May 21, 2025 • 59 mins
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show discuss President Donald Trump's "Golden Dome" event, highlighting the evolving role of AI and space technology in modern warfare. The hosts emphasize the strategic importance of Space Force, originally mocked but now seen as prescient, especially with SpaceX dominating satellite launches and reshaping global communications and defense. The conversation shifts to a controversial case in Maine, where State Representative Laurel Libby was stripped of her voting rights for opposing a biological male competing in girls' sports. The hosts criticize the Democratic Party's stance on gender and free speech, applauding the U.S. Supreme Court for intervening to restore Libby's rights. A major segment of the hour is dedicated to dissecting CNN anchor Jake Tapper’s recent media appearances and his book, which revisits President Joe Biden’s cognitive health and the media’s role in covering it up. Clay and Buck analyze Tapper’s interview with Megyn Kelly, praising her for holding him accountable. They argue that Tapper and other mainstream media figures knowingly suppressed concerns about Biden’s mental acuity, only acknowledging them now that Biden’s political future is uncertain. The hosts also revisit Tapper’s past criticism of Lara Trump, noting his recent apology and reversal on Biden’s condition. Trump meets with South African President The hosts deliver a provocative and in-depth discussion centered around President Donald Trump's contentious Oval Office meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. This hour is packed with politically charged commentary, international relations analysis, and cultural critique, making it a must-listen for politically engaged audiences. The segment opens with breaking news coverage of Trump dimming the Oval Office lights to play a four-and-a-half-minute video showing South African lawmakers allegedly calling for violence against white farmers. This dramatic move sets the stage for a broader conversation about race, immigration, and media narratives. The hosts argue that Trump is using these high-profile diplomatic meetings to dominate the news cycle and force mainstream media to cover topics they typically avoid. A major theme in this hour is the plight of white South African farmers, with the hosts asserting that they are victims of racially motivated violence and land expropriation. They criticize the U.S. media and Democratic politicians for allegedly ignoring or downplaying these issues due to racial and political biases. The discussion also touches on the recent U.S. decision to grant asylum to a group of 59 South African farmers, which the hosts defend as a legitimate humanitarian response. Alan Dershowitz on the Preventative State A compelling interview featuring Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz, who discusses his new book, The Preventive State: The Challenge of Preventing Serious Harms While Preserving Essential Liberties. Dershowitz explores the legal and constitutional implications of preventive measures like deportation, critiques the ACLU’s partisan shift, and reflects on his own political evolution from a lifelong Democrat to an independent constitutional libertarian. The conversation dives into the Sean “Diddy” Combs sex trafficking case, where Dershowitz predicts a likely conviction that could be overturned on appeal due to prejudicial evidence—drawing parallels to the overturned Harvey Weinstein conviction. He also weighs in on President Biden’s cognitive fitness, the media’s role in covering it up, and the potential legal ramifications of decisions made during his presidency, including the use of the 25th Amendment and presidential pardons. ME Rep. Laurel Libby Interview with Maine State Representative Laurel Libby, who recently won a Supreme Court ruling restoring her right to vote in the legislature after being censured for opposing biological males competing in girls’ sports. Libby discusses the political fallout in Maine, the
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show podcast. Welcome everybody to the Clay Travis and
Buck Sexton Show on this lovely Wednesday, all across the land.
A lot of news to talk about. Trump's big Golden Dome,
(00:22):
the biggest, beautifulest, most golden Dome. Talked about it yesterday,
got into some really interesting stuff about the future of warfare.
AI technology integrated into a global a global battlefield. It's
so much stuff to dive into on that, and we
will update you on some of the key moments from it.
(00:44):
And our friend Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth was there
as well as long as well as the leader of
Space Force. Space Force getting their moment in the sun,
if you will. Something that Trump came up with as
an idea looks pretty press in retrospect, doesn't it. At
the time, I remember there was snickering. There was oh,
(01:06):
Space Force, what was it gonna be like Star Trek. No, Actually,
it's really important as Elon and SpaceX are the pre
eminent satellite launch company slash nation state in the world,
and something like Clay, I think eighty percent of the
satellites in orbit are SpaceX launched at this point. So
(01:29):
the world is the world of space is changing so rapidly,
and it affects us so much. This is no longer
just about oh, maybe we can do a cool thing
and and get you know, figure out something the first
time we did this or no. No, this is affecting
telecommunications for all of us. It's affecting targeting on the
battlefield's there's a huge world of stuff that we've been
(01:53):
thinking is coming for a long time. It is here imminently,
and so we we'll talk a bit about that. Obviously,
the Golden Dome stuff is big. Clay is also going
to update us on this. Right. It was a state
assembly woman in Maine's the It's crazy that the Supreme
Court of the United States had to weigh in to
(02:16):
get Laurel Libby, who is in Maine, and I know
we have a lot of people listening in Maine to
get her able to vote again because they basically stripped
her of all representative rights because she spoke out against
a boy winning a girls championship in the state of Maine.
And so I we've had her on the show before
(02:38):
and we may have her on the show again. But
I just the world that we have entered where the
Supreme Court of the United States has to get involved
because Democrats don't want anyone to speak out against men
and women's sports, and in fact will not allow them
to be representing their district. Ah, I buck this thing
(02:58):
off the crazy train.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Democrats are on a crazy train going so fast that
I can't even believe some of the places we end up.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
I know we have to keep playing whack a mole
with this too. I wish that we could say this
argument is done and over with. We won, but they
won't stop. So we can't stop because if we do,
we seed ground to them in there. Crazy anyway, Clay
O bring us into that. I think it's a really
interesant conversation. More from Tom Homan on the border. But
so look, let's take a moment here. Okay, we had
(03:28):
had this exchange here Clay and I and all of
you and a lot of you weighed in about this book,
that original sin, this book that has come out which
I stand behind. I do not advise you know, you
can read some of the excerpts if you want online
and you'll get the idea. I don't think that you
learn very much. The specifics of the details might be
somewhat lurid, but we already knew all of this, So
(03:51):
this would only be news to people so foolish that
they believe the Democrat media when they said Biden didn't
have dimension. This would only be a situation of oh
my gosh, revelation for people who were completely hoodwinked by
this con And we were not, as we know from you,
and neither were any of you. Because if you chose right, Clay,
(04:12):
if you choose to listen to this show, it means
you are independent, thinking enough, and wise enough to see
through the bull crap that places like CNN and The
Washington Post were peddling. Right, so we're already you know,
we're sitting here like we already knew. Okay, But we
had talked about whether we would have Jake Tapper on
(04:33):
to talk about his book. I can tell you that
Jake Tapper is a guy who in earlier years, when
CNN was feeling robust, he was a behind the scenes,
a very nasty guy with very sharp elbows and very
underhanded in his dealings with people in media, in my opinion,
and I could give lots of details about it and
(04:56):
now all of a sudden, he's coming out like a
whipped dog like now all of a sudden, and it's well,
you know, I guess maybe I was wrong. Okay, So
do we have him on or not? That was the question. Well,
now I think it's kind of moot because he went
on Meghan Kelly's show. And full credit to Megan, who
is a great interviewer and is you know, is fearless.
(05:19):
She and Jake are friends and she's open about that
they're friends. He went on her show. I thought, come on,
there's no way she's gonna really hold him to account. Now,
would he have gotten rougher stuff Clay if he had
come on this show first, Yes, But did she fulfill
the necessary role here of not letting him get away
(05:42):
with lies and nonsense and asking the tough questions? Yes
she did, Yes she did. I mean I think on
this show it would have been like it would have
been hard for me not to start swearing, honestly. But
here we go. Let's start with some of this. Claut's
work through some of this together. This is one of
the better moments. This is from Megan's interview with Tap
and you say, Buck, why are we talking this because
we're still in the early stages of the Democrats finally
(06:04):
admitting what we were saying all along. And it's the
biggest political scandal of our lifetime. I don't know what
could be bigger than this. And it's the biggest media
scandal of our lifetime for sure. This is cut to
Megan Kelly's show with tapp or play it over here.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
In my ecosphere, we were covering all of these. It
wasn't just falling down, it was getting lost.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
It was some of the stuff you report in your book.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
We knew and we were reporting on, like the multi
jump cuts in the videos of him, or it was
obvious he couldn't get through a one minute take. It
was clear to us that he was using teleprompter, and
there was some reporting on that at the time, all
of which the White House was denying. Now the current
white House, I have some connections with the Joe Biden
white House. I had none, but you did. There was
(06:48):
an attempted cover up. It could only ever work if
you allowed it, if the press allowed it.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Some of us tried not to, and some of us
were complicit.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
The Biden white House did not like me. Okay, this
is I do not have great connections with the Biden
White House.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Well, clearly source.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
You said you talked to over two hundred sources for
this book.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
And worked.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
No, that's the point is that they were not being honest.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
That's let's play a couple of these, because I think
what she said is important. He says, I didn't have
great contacts in the Biden White House. Well that's a
lie and also totally but he brags about interviewing two
hundred people for a tell all book, So you have
to have some connections to be able to get them
to talk to you.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
This also is great.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And she goes off on him and says, one of
us didn't miss the biggest story of the century in
presidential politics.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Cut three go.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
On the Street journal get it in June of twenty
twenty four, and Jake Tapper and CNN couldn't find sources
for this story. Then before he dropped out.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Annie Lynsky and Shavon Hughes did an amazing job in
their reporting and they should be heralded.
Speaker 5 (07:59):
And I old them.
Speaker 4 (08:00):
I had them on my show right after the debate
to talk about the great reporting to the debate.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
But you did not put them on when they published
that story, which was before the debate.
Speaker 5 (08:09):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (08:10):
I don't know what the booking situation was, but it
wasn't because I didn't want them.
Speaker 5 (08:13):
I'm sure.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
I'm sure I said that, let's book that did they?
Speaker 6 (08:17):
You?
Speaker 3 (08:18):
You put on a democrat and you allowed the Democrat
to rive on the report as a Ruper Murdoch sponsored
hit piece.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
It's just that what we going to do.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
If we're going to if we're going to do this,
let's just stick to the facts here, Okay, when there
is a damnator.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
That's what I've been doing all along. I'm one of
us didn't miss the biggest story of the century when
it comes to presidential politics, and one of us did.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
I give her credit. This is what I wanted us
to do if we had Jake on instead. Megan did it.
So I'm one more because I do think this matters. Buck,
I will give Jake Tapper some small measure of credit here.
He says he apologized to Laura Trump. We talked about
this on the show, because he ripped her and said, oh,
you're mocking his stutter and and derided the idea that
(09:08):
she could argue wasn't mentally.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Or a horrible thing to say. Yes, a horrible thing
to say. I mean to say, what what a kids
would say? We will play the full clip. I mean
it was it was gutter stuff that he pulled with
Laura Trump, who you know, you know her, Clay, I
know her. It's a lovely person, Okay. It is like
you know you'd want you'd want to leave your kids
with her at the barbecue, you know, for for the
(09:31):
day and know that they have a great time. Like
she's a lovely person.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Well, and what it's representative of is I've seen less
of this, but I was concerned on Sunday when you say, hey,
I don't believe Joe Biden when he says he found
out he had cancer on Friday. That doesn't mean that
you want somebody to be unsuccessful in their fight against cancer, right,
And so when you criticized Joe Biden, what they tried
to say was, oh, well, that's you're being unfair. You're
(09:56):
going after him because of a stutter, which is designed
to limit any criticism by directly attacking you. That is
a clear attempt that they made to try to protect
Biden by attacking anybody or raising it as an issue.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Pure propaganda, which nobody believed. And here's why they Clay,
no person would think, first of all, if you're making
fun of a stutter, you would make fun of a stutter.
And nobody in public life would think that making fun
of a stutter is something that you should do, because
people would say that's cruel, that's a jerk move. Yeah,
(10:33):
talking about a president having dementia who has the nuclear
codes is fair gain. And by the way, this is
just a natural outgrowth of anything we don't like as racist,
anything we don't like as sexist. They don't actually address
the arguments. As soon as you go to a personal attack,
that is a sign that you have lost the argument.
But to Jake Tapper's minimal credit here he is. He
(10:56):
says he has apologized to Laura Trump cut for you cover.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
The Biden presidency aggressively throughout the four years, and you
didn't cover mental acuity hardly at all. I mean time
and time again when issues came up. You seem to
be running cover for the president. Interested Well, I mean,
we'll start with a Laura Trump issue that you referred.
Do you want to apologize to Laura Trump?
Speaker 7 (11:17):
Now I've already apologized her I called her months ago,
and what does she say. I mean, I don't want
to disclose the contents of a private conversation, but I
thought the conversation went well, and she said, she has
said this publicly, so I feel fine of sharing it.
She said that she would never mock anybody's stutter.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
But I mean, you.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Know, after we did the research for this book and
I realized how bad his acuity issues were, I like,
I mean, I called Laura Trump and I said, you
were you were right.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
She was totally right. I just got a why. I
just got to keep repeating at Clay, this was not
a mistake. It was an op. Just for every thing
you hear from these Democrats about this, it was not
a mistake. It was an op. Just have that running
through your head. They knew what they were doing. They
knew all along, and we knew all along, and we
(12:11):
knew that they knew that we knew, and yet the
game just kept on playing out like this, Which is why,
I mean, I see, here's the thing, Clay, I correctly
not to religate this. I correctly identified the ruthlessness and
the lying nature of the Democrat Party with regard to
Biden in twenty twenty four. The only wrinkle in my whole,
(12:33):
the only wrinkle in my whole thesis all along, stretching
back for years, the debate that was the whole. That
was when if they had gotten through that debate, Biden
was the candidate. Everybody should remember that he had cancer.
They knew they hit it, and they knew he had dementia,
and they were hiding that all along.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
And they would have never told these stories if he
had won the election. That's the other thing about this.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
The whole game was they have the cancer out, they
talk about his cancer. He steps down for that, not dementia,
and no one asked any questions, and Kamalas starts giving
speeches about being the first black woman president. Totally, And
the only reason now that this book is coming out
is because Jake Tapper has no benefit whatsoever from having
(13:18):
to play a Democrat propagandist, so he can effectively bury
Biden's political legacy and to a large extent, Kamalis too,
because I think the conversation is going to shift to
what Kamala, you argued for years that Biden was okay.
I think this is going to sabotage any future that
Kamala had. So they've taken her down. This takes her
(13:40):
down to this is this is what's got along She's
I told you, remember this, I told all of you.
She's gonna end up provost at some U C. School,
you know, and they're just gonna She's gonna be kind
of sent sent to the archives, as we used to
say in the CIA, send to the archives.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
I think this is going to be tough, honestly for
anybody that was in the Biden cabinet when they try
to run into one. Maybe not in the Democrat primary,
although I'm curious for the outsiders who weren't in the
Biden camp whether they can attack this and whether it
has residents, but certainly in the general election. Can you
imagine jd Vance running against mayor Pete or somebody like
(14:15):
that and saying, dude, you lied to us for four
years about Biden's mental acuity. Why can we trust you
on anything? I think that will register really well with
independent voters. You know what else registers well, Buck's nervousness.
You might even be able to hear it during the
course of today's show. Long suffering New York Knicks fan
with a big game tonight against the Indiana Pacers. We've
got the NHL Playoffs underway, and if you're in Oklahoma
(14:38):
City or you're in the Minneapolis area, that game's going on.
Final four NHL, Final four of the NBA, also Major
League Baseball, all of it going on right now. Make
sure that you've got prize picks downloaded, because you can
get hooked up. All you have to do is pick
more or less for your favorite athletes Tennis as well, golf.
Whatever you are into, you can play in Texas, California,
(15:01):
and Georgia's fabulous best way to get action on sports
in more than thirty states, including like I said, California, Texas, Georgia.
Withdrawals fast, safe and secure. Some can hit your account
as little as fifteen minutes. Download the app today. Use
my name Clay as the code for fifty dollars instantly
after you play your first five dollars. That's code Clay
(15:22):
for fifty dollars instantly after you play your first five dollars.
Price picks run your game code Clay.
Speaker 8 (15:30):
Clay, Travis and Buck Sexton. Mic drops that never sounded
so good. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
In the last six months, we've experienced wildfires, tornadoes, flooding,
and multiple major storms. If you remember, during Hurricane Helene,
we sent some rapid radios to family. They were in
places with downpower lines and extremely limited communication services. With
rapid radios, we were able to communicate with those family
members at the touch of a That made such a
difference at a critical time for my family. There's no
(16:04):
better feeling than knowing your friends and family are safe,
and you can eliminate some of that stress by opening
that communication immediately with rapid radios. These modern day walkie
talkies work on a nationwide LTE network and have a
five day charge. We don't know when the next big storm,
power outage, or unforeseen circumstances may hit. Put your mind
(16:24):
at ease and go to rapid radios dot com get
up to sixty percent off. That's rapid radios dot com
for up to sixty percent off, free ups shipping, and
a free protection bag. Make sure you use code Radio
to get an extra five percent off. Welcome back invis
(17:00):
Buck Sexton Show. So just now in the Oval Office,
Trump is meeting with the President of South Africa. Have
you seen this yet, Buck, Oh yeah uh.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
He dimmed the lights in the Oval Office and played
a four and a half minute video of South African
lawmakers demanding that white people be killed and their land
be seed. And it is blowing up everywhere as we speak.
(17:36):
I am scrolling through to see how South Africa's leader responded,
but it is It is really pretty extraordinary, these moments
that Trump is having in the Oval Office with leaders
of foreign countries, whether it was Zelenski in February, now
(17:56):
the South African leader today. And of course this comes
on the heel was at fifty nine fifty some odd
South African farmers who were white being granted amnesty in
the United States, and everybody came out and said, oh
my goodness, this is on the Democrat side. Unacceptable and
this has just happened, So we will pay attention to you.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
I just wanted to give you a heads up. Buck.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
This is something we've talked about quite a lot on
the show and it has not gotten very much attention.
But remember one of the CNN commentators said, why don't
they just go back to where they're from? And many
of these South African white farmers have been there for
hundreds of years, some of them since the sixteen hundreds.
(18:39):
And these were people that have been victims of violence
at high levels.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
The Dutch East India company land around the what is
it the Cape of Good Hope around sixteen fifty four,
and the Dutch didn't displace and there was no one there.
Now you could say there was somebody there in the
land that is now currently South Africa. Yeah, but it
(19:06):
was a sparsely populated land. Here's some things that people
don't ever think about when they talk about this what
was considered tribal land at that point. Well, they may
be curious to know that in the seventeenth century and
that part of Africa, the tribes almost to I think
every single one. I mean, I'm trying to think of
there's any exception Clay. They were migrant herdsmen, if you will.
(19:30):
So they were constantly on the move. They would move
with the seasons, they would move with their herds. They
were overwhelming a herding societies. So what's their land or
rather how much land or what really is is why
is it that there is an assumption that to be
native to Africa you have to be black. There are
(19:51):
people now I know, people are going to say, everybody
originated from Africa, and I'm aware of this too, and
the you know, the anthropological origins of the human species.
But there's the whole northern part of Africa. Is you know,
is Egypt part of Africa. It's a fun thing to
ask people, this is Egypt part of Africa? They go, well, yes,
but so are Egyptians Africans? People will say no, and
(20:12):
you say why why is not the case? Of course
they're Africans right.
Speaker 9 (20:16):
Anyway, It's interesting the way these things are spoken about
and talked about because the storyline, now, yes, was there
a racist system of apartheid instituted that you know, needed
to be overturned.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
Absolutely, it happened. But they didn't overturn it with a
system that was also not race or rather that was
not racist. They overturned it with a system that was
explicitly racist. It just switched the direction of the racism.
And what you see now with Trump showing everybody what's
really going on, is that the objection. You know, Clay,
(20:51):
we've been covering the immigration issue very closely every time,
and I used to have these fights and you know,
when I lived in DC for a couple of years,
I was doing the show at the Hill, we'd have
all these democrat I would say, these people are not
asylum segreas, so yes they are. They deserve their day
in court, they deserve to present evidence to show. I'm like,
these people are showing up with with Q cards that
(21:11):
say in whatever language they speak, you know, and by
the way, I mean actual QUE cards. They actually would
have this written out. Sometimes I have a credible fear
of violence in my insert the blank country, and that
was how you pass their credible fear test. Clay. I
bring this up because all the media are assuming that
these fifty migrants that we've taken in from legally taken
in from South Africa are not deserving of asylum. They
(21:34):
have no idea, None of these people have, you know,
they haven't looked into their individual cases. Their objection to
the South African migrants, and this goes to what Trump
is is explicitly I think showing every right now is
that they are white and that they've come here legally. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Look, sorry, I'm just catching up because of this Oval
office event reminds me of what happened with Ukraine, where
we're live on the air and we're like, oh, my goodness, Like,
this is kind of remarkable. I'm sending some clips in
to our team so that they can be on top
of this and we can share with all of you. Look,
this is I think significant. So you might say, okay,
(22:12):
why does this matter?
Speaker 5 (22:13):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:15):
Well, and again I'm texting in different clips that have
just happened in the Oval Office to our team so
that we can make sure that we're.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
On top of this.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
What is really happening here in the Oval Office is
and this is unique. I don't remember this happening very often.
Trump has decided that one of the best ways he
can dominate the news cycle and force the media to
talk about what he wants them to talk about is
do it while you have these gatherings with foreign leaders
(22:46):
in the Oval Office, which are traditionally just kind of banal.
There's not a lot of news that comes out of them.
They talk about how much they like each other, and
it's a kind of a grip and grin handshake stuff.
Event Trump is turning them into must see television and
also forcing then the media to cover what takes place there. Now,
(23:08):
I can already tell you what the response to this
is going to be. Oh, Trump only cares about violence
in South Africa when it impacts white people, right, And
they're going to say, well, yes, there is violence against
white people in South Africa, but South Africa has huge
rates of violence overall, and black people are actually much
more likely to be victims of violence in South Africa,
(23:30):
which is true because they're the majority of the country.
But I'm just telling you what the talking points will
be in response to this.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
But let's keep digging into this, right, Let's keep having
this fight with them, because they're wrong, and so they'll lose.
The more that's exposed, the more that is known about this,
the weaker the Democrat position becomes, which is true of
almost every Democrat position, I think, But in this case,
I think they're digging a deeper hole for themselves than
they realize. First of all, the people, and you're right
about what their talking points will be. The people that
(23:56):
would make that case, though, are also people who in
this country, for example, well say they only care about
let's say police brutality or police violence that involves members
of the black community, correct, even though guess what, overwhelmingly
it is members of the white community who suffer from
state or police violence. But they will say, oh, it's
(24:17):
all about the proportion. Okay, Well, then let's take a
look at the proportional violence in South Africa, and let's
also take a look at the you know, the reason,
the motive for that violence, and it is in many
cases explicitly anti white and it is encouraged by the state.
So mir the people who are objecting to the South
(24:39):
African migrants when they apply a similar framework of state
violence racism in this country, you can see they actually
have no principles to work on whatsoever, that it's only
what happens here and what happens there they view as
totally you know, irrelevant comparisons when they're actually very apt comparisons. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
Well, look, I mean I use this analogy all the
time because I think it is an important aspirational goal. Lady,
justice is blind, go look at any exact I've heard
you say that before, You've heard me say it. But
I think it's it's such an important example to use
because it's an aspirational goal for all of society that
we would weigh guilt or innocence based.
Speaker 1 (25:21):
Not in any way on what the.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Race or gender, or ethnicity, or religion or sexuality is
of the accused that we would just look at the facts,
and in many ways, what happens is we swung right
from admittedly racism against minorities to racism is okay in
favor of minorities to make up for racism in the past,
(25:47):
and we skipped right over trying to have fair and
impartial application of justice.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Well, this is now you're hitting on the critical principle
that is so upsetting. So there's the immigration component of
this right, which is America shouldn't take in any white
people really as immigrants period. I mean, that's what the
Democrats actually want. Democrats believe that a less white America
(26:13):
will inherently be a more just America because it is
the white people in America who do all the oppressing,
right if you actually take their life, So they think
that a more just America must be a less white America.
That is a left wing Democrat belief. So that's on
the immigration piece, Clay. But the other piece, which is
what you just touched on, is in South Africa, you
have a dender rights case of black racism against white
(26:38):
people as a matter of law, as a matter of policy,
and as a matter of day to day life. Well,
if it's possible. There doesn't that go against the narrative
in this country of only white people can be racist? Yes,
it distracts.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
This is what I would say is a foundational idea
that I would encourage all of you to contemplate if
you haven't already come to the conclusion white, Black, Asian
and Hispanic people can all be racist. That is one
billion percent true.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
Kind of like we're very anti cancer here, we're very
anti racism. Yes, but you know the thing with like
the cancer, like there's no good cancer, and there's no
good racism. We're anti it across the board. I'm anti
any racial animis based on skin color. I'm anti all tumors, right,
I mean this is you can be consistent. Yes, and
we wish nobody ever died. We would be very pro
(27:32):
immortality too. Yes, we are pro anti death, anti death,
pro living. But I do think that that statement that
I just made white, black, Asian, and Hispanic people can
all be racist. Many Democrats, many left wing voters would say, no, Clay,
you're wrong. Oh, the fundamentally reject that, Yes, only white
(27:52):
people can be racist, and therefore we can only focus
on racism white in the direction of black Asian or Hispanic.
And what's really fascinating about this is you questioned me.
You say, Okay, Clay, I don't disagree.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Remember when stop Asian Hate just vanished, when they decided
that Asian hate was actually being driven.
Speaker 1 (28:11):
You know what the problem with that campaign was surveillance cameras. Yeah,
it was rough. They started rough.
Speaker 2 (28:18):
It was like two months they were like this and
it was that post COVID they were like, this rise
of anti Asian hate is unexcepted.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
They the media was like, must be guys named Billy,
Bob and Maga.
Speaker 2 (28:28):
Hats and no, it turned out it was not mostly
black guys beating up innocent Asian people. And they were like, oh, well,
Asian hate's really not that big of a deal. And look,
hate is wrong. Racism is wrong, but it can run
in many different directions, be condemned everywhere.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
By the way, this is interesting too. Trump.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
I don't know I've ever seen a president who loves
athletes more. He's got Ernie Els and Ratief Goosen, two
famous South African golfers with him in the media, and
Ernie Els and Ratief Goosen have spoken out to say
they want to see the country flourish, but they have
to end racism in the country in order for that
(29:10):
to happen. So those are two white golfers who many
of you out there who are golf fans will know
very well, Ernie L's or Chief Goosen, both major winners
in the PGA Tour, and just goes there just this
is another moment where Trump is forcing the Democrats. It's
like the MS thirteen guy and that we're all supposed
to care so much that he was deported, you know,
(29:31):
the bad guy. Trump is forcing the Democrats here because
he knows how they think to defend the indefensible, which
is the policies right now of South Africa. They are
morally and intellectually indefensible. If you're anti racism, yes, and
it's an example of moving from apartheid, which was wrong,
to now a new form of racism, which is white
(29:52):
no longer being in the control of the government. I
think they're seven percent of the population. I would also
point out and being discriminated against by the majority black
ruling class. Now I would also point out Elon Musk
is South African, so I think I would I would
bet that one reason Trump has become more aware of
this is that Elon Musk has been outspoken about what
(30:15):
he has seen in his country, and I think Trump
has certainly become aware of it in a way that
he might not have.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Think about how powerful the narrative really is that's been
sort of foisted on everybody in this country. Can you say,
if you walk into a room, you're like, Elon Musk
is an African. Do people think that you're you know
that that's weird? They they they there's automatically right, you
say it, and they go, oh, whoa, whoa, what do
you mean? So, so there are land masses that are
only for certain like massive land masses that are only
(30:43):
for people of a certain skin color. Is that is
not the position that they take, but that is the
position that democrats take.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Evon Musk is factually the most successful African American in
the history of the United States.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
He's the most yeah, most American in the world.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
Yes, maybe the most successful African American in the history
of Africa existing as we know it in civilization. Certainly
he's up near the top of the list. Maybe they'll
make a statute to him in the new African American
Museum going up on the National mall. That would be
Can you imagine Can you imagine the reaction if Trump
(31:21):
came out and said, Hey, I think we need an
Evon musk wing in the new African American mall that's
going up on the Capitol, the Capitol Mall that the
reaction to that would be absolutely hysterical.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
All right, look, we'll get back into this. We'll actually
take you to a couple of clips of the president
here in just a second talking to the President of
South Africa. But your online identity is worth a lot
to cyber hackers. Then the latest scam involves a phone call.
They get your name and number from a stolen database
and call you, posing as an IT professional. They trick
you into revealing private info. These guys are sophisticated, they're
bad actors, and they can trick very smart people. You're busy,
(31:57):
you're not thinking all the time about how someone's trying
to scam you. That's when they pounce. This is why
you need someone to have your back. LifeLock my friends.
LifeLock to text and alerts you to potential identity threats
you may not spot on your own, like someone taking
out loans in your name or racking up charges on
your credit card, and if you do become a victim
of identity theft, a dedicated US based LifeLock restoration specially
(32:17):
it will fix it guaranteed or your money back. Having
LifeLock gives you peace of mind knowing someone has your
back online. Help protect yourself. Get LifeLock. Join now, say
forty percent off your first year with promo code Buck.
Call one eight hundred LifeLock or head tolifelock dot com.
Use my name Buck as your promo code for forty
percent off. Terms of plot. All right, a third hour
(32:55):
of play and Buck kicks off. Now we are joined
by law professor emeritus and best selling author Alan Dershowitz.
He's got a new book out released just yesterday, The
Preventive State, The challenge of preventing serious harms while preserving
essential liberties. Go get your copy, read it on the beach.
You'll impress everybody who sees you with how smart you are.
(33:18):
Professor Dershowitz, good to have you on.
Speaker 6 (33:21):
Hey, it's great to be on. It's a very topical
book because it deals with all the preventive mechanisms that
we use to try to stop crying from occurring. Like
deportation also, yep.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
I was going to jump right into that. I mean,
tell us about tell us about the deportation piece, and
how you think the administration is doing on a legal
front there.
Speaker 6 (33:40):
Well, you know, deportation is one of the oldest forms
of prevention known to humankind. That used to be called exile.
If we were afraid of somebody, we would exile them
and make them leave the country. And so we're using
that now as a mechanism of prevention. And I would
say that I would give a split verdict to the administration.
They're doing the right things substively. That is, they're trying
(34:02):
to throw the right people out. They're trying to make
sure that we're not subject to crime by gang members.
On the other hand, they're not doing such a great
job on due process. And the Supreme Court has basically
come down with split decisions. They basically said, look, the
president has the authority to decide who's in the country
and who's not in the country, but he has to
(34:23):
cross every constitutional t and dot every constitutional ie. And
so the courts have struck back on some of the
mechanisms that are being used, but they said it's okay
to use deportation as a method of crime prevention.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
I'm talking to Alan Dershowitz. You and I have tried
a similar path where I voted Democrat and then democrats
I started to see losing their mind, and I have
changed how I voted. I'm curious for you. You've had
a longer career in the law than I have, by
by far, and a much more successful one.
Speaker 1 (34:59):
But I'm also a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
When did in your mind it go from a quote
unquote traditionally liberal perspective to stand, for instance, for First Amendment,
free speech, for basic principles of fairness, and turn into
more of a conservative one. Do you remember a point
in time when you looked around and said, boy, the
(35:22):
ACLU isn't the ACLU that I grew up supporting.
Speaker 6 (35:26):
Well supporting. I was on the national board. I was
the youngest person on the national board of the ACOU.
I spent years supporting the ACO you. I worked with
the ACOU to defend the rights of Nazis to march
in Skokie, Illinois. I defended people on death row. As
an ACOU lawyer, I won't give a nickel to the ACOU,
and I called the ACO you the anti Civil Liberties Union.
(35:49):
They have become completely partisan in political Once every two
years they represented a Nazi in order to show that
they're still civil libertarians. But the vast, vast, vast majority
of their work is on progressive, woke, left wing causes,
and you know, they've become kind of a leader and
(36:11):
the weaponization of the legal system against Donald Trump, against Republicans,
against Conservatives, against Christians, and so I'm totally contemptuous. You know,
it's interesting. I've devoted my whole life to human rights,
civil liberties, and civil rights. I now see something that
s marks civil liberty, civil rights, human rights, I throw
in the garbage pail because I know it's going to
(36:32):
be on the wrong side of everything. Today. Human rights
has just turned against Israel, against the United States, against Christianity,
against decency, and so I have no support for those
concepts anymore. They've been hijacked, they've been taken away. And
I'm still a civil libitarian. And you know, I describe
myself as a constitutional libertarian, but as well as a
(36:58):
meritocratic Egallon Tarrian and a constructive contrarian. So I haven't changed.
But like Ronald Reagan said, the Democrats have left me.
I left the Democratic Party hours after the Democratic Convention
this year when I saw that they were picking one
after the other progressive, anti liberal speakers, anti israel speakers,
(37:22):
sometimes anti Semitic speakers, and the Republicans were doing a
better job and preserving liberty and democracy and freedom of speech.
I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent, but I'm not
a Democrat.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
How'd you vote?
Speaker 6 (37:37):
I can't say, because I you know, I love sleeping
with my wife, and and you know she has made
me sworn me to secrecy. I can tell you this.
I voted for Biden and I word for Hillary Clinton.
But I'm not going to disclose how I voted in
the last in the last election, and or how I
(38:01):
would vote in the next election. But I have been
supportive of many of the things that Trump has done,
just as I was supportive of many of the things
that previous presidents have done well at the same time
being critical of many of the things. And deportation is
one of the things I'm concerned about. I'm also concerned
(38:22):
that Donald Trump may abandoned Israel. That's been a concern
for me. And is he going to allow Israel to
protect itself against the potentional nuclear Iran. I don't know
the answer to that question. In my book To Prevent
a State, I spend a lot of time on the
Iran issue because that's the personification of preventive attack. I
(38:46):
use the example of Nazi Germany in nineteen thirty five,
when Britain and France could have destroyed Nazi Germany before
it was capable of destroying all of Europe and killing
fifty million people, and they didn't do it because they
didn't take it was seriously and you know, peace in
our time, Chamberlain, and that enabled Hitler to kill fifty
(39:09):
million people. Had they attacked, they would have you know,
killed fifteen fifteen thousand people with twenty thousand people, and
they would have defeated Nazi Germany. But you know, were
history is blind to the future, and we just don't know.
At that time, we didn't know what we were stopping,
and so I spend time in my book on that
(39:30):
as well.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
The preventive state the challenge of preventing serious harms while
preserving es central liberties. Professor Dershweriz's book just came out yesterday,
and Professor Derschwitz, if I could draw upon your time
as a criminal defense attorney. I know you're not on
this case. That would be interesting. You're not on this case,
but I'm sure you've been following it and seeing in
the headlines. What is your just overall sense as to
(39:56):
the likely outcome to the degree you can see it
this early on in the case, or perhaps the pitfalls
for either the defense or the prosecution in the Sean
Combs aka Puff Daddy a k a. P. Diddy sex
trafficking case that's getting a lot of attention to headlines
given how high profile mister Combs is.
Speaker 6 (40:15):
If I had to make a prediction, I would predict
that he'd get convicted and that his conviction would have
reversed on appeal. I don't understand how a jury should
be able to see that horrible video of him kicking
and beating up his girlfriend in the whole way of
the hotel. That's not what he's charged with. He's charged
with running you know, a Rico enterprise, and that that
(40:40):
tape is so done prejudicially. You can't get it out
of your head. As soon as you see that tape
and say to yourself, I want to convict the son
of a bitch, and so I think it will be
reversed on appeal. But it's very hard to believe that
a jury won't find his conduct up.
Speaker 1 (40:57):
But why do you think, Professor derschwud Selina? So clearly
you're right, I mean, the guy's a mind. The guy's
a bad guy. I mean everyone, there's no right. He's
not on trial for being a good guy or a
bad guy. He's a bad guy. That's very clear, and
I think even the defense isn't really contesting that. But
as a matter of law, why would you how would
you see it? Perhaps, and again I know you're we're
asking you to sort of see into the future, which
(41:19):
is tough, But how would you see it being overturned?
If let's say the jury does what you think, why
would you think then that it might be overturned.
Speaker 6 (41:27):
On appeal for the same reason that the Harvey Weinstein
New York conviction was overturned, And that is the admissibility
of prejudicial material that swayed the jury to convict. Even
though the elements of the crime and the elements of
RICO are very tough to establish, and the elements of
you know, conducting sex trafficking business so that would be
(41:52):
the grounds for reversal. That evidence came in that should
never have been seen by the jury.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
All right, let me go back to your experience, and
you're staying committed to principal aclu and everything else we
talked earlier on this program. As suddenly Jake Tapper writes
a book and says, boy, we could have never known
that Joe Biden wasn't mentally or physically competent for the job.
And the New York Times and the Washington Post right
(42:19):
editorial saying, boy, you know, somebody really should have said
something about the state that Biden was in. And you know,
the media ostensibly does exist to speak truth to power.
They wrote democracy dies in darkness at the top of
the Washington Post. You are steeped in liberal circles where
you hang out, where you live. What are people who
(42:40):
read the New York Times and watch MSNBC. What are
they saying in conversations that you hear. Do they feel
as if they have been lied to? Or are they
so convinced that Trump is hitler that they don't even
care if they're being lied to because it's a price
worth paying.
Speaker 1 (42:57):
What are you here?
Speaker 6 (42:57):
So it's the latter. They're praising people who lied, and
they wished the lie had been successful and that Biden
would have been allowed to run because many of them
think that Biden would have snuck past the finish line
because he's more likable than Kamila Harris. I don't know
whether that's true or not. I'm not a polster, but
(43:20):
I can only tell you that people on the MS
on that side, the New York Times, CNM, MSNBC side,
they don't care about lying. They would have been very
happy if there had been a complete, in total and
successful cover up in order to defeat Trump, and then
Biden would be president for a couple of months, and
(43:40):
then he'd have to leave office, either through the twenty
fifth Amendment or by resignation, and then we'd have Kamil
Harris as president. That's what the Martha's Vineyard crowd is
objecting to, not that they were denied the truth, but
that they didn't do a good enough job covering up
(44:00):
the truth.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Let me ask you this too, Given that I think
anybody who's the rational reasonable person would acknowledge that Biden
was not mentally or physically capable of being president in
the United States, do you, as a warrior, believe there
is any value in challenging some of the decisions made
by Biden, for instance, this big pardon, expansive pardons that
(44:22):
he gave at the end of his tenure based on
his mind not being capable of entering into the decisions
that were being made. Is there any legal ground there
in your mind to challenge these things.
Speaker 6 (44:35):
I don't think so, because then you'd have to challenge
probably some of the things at the end of the
Reagan of presidency, maybe the Roosevelt presidency, certainly the Widrick
Wilson presidency. You know, there if in fact Biden didn't
know that things were being signed for him by the
use of the auto pen, that might pose an interesting challenge.
(44:59):
It would have to be something it was constitutionally required
to be signed, like a law. Pardons, for example, don't
have to be signed. You can just give an oral pardon,
but for a law to be valid, it has to
be the signed or vetoed by the president. And if
it could be demonstrated that Biden didn't really know and
that he was he had authorized somebody else to do
(45:20):
the signing, that could raise could raise problems. You know,
in some respects. All of this goes back to prevention,
because what is the twenty fifth Amendment all about. It's
all about trying to prevent a non qualified president from
having access to the nuclear trigger. And you know, we
(45:41):
do so many things preventively in order to assure that
greater dangers don't exist, and we have to make sure
that when we do it, we do it according to
due process. And that's the crisis we're in now. We're
not in a constitutional crisis. We're in a political crisis
and a constitutional conflict, and the Constitution is so far
(46:03):
figured out ways of getting resolving these issues, and so
I'm not worried as long as President Trump says and
really does not in any way violate a Supreme Court order,
and we're not in a crisis.
Speaker 2 (46:21):
Last question for you quickly here because we've got to
get to a break. But you talked about your experience
with Trump and being of the opinion that he's better
on Israel issues than certainly Democrats have been based on
the platform they put forward in the DNC two parter.
Do you hear a lot of Jewish people out there
acknowledging that Trump has been very good on Israel and
(46:42):
the second part of that do people say, Hey, you
can criticize him for a lot, but the idea that
he's Hitler is absolutely insane. I'm talking Jewish voters in particular.
Speaker 6 (46:52):
No, I wish they were more sensible Jewish voters. But
there are a lot of Jewish voters who don't believe
he's supportive of Israel. Can't find you know, these are
people who are afflicted with Trump derangement syndrome. Some of
them also have bb derangement syndrome. And you know, neither
not who not Trump can do anything right. And so
if he's supportive of Israel, it must be for in
(47:16):
an effort to get a plane from Qatar. If he's
against people on campus who are anti Semites or anti Israel,
has nothing to do with that Semitism. It has to
do he doesn't like universities. Unless you are in some
of these radical, progressive, woke, left wing circles, it is
impossible to understand the depths. I mean, they think it's
(47:39):
an insult to Hitler just say that Trump's Hitler. They
think he's worse. I mean, these people just have no
limit to what And by the way, I know people
in Israel have the same attitude to you. They cannot
be rational about those subjects. And it's too bad, because
(48:01):
you know, in both cases not to know and Trump
have done many good things, and I've done some things
that are subject to criticism, and people should have a
nuanced view, but they don't.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Alan Dershowitz appreciate the time, sir, book is out. The
preventative state, the challenge of preventing serious harms while preserving
essential liberties. We appreciate the time, sir.
Speaker 6 (48:22):
Thank you so much. Be well.
Speaker 2 (48:25):
If you live in a house, you know it already.
Your roof can collect a lot of rain. In fact,
it was raining so hard yesterday I told the crew.
I was like, I may get knocked off air because
the storms are coming through with such severity while we're
on air. And that can happen April May June in
particular all over the area that I live. And your
gutters can get clogged in a big way, not only
with limbs, not only with leaves, with walls, footballs. My
(48:49):
kids are in the backyard playing all the time, and
I got to tell you, everything ends up in the gutter.
And if you've got kids, your grandkids, you probably have
experienced that tech that as well. Right now you can
save up to thirty percent off at leaffilter dot com
slash Clay and Buck. You can make sure that your
gutter clogs don't have to become a reality. This is
America's number one gutter protection system. Schedule your free inspection
(49:09):
up to thirty percent off your entire purchase at leaffilter
dot com, slash Clay and Buck. That's l E A
F Filter dot com, slash Clay and Buck. See the
representative for warranty details. Welcome back in Clay, Travis buck
(49:39):
Sexton show hope all of you are having a fabulous Wednesday.
We are joined now by a woman who had to
go all the way to the Supreme Court to be
able to speak and vote in the main legislature.
Speaker 1 (49:54):
She is Laurellibby.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
And for those of you who don't know, I want
to give a quick background and you can correct me
if I'm wrong on any of this.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
Laurel, and thanks for coming on with us.
Speaker 2 (50:03):
You spoke out against men being able to win women's
championships in Maine, something that I would imagine the vast,
vast majority of people in Maine certainly almost everyone listening
to us in Maine right now would agree with but
the vast majority of people in general. You were then
censored because you refuse to apologize for this. They would
not allow you to vote to represent your constituents in Maine.
(50:28):
You went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court
yesterday in a seven to two ruling said, the main
legislature has to allow you to do your job on
behalf of your constituents.
Speaker 1 (50:39):
Have I got that right? Can you believe that all
this has actually happened?
Speaker 5 (50:43):
That is a very concise yet accurate summary, I would
have to say, And no, it is kind of It's
pretty unbelievable when you say it like that. Remarkable that
a majority party would try to silence a member of
the minority party and take my constituents owed away. It's
astounding the defenders of democracy at work.
Speaker 1 (51:04):
What what exactly is there? And Laurel, appreciate you being
with us and thank you for doing what you've been
doing standing for what is I think obvious obvious truth
in this matter. But just so I'm clear on this,
Clay's been following this story very closely. What is their
rationale for silencing you? Like what you know, I understand
(51:25):
you've gone against the narrative, but officially speaking, on what
grounds are they doing this?
Speaker 5 (51:32):
Well, they don't really have good grounds to do this.
First of all, I haven't broken the law. I didn't.
I didn't do anything even against our rules, which they're
claiming that I did. What I did was from the
privacy of my own home. I made a Facebook post
and stood side by side of a biological male participating
in the pole vault, winning fifth place at a regional
(51:53):
meet last year, and then ning the girls state championship
this year. And you know, they say a picture speaks
a thousand words, and this did. And so the excuse
that they came up with was that this was a
photo of a minor. And I'll just remind folks that
when you win a state championship, you have to expect
(52:15):
that your photo is going to be out there. And indeed,
these were publicly shared photos that were public before I
shared them. But that's the grounds that the Democrats are
trying to stretch to to say that this was should
not have been posted, and we use that to make
their unconstitutional censure and say that I'm not allowed to
(52:35):
represent my constituents.
Speaker 2 (52:37):
So you're still not allowed to speak on the floor
of the state House.
Speaker 1 (52:42):
Is this true?
Speaker 2 (52:42):
In other words, while you're allowed to vote, you aren't
allowed to make arguments about how you were voting.
Speaker 5 (52:48):
That is entirely accurate and it's just as ludicrous as
it sounds. So I will be allowed to vote now,
but I will not be allowed to speak as the
case makes its way through the courts. Of course, being
able to vote on behalf of my constituents that is
the most important piece, and that's how my constituents had
(53:09):
been disenfranchised with not having a vote on the legislation.
And so that's what we requested from the Supreme Court
in our emergency application, was to have the ability to
vote on behalf of my constituents. And on June fifth,
will be heard in the First Circuit Court of Appeals
regarding the full case, and that includes getting my voice back.
Speaker 2 (53:30):
Okay, So this is just bonkers to me that this
could become an issue in any state. But if it
became an issue, let's say in Illinois or in Vermont
or in California, states that are overwhelmingly Democrat, that might
make a little bit more sense. But Trump won one
(53:50):
of the congressional districts in your state, the state was
decided by seven points overall. What percentage of main residents
do you think agree with the argument that you are making.
What do you hear when you go out and about
in the state.
Speaker 5 (54:08):
Well, you know, when I talk to folks, it's clear
that the polling that demonstrates two thirds of Manors don't
believe that biological mail should be participating in girls' sports
is extremely accurate. But I have to tell you, you know,
the numbers are even more startling than you may realize.
Of course, the breakdown by congressional district is impressive, but
(54:30):
when you get to actually how much the Democrats won
the House majority by in our state of one point
three million people, they only won the majority by sixty
votes across the entire state. So they're ruling with an
iron fist here and making these unconstitutional moves when they
only hold the majority by sixty votes.
Speaker 1 (54:51):
Do you think, Laurel, there's going to be any political
blowback on the Democrats? You know, I don't mean new
cycle blowback, right, I mean, you know the next election cycle.
Is this the kind of thing that, by the way, Manors.
Speaker 5 (55:09):
Is that right, Maynors.
Speaker 6 (55:10):
You got it.
Speaker 1 (55:11):
Mayners just making sure manors they see this and they realize, Wow,
the Democrats in our state have have lost their minds.
You know, what's your sense of that?
Speaker 6 (55:21):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (55:22):
You know, as I talk with folks, it does seem
apparent to everyone but Augusta Democrats that they have lost
their minds. And I say Augusta Democrats because this goes
across party lines. There are plenty of Democrats out and
about in Maine who think it's insanity to allow biological
males to compete in girls' sports. And they also think
it's insanity to unconstitutionally bar a sitting legislator from voting
(55:45):
on behalf of her district. So the folks who are
in power in Augusta are way out on a limb here.
It is not a representative of your average manor that
doesn't agree with them.
Speaker 2 (55:58):
So obviously you have coming up in May next year
a big Senate race. Susan Collins, Republican, is going to
be up for reelection. I believe I'm correct in this,
You can correct me if I'm wrong. And that is
massive because Republicans have a fifty three to forty seven
advantage and Susan Collins, one of the rare members of
(56:19):
the Senate who is representing a state that voted differently
in the presidential race, in other words, cross party. Am
I crazy or does this have to be a fairly
significant issue statewide in that race based on what the
Democrats in the legislature have done to you?
Speaker 5 (56:39):
I certainly hope this has significant influence in the twenty
twenty sixth election. Of course, we do have Senator Collins reelection.
She is the last Republican Senator in New England, which
is pretty remarkable. In addition, we also have a gubernatorial race.
We have of course the congressional CD one and CD two,
(57:02):
and we also have the full legislature every two years,
House and Senate up for a vote. And so you know,
I hope that this does come back to bite the
Democrats next year, and I certainly will be working very
hard to ensure that it does.
Speaker 1 (57:17):
Laurel appreciates you standing strong on this issue, and as
you continue to do just that, we'll have you back
on the show. Make sure everybody knows about you're doing
up in Maine. Beautiful along the coast, I hear maners
have some great stuff up there.
Speaker 5 (57:30):
Hey, it's gorgeous throughout.
Speaker 1 (57:33):
All right, wonderful, Thank you so much, thank you. All
righty Clay, I'm going to talk everybody about Birch Gold
here for a second. Let's do it. Look, I've been
a gold guy for a long time. I'm a believer
in gold and about it well over a decade ago.
Now is when I purchased my first gold. It's gold coins,
and they've gone up more than one hundred and sixty
(57:53):
percent in value. Today it's even easier to purchase gold.
There are many more ways to do it because your
IRA or four oh one K, even your savings account.
It's important as ever to do this given external factors
beyond our control and the systemic realities of our debt
and how we're gonna have financial issues as a country
in the future, and you just want to be prepared
(58:14):
for it. You want to diversify, you want to take
action now. One of the best ways to protect your
savings is through that diversification I talked about with gold
from the Birch Gold Group. The past twelve months, I
want you to know some of these numbers. Okay, the
past twelve months, the value of gold has increased by
forty percent. Now you're not like getting in and out
of gold, right, You're not. Oh wait, what about the
(58:35):
gold earnings report? Or no, no, no, You just buy
gold and you have it, and it's gone to forty
percent last twelve months. Central banks continue to buy gold
and record quantities. You can easily convert an existing ira
or four okay, think about that old ira or four
when k you have from a job, maybe you work
for five years, maybe ten years, whatever it is, and
it's just sitting there. You can convert that into a
(58:57):
gold ira and then just watch gold work its magic time.
Text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight ninety
eight and Birch Gold will send you a free infokid
on gold. No obligation, just the most useful information to
make you a believer in gold over the long term.
Text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight ninety eight.
(59:17):
That's Buck, b Uck. Text Buck to ninety eight ninety
eight ninety eight, or go online to Birch Gold dot
com slash buck Birch goold dot com slash b Uck
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show podcast. Welcome everybody to the Clay Travis and
Buck Sexton Show on this lovely Wednesday, all across the land.
A lot of news to talk about. Trump's big Golden Dome,
(00:22):
the biggest, beautifulest, most golden Dome. Talked about it yesterday,
got into some really interesting stuff about the future of warfare.
AI technology integrated into a global a global battlefield. It's
so much stuff to dive into on that, and we
will update you on some of the key moments from it.
(00:44):
And our friend Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth was there
as well as long as well as the leader of
Space Force. Space Force getting their moment in the sun,
if you will. Something that Trump came up with as
an idea looks pretty press in retrospect, doesn't it. At
the time, I remember there was snickering. There was oh,
(01:06):
Space Force, what was it gonna be like Star Trek. No, Actually,
it's really important as Elon and SpaceX are the pre
eminent satellite launch company slash nation state in the world,
and something like Clay, I think eighty percent of the
satellites in orbit are SpaceX launched at this point. So
(01:29):
the world is the world of space is changing so rapidly,
and it affects us so much. This is no longer
just about oh, maybe we can do a cool thing
and and get you know, figure out something the first
time we did this or no. No, this is affecting
telecommunications for all of us. It's affecting targeting on the
battlefield's there's a huge world of stuff that we've been
(01:53):
thinking is coming for a long time. It is here imminently,
and so we we'll talk a bit about that. Obviously,
the Golden Dome stuff is big. Clay is also going
to update us on this. Right. It was a state
assembly woman in Maine's the It's crazy that the Supreme
Court of the United States had to weigh in to
(02:16):
get Laurel Libby, who is in Maine, and I know
we have a lot of people listening in Maine to
get her able to vote again because they basically stripped
her of all representative rights because she spoke out against
a boy winning a girls championship in the state of Maine.
And so I we've had her on the show before
(02:38):
and we may have her on the show again. But
I just the world that we have entered where the
Supreme Court of the United States has to get involved
because Democrats don't want anyone to speak out against men
and women's sports, and in fact will not allow them
to be representing their district. Ah, I buck this thing
(02:58):
off the crazy train.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Democrats are on a crazy train going so fast that
I can't even believe some of the places we end up.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
I know we have to keep playing whack a mole
with this too. I wish that we could say this
argument is done and over with. We won, but they
won't stop. So we can't stop because if we do,
we seed ground to them in there. Crazy anyway, Clay
O bring us into that. I think it's a really
interesant conversation. More from Tom Homan on the border. But
so look, let's take a moment here. Okay, we had
(03:28):
had this exchange here Clay and I and all of
you and a lot of you weighed in about this book,
that original sin, this book that has come out which
I stand behind. I do not advise you know, you
can read some of the excerpts if you want online
and you'll get the idea. I don't think that you
learn very much. The specifics of the details might be
somewhat lurid, but we already knew all of this, So
(03:51):
this would only be news to people so foolish that
they believe the Democrat media when they said Biden didn't
have dimension. This would only be a situation of oh
my gosh, revelation for people who were completely hoodwinked by
this con And we were not, as we know from you,
and neither were any of you. Because if you chose right, Clay,
(04:12):
if you choose to listen to this show, it means
you are independent, thinking enough, and wise enough to see
through the bull crap that places like CNN and The
Washington Post were peddling. Right, so we're already you know,
we're sitting here like we already knew. Okay, But we
had talked about whether we would have Jake Tapper on
(04:33):
to talk about his book. I can tell you that
Jake Tapper is a guy who in earlier years, when
CNN was feeling robust, he was a behind the scenes,
a very nasty guy with very sharp elbows and very
underhanded in his dealings with people in media, in my opinion,
and I could give lots of details about it and
(04:56):
now all of a sudden, he's coming out like a
whipped dog like now all of a sudden, and it's well,
you know, I guess maybe I was wrong. Okay, So
do we have him on or not? That was the question. Well,
now I think it's kind of moot because he went
on Meghan Kelly's show. And full credit to Megan, who
is a great interviewer and is you know, is fearless.
(05:19):
She and Jake are friends and she's open about that
they're friends. He went on her show. I thought, come on,
there's no way she's gonna really hold him to account. Now,
would he have gotten rougher stuff Clay if he had
come on this show first, Yes, But did she fulfill
the necessary role here of not letting him get away
(05:42):
with lies and nonsense and asking the tough questions? Yes
she did, Yes she did. I mean I think on
this show it would have been like it would have
been hard for me not to start swearing, honestly. But
here we go. Let's start with some of this. Claut's
work through some of this together. This is one of
the better moments. This is from Megan's interview with Tap
and you say, Buck, why are we talking this because
we're still in the early stages of the Democrats finally
(06:04):
admitting what we were saying all along. And it's the
biggest political scandal of our lifetime. I don't know what
could be bigger than this. And it's the biggest media
scandal of our lifetime for sure. This is cut to
Megan Kelly's show with tapp or play it over here.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
In my ecosphere, we were covering all of these. It
wasn't just falling down, it was getting lost.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
It was some of the stuff you report in your book.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
We knew and we were reporting on, like the multi
jump cuts in the videos of him, or it was
obvious he couldn't get through a one minute take. It
was clear to us that he was using teleprompter, and
there was some reporting on that at the time, all
of which the White House was denying. Now the current
white House, I have some connections with the Joe Biden
white House. I had none, but you did. There was
(06:48):
an attempted cover up. It could only ever work if
you allowed it, if the press allowed it.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Some of us tried not to, and some of us
were complicit.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
The Biden white House did not like me. Okay, this
is I do not have great connections with the Biden
White House.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Well, clearly source.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
You said you talked to over two hundred sources for
this book.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
And worked.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
No, that's the point is that they were not being honest.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
That's let's play a couple of these, because I think
what she said is important. He says, I didn't have
great contacts in the Biden White House. Well that's a
lie and also totally but he brags about interviewing two
hundred people for a tell all book, So you have
to have some connections to be able to get them
to talk to you.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
This also is great.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And she goes off on him and says, one of
us didn't miss the biggest story of the century in
presidential politics.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Cut three go.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
On the Street journal get it in June of twenty
twenty four, and Jake Tapper and CNN couldn't find sources
for this story. Then before he dropped out.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Annie Lynsky and Shavon Hughes did an amazing job in
their reporting and they should be heralded.
Speaker 5 (07:59):
And I old them.
Speaker 4 (08:00):
I had them on my show right after the debate
to talk about the great reporting to the debate.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
But you did not put them on when they published
that story, which was before the debate.
Speaker 5 (08:09):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (08:10):
I don't know what the booking situation was, but it
wasn't because I didn't want them.
Speaker 5 (08:13):
I'm sure.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
I'm sure I said that, let's book that did they?
Speaker 6 (08:17):
You?
Speaker 3 (08:18):
You put on a democrat and you allowed the Democrat
to rive on the report as a Ruper Murdoch sponsored
hit piece.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
It's just that what we going to do.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
If we're going to if we're going to do this,
let's just stick to the facts here, Okay, when there
is a damnator.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
That's what I've been doing all along. I'm one of
us didn't miss the biggest story of the century when
it comes to presidential politics, and one of us did.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
I give her credit. This is what I wanted us
to do if we had Jake on instead. Megan did it.
So I'm one more because I do think this matters. Buck,
I will give Jake Tapper some small measure of credit here.
He says he apologized to Laura Trump. We talked about
this on the show, because he ripped her and said, oh,
you're mocking his stutter and and derided the idea that
(09:08):
she could argue wasn't mentally.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Or a horrible thing to say. Yes, a horrible thing
to say. I mean to say, what what a kids
would say? We will play the full clip. I mean
it was it was gutter stuff that he pulled with
Laura Trump, who you know, you know her, Clay, I
know her. It's a lovely person, Okay. It is like
you know you'd want you'd want to leave your kids
with her at the barbecue, you know, for for the
(09:31):
day and know that they have a great time. Like
she's a lovely person.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Well, and what it's representative of is I've seen less
of this, but I was concerned on Sunday when you say, hey,
I don't believe Joe Biden when he says he found
out he had cancer on Friday. That doesn't mean that
you want somebody to be unsuccessful in their fight against cancer, right,
And so when you criticized Joe Biden, what they tried
to say was, oh, well, that's you're being unfair. You're
(09:56):
going after him because of a stutter, which is designed
to limit any criticism by directly attacking you. That is
a clear attempt that they made to try to protect
Biden by attacking anybody or raising it as an issue.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Pure propaganda, which nobody believed. And here's why they Clay,
no person would think, first of all, if you're making
fun of a stutter, you would make fun of a stutter.
And nobody in public life would think that making fun
of a stutter is something that you should do, because
people would say that's cruel, that's a jerk move. Yeah,
(10:33):
talking about a president having dementia who has the nuclear
codes is fair gain. And by the way, this is
just a natural outgrowth of anything we don't like as racist,
anything we don't like as sexist. They don't actually address
the arguments. As soon as you go to a personal attack,
that is a sign that you have lost the argument.
But to Jake Tapper's minimal credit here he is. He
(10:56):
says he has apologized to Laura Trump cut for you cover.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
The Biden presidency aggressively throughout the four years, and you
didn't cover mental acuity hardly at all. I mean time
and time again when issues came up. You seem to
be running cover for the president. Interested Well, I mean,
we'll start with a Laura Trump issue that you referred.
Do you want to apologize to Laura Trump?
Speaker 7 (11:17):
Now I've already apologized her I called her months ago,
and what does she say. I mean, I don't want
to disclose the contents of a private conversation, but I
thought the conversation went well, and she said, she has
said this publicly, so I feel fine of sharing it.
She said that she would never mock anybody's stutter.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
But I mean, you.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Know, after we did the research for this book and
I realized how bad his acuity issues were, I like,
I mean, I called Laura Trump and I said, you
were you were right.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
She was totally right. I just got a why. I
just got to keep repeating at Clay, this was not
a mistake. It was an op. Just for every thing
you hear from these Democrats about this, it was not
a mistake. It was an op. Just have that running
through your head. They knew what they were doing. They
knew all along, and we knew all along, and we
(12:11):
knew that they knew that we knew, and yet the
game just kept on playing out like this, Which is why,
I mean, I see, here's the thing, Clay, I correctly
not to religate this. I correctly identified the ruthlessness and
the lying nature of the Democrat Party with regard to
Biden in twenty twenty four. The only wrinkle in my whole,
(12:33):
the only wrinkle in my whole thesis all along, stretching
back for years, the debate that was the whole. That
was when if they had gotten through that debate, Biden
was the candidate. Everybody should remember that he had cancer.
They knew they hit it, and they knew he had dementia,
and they were hiding that all along.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
And they would have never told these stories if he
had won the election. That's the other thing about this.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
The whole game was they have the cancer out, they
talk about his cancer. He steps down for that, not dementia,
and no one asked any questions, and Kamalas starts giving
speeches about being the first black woman president. Totally, And
the only reason now that this book is coming out
is because Jake Tapper has no benefit whatsoever from having
(13:18):
to play a Democrat propagandist, so he can effectively bury
Biden's political legacy and to a large extent, Kamalis too,
because I think the conversation is going to shift to
what Kamala, you argued for years that Biden was okay.
I think this is going to sabotage any future that
Kamala had. So they've taken her down. This takes her
(13:40):
down to this is this is what's got along She's
I told you, remember this, I told all of you.
She's gonna end up provost at some U C. School,
you know, and they're just gonna She's gonna be kind
of sent sent to the archives, as we used to
say in the CIA, send to the archives.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
I think this is going to be tough, honestly for
anybody that was in the Biden cabinet when they try
to run into one. Maybe not in the Democrat primary,
although I'm curious for the outsiders who weren't in the
Biden camp whether they can attack this and whether it
has residents, but certainly in the general election. Can you
imagine jd Vance running against mayor Pete or somebody like
(14:15):
that and saying, dude, you lied to us for four
years about Biden's mental acuity. Why can we trust you
on anything? I think that will register really well with
independent voters. You know what else registers well, Buck's nervousness.
You might even be able to hear it during the
course of today's show. Long suffering New York Knicks fan
with a big game tonight against the Indiana Pacers. We've
got the NHL Playoffs underway, and if you're in Oklahoma
(14:38):
City or you're in the Minneapolis area, that game's going on.
Final four NHL, Final four of the NBA, also Major
League Baseball, all of it going on right now. Make
sure that you've got prize picks downloaded, because you can
get hooked up. All you have to do is pick
more or less for your favorite athletes Tennis as well, golf.
Whatever you are into, you can play in Texas, California,
(15:01):
and Georgia's fabulous best way to get action on sports
in more than thirty states, including like I said, California, Texas, Georgia.
Withdrawals fast, safe and secure. Some can hit your account
as little as fifteen minutes. Download the app today. Use
my name Clay as the code for fifty dollars instantly
after you play your first five dollars. That's code Clay
(15:22):
for fifty dollars instantly after you play your first five dollars.
Price picks run your game code Clay.
Speaker 8 (15:30):
Clay, Travis and Buck Sexton. Mic drops that never sounded
so good. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
In the last six months, we've experienced wildfires, tornadoes, flooding,
and multiple major storms. If you remember, during Hurricane Helene,
we sent some rapid radios to family. They were in
places with downpower lines and extremely limited communication services. With
rapid radios, we were able to communicate with those family
members at the touch of a That made such a
difference at a critical time for my family. There's no
(16:04):
better feeling than knowing your friends and family are safe,
and you can eliminate some of that stress by opening
that communication immediately with rapid radios. These modern day walkie
talkies work on a nationwide LTE network and have a
five day charge. We don't know when the next big storm,
power outage, or unforeseen circumstances may hit. Put your mind
(16:24):
at ease and go to rapid radios dot com get
up to sixty percent off. That's rapid radios dot com
for up to sixty percent off, free ups shipping, and
a free protection bag. Make sure you use code Radio
to get an extra five percent off. Welcome back invis
(17:00):
Buck Sexton Show. So just now in the Oval Office,
Trump is meeting with the President of South Africa. Have
you seen this yet, Buck, Oh yeah uh.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
He dimmed the lights in the Oval Office and played
a four and a half minute video of South African
lawmakers demanding that white people be killed and their land
be seed. And it is blowing up everywhere as we speak.
(17:36):
I am scrolling through to see how South Africa's leader responded,
but it is It is really pretty extraordinary, these moments
that Trump is having in the Oval Office with leaders
of foreign countries, whether it was Zelenski in February, now
(17:56):
the South African leader today. And of course this comes
on the heel was at fifty nine fifty some odd
South African farmers who were white being granted amnesty in
the United States, and everybody came out and said, oh
my goodness, this is on the Democrat side. Unacceptable and
this has just happened, So we will pay attention to you.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
I just wanted to give you a heads up. Buck.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
This is something we've talked about quite a lot on
the show and it has not gotten very much attention.
But remember one of the CNN commentators said, why don't
they just go back to where they're from? And many
of these South African white farmers have been there for
hundreds of years, some of them since the sixteen hundreds.
(18:39):
And these were people that have been victims of violence
at high levels.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
The Dutch East India company land around the what is
it the Cape of Good Hope around sixteen fifty four,
and the Dutch didn't displace and there was no one there.
Now you could say there was somebody there in the
land that is now currently South Africa. Yeah, but it
(19:06):
was a sparsely populated land. Here's some things that people
don't ever think about when they talk about this what
was considered tribal land at that point. Well, they may
be curious to know that in the seventeenth century and
that part of Africa, the tribes almost to I think
every single one. I mean, I'm trying to think of
there's any exception Clay. They were migrant herdsmen, if you will.
(19:30):
So they were constantly on the move. They would move
with the seasons, they would move with their herds. They
were overwhelming a herding societies. So what's their land or
rather how much land or what really is is why
is it that there is an assumption that to be
native to Africa you have to be black. There are
(19:51):
people now I know, people are going to say, everybody
originated from Africa, and I'm aware of this too, and
the you know, the anthropological origins of the human species.
But there's the whole northern part of Africa. Is you know,
is Egypt part of Africa. It's a fun thing to
ask people, this is Egypt part of Africa? They go, well, yes,
but so are Egyptians Africans? People will say no, and
(20:12):
you say why why is not the case? Of course
they're Africans right.
Speaker 9 (20:16):
Anyway, It's interesting the way these things are spoken about
and talked about because the storyline, now, yes, was there
a racist system of apartheid instituted that you know, needed
to be overturned.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
Absolutely, it happened. But they didn't overturn it with a
system that was also not race or rather that was
not racist. They overturned it with a system that was
explicitly racist. It just switched the direction of the racism.
And what you see now with Trump showing everybody what's
really going on, is that the objection. You know, Clay,
(20:51):
we've been covering the immigration issue very closely every time,
and I used to have these fights and you know,
when I lived in DC for a couple of years,
I was doing the show at the Hill, we'd have
all these democrat I would say, these people are not
asylum segreas, so yes they are. They deserve their day
in court, they deserve to present evidence to show. I'm like,
these people are showing up with with Q cards that
(21:11):
say in whatever language they speak, you know, and by
the way, I mean actual QUE cards. They actually would
have this written out. Sometimes I have a credible fear
of violence in my insert the blank country, and that
was how you pass their credible fear test. Clay. I
bring this up because all the media are assuming that
these fifty migrants that we've taken in from legally taken
in from South Africa are not deserving of asylum. They
(21:34):
have no idea, None of these people have, you know,
they haven't looked into their individual cases. Their objection to
the South African migrants, and this goes to what Trump
is is explicitly I think showing every right now is
that they are white and that they've come here legally. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Look, sorry, I'm just catching up because of this Oval
office event reminds me of what happened with Ukraine, where
we're live on the air and we're like, oh, my goodness, Like,
this is kind of remarkable. I'm sending some clips in
to our team so that they can be on top
of this and we can share with all of you. Look,
this is I think significant. So you might say, okay,
(22:12):
why does this matter?
Speaker 5 (22:13):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:15):
Well, and again I'm texting in different clips that have
just happened in the Oval Office to our team so
that we can make sure that we're.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
On top of this.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
What is really happening here in the Oval Office is
and this is unique. I don't remember this happening very often.
Trump has decided that one of the best ways he
can dominate the news cycle and force the media to
talk about what he wants them to talk about is
do it while you have these gatherings with foreign leaders
(22:46):
in the Oval Office, which are traditionally just kind of banal.
There's not a lot of news that comes out of them.
They talk about how much they like each other, and
it's a kind of a grip and grin handshake stuff.
Event Trump is turning them into must see television and
also forcing then the media to cover what takes place there. Now,
(23:08):
I can already tell you what the response to this
is going to be. Oh, Trump only cares about violence
in South Africa when it impacts white people, right, And
they're going to say, well, yes, there is violence against
white people in South Africa, but South Africa has huge
rates of violence overall, and black people are actually much
more likely to be victims of violence in South Africa,
(23:30):
which is true because they're the majority of the country.
But I'm just telling you what the talking points will
be in response to this.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
But let's keep digging into this, right, Let's keep having
this fight with them, because they're wrong, and so they'll lose.
The more that's exposed, the more that is known about this,
the weaker the Democrat position becomes, which is true of
almost every Democrat position, I think, But in this case,
I think they're digging a deeper hole for themselves than
they realize. First of all, the people, and you're right
about what their talking points will be. The people that
(23:56):
would make that case, though, are also people who in
this country, for example, well say they only care about
let's say police brutality or police violence that involves members
of the black community, correct, even though guess what, overwhelmingly
it is members of the white community who suffer from
state or police violence. But they will say, oh, it's
(24:17):
all about the proportion. Okay, Well, then let's take a
look at the proportional violence in South Africa, and let's
also take a look at the you know, the reason,
the motive for that violence, and it is in many
cases explicitly anti white and it is encouraged by the state.
So mir the people who are objecting to the South
(24:39):
African migrants when they apply a similar framework of state
violence racism in this country, you can see they actually
have no principles to work on whatsoever, that it's only
what happens here and what happens there they view as
totally you know, irrelevant comparisons when they're actually very apt comparisons. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
Well, look, I mean I use this analogy all the
time because I think it is an important aspirational goal. Lady,
justice is blind, go look at any exact I've heard
you say that before, You've heard me say it. But
I think it's it's such an important example to use
because it's an aspirational goal for all of society that
we would weigh guilt or innocence based.
Speaker 1 (25:21):
Not in any way on what the.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Race or gender, or ethnicity, or religion or sexuality is
of the accused that we would just look at the facts,
and in many ways, what happens is we swung right
from admittedly racism against minorities to racism is okay in
favor of minorities to make up for racism in the past,
(25:47):
and we skipped right over trying to have fair and
impartial application of justice.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Well, this is now you're hitting on the critical principle
that is so upsetting. So there's the immigration component of
this right, which is America shouldn't take in any white
people really as immigrants period. I mean, that's what the
Democrats actually want. Democrats believe that a less white America
(26:13):
will inherently be a more just America because it is
the white people in America who do all the oppressing,
right if you actually take their life, So they think
that a more just America must be a less white America.
That is a left wing Democrat belief. So that's on
the immigration piece, Clay. But the other piece, which is
what you just touched on, is in South Africa, you
have a dender rights case of black racism against white
(26:38):
people as a matter of law, as a matter of policy,
and as a matter of day to day life. Well,
if it's possible. There doesn't that go against the narrative
in this country of only white people can be racist? Yes,
it distracts.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
This is what I would say is a foundational idea
that I would encourage all of you to contemplate if
you haven't already come to the conclusion white, Black, Asian
and Hispanic people can all be racist. That is one
billion percent true.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
Kind of like we're very anti cancer here, we're very
anti racism. Yes, but you know the thing with like
the cancer, like there's no good cancer, and there's no
good racism. We're anti it across the board. I'm anti
any racial animis based on skin color. I'm anti all tumors, right,
I mean this is you can be consistent. Yes, and
we wish nobody ever died. We would be very pro
(27:32):
immortality too. Yes, we are pro anti death, anti death,
pro living. But I do think that that statement that
I just made white, black, Asian, and Hispanic people can
all be racist. Many Democrats, many left wing voters would say, no, Clay,
you're wrong. Oh, the fundamentally reject that, Yes, only white
(27:52):
people can be racist, and therefore we can only focus
on racism white in the direction of black Asian or Hispanic.
And what's really fascinating about this is you questioned me.
You say, Okay, Clay, I don't disagree.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Remember when stop Asian Hate just vanished, when they decided
that Asian hate was actually being driven.
Speaker 1 (28:11):
You know what the problem with that campaign was surveillance cameras. Yeah,
it was rough. They started rough.
Speaker 2 (28:18):
It was like two months they were like this and
it was that post COVID they were like, this rise
of anti Asian hate is unexcepted.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
They the media was like, must be guys named Billy,
Bob and Maga.
Speaker 2 (28:28):
Hats and no, it turned out it was not mostly
black guys beating up innocent Asian people. And they were like, oh, well,
Asian hate's really not that big of a deal. And look,
hate is wrong. Racism is wrong, but it can run
in many different directions, be condemned everywhere.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
By the way, this is interesting too. Trump.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
I don't know I've ever seen a president who loves
athletes more. He's got Ernie Els and Ratief Goosen, two
famous South African golfers with him in the media, and
Ernie Els and Ratief Goosen have spoken out to say
they want to see the country flourish, but they have
to end racism in the country in order for that
(29:10):
to happen. So those are two white golfers who many
of you out there who are golf fans will know
very well, Ernie L's or Chief Goosen, both major winners
in the PGA Tour, and just goes there just this
is another moment where Trump is forcing the Democrats. It's
like the MS thirteen guy and that we're all supposed
to care so much that he was deported, you know,
(29:31):
the bad guy. Trump is forcing the Democrats here because
he knows how they think to defend the indefensible, which
is the policies right now of South Africa. They are
morally and intellectually indefensible. If you're anti racism, yes, and
it's an example of moving from apartheid, which was wrong,
to now a new form of racism, which is white
(29:52):
no longer being in the control of the government. I
think they're seven percent of the population. I would also
point out and being discriminated against by the majority black
ruling class. Now I would also point out Elon Musk
is South African, so I think I would I would
bet that one reason Trump has become more aware of
this is that Elon Musk has been outspoken about what
(30:15):
he has seen in his country, and I think Trump
has certainly become aware of it in a way that
he might not have.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Think about how powerful the narrative really is that's been
sort of foisted on everybody in this country. Can you say,
if you walk into a room, you're like, Elon Musk
is an African. Do people think that you're you know
that that's weird? They they they there's automatically right, you
say it, and they go, oh, whoa, whoa, what do
you mean? So, so there are land masses that are
only for certain like massive land masses that are only
(30:43):
for people of a certain skin color. Is that is
not the position that they take, but that is the
position that democrats take.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Evon Musk is factually the most successful African American in
the history of the United States.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
He's the most yeah, most American in the world.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
Yes, maybe the most successful African American in the history
of Africa existing as we know it in civilization. Certainly
he's up near the top of the list. Maybe they'll
make a statute to him in the new African American
Museum going up on the National mall. That would be
Can you imagine Can you imagine the reaction if Trump
(31:21):
came out and said, Hey, I think we need an
Evon musk wing in the new African American mall that's
going up on the Capitol, the Capitol Mall that the
reaction to that would be absolutely hysterical.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
All right, look, we'll get back into this. We'll actually
take you to a couple of clips of the president
here in just a second talking to the President of
South Africa. But your online identity is worth a lot
to cyber hackers. Then the latest scam involves a phone call.
They get your name and number from a stolen database
and call you, posing as an IT professional. They trick
you into revealing private info. These guys are sophisticated, they're
bad actors, and they can trick very smart people. You're busy,
(31:57):
you're not thinking all the time about how someone's trying
to scam you. That's when they pounce. This is why
you need someone to have your back. LifeLock my friends.
LifeLock to text and alerts you to potential identity threats
you may not spot on your own, like someone taking
out loans in your name or racking up charges on
your credit card, and if you do become a victim
of identity theft, a dedicated US based LifeLock restoration specially
(32:17):
it will fix it guaranteed or your money back. Having
LifeLock gives you peace of mind knowing someone has your
back online. Help protect yourself. Get LifeLock. Join now, say
forty percent off your first year with promo code Buck.
Call one eight hundred LifeLock or head tolifelock dot com.
Use my name Buck as your promo code for forty
percent off. Terms of plot. All right, a third hour
(32:55):
of play and Buck kicks off. Now we are joined
by law professor emeritus and best selling author Alan Dershowitz.
He's got a new book out released just yesterday, The
Preventive State, The challenge of preventing serious harms while preserving
essential liberties. Go get your copy, read it on the beach.
You'll impress everybody who sees you with how smart you are.
(33:18):
Professor Dershowitz, good to have you on.
Speaker 6 (33:21):
Hey, it's great to be on. It's a very topical
book because it deals with all the preventive mechanisms that
we use to try to stop crying from occurring. Like
deportation also, yep.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
I was going to jump right into that. I mean,
tell us about tell us about the deportation piece, and
how you think the administration is doing on a legal
front there.
Speaker 6 (33:40):
Well, you know, deportation is one of the oldest forms
of prevention known to humankind. That used to be called exile.
If we were afraid of somebody, we would exile them
and make them leave the country. And so we're using
that now as a mechanism of prevention. And I would
say that I would give a split verdict to the administration.
They're doing the right things substively. That is, they're trying
(34:02):
to throw the right people out. They're trying to make
sure that we're not subject to crime by gang members.
On the other hand, they're not doing such a great
job on due process. And the Supreme Court has basically
come down with split decisions. They basically said, look, the
president has the authority to decide who's in the country
and who's not in the country, but he has to
(34:23):
cross every constitutional t and dot every constitutional ie. And
so the courts have struck back on some of the
mechanisms that are being used, but they said it's okay
to use deportation as a method of crime prevention.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
I'm talking to Alan Dershowitz. You and I have tried
a similar path where I voted Democrat and then democrats
I started to see losing their mind, and I have
changed how I voted. I'm curious for you. You've had
a longer career in the law than I have, by
by far, and a much more successful one.
Speaker 1 (34:59):
But I'm also a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
When did in your mind it go from a quote
unquote traditionally liberal perspective to stand, for instance, for First Amendment,
free speech, for basic principles of fairness, and turn into
more of a conservative one. Do you remember a point
in time when you looked around and said, boy, the
(35:22):
ACLU isn't the ACLU that I grew up supporting.
Speaker 6 (35:26):
Well supporting. I was on the national board. I was
the youngest person on the national board of the ACOU.
I spent years supporting the ACO you. I worked with
the ACOU to defend the rights of Nazis to march
in Skokie, Illinois. I defended people on death row. As
an ACOU lawyer, I won't give a nickel to the ACOU,
and I called the ACO you the anti Civil Liberties Union.
(35:49):
They have become completely partisan in political Once every two
years they represented a Nazi in order to show that
they're still civil libertarians. But the vast, vast, vast majority
of their work is on progressive, woke, left wing causes,
and you know, they've become kind of a leader and
(36:11):
the weaponization of the legal system against Donald Trump, against Republicans,
against Conservatives, against Christians, and so I'm totally contemptuous. You know,
it's interesting. I've devoted my whole life to human rights,
civil liberties, and civil rights. I now see something that
s marks civil liberty, civil rights, human rights, I throw
in the garbage pail because I know it's going to
(36:32):
be on the wrong side of everything. Today. Human rights
has just turned against Israel, against the United States, against Christianity,
against decency, and so I have no support for those
concepts anymore. They've been hijacked, they've been taken away. And
I'm still a civil libitarian. And you know, I describe
myself as a constitutional libertarian, but as well as a
(36:58):
meritocratic Egallon Tarrian and a constructive contrarian. So I haven't changed.
But like Ronald Reagan said, the Democrats have left me.
I left the Democratic Party hours after the Democratic Convention
this year when I saw that they were picking one
after the other progressive, anti liberal speakers, anti israel speakers,
(37:22):
sometimes anti Semitic speakers, and the Republicans were doing a
better job and preserving liberty and democracy and freedom of speech.
I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent, but I'm not
a Democrat.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
How'd you vote?
Speaker 6 (37:37):
I can't say, because I you know, I love sleeping
with my wife, and and you know she has made
me sworn me to secrecy. I can tell you this.
I voted for Biden and I word for Hillary Clinton.
But I'm not going to disclose how I voted in
the last in the last election, and or how I
(38:01):
would vote in the next election. But I have been
supportive of many of the things that Trump has done,
just as I was supportive of many of the things
that previous presidents have done well at the same time
being critical of many of the things. And deportation is
one of the things I'm concerned about. I'm also concerned
(38:22):
that Donald Trump may abandoned Israel. That's been a concern
for me. And is he going to allow Israel to
protect itself against the potentional nuclear Iran. I don't know
the answer to that question. In my book To Prevent
a State, I spend a lot of time on the
Iran issue because that's the personification of preventive attack. I
(38:46):
use the example of Nazi Germany in nineteen thirty five,
when Britain and France could have destroyed Nazi Germany before
it was capable of destroying all of Europe and killing
fifty million people, and they didn't do it because they
didn't take it was seriously and you know, peace in
our time, Chamberlain, and that enabled Hitler to kill fifty
(39:09):
million people. Had they attacked, they would have you know,
killed fifteen fifteen thousand people with twenty thousand people, and
they would have defeated Nazi Germany. But you know, were
history is blind to the future, and we just don't know.
At that time, we didn't know what we were stopping,
and so I spend time in my book on that
(39:30):
as well.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
The preventive state the challenge of preventing serious harms while
preserving es central liberties. Professor Dershweriz's book just came out yesterday,
and Professor Derschwitz, if I could draw upon your time
as a criminal defense attorney. I know you're not on
this case. That would be interesting. You're not on this case,
but I'm sure you've been following it and seeing in
the headlines. What is your just overall sense as to
(39:56):
the likely outcome to the degree you can see it
this early on in the case, or perhaps the pitfalls
for either the defense or the prosecution in the Sean
Combs aka Puff Daddy a k a. P. Diddy sex
trafficking case that's getting a lot of attention to headlines
given how high profile mister Combs is.
Speaker 6 (40:15):
If I had to make a prediction, I would predict
that he'd get convicted and that his conviction would have
reversed on appeal. I don't understand how a jury should
be able to see that horrible video of him kicking
and beating up his girlfriend in the whole way of
the hotel. That's not what he's charged with. He's charged
with running you know, a Rico enterprise, and that that
(40:40):
tape is so done prejudicially. You can't get it out
of your head. As soon as you see that tape
and say to yourself, I want to convict the son
of a bitch, and so I think it will be
reversed on appeal. But it's very hard to believe that
a jury won't find his conduct up.
Speaker 1 (40:57):
But why do you think, Professor derschwud Selina? So clearly
you're right, I mean, the guy's a mind. The guy's
a bad guy. I mean everyone, there's no right. He's
not on trial for being a good guy or a
bad guy. He's a bad guy. That's very clear, and
I think even the defense isn't really contesting that. But
as a matter of law, why would you how would
you see it? Perhaps, and again I know you're we're
asking you to sort of see into the future, which
(41:19):
is tough, But how would you see it being overturned?
If let's say the jury does what you think, why
would you think then that it might be overturned.
Speaker 6 (41:27):
On appeal for the same reason that the Harvey Weinstein
New York conviction was overturned, And that is the admissibility
of prejudicial material that swayed the jury to convict. Even
though the elements of the crime and the elements of
RICO are very tough to establish, and the elements of
you know, conducting sex trafficking business so that would be
(41:52):
the grounds for reversal. That evidence came in that should
never have been seen by the jury.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
All right, let me go back to your experience, and
you're staying committed to principal aclu and everything else we
talked earlier on this program. As suddenly Jake Tapper writes
a book and says, boy, we could have never known
that Joe Biden wasn't mentally or physically competent for the job.
And the New York Times and the Washington Post right
(42:19):
editorial saying, boy, you know, somebody really should have said
something about the state that Biden was in. And you know,
the media ostensibly does exist to speak truth to power.
They wrote democracy dies in darkness at the top of
the Washington Post. You are steeped in liberal circles where
you hang out, where you live. What are people who
(42:40):
read the New York Times and watch MSNBC. What are
they saying in conversations that you hear. Do they feel
as if they have been lied to? Or are they
so convinced that Trump is hitler that they don't even
care if they're being lied to because it's a price
worth paying.
Speaker 1 (42:57):
What are you here?
Speaker 6 (42:57):
So it's the latter. They're praising people who lied, and
they wished the lie had been successful and that Biden
would have been allowed to run because many of them
think that Biden would have snuck past the finish line
because he's more likable than Kamila Harris. I don't know
whether that's true or not. I'm not a polster, but
(43:20):
I can only tell you that people on the MS
on that side, the New York Times, CNM, MSNBC side,
they don't care about lying. They would have been very
happy if there had been a complete, in total and
successful cover up in order to defeat Trump, and then
Biden would be president for a couple of months, and
(43:40):
then he'd have to leave office, either through the twenty
fifth Amendment or by resignation, and then we'd have Kamil
Harris as president. That's what the Martha's Vineyard crowd is
objecting to, not that they were denied the truth, but
that they didn't do a good enough job covering up
(44:00):
the truth.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Let me ask you this too, Given that I think
anybody who's the rational reasonable person would acknowledge that Biden
was not mentally or physically capable of being president in
the United States, do you, as a warrior, believe there
is any value in challenging some of the decisions made
by Biden, for instance, this big pardon, expansive pardons that
(44:22):
he gave at the end of his tenure based on
his mind not being capable of entering into the decisions
that were being made. Is there any legal ground there
in your mind to challenge these things.
Speaker 6 (44:35):
I don't think so, because then you'd have to challenge
probably some of the things at the end of the
Reagan of presidency, maybe the Roosevelt presidency, certainly the Widrick
Wilson presidency. You know, there if in fact Biden didn't
know that things were being signed for him by the
use of the auto pen, that might pose an interesting challenge.
(44:59):
It would have to be something it was constitutionally required
to be signed, like a law. Pardons, for example, don't
have to be signed. You can just give an oral pardon,
but for a law to be valid, it has to
be the signed or vetoed by the president. And if
it could be demonstrated that Biden didn't really know and
that he was he had authorized somebody else to do
(45:20):
the signing, that could raise could raise problems. You know,
in some respects. All of this goes back to prevention,
because what is the twenty fifth Amendment all about. It's
all about trying to prevent a non qualified president from
having access to the nuclear trigger. And you know, we
(45:41):
do so many things preventively in order to assure that
greater dangers don't exist, and we have to make sure
that when we do it, we do it according to
due process. And that's the crisis we're in now. We're
not in a constitutional crisis. We're in a political crisis
and a constitutional conflict, and the Constitution is so far
(46:03):
figured out ways of getting resolving these issues, and so
I'm not worried as long as President Trump says and
really does not in any way violate a Supreme Court order,
and we're not in a crisis.
Speaker 2 (46:21):
Last question for you quickly here because we've got to
get to a break. But you talked about your experience
with Trump and being of the opinion that he's better
on Israel issues than certainly Democrats have been based on
the platform they put forward in the DNC two parter.
Do you hear a lot of Jewish people out there
acknowledging that Trump has been very good on Israel and
(46:42):
the second part of that do people say, Hey, you
can criticize him for a lot, but the idea that
he's Hitler is absolutely insane. I'm talking Jewish voters in particular.
Speaker 6 (46:52):
No, I wish they were more sensible Jewish voters. But
there are a lot of Jewish voters who don't believe
he's supportive of Israel. Can't find you know, these are
people who are afflicted with Trump derangement syndrome. Some of
them also have bb derangement syndrome. And you know, neither
not who not Trump can do anything right. And so
if he's supportive of Israel, it must be for in
(47:16):
an effort to get a plane from Qatar. If he's
against people on campus who are anti Semites or anti Israel,
has nothing to do with that Semitism. It has to
do he doesn't like universities. Unless you are in some
of these radical, progressive, woke, left wing circles, it is
impossible to understand the depths. I mean, they think it's
(47:39):
an insult to Hitler just say that Trump's Hitler. They
think he's worse. I mean, these people just have no
limit to what And by the way, I know people
in Israel have the same attitude to you. They cannot
be rational about those subjects. And it's too bad, because
(48:01):
you know, in both cases not to know and Trump
have done many good things, and I've done some things
that are subject to criticism, and people should have a
nuanced view, but they don't.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Alan Dershowitz appreciate the time, sir, book is out. The
preventative state, the challenge of preventing serious harms while preserving
essential liberties. We appreciate the time, sir.
Speaker 6 (48:22):
Thank you so much. Be well.
Speaker 2 (48:25):
If you live in a house, you know it already.
Your roof can collect a lot of rain. In fact,
it was raining so hard yesterday I told the crew.
I was like, I may get knocked off air because
the storms are coming through with such severity while we're
on air. And that can happen April May June in
particular all over the area that I live. And your
gutters can get clogged in a big way, not only
with limbs, not only with leaves, with walls, footballs. My
(48:49):
kids are in the backyard playing all the time, and
I got to tell you, everything ends up in the gutter.
And if you've got kids, your grandkids, you probably have
experienced that tech that as well. Right now you can
save up to thirty percent off at leaffilter dot com
slash Clay and Buck. You can make sure that your
gutter clogs don't have to become a reality. This is
America's number one gutter protection system. Schedule your free inspection
(49:09):
up to thirty percent off your entire purchase at leaffilter
dot com, slash Clay and Buck. That's l E A
F Filter dot com, slash Clay and Buck. See the
representative for warranty details. Welcome back in Clay, Travis buck
(49:39):
Sexton show hope all of you are having a fabulous Wednesday.
We are joined now by a woman who had to
go all the way to the Supreme Court to be
able to speak and vote in the main legislature.
Speaker 1 (49:54):
She is Laurellibby.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
And for those of you who don't know, I want
to give a quick background and you can correct me
if I'm wrong on any of this.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
Laurel, and thanks for coming on with us.
Speaker 2 (50:03):
You spoke out against men being able to win women's
championships in Maine, something that I would imagine the vast,
vast majority of people in Maine certainly almost everyone listening
to us in Maine right now would agree with but
the vast majority of people in general. You were then
censored because you refuse to apologize for this. They would
not allow you to vote to represent your constituents in Maine.
(50:28):
You went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court
yesterday in a seven to two ruling said, the main
legislature has to allow you to do your job on
behalf of your constituents.
Speaker 1 (50:39):
Have I got that right? Can you believe that all
this has actually happened?
Speaker 5 (50:43):
That is a very concise yet accurate summary, I would
have to say, And no, it is kind of It's
pretty unbelievable when you say it like that. Remarkable that
a majority party would try to silence a member of
the minority party and take my constituents owed away. It's
astounding the defenders of democracy at work.
Speaker 1 (51:04):
What what exactly is there? And Laurel, appreciate you being
with us and thank you for doing what you've been
doing standing for what is I think obvious obvious truth
in this matter. But just so I'm clear on this,
Clay's been following this story very closely. What is their
rationale for silencing you? Like what you know, I understand
(51:25):
you've gone against the narrative, but officially speaking, on what
grounds are they doing this?
Speaker 5 (51:32):
Well, they don't really have good grounds to do this.
First of all, I haven't broken the law. I didn't.
I didn't do anything even against our rules, which they're
claiming that I did. What I did was from the
privacy of my own home. I made a Facebook post
and stood side by side of a biological male participating
in the pole vault, winning fifth place at a regional
(51:53):
meet last year, and then ning the girls state championship
this year. And you know, they say a picture speaks
a thousand words, and this did. And so the excuse
that they came up with was that this was a
photo of a minor. And I'll just remind folks that
when you win a state championship, you have to expect
(52:15):
that your photo is going to be out there. And indeed,
these were publicly shared photos that were public before I
shared them. But that's the grounds that the Democrats are
trying to stretch to to say that this was should
not have been posted, and we use that to make
their unconstitutional censure and say that I'm not allowed to
(52:35):
represent my constituents.
Speaker 2 (52:37):
So you're still not allowed to speak on the floor
of the state House.
Speaker 1 (52:42):
Is this true?
Speaker 2 (52:42):
In other words, while you're allowed to vote, you aren't
allowed to make arguments about how you were voting.
Speaker 5 (52:48):
That is entirely accurate and it's just as ludicrous as
it sounds. So I will be allowed to vote now,
but I will not be allowed to speak as the
case makes its way through the courts. Of course, being
able to vote on behalf of my constituents that is
the most important piece, and that's how my constituents had
(53:09):
been disenfranchised with not having a vote on the legislation.
And so that's what we requested from the Supreme Court
in our emergency application, was to have the ability to
vote on behalf of my constituents. And on June fifth,
will be heard in the First Circuit Court of Appeals
regarding the full case, and that includes getting my voice back.
Speaker 2 (53:30):
Okay, So this is just bonkers to me that this
could become an issue in any state. But if it
became an issue, let's say in Illinois or in Vermont
or in California, states that are overwhelmingly Democrat, that might
make a little bit more sense. But Trump won one
(53:50):
of the congressional districts in your state, the state was
decided by seven points overall. What percentage of main residents
do you think agree with the argument that you are making.
What do you hear when you go out and about
in the state.
Speaker 5 (54:08):
Well, you know, when I talk to folks, it's clear
that the polling that demonstrates two thirds of Manors don't
believe that biological mail should be participating in girls' sports
is extremely accurate. But I have to tell you, you know,
the numbers are even more startling than you may realize.
Of course, the breakdown by congressional district is impressive, but
(54:30):
when you get to actually how much the Democrats won
the House majority by in our state of one point
three million people, they only won the majority by sixty
votes across the entire state. So they're ruling with an
iron fist here and making these unconstitutional moves when they
only hold the majority by sixty votes.
Speaker 1 (54:51):
Do you think, Laurel, there's going to be any political
blowback on the Democrats? You know, I don't mean new
cycle blowback, right, I mean, you know the next election cycle.
Is this the kind of thing that, by the way, Manors.
Speaker 5 (55:09):
Is that right, Maynors.
Speaker 6 (55:10):
You got it.
Speaker 1 (55:11):
Mayners just making sure manors they see this and they realize, Wow,
the Democrats in our state have have lost their minds.
You know, what's your sense of that?
Speaker 6 (55:21):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (55:22):
You know, as I talk with folks, it does seem
apparent to everyone but Augusta Democrats that they have lost
their minds. And I say Augusta Democrats because this goes
across party lines. There are plenty of Democrats out and
about in Maine who think it's insanity to allow biological
males to compete in girls' sports. And they also think
it's insanity to unconstitutionally bar a sitting legislator from voting
(55:45):
on behalf of her district. So the folks who are
in power in Augusta are way out on a limb here.
It is not a representative of your average manor that
doesn't agree with them.
Speaker 2 (55:58):
So obviously you have coming up in May next year
a big Senate race. Susan Collins, Republican, is going to
be up for reelection. I believe I'm correct in this,
You can correct me if I'm wrong. And that is
massive because Republicans have a fifty three to forty seven
advantage and Susan Collins, one of the rare members of
(56:19):
the Senate who is representing a state that voted differently
in the presidential race, in other words, cross party. Am
I crazy or does this have to be a fairly
significant issue statewide in that race based on what the
Democrats in the legislature have done to you?
Speaker 5 (56:39):
I certainly hope this has significant influence in the twenty
twenty sixth election. Of course, we do have Senator Collins reelection.
She is the last Republican Senator in New England, which
is pretty remarkable. In addition, we also have a gubernatorial race.
We have of course the congressional CD one and CD two,
(57:02):
and we also have the full legislature every two years,
House and Senate up for a vote. And so you know,
I hope that this does come back to bite the
Democrats next year, and I certainly will be working very
hard to ensure that it does.
Speaker 1 (57:17):
Laurel appreciates you standing strong on this issue, and as
you continue to do just that, we'll have you back
on the show. Make sure everybody knows about you're doing
up in Maine. Beautiful along the coast, I hear maners
have some great stuff up there.
Speaker 5 (57:30):
Hey, it's gorgeous throughout.
Speaker 1 (57:33):
All right, wonderful, Thank you so much, thank you. All
righty Clay, I'm going to talk everybody about Birch Gold
here for a second. Let's do it. Look, I've been
a gold guy for a long time. I'm a believer
in gold and about it well over a decade ago.
Now is when I purchased my first gold. It's gold coins,
and they've gone up more than one hundred and sixty
(57:53):
percent in value. Today it's even easier to purchase gold.
There are many more ways to do it because your
IRA or four oh one K, even your savings account.
It's important as ever to do this given external factors
beyond our control and the systemic realities of our debt
and how we're gonna have financial issues as a country
in the future, and you just want to be prepared
(58:14):
for it. You want to diversify, you want to take
action now. One of the best ways to protect your
savings is through that diversification I talked about with gold
from the Birch Gold Group. The past twelve months, I
want you to know some of these numbers. Okay, the
past twelve months, the value of gold has increased by
forty percent. Now you're not like getting in and out
of gold, right, You're not. Oh wait, what about the
(58:35):
gold earnings report? Or no, no, no, You just buy
gold and you have it, and it's gone to forty
percent last twelve months. Central banks continue to buy gold
and record quantities. You can easily convert an existing ira
or four okay, think about that old ira or four
when k you have from a job, maybe you work
for five years, maybe ten years, whatever it is, and
it's just sitting there. You can convert that into a
(58:57):
gold ira and then just watch gold work its magic time.
Text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight ninety
eight and Birch Gold will send you a free infokid
on gold. No obligation, just the most useful information to
make you a believer in gold over the long term.
Text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight ninety eight.
(59:17):
That's Buck, b Uck. Text Buck to ninety eight ninety
eight ninety eight, or go online to Birch Gold dot
com slash buck Birch goold dot com slash b Uck
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
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.
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.
Good Hang with Amy Poehler
Come hang with Amy Poehler. Each week on her podcast, she'll welcome celebrities and fun people to her studio. They'll share stories about their careers, mutual friends, shared enthusiasms, and most importantly, what's been making them laugh. This podcast is not about trying to make you better or giving advice. Amy just wants to have a good time.