October 15, 2025 • 63 mins
$15 Billion a Day
A deep dive into Day 15 of the Schumer-led government shutdown, examining its economic toll, the political brinkmanship behind it, and why Democrats are being blamed for holding up funding. They highlight the real-world impact on military families and federal workers, with warnings that the shutdown could cost the U.S. economy up to $15 billion per day. Clay and Buck scrutinize Democratic leadership struggles, focusing on Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries’ efforts to maintain control amid fears of primary challenges from progressives like AOC. They connect the shutdown to upcoming political events, including the “No Kings” rally, and discuss how Democrats lack a clear message heading into the 2026 midterms.
Landmark SCOTUS Decision
A deep dive into the Supreme Court’s pivotal hearing on racial gerrymandering, a case that could redefine congressional redistricting and dismantle race-based districting rules rooted in the Voting Rights Act. The hosts explain the historical context of civil rights-era protections, the tension with the Equal Protection Clause, and why they believe the Court is poised to declare racial gerrymandering unconstitutional. They critique Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s controversial analogy comparing voting access to disability accommodations, arguing it exposes flaws in DEI-driven judicial appointments.
Clay and Buck then broaden the discussion to shifting voter demographics, noting how Black and Hispanic voters are increasingly diverse in political leanings, undermining the decades-old assumption of monolithic voting blocs. They highlight Trump’s gains among Black men and the growing unpredictability of Hispanic voters, framing these trends as a major challenge for Democrats heading into future elections.
Invite Us on The View!
Clay and Buck challenge The View’s claim that Republicans avoid appearing on the show. They reveal behind-the-scenes emails proving Producer Ali pitched them as guests, calling out Joy Behar’s narrative and challenging the show to host a real debate. They share humorous commentary on media bias and the lack of ideological diversity in mainstream media.
From there, the hosts tackle the transgender sports controversy, spotlighting a California gubernatorial candidate’s stunning suggestion that gender-neutral Olympic competitions are “worth discussing.” Clay and Buck dismantle this argument with hard data, noting that even high school boys outperform the fastest female Olympians, and warn that such policies would erase women’s sports. They also cover breaking news on a federal judge blocking an attempt to withdraw a transgender athlete lawsuit, setting the stage for a Supreme Court showdown over whether men can compete in women’s sports. This ties into broader litigation on gender-affirming care for minors, where recent rulings have upheld state bans, signaling a major legal shift.
Steve Hilton for CA Gov
A fiery interview with Steve Hilton, Republican candidate for California governor. Hilton slams Gavin Newsom’s leadership, exposing California’s deep problems—highest poverty and unemployment rates, worst public school performance, soaring taxes, and a broken housing system. He contrasts Newsom’s rosy stump speech touting California’s size and economic clout with harsh realities like wildfire recovery failures and bureaucratic gridlock. Hilton vows to reverse far-left policies, including laws allowing biological men in women’s sports, and calls on listeners nationwide to support his campaign.
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 & Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome everybody to the Wednesday edition of The Clay Travis
and Buck Sexton Show. Shut Down Day fifteen, I think,
and things are actually heating up a little bit on
Capitol Hill and with the Schumer shut down, Democrats trying
to play a bit of hardball. You had Speaker Johnson
(00:23):
holding a press conference this morning. I watched it as
I was drinking my delicious crack at coffee, as one does.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
And I'm glad that you're watching these press conferences, so
others do not be hab to watch these press conferences,
because that sounds miserable.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
We still haven't figured out what like nice you know,
wine and cheese basket you're gonna send me for being
the one of this duo to read Kamalas one hundred
and seven days, Clay, that.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Was towards you finished day. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Oh, I read it on the on the Taiwan plane.
I read it, and my lord, you know it's every
day is a chapter. Think about that, think about the
mentality or rather every chapter? Yeah, every chapter. And so
you're like, wait, I have Once you get deep enough in,
you're like, I have seventy more chapters of this.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Organized. I guess it's very simple to organize in that respect.
But so it's just a minute analysis of the entire campaign.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Then I'm just saying, you're leaving some of us behind
taking slings and arrows. While you're out there at the
beach at the new house. Some of us are reading
Kamala's memoir because you know team player and all that,
you know it was. It was actually more brutal than
I thought. Let's get into the realities of this shutdown
and what is at stake. Also China, China saying that
(01:38):
they are going to play hardball with Trump on trade,
gearing up for what they think will be another stock
market plunge. They're going to try to make the market
plunge in this country. So we'll discuss that and then
something else, just a story in the background for us
to dive into as we can. The percentage of students
identifying as non binary or trans has suddenly fallen off
(02:03):
a cliff. Isn't that so interesting? And we will get
into why that is and what, of course the left
will be saying about this. We've also got Ryan Gerdusky
joining us later on the program, but talk about the
big elections coming up in a few weeks and then
we'll also be talking a bit of California, my friend,
(02:23):
we'll be having a California discussion with Steve Hilton, who
is running for Governor's there.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Yes, sir.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Also, as we are talking to all of you, there's
actually a very potentially transformative Supreme Court case that is
being argued basically about majority black districts and how you
reconcile that with the equal Protection Clause. And there is
a possibility, and it is not an insignificant one, that
(02:52):
we could see all racial Jerrymanderin declared unconstitutional as a
part of this court case, and so there's questioning going
on about that right now, and it could be incredibly
incredibly impactful for what, for instance, the House is going
to look like in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
Because right now, and this is.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
Legal nerding a little bit, there is a balancing act
between how you apply the Civil Rights Act, which has
been applied to basically permit these majority black districts, even
require them, while also analyzing it in the context of
the of the sort of equal protection clause which would
(03:36):
not allow race to be factored in, and then how
is it implicated with for instance, affirmative action in race
based decision making as it pertains to colleges and universities.
So it's a big case, and I think there is
a possibility the Supreme Court finally says, once and for all,
racial gerrymanagering is unconstitutional. It's certainly not necessary compared to
(03:59):
the nineteen six these and so that case is being
heard right now as we all talk to you, and
that could be profoundly transformative.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
I think that our guiding light is it load star?
Isn't that?
Speaker 3 (04:11):
How you say?
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Is that the load star?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I know there's the loan there star state, but isn't
loads There's a load star. There's also the North Star
as the light upon which you should follow. So there's
multiple different stars that are guiding lights.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Yeah, look at Clay with the astronomy over here, he's
a man of many talents. Where's many hats. But yes,
our load star on this, on all these issues, should
be the best way to stop discriminating by race is
to stop discriminating by race, which I'm pretty sure is Alito?
Was that Alito?
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Or was that I think it was John Roberts. I
think it was the majority opinion of John Roberts, if
I remember correctly, if you guys can go back and
do fact check on that. But I think Roberts are
at that majority opinion, and that's his line.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
You know, balls and strikes. Sometimes even Morning Joe gets
it right, you know what I mean? So there you go.
All right, Now, let's dive into this shutdown brinksmanship here
for a second, because what's happened Klayce. So we're in
day fifteen. You've got military members, and you've got people
(05:13):
who are working for the government in things we actually
need and want the government to do, who at this
point have missed a paycheck. Right, most people are paid
bi weekly, So now if you are paycheck to paycheck,
there's no money. So now you're running up credit card bills,
and now the family stress is increasing. And it's very
important that the American people understand Republicans were ready to
(05:33):
do the same funding that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats
voted for what was the last March. I think they're
willing to just keep funding the government. Democrats are holding
hostages here. Democrats are the ones that won't go forward
and do this in a reasonable rational way. And the
Treasury Secretary Scott Vessen is saying this is just going
(05:55):
to start lighting our money as a country on fire
if we don't get this thing at all. This is
cut to Secretary Besant play it.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
We call on the moderate Democrats in the Senate to
be heroes, be heroes, break away from the hive of radicalism,
and do something for the American people, because we are
starting to cut into muscle here. We believe that the
shutdown may start costing the US economy up to fifteen billion.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Dollars a day.
Speaker 4 (06:24):
And this is a decision that Democrats are making. And
one of the reasons that they are not being held
to task is because the mainstream media is not coming
at them the way they would have if the Republicans
were willing to keep the government clothed.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
That's absolutely true. Now they don't have play. I think
we could agree the same power that they once did
to completely shape and dominate the narrative on this. But
we do know that if this was a different circumstance,
the Democrats would be pounding the damage of the shutdown
all that I'm sorry, the media would be pounding the
(07:00):
shutdown damage all day long and making sure that it
was front and center in every newscast, in every news cycle.
But it's on the Republicans, I'm sorry. On the Democrats, yes,
one hundred percent, and I just I understand there's starting
to be some impact. I have the sneaking suspicion they're
(07:20):
doing another one of these stupid no Kings rallies this weekend,
I believe buck for all of the people who are
complete losers and can't find a better way to fit
to spend a spectacular fall weekend than walking around screaming
about how you don't support kings, I think they're waiting
till after the No Kings rally happens because they don't
want to try to strip its momentum to actually preach
(07:44):
in agreement. That's my conspiracy theory here, because if you
acquiesce and bend the knee on the Friday before the
No King's rally, then everybody's like, do have kings?
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Oh by?
Speaker 2 (07:56):
And all of this is about Chuck Schumer and Hakeem
Jack Freeze trying to maintain their limited House and Senate
authority and off stave off everybody out there. And so
I think that's really what this is based on more
than anything else. And I suspect that they will bend
(08:17):
the knee sometime next week, that's my guess. I also
think Trump stole so much of the thunder with the
Middle East Peace agreement. I just don't even hear that
many people asking about this. Does anybody come up to you?
People come up and ask all sorts of questions. When
I'm out and about, nobody's asking about the shutdown. And
(08:38):
I understand people out there who have government jobs, and
some of you are listening to us. You're gonna get paid,
and so there isn't any suggestion that eventually you're not
gonna get paid. Now, maybe you don't have savings, and
I get that's frustrating you have to pull out the
credit cards and things like that. But this is all
Democrat driven, and I think it's much connected to this
(08:58):
No King's rally on the a teenth, where they're trying
to avoid creating a stir by bending the knee before
the rally. I really think there's a big part of
it that's just predicated on this.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
That's definitely. I think the analysis you put forward on
next week sounds very reasonable, very likely to me. And
as we're seeing where this goes, remember Republicans have voted
nine times to reopen the government. So the Republicans have said,
let's go. They're not the ones that are the sand
in the machinery or in the gears.
Speaker 3 (09:33):
Here.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
It is the Democrats who have sabotaged the reopen and
it is because now they say they want another one
point five trillion dollars in spending. They're in the minority.
They shouldn't be in a position to make these kinds
of demands, and they are making demands at the expense
of right now, good sense and a lot of people
who anxiety is rising. Look, you know, Clay, I get it.
(09:57):
People are going to get paid. But having been a
government employed who lived paycheck to paycheck for many years,
you know you don't want to run up credit card bills, right,
And it's it's just an anxiety if you're you know,
you've got a family, I mean, you've got a couple
of kids. Uh, there's that anxiety of I did my part,
I'm showing up. And remember this is now we're talking
not about people who there's a lot of what I
(10:19):
call low show jobs in the federal government, especially in
the Beltway, where you show up, you don't show up,
it doesn't really matter. We're talking about military service members.
Now we're talking about people that we have as a society,
as a country, asked to do these jobs because they
need to be done, and I know we're gonna end
up paying them. But the Schumer shutdown is just complete theatrics.
(10:41):
It's unnecessary, and it's to your point about the No
Kings rally, it's just so they can say we stand
and fight, we stand and fight Trump, and that Chuck
Schumer can say that so that AOC doesn't go from
Congresswoman AOC to Senator AOC.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
This is not based on what's best for the country.
It's based on what's best for the Democrat Party. And
I don't think it's lost that. Essentially, you have two
guys from New York City that are the top Democrats
in elected office right now. One of them obviously Hakeem Jefferies,
who is I think a middling at best leader for
the Democrat Party. Whatever you think of Nancy Pelosi, she
(11:18):
was able to corral heard the cats, dominate them, and
strategically she had some sort of vision. Chuck Schumer, I
think also very middling level leader in the Senate, and
they recognize that they are being challenged Look, there's talk
out there that one of Mamdani's top political aids is
(11:40):
going to challenge Hakeem Jeffries in the midterm and may
take try to win that primary and knock him out
of being in Congress at all, which is a sign
of how little respect they have for his leadership to
challenge in a serious way the Democrat minority leader. And then,
as you just mentioned, Chuck Schumer lives in eternal fear
(12:01):
of AOC deciding she wants to be a senator and
wiping him out. So I think that's really what this
entire government shut down is about. Schumer upset the crazy
left wing when he agreed to this back in March
and he's decided he can't do it again.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
What does Schumer do if he wakes up and he's
not a senator anymore? Lawn bowling, Madjong, New York Times
crossword puzzle, like, what is you know? Schumer at this
stage of the game play, His whole thing is he's
just got.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
To be in the game.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
This is why I argue in an ideal world, there
would not be professional politicians because there would be people
who do things other than politics, and so if they're
not politicians anymore, their life doesn't feel as if it's
without purpose. I think one reason why so many of
these politicians in their seventies and eighties are refusing to
step away is they don't have anything else. And I
(12:55):
think Chuck Schumer is a good example of that.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Now.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
I think the one thing Chuck Schumer has working in
his face. I don't know that AOC wants to run
for statewide office in New York. I think she wants
to run for president in the United States. So Chuck
Schumer may benefit because AOC's ambitions are bigger than the
office that he currently holds. That would be my forecast,
and I think you and I both have said we
don't think it's crazy to contemplate AOC as the VP
(13:19):
nominee with a Governor Gavin Newsom as the nominee.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
For his was AOC a more dynamic personality and online
avatar by leaps and bounds than Kamala who was just
a VP under Biden. Not even a question right, So
of course she.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
Could be the VP.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
And she's got the Bernie Sanders stamp of approval, as
Bernie is now frankly too old to ever run for
president again. We'll take some of your calls, the talkbacks,
little early preview. Don't even look at them, Buck, they're hysterical.
As you may well remember from yesterday when I made
the greatest argument in the history of the show about
the worst way to die, and a lot of you
had opinions on that fire agreement in the Middle East.
(14:01):
This week, along with the release of the remaining twenty
living hostages, brought great relief for Israeli citizens. They waited
more than two years for this moment. In that same spirit,
it's worth highlighting what one of our longtime partners is doing,
the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, that's the IFCJ.
For four decades, the Fellowship has brought Christians and Jews
together to solve big problems facing the Jewish people in
(14:24):
places all over the world, Israel, but also the former
Soviet Union. One of the problems is feeding the hungry
and those without means. That's why six days a week
IFCJ teams in Israel are on the ground hand delivering
boxes of food to feed and comfort to poor, particularly
the elderly, some of which are the last remaining Holocaust survivors.
(14:44):
I went to this food bank and helped to create
food to be distributed that many of you have helped
to pay for. Put your faith into action by taking
part in the ifcj's mission to find out how visit
IFCJ org. That's IFCJ dot org.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
Claytravison buck Sexton mic drops that never sounded so good.
Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you
get your podcasts. People ask us all the time how
we can save the next generation.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
We've got our show and the info is an antidote.
But we also have a couple books coming out.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Clay that's right, and you can pre order both of
them right now and be book nerds just like us.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
You'll laugh, you'll nod, and you'll get smarter too.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Mine's called Balls How Trump young men in sports saved America?
Speaker 1 (15:35):
And mine is manufacturing delusion How the Left uses brainwashing,
indoctrination and propaganda against you.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Both are great reads. One might even say they would
make fabulous gifts.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Indeed, so do us a solid and pre order yours
on Amazon today.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Welcome back in Clay Travis buck Sexton Show. All right,
you want some spice, I'm gonna give you some spice,
right out of the break. We're going to have some
fun with the view, but I had them. I was
trying to pay attention to the Supreme Court argument on
racial gerrymandering that is happening today because I think it
has the potential to be incredibly consequential and transformative to
(16:16):
the political process in the country. And let me give
you a one minute take on exactly what is at stake. Historically,
black voters were suppressed from the polls prior to the
civil rights movement in the South. That is not a
historical fallacy, that is in fact historical truth. As a result,
(16:37):
there was an entire line of jurisprudence dealing with voting
rights that were trying to rectify the wrong of majority
black voters in the South who were being restricted in
many ways from pole access. Therefore they did not have
a substantial say in the Democrat process in many Southern states.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
That was wrong.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
That was Buck and I were born a long time
before Buck was born, quite some time before I was born,
since he is much younger than me. But so that process,
unfortunately now has polluted the court rulings of the Supreme
Court because we no longer even though Democrats would like
(17:20):
it to be the case. Live in a world that
is like nineteen sixty five or nineteen fifty eight or
nineteen forty eight, or whatever year you want to go
to in the South, when black voters did not have
the ability to get to the polls and vote for
their preferred candidates, so they put in place this review
(17:41):
of the voting process through the civil rights laws. Now
what you are seeing is that those precedents are actually
extremely racist because they are predicated on the idea that
black voters sort of monolithically and uniformly vote a certain way,
and that is starting to crumble. And it also creates
(18:03):
the Civil Rights era court decisions create tension with the
equal Protection clause that tries to treat everyone equally and
does not allow race to be determined as a factor.
So we have talked about this quite a lot already
in the court system as it pertains to affirmative action,
which the courts have ruled. Was I correct that John
(18:24):
Roberts is the one who said the way to stop
discriminating based on race is by stopping to discriminate based
on race? Do we get a fact check on that?
I believe I'm correct. So we have seen in the
world of colleges and universities. The idea of your race
as a dispositive factor when it comes to your admission
is not actually permissible under our constitution. And so there
(18:49):
are still lots of ways that colleges and universities are
trying to trick their way through that process, but it
is not permissible to strictly have quotas racial analysis. All
of that, okay, With that as a background, they now
today are hearing an argument about that tension between the
Civil Rights era precedents where race is allowed to be
(19:12):
a predominant factor in the jerrymandering of congressional districts, and
that tension with the equal rights component equal protection clause
of our amendments in the post Civil War era that
gets the Sixteenth Amendment. I've been a while since I
(19:33):
passed the bar. How do you reconcile that? I think
the Supreme Court is going to say racial jerrymandering is
no longer allowed. I think it is the right decision.
I think it is the appropriate decision. People on the
left are up in arms about this. You're going to
hear a lot about it. And Katanji Brown Jackson demonstrated
(19:53):
and the futility of that argument. By making that argument,
I had them pull it to try to argue in
favor of racism.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
To combat racism. Here is what she said.
Speaker 6 (20:05):
A kind of paradigmatic example of this is something like
the Ada Congress past the Americans with Disabilities Act against
the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible
to people with disabilities, and so it was discriminatory in
effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings,
(20:26):
and it didn't matter whether the person who built the
building or the person who owned the building intended for
them to be exclusionary. That's irrelevant. Congress said, the facilities
have to be made equally open to people with disabilities,
if readily possible. I guess I don't understand why that's
not what's happening here. The idea in section two is
(20:50):
that we are responding to current day manifestations of past
and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so
that they don't have equal access to the voting system. Right,
they're disabled.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Okay, So what she analogized there, and I understand we're
going into the weeds a little bit, is she's saying
black voters are the equivalent of disabled people in that
they have to be constantly considered because they are unable
to vote as others would be able to vote, just
as disabled people are unable to access. Now, this is
(21:30):
an incredibly strained and poor analogy by her, and I
think it's actually evidence that she is Frankly, I'm not
sure qualified in any way to be a Supreme Court justice.
I don't think that the accents. Yeah, I don't think
Katanji Brown Jackson is in the top half of intelligent
(21:51):
lawyers in America. And this is what happens when you
say I'm only going to pick someone based on their race,
which is what Joe Biden did with her. And then
I don't think he picked the smartest black woman who
is a lawyer in America to be his representative of
black women, but in so doing he excluded ninety five
(22:14):
percent of Americans. In fact, I would argue that the
way that Joe Biden selected Katanji Brown Jackson actually violates
all of the precepts of the Constitution that she now
is trying to argue should be continued to be in effect.
In other words, she is the quintessential DEI candidate and
(22:34):
she much like Soto Mayor. I think regularly when they
ask questions, evinces a very poor comprehension of the law.
That is not in any way a strong left wing tenant.
There are lots of people Kagan buck. Kagan's really smart.
I don't agree with everything that most of what Elena
(22:55):
Kagan says in her opinions, but she is of the left,
and she is a very smart person of the left.
I do not think Soto Mayor and Katanji brown Jackson
are even eloquent advocates of the positions the left would
like to put out there, and this I think is
evidence of that with her line of questioning, Well.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Yeah, I'm a Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I disagreed with strenuously
on a whole range of things, but she understood the arguments.
She knew what the arguments of both sides were. I
just don't agree with her analysis. And you know, without
getting into the specifics, I think Kotanji Brown Jackson doesn't
even understand the argument on the side. Honestly, that's my
just listening to her talk about these things. She doesn't
(23:35):
get it. But you know, on the one hand, this
is one of these it's very complicated. It's a VRA
section two, it's a history.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
And I understand people's eyes roll back into their head. Yes,
it's very complicated comma, but actually very simple. Right, you're
doing the complicated legal analysis side of this. Clay gets
excited about the law stuff. It's like we're back in
law school professors walking around.
Speaker 1 (23:59):
He's just Travis. Mister, Travis, did you do the reading
last night? And you know Clay's doing his thing. You
always did the reading, Clay, we.
Speaker 3 (24:06):
Know you did. I love reading assignments.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
So there's that part of it. But then there's this
part of it. We just need to live in a
country where we don't have racial set asides and entitlements
for anybody at all, period, full stop. And if there
was ever a time where we had to make those
arguments because of previous discrimination, or rather we made those
concessions because we thought it would make things better. Now
(24:29):
we've reached a point where everybody should understand that that
was a effectively temporary emergency measure and should no longer
be the case. We should not have racial entitlements masquerading
as civil rights protections, and that is what this is.
If a state is allowed if the people in a
(24:50):
state are allowed to redistrict however they see fit. Really,
because it's left to the states. But here's the problem.
It's almost like drawing the borders of a country. Yeah,
what justifies the borders of a country? You know, it's
a complicated thing, but really it's lines on a map.
Then they fight over it and whatever. But there's not
some more like the border between the US and Canada
(25:13):
is not a moral question, it's a political question. That's
one that we have solved with our northern neighbors. The
borders of congressional districts in various states are left through
the processes and the legislatures in those states, and everybody
should just be playing by the same rules within that state.
There shouldn't be a oh, we don't have enough black
(25:33):
majority districts in this state, so therefore this map is
unfair because it is an equal protection clause violation. Because
a lot of Republicans sit there and say, hold on
a second, my vote has been nullified effectively by the
state legislature, So why isn't it and why is that okay?
But overwhelmingly Democrat black voters in a lot of these
(25:55):
states get to have a special protection. No, I'm sorry.
We either all live if by the same rules, or
we don't. The complex distilled down to the simple, I
rest my case, counselor.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
I think you're right, and I think that's where we're headed.
Let me add on a couple of layers here that
are hopefully not super legal nerd esque. The problem here
was one that should and needed to be ridressed, right.
The problem is the problem is fixed. It no longer exists,
and so the precedent that made sense in nineteen sixty
(26:28):
five doesn't make sense in twenty twenty five. I would
also point this out. It is predicated on the idea
that black voters are monolithic in the way that they vote.
That is increasingly not the case. This is why I
think it's significant that Donald Trump got twenty one percent
of black men of their vote in twenty twenty four.
(26:50):
One in five black guys said Trump's my guy. A
lot of black guys are listening to us right now
that are a part of that team, and it's growing,
and there are more some of you guys out there.
You used to never be able to find another Black Republican.
Now one in five. I mean, I bet you're finding
a lot more people that are open to your arguments.
Black women too. This has been applied Buck, for Hispanic voters.
(27:12):
Hispanic voters are basically now fifty to fifty. They're much
more similar to white voters or Asian voters, where you
don't have a strong sense of how somebody's going to
vote based on their race and gender. If you see
a white guy, now somebody see a white chick where
in the Rachel Maddow specs, you probably got a pretty
good chance.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
Hey that's a lib.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
But by and large, you see a white person, they
could be conservative, they could be liberal, they could be
who they don't care about politics at all. Same thing
as increasingly becoming true of Hispanic voters. As you know
because you live in Miami, Buck, there's also a huge
difference between a Cuban voter and a recent immigrant from
Mexico or Venezuela or The Hispanic voting block is actually
(27:54):
very diverse depending on where that Hispanic voter is from.
The mono thick nature of Black support for the Democrat
Party is crumbling. In times like these, they trot out
someone like Katanji Brown Jackson to argue not based on
the law. But oh my goodness, based on the result
of this case, it would be harmful politically to Democrats,
(28:17):
and that is why she is a political actor more
than she is a judge, and that is unfortunate. One
of the arguments we make here, and this goes to
disparate impact, which is I think a inherently incorrect legal
philosophy of Well, if the end result isn't the same
among arbitrary distinctions that we're going to make between people,
(28:41):
then there's something wrong with that law. If the law
is universally applicable and everybody has to live under it,
the outcome of that law does, and then the law
is ethical and moral. The outcome of that law does
not matter to me a meaning, And this is where
we get into there is a disparate impact.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
I know you love this argument, but saying this for
a long time, Clay, there's a disparate impact between men
and women in homicides. That doesn't mean that homicide laws
are bad. It just means that more men kill people,
and that doesn't mean they're sexist in particular.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
It doesn't mean that men are being targeted by homicide
laws because men happen to be impacted by them more so.
The fact of the matter is, if we're going to
have a society where we don't have racial entitlements, we
have to remove racial entitlements, including holdovers from the Civil
Rights era, like Section two of the Voting Rights Act.
(29:34):
And Clay, you were correct. It was John Roberts for
the win on to stop discriminating by race. Stop discriminating
by race. It's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
Alito is my favorite, so I thought it was going
to be an Alito move, but it was actually Roberts.
Speaker 3 (29:48):
So good on.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
You probably the best sentence of John Roberts's career. The
way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is
to stop discriminating on the basis of race. I don't
understand how that same LODG does not govern when it
comes to analyzing racial jerrymandering. And I hope John Roberts
will apply the same principle in this case as he
did in the decision having to do basically with whether
(30:14):
or not there can be affirmative action in schools. So
that is going to be a huge decision. Maybe some
of you are trying to face a huge decision. What
do you do for the holiday season? I know I
just said the holiday season, and some of you are
having alarm bells go off, and you know it's basically
two months till Christmas, two months until Christmas? What are
(30:36):
you going to do for Christmas? How about the dads
and the granddads out there, How many of you are
actually great gift givers? I am not. I am not
a good gift giver. I don't enjoy shopping period, and
I particularly don't try to enjoy shopping for so many
other gifts. But you know what's a great gift that
(30:57):
doesn't require you to shop at all. It just requires
you to listen to this show and pull out your
phones right now. Legacy Box, you can preserve your family's
history in time for the holidays. You can blow everybody
away by being the thoughtful family member who ensures that
your great aunts old timey photos are digitized, that Grandma
(31:20):
and Grandpa's VHS tapes are digitized, that the old slides,
the old eight millimeter reels, whatever family history you have.
Legacy Box is all about taking it and making sure
it's preserved for generations to come. I've visited their Chattanooga factory.
They've got an incredible business. You send in your old photos,
(31:41):
your old VHS tapes, your old eight millimeters, whatever family
memories you have, they will digitize them and allow you
to be able to share it with everyone. That photo
from nineteen twenty, that VHS tape of Christmas nineteen eighty eight,
that eight millimeter film of Grandma and Grandpa going on
(32:02):
their honeymoon, all of it can be preserved digitally forever,
and right now you get fifty percent off at legacybox
dot com slash clay. That's a legacybox dot com slash
clay to say fifty percent. You're gonna love having your
recorded memories preserved forever digitally, easy to share with the grandkids,
(32:24):
the great grandkids, so everybody knows the family history stories.
The legacybox dot Com slash clay fifty percent off. That's
a legacybox dot Com slash clay.
Speaker 7 (32:36):
You don't know what you don't know right, but you could.
Speaker 5 (32:40):
On the Sunday Hang with Clay and Buck podcast, Welcome.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
Back in Clay, Travis Buck Sexton Show appreciates all of you,
and there's a lot of reactions pouring in. Pamela just said,
I'm gonna ihop in Pensacola, having breakfast. Almost spit out
my coffee with your remark about the danger women may
be in. Thank goodness, I was only drinking coffee, not
eating the sausage. You have only yourself to blame, Buckster,
(33:06):
so appreciate Pamela. I'm glad that she is still alive.
And there are there are a lot of reactions rolling
in and we are having a great deal of Fuschia.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Tell everybody, take your time, cheer your food. It's very straightforward.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
Okay, let's go.
Speaker 4 (33:25):
The View.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
This is fun. Okay.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
So those of you who follow us on social media,
as you all should be doing, you can find us
at YouTube. You can find us at Twitter, Instagram, TikTok.
I don't think there's a social media platform we're not on.
Know that we have had a lot of fun with
the View over the years, and we just shared from
producer Ali and producer Ali you can come up if
(33:48):
you want and tell the full story here. But a
while back, Ali said, hey, we'll invite you. We'll tell
the View people, Hey, Clay and Buck are happy to
come on the show. So in July and I just
shared this email from Ali to the View and I
will read it for all of you. This is a
producer at the View. Hi lour conservative radio host Clay
(34:12):
and Buck would like to pitch themselves as guests on
the View. They often play clips from the program on
their nationally syndicated radio show Granted as a means to
refute them, and thought a sit down would be productive
for both audiences since they come from two completely different perspectives.
Buck lives in Miami and Clay lives in Nashville, but
they'd be willing to travel to New York. Thank you
(34:34):
for the consideration. This went out in July. Now I'm
going to pull Ali up in a sec. But first,
here is Joy Behar saying, you know, the truth of
the matter is Republicans won't come on the show.
Speaker 3 (34:47):
They're afraid to listen.
Speaker 8 (34:49):
I think that we should have more Republicans on the show,
but they don't want to come on.
Speaker 9 (34:53):
They're scan of us.
Speaker 8 (34:54):
It's like like Marjorie's Hyla Green says that she finds
the Republican men afraid of powerful women. Well, that's maybe
true of all of political persuasions. But if they would
come on this show and they can explain to us
what they're trying to do to this can.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
We Okay, well, I don't think Bucket Eye are afraid
of powerful women.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Challenge accepted, Chile accepted.
Speaker 2 (35:17):
All right, Producer, Ali, you have now written another email
to the View reiterating.
Speaker 3 (35:22):
You can come up.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
But the email that I read you sent in July
was their response to that email from the View.
Speaker 10 (35:29):
Yes, actually there was a quick response, very quick, saying
they only had two more episodes to shoot, so their
schedule was full and they wouldn't be back until the fall,
at which point I said, Okay, I'll follow up in
the fall. And I followed up today and I have
I'm waiting to hear back.
Speaker 2 (35:47):
And you said, I tell you this is important. We're
happy to do it.
Speaker 3 (35:51):
This is important.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
The View, according to groc, has frequently had two guests
on simultaneously, two guests including politicians, authors, actors, and even
musical guests who are there as a duo. So I
just want to be clear, there is no reason why
they could not have a Clay and buckethon on the
(36:14):
View based on the established parameters they have for guests
in the past, because I don't I don't want them
throwing that at us either. We can because if what
they'll try to do. If it's just one of us,
they're going to try to overtalk and just have too
many voices shouting at you at the same time.
Speaker 10 (36:30):
Just make sure you bring that third hat. Oh.
Speaker 2 (36:33):
I would bring a hat for Alyssa Farr Griffin and
I would hand it to her and I would say, hey,
since Trump's brought back to hostages, here is a red
Maga hat. You can put that on for this entire
segment to honor President Trump's great job in bringing back
the hostages.
Speaker 1 (36:46):
I'm gonna tell you something. I think that she actually
would be willing to wear the hat. I think that
she worries that if she wore that hat it would
trigger other members of the table too much, like they
would even though she said this was the marker that
she laid out there, I think she realizes that the
rest of the table would throw a fit about it.
Speaker 3 (37:06):
Would they have?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
They have no sense of humor about it at all.
By the way, Joy Behar has a writing team. They
write all of her jokes. She's actually not that funny.
She's not coming up with this stuff on the fly
if you watch her closely. Now I'm throwing down the
gomble a little bit you watch her closely, she's trying
to find ways to get in lines that have been
written by her writers.
Speaker 3 (37:26):
I will give this doesn't happen very often.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
She does look great for her age, though, to be fair, Joy,
you look great. I'm just saying.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Also, she is probably not aware of most of the guests,
so she may think to herself when she says Republicans
are afraid to go on the show, because, to be fair,
people pitch themselves.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
On this show all the time.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
I mean, producer Ali, you can say, like if people
out there like, is this a common thing? I mean,
we get pitches, hundreds of pitches a year, maybe thousands,
dozens a day of people who are saying, hey, we'd
like to come on as a guest. So and most
of them we never Bucket, neither Buck nor I are
going and saying we can't have this person on. So
I don't necessarily know that Joy is aware of the
(38:12):
number of people who are reaching out that would be
willing to come on. So when she's saying that, she
may actually believe Buck that she's being truthful. She is not, however,
and we just you know, we shared the so called
receipts of the invitation that we put out there. Hey,
we're happy to come on. And by the way, you know,
we would have Alyssa on this show, you know, if
(38:34):
they wanted to put a view member on this show
to promote their show. I mean, we're not running and
hiding from any of that. Speaking of running and hiding, though, Buck,
you were talking about this a little bit earlier. And
we've got a couple of guests, by the way, coming
in the third hour, our buddy Ryan Gardusky. We're going
to talk about the absolute latest on Virginia, New York City,
(38:56):
and New Jersey as those elections get closer. Steve Hilton
out in California to talk about the Katie Porter insanity
and the potential run there. I wanted to play this
because this is one of the people that is running
to be a Democrat nominee for California when Gavin Newsom
is forced to turn limit himself out and she went
(39:18):
on Piers Morgan and the LA is going to have
the Olympics in twenty twenty eight. The Summer Olympics are
taking place in Los Angeles. Should be awesome, It be
a lot of fun to watch. But Piers Morgan asked
this Democrat California governor's candidate, Hey, what do you think
about the idea of trans women, that is, men pretending
(39:42):
to be women being able to compete in the Olympics?
And he followed up, and I just want to play
a cut from this because these people have lost their
minds and they're totally trapped on this trans argument.
Speaker 9 (39:54):
Listen, this seems to me like you would like to
remove any any sexual differentation between the Olympic sports. I
let them all compete, it would be gender neutral with
it if you were governor.
Speaker 11 (40:06):
Well, again, I want to be sure that everyone has
the ability to compete.
Speaker 9 (40:11):
Would you have a gender neutral Olympics where you would
have not you wouldn't have male and female sport, then
you just have one one that everyone could join in.
Speaker 11 (40:19):
Well, I don't think we're going to get that tomorrow,
but I think it's a conversation worth having.
Speaker 9 (40:23):
You think it's a conversation worth having where you have
gender neutral Olympics.
Speaker 11 (40:27):
Because we need to understand what the attributes are of
athletes across the spectrum.
Speaker 9 (40:34):
You've already said that you understand the reason they separate
the sexes is that men have a physical advantage over women.
Speaker 2 (40:42):
He also did, maybe we can grab this because I
think it really kind of brings it home. He says, wait,
you think that a woman should run against Usain Bolt
in the one hundred meters, the fastest man in the
history of the world, and you think that's going to
be a fair competition, And basically she says yes, she
doesn't know, maybe them and would win. These people are crazy, buck,
(41:03):
and I don't know how they get off of this
crazy train without.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
Having the Supreme Court. I think your argument that you've
already hit.
Speaker 3 (41:14):
That's what it is.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
It's well, by the way, there is there are a
few things that are making their way toward the Supreme
Court right now. In fact, there is litigation out of
I think it's in Colorado. The case is little the Hetcocks,
maybe heacocks, but it's a transgender student who wanted to
(41:37):
be on the girls cross country team and this and
brought suit back in twenty twenty. Really at the peak
of this, Yeah, I wanted to join. Oh yeah, this
is no it's Idaho that I said Colorado, sorry, Idaho, Idaho,
Boise State. So it's college, it's college level and wanted
to be on the women's college cross country team sued, sued,
(41:59):
and a Ninth Circuit judge ended up getting involved in
this and now it's law. Without getting too deep into
the weeds on this, the situation is that the original
plaintiff is trying to try to withdraw his case as
(42:19):
a her try to withdraw the case Clay because they
don't want the Supreme Court to actually take this up.
And a federal judge just today, Judge Nie who is
a Trump appointee, said, oh, no, you're not doing this,
you know, hide the football situation here. You wanted to
bring a federal lawsuit about you know, discrimination, saying that
(42:41):
you're actually to be treated as a woman. We're taking
We're taking this thing on, like let's go. And now
it looks like the Supreme Court is eventually going to
be taking this up, and I think they're going to
have to weigh in on no men or men and
women are women and we're allowed to make different decisions
about the two in law as a matter of law.
Speaker 2 (43:00):
There is a going to give them credit here, great
long form piece in the New York Times recently looking
at the Scurmetti case. Jonathan Scrimetti is the Attorney General
of the state of Tennessee. The Supreme Court came out
and said that the state can restrict this so called
gender affirming care for miners, that there is a state interest,
(43:23):
and the trans community is in a panic because they
thought that they were going to be able to win
these cases, basically that the trans treatments and all this
stuff on miners is actually okay, and instead they're losing.
And what you just pointed out as an important point,
they're now trying to avoid giving the Supreme Court an
opportunity to strike down a lot of the state laws.
(43:47):
And so they're trying to pull back now because they're like, oh,
my goodness, the same logic of Scurmetti is certainly going
to apply in sports.
Speaker 3 (43:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (43:55):
The transactivists don't want their day in court all of
a sudden, Yes, isn't that so interesting to see? They
want to rely and this goes into the Weeds book.
They want to rely on like the Ninth Circuit and
some of the liberal circuit courts without having to get
a nationwide ruling, so that in California and Oregon and Washington,
the crazy arguments can prevail instead of the Supreme Court
(44:18):
slapping it down. So I'm very familiar with this tactic,
Clay because as a longtime New York City and New
York State resident, particularly on the New York City side,
this is the game they used to play all the time.
They would they did flatly unconstitutional things when it came
to firearms, and then the moment somebody brought legislation, they
would change it. And then they would do something else
flatly on conf you know, five hundred dollars fee to
(44:42):
be a con to be not a concealed carrier, to
be a premise permit holder. They would just use the
system in bad faith to do things that they knew
were unconstitutional, and instead of actually find and allowing the
system to then say no, you're disrespecting the rights, the
two way rights of people in New York City, they
would pull and then it's moot. And they would argue
it's moot. That's what this transathlete in Idaho is trying
(45:06):
to do. And this uh, thank Heavens's Trump appoint has
said no, no, no, you brought it. Now we're gonna
finish it. We're gonna do We're gonna see where this
actually goes. Yeah, and it's not going to go a
good place for all these people. But I mean, this
woman is trying to become the Democrat nominee for California,
and her argument is, we don't really know whether men
are faster than women or not. To put this into
(45:28):
context for you, buck, every single state high school champion
in Texas last year for track and field, every single
boy these are you know, eighteen and younger boys, fifteen
to eighteen year old boys. Every single Texas state champion
ran faster speeds than the fastest women in the history
of the Olympics. So we're not even talking about I
(45:49):
think Florence Griffith's Joiner Flow Joe is still the fastest
woman of all time. Every Texas high school state champion
at all district levels smoked flow Joe. So we're not
even talking about men versus women on the best men
in the world. We're talking about the state of Texas
by itself. Every boy state champion is faster than the
(46:10):
fastest woman that's ever existed in the history of the world.
Switch your cell phone service from AT and T, Verizon
or T Mobile to Pure Talk. You'll start saving money
immediately without sacrificing quality. Look, we've always appreciated what pure
Talk stands for here, both in terms of their values
and also the value they provide to you by giving
you great service at the lowest possible price, and also
(46:33):
standing with free speech. Switch your cell phone service to
pure Talk support a business that appreciates free speech. You're also,
of course going to get grete five G nationwide coverage
on a reliable, secure network, and the price of Pure
Talk service just the best you're gonna find, and it's
why you should change from AT and T, T Mobile
or Verizon. Monthly plans start at just twenty five bucks
(46:54):
a month. Dial pound two fifty say Clay and Buck
to switch to our wireless company, pure Talk right now.
You'll save it additional fifty percent off your first month.
Dial pound two five zero, say Clay and Buck to
switch to Puretalk.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
Do it today.
Speaker 12 (47:08):
News and politics, but also a little comic relief.
Speaker 5 (47:12):
Clay Travis at Buck Sexton. Find them on the free
iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts. People ask
us all the time how we can save the next generation.
Speaker 1 (47:23):
We've got our show and the info is an antidote.
But we also have a couple books coming out.
Speaker 2 (47:27):
Clay, that's right, and you can pre order both of
them right now and be book nerds just like us.
Speaker 1 (47:33):
You'll laugh, you'll nod, and you'll get smarter too.
Speaker 2 (47:36):
Mine's called balls, how Trump young men in sports saved America.
Speaker 1 (47:39):
And mine is manufacturing delusion, how the Left uses brainwashing,
indoctrination and propaganda against you.
Speaker 2 (47:46):
Both are great reads. One might even say they would
make fabulous gifts.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Indeed, so do us a solid and pre order yours
on Amazon today. All right, welcome back in here too,
Clay and Buck. We will be chatting, I believe, shortly
with Steve Hilton about California. You know what, Actually I
want to pull this from yesterday, guys, grab yesterday because
I feel.
Speaker 13 (48:07):
Like Gavin Newsom is out there working on his stump speech.
He's getting a little breathier, he's button in that shirt
a little lower, just slicking back that hair just a little tighter,
and he's ready to look at all the folks of
America and just tell them that.
Speaker 3 (48:24):
Damn, he's so handsome.
Speaker 10 (48:26):
You know.
Speaker 1 (48:26):
I mean, I really think that Gavin Newsom is thinking
that it's it's his nomination to lose at this point
of the Democrat side. I don't think that he is
silly or foolish in that assessment. I think we've both
said that we think it'll be Gavin Newsom with AOC
as the VP.
Speaker 3 (48:44):
If we nail that.
Speaker 1 (48:45):
One so far in advance, that'd be a pretty impressive call.
But we're riding on the same train on that one.
I think that's probably what It's always tough to pick
these things so far and out, so far in advance.
Whoever would have thought, for example, that Joe Biden would
even be the nominee in twenty I truly clay. I
went on a whole rant on radio when the Democrat
primary was happening, and I just said, we know it
(49:07):
can't be Biden. The guy's got dementia. Well, it turns
out people didn't care that much.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
Not only that, you hit on something that I think
is one reason it's hard to predict the outcome, and
it didn't get a lot of attention because he ended
up not being challenged in a significant way for the nomination.
Biden flipped the order of the states when it came
to the Democrat primary contest so that South Carolina was
(49:33):
first because he knew James Clyburn and black voters were
going to have his back. And that would forestall any
significant challenge against him. Because Biden never did well in
Iowa or New Hampshire. What is going to be the
first state going forward. I think that is a real
part of trying to horse race and handicap the likelihood
(49:54):
of what is going on. And I think it's one
reason why it's challenging to have a exact reason here.
We've got Steve Hilton, by the way, I think now, Steve,
I don't know if you've seen the clip yet of
the crazy Democrat nominee, one of the people running for it,
saying that she doesn't know whether a woman could beat
(50:15):
Usain Bolt in one hundred meters. But I thought it
was a perfect distillation of where the California Democrat primary is.
Speaker 3 (50:23):
They're just bonkers.
Speaker 7 (50:26):
I'm so excited to talk to you about this today
because I was actually on that interview with Piers Morgan
was following her up, and originally I think they set
it up as a debate, and she didn't want to
do a debate, so I was just patiently waiting and
as she was speaking, I saw myself on the little
video green room. Wait. My jaw was dropping, and I
(50:47):
kept thinking she's not going to say that, like, surely
she No way, she's going to say gender neutral Olympics.
No way, she's going to say track and field. When
peers asked her, what's sports biological men could compete with,
and every time you thought, no way, she's not going
to say something so crazy, she said it. It's just incredible.
(51:10):
But exactly as you say, this is where they're at.
These California Democrats insane, the far left still in control.
People are sick of it here and that's why I'm
running for governor because we've got to have chage. We
can't go on like this with these lunatics in charge
of our beautiful state.
Speaker 1 (51:26):
What do you say, Steve, that's buck thanks for being
here with us. To whether it's Gavinussum or other Democrats
out there, they really seem to have taken this point
of view that California is actually doing great and that
it's awesome, and that they're kicking ass and their governance
is amazing. Like they're not trying to excuse or explain
(51:46):
any of the shortcomings. They just say that it's been fabulous.
I mean, Gavin Newsom instead of even feeling like he
has to defend anything he just is basically saying California
is number one in all these different things and leaves
it at that.
Speaker 7 (52:02):
Yeah, well, listen, this is what ties together the Betty
Ye interview, the other car crash interview we saw with
Katie Porter and Gavin Newsom, all of them. This is
what you get. This is the attitude you get after
fifteen years of one party rule. This total arrogance, entitlement,
contempt for the truth, for the reality of people's lives.
(52:22):
And they just think they can get away with it
because for so long they've had appliant media in California.
They're not used to being asked these kinds of questions,
and they're not used to being held accountable by a
strong opposition party. And that's why I'm really confident when
they face a candidate like me who's just not going
to let them get away with it, it's going to
(52:42):
be a very different story next year in the election.
Just specifically on the Gavin Newsome bs that he spews
about all of this, I mean, his favorite statistic, he's
got to have to slightly adjust it a little bit.
He's been saying for a while. Oh, it's everything's great,
because we have the fourth largest economy in the world.
That was true, by the way, until yesterday we dropped
(53:02):
down to fifth. But still that's good. But beneath that,
you've got a story of California as a state now
where the rich get richer and the people who own
these giant AI and tech companies are doing well. That's
the reason we have such a big economy. But at
the same time, we have the highest unemployment rate in
all of America, the worst in all fifty six. Same
(53:23):
with poverty. We have the highest poverty rate. And if
you look carefully at what he says, he's always talking
about the size of things. You know, we're the biggest
for this, and we're the largest for that. But actually
that's going to be true for almost anything because we're
the biggest state with the largest population. But if you
talk about the actual performance on any metric, we are
not just doing badly. We're doing the worst of all
(53:45):
fifty states, the worst reading scores for kids in public schools,
the worst, the highest taxes, the highest cost for housing, gas, electricity,
water ensure, everything, the worst business climate ten years in
a row. There's literally nothing they can point to is
a success. And so they've got to do these kind
of ridiculous, statistical nonsense. But everyone can see, everyone can
(54:07):
steal it. That's why you've got a large majority now
in California. You say it's time for change, and that's
why I'm confident I'm going to win next year.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
We're talking to Steve Hilton. I want to go to
the arson that we found out actually cause the LA fires.
We hear from a lot of people out there. Adam
Carolla was on with us recently. He has a house
in one of the communities that was drastically impacted. I
see these stories and I hear from people they still
(54:34):
can't get rebuilt. What are you seeing and hearing from
the people of Los Angeles responding to that wildfire crisis.
A lot of the media, the drive by media, as
Rush called them, have left and they're not covering the
failure of LA to be rebuilt. What do you see
and hear on the ground there in the aftermath of those.
Speaker 7 (54:54):
Fires, Well, it's a total disaster. That is a completely
perfect illustration of how they're running the state. So you
look at the just on the numbers. I looked them
up the other.
Speaker 3 (55:05):
Day just to get the latest.
Speaker 7 (55:07):
The Malibu is the most egregious in Malibu, six hundred
homes destroyed. The total number of permits issued for rebuilding
two literally two. If you look across the various burned
neighborhood after Dina Pacific Palisades, it's under ten percent. And
the reason is that they are. It's this terrible combination
(55:29):
which is what's destroying California, of far left ideology and
incompetent governance and both of those two things working together.
So the ideology comes in when they are now pushing
this idea that the single family home, that the foundation
of the California dream is some evil thing that needs
(55:51):
to be fought back and everyone needs to be living
in apartments with no parking and taking transit in the
name of climate change. I mean, do they live like that?
The people who push this newsom Does he live in
an apartment? Does Nancy Pelosi get her Francisco on transit?
Of course not. It's total elitism, and that's the ideology.
So they want people to move out so they can
(56:14):
build apartments in line with their ideology of what they
call density. But the second point is just the sharing competence,
where months ago said she is streamlining permitting and whatever.
None of that's happened. And I talk to people who
literally they go to the building department every day. There's
a different person, there's a different rule. Nothing's been streamlined,
(56:36):
nothing's been simplified. They can't get insurance. The insurance people say, well,
we can't give you insurance. Do you get a permit.
The permit people say, you can't get a permit until
you get the insurance. It's just a nightmare for people.
No one's gripping it. No one's in charge, whether that's
Newsome or Carabath locally or Newsom at.
Speaker 3 (56:53):
The state level.
Speaker 7 (56:54):
And it's just a perfect illustration of everything that's gone
wrong in California.
Speaker 1 (56:58):
Well, I have to tell you, Steve, there's somebody out
there with windswept hair and a shirt button down to
his navel who disagrees with you. We want to let
you react. Here is Gavin Newsom, his version of California.
You play thirty three.
Speaker 14 (57:14):
I think there's a California arrangement syndrome, and he's part
of it. I mean, I think people are obsessed with
focusing on what's wrong with the state and not what's
right with the state. I mean, you have more scientists engineers,
more researchers, more Nobel laureates in the state than any
other state in the nation. We're the fourth largest economy
in the world four point one trillion dollars, with the
finest system of higher education that addresses the issue of
equity better than any other public education system in the world.
(57:37):
We dominate in every category, name it with the biggest
manufacturing state, the biggest farming state, in every key category.
The quality of life here consistently, and you look at
the top ten cities in the United States of America,
consistently the top five are identified in the state of California.
Speaker 1 (57:54):
All Right, so obviously preparing I know, I'm going to
give you the floor. He's preparing his stuff speech there.
And I also feel like a lot of this is well,
you're also by far the biggest state, Gavin, But go ahead, Steve.
Speaker 7 (58:07):
Oh. I wish I was able to have a debate
with him. I wish he was running again so I
could just go for it. First of all, it's exactly
what I said. He just says, were the biggest, the largest. Yes,
we have the largest egg industry, but it's being crushed
by their policies. By Gavin Newsom's policies. We should be
expanding our farming industry. Instead, it's being destroyed because he
(58:29):
refuses to give them water because of their climate agenda,
their labor regulations makes it more and more expensive. Look
at manufacturing, Yes, which is the largest because we're the
largest pretty much in everything, because we're the biggest state
with the largest population. What's actually happening with manufacturing. You
take Nvidia, the world's most valuable company, just announced with
President Trump a few months ago a half trillion dollars
(58:51):
of investment in America. None of it in California. It's
in Texas, it's in Arizona, because those are places where
you can actually build things without years of bureaucratic delay
in massive taxes. Everything he says is a lie because
it doesn't reflect the truth about what it's like here,
which is that we are, on every metric that matters,
(59:13):
the worst performing state in America, and that's the direct
result of his policies and his incompetence.
Speaker 2 (59:21):
You mentioned Katie Porter. We played the audio it went Megavirals.
She was at the time the favorite to be the
nominee for California Democrats next year. What was your thought
when you saw it, did it surprise you? What does
it say about Katie Porter and California Democrats?
Speaker 7 (59:39):
It did a little bit, because I've met her a
few times. Most of the polls show that, I mean,
we have this top two system in California where you
don't have a Republican and a Democrat primary. Everyone's on
the same ballot and the top two go through to
the general election. And the last few months, I mean
the polls, it's pretty early. There's a large number of
don't know, so I'm not too kind of focused on
(01:00:00):
on this, but they've pretty consistently showed that the top
two is Katie Porter and me and so in once
I've been paying attention to her. We see each other
every now and again at these standardate forums, not a
real debate, but you know, she's the ineptness on display there.
The fact that you just couldn't answer a basic question
and completely lost it was really surprising to me. But again,
(01:00:23):
what's interesting is that the machine doesn't care. The Democrat machine,
this arrogant, entitled a bunch of people who think that
they've got they've got the right to rule forever in California.
How dare you ask me questions, how dare anyone think
that they're going to interrupt our control of this state?
Right back in behind her, you had unions coming out
(01:00:44):
with statements saying, yes, we're we're for Katie Porter. Still
we need we don't want someone polite, we need someone
who's going to fight all this nonsense. The real interesting question, though,
is that the Democrat machine in California overall, it's still
run by Nancy Pelosi, who can't stand Katie Porter. And
so even before this meltdown, the rumor mill here was
(01:01:07):
saying that they are looking for another candidate because they
don't want Katie Porter, because they don't control her actually,
and so right now the speculation is that they are
trying to recruit Alex Padia. He's the US senator who
made a fool of himself barging into Christine Nomes press conference.
He's the guy that they want, and I'd say bring
(01:01:27):
it on, because he's just another completely a complete mediocrity,
another machine politician who'll just spout the party line controlled
by the unions and cannot possibly represent the change that
we need in California.
Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Steve Hilton, If people like what they're hearing here, how
can they find out, how can they get involved?
Speaker 7 (01:01:49):
Thank you, man, I appreciate that. Steve hiltonfogovernor dot com
f R. Look, we got to it's not just a
California wherever you're listening in the country. Right back to
where we started with the trans athletes and biological men
and girl sports that all started here in California. They
passed that law on twenty thirteen. As governor, I would
overturn it. But it's a good example of how so
(01:02:12):
many of the crazy far left insanity that's been inflicted
on the rest of the country, it starts in California.
So help me beat it here. Steve hiltonfogovernor dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:02:24):
Good stuff, Steve, we'll talk to you again. Keep up
the good fights. We appreciate you.
Speaker 7 (01:02:29):
Fantastic see thing cheers.
Speaker 3 (01:02:30):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (01:02:31):
All right, you're gonna hear a lot of great things
about one of our new sponsors, Cozy Earth. But guess
what you don't have to hear from me or Buck.
Just trust us on this. Carrie and Laura, our respective wives,
they absolutely love these products. Cozy Earth most comfortable, luxurious
soft sheets you'll ever sleep on. And if you don't
(01:02:52):
know if that's going to be true for you. You
get one hundred days to try these sheets out, no risk,
one hundred days, and then a ten year warranty on.
Speaker 3 (01:03:01):
Top of it.
Speaker 2 (01:03:02):
What do you have to lose? Trust us on this
bamboo sheets transform your sleep temperature, regulating, moisture wicking. You
are going to love them. We got them in the
Travis household. They got him in the Sexton household. We
give trust them to sleep on our beds. You'll love
them too. Go to cozyearth dot com code Clay and
(01:03:22):
you get twenty percent off everything. That's cozyearth dot com.
Go check out all the products there. Use my name
Clay for twenty percent off. Let them know that you
found and heard about Cozy Earth at Clay and Buck.
That's Cozy Cozycozy Earth dot com. Code Clay for twenty
percent off everything.
Speaker 12 (01:03:44):
Keep up with the biggest political comeback in world history
on the Team forty seven podcast. Clay and Buck highlight
Trump free plays from the week Sundays at noon Eastern.
Speaker 5 (01:03:54):
Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get
your podcasts
Welcome everybody to the Wednesday edition of The Clay Travis
and Buck Sexton Show. Shut Down Day fifteen, I think,
and things are actually heating up a little bit on
Capitol Hill and with the Schumer shut down, Democrats trying
to play a bit of hardball. You had Speaker Johnson
(00:23):
holding a press conference this morning. I watched it as
I was drinking my delicious crack at coffee, as one does.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
And I'm glad that you're watching these press conferences, so
others do not be hab to watch these press conferences,
because that sounds miserable.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
We still haven't figured out what like nice you know,
wine and cheese basket you're gonna send me for being
the one of this duo to read Kamalas one hundred
and seven days, Clay, that.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Was towards you finished day. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
Oh, I read it on the on the Taiwan plane.
I read it, and my lord, you know it's every
day is a chapter. Think about that, think about the
mentality or rather every chapter? Yeah, every chapter. And so
you're like, wait, I have Once you get deep enough in,
you're like, I have seventy more chapters of this.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Organized. I guess it's very simple to organize in that respect.
But so it's just a minute analysis of the entire campaign.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Then I'm just saying, you're leaving some of us behind
taking slings and arrows. While you're out there at the
beach at the new house. Some of us are reading
Kamala's memoir because you know team player and all that,
you know it was. It was actually more brutal than
I thought. Let's get into the realities of this shutdown
and what is at stake. Also China, China saying that
(01:38):
they are going to play hardball with Trump on trade,
gearing up for what they think will be another stock
market plunge. They're going to try to make the market
plunge in this country. So we'll discuss that and then
something else, just a story in the background for us
to dive into as we can. The percentage of students
identifying as non binary or trans has suddenly fallen off
(02:03):
a cliff. Isn't that so interesting? And we will get
into why that is and what, of course the left
will be saying about this. We've also got Ryan Gerdusky
joining us later on the program, but talk about the
big elections coming up in a few weeks and then
we'll also be talking a bit of California, my friend,
(02:23):
we'll be having a California discussion with Steve Hilton, who
is running for Governor's there.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Yes, sir.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Also, as we are talking to all of you, there's
actually a very potentially transformative Supreme Court case that is
being argued basically about majority black districts and how you
reconcile that with the equal Protection Clause. And there is
a possibility, and it is not an insignificant one, that
(02:52):
we could see all racial Jerrymanderin declared unconstitutional as a
part of this court case, and so there's questioning going
on about that right now, and it could be incredibly
incredibly impactful for what, for instance, the House is going
to look like in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
Because right now, and this is.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
Legal nerding a little bit, there is a balancing act
between how you apply the Civil Rights Act, which has
been applied to basically permit these majority black districts, even
require them, while also analyzing it in the context of
the of the sort of equal protection clause which would
(03:36):
not allow race to be factored in, and then how
is it implicated with for instance, affirmative action in race
based decision making as it pertains to colleges and universities.
So it's a big case, and I think there is
a possibility the Supreme Court finally says, once and for all,
racial gerrymanagering is unconstitutional. It's certainly not necessary compared to
(03:59):
the nineteen six these and so that case is being
heard right now as we all talk to you, and
that could be profoundly transformative.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
I think that our guiding light is it load star?
Isn't that?
Speaker 3 (04:11):
How you say?
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Is that the load star?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I know there's the loan there star state, but isn't
loads There's a load star. There's also the North Star
as the light upon which you should follow. So there's
multiple different stars that are guiding lights.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Yeah, look at Clay with the astronomy over here, he's
a man of many talents. Where's many hats. But yes,
our load star on this, on all these issues, should
be the best way to stop discriminating by race is
to stop discriminating by race, which I'm pretty sure is Alito?
Was that Alito?
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Or was that I think it was John Roberts. I
think it was the majority opinion of John Roberts, if
I remember correctly, if you guys can go back and
do fact check on that. But I think Roberts are
at that majority opinion, and that's his line.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
You know, balls and strikes. Sometimes even Morning Joe gets
it right, you know what I mean? So there you go.
All right, Now, let's dive into this shutdown brinksmanship here
for a second, because what's happened Klayce. So we're in
day fifteen. You've got military members, and you've got people
(05:13):
who are working for the government in things we actually
need and want the government to do, who at this
point have missed a paycheck. Right, most people are paid
bi weekly, So now if you are paycheck to paycheck,
there's no money. So now you're running up credit card bills,
and now the family stress is increasing. And it's very
important that the American people understand Republicans were ready to
(05:33):
do the same funding that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats
voted for what was the last March. I think they're
willing to just keep funding the government. Democrats are holding
hostages here. Democrats are the ones that won't go forward
and do this in a reasonable rational way. And the
Treasury Secretary Scott Vessen is saying this is just going
(05:55):
to start lighting our money as a country on fire
if we don't get this thing at all. This is
cut to Secretary Besant play it.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
We call on the moderate Democrats in the Senate to
be heroes, be heroes, break away from the hive of radicalism,
and do something for the American people, because we are
starting to cut into muscle here. We believe that the
shutdown may start costing the US economy up to fifteen billion.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Dollars a day.
Speaker 4 (06:24):
And this is a decision that Democrats are making. And
one of the reasons that they are not being held
to task is because the mainstream media is not coming
at them the way they would have if the Republicans
were willing to keep the government clothed.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
That's absolutely true. Now they don't have play. I think
we could agree the same power that they once did
to completely shape and dominate the narrative on this. But
we do know that if this was a different circumstance,
the Democrats would be pounding the damage of the shutdown
all that I'm sorry, the media would be pounding the
(07:00):
shutdown damage all day long and making sure that it
was front and center in every newscast, in every news cycle.
But it's on the Republicans, I'm sorry. On the Democrats, yes,
one hundred percent, and I just I understand there's starting
to be some impact. I have the sneaking suspicion they're
(07:20):
doing another one of these stupid no Kings rallies this weekend,
I believe buck for all of the people who are
complete losers and can't find a better way to fit
to spend a spectacular fall weekend than walking around screaming
about how you don't support kings, I think they're waiting
till after the No Kings rally happens because they don't
want to try to strip its momentum to actually preach
(07:44):
in agreement. That's my conspiracy theory here, because if you
acquiesce and bend the knee on the Friday before the
No King's rally, then everybody's like, do have kings?
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Oh by?
Speaker 2 (07:56):
And all of this is about Chuck Schumer and Hakeem
Jack Freeze trying to maintain their limited House and Senate
authority and off stave off everybody out there. And so
I think that's really what this is based on more
than anything else. And I suspect that they will bend
(08:17):
the knee sometime next week, that's my guess. I also
think Trump stole so much of the thunder with the
Middle East Peace agreement. I just don't even hear that
many people asking about this. Does anybody come up to you?
People come up and ask all sorts of questions. When
I'm out and about, nobody's asking about the shutdown. And
(08:38):
I understand people out there who have government jobs, and
some of you are listening to us. You're gonna get paid,
and so there isn't any suggestion that eventually you're not
gonna get paid. Now, maybe you don't have savings, and
I get that's frustrating you have to pull out the
credit cards and things like that. But this is all
Democrat driven, and I think it's much connected to this
(08:58):
No King's rally on the a teenth, where they're trying
to avoid creating a stir by bending the knee before
the rally. I really think there's a big part of
it that's just predicated on this.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
That's definitely. I think the analysis you put forward on
next week sounds very reasonable, very likely to me. And
as we're seeing where this goes, remember Republicans have voted
nine times to reopen the government. So the Republicans have said,
let's go. They're not the ones that are the sand
in the machinery or in the gears.
Speaker 3 (09:33):
Here.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
It is the Democrats who have sabotaged the reopen and
it is because now they say they want another one
point five trillion dollars in spending. They're in the minority.
They shouldn't be in a position to make these kinds
of demands, and they are making demands at the expense
of right now, good sense and a lot of people
who anxiety is rising. Look, you know, Clay, I get it.
(09:57):
People are going to get paid. But having been a
government employed who lived paycheck to paycheck for many years,
you know you don't want to run up credit card bills, right,
And it's it's just an anxiety if you're you know,
you've got a family, I mean, you've got a couple
of kids. Uh, there's that anxiety of I did my part,
I'm showing up. And remember this is now we're talking
not about people who there's a lot of what I
(10:19):
call low show jobs in the federal government, especially in
the Beltway, where you show up, you don't show up,
it doesn't really matter. We're talking about military service members.
Now we're talking about people that we have as a society,
as a country, asked to do these jobs because they
need to be done, and I know we're gonna end
up paying them. But the Schumer shutdown is just complete theatrics.
(10:41):
It's unnecessary, and it's to your point about the No
Kings rally, it's just so they can say we stand
and fight, we stand and fight Trump, and that Chuck
Schumer can say that so that AOC doesn't go from
Congresswoman AOC to Senator AOC.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
This is not based on what's best for the country.
It's based on what's best for the Democrat Party. And
I don't think it's lost that. Essentially, you have two
guys from New York City that are the top Democrats
in elected office right now. One of them obviously Hakeem Jefferies,
who is I think a middling at best leader for
the Democrat Party. Whatever you think of Nancy Pelosi, she
(11:18):
was able to corral heard the cats, dominate them, and
strategically she had some sort of vision. Chuck Schumer, I
think also very middling level leader in the Senate, and
they recognize that they are being challenged Look, there's talk
out there that one of Mamdani's top political aids is
(11:40):
going to challenge Hakeem Jeffries in the midterm and may
take try to win that primary and knock him out
of being in Congress at all, which is a sign
of how little respect they have for his leadership to
challenge in a serious way the Democrat minority leader. And then,
as you just mentioned, Chuck Schumer lives in eternal fear
(12:01):
of AOC deciding she wants to be a senator and
wiping him out. So I think that's really what this
entire government shut down is about. Schumer upset the crazy
left wing when he agreed to this back in March
and he's decided he can't do it again.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
What does Schumer do if he wakes up and he's
not a senator anymore? Lawn bowling, Madjong, New York Times
crossword puzzle, like, what is you know? Schumer at this
stage of the game play, His whole thing is he's
just got.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
To be in the game.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
This is why I argue in an ideal world, there
would not be professional politicians because there would be people
who do things other than politics, and so if they're
not politicians anymore, their life doesn't feel as if it's
without purpose. I think one reason why so many of
these politicians in their seventies and eighties are refusing to
step away is they don't have anything else. And I
(12:55):
think Chuck Schumer is a good example of that.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Now.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
I think the one thing Chuck Schumer has working in
his face. I don't know that AOC wants to run
for statewide office in New York. I think she wants
to run for president in the United States. So Chuck
Schumer may benefit because AOC's ambitions are bigger than the
office that he currently holds. That would be my forecast,
and I think you and I both have said we
don't think it's crazy to contemplate AOC as the VP
(13:19):
nominee with a Governor Gavin Newsom as the nominee.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
For his was AOC a more dynamic personality and online
avatar by leaps and bounds than Kamala who was just
a VP under Biden. Not even a question right, So
of course she.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
Could be the VP.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
And she's got the Bernie Sanders stamp of approval, as
Bernie is now frankly too old to ever run for
president again. We'll take some of your calls, the talkbacks,
little early preview. Don't even look at them, Buck, they're hysterical.
As you may well remember from yesterday when I made
the greatest argument in the history of the show about
the worst way to die, and a lot of you
had opinions on that fire agreement in the Middle East.
(14:01):
This week, along with the release of the remaining twenty
living hostages, brought great relief for Israeli citizens. They waited
more than two years for this moment. In that same spirit,
it's worth highlighting what one of our longtime partners is doing,
the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, that's the IFCJ.
For four decades, the Fellowship has brought Christians and Jews
together to solve big problems facing the Jewish people in
(14:24):
places all over the world, Israel, but also the former
Soviet Union. One of the problems is feeding the hungry
and those without means. That's why six days a week
IFCJ teams in Israel are on the ground hand delivering
boxes of food to feed and comfort to poor, particularly
the elderly, some of which are the last remaining Holocaust survivors.
(14:44):
I went to this food bank and helped to create
food to be distributed that many of you have helped
to pay for. Put your faith into action by taking
part in the ifcj's mission to find out how visit
IFCJ org. That's IFCJ dot org.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
Claytravison buck Sexton mic drops that never sounded so good.
Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you
get your podcasts. People ask us all the time how
we can save the next generation.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
We've got our show and the info is an antidote.
But we also have a couple books coming out.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Clay that's right, and you can pre order both of
them right now and be book nerds just like us.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
You'll laugh, you'll nod, and you'll get smarter too.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Mine's called Balls How Trump young men in sports saved America?
Speaker 1 (15:35):
And mine is manufacturing delusion How the Left uses brainwashing,
indoctrination and propaganda against you.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Both are great reads. One might even say they would
make fabulous gifts.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Indeed, so do us a solid and pre order yours
on Amazon today.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Welcome back in Clay Travis buck Sexton Show. All right,
you want some spice, I'm gonna give you some spice,
right out of the break. We're going to have some
fun with the view, but I had them. I was
trying to pay attention to the Supreme Court argument on
racial gerrymandering that is happening today because I think it
has the potential to be incredibly consequential and transformative to
(16:16):
the political process in the country. And let me give
you a one minute take on exactly what is at stake. Historically,
black voters were suppressed from the polls prior to the
civil rights movement in the South. That is not a
historical fallacy, that is in fact historical truth. As a result,
(16:37):
there was an entire line of jurisprudence dealing with voting
rights that were trying to rectify the wrong of majority
black voters in the South who were being restricted in
many ways from pole access. Therefore they did not have
a substantial say in the Democrat process in many Southern states.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
That was wrong.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
That was Buck and I were born a long time
before Buck was born, quite some time before I was born,
since he is much younger than me. But so that process,
unfortunately now has polluted the court rulings of the Supreme
Court because we no longer even though Democrats would like
(17:20):
it to be the case. Live in a world that
is like nineteen sixty five or nineteen fifty eight or
nineteen forty eight, or whatever year you want to go
to in the South, when black voters did not have
the ability to get to the polls and vote for
their preferred candidates, so they put in place this review
(17:41):
of the voting process through the civil rights laws. Now
what you are seeing is that those precedents are actually
extremely racist because they are predicated on the idea that
black voters sort of monolithically and uniformly vote a certain way,
and that is starting to crumble. And it also creates
(18:03):
the Civil Rights era court decisions create tension with the
equal Protection clause that tries to treat everyone equally and
does not allow race to be determined as a factor.
So we have talked about this quite a lot already
in the court system as it pertains to affirmative action,
which the courts have ruled. Was I correct that John
(18:24):
Roberts is the one who said the way to stop
discriminating based on race is by stopping to discriminate based
on race? Do we get a fact check on that?
I believe I'm correct. So we have seen in the
world of colleges and universities. The idea of your race
as a dispositive factor when it comes to your admission
is not actually permissible under our constitution. And so there
(18:49):
are still lots of ways that colleges and universities are
trying to trick their way through that process, but it
is not permissible to strictly have quotas racial analysis. All
of that, okay, With that as a background, they now
today are hearing an argument about that tension between the
Civil Rights era precedents where race is allowed to be
(19:12):
a predominant factor in the jerrymandering of congressional districts, and
that tension with the equal rights component equal protection clause
of our amendments in the post Civil War era that
gets the Sixteenth Amendment. I've been a while since I
(19:33):
passed the bar. How do you reconcile that? I think
the Supreme Court is going to say racial jerrymandering is
no longer allowed. I think it is the right decision.
I think it is the appropriate decision. People on the
left are up in arms about this. You're going to
hear a lot about it. And Katanji Brown Jackson demonstrated
(19:53):
and the futility of that argument. By making that argument,
I had them pull it to try to argue in
favor of racism.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
To combat racism. Here is what she said.
Speaker 6 (20:05):
A kind of paradigmatic example of this is something like
the Ada Congress past the Americans with Disabilities Act against
the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible
to people with disabilities, and so it was discriminatory in
effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings,
(20:26):
and it didn't matter whether the person who built the
building or the person who owned the building intended for
them to be exclusionary. That's irrelevant. Congress said, the facilities
have to be made equally open to people with disabilities,
if readily possible. I guess I don't understand why that's
not what's happening here. The idea in section two is
(20:50):
that we are responding to current day manifestations of past
and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so
that they don't have equal access to the voting system. Right,
they're disabled.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Okay, So what she analogized there, and I understand we're
going into the weeds a little bit, is she's saying
black voters are the equivalent of disabled people in that
they have to be constantly considered because they are unable
to vote as others would be able to vote, just
as disabled people are unable to access. Now, this is
(21:30):
an incredibly strained and poor analogy by her, and I
think it's actually evidence that she is Frankly, I'm not
sure qualified in any way to be a Supreme Court justice.
I don't think that the accents. Yeah, I don't think
Katanji Brown Jackson is in the top half of intelligent
(21:51):
lawyers in America. And this is what happens when you
say I'm only going to pick someone based on their race,
which is what Joe Biden did with her. And then
I don't think he picked the smartest black woman who
is a lawyer in America to be his representative of
black women, but in so doing he excluded ninety five
(22:14):
percent of Americans. In fact, I would argue that the
way that Joe Biden selected Katanji Brown Jackson actually violates
all of the precepts of the Constitution that she now
is trying to argue should be continued to be in effect.
In other words, she is the quintessential DEI candidate and
(22:34):
she much like Soto Mayor. I think regularly when they
ask questions, evinces a very poor comprehension of the law.
That is not in any way a strong left wing tenant.
There are lots of people Kagan buck. Kagan's really smart.
I don't agree with everything that most of what Elena
(22:55):
Kagan says in her opinions, but she is of the left,
and she is a very smart person of the left.
I do not think Soto Mayor and Katanji brown Jackson
are even eloquent advocates of the positions the left would
like to put out there, and this I think is
evidence of that with her line of questioning, Well.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Yeah, I'm a Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I disagreed with strenuously
on a whole range of things, but she understood the arguments.
She knew what the arguments of both sides were. I
just don't agree with her analysis. And you know, without
getting into the specifics, I think Kotanji Brown Jackson doesn't
even understand the argument on the side. Honestly, that's my
just listening to her talk about these things. She doesn't
(23:35):
get it. But you know, on the one hand, this
is one of these it's very complicated. It's a VRA
section two, it's a history.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
And I understand people's eyes roll back into their head. Yes,
it's very complicated comma, but actually very simple. Right, you're
doing the complicated legal analysis side of this. Clay gets
excited about the law stuff. It's like we're back in
law school professors walking around.
Speaker 1 (23:59):
He's just Travis. Mister, Travis, did you do the reading
last night? And you know Clay's doing his thing. You
always did the reading, Clay, we.
Speaker 3 (24:06):
Know you did. I love reading assignments.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
So there's that part of it. But then there's this
part of it. We just need to live in a
country where we don't have racial set asides and entitlements
for anybody at all, period, full stop. And if there
was ever a time where we had to make those
arguments because of previous discrimination, or rather we made those
concessions because we thought it would make things better. Now
(24:29):
we've reached a point where everybody should understand that that
was a effectively temporary emergency measure and should no longer
be the case. We should not have racial entitlements masquerading
as civil rights protections, and that is what this is.
If a state is allowed if the people in a
(24:50):
state are allowed to redistrict however they see fit. Really,
because it's left to the states. But here's the problem.
It's almost like drawing the borders of a country. Yeah,
what justifies the borders of a country? You know, it's
a complicated thing, but really it's lines on a map.
Then they fight over it and whatever. But there's not
some more like the border between the US and Canada
(25:13):
is not a moral question, it's a political question. That's
one that we have solved with our northern neighbors. The
borders of congressional districts in various states are left through
the processes and the legislatures in those states, and everybody
should just be playing by the same rules within that state.
There shouldn't be a oh, we don't have enough black
(25:33):
majority districts in this state, so therefore this map is
unfair because it is an equal protection clause violation. Because
a lot of Republicans sit there and say, hold on
a second, my vote has been nullified effectively by the
state legislature, So why isn't it and why is that okay?
But overwhelmingly Democrat black voters in a lot of these
(25:55):
states get to have a special protection. No, I'm sorry.
We either all live if by the same rules, or
we don't. The complex distilled down to the simple, I
rest my case, counselor.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
I think you're right, and I think that's where we're headed.
Let me add on a couple of layers here that
are hopefully not super legal nerd esque. The problem here
was one that should and needed to be ridressed, right.
The problem is the problem is fixed. It no longer exists,
and so the precedent that made sense in nineteen sixty
(26:28):
five doesn't make sense in twenty twenty five. I would
also point this out. It is predicated on the idea
that black voters are monolithic in the way that they vote.
That is increasingly not the case. This is why I
think it's significant that Donald Trump got twenty one percent
of black men of their vote in twenty twenty four.
(26:50):
One in five black guys said Trump's my guy. A
lot of black guys are listening to us right now
that are a part of that team, and it's growing,
and there are more some of you guys out there.
You used to never be able to find another Black Republican.
Now one in five. I mean, I bet you're finding
a lot more people that are open to your arguments.
Black women too. This has been applied Buck, for Hispanic voters.
(27:12):
Hispanic voters are basically now fifty to fifty. They're much
more similar to white voters or Asian voters, where you
don't have a strong sense of how somebody's going to
vote based on their race and gender. If you see
a white guy, now somebody see a white chick where
in the Rachel Maddow specs, you probably got a pretty
good chance.
Speaker 3 (27:31):
Hey that's a lib.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
But by and large, you see a white person, they
could be conservative, they could be liberal, they could be
who they don't care about politics at all. Same thing
as increasingly becoming true of Hispanic voters. As you know
because you live in Miami, Buck, there's also a huge
difference between a Cuban voter and a recent immigrant from
Mexico or Venezuela or The Hispanic voting block is actually
(27:54):
very diverse depending on where that Hispanic voter is from.
The mono thick nature of Black support for the Democrat
Party is crumbling. In times like these, they trot out
someone like Katanji Brown Jackson to argue not based on
the law. But oh my goodness, based on the result
of this case, it would be harmful politically to Democrats,
(28:17):
and that is why she is a political actor more
than she is a judge, and that is unfortunate. One
of the arguments we make here, and this goes to
disparate impact, which is I think a inherently incorrect legal
philosophy of Well, if the end result isn't the same
among arbitrary distinctions that we're going to make between people,
(28:41):
then there's something wrong with that law. If the law
is universally applicable and everybody has to live under it,
the outcome of that law does, and then the law
is ethical and moral. The outcome of that law does
not matter to me a meaning, And this is where
we get into there is a disparate impact.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
I know you love this argument, but saying this for
a long time, Clay, there's a disparate impact between men
and women in homicides. That doesn't mean that homicide laws
are bad. It just means that more men kill people,
and that doesn't mean they're sexist in particular.
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
It doesn't mean that men are being targeted by homicide
laws because men happen to be impacted by them more so.
The fact of the matter is, if we're going to
have a society where we don't have racial entitlements, we
have to remove racial entitlements, including holdovers from the Civil
Rights era, like Section two of the Voting Rights Act.
(29:34):
And Clay, you were correct. It was John Roberts for
the win on to stop discriminating by race. Stop discriminating
by race. It's pretty good.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
Alito is my favorite, so I thought it was going
to be an Alito move, but it was actually Roberts.
Speaker 3 (29:48):
So good on.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
You probably the best sentence of John Roberts's career. The
way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is
to stop discriminating on the basis of race. I don't
understand how that same LODG does not govern when it
comes to analyzing racial jerrymandering. And I hope John Roberts
will apply the same principle in this case as he
did in the decision having to do basically with whether
(30:14):
or not there can be affirmative action in schools. So
that is going to be a huge decision. Maybe some
of you are trying to face a huge decision. What
do you do for the holiday season? I know I
just said the holiday season, and some of you are
having alarm bells go off, and you know it's basically
two months till Christmas, two months until Christmas? What are
(30:36):
you going to do for Christmas? How about the dads
and the granddads out there, How many of you are
actually great gift givers? I am not. I am not
a good gift giver. I don't enjoy shopping period, and
I particularly don't try to enjoy shopping for so many
other gifts. But you know what's a great gift that
(30:57):
doesn't require you to shop at all. It just requires
you to listen to this show and pull out your
phones right now. Legacy Box, you can preserve your family's
history in time for the holidays. You can blow everybody
away by being the thoughtful family member who ensures that
your great aunts old timey photos are digitized, that Grandma
(31:20):
and Grandpa's VHS tapes are digitized, that the old slides,
the old eight millimeter reels, whatever family history you have.
Legacy Box is all about taking it and making sure
it's preserved for generations to come. I've visited their Chattanooga factory.
They've got an incredible business. You send in your old photos,
(31:41):
your old VHS tapes, your old eight millimeters, whatever family
memories you have, they will digitize them and allow you
to be able to share it with everyone. That photo
from nineteen twenty, that VHS tape of Christmas nineteen eighty eight,
that eight millimeter film of Grandma and Grandpa going on
(32:02):
their honeymoon, all of it can be preserved digitally forever,
and right now you get fifty percent off at legacybox
dot com slash clay. That's a legacybox dot com slash
clay to say fifty percent. You're gonna love having your
recorded memories preserved forever digitally, easy to share with the grandkids,
(32:24):
the great grandkids, so everybody knows the family history stories.
The legacybox dot Com slash clay fifty percent off. That's
a legacybox dot Com slash clay.
Speaker 7 (32:36):
You don't know what you don't know right, but you could.
Speaker 5 (32:40):
On the Sunday Hang with Clay and Buck podcast, Welcome.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
Back in Clay, Travis Buck Sexton Show appreciates all of you,
and there's a lot of reactions pouring in. Pamela just said,
I'm gonna ihop in Pensacola, having breakfast. Almost spit out
my coffee with your remark about the danger women may
be in. Thank goodness, I was only drinking coffee, not
eating the sausage. You have only yourself to blame, Buckster,
(33:06):
so appreciate Pamela. I'm glad that she is still alive.
And there are there are a lot of reactions rolling
in and we are having a great deal of Fuschia.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Tell everybody, take your time, cheer your food. It's very straightforward.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
Okay, let's go.
Speaker 4 (33:25):
The View.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
This is fun. Okay.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
So those of you who follow us on social media,
as you all should be doing, you can find us
at YouTube. You can find us at Twitter, Instagram, TikTok.
I don't think there's a social media platform we're not on.
Know that we have had a lot of fun with
the View over the years, and we just shared from
producer Ali and producer Ali you can come up if
(33:48):
you want and tell the full story here. But a
while back, Ali said, hey, we'll invite you. We'll tell
the View people, Hey, Clay and Buck are happy to
come on the show. So in July and I just
shared this email from Ali to the View and I
will read it for all of you. This is a
producer at the View. Hi lour conservative radio host Clay
(34:12):
and Buck would like to pitch themselves as guests on
the View. They often play clips from the program on
their nationally syndicated radio show Granted as a means to
refute them, and thought a sit down would be productive
for both audiences since they come from two completely different perspectives.
Buck lives in Miami and Clay lives in Nashville, but
they'd be willing to travel to New York. Thank you
(34:34):
for the consideration. This went out in July. Now I'm
going to pull Ali up in a sec. But first,
here is Joy Behar saying, you know, the truth of
the matter is Republicans won't come on the show.
Speaker 3 (34:47):
They're afraid to listen.
Speaker 8 (34:49):
I think that we should have more Republicans on the show,
but they don't want to come on.
Speaker 9 (34:53):
They're scan of us.
Speaker 8 (34:54):
It's like like Marjorie's Hyla Green says that she finds
the Republican men afraid of powerful women. Well, that's maybe
true of all of political persuasions. But if they would
come on this show and they can explain to us
what they're trying to do to this can.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
We Okay, well, I don't think Bucket Eye are afraid
of powerful women.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Challenge accepted, Chile accepted.
Speaker 2 (35:17):
All right, Producer, Ali, you have now written another email
to the View reiterating.
Speaker 3 (35:22):
You can come up.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
But the email that I read you sent in July
was their response to that email from the View.
Speaker 10 (35:29):
Yes, actually there was a quick response, very quick, saying
they only had two more episodes to shoot, so their
schedule was full and they wouldn't be back until the fall,
at which point I said, Okay, I'll follow up in
the fall. And I followed up today and I have
I'm waiting to hear back.
Speaker 2 (35:47):
And you said, I tell you this is important. We're
happy to do it.
Speaker 3 (35:51):
This is important.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
The View, according to groc, has frequently had two guests
on simultaneously, two guests including politicians, authors, actors, and even
musical guests who are there as a duo. So I
just want to be clear, there is no reason why
they could not have a Clay and buckethon on the
(36:14):
View based on the established parameters they have for guests
in the past, because I don't I don't want them
throwing that at us either. We can because if what
they'll try to do. If it's just one of us,
they're going to try to overtalk and just have too
many voices shouting at you at the same time.
Speaker 10 (36:30):
Just make sure you bring that third hat. Oh.
Speaker 2 (36:33):
I would bring a hat for Alyssa Farr Griffin and
I would hand it to her and I would say, hey,
since Trump's brought back to hostages, here is a red
Maga hat. You can put that on for this entire
segment to honor President Trump's great job in bringing back
the hostages.
Speaker 1 (36:46):
I'm gonna tell you something. I think that she actually
would be willing to wear the hat. I think that
she worries that if she wore that hat it would
trigger other members of the table too much, like they
would even though she said this was the marker that
she laid out there, I think she realizes that the
rest of the table would throw a fit about it.
Speaker 3 (37:06):
Would they have?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
They have no sense of humor about it at all.
By the way, Joy Behar has a writing team. They
write all of her jokes. She's actually not that funny.
She's not coming up with this stuff on the fly
if you watch her closely. Now I'm throwing down the
gomble a little bit you watch her closely, she's trying
to find ways to get in lines that have been
written by her writers.
Speaker 3 (37:26):
I will give this doesn't happen very often.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
She does look great for her age, though, to be fair, Joy,
you look great. I'm just saying.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Also, she is probably not aware of most of the guests,
so she may think to herself when she says Republicans
are afraid to go on the show, because, to be fair,
people pitch themselves.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
On this show all the time.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
I mean, producer Ali, you can say, like if people
out there like, is this a common thing? I mean,
we get pitches, hundreds of pitches a year, maybe thousands,
dozens a day of people who are saying, hey, we'd
like to come on as a guest. So and most
of them we never Bucket, neither Buck nor I are
going and saying we can't have this person on. So
I don't necessarily know that Joy is aware of the
(38:12):
number of people who are reaching out that would be
willing to come on. So when she's saying that, she
may actually believe Buck that she's being truthful. She is not, however,
and we just you know, we shared the so called
receipts of the invitation that we put out there. Hey,
we're happy to come on. And by the way, you know,
we would have Alyssa on this show, you know, if
(38:34):
they wanted to put a view member on this show
to promote their show. I mean, we're not running and
hiding from any of that. Speaking of running and hiding, though, Buck,
you were talking about this a little bit earlier. And
we've got a couple of guests, by the way, coming
in the third hour, our buddy Ryan Gardusky. We're going
to talk about the absolute latest on Virginia, New York City,
(38:56):
and New Jersey as those elections get closer. Steve Hilton
out in California to talk about the Katie Porter insanity
and the potential run there. I wanted to play this
because this is one of the people that is running
to be a Democrat nominee for California when Gavin Newsom
is forced to turn limit himself out and she went
(39:18):
on Piers Morgan and the LA is going to have
the Olympics in twenty twenty eight. The Summer Olympics are
taking place in Los Angeles. Should be awesome, It be
a lot of fun to watch. But Piers Morgan asked
this Democrat California governor's candidate, Hey, what do you think
about the idea of trans women, that is, men pretending
(39:42):
to be women being able to compete in the Olympics?
And he followed up, and I just want to play
a cut from this because these people have lost their
minds and they're totally trapped on this trans argument.
Speaker 9 (39:54):
Listen, this seems to me like you would like to
remove any any sexual differentation between the Olympic sports. I
let them all compete, it would be gender neutral with
it if you were governor.
Speaker 11 (40:06):
Well, again, I want to be sure that everyone has
the ability to compete.
Speaker 9 (40:11):
Would you have a gender neutral Olympics where you would
have not you wouldn't have male and female sport, then
you just have one one that everyone could join in.
Speaker 11 (40:19):
Well, I don't think we're going to get that tomorrow,
but I think it's a conversation worth having.
Speaker 9 (40:23):
You think it's a conversation worth having where you have
gender neutral Olympics.
Speaker 11 (40:27):
Because we need to understand what the attributes are of
athletes across the spectrum.
Speaker 9 (40:34):
You've already said that you understand the reason they separate
the sexes is that men have a physical advantage over women.
Speaker 2 (40:42):
He also did, maybe we can grab this because I
think it really kind of brings it home. He says, wait,
you think that a woman should run against Usain Bolt
in the one hundred meters, the fastest man in the
history of the world, and you think that's going to
be a fair competition, And basically she says yes, she
doesn't know, maybe them and would win. These people are crazy, buck,
(41:03):
and I don't know how they get off of this
crazy train without.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
Having the Supreme Court. I think your argument that you've
already hit.
Speaker 3 (41:14):
That's what it is.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
It's well, by the way, there is there are a
few things that are making their way toward the Supreme
Court right now. In fact, there is litigation out of
I think it's in Colorado. The case is little the Hetcocks,
maybe heacocks, but it's a transgender student who wanted to
(41:37):
be on the girls cross country team and this and
brought suit back in twenty twenty. Really at the peak
of this, Yeah, I wanted to join. Oh yeah, this
is no it's Idaho that I said Colorado, sorry, Idaho, Idaho,
Boise State. So it's college, it's college level and wanted
to be on the women's college cross country team sued, sued,
(41:59):
and a Ninth Circuit judge ended up getting involved in
this and now it's law. Without getting too deep into
the weeds on this, the situation is that the original
plaintiff is trying to try to withdraw his case as
(42:19):
a her try to withdraw the case Clay because they
don't want the Supreme Court to actually take this up.
And a federal judge just today, Judge Nie who is
a Trump appointee, said, oh, no, you're not doing this,
you know, hide the football situation here. You wanted to
bring a federal lawsuit about you know, discrimination, saying that
(42:41):
you're actually to be treated as a woman. We're taking
We're taking this thing on, like let's go. And now
it looks like the Supreme Court is eventually going to
be taking this up, and I think they're going to
have to weigh in on no men or men and
women are women and we're allowed to make different decisions
about the two in law as a matter of law.
Speaker 2 (43:00):
There is a going to give them credit here, great
long form piece in the New York Times recently looking
at the Scurmetti case. Jonathan Scrimetti is the Attorney General
of the state of Tennessee. The Supreme Court came out
and said that the state can restrict this so called
gender affirming care for miners, that there is a state interest,
(43:23):
and the trans community is in a panic because they
thought that they were going to be able to win
these cases, basically that the trans treatments and all this
stuff on miners is actually okay, and instead they're losing.
And what you just pointed out as an important point,
they're now trying to avoid giving the Supreme Court an
opportunity to strike down a lot of the state laws.
(43:47):
And so they're trying to pull back now because they're like, oh,
my goodness, the same logic of Scurmetti is certainly going
to apply in sports.
Speaker 3 (43:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (43:55):
The transactivists don't want their day in court all of
a sudden, Yes, isn't that so interesting to see? They
want to rely and this goes into the Weeds book.
They want to rely on like the Ninth Circuit and
some of the liberal circuit courts without having to get
a nationwide ruling, so that in California and Oregon and Washington,
the crazy arguments can prevail instead of the Supreme Court
(44:18):
slapping it down. So I'm very familiar with this tactic,
Clay because as a longtime New York City and New
York State resident, particularly on the New York City side,
this is the game they used to play all the time.
They would they did flatly unconstitutional things when it came
to firearms, and then the moment somebody brought legislation, they
would change it. And then they would do something else
flatly on conf you know, five hundred dollars fee to
(44:42):
be a con to be not a concealed carrier, to
be a premise permit holder. They would just use the
system in bad faith to do things that they knew
were unconstitutional, and instead of actually find and allowing the
system to then say no, you're disrespecting the rights, the
two way rights of people in New York City, they
would pull and then it's moot. And they would argue
it's moot. That's what this transathlete in Idaho is trying
(45:06):
to do. And this uh, thank Heavens's Trump appoint has
said no, no, no, you brought it. Now we're gonna
finish it. We're gonna do We're gonna see where this
actually goes. Yeah, and it's not going to go a
good place for all these people. But I mean, this
woman is trying to become the Democrat nominee for California,
and her argument is, we don't really know whether men
are faster than women or not. To put this into
(45:28):
context for you, buck, every single state high school champion
in Texas last year for track and field, every single
boy these are you know, eighteen and younger boys, fifteen
to eighteen year old boys. Every single Texas state champion
ran faster speeds than the fastest women in the history
of the Olympics. So we're not even talking about I
(45:49):
think Florence Griffith's Joiner Flow Joe is still the fastest
woman of all time. Every Texas high school state champion
at all district levels smoked flow Joe. So we're not
even talking about men versus women on the best men
in the world. We're talking about the state of Texas
by itself. Every boy state champion is faster than the
(46:10):
fastest woman that's ever existed in the history of the world.
Switch your cell phone service from AT and T, Verizon
or T Mobile to Pure Talk. You'll start saving money
immediately without sacrificing quality. Look, we've always appreciated what pure
Talk stands for here, both in terms of their values
and also the value they provide to you by giving
you great service at the lowest possible price, and also
(46:33):
standing with free speech. Switch your cell phone service to
pure Talk support a business that appreciates free speech. You're also,
of course going to get grete five G nationwide coverage
on a reliable, secure network, and the price of Pure
Talk service just the best you're gonna find, and it's
why you should change from AT and T, T Mobile
or Verizon. Monthly plans start at just twenty five bucks
(46:54):
a month. Dial pound two fifty say Clay and Buck
to switch to our wireless company, pure Talk right now.
You'll save it additional fifty percent off your first month.
Dial pound two five zero, say Clay and Buck to
switch to Puretalk.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
Do it today.
Speaker 12 (47:08):
News and politics, but also a little comic relief.
Speaker 5 (47:12):
Clay Travis at Buck Sexton. Find them on the free
iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts. People ask
us all the time how we can save the next generation.
Speaker 1 (47:23):
We've got our show and the info is an antidote.
But we also have a couple books coming out.
Speaker 2 (47:27):
Clay, that's right, and you can pre order both of
them right now and be book nerds just like us.
Speaker 1 (47:33):
You'll laugh, you'll nod, and you'll get smarter too.
Speaker 2 (47:36):
Mine's called balls, how Trump young men in sports saved America.
Speaker 1 (47:39):
And mine is manufacturing delusion, how the Left uses brainwashing,
indoctrination and propaganda against you.
Speaker 2 (47:46):
Both are great reads. One might even say they would
make fabulous gifts.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Indeed, so do us a solid and pre order yours
on Amazon today. All right, welcome back in here too,
Clay and Buck. We will be chatting, I believe, shortly
with Steve Hilton about California. You know what, Actually I
want to pull this from yesterday, guys, grab yesterday because
I feel.
Speaker 13 (48:07):
Like Gavin Newsom is out there working on his stump speech.
He's getting a little breathier, he's button in that shirt
a little lower, just slicking back that hair just a little tighter,
and he's ready to look at all the folks of
America and just tell them that.
Speaker 3 (48:24):
Damn, he's so handsome.
Speaker 10 (48:26):
You know.
Speaker 1 (48:26):
I mean, I really think that Gavin Newsom is thinking
that it's it's his nomination to lose at this point
of the Democrat side. I don't think that he is
silly or foolish in that assessment. I think we've both
said that we think it'll be Gavin Newsom with AOC
as the VP.
Speaker 3 (48:44):
If we nail that.
Speaker 1 (48:45):
One so far in advance, that'd be a pretty impressive call.
But we're riding on the same train on that one.
I think that's probably what It's always tough to pick
these things so far and out, so far in advance.
Whoever would have thought, for example, that Joe Biden would
even be the nominee in twenty I truly clay. I
went on a whole rant on radio when the Democrat
primary was happening, and I just said, we know it
(49:07):
can't be Biden. The guy's got dementia. Well, it turns
out people didn't care that much.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
Not only that, you hit on something that I think
is one reason it's hard to predict the outcome, and
it didn't get a lot of attention because he ended
up not being challenged in a significant way for the nomination.
Biden flipped the order of the states when it came
to the Democrat primary contest so that South Carolina was
(49:33):
first because he knew James Clyburn and black voters were
going to have his back. And that would forestall any
significant challenge against him. Because Biden never did well in
Iowa or New Hampshire. What is going to be the
first state going forward. I think that is a real
part of trying to horse race and handicap the likelihood
(49:54):
of what is going on. And I think it's one
reason why it's challenging to have a exact reason here.
We've got Steve Hilton, by the way, I think now, Steve,
I don't know if you've seen the clip yet of
the crazy Democrat nominee, one of the people running for it,
saying that she doesn't know whether a woman could beat
(50:15):
Usain Bolt in one hundred meters. But I thought it
was a perfect distillation of where the California Democrat primary is.
Speaker 3 (50:23):
They're just bonkers.
Speaker 7 (50:26):
I'm so excited to talk to you about this today
because I was actually on that interview with Piers Morgan
was following her up, and originally I think they set
it up as a debate, and she didn't want to
do a debate, so I was just patiently waiting and
as she was speaking, I saw myself on the little
video green room. Wait. My jaw was dropping, and I
(50:47):
kept thinking she's not going to say that, like, surely
she No way, she's going to say gender neutral Olympics.
No way, she's going to say track and field. When
peers asked her, what's sports biological men could compete with,
and every time you thought, no way, she's not going
to say something so crazy, she said it. It's just incredible.
(51:10):
But exactly as you say, this is where they're at.
These California Democrats insane, the far left still in control.
People are sick of it here and that's why I'm
running for governor because we've got to have chage. We
can't go on like this with these lunatics in charge
of our beautiful state.
Speaker 1 (51:26):
What do you say, Steve, that's buck thanks for being
here with us. To whether it's Gavinussum or other Democrats
out there, they really seem to have taken this point
of view that California is actually doing great and that
it's awesome, and that they're kicking ass and their governance
is amazing. Like they're not trying to excuse or explain
(51:46):
any of the shortcomings. They just say that it's been fabulous.
I mean, Gavin Newsom instead of even feeling like he
has to defend anything he just is basically saying California
is number one in all these different things and leaves
it at that.
Speaker 7 (52:02):
Yeah, well, listen, this is what ties together the Betty
Ye interview, the other car crash interview we saw with
Katie Porter and Gavin Newsom, all of them. This is
what you get. This is the attitude you get after
fifteen years of one party rule. This total arrogance, entitlement,
contempt for the truth, for the reality of people's lives.
(52:22):
And they just think they can get away with it
because for so long they've had appliant media in California.
They're not used to being asked these kinds of questions,
and they're not used to being held accountable by a
strong opposition party. And that's why I'm really confident when
they face a candidate like me who's just not going
to let them get away with it, it's going to
(52:42):
be a very different story next year in the election.
Just specifically on the Gavin Newsome bs that he spews
about all of this, I mean, his favorite statistic, he's
got to have to slightly adjust it a little bit.
He's been saying for a while. Oh, it's everything's great,
because we have the fourth largest economy in the world.
That was true, by the way, until yesterday we dropped
(53:02):
down to fifth. But still that's good. But beneath that,
you've got a story of California as a state now
where the rich get richer and the people who own
these giant AI and tech companies are doing well. That's
the reason we have such a big economy. But at
the same time, we have the highest unemployment rate in
all of America, the worst in all fifty six. Same
(53:23):
with poverty. We have the highest poverty rate. And if
you look carefully at what he says, he's always talking
about the size of things. You know, we're the biggest
for this, and we're the largest for that. But actually
that's going to be true for almost anything because we're
the biggest state with the largest population. But if you
talk about the actual performance on any metric, we are
not just doing badly. We're doing the worst of all
(53:45):
fifty states, the worst reading scores for kids in public schools,
the worst, the highest taxes, the highest cost for housing, gas, electricity,
water ensure, everything, the worst business climate ten years in
a row. There's literally nothing they can point to is
a success. And so they've got to do these kind
of ridiculous, statistical nonsense. But everyone can see, everyone can
(54:07):
steal it. That's why you've got a large majority now
in California. You say it's time for change, and that's
why I'm confident I'm going to win next year.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
We're talking to Steve Hilton. I want to go to
the arson that we found out actually cause the LA fires.
We hear from a lot of people out there. Adam
Carolla was on with us recently. He has a house
in one of the communities that was drastically impacted. I
see these stories and I hear from people they still
(54:34):
can't get rebuilt. What are you seeing and hearing from
the people of Los Angeles responding to that wildfire crisis.
A lot of the media, the drive by media, as
Rush called them, have left and they're not covering the
failure of LA to be rebuilt. What do you see
and hear on the ground there in the aftermath of those.
Speaker 7 (54:54):
Fires, Well, it's a total disaster. That is a completely
perfect illustration of how they're running the state. So you
look at the just on the numbers. I looked them
up the other.
Speaker 3 (55:05):
Day just to get the latest.
Speaker 7 (55:07):
The Malibu is the most egregious in Malibu, six hundred
homes destroyed. The total number of permits issued for rebuilding
two literally two. If you look across the various burned
neighborhood after Dina Pacific Palisades, it's under ten percent. And
the reason is that they are. It's this terrible combination
(55:29):
which is what's destroying California, of far left ideology and
incompetent governance and both of those two things working together.
So the ideology comes in when they are now pushing
this idea that the single family home, that the foundation
of the California dream is some evil thing that needs
(55:51):
to be fought back and everyone needs to be living
in apartments with no parking and taking transit in the
name of climate change. I mean, do they live like that?
The people who push this newsom Does he live in
an apartment? Does Nancy Pelosi get her Francisco on transit?
Of course not. It's total elitism, and that's the ideology.
So they want people to move out so they can
(56:14):
build apartments in line with their ideology of what they
call density. But the second point is just the sharing competence,
where months ago said she is streamlining permitting and whatever.
None of that's happened. And I talk to people who
literally they go to the building department every day. There's
a different person, there's a different rule. Nothing's been streamlined,
(56:36):
nothing's been simplified. They can't get insurance. The insurance people say, well,
we can't give you insurance. Do you get a permit.
The permit people say, you can't get a permit until
you get the insurance. It's just a nightmare for people.
No one's gripping it. No one's in charge, whether that's
Newsome or Carabath locally or Newsom at.
Speaker 3 (56:53):
The state level.
Speaker 7 (56:54):
And it's just a perfect illustration of everything that's gone
wrong in California.
Speaker 1 (56:58):
Well, I have to tell you, Steve, there's somebody out
there with windswept hair and a shirt button down to
his navel who disagrees with you. We want to let
you react. Here is Gavin Newsom, his version of California.
You play thirty three.
Speaker 14 (57:14):
I think there's a California arrangement syndrome, and he's part
of it. I mean, I think people are obsessed with
focusing on what's wrong with the state and not what's
right with the state. I mean, you have more scientists engineers,
more researchers, more Nobel laureates in the state than any
other state in the nation. We're the fourth largest economy
in the world four point one trillion dollars, with the
finest system of higher education that addresses the issue of
equity better than any other public education system in the world.
(57:37):
We dominate in every category, name it with the biggest
manufacturing state, the biggest farming state, in every key category.
The quality of life here consistently, and you look at
the top ten cities in the United States of America,
consistently the top five are identified in the state of California.
Speaker 1 (57:54):
All Right, so obviously preparing I know, I'm going to
give you the floor. He's preparing his stuff speech there.
And I also feel like a lot of this is well,
you're also by far the biggest state, Gavin, But go ahead, Steve.
Speaker 7 (58:07):
Oh. I wish I was able to have a debate
with him. I wish he was running again so I
could just go for it. First of all, it's exactly
what I said. He just says, were the biggest, the largest. Yes,
we have the largest egg industry, but it's being crushed
by their policies. By Gavin Newsom's policies. We should be
expanding our farming industry. Instead, it's being destroyed because he
(58:29):
refuses to give them water because of their climate agenda,
their labor regulations makes it more and more expensive. Look
at manufacturing, Yes, which is the largest because we're the
largest pretty much in everything, because we're the biggest state
with the largest population. What's actually happening with manufacturing. You
take Nvidia, the world's most valuable company, just announced with
President Trump a few months ago a half trillion dollars
(58:51):
of investment in America. None of it in California. It's
in Texas, it's in Arizona, because those are places where
you can actually build things without years of bureaucratic delay
in massive taxes. Everything he says is a lie because
it doesn't reflect the truth about what it's like here,
which is that we are, on every metric that matters,
(59:13):
the worst performing state in America, and that's the direct
result of his policies and his incompetence.
Speaker 2 (59:21):
You mentioned Katie Porter. We played the audio it went Megavirals.
She was at the time the favorite to be the
nominee for California Democrats next year. What was your thought
when you saw it, did it surprise you? What does
it say about Katie Porter and California Democrats?
Speaker 7 (59:39):
It did a little bit, because I've met her a
few times. Most of the polls show that, I mean,
we have this top two system in California where you
don't have a Republican and a Democrat primary. Everyone's on
the same ballot and the top two go through to
the general election. And the last few months, I mean
the polls, it's pretty early. There's a large number of
don't know, so I'm not too kind of focused on
(01:00:00):
on this, but they've pretty consistently showed that the top
two is Katie Porter and me and so in once
I've been paying attention to her. We see each other
every now and again at these standardate forums, not a
real debate, but you know, she's the ineptness on display there.
The fact that you just couldn't answer a basic question
and completely lost it was really surprising to me. But again,
(01:00:23):
what's interesting is that the machine doesn't care. The Democrat machine,
this arrogant, entitled a bunch of people who think that
they've got they've got the right to rule forever in California.
How dare you ask me questions, how dare anyone think
that they're going to interrupt our control of this state?
Right back in behind her, you had unions coming out
(01:00:44):
with statements saying, yes, we're we're for Katie Porter. Still
we need we don't want someone polite, we need someone
who's going to fight all this nonsense. The real interesting question, though,
is that the Democrat machine in California overall, it's still
run by Nancy Pelosi, who can't stand Katie Porter. And
so even before this meltdown, the rumor mill here was
(01:01:07):
saying that they are looking for another candidate because they
don't want Katie Porter, because they don't control her actually,
and so right now the speculation is that they are
trying to recruit Alex Padia. He's the US senator who
made a fool of himself barging into Christine Nomes press conference.
He's the guy that they want, and I'd say bring
(01:01:27):
it on, because he's just another completely a complete mediocrity,
another machine politician who'll just spout the party line controlled
by the unions and cannot possibly represent the change that
we need in California.
Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Steve Hilton, If people like what they're hearing here, how
can they find out, how can they get involved?
Speaker 7 (01:01:49):
Thank you, man, I appreciate that. Steve hiltonfogovernor dot com
f R. Look, we got to it's not just a
California wherever you're listening in the country. Right back to
where we started with the trans athletes and biological men
and girl sports that all started here in California. They
passed that law on twenty thirteen. As governor, I would
overturn it. But it's a good example of how so
(01:02:12):
many of the crazy far left insanity that's been inflicted
on the rest of the country, it starts in California.
So help me beat it here. Steve hiltonfogovernor dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:02:24):
Good stuff, Steve, we'll talk to you again. Keep up
the good fights. We appreciate you.
Speaker 7 (01:02:29):
Fantastic see thing cheers.
Speaker 3 (01:02:30):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (01:02:31):
All right, you're gonna hear a lot of great things
about one of our new sponsors, Cozy Earth. But guess
what you don't have to hear from me or Buck.
Just trust us on this. Carrie and Laura, our respective wives,
they absolutely love these products. Cozy Earth most comfortable, luxurious
soft sheets you'll ever sleep on. And if you don't
(01:02:52):
know if that's going to be true for you. You
get one hundred days to try these sheets out, no risk,
one hundred days, and then a ten year warranty on.
Speaker 3 (01:03:01):
Top of it.
Speaker 2 (01:03:02):
What do you have to lose? Trust us on this
bamboo sheets transform your sleep temperature, regulating, moisture wicking. You
are going to love them. We got them in the
Travis household. They got him in the Sexton household. We
give trust them to sleep on our beds. You'll love
them too. Go to cozyearth dot com code Clay and
(01:03:22):
you get twenty percent off everything. That's cozyearth dot com.
Go check out all the products there. Use my name
Clay for twenty percent off. Let them know that you
found and heard about Cozy Earth at Clay and Buck.
That's Cozy Cozycozy Earth dot com. Code Clay for twenty
percent off everything.
Speaker 12 (01:03:44):
Keep up with the biggest political comeback in world history
on the Team forty seven podcast. Clay and Buck highlight
Trump free plays from the week Sundays at noon Eastern.
Speaker 5 (01:03:54):
Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get
your podcasts
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.
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com