It's Fashionable For Democrats To Trash America

Jeffrey Epstein cover up. Buck interviews Black Rifle Coffee CEO, Evan Hafer, and the authors of Justice on Trial, Mollie Hemingway & Carrie Severino.

Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:10):
You are entering the freedom hunt. Ilhan omar Veto and
AOC seem to not really like America very much. This
is an increasing theme among Democrats these days. We'll talk
about that lost more updates on the Epstein case. It
is increasingly chilling to find out the details. How far

(00:31):
up does the cover up go? Plus, our friends Molly
Hemingway and Carrie Severino join to talk about their number
one smash book on the fight to get Kavanaugh confirmed.
That and more coming up on The Buck Sexton Show.
Bucks Sexton Mission, Decoding the news and disseminating information with
actionable intelligence. Make no mistake America, You're a great American Again.

(00:56):
This is the Bucks Sexton Show. Thomas, I can speak
for three hours without a phone call. Try doing that.
Some kind it is about back then, No, And so
it is not that they might not be knowledgeable about this,
but they use it as a as a tool to
steer up hate and division and ignorance really is pervasive

(01:21):
in many parts of this country. And as someone who
was raised by educators, I really like to inform people
about about things that they might be ignorant too, willingly
or unwillingly. Here we are in Nashville. I know this
from my home state of Texas, those places that formed
the Confederacy, that this country was founded on white supremacy,

(01:44):
and every single institution and structure that we have in
our country still reflects the legacy of slavery and segregation
in Jim Crowe and suppression even in our democracy, the
ability to vote and participate in our elections. Welcome to
the Buck Sexton show. You hear from some big Democrats there?
What do they think of America? Ilhan Omar immigrant to

(02:08):
this country, by the way, that is, she thinks that
ignorance is pervasive in this country. Huh okay. I wonder
if she would say that ignorance is pervasive in other countries.
I'm just curious. Is ignorance pervasive in Somalia? Would we
would we hear ilhan Omar say that? Or is that that?

(02:29):
That's mean, that's a bad thing to say. Only say
it about America. Where else is ignorance pervasive? I'll notice
that the left will say things about this country they
would never say about other countries, other countries that could
learn a whole heck of a lot from the United States.
Oh and then there's Petto who's like still running for

(02:49):
president unlike really just like wants your vote so bodily,
and it's just like white supremacy is infused in like
all of like everything always and even though I'm a
rich white guy and like the media loves me, like
I swear, I understand the struggle. Bro. These are the Democrats, folks.

(03:14):
This is your modern democratic party finding ways to trash
this country as a means of stirring up presentment, animosity patriots,
even because it benefits them politically to do so. Beato
saying this country was founded on white supremacy. I wish
you would go back and read the full speech, not

(03:36):
just the section of it that Colin Kaepernick tweeted out
a few days back about how America was doing terrible,
terrible things right. Frederick Douglas was, in fact in that
speech referring to the bad things some Americans were doing
as a betrayal of the greatness of this country, that
slavery and slaveholders were betraying the ideology of the Founding

(04:00):
and the founders, that individual human liberty had to be
realized because that was the true goal of the Founding,
and that the inability to reach that stage was an
insufficient recognition of what it was, that the brilliance of
the founders and their own promise to this country. But

(04:26):
that's too pro American, I guess to look at the
words of Frederick Douglas and see what they really were
that to an ill hunt Omar and others would rather
find ways to trash this country. They think that this
is what they're base, and it is apparently what their
base wants to hear about all the terrible things America
has done the past. You know, you find me a
country that has ever had any power, and I'll find

(04:49):
you a country that has engaged in all kinds of
reprehensible behavior in its past. You know, find me. You know,
whether we're talking about the entirety of the Mediterranean basin,
just just give me the time period, give me the year.
This is. This is a ridiculous exercise in virtue signaling.

(05:12):
But it's more than that too. It's shaping narratives of
the past in order to transfer power today. I know
Tucker last night on his show, he had some harsh
I think, very very astute, but harsh words for Ilhan Omar.
Rightly so. But the Democrats do seem to embrace this logic,

(05:35):
this theory that other countries only produce great people, awesome people,
that everyone who comes to this country from another country
is better than the Americans who are already here seems
quite strange to me. Why everyone wants to get here
so badly, even though we operate concentration camps and we're
soaked in racism, and we, you know, the entire left

(05:56):
wing ideal, the left wing vision, or maybe even we
should just say view, because it's current day, not even
necessarily the future, the left wing view of America is
not what is recognizable to you or me. I'm here
in the swamp, I'm in Washington, d C. I walk
around the people of all different ethnicities, all different backgrounds.

(06:16):
You know, people are getting along just fine. We're just
all trying to hustle, all trying to pay our bills,
feed ourselves, feed our families, do our thing. And this
country works remarkably well. And right now it's doing very well.
You'll notice Trump administration. Now we're in year three. Where

(06:37):
are the neighborhoods being burned down? That hasn't happened? You know,
Where's the violence that we see in the streets tends
to come from the left, tends to come from antifoe.
We're actually getting along pretty well as a country these days.
But the left when oh my Trump is horrible and
he's pulling this apart, and no he's not. Trump is

(06:58):
in fact not agitating on issues of race at all
on a daily basis. He isn't telling us that we're
a nation of cowards because we won't, as Eric Holder did,
because we won't talk about race. Always turn on MSNBC.
All they want to do is talk about race all
the time because it's so just take this position that

(07:19):
you know, the white male patriarchy is oppressing everybody else
and just just keep spewing that, look what Peto, did
you know, we're just like so racist and terrible and
we're all being founded on races and racism. And then
this is a desperate guy who's looking for some traction
among the left wing base, but he knows that that's
going right into the center, right into the center of
the progressive wheelhouse. Just start talking about how racist and

(07:42):
terrible America is and how white people have so much
to atone for, and progressives, including other white progressives, but
progressives across the board are gonna be like, yeah, that's right. Now,
you're now you're speaking the truth. It's a truth though
that I think so many people don't recognize in this

(08:02):
country at all. Like I said, not only is the
country very prosperous, but the country is overwhelmingly very much
at peace with each other right now. Not politically, but
in our day to day lives. You walk around and
people are doing their own thing. We are actually quite
law abiding when you look at the size and scope

(08:23):
and scale of this country. But Democrats are agitators. They
are rabble rousers. They are community organizers who only wish
to complain and tear down very little, very little that
they want to celebrate, very little to build on. They'd
much rather destroy, like, for example, destroying the Department of

(08:44):
Homeland Security. I mean, here's Okasio Cortez telling New York
or radio that, you know, maybe we just get rid
of all. You know. This is the woman that has
been saying abolish ice, abolish ice, who lied, that's right,
lied about members of Board of roll said she felt
unsafe around them. Does she feel unsafe if she if

(09:05):
she sees cops in a Starbucks? Somebody should ask her
because I'm not sure what The answer is, she lives
in a fancy apartment down here in DC. I wonder
if she gets worried she walks into Starbucks and sees
a member of Metro Police. Oh my gosh, she has
a gun. Police. I walk in, I see a cop
in the place, and I think, well, this is the
safest restaurant I could be in right now. I think.
I think a vast majority of normal Americans feel the

(09:29):
same way, and they should. To think otherwise is to
be delusional. But Democrats embrace delusion because it is a
means to power for them. Here's AOC though, talking about
how getting rid of the Department of Homeland Security sounds
like just a just wonderful idea to her. Play eight
Ice is not under DJ, it's under the Department of

(09:52):
Homeland Security, and so we have Now would you get
rid of Homeland Security too? I think so. I think so.
I think we need to undo a lot of the
egregious a lot of the egregious mistakes of the Bush administration.
Did um. I feel like we are at a very
it is a very qualified and supported position, at least

(10:13):
in terms of evidence and in terms of being able
to make the argument that we never should have created
DHS in the early two thousands. Does she know what's
in DHS? You know? I know that people would would
shy away from asking her a knowledge based question because
it's so likely she would fail. And if you were
a reporter and you asked AOC, oh, yeah, okay, what

(10:35):
in what in DHS should we get rid of? What
are the what are the different agencies of the Department
of Homeland Security? Do you think she'd know Sacred Service,
Coast Guard, Immigration, the Customs and forceman She probably knows
that one Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA. So when she

(10:59):
says get rid of DHS, does she even understand what
is in the Department of Homeland Security? I think the
answer is obviously no, she does not. And real journalists
would ask that question. They don't have to say, name
them because there's a lot of them. There's many federal departments,
and I think very few people couldn't name them off
the top of their TSA very few people could name
all of them. But could she name a couple that

(11:22):
should go? Could you just show us that she knows
other than ice, what DHS is comprised of in terms
of the most well known agencies, which one should go AOC,
I don't ask that question because then that would expose it.
She doesn't even know what the heck DHS does. But
it's just a way to bash, a way to bash

(11:42):
the Bush administration. That's right, Oh, because of what they
did after nine eleven, abolish ice. America is full of
ignorant people. America is soaked in racism. Do you ever
hear this? I mean, this is just from today, my friends,
AOC bato ilhan o more. Do you ever have a

(12:02):
day when you hear three Republicans just crash, just trash
this country and national security agencies and law enforcement you know,
soup the nuts top to bottom. Not a few people
at the FBI, not a few people who aren't doing
good jobs where I mean the whole that's the whole thing. Yeah,
let's just let's get rid of the Secret Service, Immigration

(12:24):
and Customs Enforcement, and Coast Guard. Ya get rid of
all of it because America is full of a bunch
of ignoramuses who are racist. Do you ever hear that
from Republicans? Do you ever hear that from conservatives? And
yet you hear it from the left so often that
it's it almost is barely newsworthy. I mean, they certainly
have no problem with it on a whole bunch of

(12:44):
the different left wing networks out there. Yeah, that's right.
They think that what they're speaking truth to power, they're
holding America accountable. But this is like the people that
think having every UN resolution bashing Israel is somehow justice
because you know Israel does this, and well, we support
Israel by criticizing it. They'll say, all these leftists, all

(13:07):
these anti Semites, they'll say that, and he'll say, okay,
well what about I don't know what's going on like
the Sudan, All right, what's going on? What about what's
going on North Korea? Maybe the UN could spend some
time on that. Oh no, no, no, no, Just this
fixation on Israel shows us what they really think and
who the left really is when it comes to Jews
and Israel. But the fixation on bashing America for people

(13:28):
who are not just Americans but are representing us in
our government, the fixation on the left for people tells
us a lot about what they really think of this country.
And it brings me all the way back to Barack
Obama's promise to fundamentally transform this place. I don't think
you have to fundamentally transform something that's really pretty fantastic.

(13:50):
And that's why the residence of Trump's Make America Great
Again is being proud of this country, having context for
the criticisms that we make of this country, and not
engaging in this constant cycle of virtue signaling and moral
preening at the expense of this nation done by people who,
by the way, are overwhelmingly leftists, who are dishonorable, who

(14:13):
are cowardly, who do very little to better this country,
and just want to stand up in front of the
rest of us and tell us how much better than
us they are. This is going to be a problem
for Democrats who want to win elections, unfortunately, not a
not an insurmountable one, because there are a lot of
this is a Democrat ideology. Now much of the Democratic

(14:37):
Party subscribes to this. It's not just the politicians. You
walk around a lot of it's fashionable in DC, it's
fashionable in LA in some parts of New York City
to say, yeah, America is not so great. We got
a lot of this. This this country's pretty crappy in
a lot of ways, really racist, A lot of ignorant people.
Trump's the president. This is what the elites walk around

(15:01):
chin wagging about, feeling very superior. So what is the
three to five percent of voters in the middle think
about all this? That's what's really going to determine the
next election. A lot to see, but anti Americanism it
is very much a feature and not a bug of
the modern Democratic Party. You can listen to it yourself.

(15:23):
From all of them. They want to let you know.
I've got more on Epstein today. He Acosta did a
whole press conference where he tried to defend himself. I
think it's pretty it's kind, it's pretty indefensible, and the
deal is pretty indefensible. But we'll get into the some
of the details there, and some of my theories is
to wear this whole thing. Dan's We've got both authors,

(15:43):
the co authors of the new Smash book on Kavanaugh
coming up, so we'll be right back to him. I mean,
how much pandering do Democrats think in this primary they'll
be able to get away with? Uh, It's it's a
fair question. It's a fair question. At what point does

(16:05):
what they say become even for the left wing base.
They're trying so hard to energize and get a bigger
piece of say, well, hold on a second, um, that's
just crazy talk. Joe Biden, whom I've been telling you
he's still ahead of the polls, but I've been he's
gonna keep dropping and dropping. He's not gonna he's not
gonna win. Joe Biden has uh what was asked by

(16:31):
an activist in South Carolina, a question that should just
for any person result in oh well, I can't exactly
agree to that, but not Joe Biden. Here's here's what
he has to say. Play six. The ACLU has the
roadmap for cutting incarceration by fifty percent through reforms that
have been endorsed by both the right and the left,
including four other presidential candidates and many conservatives, cutting incarceration

(16:56):
by fifty percent if elected, doing more than that, Wait,
there should be no look yeah, answer, yes, thank you.
I got a better plan than you guys have. Like,
I can't wait for hear in cut incarceration fifty percent? Folks. Hmm.

(17:18):
If you want a roadmap to how to turn around
the massive decline in crime in this country, cutting incarceration
fifty percent, I think it's gonna get it. I'm not
saying we shouldn't cut incarceration ten percent, fifteen percent. I mean,
I think there are ways that we should have and
we should think more about prison. And I'm a big

(17:38):
believer in violent crimes and assaults on individuals and things
like that should be treated as entirely separate from UH
and being separate prisons from people who are do things
that are just you know, violations of state order, things
like that malam and say versus malum prohibitive malam or
rather things that are bad in nature versus things that
are bad because the state says, that's a deeper discussion

(18:01):
than we have time for right now. But fifty percent, folks,
what Biden? I mean, why doesn't Biden just walk around
and say, you know what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna
I'm gonna give everybody a check for a million dollars.
Just everyone's gonna get a million dollars. That sounds like gramman,
Come on, the government could do that. I mean, technically,
the government could do that. Probably a really bad idea,
but hey, man, Biden is like Santa Claus running around

(18:23):
just giving out gifts to everybody, any anything to stay
on top the polls. We've got more on the left
and Epstein. We got some Epstein updates coming your way.
In a moment here a Costa try to defend himself.
Was he successful in explaining the deal he gave Epstein?
That's coming up. In two thousand and six, a grand
jury convened by the state attorney the district attorney at

(18:46):
Palm Beach County reviewed the evidence and recommended a single charge,
and that charge would have resulted in no jail time
at all, no registration as a sexual offender, and no
restitution to the victim. The Palm Beach State Attorney's office
was ready to let Evestein walk free, no jail time, nothing.

(19:08):
Prosecutors in my former office found this to be completely unacceptable,
and they became involved. Our office became involved. Our prosecutors,
as this two thousand and eight article recounts, presented the ultimatum,
plead guilty to more serious charges, charges that require jail time,

(19:29):
registration and restitution, or we'd roll the dice and bring
a federal indictment. Without the work of our prosecutors, Epstein
would have gotten away with just that state charge. That
is Alex Acosta, the Director of Health and Human Services

(19:51):
Cabinet official the Bush and the Trump administration. He comes
out saying, today he held this press conference explaining, how
was it that given the horrific conduct of Epstein, I mean,
a true underage attacking sexual predator on a systematic scale,

(20:14):
where this guy, I mean, this guy's a monster. I mean,
how is it that he was able to get this
shockingly favorable prosecution deal when a normal person, a normal
person who was found, let's say, with just some some
underage girls in you know, photographs, would be facing registering

(20:38):
as a sex offender, prison time. I mean, you know,
a possession of child pornography is treated incredibly seriously under
under federal law. Now, I understand they didn't have that
on Epstein until now, but just to give you a
sense of the degree of the charges Epstein was taught
was never mind just photographs for a moment. He was
charged with actual sexual conduct with miners and trafficking in minors.

(21:03):
I mean, this is what was known about him at
the time. Now here's where I have to say, Acosta,
after today, I do think and some of you and
you can disagree with me on this, that's fine. I
do think he's kind of got to go. What he
says is true, as in his office at least did something,

(21:27):
did something to punish Epstein, whereas the Palm Beach Democrat,
by the way, Palm Beach district attorney, was going to
let him off with essentially nothing, let him off entirely.
This guy flying around young girls, He's having sex with
underage girls all over the place. I mean, you know,

(21:48):
usually one allegation, one count of this would be enough
to land somebody in prison and to have them registered
a sex offender, because it's really serious. But they were
gonna make this whole thing go away for him, all right.
So Acosta, in fairness, at least hasn't register as a
sex offender and there's some criminal punishment. But why does

(22:12):
a Costa ignore that the victims are supposed to know
about this? Why does a Costa meet with Epstein's lawyer
in a very chummy fashion in a hotel lobby to
talk about this? What was really going on here? Folks?
I'm telling you this right now. We do not have
anything near anything near the full story about this Epstein case.

(22:38):
We're hoping you get to you know, and you know,
and Coulter has been on this for years people think
of the best selling books that she's written, but which
obviously this thirteen of them. But on the Central Park
five and on Epstein, she's been way ahead of the curve.
So we're hoping. I've been. I'd talked to and today
and she said she's gonna hopefully come on either tomorrow

(22:58):
or later this week. Um, she's been saying all along,
there's there's much bigger stuff going on here today during
the press conference with a cost Remember this is a
cabinet level member of the bushman of it. I keep
saying that, sorry, the Trump administration, cabinet level Trump administration figure.
And he was asked by a journalist a very very

(23:19):
very very kind of out of the blue question, I
would think, But here's his answer to it. Was Epstein
ever raised as an intelligence asset to him? I mean,
I was in the CIA. So when people start talking
about whether somebody was an intelligence asset, my ears all
of a sudden, going, huh, hold on, hold on a second,

(23:42):
what is this all about? Play clip twenty story. Were
you ever made aware of any point you're handling this
case if mister Epstein was an intelligence asset of some sort? Um,
so so so so there has there has been reporting
to that effect. And and let me say, there's been
reporting to a lot of effects in this case, not

(24:04):
just now, but over the years. And again, I would,
you know, I would hesitate to take this reporting as fact.
This was a case that was brought by our office.
It was brought based on the facts, and and I
look at that reporting and others. I can't address it
directly because of our our guidelines, but I can tell

(24:29):
you that that a lot of reporting is just going
down rabbit holes. That's not a no, that's not a denial,
and there has been reporting to say that. A Costa initially,
when pushed about this by the Trump administration, may have
said something like, oh it was you know, I was

(24:51):
told he was an intelligence asset, and so I didn't
push much further. You know, essentially, this guy Epstein is
supersecret squirrel. You know, the government within the government, like
the deep state, wants this guy protected. So I didn't
ask any questions. There's real reporting on that, folks. It's
not conspiracy stuff. That's what is being reported. He told

(25:14):
the Trump administration. Very very strange. Now do I think
that that's true, Probably not, but it certainly raises some eyebrows,
and especially when Acosta was asked at press conference, it's
not a hard thing to be like, no, that's ridiculous.
He's not an intelligence asset. Come on, that's not a

(25:35):
hard thing to say as a US citizen. He's a
PETO and now he's facing forty five years in federal prison.
They can't just confer that was can either confirm nor deny,
which coming from the intelligence world that I used to
operate in, why are you pulling that one out? Strikes

(25:57):
me as very odd. Another thing here that strikes me
as very odd. Epstein was fabulously wealthy, not just a
little bit rich. I mean this guy was super big
time billionaire level rich. He's living in a seventy million

(26:19):
dollar mansion in New York, folks, and that was one
of six homes that he owned. Private jet everywhere one
of them was made a commercial airliner. I think that
they retrofitted to be a private jet. I mean, this guy,
this guy spending money in the you know, at the
very very top of the spendthrift scale. I mean, this

(26:41):
guy was just blown cash all over the place in
the way that very few, even very wealthy people can do.
They say oh, he's a hedge fund manager. No one
knows who his clients are. No one really knows where
this guy made his money. I'll tell you this. You
tell me who you know. You be the name of
an individual who's a billionaire, and you want to know

(27:03):
how he made his money. It's usually not hard to
figure out at all. And for someone to become a
billionaire on Wall Street, a self made billionaire, which is
what he would have to be, there would have to
be all kinds of major transactions and stories, and you
know he you know, short of this stock hostile takeover

(27:24):
of that company. There's nothing. Nobody seems to know how
this guy. We're really to believe that he's some secret
stock picking genius. Didn't have to out in the open,
you know, do didn't have to raise funds in the open.
People just gave him all this money. Didn't have to

(27:45):
do you know what they call a beauty contest. You
go around, you pitch to different people. You know, give
me money, give me money, I want to invest your money.
Didn't have to do a raise. That's just this, doesn't
you know. I don't operate in that world, but I
know a lot of people who are from Wall Street
and do you know the big players in finance, and
this guy had access to everybody had access because he

(28:06):
was so rich because of his of the of the
piles of cash and who's able to throw around. No
one really knows how he made his money. How is
that possible. It's not. It's not something that you can
You can't become a billionaire really in secret the way
this guy did. There's something wrong here. No one really

(28:27):
knows how he made his money. I'm sorry, there's a
big issue here. Yeah, offshore accounts, blah blah, but yeah, okay,
but what was he doing to make all this money? Now,
there are some theories out there, There are some theories
and this is not where the facts are yet. But
let's just say, or rather, this is not proven by

(28:47):
the facts, but here is a fact pattern that at
least lends some credibility to this line of argument. This
guy was clearly enabled by people and had very very
high level connects. He also had cameras all over his home,
cameras set up and was according to the victims in

(29:11):
these uh you know, his young victims, he was fascinated
by and was very much interrogating these girls who were
brought in and sexually abused by people who weren't Epstein,
and we haven't gotten those names yet. I'm very curious
to see what that's how that's going to turn out.

(29:32):
But there are some there are some warning signs. There
are some indicators here that Epstein may have at least
maybe he was running a lot of money and he
was good at it. But you know, it's another way
to run money and another way to get information, maybe
market moving information, to get protection from above blackmail. Somebody,

(29:53):
somebody was bankrolling this guy, that's for sure. I mean,
there's no way. It is not possible to become that
wealthy and not start out with assets. I mean, I
can tell you that Epstein didn't take his salary from
his Wall Street job, save that money and then just
invested and become a billionaire. Somebody was bankrolling this guy.
Could it be a foreign government good Epstein? I mean,

(30:16):
remember Acosta has asked if he was an intelligence asset.
Maybe it's not that he's an American intelligence asset. Maybe
it's something else we don't know. Somebody was giving this
guy a lot of cash and he was protected from
on high. Acosta's deal with him is indefensible, and Acosta
kind of knows it, but somebody might have put the

(30:39):
pressure on Acosta. You know, maybe in this Acosta was
not the guy really making the final determination, or if
somebody else came down and said this is the way
it's going to be. Folks, we are just the beginning
of this, and there is a very real concern that
we should all have that even with this now out
into the public the way that it has been, that
this could still get this can still get covered up.

(31:03):
When you're talking about money and power and influence at
this level, what isn't possible is the question you have
to ask this guy. Epstein's got photos with It's the
who's who of media and politics of the most powerful
people in the country. He's rubbing elbows with them all
the time. He has fabulous levels of wealth. No one
really knows how he acquired it. This story that the

(31:26):
media didn't want to cover this story until now, probably
because they think they can put it on Trump, even
though Trump is going to come out of us looking
just fine. Trump didn't like this guy, barely knew this
guy at all, that's obvious. So how do you get
the kind of influence that Epstein had were up. Allegedly,
Graydon Carter, the editor in chief of Vanity Fair, removed

(31:47):
allegations from underage victims from a story in Vanity Fair
at Epstein's request. You're going to strong arm the editor
in chief of Vanity Fair, very connected and wealthy guy himself.
You're going to strong arm him to change a story
just because you're good at moving money around. I don't
think so we're going to stay on this. I don't
do conspiracy theories on this show. I do try to

(32:12):
get as far ahead of stories as I can based
on the facts, and I try to indicate where I
think things are going. But there has been some attention
this is in light of the Epstein story of a
case that's now a couple of decades old, and it
wasn't in this country. It was in Belgium with a

(32:36):
convicted child rapist and murderer named Mark Paul Alan du True.
This d True fellow, starting in the nineties, kidnapped, raped,
and murdered a number of small girls aged between eight
and nineteen. He buried their bodies after doing all them.

(32:59):
I mean, I can't even tell you the kind of
horrific things that to True was convicted of doing to
these girls. He's now serving a life sentence. They don't
have the death penalty in Belgium. But why people are
looking at this case or why it's coming up again
and you can just do a couple today? I saw
it to said, what is this story? I read about
it a little bit, did some Google searches on it.

(33:21):
It turns out that this was a fellow who was
an evil psychopath. But he claimed that he was part
of a very high level pedophile ring in Belgium, involving
law enforcement and politicians. And when people looked into what
had really gone on in his case, it was unbelievable

(33:47):
how inept, at a minimum, the police were. I mean,
at one point you had a police officer inspecting a
home on a tip and there were girls screaming out
from the basement who were being chained there, who eventually
starved death. Unbelievable stuff. The police were so incredibly incompetent
that it's hard to believe that they And this was

(34:07):
in the late nineties early two thousands. His trial was
in two thousand and four, seven years after his initial arrest,
So this went on for a long time in Belgium.
And there was a special prosecutor essentially brought in to
oversee the case our magistrates, so it's kind of like
a judge I believe, to oversee the case who was

(34:30):
replaced and then later on broke down on the stand
this is the guy who's supposed to bring this guy
to justice, and said that he was being threatened his life,
was being threatened by senior government officials, by people effectively
in the Belgian deep state and with connections to the mafia,
the European mafia, for trying to bring to light what

(34:53):
exactly had happened here. I mean, you read about this
due true case, which it sounds like it's may up
for some some you know, novel, and it's all a
matter of record that this guy was a pedophile, rapist
and murderer, and there were some very very disturbing things
that happened. It led to a three hundred thousand person

(35:15):
march trying to get justice here, people marching in the streets,
twenty witnesses. According to the Guardian, the UK mysteriously died
and all along there were these indicators that there were
powerful people that did not want the truth to come out.
It was perhaps the political fight of my lifetime, one
that I felt close to because I was here in

(35:36):
the swamp as it was unfolding. It was hard to
believe at certain points the confirmation of Brett Cavanaugh. The
fight that was around it, during it and afterwards continues
on to this day. There's a fantastic new book out
now that details exactly what happened then, and this is
it's important not just to know the truth of that

(35:59):
back and forth, but also to understand going forward what
we as conservatives my friends are up against. The authors
of Justice on Trial, the Kavanaugh confirmation, and the future
of the Supreme Court are with us. Now. You can
get the book, by the way on Amazon where it
is number one that's Justice on Trial. We have Molly
Hemingway and Carrie Severino, the two co authors, joining us.

(36:21):
Thank you so much, ladies. I know you're super busy.
It's yeah. Well, it's great to be here with you,
all right, So just can I start with Molly telling
me what do people need to when we think about this?
And we covered it very much on the show, so
this audience remembers the Kavanaugh trial, but to bring us
back into it, what is the top line here that
you get into in the book. What do people need

(36:43):
to take away from that fight? Yeah, we wrote Justice
on Trial because the Kavanaugh confirmation we thought was the
most important thing to happen to America last year, and
first and foremost just getting the facts down. We interviewed
more than one hundred people, the president, Supreme Court justices,

(37:03):
dozens of senators to find out exactly what had happened
and how this confirmation battle was waged by all sides,
so that people have the information so that they will
be on guard in the future when such tactics are
used again. We show in our book that this did
have precedent. There were a lot of comparisons to the

(37:26):
Justice Thomas hearings, the Robert Bork hearings, and it will
be used again so long as people tolerate and allow
this type of destruction and character assassination to continue. Kerry,
what were some of the facts that you uncovered from
this hundred plus interviews you did and the deep dive
into everything from the Kavanaugh confirmation fight. What are some

(37:46):
things that people might not know or some of the
new information that came to light as a result of
your investigations. Wow, we learned so many fun stories, even
from people who really involved in the process. As you
were watching this as as it played out, we learned
a lot of new things, everything from the details of
how Justice Kennedy was able to sneak out and get

(38:08):
into the White House without other people knowing how even
when he told his own colleagues at the Supreme Court
about his retirement, they were surprised he had managed to
keep them in the dark as well. But also when
you get into the Kavanaugh confirmation, as particularly this kind
of second phase, some of the details about the coordination
and the left, the way that Democrats, even intensely involved

(38:29):
in trying to make sure this rolled out in a
very media friendly way as part of their coordinated campaign
to oppose Kavanaugh. They couldn't do it by the traditional
means of talking about his decisions, and of course they
were mischaracterizing them at the time, then they would do
it by trying to bring scoreless allegations. We had one
really shocking story that I loved was where we had

(38:50):
learned that Senator Harris and Senator Horrona we're talking in
the ante room after in the middle of one of
the hearings with Blasi Ford and Horona said, you know,
isn't it so great? We encouraged her to where that
blue dress and asked for caffeine to create those parallels
to Anita Hill. And so it's just shocking. The Democrats
were really, you know, part of this campaign to have

(39:12):
a media push for attacks on Justice Kavanaugh. And I
think that's the kind of thing that we're hoping we
can prevent happening to future nominees. And Molly, you were
able in this to put out there some information that
was known to the White House at the time about

(39:32):
Blasi Ford. I mean, I'll just say for the record,
and I don't know if you ladies agree or disagree,
but I thought the second accuser was entirely not credible
and the third accuser was entirely insane. So Blasi Ford
was the only one that they were really hanging their
hats on to get this thing done. But there was
information that wasn't released about her that you deal with
in the book. Right, at least the first accusation was

(39:55):
within the realm of possibility, which is not what you
could say about some of the subsequent allegations. It was
also true that there was no corroborating information that gave
reason to, you know, to support this allegation. What we
uncovered in our reporting was that both the White House
and Senate Republicans were being given quite a bit of

(40:15):
information that showed that Christie Blasi was not who the
Washington Post was portraying her to be necessarily, or that
things were a little more complicated than they were showing.
We interviewed friends who like her, who you know, who
generally have a positive view of her, who reported that
she was a heavy drinker in high school, very aggressive
with boys. And this isn't to say that that has

(40:37):
varying on her accusation. The lack of evidence to support
the accusation is what's key there. But we thought it
was interesting that they had this information and they didn't
use it, and they didn't use it because they knew
that the media would destroy anyone who who talked about
these things, even though they were widely talked about in
her community and had been for decades. Well, I do

(40:58):
also think that we need to m and then what
the standards are going to be going forward here, because
Brett Kavanaugh's fondness for drinking beer not only was relevant
somehow in all of this, but became a national punchline,
but that's perhaps a discussion for another time. Kerry, how
near fought a contest was this? I think that to

(41:18):
make sure that everyone really pays attention to this, and
remember every when the book is Justice on Trial, the
Kavanaugh Confirmation, in the Future of the Supreme Court. It
is number one on Amazon. I have already bought my copy.
I recommend you do the same. But Kerrie, how close
fought a battle was this to get Kavanaugh through? Yeah?
I mean I think we learned in our reporting that

(41:39):
this was absolutely not a done deal, right right up
until the end. I mean when that vote was called,
Mitch McConnell did not know if he had the vote,
but he knew we have to go forward and see
what's happening. One of the exciting stories that we learned was,
you remember that moment when Jeff Lake was trying to
decide whether he's going to vote for Kavanaugh out of
committee and he goes in the back room and there's

(42:00):
discussion with Senator Kohn's there. That was not just close
fought in a figurative sense, but almost in a literal sense.
There were senators who were literally threatening to punch each
other in that back room. It's a crazy scene that
we detail in our book, where Jeff, Jeff Lake, and
Chris Kohn's are tucked in this tiny phone booth. In

(42:20):
this back room, You've got Senator Cornyan trying to get
in there as well, all these senators vying for Flake
trying to get his ear, dozens of staffers back there.
It is a wild scene. And they were so frustrated
with the way that Democrats did and politicized the process
and throwing the rules and the Senate's procedures under the
bus in their no holes barred attempt to get Kavanaugh,

(42:42):
to block Kavanaugh's confirmation. The irony, of course, is that
Jeff Flake's delay actually ended up, I think helping Kavanaugh
because it really allowed the FBI to look at some
of those things, and they actually uncovered that effect there
was no evidence for the allegations, and in fact, it
uncovered other evidence of maybe witness tampering even in the process,
and so I think people came out of that FBI

(43:05):
investigation even more confident that these allegations did not have
any foundation. A boy, just listen to Susan Collins and
you can hear the play by play discussion of all
of that evidence and why it ended up being a
victory in the end. Molly, how do you gauge the
influence on this process that Michael Avanatti and the Julie Sweatnick,

(43:26):
the third accuser, the one who made the as anybody
being honest would have to admit, just completely implausible and
insane allegations about Brett Cavanaugh being part of a secret
gang rape society that no one had ever heard of
or knew anything about before. Do you think that that
may have actually tipped the balance in favor of Kavanaugh
or how did that factor into all of this? Yeah,

(43:48):
our reporting indicates that it actually did just that. You know,
when the first allegations came out, people who who had
thoughtful you know, who had thought things about the confirmation
process were not surprised, and they were prepared for something
like this because they've seen it being done before, whether
with Robert Bork or Clarence Thomas. A bunch of people
took it much more seriously, frankly than they probably should

(44:10):
have been. By the time these more ridiculous allegations are
coming out, people recognize the campaign for what it is,
a last minute no holds barred attempt to delay and obstruct,
even if it meant destroying a man who heretofore had
a wonderful reputation, And so it was so absurd that
at the time that the allegation comes out, one Senate staffer,

(44:31):
it's just like, thank God, this is happening. It's over
for the anti kabanaf forces. And I think he was
shown to be absolutely right. And Carrie, it's fair to
say this isn't necessarily over, not just that the tactics,
and I think this is why your book is so important,
why everybody should read Justice on Trial, because they they
will replay this. And there's been some similarity to Bork

(44:55):
and to Justice Thomas in the past, but this was
uglier and really for a lot of people, I think,
more ruthless than anything that we had ever seen before,
certainly in my lifetime or within my memory. But also,
they're still hoping to get after Kavanaugh and create a
narrative to destroy him even though he's on the court,
aren't they. That's absolutely right. I clerked at the Supreme

(45:17):
Court for Justice Thomas, and you know there weren't just
analogies to his confirmation process through the way that these
allegations came out. We're seeing the same pattern after the confirmation.
When Thomas was confirmed, two to one Americans believed him
over Anita Hill. And you've seen decades long, a steady
drumbeat of messaging, of building a narrative that says exactly

(45:41):
the opposite. And I think if you ask most people
up today, they will have forgotten that that original response
to people who really watched that process unfolded in real time.
We want to make sure that doesn't happen to Kavanaugh
because now that they've lost their battle to stop him
from getting on the court, they want to discredit him
and all of the conservative decisions he has going forwards.
So with Justice on trial, we're hoping we can stop

(46:03):
that disinformation campaign in its track to the facts. We'll
speak for themselves, and Molly, it's already been said that
there are some books that are planned from the other
side of the political spectrum about Kavanaugh that are clearly
going to be meant to take him down and say
that this was, you know, a huge defeat for the
me too movement and it's all terrible. Have you come
across some of that from the mainstream media, So far

(46:27):
that they're trying to suppress your book in favor of
getting out the other narrative, because you and Kerry got
this book out first. We did, and it is very
thoroughly reported, and I think people might be surprised at
just what a fair and even handed and balanced book
it is. It is number one, it's been number one
for days, and yet we have seen almost no attention

(46:48):
from corporate media, and so I think that really speaks
to the front. You know, it's kind of what we
covered when we were when we were going through this,
there was major media malfeasons and how they approached this,
and it is unfortunate that some of the porters who
are working on books were well known for their anti
Kabinaugh activism as reporters during the process. So I mean,
I hope, I hope they do a better job with

(47:09):
their journalism on the book than they did during the process. Well, congratulations, ladies.
The good news is that it's number one and it's
going to continue to sell really well because it's an
important story and the two of you are perfect people
to write it. Molly Hemingway and Kerry Savorino. Everybody Justice
on trial, the Kavanaugh confirmation and the future of the
Supreme Court. Ladies, thank you for doing this. Molly. You

(47:30):
know how much this meant to me too, because we
talked about this when it was all going down. So
thank you for writing the story. Yeah, yeah, thank you
for writing the story, and thank you for all your
work on this. Thank you so much. Buck, All right, team,
we'll be right back. Debt piles up, deficit twenty five
percent higher since election. That's that's on the headline right

(47:56):
now of the Drudge Report, and the numbers don't line.
We are spending a lot, folks. The Trump administration, for
all the good, is spending a lot of money, and
the country's public debt now is on its way to
exceeding nine of GDP. Let me tell you something right now.

(48:17):
Because you have a pro business, pro capitalist in the
White House, an administration that is cutting taxes and cutting regulation,
things seem like it's okay and they're going pretty well.
But the moment, the moment that you have a democrat
in charge again, they will point to the lack of
spending restraint to justify what will be just the worst

(48:43):
kind of overspending. The stuff that we saw from the
Obama years and then some and there's even now and
Bernie Sanders and Okazio Cortez and that wing of the
Democratic Party is increasingly embracing this. Some of you will
know exactly I'm talking about a theory called MMT modern

(49:04):
monetary theory. And here's a very short version of what
MMT is. And this is I'm telling you Bernie Sanders
advisors are all about this. You know, sees advisors are
all about this. The hard left in this country is
trying to promote MMT as a mainstream economic theory, even
Democrats like Larry Summers. No, this is crazy, but here's

(49:26):
a short version of it. Public debt doesn't matter, anything,
can be anything you want it to be. The only
thing you have to worry about with public debt is inflation.
And all you have to do is monitor inflation as
you spend and find ways to combat inflation specific to

(49:47):
whatever cause that inflation. Now, some of you are going
to say, well, hold on a second. There are some
huge what ifs or ifs and and how twos and
all that. Who says that once in inflation starts, you'll
be able to stop it, and especially if the inflation
is the result of a government decision, and active decision

(50:09):
is to say we can spend whatever we think we
need to spend. This is in part what brought down
I mean, I don't like to always make the Venezuela comparison,
but this is in part what brought down Venezuela and
Venezuela under Chavez from nineteen ninety nine to what twenty twelve,
when he was in charge, they just spent and spent
and spending. People liked it, the poor people liked it.

(50:30):
A lot of spending, a lot of public spending. But
then you had a couple of things happened. You had
the oil prices drop, which also meant that the foreign
foreign currency reserves in Venezuela dropped. It meant their overall
economic picture got a lot worse because they had just
had less revenue. And then they decided, well, we have
public we now have public death that we can't pay,

(50:51):
so let's just start and let's just start printing dollars
or in their kids, printing bolivars. Well, guess what happens
Then the global currency markets say, hold on a second.
Now you're making our money. Now we're not going to lend.
You're making our money worth less this is not good.
And then they say, oh, no, no, no, we're just
gonna keep We're gonna inflate the dollar, We're gonna inflate
the debt away. Well, then you get to inflation that

(51:14):
turns into hyperinflation, which just means really really bad inflation.
The currency becomes worthless. People with savings all of a
sudden have no savings, the poor have no buying power whatsoever,
and you have breadlines and just pandemonium on the streets,
which is exactly what you have in Venezuela. Now, modern
monetary theorists in this country on the left, the progressives

(51:37):
that are pushing this, would say that can happen to
us because America, unlike Venezuela, is the global reserve currency. Okay,
let's just play this out for a moment. That's true
right now. Is it always going to be true? What
happens when democrats, if they get in charge and implement MMT,
which I think they will, they'll just say that they

(51:57):
don't even care with the debt as anymore. They whatever
they think needs to be spent, and then just they'll
monitor inflation along the way so that they'll say, oh,
we're not going to spend. We're not going to triple
the national debt in a year, but we don't have
to worry. It's not a concern. You don't ever have
to pay it down. You can just keep running the
debt higher and higher and higher, as long as you
do it in a controlled way. That's modern monetary theory,

(52:19):
doesn't matter. There's no downside of this. Okay, What happens
when it becomes clear that that's the official policy of
the United States government and then all of a sudden
other countries say, you know what, we're gonna start buying
are We're gonna start buying oil and Redman b or
what happens if people say, oh, I'm gonna start putting
my assets into cryptocurrency. What happens when we're not the

(52:40):
reserve currency anymore. This is how governments fall. This is
how economies collapse. This is how entire hegemons are brought
to their knees. And it is an active policy promoted
by democrats. Now modern monetary theory, Google, you see exactly

(53:00):
I'm talking about. This is what aoc This is what
Bernie and Warren, that's what they want to do. Come
up with a framework and economic theory that the government
can spend whatever it wants to spend as long as
it pays attention as it's spending it. This could destroy,
absolutely destroy the US economy. And I don't mean a recession,
I mean done, collapse, finished. Democrats are increasingly embracing this theory.

(53:26):
It's easy as we focus in on the different personalities
and the day to day Twitter fights and media throwdowns,
it's easy to lose out of the fact that there's
some very big issues, things that affect you, things that
will matter to you, that will be on the ballots,
so to speak, or will be determined by the ballots

(53:48):
in the next election. One of them is just how
far left this country is going to go on a
whole host of issues and a whole whole swath of things.
And this is why AOC and Bernie demanding a climate
change national emergency should be troubling to everyone listening to

(54:11):
this play nine. We have two of them twelve years
to transform our energy system away from post to energy
efficiency and sustainable energy. This is a moral imperatle there
is no choice. This is a political crisis of an action,
and it's going to take political will, political courage in

(54:35):
order press to treat this issue with the urgency that
the next generation needs. Here we have two leading progressives,
two progressives who are beloved on the left and probably
the ones who are the most able to with a
single statement, a single utterance or tweet, move the news cycle,

(54:57):
create a controversy, or create a furious back and forth
between left and right. I mean, it's it's AOC and
it's Bernie, and they're saying quite openly here that we
have twelve years to dramatically transform and that's not an overstatement.
In fact, if anything, it's understatement. I mean, to completely

(55:19):
upend the American economy or else we're all going to die.
That's that's what they are. That's what they're They're saying
that we have twelve years or else the whole the
whole world is going to overheat and we're gonna have
catastrophic climate change and horrible things are going to happen.
I mean, they are effectively profits of doom. They might

(55:43):
as well be pushing around shopping carts with you know
John three sixteen scrawled in in semi legible handwriting while
not wearing any you know, will not wearing any pants
and uh not having bathed in about three years. You know,
they they are completely out of their minds, and yet

(56:04):
they're treated as people who should not only are are
you worthy of our attention? But should run the country,
should be in charge of things. You know, the best
thing that Trump has going for him going to reelection
the best thing. And I think there's a lot of
stuff about Trump that really is exceptional and excellent, but
the single best thing is the modern Democratic Party. These

(56:27):
people are wacko. You know, if it were Trump versus
some really sound, thinking, slick Democrat technocrat who understood markets
new I'll tell you this right now, if he had
a better personality and a bunch more charisma, you know,
someone like a A Bloomberg or even someone like a

(56:50):
Howard Schultz as the Democrat candidate, he'd have to win
the Democratic nomination, but would be far more formidable in
my mind than we're seeing here. I think Trump still wins,
but at least you look at Michael Bloomberg, you go,
this guy's not you know, he's not going to run
the country into the ground the way that San Francisco

(57:10):
has been running into the ground, or that you know,
Los Angeles is being run to the ground. Now, I
mean he ran New York pretty well, very well. Really,
we're gonna be honest, and it's but in some way
he remember he was a Republican folk, so that's at
the name. He's a Democrat on some issues, Republican others.
You know, a centrist Democrat who's not an economic illiterate
would be at least a challenge or worthy of the

(57:32):
name for Trump. That the Democratic Party today is just
hoping that they can be looney enough and do enough,
just insane fear mongering and scream racist enough and all
this stuff that they can get people to vote for
them to beat Trump. It's it's just troubling. Meanwhile, Trump
understands this Green New Deal. I mean, this is this
is idiocy, It really is. It's idiocy on steroids, play

(57:54):
ten kill millions of jobs. It'll crush the dreams of
the poorest Americans and disproportionately harm minority communities. I will
not stand for it. We will defend the environment, but
we will also defend American sovereignty, American prosperity, and we

(58:15):
will defend American jobs, defend the environment, but also defend
American prosperity. That that's what should be done here. It
does not have to be either or. The Left pretends
that it's either or. So the fight over the Green
New Deal, this is they can't walk away from this.
Now the Left has made its bed. It's gonna have

(58:35):
to sleep on. It's sleeping it on healthcare for illegals,
on the Green New Deal, on obviously raising taxes, but
they always want to raise taxes. They can't walk through
the Green New Deal. And on healthcare. I've got to
say this is where my criticism starts to focus in
on the Republican Party, because there has to be a

(58:57):
much better messaging campaign about what Trump really plans to do,
especially if we get back a majority in the House.
On healthcare, because folks, it did not there was no repeal.
Now there may be a judicial dismantling, and I believe
it's the Fifth Circuit in Texas that is looking at
it right now. There may be a judicial dismantling of Obamacare.

(59:18):
In essence, a federal judge has said that because the
individual mandate was necessary for the whole law, and because
the individual mandate is a tax, and because Trump has
gotten rid of that tax, therefore no individual mandate. Therefore no,
Obamacare more or less is the way it goes. That
would be judicial strengthen it, but it's gonna make it

(59:39):
all the way for the Supreme Court. And do we
think that will Roberts save Obamacare a third time? I
think the answer is yes. I would put money on it.
Robert's whole legacy now is that he wouldn't save the
American people from the stupidity of Obamacare the first or
the second time. And you know that that will never
be able to see him the same way after that decision.

(01:00:00):
That was a decision made for that was political. It
was not legal as political attacks, as a penalty a
penalties attacks, I don't think so. But here is Jim
Jordan just talking about the lies, and we need more
of this. The lies of Obamacare Play fifteen. I call
him the nine lies of Obamacare. Think about this. Remember
this one. If you like your doctor, you can keep

(01:00:22):
your doctor, y'all? Remember that one. How about the one
if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.
We were told by the President of the United States
premiums were gonna go down. He then got more specifics.
Premiums will go down on average fifteen hundred dollars he
said deductibles would decline. Five false statements right there. Oh,
remember this one. They told us the website was gonna work.

(01:00:44):
They told us the website was secure. Your information would
be secure. There. They told us that these co ops
were wonderful. End all, be all creations. Twenty three were created.
Guess how many are still in existence. Four the other
Night team went bankrupt. Oh, you have the ninth fly.
They told us. First they told us it's not attacked.

(01:01:05):
Then they went to court and said it is attack.
Now they're saying, no, it's not really attacked at all
because you can't attack him out because the individual man
day is gone, there's no penalty. Nine different lies. We
were told about Obamacare, and the hearing is titled how
Trump's efforts? How can you undermine something that's already failed?
Someone has to be out there making the case because
healthcare does move voters. People care about healthcare and the

(01:01:30):
administ This is one of the very I think we're
gonna be heading into the election. Who knows, really, I
think we're gonna be heading the election though with a
very strong, very strong economy. I think Trump is going
to be in an excellent position based on where this
country is in terms of unemployment and job creation, job
growth GDP, all of that. You know, Oh, he's gonna

(01:01:52):
start a trade ward with China and we're wrong. No,
it's all it's okay, We're fine. You know, they's all
the fearmongering that they do. Oh what's gonna But I say,
I think that the Republican Party needs to get it
together here and present a healthcare plan that makes sense,
that people can understand, and that will make things better,

(01:02:14):
and that means increasingly market based dollars follow where the
patient wants them to go, not where the system wants
it to go. More on this they'll coming up later
in the week. I assure you any small town, any
big city in this country, walk up to a citizen,
walk up to a person on the street and ask him,
do you think on the census we should ask a
citizenship question and their response will be yes. This is

(01:02:36):
so common sense, but everyone gets it except Democrats in
the United States. Cont We've been considering all the options,
and I've been in constant discussions with the President ever
since the Supreme Court decision came down, and I think
over the next day or two you'll see what approach
we're taking. I think it does provide a pathway for

(01:02:56):
getting the question on the census. How is it that
any serious person in our government or in our media
could oppose having more data about who is in this
country and what their status is. Just step back for
a moment, this whole census issue now, and there's the

(01:03:18):
judges and that they said that they didn't like the
Trump administration's rationale for this. I don't think that that's
something that judges should be weighing in on. Where does
that end? Well, this is legal, but we don't like.
We don't like why you're doing it, even though it's
legal for you to do it. So we're gonna say
you can't do this. I'm sorry that that's not the
role of federal judges. Is it legal as a constitutional
that's it. There shouldn't be this. Well, the thought processes

(01:03:42):
that went into this we don't like, so therefore you
can't do it. Now, the administration may still try to
find a way to get their bar As Attorney General,
bar is saying that this may in fact still happen.
There will be a sensus question here, But keep in
mind most recent polling shows that a majority of his
Bannic Americans want there to be a sense this question.

(01:04:04):
So you know when we hear, oh, it's so racist,
it's so racist, Why is it racist? We just want
to know who is here, and we're supposed to know
who is here. In fact, understanding who's in your country
and making individuals, you know, making your citizens countable is
a very basic function of the state. That's a there's

(01:04:25):
the reason for it being in the constitution. We've got
to know who's here so we can apportion proper funds
and representation. And it's not just the Democrats see this
as an opportunity. You know that they're gonna say it's
all about jerry mannering. But jerry mannering is never gonna stop.
There'll always be jerry mandering because there's no such thing.
Just like there's no truly objective news story that can't

(01:04:48):
that cannot exist. There's no such thing as a truly
objective news story. There there can all be honesty about
one's perspective, and from a news organization, there can never
be a truly neutral district. Congressional districts will always favor
a little bit one side or the other, so they're
not going to get rid of Jerrymannery. They say that

(01:05:08):
it's going to have less participation, even though this question
has been on the census in the past. They say
that it's because they'll be less participation. But to that,
I just say, they don't know that. That's just a guess.
It's you know, they don't know that that's going to
be the case. And plus people could just you know,
they could lie or just answer it or not answer it,

(01:05:31):
or any number of things. That doesn't strike me as true.
Here's what is true here, Here's what I see at
the very the very heart of this. That is they
do not want us to have a better sense of
how many illegals are in the country. Now. I don't
know if the census would necessarily get us those answers right,

(01:05:54):
because right now we rely on old census data for
the for the number of illegals. That's always what's that
is always what they say with the eleven million number,
it's based on census data. Okay, well that was at
a minimum ten years ago. But I think that there's
a very real concern, and it's not just a Democrat concern.

(01:06:16):
I think there is a concern throughout the bureaucracy, the
federal government's bureaucracy, and even it could even affect the
perception in the judiciary. And that if the American people
really found out how many illegals are in this country,
they would completely completely freak out because they would know

(01:06:42):
the one they've been lied to all this time. And two,
the federal government has been asleep at the switch while
there has been a massive, a massive infusion dare I say,
invasion of illegal immigrants in the United States that is
transforming and will transform the character of this country for
many decades to come. Think about it this way. Anybody

(01:07:06):
that came here illegally, they're children. They're gonna think, well,
my mom or my dad came here illegally, and so
whichever political party tells me that's fine, they're gonna want
to vote for that party. So you got built in
Democratic voters. They're gonna want to believe it their version
of the American dream, the I came here illegally, but
that's fine. Whoever tells them that that's the case is
going to have their political allegiance. So this is this

(01:07:27):
is going to change the electorate in that sense. This
is going to make a major shift in the overall
political map. And they know this right, and they know
that that's this is why Democrats don't want the crisis
of the border to stop. But something as straightforward as
a census, Democrats fight tooth and nail because they don't

(01:07:48):
want the data. Remember we talked about yesterday, Can the
data be racist? Democrats will say, yes, some data, just
the collection of facts that can be racist. Here they
think that the collection of census data is somehow racist
or rooted in racism. I really do just want to
know as much as we can know about who is

(01:08:08):
in this country, what household the household is going on.
I would like us to know that. But the Democrats
do not want us to know, and that's why they
fight so hard on the census question. I hope that
Barr has a way they can get this through the process.
I saw today that the team, the legal team that
they want to use is no longer a judge, a

(01:08:29):
federal judge of Obama appoint to each as Trump tweeted out,
is saying that they can't switch out the DJ legal
team on this issue at the last second. So maybe
they'll just add to the team instead, or but it's
always procedurally. You'll notice Democrats are so good. It's unfortunate,
but it's true. They're so good at using the process
as its own political weapon. You know, I always tell

(01:08:51):
you that the process is the punishment. That was true
during the Muller probe. But you know, these different Obama
appointee judges they'll find some interpretation of statute where oh,
even if you can do this, you know, the notification
procedures in place for it are wrong, or oh there's
you know, this is like saying, you know, all your
all your mortgage paperwork for the houses in order, but

(01:09:11):
you didn't cross this t on page seventy two. So
we're just going to say that your house, your contract
for this house is no on and void. Now because
this is improper. You know, there's there's a real bad
faith approach to the law and to the bureaucracy from
the left, and they feel completely justified in it. They

(01:09:32):
don't think that they're abut or rather, even if they
recognize that it's abusive, they think that the abuse is
justified because Trump. You know, this is like what we
see with the whole Twitter victory for people that sued
Trump saying that it's a First Amendment violation for Trump

(01:09:52):
to block them on Twitter. Okay, well, now guess what
that's not. There's no special presidential First Amendment. Now that's
the first Amendment for any public figure who works for
the government, any government figure. So AOC better on block
all the conservatives out there that are coming after her
on Twitter. Can't can't curate her feed anymore. You know,

(01:10:14):
think of all the all the frivolous lawsuits and stupidity.
You know, but the left never thinks about the long
term damage to the law. They just want the short
term victory. They want that thrill of a judge slapping
down Trump, because that's what Trump's arrangement syndrome does. It
makes you think short term only. I think that I
would say that your message is excluding people. You're excluding me,
You're excluding people that look like me, You're excluding people

(01:10:37):
of color, You're excluding you know, Americans that that maybe
support you. I think that we need to have a
reckoning with the message that you have and what you're
saying about make America great again. I think that you're
HARKing back to an era that was not great for everyone.
It might have been great for a few people, and
maybe America is great for a few people right now,

(01:10:59):
but it's not great for enough Americans in this world.
And I think that we have a responsibility, each and
every one of us. You have an incredible responsibility, as
you know, the chief of this country, to take care
of every single person, and you need to do better
for everyone. That's a Miss Rappino of the winning World

(01:11:22):
Cup women's national team soccer team, and she's saying that
Trump excludes people. I would prefer it, honestly, if if
people were going to say that Trump Trump has a
message of exclusivity, if they could just cite how he

(01:11:42):
is being, how he's excluding them, or what he has
said that is excluding them. You know, from the LGBTQ
community in particular. There's a little bit of a disconnect
your folks, and I need I need explained to me,
or I need someone to try and explain. I think
they would fail if they tried, but they could. Trump
is the first president who have ever during his campaign

(01:12:04):
stood on stage more than once and waived the gay
pride flag, held it up at a campaign event, and
run as somebody who is in favor of the continuation
of gay marriage or in favor of gay marriage. He's
the first president ever Barack Obama did not run, and
he ran as a traditional marriage candidate. I guess he

(01:12:27):
was a bigot then, but then they forgave him. But
Trump is the first president who ever enter office as
as somebody who is in favor of gay marriage, and
yet we're told that he is so excludes people from
the LGBTQ community. How so what does he say? What

(01:12:47):
has Trump ever said as president or during his campaign
that was anti gay or excluded the gay community. I'm wondering.
I follow this very closely, and if they're going to
say that he that his administration is not on board
with a lot of the transgender agenda items, I would

(01:13:10):
just say, well, those are changing all the time, and
not even Democrats know what those rules are supposed to
be because they're making them up as they go along,
and they've gone comple I mean, it's gotten completely out
of control. I saw a tweet last night from a
Blue check journalist I cannot remember her name. It said
that there's something called trans babies, that babies can be
transgender babies don't have a sexual orientation, they're just babies.

(01:13:34):
Trans babies. She says, how would you even know if
that was a thing. This is this is where it's going.
And this is also why you have, you know, twelve
year old drag queens who are being feted, being celebrated
in the media as this is some some form of
expression that we all need to we all need to

(01:13:54):
think is great and if we don't, you're a bigot. Anyway,
Trump is, they're he is when he says he's not
treated fairly. One of the reasons that residents because he's
not he's not treated fairly on these issues. And Rapino, Look,
I'm sorry, you know, women's soccer, it's just we just
don't care that much. You know, it doesn't make that
much money. It's not as it's just not as competitive

(01:14:17):
as a lot of other sports on a global scale.
It's just not I mean, they can get all, oh
but they lost to the fourteen year old men's national team,
So you can't talk to me about all this stuff
and not factor that into the analysis somehow. But then
when when it's when it comes time to figure out
what should what should happen next? Now that the women's

(01:14:38):
national team is getting all this attention, what should happen next?
Here is what means Rappino says, people need to do
to be part of the movement, man, and be part
of like what the good people are doing. Play three, Well,
it's immediately following the final whistle. You get that USA
USA chance. But equal pay, equal pay, along that same cadence. Yeah,
I think fans want to know what they can do

(01:14:59):
to support that right. Fans can come to games. Obviously
the national team games will be a hot ticket, but
we have nine teams in the NWSL. You can go
to your league games. You can support that way. You can,
you know, buy players jerseys, you can lend your support
in that way. You can tell your friends about it,
you can become season ticket holders. I think in terms

(01:15:21):
of that, that's the easiest way for fans to get involved.
Buy my stuff, she says, pay for our jerseys, or
buy our jerseys, get season tickets commerce. Now, I have
to say I like that answer in the sense that
it is in fact a call to capitalism and to

(01:15:42):
free enterprise and choice and individuals making their own decisions
about their own pocketbooks. So I like all of that.
I'm in favor of all of that. But she seems
to miss the point here, which is, while it's fine
to say, hey, board us more so we make more
money so than we can get closer to equal pay.

(01:16:03):
It's not that they should just get equal pay, which
has been the rallying cry all along that they're underpaid.
They're not underpaid, they are overpaid. Payment as it relates
to the revenue they bring in is higher for the
women than it is for the men. The men's national
team makes a whole lot more money. We've already been

(01:16:24):
through this, you know this. But oh, the media absolutely
thinks they are fantastic. They could not be more on
board for this team. You know, if you don't want to,
if you don't want to hear from me on this.
You know who had some great stuff to say about
this back in twenty fifteen, the MMA superstar female who

(01:16:47):
was more highly paid than any male, Ronda Rowsey. She
understands commerce and capitalism and free markets. Apparently play this
is Ronda Rowsey, Play nineteen. We've got quite a large
pay dispute happening with our Australian women's soccer team at
the moment. Is it frustrating for you as someone who's
so prominent in your sport? And we heard you say

(01:17:10):
on the Ellen show the other day, you are the
richest fighter in ufcay that that sort of thing is
still going on. I think that how much you get
paid should have something to do with how much money
you bring in. I'm the highest paid fighter or not
because Dina and Lorenzo wanted to do something nice to
the ladies. They do it because I bring in the
highest numbers. They do it because I make them the

(01:17:31):
most money. And I think that the money that they
make should be proportionate to the money that they bring in.
Rhonda Rousy must be such a sexist part of the patriarchy,
or she understands basic economics and how markets function. Maybe
maybe that's what it is. So let's just all stop
at the social justice I am a woman, hear me,

(01:17:54):
roar nonsense from the women's national team here, and get
into reality. And reality is they're overpaid. The moments kneeling
were difficult for you, Yeah, it was. It was it
was people's reaction or a little bit. Yeah, obviously knowing
you know, especially after the first time that I did it,

(01:18:15):
you know, knowing how angry people were. But also it
was difficult and heavy, But I had this immense sense
of pride and responsibility in doing that. So I think
that's where the strength of doing it a number of
times came from a sense of pride and responsibility. US
women's national team player there, Megan Rapino says of kneeling

(01:18:38):
during the national anthem. I want to bring on a SuperPatriot,
my friends, now, somebody who can weigh in on this
as well as everything else going on in the world
around us. We have our friend Evan Hayfer joining us now.
He is a veteran of the Special Operations community, and
he's also the CEO of Black Rifle Coffee, a fantastic

(01:18:59):
and very loyal sponsor here on the show. That is
the coffee I drink every day. So Evan, thank you
for making delicious coffee and for your services country sir.
It's my pleasure. Thanks a lot, Buck. I definitely appreciate
the opportunity to come on. It's always a pleasure to
talk to you and talk to everybody that listens to
the show. Somebody tell me a bit about what's your
reaction to the attention. I mean, obviously now the left

(01:19:22):
wing members of the US national soccer team women's team
are getting all kinds of attention. I'm not even sure
that is Rapino even one of the best players. I
have no idea, but she's certainly the most famous. Right now,
what do you think of people that think that that
feel pride at kneeling during the anthem? I guess I
think the first question that I have to ask is, so,

(01:19:45):
why are you playing for the US soccer team If
you're going to kneel during the national anthem? I just
have to wonder, well, why are you playing for the
team to begin with? There's so much shame in what
we do in the national anthem, and why do we
not just immediately say, great, your job here is over.
If you can't respect the flag, if you can't respect

(01:20:06):
the national anthem. I think it's pretty cut and dry.
For me. It's black and white. Doesn't make sense that
she even plays for the team. Yeah, I have to
wonder at what point does anti Americanism conflict with representing
America on the world stage as as an athlete. Everyone
gets all confused here about the First Amendment. The First
Amendment doesn't mean that you can say whatever you want

(01:20:26):
and no one else can take action based upon It
just means the government can't take action, right, Yeah, it
doesn't it really doesn't make sense to me. I think
this is kind of a from my perspective, I think
this is just a way for people to garner attention
at this point, right, So they're wanting to try to
gather some form of attention from the progressive left and

(01:20:47):
you know, to pedestal themselves into some heroic position where
in allectuality. It's just kind of idiotic. So, like the
entire thing from her perspective, just seems a little bit
when I see this, it's controversial and it seems exploitive
to me. Yeah, I gotta say, there's all the whole

(01:21:08):
equal pay thing. We've already we've been going over that
on the show quite a bit. They get unequal pay
in their favor actually, So I don't know what at
what point do people have to face up to that reality.
But I also, you know, I didn't get a chance
on the show to speak about a controversy from just
a just a few what was it just a few
days ago now, where you had a number of a

(01:21:30):
Starbucks barista asked police officers to leave because the barista
this was in Phoenix, did not feel safe as a
result of officers being there. This strikes me as as
as a new phenomenon really or newer where now it's
not even just blaming cops whenever there's a situation with
use of force involved, but cops now create their own

(01:21:53):
feeling of unsafeness among some of the woke crowd. This
is a surprise. This is uh, you know, I it's
it's a surprise that there's a certain portion of me
where I think this is just part of the progressive
left narrative right there. They're they're they're gathering support, and

(01:22:14):
what they do is they inflate these incidents. And when
I say this, you know, the overwhelming statistic with support
that police officers, among all of their interactions with the
public are overwhelmingly positive. They protect and serve America every day. Uh.
The amount of corruption within law enforcement is is really
insignificant compared to other places in the world. And this

(01:22:37):
to me seems it just emphasizes this cultural divide between
uh we could say on the on the left and
the right, and the cultural divide between companies. And that's
why I always say we have to vote with our dollars.
We have to support the companies that support the people
and the things that we believe in Uh, this just

(01:22:58):
exaggerates and as an exam ample of how Starbucks and
other corporations they're they're not publicly as they did last
year year before. You know, they shut down their stores
for sensitivity training when they when they kicked out to
unpaying patrons. And for me, I'm looking out at saying

(01:23:20):
that's that's fantastic that we did that two years ago.
But where are and why are we not shutting down
your stores now for sensitivity training towards police officers. And
I think what it is is it just shows that
there's a big divide culturally and corporations in America and
those that are patriotic and support law enforcement, military and

(01:23:42):
those that really don't. They just pay lip service and
they support a very progressive narrative within their companies and
then outward facing. Two. Yeah, and part of your brand
promise that Black Rifle Coffee is support for the veteran
and first responder in law enforcement community. So at least
people can stop in a Black Rifle store and know

(01:24:02):
that no one's going to say that they feel unsafe
because there are cops there. No we you know, the
funny thing is we have I just walked in through
my coffee shop today here in Salt Lake. There were
two soldiers and a law enforcement officer literally standing at
the front door. When I say that there, they were
talking in front of the shop. I sat and had

(01:24:24):
a small conversation before I went in. There are law
enforcement and military officers here every day, and it's part
of our ethos, it's part of who we are. What
I say is it's it's it's not pr it's who
we are. And there's no person in Black Rifle that
would ever think that would be It would be incomprehendable
for them to think that they should ever ask a

(01:24:44):
police officer to leave because a customer feels unsafe. We
would ask the customer to leave before we ever we
ever had that idea to tell a police officer, a
group of police officers to leave. It's it's really unimaginable
to me. And one question I want to just throw
to you, Evan before let you get back to running
the Black Rifle Empire. I've had I had on our

(01:25:08):
mutual friend Tyler Merritt from nine Line to tell me
what he thought about the Eddie Gallagher you know, near
exoneration or at least you know the the beating all
but the most minor single charge of all the charges
against him. What was your take on that whole situation?
It seemed to a lot of outside observers, people who
don't have a mill background, they see this, they say,

(01:25:28):
there are guys from within his own unit speaking out
against him. The press seemed to be trying him before
the facts even came out. Just what was your take
on the whole Eddie Gallagher Navy Seal prosecution. You know,
before and during I really had a lot of faith
in the process. I felt like, whether you know guilty

(01:25:48):
or innocent, the process will work. And I think that
I was right, which was I didn't know enough about
the situation in order to weigh in on it. And
when I read through it, and I read a lot
of the articles and I listened to a lot of
podcasts on it, the problem was it was so gray.

(01:26:09):
And when I say that, you had a lot of
people from his teams that were speaking out against and
then there are a lot of guys from his past
and his current teams that were pro So for me,
I'm looking at it saying, you know what, I really
think the process will prove his innocence or his guilt

(01:26:30):
and the process worked. You know, this is part of
what makes the country great. We've got a fairly comprehensive
process for people that should be innocent until proven guilty,
and they are. I think this is one of the
cases where once again I think the media, especially the
left and progressive media, they're hungry to try people in

(01:26:54):
the public eye, put information out that open only excused
public opinion and can tarnished the reputation of special operations
the United States military. I think this is part of
the media agenda. Now that's not me being a conspiracy theorist.
I think this is the way the progressive left. I
think this is the way they think they want to

(01:27:15):
tarnish the reputation of the American service member, the American
involvement in some of these foreign countries, and they want this.
They're hungry to see something that isn't there. And this
is just one for instance where I think the process
worked in favor of the person that was innocent. I mean,
any black Rifle initiatives or in black Rifle coffee events

(01:27:38):
coming up you want to tell the audience about, yeah, absolutely,
through the twelfth you know what we did is in
everyday here at Black Rifle, we give free coffee law
enforcement anytime they walk through the doors. Law enforce and
military personnel, they're always welcome, they always get free coffee.
We're doing a buy back, give a back initiative right now,
which is you buy back coffee from Black Rifle. We're

(01:28:00):
shipping out to all fifty states local federal law enforcement.
Keep them caffeinated, keep them working, keep him out on
the street, protecting us, serving America and all our communities.
So we're trying to donate as much coffee as we
can to the American law enforcement community on the next
all the way through the end of the week, so
all the way through the twelfth All right, Evan, Hey

(01:28:21):
for everybody, CEO of Black Rifle Coffee Special Operations, Veteran Evan,
thanks so much, my friend. Always good to have you
on the show. Great, great to be here. Thanks a lot, Buck,
I appreciate a lot. All right, team, we'll be right back.
There are some controversies that are so stupid it's hard
to believe that anyone really thinks that they're worthy of attention.
But now, because we live in an era of the

(01:28:45):
hyper politicization of all things, always and all the time.
Sure enough air conditioning, my friends, that's right, Your AC
unit is an instrument of oppression and the patriarchy. I
kid you not. This got some attention over the Fourth

(01:29:07):
of July holiday because there and this is not the
first time. This stretches back for a while people are
saying that air conditioning is sexist? Do Americans need air conditioning?
An article in The New York Times asked by Penelope
Green right before Fourth of July, and then Jacobin Magazine,

(01:29:29):
which is far left, rights freezing workers of the world unite.
Millions of you are suffering and overly air conditioned workplaces
right now. Remember this isn't about remembering to wear an
extra sweater at work. It's class war. Workers should be
in control of office temperatures, not bosses. How much how
much crazier are things going to get before there's a

(01:29:52):
recognition that we don't really we don't really need to
do this anymore, that this doesn't need to be a thing,
That we don't have to accept the politicization of everything
and at all times, um, I gotta tell you, they
really believe this, you know, you may, I can. I

(01:30:13):
can make a lot of jokes about this, but here
we go, Taylor and I will Taylor Lorenz. Who's at
the Daily Beast, I think, which is like woke woke
dot com. I mean it's just all Oh no, she's
at The Atlantic. I'm sorry, I don't know, which is
also woke dot com. She tweeted out that air conditioning
is unhealthy, bad, miserable, and sexist, and that's got a

(01:30:37):
lot of attention. Why is air conditioning sexist? Let's break
this down, folks, because men prefer a cooler temperature and
women prefer it warmer, mostly because of their office appropriate
dress code, office appropriate attire. And I can tell you
this first of all, men having to wear suits in
the summer is cruel and unusual. It's it's our verse

(01:31:00):
having to wear high heels, and we don't want to.
I'm just telling you there is no such thing as
a summer suit. It is a lie. It does not exist.
Any suit that claims to be a summer suit. When
you're in the sun, trust me. You start sweating uncontrol.
I don't care if it's sear, sucker, I don't care
if it's linen. You're gonna sweat, sweat and sweat some more.
All right, So, so start with that air conditioning is

(01:31:24):
the only thing that will make you, when you're wearing
a suit in summertime, be reasonably comfortable. And I'm sorry, ladies,
but you know, pardon me for being an agent of
the patriarchy here, but if you are cold, putting on
a sweatshirt is an option. If you're a dude wearing
slacks and a blazer, or even slacks in a long
long shirt, you what are your options? Are we allowed

(01:31:46):
to walk around in our undershirts. It's really hard. It's
really hard to layer down. It's very easy to layer up.
And this, this idea that an air and an unair
conditioned is something that in a lot of the country
you would want. This is crazy, all right, this is
completely I mean, producer, Mike, it's a nice what is it.

(01:32:07):
It's like sixty eight there in the New York office.
That's the way it should be. This is crazy. You know,
there was a power outage in my building in DC recently.
We had no AC overnight. And I tell you it's
hard to sleep when it's ninety degrees outside and you
have no air conditioning inside. This is crazy. But this
is more than anything else. It's just a reminder that
people want to make everything political all the time, and

(01:32:28):
saying that it's sexist is just being whiny. All right.
The appropriate response to offices or air conditioned is I
will wear a sweater or a sweatshirt or another layer
and not be cold. I don't because what else are
we gonna do. Also, if you're a little cold, you
can still function. If you are sitting at a desk

(01:32:49):
hot and sweaty and dripping with sweat, you can't do it. Mark,
Am I right? Or am I right? I mean I'm
a large, sweaty individual. Without air conditioning, I'd probably die. Right.
Air Conditioning has made whole parts of the air Conditioning
is a wonderful invention, made a whole parts of the
world much more pleasant and inhabitable, and by the way,

(01:33:09):
has saved especially when you factor in elderly people who
will sometimes be in a home that can get very,
very very hot, and they can overheat and die. Air Conditioning,
this is not a joke, has saved thousands, perhaps tens
of thousands of lives a year globally. Okay, So you know,
if anybody doesn't realize this, go back and look at
how many people died from the heat wave in France.

(01:33:33):
Let me see if I can actually pull up the
stat for you real quickly. Heatwave France debts. It was, yeah,
the two thousand and three European heat wave. People said,
I mean this is they said, fifteen thousand debts is
what it says here, all right, that's just from one
heatwave in Europe. Air conditioning prevents that from happening all
the time, folks. So the war on AC, just like

(01:33:55):
the war on CO two, is something that people can
only believe who are self righteous, sanctimonious and don't really
understand how things work. It is not the patriarchy. I
know some ladies, by the way, who like it nice
and cold and like the AC on. So I don't
know how this becomes a sexist thing. But you know,
whenever you want to make an argument now on the
left and you want to try to get a leg up,

(01:34:16):
you want to get an advantage, just make it about
some is m somewhere right, sexism or the or the patriarchy.
I don't think so. Hey, Team Buck, it's time for
roll Call Rollall's where the roll gets called Facebook dot Com.

(01:34:51):
Slash Buck Sexton producer Minke can we can we set
up an email account at buck Sex and dot com
that we can actually start using for the show. People
keep asking and I keep saying, we'll do it, We'll
do it. Yeah, man, can we do that. Let's do that.
That would be a smart so people can email because
not everyone wants to Facebook. And now that we're actually
thinking about alternative platforms to Facebook, I feel like, yeah,

(01:35:12):
we're also actually working on I know you know this.
We're working on your website too and putting additional content
up at bucksex and dot com so we can put
we can put something up there too, So look for
that in your future. Makes all the magic happen, folks.
He's the guy. He's the guy that's making it happen.
I'm just the guy that blabs on the radio. You
gotta talk producer Mike if you want things to change
on the site, on the platforms, so fill his inbox

(01:35:32):
so to speak, Facebook, dot com, slashbuck Sex. It all right,
here we go, Josh, Hey Buck, thanks for the words
and remembrance for the late Ross Perot as he is
a man that I greatly respect and followed When I
was a young boy gaining an interest in history and politics.
One of my favorite memories in elementary school was holding
a mock election where we actually voted on the same
equipment our parents would vote for. The first man I

(01:35:56):
ever cast a ballot for would have been Ross p
Thanks for all you do and have been listening to you,
by the way, since the Blaze days. Also, can you
look into issues in the Blaze Radio where sometimes your
show is unable to stream and all I hear is
commercials during the show. Josh, Well, Jess, thanks for being
with me since Blaze days. And as for the platform there,

(01:36:17):
I'll have to write them an email and say, hey, guys,
what's going on. I'm not really sure. I gotta go
down to visit my old buddy Glenn and Dallas. It's
been a while. I gotta go check on the Glenster
see how he's doing. And Yeah, as to Ross Pero,
I totally appreciate what you wrote in Josh, and I
saw some stuff today about how the last political act

(01:36:38):
that Ross Perot did was to write and I can't
verify this beyond social media, but it's it rings true
and if it's wrong, I'll correct it. But I saw
that Ross Perot wrote check for Trump twenty twenty for
the maximum amount, because I understand it that was one
of the things so so Ross Perot was apparently on
board the Trump training. Interesting stuff, Chris, Right here we go.

(01:37:07):
Whoa hey Buck, longtime podcaster, But I have to say
your way off regarding the father to call the police
the guy tailgating in whose apartment building? I'm no security expert,
but I know enough about that tailgating that it is
among the most most difficult security vulnerabilities for building complexes.
Most people are nice and just let whoever through making

(01:37:29):
the whole system irrelevant. Basic questioning and a call to
the police is the right move. If your building doesn't
have dedicated security staff, especially in a city with the
highest concentration of people googling Amazon package stolen, everyone into
company or apartment building needs to be security minded. An
eye for one would feel safer knowing that this man
was among my neighbors. However, most people won't see it

(01:37:51):
that way. After all, a sheep dog looks a lot
like a wolf. You also know this guy maybe having
a bad day, but rather his father was killed several
years ago by another person trying to enter a residence. Really,
that doesn't change anything about whether you should or shouldn't
have responded as you did, but it's but it speaks
to what you're saying about cutting in some slack. When

(01:38:12):
you walk into or out of a building, make sure
everyone buzzes in and keep your shields high. Well, let
me see this. This is very very interesting. Slain Berkeley
man's famili says police share blame. Berkeley police, this is
a This is a San Francisco chronicle from October twenty,

(01:38:34):
twenty thirteen. Berkeley police or probably to blame for slaying
of a man who was bludgeoned by a mentally disturbed person,
the victim's family said Friday, because officers weren't allowed to
respond to his emergency call for help. The two grown
sons of Peter Kukor sixty seven criticize the police department
for failing to respond to their father's call for help

(01:38:56):
about an intruder on his property. No that he had
called the number that police described on their website as
an emergency line. I'm aware that police have stated they
made no mistake and responded to my father's call for help.
Christopher Kukor, thirty seven s that at a news conference,
we find this very disturbing. No officers showed up before

(01:39:17):
Peter Kucorps was killed in the driveway of his home
on Park Gate in the Berkeley Hills the night of
February eighteenth. The department said it was responding only to
emergency calls as it deployed officers to what turned out
to be a small occupy march. Let's see here, I'm
trying to find out more. How do we know that?

(01:39:41):
Here we go? Victims widow devastated Peter Kucorps widow Andrew Kucorps. Sorry,
I don't know how to pronounce this last name. C
U k O R. Phone nine one one. His attack
was in progress. Peter, who was one attack, called the
police at a forty five PM. Told the dispatcher there
was a young man hanging around my property, acting strangely.
He's looking for someone named Zoe. He's pretty spacey, Kukor

(01:40:05):
told the dispatcher. He says that he lives here. He
wants to come in, which is very strange. I'd like
an officer up here right away. M residence in danger,
Kukor said. Friday. Police never told his father the call
is classified as a lower priority, he said, so how
do we know how do we know that this was
the guy's father. That's very interesting and I'm just I'm

(01:40:29):
just going on what we have here from our our
member of the team who has written in on this one.
But it is a very very very interesting to note
that this may have been what's going on here. I
did not did not have this. Certainly, this is what
Chris is telling me. He's provided all these links. So Chris,

(01:40:50):
I will take your facts as as presented right now.
That is certainly noteworthy that if this individual's father was
killed by an intruder on his property some years ago.
I don't see where the because this guy wasn't identified
in the video from what I understand. But look, I
try to be even handed or or fair minded in
my analysis of the situation. I do think that people

(01:41:13):
tailgate and get into a building is a problem. But
I also think that this guy who was the father
confronting that individual needs to be he needs to be
aware of all of the optics, the dynamics of the situation.
That guy clearly could have said I'm here to see
somebody in three g here's a person's name, but he

(01:41:35):
turned it. You know, he set the guy up by
turning on the video and saying, you know, why why
should I not be here? And look it was It's
a difficult situation, and I understand that you can feel
a little bit like what am I really going to
do here? I mean, I told you myself that I
remember feeling a little a little sheepish after I saw
It's a classic scam that's often run in New York City,

(01:41:58):
among other cities, where someone will come up to you
and say what's your name, and they'll have a CD
in their hand, and you just say what your name is,
and they'll write the name on the CD, and then
they'll want fifteen dollars for some CD and they'll say, oh,
I just autographed my newest, my newest album for you.
And if you won't give them fifteen dollars for a
CD that's obviously worth nothing to you, then you have

(01:42:18):
a problem. I saw some tourists. I saw that happening
in New York. This is a couple of years ago,
and I thought about intervening. But the truth is, all
that has to happen is that kid. Then you know,
if he starts a hey, he was a he was
a minority youth, If i'd say about twenty years of age.
All that he has to say is that this that
this guy who had nothing to do with me, had
nothing to do with anything, was, you know, said something

(01:42:41):
racist or I'm just trying to make money as as
an as an artist and I don't know why this guy,
you know, And now I've got a problem right now.
Now I'm the bad guy, even though I know exactly
what's happening, which is a scam. I mean, they're scamming
tourists in my hometown, which I hate. I hate people
who scam tourists. It's disgusting. So, you know, but it's
a tough situation. You intervene, and now all of a sudden,

(01:43:01):
you know, what's the story? What's the narrative really going
to be? You know, if you tell somebody who's walking
into the building, hey, you know why, you know, I
would have to ask, does this guy does the father
say for everybody who walks in the building, who are
you here to see? Or only does he only make
that determination for certain people? You know, this is where
it starts to get tricky, folks. But I understand there's

(01:43:23):
a lot of different dynamics there. And yeah, package thievery
happens all the time, and it's a terrible thing. It's
really annoying it. You know, it happens particularly in buildings
where there's no real security. So and that's why you
need to get the cameras that we talk about here
on the show. That's right, we advertise cameras to help
you deal with package thievery. You gotta get ready for
that live read coming up. But Chris, look, I appreciate

(01:43:45):
your opinion. Very interesting that you gave me that these
links here from the San Francisco Chronicle on this, and
I know that there's a there's a sense of lawlessness.
Especially I was just talking today to somebody about what's
going on in Santa Monica, California, and the situation there
is the Metro from downtown LA is now dropping all

(01:44:06):
these vagrants in Santa Monica, which is the last stop
on this public transit line, and they're living on the
beach now. So the the most expensive per square foot
place to rent a home in Los Angeles is actually
Santa Monica. And I would have thought it's Beverly Hills.
Apparently at Santa Monica, and now you have homeless encampments
on the beach there and San Francisco. I mean, the

(01:44:27):
Los Angeles City Council doesn't want to do anything about
it because what are they gonna do? Well, Team, obviously,
I got a little fired up about this stuff. But
let's see one ware here, Ksey, so I married an
axe murderer. If it's not Scottish, it's crap. Buck. You
make me laugh. On another note, does anyone besides me

(01:44:48):
see the absolute idiocies of a left in their day
to day life? For instance, I have one in particular
that as prope and borders, but the other hand wants
a reservation to be off limits to non native persons
because it's quote their land. It's even made mention that
she wants to see a barrier and a patrol unit
in place to enforce it. Keep doing what you're doing,
sepify you or die and she'ld tie. All right, Casey,

(01:45:09):
thanks so much, man. I appreciate you riding in. I'm
glad i'll be able to give you a chuckle. It's
certainly one of my goals here on the show, and
I'll try to try to keep it up as much
as I can. Team. This has been a fantastic broadcast.
Of the buck Section show. Hope you have enjoyed it.
Please come back tomorrow. Tell a friend say hey, come
join the Freedom Hut. It's easy, it's free, it's fun.
Until then, shield Ti