Rush Limbaugh Program - June 7, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 7, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

35:17

June 7, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Buck Sexton here filling in for Rush.
	Thank you so much for joining or for staying with me if you've been uh listening for a little bit.
	Very much appreciated.
	Follow me on Facebook at Facebook.comslash Buck Sexton.
	I'm checking in as I can throughout the show and certainly will respond to messages after the show.
	Alright, so we got to talk about the judge, right?
	I see now CNN.com main uh headline story, huge photo, angry looking Paul Ryan.
	Ryan slams Trump's racist comment.
	You've got a whole lot of the never Trump crew out there saying, I told you, better step away now.
	Uh better step away before it's too late.
	Uh and I kind of want to ask and okay, step away and and and then what?
	Even if we we being the the royal we, what however you want to describe, we uh step away and then Hillary wins.
	Or no, there's something else.
	Gary Johnson wins, that's gonna make conservatives happy.
	Someone needs to explain to me, step away and then what?
	I want to know what the answer maybe there'll be an answer.
	I haven't heard it yet.
	Um so but there are people out there who are saying step away.
	And a lot of talk about Trump's uh racist comment.
	I will get into that.
	Uh let me just say before we dissect the Trump commentary on Judge Curiel, let's first just be clear on one thing.
	The can't Clinton campaign has for months now, or as soon as they realized that they were going to be facing off against Trump, uh the narrative was going to be Trump is a sexist and Trump is a racist.
	And it didn't matter if Trump did change and and all of a sudden became more presidential and did all the things that people want him to do, and quite honestly, and even people like me think that it would be nice if he sort of took a just was a little just a little just like take it, take it down on the amp from like an eleven to like a nine, you know, just just drop it spinal tap style.
	Just don't go to don't go to eleven.
	Uh just give me a little less.
	You know, go to like a nine on the Trump scale or an eight on the Trump scale.
	I don't know, some supporter would say, but then he won't be Trump.
	And I say I mean, isn't there such a thing as like three quarters speed Trump, maybe?
	Anyway.
	Um but I would I would like that, and I know many others have been calling for that as well.
	But even if he did it, my point here is that he's going to be called the sexist and a racist, and that drumbeat will get louder and louder, and more and more in the media, especially those who have been trying to seem like, oh, I'm an objective.
	I'm an objective news person.
	I'm very down the middle, straight shooter, called like I see it.
	Uh all the people that take that should say all of them, a lot of people who take that perspective, pardon me, not all of them, um, are going to, as we get closer and closer, be like, well, I'm in, I'm objective, but Trump is a huge racist, and anybody who supports him, probably a racist too.
	You'll hear that.
	That will that will start to come that will start to come out.
	And that was going to happen no matter what Trump said.
	At this point, well, you know, when I say no matter what he said, forget about in during the primary.
	I mean once it was clear he was the nominee.
	Had he even taken a much more conciliatory uh moderate even tone, which doesn't mean a moderate tone, it means more moderate, right?
	It means a little less Trumpified.
	He was still going to be hit with he's a racist and he's a misogynist.
	And that's going to be really that was going to be the largest uh you know, the sort of or the loudest I should say, talking points you'd hear from the Trump campaign.
	I think that's I think that's been obvious all along.
	That all said, it does not help when Trump says something like this that a normal person could hear and be like, ooh, no, that's not really that's not that's not how that should have been said.
	Uh not good, not helpful.
	Um and people would say, Oh, Bach.
	Well, look, he has, for example, let's just step back for a second.
	I know some of you that this is like walking around on the, you know, walking around on the ledge, being like, some of you are like, no, some of you are like, yes.
	Uh actually, probably all you're like, no, no.
	Um nonetheless, because I don't I don't even know which side of this uh which side of this you may be on.
	Uh when he talked about the uh the Muslim ban, such as it was.
	Uh now he's walked that back a bit.
	Be like, no, I would consider it.
	You know, he's he's walked it back a bit, not he hasn't repudiated it, but he's sort of changed his approach as town, however you want to put it, right?
	So even Trump realizes sometimes Trump will walk things back.
	On the issue of this judge saying, as as Trump did, uh, just saying he's uh he's Mexican, and then implying that that alone means that he can't be fair in this case is a blunder.
	Not good, not good.
	Uh but when you look so there you have it.
	I I I think it's a blunder.
	You can disagree.
	I think it's an I I think that that's a a not a a calling it unwise is being perhaps too gentle.
	It's not a smart way of putting it.
	It sounds to people like he is impugning someone for specifically their background ethnicity.
	Okay.
	That said, comma.
	Now here we go into the merits of this.
	And by the way, I'm annoyed that we even have to spend all this time because now the Trump campaign is on as much as it ever is, and you could say that maybe it never really plays defense, but it's somewhat on defense on this issue.
	I mean, you've got you got Paul Ryan coming out and saying this now, uh, which, you know, saying that it's a racist comment, just straight up saying it's racist.
	Okay.
	I think the GOP's coming out and saying it's racist, a lot of GOP establishment, never Trump is uh the Never Trump movement.
	Really, it's more of it's an it's an idea.
	Uh I don't know if it's ever going to be sort of organized into what we would call a movement, but it's people like, look, I'm never voting for Trump.
	Those who have platforms are saying, I told you so, and you should step back away from this now before you are uh consumed by the Trump catastrophe, but all that out there now.
	You look at the background of the uh you let's let's even step further back than that.
	The judiciary in general, there are countless examples that you can point to and talk about of the uh of of judges, of of lawyers, of jurors, people that make up the justice system in this country where their proclivities, their political organizations, their activities, all the rest of it are fair game to discuss because we want the fairest possible verdicts under the law.
	This happens all the time.
	I'm old enough to remember when people wanted Justice Antonin Scalia, he rest in peace, um, they wanted him to recuse himself from a case because he went duck hunting once with Dick Cheney.
	Now look, I know this is that's not a a racial issue, but I'm just saying that the people are very, you know, this is people talk about this stuff.
	It's fair game to discuss affiliations.
	What I find so interesting is that there are some affiliations, uh uh uh identity essentially.
	You know, if you have a judge who has been part of an identity group, an activist identity group in the past, meaning uh that there's you know, it's it's about people who come from a certain perspective.
	Sort of take the to take the heat out of this for a second, let's make it about uh I I don't know.
	I I can't even any any group that I pull out of the of thin air right now will be um perhaps won't really take the heat out of this that I want to.
	Let's say you're part of an Irish affinity group.
	I'll go with partial part of my heritage here, right?
	You're part of an Irish affinity group, and you want there to be more uh people of Irish heritage uh pushed forth into uh push forth into positions as lawyers, and really also are part of groups that want just more and more Irish immigration in this country.
	If you were then to be on a case where you're deciding that whether whether, for example, Irish people who are here in violation of a law should be uh should be legalized or not, one could understand why there would be some questions about the objectivity there, right?
	And that would be a I uh and in this case, also you're like, yeah, we could talk about that.
	The moment though you change, the moment it becomes about different identity groups, now all of a sudden people get very scared because we live in an era where the wrong comment, even a comment that doesn't express one's true feelings or intentions, but just trying to discuss some of these issues can get you fired, can end your career, can get you death threats, can get you punched in the face outside of a rally.
	And as I say this to you, I think to myself, we are stumbling upon one of the reasons that people like Trump so much.
	And by the way, despite what, as Paul Ryan claims or says is uh is is a racist comment, and as I've told you is not a smart comment, uh was not the way he should have said it, despite all of that, I think there are a lot of people who just at this point they've just had enough.
	That they're sick of having to constantly walk around and be like, oh gosh, oh gosh, am I saying the wrong thing when they just want to have an open and honest discussion about things that matter, the judiciary certainly matters, the uh the courts certainly matter to people, And we're all tired of it.
	We all we are all tired of the political correctness, except for those who use it as a weapon, those on the left progressives, they think it's great, right?
	And they're really right now, you could say they've sort of reached uh their their sh uh you they've reached a moment in time where they have the media fully behind them, and we're going to get into how far uh how far they've sort of jumped the shark shortly.
	Um but they're now at a point where they're getting their way over and over again, and they're not just winning, they're like running around and uh they haven't just won the battle, they're metaphorically speaking, bayonetting the survivors, right?
	I mean, they they are going all out, maximum uh maximum position, taking the maximum position on all these issues.
	So it's in that environment in that context that people have this uh willingness to at least l let Trump uh give Trump more leeway, those who support him, and I know as many of you listening don't or do very cautiously.
	It's in that environment where a comment like this is made, and people might even say, yeah, yeah, that's racist, but you know what?
	They don't actually think Trump is a racist, and they will still vote for him over Hillary, if nothing else, because at least he's willing to talk about things that other people can't talk about and everyone's sick of it.
	Everyone's sick of the restraints and the constant fear and the oh, I might lose my job, and having a presidential candidate who is at least willing to go after some of those issues has a value.
	Then we get into so we know that you can speak about a judge's uh business and sort of commercial interests in something, and and there's the possibility of recusal there.
	Um it's left up to judges to recuse themselves, right?
	It's which is interesting, isn't it?
	It's sort of like, well, is this is this corrupt or not?
	Uh I'll be the decid I'll be the decider on that one.
	I'll decide for you uh for everyone else.
	In this particular case of Judge Curiel, um, who was is an Obama appointee to the federal court.
	Uh you have somebody who is a member of a group, and I wanted to do some of the research with this uh on this, and Mr. Snerdley was uh quick on the spot with some of the stuff helping me out.
	So we know Judge Curiel is a member of uh La Raza San Diego, and he's a member of that group.
	What's interesting is that La Raza San Diego is also listed on the Hispanic National Bar Association website as a sort of affiliate group.
	So he's so this judge is involved with the group that's involved with the group that did call for a boycott of Trump, all Trump properties and and Trump's businesses, because of his comments last this is just last year, because of his comments on illegal immigration and uh more specifically illegal Mexican immigration.
	And so they called for a boycott.
	Now, whether you think the comment was racist or not, whether you believe Trump is a racist or not, uh there is certainly ample room to have a discussion about whether a judge, apart from the comment, whether a judge that is that is tied to a group that is a that is openly advocating, and this is in the case of La Raza San Diego, uh, for individuals, yes, to be more for Hispanic individuals specifically.
	So they're they're making a racial distinction.
	They're saying, well, we're advocating for more Hispanic people to be involved in the legal processes and the legal system, um, but also gets tied in with groups that have very political and very partisan positions on things like immigration.
	When you have a presidential candidate whose biggest sort of lightning rod issue, and the thing that vaulted him to the front of the GOP line is in fact an immigration-related issue that ties very directly into uh specifically Hispanic and Latino immigration.
	Is he is he allowed to bring that up?
	The way he brought it up was wrong, but is he allowed to have some uh he's certainly allowed to, I mean, from a legal perspective, but are we really going to shut him down for even thinking about this?
	Um it's one thing to say that he said it wrong, it's another thing to say that he is also wrong on all of the merits.
	Um and I'm looking at associations.
	Look, saying he's saying that Judge Curiel is Mexican, therefore he can't ruin the case, that's wrong, shouldn't have said it.
	But is Judge Curiel tied to organizations and groups that if you were in Trump's situation, you would think would give you some pause, meaning that is he tied to activist groups here That have taken explicitly political positions that would put them at odds with Trump.
	That's that's fair game, right?
	So it's a, or at least I think it should be, that should be fair game.
	And we talk about these things with just with judges and justices all the time.
	You know, you've had uh I believe uh Elena Kagan had to what she had to recuse herself in uh Oberkfell uh because she had been a part of the Obama administration and had been o openly advocating as part of the Obama Station for gay marriage.
	If memory serves, I could be off on that, but I'm doing this on the fly.
	So you have people that will recuse themselves because of previously stated political positions, for example.
	If you've been sort of an advocate for one political position and then you're a judge, that can be an issue.
	So that's where I am on this.
	That was kind of a nuanced tightrope walk, I think, right?
	Um, maybe not nuanced enough.
	Let's see what's set on the lines.
	800 282-2882.
	Buck Sexton in for rush.
	I'm sure you have some thoughts on this one.
	Be back in a few.
	Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh.
	You can direct all your thoughts, critiques, uh hair on fire screaming uh to me at Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton.
	Uh go for it.
	Light it up.
	Uh let's take Addy in Oregon.
	Addy, you're on the Rush Limbra program, you're speaking to Buck.
	Uh uh okay.
	I just wanted to give you a little information, a little background on the uh Rafa.
	That the the word Rafa does mean uh race.
	I was I'm I am a Mexican American and I was born and raised in California.
	My brother um uh is um born and raised in California, and he was a professor of sociology way back in the 60s, and he used to talk to me about this group that they he had started that they had formed, and they said their goal was to take uh California back and give it to Mexico.
	This was way back in the sixties.
	I was a teenager at that time, and of course I wasn't that uh interested in politics, but he was, and he was um, like I said, a profession professor of sociology in a liberal.
	And I think that the people at the GOP owe uh Trump an uh an apology because he's right, he just didn't explain himself right.
	The purpose of this group is to give California back to mystical and they're already uh very well underway.
	And and not only that, but this group has access to the White House.
	And I think like I said before, that's a GOP oath uh Obama, I mean um uh Trump a um apology for calling him a racist.
	He's not a racist.
	What he's saying is true, this judge needs to step down because he does belong to that um that Larassa group, whatever group he belongs to.
	Um and the goal, he his goal is totally the opposite of of what Trump wants.
	So he it would uh he should step down because he the judge would be biased in this in this case.
	Right, look.
	And this started way back in the 60s when I was a teenager, like I said, my brother started it, and one of the people that started it was a professor of social sociology in one of the colleges in Southern California.
	So that's all I know about the background, but I think that the GOP just goes just owes uh um Trump an apology because he's never gonna get an apology from the GOP.
	That much I can I can promise you.
	But Addy from Oregon, uh, thank you for that background.
	Um and sharing your your opinion and thoughts on this one.
	Look, you know, we're we're in a very interesting place right now where the you know the future uh the future direction of the country, when you look at the the demographics and just how much uh illegal immigration, if there is a mass legalization, could tip the political scales.
	It's something that really needs to r really needs thought.
	Uh people need to spend more time, I think, on this issue than a lot of the others that we waste time on because what does that what does that mean going forward?
	And uh you have rallies happening right now where there are people who are protesting Trump, but they're they're waving uh and this was at the rally that we saw last week, or was it on Friday, and people are waving Mexican there's violence going on, people punching, but they're just anti-Trump, right?
	They're not they don't support anybody, they're just anti-Trump.
	Uh there's waving of of Mexican flags at the rallies.
	That just seems to be what what is the point that's being made there?
	Um I I'm I'm sort of confused by that.
	I I would like I'd like a greater degree of clarity on on why is it you have you have Trump protesters who, instead of just saying, I don't like this guy, you know, he's a jerk and I'm an American just like everybody else, they're waving Mexican flags.
	That seems to be a strange decision to me under the circumstances.
	And I think that the Democrats are realizing that people can see this stuff because it's live streams, whether the media talks about it or not, a lot of Americans are seeing this and thinking, what's that all about?
	So uh we'll take some more calls on this, because very interesting issue, and then we'll talk about oh, the transgender rights issue as well.
	More coming up.
	Yes, Buck is here on the EIB.
	If you want to talk about the Trump stuff and you're on hold, stay, we'll we can still take it, but I want to move on to another story so I can get it in today because wow, uh, you see the extent of the left's well in incoherence really, and I want to we can get into the motivations behind this sort of thing as well.
	Obviously the the bathroom bill uh and and and other fights that states are now having with the federal government, uh, and there's lawsuits going on now about whether a student who who claims to be and claims is the proper word.
	There's no medical uh there's no medical sort of arbitration that goes on here, there's no medical certification of the transgender status.
	It's not it's just somebody says I'm transgender, and then they they can uh fall they fall under the federal government now deciding that under Title with Title IX to pressure schools into obeying, they have to open up uh women's restroom, uh restroom, locker room, showers to men, and vice versa.
	Um this is something that is also getting some attention because you have the Georgia uh ACLU director.
	Um when was this was from what was this, just last week?
	Yeah, just last week, the head of Georgia's ACLU chapter uh said that she has resigned because of all the hostility she met with when she questioned the ACU ACLU's stance on their transgender policy, um, and she said that she risked being branded a homophobe even by raising her critique.
	She said, quote, there are real concerns about the safety of women and girls in regards to this bathroom debate.
	It seems to me that instead of stifling the dialogue, we want to encourage a robust debate to come up with an effective solution.
	And this is because uh Ms uh Ms. Smith here had had her kids in a restroom in Oakland, California, when three transgender I mean, the three transgender that they're saying three transgender women in the piece.
	I mean, these are three men who are transgendered uh with with audibly deep voices.
	They're obvious they're obviously men to these young girls in the bathroom.
	They they could figure it out, they knew, and they were frightened by this.
	She says, quote, my kids were visibly frightened, and I was scared and I was ill-prepared to answer their questions.
	I've been asking those same questions, and I want to have an honest conversation about them.
	Her colleagues turned on her.
	No surprise there.
	Um people will say that, you know, that this is now if you are in any way opposed to this, this is going to become the new, the new frontier for because you know, they're looking for more civil rights struggles to have.
	They're saying this is sort of the new frontier of civil rights struggles, and therefore, if you're on the wrong side of this to borrow from Obama, you're on the wrong side of history.
	You are a bigot, you're vile, you're evil, you're a bad person.
	Now, we could sit and f and just discuss how uh i it seemingly insane it is to me, and uh, I don't know, I'm I'm a strange I'm a strange fellow, I suppose, because I wouldn't want I don't have children, but I wouldn't want my teenage daughter having to share a shower with a teenage boy who believes you become a woman just because you'd feel unsafe.
	And then you also get into the issues of uh you know, people who will abuse this law and they say, Oh, nobody will yeah, that's right.
	There are no siccos out there who will pretend to be transgender in order to use women's facilities and bathrooms.
	I mean, what do they have to do?
	There's there's no standard for this.
	People say, oh, well, they'll put on a wig and maybe not.
	Maybe they'll just say no, I consider myself to be transgender.
	What's the it's just up to choice?
	And it's interesting because Title IX, which is now being used to enforce this by sort of administration uh diktat.
	Uh they're just deciding this is the way it's going to be.
	Title IX is supposed to protect women, and as we see now, well, what's the uh how does one distinguish officially under law?
	Maybe this is an easy way to clarify this point, or not to clarify, but to take it to its logical ends.
	Some of us have said in recent months on this issue, well, I mean, look, uh are they really gonna have what's next?
	You're gonna have guys who say that they are uh gals, or men who claim to be women, teenage boys who said that they're teenage girls, whatever the case may be.
	Are they gonna be allowed to compete in gender segregated sports?
	Have we really lost our minds that much or not us, but has the federal government and and the progressive left lost their minds that much that they think that that's normal?
	Or rather that's right, I should say.
	Better word than normal.
	And the answer is yes, they they do believe that.
	This piece on TheBlaze.com from just last week, you have up in Alaska an 18-year-old senior at Haynes High School who's who's competing in a girls' track meet.
	And and no surprise, doing very well at the girls' track meet.
	Now he identifies as female.
	This is a psychological distinction, right?
	That it's a it's a psychological distinction somebody claims to be female.
	But physically, there's still every every single cell, right?
	XX chromosome, XY chromosome.
	We know there are differences and distinctions here.
	We know that in the aggregate, and people say, what about, and they'll say, what about and they'll name some supreme uh you know, supremely gifted female athlete, and they'll say, well, you know, some guy behind a desk, you know, she's faster than you.
	It's like, well, that's not really the point, is it?
	The reason we segregate uh men and women on the athletic field is because generally speaking, there is a vast difference in the musculature of men and women uh because of genetics and because of, again, chromosomes XX, XY.
	And that is not changed one bit.
	That is not changed in this process at all.
	So you now have, if you're going to take the Obama administration at its word, the threat of removing millions of dollars of funding for schools, if boys can't use the women's locker room, and even beyond that, they can't compete on women's sports teams.
	This is it's one of these things where you start to think to yourself, what do they really hope to accomplish here?
	Uh uh is this really just meant to force people who have a not even conservative, just sort of a you could say a traditional point of view.
	And a scientifically based one, I might add, about gender distinction, about how this is a very straightforward process.
	Right.
	Um I I've even, you know, you you you see this and you see people talking about this, you say, how is this hard what are they not how is this hard to understand?
	Okay, even if if we want to make accommodations, and you know, there's a difference between being unkind to somebody who's transgender or or you know, being unwilling to help or to make certain accommodations for that person and saying they're gonna compete on women's sports teams, right?
	No one's saying be unkind to people, no one's saying be unfeeling or or unsympathetic or unwilling to even make some accommodations for a person that has this uh has this uh belief.
	Uh deep-seated belief, and people say that it's biochemical, I guess, insofar as it's psychological, but it's not physically manifested in these cases, it's psychologically manifested.
	And this is of course we say, you're not a you're not a doctor, you're not scientists.
	Well, neither are all the neither is Barack Obama, neither are all the people that are making these these decisions about how the policy will be enforced.
	So I just want to know at what point do we does the madness actually become so incoherent and in fact so dangerous that either the progressive left will back off or Democrats will pay a price or a combination thereof will occur.
	I said recently on on my own show, I said, you know, there's there's gotta come a point here where we all recognize that this is this is just not this is not okay, right?
	I mean, for example, I I mentioned the the uh MMA, mixed martial arts, which I'm sure some of you watch, some of you probably do a little MMA yourself, know very well.
	Are we gonna draw the line there where you can't say, well, I'm transgender, so I'm going to be an MMA fighter who has male uh entirely male anatomy and and cells and and musculature fighting against females?
	And I was like, well, at least we'll draw the line that like we understand that, right?
	You're not gonna be able to be a guy and get into a women's box guy and get into a woman's boxing ring.
	I was wrong.
	There in fact already is an MMA fighter and is trying to who who has fought who's transgender and has fought women.
	And one of them was uh from what I read very seriously injured, more so than you usually get even an MMA fight.
	No surprise there.
	Because these are differences.
	These are scientific, biological differences that the left is trying to erase, and we're all forced to rest around and ask why.
	What purpose do they really think that this serves?
	Other than I have to say, to rub in uh to rub it in the faces of people who are conservative, traditional, uh I don't know, Christian, go down the line.
	To just force them to bend the knee because they can.
	I mean, you really get the sense that in a that culturally, because they've won so many battles at this point, the left is just drunk with its own power and needs another issue to force those who aren't part of the progressive movement who aren't left to to force them to go along.
	Why?
	Because they can.
	Who does this really help?
	And how does this not devolve into incoherence?
	How is the federal government going to make these distinctions, by the way?
	As I've said before, you know, there are some institutions of higher learning.
	Oh, this is a big secret, I know for people, not really a big secret, but where there are a lot more men than women.
	This is just a fact.
	There are a lot more men than women at uh at some of the some institutions that have or I should say a lot more men than women.
	That's actually not even correct.
	Um they have many more male than female applicants, better way of putting it.
	Uh and you have a much better chance of getting in if you are female because they want some degree of parity.
	Um and what exactly uh Yeah, i uh I was I wanted to give you the numbers of this in case I was challenged on this.
	I just did a quick uh Google search.
	But you know, the MIT has fifty-five percent male, forty-five percent female.
	Um they try to achieve parity, you just statistically have a much better shot of getting in if you're female.
	Are you allowed to now check that box on college applications?
	Because it'll might make it easier for you.
	Depends on the institution, but it might make it easier for you.
	And if that's the case, and this is the question the left really doesn't want to answer, if gender is fluid and subject to whims to psychological considerations alone.
	If gender can just be a psychological construct, why can't race?
	And if race is a psychological construct, why can't you apply to college as whatever you want as a Native American?
	Oh, we know somebody who's already done that, who of dubious, of dubious Native American origin.
	Um why can't you do that?
	The left has no answer.
	So now if you're a high school senior and you want to try to use affirmative action to your benefit, or you want to try to use the system to your benefit, it's wide open to you.
	And I would challenge any leftist to explain to me how that is not the case.
	On what basis do they make these distinctions when they're unwilling to make even the most basic distinctions?
	Male versus female.
	800 282-2882, Buck Sexton in for Rush, back in a few.
	Buck Sexton here, Infor Rush Limbaugh, Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton, send me your commentary there.
	Keep it clean.
	I mean, whenever I say that, it's just like the expletives just more and more of them pile up.
	Um about how awesome I am, obviously.
	Let's take Diane in Florida.
	Diane, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show, you're speaking to Buck.
	Hey, Buck, how's it going?
	Good, how are you?
	Good.
	I've been listening to you and you're making a lot of great salient points about the the egregious examples of liberal progressive policies and how harmful they are to our country.
	And um I totally totally agree with that.
	And I I wanted to know, because earlier in the program you're talking about that Donald and that you kind of like sort of softening up to him, but he continues down a certain payoff and says things that you might not like, you might sit the election out.
	And I thought, how do how do you reconcile that with not thinking that that's a vote to Hillary and a continuation of harmful policies and Olinskiite tactics?
	And not just you, I'm not just picking on you.
	I'm just I'm wondering how, you know, um people like with that kind of a mindset can't just and I know this sounds obnoxious, just put their big boy pants on and to say, I'm gonna hold my nose and I'm gonna vote for him because not voting for whoever they're not gonna need to be.
	But Diana, I think I think you're um maybe overemphasizing one part of what I said at the expense of uh the rest of what I said because I I said that I was never Hillary.
	I've been never Hillary for months.
	I've said it on CNN very loudly.
	I also was a career supporter, as I said to you, so I'm open about that.
	But I I I at this point take Trump over Hillary for all the reasons you said.
	I'm also not I mean if if Trump and when I said that if he when I say he's going down, I'm not saying if he goes down, if he keeps doing exactly what he's doing, I'm not going to vote for him.
	But there certainly are scenario.
	I mean, if Trump in a month said, you know what, I was wrong about all that wall stuff, and I'm you know, after the convention, let's say I'm I was wrong about all that wall stuff, and you know, I'm not actually going to stand up for America, you know, abroad or whatever.
	If he reversed, and he has reversed himself on many things, so this wouldn't be inconceivable.
	If you reversed himself on some of the core tenets of his campaign, then yeah, then maybe, you know, and I I don't think that's likely to happen, but I'm just saying I won't blind I'm not going to support Trump under any circumstances.
	I just right now would support him over Hillary.
	Um so I I think you're focusing in on sort of a uh a black swan event in the sense that I I'm not saying I think that's likely, but I also am not I'm not going to vote for Trump no matter what he says or does.
	And I think that that should be I think the Trump campaign should be aware.
	There are a lot of people out there who I think take my position on this, which is okay, some good stuff here, some not so great stuff, better than Hillary, and just please don't do anything too crazy.
	I I think that's a I think that's kind of the summary position.
	Okay.
	I mean but but still fitting it out and not voting at all is voting for Hillary, or am I crazy by thinking that?
	Well, no, I mean voting for Hillary is voting for Hillary.
	And also I live in New York, so quite honestly, my casting of vote at all is pretty much a it's kind of a waste of time.
	It's an irrational act, right?
	I mean, you know, that's so so let's start there.
	So any individual uh for for a lot of us, and this is where the and this is why I understand some of where or a lot of where the Never Trump movement comes from.
	Voting is an act of conscience.
	It's it's an act of of principle, right?
	It's not actually unless you live in certain states, your vote probably your your individual vote does not matter.
	That is true.
	Uh so you know, me sitting out in New York, I mean Hillary's gonna well, actually, some people say Trump, but I think that's crazy.
	Hillary's gonna win New York, so it doesn't really matter either way.
	But for me, you know, as much as I can engage in the political process, my vote's all I have, and I'm not gonna give it to somebody if he totally goes off the rails.
	But I think I gotta leave it there, Diane.
	I gotta go into a uh gotta go into a break.
	But thank you very much for your uh thoughtful question.
	I appreciate it.
	Uh I have to go in a break, but Buck will be right back.
	Buck Sexton here, InfoRush today.
	You can send me your thoughts and comments on the show at Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton.
	You can also download them on daily podcast, Monday through Friday at the Blaze.com slash Buck Sexton.
	Please do, because the show continues in a sense, even when I'm off in the in that I can hear your comments, read them and all the rest.
	So that's a fun way for us to keep the conversation going.
	I know there are a lot of calls we weren't able to get to today where people had all sorts of thoughts on the Trump judge situation.
	Good news for me is I get to come back here on Friday, which is very exciting, and can continue to talk because I'm sure the media's gonna be talking about this all week.
	Talk a bit about that, and also get into some national security and some counterterrorism stuff, some of the things from my former CIA analyst background that I think would be of interest uh to uh to you and and to all of us, uh things that I didn't have a chance to hit today.
	So I'll be back Friday, 12 to 3.
	Well, you you know what the time is, sorry.
	I'll be back Friday here.
	Uh and as always, I thank uh Rush and the team for throwing me the keys to the EIB Ferrari.
	It's always fun to go for a spin in it, so thank you very much for that.
	Buck Sexton here, closing it out.
	Thank you very much for joining.

▲