All Episodes

February 28, 2020 106 mins

Season 4, Episode 42.

Ben Weingarten fills in for Buck!

Learn more about your ad-choices at

See for privacy information.

Mark as Played

Episode Transcript

Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is the Buck Sexton Show where the mission where
mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence
mcnoma stake American bring You're a great American Again The
Buck Sexton Show begins, CIA Analyst. Remember he's a great guy. No,

Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weingarten
in four Bucks Sexton. Always a pleasure to be with you,
and want to start by thanking Buck as always for
the opportunity to fill his big shoes. We've got a
lot to get to during this episode. As you may know,
this week, I released my new book American Ingred ilhan

Omar and the Progressive Islamists Takeover of the Democratic Party,
which uses ilhan Omar as sort of the personification the
symbol of where the Democratic Party is is going and
delves into the danger for American national security and ultimately
our core values and principles to the extent this hostile

takeover of the Party continues. So we'll get to that
directly and infuse that into some of the stories that
we grapple with during today's episode. We'll also talk about
the coronavirus. That's where we'll begin today's episode, as well
as a discussion on the corruption of our education system,
the Democratic Party, showing that democracy dies in darkness, the

increasingly hot confrontation with China in general and over Huawei,
and the all important fifth generation technology five G technology
in particular with David Goldman. Our education segment will be
with Joy Pullman of the Federalist and last, but not least,
we'll also have a conversation with Michael Pack, who is
the producer of a spectacular new documentary on Clarence Thomas

that I urge you to see. But as noted, the
big talk today the last several days is this potential
pandemic in the form of coronavirus. And this story, interestingly enough,
implicates a major theme that I've talked about on any
number of episodes filling in for Buck, dealing with US

China relations, the threat of the Chinese Communist Party, It's nature,
and ultimately what the consequences are for all of us
to the degree to which it remains as strong as
it has been. So I want to talk about the
coronavirus story in context of what it says about China
and then what it says about America in our reaction

to it. Frankly, the shameful, sickening, and disgusting reaction that
we've seen from the left politicizing an issue that cannot
be politicized. Just like national security should never be politicized
because it deals with the life and limb of American citizens,
so too it should be the same with anything public
health wise that is as major as this potential pandemic.

Let's start, though, with China, where this whole thing started.
About ten days ago, Jimmy Lay, a media tycoon, ardent hawk,
anti Chinese Communist Party figure in Hong Kong, an owner
of the Apple Daily newspaper, which frequently takes a confrontational
tone towards the Chinese Communist Party, wrote an article in

The Wall Street Journal that I urge you to pick up,
read and let it absorb a little bit, because it
describes the nature of China and also what it means
for us. I'm going to read a little from that
article and you understand why. In a moment, he wrote,
there exists today no vaccine for the coronavirus now engulfing China.

That is a challenge for President Shi Jinping as he
struggles to contain it. But the spread of the coronavirus
has revealed a truth that poses a much greater risk
to mister She. There is no cure for Chinese communism
except the collapse of the party. The more mister She
pursues his authoritarian agenda, the more distrust he will sew
at home and abroad. Far from transforming Beijing into the

world's waiting superpower, his policies will instead keep China from
taking its rightful place of honor in a peaceful, modern
and integrated world. This much should already be clear from
how badly Chinese authorities have botched their response to a
virus that each day claims more innocent Chinese wives. He
goes on to describe the Chinese authorities quashing those doctors

who were speaking out in the Wuhan province where this
outbreak started. When the outbreak did happen and a seafood
market was identified as the probable origin of the virus,
local authorities closed it down. They hid the threat, telling
the public that the market was merely being renovated. In
other words, as the outbreak was already underway, the local
government did what communist governments always do. Cover up. Deception

is China's true real rule of law and let me
stop right there. Deception has been at the core of
every communist aalitarian regime in the history of mankind. Why
because the truth is the strongest weapon against its totalitarian regime.
That's why they need to control the flow of information,
and by the way, why they want to control all

information and communications around the world through as we'll talk
about a bit later, dominating fifth generation five G network infrastructure.
Lie goes on. Now, the world must start asking something
that Chinese people living under communism ask themselves every day.
How reliable can China's political, social, and economic institutions be
when it's local government leaders routinely lie to their citizens

and superiors alike, Mister she has no understanding of this.
He talks of a people's war on the coronavirus and
has mobilized vast resources to combat at Communist governments excel
at mobilizing resources because their command economies and these big
actions quarantining entire cities, deploying the military, building hospitals, overnights
can look impressive, but their efficacy is hobbled by the

lack of free community. And that's what prevented Doctor Lee,
the doctor who is a whistleblower on this who himself
succumbed to the virus February seventh from getting his findings
out in a way that might have avoided much of
this pain. And the same problem makes it so that
no one in China can ever trust what anyone else says.
That goes for mister she himself. China's president cannot trust

the information he is getting. The lack of trust means
he must make decisions in the dark. No institution can
function effectively this way. But stop for a moment just
to point out that again, the free flow of information
is pivotal to free societies, precisely because good ideas compete
with bad ideas, and hopefully the best ideas went out

if we're not suicidal in capitalism, why does capitalism work?
Because there are price signals. There are prices that tell
us how much people desire of a product and how
much they're willing to pay for it. Coordinate the actions
of millions of people, hundreds of millions, billions of people,
and tell of those who are bringing those goods and

services to market whether or not they're doing the right
job and fulfilling the demand properly through profits and losses
that can be analogized to governments making decisions as well,
to the extent they have to intervene in different areas
of our lives. If you have no price signals, you
fail ultimately. That's why all these communist countries do ultimately fail.

But they can hang on for an awful long time
and create a ton of misery and kill millions of
people in the process. Let me continue a little bit
from this article. The Communist Party sees things differently. It's
leaders are betting the projects such as the Belt and
Road Initiative, Whawa's advanced five G wireless network, and the
MAIDE in China twenty twenty five industrial policy will ensure
China's global supremacy in the decades ahead. He says. Let's

assume for the moment that this is true. Without institutions
and a culture of trust, the China dream will prove empty.
The Chinese Communist Party continues to rule using deception and fear,
but as the coronavirus evolves into a global pandemic, it
undermines the case for authoritarian competence. Even worse for party
leaders is the potential for public unrest when the fear

of death seems more menacing and immediate than the fear
of dictatorship, and he quoses out his article by saying,
this the devil's bargain. Mister She has always offered the
people of China as this surrender your freedom and an
exchange you will enjoy continuing material improvement in your day
to day lives. But if the consequence of surrendering your
freedom may be losing your life, that becomes a much

harder sell. Today, mister She is still seeking more control
as it means to stop the coronavirus, But control does
not mean stability, especially when it helps create and feed
a health epidemic. If the coronavirus does nothing more than
expose this single truth, it may prove as revolutionary as
any event in China's history. Let's just point out that

our Democratic Party today wants control over every aspect of
our economy and in particular healthcare. They want a nationalized
healthcare system. We see what happens in China when you
have a commanding control of so maybe those who are
attacking our president this administration ought to step back a
second and look in the mirror, and in the next
segment we will talk about that. But I want to

tie this back to the fact the story of Jimmy
Lai himself, who wrote this op ed. It was revealed
that he was arrested today in Hong Kong Friday in
Hong Kong, quote, according to one article, for taking part
in an unauthorized anti government in March last year amid
the city's most serious political crisis for decades. Let me

repeat that again. He writes this op ed ten days
ago talking about the Chinese Communist Party's failures with respect
to coronavirus. Ten days later, arrested in Hong Kong for
his role supposedly in protests. Christian Wynn wrote a great
piece on this I urge your read it on Fox Business,
where he notes that he and two others Jimmy Lay

and two others were charged and released for a legal
assembly so called related to one of the scores of
mass gatherings against the government that have taken place ince
West June Andrew Ie, a pro democracy member of Hong
Kong's Legislative Council, observed quote the three were not even organizers.
This is clearly political persecution. Authorities also reportedly charged by

with allegedly intimidating a reporter in twenty seventeen by using
foul language. That journalist works for Oriental Daily, a pro
Beijing competitor newspaper. In reality, the Hong Kong government, whose
activities are increasingly directed by Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party,
is trying to use the disastrous coronavirus outbreak to its advantage.
Protests have dropped off due to concern about the outbreak.

Rather than focus all of their energy on public health,
authorities are evidently hoping instead to crack down on pro
democracy sentiments. This politics before health conduct fits with actions
by China's Communist government on the mainland, which included harassing
doctors who warned of the outbreak and misuading the world
of its severity and scope. So what is my takeaway

from all of this before we talk about the impact
on America and what a response has been. We cannot
or certainly should not rely on China for anything essential.
And you may have seen so many of the everyday
medicines that we use in this country are produced in China,
delivered by China. Parts used in American weaponry, in our vehicles,

in our computers, and other critical technology that we use
every second of every day made in China, the network
infrastructure or the phones that we rely on to the
extent it's Huawei back and even if it's not related
to h Huawei necessarily made in China. You want to
make the case for decoupling from China. Why we need

to shift our supply chains away exhibit A. This pandemic,
Not even to mention SARS and other problems that we've
seen before this, you cannot be tied inextricably intertwined to
a Chinese Communist Party led China. You can't. When I
come back, we'll talk about the way that the Democrats cynically, shockingly,

sickeningly are trying to capitalize on this crisis. This has
been one garden for Buck Sexon here in the Buck
Sexon Show. Be back just after this. You're in the
Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexon Show podcast. Welcome
back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben Weinegarden

in for Buck Sexton. And before the break we were
talking a bit about coronavirus, which has shocked those in
our financial markets. And you've likely seen if you're watching
your four oh one K or any of your portfolios
that the last several days, the markets have tanked, to

put it lightly, because of the spread of coronavirus to
the African continent, including it one of its largest countries
in Nigeria, in places like Italy, and then of course
several cases here in the US as well. And Sean Davis,
my colleague at the Federalists, had a great line about

what the reaction has been here. He said, a handful
of this is a tweet, a handful of never Trump
a looo, and left wing media personalities are really struggling
between bashing the redneck prepper rubes for being prepared for
coronavirus quarantines and blaming Trump for not doing enough to
prevent global pandemic that started in China. It's so strange, Yes,
it is strange. Indeed, this is an issue where there

cannot be the hyper politicization that there is in everything else,
but the left is forcing it. My argument is simply this,
we are talking about a potential pandemic and Democrats are
trying to use this to bash the president. We're going
to destroy ourselves if we can't get over political bickering

and snipering in the face of all the myriad threats
that we face, and it's to be expected, but it's
no less shameful. I think that the responses from the
media and other Democrats attacking the Trump administration's fitness to
deal with this issue, because they love to talk, always

talk about the fitness, notwithstanding their own problems, really reflects
Actually they're not only their willingness to try to win
at all costs by politicizing anything and everything, but how
desperate they are going into twenty twenty. This is the
thing that they're holding onto a disaster in the United States.
That's what they want. That is what they are saying
at the end of the day. And you know, we

saw this before the midterm elections as well, many of
them cheering on any sort of economic correction contraction because
they know, they admit that the Trump economy is strong.
It's the same thing here, but it's even more sick
because this is again about the life and limb of
American citizens, the first priority of every single representative, or
what is supposed to be the first priority of every

single one of our so called representatives. But for a second,
let's also point out who the party is. If they're
going to politicize this, they should be caught out for
the fact that this is a Democratic party that couldn't
build a functioning healthcare website with three hundred million dollars.
They want to take over all of healthcare. They can't
build a website with infinite resources behind it for their

Obamacare portal. This a party that couldn't run a caucus
in Iowa. The AP just announced it will not be
able to declare a winner after certification is finally completed,
which I believe it's used to be tomorrow, weeks after
the caucus. This is a party of open borders. Meanwhile,
according to one report, Brandon Judd, the president of the

National Border Patrol Council, said on February tenth that there
were three Chinese nationals who were apprehended illegally entering Texas
with food symptoms and who had to be quarantined. Luckily
they didn't have the coronavirus. But this is a wake
up call, he said. This is a party of Bolshevik
Bernie Sanders, do you really think that with a socialized
healthcare system, we're going to be able to quickly innovate

and get vital vaccines to the marketplace. No, we're gonna
go the exact same way as China. You think Bernie
would be able to deal with the equivalent of a Chernobyl.
And by the way, we haven't had Chernobyls precisely because
we're not the Soviet Union, we haven't had Chernobyls. But
you have to think twice about if they were in power.

And I'm not politicizing it. I'm saying that it is
a threat when they are in power potentially. And I'm
also not saying that I would be attacking them while
they were in power. I would be providing criticism intended
to push them towards doing the right things. Were they
in power, with he and his central planners and his
czars overseeing everything, you would run the risk of Chernobyls.

So what do I think ultimately happens. If we're going
to focus on the political aspect of this for a second,
I think this is going to backfire on Democrats. I
think there's a good chance of it because while this
is something of a September October surprise, except months in advance,
which they probably view as a bad thing about this
potential pandemic emerging, I think the Trump arrangement syndrome is

going to backfire here. They could have said, if the
Democrats could have said, this is the time to come together,
rise up a partnership, act like grown ups, even if
they don't believe it, they could have said that. They
could have pandered. They didn't. And what I think they're
underestimating here is that one of the core traits that
Trump exudes, and he has from the time he descended

on that escalator, is strength, fortitude, anti political correctness, goal based,
pragmatic again, strength at core, and do what needs to
be done and cut the bs. So in a wartime
sort of mode or a crisis kind of mode, you

can bet that he's going to exude strength and patriotism
and seek to instill confidence in the American people. And
I am confident that we certainly have the capability to
grapple with any sort of disaster to befollow us as
a country, but not to the extent half the country
or the party representing half the country embraces an anti
American ethos like as I'll talk about the party that

is now Bernie Sanders and ilhan Omar, the American ingrate,
as my book title is, party Now represents. This is
Ben Weegarden for Buck Sexon on the Buck Sex and Show.
We'll be back at just after this. Thanks for listening
to the Bus Sex and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get
your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show.

This is Ben Wee Garden in for Buck Sexton. And
as I noted at the top of the show, this
week I released my first book, American ingrate ilhan Omar
and the Progressive Islamist Takeover of the Democratic Party. And
I urge you to get your hands on at least
a few copies of the book, one for you, one

for your kids who need to read this before they
get indoctrinated in the schools that we're about to talk
about a little bit later, and we have another generation
of anti American self loathing fellow citizens. And then as well,
to bug any of your Bolshevik Bernie Brow friends, not
really to bug them, honestly, but to point out that
for those who are would fashion themselves JFK Democrats, your

grandfather's Democrats or your father's Democrats, to understand the stakes
if the Democratic Party is to be fully taken over
by its progressive wing, and that is sort of the
broader message that comes out of American Ingred, but it
uses ilhan Omar as the figure to get there and
also delves into not just the danger posed by an

anti American blame America first cohort of Democrats dominating that party,
but also the danger that ilhan Omar herself poses. And
I'm going to tease that out and explain it in
just a second, but I first want to point out
people talk about ilhan Omar and focus on this figure ingratitude.

That ingrate in my title is I think what the
viscerally negative reaction is to someone who says that on
nine to eleven, some people did something, or maybe you
didn't see this tweet that Thanksgiving is a time to
remember that this is a country founded on genocide and
colonialism and it's only continued that America is the scourge

of the earth, conceived in sin and continuing to sin
in every engagement we've been involved in a country that
is unjust demanding a completely radicalized social justice so called
agenda that would actually hurt the very people ilhan Omar
claims to speak for, and by the way, her district

is ranked on any number of measures as one of
the worst in the country for Black Americans minorities, who
she claims again to speak for, and her party claims
to speak for. Someone who believes in overturning our capitalist order,
free homes for all who need it, socialized medicine, abolish ice,

so free for all at our borders, no actual freedom
for American citizens, and the imperiling of our life and whim.
But again we need to It cannot be emphasized enough
that on top of the radicalism, and we haven't even
talked about all of the jew hatred reflected in her
remarks and her associations and ties, and in spite of

the alleged criminality associated with the bizarre allegation backed up
with substantial evidence, and I go in chapter and verse
an American ingreat to talk about it that she fraudulently
married her brother, a foreign national, in order to have
him come over here, get an education, and then leave,
at which point she reunited with the person with whom

she had been with for years before and might have
still been with during the years where she was married
so called to this foreign national. On top of all
of the raft of criminality associated with that, and it
implicates not just marriage fraud and immigration fraud, but also
student loan fraud as well, so educational fraud with respect

to the public funding used to get him into school,
same school she attended, and then perjuring herself in the
divorce proceedings where she broke off the relationship with this man,
and then also by the way, tax fraud associated with
the fact that she filed jointly with her current husband,

now actually divorced, but the person who she would ultimately marry,
with whom she had had three children, filing jointly for
taxes when she was not technically married to him and
still technically married to this previous person that she had
allegedly fraudulent, fraudulently married. Leave aside all that craziness for
a second. Consider that background in context of how powerful

Omar is not just symbolically but substantively. She was recently
named the co chair of Democratic front runner Bernie Sanders
campaign in the pivotal twenty twenty state of Minnesota, along
with another gem Keith Ellison, the state attorney general whose
seats she took when she became a member of the House.

She recently proposed a battery of foreign policy bills that
Ben Rhodes described as the new progressive baseline. This is
a foreign policy agenda that is about so called justice, equality, fairness,
making up for America's sins by appeasement, submission, demilitarizing quote unquote,

and then, unless we forget this is a member of
the House who, in spite of her known vario and
anti semitism, the blame America first positions and siding with
our adversaries by the way, as I'll get to in
a moment, and the potentially commising background that would stop
her from ever being able to get a security clearance
under normal circumstances, but she doesn't need it because she
has that House Foreign Affairs Committee seats and as a

member of Congress, and oh, by the way, Grapple is
with the most sensitive national security and foreign policy information
and issues on that committee. She is able to act
with total impunity while holding those positions because her party
is effectively condoned her rhetoric and her behavior. And it
started first when they put her on that committee, powerful committee,

in what seems like a deal that Speaker Pelosi made
with Party progressives to appease them by putting her in
that spot, knowing some of the things that she had
said about Israel hypnotizing the world in her infamous tweet
years before, and party officials, by the way, in Minneapolis
area had warned about this. They were nervous about it.

They had an intervention with her about it before she
ever won that House seat. Clearly the intervention didn't work.
The red lion was when her party refused to censure
her by name and for her specific comments regarding the
so called Israel lobby and her invocation of other anti
Semitic tropes. But again, what it shows is that the

party has caved to its progressive wing. And if you
want the clearest example of it, we have Bernie Sanders
right now as the front runner. But before that note,
we had impeachment. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi, under normal circumstances,
in a world where the squad didn't exist, would have
pushed for that impeachment. Do you think Gerald Nadwer would
have been on board. Do you think Elliot Angele would

would have been on board? Honestly, do you think Adam
Shift necessarily would have been on board? You probably didn't
even hear about Adam Shift's name until the last couple
of years. Why question is why, and the answer is
because they saw when AOC was elected that any one
of them could get picked off in a primary. The
Democratic establishment is terrified. You see it in the effort

likely to steal a nomination from Bernie Sanders, and we'll
get to that a little bit later. And you see
it in the candidates staking out more radically left positions
than candidates have ever staked out before, pandering to a
left wing that they had not many of them had
not fully associated within the past. And you see it
in the decisions that Spuccre Pelosi has made and some

of the bills that have been brought to the floor
in the House. And it is precisely because they fear
for their political lives, because they know that there are
many aocs out there, and there are many ilhan Omar's
out there. So when you see Bernie Sanders embrace in
ilhan Omar, obviously he's there with her already, but it
reflects the fact that this progressive poison is ascendant in

the Democratic Party. And how can a party that represents
half the country be an anti American party and keep
this country actually together? What will unite us. At the
end of the day, it's completely about disunifying the country.
It's about pitting people against each other. It's why, as
I go into great depth in this book American Ingrate,
I talk about Ilhan Omar's intersectionality and politics of identity,

which is all about dividing us, rubbing raw the sores
in our society to put us against each other, divide
us and ultimately take us down. But from their perspective,
taking us down is bringing us up to another level,
because in their perverse worldview, bringing America down, putting America second,
is America first for them, that blame America first ideology.

For them, the old is the only moral just thing
to do, because we are the worst country in the
history of mankind in their view. So at the end
of the day, why does Congresswoman Omar matter? Why should
we care about the fact that she has been elevated
and embraced by her party? And I make the comprehensive

case in American in Grade that she has indeed been
embraced by the party because what she represents symbolically and
her own power substantively is being embraced by the front
runner of the party. Is where the party is shifting ideologically.
She's a leading indicator, if not an indicator of the

fact that the party is already there with her. And
I will talk about the danger of the fact that
she is where she is and the party is where
they are. Just after this break, this has been one
garden for Buck Sexon on the Buck sex and show
back just after this you're in the Freedom Hud. This
is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the

Buck Sexon Show. This is Ben Weine Garden in for
Bucks Sexon and we have been talking about the release
of my new book. Very excited about it. The reception
has been exceptional so far. If you hadn't seen Newt
gang Ridge tweeted about it and said essentially that American
ingred ilhan Omar and the progressive Islamist takeover of the

Democratic Party shows exactly where this anti americanism and radicalism
reflected in Bernie Sanders for example, and by the way,
many other Democrat candidates refusing to speak at APAC. The
American Israel Joint Group Bipartisan are arguably a left leaning group. Honestly,
they won't speak there. In in Bernie's embrace of Castro

and the Communists. And I appreciate speaker gang Rich making
that point because it's an essential one that this represents,
this progressive movement represents anti Americanism. Blame America first, put
American second, third, not just second to third, put Americans last.
And as I've argued, a vote for Bernie Sanders is

a vote for ilan Omar and the ideology she embraces.
And again that is where the Democratic Party is right
now with Bernie as the front runner. Now. In terms
of ilhan Omar's own danger as an individual, I noted
the alleged criminality, the anti American positions. I also talked

about the ethics violations, or if I didn't, she has
had ethics violations with respect to her campaign spending, refuses
to answer when questioned on almost any of this, and
then she has all the substantial power that we've talked about.
Not mentioned is her Islamist collusion, and that is with
foreign regimes, dignitaries associated with Sunni Islamist groups, her support

of Shia Islamists. With respect to the Iranian Molocracy, she
stands with the Iranian Molocracy and its allies against America's
partners in several of the Sunni Arab states like Saudi
Arabia and Egypt and Jordan, and of course our key
partner ally in the region, Israel, who perversely, amazingly, as
a result of the Obama administration policies, has now ended

up in a partnership with these countries that before would
have sought to destroy Israel, an amazing thing, one of
the only positives of the Obama foreign policy agenda. Miraculously
this has all transpired and materialized. But ilhan Omar's own
Islamist collusion, and I had a editorial about this in
the New York Post this week. I urge you to

check out just regarding ilhan Omar's ties to Turkey alone,
and the jumping off point for this, and actually the
jumping off point for the whole book was at a
picture surface of ilhan Omar as a state representative in
twenty seventeen meeting with Turkish President er Towan on the
sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York. So
the first question you have to ask is why the

heck is air to one meeting with a state representative
from Minnesota on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly,
and the reporting very scant and often foreign language on
that meeting shows that they were talking about Turkish Somalia
relations of all things, which is bizarre. Omar, a native
of Somalia, has maintained incredibly close ties to a Somali

regime that is one of the most corrupted in the world.
It's a Shariah based regime. It's a constitution talks about
social justice and Shariah, which fits in perfectly with Ilhan.
Omar's associations with all manner of Islamist and her pro
Islamic identity combined with her progressivism, and she has talked
about her views of Islam and Islam itself being a ideology,

a theopolitical ideology that fits with this social justice milieu
as well. I go into great length to talk about
her ties and several meetings that she's had with senior
Turkish officials, including Ardwan, her taking fifteen hundred dollars from
a man reported to be er Towan's cousin who lobbies

through a Turkish group against things like, for example, the
recent House resolution to recognize the Armadian genocide perpetrated by
the Ottoman Turks, which the Turkish government hates terrible pr
for them, so she takes fifteen hundred dollars from him.
She meets with all of these officials fifteen hundred dollars

in campaign contributions, that is, meets with all these Turkish officials,
says she's going to say nice things about Turkey, has
said nice things about Turkey and context in particular of
Turkey helping Somalia, which again, what is a US representative,
Why does she have a stake in this? What is
her equity in that issue? She is one of the
only people not to vote to censure or rather to

recognize the Armadian genocide as being perpetrated by the Ottoman Turks.
And then she also votes against sanctions on Turkey. There's
a person who loves sanctions when it comes to Israel,
and she's tweeted BDS Saudi BDS Saudi Arabia before, but
then she goes out she votes against sanctions on Turkey
over their incursion into Northern Syria against the Kurds, and

that was overwhelmingly bipartisan support for those sanctions, just like
there was overwhelming bipartisan support for that aforementioned resolution. She
takes Turkey's side on those issues, and then she writes
in the Washington Post about how she's really against sanctions
when it comes to Turkey. They're detrimental, they hurt people,
They're all these terrible humanitarian knock on effects, but completely

silent on how she squares that with her support of
the terror tied BDS movement against Israel. That's just Turkey.
But I document at great length in this book Elanomer's
ties again to Somali leaders, some of whom are terror tied,
certainly corrupt her own husband in law serving in that

regime ultimately. And then her affiliations with all manner of
anti American, anti Israeli radical groups and individuals in the US,
including care which of course was an unindicted co conspirator
in the largest terrorism financing case dealing with Hamas in
US history. And these ties are legion And we are

talking about her speaking in front of these groups, her
appearing pictured with these individuals, working with these individuals on
any number of issues in Congress, her taking money from them,
campaign contributions to the tune of over twenty thousand dollars
from Islamist linked individuals, and that was only as of
last year. You put all this together, and she represents

the personification of what I deem the Progressive Islamist Alliance
or axis, and it is jew hatred that is the
glue that holds that intersectionalist alliance together as representative of
ultimately hatred for Judaeo Christian Western civilization. And that at
core is the importance of this book. It is about
a war on us. So I urge you to pick

up American Ingrate, ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamist take
Over the Democratic Party. Tweet out a picture of it,
be happy to sign copies. This has been wandering in
for Buck sex And on the Buck Sex and Show,
and we'll be back just after this. Thanks for listening
to the Bus Sex and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or where you get
your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This

is Ben wine Garden in for Buck Sexton, and we
open today's show by talking about coronavirus and in particular
what the implications are and what it tells us about
the ruling Chinese Communist Party, which, as I've argued at length,
is the number one threat to American liberty engaged in

a whole of government comprehensive strategy to become not just
a regional hegemon, but the world hegemon as well as
the impact on America and frankly, the catastrophic consequences to
the extent we are going to politicize a potential pandemic
that we're just going to tear ourselves apart as a country, which,

by the way, of course, is what all of our
adversaries love. In some ways, it's almost providing a lifeline
to the Chinese Communist Party because when you consider the coronavirus,
after the quote unquote trade war that they have endured
under the Trump administration, after what transpired in Hong Kong,
they've had a lot of losses over the past few years,

and the coronavirus, of course, is having massive economic consequences.
You have all manner of Western businesses shutting down operations there.
We've already seen the shift of supply chains, which I
think is a welcome development and which President Trump himself
has encouraged in tweets and statements in the past. But
it ought to be noted that there are other dimensions

to this competition as well, and the threat posed by
the Chinese Communist Party has not receded, even though it
has substantial problems right now as a consequence both of
this emerging potential global pandemic as well as the consequences
of the so called trade war that has transpired to date.

And this is an area that I think again is
the seminal contribution on the foreign policy side of the
Trump administration, which has been the reorientation of US national
security and foreign policy towards the Chinese Communist Party. And
in spite of how critical I have been on this
show in the past, of a politicized law enforcement, particular

at its most senior levels, abusing the spy apparatus, the
intelligence apparatus, weaponizing and politicizing it in a bid to
not just undermine the Trump administration agenda, but really ultimately
as an attack on us, we the people who voted
for it and who voted to overturn establishment policy and

again focus on America first, on China. There has been
an amazing sort of bipartisan realization that the status quo
is untenable, unsustainable, and does pose a great risk ultimately,
and we're not fully there, as you see with Mike Bloomberg,
for example, who won't call she dictator and says he
has to answer to his constituents, when his constituents are

other people in the Chinese Communist Party who threatened his power.
At the end of the day, it's laughable. And of
course many of these candidates directly or indirectly have had
commercial financial ties to China in the past as well,
so disastrous on that count. But there has been a realization,
I think, and I think it's pretty well documented in

the highest reaches of the US government and even on
a bipartisan basis to some degree, with the likes of
even Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, a realization that we
have given China the world since we've opened that relationship,
and at every single point of crisis, we as a
nation have really caved to them. Probably the best example

of this, the most horrendous example of this being in
the wake of TMMN Square, when the Chinese Communist Party
engaged in a disaster and we essentially let them off
the hook and said the status quo will continue, and
we have enabled the Chinese Communist Party to get rich,
and they've thanked us by continuing to steal our crown jewels,

threatening today our Navy for example, in the region, and
of course seeking to dominate the world with five G technology,
as we'll talk about shortway with my next guest, David Goldman.
But it does bear noting the actions and the words
that Trump administration officials have taken, and again I say
that in particular in the realms of national security and

foreign policy. And I'd urge you to draw your attention
to a few recent actions which demonstrate that even if
there was a Phase one trade deal with the Chinese
Communist Party, the Trump administration is as ego by it
as ever in terms of continuing to counter the Chinese
Communist Party with a whole of government strategy. And there

have been a few speeches delivered recently that I urge
you to read in full because it just represents a
remarkable sea change in you s foreign policy, in particular
from Attorney General William Barr Bill Barr, as well as
Secretary of State Pompeo, and bears noting that just a
couple of weeks ago, the Department of Justice unveiled a
nine count indictment in which it alleged that four members

of the PLA that's the Chinese Army Research Institute hacked
Equifax's computer networks, stealing sensitive information including names, birthday, social
security numbers of almost one hundred and fifty million Americans
that's almost half the country in other words, and driver's
licensed numbers from ten million or more Americans. And these
PLA officers were also charged with engaging in economic espionage

and a raft of other crimes as well. That's a
remarkable thing that that indictment was revealed, because in the past,
the US would have never engaged in an operation to
prosecute PLA TIEDE officials, let alone PLA officials themselves. What
Barr said was, for years, we have witnessed China's veracious
appetite for the personal data of Americans, including the theft
of personal records from the US Office of Personnel Management,

which we've talked about talked about at length of the show,
the intrusion into Marriott Hotels and Anthem Health Insurance Company,
and now the whole sealth theft of credit and other
information from Equifax. This data has economic value, and these
thefts can feed China's development of artificial intelligence tools as
well as the creation of intelligence targeting packages. And what
Bar has overseen at the Department of Justice is a

China initiative that has led to a number of public
actions charging individuals and entities for crimes relating to everything
from the infiltration of US academic and research institutions and
strategically significant and sensitive areas, to charging people with committing
espionage on behalf of the Chinese government, trafficking and counterfeit
goods which steals millions, if not billions of dollars ultimately

in wealth from Americans over time, the illegal importation of
goods manufactured in China, and numerous trade theft cases, as
well as, of course, actions against the telecommunications giant and
central player in China's grand strategy, Whawei, the behemoth, the
crown jewel for the Chinese Communist Party in their effort
to be the dominant world power. So i'd urge you

to read Attorney General Bar's speech at the CSIS think Tank,
as well as a speech delivered by Secretary of State
Pompeo to governors in which he talked about the Chinese
Communist Party's targeting of American political officials, including governors around
the country. Next, We're going to have an in depth
conversation with a China watcher par excellence, an expert when

it comes to Huawei in specifically and the Chinese Communist
Party and its grand strategy generally. David Goldman, this has
been one going in for Buck Sexton on the Buck
Sexton Show. We'll be back with David Goldman just after this.
You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton
Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This

is Ben Weinegarden in for Buck sexon and we've been
talking about as we always do, for about an hour
when filling in for Buck Sex and the pivotal foreign
threat of our time to our liberty as Americans, that
of the Chinese Communist Party. And one of the shrewdest
and most knowledgeable China watchers out there is my next guest,

David Goldman, known as Spengler, where he writes for the
Asia Times. He also contributes frequently to PJ Media and
also I'm proud to report and happy to report has
a book coming out later this year regarding some of
our topics today on Huawei in particular, You will be assimilated. David,
thanks so much for coming on the program. Bran, thanks
so much for having it's a great pleasure. So first

I should say, you work in financial markets in addition
to all your writing, and we've seen financial markets essentially
tank in the West during this last week in large
part and I hate when financial watchers attribute market movements
to one or two particular events, but in this case,
I do think it is safe to say in response

to coronavirus and government responses to coronavirus. So first, I
just wonder if you'd give us your general take on
what has transpired and where do you think this is going,
both for China and the US. The point at which
the markets went bananas is when Korea and Japan and
Italy showed a very large number of cases. The rate

of spread of the virus outside of China became significantly
greater than the rate inside China itself. China is a
detallature in surveillance state. If you go by an aspirin
and you're not on the quarantine list in the city
like Uha, the police will come and give you a
test for COVID nineteen to make sure you're nottivating quarantine.

So the Chinese have had the capacity to locked down
gigantic members of the population isolated a city of thirteen
million people. Very hard to do in the West, and
the rate of infection in China has level dwelt, but
outside China much harder to control. So with Japanese schools
shut down, with a Japanese island of Hokaido quarantined at home,

with lower a thousand cases in Korea, and rapid spread
in Italy, nobody knows what kind of damned this will inflict,
and also what kind of political problems it will dredge
up in its way. God forbid that Bernie Sanders becomes
president of the United States. But if you have a
sufficient crisis like this, obviously it increases the chances of

something terrible like that happening. So the degree of uncertainty
is so great about this that it spooked the market.
I think the market has gone much too far, by
the way. Personally, I've been buying certain stocks this morning,
and I'm comfortable that we're not going to have anything
like the two thousand and eight crash. Totally different situation.

Not very worried, but I do think it would be
appropriate for saying emergency tax cuts and similar to spending
to come from the major governments as a way of
timing the economy over getting over the hump as we
learned to double the virus. And it's worth noting also
that there was a report I believe from the Jerusalem

Post last night that is an Israeli company was supposedly
within weeks away from developing a virus to handle coronavirus,
so potentially vaccine. Yes, yes, that's true, but it's very
unlikely that any vaccine is going to have a measurable
impact in the rise in the several months that we'll
worry about. Now. Sure, I want to transition to something

that we've discussed on this program atlant on numerous occasions,
and that is China's Grand strategy. It's focus in particular
on being a dominant player in technology and networking and
information technology in particular. And so we'll start very narrow
to get to a broader question, which is how does
fit into China's grand strategy. Walway is an entirely unique

development in five thousand years of Chinese history. I can't
overestimate how important it is. For the first time China
has managed to enlist the towns of ten to thousands,
so some of the best Western engineers and scientists. It
is not a Chinese company. It is an imperial company

in which the Chinese Empire has put into harness many
of the best minds in the West. For example, we
are very cross with Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of England,
for allowing Wali to build out part of Britain's five
G network, and the American officials seem to be shocked
by this decision. They could have seen it coming. Ten

years ago. Two eleven, Wali hired the Chief Information Officer
of Her Majesty's government, John Suffolk. Two and twelve Wali
anounced that was going to spread two billion dollars around
in England in the form of research grants, laboratories, R
and D, all kinds of things. They have bought their
way into every university department, every startup, every lab that

has anything to do with telecommunications. They've hardwired the British
scientific establishment into their project, and they've been doing it
in public view, bragging about it openly for more than
nine years. So the extent to which China has linked
itself into the scientific contento, large school lead and key

parts of the corporate sector in Western Europe and of
course Russia, obviously Southeast Asia is up to the Chinese
have never attempted before, they ever done before. Now they
have a juggernail which is extremely hard to stop, and
it can't be stopped us by scolding our allies working
with you've written some very interesting stories regarding your experiences

touring Wahwei facilities. Of course under the close watch, I'm
sure of their handwears. Meeting with Huawei officials, officers, regular
workers there. Can you share some of your insights that
you think are most pertinent regarding those visits. I became
aware of this by stumbling into the manhole, so to speak.

I'm the forest gump analyst here. I just happened to
be there at the right time. Four years ago, I
was working as an adjustment banker for a little boutique
in Hong Kong and we wanted to get Walwe's business.
Nobody was objecting to it then it wasn't on the radar,
so I introduced them to the government of Mexico, where

by the way, Walwi is now building Mexico's national broadband system,
including five G. I'm the American border. You don't hear
a lot of talk about that, but it was something
of an accomplishment. So I took the Mexican ambassador to
Chi to Huawei headquarters in Shenzen and we went through
the exhibition hall of their technologies, which looks like ten

air and space museums in the National Mall. It's an
incredible place. And afterwards they sat the Mexican delegation down
in a little amphitheater, and a fellow from while they
came up with a power point and said, you are
a big country. You have bad broadband. Bad broadband means
you are poor. We will make you rich. You can

become rich like China. Let us come in and build
a national broadband network. Then we bring in Chinese e commerce,
we bring in Chinese e finals. When we bring in
Chinese technology, you will become like China. Sounded like the board.
You will be assimilated. And Mexicans are just stunned. The
massador said, how long have you been doing this? The

Chinese guy kind of looked at his watch and said, oh,
I don't know, seven or eight years. And their mouths
are on the floor now. Of course they are doing it.
So what China wants to do is not just spin
and spy on our information flows or steal our secrets.
That's so nineties. What China wants to do is become

the dominant force in the world economy and use its
control of broadband to layer in all the new technologies.
Go to de find a twenty first century artificial intelligence,
automated manufacturing, autonomous vehicles, remote control surgery, medical diagnostics, or

artificial intelligence via the cloud, and all of this is public.
You can go to Wawei's website and watch their confidence
speeches on this and streaming video. You can read their
profiles for transforming the technological capability of every country in
the world. They've got a little profile of a hundred
countries and what they want to do to them. This

is a plan for China to be de transformative factor
in the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the dominant power in
the world economy. So it'd be fair to say that
in this case, the communists are selling us the rope
with which to hang us. Well, I mean, it's a
communist I've met more communists in Cambridge, Massachusetts than I
have in China. This is if it were just communists.

Ben and I fight with all of my conservative friends
about this all the time. Communistry idiots. Communism isn't that
became a wasn't It's a stupid idea. The Chinese are
the embodiment of the old Mandarin meritocracy which has ruled
China for twenty five hundred years. They just happened to

be called to communist party. We're dealing with a five
thousand year old empire that's curious, pragmatic, energetic, brutal and
ruthless and has now woken up from five thousand years
of slumber, looked at the world and said this looks
appetized into us. Why don't we take it. We're speaking

with David Goldman here and we'll continue this conversation right
after the break. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck
Sexon on the Buck Sexon Show. Back just after this.
Thanks for listening to the bus Sex and Show podcasts.
Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or
wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck
Sexton Show. This is Ben Weingarten in for Buck Sexton,

and I want to continue this conversation with David Goldman.
He's known as Spangler for Asia Times. He writes at
PJ Media and elsewhere, and as I noted previously, is
one of the shrewdest China watchers. There is, and we've
been talking about Whawei as a seminal player in the
Chinese Communist Party's grand strategy to be the dominant world power.

And that brings us naturally, naturally to the question of
how far behind is America and why have we failed
to date to counter the CCP in this endeavor. Well,
see our technol companies bend. It's not so much that
they're rearranging the decktures and the Titanic. It's more like
their sealing and the the silver spoons from the dining room.

They've had a twenty year freide where they figured out
that if they invest in software, which is infinitely scalable,
marginal costs of adding a customer, zero, huge rates of
return in equity, they don't have to do the dirty
and lower return job of building the hardware. Let they

contract that out to the Asians. Not simply China, of course,
it's a Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, of course, South Korea. It's
all the same model. The Asians subsidize chip fabrication plants
the way we subsidize sports stadiums or airports. So the
US tech sector instead of investing in physics, hardware, changing nature,

high tech manufacturing concentrated exclusively on software. Cisco, for example,
use through the dominant telecommunication equipment company in the world.
They've moved almost entirely out of hark Or. They're a
software company. They've got a return in equity of thirty
five percent. At breakfast stows a few months ago with
a senior guy from WAWE, and he said, we don't

understand you Americans. If you were worried about us, why
didn't you just have Cisco by Ericson. That's the big
Swedish telecommunications company and the closest to a competitor that
WAWE has. Have Cisco by Ericsson and create a national
champion that competes with us. And I told the Walwe guy, well,
it's real simple. Cisco as a return of equity of

thirty five percent. Ericson had a return of equity last
year of about zero. So Cisco stock price would go down,
and we don't do anything that doesn't boost stock prices.
That's simple. So we've been entirely focused on shareholder value
and going for the quickest buck without thinking about long

term consequences. Whereas a Chinese have been digging in and
building the infrastructure to dominate not just five detelecommunications, but
all the many manufacturing, mining, retail, finance, shipping applications that
come often so in just a couple of minutes. And

I know it's difficult to condense it or distill it.
You've argued in effect, if not directly, for a national
industrial policy, and free marketeers will of course fear the
government and private sector working hand in hand, legitimate fears
in many cases, but of course we're dealing with an
existential threat here. Or they'll argue that the government directing

projects in space like telecommunications will lead to all of
the problems that we know tend to come from central planning.
So what is your response to them? And then what
does your whole of government plan look like. All those
objections are valid, and the best way to avoid them
is do what we did under the Reggae devestation, where

we were spending the equivalent in today's dollars at three
hundred billion dollars a year in basic scientific research. We
contract out to the big corporate labs which don't exist anymore,
to look into all kinds of things, out of which
we got chief and fast semiconductors, the semiconductor laser optical networks,
the Internet itself. Virtually everything that went into the digital

age came out of a basic science grant from the
Defense Department, but we let private companies raise money and
take the risk of commercializing the inventions. So I think
we need to work our way back up to that
three hundred billion dollars a year level, about a point
and a half of GDP of subsidies for basic research.

We need to train more engineers to get there. We
need to train more scientists, We need to persuade the
corporations that used to have these giant industrial labs to rebuild.
And it's absolute we could do overnight, but we need
to go backs of the kind of things we did
and won the Cold War under Reagan, who was of
course a great free marketer and did not allow the

private sector for the most part, to exploit government subsidies,
which is what many of my free market colleagues worry about,
as do I. We've been speaking with David Goldman. I
urge you to read everything you can that he writes,
and he is a book coming out later this year
on many of the topics we've just spoken about that.
It will be titled You Will be Assimilated. David, thank
you so much for coming on the program. Ben, thanks

so much for having me. And this is Ben Winegarden
in for Buck sex In here on the Buck Sex
and Show. Back just after this you're in the Freedom Hud.
This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to
the Buck Sex and Show. This is Ben Weingarten in
for Buck Sexton and with my last guest, we talked

about the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party. But
as I've talked about on numerous occasions a show, ultimately
America has the capability to grapple with any foreign adversary,
almost any challenge we could possibly face externally. The greater
challenge that we have is do we have the will

and do we have the internal strength the cohesion. Are
we united enough to grapple with not just those external
problems but the internal problems that we are facing today.
And a couple of those core problems are one the
collapse of the family and two and relatedly in many respects,

just the horrid shape that our education system is in,
something that our adversaries a certain way themselves taken advantage
of and one of the keenest experts on the state
of our education system where it's headed, where we are
today is Joy Pullman, who is my colleague, the executive
editor of the Federal Issues, written an ebook recommending more

than four hundred classic books for family was with young children,
which I urge you to take a look at. And
she's also the author of The Education Invasion, How Common
Core Fights parents for control of American Kids, a book
that I actually interviewed Joy on in the past, and
she wrote a great piece at the Federalists recently where
she talked about an exchange on Morning Joe which implicated

the whitewashing of Bernie Sanders's communist coddling. So with that background, Joy,
tell us about that exchange and your thoughts on it. Well,
it seems, you know, look, it wasn't a big deal,
but it kind of underscores a lot of things that
are the service, kind of like a tip of the
iceberg sort of thing. So I think it was Wednesday
morning on Joe Scarborough show on MSNBC Morning Joe, he

and a guest were talking about you know, Scarborough has
been public about his concerns about socialism and communism, and
Bernie Sanders potentially becoming the Democratic nominee label is one
of those. So even though he is obviously a leftist,
Scarborough isn't willing to go as far as to label

the ideas you know, socialism or communism. So he and
his number There are a number of panelists, but the
one he had this exchange with was a fellow from
Princeton University Eddie and I don't know if I'm probably
not going to pronounce his name well, but Gaudi Gaude anyway,
so what they you know, the fellow was seemed to be,
you know, kind of advocating for Bernard Standers, and one

of the things that he said was, you know a
lot you know Americans. He didn't think that Bernie's comments
supporting socialist dictator Fidel Castro Cuba was necessarily a bad
thing because he noted that a number of Americans think
that America is basically an imperialist, colonialist power. And Scarborough said, okay,

well that's two percent of Americans for the other ninety
eight percent, how does this work? Well, but what I
want on to talk about in the article is how
actually that's not two percent of Americans. You know, depending
on the question that you're asking and you know, and
the poll that you're looking at, something between thirty and
forty percent of Americans, and especially higher percentages of young

people will agree. I mean half of you know, half
of Americans will agree that with the statement that America
is a racist and a sexist country. You know, thirty
to forty percent of especially young people will agree. The
United States, you know, it shouldn't be proud of its history.
United States wasn't great and never will be. A twenty
percent of them said young people that America will never

be great. You know. So again, some of these are
minority numbers, that they are very sizeable minority numbers, and
it's a shocking how big that is, and that obviously
has grown across time, this negative view of people, you know,
of American Again, I think America definitely comes in for
criticism and a number of things that we've done corporately politically,
I think we still do now. I mean, we're overseeing

what I consider to be mass genocide with our laws
about abortion. You know. So definitely think that America can
be criticized, but that doesn't mean that I hate America.
And the growth of really negative opinions among Americans, especially
given that we know that the growth, that growth is

fed by public tax dollars, public education institutions. Attacking the
very nation that feeds them, that supports them, that sustains them.
That is a new and it's very troubling thing for
the future of this country. And I have to have
a little tie in here to my book American ingrids
ilhan Omer and the Progressive Islamist take over the Democratic Party, because,

as I note in that book, while she was raised
herself in a Marxist Islamist dictatorship in Somalia in the
early years of her life, and her family served that regime,
she could have gotten the same anti American ideas there,
like the ones you just described to imperialist colonialist occupying power,
just as easily from Somalia as in the encove that
she lived in in Minneapolis. That is a really scary

concept to consider, and it begs the question, how did
the American education system become anti American? Well, I mean
it's taken a long time. You know something people are
familiar probably with the phrase the long march through the institutions,
But I mean part of it just is that the
left deliberately targeted cultural institutions, one of the chief ones

of which is education. And quite frankly, people on the right,
conservatives and even people who wouldn't call themselves political conservatives
but are kind of dispositionally moderate or conservative, they we
haven't put it up. We haven't put up a fight.
You know. Really the left has been the aggressors in
this case, and you know, they keep pushing and coashing
and keep pushing, and it's I don't think it has

dawned fast enough on Americans a of all what they're doing,
and be the consequences of it, and then you know,
maybe to add a C there. Therefore, you our response
has just been extremely lacking. You know, we we have
known about problems like this for at least the past
fifty two one hundred years. You know, I've done you know,
some search about the history of American education politics, and

you know, so this has been evident from the beginning,
and Americans have been complacent, particularly our political leaders on
the right have done way too much, you know, trying
to be moderates, trying to be partisan. And while they
have you know, basically done that, you know, the you know,
the schools have been transformed under their feet into agents
you know, that really turn Americans against their own country.

And I mean, I think that's completely outrageous. There's no
point in a conflict country can exist. You know, if
we are literally teaching people to hate the country. You know,
that is educating them and in many cases clothing and
feeding them and housing them in school. You know, schooling
them is you know, we just can't continue as a
country if we're going to allow our own institutions to

attack our existence. Only a country that has it really
good on a relative and absolute basis could have the
time or the sort of narcissistic self loathing that we
do to have these great institutions and then seek to
tarnish them. It really is a remarkable thing. Do you
think there's something in the American psyche that is just

broken at this point? Well? I do, Actually, I mean,
I think it's a Western thing. Self criticism is something
that the West says that you don't see to the
same extent in for example, the Eastern you know kind
of heritage. So I mean, and I think there is legitimacy. Again,
there is something that makes it can be a strength
to criticize yourself to notice your flaws and seek to

correct them. I mean, the America most maybe the most
notably did that, you know, with the Civil War and
a civil rights movement. Sure we had a flaw, and
you know, we worked to fix it and that needed
to happen. So there are absolutely positive things that come
from that. But there's also, you know, a point where
it goes too far, you know, where you say that
because America has done things, therefore all the good things

are negated or we can't notice them or talk about
them too or put the evil things in context. And
that really is what education ought to be. I don't
advocate for education is indoctrination from a conservative point of view,
I want people to know the truth, and you know,
they're left instead of presenting people all of the facts
in the whole context and doing that as a developmentally

appropriate time. I mean, I have not shown my preschoolers,
you know, pictures of whipped American slaves, right, but that
is a historical fact that people need to see perhaps
at some point. I haven't brought my babies to the
American Holocaust Museum, but I've been there, and I think
Americans should go there, right, you know, So that process
of education needs to be done wisely in it, but

it needs to have the whole truth. And too many
times and too often, especially nowadays, American kids are not
given the whole truth, and that colors their worldview and
and and I think really what needs to happen is
we need the American kids need to start with a
disposition to love and have affection for their country, and
then from that orientation then they learn how to criticize it,

just like within a family, right, And you know, we
all have families and we all mostly love them, but
we're also free to criticize our families, right. But you
do that from wanting your family to be better, you know,
and so rather than hating your family and wanting to
destroy it. So what Criticizing out of love and criticizing
out of hatred are two completely different things and only

one of them is the one that the left tries
to do typically. Today, Well, we're up against a break
in about a minute and a half or so. But
before we hit that break, I wanted to ask. I've
seen a book for toddlers titled A is for Activism
and for every letter of the alphabet, it's just it's
beyond parody in some ways, but the fact that this

is really in bookstores is remarkable. And then as you
go up the grade levels, you have Howard Jin's people's history.
Now we have the sixteen nineteen project pervading many school
districts throughout the country. Is there any competition from our
side to the left's content continued along March through the

institution of the Academy, There is very very little. There
is some, there are some very tiny, you know, less
than I think one or two percent of the country
has access to private school choice programs. Republicans have really
I mean, they play talk a big game, but they
do not act a big game when it comes to
jeffreying parents. I mean the plurality of parents. So that is,

you know, the largest group of parents, something around forty
five percent want to send their kids to a private school,
but only ten percent of American parents do that, right,
So huge mismatch between what Americans want and what they're getting.
And Republicans have really dropped the ball on making sure
they can access that. And so, I mean, and the
right has completely I mean, I just wish this weren't true,

but it is true. Has ignored the fact that education
and family is crucial. Maybe you know the bet that
plus religion, I would say, you know, in terms of
the culture cultural impact, those three things are the chief ones,
and the right has a very poor game on at
least two of them. And we are losing the country
because of it. And if we don't start getting with

the program and taking I think we should have a boycott, divestment,
sactions movement for Marxist education. We need to not send
taxpayer dollars or support or put public names on any
education institution that attacks, you know, the country that gives
it money and gives it children. We'll be back with
more with Joy Pullman just after this. Thanks for listening

to the bus X and Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
on Apple podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you
get your podcasts. Welcome back to the Buck Sex and Show.
This is Ben Weingarten in for Bucksex In and before
the break we were talking with Joy Pullman about the
Long March through the Institutions, which, by the way, the
Long March, the origins of it start in part with

Antonio gramscy leftist Italian official who ideologue, rather I should
say who espouse this sort of view of taking over
through cultural institutions to ultimately impact everything else. And it
bears noting that former Mayor Pepodijj's father was the world's

foremost expert on gram sheet, So if you think he's
the moderate in their party, you might want to think
again about that. Joy was just talking before the break
about the challenges that we face both in academia and
outside of academia as well, and I think it dovetails
with something that I talk about at length in my
book American Ingrate about the decline and religiosity, devotion to

building families, and also love of country among in particular
younger generations. What do you think the link is, Joy,
between what is transpired in our education system and the
declines in all of these essential areas well. It's really
hard to I mean, I think it's that's almost you know,
chicken or the egg question. It's hard to say, you

know what came first, families getting you know, becoming a mess,
or school is becoming a mess. I would probably say,
you know, families becoming a mess, right, because I mean,
I know a lot of teachers and they will uniformly
tell you, you know, we have to deal with so
much stuff, so much personal stuff, that it's really hard
to make way for the business of education. And you know,

the family is the place that sets the child's first
loves and and orient you know, his kind of direction
in the world. And a lot of families, you know.
I mean, actually this happened to me when I became
a parent. I wasn't aware of how explicit I need
to be in order to teach my children to behave
the way that I want them to behave. I saw,

you know, a lot of the things the kids would
just pick up or get through osmosis. And I was wrong,
even about simple things like how to play with toys,
you know, and of course discipline things, but also of
course with um you know, these these ideas of the heart,
you know, these orientation short of the world, what to
love and how to love it. Kids need to be

explicitly and openly taught that. And that, in fact is
something again that the left tends to do better than
the right. Right they openly propagandies they're kids, like you
were saying with this little board book about a for activists.
I mean, I think that's a ridiculous thing to teach
a child. But at least the left gets that little
children need to hear the most important things right away

when they're too you know, have it on their lips,
you know, just I mean, you know, I was so.
For example, the school my kids go to as a classical,
private Christian school, and the very five six year old
kids are memorizing the First Amendment. They don't know what
the First Amendment means, but it is going to be.
It's in their heart. They have taught that it's something
that is valuable, used as a valuable class time, and

it is something that the school comes back to over
the years and it deepens and deepens in their heart,
and it becomes a part of who they are. And
you know, I think the First Amendment, you know, and
these things like scripture versus and hands, they're much much
more valuable and worthy of a child's mind and attention,
you know, than ridiculous activist board books about ridiculous political causes. Right,

for me, politics is a lot as secondary to these
deeper and transcendent things. And you know, but but again,
typically the people on the righteous we don't think. And again,
like I said, I've been guilty of this as a
parent myself, haven't thought about the fact that that explicitly
that it's not going to happen by osmosis. The kids

need to be actively enculturated. They need to be actively
taught what is good and what is wrong, and it
has to be completely saturating their entire life. And we
can't just assume that someone else is going to do it.
We have to do it ourselves, and we have to
make sure that it is happening. And as the fact
that we haven't done that is the reason. You know

that kids' minds are so empty and available for propaganda today.
And you've written extensively about education policy in context of
common core and beyond. Practically, what would be sort of
your three point plan for restoring a love of country
and a knowledge of our core institutions and our real
actual history. I mean, I think, first of all, eliminate

the US Department of Education. You know, the federal government
takes ten cents on the dollar of all the money
given to public schools and controls with it the other
ninety percent. And it is a bureaucratic institution that is
anti as an institution, is anti American, anti freedom, anti
parental choice. The more we can do to cut down

its power, its influence, in its reach. The better you know,
states will be able to be set free to be
more responsive to parents and localities. And the second thing
at the state level is, you know, state Republicans have
got to get to get the parents really need to
have real school choice there. They need to be able
to be completely in control of the money that is

spent on behalf of their kids and needs to not
be able to, you know, to be accessed and controlled
by special interests who obviously don't have America's best interest
at heart. So those, you know, those are the very
first two things. Those are political things. But I think
the third thing is, you know, parents, conservative donors, people
who vote in Republican primaries. We need to start prioritizing

education as an a crucial thing for the future of
our country. You know, the party doesn't matter so much
to me. It only matters in terms of you know,
it helps that the country is made better because I
believe an idea is stronger and our ideas are not
going to be as easily sown and among a rocky
ground of minds that have been taught to hate America,

to think that it's an inherently sexist and racist and
don't know a dang thing about the Constitution or the
founders or all the things that they went through that
do make our country great. So the people people on
the right need to stop treating education like you know,
it's it's not a priority, that it's just a side
issue or it's a local issue. They need to be
tackling this head on and being extremely serious about not

sending taxpayer funds and American children to tuitions that are
controlled by leftists. Last question, and one need not be
conspiratorial to sort of follow this line of thinking. It's
very clear that there has been a dumbing down in
our education system combined with indoctrination. You also have the

heavy subsidization of higher education through the federal government, and
then you have, as a consequence, all of these people
with massive student debt. They sort of start their careers
behind many of them and obviously this can be cliched,
but study things in college that do not lead them
to be productive in the private sector, and so then

you have them economically hobbled and ultimately dependent on government.
Do you see the linkage between those points? Oh? Absolutely,
and yeah, if I were a conspiracy theorist, which I
try to interpret what happens in light of the best
available explanation, the most positive one. But if I were

or a theorist, I would say that was deliberately done,
you know, because people who I mean, I mean and
the American founders talked about this explicitly, and they put
it into our founding dot documents such as the Northwest Ordinance.
They said that our system of government cannot continue to
endure it with an ignorant people. If you are stupid
and you're dependent, you cannot run your own life. So

we need to have, you know, an economy and education,
system of culture that focuses on self reliance. And so
that requires a certain way of being, certain habits of behavior,
and frankly, you know, government not preying upon people and
locking them into that scenario you you describe that makes
them automatically dependent, you know, when they are just starting

out in their life. We've been speaking with the Joy Pullman.
She wrote a great piece of The Federalist recently titled
Dear Joe Scarborough, More Americans hate America than you think. Joy,
thanks so much for coming on the program. Well, thank you,
And this has Ben Weinardon in for Buck Sex and
on the Buck Sex and show back after this You're
in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.

Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben
Weingarten in for Buck Sexton. We just talked at Wayne
with my federalist colleague Joy Pullman about the perversion, the
corruption of our education system and the knock on effects
of that. Really not focused on enough in terms of

what are the actual what are our biggest weaknesses as
a country faced with all manner of foreign adversaries, any
number of challenges that every country has to deal with.
But at core, the people are the strength of the country,
and America remains by far the strongest world power. We
have intellectual capital, we have the technology, we have the firepower,

but do we have the will? And the way you
break the will if you believe that America's strengths are
actually its weaknesses or they ought to be turned into weaknesses,
is you start with indoctrinating generations of people in an
anti American ideology, and that is at core one of
the major major parts of American ingrate. Ilhan Omar and

the progressive islam As takeover of the Democratic Party. She
is a consequence of it. A person like Ilhan Omar
could never get elected in another era of America. Couldn't happen.
And yet, as I noted, and I write at length
in the book, and I've explained this in interviews elsewhere,
and we talked about her a bit here, she could

have just as easily gotten these ideas here in the
America's heartland as in Mogadishu, sam in Minneapolis as Mogadishu.
That is a remarkable commentary on the state of where
America is now. Of course, that's not even getting into
the consequences of our academic system that has led to
a situation where they're oponents of open borders, and where

we would have allowed this massive influx of Somali immigrants
harboring the kind of ideas that elan Omar does in
the first place, from a country, by the way, that,
as I noted, was a Marxist Islamist dictatorship and today,
and as it's been for the last decade, ranked consistently
as the most corrupt country in the world. And oh,

by the way, in terms of the refugees who were
settled here, rates based on some studies of upwards of
eighty percent fraud in terms of immigrants coming here who
started in Somalia. And we see these knock on effects
of the dominance of progressivism not just in the academy,
but then ultimately in all of our institutions, even in

the business world. And we talked at length in a
prior episode about Woke Capital and how Blackrock, the world's
largest asset manager, was starting to infuse not just the
rhetoric of the company, but even it's investing positions or
the positions that lets clients invest in through black Rock

be impacted by a progressive worldview, in particular on the
matter of climate change, but even beyond that, because basically
there's been a massive shift in the corporate world, among
especially the elites that run the largest companies in the world,
towards a different view as to what the purpose of
a company is now among these people who naturally many

of these executives came out of our elite schools dominated
by progressivism, indoctrinated in that milieu, operating in the same
world at the cocktail parties the attend, and where they
send their kids to school with other parents who have
the same worldview. These companies now believe that they have
a job of activism. It's not just a turn of profit.

It's not just to reward their shareholders and their other stakeholders.
It is to be political. Actors use their corporate power
to impose upon us their views. Sometimes it's explicit, sometimes
it's a little bit more implicit, and they express it

in ways like we will not allow you to through
our vehicle invest in, say coal producing coal sector companies,
non clean energies, we won't touch them for the way.
This example of this another financial institution, and this was
reported by Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review. Recently, he writes

an article JP Morgan Chase joins the war on America's
energy and he starts JP Morgan Chase has decided that
it's better for the company to join the progressive environmental
gods than to continue supporting the great American energy miracle
that has brought so much prosperity, stability, and job creation
to this country. Has the left finally won the war
for the heart and soul of corporate America. During the

company's annual investor Day on Tuesday of this week, the
Giant Bank announced it would no longer be financing loans
for oil and gas drilling in the Arctic, and would
divest from its financing coal plants or mines. It also
announced it would be divesting from any company that gets
the majority of its revenue from coal by twenty twenty four.
When the left camp went at the ballot box or
in a democratic debate in legislators, it seeks recourse through

the courts or even better, the culture and markets. In
this case, groups like Rainforest Action Network bullied the bank
into submission publishing reports showing JP Morgan Chase to be
the single biggest lender to the oil and gas industry. Now,
of course companies are most concerned with they're not most
concerned with, but a chief concern is their reputation. You're

only as good as your reputation, and they hate being
attacked by activist groups and will do anything to essentially
pay for protection, and that may be literally paying for
protection in the way of investing in things that these
activists demand of them. Are conversely not investing in things
that activists demanded them. So this article goes on. At

Tuesday's announcement, JP Morgan committed to investing in two hundred
billion dollars, say, paying for protection in two hundred billion
dollars worth of projects and support of the United Nations
sustainable development goals. That is, the company's credential in the
elite world that will make its profits kosher. Sort of
an extortion that the progressives make companies pays the cost
of doing business in a political system they control. However,

it is never enough for the leftist anarchists who are
now demanding the Bank also pull out of financing drilling
in the lower forty eight states as well. And then
Horowitz goes on to note that it's truly hard to
overstate the economic miracle that oil and gas drilling as
ushered into our job market. We have now become the
global superpower of oil and gas production and exports, by
the way, against all of these progressives, in the face

of them, in spite of Obama's own anti energy agenda,
because fracking, thank god, proliferated during that time, to the
point that even the conflict with I ran in January
did not cause a spike in energy prices at all.
These woke corporate executives are willing to destroy essential parts
of our economy if it comes to it to try

to appease an unappeasable progressive mass. And now, as I've
argued in the past, there are likely government incentives that
make it such that it is profitable for them to
do this. But ultimately, we, the American people, suffer if
we're going to destroy the energy sector because financial institutions

won't channel money into these very productive areas that, by
the way, don't just help create jobs for Americans, create
wealth for Americans, but also make it such that we
don't need to be reliant upon, in some cases, our
worst adversaries. So if there is some sort of crisis
in the Middle East, it doesn't tank our economy. Woke

capital is incredibly detrimental to America. And what is even
scarier is a report that recently claim came out from
Real Clear Politics. They did a poll of about twenty
five hundred registered voters and they ask them this question,
which of the following comes closer to your view? The
purpose of a corporation is to maximize financial returns for shareholders,

but also to over value to customers, invest in employees,
deal ethnically with suppliers, and support the communities where they work.
Here's another response. Potentially single purpose of a corporation is
to maximize financial returns for shareholders, and then the other
answers don't know. Seventy seven percent of respondents responded with
that first answer, that a corporation as all of these
other required goals besides producing a good or service that

people want to buy such that they are profitable. Do
we want businesses operating on the basis of politics? And
is there any way that doesn't end up corrupted ultimately
when you have progressives in power, businesses taking progressive positions,
and of course private public so caught partnerships between them.

And what does it mean when you have companies that
are basically going to shut out or piss off fifty
percent of the country on any given issue. Is that
where we want to be? Is that where we want
to be in our civil society? Or do we want
to be a live in wet lives society where people
have freedom to choose where they go and companies aren't
constantly imposing their own ideologies on their customers. This has

been one gern in for Buck Sexon on the Buck
Sexton Show, Fight against will Capital all you can We're
back right after this. Thanks for listening to the bus
Sex and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast,
the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show. This is Ben
Weingarten in for Buck Sexton, and we have had plenty

of gloom and doom in today's episode. Talked to edwyanth
about Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and I believe that a person
who is the perfect corrective or foil talan Omar in
many respects is the Supreme Court justice that I most admire.
I think a generational Supreme Court justice, and that's Justice
Clarence Thomas. And I am so pleased to be joined

today by someone who I think agrees, Michael Pack. He's
the president of Manifold Productions and independent film and television
production company and the producer of the new documentary Exceptional
Documentary Created Equal Clarence Thomas in his own words, which
you can find out all about at Justice thomasmovie dot com.
Mister Pack, thanks so much for joining us, and thank

you for having me on the show. Ben. So let's
jump right in. Justice Thomas, as I noted, is in
my view, the greatest jurist of this generation and one
of the ways the Left likes to savage him is
to harp on the fact that he doesn't typically ask
questions of those presenting arguments at the Supreme Court. So
I think your documentary created equal Clarence Thomas in his

own words is an interesting response to that? Was that intentional? Well,
that's right, they say, because he doesn't speak in an argument,
that he's not acting the court, he's not smart, he's
not articulate, But quite the opposite is true. I mean,
he's very acting the court and has been since the beginning.
Especially he's written over six hundred opinions, thirty percent more
than any other Supreme Court justice, including Justice Ginsburg. So

he's very active, and he's a great storyteller. And so
in fact, we fashioned the documentary so that he can
look right at the audience and tell them what is
very dramatic, eventful, and I think inspiring life is like
without filters, really, And I think that's another way that

he's minimized by the Left in his enemies is downplaying
the drama of his story. And our film tries to
do that correct that. And you documented with vivid imagery
and as you noted, storytelling without giving away too much
of the plot. Our listeners may well know that Justice

Thomas grew up poor in many ways, filled with anger,
but also imbued with many of the traits bestowed upon
him or inculcated in him by his grandfather, traits that
we'd probably today ascribe to conservatism, even though back then
they were just traditional. It seems like ultimately those character
traits sort of sort of shine through and were reflected

in Justice Thomas's politics. But before he got to the
Justice that we see today, he was sort of a
leftist radical. What changed him, Well, that's right, I mean,
it's important to go back to the part, the earlier
part of the story that you alluded to to understand
what changed him. As you say, he grew up first
in dire poverty. He was born in Pinpoint, a gull

Of speaking area outside of Savannah, and his father left
before he could remember. So his mother, though, brought him
and his brother when he was about six to Savannah,
and he had there experienced dire poverty in the jim
Crow South, something it's hard pressed almost imagine today. Didn't
have enough to eat cold in the winter, and after
a couple of years of this, his mother, realizing she

couldn't take care of her two boys, brought them to
her father, his grandfather, to raise, and as you said,
that was where he got his values. His grandfather believed
in hard work, working from son to son, no excuses,
and he had converted to Catholicism and sent Justice Thomas
and his brother to Catholic schools then segregated by run

by Irish nuns who loved the boys and gave them
a good education and solid values. And then he did
reject that for it well, rather before he did. He
succeeded in that environment and decided he wanted to become
a priest and went to the seminary and other seminaries,
unlike his earlier schooling, had been all white and were

just desegregating. And it was there that he first experienced
racism really and it reached a peak for him in
nineteen sixty eight when he was watching TV the day
that Martin Luther King Jr. Was shot, and one of
the white seminary and said, I hope that son of
a bitch dies, and that shocking comment capped off just

as Thomas is feeling that the church wasn't doing enough
for civil rights, and then he just slipped. He became
an angry black man. He decided to want to be
a priest. He told his grandfather, who kicked him out
of the house, and that's what began his radical period.
And he had to go wherever he could, and he
had a full scholarship at holy Cross and his radicalism
continued there. He upstart the Black Student Union. They invited

black panthers to speak. He supported, as he says, anyone
who was in your face, from Stokely Carmichael to Malcolm X.
And it was only by sort of hitting a kind
of bottom that he started to come back to get
back to your question. Then he participated in an anti
war rally in a nearby Cambridge that became a near riot,

and he felt himself getting swept up in the madness
of the crowd, the hysteria of the crowd out, and
he was scared by what he had become. And when
he returned to holy Cross well after midnight, he went
in front of the chapel then closed, and he had
never had prayed in a long time, and then he
prayed and asked God, if you will take anger out
of my heart, I will never hate again. And that

was his beginning of his coming back to his spiritual
values and what he thought of as the political views
as well of his grandfather. That as you say, we
may think of today's as conservative, but we're really fundamental
kind of common sense values of both his grandfather and

a lot of people in that period. But he did
have a series of experiences both through college and law
school and later that made that were the milestones and
his political journey back. And he finally the first Republican
he voted for was Ronald Reagan in nineteen eighty in
and then went to work in the Reagan ad ministry. Yeah,

it's probably worth noting that the fact that he turned
on his fellow radicals, it's probably one of the reasons
he's most reviled today by the predominant American left. What
did you discover in making this documentary about Justice Clarence
Thomas that you never knew about him, or that our
audience might not know about him. I didn't know that

much before I began, But I think the thing that
stands out to me most is his resilience through his life,
surviving and overcoming many obstacles, including one that happened later
in the story than we said so far. You know,
the attacks on him the Benita Hill part of his

confirmation battle, but also the growing up in the difficult
way he did. He had great resilience and he refused
to define himself as a victim. I mean, that's what
stands out to me most. He could. He has a
very good basis to call himself a victim. He grew
and poverty, he had a single raised by a single
mother in the jim Coosouth, subject to wheel racism, but

he won't define himself as a victim. And I think
that has allowed him to succeed in spite of all
those difficulties. And I think that's what makes it sorry,
inspiring and memorable. Yea, what in your view are the
one or two most pivotal lessons from Justice Clarence Thomas's
wife that you would like viewers and listeners here to

take away. I think that not define yourself as a
victim is a big one. I mean we all are
tempted that way. I mean, we who are conservatives always
accused the left of doing it, but we can fall
into it too, and it's in a way a human
trap and one that we should avoid. True or not
it's suffocating to your life. So that's one big lesson.

And the other lesson is that Justice Thomas stood up
for his principles against opposition, and I also found that inspiring.
So I appeal to you our listeners to go see
the movie. As you said in your intro. They can
find out about it at Justice thomasmovie dot com, where

we list where it's playing each week. It plays in
different theaters. It's been in a hundred so far. But
if it's not in a theater near your listeners, they
can sign up on the website. If there's a big
enough group, we can make a screening happen. So if
the first step is to go to Justice thomasmovie dot
com and they can see the trailer and get it

sense what the film is like, so they want so
I appealed to them to go, bring their children. I
think it's aspiring for young people and bring people of
different political views. I think even if you don't like
his politics, you should understand Justice Thomas whatever you're you know,
if you're a liberal or if you disagree with them.
We've been speaking with Michael Packy's the producer of the

Exceptional New documentary created equal Clarence Thomas in his own words, Michael,
before you have to run out on us, want to
ask one last political question, and that concerns the Broadcasting
Board of Governors, which is a very significant part of
the feral government, and that it's engaged essentially in putting

forth the American message and combating propaganda of our adversaries.
And it's been reported that you've been tabbed to be
the CEO of the Broadcasting Board of Governors. Could you
provide us just a bit of a status update on
where your nomination is right now? Okay, well, really that's
a whole other subject subject, a good topic for another broadcast.
But I have been since it's a new year. I've

been renominated by the President, and I had already had
my hearings for the Senate for a relations committee, but
they're set to vote, so after they committee votes and
then it goes to the full Senate, and it's been
a slow process, but who knows, the end could be
in sight. I think it is a very important position,
and I'm honored that the President wants me to serve

in it. We'll look forward to continuing conversation another time,
but as for today, again the name of the documentary
has created equal Clarence Thomas in his own words. You
can find more at Justice Thomas Movie dot com. Michael Pack,
thanks so much for joining us today. Thank you, Bet.
And this has Ben one Garden in for Buck sex
And on the buck Sexton Show. We'll be back just
after this. You're in the Freedom Hud. This is the

buck Sexton Show podcast. Welcome back to the Buck Sexton Show.
This is Ben Winegarden in for Buck Sexton. And we'll
try to put a tidy bow on what we've discussed
during the program today. And we started talking about coronavirus,

what it means for China, what it means for the US,
and we talked a bit about American ingred at ilhan
Omar and the progressive Islamist takeover of the Democratic Party.
My new book that I urge you to pick up,
as I said before, at least three copies, one for you,
one for your children, and one to anger a Bernie
Brow or more seriously, to any of your still rational

Democratic friends to understand what is coming if a party
representing fifty percent of the country is dominated by anti American,
blame America firsters in general, and in particular someone as
dangerous as ilhan Omar, And as I've argued, a vote
for Bernie Sanders is a vote for ilhan Omar and
everything that she embraces ideologically, as well as the actual

national security threat posed by her own collusion with the
swamist adversaries, both foreign and domestic terror tied groups and
individuals sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. And that
is actually the perfect representation of the ticking time bomb
that is this ascendant progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
And the Democratic establishment gets the danger here because they

understand that perhaps for the majority of Democrats out there,
the average Democrat voter, and the average Democrat voter, by
the way, tends to be much older than the woke
progressives who might be the loudest today and who are
clearly playing a substantial role in these primaries. But they
understand that the average Democrat voter is more in the mold,

at least relatively of a JFK sort of Democrat, a
Pat moynihan sort of Democrat, than these Democrats than the squad.
But all the energy in the party resides with its activist, progressive,
radical anti American wing and so you see that we've

ended up in a situation where a party that hates
wealth attacks the wealthy, is behind me too and other
such movements, the establishments putting all their eggs or some
of their eggs at least in the Mike Bloomberg basket,
for example, even though I think he's a terrible candidate
in terms of having no appeal whatsoever substantive or stylistic,

well in general, but then also to the key swing
states that are at play here, and they're going to
let this billionaire come in and as he said before,
buy how seats he essentially let slip in that last debate,
buy a nomination, steal it from a true believer, or
at the very least help the party with his mass

of resources, and keep afloat some of these other figures
directly or indirectly himself, so that the nomination can be
stolen from Bernie Sanders. And I'm of two minds on this.
On the one hand, I think Bernie Sanders is maybe
their most compelling candidate. And for those who think that
it's going to be a cakewalk if it's Trump versus Sanders,
I would urge some caution there not because on a

substantive basis, he should beat Donald Trump in any stretch,
in any form, it would be cataquismic, absolutely cataquismic to
the country. But Bernie Sanders is sort of the opposite
side of the populous coin. And I've argued the very
simplistic case for Bernie's strength is this, he appears to

be genuine. He's been consistent on nearly every issue for
four decades. He's the real deal when it comes to
his ideology. He takes positions that would be perceived as
politically suicido, but which resonate with a core on the
Democratic side. And when you hear people go out there

and attack him, like James Carville, they're not saying I
disagree with his ideas. They're saying I think he's politically
toxic potentially. But they all are ideologically in his direction,
oriented in his direction. But Bernie is a candidate with
a message, and he is the right messenger, just as

Donald Trump was. Content free candidates who try to pander
and push to try to win over in the Democrats case,
the woke anti American progressives, they're showing themselves to be
not the real deal. They're not genuine Bernie is the original,
genuine article, and a candidate with a message be it's

a candidate with no message anytime. And that's why I
think he has a real chance still in their fields,
even though if he only gets a porality not a majority.
The party that talks about democracy dying in darkness is
willing to take away of the nomination from the person
who gets the most votes. That is what they all
basically agreed to when every candidate who was asked the question.
But Bernie said, if you have a porality, that's not

enough to win our nomination, which means that they're asking
for a broker convention. And a brokered convention, I believe
where it's taken away from Bernie would lead to nineteen
sixty eight catastrophe for Democrats. Literal riots, chaos, violence, tearing

their party apart. Except the cops will stand down because
the Democrats do not believe in there being any policing today.
It will be an embarrassment for them, it will be
a disaster for the country. But ultimately, I think what
you're seeing is that there is a real civil war
for the heart of it, and my book American ingrate
Ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamas Takeover of the Democratic
Party argues that even if the Bernie wing doesn't win

today or tomorrow, it is destined to win the way
things are going, and they are empirical and anecdotal reasons
for it. But what really matters is that it means
the end of a pro American fifty percent of the
country representing party, and that's a disaster for the country
as a whole. This has been Ben Weingarten in for
Buck Sexon on the Buck Sexton Show. I want to

thank Buck for the opportunity to fill in for him,
and I want to thank you for listening and again
urge you to pick up my new book, American Ingrate.
Ilhan Omar and the Progressive Islamas Takeover of the Democratic
Party have a great weekend, and thanks so much for
joining us.
Advertise With Us

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC
Death, Sex & Money

Death, Sex & Money

Anna Sale explores the big questions and hard choices that are often left out of polite conversation.

Stuff You Should Know

Stuff You Should Know

If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.

Music, radio and podcasts, all free. Listen online or download the iHeart App.


© 2024 iHeartMedia, Inc.