Buck Sexton breaks down everything you need to know about Saudi Arabia

Glenn's in New York City for the week, and he was joined by TheBlaze's National Security Expert Buck Sexton for an in depth discussion on the Middle East and Saudi Arabia.

Below is a transcript of this segment

Glenn: How are things going to change in Saudi Arabia? Who is really going to be in charge? How is this guy’s health?

Buck: I think the Saudis, there’s a couple of dynamics that are intersecting right now, and one of them is just that the Saudis aren’t quite as important to us as they used to be, and they recognize that. The Saudis, because of shale, because of the energy revolution in this country, we don’t need them in quite the same way. They’re not going to be able to play quite the same role of oh, Saudis, up your production, we need you.

Glenn: But as a guy from Texas, where all the Texas-based oil companies are currently freaking, out saying we cannot handle this, we can’t handle this drop in the price of oil this low for this long, and the new king saying he’s going to continue dropping the price of oil—

Buck: You’ve got sort of an old-fashioned price war going on. It’s not just hurting us.

Glenn: Exactly right, and they win.

Buck: It’s not just hurting us, it’s hurting other countries. Well, hopefully the technology will get even better, and that will add into this as well, but on the security side, the real overlay across the entire Middle East now, as I see it, you have the Islamists, jihadists, sort of the hardline fundamentalists on the one side and really everybody else on the other.

You also have intertwined within that Sunni and Shia, and when you’re talking about Saudi Arabia, they are not just because, of course, it’s where you find Mecca and Medina, it’s where people go for the pilgrimage, for the Hajj, they have elevated themselves as the real clear, especially because what’s happened in Egypt, they are the clear defenders of the Sunni, so to speak.

This schism which goes all the way back to the seventh century, it goes all the way back to the earliest years after the life of the Prophet Muhammad, this schism is now playing out in conflicts that include Syria, includes Yemen. It includes Iraq. I mean, you look at everything that’s happening there, there’s a Sunni-Shia divide. Iran is picking favorites. Iran is meddling, getting involved in things.

The Saudis are doing the same, and because we’re not as clear on what we want right now, both of those states have, I think, a freer hand to do that, or at least Saudis feel that they have a freer hand than maybe they did in the past because the administration is essentially saying we don’t really have a vision. We don’t really know…this current administration doesn’t really know what the Middle East should look like.

Glenn: Some people describe Saudi Arabia as the heartland of hate. How would you describe it?

Buck: Just imagine for a second that you took, sort of to give you a sense of a corollary, if, you know, Catholics, Rome, right, Vatican, the Vatican, if you had a country, let’s say all of Italy, that banned the practice of any religion that was not Catholicism, that beheaded people for actually apostasy or for trying to spread a different religious belief system, I think the world would look very unfavorably upon that.

Glenn: Yeah, I don’t think if the pontiff who had been washed in blood who, you know, had the big machetes and beheading people there at St. Peter’s, if he died, the world would not be saying he was a reformer.

Buck: Yeah, the world has embarrassed itself in the case of Saudi Arabia or at least the world media has embarrassed itself, I think, most of it, by referring to…I mean, this is really just the sort of lowest of low expectations. I think it’s a fair way to put it.

Glenn: Don’t you think it is the racism of low expectations? I’m fascinated by the way we just accept from the Middle East that okay, yes, they’re behaving like barbarians, but they’re doing the best they can. Excuse me? I mean, what are you saying?

Buck: The left in this country doesn’t really take that tone. Their tone is well, it’s different than ours. Don’t criticize it. They’re doing things differently there, and the things that are bad are actually our fault. It would be one thing if we had clarity on the barbarity, if we were all agreed that look, what they’re doing is ridiculous, guys, and maybe we can’t change it, but what you hear actually in this country is well, no, it’s one of the three great monotheisms, and this is the seat of the religion, and they’re doing things differently, but that’s okay because the Crusades or the Inquisition or, you know, you hear this just sort of hiding of the ball all the time.

People aren’t honest about the fact that not only are the Saudis…are they doing things from a human rights perspective that are just appalling, and they are, but they have been the main exporters of virulent Islamist hate for decades.

Glenn: Okay, so let me just talk about the double standard again. The new prince, the new king, is going to continue the work on the border fence.

Buck: They apparently believe in fences. They believe very strongly in fences to the north and to the south. They think that those can keep people out who aren’t supposed to be there.

Glenn: So, we’re not supposed to have one, because that’s racist.

Buck: We say it’s not possible also, which apparently the Saudis are better at engineering than we are. I doubt that.

Glenn: The Israelis build a fence.

Buck: Well, they’ve shown that it is of course possible.

Glenn: Right, but that fence is racist. That fence is akin to the Holocaust, right?

Buck: The fence that the Saudis are building, of course, is keeping out other Arabs, so that’s the justification for it is that this is just hey—

Glenn: The world is completely silent. It’s an enormous fence, enormous.

Buck: And it’s going to be getting bigger too. They recognize that the instability that exists on the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen and also to the north in Iraq, that’s not going away.

Glenn: So, the president has to go meet the new king. Was he called and told? I mean, because honestly I don’t think the president at this point cares all that much.

Buck: I don’t think he cares all that much either, and I think that part of this might just be the sting of the condemnation that came for the administration after not sending anyone to that march. Remember, it didn’t have to be Obama. This was, I think, where the criticism was fair. Biden, the Secretary of State, somebody you would think should be there, and nobody was there. People said well, the French ambassador was there. Yeah, the French ambassador could hop in a cab and go the ten minutes or whatever it was to the march.

Glenn: Eric Holder was there, but he left.

Buck: Yeah, didn’t have time or didn’t have the inclination.

Glenn: Right.

Buck: So the president, I think, wants to, again, because, you know, ego does factor into this too, and legacy, wants to seem like he’s on top of things, he’s going there. Look, we have this very strange alliance, this bedfellows relationship with the Saudis that we’re not about to abandon, and quite honestly—

Glenn: Should we?

Buck: We can’t.

Glenn: I don’t buy that.

Buck: Oh, I mean, we say abandon it entirely, I mean, what would that really even mean at this point?

Glenn: I mean we as a nation. If I’m President of the United States, and I said to you, you’re an advisor, I say Buck, here’s the thing, by the end of my administration, I want the cord cut as much as I possibly can from the Saudis. I don’t trust them. I don’t want their stinking oil. We have enough resources here. I’m not going to be held hostage by these guys anymore. They’re bad people. They oppress women. They stone homosexuals. They kill you if you’re a Christian. I’ve got nothing in common with these people. I don’t want more enemies, but they’re not exactly our friends. I don’t want any more enemies, I want out. What do you tell me?

Buck: I would tell you that the levers you have to try to prevent them, prevent not just the royal family or the regime there but try to prevent Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Peninsula from being even more so than it is sort of the wellspring of this global ideology that’s very dangerous and destabilizing all over the world, you’d rather have some input into this than no input, and then also when you add the energy issue into it, you’d rather try to steer them in directions that are useful to U.S. policy in the region than not.

Does it feel good? Does it smell good? Are we okay with this? No, but it’s going to continue. Look at Republican, I mean, this is one issue where the scorn is bipartisan. For anybody who’s going to say well, that’s just silly talk, Republicans on this issue, they are “What’s up, Abdullah? We’re all pals.”

Glenn: You know what it is? This is the biggest key that opened up my mind, and I am so glad to see so many people understand this now. When people are like oh, you know, talking about liberals, stop talking about liberals. I can live side by side with a liberal. I can live side by side with a liberal. Progressives are in both parties, and it is this idea of whether it is the UN that controls everything or the United States and its military that controls everything, that’s the progressive idea. The true independent, the true classic liberal wants nothing to do with either one of those.

Buck: This is why I won’t call them liberal. I mean, I just refuse to call progressives liberal. I hate that they’ve appropriated that term.

Glenn: I agree.

Buck: I think it should be a movement in this country to stop referring to people who are statists, who want control of the apparatus, who want to take your stuff, who want to tell you what to do, as liberal. They’re the antithesis of liberal.

Glenn: That’s why we are misunderstood in Europe, because they gave us the conservative title, which we’re classic liberals. We’re classic liberals.

Buck: And we haven’t come up with a term that is as useful or as accurate for the beliefs of people like you and me who are classic liberals in this country. It’s been appropriated by the other side. It really does hurt, I think, the discussion, because you don’t know who’s on what side. It muddies all the waters. But the Saudi problem is very real, and look, until 9/11, by the way, we had no cooperation from them on a lot of these issues. It was only after 9/11 happened that we’re like we like your oil, we know you behead people…we’re serious now, where are the bad guys?

Glenn: Are we really serious though?

Buck: We were. Are we as serious now? Probably not.

Glenn: What happens? What do you see? Give me a look five years down the road with the jihadis all around the world. What does the world look like in five years?

Buck: What’s different now or what’s different at this phase of the game is that they are playing for control of nationstates. This isn’t just a question of their hitting out at the U.S. and at Israel, and they’re trying to sort of wage this global insurgency, which is really what the jihadists are trying to do. Now they’re saying okay, where do we have a strong enough foothold that we can actually run it, we can be in charge? Because the moment you do that, and we’re seeing this with the Islamic State…why can’t we get rid of the Islamic State? Well, it’s not a bunch of guys in training camps. It’s guys that are controlling cities.

In the case of Mosul, Mosul has about 2 million people that live in that city, so to take that back, there’s no nonconventional, unconventional way to take that back, and so if they can establish control of the infrastructure of an actual state, of a country, whether it’s Libya, whether it’s Syria, Iraq, Yemen, I mean, go down the line, they’re getting more and more opportunities to do this, that changes the whole game.

The reality is that if they can do that in a couple of places, they think they can do it all across the Middle East, and that’s not…once you start to look at what the landscape is of a nuclear Iran on the one hand and this rising Sunni jihadism on the other hand in Syria, Iraq, all these other countries, who’s going to stand up again? We always hear about the moderates, and they’ll point to some blogger that nobody’s heard of in Cairo. That’s not going to cut it.

Glenn: So, if I’m President of the United States, my phone bill, my international phone bill, is mainly made up of phone calls to Israel because they’re the only ones that have the same kind of ideology that we have. You could disagree with them on a lot of things, and I do disagree with a lot of things on Israel, but they’re the only ones that have a clue as to what the Western world believes in and follows, and yet, Benjamin Netanyahu is coming, and we’re peeing all over him.

Buck: Well, the White House is.

Glenn: Yes.

Buck: The White House is.

Glenn: The White House is.

Buck: Unsurprising given the president’s antipathy. Look, if you’re a man of the academy in this country, I mean, if you’re somebody who your background comes from the university, it comes from a campus, right, which is the really, with the president, I mean, I know he’s a politician, but before then he’s really a guy of the academy, you tend to be anti-Israeli. That’s now taught.

Glenn: But let me ask you this. He is a man of the campus. He’s a well-educated man. He campaigned as a guy who was a constitutional scholar, so there’s no excuse for derailing the Constitution on him. He knows exactly what he’s doing. You cannot be…and this I felt on the Paris thing, you don’t send anybody? That doesn’t occur to you to send anybody? You don’t want to go to our oldest ally? There’s nothing that crosses your mind?

Buck: It wasn’t that he forgot—

Glenn: No, he chose not to.

Buck: And he chose because this administration does not want to be seen in any capacity ever as taking something that could even be construed as critical of Islam.

Glenn: So there’s no way you’re this wrong on this many things. There’s no way. You could play the odds, man. You cannot make this many mistakes, you can’t, and have it come out in favor of jihadists.

Buck: You’d be right by accident sometimes.

Glenn Once in a while you’d be like okay, well that one fell in our favor. It is falling to the jihadists and to the caliphate every single time. So, I’m Benjamin Netanyahu, is the American administration an enemy of mine?

Buck: The American administration is not an enemy, but they can’t count on—

Glenn: Show me why they’re not. Show me the time that they have said “Buddy…”

Buck: I think the administration is apathetic, and you could say that apathy in the face of rising threats all around Israel, which are clear and obvious, I don’t think anybody would disagree on what’s happening in Syria and the prospect for what will happen, by the way, probably soon in Egypt and what’s happening in Iraq, that it’s a dangerous neighborhood that’s getting more dangerous.

Glenn: And you’re making it, as the administration, you’re making it more dangerous.

Buck: I have to say I’ve always had a tough time, because there is a healthy dose of incompetence at the upper reaches. Look at the people that are making a fair amount of the administration’s decisions.

Glenn: I believe they’re all like 14 years old, I know.

Buck: I mean, there’s a healthy amount of incompetence too, and I don’t want to make it seem like they all have these Machiavellian schemes that are playing at every step of the way.

Glenn: Some do.

Buck: The president does play a lot of golf. I mean, some of these things are true.

Glenn: But they also have people like Samantha Power, who knows exactly what she is doing. She’s well thought out.

Buck: She’s well thought out. I think it’s interesting that her whole ideology of responsibility to protect, somehow that’s I don’t really know who we’re protecting, but this is what she came into office, or came into her position rather, espousing. The Israelis have, and under Netanyahu I think there’s a recognition that they’ll take care of themselves, or they have to. They will have to if things get really ugly, and I think at least right now they would agree that they can, but that could change.

Demographically speaking, Israel is very small, and the Arab world is very large, and we’ve seen United Arab armies in the recent past trying to eliminate the state of Israel. The moment you throw a nuclear Iran into the mix, I think things change pretty dramatically. That’s what the Israelis believe.

Protests following the fatal police shooting of Walter Wallace Jr quickly devolved into violence, rioting, and looting in Philadelphia, and BlazeTV's Elijah Schaffer was there to document what the mainstream media won't. But while filming the carnage inside a Five Below on Tuesday, Elijah was surrounded and attacked by looters.

Elijah joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Wednesday to detail his experience and to explain why mainstream media efforts to downplay the violence just show that independent media has never been more important.

"Unfortunately, [the attack] escalated from one person to about a dozen very quickly," Elijah explained. "I'm actually really happy to be alive. Because in that same shopping center, right there, there was a 15-year-old girl who was shot, according to reports. And I heard multiple gunshots throughout the night. Another individual is reported to have heard a gunshot as well, so we try to confirm. I watched people get pummeled beyond belief."

Glenn asked Elijah to respond to mainstream media claims that conservatives are exaggerating the looting and violence in Philadelphia.

"It's so funny to hear people that aren't there try to counter what we're reporting," Elijah replied.

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

In the final days before the 2020 election, President Donald Trump is gaining among black voters, particularly men, because his record of accomplishments "speaks for itself" and the "façade" that President Trump is a racist "just doesn't ring true," argued sports columnist Jason Whitlock on "The Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday.

Jason, who recently interviewed the president at the White House for OutKick.com, shared his thoughts on why he believes many black Americans — notably celebrities such as Kanye West, Ice Cube, and 50 Cent — are breaking from the "façade" that President Trump is a "flaming racist."

"I really believe the facts are starting to speak for themselves, and that Donald Trump's record of accomplishments, particularly as it relates to African Americans, speaks for itself," Jason told Glenn. "He actually has a record to stand on, unlike even Barack Obama. When [Obama] was president, I don't think he had much of a record to stand on, in terms of, 'Hey, what did he actually deliver for African Americans?' President Trump has things he can stand on and, you know, beyond that I think black people understand when he starts talking about black unemployment rate. And America's unemployment rate. And then, when you add in for black men, the façade we've been putting on [President Trump] … you know, this whole thing that he's some flaming racist, it just doesn't ring true."

Jason suggested that Trump's fearlessness, unabashed masculinity, and record of keeping his promises resonates with men in the black community. He also weighed in on how media and social media's bias plays a huge role in convincing people to hate President Trump while ignoring Antifa and others on the Left.

"I keep explaining to people, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, they're some of the most secular places on earth. And we've reduced everyone to a tweet, that we disagree with," he added.

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Megyn Kelly is not happy about the "disgusting" media coverage of President Donald Trump, specifically pointing to Lesley Stahl's "60 Minutes" interview on CBS Sunday.

On the radio program, Megyn told Glenn Beck the media has become so blinded by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" that they've lost their own credibility — and now they can't get it back.

"It's disgusting. It's stomach-turning," Megyn said of the media's coverage of the president. "But it's just a continuation of what we've seen over the past couple of years. Their 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' has blinded them to what they're doing to their own credibility. They can't get it back. It's too late. They've already sacrificed it. And now no one is listening to them other than the hard partisans for whom they craft their news."

Megyn also discussed how she would have covered the recent stories about Hunter and Joe Biden's alleged corruption. Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Imagine sometime next year, getting called before HUWAC – the House Un-Woke Activities Committee.

"Are you or have you ever been a member of the un-woke?"

Something like that is not as far-fetched as you might think.

Last week, Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration, now a UC Berkeley professor, tweeted this:

Since the 1970s, there have been dozens of "Truth Commissions" around the world like the kind Robert Reich wants in America. Most of these have been set up in Africa and Latin America. Usually it happens in countries after a civil war, or where there's been a regime change – a dictator is finally overthrown, and a commission is set up to address atrocities that happened under the dictator. Or, as in the commissions in East Germany and Czechoslovakia, atrocities under communism. Or, in the most famous example, South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation commission addressed the decades of apartheid that ravaged that nation.

These commissions usually conclude with an official final report. These commissions and reports have served as a means of governments trying to close a dark chapter of their country's history, or provide emotional catharsis, as a way to generally move on. Sometimes it kind of works for people, most of the time it leaves people clamoring for more justice.

Here's how one professor described truth commissions in an article in The Conversation last year. He wrote:

The goal of a truth commission… is to hold public hearings to establish the scale and impact of a past injustice, typically involving wide-scale human rights abuses, and make it part of the permanent, unassailable public record. Truth commissions also officially recognize victims and perpetrators in an effort to move beyond the painful past… Some have been used cynically as tools for governments to legitimize themselves by pretending they have dealt with painful history when they have only kicked the can down the road.

See, this is the problem with a lot of "Truth" commissions – they are inherently political. Even if you trust your government and give them all the benefit of the doubt in the world that their Truth commission is trying to do the right thing, it is ALWAYS going to be political. Because these truth commissions are never set up by those who have LOST power in government. They're always established by those who have WON power.

The Deputy Executive Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice says one of the main points in these Truth commissions is that "the victims become protagonists."

A Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility.

So, who are the victims in Robert Reich's America? People like him, members of the far-Left who had to endure the atrocities of four years of a president with different political ideas. What an injustice. I mean, the left's suffering during the Trump administration is almost on the level of apartheid or genocide – so we totally need a Truth commission.

There have been lots of calls for the U.S. to have its own Truth and Reconciliation commission, especially around racial injustice.

This past June, Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California introduced legislation to establish the " United States Commission on Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation."

Ibram X. Kendi – the high priest of anti-racism, and author of Target's current favorite book " Antiracist Baby" – proposes a Constitutional anti-racism amendment. This amendment would:

establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for pre-clearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.

If you think that is far-fetched, you haven't been paying attention to the Left's growing radicalism. In a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration, a Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility. And of course, such a DOA would never stop at policing government.

We're in a dangerous, precarious moment in our history. Given the events of 2020, should Democrats gain the White House, the Senate, and the House, how many commissions will be in our future? They will suddenly have plenty of political capital to drag the nation through years of commission hearings.

And the Left's form of justice is never satisfied. You think it will stop at a T&R commission on race? MSNBC's Chris Hayes tweeted this month about the need for a commission to deal with Americans who are skeptical about wearing masks:

Or what about a Truth commission on religion? I mean, look at those reckless churches spreading Covid this year. Or this would be a big one – a T&R commission on climate change deniers.

The Left is highly selective when it comes to truth. That's why they are the very last group you want in charge of anything with "Truth and Reconciliation" in the title.

This is one of the most incredibly frustrating things about the Left in America today. The Left insists there is no such thing as absolute truth, while simultaneously insisting there are certain approved truths that are undeniable.

So, you can't question "Science" – even though that's pretty much what every great scientist in history did.

You can't question racism as the explanation for all of existence – because, well, just because.

You can't question third-party "Fact-checkers" – because the powers that be, mainly Big Tech right now, have decided they are the Truth referees and you have to trust what they say because they're using certified external fact-checkers. They just forgot to tell you that they actually fund these third-party fact-checkers. It's like if McDonald's told you to trust third-party health inspectors that they were paying for.

The Left thinks it has a monopoly on Truth. They're the enlightened ones, because they've had the correct instruction, they're privy to the actual facts. It's psychotic arrogance. If you don't buy what they're selling, even if you're just skeptical of it, it's because you either don't have the facts, you willingly deny the facts, or you're simply incapable of grasping the truth because you're blinded by your raging racism problem. It's most likely the racism problem.

The Left never learns from its own preaching. For the past 60-plus years they've decried the House Un-American Activities Committee for trying to root out communists, getting people canceled, ruining Hollywood careers, etcetera. But a HUAC-type committee is precisely what Robert Reich is describing and many on the Left want. It's not enough for Trump to be voted out of office. Americans who helped put him there must be punished. They don't want reconciliation, they want retribution. Because the Left doesn't simply loathe Donald Trump, the Left loathes YOU.