Peter Doocy Exposes Psaki on Climate Change and Russia

BUCK: Yes, Peter Doocy, high five over in the White House West Wing there for Fox News.

BUCK: Welcome back to Clay and Buck show — and, my gosh, I love this. Because let’s all remember something as he’s asking this question. A totally fair question to ask in a moment of national security crisis of this administration because the mantra of Democrats has been for years now, “The greatest national security threat we face is global warming,” or is it “climate change,” or is it “climate disruption,” or is it “climate catastrophe”?

Depends what year. Depends what they feel like saying at any point in time. But you’ll notice that this is a way of showing the absurdity of the modern Democrat Party, particularly on issues where it really matters to see things as they are, to see things with clarity. Clay, the Biden White House ultimately… Yeah, people will say, “Oh, but, Buck, they’re so serious about socialism and about destroying the country.” Yeah, okay, fine. But they’re unserious people! This is the problem.

They live in this fantasy of leftist delusion where things like saying, “The greatest threat we face,” “an existential threat”, and we can actually find clips of Biden and Obama and Pelosi. The greatest threat we face is climate change? No, I think there’s some bigger threats we face right now, folks. I think everyone’s recognizing that. I’m not even necessarily talking about Russia, which is a prelude, of course, to what Clay’s gonna be talking about in a few minutes. You like that? That’s smooth.

CLAY: Yeah, look.

BUCK: Yeah. (laughing)

CLAY: One of the things that we learn is that oftentimes Democrat obsessions are luxuries of low crime, of low danger, and of low concern in the moment obsessions — and I’ll give you an example. Obviously, this is really a funny clip because it is not the case that the biggest threat in America today is global warming or climate change, right? That’s just laughably absurd. Any day we could have any string of awful things that could occur, just using nuclear proliferation as one of the dangers.

We could have much of life extinguished in a heartbeat over one of those issues, right? Not gonna happen with global warming. But what’s crazy, Buck, is, to me this ties in with defund the police. Defund the police coming out of George Floyd in June-May of 2020, the entire argument was predicated on our murder rate being so low and our rate of violent crime being so low that you could be concerned that we were over-punishing violent criminals. That was the unmentionable underlying thesis behind defund the police.

It was that crime was so low that we could have fewer police and it wasn’t gonna overall impact things, and that we didn’t have to put violent criminals behind bars. Buck, that lasted what, six months before people all over this country started saying, “We have created a recipe for disaster; we have to figure out how to fix this”? And I saw a data point — did you see this — coming out of L.A.

George Gascon, 98% of the DAs in L.A. support him being recalled. I want to repeat that stat because I was reading it yesterday and I couldn’t believe it. In the City of Los Angeles, George Gascon — I believe he faces a recall, Buck, in June in the City of Los Angeles to be the top prosecutor — 98% of the people who work underneath him as longtime district attorneys prosecuting cases believe that he needs to be removed because of not actually enforcing the law. And we just saw that video, Fox News had it — I think they had it out of Fox L.A. — of the sexual assault by a man who changed his gender or whatever, and bragged about the fact that he was gonna have no consequences. That audio is ricocheting all throughout L.A. and major changes are coming.

BUCK: It’s also important to notice that a lot of people who — and I think this also is applicable particularly in the national security context. People who talk a big game about caring for others and push for certain policies don’t care about the destruction, the suffering, and the misery that will come from those policies for other people, as long as they get to look like they care.

A perfect example is on the crime issue we’re talking about letting career criminals, violent felons out early or not even prosecuting them at all. If you live in a rich neighborhood — if you’re Nancy Pelosi and you’ve got not only mansions to go back and forth and a private jet to but also armed security detail — you don’t care. It doesn’t matter to Nancy Pelosi what’s happening in Oakland or Baltimore or Chicago or Houston or name a city right now.

Doesn’t matter to her if the crime race goes up, because she gets to pose as somebody who’s working so hard to deal with “social inequities” and push for “social justice.” On the national security side, a lot of people right now talking a very big game about Ukraine because they care so much about… Even Jen Psaki: Our principles. What’s the principle? The principle is, yeah, sure, diplomacy, fine. No one’s saying what Putin did is a good thing, is okay.

That’s why they freak out about Trump praising Putin. Clay, we’re just saying, “Well, it’s not our fight and we shouldn’t go to war over this,” and there are a lot of people who are kind of saying, “Well, we should at least consider that option” in the background. And they’re all Democrats right now. But I guarantee you, they’re not going to war.

CLAY: And what’s also wild is, Buck, we just did everything we could to get out of Afghanistan to try to end a never-ending war, and it feels like on that border region with Ukraine and Russia, it’s potentially going to be a never-ending border war for decades before all is said and done.