FBI Bombshells

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Mr garbutsch Off teared down this wall. Either you're with
us or you were with the terrorists. If you got
healthcare already, then you can keep your plan. If you
are satisfied with Trump is not to be president of
the units, take it to a bank. Together, we will
make America great again. It's what you've been waiting for

(00:35):
all day. The Buck Sexton Show joined the conversation called
Buck Toll Free at eight four four nine hundred Buck
that's eight four four nine hundred to eight to five
The Future of talk radio. Buck Sexton, Welcome to the
Buck Sexton Show. Everybody, Oh my gosh, A lot going

(00:56):
on today. I will be honest with you. I will
tell you that I had been planning, and some of
you saw this on Facebook this morning. I've been planning
to just really change it up today with a show
that would be things of of interest to me and
maybe a little bit of historical storytelling or something. I
don't know. I just wanted to get away from what
had been so dominant in the headlines this week. And

(01:18):
then at about two o'clock today, boom, big stories, I mean,
just big stuff dropping. The biggest how has to do
with this Russia indictment Russia collusion situation. Um, you have
Special Counsel Mueller charging thirteen Russians with interfering in the

(01:40):
twenty sixteen election. That's that's at least how it's being presented.
I'm gonna dig into this a bit. This is Oh boy,
it's gonna be a bit frustrating. But here's uh Deputy
Attorney General Rod Rosenstein with just exactly what's going on
and Grand Jury in the District of Columbia to day
return an indictment presented by the Special Council's office. The

(02:03):
indictment charges thirteen Russian nationals and three Russian companies for
committing federal crimes while seeking to interfere in the United
States political system, including the presidential election. The defendants allegedly
conducted what they called information warfare against the United States

(02:25):
with the stated goal of spreading distrust towards the candidates
and the political system in general. Now, this is being
spawned by both sides. The Trump colluded with Russia and
betrayed his countryside, also known as the mainstream media as

(02:46):
well as the No, this is nonsense. How could anyone
think this about Trump? I'm so sick of this Malarkey
investigation as being a day when we're where we come
to a conclusion, right, there was there was there was
no collusion, there was interference. There was no collusion yet

(03:07):
how much interference was there. Here's the problem, folks, It's
never gonna end. This is the They're never gonna stop.
It doesn't matter what comes out, it doesn't matter what
the actual information is. Rod Rosenstein, Muller. Heck, even throw
Combie in there. If you stopped taking Twitter photos of
waterfalls for a moment, throw Comi in there. And if

(03:30):
they all said, you know what, we've really looked into
this and Trump there was no collusion with Trump. He
didn't do anything wrong. You know what the press would say,
Still unable to find Trump Russia collusion, but questions linger.
That's all. So I'm just preparing. It's never gonna change.
So let's just get so we'll focus on the facts
and ignore as much as we can the nonsense political

(03:53):
spin that's being put on all this by people who
aren't invested in in the facts. They're invested in a narrative.
Here's happened, Um, you had a bunch of Russians, according
to the indictment and I read through the indictment several times.
You had a bunch of Russians part of a Internet
reason that they had some phony name for Internet research company,

(04:17):
and they set up phony bank accounts in the US
two and and took on ideas of Americans. So so
there Look, there are some actual crimes that occurred here,
um identity theft by or fraud, but they set up
sock puppets and Facebook stuff, and I think they maybe
got a rally or two together somewhere by using the

(04:40):
Internet in order to run a whole bunch of different
messages during the election. After the election, they were sometimes
pro Bernie Sanders, they were pro Trump in some ways,
they were anti Hillary, anti Rubio, anti Cruise. This started everyone.
This is according the indictment to So this is all

(05:00):
now all on the record, official d o J position,
criminal proceeding. This is not theoretical. This started in there.
Did anybody almost in the world, including maybe like President
Trump's immediate family, think that he was going to win
the election in probably not seem pretty unlikely at the time.

(05:24):
If if you think back, I know a lot of
your like Buck, I saw it coming. Maybe you saw
it coming in Okay, I don't think so. I doubt
that that would be quite a prediction that all said,
the Russian effort here was to just create a sense
of agitation in the political system and some degree of

(05:49):
of undermining of the sanctity of our electrical process or
something like that, basically just to so confusion and chaos.
They call it information and warfare, which I would notice
that's that's a that's pretty strong terms for some Facebook
sock puppets and Twitter trolls. That seems to me to

(06:10):
be perhaps taking this a bit far, which is also
why I'm I'm a little concerned about what this really
means going forward. So now is is fake news if
it involves if a foreign country puts fake news out there?
Is that a Is that an act of war? What
is the additional illegality here? In the indictment, it specifically

(06:31):
mentions defrauding the government of the United States and defrauding
the Federal Election Commission by by by being a part
of our process, by spreading lives, by by rumor spreading essentially. Look,
I'm I don't like Russia. I don't you know, like
I like Russians what I mean that, but I don't
like the Russian government meddling in our stuff. I don't

(06:53):
I don't think this is a good thing. But where
does that stop and start? The Internet is global, folks.
Here's the biggest problem I have with this. And by
the way, I don't think that I've forgotten or or
I'm not going to get to the FBI just just
doing a straight up a face plant on the whole
uh stopping the shooter thing. I I knew that that

(07:15):
it looked kind of bad for them, and then we've
got that they just ignored the TEP. We will get there.
That's probably gonna wait until the second hour, but I
promise you we're going to really roll up the sleeves
on that one, because Wow, I just wanting to get
that out there. That's something we will have to tackle
today too, because a lot of big news for a Friday. Uh. Well,
the biggest problem I have with this, and I actually

(07:38):
tangled with the former CIA director. He was never, never
my boss at the agency, so I have no particularly
fondness or loyalty to him. But John Brennan, who wrote
that the do o J statements and indictments revealed the
extent and motivations of Russian interference in the election, claims
of a hoax in tatters. My take implausible that Russian

(08:01):
actions did not influence the views and votes of at
least some Americans. I responded to Mr Brennan, former CI director,
close confidante of Obama's, by the way, and a hyperpartisan,
and I know that's the case. It's I got people
who tell me things. But here's what I respond said.
Under this standard, Mr Brennan, any foreign actor anywhere in

(08:25):
the world can undermine the results of any U s
election by setting up a few sock puppets buying some
Facebook ads, because that would also influence quote, at least
some Americans. You'll notice that there's no effort, nor is
there any curiosity in the part of the media to
try and engauge the extent and effect of this effort.

(08:50):
They're saying things like, oh, it looks like they spent
a few million dollars. A few million dollars to influence
the US presidential election. Is that a joke? If they
were trying to influence a congressional seat in Oklahoma might
be like, all right, you know, a few million dollars,
that's gonna be a lot. Yeah, But us presidential election.

(09:12):
Does anyone take Russian sock puppets? Seriously? Was this? Was
this having any effect? Now here's the problem with this.
It leaves it all completely open ended. They can say,
and technically there's truth to it, that Russia interfered in
our election, and that's all they want to keep saying,
because the subtext of that for the Democrat left is

(09:34):
that Russia interfered in our election and therefore Donald Trump
is an illegitimate president. We all know that, right, That's
what they're really saying, that's the subtext. What I'm saying
in response to that is, this is the equivalent of
at a presidential election saying there was some voter fraud

(09:57):
and we can point to at least a few cases
of people into I did for voter fraud. Therefore, this
election was tainted by voter fraud and we can't consider
it to be legitimate. See. A reasonable response to that
would be does it I mean, are we talking about
a few hundred votes with over sixty million casts? Because

(10:17):
that's obviously not changing the course of the election. But
that's not what they're doing here. This is the this
is the digital equivalent of well, because thirteen Russians working
with a few dozen other Russians created some fake Facebook
accounts that said, you know, lock her up for Hillary,
that that brings the election into doubt. I would also

(10:38):
note that the the saber rattling over this just visa
vie Russia is astonishing to me. Okay, so we're worried
about Russia doing this in the next election. How do
we stop this? And what's a legitimate recourse other than
to say, okay, Russia, don't do this. Are we going
to give the power to any non state actor in

(11:00):
Russia or anywhere else in the world for that matter,
to cause major diplomatic incidents for US because they set
up some US based social media accounts. As I said,
there are some aspects of the Russian intrusion into our
process that certainly break laws identity theft. Although identity theft,
you really want to get down to this, the fact

(11:20):
that matters that identity theft occurs, and what I mean
that I'm not talking about when you open bank accounts
and but just creating false accounts. People do that all
the time. I'm not charged. Clearly, the addition of some
of the other criminal statutes into this indictment today about
these thirteen Russians in the election is to give it

(11:40):
a little bit more half, little more teeth, a little
more clarity, because things like information warfare and spreading distrust
are not crimes. That's what troubles me about this. So
Mueller saying effectively in this indictment, the DJ is saying, remember,
he's not apart from the Department of Justice, he's just

(12:01):
a rogue operator within it. That's what the Mueller probe is.
But they're saying effectively that this is information warfare. Huh.
That seems to me to be troubling because if it's
information warfare, what is the proper response and how do

(12:22):
we stop it? And what is a way to quantify
the scope and scale of the problem. They don't make
any effort of that because the narrative on the left
is Russia interfered in the election. The narrator on the
right is well a version of what Rosenstein said in
a statement today. I think he wrote this what I've

(12:47):
identified for you with the allegations in the indictment. There's
no allegation in the indictment of many effect on the
outcome of the election. So there's nothing about collusion and
there's nothing about changing the course of the election in
the indictment. For some of us, we've reached the point where, okay,
if they don't have it, now you know they clearly

(13:09):
don't have it. But for the other side, it's just yet,
they're always inserting the Yet we don't have evidence of collusion. Yet,
we don't have evidence that it changed the course of
the election yet, And that will never change, folks. And
that's what's so frustrating about it. You're not dealing with
good faith actors on the other side here, the Democrats,

(13:30):
the left, they don't care what the eventual outcome is,
the processes, the punishment, and as long as they can
keep running with this storyline that Russia did anything just
just tip the scale just a tiny bit in favor
of Trump. It cast aspersions on the legitimacy of the
Trump presidency. Trump is therefore deserving of no degree of respect,

(13:52):
no degree of bipartisan goodwill. He's hashtag not my president.
They would say so as much as today to me.
To me, it's it's really inflated by the left situation.
It's just not as big a deal as they want
to make it into. It's also not going away anytime soon,

(14:14):
so we'll get into it more of this. But you know,
I take a different approach. I saw a lot of conservicing.
See no collusion, no collusion. I want to say, guys, yeah,
no collusion. But that doesn't stop this because they just
say no collusion. Yet they say we're going to find collusion.
So just you know, don't think that this is the
end of it based on the fact that they haven't

(14:35):
asserted any Trump Russia active conspiracy here. I've also been
telling you all along that they use the term collusion
and not conspiracy because collusion will be used as a
political word so that this becomes a political crime, as
an impeachment becomes the only viable route to deal with it.

(14:55):
Conspiracy has a specific legal definition and terminology attached to
it that they will never or be able to prove.
And they know that. That's why it's always been about collusion,
because those words otherwise could be used somewhat interchangeably. All Right,
we have a lot more here. What do you think,
By the way, the thirteen I really want to hear
from all of you because I look at this and
I'm just like, what is Muller doing These Russians are

(15:16):
never gonna get extradited. They're never gonna face justice. They
set up some sock puppets. They use some fake bank accounts,
you know. They I don't think they stole money from anyone,
although I have not. I have to have to go
back and look at that. But so there's they're guilty
of some identity, identity theft and wire fraud. It's not good.
It's criminal, but it's also not keeping me, you know,

(15:40):
up late at night shaking in my booties here. And
as for the information warfare, I just think it's laughable.
I'm not okay with it. I don't approve of it.
I think Russia is a bad actor in this situation.
But I also think, come on, everyone, let's get a
grip here. I really think that they's had any effect
on anything. The answer overs, and then it's absolutely all right.

(16:02):
Eight four four to five. It is Friday. I want
to hear from lots and lots of you folks out there.
Eight four four buck will be right back. The defendants

(16:23):
posed as politically and socially active Americans advocating for and
against particular candidates. They established social media pages and groups
to communicate with unwitting Americans. They also purchased political advertisements
on social media networks. The Russians also recruited and paid

(16:45):
real Americans to engage in political activities, promote political campaigns,
and stage political rallies. The defendants and their co conspirators
pretended to be grassroots activists. So is this information warfare
or just FEC violations or is it both? You know,

(17:06):
I'm wondering where do we Where do we draw the
lines here? They're saying that thirteen guys indicted for this,
that's it. You'll notice that there's some I I think,
very feverish moving of the goal post that's going on
here by many of those who have been promoting a

(17:30):
narrative about Russia collusion for over a year. Now, do
not forget my friends. Do not let them change and
rewrite history. The whole frenzy behind this is not that
a few people created some social media profiles to try
to trick some people into what hating Hillary. Think about

(17:52):
how much noise was out there, we were talking about
separating the signal from the noise. How many millions and
millions of Twitter accounts, hundreds of millions of Facebook account
they're posting things about the election, literally hundreds of millions,
and yeah, this was the difference maker. This is laughable,
except people think that it is the biggest political scandal

(18:16):
of the last you know, hundred years or whatever. I mean,
the Democrats do. But the story was not that there
was some Russian intrusion into our political ecosystem via social media, right,
That was not what was getting them all riled up.
Don't let them just ease into that now. Oh No,
it was that there was high level cooperation with the

(18:38):
Trump campaign to do that. We still have nothing on
that zero And we cannot allow those who were promoting
that storyline for over a year to just kind of
slink away, just be like, hey, you know, yeah, we
we really were just worried about those sock puppets and
Twitter trolls. No, that is not what was at the

(19:01):
heart of all of this, because that's not gonna stop.
Someone explained to me how the FBI is supposed to
handle this. There are some someone in Russia, some group
in Russia sets up a few a few hundred accounts
to try and help a political candidate in the US,
and they're tweeting stuff out about them. Are we and
they're pretending that it's coming. It's coming from like you know,

(19:24):
Bill in Kentucky. Uh, are we gonna do what? We're
gonna block the Internet from Russia to the U. S.
I mean, let's let's think about this for a moment.
We're gonna freak out yell at the Russian government for this.
I just want to know what what's the real response?
You know, we were talking about trying to deal with
Russian intrusion the elections, So how do we do that?

(19:46):
Anyone have any ideas. I'm wondering. We'll be back. He's
holding the line for America. Buck Sexton his back. After

(20:06):
the election, the defendants allegedly stage rallies to support the
president elect while simultaneously staging rallies to protest his election.
For example, the defendants organized one rally to support the
president elect and another rally to impose to oppose him,
both in New York on the same day. There he

(20:28):
had Deputy Attorney General Rodenstein from a statement today after
the indictment of the thirteen Russians, as I said, by
the way, Russians who will never be extradity the United States.
So I'm glad that justice will be served by indicting
these guys who are in Russia and nothing is going
to happen to them. But anyway, I know, look, you

(20:50):
go on the record, we show the Russian government you know,
don't don't do this kind of stuff and all the
rest of it. But yeah, there you have it. Here's
here's something that I want to want you all to
keep in mind. It's quite clear based on the timeline
here was when much of this guts started. It is
quite clear from a timeline that the purpose of the

(21:11):
sock Puppets and this member of sock Puppet is a
fake identity on Facebook or I think people use it
for Twitter too, um and a troll you all know,
to Twitter trolls. So it's really kind of the same thing. Uh.
The reason they did all this was to create some
degree of distrust and chaos in our political system. But

(21:35):
I just think it's a laughably inept effort to do that, right,
I mean, this would be like the equivalent of me
running over And I know some of you like, hey,
what the Obama administration do in Israel during its election?
But maybe we'll go there later. But if if I
showed up in a foreign country and I did a
printing of leaflets, you know, root for this candidate, not

(21:57):
this candidate. This guy did these bad things, and I
just started handing them out to people on the street.
I'm sure I'd be violating some election law in that country,
and fine, but would anyone really think that I would
change the outcome of the election that way? Our elections
such fragile things, that's such a meager effort would have

(22:17):
any impact on the outcome. And yet if CNN and
MSNBC we're reporting on it, they'd be like buck Sexton
interfering in the election in yeah, Azerbaijan or wherever, right,
interfering in the election. Technically true, But as I said
to you with the voter fraud issue, okay, but we

(22:38):
need some sense of context and scale, some sense of
how important this is. You know, it's also technically true
that I committed a crime today. It is technically true.
You could even say that today I branded myself a
criminal because I jay walked a couple of times. Because
I'm a New York City and we all jaywalked. Would

(23:00):
it be fair to call me a criminal because I
jaywalked today? Is it? Is it? Specifically? If you want
to get really technical about it. Did I break a law? Yes, yes,
But should I be locked up for that one? I
really hope not, because all the rest of my fellow
New Yorkers are Gonnet locked up too. I think I'm
trying to illustrate the point here. I hope it's Uh,
it's clear enough with what I'm trying to say. Uh. Meanwhile,

(23:25):
the press just wants to freak out a Trump Russia
day president president by day, kid right presiders Russia and

(23:56):
the grocer. Yeah, let's just let's just go to war
with Russia over there's everybody. Let's just let's just get
to it. The sock puppet twitter troll War of twenty eighteen.
These people are nuts. Most of them don't even know

(24:17):
that the Communist Party during the Soviet Union was sending
funds to various fellow travelers in the United States, specifically
so that they would publicized communist ideology, anti American stuff.
And by the way, they also infiltrated some major left
wing publications with all that, but they don't like to
talk about that. And they infiltrated the State Department look
up Alger Hiss and a whole bunch of other places

(24:39):
in the United States government. Again, I'm not saying anything
that's okay, But in the case of setting up some
you know, weekly communist rag that's printed in someone's basement
somewhere in the fifties of the sixties, you know, I
don't think they are about to overthrow the US government
with that. None of this stuff is new. It's just

(25:04):
being exaggerated now because we all know why. It is
to make Trump's election illegitimate. That is the fundamental purpose
of this entire thing, and to try and pretend it's
anything else is preposterous. I want to know. I would

(25:24):
like some of these people who go on TV. By
the way, it's like CNN, it's just basically hiring anyone
who's ever worked for and every anyone who's ever worked
for Mueller or James Comey is like finding employment and
airtime over at CNN. Now, isn't that curious? All these
FBI and d o J folks that with an ax
to grind against administration. Oh, they're just they are just

(25:46):
civil servants doing their duty, sir, Will you with action Russia? Yeah? Sure,
Trump should have. Oh man, he could have some fun
with that one. I think he just wanted to ignore it.
But you have all these people now that are running
around with us on TV, and they're saying this stuff,
and at the end of the day, they're doing Russia's

(26:09):
work for them. Nothing could be more undermining about our
elections than the storyline that CNN has been running with
for over a year now, and MSNBC and the New
York Times and the Washing Post and many others. Right,
they are clearly convinced or willing to convince their fellow
Americans that Trump cheated. That's what this is about. Trump cheated.

(26:33):
Here's a fun thought experiment, folks, with the thirteen Russians
indicted today, do any of you think that if Hillary
had won the election, we would all be sitting here
worried about the Russian intrusion into the next election? No? No,
Remember how there was this moment in time some months

(26:56):
back when they admitted, the press admitted that the Obama
administrator should have made a decision not to make a
huge deal out of the Russian metaling. Right, FBI knew
about this, they knew there were these stock puppet accounts
and stuff. Obama administration didn't make a big deal. How
was it that it wasn't such a big deal then,
But now it is such an enormously big deal. How

(27:20):
was it that we went from President Obama saying this,
what is it about our political system that made us vulnerable? Two? Uh,
these kinds of potential manipulations, which, as I've said publicly before,
we're not particularly sophisticated. This was not some elaborate, uh

(27:41):
complicated espionage scheme. They hacked into some Democratic Party emails.
Not an elaborate, complicated espionage scheme. I know that specifically
about the emails and not about the stock But it
was all part of the same effort. Right and Obama,
the president receiving the PDB every day, the Presidential Daily Brief,

(28:01):
he was clearly aware of this stuff. He must have
been made aware by the FBI, and they decided not
to make a big deal of it. But yet that
was then. It wasn't a big complicated espionage scheme. Now
we are told things like this by former Justice Department officials.
If the indictments we believed it has proven, it looks
like a pretty sophisticated operation. These groups functioned um trying

(28:25):
to present themselves as Americans, had enough clout online to
show some followers, and and tried to get in touch
at least on a couple of occasions with members of
the Trump campaign and helped to organize um various kind
of of rallies. Both it looks like foreign against Trump.
So what are we to do about that? What are
we to make of it? How do you stop that?

(28:48):
I would note, are we going to have mandatory verification
of Actually wish that social media did have man mandatory verification.
I wish that every person with a social media account
had we all got to know who they were, exactly,
who's operating it and there was none of this stuff.
That actually be a great idea for like a new
version of Facebook where everyone it has to be a
real person, you've got accountability. That would be great. I'm

(29:12):
all in favor of it. But this is not realistic.
It's not the way that it works right now. So
there's a there's no end in sight to this, folks.
You know, I know Trump tweeted out that there was
no collusion. He's correct, there's no collusion. Um And I
saw that my old friend Kaylee mckin then he was
on Fox and she said, this is the end of
the Russia collusion conspiracy. It's not the end of the conspiracy.

(29:37):
I think she was implying it should be and I
would agree with that, but it is not the end
at all. They will not stop. It is not going away.
So this is the big news that we get on
on Friday. This continues on, and you know now you're
going to have all kinds of talk about when the
next shoe will drop them all investigation. I will note

(29:58):
that there I saw only today some people on the
left now that we got these thirteen indictments out there,
so some people who were uh saying, well, I mean,
nobody really took it seriously. There was collusion at the
top level the Trump campaign, because why would he be
reaching out Why would the Russians have contact with a
C list player even in the Trump circle like Carter

(30:20):
Page and Papadopoulos the No matter what anyone says, those
are low level people in the campaign. If Trump is involved,
why the Russians interacting with them? That makes no sense.
But they're just changing the story so that it seems
like they're less crazy as this goes along, because eventually
there will not be any more room for them to say, oh,

(30:42):
there was Russia collusion. Oh it's any day now. But
until that day we get to keep hearing not yet,
not yet, they're on it, and the press will be
asking the president, may the president, will you sanction Russia? Yeah,
that's how this is going to go. Oh, by the way,

(31:02):
it's Fridays. You know what that means. It's action movie
quote Friday, where it's an effect. Today we're not action.
You could ask yourself question, lucky you a movie? This
spot off? Quote Friday's action movie quote Fridays? Here you

(31:33):
actually movie quote Friday? Everybody? Are we got lines? We'll
get to some calls after the break. Stay with me
our two. We're gonna talk about this. It's FBI situation.
They messed up big time, folks. We will get into
that in the next hour. Stay with me. Does this
end today? Like? Is this over for the Trump campaign
and any of the officials. I think it's particularly good news.

(31:55):
That doesn't mean that that that word is subject is
not subject to change, but at least on the available
evidence at this point in the investigation, I think that
the White House probably should justifiably breathe a sigh of relief,
meaning that the secondary aspect of the mandate has not
been proven. In other words, there's no evidence yet that
has been developed, and this indictment would seem to be

(32:15):
consistent with that. That would indicate that there was collusion
by the Trump campaign in Russian efforts to interfere and
influence the two thousand and sixteen presidential election. Yeah, it's
not over that, guy's right, it's not over. Going to
keep on just grinding on the background. Let's take Charles

(32:37):
in Houston. What's up, Charles, Hey, Buck, how's it going, man?
I'm good, Thank you for your call. Hey, I just
want to talk about informational warfare for part of it.
That's you know, they're trying to they're trying to demonstrate,
you know, there's no monetary value going back and forth,
at least none that none that they have divulged to

(32:57):
us right now. But George Sorrow spends all his money.
He's a for national influence in super PACs and actually
spending money. So why aren't people up in arms about that?
It's going to the US citizen. I don't have to check.
I think he is. I think he is a U.
S citizen, But I mean he's he does not sound
like a U. S. It is in because he is

(33:18):
so autos But you know, yes, he is a U.
S citizen, So okay, well, I mean, and then then
that takes that off the table, you know, but that's
where I was going with that. Not sure, it's not
sure where we could go there, but we'll check. I could.
I could be wrong, I mean, I but I also wonder,
you know, he is a US citizen. Yeah. I also wonder, Charles,
at what point does this become so so if it's

(33:39):
an f EC violation, meaning it's a Federal Election Commission
violation for Russians to be trying to remember wage information
warfare that's from the indictment, which I've never even heard
of as a crime before. I'm not saying there's no
such thing as information warfare, but that's a very malleable term, right.
Uh So, So can I can any one now anywhere

(34:01):
in the world set up an account where they're like,
you know, my name, my name is you know, my
name is Jim, and I live in America and I'm
voting for so and so, and it's actually some dude
in I don't know, the Philippines or India or Turkey
or you know who knows where? Right, and are they
waging information warfare? Acains the United States, it seems a

(34:22):
little extreme. Well with with an open internet, you know,
so it's gonna open internet and go down that route.
People didn't do whatever they want exactly, but even take
the international flavor out of it. What if Buck sex
and tomorrow writes a blog post based on information of
that moment staying something, then comes back six months later,
Oh it was, you know, there was They found more information.
They come back and say, well, Buck was spreading information warfare.

(34:43):
He's you know, he's a he's a terrorist against the state,
he's domestic And where does the line get drawn with this?
This is what I was amazed, and I got a
lot of heat for this day on Twitter because I said,
this seems like weird overreach to me. Look, I'm not
saying that identity theft and and wire fraud or whatever
are in crimes. I get that. But the whole point
about how how information warfare is being waged by the
Russians here, I'm like, uh, they information warfare. They were

(35:07):
advocating for different political candidates in this country. By the way,
we do all kinds of the US government openly does
all kinds of stuff. We've got our pro democracy organizations abroad.
Guess what a pro democracy organization in a country that
doesn't have democratic elections is influencing the country, right, I mean,
we have all these different international institutions that we're influencing

(35:28):
countries all the time. I just think the information warfare
concept is that just kind of that strikes me a
little weird. You know, if they just indebted these guys
for identity theft, they'll be like, yeah, okay, fine, information
war A conspiracy to defraud the United States government was
what they was what they actually said in the indictment.
Defraud the government, how I mean defraud and the individuals

(35:51):
who have their identity stolen. Fun but defraud the government
because they were spreading ideas. That's called politics book. That's
what I thought by our foreign Also, how about this,
a lot of foreign media entities are state sponsored. So
is now a state sponsored media entity that operates in
this country. We're just talking about Al Jazeera earlier in

(36:12):
the week, and they might have to register as a
foreign agent, right, But there are a lot of foreign
media entities Dore's does the Daily Mail, the UK based
Daily Mail? Do they are they waging information warfare in
this country? If they spread a story that's a lie
or the the BBC are absolutely right, the BBC that
that's government news, that's government information. So okay, So people say,

(36:33):
well those aren't hostile. Okay, So what about what about
Chinese uh state sponsored media? What about like Shinhwah news agency?
Are are they waging information warfare when they post stories
on the internet in English and people share them here?
I mean, I'm just trying to think this thing through
beyond oh my god, Russia, and you know it starts
to get a little hazy, doesn't it. Well, you're using
you're using logic again. You're trying to think of the

(36:54):
bigger picture, not the immediate sound by. You're trying to say, okay,
if they say this, what does it mean for ABC
and D as well? You know you're you're thinking down
the road and implications, right, You're not just going to
the Democrat Montra going not our president like you're pointing
out before. Well, I appreciate that. And Charles and Soto
sends the guards, how do you have a good weekend?
You have a good weeks misses you bye bye? Um

(37:16):
Kenny in Boston, Kenny, we got about actually we got
like less than a minute but you've been on hold
that everyone else is on the hold. What do you got, Kenny?
I got a couple of things. I got a quote,
and I have a thing about the Russian blockbuster as
it's called. You know, what's the scariest thing about me
is the timings and the patterns of these announcements and stuff.

(37:38):
They come at a great time. So how is it
possible that this particular Russian thing was based on the
fact that they dropped the ball on the shooter investigation
and that this story has actually been lying and waiting.
You know, they just hastily through this together or got
the thing through and all of a sudden, Oh yeah,
I guess what we get. We don't know when these

(38:01):
uh indictments were laid down. We're gonna talk about Kenny,
thank you for Colina. We're gonna talk about the FBI
what we found out today about how they handled that tip.
The FBI got a tip that could have prevented that shooting. Folks.
So I had planned team Welcome to our two of
the Buck Sexton Show. I had planned, because it was Friday,

(38:21):
to move on to some other topics. I felt I
felt like we had discussed what was necessary with regard
to that terrible shooting in Parkland, Florida. I didn't I
wasn't gonna touch on the subject at all today. I
didn't think it was really something we had we had
to do. I felt like we had covered it. And
then this FBI statement comes out this morning, and I am.

(38:47):
I am at a level shocked, but also not at all.
You know, there's a part of me that wants to
believe that the FBI is more on it than this,
And then there's also know a part of me that
knows that federal bureaucracies and the federal government. That's what
I said to you yesterday, that the government can't protect
you all the time, and the government can't protect you

(39:11):
that well, a lot of the time. It's up to you.
It's up to all of us. You gotta protect each other,
gotta protect yourself. Here's this FBI statement. I'll just read
it to you, and then, well, I don't know what
what we're supposed to make of this. It's on January,
a person close to Nicholas Cruz, the Parkland shooter, contacted

(39:35):
the FBI's Public Access Line tip line to report concerns
about him. The caller provided information about cruizes, gun ownership,
desire to kill people, uranic behavior, and disturbing social media posts,
as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

(39:57):
Under established protocols, the nation provided by the callers should
have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The
information should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office,
where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken. We have
determined that these protocols were not followed for the information

(40:20):
received by the p L on January five. The information
was not provided to the Miami Field Office and no
further investigation was conducted. At that time. FBI Director chrispher
Ray said, we are still investigating the facts. I am
committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in
this particular matter, as well as reviewing our process for

(40:43):
responding to information that we received from the public. It's
up to all Americans to be vigilant, like I've been saying,
and when members of the public contact us with concerns,
we must act properly and quickly. We have spoken with
victims and families and deeply regret the additional pain this
causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of

(41:04):
the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to
keeping the American people safe and are relentlessly committed to
improving all that we do and how we do it.
That's the statement, uh, in terms of a foul up, Folks,
in this situation, I'm having a hard time thinking how

(41:24):
much bigger of a mess up you could see from
the FBI side than this. They received a name, with
detailed information and a specific claim that this school shooter
was likely to conduct a school shooting, and they just
did nothing. Now, notice what happens when you put this

(41:48):
in conjunction with the other story. And that was already
concerning enough that the YouTube comment about quote I want
to be what he said, I want to be a
professional school shooter. I'm going to be a professional school shooter.
End quote. How that was flagg for the FBI. The

(42:10):
FBI met with the person who flagged it, which I
will note. You know, when they just do that and
don't follow up and try to find the person who
did it, makes you think do I really wanna do
I really want to see something say something? Because all
of a sudden, I've got FBI guys who are like, well,
how do you know this person? You know, what do
you know? What do you know about this? Look, I
can understand from a normal person's point of view on this,
you might say, maybe I'm just not gonna see something

(42:31):
and say anything. But they had that information about the
YouTube posting in true name Nicholas Cruz spelled in a
way that very few people in the country spell their
name that way. I mean, if they had done an
Instagram search of the name. Okay, I'm not talking about
some high level, super secret scurel FBI stuff. We're not

(42:54):
talking about you know, rerouting spy satellites here, folks. If
they had done an Instagram search of the name on
the YouTube comment, they probably would have found the kid
right away. I'm guessing there aren't a lot of Nicholas
Cruises that are writing that kind of stuff and have
photos of them all over the place with knives and

(43:15):
guns and looking pretty aggressive and mutilated animals and all
the rest of it. Right, So if they fell down
on that one, and I was willing to say, Okay, look,
a lot of comments, there's a lot of stuff going
on that nothing's perfect, and you know, there's human error here.
I understand that However, when you have someone who is
calling in to the FBI line with detailed information and

(43:39):
a name about an individual who may be involved in
a who maybe soon to be a school shooter, and
the FBI does nothing, What the heck is the point
of the FBI's public access line. And I know, I
do think it's unfair to immediately jump to a conclusion

(44:02):
that I saw a lot of people doing on social media,
which is, oh, well, you know, maybe they were doing
there was too much Russian Russia investigation going on for
there to be any resources put to this. I don't
think that's fair. Different offices different But I do think
if someone had called into that tip line and said,
you know, I I know the guy who offered to

(44:25):
give the Trump campaign Hillary's hacked emails, I feel like
that person would have gotten there would have been a
call back, and there would have been some action taken.
I do think that's true, which tells you something about
the priorities these days of America's premier law enforcement agency,
at least from the top down. You know that that
may be that the influence that this collusion hysteria has

(44:49):
had is deeper than we think. But I'm surmising. I'm
I'm theorizing on that one. But you'll notice that there
was this recitation of the mantra after this terrible school
shooting of if you see something, say something, it's incumbent

(45:10):
upon each each one of us to report to the
authority's report to the authorities. It was reported repeatedly and
in detail. Everybody knew every red flag was seen and
noted and spoken about. And what we get to here
is is there is there nothing the government can do

(45:32):
or would do to stop this. And I think the
answer is maybe even if they had followed up on this,
maybe the intervention by the FBI to sit down with
this kid and say, don't be a psycho killer that
might have had some effect. I don't know. We also
could argue, what have a accelerate the process, but it

(45:53):
seems like there's very little hope. If they can't stop
Nicholas Cruise from being in a school shooter, what makes
you think that they're going to stop the next one.
This kid could not have been anymore obvious, aggressive, blatant,
leaving a huge trail for everybody. I mean, if we

(46:16):
were to put this in terrorism in terms, this would
be like the guy who you know, is walking around
the back of the mosque saying, I want to be
a suicide bomber. I want to be a suicide bomber.
And everyone knows and they interview him and everything, and
he's on the FBI's radar, and then a couple months
later he's a suicide bomber somewhere. Yeah, that is pretty
analogous to what happened here this guy. All the flags

(46:38):
were there, we saw them, we noted it. The FBI
didn't pass it along, didn't didn't look into this. I
would say this. I wonder what other tips were called
into the public access line that that did get followed
up on. Where they looking into, you know, Medicare fraud
and Florida. Where they were what were they spending their
resources and time doing well? I guess they didn't even

(46:59):
pass it onto the field office. So not to single
out the Florida field office, but what were they spending
their resources on what could be a higher priority than
at least look it into this. They've they've got the people,
They've got the people to run down the all the
stuff we're seeing with the Russia. We look, we had
this all this fan for today, right thirteen indictments in

(47:22):
Russia of Russians for setting up sock puppets. That's a
whole lot less important than what what happened earlier this
week in Florida, a whole lot less devastating, not even
the same universe, not even the same stratosphere of importance,
and yet nobody looked into it. Um, this is my friends,

(47:46):
this is not This is not good. It does not
look good for the FBI on this one. Um, it
makes us feel It makes it feel like the whole
see something, say something campaign is just lip service, you know,
see something, say something ing has meaning, maybe if you're
talking about I don't know, someone engaged in white collar

(48:06):
fraud somewhere, or maybe Russia collusion. But school shooting. This
didn't get this didn't get any resources or any attention whatsoever.
I mean human error. I was willing to give the
FBI some benefit of the doubt on the YouTube comment
because I figured, Okay, there's a lot going on, you know,
they there's a lot of comments that are posted here

(48:26):
and there. But that was because you didn't have a
full picture, and what it was just Nicholas Cruz a
name and one comment on one YouTube clip. Okay, there's
a lot of any of you have spent time in
the comment sections of websites, no, pretty gross, scary stuff
that people are saying, and all the rest of it.
But this call, this call had everything quote cruises, gun ownership,

(48:51):
desire to kill people, erratic behavior, disturbing social media posts,
potential of him conducting a school shooting. The FBI could
have followed up on this in two minutes. They could
have looked at this kid's instag I mean it was
all there. They didn't even have to investigate really, I mean, heck,

(49:12):
they could have brought in a high school kid and said, hey,
this is what we were told. What do you think
you know? Can you do a do a quick scrub
of social media? Could have brought in an intern. I
would have been able to figure this out. Nothing. Ah, Look,
it looks pretty bad for the fbion. I don't know
what else to say. I remember or all the you know,

(49:34):
the different you know, the heat that the intelligence community
got for while both WMD and Rock and then before
that Missing nine eleven. And I'm a believer in accountability
for these massive and very powerful federal bureaucracies. I really am.
And I don't know what accountability looks like for this,
because this is this is bad. Governor Scott of Florida's

(49:57):
saying the FBI director should resign. I think there's a
there's two philosophies on that point. On the one hand,
you have people who will say, pardon the phrase, the
buck stops with the guy at the top. That would
be Christopher Ray. So even though he had no direct
ability to influence this, there has to be a show
of accountability. Maybe the other side of it is, are

(50:19):
you really going to have the FBI director resigned because
of what employees far down the chain of command did
not do has nothing to do with him. I tend
to fall more into that category, just because I don't
think you can hold the head of an organization responsible
for uh incidental or or not incidental, but aberrant one

(50:40):
off conduct. It's one thing if it's systemic and not caught,
and there's a there has to be accountability for that.
But who man, it's a bad it's a bad day
for the bureau um. I don't think there's any way
around that. And I don't know who it's tough, folks.

(51:04):
Given the week we just had as a country, well
we all just went through. We saw, we heard the videos,
the footage, everything, and I was really hoping, just for
the purpose of a bit of psychological recuperation, we just
moved past it today and then this happens the FBI. Hey,
I mean they they came clean, So I guess there's
that's a good sign at least for some sense of accountability.

(51:28):
But I don't know how they can miss a more
obvious one than this. This is this is Hey. I
think a guy across the street is trying to build
a truck bomb. Here's his name. I've seen photos of it.
You can check it out online. He's been posting stuff
about how he wants to build a truck bomb. You
really should check this out. And the FBI doesn't. It
doesn't even begin to look at it, see something, say something.

(51:52):
Come on, what do you think ben't too harsh? Not
harsh enough? What are we to make of this? The
backle at the bureau eight four eight four, four to
eight to five. We'll be right back herb in New Jersey.

(52:13):
Welcome to the Bucks Acton show. Sir, dude, how are you?
I'm good, dude, how are you? I'm doing pretty good? Hey, listen,
I wants your opinion on this possible scenario. So, um
Muller was charged with investigating the possibility of Russian interference
in our election, and lo and behold, today we get

(52:34):
these indictments charging these individuals and organizations with violating various
laws relating to the conduct of our election and other charges. Um. So,
out of gratitude for a job well done, President Trump

(52:54):
UH declares the investigation successfully completed and rewards Mueller with
an appointment to replace Ray as director of the FBI,
with the charge of cleaning up the mess that currently
embroils the FBI because of things like the botched UH
Clinton email investigation and the UH the Docier debacle that

(53:19):
led to potentially bogus spice a warrant. And now look
at this mess in Parkland, Florida, where they dropped the
ball and should have at least paid this guy a
visit to talk to him. So is there is there
a question in their herbari? Well, I want to know
what do you think of that? Of all that stuff

(53:41):
they mean, all the things you're talking about. Well, yeah,
I mean, here's here's my My suggestion was, suppose Trump
declares that we have a successfully completed the investigation into
Russian meddling in our election, the indictments that were issued today.
But he can't. He can't that that doesn't work because
the Mueller probe is still ongoing and Mueller has already

(54:03):
said that. Okay, well I missed that part. I'm just
thinking that. You know, all along we've been hearing that
the Russians medal, the Russians medal, the Mustans medal, and
and now we have the proofs of the Russians medal
and uh. In his statement today we heard, um, uh,
what's that guy's uh? The deputy director Rosenstein. Rosenstein made

(54:28):
a very uh appointed statement that there were no and
it's in the indictment also, there there were no US
citizens who were knowing participants. Yeah, winning versus unwitting is
the terms is the term they use. Yeah, right, it's
no collusion. Yeah. But but did you hear my whole
thing herb about yet? Because the Left is not given

(54:49):
up on this. They're just saying they haven't proven it yet.
And what Rosenstein said is that, yeah, there's nothing in
this indictment about that, but there could be another indictment
or even a superseding indictment with more of it. I
hear you her, but I appreciate you calling it from
New Jersey, and thank you for sharing your thoughts here
on the show. All right, Mark in Waynesboro, Virginia. Hey, Mark,

(55:13):
Hey Buck, it's a pleasure to talk to you. Hey. So,
in America, there used to be a time when men
that were in the high positions of power, whether they
were generals or government officials, if seventeen innocent, precious American
children died on their watch, at a bare minimum, that

(55:37):
individual would resign, and in some cases, out of honor,
that individual would go out into the woodshed in the
backyard and either hang themselves or shoot themselves. Now, we
had an athletic director and a football coach down there
in um Florida that, without a second thought, gave their

(55:57):
life to protect those innocent kids. But look at the
classlessness of Director Ray. Look at the complete despicable behavior
of all of these bureaucrats in Washington, d C. They
have proven that not only are they corrupt, but they
have absolutely no interest or desire whatsoever to do their

(56:21):
job to protect the American people. And that's with a
budget of money that is an un goodly sum of
money to any of us. You had asked if you
thought that he should resign or if somebody lower down
the chain should be held accountable. What's astonishing, Buck is

(56:41):
no one has been held accountable yet, and you and
I both know, Buck, that no one will be held accountable,
and any absence of honorable men in this fraudulent federal
government in Washington, d C. The American people are gonna
do nothing but suffer under this joke of a federal
government of here. Mark, I appreciate you calling him, and

(57:02):
I will say that I think that Nicholas Cruise will
be held accountable, but that will be not nearly enough
justice under the circumstances. Um, we gotta roll into a
quick break here, folks. When we come back, we will
have much more. By the way, if you want to
throw any thoughts at me on Russia, on the FBI's
mess up here, or even if you eat Friday, you
can give me an action movie quote if you're so inclined.

(57:23):
I was hoping to have a bit of a lighter
show today, but the news conspired against me. The news
colluded against me. We'll be back alright, Team lines are lit.
Let's get to them. We have Todd in Greenboro. Hey Todd, Hey,
how are you doing books? I'm all right, thank you
for your call. I just want to ask, freaking what's

(57:45):
the last color want from this government? Three fifty freaking
million people in this freaking country, and what he wants
to he want He wants somebody to control everybody. What
what are we gonna do? But on top of that,
the shooting, how are you going to correct it? It's
all pointing fingers one way or another. Oh, it's his fault. No,

(58:08):
it's their fault. No, it's it's your fault, homie, it's
your fault. Freaking The American public needs to realize it's
your fault. These are your kids out here pulling triggers,
freaking because you are weak. Well, I mean maybe it's
it's I think you could say that it's it's our

(58:29):
responsibility to keep our children safe. It's the fault of
the shooter. Nicholas Cruz and I do think that there is, uh,
there's reasonable criticism of the FBI is failure to follow
up on a very specific tip about exactly what happened here.
But there's a currently an environment of every running around

(58:50):
just trying to hang whatever their political issue is on
this like a Christmas tree. I mean, it's just terrible.
I mean there there's so much grandstanding and nonsense and
that's not helpful at all. And and looking even when
I mean, I know I had I had guests on
yesterday talking about greater security at schools. Here's here's just
something that's just reality. I'm sure, And I know you

(59:11):
know this, Todd. Somebody has an Air fifteen and they're
planning out a a mass slaughter of civilians and they know,
they know the area well, they know the target well,
they understand who's gonna be there, where they're gonna be,
and they're just trying to kill in us in people.
You could have had fifty arm guards there and at
best you might have had a faster response time and

(59:32):
a fewer casualties. But people were almost there was no
way that you weren't going to take casualties once the
shooter got on the grounds and had an air fifteen
in his hands. It's just it's just not realistic to
think otherwise. Correct. But can I ask a question, yes, sir,
is it is it a question of security or is
it the question of your government? Well, I mean, well

(59:55):
it kind of rolls in together. But I mean security
in schools. We put more security on our in our
banking system than we do on our children. I mean,
who are the greatest teachers. Who are the greatest teachers
in America? That's one question. That would be American special Forces.

(01:00:18):
They jump into other countries and teach them how to
kill people. They are the greatest teachers in America. Now
you've got retired freaking green Berets all over the East Coast,
all over America. Could you not put them in a school,
have them have a weapon on them, and they could

(01:00:41):
stop this mess. It's security, it's not freaking your government.
What are we doing? What are we doing? Well? The answers,
I think, by the way, Todd, we're not going to
do very much. I think we're probably gonna do nothing
in the aftermath of this. That's different from what we're
already doing. I appreciate you calling in. I appreciate your passion.
Thank you, sir. Have a good weekend. Al in Colorado,

(01:01:02):
welcome to box section show shields high buck sheels high Al.
I want to offer a solution. Um. First of all,
they are they all just stop giving every federal employee
uh an automatic uh employment until retirement. You have to

(01:01:24):
be able to fire them, and they can't. Yeah, civil
service firing is almost impossible. I've talked to you about
this before. If you if you show up on time
for your job, leave on time, and don't break the law,
it is very hard to fire a civil servant, right
and don't punch your boss in the nose. Uh. That
my solution. My solution is, you know the problem. The

(01:01:47):
problem lies in that, uh, you notify the FBI that
so and so is is a bad guy. Yeah, goes
out and says, howdy, um, what you're doing? He says nothing,
jef I can't do anything because he hasn't done anything yet. Well,
that that's a good point. That's what I've been saying.

(01:02:08):
Let's let's say al that that the FBI had not
let's say the FBI had not failed to as it
as it admits, failed to uh follow protocol here and
they had met with Nicholas Cruz. They sat down with
him and they said, hey, we see all this stuff.
We're hearing some very bad things about you. They can't
lock him up based on anything that I have seen

(01:02:30):
and and so, if he's really committed to this. He
may say, oh, wow, the FBI visited me. They're on
to me. You know, I better go that they can't.
And then people have said things like, why can't we
put them under surveillance? You're you're not gonna put every
every whacko in the country under twenty four hour surveillance
because you just can't. You don't have the resources of
the time, of the manpower. There's no way you'd be
able to pull that off. And you also then get

(01:02:51):
into whole question about, well, how can you put somebody
under twenty four hour surveillance that they haven't actually committed
a crime yet. These are the problems of living in
a free society, my friends. You know, the rule of
law sometimes means that things like this are are complicated. Buck,
I've got a solution. Here's my solution. Okay, um authorize

(01:03:14):
these i FBI guys when they when they go out
and they find this young man um and he is
a he is a man at nineteen, he's definitely a
man um. And you take him and you put him
in the car and you drive up to the nearest
prison and they're all over health half acres. You take

(01:03:35):
him to the nearest prison and you say we're just
going for a visit, and you're walking through there and
you show him these miscreants in the prison and say
which which one would you like to be the voice
toy for? This is? This is some version I think

(01:03:56):
al of the I believe it's MTV, and I'll thank
you for Colinger from Colorado. I believe it was MTV
that did a version of a did a show called
Scared Straight where they would bring juvenile delinquents into a
very frightening prison and have them I mean, I remember
watching this, so I know it's a thing. I think
it was called Scared Straight. But they would scream at

(01:04:17):
them in prison to get the juvenile delinquents to stop there.
They're delinquent ways basically, and they had guys who I mean,
I remember that there was some very uh how do
I put this, Some some salty language was used by
the convicts to really to really bring the point home. Um,

(01:04:40):
I want to there's a little bit of a feud
going on right now, a feud brewering that while has
some fun with here where CNN is calling out by
name on TV one of your I'm guessing favorite senators.
Certainly i'd say, he's in your top fifty senators for sure,

(01:05:00):
maybe your top five, maybe your favorite, but definitely your
top fifty. Who is that senator? And what is the feud?
If you stay through the break, you will find out
all these things. So I just want to tell you
a bit about how CNN likes to present the gun
control debate on on on air. I remember many years ago,
after the new Town shooting, a friend of mine was

(01:05:23):
asked by producers overseas before I worked there. I don't know.
I was asked at CNN to present the pro Second
Amendment point of view, and he was on a show
with a live audience. They didn't tell him that. They
also didn't tell him that during the show he would
be asked to stand up and give the second time
a point of view surrounded with the parents of Newtown victims.

(01:05:47):
That was how they wanted to, you know, structure things.
They thought that was the way to go. That wouldn't
in any way influence his feelings about making his point
of view. They would have parents standing next to him
who are crying, understand Annalie, who were heartbroken about what
had happened, and he was supposed to be the one
defending the right to bare arms standing right next to them.
That was how they that was how they wanted to

(01:06:07):
do it, CNN, and that was Piers Morgan's show. By
the way, if you're wondering, um, which I'm sure's no
surprise to any of you, that Piers Morgan would take
that approach, he is. He is aggressively ignorant on the
issue of gun control and the Second Amendment UM, and
still weighs in on this issue all the time. He

(01:06:31):
might be great on other things, he might be a
really nice dude. I don't know. The point is he's
not right in the Second Amendment. Uh. But CNN also
wants to go after people like Ted Cruz, for example,
and say that Ted Cruz is well, we have the clip.
We invited Republican Senators Marco Rubio ted Cruz while he's
from Texas, because he talks about this issue a lot.

(01:06:52):
We invited the governor to come on the show this morning.
They declined. We say, let's get after it. It's not
a slogan, it's an approach. You have to take these
issues on. You gotta ask the tough questions. You must
be held accountable. Rubio says this is an inexplicable tragedy
that couldn't be less true. Governor Scott is actively fighting

(01:07:12):
right now to penalize doctors who even asked patients in
their state if they have firearms? Where are they? They
will come on here, They're on Fox News this morning,
the mother Ship, so they won't be pressed about gun control.
What are they afraid of? Yes, what are they afraid of? Well,

(01:07:34):
here's the problem with that. Mm hmmm, the whole issue. Uh.
Ted Cruz says that he gave a fifteen minute exclusive
interview to CNN that they just never aired. So it
seems pretty unfair, doesn't it to have a CNN anchor
saying that Ted Cruise is scared to talk about gun rights.

(01:07:57):
Notice how gun control is what some people say, gun
rights is what other people said. The language always gives
you such a a sense of which side of the
issue one person is going to be on. Ted Cruz
had appeared or had called, and they just didn't use
the interview. I would note that I had the I
had the experience of doing a CNN show for Brian
Stelter once, an interview on terrorism, and Stelter thought he

(01:08:19):
had a big gotcha moment, and it was because I
said that something was Islamic terrorism and it was going
to be that it was too early. It turns out
I was just right. Uh, and they gave me the
they did. We did the whole interview, and it was
supposed to air on a Sunday. We interviewed on Friday.
They just never told me anything, never aired it, and
pretended that there was breaking news on a Sunday, which

(01:08:43):
is why they couldn't arrow it. You see, these are
the games fake news plays. This is this is how
they operate, folks. It's all journalism, integrity and honesty when
it suits them to say so, but when it comes
down to it, it's just all a show. It's not journalism,
it's activism, and they're always trying to protect some very

(01:09:06):
fragile egos and very flimsy intellects over there. Nonetheless, I
would love to see Ted Cruise go on go on
CNN and talk on control with any of their anchors.
It would be a wipeout. My advice to any of
those CNN anchors would be, uh, save yourself the humiliation,
and I'm sure I have a feeling they will. But

(01:09:28):
this was not just some one off thing. They actually
were running a graphic on tv UM, so they were
presenting it as though it were news. Unwilling CNN ran
a graphic unwilling to appear on CNN. What are they
afraid of? This was a full screen on CNN's air

(01:09:50):
national channel across the country. Governor Rick Scott center mark
of Rubio, Senator Ted Cruz, and Ted Cruz is like,
that's bull I'll come on your show and it's I'm
talking about this issue. In fact, I did for fifteen
minutes an interview already with you, and you just chose
not to run it. And now you're gonna call me
a coward? How much dirtier and more dishonest do you

(01:10:10):
think they can really get? Kind of makes you wonder,
isn't it. Mike and Alabama got some thoughts? What's up, sir?
Kay Bugus? Is Mike and Alabama shield tied? Mike? I
don't know. In regards to the Florida shooting, I don't
know if there's a direct way it would be applicable.
But I do know that in Florida they have a

(01:10:32):
thing called the Baker Act, and uh it allows for
involuntary Uh. I don't know if it's incarceration, institutionalization I
think is the word you might be looking for, Yeah,
for someone that's got mental health issues, And it doesn't
necessarily mean they've committed a crime of any sort yet.

(01:10:52):
Uh from what I understand, both of the the guy's
parents were deceased, so that may have been a reason
why they it and go with the Baker Act. But
I think lawenforcement can initiate that as well. I could
be wrong. No, there there is and and Mike, I
won't pretend to be an expert in a in a
legal process or the specifics of its state by state,
but there I know there are ways that you can

(01:11:15):
have somebody involuntarily committed to a mental institution if they
proved to be a harm to themselves or to others.
But that is a it is a high bar, and
I have to say it's generally with with very good reason.
That's a high bar, right, I mean, could you imagine
people that just need some help, You wouldn't want them
to be uh sent away to a mental institution. And
also it leaves a mark on on a person's record.

(01:11:37):
You will never be able to get a gun after that, legally,
you will never so it's there, but it's it's tricky
with this guy. Do I think that there probably could
have been a case I'd have to bring a psychiatrist
with with background and how the state functions on this
on the show, My my gut tells me that you

(01:11:57):
probably could get this guy, uh sent away for and
sent away to a mental I mean, you know, not
we before the shooting, it would have been sent away
to get help. Now it's you know, sent away for life,
if not into the into a lethal injection room. But
at this point, yeah, at this point, but beforehand, it
would have been sent away to get them help. And

(01:12:17):
and I think that it's there, but I look, it
used to be a lot easier to do that, and
they've changed the law of the a c l U
has fought like mad against involuntary institutionalization, uh, you know,
to to elevate the standards. It's one of the reason
why I mean, look, I'm here in New York City
and I see severely mentally ill people. They're usually uh

(01:12:38):
the home, they're usually homeless, and you see them and
they're doing things on the street, and it's very clear
they're severely mentally ill. But unless they're a danger to
themselves or others. You generally can't get them committed. And
part of the problem is that by the time it's
clear they're a danger to themselves or others, it's too late,
you know what I mean. Sometimes the first time it's

(01:12:58):
clear is when they've you know, cracked a rock over
some old lady's head for no reason. So it's and
there's no there's that. I keep saying this because it's true.
There's no easy answers. Mike Alright, Rock and Roll, thank
you for calling him my friend. I appreciate it. Good
to talk to you and have have a good weekend. Um,
and it's it has been quite a week. You noticely

(01:13:19):
that they don't talk about this very much either. The
markets actually had a really good week. I feel like
last week everybody was, oh my gosh, the bottom is
falling out of the market. What are we gonna do Now,
Everyone's like, yeah, it's it's coming back, It'll be all
It'll be all right. That's good, that's a good thing.
I'm trying to find the positives. Oh, CNN reporting playmates

(01:13:40):
alleged affair with the president. I haven't read this. Have
you guys read the story yet? Oh you have all right,
I'll have to read. I didn't read this one today.
I was busy with the Russia and the and the
FBI stuff. Um this this is one of these things
where the media will I'm not gonna say it's not
a story, but they're gonna run with a story for

(01:14:00):
as long as they can. And I think this affects
the Trump base. I think it's probably a zero one
way or the other. I don't think they care. Nope,
So we will see. Uh, this is just kind of
where we are now and the way we deal with
political not political scandals, politicians personal scandals, you know, whether

(01:14:21):
you believe it or not, still is just not going
to have an effect. Things have changed quite a bit.
We will talk about immigration coming up, because I think
that that is a subject that we can get some
greater clarity on after it was so pushed aside this
week with some of the other major events that had happened.
We'll also have a friend joined to talk to us

(01:14:42):
about an interesting program in well a research that shows
that school choice may help lessen criminality, which you can
imagine that I have all kinds of interesting discussions going forward.
I wish that they'd get back on uh school choice
issue at the the national level. It has not been

(01:15:05):
something that's been a part of Trump's agenda. And we
will have some of your thoughts via roll call. We'll
have kind of an extended session. We'll spend at least
a solid segment of roll call coming up. It reminds
me by the way Facebook dot com slash buck sex
in if you want to share thoughts. Also, we always
post stories and more on buck Sexton dot com. Please
do check it out. We'll be getting into that and

(01:15:28):
a whole bunch of other things. And then by the
time our third hour has done, folks and you listen
to it, your weekend gets to begin. So that's exciting.
We'll be right back. Hey, everybody, I just want to
take a moment to say before our before I bring
in some esteemed guests here. I just find it so
disappointing the way people get so nasty to each other

(01:15:49):
over the whole Russia investigation thing, and particularly look, I
expect the left to act like a bunch of maniacs.
A lot of them of stake their their careers at
some level, not really, I mean people will forget, but
they stake their credibility on their being really an impeachment
that comes out of all this. They think they're gonna

(01:16:10):
take the media, believe they're gonna make right the election
by taking down the Trump presidency with this narrative that
will lead to an impeachment. So there's a lot of
there's a lot going on here, but it just bums
me out to see the different people who are involved
in all this, who are just uh, just nasty. And

(01:16:33):
their conservatives, Yeah, they somehow believe this, They've somehow bought
into this, and they refer to other conservatives as as
Trumpists or Trumpers because they don't think that the president
United States had some hatch, some conspiracy with the Russians.
That just the whole thing is so nuts, and it

(01:16:59):
is you know, it is problematic. It is troubling. Uh,
it is really bothersome to me that we have reached
this point now where you can't even really have a
civilized discussion about this. You can't even you know, you
have uh, you have Adam Schiff making quite clear what

(01:17:24):
the real goal is here. Play clib seven for me
for a second. The president's conduct was so incompatible with
office that they needed to vote to remove him. Uh,
it is going to be important for people to know
that that was not something that we were seeking from
the very beginning because of what this will put the
country through. So I think early talk about impeachment before

(01:17:46):
we finished our investigation um makes that case more difficult
if the evidence comes to support it, and we need
to let Bob Mueller do his job. A big part
of what I consider my job right now is making
sure or we stay the hell out of Bob Mother's way.
Because they want to impeach Trump. I mean, this is

(01:18:06):
it is, This starts to get to be pretty preposterous here.
I mean, they there's a reason. There's a reason that
they're so set on this Mueller investigation. So so we
know that some Russians, some Russians have been indicted and
it's not going to change anything. There mightn't even to

(01:18:26):
die some more Russians. Not gonna change And we've we've
known about this for a long time. We have been
hearing about Russia interference in the election for a year
and a half. And you'll notice no one ever has
some policy in mind for it, no one ever has
a solution they want to talk about. This is just
all about Trump. Which I can kind of handle at

(01:18:47):
some level, But I also feel like, you know, because
I know I expect this, but I just feel like,
what's with these conservatives? They really would rather they want
they want to they want to be right on this
one in that Trump portrayed his country. That would make
them feel better. They'd be happier with the future in
which we have I guess a Pence by the way,

(01:19:09):
It's not like they would accept Pence as a replacement
for Trump. If in fact they did repeat and removed
from from office, they would say the whole thing was illegitimate.
They they would uh, it would cause a crisis of
governance and a crisis of confidence in our governing institutions
in this country, the likes of which certainly has never
occurred before in my lifetime. But it's just disappointing. There's

(01:19:31):
a there's a childishness in the media on this issue
that it's it's just gross. It feels icky. Anyway, we're
gonna talk more about what's going on with immigration here
in a second. I've I've been saying to you that,
you know, some big stuff happened this week on the
issue of immigration. It's not like this just we should

(01:19:53):
just skip over it. So I wanted to bring in
our friend Marker Corey and from the Center from Immigration Studies.
I know, Friday, and we're gonna be talking policy kind
of late on a Friday. But yeah, hey, we're we're
always we're always focused on what matters here, folks, or
at least most of the time. Sometimes not really. When
I'm screaming and pretending to be a journalist yelling at

(01:20:14):
at Trump, maybe that's not or or my Sorrows impression, which,
by the way, I feel like I don't get enough appreciation.
I think my Sorrows is pretty good. Like I think
it's if you listen to Sorrows, don't know, he's sort
of enough sounds like these, and he has you can
talk about the markets and the things that the market
is doing, and I feel like that's kind of listen

(01:20:34):
to some Sorrows audio. That's pretty close. It's not perfect. Gosh,
everyone's a critic. Yeah, it's like somehow my Hillary impersonation,
which sounds nothing like Hillary. Everyone is like your spot
on you know, somehow that's perfect. But my Sorrows, which
which if I called you and let the message on
your machine and you may in fact, believe was sorrows.

(01:20:56):
You're just you're you're rejected that one. It's just not fair, folks,
It's just not fair at all. Oh, Sonny, we've got
my thank you, my Bernie Bernie Sands. I wish you
would run again, just so I could do Bernie all
the time. But like, hey, it's Bernie's night, and the
mood is right for socialism. You know, we'd have so
much fun with the burn. I kind of missed the burn.

(01:21:18):
He was a great character to work into things him.
And if you remember Janet Politano, big sis, you know,
talking about Homeland, talking about the border strip searching guys
that are trying to get drugs in the country, and
the whole thing Janet to Politano. You know, there's a
whole bunch of a whole bunch of different characters. Alright, alright,

(01:21:40):
we're gonna get into some serious stuff in a minute.
We've got our friend marcret Corey and joining also. I
wanted to bring in a friend and a contributor to
the Federalist Enis Felcher, who's gonna talk about how school
choice has a has been shown. It's not proven yet.
There's some studies show dramatic impact on crime as in
reduces it very much. We will get into that and

(01:22:03):
much more in just a couple of minutes. Your team,
stay with me. I am optimistic. One of the reasons
why I'm so optimistic as the President did something that
many of us found surprising and very intriguing. He said
that he was willing to support a path of citizenship,
a twelve year path of citizenship for Dakas for these dreamers.

(01:22:24):
So is immigration reform dead or not? Where are with
with all this? We've got somebody who can shed a
lot of light on this. We have Marker Corey and
with this he is from the Center for Immigration Studies
c i S dot org. He's the executive director. Mark.
Always good to have you on the program. I'm glad
to be here. Than our first keys update us on
what happened in the immigration kind of got pushed aside,

(01:22:47):
even though it's probably the single most important policy issue
facing the Trump administration right now. Kind of push aside
this week. But some stuff happened. What happened this week
with Congress, Well, the President had a submit, did some
an outline of what he would like Congress to pass um.
In other words, amnestying the Dreamers, and he actually increased

(01:23:08):
it to amnestying up to almost two million people, not
just the one with the DOCCA work permits from Obama's
illegal program, but a million extra. These are people who
came here illegal, but they came as minors. Um. He
sweet tried to sweeten the deal by by adding up
by asking for an amnesty for almost two million people

(01:23:30):
in exchange for changes to chain migration policy so that
only husband's wives and little kids can be brought here
from abroad, not other relatives, getting rid of the visa lottery,
which is literally a lottery we give green cards out
at random to people across the world. And funding for
the wall, and other enforcement measures. That was a package.

(01:23:53):
Congress in the Senate specifically had four measures. One of
them was that, and then several couple others that were
much weaker. Brought them all up for a vote. What
the majority leader in the Senate said is, look, let's
just have a free for all here. Whatever you guys
can put together, bring it up for a vote. See
if it gets the sixty votes it needs to pass

(01:24:15):
the filibuster rule. All four measures failed. This was on Thursday.
None of them passed, and the Senate basically has decided that,
you know, they're finished with this, They've got other things
to do, and now it's up I guess, to the
House of Representatives to see if they passed something that
amnesties these DACA young people. They're not kids, but the

(01:24:39):
twenties and thirty year olds illegal immigrants. Um and UM.
That's kind of where it is now. So, but even
if the House does pass something, it still has to
get through the Senate, right, so it seems it seems
to be pretty unlikely Mark that this is actually going anywhere. Yeah,
I think it is quite frankly and um. The reason
there was of an urgency to do something about this

(01:25:03):
is that the President canceled the DOCCA program, which was
illegal to begin with. Under Obama, President said he was
gonna pull the plug on it on day one. He
waited till day two hundred, but he finally did pull
the plug on it, and March, the beginning of March
is when the program expires, because they gave him a

(01:25:23):
grace period and people would start losing their work permits.
So there was this idea that they had to get
it done by them. Well, several court rulings outrageous. Court
rulings actually said the president couldn't do that, um, in
the words, he couldn't cancel a memo, that's all. It
was a memo from a previous administration. Supreme Court's going
to strike those down almost certainly. So at some point,

(01:25:48):
people with work permits are gonna start losing the work
perments they're gonna expire. And I think once that happens,
maybe there'll be some more interest in doing something on this,
but probably not so. I think, um, they're the What
this really boiled down to is that the Democrats and
some of their Republican pro immigration allies valued keeping chain

(01:26:13):
migration very high. In other words, they were unwilling to
cut immigration by a couple hundred thousand a year rather
than amnesty. You know, these young people who grew up here.
They made the choice that it was more important to
them to let these young people who grew up here
lose their work permits and go back to becoming regular

(01:26:36):
illegal aliens than it was to um reduce immigration back
to the level it was in the nineteen eighties. It's
not even very radical. We're speaking to market Corey and
executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies here, Mark,
can you give me some clarity on what we know
about illegal immigrants specifically and crime and what person? Because

(01:26:57):
I've seen some articles here and there that are saying
that like a large percentage of federal crimes are committed
by illegal aliens. Do do we have good data on that?
What can you tell me about the numbers? There's nobody
has good data on this. Their studies all over the place,
but none of the data is particularly good. And what, um,

(01:27:17):
the there's no questions that illegal immigrants make up a
hugely disproportionate share of the federal prison population. But remember
most people in jail are in state prisons. That's where
most of the crimes are punished. Not you're a burglar,
you stab somebody, you go to state prison, right exactly. Um.
That having been said, there's been research that suggests immigrants

(01:27:40):
might be less likely to be involved in crime. But again,
the data is terrible on this. It people don't want
to know. The FBI does not do a good job
of collecting data on this one. Does A recent report
by a scholar named John Lott l O. T T
who has done a lot of work on the gun.
Oh yeah, I know John, we thought him on the show. Yeah,

(01:28:01):
he got a data source from Arizona which specifically, in
other words, from their state prison that specifically does ask
legal status, and he found a very disproportionate rate of
criminal activity on the part of illegal immigrants specifically. So
that's an important finding, but it's just one finding. This

(01:28:23):
is something that the powers that be literally don't want
to know the answer. Well, that was my next question.
How is it possible, Mark, that we have people who
are in custody and yet we don't have numbers about
how many of those who are in the government's custody
are actually illegal aliens. That just seems unfathomable to me.

(01:28:43):
They keep all kinds of data on the prison population. Yeah,
I mean, look, I'm not saying they don't know in
each individual case. But remember, if you know a fact
about the various people you arrest, but you don't enter
it into your compute system, then it doesn't matter. If
it's on a piece of paper, no, one can never

(01:29:04):
really know it. You can't use that data for analysis.
It's kind of like with these DOCA people we were
talking about, a lot of them used translators to sell
out their applications. They were supposedly they're so assimilated, they're
so Americanized, that we need to give them citizenship. And
yet a lot of them don't even know English, and
so we would be good to know what percentage don't

(01:29:26):
know English. You know what it's on the form, but
they never answered it into the computer, so there's no
way to know. There was a program that there was
a program mark that was talking about briefly at least
by the White House earlier this week that would have
changed the Supplemental Nutritional Nutrition Assistance Program SNAP, better known
as food stamps, by having a food box essentially as

(01:29:46):
part of the benefits. It wouldn't be entirely the equivalent
of cash, which is what an E B T card
is right now. And I people are asking me this,
and I said, look, I don't really have the answer
for you, and so I wanted to pose it to you.
Do we have good numbers on on either immigrant usage
of federal welfare and or illegal alien usage of federal welfare?

(01:30:09):
We actually do, and were we seem to be the
Center for Immigration Studies, seems to be the only people
who ever used it. Let me explain, there is um
information from the Census Bureau surveys on whether people have
used government benefits, but it seems that it was underestimated.
That's usually where the data comes from. That's what we've
used at the Center when we report this. Well, there's

(01:30:31):
a different survey which for technical reasons is much more
difficult to use, which specifically is about use of government programs.
And what we found was we were the first people
ever looked at that to figure out what immigrant welfare uses.
We found out that families headed by a foreign born
person this is legal or illegal, put together, about half

(01:30:54):
of them use at least one government welfare program. Is
what we found UM and it's really pretty remarkable. Illegal
immigrants UM are cipher. I don't have the number in
front of me. It's slightly lower because the illegal immigrants
themselves are not eligible, but their children are eligible. And
if you get an E B T card to go

(01:31:15):
shop at the grocery store, the four year old is
not going to the grocery store with that. In other words,
he's getting you're getting it on his behalf because he's
a US citizen born here, but he's not doing the show.
So in illegal can almost be the custodian of the
federal benefits for the legal child, right, not almost, but literally.
And it's not like the kid is the only one

(01:31:36):
eating the food, you know what I mean. So, so
these benefits are widely used, even by illegal limrates, and
it's not because anybody's ripping off the taxpayer. The fact
is almost all of these families, immigrant families, legal or illegal,
who are getting government benefits, they're people working in that family.
It's just that they're a mismatch for our economy. They're

(01:31:58):
low skilled people, and they can't earn enough money to
feed their own children. Literally. So the question is not
so much how do we keep immigrants from using welfare?
The more important question is why are we letting people
in who are incapable of earning enough money to feed
their own children? And Mark before we let you go.

(01:32:20):
It seems to me that perhaps with the way Trump
has approached immigration reform up to this point, he may
have exposed something which which you also alluded to I
believe before, which is that it's actually not necessarily DACA
recipients who are the crown jewel of the Democrats immigration
reform desires. It may actually be chain migration, which I've

(01:32:42):
noticed they're now calling family based migration, which is one
of the terms for it. It's just the chain migration
is also a long used, normal term which they're trying
to make, you know, somehow problematic or unpc But no,
I think you're right. The goal here, or let me
put it this way, the more important thing is to

(01:33:04):
keep immigration going indefinitely into the future. And the DOCCA
young people, I mean, they're happy that if they could
get them green cards, sure that they're not against that.
But if they don't, But I mean, if the price
of that is giving up an unending flow of immigration
in the future. Remember last year we had one point

(01:33:25):
two million people got green cards. If that's the price,
if reducing that down to say eight or nine hundred
thousand or six or seven hundred thousand is if that's
the price, then they're not going to pay it. They're
okay with these DOCCA people losing their work permits because
the more important issue is keeping immigration going indefinitely at
as a high level as possible. Real quick. You don't

(01:33:47):
expect any major legislation immigration this year? Is that fair
to say? Yeah? I think, I mean I may be wrong,
but yeah, if you were. If I were a betting man,
I would bet lunch on nothing happening. Well, I'm putting
my chips right next years on the table. I think
the same is true everybody. Marcret Corey and c I
s dot Org for the Center for Immigration Studies work.
It's a great site. They do fantastic stuff. Mark, have
an excellent weekend. Thank you for joining team. We're gonna

(01:34:10):
roll into a quick break, will be back with an
interesting study that very few people know about that I
think has implications for a lot of stuff when it
comes to uh schools in this country, and when it
comes to violence in fact in this country and criminality,
and how schools can play a role perhaps in lessening

(01:34:32):
all of that. I know I'm speaking in very generic
terms that because I want our expert to inform you,
So stay right there, all right. So we talked about
school choice among conservatives with some regularity. It hasn't gotten
a lot of attention in the Trump era, but I
think it's something that we should refocus on, and there
are actually some research out there that shows that may
have benefits beyond just the usual test scores, math, reading

(01:34:54):
and all of that. It could actually have a much
bigger societal impact. But I have to bring on the
expert to talk about this when we have in s
felture with us now. She is a contributor to the Federalists,
and that's great to have you on. Thanks for having me, Buck,
all right, so tell me about this research. I've heard
you speak about it briefly before, but apparently it's something

(01:35:16):
that ties together behavior and school choice in ways that
really would matter to broader society, right exactly. I think
it's it's really important to think about the broader implications.
I think actually behavioral implications and UM societal or community
implications are actually a lot more important to our daily

(01:35:37):
lives than things like test scores. Although I'm happy to
go through the evidence that shows a school choice raises
math and reading scores. UM. The evidence that I want
to talk to you about today is actually these two
studies that came out fairly recently, One about a charter
school in New York in Harlem, and the other about
the Milwaukee Bouncer Program, which is the longest running modern

(01:36:00):
school choice program in the nation. UM. The first study
is UH comes from both Harvard and Princeton, a joint
study UM, and it was on the Promise Academy charter
school in Harlem, And I actually found that enrolling in
this charter school versus and match public school student dropped
the crime rate of the incarceration rates to zero, right,

(01:36:23):
so it reduced it by a hundred percent. If we
were talking about some kind of big government program, right,
I'm sure that that would be on every paper. Um,
then the New York Times would have a lot to
say about a big government program that reduced crime by
a hundred percent. YEA repeat exactly. You're telling me that
if people enrolled in this students enrolled in this school

(01:36:45):
of New York City, the crime reduction for those students
was a hud. That's pretty astonishing, right for boys, it
didn't do as much for girls, but it did reduce
their crime as well. But they commit Girls commit far
fewer crimes than boys do to begin with. Um, but
I feel like I'm being woman explained right now. But
that's okay. We all have our advantages. Um. Anyway. The

(01:37:09):
second piece of evidence is a study from the University
of Arkansas, which has a whole department that studies the
effects the school choice, and it's on this very long
running voucher program that started in which is why we
can actually go ahead and do longitudinal studies on kids
as they get into their they graduate from high school
and get into their twenties. Um. And as it turns out,

(01:37:32):
there were enormous effects of the Doucher program UM on
all sorts of criminal measurements, so felony convictions for kids
in the program versus a match public schools didn't sell
by almost eighty percent. Okay, drug crime was down by best.

(01:37:54):
I mean, I think we get the picture right that
these are massive effects that we haven't been able to
replicate with any of the big government programs that we have,
either in education or UM in the crime prevention arena, right,
um and and right especially this week, people are asking
a lot of questions in as about what can we
do with troubled youth and how do we prevent you know,

(01:38:15):
problems from those who slipped through the cracks and everything.
It sounds like this is at least in an area
that is worth pursuing more, which is does school choice
have an effect a massive dampening effect on violence? Yeah? Absolutely,
And I think it also circles back to the main point,
which is people care about the values that their kids

(01:38:38):
are learning in school, right. It's not. Of course, we
all want our kids to to learn how to read
and to do math um, but the values are equally important.
Trooping a child's character used to be a large part
of education, and increasingly in the public school system or
in the traditional public school system, that's either something they
don't pay any attention to it at all or um,

(01:39:01):
you know, it's controlled by one left wing point of view,
and parents are left, as they have different values, are
left with very few options about you know, if they
can't afford to send their kids to a private school
on their own dime, um, they can't homeschool because mom
and dad both work, right, they have very very few
options to find a school or an education for their

(01:39:23):
kid that actually fits with their values. And this is
what the conservatives should because especially concerned with right um,
our ideology is going to die out if we keep
sending our kids to the public school system that teaches
them to be left wingers. Right um. And that's you know,
some of that we can counteract at home, but not
all of it. And so it's incredibly important that we

(01:39:45):
get these choices that then have so much of an impact,
not just on tat schools, but on things like families,
on communities, on crime rates, on values, things that conservatives
normally like to talk about. Yeah, crime behavior, violence, and
society at large. If schooling can have an effect on this,
a very positive effect on this, and school choice in particular,

(01:40:05):
it would seem like that scenario that should get a
lot more attention under from the administration and from the
media at large. But as we know, teachers unions not
so much a fan of this stuff, and as from
what I understand, absolutely not, teachers unions basically resist all
change to the education system, even though pretty much everyone

(01:40:26):
agrees that the education system is sailing our kids. The
unions have this constant refrain, which is, if you give
us more money, will make it better. Right, We've we've
been giving them more money, both on the federal and
the state levels for basically forty years, and they haven't
done better, and in fact, the problems hasn't many ways
gotten worse. Um and and so they every time they

(01:40:48):
come back with the same refrain, the same refrain, if
you just give us more money this time, we'll make
it work, when in reality, we spend among the highest
per pupil spending in the developed world where number three, Um,
you know what have they spend in DC, by the way,
is it's like private school tuition per student? Oh yeah,
it's like Sidwell Friend's tuition, not just any private school.

(01:41:08):
It's thirty thousand dollars per student. That's astonishing. Imagine just
imagine if every DC parent got thirty thousand dollars in
their pocket to send their kids to whatever educational experience
was best for that kid. Just imagine the impact that
that would have. But instead it's going into the same
system that is repeatedly failing kids, um and failing families

(01:41:32):
who don't have a lot of other options. He has
feltures a contribute to the Federalists. You can re relatest
at the Federalist dot com. Also follow her on Twitter.
And as We're gonna have to get in touch with
somebody at the White House to get them start looking
at school choice stuff, because I'm not hearing enough about
this and I feel like this is this is one
place where conservatives win when people know the truth absolutely
and more importantly, get in touch with your state legislators.

(01:41:54):
Get in touch with your state lawmakers, because education policy
should be made at the state level. And largely still is.
The funds come from the state, and the states really
set the policy. So talk to your legislators. Make sure
that you know they know that this is an important
issue for you. It's to me, I think it's the
survival of our ideology, of the belief systems that we

(01:42:16):
have of um, you know, civics in America and really
of citizenship in America. We don't, you know, improve the
quality of the education that our kids received. We're just
going to continue down the wrong path. And as felt
everybody follow her on Twitter and dinas have a great weekend.
Thank you for joining. Thank you day. We're gonna roll

(01:42:37):
into a quick break here we come back. We're gonna
get into some roll call. Man, It's a lot for
a Friday, everybody. I tell you today I kind of
cleared out the schedule, you know. I talked to some
Fox people. I'm like, you know what, I'll do one
hit today. I don't. I can't no more TV for me,
wear some sweats. I'm gonna cook myself a nice Friday

(01:43:00):
style brunch, you know, a lot of bacon, a lot
of eggs around like one o'clock in the afternoon. You know,
I just really kind of lean into it. I was
gonna do a little a little bit of reading for pleasure,
which is, I know, such an anomaly these days. He's
gonna kick back, relax, and you put on some Cat
Stevens and let the cat pur. And instead, I know,
now his name is like something like Yosef Islam or something. Right,

(01:43:22):
Cat Stevens changed his name to Salmon Islam or Yosef
Islam or something. I forget what Cat Stephen's name is. Now. Anyway,
you gotta let the cat pur while you're drinking some zema.
And and I was just sitting around, you know, thinking
that it was gonna be pretty chill, and sure enough
it was like blam, huge story on Russia and then blam,
FBI dropped the ball and I'm sitting here, I'm like,

(01:43:43):
oh no, my whole day got turned upside down. And then,
you know the problem with with getting involved in this
stuff as you start to see some of the some
of the Twitter battles. You know, right when the news breaks,
you want to get in there, and next thing you know,
you're in some You're in some long Twitter to exchange
with some clown from who knows what network, and You're like,

(01:44:04):
why am I even doing? What am I doing with
my life? Like what is the point? What is the
point of this? I should be focused on the content
for the show, focused on making sure that I'm as
prepared as I possibly can be every single day for
the Freedom Hub, which is no doubt my mission and
my mantra. But it was quite a change today. So
anyway with that, I I will get into I will

(01:44:26):
get in from Pope. There we go yet, Team Bucking.
It's time for roll Call? Who roll Call? We gotta
make some cool like you know what I mean? We
should probably take some some lee Aramy quotes. Isn't that
as the guy's name from Full Metal Jacket? Actually movie
quote Friday. I should know this, you know what I'm saying,
and we can intersperse them and create our own thing

(01:44:46):
for roll call, Like I didn't know they stacked stuff
that high, you know that stuff something like that, and
we put that in there. That's amazing. I admit. I
think that there are a couple of movies where you
have to think of it as a movie in in
two parts, and one of them is Wedding Crashers. The

(01:45:07):
first hour of Wedding Crashers is like a highly entertaining,
amazing movie that I can watch anytime. The second hour
is a not funny, depressing, weird devolution into the depths
of human despair and like frailty. It's not what I
was signed up for at all. Right, Basically, when they
leave the island with the really nice country house on

(01:45:28):
the on the shore of Maryland in wedding Crashers, it's
no longer a movie you should watch. I I kind
of and some of you gonna get mad at me,
but you know what, that's okay. I like to I
like to provoke sometimes. I feel the same way about
Full Metal Jacket first hour. Full Metal Jacket is like
cinematic masterpiece. It's incredible. Uh, it's, you know, among among
the best of Kubrick's works. The second hours. You know,

(01:45:50):
he could have like taken it and put it in
the middle of the movie Platoon and been like, yeah,
it's like all kind of the same. It was fine,
it was not. I didn't have quite the same In fact,
and I think Lee Airmy and I'm probably getting his
name wrong, but that the drill instructor really carried the
movie on his shoulders. Um he did quite an amazing job,
a timeless a timeless character, and I'm sure he's a

(01:46:10):
conservative all right in roll call Now, pardon the digression there,
big fan of your show. This comes from John So John,
I'm a big fan of you original Saturday squad here. Oss.
You have the perfect mix of analysis, opinion, and humor,
and you are polite to callers. Miss the days when
you be doing your show after a panel appearance on

(01:46:30):
CNN and you would vent some anger. That was good stuff.
I download all your shield HiPE podcast. You should consider
doing a deep dive on Operation AJAX. Uh. There's probably
a lot of misinformation regarding this. For a recommendation, I
would recommend blank he's a blankety blank blank blank. Okay, anyway,

(01:46:51):
keep up the good work and shields high. Thank you
very much, John. Yeah. That The only good part about
CNN is that when they would cut me off and
not let me respond ring an ambush, I would then
sometimes come on radio and just vent spleen or like
a solid thirty minutes on it, which which made for
some good radio buck There were buck slaps all over
the place. They're just buck slaps left and right, so

(01:47:16):
you know there whoa hey, there came out of nowhere.
By the way, every time we do that, I think
of the the radio show on Parks and Wreck. Do
you guys know Parks and Wreck? The show where the
guys you know what's his name, crazy Ira and the douche.
It's that's like among the best parts of the show.
Although the guy whose name is like Mervin Myrtle or whatever,

(01:47:38):
who's the the NPR style host, I actually like his
pseudo radio show more. You know. It's like, oh, we're
listening to uh, Swedish jazz music and he's just so boring,
and they're talking about like the mating habits of flying
squirrels and stuff like that. It's a you know, NPR.
It's it's great. It's great stuff. And now I'm not

(01:47:59):
actual mp are I mean their version of MPR in
Parks and Recreation. Another thing, I'll give you a tip,
skip the season two. If you haven't seen Parks in Rex.
Season one is garbage. Just go right to season two
on Netflix and start watching it. From there, you'll love it.
Ron Swanson will be your favorite TV character, one of
your favorite TV characters of all time. But season one
is bad. It's almost like unwatchable. So you gotta go
right to season two. You miss nothing, all right? Now

(01:48:22):
we have uh Bill, who's next up? Food for Poor?
Thirty to forty years ago, the poor could get basic food, flour, beans, cheese, Uh, power,
power eggs. I guess that's powdered eggs, right, powdered, Yes,
power high powered powdered or I can't speak power eggs.

(01:48:42):
Sounds like something you take before you're lifting. Yeah, I'm
lifting away. It's I'm very strong, going to pump you up.
I have to the clap thing. I don't know if
you could hear that. Not a lot of SNL sketches
really hold up from back in the day, Like there's
a there's a lot of nostalgia with them. But if
you go back and you watch some of the Jim
Blushi stuff, feel like this doesn't this doesn't hold up

(01:49:03):
all right. He writes food for the Poor thirty or
four years and you get that stuff. They all had
to take, Uh. They had to take all these commodities,
not just what they wanted. This means they had to
prepare the food instead of just pouring it out of
a box. They would take all and if they did
not want something, throw it in the trash or sell
it to someone. All right, Bill, Well, thank you for
the historical context there. I would say this, I'm gonna

(01:49:25):
have to return to this issue of food and food
stamps and all that. This this was this is a
surprise during the show. I mean we the response on
the phones, on email and Facebook to that one segment,
which I just kind of thought about something I had
read earlier in the day was was profound. People were
really really into it. Um. So we will get into

(01:49:45):
that some more. Uh Irwin rights the following, Hey, Buck,
I agree with you, there's really no solution to this problem.
Fully support the Constitution, the Second Amendment, and therefore support
the idea that this kind of unfortunate situation is a
cost of doing business, you know earin I'm so open
to any ideas that will fix this that don't have

(01:50:07):
really bad trade offs, that are all and and are
also worthless actions to prevent it. Right, If someone says
we can do this, it would stop gun That's why
when people say more armed security at schools, all right,
how much more I don't know how highly trained up
for discussion, but more not opposed to that? Will it
stop some Maybe? Is there any real downside as I

(01:50:27):
see it, not really. You know, your school safety officers
there for any number of safety issues. Right. The guy
who's standing there, who's got a glock on his hip
to make sure there's not a school shooting, could also
be the guy who have you know, a student is
having some kind of you know, major health emergency. He
could be a first responder. I mean, it can sort
of many hat the positions that people have with regard
to this, they're not just it's not like they're standing

(01:50:49):
there in a you know, standing there in some kind
of you know, armored personnel carrier on the lookout, right.
I mean they're gonna be able to interact with students
and do things. They're not dug into a machine gun
nest with a fifty cow waiting for someone to come
after them. They can be helpful to other parts of
the school atmosphere and keep kids safe without having to

(01:51:11):
engage an active shooter. Right, there's other stuff anyway, Bill
writes the following, and I'm sorry, Bill, because it got
frozen there for a second. Hey, Buck, great work on
your radio show. Really enjoy listening to it on Stitcher.
That's right, everybody, you can listen on stitcher. By the way,
could you have your people tech people look into your
voice level? It seems kind of low and have trouble

(01:51:32):
When I turn it up the bump music comes on.
It's really loud. Is this a thing? Are we are
we having? Is this on me? Oh? I turned my
oh oh, all right, this is a This is apparently
my radio technique. Folks. Occasionally I don't speak right into
the microphone because blue blue. But yeah, you guys are right.
You're not the first people have told me that I

(01:51:53):
get all animated and I assume I'm talking. I assume
the whole team is in the room with me, and
I'm not actually speaking to people across the entire our
United States through a little metal tube that I have
to be very close to it all times or else
my voice does not really carry over it. But we
have a ton more messages in the in the inbox
for this week. I will hold some off for Monday.

(01:52:14):
And you know, by the way, we're also going to
start thinking about some ideas for going live with video
or maybe post show video or pre show video. So
you've got ideas on that, let me know. Facebook dot com,
slash box, sex and official Team Buck at gmail dot com.
If you want to email us, we should probably get
a company email for that. By the way, just a
thought makes it sound like I'm doing Wayne's World thing

(01:52:36):
out of my basement here. We should get a real one. Hey, everybody,
have a great weekend. Excited to join you next week.
Shields High

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

Death, Sex & Money

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}FBI Bombshells

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

Death, Sex & Money

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

FBI Bombshells

Dateline NBC