September 19, 2025 • 60 mins
Kimmel Context Buck Sexton discussed the indefinite suspension of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel by ABC/Disney. He argued that this was a justified business decision based on Kimmel's poor performance and offensive comments, rather than an issue of free speech. Sexton framed the event as a market correction and a sign that corporations were no longer willing to antagonize conservative audiences. He contrasted the left's current defense of Kimmel with their past calls for censoring conservatives, highlighting what he saw as hypocrisy. Democrat Infighting Analysis of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (AOC) rumored ambitions to run for either president or the U.S. Senate, challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. The hosts explore AOC’s political trajectory, her branding strategy, and her influence on the progressive wing of the party, while contrasting her youth and media appeal with Schumer’s establishment credentials and age. We're All Charlie The conversation shifts to President Donald Trump’s enduring energy and dominance in the political landscape, emphasizing his resilience and continued influence despite attempts to question his age and fitness. Buck argues that Trump remains a “force of nature,” drawing comparisons to the perceived decline of other political figures. Idiot AOC Buck analyzes the political polarization surrounding Charlie Kirk’s legacy, particularly the backlash from figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC). He critiques AOC’s rhetoric as emblematic of leftist hypocrisy, emotional manipulation, and ignorance of conservative principles. Buck defends Kirk’s intellectual contributions and his commitment to free speech and civil discourse, contrasting it with the hostile environment conservative speakers face on college campuses.
Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8
For the latest updates from Clay and Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/
IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
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. Friday edition of The Clay
Travis and Buck Sexton Show kicks off right now. Our
may man Clay take it a day to speak to
conservative youth up in Michigan. So just me today, mister
Buck the buckster demand of many names, including James, which
(00:23):
is his first name. We shall dive into all of
the latest news the Jimmy Kimmel not quite firing, I think,
but indefinite suspension which sounds a bit like it could
turn into a firing. Some very interesting updates on that,
Some things you need to know about that whole situation.
(00:44):
We are looking at that as not only an indicator
of where things are, but perhaps there's a harbinger of
things to come in the media ecosystem. It's a new
world in this Trump two point zero. There's a new
sheriff and his name is Donald Trump and all of
his people in this administration. We shall discuss something that
(01:05):
makes me want to go back and pull from I
think it was the January of this past year, after
the election, Clay said, who do I think the Democrats
are going to rally behind, and there was a day
when I said, very early on, I know people will
say this is crazy, but it's going to be very likely.
(01:28):
I think that AOC Alexandria Ocazio Cortes will become the Democrat,
if not nominee, a darling of that Democrat primary campaign.
And sure enough, already a story out in I think
it's axios here about how AOC is eyeing a presidential run. Remember,
(01:51):
I think it was a couple of days ago Clay
pointed us out. He helped me with the math on
this one. We're fifteen months out from this, We're not
far at all from there. This isn't oh, I'm talking
about who the nominee is going to be, and we're
years in advance of this mattering no, because they're going
to have an open primary and we can't have that.
(02:13):
You know, there's not going to be an incumbent on
the on either side obviously, so it's gonna be very interesting.
But AOC, we'll discuss that a little bit. Kamala Harris's
book making more waves because people are finding parts of
it that are well, maybe a little too honest about
(02:36):
some things. And that's a surprise, isn't it. I had
to ask the team, do I need to read Kamala's book?
Am I going to do that? Clay read the Jake Tapper,
the Fake Tapper book about original Sin. I think it
was so he brought us out. Maybe I should have
to read Kamala's book. I'll see about that one. So
we'll discuss There's also some very interesting, very interesting details
(03:03):
to get into about well, about the situation of these
companies like Disney and how they view what is going on,
what is going on with the American people right now,
and how they recognize that they can't continue to just
(03:26):
antagonize half of the country. This ties into Kimmel thing,
and we'll discuss this. So we've got some Harris stuff,
some AOC stuff. Let's dive into Jimmy Kimmel right now.
I want to share with you here is the heart
of the issue is that he said something stupid, that
he's a jerk, that he is not good at what
(03:47):
he does, and that a private company took action against him.
The story that the Democrats are trying to make the
center of all this what they are trying to focus on.
They're saying, oh, the First Amendment, the government all of
a sudden they care about the First Amendment. They certainly
didn't care about the First Amendment during COVID, when private
(04:09):
corporations were being leaned on, I mean practically a metaphorical
gun to the head of these social media platforms from
the Biden administration saying go after this person, shut them down,
go after that person, shut them down. And the Supreme Court,
in a horrible decision just earlier this year, said yes, sorry,
(04:29):
you can't prove that those companies did it because of
that government pressure. Government pressure alone is not enough. Well,
it turns out the more we find out about this situation,
it isn't even government pressure. This is just the people
at Disney are waking up to the realities here of
the media marketplace. I bring you my friends the Wall
(04:51):
Street journals reporting on this, they write the following Soon after,
Federal Communications came Chairman Brendan Carr blasted Late night host
Jimmy Kimmel over remarks related to the killing the assassination
of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Executives at ABC and parent
company Disney knew they had a big problem. Kimmel during
(05:14):
his Monday show had criticized how President Trump and some
other Republicans were responding to the fatal shooting. Carr suggested
during a podcast appearance two days later, the FCC could
take action against the broadcast licenses of ABC owned stations.
Advertisers and affiliates soon called the network expressing concern over
Kimmel's show. Executives at Sinclair and Nextstar, owners of more
(05:35):
than sixty local ABC stations, told network leaders after Car's
remarks they would indefinitely preempt the show starting that night,
moves that would hobble the program's reach. Kimmel had planned
to address cars comments on his own show Wednesday night,
according to people familiar with the matter. Before his on
air appearance, Dana Walden, co chairman of Disney Entertainment, spoke
(05:58):
to the host about his play, and the people said
after the conversation between Kimmel and Walden, she and other
senior executives thought the Stars approach could make the situation worse.
Executives also discuss staff safety, threatening emails on kimmel show,
et cetera, et cetera. Walden huddled with her team and
Disney chief executive Bob Iger before they temporarily decided to
(06:22):
take Jimmy Kimmel live off the air and informed Kimmel
of the decision. Uh, look, this is the truth, Jimmy
Kimmel isn't worth the headache, isn't talented, isn't getting good ratings,
isn't making them money? And Disney made this choice. And
(06:43):
Disney has a right to make this choice. You know,
this is so straightforward. The people who are saying that
this is a free speech issue, hold on a second.
I can't come on this radio show and say crazy things.
I mean I could, but then my company, iHeart, has
a right take action because that's who I work for. Right.
(07:03):
This is the reality. It's true of all the hosts
you know on Fox News. Now, if I came on
this show and said crazy things, and the government when
I said crazy obviously not. You can't threaten people's lives
and things like that. But I just mean things that
bring you into public disrepute, things that offend your own audience,
things that are beyond the pale. It can't lock me
(07:27):
up for that. That's the First Amendment. That's what the
First Amendment means. It doesn't mean that the company can't
fire me. And obviously, and Disney is a company, as
you all know that has made a lot of very bad,
very woke decisions stretching for quite some time. And now
they're trying to turn Jimmy Kimmel, rather the left, not Disney,
(07:48):
trying to turn Jimmy Kimmel into some free speech martyr.
He's a jerk. He's a jerk, he told his audience
on Monday. Remember, we hit some new lows over the
weekend with the Maga gang desperately trying to characterized this
kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one
of them. As I said, this would be like saying,
you know, John Wilkes Booth, huge Abraham, you know, huge
(08:10):
Abraham Lincoln fan, big supporter of abolition and the North
and the War. I mean, it doesn't get any dumber.
And so it's a lie on top of being deeply offensive.
And it just was really a last straw situation, right
it was. It was people have had enough of him.
And this is something that we need to be very
(08:33):
clear about with conservatives in the media. We have said
things that are factually true. We have said things that
no person who is emotionally stable and reasonable would be
offended by and been fired or taken off the air
or you know, whatever it may be by these different companies.
(08:54):
There's been this doubles there's been a double standard for
a long time. But we have not argued that they're
can be there's zero standard, because that's completely unworkable. Right.
It's one thing to say, hey, I shouldn't be fired
from my job because I refuse to refer to a
guy with female pronouns because that's just the truth. Right,
(09:17):
That's just the truth. And if it offends the left,
too bad, but that is the truth. It's another thing
to say that you could go into your boss, or
you know, you could go on air and trash your
own boss on the air. Let's just say and expect
that there'd be no consequences, Like that's it. You can't
have a company that way. It's insane. This is all
very straightforward, but they are desperate, desperate to turn this
(09:40):
into some big free speech. The left doesn't care about
free speech at all. They're the ultimate authoritarians. They're the
ultimate authoritarians, and if we live in a in a
society're the only authoritarians. If we live in a society,
we're only conservatives face consequences for speech why would the
Democrats stop doing what they do if they never suffer
(10:01):
cons So we go to the map, we create an
unrealistic standard of defending them, which would be which would
cover someone like Jimmy Kimmel. He of course he should
be taken off the air fort he said, he's a
moron and it's a lie and it's disgraceful. But we're
gonna we're gonna defend that when it comes to a
private company again, not the government. If the Trump administration had,
you know, sent in federal agents and and thrown Jimmy
(10:23):
Kimmel in a cell for what he said. Okay, I
mean that's a First Amendment issue. Disney's saying, this guy's
a loon and he's gonna make it worse, and we're
taking him off the air because we pay him a
whole lot of money and he's not worth it. That's
called commerce. But Stephen Colbert, he doesn't see it that way.
Here he is saying this was cut three, and what
(10:44):
a shock that Stephen Colbert doesn't see it that way.
Cut three, We're all Jimmy Kimmel played Welcome around the world,
Welcome one and all to the Late Show. I'm your host,
Stephen Colbert.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
But tonight we are all Jimmy Kimmel.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
No, only you are Jimmy Kimmel in that you, Stephen Colbert,
are also a wildly overpaid, snide, underperforming left wing jerk.
And I think this is something else you have to remember.
With all this, They've betrayed their craft. They have betrayed
(11:27):
their craft of comedy. And I know that's not the
biggest issue, but it does bother me. These are people
who are who have a You know, I come to
this show every day and I think it is a blessing.
The fact that I with Clay of course plays out today,
but the fact that we get to speak to you
I view as a gift every every single day, every hour.
(11:50):
Believe it or not, I really really feel I know
you believe it, but I really feel this way. It's
a gift. It's amazing. I get to do this for
a living, and so I try to do the absolute
best job that I can every day, and I try
to serve you this audience that RUSH built every day.
I cannot believe how self indulgent, how narcissistic, and just
(12:14):
nasty people like Colbert and Kimmel are because Remember, there
are people that would have tuned into those shows who
just wanted some lightness and laughter at the end of
their day, and they get mocked. Their beliefs are ridiculed,
not in a way that's intended to bring people to laugh,
but that's intended to placate the sensibilities of a very
(12:40):
small and very nasty contingent really of coastal America, you know,
blue state America, that isn't interested in laughing together, but
wants to laugh at because of their own insecurities, their
own inability to debate, their own lack of self awareness.
And so Kimmel has just been pandering to that, as
(13:02):
has Stephen Colbert. So yeah, they're very similar. And late
night TV has been in a decline for years because
of all this. Conservatives have been saying this. The right
I have been saying it, Clay has been saying it.
All of us in the conservative media, the right wing media,
whatever you want to call it, We've been saying this
four years. These guys aren't comedians anymore. They are crappy
(13:25):
political pundits who have people that also write jokes for them,
so they don't have the responsibility of having to be
knowledgeable or insightful about anything. Oh, I'm just a comedian.
Clown knows on, clown knows off. This is what John
Stewart used to do, although he actually was a little
bit funnier than these two, and what he did even
more dishonest in many ways, but at least occasionally you'd
(13:46):
get a chuckle out of it. But this is the
game that they play. Oh, you know, Jimmy Kimmel can
go on the air, Jimmy Kimmel can cry about Cecil
the Lion and then make a nasty comment in the
aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination. And anybody who is a
normal American is going to see this guy and think
that he's he's a he's a good dude. He's somebody
(14:07):
that you want to, you know, cozy up on the
couch with the wife, the husband, the kids and watch
at the end of the night. Of course, not Disney
figured this out, and Disney took some action. Now we'll
see what Disney does going forward on this one. But
I don't see this at all as some First Amendment issue.
I am not concerned about this. I think that this
(14:30):
has just been a long time coming and Uh, that's
that's where I'm coming down at it. So call me
speaking of free speech eight hundred two eighty two, two
eighty two. The lines are open here we can discuss
what a week it's been. La Clay and I were
NonStop all the time in New York City, were getting
a lot of stuff done there, a lot of meetings
and and ideas for the show. And thankfully I had
(14:51):
Chalk in New York. They always keep it there for me.
I had specifically the Chad Mode, which gives you so
much energy and it's great for your pre work if
you've never tried pre workout before, I really recommend it.
If you're going to go on a long walk, along, run,
anything where you just want more energy, Chadmode pre workouts incredible.
It's really one of my favorite Chalk products. But the
Chalk's Mail Vitality Stack, if you want a more holistic,
(15:13):
overall energy focus and drive boost, go to Chalk dot
com check out that Mail Vitality Stack, which can replenish
testosterone by up to twenty percent in just three months
time according to studies. The ingredients, like all of Chalk's products,
are all natural if you're looking them up right now
looking up Chalk right now, it's spelled Choq. Go online
to Chalk dot com. That's Choq dot com. Use my
(15:36):
name Buck for that big time discount on any subscription
for life. You can cancel your subscription at any time
without penalty, no worries, but you won't want to. Chalk
products are top tier. Go to chalkcchoq dot com promo
code buck. Well, let's talk about Democrats. It's always in
(16:01):
front one. Talk about the Democrats. I will give you.
I had an update for you on the Charlie kirkissas
and what we know about him, very troubling stuff. We'll
get to that at the bottom of this hour because
I wanted to first dive into this the Democrat situation
leadership wise, and this piece in Axios, which I saw
(16:26):
it said aoc I's twenty twenty eight presidential run. And
now the headline that I'm seeing is AOC's twenty twenty
eight decision run for president or Senate. So it feels
like they're already downgrading this a little bit from what
I initially saw. But here's what they're saying. AOC and
(16:46):
her team are positioning for her to run for president
of the or the US President of the Senate, president
or the US Senate in twenty twenty eight. According to her,
people could shake up the presidential race if it were
to be Senate Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, seventy four
is up for reelection in twenty twenty eight. I think
(17:08):
she would beat Chuck Schumer. I really do remember she
pushed out. I forget who the guy was. He was
a senior Democrat guy in the House, though, who just
got really entitled and lazy and didn't really want to
fight for his seat. I can't remember his name now
it's been a while. But she was an upstart and
she managed to beat him. For that's an I love
(17:30):
watching Democrat in fighting is always fun, right, It's like
watching you want both sides to lose, so whatever they
do to each other so entertaining. But I think that
AOC would be formidable Schumer when it comes to funding,
and he knows the game, and he's got the donors
and all that shore. But he's gonna be seventy what
is he gonna be seventy six, seventy seven? What he's
(17:51):
up for reelection? The guy's gonna be looking at eighty
years old. AOC's a whole lot younger, And I do
think the dynamic has changed a little bit now. Joe Crowley,
thank you, team Joe Crowley, was you AOC beat? I
think the dynamic has changed a bit now in a
post Biden public meltdown era where now it really it
(18:15):
really hits when somebody says, look at that guy or
that gal, too old for that position of power. Right now.
I know they want to do this with Trump, but
it doesn't work because Trump is It's still a force
of nature, right This guy is the energy and the
you know this, I'm this is just true. Even honest
(18:37):
people who despise Trump are willing to admit that the
guy has just an unbelievable zest for the game, for
being out there, for doing press conferences, for doing live events,
and then you know, playing eighteen holes and then you
know traveling to this place and traveling to that place
and having the conferences. And he's incredible that way. So
(18:58):
that's why it doesn't work. If Trump was and apparent
in his physical capability, then they would be pushing this
a lot, obviously in a post Biden era. But you know,
Chuck Schumer, I mean he's getting up there. He looks
like he's lost a step, and you know, senate term
six years is really gonna be anyway, I think she
(19:18):
could be formidable for Schumer. But in my mind she's
going to run for president. Well why wait? You think
they think she's going to be patient and take the
long view on this one and now run for president
Because as I've said, and I do really believe this,
running for president has become for a lot of people
just a branding exercise. It's something that allows a person
(19:40):
to get their name out there, to build their social media,
which matters in elections. Now, this matters in politics. So
I could see this absolutely being the case. Now, the
problems that she'll come up against are she's far left.
He's kind of a phony in a lot of ways. Right,
(20:02):
as you know, she's like AOC from the Bronx, except
she's from Westchester, so and those are not similar places. Really.
There are some very nice parts of the Bronx and
there are some very you know, very upscale, expensive parts
of the Bronx, and that's sure, But she's pretended to
(20:22):
be from the the mean streets of the Bronx, and
that's just not true. So she's up as somebody also
who is very left wing, as we know, and that
will be an issue for it. But I think the
bigger problem is she is not, in fact very bright,
and that is a reality that will be hard for
(20:46):
her to cover up for very long. I mean, for example,
after after Charlie Kirk's assassination, here's AOC this is cut
fifteen calling for gun control play fifteen. I mean, listen, I.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Know this might be a point of disagreement amongst some folks,
but I think that our common sense kind of gun
safety measures are so passed beyond in terms of us
being able to pass this. This isn't about taking anyone's
guns away, because isn't about attack and Second Amendment. It's
about how do we get to a point where people
(21:24):
who are at risk of committing domestic violence, who are
at risk of committing violence can so easily gain access
to devil's weapons such as these. And so to me,
it's time to pass common sense gun safety measures, the
kinds of things that responsible gun owners also support.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
What she says is just completely it's just problem, it's nothing,
it's nonsense. What would be the common sense gun safety
measure that would apply to the assassination or the assassin
of Charlie Kirk, what what would it have been? What
would it what would have stopped this? If you're talking
(22:09):
about the weapon, which is what Democrats almost always focus on,
it was a bold action rifle. So now where it's
just saying you can't have If you can't have a
bold action rifle, you can't have a firearm. Period. This
is what the UH. A lot of the Democrats will say, well,
(22:29):
I have no problem with with hunters. You know, when
they put Tim Walls out there, it was like holding
a shotgun upside down, looks like, you know, less masculine
version of Elmer Fudd, you know, and he's like, oh,
he's like, I like to go hunting. You know this, No,
the second moment is not about hunting. It's a nice,
nice thing to be able to do with your firearm,
(22:50):
but it's not about hunting. As you know, it's a
defense against tyranny. It's the it's the inherent right of
self defense and defense against the tyrannical state that we
all have and that the founders recognized. But they would
usually say things. Democrats would say things like wow, you
know you don't need one hundred rounds to kill a
deer or something. So yeah, but if you're taking away
(23:11):
both action rifles, now, now there's no firearm that somebody's
gonna be able to have, so on the actual weapon,
the actual tool, the firearm. Here, there's no gun control
law that anybody could even begin to talk about that
isn't just the absolute confiscation of all firearms. Because if
you can't have a both action rifle, you can't have anything.
(23:31):
You definitely can't have a semi auto rifle, you definitely
can't have a pistol. I mean, you go down the list,
it's absurd. And then she brings up well, to stop
people that are prone to violence from getting access to
a gun, Okay, there are laws about this. You have
to fill out a form, you have to say would
you've been involuntarily committed? I mean, there are these things,
(23:51):
there are these steps in the process. There is a
background check, but none of that would have caught this individual.
So what really And it's interesting that there was some
brief conversation about making, uh, making the mental health status
of somebody who is transgender a possible barrier to firearms ownership.
(24:17):
That's an interesting conversation. You know, the NRA publicly came
out against it. It's an interesting conversation, and Democrats don't
want that. That they don't want because that also brings
up the issue of whether transgenderism or gender dysphoria as
it was formerly called and listed in the DSM, gender
(24:37):
dysphoria is a mental health condition that in any way
could be a precursor to people that are a danger.
This is that's the conversation that it brings up, is
what the conversation. That's what they didn't want to have.
Uh So I would just not that AAOC on any
number of issues is going to do very poorly if
(24:59):
she ha has to, if she has to actually explain
her positions to the American people, but she won't really
have to explain them. You know, she's young, she's dynamic,
she's telegenic. We're in a media obsessed world and a
media obsessed culture and politics increasingly. You know, it does
(25:19):
feel like a game show unfortunately, and it is. It
is very similar to it in many ways. Now it's
just about you know, who's famous and who's who's getting
attention and who's getting talked about. So I think she
is almost certain to run for president. As I said
all along. Something else that has been interesting to me
in this whole process, though, is where does that leave
(25:43):
good old Gavin, good old Gavin Newsom. Well, he is
right now the standard bearer of the Democrat Party. He
is the guy who he thinks can coast into that role. Well,
what's the obvious move here. It at the top of
the ticket, AOC at the bottom of the ticket. That
(26:04):
way they can do the preparing for the future thing.
Newsham has the you know, the experience and everything else.
It is also the case that you've had two female
nominees for the Democrats who have both lost back to back,
not back to back, but have both lost in succession,
so you know Hillary and then Kamala, So they would
(26:27):
have a guy at the top of the Democrat ticket.
In that case, you'd have some diversity with AOC at
the bottom of a gender end. She is at Latina,
So that would make Democrats happy, and it would make
the left feel like they would have a powerful voice
inside the administration. I just think that we already know
that's where it's got to go. It's going to be
Newsom at the top of the ticket. AOC at the
(26:48):
bottom of the ticket. I think this is I don't
want to say it's preordained. A lot of things can
happen between now and then, and I understand that mom
Donnie's probably going to become who has a lot of
similar to AOC ideologically and everything else. He's probably going
to become the mayor of New York City, but it's
gonna take him a while to make New York worse.
It's gonna take a little bit of time, and he's
(27:11):
a going to be someone that they will just say, well,
that's New York. And I don't think that he's going
to drag down, for example, AOC, certainly in a Democrat primary.
So this is where I see it going. As you're
wondering how the Democrat Party is going to shake out,
I think eventually it will just it will be clear
that they need an establish an older establishment figure, not
(27:32):
as old as Biden, because we all know how that
ended up. But you're gonna have Gavin Newsom, and then
you'll have to make things more interesting. You will have
AOC at the bottom of the ticket. I think that
is where it is all going. And I tend to
be right on these things, so we shall see. I'm
excited to be having some stakes tonight courtesy of Good Ranchers.
(27:54):
Good Ranchers is absolutely delicious. Go to good ranchers dot com.
You'll see what I'm talking about. They send a box
of proteins to you. I mean meat. We're talking beef, chicken, pork, salmon,
and this is the good stuff. And you'll be amazed
at how much beef is actually important to our country.
But Good Ranchers, all of it is American. My friends,
(28:15):
we love the taste of Good Ranchers in this household.
Every shipment that arrives feels like Christmas morning when I
open that box comes to your home. Like I said,
it's a subscription, but you pick what you want, how
often you want it delivered chips overnight's guaranteed. When you
get your Good Rancher subscription, you'll be getting twenty five
bucks off each month. You'll also get free shipping at
a free gift in every order for life. Choose from bacon, chicken, nuggets,
(28:36):
even Wag you burgers. You can swap the gift each
month to try something new. Visit good ranchers dot com.
Use my name buck as your promo code also get
a one time forty dollars discount plus a twenty five
dollars ongoing in future months ongoing discount of future months,
So that's sixty five dollars off a month. Look, I'm
just telling you, this meat is amazing. You have it delivered.
It's so convenient, it's already all sealed up for you.
Put it right in your freezer. Thought, you're good to go.
(28:59):
It's delicious. God at good ranchers dot com. Use my
name Buck, you'll get the gift, you get the discount,
and you'll be eating delicious and meat from American farmers,
American ranchers good ranchers dot Com promo code Buck. This
is not going to really be a surprise, I think,
(29:22):
to anyone, but it just goes to thepravity and clear
uh just evil of the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin here
that he They now have been looking into his online
(29:45):
activities and his online profile, so the kind of things
that he would do, sites he would go to. All
of this part of it is attract communications, which the
FBI must do because there is still the possibility of
conspirators or those who may have aided and embedded the
assassination of our dearly departed friend Charlie Kirk. But what
(30:10):
they found is really disgusting stuff, and again not a
surprise given what we already knew about this person. There's something,
there's a very basic part of your humanity and a
(30:30):
very clear part of your soul that you would have
to have shut out and smothered to be able to
put the sights of a rifle on someone having a
peaceful exchange of ideas on a college campus, completely defenseless.
(30:55):
I might add, you know, this isn't someone who said,
you know, I'll meet you at high noon and we'll
see may the best man win. This is the cowardly
shot of an assassin, a sniper against an unarmed and
defenseless person and a father, a husband, And the fact
(31:15):
of I still the part of this that is just
I'm haunted by it. I know many of you are
the visual the videos of what happened to Charlie, which
I do not ever want to see again. But at
the time we were all watching, and we all saw
and that just the thought of his children and his wife,
it hits all of us, and we're obviously never going
(31:37):
to forget Charlie's legacy and all the brilliant and fantastic
things that he did and was doing for this country.
We're also not going to be able to forget the
trauma though, of what happened to him, and we shouldn't
forget it. But it's painful. It's painful, and I would
feel that way if what happened had happened to somebody
(31:58):
who was a staunch you know, if it was the
same set of circumstances to a staunch Democrat who was
part of a major movement. You know, if they had
done this to some big name democrat, I would be
horrified by this and horrified by what it has done
to that person's family and so forth. You know that,
we all know that. And so when you look at
(32:21):
what kind of a person could do that this Tyler Robinson,
it's the kind of person who, according to the New
York Post here played furry porn video games. Now, I
will tell you I am reasonably informed of things in
(32:43):
this world, because for my job, I have to just
know about as much as I possibly can. I had never,
until reading this article heard of a furry porn video game.
But if you just go through the words in your
head you will understand more or less what we're talking
(33:03):
about here. And this guy was going into the you know,
hardcore and deep, dark, scary corners of the twisted sexual Internet,
and this was part of his radicalization process. This is
part of what led this man. Like I said, you
(33:25):
have to have darkened your soul, you have to have
suppressed that basic part of your humanity to have done
what this person did. There's something satanic that is central
to this act. You must have whether you you know,
whether he believes in Satan or not, there must have
(33:48):
been you know, whether it was like a Satanist or not.
There must have been a devil at the center of
this process, because otherwise you couldn't do it. And I
think that there's a broader problem here, and it is this.
The movement, this TRENDSUH and all the letters and everything else.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
Is creating more and more space for really bizarre and
depraved sexual stuff online.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
It doesn't get talked about, certainly by the media that
supports this stuff in general, but it's real and it's there.
And you know the number of people, for example, who
are being pushed down this path with there's this this
Scott Atlas you know who's a well known doctor and
(34:46):
you know an MD and was involved with speaking out
against COVID. Used to have him on my show during
that period and he's now you know, it's serving in
the serving in the Trump administration. Uh. He wrote an
op ed. I was just reading it. It's looking at
the the prevalence of people or who are Q or
questioning or intersects as a function of gen Z, which
(35:12):
again this is the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin. The assassin
is a gen Z person by age. And the increase
is in the thousands of percentile points, you know, thousands
of percentage points. So it's ten fifteen times or more
(35:33):
increase in people who are identifying this way. And that
is here you go. This is from the Scott Atlas piece.
Gen Z's psychological frailty sets the stage for unique vulnerability
to social contagion, suggested by the explosion of gender confusion.
(35:54):
Transgender identification among young adults surge from pointin five nine
percent in twenty fourteen to three point zero eight percent
in twenty twenty three, a four hundred and twenty two
percent increase, with non binary identities up one thousand two
(36:15):
hundred and sixty percent and transgender men quadrupling three hundred
and nine percent, driven by social media echo chambers and
peer pressure. Gallup's twenty twenty five pole shows LGBTQ plus
identification at nine point three percent overall, nearly triple three
(36:37):
point five percent in twenty twelve, doubling in five years,
with over twenty three percent of gen Z identifying as such.
A twenty twenty five poll from the Williams Institute estimates
over seven hundred and twenty four thousand transgender youth in America.
This confusion pushes use toward youth, toward drastic measures like
(37:00):
mutilative surgeries, and fuels mental health crises. This also notes,
by the way, that only thirteen percent of d transitioners
will receive any support at all from LGBT organizations. So
they'll all help you quote transition, but if you want
to de transition, you're on your own. Why is that?
(37:20):
Why should there be such an agenda? Isn't it about
helping people, helping people in crisis? Not allowed to detransition?
Something you don't even hear about very much? Do you?
Why do I bring these things all? Why am I
talking about this? And the talking about the assassin because
he's gen Z and he was in love with a transferry.
(37:41):
This is deeply psychologically and emotionally destabilizing stuff. This is sicko,
weirdo stuff. Okay, you know what, I know it. We
all know it. Something very wrong here. And he doesn't
come from a background at all that would, you know,
be indicative of this kind of a trend. It's one
(38:04):
thing when you see and I get start to name them,
but all these celebrities, all these I love. By the way,
Hollywood people finally realize Hollywood is gross. It has so
much less cultural power and impact that it used to
no one. I mean, if you look up to celebrities now,
like Hollywood actors, you really, you know, you really don't
know anything about anything, right, I mean, you know, you
(38:24):
want to enjoy a movie once in a while with
some of these you know Schmo's, that's fine. But yeah,
we don't look up to them. Go that actor he
said this or she said that. But it's one thing
when one of these actors says, oh, I have like
a trans kid. I got a non binary kid. I
got a you know, I got a I got a
kid who's trans, non binary, furry and questioning. You go, okay,
(38:46):
that's the that's the parents projecting their psychoses and neuroses
onto their kid like it's very obvious, right, It's no
surprise that the left wing radicals have these kids who
can't just grow up and like the boys play with
trucks and then go through puberty and find girls. All
of a sudden, they go through puberty and they think
girls are pretty, and then they want to be around girls,
(39:09):
you know, in their teenage years more and or you know,
at some point of their teenage years, and then they
want to get married and have babies. That can't be that.
There has to be some other thing that they are
pushed towards. In the case of the Charlie Kirkisassen, though
it was online and it was the institutions like maybe
his I don't know what his high school was, but
(39:29):
in this case, I think primarily online, this ideological ecosystem
and echo chamber that is constantly reinforcing, pushing this stuff
and reinforcing this stuff. And I told you I saw
this with jihannis radicalization. There were people who would become
(39:50):
willing to murder innocence, including women and children in the
name of jihad, mostly based on watching YouTube videos. This
is real, This can happen. This kind of brainwashing in
this case, really a form of self brainwashing is possible.
(40:11):
It does happen, and it happened with this shooter. But
in this case it's this depraved gender transgender identity stuff
all mixed into this, which can completely unmore anybody. But
you know, a young man. I mean, can you imagine,
(40:33):
you know, maybe all these messages this guy is watching.
I'm trying to remember even what you call this. It's
like transfurry porn video games in his spare time. This
guy's a sick weirdo. And even apart from what we
know about the violence, and you know, the the murder
of Charlie Kirk, which of course is the worst thing
(40:55):
of all, but this guy's got problems. And yet the
Left is always telling you that they want to make
more space for this stuff. You got to be more
tolerant of this stuff. This is this is just the
way people are. Well, you know, maybe it shouldn't be
the way people are. Maybe we should be able to say,
you know, if you're if you find yourself as a
(41:16):
gen Z person, not knowing whether you are attracted to
men or women, or whether you're a man or a woman,
and whether you should watch you know, furry porn online
or you're watching furry porn online. Rather, you need help.
This should not be encouraged. This should not be called
(41:36):
part of a civil rights crusade. There's something very sick
and evil and twisted that is going on here, and
they are going after our youth with this, people eighteen
to twenty five. We see the numbers, we see the reality,
and they're they're radicalized into this. You know, we don't
(41:57):
have good terminology really yet or what to call this.
I mean leftism, sure, you know, gender identity stuff, trans
cult there's all these different things. But something has happened
here because you can't tell me that some guy who
grows up with in an otherwise normal and stable family
in you know, I think Utah with a dad in
(42:18):
law enforcement, this guy ends up by the time he's
college age watching transferree cartoon porn or whatever and is
in love with a transferrey himself. And you can't tell
me that there's not something really wrong with the influences
that he is subjected to online and by this digital culture.
(42:43):
And we have to figure out ways to counteract this,
to fight against this, to shut this stuff down, to
push this stuff, you know, out of as far out
of the mainstream certainly as possible, because the left is
always trying to mainstream this stuff. The left always gets angry.
We say, you know, I don't think you should have
kids able to access hardcore pornography online. So let's put
(43:07):
some things in place. And you know who has problems
with it? The left always, Oh, you know what I mean?
Free speech? No, I don't think. I don't think a
third grader being able to find, you know, easily some
of that without age verification stuff, find some of the
stuff that we all know is freely online. It's not
a free speech issue, Okay, you know, and this is
(43:27):
a demonic argument to make that they make. I have to
remember that. I'll take your calls here in a second
on this one. I'm sure a lot of you want
to weigh in. Look, we'll see some fireworks on Capitol
Hill in the weeks ahead, because, oh my gosh, is
there gonna be a shutdown. Look, the government still got
a lot of dysfunction and a huge amount of debt.
Trump's fixing it as fast as he can. But he
can't fix all thirty seven trillion, and so there's gonna
(43:50):
be inflation, and there's gonna be instability, and gold is
gonna be valuable. That's just the way it goes. Gold
makes sense, and Birch Gold Group believes every American should
own physical gold until September thirtieth. If your first time
gold buyer, Birch Gold is offering a rebate about the
ten thousand dollars in free metals on qualifying purchases. To
claim eligibility and start the process, request an infoKit now.
(44:13):
Just text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight
ninety eight. Birch Gold can also help you roll in
existing IRA or four oh one k into an IRA
in gold and you are still eligible for a rebate
in free metals about the ten thousand dollars diverse five
with gold like I do from Birch Gold Group. Make
now your first time to buy gold. Take advantage of
a rebate about the ten thousand dollars when you buy
(44:33):
by September thirtieth, Text my name buck do ninety eight
ninety eight ninety eight Text Buck to ninety eight ninety
eight ninety eight.
Speaker 4 (44:40):
Today we have some oh boy AOC.
Speaker 1 (44:54):
AOC has decided she's going to weigh in on the
legacy of Charlie Kirk. And I was saying before that
she thinks she's going to run. I think she is
going to run, and she is a leftist. To be
a real leftist in America, you have to be somewhat
(45:17):
delusional or entirely delusional. You have to be ignorant of history.
You have to be hypocritical, you have to be childish
in your view of the world around you. You have
to be emotionally driven. There are preconditions to be a
leftist in America today. And that's why if I know
(45:38):
that somebody is a leftist, I can already know all
these things about them one and the other. They always
go together, the characteristics and the political affiliation. And AOC
is a perfect example of this. And maybe she's the
pinnacle of this in many ways. But instead of instead
(46:00):
of grace, instead of oh, I don't know, just basic respect,
she when she speaks about the recently assassinated Charlie Kirk,
had this to say play twenty one.
Speaker 5 (46:16):
His rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant, uneducated, and sought to
disenfranchise millions of Americans far from the working quote working
tirelessly to promote unity unquote asserted by the majority in
this resolution. It is equally important that Congress does unite
(46:38):
to reject the government's attempt to weaponize this moment into
an all out assault on free speech across the country,
all in the name of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 1 (46:51):
So, yeah, the House and the Senate have approved a
resolution to honor Charlie Kirk, and this has gone to
a ceremonial measure, something that Charlie clearly deserves. And I'm
glad that they're doing it. But Democrats are standing against it.
(47:12):
Although one hundred rank and file Democrats joined, so there's
that there are some Democrats that went along with it.
Three fifty eight On that one, AOC, it seems, has
a problem with it. Notice the words that she chooses
to use here as saying things like he is well,
(47:33):
first of all, uneducated and ignorant. It's one thing to
disagree with Charlie, put to suggest that he is uneducated
on politics is to announce the stupidity of the person
making the claim. He clearly no matter what you think
(47:55):
of his positions, and obviously I agree with this position.
But I just mean, if we're trying to look at
this from an objective reality, this is a guy who
knew politics and history and at a very impressive level.
And that's coming from a guy who also honestly knows
those things that are pretty high level. So I think
I know what I'm talking about. He was very skilled
(48:20):
in those areas. And what's even more gall like I
think about this is AOC is not you know, this
is like a junior high school basketball player saying that
this guy who was in the NBA can't shoot one
is way out of depth on this. Now. I understand
AOC also very famous social media personality, but she's talking
(48:43):
about education level and she's talking about ignorance. Remember, ignorance
would be you don't know, you don't know the things.
It's not that you're choosing the wrong formulation or Ignorance
is different than wisdom. Ignorance is you're just well, you're ignorant.
You don't even know what you don't know. To say
that Charlie is ignorant is the kind of criticism you
(49:07):
could only make about him if you knew nothing about him,
which maybe that's true of AOC. Or you're just a
brainless demagogue, which is definitely true of AOC. And then
she says, did to disenfranchise people. This is one of
these words, you know, whenever you hear that, you should
remember this. It's not like Charlie was. You know, she
(49:30):
doesn't mean that just in the context of like voting
rights issues. But they try to hijack the language of
the great moral peak, if you will, of the Democrat
Party today is still supposed to be the civil rights movie,
even though that's totally rewritten. I know, the Democrats of
the Party of slavery and segregation and Jim Crow and
you know, Eisenhower was the one who actually moved first
(49:51):
to do some of the biggest things in civil rights
and he was a Republican. So but just we'll forget it,
but forget about that debate for a second, because we
could do that all good to that all day. She
says disenfranchised because it is meant to evoke certain feelings
of revulsion from the Democrats listening and moral superiority, for
(50:13):
he's disenfranchising people. But even more than that, how and
think about this, She's claiming he's disenfranchising people when his
primary vehicle for reaching the public was inviting people onto
a stage, onto a platform with him for that exchange
(50:35):
of ideas. In fact, what Charlie was doing was offering
to enfranchise anybody who was willing to come up to
a microphone. And the Left killed him for it. But
that is what he was doing, saying, let's have this disbate,
let's have this debate, let's have this discussion. He didn't
call people names, he didn't curseit them, he didn't none
(50:59):
of that. Let's just talk about this and let's see
if the best ideas can win. And you know, even
if the best ideas don't win, it's a good thing
to have spent the time to hear the other side.
You know, I'll tell you one thing that you learn
pretty quickly in a marriage, and you know, I mean,
(51:21):
I've learned this too, is that it's not always about
who's right. In fact, a lot of the time it's
not really about who's right in a marriage. It's about
the willingness to hear each other out and do so
with respect, and the closeness and there and the trust
that that process brings. Right, I don't need my wife
(51:45):
and hopefully she doesn't need me to always say you know,
you're right, I'm right, who's right? You know, it's not
let's talk. Let's talk about this and then that alone,
if it's done the right way, is helpful. And I
mean I think that there's some truth to that in
politics as well. Not politics is not the same as
(52:06):
a marriage, but it's not always about getting the end
results you want. Just going through that process and respecting
that process can be a very positive thing. It creates trust,
it creates open lines of communication, It creates a sense
that we have a forum to address this and other
(52:28):
things as I of course that forum in the case
of Charlie was stolen from us by a psycho murderer,
but it was very powerful to have that. It was
very powerful to have a place where people could go
and be heard, and I think for a lot of them.
(52:49):
And there were people that spoke out, even who disagreed
with Charlie, who were students and such, who said, you know,
I respected that he was willing to do that. You know,
it's been the case for all long time at these
campus speeches. I wanted to say this earlier, so I'm
going to just put a pin in what I was
about to say because we're running. I'm running out of
show and I have about three hours more show in
(53:10):
my head to do. Don't worry, I'm not gonna put
it all on your plate today. But why is it
that if I asked any of you to show me
a in the last I would go so far as
to say, the last twenty years, show me a left
(53:31):
wing speaker who has been subjected to serious threats, violence
and intimidation on the college campus anywhere in America. None
of us could come up with one off the top
of our hands. None of us could come up with one.
And why is it that if even the most vile
(53:52):
and men, or there's some vile left wingers out there,
the most vile, incendiary, you know, race baiting, communists, lunatic,
somebody that AOC would think is fantastic. By the way,
why is it that that person could go speak? Not
only at any college, that person could go, not that
(54:14):
I don't think they would. It's one thing to platform somebody,
I want to be clear, and that's not always. You know,
you shouldn't invite you know, you shouldn't invite Osama bin
Laden to come speak at your university. He's dead, So
you get what I'm saying right, I'm not saying disinvite anybody.
But I can tell you this, if there was somebody
who had very who was necessary for the conversation, let's say,
(54:37):
oh here, ir perfect example, irreperfect example. If Catangie Brown
Jackson was invited to speak at Hillsdale College, why is
it that we all know and by the way, maybe she,
I mean she very well could be Supreme Court justice.
So that that's why I didn't want to say some
(54:57):
crazy left winger and somebody says, well, they would never
be invited. Catanji Brown Jackson could be invited to speak
at at Hillsdale College and would know that she would
be treated, that she would be treated with respect, that
she would be able to speak, that they wouldn't try
to drown her out, That there wouldn't be people, you know,
dressed up outside and you know, animal costumes and banging
(55:21):
drums and doing all kinds of crazy stuff to create
a you know, that wouldn't happen. There would be respect offered. Now,
Hillsdale's a conservative and traditional college. So I just but
that we all know that you know it and I
know it. And yet for example, I went to Amherston
Justice Scalia when I was there spoke. I know this
(55:42):
is a while ago, but it was a zoo Oh
my gosh. People in the political science department boycotted it
and the professors and everything and oh and people were,
you know, banging cowbells and it was a total just madness.
This is not a both sides thing. They embrace this
(56:02):
because it's who they are fundamentally. This is what the left,
this is what the Democrat Party has become. And that's
why you run through these examples in your head and
you go hold on a second. By the way, there
are people that were dressed up at that at that
remember at the Scalia speech, who were in duck costumes
(56:23):
because the big scandal of the day some remember, was
that Scalia had gone duck hunting with Dick Cheney at
some some ranch or something somewhere, and so that was
a schedule that they did just they were both there.
They both went duck hunting, and that was a big scandal.
So there was people in duck costumes outside. But this
is the stuff that they do. It is our cultures,
(56:45):
the right and the left in this country. The political
cultures are different, and we need to be very clear
on this. Yes we know, but we can't allow them
to pretend that this is something that we both have
to work on or no. No, we are the ones who
do things with some respect and civility and they simply
(57:06):
do not. And that's why when AOC is saying something like,
Charlie Kirk is, you know, ignorant and uneducated? Okay, like
on what also? I know some of you already thinking this,
if there would be such a thing as a mercy
rule in a debate, if we could have had Charlie
and AOC on a stage together, first of all, it
(57:28):
would have been amazing viewing. I mean I would have
been there with the popcorn and other thing and it
would have been an absolute butt kicking. And we all
know that, and I think AOC even knows that. So
for him to call Charlie for her rather to call
Charlie ignorant and an uneducated is just so there's so
(57:55):
much hutzpa there, there's so much dishonesty there, and I
just just couldn't let it, couldn't let it go. And
she is going to be the standard bearer for the
Democrats for a big part of the Democrats going forward.
This is what we are going to be up again,
So get ready for it. A person who is who
is very politically savvy in her own way, in her
(58:15):
own way, she gets the branding, she gets the presentation.
Yeah she's an airhead, but doesn't mean she's not going
to be a problem. Look at what she's already been
able to accomplish. Yeah she doesn't understand reality and policy
and history, but you know who doesn't either. Maduro in
Venezuela like that. Some of the people that there are
(58:36):
there are there are moron thugs who run entire countries, Okay,
there are you know, look at look at the history
of communism, just littered with people who should have been
left to what they were originally doing, which is usually
you know, throwing uh, you know, throwing bricks at people
on the street. So I'm just saying, get ready for it.
(58:57):
I think the the the democrat era of AOC is
coming upon us. Look, there's not a lot of room
here in the studio for all the products we love
telling you about, but because it just gets tightened here.
But there's always room for two products from Chalk their
pre workout chad Mode, which I love, and their daily
supplement Chalk Daily. The first, chad Mode is a powder
you put into water and you drink it before exercise.
(59:18):
You can also put it in almond milk or juice,
whatever you want. I just go in water. I actually
really like the taste of it. It's cool blue color
and it's it's got enough sweetness but not too much sweetness.
Chad Mode is absolutely delicious. I have a little bit
every day in the morning. And the second though is
Chalk Daily. Oh, Chadbow, by the way, gives you energy, drive, focus.
Chalk Daily is meant to fortify your body with natural
(59:39):
ingredients to give you all day drive in stamina and
if you're looking to get those things going right now,
go to chalkcchoq dot com. Their Male Vitality Stack, their
best seller, includes a leading ingredient that replenishes diminished the
stosterone by to twenty percent in three months time. According
to studies, Chalk has the best supplements, a whole range
of them. Go check them out for yourself online. I'm
taking them every day. Box c h o q dot
(01:00:01):
com used buck as the promo code and you'll get
a massive discount on any Chalk subscription for life. That's
chalk c ch o q dot com promo code buck
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show podcast. Welcome everybody. Friday edition of The Clay
Travis and Buck Sexton Show kicks off right now. Our
may man Clay take it a day to speak to
conservative youth up in Michigan. So just me today, mister
Buck the buckster demand of many names, including James, which
(00:23):
is his first name. We shall dive into all of
the latest news the Jimmy Kimmel not quite firing, I think,
but indefinite suspension which sounds a bit like it could
turn into a firing. Some very interesting updates on that,
Some things you need to know about that whole situation.
(00:44):
We are looking at that as not only an indicator
of where things are, but perhaps there's a harbinger of
things to come in the media ecosystem. It's a new
world in this Trump two point zero. There's a new
sheriff and his name is Donald Trump and all of
his people in this administration. We shall discuss something that
(01:05):
makes me want to go back and pull from I
think it was the January of this past year, after
the election, Clay said, who do I think the Democrats
are going to rally behind, and there was a day
when I said, very early on, I know people will
say this is crazy, but it's going to be very likely.
(01:28):
I think that AOC Alexandria Ocazio Cortes will become the Democrat,
if not nominee, a darling of that Democrat primary campaign.
And sure enough, already a story out in I think
it's axios here about how AOC is eyeing a presidential run. Remember,
(01:51):
I think it was a couple of days ago Clay
pointed us out. He helped me with the math on
this one. We're fifteen months out from this, We're not
far at all from there. This isn't oh, I'm talking
about who the nominee is going to be, and we're
years in advance of this mattering no, because they're going
to have an open primary and we can't have that.
(02:13):
You know, there's not going to be an incumbent on
the on either side obviously, so it's gonna be very interesting.
But AOC, we'll discuss that a little bit. Kamala Harris's
book making more waves because people are finding parts of
it that are well, maybe a little too honest about
(02:36):
some things. And that's a surprise, isn't it. I had
to ask the team, do I need to read Kamala's book?
Am I going to do that? Clay read the Jake Tapper,
the Fake Tapper book about original Sin. I think it
was so he brought us out. Maybe I should have
to read Kamala's book. I'll see about that one. So
we'll discuss There's also some very interesting, very interesting details
(03:03):
to get into about well, about the situation of these
companies like Disney and how they view what is going on,
what is going on with the American people right now,
and how they recognize that they can't continue to just
(03:26):
antagonize half of the country. This ties into Kimmel thing,
and we'll discuss this. So we've got some Harris stuff,
some AOC stuff. Let's dive into Jimmy Kimmel right now.
I want to share with you here is the heart
of the issue is that he said something stupid, that
he's a jerk, that he is not good at what
(03:47):
he does, and that a private company took action against him.
The story that the Democrats are trying to make the
center of all this what they are trying to focus on.
They're saying, oh, the First Amendment, the government all of
a sudden they care about the First Amendment. They certainly
didn't care about the First Amendment during COVID, when private
(04:09):
corporations were being leaned on, I mean practically a metaphorical
gun to the head of these social media platforms from
the Biden administration saying go after this person, shut them down,
go after that person, shut them down. And the Supreme Court,
in a horrible decision just earlier this year, said yes, sorry,
(04:29):
you can't prove that those companies did it because of
that government pressure. Government pressure alone is not enough. Well,
it turns out the more we find out about this situation,
it isn't even government pressure. This is just the people
at Disney are waking up to the realities here of
the media marketplace. I bring you my friends the Wall
(04:51):
Street journals reporting on this, they write the following Soon after,
Federal Communications came Chairman Brendan Carr blasted Late night host
Jimmy Kimmel over remarks related to the killing the assassination
of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Executives at ABC and parent
company Disney knew they had a big problem. Kimmel during
(05:14):
his Monday show had criticized how President Trump and some
other Republicans were responding to the fatal shooting. Carr suggested
during a podcast appearance two days later, the FCC could
take action against the broadcast licenses of ABC owned stations.
Advertisers and affiliates soon called the network expressing concern over
Kimmel's show. Executives at Sinclair and Nextstar, owners of more
(05:35):
than sixty local ABC stations, told network leaders after Car's
remarks they would indefinitely preempt the show starting that night,
moves that would hobble the program's reach. Kimmel had planned
to address cars comments on his own show Wednesday night,
according to people familiar with the matter. Before his on
air appearance, Dana Walden, co chairman of Disney Entertainment, spoke
(05:58):
to the host about his play, and the people said
after the conversation between Kimmel and Walden, she and other
senior executives thought the Stars approach could make the situation worse.
Executives also discuss staff safety, threatening emails on kimmel show,
et cetera, et cetera. Walden huddled with her team and
Disney chief executive Bob Iger before they temporarily decided to
(06:22):
take Jimmy Kimmel live off the air and informed Kimmel
of the decision. Uh, look, this is the truth, Jimmy
Kimmel isn't worth the headache, isn't talented, isn't getting good ratings,
isn't making them money? And Disney made this choice. And
(06:43):
Disney has a right to make this choice. You know,
this is so straightforward. The people who are saying that
this is a free speech issue, hold on a second.
I can't come on this radio show and say crazy things.
I mean I could, but then my company, iHeart, has
a right take action because that's who I work for. Right.
(07:03):
This is the reality. It's true of all the hosts
you know on Fox News. Now, if I came on
this show and said crazy things, and the government when
I said crazy obviously not. You can't threaten people's lives
and things like that. But I just mean things that
bring you into public disrepute, things that offend your own audience,
things that are beyond the pale. It can't lock me
(07:27):
up for that. That's the First Amendment. That's what the
First Amendment means. It doesn't mean that the company can't
fire me. And obviously, and Disney is a company, as
you all know that has made a lot of very bad,
very woke decisions stretching for quite some time. And now
they're trying to turn Jimmy Kimmel, rather the left, not Disney,
(07:48):
trying to turn Jimmy Kimmel into some free speech martyr.
He's a jerk. He's a jerk, he told his audience
on Monday. Remember, we hit some new lows over the
weekend with the Maga gang desperately trying to characterized this
kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one
of them. As I said, this would be like saying,
you know, John Wilkes Booth, huge Abraham, you know, huge
(08:10):
Abraham Lincoln fan, big supporter of abolition and the North
and the War. I mean, it doesn't get any dumber.
And so it's a lie on top of being deeply offensive.
And it just was really a last straw situation, right
it was. It was people have had enough of him.
And this is something that we need to be very
(08:33):
clear about with conservatives in the media. We have said
things that are factually true. We have said things that
no person who is emotionally stable and reasonable would be
offended by and been fired or taken off the air
or you know, whatever it may be by these different companies.
(08:54):
There's been this doubles there's been a double standard for
a long time. But we have not argued that they're
can be there's zero standard, because that's completely unworkable. Right.
It's one thing to say, hey, I shouldn't be fired
from my job because I refuse to refer to a
guy with female pronouns because that's just the truth. Right,
(09:17):
That's just the truth. And if it offends the left,
too bad, but that is the truth. It's another thing
to say that you could go into your boss, or
you know, you could go on air and trash your
own boss on the air. Let's just say and expect
that there'd be no consequences, Like that's it. You can't
have a company that way. It's insane. This is all
very straightforward, but they are desperate, desperate to turn this
(09:40):
into some big free speech. The left doesn't care about
free speech at all. They're the ultimate authoritarians. They're the
ultimate authoritarians, and if we live in a in a
society're the only authoritarians. If we live in a society,
we're only conservatives face consequences for speech why would the
Democrats stop doing what they do if they never suffer
(10:01):
cons So we go to the map, we create an
unrealistic standard of defending them, which would be which would
cover someone like Jimmy Kimmel. He of course he should
be taken off the air fort he said, he's a
moron and it's a lie and it's disgraceful. But we're
gonna we're gonna defend that when it comes to a
private company again, not the government. If the Trump administration had,
you know, sent in federal agents and and thrown Jimmy
(10:23):
Kimmel in a cell for what he said. Okay, I
mean that's a First Amendment issue. Disney's saying, this guy's
a loon and he's gonna make it worse, and we're
taking him off the air because we pay him a
whole lot of money and he's not worth it. That's
called commerce. But Stephen Colbert, he doesn't see it that way.
Here he is saying this was cut three, and what
(10:44):
a shock that Stephen Colbert doesn't see it that way.
Cut three, We're all Jimmy Kimmel played Welcome around the world,
Welcome one and all to the Late Show. I'm your host,
Stephen Colbert.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
But tonight we are all Jimmy Kimmel.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
No, only you are Jimmy Kimmel in that you, Stephen Colbert,
are also a wildly overpaid, snide, underperforming left wing jerk.
And I think this is something else you have to remember.
With all this, They've betrayed their craft. They have betrayed
(11:27):
their craft of comedy. And I know that's not the
biggest issue, but it does bother me. These are people
who are who have a You know, I come to
this show every day and I think it is a blessing.
The fact that I with Clay of course plays out today,
but the fact that we get to speak to you
I view as a gift every every single day, every hour.
(11:50):
Believe it or not, I really really feel I know
you believe it, but I really feel this way. It's
a gift. It's amazing. I get to do this for
a living, and so I try to do the absolute
best job that I can every day, and I try
to serve you this audience that RUSH built every day.
I cannot believe how self indulgent, how narcissistic, and just
(12:14):
nasty people like Colbert and Kimmel are because Remember, there
are people that would have tuned into those shows who
just wanted some lightness and laughter at the end of
their day, and they get mocked. Their beliefs are ridiculed,
not in a way that's intended to bring people to laugh,
but that's intended to placate the sensibilities of a very
(12:40):
small and very nasty contingent really of coastal America, you know,
blue state America, that isn't interested in laughing together, but
wants to laugh at because of their own insecurities, their
own inability to debate, their own lack of self awareness.
And so Kimmel has just been pandering to that, as
(13:02):
has Stephen Colbert. So yeah, they're very similar. And late
night TV has been in a decline for years because
of all this. Conservatives have been saying this. The right
I have been saying it, Clay has been saying it.
All of us in the conservative media, the right wing media,
whatever you want to call it, We've been saying this
four years. These guys aren't comedians anymore. They are crappy
(13:25):
political pundits who have people that also write jokes for them,
so they don't have the responsibility of having to be
knowledgeable or insightful about anything. Oh, I'm just a comedian.
Clown knows on, clown knows off. This is what John
Stewart used to do, although he actually was a little
bit funnier than these two, and what he did even
more dishonest in many ways, but at least occasionally you'd
(13:46):
get a chuckle out of it. But this is the
game that they play. Oh, you know, Jimmy Kimmel can
go on the air, Jimmy Kimmel can cry about Cecil
the Lion and then make a nasty comment in the
aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination. And anybody who is a
normal American is going to see this guy and think
that he's he's a he's a good dude. He's somebody
(14:07):
that you want to, you know, cozy up on the
couch with the wife, the husband, the kids and watch
at the end of the night. Of course, not Disney
figured this out, and Disney took some action. Now we'll
see what Disney does going forward on this one. But
I don't see this at all as some First Amendment issue.
I am not concerned about this. I think that this
(14:30):
has just been a long time coming and Uh, that's
that's where I'm coming down at it. So call me
speaking of free speech eight hundred two eighty two, two
eighty two. The lines are open here we can discuss
what a week it's been. La Clay and I were
NonStop all the time in New York City, were getting
a lot of stuff done there, a lot of meetings
and and ideas for the show. And thankfully I had
(14:51):
Chalk in New York. They always keep it there for me.
I had specifically the Chad Mode, which gives you so
much energy and it's great for your pre work if
you've never tried pre workout before, I really recommend it.
If you're going to go on a long walk, along, run,
anything where you just want more energy, Chadmode pre workouts incredible.
It's really one of my favorite Chalk products. But the
Chalk's Mail Vitality Stack, if you want a more holistic,
(15:13):
overall energy focus and drive boost, go to Chalk dot
com check out that Mail Vitality Stack, which can replenish
testosterone by up to twenty percent in just three months
time according to studies. The ingredients, like all of Chalk's products,
are all natural if you're looking them up right now
looking up Chalk right now, it's spelled Choq. Go online
to Chalk dot com. That's Choq dot com. Use my
(15:36):
name Buck for that big time discount on any subscription
for life. You can cancel your subscription at any time
without penalty, no worries, but you won't want to. Chalk
products are top tier. Go to chalkcchoq dot com promo
code buck. Well, let's talk about Democrats. It's always in
(16:01):
front one. Talk about the Democrats. I will give you.
I had an update for you on the Charlie kirkissas
and what we know about him, very troubling stuff. We'll
get to that at the bottom of this hour because
I wanted to first dive into this the Democrat situation
leadership wise, and this piece in Axios, which I saw
(16:26):
it said aoc I's twenty twenty eight presidential run. And
now the headline that I'm seeing is AOC's twenty twenty
eight decision run for president or Senate. So it feels
like they're already downgrading this a little bit from what
I initially saw. But here's what they're saying. AOC and
(16:46):
her team are positioning for her to run for president
of the or the US President of the Senate, president
or the US Senate in twenty twenty eight. According to her,
people could shake up the presidential race if it were
to be Senate Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, seventy four
is up for reelection in twenty twenty eight. I think
(17:08):
she would beat Chuck Schumer. I really do remember she
pushed out. I forget who the guy was. He was
a senior Democrat guy in the House, though, who just
got really entitled and lazy and didn't really want to
fight for his seat. I can't remember his name now
it's been a while. But she was an upstart and
she managed to beat him. For that's an I love
(17:30):
watching Democrat in fighting is always fun, right, It's like
watching you want both sides to lose, so whatever they
do to each other so entertaining. But I think that
AOC would be formidable Schumer when it comes to funding,
and he knows the game, and he's got the donors
and all that shore. But he's gonna be seventy what
is he gonna be seventy six, seventy seven? What he's
(17:51):
up for reelection? The guy's gonna be looking at eighty
years old. AOC's a whole lot younger, And I do
think the dynamic has changed a little bit now. Joe Crowley,
thank you, team Joe Crowley, was you AOC beat? I
think the dynamic has changed a bit now in a
post Biden public meltdown era where now it really it
(18:15):
really hits when somebody says, look at that guy or
that gal, too old for that position of power. Right now.
I know they want to do this with Trump, but
it doesn't work because Trump is It's still a force
of nature, right This guy is the energy and the
you know this, I'm this is just true. Even honest
(18:37):
people who despise Trump are willing to admit that the
guy has just an unbelievable zest for the game, for
being out there, for doing press conferences, for doing live events,
and then you know, playing eighteen holes and then you
know traveling to this place and traveling to that place
and having the conferences. And he's incredible that way. So
(18:58):
that's why it doesn't work. If Trump was and apparent
in his physical capability, then they would be pushing this
a lot, obviously in a post Biden era. But you know,
Chuck Schumer, I mean he's getting up there. He looks
like he's lost a step, and you know, senate term
six years is really gonna be anyway, I think she
(19:18):
could be formidable for Schumer. But in my mind she's
going to run for president. Well why wait? You think
they think she's going to be patient and take the
long view on this one and now run for president
Because as I've said, and I do really believe this,
running for president has become for a lot of people
just a branding exercise. It's something that allows a person
(19:40):
to get their name out there, to build their social media,
which matters in elections. Now, this matters in politics. So
I could see this absolutely being the case. Now, the
problems that she'll come up against are she's far left.
He's kind of a phony in a lot of ways. Right,
(20:02):
as you know, she's like AOC from the Bronx, except
she's from Westchester, so and those are not similar places. Really.
There are some very nice parts of the Bronx and
there are some very you know, very upscale, expensive parts
of the Bronx, and that's sure, But she's pretended to
(20:22):
be from the the mean streets of the Bronx, and
that's just not true. So she's up as somebody also
who is very left wing, as we know, and that
will be an issue for it. But I think the
bigger problem is she is not, in fact very bright,
and that is a reality that will be hard for
(20:46):
her to cover up for very long. I mean, for example,
after after Charlie Kirk's assassination, here's AOC this is cut
fifteen calling for gun control play fifteen. I mean, listen, I.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Know this might be a point of disagreement amongst some folks,
but I think that our common sense kind of gun
safety measures are so passed beyond in terms of us
being able to pass this. This isn't about taking anyone's
guns away, because isn't about attack and Second Amendment. It's
about how do we get to a point where people
(21:24):
who are at risk of committing domestic violence, who are
at risk of committing violence can so easily gain access
to devil's weapons such as these. And so to me,
it's time to pass common sense gun safety measures, the
kinds of things that responsible gun owners also support.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
What she says is just completely it's just problem, it's nothing,
it's nonsense. What would be the common sense gun safety
measure that would apply to the assassination or the assassin
of Charlie Kirk, what what would it have been? What
would it what would have stopped this? If you're talking
(22:09):
about the weapon, which is what Democrats almost always focus on,
it was a bold action rifle. So now where it's
just saying you can't have If you can't have a
bold action rifle, you can't have a firearm. Period. This
is what the UH. A lot of the Democrats will say, well,
(22:29):
I have no problem with with hunters. You know, when
they put Tim Walls out there, it was like holding
a shotgun upside down, looks like, you know, less masculine
version of Elmer Fudd, you know, and he's like, oh,
he's like, I like to go hunting. You know this, No,
the second moment is not about hunting. It's a nice,
nice thing to be able to do with your firearm,
(22:50):
but it's not about hunting. As you know, it's a
defense against tyranny. It's the it's the inherent right of
self defense and defense against the tyrannical state that we
all have and that the founders recognized. But they would
usually say things. Democrats would say things like wow, you
know you don't need one hundred rounds to kill a
deer or something. So yeah, but if you're taking away
(23:11):
both action rifles, now, now there's no firearm that somebody's
gonna be able to have, so on the actual weapon,
the actual tool, the firearm. Here, there's no gun control
law that anybody could even begin to talk about that
isn't just the absolute confiscation of all firearms. Because if
you can't have a both action rifle, you can't have anything.
(23:31):
You definitely can't have a semi auto rifle, you definitely
can't have a pistol. I mean, you go down the list,
it's absurd. And then she brings up well, to stop
people that are prone to violence from getting access to
a gun, Okay, there are laws about this. You have
to fill out a form, you have to say would
you've been involuntarily committed? I mean, there are these things,
(23:51):
there are these steps in the process. There is a
background check, but none of that would have caught this individual.
So what really And it's interesting that there was some
brief conversation about making, uh, making the mental health status
of somebody who is transgender a possible barrier to firearms ownership.
(24:17):
That's an interesting conversation. You know, the NRA publicly came
out against it. It's an interesting conversation, and Democrats don't
want that. That they don't want because that also brings
up the issue of whether transgenderism or gender dysphoria as
it was formerly called and listed in the DSM, gender
(24:37):
dysphoria is a mental health condition that in any way
could be a precursor to people that are a danger.
This is that's the conversation that it brings up, is
what the conversation. That's what they didn't want to have.
Uh So I would just not that AAOC on any
number of issues is going to do very poorly if
(24:59):
she ha has to, if she has to actually explain
her positions to the American people, but she won't really
have to explain them. You know, she's young, she's dynamic,
she's telegenic. We're in a media obsessed world and a
media obsessed culture and politics increasingly. You know, it does
(25:19):
feel like a game show unfortunately, and it is. It
is very similar to it in many ways. Now it's
just about you know, who's famous and who's who's getting
attention and who's getting talked about. So I think she
is almost certain to run for president. As I said
all along. Something else that has been interesting to me
in this whole process, though, is where does that leave
(25:43):
good old Gavin, good old Gavin Newsom. Well, he is
right now the standard bearer of the Democrat Party. He
is the guy who he thinks can coast into that role. Well,
what's the obvious move here. It at the top of
the ticket, AOC at the bottom of the ticket. That
(26:04):
way they can do the preparing for the future thing.
Newsham has the you know, the experience and everything else.
It is also the case that you've had two female
nominees for the Democrats who have both lost back to back,
not back to back, but have both lost in succession,
so you know Hillary and then Kamala, So they would
(26:27):
have a guy at the top of the Democrat ticket.
In that case, you'd have some diversity with AOC at
the bottom of a gender end. She is at Latina,
So that would make Democrats happy, and it would make
the left feel like they would have a powerful voice
inside the administration. I just think that we already know
that's where it's got to go. It's going to be
Newsom at the top of the ticket. AOC at the
(26:48):
bottom of the ticket. I think this is I don't
want to say it's preordained. A lot of things can
happen between now and then, and I understand that mom
Donnie's probably going to become who has a lot of
similar to AOC ideologically and everything else. He's probably going
to become the mayor of New York City, but it's
gonna take him a while to make New York worse.
It's gonna take a little bit of time, and he's
(27:11):
a going to be someone that they will just say, well,
that's New York. And I don't think that he's going
to drag down, for example, AOC, certainly in a Democrat primary.
So this is where I see it going. As you're
wondering how the Democrat Party is going to shake out,
I think eventually it will just it will be clear
that they need an establish an older establishment figure, not
(27:32):
as old as Biden, because we all know how that
ended up. But you're gonna have Gavin Newsom, and then
you'll have to make things more interesting. You will have
AOC at the bottom of the ticket. I think that
is where it is all going. And I tend to
be right on these things, so we shall see. I'm
excited to be having some stakes tonight courtesy of Good Ranchers.
(27:54):
Good Ranchers is absolutely delicious. Go to good ranchers dot com.
You'll see what I'm talking about. They send a box
of proteins to you. I mean meat. We're talking beef, chicken, pork, salmon,
and this is the good stuff. And you'll be amazed
at how much beef is actually important to our country.
But Good Ranchers, all of it is American. My friends,
(28:15):
we love the taste of Good Ranchers in this household.
Every shipment that arrives feels like Christmas morning when I
open that box comes to your home. Like I said,
it's a subscription, but you pick what you want, how
often you want it delivered chips overnight's guaranteed. When you
get your Good Rancher subscription, you'll be getting twenty five
bucks off each month. You'll also get free shipping at
a free gift in every order for life. Choose from bacon, chicken, nuggets,
(28:36):
even Wag you burgers. You can swap the gift each
month to try something new. Visit good ranchers dot com.
Use my name buck as your promo code also get
a one time forty dollars discount plus a twenty five
dollars ongoing in future months ongoing discount of future months,
So that's sixty five dollars off a month. Look, I'm
just telling you, this meat is amazing. You have it delivered.
It's so convenient, it's already all sealed up for you.
Put it right in your freezer. Thought, you're good to go.
(28:59):
It's delicious. God at good ranchers dot com. Use my
name Buck, you'll get the gift, you get the discount,
and you'll be eating delicious and meat from American farmers,
American ranchers good ranchers dot Com promo code Buck. This
is not going to really be a surprise, I think,
(29:22):
to anyone, but it just goes to thepravity and clear
uh just evil of the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin here
that he They now have been looking into his online
(29:45):
activities and his online profile, so the kind of things
that he would do, sites he would go to. All
of this part of it is attract communications, which the
FBI must do because there is still the possibility of
conspirators or those who may have aided and embedded the
assassination of our dearly departed friend Charlie Kirk. But what
(30:10):
they found is really disgusting stuff, and again not a
surprise given what we already knew about this person. There's something,
there's a very basic part of your humanity and a
(30:30):
very clear part of your soul that you would have
to have shut out and smothered to be able to
put the sights of a rifle on someone having a
peaceful exchange of ideas on a college campus, completely defenseless.
(30:55):
I might add, you know, this isn't someone who said,
you know, I'll meet you at high noon and we'll
see may the best man win. This is the cowardly
shot of an assassin, a sniper against an unarmed and
defenseless person and a father, a husband, And the fact
(31:15):
of I still the part of this that is just
I'm haunted by it. I know many of you are
the visual the videos of what happened to Charlie, which
I do not ever want to see again. But at
the time we were all watching, and we all saw
and that just the thought of his children and his wife,
it hits all of us, and we're obviously never going
(31:37):
to forget Charlie's legacy and all the brilliant and fantastic
things that he did and was doing for this country.
We're also not going to be able to forget the
trauma though, of what happened to him, and we shouldn't
forget it. But it's painful. It's painful, and I would
feel that way if what happened had happened to somebody
(31:58):
who was a staunch you know, if it was the
same set of circumstances to a staunch Democrat who was
part of a major movement. You know, if they had
done this to some big name democrat, I would be
horrified by this and horrified by what it has done
to that person's family and so forth. You know that,
we all know that. And so when you look at
(32:21):
what kind of a person could do that this Tyler Robinson,
it's the kind of person who, according to the New
York Post here played furry porn video games. Now, I
will tell you I am reasonably informed of things in
(32:43):
this world, because for my job, I have to just
know about as much as I possibly can. I had never,
until reading this article heard of a furry porn video game.
But if you just go through the words in your
head you will understand more or less what we're talking
(33:03):
about here. And this guy was going into the you know,
hardcore and deep, dark, scary corners of the twisted sexual Internet,
and this was part of his radicalization process. This is
part of what led this man. Like I said, you
(33:25):
have to have darkened your soul, you have to have
suppressed that basic part of your humanity to have done
what this person did. There's something satanic that is central
to this act. You must have whether you you know,
whether he believes in Satan or not, there must have
(33:48):
been you know, whether it was like a Satanist or not.
There must have been a devil at the center of
this process, because otherwise you couldn't do it. And I
think that there's a broader problem here, and it is this.
The movement, this TRENDSUH and all the letters and everything else.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
Is creating more and more space for really bizarre and
depraved sexual stuff online.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
It doesn't get talked about, certainly by the media that
supports this stuff in general, but it's real and it's there.
And you know the number of people, for example, who
are being pushed down this path with there's this this
Scott Atlas you know who's a well known doctor and
(34:46):
you know an MD and was involved with speaking out
against COVID. Used to have him on my show during
that period and he's now you know, it's serving in
the serving in the Trump administration. Uh. He wrote an
op ed. I was just reading it. It's looking at
the the prevalence of people or who are Q or
questioning or intersects as a function of gen Z, which
(35:12):
again this is the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin. The assassin
is a gen Z person by age. And the increase
is in the thousands of percentile points, you know, thousands
of percentage points. So it's ten fifteen times or more
(35:33):
increase in people who are identifying this way. And that
is here you go. This is from the Scott Atlas piece.
Gen Z's psychological frailty sets the stage for unique vulnerability
to social contagion, suggested by the explosion of gender confusion.
(35:54):
Transgender identification among young adults surge from pointin five nine
percent in twenty fourteen to three point zero eight percent
in twenty twenty three, a four hundred and twenty two
percent increase, with non binary identities up one thousand two
(36:15):
hundred and sixty percent and transgender men quadrupling three hundred
and nine percent, driven by social media echo chambers and
peer pressure. Gallup's twenty twenty five pole shows LGBTQ plus
identification at nine point three percent overall, nearly triple three
(36:37):
point five percent in twenty twelve, doubling in five years,
with over twenty three percent of gen Z identifying as such.
A twenty twenty five poll from the Williams Institute estimates
over seven hundred and twenty four thousand transgender youth in America.
This confusion pushes use toward youth, toward drastic measures like
(37:00):
mutilative surgeries, and fuels mental health crises. This also notes,
by the way, that only thirteen percent of d transitioners
will receive any support at all from LGBT organizations. So
they'll all help you quote transition, but if you want
to de transition, you're on your own. Why is that?
(37:20):
Why should there be such an agenda? Isn't it about
helping people, helping people in crisis? Not allowed to detransition?
Something you don't even hear about very much? Do you?
Why do I bring these things all? Why am I
talking about this? And the talking about the assassin because
he's gen Z and he was in love with a transferry.
(37:41):
This is deeply psychologically and emotionally destabilizing stuff. This is sicko,
weirdo stuff. Okay, you know what, I know it. We
all know it. Something very wrong here. And he doesn't
come from a background at all that would, you know,
be indicative of this kind of a trend. It's one
(38:04):
thing when you see and I get start to name them,
but all these celebrities, all these I love. By the way,
Hollywood people finally realize Hollywood is gross. It has so
much less cultural power and impact that it used to
no one. I mean, if you look up to celebrities now,
like Hollywood actors, you really, you know, you really don't
know anything about anything, right, I mean, you know, you
(38:24):
want to enjoy a movie once in a while with
some of these you know Schmo's, that's fine. But yeah,
we don't look up to them. Go that actor he
said this or she said that. But it's one thing
when one of these actors says, oh, I have like
a trans kid. I got a non binary kid. I
got a you know, I got a I got a
kid who's trans, non binary, furry and questioning. You go, okay,
(38:46):
that's the that's the parents projecting their psychoses and neuroses
onto their kid like it's very obvious, right, It's no
surprise that the left wing radicals have these kids who
can't just grow up and like the boys play with
trucks and then go through puberty and find girls. All
of a sudden, they go through puberty and they think
girls are pretty, and then they want to be around girls,
(39:09):
you know, in their teenage years more and or you know,
at some point of their teenage years, and then they
want to get married and have babies. That can't be that.
There has to be some other thing that they are
pushed towards. In the case of the Charlie Kirkisassen, though
it was online and it was the institutions like maybe
his I don't know what his high school was, but
(39:29):
in this case, I think primarily online, this ideological ecosystem
and echo chamber that is constantly reinforcing, pushing this stuff
and reinforcing this stuff. And I told you I saw
this with jihannis radicalization. There were people who would become
(39:50):
willing to murder innocence, including women and children in the
name of jihad, mostly based on watching YouTube videos. This
is real, This can happen. This kind of brainwashing in
this case, really a form of self brainwashing is possible.
(40:11):
It does happen, and it happened with this shooter. But
in this case it's this depraved gender transgender identity stuff
all mixed into this, which can completely unmore anybody. But
you know, a young man. I mean, can you imagine,
(40:33):
you know, maybe all these messages this guy is watching.
I'm trying to remember even what you call this. It's
like transfurry porn video games in his spare time. This
guy's a sick weirdo. And even apart from what we
know about the violence, and you know, the the murder
of Charlie Kirk, which of course is the worst thing
(40:55):
of all, but this guy's got problems. And yet the
Left is always telling you that they want to make
more space for this stuff. You got to be more
tolerant of this stuff. This is this is just the
way people are. Well, you know, maybe it shouldn't be
the way people are. Maybe we should be able to say,
you know, if you're if you find yourself as a
(41:16):
gen Z person, not knowing whether you are attracted to
men or women, or whether you're a man or a woman,
and whether you should watch you know, furry porn online
or you're watching furry porn online. Rather, you need help.
This should not be encouraged. This should not be called
(41:36):
part of a civil rights crusade. There's something very sick
and evil and twisted that is going on here, and
they are going after our youth with this, people eighteen
to twenty five. We see the numbers, we see the reality,
and they're they're radicalized into this. You know, we don't
(41:57):
have good terminology really yet or what to call this.
I mean leftism, sure, you know, gender identity stuff, trans
cult there's all these different things. But something has happened
here because you can't tell me that some guy who
grows up with in an otherwise normal and stable family
in you know, I think Utah with a dad in
(42:18):
law enforcement, this guy ends up by the time he's
college age watching transferree cartoon porn or whatever and is
in love with a transferrey himself. And you can't tell
me that there's not something really wrong with the influences
that he is subjected to online and by this digital culture.
(42:43):
And we have to figure out ways to counteract this,
to fight against this, to shut this stuff down, to
push this stuff, you know, out of as far out
of the mainstream certainly as possible, because the left is
always trying to mainstream this stuff. The left always gets angry.
We say, you know, I don't think you should have
kids able to access hardcore pornography online. So let's put
(43:07):
some things in place. And you know who has problems
with it? The left always, Oh, you know what I mean?
Free speech? No, I don't think. I don't think a
third grader being able to find, you know, easily some
of that without age verification stuff, find some of the
stuff that we all know is freely online. It's not
a free speech issue, Okay, you know, and this is
(43:27):
a demonic argument to make that they make. I have to
remember that. I'll take your calls here in a second
on this one. I'm sure a lot of you want
to weigh in. Look, we'll see some fireworks on Capitol
Hill in the weeks ahead, because, oh my gosh, is
there gonna be a shutdown. Look, the government still got
a lot of dysfunction and a huge amount of debt.
Trump's fixing it as fast as he can. But he
can't fix all thirty seven trillion, and so there's gonna
(43:50):
be inflation, and there's gonna be instability, and gold is
gonna be valuable. That's just the way it goes. Gold
makes sense, and Birch Gold Group believes every American should
own physical gold until September thirtieth. If your first time
gold buyer, Birch Gold is offering a rebate about the
ten thousand dollars in free metals on qualifying purchases. To
claim eligibility and start the process, request an infoKit now.
(44:13):
Just text my name Buck to ninety eight ninety eight
ninety eight. Birch Gold can also help you roll in
existing IRA or four oh one k into an IRA
in gold and you are still eligible for a rebate
in free metals about the ten thousand dollars diverse five
with gold like I do from Birch Gold Group. Make
now your first time to buy gold. Take advantage of
a rebate about the ten thousand dollars when you buy
(44:33):
by September thirtieth, Text my name buck do ninety eight
ninety eight ninety eight Text Buck to ninety eight ninety
eight ninety eight.
Speaker 4 (44:40):
Today we have some oh boy AOC.
Speaker 1 (44:54):
AOC has decided she's going to weigh in on the
legacy of Charlie Kirk. And I was saying before that
she thinks she's going to run. I think she is
going to run, and she is a leftist. To be
a real leftist in America, you have to be somewhat
(45:17):
delusional or entirely delusional. You have to be ignorant of history.
You have to be hypocritical, you have to be childish
in your view of the world around you. You have
to be emotionally driven. There are preconditions to be a
leftist in America today. And that's why if I know
(45:38):
that somebody is a leftist, I can already know all
these things about them one and the other. They always
go together, the characteristics and the political affiliation. And AOC
is a perfect example of this. And maybe she's the
pinnacle of this in many ways. But instead of instead
(46:00):
of grace, instead of oh, I don't know, just basic respect,
she when she speaks about the recently assassinated Charlie Kirk,
had this to say play twenty one.
Speaker 5 (46:16):
His rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant, uneducated, and sought to
disenfranchise millions of Americans far from the working quote working
tirelessly to promote unity unquote asserted by the majority in
this resolution. It is equally important that Congress does unite
(46:38):
to reject the government's attempt to weaponize this moment into
an all out assault on free speech across the country,
all in the name of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 1 (46:51):
So, yeah, the House and the Senate have approved a
resolution to honor Charlie Kirk, and this has gone to
a ceremonial measure, something that Charlie clearly deserves. And I'm
glad that they're doing it. But Democrats are standing against it.
(47:12):
Although one hundred rank and file Democrats joined, so there's
that there are some Democrats that went along with it.
Three fifty eight On that one, AOC, it seems, has
a problem with it. Notice the words that she chooses
to use here as saying things like he is well,
(47:33):
first of all, uneducated and ignorant. It's one thing to
disagree with Charlie, put to suggest that he is uneducated
on politics is to announce the stupidity of the person
making the claim. He clearly no matter what you think
(47:55):
of his positions, and obviously I agree with this position.
But I just mean, if we're trying to look at
this from an objective reality, this is a guy who
knew politics and history and at a very impressive level.
And that's coming from a guy who also honestly knows
those things that are pretty high level. So I think
I know what I'm talking about. He was very skilled
(48:20):
in those areas. And what's even more gall like I
think about this is AOC is not you know, this
is like a junior high school basketball player saying that
this guy who was in the NBA can't shoot one
is way out of depth on this. Now. I understand
AOC also very famous social media personality, but she's talking
(48:43):
about education level and she's talking about ignorance. Remember, ignorance
would be you don't know, you don't know the things.
It's not that you're choosing the wrong formulation or Ignorance
is different than wisdom. Ignorance is you're just well, you're ignorant.
You don't even know what you don't know. To say
that Charlie is ignorant is the kind of criticism you
(49:07):
could only make about him if you knew nothing about him,
which maybe that's true of AOC. Or you're just a
brainless demagogue, which is definitely true of AOC. And then
she says, did to disenfranchise people. This is one of
these words, you know, whenever you hear that, you should
remember this. It's not like Charlie was. You know, she
(49:30):
doesn't mean that just in the context of like voting
rights issues. But they try to hijack the language of
the great moral peak, if you will, of the Democrat
Party today is still supposed to be the civil rights movie,
even though that's totally rewritten. I know, the Democrats of
the Party of slavery and segregation and Jim Crow and
you know, Eisenhower was the one who actually moved first
(49:51):
to do some of the biggest things in civil rights
and he was a Republican. So but just we'll forget it,
but forget about that debate for a second, because we
could do that all good to that all day. She
says disenfranchised because it is meant to evoke certain feelings
of revulsion from the Democrats listening and moral superiority, for
(50:13):
he's disenfranchising people. But even more than that, how and
think about this, She's claiming he's disenfranchising people when his
primary vehicle for reaching the public was inviting people onto
a stage, onto a platform with him for that exchange
(50:35):
of ideas. In fact, what Charlie was doing was offering
to enfranchise anybody who was willing to come up to
a microphone. And the Left killed him for it. But
that is what he was doing, saying, let's have this disbate,
let's have this debate, let's have this discussion. He didn't
call people names, he didn't curseit them, he didn't none
(50:59):
of that. Let's just talk about this and let's see
if the best ideas can win. And you know, even
if the best ideas don't win, it's a good thing
to have spent the time to hear the other side.
You know, I'll tell you one thing that you learn
pretty quickly in a marriage, and you know, I mean,
(51:21):
I've learned this too, is that it's not always about
who's right. In fact, a lot of the time it's
not really about who's right in a marriage. It's about
the willingness to hear each other out and do so
with respect, and the closeness and there and the trust
that that process brings. Right, I don't need my wife
(51:45):
and hopefully she doesn't need me to always say you know,
you're right, I'm right, who's right? You know, it's not
let's talk. Let's talk about this and then that alone,
if it's done the right way, is helpful. And I
mean I think that there's some truth to that in
politics as well. Not politics is not the same as
(52:06):
a marriage, but it's not always about getting the end
results you want. Just going through that process and respecting
that process can be a very positive thing. It creates trust,
it creates open lines of communication, It creates a sense
that we have a forum to address this and other
(52:28):
things as I of course that forum in the case
of Charlie was stolen from us by a psycho murderer,
but it was very powerful to have that. It was
very powerful to have a place where people could go
and be heard, and I think for a lot of them.
(52:49):
And there were people that spoke out, even who disagreed
with Charlie, who were students and such, who said, you know,
I respected that he was willing to do that. You know,
it's been the case for all long time at these
campus speeches. I wanted to say this earlier, so I'm
going to just put a pin in what I was
about to say because we're running. I'm running out of
show and I have about three hours more show in
(53:10):
my head to do. Don't worry, I'm not gonna put
it all on your plate today. But why is it
that if I asked any of you to show me
a in the last I would go so far as
to say, the last twenty years, show me a left
(53:31):
wing speaker who has been subjected to serious threats, violence
and intimidation on the college campus anywhere in America. None
of us could come up with one off the top
of our hands. None of us could come up with one.
And why is it that if even the most vile
(53:52):
and men, or there's some vile left wingers out there,
the most vile, incendiary, you know, race baiting, communists, lunatic,
somebody that AOC would think is fantastic. By the way,
why is it that that person could go speak? Not
only at any college, that person could go, not that
(54:14):
I don't think they would. It's one thing to platform somebody,
I want to be clear, and that's not always. You know,
you shouldn't invite you know, you shouldn't invite Osama bin
Laden to come speak at your university. He's dead, So
you get what I'm saying right, I'm not saying disinvite anybody.
But I can tell you this, if there was somebody
who had very who was necessary for the conversation, let's say,
(54:37):
oh here, ir perfect example, irreperfect example. If Catangie Brown
Jackson was invited to speak at Hillsdale College, why is
it that we all know and by the way, maybe she,
I mean she very well could be Supreme Court justice.
So that that's why I didn't want to say some
(54:57):
crazy left winger and somebody says, well, they would never
be invited. Catanji Brown Jackson could be invited to speak
at at Hillsdale College and would know that she would
be treated, that she would be treated with respect, that
she would be able to speak, that they wouldn't try
to drown her out, That there wouldn't be people, you know,
dressed up outside and you know, animal costumes and banging
(55:21):
drums and doing all kinds of crazy stuff to create
a you know, that wouldn't happen. There would be respect offered. Now,
Hillsdale's a conservative and traditional college. So I just but
that we all know that you know it and I
know it. And yet for example, I went to Amherston
Justice Scalia when I was there spoke. I know this
(55:42):
is a while ago, but it was a zoo Oh
my gosh. People in the political science department boycotted it
and the professors and everything and oh and people were,
you know, banging cowbells and it was a total just madness.
This is not a both sides thing. They embrace this
(56:02):
because it's who they are fundamentally. This is what the left,
this is what the Democrat Party has become. And that's
why you run through these examples in your head and
you go hold on a second. By the way, there
are people that were dressed up at that at that
remember at the Scalia speech, who were in duck costumes
(56:23):
because the big scandal of the day some remember, was
that Scalia had gone duck hunting with Dick Cheney at
some some ranch or something somewhere, and so that was
a schedule that they did just they were both there.
They both went duck hunting, and that was a big scandal.
So there was people in duck costumes outside. But this
is the stuff that they do. It is our cultures,
(56:45):
the right and the left in this country. The political
cultures are different, and we need to be very clear
on this. Yes we know, but we can't allow them
to pretend that this is something that we both have
to work on or no. No, we are the ones who
do things with some respect and civility and they simply
(57:06):
do not. And that's why when AOC is saying something like,
Charlie Kirk is, you know, ignorant and uneducated? Okay, like
on what also? I know some of you already thinking this,
if there would be such a thing as a mercy
rule in a debate, if we could have had Charlie
and AOC on a stage together, first of all, it
(57:28):
would have been amazing viewing. I mean I would have
been there with the popcorn and other thing and it
would have been an absolute butt kicking. And we all
know that, and I think AOC even knows that. So
for him to call Charlie for her rather to call
Charlie ignorant and an uneducated is just so there's so
(57:55):
much hutzpa there, there's so much dishonesty there, and I
just just couldn't let it, couldn't let it go. And
she is going to be the standard bearer for the
Democrats for a big part of the Democrats going forward.
This is what we are going to be up again,
So get ready for it. A person who is who
is very politically savvy in her own way, in her
(58:15):
own way, she gets the branding, she gets the presentation.
Yeah she's an airhead, but doesn't mean she's not going
to be a problem. Look at what she's already been
able to accomplish. Yeah she doesn't understand reality and policy
and history, but you know who doesn't either. Maduro in
Venezuela like that. Some of the people that there are
(58:36):
there are there are moron thugs who run entire countries, Okay,
there are you know, look at look at the history
of communism, just littered with people who should have been
left to what they were originally doing, which is usually
you know, throwing uh, you know, throwing bricks at people
on the street. So I'm just saying, get ready for it.
(58:57):
I think the the the democrat era of AOC is
coming upon us. Look, there's not a lot of room
here in the studio for all the products we love
telling you about, but because it just gets tightened here.
But there's always room for two products from Chalk their
pre workout chad Mode, which I love, and their daily
supplement Chalk Daily. The first, chad Mode is a powder
you put into water and you drink it before exercise.
(59:18):
You can also put it in almond milk or juice,
whatever you want. I just go in water. I actually
really like the taste of it. It's cool blue color
and it's it's got enough sweetness but not too much sweetness.
Chad Mode is absolutely delicious. I have a little bit
every day in the morning. And the second though is
Chalk Daily. Oh, Chadbow, by the way, gives you energy, drive, focus.
Chalk Daily is meant to fortify your body with natural
(59:39):
ingredients to give you all day drive in stamina and
if you're looking to get those things going right now,
go to chalkcchoq dot com. Their Male Vitality Stack, their
best seller, includes a leading ingredient that replenishes diminished the
stosterone by to twenty percent in three months time. According
to studies, Chalk has the best supplements, a whole range
of them. Go check them out for yourself online. I'm
taking them every day. Box c h o q dot
(01:00:01):
com used buck as the promo code and you'll get
a massive discount on any Chalk subscription for life. That's
chalk c ch o q dot com promo code buck
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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
What Are We Even Doing? with Kyle MacLachlan
Join award-winning actor and social media madman Kyle MacLachlan on “What Are We Even Doing,” where he sits down with Millennial and Gen Z actors, musicians, artists, and content creators to share stories about the entertainment industry past, present, and future. Kyle and his guests will talk shop, compare notes on life, and generally be weird together. In a good way. Their conversations will resonate with listeners of any age whose interests lie in television & film, music, art, or pop culture.