listening to the show, saying no buck, they know it's going to dissolve the state, and that I think is also true. In many cases. This is a very effective way not just of transforming America,

but really dissolving America into something else. It becomes something different over time. And you've been look at the history of Europe. We think of Europe now as some kind of a monolith. First all, Europe is not even a true political union. It's an economic union, and it's and it's a geographic designation. I mean, Europe is geography. Europe is not really a cohesive political identity, although we tend to talk about it and many people think about it

that way. But go back one hundred years and Europe was you know, states were being dissolved, states were being you know, consumed by other states, States were falling apart. You know, there's all kinds of coming and going. And by the way, one of the reasons that was happening, one of the main reasons that you had these states at each other's throats. It wasn't just fighting over resources, it wasn't just fighting over boundaries in an arbitrary fashion.

It was the conflicts of cultures within the European geographic designation, and the French fighting against the Germans and all these different Eastern European factions, and the Brits fighting against the Germans, and the Italians fighting against the this and that that, and the Spanish fighting against each other. You know, the idea of nation states of post Soviet stability is very new, and we have this idea that the left. I think that there's the good faith open borders, or at least

well intentioned that's a better way to put it. There's the well intentioned open borders crowd, and then there's the

sorrows burn it all down, open open borders crowd. And on the well intentioned side of it, I don't believe that they have enough of a knowledge of history to understand that states that don't have the ability to to propagate themselves, and people think of propaganda but I mean to continue with what they are to perpetuate the ideas of the state, they eventually come to a halt because we've never really had in this country an ethnic cohesiveness

that is never existed in America. We've never been, you know, a Slavic people. We've never been a you know, go down us. We've never been a people that were tied to one ethnicity, one identity. That way, We've always been an idea, and increasingly we're bringing in people in such large numbers that you know, maybe they don't adopt that idea.

And you can live in America now and and probably never speak in the should speak any one of a couple of one hundred different languages and get around just fine, and you don't have to buy into any of the stuff that makes US America. Necessarily, you just you know, just do your own thing and get the benefits from the state that you can and view this essentially as an economic And that's what's happening for a lot of

migrants who are coming here. And this is what Europe has figured out the hard way too, because they're coming in such large numbers with such frequency, being told that they are owed, this being told that America, because of its imperialism and because it is the inheritor of Great Britain's colonial past and colonial sins that that America owes all of this to its immigrant population, that any anyone who can come here, I'm talking illegal immigrants, anyone who

comes here and just shows up, can demand the resources of the state, which means your resources, my resources, because there's some kind of moral obligation that we have to fulfill to them. Now that that is not conducive to a process of cultural and political assimilation that will allow us to continue to live together in relative peace and tremendous prosperity in this country. It's just there's not that much that's holding us all together. If we keep allowing

this to happen. Not only do you have a polarization between left and right occurring, and we have tens of millions of people in this country who have very limited, certainly legal ties to it in the sense that they're here illegally, but also you start to wonder what kind of real love for this country do they have, and how much do they buy into constitutionalism, limited government, respect

for the rule of law. The founding fathers when they're constantly being told the founding fathers were racist, that America is forever and unalterably scarred and irredeemable because of its history of slavery. And this is what a lot of if you're a new arrival into America, this is what the left is telling you. And they don't even want

this discussion to happen. And that's why in Europe, and increasingly you're seeing it with the way that the media covered the caravan here, they want to make criticism of immigration a hate crime. That's the goal. They want to shut down the conversation because ultimately, if people knew what was going on, they would agree much more with you and me on this than with the Democrats and with the left. You might think there are some areas of culture that would not be subject to liberal whims and

the destruction of things that we could all celebrate. Right, you might think that, I don't know, Christmas movies, for example, are beyond the left's ever pathetic asp But you'd be wrong, that's right. The huff Post has a problem with the Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer movie. It's kind of a live action movie from a long time ago. Remember this one Rudolf. Rudolf, Well, what do you want? You promised to walk me home? Aren't you gonna laugh at my nose too? I think it's a handsome nose, much better

than that silly false one you were wearing. It's terrible. It's different from everybody else's, but that's what makes it so grand. Why any doe would consider herself lucky to be with you? Where did they come up with this guy? Aren't you go to laugh at my nose too? Rudolph sounds kind of weird. You know, my nose a bitch nose. But where'd they come up with this? Rudolph sounds like a curmudgeedi seventy five year old to be. Yeah, wish your head. It better knows you and your little red

nose you've got. And I also liked that the female deer, the dough whatever her name is, just like, oh, Rudolph, it is just ground is Rudolph? You know, all of a sudden being invited to finishing school here's it seems

kind of strange. But you know, you're like Buck, why why are we talking about Rudolph other than obviously you know, Rudolph the red nose reindeer Christmas time, well, the holiday TV classic Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer, according to the Huffington Post, is quote seriously problematic because Rudolph has been marginalized. That's right. They think that Rudolph goes to, you know, the core of American society now and power imbalances because they're saying that the tail is not as jolly as

some thought before. They're sharing their observations now about this online. According to huff Post, for example, somebody wrote that the yearly reminder that Rudolph the Red Noose Reindeer is a parable on racism and a homophobia with Santa as a as a bigoted, exploitative jerk. I didn't know that anyone thought of Santa that way. Another one wrote in to say Santa's operation is an hr nightmare and in serious need of diversity and inclusion training. I'm not making I'm

not making this up. By the way, former Rudolph fans are pointing out Rudolph's father verbally abuses him, which I did not know that was a thing that happened either. And you know this is I think that the dad tells him that he has to put a fake nose on so we can fit in with the other reindeers, and Rudolph says, it's not very I can't believe we've

been talking about this on radio. Santa Claus brates don Or the reindeer for his son nose, Son's nose, and the school coach encourages bullying in the Rudolph movie, and they go on that they do this whole analysis of it all, and then they say that there's what is this if you don't fit in, you know, don't be a jerk. Speaking of Rudolph, yearly reminder, deviation from the norm will be punished unless it is exploited. That's right.

Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer. According to some people on the left, it seems, is a parable about the exploitation of modern society. Yeah, yeah, it's the d Rudolph the Red Nose. They late be like, why can these news just you know, they be bright and whatna if you're seeing it, Slee man, he doesn't have to, you know what I mean. I guess I do know what you mean. Yeah, Rudolph. Rudolph is not something we can all just celebrate in

peace anymore. They do this with everything though, with every show now they go back and they apply their wokeness. Right woke means socially justice aware or social justice aware. They apply their wokeness to the issue, and we're all supposed to just fall in line right away and be like, oh my gosh, I don't want to get in trouble with the woke police. This is all also just to say that the best you know, I know it's a little early maybe for this talk, but since I brought

up what the best Christmas movie of all time? As a movie is Diehard? You know you can yell at me say buck Diehart is an action movie, and I would say, yes, that's fine, and probably if you're a purist you would say a wonderful life. Although some of you are going to come at me with a Christmas story, which is also a good movie. As long as you don't say Love Actually, we can still be friends. Love Actually is an annoying movie. And I know so many women in my life have loved that movie and I

don't know what to say to them about it. It is just simply unacceptable. There should also be better Thanksgiving movies. You know, when you think about a great Thanksgiving movie, there are probably some that are set during Thanksgiving, but there's nothing really that that hits it. I thought Elf with Will Farrell was actually was actually pretty good. You know what, I've never seen The Nightmare before Christmas. I don't know if that's really my jam or not. Miracle

on thirty fourth Street is obviously a great one. Yeah, which is better? Oh? Which is better? I can get? I can get you movie purists, you know, going after each other on this one. I bet better movie Miracle on thirty fourth Street or It's a Wonderful Life. You can tear each other apart with that one. And you know it's also a great Christmas movie for what it is.

Home Alone, you know, Yes, I know McCauley culkin. Now we all think of him as like the twenty five year old who had kind of a patchy beard and ten million dollars in the bank and maybe some bad habits, but or not twenty five year old, fifteen year old, but you know, he's he's a pretty good movie. Actually, I mean Home Alone really really holds up over over to So the Rudolph movie is not one that I

could put at the very top of the list. But I don't think that Rudolph is a parable about exploitation because it's about imaginary animals and it's for kids. One of the areas that conservatives need the most work on is the fight over language. First of all, understanding why it's important not to concede terms to the other side that are used specifically because it makes it harder to

have an honest discussion about something. And in the area of the gender rights struggle, particularly transgender rights, this is something that everyone needs to pay much more attention to than they generally do. And I also enjoy listening to British people fight because I do. How dare you say? What are you doing? What are you saying? Excuse me? Say? Who? What? What? This was on an H Julia on HB one. I don't know what this is. It's a it's a radio

show in the UK. I don't even realize they have talk radio there the way we do here, Although that that makes sense now that I say it out loud, But I want to play this whole clip here. Here's a discussion about just the usage of the term cys gender. Now.

They had been talking about how in prisons now there are people who think we're rather the people that are making policy think that in prisons, a transgender female meaning a biological male also known as a male, should be able to be housed with female inmates if they're transgender, And this is obvious safety and other risks, and there's a whole lot of stuff that comes with this, and it's just crazy. Here is how a few British for people.

Oh hello, let's let's have a discussion about transgender rights, shall we. But there is also a broader question here, which is about whether we believe it is possible or indeed necessary to have female only spaces. If you are physically intact as a man and biologically exactly you, you're not in a women's prison. End off, but nothing to discuss. But also, if you are a woman in a woman's prison, you should be safe from being attacked by a sist

or a trans woman. So actually everyone should be safe. Can I just say you're not an out come on my show and say a CIS or a trans woman a woman it is trans? No, no, no, there's a you don't. I'm not a CIS woman. Vanessa is not a CIS woman. We are women, we are biologically women. I am not going to have that BBC claptrap on my show. I'm just using a bit of just a differentiate. No, I'm not going to have it. I'm a woman. I'm not a CIS woman woman. I was born a woman.

Fifty percent of this population are women. We're not CIS women. We don't have to adjust what we're called for a tiny minority of activists who don't even represent trans I said, non trans woman, would that be? That would be equally If you say that, I'm going to ask you to leave my studio. I'm absolutely serious. I'm not having it. I'm not having I'm not having our language in this country introduced in this way. I'm a woman, you are

a man. I'm quite happy for someone to be a trans woman or trans man, but you don't take away what I am because you choose to change your gender. But you get there was something using it in that sentence to point out the two groups and trans woman, you don't take away what I am. That's completely unacceptable that BBC claptrap. I kind of like this feisty British lady. But I'm not even sure that we should concede that there is something known as a as a trans woman.

I think you might have to say a transgendered individual, but to say a trans woman. He notice how you end up with this is a kind of woman, when in reality there are really just men and women. There is man, there is woman. There is not some other form of those two genders. There is nothing else. And no matter how much they try to emotionally or psychologically blackmail people, no matter how much the progressive left makes noise about this, they are flying in the face of reality.

I mean, what they are saying is just simply flatly not true. And one of the things that I'm going to try always very hard to accomplish here in the Hut is we will not say things that we know to be untrue, even if everyone else is saying them. And this is going to come with consequences. I mean, this is also why when you hear about banning, criticism

of immigrants, banning talk about Islam. These are all areas where you see debates, people want to shut down debates, and and they realize that this is in most cases anti free speech. I mean, some of the left is just so stupid and so ignorant that they don't even

know what free speech is. In fact, a lot of the left these days, but many of them, if you were to ask away from the cameras, would say, well, even if we know we're violating the principle of free speech, even if we know we are shutting down debate, it's for a righteous cause, whether it's transgenderism or immigrant rights, or whatever the case may be, and therefore the violations of principle are justified. This is one of the root fallacies of the leftists. The ends always justify the means

when morality is relative. Time to spread some freedom coast to coast. He's a lean, mean analysis machine. Team Buck. It's time for roll call. Friday. Roll call is always a little bitter sweet because it does mean that the weekend is here, but it means it's the last time I get to talk to you for a couple of days. That's no fun. I hope you have excellent weekend plans. Mine will include a little birthday celebration with Miss Molly, and other than that, probably some Netflix and eating some

good food and catching up on sleep. I've got a whole bunch of books and reading these days, including one on this guy who stole a billion. They didn't even know how much, billions of dollars. It's called a billion dollar whale. I gotta tell you, it's really really entertaining. It's a true story and it's a recent story. So that's I'll let you know how that one goes. I also have to finish season three of The Last Kingdom.

I am Utred, son of Utred. Very few of you know what I'm talking about with that, but some of you will, and those of you who do understand, Last Kingdom is one of the most underrated shows I think on TV these days. All Right, your thoughts, not mine, Roll Call Time, Joe Right. Mark Stein would be an amazing fill in host for the Hut. Joe. I appreciate that, and Mark is great, but Mark is a Rush fill in, and Rush is the Rush is the general of the

talk radio Army, so he gets his pick. And Mark is very happy to fill in for Rush on the EIB. So I think we're gonna have to get him here anytime soon. But I do think we got Harlan Hill, Benny Johnson, and Raheem Kassam. I'd love to get a lady in the mix on the radio, so I'm thinking about who might who that might be. I might see if maybe Molly Hamingway over at the Federalist would be interested. She's in high demand these days, but it might be fun if I could get her to carve out the time.

Carolyn right or as I would agree, everyone is entitled to a legal defense, it would appear more that the dirsh participated in a severe miscarriage of justice that would make any decent person's skin crawl. Just curious about your thoughts shields high now, Carolyn is referring to the billion dollar or the billionaire pedophile at Epstein, and it is. It is an incredibly disturbing and disgusting story. Miami. Harold put it out earlier this week. I would recommend it

to you if you have not read it. Epstein was a serial pedophile. Epstein was having relationship He's a billionaire, lived in Palm Beach, was having not even relationships. He was engaged in essentially child trafficking thirteen year olds, fourteen year olds, and he was having you know, illegal relations with them on a regular basis, dozens of them. Close to one hundred I think is the total number of victims. He got two years in prison, two years in Palm

Beach County jail, really in a halfway house situation. In the Palm Beach County jail. So and it was in fact, a now Trump appointee, Alexander Acosta, who played a critical role when he was US attorney for that district in Florida to give an incredibly or actually he's sorry, he was district attorney rather and gave an incredibly soft deal to this guy, and a lot of this guy was friends with the Clintons, he's friends with Trumps, he's he

was a very prominent fellow and credibly rich circles. And he's a true sexual predator in the worst kind of in the worst way. And I think that it's important that people understand this story. So I'm not going to get into the full details now. Maybe it will another time. Miami Harold though on it's how a future Trump cabinet member gave a what is it, gave Jeffrey Epstein the deal of a lifetime. It's it's a remarkable story that

came out this week. Definitely, it's troubling. That's tough reading. When you read it, you it's disturbing. So I'm not reckonmen read the billion dollars a wail. If you want to enjoy yourself and have some time off read this story if you want to take a tour into the darkest recesses of a corrupted human soul. All right, Roberto, right, chill, tie book. The line you offer you use from office space. So what would you say you do here? Oh? Well,

you caught that, Roberto. Also, I can't decide which impression I like better, your Hillary or your Cuomo. Your Cuomo is more accurate, but your Hillary is funny because it captures her crookedness and insincerity. Great show, as always, Thank you, Roberto that I completely agree the Cuomo. The Cuomo is more in line with how he sounds, which is both aggressive and stupid. But you know, the Hillary one really captures a certain essence of basically Hilly walking around saying

I'm terrible. So there's that. Sorry, I gotta keep you awake. It's late in the show. I don't know what's going on. You might be if you're listening to show driving home or something. I want you to be totally you know, odds, wide open, hands on the wheel. That's what I'm here for. Safety first, Adam writes Buck. The process will pull as much carbon out of the airs you can feed at. Energy diamond is Oh, this is more on the diamond thing. Adam. Yeah, I got to read about this man. You're you're Adam

is the science guy. Apparently, I am not. I am not, so I have to read this is about how you make diamonds somehow interesting stuff. Cheryl writes, I love imitations. I have to say your best imitations are Christian amumpor number one, the Cuomos, and then Hillary. Okay, I'll take it. Thank you, thank you very much. You know you're not the only Someone told me recently, very very soon, very close to me, said that Christianamumpo, with her incredibly arrogant,

overwrought accent, was his favorite too. So because if you really listen to you're like, no one actually talks that way. But mister ambassador, is it, in fact the case that you can't have this discussion without speaking in a way that sounds like you're just running out of breath? Yeah, Christian Mumport's true. Tyson writes, the best steaks in the world come from Nebraska, so you're right to promote Omaha steaks. If you need some help of sauces or any type

of cooking, checkout food Wishes on YouTube. Tyson turns out food wishes is what I used for that bourbon pepper sauce. So you are a step ahead, my friend, Tyson. You and I are man. We are linked psychically. So the bourbon pepper steak sauce was was very good. I just somehow it kind of it's separated. I think it was

the heat and it's separated. At the end, it was looking perfect, and then I added a little more cream because I like heavy cream, and that messed it all up, and then it separated out and then it burned and I had problems. But next week I'm gonna be defrosting. I'm gonna be defrosting. I think it's a New York No, it's a New Yark strip or filet that I have from Omaha Steaks. I had Omaha Steaks burgers. Yes, I

crushed that. I'm great at burger cooking now. And I'll probably do a steak next week and I'll sear that one. I'll probably just do an herb butter with that, because you know, that's all you need with a steak. But I'll make a pork chop and I'll probably do some kind of a maple glaze on that pork chop. Because Oh it's delicioso, Sandy rides Buck. It's Thursday, November twenty ninth.

I'm listening to your show and I'm laughing out loud at your Cuomo imitation about being an undocumented Italian immigrant. You're the best, Well, Sandy, thank you. I had fun with that one too. I really like letting it letting a rip with the Cuomo impersonation. I can also tell you that I have it on very good I have it on very good sourcing and authority that Cuomo is not a nice guy. People have actually referred to him as like the medest guy in politics who've worked around him.

So I particularly enjoy doing the impersonation then, because some of these guys, like you know, when I give someone like Paul Ryan a little bit of a hard time on radio, Paul Ryan's a nice guy. Everybody who knows him says he's a nice guy. It's a lot easier when the person's actually a jerk, you know. So that's why Christian I'm apor not a nice person. So from what I'm told, I don't know her personally, but this is what I'm told by people who know and I trust.

So it's fun to make fun of people when you hear that they're actually not very nice. Lisa rights sauce pans high for sauce done right, you can't beat Julia Child's mastering the art of French cooking. She's all about the sauces and how to do them right. It's not a fancy picture book, but truly great directions. You'll be a master in no time. Bonapati, Lisa, Thank you, Lisa.

I'll check that out. I'd like to kick it old school, because when you think about it, I really I can't do breads and I can't do pastas, and so I'm really proteins and veggies is a majority of my diet, and so I'm just trying to think of new and interesting ways to make that, and I'm trying to limit my sugar intake. Guys, I hate to be the one to say this in case you don't know what I'm sure you'll do. In the food world, sugar really is,

unfortunately the enemy. Sugar is where the real problems coming from. And refine carbohydrates that your body effectively breaks down as sugar. That's the bad stuff. All meat, butter fat, oil. I've gone through phases where I've just been eating basically eggs, bacon, red meat, and greens and gotten in really good shape and felt really good and had local lesterol and everything else. It's it's when you know, I get a little too aggressive with Yeah, I have a chocolate stash. It's true.

Right now, I've got some Icelandic pink sea salt chocolate in my cupboard. That bar did not last very long. Sea salt chocolate gets me really excited. Look, I got weaknesses. Okay, I don't drink much. I don't do any drugs. I don't gamble, but you know, I got my I need my coffee black rifle obviously, and I need my chocolate. Those are two of my weaknesses. I can't really help it. Yeah, sugars is just bad. It's just bad. It's bad for you. I mean, small doses, it's fine, but it's bad for you.

Jeff writes, I met Mark Warner's father. He was a neighbor of mine. He was the most decent people I ever met. I don't know what happened to Mark. A real disappointment. Yeah, you know, I don't know. Man, Maybe Mark Warner is a good guy. I don't have much of a much of a background on him. But it's disappointing, you know, disappointing to say he says some things that it's just not good, not good, not smart stuff from him.

Here we go, Buck, Please don't admit in public you haven't seen the Western once upon a time in a West. This is from Chris, but not heard of it. That man card is about to be pulled. It's been argued by some to be the greatest Western ever. You know, Chris Man, you sound like a great American. But I just gotta tell you I'm not. I'm not somebody who is up on Westerns. I just don't. I know. This is where there's some parts about me. And you guys

all know this who listen to across the country. I am born and raised in America, obviously, and I love his country. I love the founding, and I'm all about patriotism and all kinds of stuff. But you know there's I don't like baseball, for example. I'm just gonna say it, I don't really like baseball, and I don't really watch Westerns, so I don't know how American I really am. Sometimes I'm some sort of hybrid or something. So all right, Team that's gonna be it for this freestyle Friday. Thank

you so much for hanging out. It is an honor. Please, if you get a chance you're talking to somebody about podcasts, be like, hey, check out the Buck Sexton Show. It really does spread the word. It helps so much. We need our audience to keep growing so we can keep this freedom hunt rocking. I will talk to you all Monday. Shields High. Just think about how many times you're going to be doing some shopping for family members this holiday,

I think. But all the times you're gonna use credit card information, you're gonna be sending sensitive stuff back and forth on your computer. You're probably gonna be traveling a little bit too, and that means you might be using public WiFi. That means that you're putting all of your information at risk, yes, from hackers, but also from these different sites that track your information and sell it. And then that's how you get these harassing emails and phone calls.

Protect yourself online with Express VPN. ExpressVPN has easy to use applications that will run the background of your computer, phone, and tablet. Once you turn on Express VPN protection, you are secure anonymizes your Internet browsing and encrypt your data and hide your public IP address. Okay, So protect your

online activity today like I do. And find out how you can get three months free at ExpressVPN dot com slash buck that's Express vpn dot com slash buck for three months free with a one year package ExpressVPN dot com slash buck