The Tyranny Of The China Colluding Ruling Class

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Ransomware these days, as you know, is a huge problem,
and there's just a story to day in the daily
mail about a massive hack of Amazon, Gmail accounts, all
kinds of your most sensitive information. Do you want to
just trust this stuff to big tech corporations that aren't
liable to you If they lose your data, there's a problem.

(00:20):
It's too bad. You need to start taking action now
yourself to protect your most sensitive information. That's why you
need Secure all right. Sek you Are. It's the one
hundred percent privacy and security focused instant messaging and email
platform located in Switzerland. That's the country where the world's

(00:43):
strictest data privacy laws are applied. Secure sek you Are
is held by privacy advocates globally in the assurance that
their data is kept truly safe by proprietary technology, independent
platform and military grade encryption methods. Your data is yours alone.
Secure does not data mine, use, or sell your data.

(01:05):
Experience the bliss of knowing that your privacy is not
in jeopardy from the prying hands of big tech, and
that you have a greater degree of security than people
who are getting their stuff hacked these days. Go with
Secure sekure dot com. Use the coupon code buck for
one week free and twenty five percent off. Be sure

(01:27):
to use that coupon code buck when you go to
secure seku are dot com. Regain your privacy, protect yourself online.
You're in the freedom hunt. Thanks for listening to The
Buck Sexton Show podcast. Get the latest from Buckhead buck
Sexton dot com. Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. This

(01:49):
is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, and it's always
an honor and privilege to fill his big shoes and
talk to you this incredible, patriotic, amazing American audience. And
we've got a heck of a week for you. And
I think the running theme of this week is that
we're going to touch on all the third rails that
you can't talk about. On China and our ruling class,

(02:11):
is collusion with it, the fraud of wokeism, and on
racism masquerading as anti racism, on election integrity questions you're
not supposed to be able to ask, around the origins
of the coronavirus, and on and on, And I think
the running theme is going to be, ultimately, when we
look back on it, the Commanding Heights of society, the
ruling class wanting to dominate every aspect of your life,

(02:32):
to increase its power, grow its wealth, and its privilege,
and to shut you up and to try to shunt
you out of American life. And we're not going to
let that happen to this country. We're going to defend
the American way of life. So I was so amped
up yesterday that I didn't formally introduce myself. So if
you haven't heard me as a guest hosting this program before,

(02:53):
my name is Ben Weingarten. I'm deputy editor of Real
Clear Investigations, a senior contributor at The Federalist, and you
can also read me in places like news Week and
Epic Times. Last year I came out with my first book,
American Ingrate, ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamist of the
Takeover of the Democratic Party, which predicted the radicalism that
we're seeing on display from the right, from the White

(03:13):
House on down to grade schools across this country. Today,
you can follow me on Twitter at b H. Winegarden
and keep up with my work at Winegarden dot substack
dot com and before we jump in today. Also worth
noting the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show will start
next Monday at New and Eastern Time, and Jesse Kelly

(03:34):
will be replacing Bucks six pm time swout the following Monday,
on June twenty eighth. So today's program, we're gonna have
a few great guests talking about allegations of election fraud
in Georgia with Paul Sperry, the decline of New York
and what its implications are for America with Seth Baron,
author of a great new book on that subject, and
then also a little bit of a news you can

(03:56):
use how to fight back against the wokeism pervading every
aspect of our society today. Because it's so imperative to
not just be negative and not just assess and observe
what appears to be this ongoing onslaught that's unstoppable. It's
imperative that we actually fight back in an affirmative way,
in the same way that a Chris Rufo fights back

(04:17):
with critical race theory, or a Governor Ronda Santis fights
back against wokeism in all of its forms within his state.
It's time to go on offense with that. Let's talk
a little bit first about the onslaught that we face,
and I alluded to this yesterday in talking about what
we have on display at the G seven and beyond

(04:38):
in this wild European vacation for putative President Joe Biden,
the sort of weekend at Biden presidency. We have a decadent, dying,
self loathing ruling class, and it exposes itself to be
the charade that it is every single day. Yesterday, the
big news from bumbling President Biden's euro Pan trip was

(05:01):
his speaking with NATO officials and NATO for one of
the first times recognize the problem of China. But what
did it say about China in this resolution or communicate
that it came to it said this in part, China
stated ambitions and assertive behavior presents systemic challenges to the
rules based international order and to areas relevant to Alliance security.

(05:26):
We are concerned those coercive policies which stand in contrast
to the fundamental values and trine in the Washington Treaty.
It's rapidly it's expanding its nuclear arsenal with more warheads
and a larger number of sophisticated delivery systems to establish
a nuclear triad. It goes on to talk about military
civil fusion strategy. Essentially that everything is part of the
Chinese Communist Party strategy for dominance, and it talks about

(05:49):
its cooperation militarily of course, with Russia and beyond. We
remain concerned with China's frequent lack of transparency and use
of disinformation. We call in China uphold its international commitments
and to act responsively in the international system, including the space,
cyber and maritime domains, and keeping with its role as
a major power. It's not worth the paper that it's
printed on. That's the real takeaway from quotes like that.

(06:10):
We're talking decades into china strategy to be the dominant
world power, to no longer buy it its time and
hide its capabilities, but actively aggressively engaging in every single domain,
to be the dominant player in the world, and all
of a sudden, now NATO recognizes it, and this is
what it claims the threat is. And then it goes
on to say NATO maintains a constructive dialogue with China

(06:32):
where possible. We welcome opportunities to engage with China and
areas of relevance to the Alliance and to common challenges
such as climate change. With the world's largest polluter, who
you know, will cheat on any kind of deal you
ever come to on environmentalism, who lies, cheats and steals
as a regular practice, who never lives up to its
international commitments. But let's have a constructive dialogue where possible,

(06:57):
engaging with China, with China's higher strategy to become a
dominant world power, and our globalist elite have been addicted
to that engagement because they think they're going to enrich
themselves off of it, or they think China's going to
be the dominant power and better to cowtown now rather
than later, thinking that ultimately they won't get their heads
chopped off by the Chinese Communist Party statement again not

(07:19):
worth the paper it's printed on. Allies urged China to
engage meaningfully and dialogue confidence voting in transparency measures regarding
its nuclear capabilities in doctrine, reciprocal transparency and understanding would
benefit both NATO and China. I mean, it's such a joke.
How do they even write this stuff? Who even thinks
this stuff up? And how much must they be laughing

(07:39):
in Beijing about statements like this while the onslaught to
be the dominant world power continues apace, and oh, by
the way, we've just self, we've just destroyed ourselves, committed
suicide for more than twelve months as a consequence of
something that almost assured We came from a virology lab
in Wuhan where there was military research going on. And
we know, by the way that China, of course, has

(08:02):
been keenly interested in bioweaponry and biowarfare in its doctrine,
in its own rhetoric and statements for years. But what
does NATO's General secretary say in a comment in response
to I guess this portion of the communicate, China is
not our adversary, but the balance of power is shifting.

(08:23):
China's not our adversary. Oh my god, you're talking about
the General secretary of NATO. China's not our adversary. In
twenty twenty one, is there any greater measure of how
out to lunch the elite are, or that they're just
lying through their teeth and they know it to be so,
and they can't admit it either fear it or again
they're trying to coo taw to their future masters. And

(08:47):
where's the Biden administration in all this? Here's what it
had to say according to the Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece
the Global Times. Recently, according to the China Central Television,
Anthony Blincoln, Secretary of States, so that the recent series
of contacts between the US and China are beneficial to

(09:07):
bilateral relations, and the US is looking forward to increasing
contact and exchanges with China at all levels. Think about
the insanity of that. You're talking about the regime that
wants to be the dominant power on the earth to
supplant the United States, that in their own rhetoric and
in their own doctrine puts America as the number one enemy.

(09:29):
And according to the CCP mouthpiece, US is looking forward
to increasing contact and exchanges with China at all levels.
Even if you don't believe them. Where's the Biden administration
saying no, Where's the Biden administration saying We're going to
cut off all ties. We are going to unplug, disconnect
from the Chinese Communist Party in every strategically significant area

(09:50):
and beyond because it poses a threat, and it lays
out the threat to us every single day in word
and deed. The fact that you don't see that tells
everything you need to know about how compromised, our so
called ruling class is and meanwhile with a great uniter
who refrains from me and tweets just propagandized against half

(10:14):
the country in front of foreign leaders on foreign soil.
Let's go to cut it. The Republican Party is vastly
diminished in numbers, The leadership of the Republican Party is fractured,
and the Trump wing of the party is the bulk

(10:36):
of the party. But it makes up a significant minority
of the American people. And we'll see significant minority of
the American people seventy four million voters, yep. Significant minority
not to be listened to. We're probably going to call
a decent percentage of them would be your actual domestic terrorists.
And we'll talk a little bit later actually about the
new National Domestic Terrorism Strategy that the administration just put

(10:57):
out today. There used to be a rule, you know,
for the people who talk about norms and standards, There
was a rule that domestic politics ends at the water's edge.
So what does Joe Biden do? Swamp creature par excellance,
with fifty years doing this in Washington, DC, being the
quintessential Washington establishmentarian, goes overseas and attacks roughly half the country.

(11:27):
He doesn't know how wrong he is about where the
Republican Party is, where the voters are. Excuse me, because
the leadership may not be there, but we're there. We
see everything for what it is when it comes to
our establishment, the uniparty establishment in many cases, and it's
total discussed and distaste for us. So we got a

(11:47):
couple of minutes left before we take a break. But
I want to delve deeper into the China theme because
it perfectly encapsulates the entire insanity of our ruling class
and how it leverages crises to both protect itself and
ultimately again of course, to assume more power. And let

(12:11):
me preview that with this are the benighted New York
Times yesterday got around to doing some more incremental reporting
on the Wuhan lab leak theory, and it spoke to
the so called bat lady or batwoman. She's angry the virologist.
There a quote briefly from the article doctor she has
denied accusations about Lableek and now finds herself defending the

(12:34):
reputation of her lab and by extension, that of her
country reached on her cell phone last week. Doctor She
said at first that she preferred not to speak directly
with the reporter, citing her institute's policies. Yet she could
barely contain her frustration. How on earth can I offer
up evidence for something where there is no evidence, she said,
her voice rising in anger during the brief, unscheduled conversation.
I don't know how the world has come to this,

(12:54):
constantly pouring filth on an innocent scientist, she wrote in
a text message, because she's the victim here. In a
rare interview over email, she denounced the suspicions as baseless,
including the allegations that several of her colleagues may have
been ill before the outbreak emerged. The speculation boils down
to one central question. Did Doctor She's lab one Institute
of Virology hold any source of the new coronavirus before

(13:15):
the pandemic erupted. Doctor She's answer is an emphatic no.
This was printed as if this was crusading journalism, But
you're talking about someone who in effects serves the Chinese
Communist Party, and The Times goes on to say she's
not a member of the party, which is sort of
hard to understand. Everyone there is effectively subservient to the CCP.
If you don't think that those words were dictated to her,

(13:37):
that she was prepared for response, and that she would
love to give this response to New York Times and
have them print it, then you haven't been You don't
understand the adversary that we're dealing with, and of course
all of you do, but the New York Times prints
this up as if this is legit. And when we
come back, I want to talk about why lab leak
is so important and goes so far beyond just this

(13:57):
pandemic and all the knock on effects of this pandemic backraction.
And before the break we were talking about lab leak
and it's greater significance. So why is it so important
to figure out the origins of the coronavirus? This is obvious,
but it's worth stating. First of all, it's imperative to
know the truth about what China's efforts were. It's also

(14:18):
imperative to know the truth about who on the US
side or what institutions on the US side were complicit.
And the reason it's so important is because if you
want to have any justice, if you want to ensure
this never happens again. If you want to deter malign
behavior or incompetent behavior or something else related to it,
you better get to the bottom of what transpired here.

(14:39):
But of course we're talking months and months later, and
as I said yesterday, the smoking guns are already dead
and buried, potentially literally in some cases when we talk
about potential whistleblowers here. What the whole lab leak situation
and the origins of this coronavirus boils down to is
a broader theme of China's adversarial nature and the way
it's embedded and insinuated itself into every aspect of Western

(15:02):
society and the globalist project too, essentially in effect transfer
our wealth, our technology, and our power over to China.
How do I tie that to the coronavirus? Will consider
all the scandals that had to basically come together and
conspire together to end up in a place where a
leak in China would lead us to destroy ourselves here,

(15:23):
or a potential leak in China at the very least
you had a government scandal. It appears in terms of
the money flows into the one Hun Institute of Virology,
and then also the internal deliberations around not wanting to
get to the bottom of lab Leak, because God forbid
it would give credence to President Trump. You have the
public health scandal of Fauci and others, not only in

(15:44):
terms of their relations with these Chinese virologists and beyond
and the money flows, but also of course the assinine
nature of the policies. Don't wear any mask, then wear
sixty masks on your face, social distancing six feet figured
out with their thumb in the air essentially, and on
on and on lockdowns which have never been tried in
the past, and we know that there's basically been no
differences and in some cases even much better superior performance

(16:07):
in terms of public health in places that didn't shut
down nearly to the degree of our most draconian cities
and jurisdictions across the country. There's a medical journal scandal
which has barely even talked about, which I'll delve into briefly.
And then of course there's the media scandal about we
can't look into lab leak, we needn't. We can't take
as legitimate or acceptable anything from Trump or Pompeo or
Cotton and beyond. The medical journal part of this is

(16:29):
really worth noting briefly, and Melissa Chen of The Spectator
put out a must read Twitter thread on this which
I'll share briefly from. She's looking at an article in
the Great publication Unheard, and she notes the media's culpability
in suppressing lab leak is obvious, but a larger share
of the blame falls upon science journal reviewers and publishers,

(16:50):
the scientific establishment. They shut down discussion and discredited alternatives.
And this article from Unheard quote scientists talking about the
fact that the medical journals themselves are partially responsible for
the cover up, which goes to my point yesterday about
the fact that even public health is being corrupted effectively
by politics. The article says the Paris Group, for instance,
submitted a letter to the Lancet in early January, signed

(17:12):
by fourteen experts from around the world that's January twenty twenty,
calling for an open debate arguing that natural origin is
not supported by conclusive arguments and that a lab origin
cannot be formally discarded. This does seem contentious, but it
was rejected on the basis it was not a priority
for us, according to the Lancet. When the authors queered
the decision, it was reassessed and returned without peer review

(17:34):
by the editor in chief there and told to let
this go. She goes on to say, Melissa Chen, tweeting
the grant makers, the NIH, the science journals, the scientists experts,
all of their incentives to tell the truth are misaligned.
It's a giant racket and they, like all bureaucrats, have
only one goal to maximize the potency of de bureaucracy.
But it's not just that. No, it's not just that

(17:55):
there's a China tie in here as well. While there
were personal and institutional interest to protect, Chen goes on,
there might be something else, Just like in Hollywood, the
need to appease Chinese commercial interests might be at play here.
China's the biggest national sponsor of publishers that produced these journals.
Did you know that? Allegation swirled that it was not

(18:16):
down to editorial miss judgment, but something more sinister, says unheard,
a desire to appease China for commercial reasons. Financial Times
revealed four years ago that debt lead in Springer Nature,
the German group that publishes Nature, was blocking access in China.
The hundreds of academic articles mentioning subjects deemed sensitive by Beijing,
such as Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Tibet. China is also
spending lavishly around the world to win supremacy in science,

(18:38):
which includes becoming the biggest national sponsor of open access
journals published by both Springer Nature and Elvesier, owner of
the Lancet Corporate links to China compromise output into sort agendas,
especially investigating something as sensitive as the origins of the coronavirus,
and it goes on to detail more of it. So
we're going to run out of time here in this

(18:58):
opening monologue and we'll turn back to this a little
bit later, but it's worth knowing that at every single
level with respect to Lableek and the coronavirus and beyond,
there's direct or indirect complicity and effect collusion between the
West and the Chinese Communist Party that made this infinitely
more bad than it could be, and our ruling class
used it to try to use surp more power and

(19:20):
take it away from you and expand its privilege. We'll
talk about that a little bit more coming up later
in the program. This ben one Garden for buck Sex
and on the buck Sex and show back right after this,
even with all the craziness going on from the Democrats
in terms of spending and economic regulation these days, there's
going to be a surge in the stock market. According
to my friends at Carnival Trading. I know could be

(19:41):
a surprise to you, but there are some key indicators
that Carnival Trading is picked up on, and they think
some of the biggest profits are going to come in
sectors that a lot of Wall Street experts miss. You
see Carnival Trading as an elite squad of strategists who
influence major Wall Street investors, and when you subscribe at Carnivore,
you'll receive real time text alerts of explosive trades they're

(20:02):
making for their elite clients. You can mirror their trades
with your discount broker or pass. Why would you pass
when their trades routinely crushed the S and P five hundred,
and they guarantee you'll earn five times your monthly subscription
or double your money back five x your monthly feet
just by mirroring their trades. The market looks to be
on the verge of a massive upswing. Get off the
sidelines and mirror Carnivorous trades right now you'll get two

(20:25):
weeks free visit get our trades dot com. That's right,
get our Trades dot com. Make sure you use promo
code buck. Just go to this website get our Trades
dot Com promo code Buck. See website for guarantee terms
and conditions. Pass performance is not a guarantee of future earnings.
Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben
Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, And in my opening monologue today,

(20:50):
I talked a little bit about the exploitation in every
respect of not just the coronavirus but by a rolling
class but lab Leak itself, and how sort of crystallized
or was a microcosm of the general ruling class onslaught
that we face. And one of the ways, of course
that the coronavirus was leveraged is in how we run

(21:10):
our elections in twenty twenty, which to a series of
a slew of dramatic measures that essentially brought us as
far away as we've ever been from voting on a
singular election day, showing a signature at a location in
a verifiable and at least facially above board sort of manner,
And one of the people who has been digging into

(21:32):
potential abnormality is associated with the twenty twenty election, a
third rail that a ruling class does not want anyone
to touch. And by the way, it's worth noting that
when I produced a podcast on this for the Claremont Institute,
YouTube actually took it down because we dared to just
raise the most basic questions regarding election integrity in twenty
twenty and the legitimacy of twenty twenty elections. Is Paul Sperry,

(21:55):
who's a senior reporter for Real Clear Investigations where I
serve as a deputy editor as well, and he's written
a column out last week why a judge has Georgia
vote fraud on his mind? Christine Biden ballots that looked xerox.
And it's worth noting that by happenstance, I found out
after we were preparing for this interview that Georgia's Secretary

(22:15):
of State Brad Raffensburger, who I'm sure every listener remembers,
he claimed to be above reproach and resisting President Trump's
supposedly wild calls about the election. He tweeted out about
twenty four hours ago restoring confidence in our elections is
going to be impossible. As long as Fulton County's elections
leadership continues to fail. The voters of Fulton County and
the voters of Georgia, they need new leadership to step

(22:36):
up and take charge. And then he said, new revelations
that Fulton County is unable to produce all ballot drop
box transfer documents will be investigated thoroughly, as we have
with other counties that failed to follow Georgia rules and
regulations regarding drop boxes. This cannot continue. And Julie Kelly,
who we had on yesterday, pointed out in December twenty
twenty that Raffensburger told the Walshare Journal quote November's election

(22:58):
was the most secure in history and Georgia, there's no
evidence of widespread voter fraud and no significant issues with
absentee ballots and worth noting as well. Before we jump
over to Paul Sperry, then later in the week, we'll
be talking with a state legislator in Arizona, where there's
currently an audit ongoing as well, just as there is
in Fulton County, Georgia, and we'll be talking about everything
that's going on there where there's some remarkable revelations as well,

(23:20):
but for now, let's talk Georgia with Paul Sperry. Paul,
thanks so much for coming on the program. Thanks for
having me. So let's talk about what was discovered thus
far in Fulton County. Essentially, it appears that there are
witnesses who claim to have received pristine ballots marked clearly
for Biden, universally in every single instance. What do we

(23:43):
know about what's gone on in Fulton County. Yeah, so
Maylan and drop off ballots and they head over thirty
six believe about thirty six of these drop boxes spread
out throughout Fulton County. In Atlanta, these ballots have to

(24:04):
be folded to fit inside return envelopes. But according to
the swarm statements of several poll workers in Fulton County,
potentially thousands of mailed in ballots were counted for Biden
that had no folds or creases, and they had identical
bubbled in marks for Biden with the exact same white
boyd inside them, and further suggesting they were xerox they

(24:27):
were printed on different stock paper. So they don't know
if there's any fire here, but there's a lot of
smoke and a judge, a local judge that's seen enough
to order an inspection, I mean no fear than four
poll managers. These are veterans of these elections there in Atlanta,
Fulton County have come forward signing affter David swearing they

(24:48):
saw stacks of mail and ballots for Biden that looked
like Dave ben Zeros. And one of the lead witnesses
was fired by the county after she blew the whistle.
And then there were an apparent break in at the
warehouse where the county was supposed to keep the suspicious
ballots under lock and key. And then right before the
petitioners and the county officials were supposed to meet with

(25:10):
the judge at the warehouse to settle the terms of
the inspection, the county hires a team of criminal defense
lawyers and files a last minute motion to dismiss the case.
So now the inspection is in the state of limbo
until the judge can rule on the motion they dismissed,
and that during takes place this coming Monday. So first

(25:31):
of all, let's talk about the scope of what we're
dealing with here. How many mail in ballots are we
talking about, potentially being reviewed and being impacted here. Well,
the league plaintiffs in the complaint against the county says
of the twenty thousand probably false ballots cast for Biden

(25:53):
and Georgia's Fulton County, that remains to be seen. But
if there's nothing to hide, you'd think that the county
officials would welcome the opportunity to prove the claim for
fraud wrong. But that's not what's happening. At every turn,
they've tried to throw up roadbox in the way of
the inspection of these suspicious ballots. Is there any justification

(26:17):
given by the county for firing this whistleblowing individual. No,
they never never did give an explanation. Rafinsburger was, you know,
and high dudgeon over it. Seemingly put out a statement
and said you condemned. And there was another one too,

(26:37):
another whistle blower alongside her, that was fired by the
county without an explanation. So it was kind of universally,
even some Democrats in the county said that that wasn't
you know, is it? He appeared untoward what they did.
So there seems that they're giving a lot of signals
that they're trying to cover something up is the thing,

(27:02):
and until they can get you know, internet warehouse and
supposedly there's several shrink wrap poots, boots in there, get
somebody in there. Like this, judge, so many neutrals should
go through UM and have an independent type of inspection

(27:26):
of the ballots to examine the integrity of these ballots,
if they were counterfeited or x or there's some type
of fraud involved. These questions, you're going to remain. You
mentioned a break in at the warehouse where I gather
all of these ballots are being held. What what details

(27:47):
do you have on that? I mean, it's it seems
this seems like something out of a story and this
does not seem real. You're talking about a whistlebler being
fired and a break in at a warehouse where the
ballots are being out of them. What's going on there? Yeah,
So the warehouse where thousands of the paper ballots, these
are absolute ballots are stored, was supposed to be under

(28:07):
twenty four seven security watch. The county guaranteed the judge
that they would be under twenty four seven security watch
by the Fulton County Sheriff's Office. However, on the afternoon
of Saturday, May twenty ninth, and alarms sounded in the
building and an ex extor door was found to being
locked and her no Fulton County Sheriff's deputies on the scene.

(28:32):
They had mysteriously left the scene right before the security breach.
So you're basically describing a Godfather One like scene at
this warehouse. Yeah, it's just there's there's there's a lot
of drama going on right now. I think as they
get closer to this um source, I think the local

(28:59):
and the way the Fulton County is all completely debotat
control the run and the Elections Office is the department
is controlled by the Democratic Commissioner through his appointee the
Elections Board, And so I think they're they're getting just
squirming a little bit here under the pressure. I don't

(29:20):
know if they thought that this this judge would actually
go ahead with ordering the inspection. And there's there's a
lot of squirrely stuff happening. Put that way, So we
saw all sorts of clams like these regarding mail in
ballots in twenty twenty in states across the country. Why

(29:41):
did this particular case rise to the level when so
many others failed? Well? In this case, you had a
number of string Acca David's people swearing in the penalty
of perjury and these regadings and a number of past
elections when the key witnesses in working these selections for

(30:02):
two decades and they all saw the same thing in
different stacks. So there was a pattern. And I think
that's what taught the judge's eye. This is this is
a nonpartisan judge run as a non partisan candidate. Although
he looked at this ACU political contributions and he gets

(30:23):
exclusions to dinner France, which is interesting. He I think
saw enough to where he said, Okay, let's let's get
to the bottom of this. It's worth noting. And you
reference in the article that former President Trump is watching
this case closely. And as I noted to listeners yesterday,
I had an interview with President Trump last week at

(30:45):
Trump Tower and he said something to the effect of,
you know, you've heard the phrase he who controls the
vote to vote counting, controls elections, and you know, I
think he said that with an eye towards both Georgia
and Arizona and elsewhere as well. So we have about
a minute and a half until a break here, people
have talked about Georgia. Well, let's let's take it this direction.

(31:08):
What are the implications to the extent these are photo
copied ballots fraudulent ballots? Essentially, does it mean that there
is it possible that there are other such ballots across
Georgia and is there any evidence for that? And how
much are we talking in terms of magnitude here? Ultimately
the question is would would this be enough to actually
switch what happened in the election in Georgia? Well, there

(31:32):
was the sab half a day that's filed by actual
registered Democrats who are pool watchers in neighboring to Cabin
and Cobb Counties, which are also democratically controlled, who witnessed
the exact same thing. They observed the exact same thing.
H is the witnesses in Fulton County where you had
these pristine, suspiciously pristine looking ballots for Biden that had

(31:57):
the exact same carving copy type of bubble putting on
different paper, no fools or creases when they should you know,
these are mail mailed in ballots or ballots that are
put into a novelope and dropped off of the drop
ways drop boxes which, by the way, we're unsurveiling and
unregulated throughout Fulton County in these other counties. But the

(32:18):
point is that that shows a pattern outside of Fulton County,
so it could have been much more widespread. But as
you know, Biden won by a razors find twelve thousand
votes in Georgia. So just in Fulton County, if you're
talking about ten to twenty thousands of league Planets is
talking about, is counterfeited balance for Biden? Then you know

(32:40):
that covers that. But I don't know if the finding
if there are any findings of fraud, you know, hard
evidence of fraud, which of course you know, I think
that would have to be settled in court. If you know,
you're talking about changing these results of the election in
these swing states, including Arizona, but it could convince more

(33:04):
states to pass inty fraud measures such as voter r
I D signature verifications, restoration of the rules regulating the land,
and absolutely balloting that we're liberalized in the name of
COVID in the twenty twenty race in general, just rolling
back a lot of this these rules that were abandoned

(33:28):
to make voting easier in these swing states. So that
so you know, that could be very significant in and
of itself, regardless of whether or not I means of
fraud changes any results of the elections. Well more with
paus Berry right after this, we're back with pauls Berry

(33:50):
talking about let's call them irregularity, is potentially in Fulton County, Georgia,
potentially thousands of mail and ballots that may have been
for audulently produced and cast. And one of the things
I wanted to ask Paul was, in your investigating for
this story, do you have any insights into what percentage

(34:10):
of ballots were denied or deemed fraudulent or otherwise dismissed
in Georgia in the general twenty twenty election versus past
such elections. No, not overall, but there were there was
a spike in double voting, people casting more than one

(34:33):
out that definitely was an issue in this race, both
the primary in the general. And something I failed to
mention earlier was that I did talk to some local officials,
election officials, and there was a caveat to or a

(34:56):
possible plausible explanation for why ballots would have been xerox
And this is the key issue here. These election officials
salary that you know, they're allowed to zero atostee ballots
that are damaged in the mail or as they were
being removed from envelopes, But for every copied ballot, the

(35:20):
county would have to produce it damaged ballot marked exactly
the same way that the Christine ballot is marked. That
several weeks eyewitnesses testified that stacks upon stacks and hundreds
of ballots in those stacks look like they had been
duplicated from the same original ballot. So that if that's true,

(35:43):
that would, you know, that would wash away any of
these explanations that they're talking about that are innocuous and benign.
So the bottom line is what they're trying to find
out were these xerox and if they were zerox, where
they stuffed into these drop boxes that were unregulated, these

(36:05):
thirty six around Fulton County or was it possibly an
inside job within the elections department. So that's what they
want to find out, and the judge seems to, with
some restrictions, wants to let that go forward. But he
does the first rule on this motion to dismiss by
the county, So just about a minute or so. Georgia's

(36:27):
election law recently passed this year, which god raised all
sorts of outrage across the country, at least in the
corporate media and across Democrats in our political class as well,
huge uproar. What actually happened within that law that will
impact or would have implications for what transpired in twenty
twenty that we're seeing in Fulton County. Did the state

(36:49):
do anything to ensure that you wouldn't have the potential
for potentially he's potentially allegedly xerox ballots like this. Well,
they they did amazingly. They agreed to keep the drop boxes,
which they never had before until Stacy Abrams, another Democrat

(37:11):
pressure groups insisted on them. Um, you know, they use
excuse of COVID to put them all out, but they're
going to limit them. They're going to cut back substantially
the number of drop boxes that you can put out there.
Um and you know, just a handful now. They're going
to allow Sultan get down from thirty six. Uh, they're

(37:34):
going to try and keep them only at election offices
instead of just anywhere like they were seeing them out before,
so that that could curb some potential fraud. But pretty say,
they just they didn't go far enough, and they didn't
want to go too far to roll back um these

(37:57):
more liberalized rules because they would have gotten hammered by
Stacy Abrams groups and been called you know, racist and
disenfranchising African Americans and so on and so forth. Paul,
I gather you have more reporting on this, and we'll
look forward to reporting on your reportage. Dam And the

(38:17):
article is why a judge has Georgia vote fraud on
his mind? Christine Biden ballots that looked xerox. Thanks so
much for coming on the program. There is a new
development in the case which we will be breaking lay
this week, by the way, on real clear investigations. But
if we're honest, we also had two other types of
mistakes that cause a lot of loss of life. One
we're just plainly political leadership mistakes. There was a lot

(38:40):
we denied the virus for too long out of the
Trump White House. There was too much squashing of descent
and playing on divisions. But I'd also think we all
need to look at one another and ask ourselves what
do we need to do better next time? And in
many respects being able to sacrifice a little bit for
one another to get through this and to save more lives.
It's going to be it's going to be essential a
little It's something that I think we could all have

(39:01):
done a little bit better on. You didn't do a
good enough job during the coronavirus pandemic, dear listener, that's
what Biden's covids are. Andy Slavitt had to say on CBS.
You just didn't sacrifice enough. Your small business might have
been destroyed. You might have had to juggle your job
and your kids for weeks on end with no end

(39:23):
in sight, while the teachers unions in many cases took
advantage of it. You couldn't go out and live like
a normal person and enjoy your natural rights. But people
who hate your guts rioted and protested in the streets
with total impunity. You couldn't even go to a place
of warship freely. You might get arrested. But you just

(39:44):
didn't sacrifice enough, says our ruling class. And this is
a good segue back to what I was talking about
in our opening monologue. Today. Our ruling quass leverage the
coronavirus to the hilt, and of course they opposed. Is
that every turn, the many policies, by the way, the
Trump administration implemented that let us have a vaccine in

(40:06):
record time that stopped the flow in of the virus
from China, which could have been far worse with a
travel band that they called xenophobic, and then they denied
later on. Think about what they leverage the coronavirus to
do while they tell you you just need to sacrifice
more next time, and that implies, by the way, there's
going to be a next time for them, because they
want all the power. They leverage the coronavirus to usurp

(40:30):
unprecedented amounts of power at the state and local level.
Thank god the President didn't do that and didn't set
a precedent like that, but of course the other side will,
I'm sure next time around if they're in power. There
was a massive transfer of wealth and effect from the
real economy to the digital economy, that is, to the
bicoastal elite who are ruling class serves and comes from.

(40:52):
They're seeking to exploit the collapse that they created in
our earn our economies and beyond with a great reset
to lead to the green insanity, which will be another
wealth transfer to their friends and de industrialization of the
economy and probably a further digitalization of the economy, which
will kill mom and pop stores across this country in businesses.

(41:15):
Of course they're gonna They leveraged the coronavirus in every
possible way to destroy President Trump as a symbol for
the seventy four million plus Americans who still have their
heads on relatively straight. And of course, they also use
the coronavirus crisis to increase censorship by proxy via big Tech,
which banned discussion of all manner of topics, including around

(41:38):
the coronavirus, including things like lab leak, that all of
a sudden, are now kosher to talk about. And by
the way, tomorrow, I'm very pleased to announce the wolf
Senator Ron Johnson on the program, and he himself has
been subjected to the big Tech censorship bullies. They usurped
all of this power. And by the way, where's Andy

(41:59):
Swab He's talking about all the mistakes on our side
that need to be examined. Well, what about the fricking
origin of the coronavirus that led us to take these
self righteously suicidal policies and to deal with the cult
of maskedam for months and months on end, and to
completely shut down normalcy in our lives in a completely
anti scientific and unscientific fashion, whereof course they would not
allow any competing views, which is the antithesis of what

(42:22):
the scientific method calls for. From the people who say
trust the science. No, when you hear trust the science,
what they mean is bow down to our politics and
what other politics. Well, now, the Biden administration today is
still deferring to the who Chinese Communist Party control who
to do what it can't or won't do with respect
to investigating China. And yes, they've basically shoved it off

(42:46):
onto the intelligence community to do a ninety day review.
But let's remember something for a second. The intelligence community
has been wildly off on all things China related for
decades in terms of its assessments of China's weaponry capability,
in terms of the destruction of our intelligence network there
in Toto, our assets there under the Obama administration liquidated,

(43:09):
and it's gone soft on China when it doesn't suit
the narrative, as recently as regarding the twenty election, when
the Director of National Intelligence at the time, John Radcliffe,
and then an analytics ombudsman for the intelligence community, wrote
a report where he said that intelligence officials went easy
on China and held it to a lower standard, essentially
than Russia, because they didn't want to serve in effect

(43:31):
reading between the lines the president's narrative about the China threat.
So why is it going to be different this time?
And by the way, isn't it interesting that you go
to the intelligence community for this review. It's actually the
perfect place to go if you don't want everyone to
know what actually happened. And I'm not maligning intelligence analysts
out there. I'm sure they're capable of doing the job.

(43:52):
But the higher ups, the political people who answer to
their ultimate consumer, Joe Biden, will think about this. The
intelligence community is the perfect place to go to not
be open and transparent about whatever was found, including potentially
American complicity in this through our public health bureaucrats and
elected officials devoted to working with communist China in perpetuity.
The intelligence community can come back with an ambiguous answer

(44:15):
about what transpired. They can say for national security and reasons,
we can't really go into detail about it. And at
the end of the day, I don't believe we'll get
to the truth of it, and the truth may have
already been destroyed and China won't pay under this administration.
Is I think where we're ultimately going and the intelligence
community review I think may prove to be a ruse
and I pray to God that I'm wrong on this,

(44:36):
but I don't think that's where we're headed. Say, quick break,
this is Ben Weegarden for Buck sex And on the
Buck Sex and Show, and we'll be back right after this.
Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show. This is
Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, and our next guest
is covering a topic that's really near and dear to
my own heart, and that is New York City and
Buck Sexon's heart, I should say as well on a

(44:58):
personal note, I was born here, raised here for the
first year of my life. Back in the late eighties,
parents moved out to the New Jersey suburbs outside the city.
Saw the city roar back to life after the dark
days of Mayor Dinkins and what preceded him as well,
and under Rudy Giuliani have a total revival renaissance sort

(45:19):
of maintained a steady state under Mayor Bloomberg and then
subsequently decay under Mayor Bill Decamio. Or de Blasio, I
should say Freudian slip or not so much. And I
actually went to school at Columbia University starting in two
thousand and six, so I've really been here in sort
of the rise and fall twice to some degree, went

(45:39):
to Columbia State in New York for the next decade plus,
and then moved my family out of this town again
in twenty twenty and back to the New Jersey suburbs.
So in my own personal life, I've sort of followed
the ups and downs of this city and hopefully gotten
out at the right times and in at the right
times as well. And someone who's watched this city keenly
with the eye of a dogged, devoted journalist and reporter

(46:03):
is Seth Baron. Seth is the managing editor of the
Claremont Institute. It's the American Mind, and at full disclosure,
I do some work on behalf of the Cremont Institute
and have contributed to the American Mind as well. Before that,
he was at City Journal doing exceptional job making the
work of writers like mine significantly better. And he's the
author of the new book The Last Days of New York.
It reporters True Tale Seth, thanks so much for coming

(46:26):
on the program today. Oh, thank you, Ben. It's a pleasure.
So New York has experienced, as I noted, a sort
of dramatic rise from the ashes over the last twenty
years and under I think it's fair to say, essentially
a Marxist mayor, it threatens to waste all of those
games and essentially go back to the bad old days

(46:48):
that preceded them. Does that generally cover the arc of
things more or less? I mean in a thumbnail sketch,
you know. I just want to point out it's funny.
Only last week to Lassio, it was talking about that phrase,
the bad old days, and he said the batt old
days of New York were not the seventies and eighties

(47:08):
when when crime was soaring. He said, the bad old
days were actually the nineties and two thousands when crime
was declining because people because people's rights weren't respected, and
and and and his definition of rights, of course is
people being able to loiter, urinate on the streets, have

(47:29):
no cash bail policies, act with total impunity, to riot
and protest and take on the cops with no recourse whatsoever.
Is that the general gist of it, I mean, I
guess so if if you look at it, I mean,
he seemed to be I think he was talking about
you know, stop, question frisk and broken windows police saying

(47:50):
and you know how that was really like, you know, savage,
even though you know, as you as you pointed out
the crime I mean crime quested orders crested under Dinkins
when they topped two thousand a year, and then under
Giuliani and Bloomberg they were driven down to three hundred

(48:10):
a year, maybe less, and now we're seeing a start
a sharp rise again. But yeah, so that's that's the idea,
you know. So the right, the right to be safe
on the streets, the right to take the subway and
not be flashed across the face that you know, those
rights don't really matter quite as much, I guess, and

(48:30):
it's worth pointing out, I think, just on an individual level,
what it means when a city goes from economic strength
and relatively I mean by any big city standards, incredibly
low violent crime rates and relative peace and prosperity that
there used to be a day. As you noted, first
of all, peep shows graffiti everywhere, crime on the violent

(48:53):
crime on the subways and needles in the streets and
all those sort of cliche images that we talk about.
And this was not a safe city. This was a big,
violent city and the kind of place where you would
want to get out of late at night. You couldn't
walk alone on the streets. And we had a couple
of decades of essentially the reversal of all those trends,
and now within a very short period of time, we've

(49:16):
reached a scenario where all of those quality of life
issues are coming back to the fore and at a
very micro level. One of the things that my family
saw when we decided to get out of here during
last year was literally that the city was putting drug
addicts and former violent criminals, in some cases housing them
homeless former drug addicts and criminals and the like, and

(49:36):
housing them in hotels and other buildings in residential neighborhoods,
in fine neighborhoods in Manhattan. So you ran the risk
if you had young children of them being exposed to
all of that antisocial behavior. To put it as diplomatically
as possible, how is it that things have reversed so
quickly in this town? And is it really just a
dramatic percentage increase in violent crime and all of these

(50:00):
other metrics by which we judge at the livability of
a city or on an absolute basis, is there really
something terrible going on here? Well, look, here's the thing.
I mean to Blasio and some of his apologists have
pointed out that, you know, crime is still much lower
than it was, you know, even under some of the

(50:20):
you know, even under Juliani, like total murders. However, people
don't live in a long term historical trend. They live
with the experience of like the day to day velocity
of you know, how these indicators are moving, and right

(50:42):
now they're being whipsawed by you know, practical like g forces,
as New York City sees, you know, the fastest rate
of acceleration of its crime crime rate. Um. You know,
murders were up in twenty twenty thirty eight forty percent.
Shootings were up one hundred percent. This year so far,

(51:05):
murders are up again, and that's on top of last
year's increase. Shootings are again way up. Um. You know,
thank god a lot of these people don't have better aim,
I guess, because otherwise murder would be much worse. So
that's the problem, is that the sudden reversal is is
what's scary to people, and the complete collapse of you know,

(51:34):
I guess I mean just to put it, you know,
like manners and moras on the street. You know, I
live in the village, and Washington Square Park over the
last year has just deteriorated into this these all night
raves where you know, people on illegal motorcycles, like those

(51:55):
dirt bikes that people ride around, tearing around the park
at night. Now the police can seize those vehicles like
they're illegal, they're not street ready. They can be seized
on site. But I guess the idea is that the

(52:15):
police don't want to. They don't want to get into
a position where there's trying to seize a motorcycle from
someone who doesn't want it seized, and then it can
turn into a you know, an ugly confrontation, and we
know how these things play out. Look, the use of
force is never pretty. So there's nothing easier than to

(52:35):
drop a video of the police trying to restrain someone
who's resisting and make it look like brutality. You know,
there's a difference between force and brutality, but that distinction
is lost on people. And so this once again highlights
a running theme this week. Yesterday I spoke a little
bit about how medical research has been pervaded by sism

(53:00):
and it's literally courted off certain fields of inquiry because
people don't want to dare touch on a third rail.
Here we're talking about public safety and politics effectively trumping it.
How much of that is a consequence of the policymakers
versus the fear of cops actually out on the bit

(53:20):
well founded fear that there will be political ramifications to
them doing their jobs. Well, it's it's dialectical, So it's both.
It starts with policymakers and politicians, you know, advocating for
the criminal class, advocating against policing, stressing this myth that

(53:43):
the major problem on the streets is police violence against minorities,
pushing the idea that some communities are over policed. You know,
you hear a lot you hear people on the left
saying that communities with low crime have have very you

(54:07):
don't see any police around. So why is that If
you don't see any police around, it must be because
the police are in fact causing the crime. The police
or the problem high crime communities have too many police.
But the thing is, like the night if you look
at nine to eleven data, nine one one data, you know,

(54:28):
calls for emergencies come from neighborhoods that have a lot
of crime. Police don't get up in the morning, and
you know, they're not ordered to go and harass black
people or to go and just you know, harry some
minority community. They go where the crime is. But policymakers

(54:50):
have pushed against this idea. And then yeah, they've imposed
laws like like okay, getting rid of qualified immunity, putting
police at personal risk of being sued. Uh, you know,
the diaphragm law making it making police you know, liable
to prosecution for assault if they you know, perhaps when

(55:11):
they're sitting like trying to arrest somebody, they squeeze their
they touch their back or chest, so, um, you know.
And then as a result of that, police justum withdrawal
from being Why be proactive, What's what's the use? You know,
just show up, show up at some point and write

(55:31):
a report. Um, you know, you can count the bullets
on the ground instead of like trying to get there
quickly to to shoot the perpetrator. So we're up against
a break shortly. But I think it's worth noting that,
just like an individual's reputation, it seems very clear to me,
and New York is a perfect example of this, and

(55:52):
other major cities have followed similar similar trajectoris. I'm thinking,
of course, of a place like San Francisco, for example,
that it can take decades to build a great city,
just like it can take decades to build one's reputation,
and it can all go put and be collapsed very
quickly if you have the wrong ideas or if I
guess you have a bad sound by it for ten seconds.

(56:13):
So with that, when we come back, I want to
talk a little bit about what preceded this decline that
is resulting in the Last Days of New York, and
then what the lessons are for the country writ large.
This is Ben Winegarden in for Buck Sexon on the
Buck Sexon Show, and we'll be back with Seth Baron
on his new book The Last Days of New York
in just a minute. Welcome back to the Buck Sexon Show.

(56:33):
Ben Winegarten in four Buck sex In and we're talking
with Seth Baron, author of the new book The Last
Days of New York a reporter's true tale. So seth,
before we get to the last days of New York,
what were the policies that preceded these last days that
resulted in a flourishing New York City in the twenty
first century. Well, you know, going back to Juliani, when

(56:58):
he came in, he brought in Bill Bratton, and you know,
they adopted the broken windows theory of of neighborhood safety.
Broken windows is widely taken as some kind of you know,
extremely harsh, zero tolerance regime of surveillance and constant uh,

(57:23):
you know, discipline, but it's really not. The idea is
that you know, if if if windows are broken, then
more windows will be broken. You know that the persistence
of a broken window just encourages more. So the idea
is to maintain the same way. Like you know, if
you don't do your dishes, they pile up and it

(57:46):
becomes harder and harder to to to keep a clean kitchen. Um.
The idea of broken windows policing is to to signal
to the community at large that that it's orderly. Um
and so people who are you know, littering, people who

(58:11):
are drinking outside. It's not that they necessarily have to
be arrested, but you know, perhaps warned, uh that, so
the indications are there that certain behaviors are not tolerated
and then the community becomes less criminogenic. So this was
you know that this was instituted with great success. You know,

(58:33):
the theory really turned out to work. Um. Then under Bloomberg,
you know, the practice and Ray Kelly, the practice of
stop question frisk, which is constitutional um was put put
into put into a place sometimes you know, aggressively, but
the goal was to get guns off the street, and

(58:57):
thousands of lives were saved that way, you know, black lives,
I may add. So you know, these policies, plus of course,
you know, a focus on you know, helping businesses and
improving tourism, getting the schools working well. All of this

(59:21):
undergirded the prosperity in public safety that New Yorkers came
to expect. And one of the other things also worth
noting is that there's been a dramatic spike. And mercifully
the numbers are low, just like they're low on an
absolute basis across the country, but there's been a dramatic
spike in hate crimes in the New York City area.
And it's worth noting that the perpetrators almost certainly are

(59:42):
not Maga hat wearers. Worth emphasizing that point. But I
did want to ask, you know, kind of what has
New York City done under Mayor Devasio to reverse these
gains and what are the lessons for the country writ large?
Do you see New York as sort of a proxy
for where all major cities are going, for where the
left is going in this country? Put it in its

(01:00:03):
proper context, certainly, yes, I mean New York City and
state has happened at the local and the state level.
Have imposed massive criminal justice reforms. These include bail reform,
eliminating cash bail in most cases, discovery reform, which makes

(01:00:25):
it very hard for prosecutors to get witnesses to testify.
As I mentioned, They've gotten rid of qualified immunity. They've
decriminalized a host of quality of life offenses like public urination,
hanging out in parks after dark, public drinking, littering, and
these have all been codified. So that makes it that's

(01:00:47):
going to make it much more difficult for a future
mayor to undo the damage. And yes, of course New
York City is not alone there are many cities across
the country going in exactly the same direction, with hard
left prosecutors declining prosecution. We're seeing the same thing in
Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Baltimore, Chicago. I mean, some

(01:01:11):
of these cities were, you know, totally dysfunctional already, but
they've gotten much worse. Saint Louis so oh, absolutely, New
York is a New York is part is in the pack. Okay,
It's just that we were kind of doing very well.
We had bucked a lot of the negative trends, but

(01:01:33):
now we're catching up. And it strikes me ironically that,
of course the so called inequality, but really the disparity
is between those who do wow in New York City,
and oftentimes it's foreigners who own these opulent departments, who
don't even reside in them full time. But the inequality,
the chasm between the halves and the have nots in
this city will only be exacerbated as a consequence of

(01:01:55):
this policy, which of course cuts at the arguments of
so called progressives like a bill at a Lazio. In
the first place, we have about twenty seconds left. What
will people get out of your book that they might
not have thought about coming into it. The Last Days
of New York. That is basically that how an entire
cadre of professional agitator's advocates, hardcore progressive policy bakers, conspired

(01:02:22):
to destroy the city, not just one man. Well, on
that sunny note, we've been speaking with Seth Baron, managing
editor of the Claremon Institute's The American Mind and author
of the new book The Last Days of New York,
A Reporter's True Tale. Seth, thanks again so much for
coming on the program. Thank you, Ben a pleasure, and
we'll be back right after this. She did to leave.

(01:02:44):
One of her close friends, member of your caucus tweeted
the following, freedom of speech doesn't exist from Muslim women
in Congress. The benefit of the doubt doesn't exist from
Muslim women in Congress. Okay, you know how democratic leadership
should be ashamed. But we just say this, Yeah, not
rebuke her, We thanked, but acknowledge that she made a clarification.

(01:03:05):
So before we go too far down the path. Yeah,
these aren't my words. That that's a member, that's a
caucus caucus member, a caucus member. So I just wanted
to get her. No, I'm not. I'm responding that we
the Congresswoman Omar is a valued member of our caucus.
She asked her questions of the Secretary of State. Nobody

(01:03:26):
criticized those about how people will be held accountable if
we're not going to the International Court of Justice. That
was a very legitimate question that was not of concern.
Members did become concerned when the tweet that was put
out equated the United States with the Taliban and leave
acusing and end. And then she clarified it, and we

(01:03:52):
thanked her for clarification. So do you want people to
just but it go? And I could say whatever they want,
but what I'm saying is is end of subt I
will promise you this. If we are fortunate enough to
have the majority, Omar would not be serving on foreign affairs.
Are anybody that has an anti Semitic, anti American view,

(01:04:12):
That is not productive and that is not right. So
those were some of the latest clips of the most
recent contra attempts, let's call it regarding Ilhan Omar, the
Member of the House from Minnesota, and some of her
colleagues as well. There, of course, you had Speaker Pelosi
running interference for her trying to make it seem as
if she made a legitimate point when she compared treating

(01:04:34):
Hamas and Israel equally and the US and the Taliban equally.
And remember, you can remember back to this clip that's
made the rounds, I think it was from twenty thirteen
or so, where essentially Ilhan Omar is mocking the way
that a teacher speaks in a class that she had
on terrorism, speaks with an affective voice about al Kida
or Hezbollah, and she says, well, you know, you don't

(01:04:56):
talk about the US military in that sort of way.
I'm paraphrasing there. But of course, this court a moral
equivalence has been part of her rhetoric since the time
she busted out into the national scene. And of course
Kevin McCarthy is right to say that no one like
Omar should ever sit on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
And there's a reason that's even deeper than just her

(01:05:18):
anti Americanism, her loathing of everything of this country stands
for her saying and their direct tweets about this, and
I chronicle them in my book on ilhan Omar. American ingreate,
ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamist takeover of the Democratic Party,
about how America was founded in genocide and of course
rooted in racism and white supremacy, and beyond paraphrasing here.

(01:05:42):
But it's not just that it's not just Omar's awful worldview,
it's that Omar actually has ties and I document this
in great detail to Muslim Brotherhood linked individuals and entities,
as well as air to One's regime in Turkey, which
is itself a major backer of and supporter of the
Muslim Brotherhood, and it's offshoots as well. So we talk

(01:06:03):
about foreign collusion if you apply the collusion standard Russian
collusion to President Trump, the false one to Ilhan Omar,
and you actually had the full force of the federal
government investigating it. She can never get a security clearance,
and she doesn't need one because she's a member of
the House. The American people, and particularly those in her districts,
are the ones that get to determine whether it's not
she get a she gets a free pass and affect

(01:06:24):
a waiver on the security clearance. But it's so much
deeper than the moral equivalency on display. What it really
comes down to the entire Ilhan Omar story, and this
was the purpose of my book in the first place,
was to say that Ilhan Omar is the personification of
where the Democratic Party is going and maybe where it is.

(01:06:47):
And the party has caved repeatedly with respect to Omar's
wretched views and associated policies. I mean, this is someone
who is essentially a Marxist in her worldview and an
anti American Marxist, but I guess they kind go hand
in hand. This is someone who believed and look at
her district. By the way, Minneapolis, the seat of her district,

(01:07:08):
has gone to hell over the last year, in no
small part because of the exact kinds of policies that
she loves. And it's already a very leftist place to
begin with, but then you add the d policing and
then the anti policing element to it, and you create
a powder keg. And even leftist reporters who are honest,
like Michael Tracy for example, have reported on the fact
that Minneapolis is now Murderopolis. And the disparity is on

(01:07:33):
the basis when you look at it from a racial lens,
in her district or some of the greatest in the
country on all manner of measures, in terms of economics
and quality of life and crime and beyond. Of course,
this is what happens with progressivism. The intentions never matched
the outcomes, and the outcomes are always the worst for
the very constituents progressives claim to care about the most.

(01:07:55):
And sometimes you have to wonder who are their constituents.
Who is Illano Mars Constitution When she goes out and
compares America to jihadas or Israel to jihadas the great
Satan and the little Satan? Who is she speaking for?
And why the hell represent this country if you hate
it so much? The importance of the Democratic Party's cave

(01:08:19):
to Omar and the Squad is that it shows directionally
that that's where the party is going, or again where
it is. And as a chronicle in the book, you
look at how big the Progressive caucus is in the
House and how much, how rapidly that has expanded since
it started in the early nineties, and we're talking, I believe,
over one hundred measures collect a hundred members collectively at

(01:08:42):
a five hundred and thirty five four thirty five rather significant,
husually significant, and particularly of a majority. You're talking almost
half of a majority Democrat majority. When the party initially
caved to her over her anti Semitic remarks and basically

(01:09:03):
diluted those remarks by saying, actually, we're going to have
a resolution that goes against any speech perceived as hateful
by any of our demographics that we care about. Essentially
is what they said by show they didn't care about
purging the party of people with views like iohan Omar.
And there's a cynical political reason for it. I mean,
first is the fact that the party, of course has

(01:09:24):
just gone way more woke and the tappened over decades,
and it's accelerated at a ridiculous rate in recent years,
which is why you have someone like Joe Biden reading
from a teleprompter about equity over equality. It's also a
cynical political play. There's a view that the future of
the party, and particularly younger voters and then also Muslim
Americans who disproportionately swing left and likely disproportionately have views

(01:09:50):
that are in line with their progressives and polling seems
to indicate this are going to be a growing cohort,
and in particular when it comes to issues like regarding
is Rael or like regarding terrorism and beyond the Democratic
Party is willing to say, basically to hell with traditional
Jewish Democrat voters, pro American pro israel belief that Israel

(01:10:11):
is in America's national interest to be an ally of,
and of course, hey, it's loads anti Semites, that it's
actually okay to cowtow in effect, to the anti Semites
and to those who take a sympathetic view towards Islamists
around the world, because that's where the votes are going
to be down the road. That's the unspoken, cynical political

(01:10:31):
aspect of all of this and why the party continues
to cave. The party sees where its future lies. They
see the ideological trendlines, they see where the votes are
going to be, and that is why ilhan Omar must
be protected. And you have to it's really important to
note the verbal tick that she has anytime she is criticized,
and how she uses identity politics as a cudgel and

(01:10:54):
as a shield. Literally, I believe the day after my
book come out, she put out a funding email or
her campaign put out a fundraising email talking about how
Islamophobic right wing extremists are coming out against her and
that they may incite violence. My book, by the way,
has hundreds and hundreds of footnotes and citations. It's as

(01:11:17):
thoroughly researched as it could be, because it had to
be bulletproof to deal with someone a figure like ilhan
Omar to talk about her wretched ideology, her criminal, it
seems personal acts that go well beyond what we're talking
about in terms of her dalliances with the adversaries of America.
And of course she attacks you as a bigot if

(01:11:37):
you speak openly and honestly about it, and so to
all of her progressive allies as well. What is that about?
At the end of the day, It's about the fact,
once again, like our entire benighted ruling class, that they
cannot tolerate dissent. No one can dissent from their ideology,
from their agenda, and you must be destroyed if you

(01:12:00):
dare speak out against them, and you better have thin
skin as a consequent thick skin in response to it.
Their entire game is to try and smear and silence
you into submission, and when that doesn't work, they'll use
the full powers of the public and private sectors against you,
as we'll talk about a little bit later in the
program today, and as we talked about with respect to

(01:12:21):
January sixth yesterday. It's obvious now for all to see,
and it was obvious to me when I wrote this book,
American Ingrate, and it came out about over a year
ago now, in February of last year, right before the
onset of the pandemic, that wokeism was the present, if
not and future of the party. And that's where we

(01:12:42):
are today. That's where we are today when you have
these establishmentarians par excellence cowtowing to people who should be marginal,
fringe figures, people they should not want to be promoting,
because broadly America rejects squad like figures, and we saw
that in twenty twenty. So I guess you can say
it's good that the Democratic Party can tinues caving to
the squad wing. Politically maybe in the near term, but

(01:13:04):
long term we are in major, major trouble. And as
I argue in the book, if the party representing half
the country acquiesces to these views, these anti American, regressive
views that again hurt most those who can least tolerate it,
that punish the middle class, the lower class in the country,
and prevent everyone from ever achieving the American dream, the

(01:13:27):
aspirations that we all seek and protecting and preserving the
American way of life. This Ben Onegarden for Buck Sex
on the Buck Sex and show back right after this,
Welcome back to the Buck Sex and show Ben Weinegarden
in for Buck Sexton. And one of the running themes
of this week is how wokeness is increasingly pervading every
aspect of our society and effectively every single domain is

(01:13:51):
part of an ideological war that one side has been
waging really for decades, and the other side, namely our side,
the side of patriotic and traditional Americans, has seeded that
battlefield or not even understood the depths of the battle
and the stakes of it. But now when you see
cancel culture not just in the digital sphere, but in

(01:14:11):
people's places of work, in the schools obviously, how the
metastasizing cancer of CRT is hopefully now being rooted out,
but through every aspect of our life that you can't
escape the hyper politicization of the woke. There needs to
be a response to it. And one person who's been
thinking about both the stakes and also how to respond

(01:14:33):
to these challenges is Nate Fisher. Nate wrote a great
article at the American Minds, which is the project of
the Carmon Institute. And I'll disclose again that I do
some work on behalf of Claremont and I've written for
the American mind as well. He wrote a piece about
a week ago, Politics is interested in You. And it's
worth noting that Nate has a background as an entrepreneur

(01:14:53):
and an investor. He's launching this project called New Founding,
which he co founded, that touch on both business and
politics and really how to respond to the woke anti
cultural revolution in your life, in your community and beyond.
And Nate joins us. Now, thanks so much for coming
on the program. Thanks Beren for having many so one

(01:15:14):
of the things you wrote in this piece, I think
it perfectly captures where we are is that our society
has morphed away from anything recognizable even ten years ago.
For many, politics was always something away from home, away
from daily life. It was somewhere else, often relevant mostly
to small things like marginal differences in a tax bill.
Not anymore. A corrosive trend is developed as some become

(01:15:34):
increasingly political and demanding the cost for others of expressing
an opinion or even ignoring the wrong activist demand has
grown intolerably high. And you go on to talk about
the intimidation that many are facing in this country, the
chilling and the silencing that's going on in this country.
Why does the left believe that it has to dominate
in every single sphere, well beyond politics, right down to

(01:15:57):
the culture, your workplace, your school, and beyond. So I
think it flows inevitably from their ideology. This is not
a This is not a liberal movement that simply wants
to improve improve people's lives, maybe maybe even once universal healthcare,
because they care about people. This is a movement that

(01:16:18):
is fundamentally revolutionary, and they see every one of these
structures as inherently oppressive. They really want to reshape. They
want to reshape our understanding of what it even means
to be a human. I would say, uh, and that
requires attacking every norm and structure that has been created

(01:16:43):
by humans, that has been created by culture, that has
shaped our culture. So you're going to see this across society.
You're going to see this in uh, in actions, from
work to basic community. It's and it's not going to stop.
There's going to be no end to it. Be of
it's a revolutionary agenda. Yeah, I think it's worth noting

(01:17:03):
that the kind of anti racist tip of the edge
of the woke anti cultural revolution over the last year,
so called anti racism, because it's really racist in practice, really,
I think describes well in part why you have to
be woke or you're going to be shunted out of
civil society today. And that's because to be an anti racist,
according to Ebermex Kendy, sort of the godfather of anti

(01:17:26):
racism today, if you are not actively engaging in anti
racist causes and policies, you are definitionally being a racist
at a given time. So thus you can't just be neutral.
You can't just stand on the sideline. If the other
side says you're a bigot, if you're not going along
with the woke agenda, then that means that you basically
have to be engaged, just at a micro level tactically.

(01:17:51):
How do you explain this to friends, neighbors, colleagues who
are good natured but haven't studied Herbert marcusa and critical
race and all of the political philosophy and theory behind
all this. How do you get them woke to what
wokeism is really about? So I think it's a challenge.
It's hard to explain. There's people who are closely following

(01:18:13):
it and they see that, they see the writing on
the wall, they see the trends. But for most people,
I think it's it'll be a story that hits home.
It'll be and it's hard to know what story that
will be. But there's enough stories coming out of some
incredibly cruel response to someone, some just something that many

(01:18:35):
people probably assumed would stop the pendulum and swimen swing
in the other direction, and it never stopped. It went further.
Whether it's whether it's the extreme pushing of a sexual
agenda on children in many cases, or it's the or
it's the not just firing, but mob really ritual sacrifice
of someone for what seems to be a fairly trivial

(01:18:58):
offense or something that wouldn't need to be considered a
offensive few years ago. So I think for many people's
it's something that they've begun to recognize in private, they
see the problem. The real challenge I think for the
as you say, good natured people, is the right has
traditionally shied away from thinking of politics in terms of conflict.

(01:19:20):
We've thought of it in terms of principles, it's one
that is really glorified principles and ideals, whether they be
the Constitution or universal views of right. And so I
try to shift the framework a little bit at times
to a domain where people recognize the conflict is exists

(01:19:43):
and is actually good to engage in. And that's the
domain of national defense. I mean, no one doubts that
when a foreign power threatens our well being and fundamentally
threatens our country actually good and honorable and actually an
obligations to stand up and and challenge them. And that
involves things that go beyond just appealing to principles that

(01:20:06):
that that go beyond just talking about niceness and decency
and a return to the basket, but really go to fighting,
fighting a conflict and doing what it takes to push
back against people who threaten our way of life. And
I think that a lot of people recognize intuitively that
that is the domain that calls for that, and what
they don't realize yet is the same principle applies at home.

(01:20:31):
So if there are people who are going to threaten
our way of life as fundamentally as as they see
in these anecdotes, it demands a different mindset, a mindset
that that is familiar, but it's not familiar when applied
to politics, a mindset of conflict. And my title alludes

(01:20:53):
to this. It's it alludes to a quote by Trotsky
who said, you may not be interested in war, but
war is interested in you. And that's a that's been
an unfortunate fact of life for many people in many
societies throughout history, and whether you like it or not,

(01:21:13):
it's it's pushed on people. Yeah, I think it's worth
noting a couple of points. Obviously, principles and ideals and
values are vital in terms of having a vision for
a nation, for one's family, for one's community, and beyond.
But translating those principles, ideals, and values into practice requires

(01:21:36):
understanding the playing field and the battlefield, ideological or otherwise,
as it really is. And I think it's very clear
that it is not a conservative value, principle or ideal
to lose to a to atalitarian onslaught. You have to
see it for what it is, and you have to
respond based on the size, scope and nature of the
threat that we face. And also to your point about

(01:21:58):
foreign adversaries and how that kind of makes it concrete
and intelligible to anyone who cares about this country and
their children and their future in this place. Is that. Look,
look at our adversaries, how they adopt the same narratives,
or in some cases they promulgate the narratives, and our
own leftists pick them up in the Chinese Communist Party
when their senior officials meet with their counterparts like Secretary

(01:22:21):
blink In, our National security advisor Sullivan, and they essentially
espouse the sixteen nineteen project view of America, the critical
race theory view of America of oppressor and oppressed. But
it's on the basis of race, what I would describe
as a racial Marxism. It's very clear they love this.
This is a propaganda coup for them. So in some

(01:22:42):
sense they are either dupes and useful idiots or worst
of our worst adversaries. Or on the other hand, our
worst adversaries are just glomming on to the same kind
of narratives being put out by those adversaries for really decades,
and it's really remarkable to see it at the commanding
heights of society speaking in the same tongue as basically
as shi jinping apparatics. So we've got a couple of

(01:23:04):
minutes before we have to take a break, before we
get there. I just want to know, from your perspective,
what are the stakes if the woke onslaught continues unabated.
What will this country look like in five, ten, fifteen years,
or maybe sooner based upon how quickly it swept the land.
So I think it's it's very hard to predict timeline,
and I tend to look not at timeline, which I

(01:23:28):
think has enormous uncerity, but trajectory and intent. And as
I said, it's a revolutionary movement. It is one that
it seeks to abolish the nuclear family. The original website
of the Black Lives Matter organization seeks to eliminate the
heteronormative family, and many talk about eliminating a subnormative society.

(01:23:51):
I don't even know what that looks like. I think
that's it's inconceivable to imagine a society where it is
not normal or for people to live according to the
sex they were born with. And so when you look
at it, when you look at goals like that, you
have to just it's really only your imagination. I think

(01:24:15):
can imagine where that might go. It's an unseavable goal,
which means probably just continual turmoil and revolution, but certainly
it means the elimination of any ability to have control,
even within your own family, of what your kids are taught,
any ability to go to work in anything less than

(01:24:36):
a environment that demands total conformity, total acquiescence, a willingness
to make what are effectively genuinelections to a set of
increasingly intrusive religious demands, and it will come to encompass
every aspect of your life. It's very hard to imagine

(01:24:59):
what that looks like, but it will take away your
freedom to dissent in any context. I know. Even in Scotland,
I think there was talk of a hate crimes bill
that could make certain conversations illegal even in your own home,
so you could have family members or guests reporting on
you to to the police, which I think is something

(01:25:22):
that's probably a familiar pattern to people from Eastern Europe
under communism, but not something that many of us can
even imagine what that feels like. This is just another example,
writ large, of the convergence that we see today between
our Chinese Communist Party supporting and cow towing elites, and
how that manifests itself in US mimicking them. It's it's

(01:25:43):
socialism or Chinese socialism with American characteristics essentially here well
more with Nate Fisher after a quick break. We've been
talking with Nate Fisher about his article at The American Mind,
which I urge you to check out. Politics is interested
in you, and talking about sort of how woke ism
is manifesting itself in all of our institutions. You see
it in corporations. Any major, large, publicly traded company has

(01:26:08):
sort of conceded already to the cult of diversity, equity,
and inclusion, which is really none of those things. It's
about imposing in a ideology on workers and essentially in
some respects brainwashing them or bludgeoning them into submission to
what is a leftist ideological agenda, which by the way,
is going to destroy morale in many of these companies.

(01:26:29):
That's going to have business consequences for them. And I
think that's a good place to start before we get
to what is to be done given the size, scope
and nature of the problems we face. So from your perspective, Innate,
as someone who has experienced in the entrepreneurial world and
the investing world, as well, to what extent do you
believe the executives at these major companies are really true

(01:26:51):
believers in this agenda or are they cynical and think
they can essentially feed the crocodile so it won't eat
them at the end of the day, regard of us
what it means for their bottom line when it comes
to the woke on swat in terms of the millions
and in some cases I think in the aggregate maybe
billions of dollars that effectively go towards wokesm either in
terms of these movements themselves, like Black Lives Matter and

(01:27:14):
at the aggregate level, or other related causes. So I
think it varies widely, and I think we really have
we have multiple classes of people running companies. There's there's
entrepreneurial founders and there's a lot of entrepreneurial founders who
I know don't believe this. It's widely is widely discussed

(01:27:35):
in private. They recognize the damage that wokeness can do
to their morale. They're they're terrified of mobs bowling up
at them, and they really do hope and that's really
the group that this is this is aimed at. There's
people who who recognize this is a problem. I kind
of hope they can keep their head down and they
can make a few token gestures. They can beat the beasts,
they can pay them off, and it'll pass them by.

(01:27:58):
And that's a that's a group needs to wake up.
They need to recognize that the demands are They can't
just give twenty thousand dollars to a local BLM organization
and buy themselves a few years of peace. At this point,
it's entered, uh, it's entered their workforce in a way
that if they don't actively if they really don't actively

(01:28:22):
look out to resist it, it will it will encompass
their org I would say there's other groups. A lot
of major corporations are effectively run by careerists. They're run
by by MBAs who are probably better at climbing the
corporate ladder than anything else. I think those people, many
in many cases are to the extent they're true believers

(01:28:42):
in anything. They believe in the system that promotes this,
and it's a system that fundamentally rewards careerists and bureaucrats.
It's one where it's one that you regularly see replacing
entrepreneurial founders who don't quite tow the party line well
enough with woke technocrats, and those people not only believe

(01:29:05):
that they stand to gain from it and they have,
they have a real incentive to continue this system. So
I think one counter example is great, which is Elon Musk,
who's a founder who is trying to do something hard
enough that I think he recognizes he recognizes the impossibility
of beating the beast if he if he tries to

(01:29:28):
compromise with them at all, he will never make it
to Mars, and I think he knows that, and that's
why you see him resists this, whereas a lot of founders,
especially building social networks and things, are they're trying to
send me is not quite as hard, and I think
there's a perception that you can kind of play along
with it. The only problem with Elon Musk, and it's

(01:29:49):
for another day, is how China may effectively own Tessa
at the end of his travails with them, which shows
you that you can you can never buy off any
of these woke protection rackets or mobs. In effect, you
have to stand ultimately for the country and for freedom.
But setting all that aside in just a minute and
a half or so tell us about Newfounding, which I

(01:30:10):
gather is a response to everything that we're talking about. Yes,
a new Founding is built on the recognition that you
need to you need a holistic response. It's not something
that can be just said at the margins. We need
a space, really a domain to be freed from this.
They can free you up to be more human. Newfounding is,
as we describe it, as a cultural and commercial syndicate

(01:30:34):
that really brings together people from business, technology, politics, and media.
We're building a number of projects, one of which is
a newsletter. You can go to newfounding dot com subscribe
to a newsletter so we'll give you updates and it'll
point you to products and businesses that are either aligned
with your values or at least are refusing to the

(01:30:55):
bow of the Walken mob and begin pouring consumer dollars
into a pocket of the economy that will hopefully be
the seed of something much bigger. We're working on a
hiring website and directory so you can work with and
do business with people who again are willing to resist this.
And finally, we're working on a number of media projects,

(01:31:16):
including a lifestyle publication. It talks about how to live
in the digital age. That is going to allow you
to really maintain your humanity in the face of especially
a big tech establishment that is increasingly enforcing this agenda
behind you. So it's I and there'll be many many
more projects that flow to that. It will be working
with many more companies. So really the goal is to

(01:31:38):
bring together a number of different people in a number
of different domains to point toward and build the seeds
of something better and more human and ultimately far more
effective and competitive. We've been speaking with Nate Fisher, co
founder of Newfounding. Thanks so much for coming on the program.

(01:31:58):
Appreciate the work that you're doing. It's so imperative that
we go on offense and not just be defensive and
look askance at history yelling stop. We can actually do
something about it, So appreciate all your efforts there. Thanks Benn,
and I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you. Welcome
back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weegarden
in for Buck Sexton, and we were just having a

(01:32:19):
conversation with Nate Fisher about the size, scope and nature
of the wocist threat to the American way of life
and obviously the topic front and center, I think for
huge squads of the country at this point is what
is transpired in our schools. And there's been some amazing reporting,

(01:32:40):
even separate and apart from critical race theory, but almost
in terms of the response to it, including among those
who have lived under real cultural revolutions like those in
communist China or North Korea recently, that have just been
remarkable in terms of their takes on what they're seeing
in this country. And it's a sad fact, but those
who have lived under tyranny, who get out of tyranny

(01:33:02):
and come here seem to have a more keen sort
of spidey sense as to what is going on when
it appears that a cultural revolution has come to this country.
They've seen it, They've seen what happens when a society
crumbles under tyranny, and they are the canaries in the
coal mine for us, and many of us have never

(01:33:26):
lived under anything like it, and so we take for
granted that what came before will follow in the future. Again,
so a couple of remarkable pieces worth noting, and this
comes in context by the way of a school district
in New Jersey, and I mentioned before I was raised
in the New Jersey suburbs, not too far from the

(01:33:47):
school district. And I moved back to New Jersey recently
over the last year and know this place well, Randolph,
New Jersey. And there's been this huge outrage over the
fact that the Randolph Board of Education is removing the
days from holidays from the school calendar all together, following
an earlier debate about how to refer to Columbus Day,

(01:34:07):
of course, as Indigenous People's Day, or whatever day they
want to call it, whatever the woke demand Randolph looks like.
And I know because I spent some time there, a
typical suburban town in America. So the fact that a
school board there went so woke as to not only
try to rename Columbus Day, but then to say, you

(01:34:30):
know what, we got to get rid of all holiday
names period, shows you how deep down to the very
fabric of society at our local schools the woke cultural
rot goes. The fact that there's been a massive outpouring
At the time of this latest article on it from
New Jersey News source, it says there are twenty five
hundred people who have signed a petition calling for the

(01:34:52):
board of Education to resign it shows you that there
is there is a maybe silent majority that's finally becoming
outspoken in this country, rising up against this asinine revolution
that we've seen. And this is an anti cultural revolution
almost definitionally, when you're talking about removing holiday names altogether,

(01:35:13):
it's not just toppling statues, it's not just renaming holidays.
It's ultimately destroying whole segments of society. And that's where
we are today. So in terms of you know, how
long is it going to take and where is it
going to end up, a question that we addressed in
that last interview with Nate Fisher, we're there in a
lot of respects, and I think we should be thankful

(01:35:36):
that there are people who've come to America for freedom,
who are speaking out about what they see and raising
quarry On calls against this absurd anti cultural revolution. So
here was one that caught my eye, and this is
an article that was in Fox News titled North Korean
defector says even North Korea was not this nuts. After
attending Iva League school, and the school in question is

(01:35:58):
Columbia University, and I should say, yeah, I'm an alum
of Columbia University at the time, I was there, Mahamud Akhmadenijad.
You may remember the Iranian leader came to campus and
was given a platform to speak, So you can only
imagine that was like a decade ago. So where's it today?
And this is one of the few remaining institutions in
the country of higher education that still reads the classic

(01:36:18):
books Greek, Latin and beyond, still reads the core texts.
Every student to Columbia University or Columbia College and Beyond
has to read these core texts of Western civilization because
they're still understood to be the building blocks of our society.
So someone going to an institution like that comes out
with this view. Yamni Park is her name. She says,

(01:36:42):
I expected that I was paying this fortune all this
time and energy to learn how to think. But they're
forcing you to think the way they want you to think.
I realized, Wow, this is insane. I thought America was different,
but I saw so many similarities to what I saw
in North Korea that I started worrying. This is a
North Korean defector who settled in the United States, transferred
to Columbia from a South Korean university in twenty sixteen.

(01:37:04):
The article goes on. Similarities that she sees include anti
Western sentiment, collective guilt, and suffocating political correctness. Yamni saw
red flags immediately upon arriving at the school. During orientation,
she was scolded by a university staff member for admitting
she enjoyed classic literature such as Jane Austen. I said,
I love those books. I thought it was a good thing,
recalled Park. Then she said, did you know those writers

(01:37:26):
had a colonial mindset? They were racists and bigots and
are subconsciously brainwashing you. The article goes on. It only
got worse from there, as Yamni realized that every one
of her quest is at the Ivy League school with
it was infected with what she saw as anti American propaganda,
reminiscence of the sword she had grown up with. American
bastard was one word for North Koreans, Park was taught

(01:37:47):
growing up the math problems would say, there are four
American bastards, you kill two of them. How many American
bastards are left to kill? How progressive? She was also
shocked and confused by issues surrounding gender and language, with
every class asking students to announce their preferred pronouns and
this is the cult of diversity, equity, inclusion that I'm
talking about, that's in every single institution. English is my

(01:38:11):
third language. I learned it as an adult. I sometimes
still say he or she by mistake, and now they're
going to ask me to call them they. How the
heck do I incorporate that into my sentences? It was chaos,
said at Yamni. It felt like the regression in civilization.
Even North Korea is not this nuts. North Korea was
pretty crazy, but not this crazy. It's direct quote. She

(01:38:33):
goes on to say, these kids keep saying how they're oppressed,
how much injustice they've experienced. They don't know how hard
it is to be free. I literally crossed through the
middle of the Gobi Desert to be free. But what
I did was nothing. So many people fought harder than
me and didn't make it. And she published a memoir
in Order to Live, where she described what it took
to survive under one of the world's most brutal dictatorships.

(01:38:58):
She goes on to say, in North Korea, I literally
we believe that my dear leader Kim Jong ouen was starving.
He's the fattest guy. How can anyone believe that. And
then somebody showed me a photo and said, look at him,
he's the fattest guy. Other people are all thin, and
I was like, oh my god, why did I not
notice that he was fat? Because I never learned how
to think critically. This is that is what is happening
in America, she continued. People see things, but they've just

(01:39:18):
completely lost the ability to think critically. North Korean's don't
have the internet, we don't have accessed any of these
great thinkers. We don't know anything. But here, while having everything,
people chose to be brainwashed and they deny it. You
guys have lost common sense to a degree that I
was in North Korean cannot even comprehend. And it goes
on from there. She's not the only defector. There was

(01:39:40):
a Virginia mom recently, someone who endured Mazedong's cultural revolution
before immigrating to the US. Her name is she Van Fleet,
and she told the Loudon County School board members in Virginia,
you are now training, teaching, training our children to be
social justice warriors and to loathe our country in our history,
she likened CRT. According to this article, which critics to
Ride as a form of neo racism to China's Cultural Revolution,

(01:40:05):
she said in part, and I believe this was during
an open hearing. One of the teachers was considered bourgeoisie
because she liked to wear pretty clothes. Van Fleet said,
so the students attacked her and spit on her. She
was covered with spit, and pretty soon it became violence.
This is her describing her time during the Cultural Revolution
as a student. To me, in a lot of Chinese,

(01:40:26):
it's heartbreaking that we escape communism and now we experience
communism here direct quote. Everything that was considered old feudalist
of oz Buddhas, everything was taken out in smash, she said.
Isn't that exactly what we're doing here in American society today?
We were asked to report if we hear anything about
someone saying anything showing that there's a lack of complete
loyalty to Mao. There were people reporting their parents, and

(01:40:47):
their parents ended up in jail. She's going, she quotes.
She's quoted. I felt like it's such a free country,
meaning I have free access to all sorts of information
books on both sides of the issue. In America, I
can't really just say what I mean, now, even though
the other side can say whatever to me into a
lot of Chinese, it's heartbreaking that we escaped communism and
now we experience communism here there in China. We were

(01:41:07):
taught to denounce our heritage, and Red guards destroyed anything
that is not Communists against statues, books and anything else.
We were also encouraged again to report on each other.
This is indeed the American version of the Chinese cultural revolution.
The critical race theory has its roots in cultural Marxism.
She goes on to say, I just want Americans to
know that their privilege is to be here, living in America.

(01:41:28):
That is just the biggest privilege. I do not think
a lot of people understand. They're thinking they're doing the
right thing. Be against racism sounds really good, but they're
basically breaking the system that is against racism. And these
are not the only folks, I mean, their a litany
of others as well. I referenced yesterday an article in
City Journal which was talking about the fight in New
York City over standardized testing and the attempt to abolish

(01:41:53):
standardized testing as a measure for students to get in
on the basis of a metric in large part of
their aptitude, a measure of their aptitude to go to
Eliot public schools, selective public schools in this area, which
have been a way out of poverty and misery for
thousands of people historically, on the basis of what they

(01:42:15):
bring to the table, their individual accomplishment, achievement, their intellect.
This talks to another person in this article, Done Zang,
one of the parents who was opposed to this effort
to purge these schools of standardized testing. It says when

(01:42:37):
he took a few hours off from work as a
data analyst on Wall Street to join the June twenty
eighteen protests outside City Hall, he didn't think he was
embarking on a political journey. In fact, he about to
stay away from politics after participating the TMM and Square
protests of nineteen eighty nine. The father of two had
an attended to Protestants coming to the US in nineteen
ninety five to pursue a PhD. He didn't know who
the New York Governor was or what the council did.

(01:42:59):
He was born in a small village in nineteen sixty nine,
seven years before the death in China of then Chairman
Mao Zedong Mao was no fan of exams. During the
cast or the Cultural Revolution, college entrance exams were largely halted.
Admissions were based on recommendations from the people, and students
who could barely read and write were sent to college
that exceptional period aside, however, exams administered by the highest

(01:43:20):
level of government has existed for more than fourteen hundred
years in China. It's how they compete in spite of
their communism. And he goes on to talk about what
it was like in China, and he says equality should
be about equal opportunities, not equal outcomes. The plans for
school diversity in New York, which is what they supposed

(01:43:41):
driving force bind getting read of these standards in terms
of standardized testing, all focused on the outcome. They sound
too much like Mao's policies to me. This article goes
on to quote other parents as well, talking about this
sort of Maoist really insurrection overtaking of our schools. And

(01:44:03):
one of those quotes is as follows from the president
of a group who's opposed to these anti meritocratic proposals, says,
this is with respect critical race theory. China's Mao used
to call the tools he adopted to push forward as
communist agenda, the three flags. I think the CRT sounds
like one of the communist red flags. And there's also

(01:44:25):
a quote talking about how they viewed CRT as a
hateful fraud and a common source of anti Asian racism.
It's one last quote from this piece from mister Zang.
The cultural revolution in China suddenly ended in nineteen seventy six,
and the college entrance exams resumed in nineteen seventy seven.
A lot of historic trends that seem perpetual are like this.
When the turning point arrives, you need to be prepared.

(01:44:49):
Take a quick break, and we'll finish up here. In
the buck Sexton Show, Ben Wanger, and in four bucks
Sexton yesterday we touched on January sixth then how it's
being used leveraged to impose a coming war on domestic
violent extremism. And today the Biden administration put out a
domestic terror strategy. And I'm sure before the week is
out we'll be able to go in depth on this,

(01:45:09):
but I think it's worth noting from their terror sheet
sort of the high level points. First of all, they
say domestic terrorism. The most lethal elements of today's domestic
terrorism threat are one racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists
who advocate through the superiority of the white race, and
two anti government or anti authority violent extremists such as
militia violent extremists. They never define who these groups are.

(01:45:31):
They never define what ideas qualify as the kind of
ideas harbored by these domestic violent extremists. They never quantify
and qualify how big this threat is. But it could
likely mean you because they don't define it. Goes on
to say, US government will augment its efforts to address
online terrorists, recruitment and mobilization of violence by domestic terrorists

(01:45:52):
through increased information sharing with the technology sector and the
creation of innovative ways to foster digital literacy and build
resilience to recruitment and mobilization. What does that give you
any confidence that basically the government's going to be working
hand in hand with big tech to pursue whoever they
perceive the threat to be in this country. Again, protecting

(01:46:12):
our life and limb is the most important task of
our government in general and our commander in chief in particular.
But what happens when it's weaponized against innocent American people,
wrong thinking American people, And as we know it appears,
based on Julie Kelly's reporting, that there are people essentially
being held political prisoners for their views on what had
transpired in the twenty twenty elections. So should you have

(01:46:34):
any confidence? Should you have any confidence in the system
protecting our most cherished liberties and justice when it's been
weaponized so many times over the last four plus years
against former President Trump and every single person in his orbit.
And tomorrow we're going to talk to Ron Johnson, Senator
Ron Johnson from Wisconsin on this program. He's been targeted
mercilessly and called a Russian agent for daring to take

(01:46:58):
a different position with respect to whatever the conventional narrative
is on issues from Hunter Biden and Russian collusion and
Ukrainian collusion to beyond, and of course, taking an unpopular
position with respect to vaccine in the eyes of our
betters gets booted off by big tech. Terrorsheet goes on
to talk about US government improving employee screening to enhanced

(01:47:20):
methods for identifying domestic terrorists who might pose insider threats.
DOJ and DHS are similarly pursuing efforts to ensure domestic
terrorists are not employed within our military or law enforcement
ranks and improve screening in vetting processes. Okay, we know
that those processes now seem to describe as potential domestic
violent extreme as conservatives serving in the armed forces. And
it goes on to say every component of government has

(01:47:41):
a role to play in rooting out racism and bigotry
and advancing equity, not equality for all Americans. We'll delve
into the details of this later in the week, but
they are setting up such a wide open standards, such
a liberal lack standard, that you can have no confidence
in people who view you as their enemy, essentially to
actually go about this in a judicious fashion, or to

(01:48:03):
even be able to substantiate their claims justifying this whole, massive,
pervasive government wide effort. Our liberties and justice are at stake.
It's all on the table right now, and that's why
we're touching all the third rails they don't want to
talk about during this week, because we need to speak
openly and honestly and courageously without fear in the face
of this totalitarian onslaught. As I mentioned Tomorrow, we've got

(01:48:26):
a great program wind up. We'll have not only center
Ron Johnson, but another figure that the ruling class loves
to try and cancel who touches all sorts of third
rails on the merits Charles Murray as well. I hope
you'll tune in for that. This has been Ben Weingarten
in for Buck Sex and on the Buck Sex and Show.
I want to thank Buck for the opportunity, and I
want to thank you for listening during this entire week.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. God bless you,

(01:48:49):
God Bless America.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

The Nikki Glaser Podcast

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Tyranny Of The China Colluding Ruling Class

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

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

Stuff You Should Know

The Nikki Glaser Podcast

All Episodes

The Tyranny Of The China Colluding Ruling Class

Dateline NBC