Daily Review with Clay and Buck - Nov 13 2025

Open for Business!

President Donald Trump officially signed legislation reopening the federal government after a 43-day shutdown. The segment opens with audio from Trump at the Resolute Desk, where he criticizes Democrats for what he calls an attempted “extortion” of American taxpayers to fund benefits for illegal immigrants. Clay and Buck analyze the political fallout, questioning whether Democrats will repeat shutdown tactics in 2026 as part of their midterm election strategy.  The conversation transitions into a broader discussion on Senate filibuster reform, with Clay advocating for procedural changes to prevent future shutdowns driven by minority party obstruction. Buck adds historical context, referencing past filibuster modifications and the potential consequences of further rule changes. 

Uncle Bill: All for Nothing

A wide-ranging interview with bestselling author and media veteran Bill O’Reilly. Clay and Buck do a deep dive into the political fallout from the recent government shutdown, which O’Reilly attributes to far-left consultants steering the Democratic Party into a failed strategy aimed at making pandemic-era Obamacare spending permanent. He argues that the shutdown hurt millions of Americans and yielded no real gains for Democrats, who now risk being branded as the “mean party” heading into the 2026 midterms. The hosts and O’Reilly also discuss the resurfacing of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, which they believe was used as a distraction from Democratic missteps.

The conversation shifts to the 2028 presidential race, where Clay and Buck predict Gavin Newsom and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as the likely Democratic ticket. O’Reilly disagrees, citing Newsom’s poor record in California, including mass outmigration and corruption scandals, and suggests Maryland Governor Wes Moore as a more viable alternative. The trio also debate the dangers of artificial intelligence in politics and media, highlighting the rise of deepfake videos and AI-generated misinformation. O’Reilly references a false image involving President Donald Trump that was cited by Rep. Melanie Stansberry, warning that AI will make it increasingly difficult to distinguish truth from fiction. The hosts call for urgent reform of defamation and libel laws to protect public figures and citizens from malicious AI content.

What H-1B Visas Are Supposed To Be

The H-1B visa program triggers a contentious exchange between Laura Ingraham and President Trump. Trump defends the need for foreign talent in specialized industries, while Ingraham argues that American workers should be prioritized. Buck provides data indicating that over 750,000 H-1B visa holders are currently working in the U.S., with India accounting for 75% of recent recipients. Clay and Buck debate whether the program is being abused by corporations to undercut American wages and bypass domestic hiring.

Buck clarifies that Trump’s comments about lacking domestic talent were aimed at highly specialized roles, such as semiconductor manufacturing, where foreign expertise is temporarily needed. Multiple callers share firsthand experiences with H-1B hires, sparking a robust debate. A computer programmer from California claims foreign workers were paid less despite equal performance. A North Carolina business owner defends the program, citing higher productivity among foreign hires. An engineering manager warns of wage suppression and offshoring trends, while another caller shares how his son’s defense contractor job was outsourced to foreign engineers despite national security concerns.

Female Mamdani?

Clay and Buck dive into some breaking news, cultural commentary, and audience-driven debate, beginning with reports of a violent incident involving Alina Habba, a U.S. attorney in New Jersey, whose office was attacked by a bat-wielding suspect. Clay and Buck highlight the growing concern over left-wing violence and express relief that Habba is unharmed. They also cover Senator John Fetterman’s hospitalization following a fall caused by a ventricular fibrillation episode, noting his humorous response and drawing parallels to historical political wit.

The hour transitions into a critique of Michelle Obama’s recent comments on race and beauty, with Clay and Buck arguing that identity politics are eroding public discourse. They dissect her career trajectory, including her high-paying diversity role at the University of Chicago Medical Center, and question the merit of such positions. This leads into a broader discussion about the Democratic Party’s push for government-run grocery stores, citing examples from Seattle and New York City. Clay and Buck mock the idea as reminiscent of failed socialist models like Cuba, and reference studies—including one f

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Oh, welcome in appreciate all of you as we roll
through the Thursday edition of the program. Rejoice, the government
is back open. Last night, President Trump at ten twenty
four pm Eastern officially signed the bill, put on his
desk from the House, and we are now back up

(00:21):
and running. And let's go ahead and take you into
that evening event. If if you missed it, as many
of you may have already been in bed, or you
may not have been paying attention. Here is what Trump
said last night, sitting at the Resolute desk in the
Oval Office as he officially began the process of opening
the government by signing the bill Cut three. I just

(00:46):
want to.

Speaker 2 (00:46):
Tell you the country has never been in better shape.
We went through this short term disaster with the Democrats
because they vote it would be good politically, and it's
an honor now to sign this incredible bill and get
our country working again.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (01:06):
One more thing, Bucky also said, for forty three days,
Democrats had no argument. That argument has not changed. This
is cut four.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
For the past forty three days, Democrats in Congress shut
down the government of the United States and an attempt
to extort American taxpayers for hundreds of billions of dollars
for illegal aliens and people that came into our country
illegally from gangs, from prisons, from mental institutions. They wanted
to pay them one point five trillion dollars, which would

(01:35):
have really hurt our healthcare businesses and our recipients and
levels never seen before. Today, we're sending a clear message
that we will never give into extortion, because that's what
it was they tried to extort. The Democrats tried to
extort our country.

Speaker 1 (01:51):
Okay, So I think the number one question most people have,
including myself, and I'm curious how you would break this
down in terms of the likelihood, is what is going
to come next? Buck? Is I'm glad that we are
now back open. The Democrats gained absolutely nothing. They seem
to have made this choice despite the fact that there
was no benefit to them at all. Why will they

(02:14):
not just do this again, maybe multiple times in twenty
twenty six as we come up on the midterm elections.
That's question one for you, Buck, and I think for
everybody out there too. And the second part here, I
don't understand why we can't modify the filibuster in this
particular fashion where we don't allow the minority party to

(02:37):
shut down the government just over having basically a tantrum.
My concern is, yes, Democrats have recognized after forty three days, hey,
we didn't gain anything. Trump's not gonna bend, but they
may still believe that they gained politically. So my concern
is why would they not do this potentially multiple times

(02:58):
in the upcoming year with the election cycle.

Speaker 4 (03:01):
Well, I think that the midterm is going to be
something of people over use the term referendum. Right, First
of all, what is it? You know, what does a
referendum really mean? A lot of people don't know how.

Speaker 1 (03:13):
Much of a referendum it would it would be.

Speaker 4 (03:15):
But I think the midterms will factor into the assessment
of whether this kind of tactic is effective or not
because a lot of the narrative is going to be
built off of this, Right, There's going to be a
lot of posturing about how we fought, we stood up
to Trump, and I think they'll see this as an
opening to talk about healthcare, the problem Democrats have, and

(03:37):
this is getting really deep into it and Clay, this
feels like something that has been building for a long time,
because again, I started talking about politics for a living
Right around it was the Tea party era, right around
when Obamacare was the thing. Right, Obamacare was the big
fight in this country politically at how it was, how long,

(04:01):
how far back we're going now, we're talking fifteen years.

Speaker 1 (04:04):
And they managed to with the obvious.

Speaker 4 (04:08):
Advantages they had in the media and the whole apparatus
around Obama himself and the worship and everything, they managed
to both roll out the good ease, Oh you can
be on your parents' plan. Oh we're going to expand coverage.
Oh we're gonna make mental health and physical health give
it parody and all this, all these things if people go, oh, well,
that sounds kind of good. With this promise of you're

(04:31):
gonna keep your doctor, it's going to bring down costs,
it's going to make the health care system more efficient, all.

Speaker 1 (04:36):
Of that is a total failure.

Speaker 4 (04:38):
In fact, it's worse than a failure because it went
in the other direction. It made you know, it's one
thing to not achieve your goal, it's another thing to
make it worse. If I was giving somebody, you know,
special diet cookies and they didn't lose weight, that's bad.
If they gained fifty pounds, that's even worse. That's what
the Obama care bill has actually done. And I think
that healthcare is going to be a big part of

(05:01):
what the mid terms because healthcare goes right into affordability.
You're gonna hear that word affordability. I might add, ad nauseum.
You're all gonna get sick of it. We're all gonna
get sick of talking about it. But it matters is this.

Speaker 1 (05:12):
This is the new version of kitchen table economic issues.
So clay about the shutdown, I think it's the beginning
phase of Democrats trying to convince the American people enough
of them that they can regain power. Remember, they're not
trying to gain they're not trying to convince you, me
or this audience. But they're trying to regain power through
convincing enough Americans that they stand against They stand against Trump.

(05:35):
That's point one, no matter what that means, we stand
against Trump, yes, no kings. And point two, we're going
to make your life style more affordable. Somehow, I think
that's gonna be the whole, the whole thing.

Speaker 4 (05:49):
They don't want to say, we're gonna kick open the
borders and let criminals run wild on the streets.

Speaker 1 (05:52):
That was kind of a loser for them in twenty four.
That wasn't a good That wasn't a good take. But
I still think they're gonna do it again. And so
if you're out there and you're saying, what are the
consequences for Democrats doing this? Yes they have an internal
civil war, Yes Chuck Schumer is under siege, but I

(06:13):
don't know that they actually lost anything. And if anything,
I think there's an incentive to try this again, which
is why I would solve this. And I'm saying this
on behalf of Republicans who may be the minority party again.
Almost certainly at some point in the next decade, Republicans
won't have control of the Senate. Why in the world

(06:38):
would we not put in place procedures to stop this
from happening, Because leave aside the temper tantrum aspect of it,
I'm concerned. And I know you talked about this in
air traffic control error that led to the deadliest plane
crash if I remember, was it in Brazil. You were
talking about buck where five hundred people died when planes

(07:02):
when two planes collided. My concern is we created a
situation where that could happen in the United States when
all the air traffic control guys and gals are not
getting paid what they should have gotten paid. They're not
getting their paychecks, and we started to have to restrict
the amount of flow of airplanes all over the country,

(07:23):
and so many of you got caught up in the chaos.
We could have had a real disaster there. That's the
area I would argue of our federal government that is
most important given the consequences of being wrong. In fact,
I know you're a big fan of this show too.
Remember one of the seasons of Breaking Bad actually opens

(07:44):
with an air traffic controller losing track of what's going
on and allowing two planes to collide in the air.
For those of you out there that are also big
Breaking Bad fans, but I don't understand why we have
allowed this process to occur and why we would continue
to allow it to occur. To me, if we modified

(08:05):
the filibuster when it comes to Supreme Court appointments, then
why in the world would we not modify the filibuster
to stop the minority party from effectively throwing a temper
tantrum and shutting down the government like this? That to
me seems like an easy resolution going forward.

Speaker 4 (08:23):
There there was a lot of talk from Trump about
getting rid of the filibuster and.

Speaker 1 (08:29):
Then they're getting rid of the whole philibuster block is
a step too far. But this is to me, would
it makes sense.

Speaker 4 (08:36):
This is what I'm gonna say, is that this is
the halfway measure is well on this one, On this one,
we are going to change the rule now. To be
fair and to be clear, Harry Reid did something of
a halfway measure with the judges too, right.

Speaker 1 (08:51):
It was for federal judges but not for Supreme Court.
And then when we were in the majority, we were like,
you know what, you're gonna play that game. We're gonna
play that game. So there's something of an arms race
that occurs.

Speaker 4 (09:01):
Within the Senate procedural rules that we will be engaging
in here. But if you want Trump to be able
to have a functional government and not just allow Democrats
to throw tantrums like this, then I think that this
then I think it makes a lot of sense to do.
We just have to understand that there will be a cost,

(09:22):
there will be a consequence on the other side at
some point. I do think there's understanding already Clay among
Republicans and among the Trump faithful, among all the Trump
voters out there. Democrats will be back in power at
some point. You know, the triumphalism of the first six months,
because it felt like such a sound and resounding defeat

(09:45):
of Kamala and the forces of evil also known as Democrats,
that has given way a little bit too. Oh wow,
they can still make people like Spamberger win in Virginia.
Kamala was closer than we think, as awful as she was,
And that's what I always like to remind people of.
They almost won with Kamala, and they did win. I know,

(10:07):
the Shenanigans, but they did win with a dementia patient
and Joe Bias. So there's a lot of Democrats out
there everybody, and a very powerful machinery around them. So
we need to be prepared not just for this midterm,
but get ready for what things are going to look
like if and when they take power again.

Speaker 1 (10:22):
All right, you want to set up this conversation. Let's
go ahead, because we talked about it yesterday the H
one B visas and some of you may have strong opinions.
In fact, I'll open up the phone lines on this
eight hundred and two A two two eight A two
for people who have used H one B visas before
business owners management, I would be interested in hearing your experience.

(10:48):
I candidly have not ever as a business owner, been
involved in anything involving these visas. But there was a
significant discussion between more Ingram who is very opposed to these,
and President Trump, who in general has been in favor
of them. And you mentioned yesterday, Buck that this kind

(11:09):
of blew up. It was during Christmas break, if I
remember correctly, the Vike Ramaswami stepped into the H one
B visa discussion on social media and he hasn't even
been that active. Viveke hasn't on social media by and
large since Look, you know, I was.

Speaker 4 (11:28):
I've talked to Vike Vike a little bit in the past.
I was very skeptical of his run because to me,
it felt like it was just for attention in brand building,
and it was successful in that regard. But I liked
a lot of what he said, and I think a
lot of what he said was in earnest. That tweet
was one of the worst self destructive tweets I've ever
seen a Republican politician put out in my life because

(11:51):
it really it really was like a swipe at America
and it felt like it was something he really believed.

Speaker 1 (11:58):
And that is not good.

Speaker 5 (12:00):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (12:00):
And by the way, you know his opponent and the
Democrat opponent in Ohio, what do you think the first
thing that she's attacking him with already on that is,
I think the Aarica doesn't have a culture of excellence.
Where do they have a culture of excellence? Vivic explain
that one to Clay one of the worst tweets I've
ever seen. I mean, not as bad as writing a

(12:22):
memoir about shooting your dog, but but bad.

Speaker 1 (12:25):
Batch We will positive is Vivik appears to be on
track to win Ohio comfortably, which would be important, and
I do think he would be a good governor. But
when we come back, I want to hear I phone
lines are open eight hundred and two two two eight
A two. I'm not wanting your opinion on this if
you haven't interacted or used these I want people out

(12:48):
there in our audience who have used the H one
B visas we're going to dive into this. We'll talk
about it some during the course of this hour. We
also are going to be joined by our friend Bill
O'Reilly at the top of the next hour. Much to discuss,
including Bill O'Reilly. Didn't he say this? He's totally wrong
on this. We'll have to tell him that Gavin Newsom

(13:10):
has no political future in the Democrat Party basically as
a president.

Speaker 4 (13:14):
We may tag team Uncle Bill on this one, Clay,
but just remember he's got old man strength.

Speaker 1 (13:20):
You know that is certainly true. I'm getting to be
an old man. I think I'm starting to have some
old man strength. But what is it about You reach
an age and the grip, the grip strength that you
have is like terrifying. You know, all of you're like
just it's like when people used to say that somebody
was farm strong. It's like you have lived a life
where you if you are physically active, it's carrying around kids,

(13:41):
it's dragging the chairs to the beach. It's just all
of the non gem related muscle musculature. It adds up
to what it's like. I don't think Uncle Bill would
be be great at deadlifting, but I think he could
probably crack a billiard ball in his left hand, like
no problem. So we'll talk about this. But H one

(14:02):
B one you guys loading lines. I can already see
poor producer Greg. I only want people who have experienced it,
not your opinion on this, I want to hear from
people that have actually used these.

Speaker 4 (14:15):
Cell Phone service is an area where you can save money.
In these days with the price of things, we all
want to be saving money. Switch to pure Talk and
get unlimited talk, text, and plenty of data on a
super fast five G network for just twenty five dollars
a month. That's about fifty dollars a month or more
in immediate savings. Pure Talk service uses the same towers
as one of the bigger companies. The reason they can
offer a more competitive price is because they don't have

(14:37):
retail stores that increase overhead. They also don't have big
stadium sponsorships and throw away money on all kinds of
marketing that doesn't really do anything. But when you work
with Puretalk, you're getting the best and you're relying on
a twenty four to seven all US based customer service team.
They'll help you switch your cell phone service over in
about ten minutes. Just dial pound two fifty, say Clay
and Buck. When you do, you'll save fifty percent off

(14:58):
your first month. Find savings with your wireless bill. Dial
pound two five zero. Say our name's Clay and Buck.
It'll connect you to Pure Talks US based customer service team.
Dial pound two five zero say Clay and Buck to
get hooked up with Puretalk.

Speaker 1 (15:13):
Making America great again.

Speaker 6 (15:14):
Isn't just one man, It's many The team forty seven
podcasts Sunday's at noon Eastern in the Clay.

Speaker 1 (15:21):
And Buck podcast feed.

Speaker 6 (15:23):
Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get
your podcasts.

Speaker 1 (15:27):
All right, second hour of Play and Buck kicks off
right now. We've got Bill O'Reilly with us mega bestselling
author commentator. You all know where to go get his stuff.
Billarilly dot com latest book, Confronting Evil Assessing the worst
of the Worst. I'm sure Bill, there's a whole chapter

(15:48):
on people who chew with their mouths open, the worst
of the worst. Thank you so much for being here
with us. Appreciate that.

Speaker 3 (15:55):
Listen, guys, I always like talking to you. Thanks trapping
me in.

Speaker 4 (16:00):
Let's get into the shutdown right away, shall we. What
the heck was this all about? I mean, give us,
give us your census to what the Democrats think they
got out of this and what they really got out
of this and how they're going to go forward now
that a lot of people, I think saw this not
the way that they had intended.

Speaker 3 (16:21):
Well, they went a partial victory here last week when
New Jersey went Democrat in the gubernatorial race when it
was supposed to be considered very tight. It was not.
People were angry about the government shutdown. Whenever the American
public is angry, they vote against the incumbents. That's all
the way back to John Adams, and it's always been

(16:42):
that way. But the genesis of this is that the
Democratic Party was getting beaten so badly by President Trump
that it had to make a stand somewhere sometime, and
the people who run the party, which are far left
regressive consultants, not senators or congress people, that the party

(17:06):
is being run as an art on the Wall Street
Journal editorial page say, very good article about money people
calling the shots in the Democratic Party. Well, they decided,
look the Republicans' weaknesses. They don't have a healthcare plan
to bring down costs, So we'll insist that the temporary
Obama care spending which rose and was supposed to come

(17:32):
back down after the pandemic subsided, be made permanent. And
the Democrats who fostered that new that Trump and the
Republicans would never agree, never to more spending in the
chaotic program. So they knew that the government was going
to shut down. Now they thought that they might be

(17:56):
able to wait it out, but ecs affected, it was over.
So forty three days, millions of Americans hurt for nothing,
the Democrats got nothing.

Speaker 1 (18:13):
Bill. It seems quite clear that Democrats recognize that they
misplayed this, that they have created a mess for themselves,
and so they decided, Hey, the government's opening back up,
let's distract everybody. Let's throw out this Epstein story all
over again. You've known and and Buck and I talked

(18:34):
about that yesterday and said, hey, this is a clear
attempt to try to avoid attention being placed upon their
h and you know their incompetence. What is the game
plan here? Uh? As we look ahead to twenty twenty six,
aren't we shouldn't we be concerned that they're just going
to shut down the government again and again that seems

(18:56):
to me to be the most likely outcome because they
don't really have any game plan, but they just want
to be reflexively anti Trump. And if that's true. What
would be a remedy? Do you support adjusting the filibuster
here to stop the government from being able to be
shut down until sixty senators, which requires you know, eight
seven eight Democrats actually come to their senses.

Speaker 3 (19:20):
There's a lot of questions in their clay. Okay, So
number one is obvious that Democrats threw this Epstein stuff
out to deflect from the embarrassment of losing the shutdown. Yes,
everybody with an IT over fifty knows that. Okay. Number two, No,
I wouldn't miss around with the filibuster at all, because

(19:42):
then you're going to create a monster that is going
to come back and do some serious damage. You can't
be changing the philibuster rules every two years. Number three.
The way to do this is for a new law,
and the Republicans have and of votes and both the
House and Senate to pass it. It says you get

(20:03):
one shot at an adjustment of spending during a fiscal
year one. So we have a January date coming up
where this might happen all over again. But I sin
just like it won't because Democrats now are becoming the

(20:24):
Party of Mean, the mean party, and well, a lot
of Americans aren't smart enough to understand what's going on
and don't really care. Most do, and so the Democrats
try the same stunt in January. There's gonna be a
lot of anger, and then you're only talking about nine

(20:45):
months until the midterms. So the Democrats gotta be very
careful here. But the way to stop it now is
to pass a new law. You get one shot on
a continuing funding basis or fiscal.

Speaker 4 (20:59):
Year makes sense. I mean, they've got to figure out
something to stream on this. We're talking to Bill O'Reilly
confronting Evil, his latest massive bestseller. Make sure you go
out and get a copy of it. So Bill, we watched,
or at least I watched. I think Clay saw some
of the clips you on on Bill Maher well done,
by the way. That's that's always a it's a good

(21:21):
show when they have somebody who doesn't just agree with
all the communists, the lunacy out in California. So it
was good that you were there. One thing though, where
Clint and I both wanted we wanted to press on
this one a little bit. You said something about how
you don't think Gavin Newsom has a shot at the
national level, for the Democrats expand upon this one because
we were both, uh, we're both thinking that that's Look,

(21:42):
I'll just say it. We both have said we think
it's going to be him at the top of the
ticket AOC at the bottom. It sounds like you disagreed.

Speaker 3 (21:48):
Tell us why, because this record is so abysmal in California,
it'd be very easy for the Republican has just taken
them apart, and you know, the spending it responsibility and
just yesterday his chief established indicted on corruption. I mean
he started to look at this guy Newsom, You're going

(22:09):
to find a thousand things that are going to weigh
him down. And I'm not sure the Democratic partyer wants
to go with a candidate is going to be on
the defensive every single day. So I would say that
a guy like Wes Moore's not as defined. He's the
governor of Maryland, and he's a patriot, you know, a

(22:31):
military guy has done a decent job trying to combat
crime in Baltimore. I'd say he had a much better
chance because he doesn't have that baggage. Now. Newsom is
a good campaigner. He's using Trump tactics, he's you know,
running on a populous thing. But when you get use

(22:52):
a million citizens, that's how many have left California under Newsom,
one million, most of whom were at Floyd. Hey, big taxes,
one million? You got something wrong with your state?

Speaker 1 (23:07):
All right, Well, we agree that he's done an awful job. Unfortunately,
I think Democrats don't care about results, and he's the
most strident in his attention gathering.

Speaker 3 (23:20):
Kamala Harris though, yeah, they care about winning the next election,
the presidential. So if you're gonna put up a Kamala Harris,
all right, and she can't articulate anything, which is what
the case was, has not one solution to any problem nothing,
you're gonna lose. Should we do a big guy from

(23:43):
California whose record is disastrous? You're gonna lose.

Speaker 1 (23:48):
Should we do a stake? Be here? I don't think
the three of us have gone out to dinner together.
It's a little bit unfair because you know, Buck and
I get to pay half and half. But we think
that Newson will be the nominee. You do not. We're
giving you the field, which actually is a great deal
for you. Do we have a handshake? Bet here? Buck

(24:08):
and I say, right now, Gavin Newsom will be the
nominee in twenty eight Are you willing to put a
stake on the line? Would actually be two stakes for
you over this situation.

Speaker 3 (24:21):
Sure, but not because I'm that confident I'll win. Because
it's gonna be a totally different country in three years,
gonna be a totally different country in one year. Yeah,
that's why the election last week, is it going to
have any direct bearing on the midterms next year? The
country is changing with lightning speed lightning.

Speaker 1 (24:41):
How concerned are you about that? By the way, because
Buck and I, I think one of the big stories
that is still not getting enough attention is AI and
how quickly it's going to change everything in this country.
Buck and I have been talking about it a lot
on this program. Are you of the opinion that AI
is going to be transformative in many ways in terms
of jobs, in terms of andative. Yes.

Speaker 3 (25:07):
The AI approach, because it's not quite here yet, is
going to alter the media above all else. Because on
social media, where you can't track these people down, can't
hold them accountable in court a law, you're gonna have
fake videos. Twenty four to seven, twenty four seven, there's

(25:29):
a congresswoman who accused Trump yesterday. Let me get her name.
I got it my notes because I'm going to do
it on the No Spin News tonight. I'm Bill O'Reilly
dot com and I just read it a quote Melanie
Stansbury from New Mexico. Okay, she says, I'd like to

(25:51):
say to the American people, believe your eyes. We have
all seen photographs of Donald Trump with underage girls sitting
on his lap. That's a quote. Yeah, there are no
photographs of Donald Trump with any girl on his lap.
There was an AI photograph that was put out. Yeah,

(26:15):
Now this congress person from New Mexico is lying to
the American people. Now, I don't know whether she is
just stupid or venal or what based upon some AI
fake image that she saw. So multiply that by ten thousand,

(26:38):
because that's what's going to happen and there's no regulation
about it. How about that for a frightening scenario.

Speaker 1 (26:45):
Nos.

Speaker 4 (26:46):
Well, and also, how do you hold someone legally responsiblet's
say for defamation? Bill if they say, well, I saw
this news site shared this photo and it looked real.
Because especially for a public figure, as you know, the
standard has to be malice has to be false, tough
to prove malice if someone's actually looking at a photo
that looks like a real photo, right, I mean, I

(27:07):
just think it complicates matters tremendously.

Speaker 3 (27:09):
It makes it harder. But I think if Trump wanted
to sue Stansbury, he would win because their statements about
Trump are malicious. So you can bring in a whole
bunch of other stuff. And it's the responsibility of any
person trafficking in the public arena to make sure what

(27:30):
they're saying is accurate.

Speaker 1 (27:33):
Well, especially something like that, right, I mean no doubt.

Speaker 4 (27:36):
Yeah, insinuating you know, some kind of sexual you know violation,
you know, violation of laws.

Speaker 1 (27:43):
Well, right, but you're gonna see a lot more of this.

Speaker 3 (27:47):
Okay, an ai image may exist, it's not a picture.
If I were a Trump, I'd go after her, and
if somebody does to me, I'll go after them.

Speaker 1 (27:56):
It's gonna happen to everybody. Bill, I think you're hitting
on something that's so incredibly important, because it's going to
become virtually impossible to distinguish between photos videos, what is
real and fake, And honestly, people are gonna believe whatever
they want to believe, So there is gonna be no

(28:18):
ability to really kind of rain this in.

Speaker 4 (28:20):
This is kind of a silly one, Bill, But you know,
there was that photo after the Louver heist.

Speaker 1 (28:25):
You know, this is much less serious than the Trump thing.
But after the Louver heist, there was the photo of
the detective who looked like he was, you know, dressing
up as like a French detective from you know, like
the nineteen fifties, and everyone was like, is it Ai?
Is it not Ai? It was actually a real photo, apparently,
but the guy had nothing to do with the cops.

(28:45):
And but by the time that photo had made it
around everywhere, nobody knew what was reality. Everyone thought this
guy was the lead detective on the Louver case.

Speaker 3 (28:53):
You know, even it's worse than that. There was a
picture of me waters Beck and at the White House.
But that was a real picture intended to say it
was Ai.

Speaker 5 (29:09):
No.

Speaker 1 (29:09):
This is also gonna be funny, Bill, the things that
are actually real. Do you know what the number what
response is gonna be, it's Ai. Everybody's gonna say that
we're not gonna have any idea what is real and
what is fake, because if something's out there that you
don't like, you just be like, ah, that's totally made up,
that's AI. And if it's really fake, you're gonna say, wait,

(29:30):
that's fake, and none of us are gonna have any
idea what's real and fake.

Speaker 3 (29:33):
Well, that's why Congress has to pass new laws, new defamation,
libel and slander laws, and they have to pass them
pretty quickly to make it easier for people to sue.

Speaker 4 (29:46):
But that that's my that's my point, Bill is people
are gonna people are gonna hide behind a bad faith
Oh I was acting in good faith standard. Unless we
change these laws because of AI, they're gonna say, I'm
just going on what was a re you know, So
you're right, we got to change.

Speaker 1 (30:00):
It's gonna be a huge problem. But to your point, Bucket,
it's going to be hosted websites that are in foreign
countries that are hard to be able to track down
because they're gonna be a lot of these sourcing, right,
and then it's going to go everywhere.

Speaker 3 (30:14):
Yeah yeah, yeah, him to the South Asian people. But
we should have the British system anyway, and the burden
of defamation should be lowered here because the Charlatans are
running wild and it's gonna it's gonna make it even

(30:37):
harder for decent people not to get framed and extorted.
And that's why Congress has got to get involved.

Speaker 1 (30:46):
Look, I think you're thanks for the time, Bill, and
we encourage everybody to go check out Bill's newest book.
I think the Times v. Sullivan's standard, and I've said
this for a long time, is going to have to
be readdressed. That's a nineteen six these early sixties civil
rights era precedent. It doesn't really play in the modern
era very effectively. Bill. We appreciate the time, and we'll

(31:10):
get you on again soon. Thanks hearing me in guys anytime,
let's Bill O'Reilly. Check them out Bill O'Reilly dot com.
He's got a god of great stuff there, in addition
to one of the best selling nonfiction book series of
all time. When we first met up with the team
at the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, they were
understandably focused on helping tens of thousands of Israeli citizens

(31:31):
displaced and affected by the war, but for many years
before then, even today, they're continuing to help members of
the Jewish faith no matter where they are in the world.
That includes Jewish community members in our nation as well
that have been affected by anti Semitic acts. For the IFCJ,
this is an important effort. The IFCJ is on the
front lines providing real help where it's needed most giving

(31:53):
food and shelter to Jewish families that feel under threat.
I have seen this for myself, and I have helped
to do some of the charity work that they have
done in Israel. I was over there about a year
ago in December. Your gift of forty five dollars will
help support their life saving work by helping provide food, shelter,
much more. Support the if Supporting the IFCJ is a

(32:18):
spiritual stand too. Please call eight eight eight four eight
eight if CJ. That's eight eight eight four eight eight
four three two five. You can also go online to
IFCJ dot org. Every dollar helps, don't wait be the difference.
IFCJ dot org.

Speaker 7 (32:37):
Stories of Freedom, Stories of America, inspirational stories that you
unite us all each day. Spend time with Clay and
find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you
get your podcasts.

Speaker 4 (32:51):
Welcome back into Clay and Buck. All right, something here
real quick. I want to get back into HMMB discussion
because we got all lines lit about this. We want
to have Uncle Bill on to give us the general
political rundown of what's happening right now. But we'll get
back to H one b's the big conversation. And I
had mentioned this in the first hour, said, look what
Trump said when he said we don't have.

Speaker 1 (33:11):
The talent here.

Speaker 4 (33:13):
He didn't mean that, I know, Trump, he didn't mean
that in the broadest sense. He meant that for specific things,
which is why we have an H one B program.
There are times when we actually do need to bring
in and by the way, they're very you know there
countries like South Korea, Taiwan, there are specific instances where
there is a skill set. I brought up TSMC, one

(33:34):
of the most valuable companies in the world. We cannot
run that fab without Taiwanese assistance, even the one in Arizona,
like we need them. So that's where your H one
B program is very Now. I think that's a small fraction,
but that's what Scott Bessant, he went, this is cut
twenty eight. He said, look, what Trump was really saying
is what Buck just said to you play it.

Speaker 8 (33:55):
The President's point here is we again, we can't snap
our fingers and say you're gonna learn how to build
ships overnight. We want to bring semiconductor industry back to
the US. There's going to be big facilities in Arizona.
So I think the president's vision here is to bring
in overseas workers where these jobs went to have skills,

(34:16):
who have the skills three five, seven years to train
the US workers, then they can go home the US
workers fully takeover.

Speaker 1 (34:25):
So that's what you do.

Speaker 3 (34:27):
You understand the concern that people have, Hey, an American
can have that job, why you.

Speaker 9 (34:31):
Give it to it can have that job because specific skills,
Because we haven't built ships in the US for years,
we haven't built semiconductors. So that this idea of overseas
partners coming in teaching American workers then returning home, that's
a home run.

Speaker 4 (34:49):
It just has to be what he's talking about. It's
so funny because Okay, that makes sense. Yeah, that's what
the H one B program is supposed to be. It's
not supposed to be low level coding where you get
to pay someone Clay from India thirty percent less than
you'd pay an American that you could find to do
the job.

Speaker 1 (35:07):
Not only pay them less, basically have them handcuffed, because
their ability to stay in the country is entirely reliant
on them being productive workers for you.

Speaker 4 (35:17):
This is why people start to say it's a little
bit like a modern indentured servitude.

Speaker 1 (35:21):
Exactly what it is.

Speaker 4 (35:22):
And then they said, well, then why would they willing
to do it? Well, one, them make a lot money,
more money here than they will in India, for example.
And two, as I said, there's the whole incentive of well,
I get to bring my family here, I get to
skip the overall immigration line. I get to then apply
in America to try to stay with my get a
green card. There's a whole thing here, all right, we
got so we got back and forth on this one.

(35:44):
So we're going to try to move quickly through the
various opinions here. Jerrolyn in Southern California a computer programmer,
what do you think?

Speaker 10 (35:53):
Jerrolin, Hey, nice to talk to you again, claim back,
I am a computer programmer, and you all just kind
of covered the points that I made to producer Greg.
I used to work for a company that was multinational
and it was kind of a it passed the initial
startup dase but it was a pretty young company and
they were still trying to trade on their startup culture,

(36:15):
and a lot of the programmers I worked with were
H ONEB visa holders from India, and I think I
couldn't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that they and
we never discussed it, because that's tachy in spite of
what kids these days think. I've noticed it's the trend
among millennials and generations you to discuss your salary. Don't
do that, kids, it's bad. Anyway, we never talked about it,

(36:38):
but I'm pretty sure all of those programmers from India
were making a lot less than the rest of us were,
and they were very good at their jobs, but not
necessarily better than the rest of us.

Speaker 11 (36:47):
Who were.

Speaker 1 (36:49):
Sorry to cut you off, Jerlyn, but you feel like
in your experience that they could have found American workers
who could have done the jobs that these H one
B workers were being hired to do.

Speaker 10 (37:01):
Yes, I think they could have, and I think they
would have had to pay them more. And I think
that my Indian coworkers were happy to accept less money
because they got to stay in America. I think we're
just making are exactly correct.

Speaker 1 (37:14):
Thank you for the call. I mean, this is fantastic.
By the way, I wanted you guys who had experience.
I appreciate. Jare Lynn. Let's go to GEM in North Carolina.
You've run a business and you've had, you say, dozens
of H one B employees. First question for you, could
you not have found Americans able to do those jobs?
Second question for you, what if anything do you think

(37:36):
should be changed about the policy or do you think
it works well?

Speaker 12 (37:40):
Now, well, great to be with you, Clay and Buck. First,
let me just say that the H one B program
is abused in various places around the country, and particularly
in the IT arena. I will tell you that the
dozens of H one b's that I managed, we hired
them for one specific purpose, and that was because they
were more productive than their equivalent American counterparts. When you

(38:02):
run a business, it's the bottom line that drives your business.
You've got to be productive. And if you've got foreign
workers who are willing to work harder, with more attention
to detail than their counterparts in America, then you're just
drawn to have to hire them and keep them employed.
We always were on the search for hard working American
workers in the IT arena, particularly in the data warehousing

(38:23):
business intelligence arena. But we just couldn't find the ones
that could work at the same level, the same degree
of attention to detail.

Speaker 1 (38:30):
So your position is there was no fungible alternative for
American workers. You legitimately believe you couldn't have run your
business without being able to hire these individuals.

Speaker 12 (38:42):
We couldn't work, We couldn't be as competitive as a
business by hiring workers that were fifty percent less productive
than their H one B counterparts.

Speaker 1 (38:51):
Where did you go to get your workers? Mostly India?

Speaker 12 (38:54):
Most of them were South Asia Indian. In fact, I
still have maintained relationships with a lot of them. One
of the thing that's been missing in all of this,
when you're looking at a merit based immigration program, there's
no better kickstart for that than the H one B
program because a good percentage of those do become American
citizens over time, and they add so much value to
our employment sector.

Speaker 1 (39:15):
Thank you for the call, David and Raleigh. You say
you have been an engineering manager. I think that's what
that says for fifteen years and worked with a lot
of H one B employees. Your take, Yeah, I.

Speaker 11 (39:30):
Believe that for the most part. Laura's right, we're flooding
the market with too many engineers, and it's clearly disrupting
the supply chain of engineers. If you look at when
I came into the industry in the early two thousands,
engineers aren't making that much more than justice for inflation
than we were back then. But I think the bigger issue,

(39:52):
like when Lutnick came out and said, hey, it's gonna
be one hundred thousand per year per h one B,
a lot of us were excited because that would fix,
you know, the issue to a large extent. But what
will happen is the companies are just going to offshore
these jobs. We're already setting up design houses in India.
Every every big fortune five hundred company has a design
house essentially under their umbrella in India right now, and

(40:16):
they're growing those right now. And so we're watching these
jobs just go straight to India.

Speaker 1 (40:21):
Thank you for the call.

Speaker 4 (40:22):
Well, you know, part of this is also the upstream,
downstream reality of when you have the consistent and systematic
undercutting of an American wage in a certain industry from
let's be honest, in the case of India, the most
populous country on Earth, there are a lot of Indians
like one point three billion or something like that. And

(40:44):
when you have this going on, it's going to create
deficiencies in the American sector because Clay perfect example, when
I got out of school, when you got out of school,
everybody in the top of my class at Amherst unless
you wanted to go save America at the SEAI, Hey,
everybody in the top of my class. There were two
job tracks for you, investment banking, management consulting.

Speaker 1 (41:08):
Both of those, by the way, you could.

Speaker 4 (41:09):
Argue, where's the value add long you know, there's a
lot of more detailed discussions. You know, there's been a
whole series TV shows made about management consulting and like
how it's you, yeah, lower your costs, raise your profits.

Speaker 1 (41:22):
Like that's that's brilliant. That's the one that's really being
erase by AI because you can plug the large data
sets in.

Speaker 4 (41:28):
But those were two areas where in your twenties, you know,
you could come out and you could start making And
I'm talking about twenty years ago, mind you, twenty years
ago you could make two three hundred grand in your
twenties pretty pretty readily within a couple of years. I mean,
I think the starting salary at the investment banks. I
got an offer from one at City Group was like
one hundred and fifty, and then with bonus it could

(41:49):
be up to one hundred and you know, if it
was a good year anyway, very variable. But the point is,
you went to be an engineer, you're making like seventy
or eighty grand.

Speaker 1 (41:58):
Now.

Speaker 4 (41:58):
I know a lot of you're saying, well, that's a
great job, that's a lot of money. Sure, but if
you had the grades to be a top engineering recruit,
you also probably had the grades to go work at
McKenzie and tell people how to run their companies that
you've never run before and make a whole lot of money.
So this is I'm just saying the incentives that have
been set up because people were thinking, oh, well, coding

(42:20):
almost became or you know, a lot of these computer
skills that we're hiring H oneb's for ore back office.
And as long as you're in a back office situation,
you're never going to really be writing your own ticket
and determining your own fate.

Speaker 1 (42:33):
No doubt, We've still got a bunch of calls. We'll
get to some of those calls when we come back
I appreciate everybody reaching out and sharing what your perspectives
on what is a challenging situation. Will continue to break
all that down going forward. But in the meantime, Buck,
I think you got something for us here.

Speaker 3 (42:52):
I do.

Speaker 4 (42:53):
Indeed, my friends, Good Ranchers, I've got Captain Flatley visiting
down here.

Speaker 1 (42:58):
That's right, Gladly. He's a captain of airlines or airline
flying rather, and he likes a great steak, just like
I do, and so does my wife, and we go
to Good Ranchers for them.

Speaker 4 (43:12):
My friends, we are stocked for this holiday season thanks
to Good Ranchers. They deliver great tasting steaks, burgers, pork chops, bacon,
even salmon that arrives via overnight shipping pack securely ensuring
freshne freshness. It's like having a restaurant meal at home
every night. Look, no matter how good a cookie you are,
if you don't have high quality proteins, you're not gonna

(43:32):
be at that top tier of deliciousness at your kitchen table.
Good Ranchers gives you exactly what you need, the raw
materials for the best dinner. You're gonna have a great
time with your family, and it's all really good, top quality,
top tier stuff too. No antibiotics, no hormones. We're both subscribers,
Clay and I. You should be too.

Speaker 1 (43:51):
You'll get twenty five dollars off every box delivered, free shipping,
and a free gift in every order for a life
the shop America's best meat.

Speaker 4 (43:59):
Visit good dot com. Start your subscription today, and if
you order before December first, and you're a first time subscriber,
use my name Buck as your promo code. You'll get
an additional one hundred dollars off your first three orders,
plus free.

Speaker 1 (44:12):
Meat for life. That's code Buck for one hundred dollars
off plus free meat for life, Good ranchers dot Com
code Buck. You ain't imagining it. The world has gone insane.

Speaker 6 (44:24):
Reclaim your sanity with Clay and Fun. Find them on
the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 1 (44:33):
Welcome back in, Clay, Travis, Buck Sexton show Our number three,
A lot of You weighing in eight hundred and two
A two two eight eight two. Uh. President Trump set
to speak soon on affordability related issues. Uh. We have
got a couple of different breaking news stories that I
wanted to hit you guys with first of all, and

(44:57):
it seems like this is kind of a significant story.
Alina Hobb, who is the state attorney I believe for
New Jersey, a US Attorney for New Jersey I believe
is her official title. According to Mary Margaret Olahan, who
we have had on the program quite a bit, she
is a Daily wire reporter, there was a attack at

(45:21):
the US Attorney's office and a suspect entered the building
with a baseball bat around five pm yesterday, proceeded to
Alena Habba's office. But Pam Bondi says, this is in
the last last hour or so these details coming out
Attorney General. Last night. An individual attempted to confront one

(45:44):
of our US attorneys Habba, destroyed property in her office
and fled the scene. Thankfully, Alena is okay. So again,
left wing violence is certainly an issue, and we're glad
that Alena Habba is okay. But somebody showing up with
a bat and attacking the office is something obviously very

(46:08):
very serious. Other news, John Fetterman's office put out this statement.
During an early morning walk, Senator Fetterman sustained a fall
near his home in Braddock, Pennsylvania, out of an abundance
of caution. He was transported to a hospital in Pittsburgh.
Upon evaluation, it was established he had a ventricular fibrillation

(46:32):
flare up that led to him feeling light headed, falling
to the ground, hitting his face with minor entered injuries.
He is still hospitalized. This is a funny quote. Senator
Fetterman had this to say, if you thought my face
looked bad before, wait until you see it now. So

(46:53):
that is John Fetterman. He's doing well, receiving routine hospital observations,
and they are adjusting potential his defibulator in the way
that I would imagine that that works inside of his body.
Reminds me Buck That quote, if you thought my face
will look bad before, wait until you see it now?

(47:16):
One of the all time great rejoinders from Abraham Lincoln.
Do you remember this quote? He was accused of being
two faced and his response was do you think if
I had two faces? I would wear this one? Which,
again I'm paraphrasing, but a pretty witty comeback that reminded
me of what John Fetterman was saying there. Now, remember

(47:40):
how he talked Buck about Michelle Obama every time she
speaks making herself less likely, she less like a bull.
She is continuing to speak and drive down her overall
likability every single time that she speaks. So I thought
we could have fun with this and play this cut.
Michelle Obama said, I've got a couple of cuts that

(48:02):
are crazy. But Michelle Obama said, Black female beauty is
so powerful we are owed respect. Cut one.

Speaker 13 (48:10):
We have to start educating people about all kinds of beauty. Yes,
and our beauty is so powerful and so unique that
it is that it is worthy of a conversation, and
it's worthy of demanding the respect that we're old for
who we are and what we offered to the world.

Speaker 1 (48:33):
Whatever I mean. First of all, every man on the planet,
trust me on this is aware of beauty. There's nobody
out there was like, hey, you know, I didn't know
this woman was attractive. But this is the toxic nature
of identity politics where she's arguing, basically because of my race,
that we that we have to be respected. And I

(48:56):
just you read her PhD or whatever the thesis that
she wrote. Oh no, no, no undergraduate Princeton thesis. Okay, no,
no PhD. She went to law school, right, she went
to Harvard for law school. That's where she met Barack Obama, right.
I know she was an attorney and he was an
associate and they met at the firm, but he was

(49:17):
older when he went back to law school, I think
is the story.

Speaker 4 (49:19):
She at one point had a job at a public
hospital in the state of Chicago, I'm sorry, in state
of Illinois, when her husband was a state legislator. I
think she was a diversity educator at the hospital, making
three hundred something thousand dollars a year. And this was
over twenty years ago, so make like half a milli
year in today's dollars to be a diversity educator. So

(49:40):
at the University of Chicago, if I remember correctly, I
think you are hitting that exactly right. But yeah, basically
a half a million dollars in today's dollars to essentially
have a job that is a cake walk. You don't
have to hardly do anything. And that is the reality.
So all of this is, all of this is bonkers.

Speaker 1 (50:04):
Also, I pulled this clip because I saw this circulating.
Democrats have decided buck that their go to talking point
for this past campaign season, and maybe it's going to
extend in the next campaign. Season, is that we need
more grocery stores provided by the government. We know that

(50:26):
this was a big part of Mom Donnie's pitch in
New York City. But this is Katie Wilson, who ended
up winning the mayor's race in Seattle. I don't know
if you've heard this. This was a flashback to her campaign,
but it is now circulating. She says that they can't
allow grocery stores to shut down in Seattle, and that

(50:46):
if it does happen, then the government needs to step
in and be the grocery store.

Speaker 4 (50:51):
Can I just just to clarify as the point of clarity, Yeah,
Michelle Obama worked at the University of Chicago Medical Center,
so you're right it was a hospital, but you know
is the U Chicago Hospital and she was executive director
for Community Affairs Diversity EDUCATORT. What she was working on
a lot of diversity and recruitment is what I'm reading here.
Guess what, She's a diversity educator making a half million

(51:13):
year basically, so nice, nice job if you've got a
bad gig.

Speaker 1 (51:17):
Relatively low stress. Here is that Seattle new mayor basically
echoing the same arguments that were made on the other side.
Of the country coast to coast. What we really need
is more government grocery stores.

Speaker 5 (51:30):
Just like Cuba, access to affordable, healthy food is a
basic rite. We cannot allow giant grocery chains to stomp
all over our communities closed stores that will and leave
behind food deserts. Together, we can build a seattle where
fresh food is for everyone, not just for those who
can afford it.

Speaker 1 (51:48):
Food doesn'ts are not natural.

Speaker 5 (51:50):
Corporations create them when they have bands in our communities.
As mayor, I'm excited to step up and with UFCW
explore public option grocery stores to.

Speaker 1 (51:59):
Fill those I thought this was funny, buck because it
directly connects with the conversation we had during the Snap debate,
which is the argument that she is making about food
deserts and availability of food has been tested and it
is just not true. There is no lack of available

(52:20):
food products that people in different communities want to buy.
And so this was a talking point probably what twenty
ten ish and now it's just coming back, even though
it's been soundly refuted. And I do think the fact
that government owned grocery stores, again like Cuba, is being
argued in favor of in both Seattle and New York City.

(52:43):
Is interesting about the dearth of real ideas motivating the
Democrat Party right now. They've done this before, as I've
said this, here you go.

Speaker 4 (52:56):
I was pulling this up giving the poor this from
the New York Times. Everyone giving the poor easy access
to healthy food doesn't mean they'll buy it. What a
shock there. And I'll read you a little bit from this.
This is twenty fifteen, class a decade ago. In twenty ten,
the Bronx, this Bronx section is what is called the

(53:17):
food desert. This Bronx community was a food desert, low
income neighborhood in New York's least healthy county. No nearby
grocery store, few places where residents could easily buy fresh food.
It's the target of a city tax incentive program to
bring healthy food into underserved neighborhoods. A seventeen thousand square
foot supermarket opened, aided by city money, paying for forty

(53:39):
percent of the cost. Neighborhood welcomed the addition, but the
diets of the neighborhoods residents did not. They don't want
to buy what coastal elites want them to buy. We
can go over this this is the New York Times.

Speaker 1 (53:57):
Study after study, we can does this really knock anyone?
This is kind of funny, isn't it. You sit there,
you go in under or in low income communities, In
low income communities, if people have the choice, generally speaking
talking about broad buying habits, you don't have to call
me and say, I have a friend who's low income
and he's running six triathlons. Yeah, okay, I get it.

(54:19):
Generally speaking, in low income communities, when people have the
opportunity to buy chips, soda, candy, you know, frozen food
that they can you know, frozen pizza, whatever, or they
can buy arugula, free range lean, you know, chicken breasts
or whatever. Which one are they going to do?

Speaker 4 (54:39):
There's a reason why they sell the food they sell
in low income communities, because that's what people in those
communities by. Even when you subsidize so called it or
not so called it is, even when you subsidize healthier food.

Speaker 1 (54:52):
And so what are you going to do about this?
You know, you either let people make their own choices
and eat garbage basically not actual garbage, but you know
what I mean, neat stuff that's bad for you, or
you let people, you know, you tell them that this
is all remember Clay. They're worried about food deserts, but
the SNAP program has to cover chips and soda. Well,
which is it? Yes? And the government run grocery stores.

(55:18):
I just I One of the biggest challenges of capitalism
is young people who have all of the benefits of
living in a capitalistic society decide that capitalism doesn't work.
And it's all one big circle. I feel like we've
seen this with policing, where people say, oh, you know what,

(55:41):
being concerned that you have too many violent predators behind
bars is a luxury of a low crime environment. And
so you have a low crime environment and people start saying, hey,
you know what, we need fewer cops, and we need
fewer people in prisons, and we need more lenient treatment
of bad guys. And then there's more bad guys on
the street. What happens the overall violent crime rate skyrockets.

(56:05):
And it would be nice if we could just have
public policy that acknowledges what works and what doesn't, And
how about we don't try the things that we know
don't work. Government funded grocery stores. I just the profit
margin on grocery stores. Buck is one or two percent.
It's one of the hardest businesses to run. You know.

Speaker 4 (56:26):
What would really be the test and this would just
would go to Mamdanism and everything as well. We should
run an experiment, go to one of these supposed Remember
it's a food desert. It's also an area where we're
gonna be told people are oppressed, and there's all the suppression.
It's a low income community, and I'm sure there's systemic
racism involved and all this other stuff go into that community.

(56:47):
Clay set up a just just let let the grocery
store that's there, or let the place where people get
their food. A lot of times it's more like a
in New York I'm speaking about now, it's more like
a convenience store. People will go in and they'll have
food there, but they don't have the big aisles like
they will in a giant or a food town or
you know whatever, a n P. I don't even if
that exists anymore, do they? Peace will exist the grocery store.

Speaker 1 (57:09):
We got Publics, we got Pigley Wigglely, we got Kroger
or PUBLICX.

Speaker 4 (57:13):
I should have said, like I just lost my Florida
card for a week. I should have said publics right away,
I didn't. Anyway, they don't have something like that necessarily.
But you could, honestly, I think offer in the in
these same communities, you could offer, not just reduce. You
could say, Okay, you can either buy the stuff that
we deem in healthy or or we'll give you We'll
give you the healthy food free. And I think that

(57:35):
people would be shocked to see what the actual result
of that experiment is.

Speaker 1 (57:39):
I think that would be super intriguing. People want to
eat what they want to eat, bottom line, And we'll
come back. We'll take some of your calls. Still a
lot of people weighing in h one be discussion and
impressed by the quality of takes there. But I want
to tell you what we are a little bit less
than six weeks until Chris misbelieve it or not, Thanksgiving

(58:02):
is am I correcting this. Fourteen days away, two weeks
from today is Thanksgiving. It's going to be here in
a hurry. We're gonna be rolling into the holiday season
and you can give an incredible gift to your family.
That's a legacy box. They can take your old VCR tapes.
They can take your old eight millimeter film reels. They
can take your old photographs, whatever family media you have.

(58:26):
You can get hooked up right now at legacybox dot
com slash clay for a nine dollars per tape deal.
That is a nine dollars per tape deal at legacybox
dot com slash clay. Early access to the best deals
of the year legacybox dot com slash clay. Give your
family the gift of memories that will last a lifetime,

(58:49):
digitally preserved forever at legacybox dot com slash clay. That's
a legacy box dot com slash clay.

Speaker 6 (59:00):
The news and politics, but also a little comic relief.

Speaker 1 (59:03):
Clay Travis at Buck Sexton.

Speaker 6 (59:06):
Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you
get your podcasts.

Speaker 4 (59:10):
Welcome back in here too, Play and Buck. You know
we important thought that we just had also about the
food situation there and the idea of government run grocery stores.
There's a lot of lobbying that goes on by Big
Agra and the big food companies to make sure that
the things that the liberal elites who run these cities

(59:32):
don't want the low income communities to be ingesting in
those quantities are covered by things like food stamps aka SNAP.

Speaker 1 (59:43):
Right.

Speaker 4 (59:44):
Obviously they're renamed because food stamps after a while had
picked up something of a negative connotation. It was food welfare,
and so they call it SNAP now. But it's the
same basic, same basic premise, or it is the same premise.
And I think that that that's one aspect of this
is that there's a big incentive clay to make people
or to encourage people to eat this stuff and for

(01:00:06):
it to be subsidized by the government. And beyond that,
I just think what experience with a government entity makes
you think that you want the government in charge of
stocking and getting the best quality for the dollar. This
is actually a really fun question.

Speaker 1 (01:00:26):
We'll take it off about how bad the food was
in my private high school. It was a scholarship school.
It was prison food. My high school should be ashamed
at the food that they were making us eat. And
that wasn't even the government, Like, I can't imagine what
it's like in an actual prison or a state facility.
Look the efficiency required to be a profitable grocery store,

(01:00:48):
to say nothing of the competition that must occur for
cleanliness and lack of spoilage and all of those things.
Kansas City tried this. Remember the story that was out
there about Kansas City. They said, hey, we need to
have government run grocery stores. They couldn't get produced there
in a healthy way, right, It was spoiling. Nobody wanted

(01:01:10):
to shop there. The shelves were mostly empty. It was
an unmitigated disaster. Which buck, if you told me, what
do you expect a government run grocery store to look like?
It is what happened in Kansas City. It's what I
would have predicted. And I wish we had trips like
field trips so kids could go to Cuba and actually

(01:01:31):
see what the full fruition of a government system that
they're supporting now in New York City is like, so
that you could understand what it's like to not have
air conditioning. Wi Fi never works, government own grocery stores,
or everybody stands in line for hours to be able
to get a bar of soap, like this is crazy.

Speaker 4 (01:01:49):
Civilization is based upon individual incentive. Yes, there's always the
group the community that you need, but need people to
have their own individual reasons for doing what they're doing,
or they're not going to do it. This is why
you places like the Soviet Union collapse into it to
atalitarian nightmare because there is no incentive for the individuals,

(01:02:13):
and so the only way they make you do what
that you're supposed to do is with a gun.

Speaker 1 (01:02:16):
In the back of your Head's just brute force.

Speaker 4 (01:02:19):
If you want to have a society that functions efficiently
and well, people have to benefit. Clay, I want a
grocery store where the manager's making six figures. I want
a grocery store where the people in charge take pride
in what they do. Like you know, it's very straightforward
to me, you know, where they take a lot of
pride in what they do. Chalk supplements that are absolutely

(01:02:40):
top tier, top class. You have to try them out
for yourself. I take Chalk's Daily and the Chalk pre
Workout formul I'm gonna go to the gym later today
and I'm gonna be hitting the Chad mode. It's great
for any workout. It's gonna go for a long run,
a long walk, but also just getting stuff done around
the house. It just gives you that energy, gets you
fired up. Chalk is spelled cchoq now. The Chalk Daily,

(01:03:01):
by the way, is a great way to start. You
could also try their Male Vitality Stack for the guys
out there. This includes a leading ingredient that replenishes diminished
testosterone levels and men, it's your body's natural source of
energy testosterone when your levels are low, and this happens
to you over time, Chalk's Male Vitality Stack can replenish
it up to twenty percent. Go to chalkcchoq dot com.

(01:03:22):
Use my name buck for a massive discount on any
subscription for Life chalk choq dot com. Use my name
buck for a massive discount