June 6, 2025 • 37 mins
Hour 2 of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show dives deep into the escalating tensions between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, offering a detailed analysis of their diverging economic philosophies and the implications for the "Big Beautiful Bill." Clay Travis explores the root causes of Musk’s recent public outburst, attributing it to frustrations over Trump’s decision not to appoint Musk’s ally to NASA, the President’s growing relationship with Sam Altman in the AI space, and broader dissatisfaction with government inefficiency. This hour emphasizes the ideological clash between Trump’s pro-growth, tax-cut-driven economic vision and Musk’s cost-cutting, fiscally conservative approach. Clay draws parallels between household budgeting and national fiscal policy, illustrating the debate between cutting government spending versus stimulating economic growth to balance the federal budget. He references Art Laffer of the Laffer Curve and Reaganomics to support Trump’s strategy, while acknowledging the validity of Musk’s concerns about unchecked government expenditures. Listeners are also treated to a unique segment featuring an astrologer who analyzes the astrological compatibility between Trump and Musk, predicting continued conflict based on their opposing Mars placements. The astrologer praises Trump’s chart as “shimmering” and destined for leadership, while casting doubt on Musk’s emotional stability and long-term trajectory. The hour concludes with a hard-hitting interview with OutKick reporter Dan Zaksheske, who exposes the WNBA’s refusal to credential OutKick journalists following Britteny Griner’s alleged racial slur caught on video. The discussion highlights media bias, censorship in sports journalism, and the double standards in how racial controversies are handled depending on the individuals involved. Clay and Dan criticize the WNBA’s lack of transparency and the broader media’s failure to hold Griner accountable, contrasting it with the league’s aggressive response to unfounded racism allegations against Indiana Fever fans. This episode is packed with political commentary, cultural critique, and media analysis, making it a must-listen for fans of conservative talk radio, Trump supporters, and those following the intersection of politics, tech, and sports.
Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8
For the latest updates from Clay and Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back in Clay Travis buck Sexton show. We've been
diving into psychoanalyzing Trump, elon what happened yesterday afternoon, why
it matters, what drove it, where to go from here,
all of that.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
So if you.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Want to and you're just now getting into your car,
you're just now starting off your day, I think you
can enjoy that.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
We're not going to stop in that analysis. But that
was deep dive. Hey, here's what I think is going
to go on now.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I'm going to talk about a little bit spin it
forward and where I think we go from here, and
a lot of you weighing in. I'm going to also
share some of your emails, some of your thoughts from
many of you as well.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Buck.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
We'll be back with me, by the way, next week
in d C. We will be in d C all
next week and I will be in DC much of
the week after, so I'm going to be doing the
show from up there. We're going to have a lot
of Senators, a lot of representatives, a lot of members
of the Trump administration in our DC studios, so that
will be coming in the near future. I said that
(01:02):
I thought that there were many different factors that led
to Elon's temper tantrum yesterday. One I think is the
fact that Trump decided not to put his buddy in
charge of NASA. I think that was a precipitating factor.
I think that AI and the fact that Trump has
been leaning into a relationship with Sam Altman, who is
(01:25):
Elon's big AI rival. And let me just say this,
I'm a diehard Elon guy. I am invested alongside of
Elon with the x Ai company.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
So I'm a.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Partial shareholder of Twitter, I'm a partial shareholder of the
Ai company, and so I want Elon to be as
wildly successful there as possible. And if you want to
say that I'm biased in Elon's favor, you can certainly
argue that because I've got money that I believe is
well invested with Elon. But I'm telling you what I
(01:59):
think is coming out of the Elon Trump relationship where
that sort of emanates from.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So, I think it's NASA, I think it's AI.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
I think it's general frustration over the slow movement of
the government in general. Here's the other part of this,
it's the Big Beautiful Bill. Because this what precipitated, at
least publicly, the fight and let me kind of dive
in here and tell you what I think. Okay, So
(02:30):
the way that the government budget gets balanced really can
occur two ways, and I think this will in many
ways crystallize the battle between these two guys. One way
the government budget can get balanced is by cutting the
government expenses so that they are below the government revenues.
(02:54):
That is basic understandable economics for anybody out there that
has ever had to balance the checkbook, ever had to
balance the family budget. You say, hey, we've got ten
thousand dollars here in monthly expenses, we're only making seven
thousand dollars. Well, you're going to end up running a
(03:15):
deficit of three thousand dollars every month unless you cut
your expenses to under seven thousand dollars. Right, some basic economics.
Much of life is just basic economics. And I wish
we did a better job of teaching two things in schools.
There are a lot of things I wish well. History
is the one that is just giving up on. And
(03:35):
you guys know I'm a history nerd. But in terms
of things that matter to you, economics and probability and statistics,
all of life is economics and probability in statistics. Well,
everything in your life comes down to economics and probability
in statistics. And if you don't agree with me, it's
(03:58):
just because you haven't realized it yet. Every single decision
you make comes down to economics, probability, and statistics. The
people who are the richest in the world are the
best at analyzing risk, which is really just a combination
in many ways of economics, probability, and statistics. What is
the likelihood of an event that is going to occur.
(04:20):
If you are better at predicting the likelihood of an event,
you are going to make a lot of money. If
you are worse at predicting the likelihood of an event,
you are going to lose a lot of money. So
there's my ted talk. You can dive into it. You
can spend your whole life. That is the reality. Okay,
So two ways to balance a budget. One is by
(04:40):
cutting expenses. This is what Elon is focused on right now.
He has decided because of Doge, that government must be
reformed and expenses must be cut. That is one way
to balance the federal government. There are lots of people
that I respect that are aggressive on this take.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Senator Ran Paul Senator Ron Johnson.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I happen to think that they are right that more
expenses could be cut from the so called big beautiful bill.
Here's the other thing, though, The other way you balance
the budget is by exploding growth. Do you know what
explosive growth looks like? Three percent? If we can grow
(05:25):
the federal the larger United States economy at three percent
or more over the next several years, the budget will
balance too, because the overall growth rate of the economy
is going to exceed the growth in which we are
spending money. Now, this is really kind of a family
(05:48):
dive relationship here, right, You, in your own life may
be married to someone who is more on the cut
the expenses men. I will say, in general, a lot
of times are cut the expenses in a household, generally speaking,
(06:09):
sometimes women are. But then there's also the grow the
pie vision of life. Well, we can take that vacation
right now because we're gonna be making more money in
six months.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I know it's expensive to take the kids. I just
went trust me to Universal Studios.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And it's gonna mean that we don't we spend more
this month than we're making. But you know, in three months,
I'm gonna be getting a raise, or in three months
we're gonna be coming into a little bit of extra money.
So really we're growing the pie and we're.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Still gonna be okay financially.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
One is realistic, look at the world as it is
and adjust right now planning. The other is, hey, let's
think about where we're going. We can afford to spend
more right now. And guess what in my household, my
wife will tell you, I am the person who is
(07:20):
always thinking into the future.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
Yeah, we can buy that.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
On big expenses, We'll be fine because X, Y or
Z is going to happen big picture, I know. I think, well,
my wife might disagree where our finances.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Are going to be.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
She meanwhile, is just looking at the bank account and
she's like, oh, well, what about this expense and what
about that expense. It has been our whole life, by
the way, and that I think is the essence of
the big beautiful build debate right now.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Trump as a builder is, hey, look at the plot
of land.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Well, in eight years, it's going to be sixty stories tall,
and we're gonna be renting to Tiffany and the revenue
is going to be two hundred million dollars a year,
and it's gonna pay the rate of the insurance, and
it's gonna pay the rate of the interest and all
these different things. And sometimes I think probably Trump himself
(08:23):
would say his view of the future is so optimistic
that it doesn't pan out. That's why he's had a
couple of companies go bankrupt. Most real estate guys gals two,
but most of them are guys. They sell the future
the beautiful vision. Trump, at his heart, is a real
(08:44):
estate guy. He is selling a beautiful vision. What he's
selling on the big beautiful Bill is the economy is
going to get roaring, and it's going to get rolling.
If we cut taxes, we're going to skyrocket growth. If
we allow hundred percent expenditures, companies are going to spend money,
and our actual growth of the economy is going to
(09:07):
be substantial enough that we're going to be able to
kill the national debt right that we're going to start
to have a surplus. This is Art Lafer's argument. One
of the greatest economists that has ever lived, Art Laugher.
We've had him on this program several times, the Laugher Curve.
He was the foundation of Ronald Reagan's entire economic argument
(09:30):
as they brought down taxes. You cut taxes, you create
growth such that your tax revenue actually grows faster than
it otherwise would. That is the essence of the Laffer curve.
That is what Trump is arguing, the big beautiful bill
is going to do. Elon came in through DOGE to
cut expenses, and he is saying the bill doesn't cut
(09:53):
expenses fast enough. Here's what neither guy is telling you.
That is the ultimate truth. The federal government is the
side as it is because of entitlements. And when as
virtually every politician does, when they tell you we're going
to do everything you want, but we're also not going
to cut in any way so security or medicare they
(10:16):
are basically Marie Antoinette and you, this is why I'm
not a politician, because I can sit here and tell
you it is virtually impossible to pay off our thirty
six trillion dollar debt without reforming entitlements. It just is
they eat up a huge percentage of our overall national debt.
(10:37):
And I think what Elon found out when he went
into DOGE and started to look at all the math
and all the numbers and all the expenses and everything else.
Deep down, I think he recognized that even if you
cut all of the so called discretionary expenses, we're still
going to have a budget that cost way too much. Now,
(11:00):
that doesn't mean we shouldn't be cutting a lot of
discretionary expenses. I one hundred percent agree with Senator Ron
Johnson and Ran Paul that our budget is too big.
But I actually think the arguments that Trump and Elon
are making, which are leading to a conflict on the
Big Beautiful Bill, are about two different perspectives of how
(11:20):
you look at a budget. Elon is looking at it
hyper focused, hyper rational, and saying, hey, we've got to cut.
Trump is looking at it and saying we've got to grow.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Now. Ideally, we would cut and grow. Right.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
It's like I want to have both sides of this
equation too. We would cut the size of the government
and we would grow. I would right now vote I
think for the Big Beautiful Bill, I would Is it imperfect?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Yes? Do I wish it cut expenses more? Yes?
Speaker 1 (11:55):
All of these things are true. I think what Elon
and Ron Johnson and Ram Paul are saying is true.
I also think what Trump is saying is true, and
I'm just looking at the challenge incarnate with a small
lead in the House and a small majority in the
Senate in getting it all through. By the way, great
email that just came in. I want to read it
(12:15):
from so many of you are weighing in, and let
me see if I can find the one that Ali
sent to me during the commercial break. This was Donna,
she said she subscribed just away in with this. I
had to subscribe right now to share my agreement with
your take on Musk versus Trump. I'm seventy something. Grew
up in the New York City suburbs.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Mulu Meulu.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
I can never pronounce that word milliulu some words you know,
guys know I can't pronounce same area as Trump.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
Yeah, it's two French. They tried to say it in
my year. I can't say it.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
My father was a hustler businessman, so I know the
type like Trump, bombastic salesman.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Doesn't bother me.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
I'm married to a tech engineer, and I have a
brother who is a highly technical engineer. Spot on about
the mindset of engineers. I joke with friends and family
about them having no social intelligence. They're perfectionist OCD, whatever
you call it. I'm sad the waste Musk identify isn't
(13:14):
being addressed fully.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
He's not wrong.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
I'm reading the biography of Teddy Roosevelt and his first
experience with politics and all that he is pretty alarming.
I'm guessing things are still that bad. Not surprised. Musk
has hit so many roadblocks. Yes, yes, and Musk and
founding his entire companies are all about destroying roadblocks. And
(13:38):
then he tries to do what he thinks is one
hundred percent right, gets ripped to the shreds for it.
And a lot of the things that he is doing
are not being implemented as he would implement them if
he's a CEO. He's frustrated, he lashes out. I think
that explains everything going on right now. If you have
a family, many of us do. Just talking about family budgeting,
the challenge of how to think about the future, you
(14:01):
should have a will that's a legal document spells out
exactly how you want things to go when you're no
longer around. I have one. I also have trust set
up all sorts of stuff. Only a third of Americans
have a will. That's crazy, that's crazy. Low and One
reason is a lot of people just don't know where
to begin, who to trust with taking care of their
(14:21):
family after they pass. You can take care of this,
take the stress away. Trust and Will dot com is
the website they make writing a will simple affordable. The
result will give you peace of mind, not just for you,
but your entire family. That website, Trust and Will dot com.
They're experts in creating personalized trust and wills that protect
your legacy. That's Trust and Will dot com. Hey, Buck,
(14:52):
one of my kids called me an unc the other
day and unk yep slang evidently for not being hip,
being an old dude. So how do we un get
more people to subscribe to our YouTube channel?
Speaker 2 (15:03):
At least that's what my kids tell me.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
That's simple enough. Just search the Klay, Travis and Buck
Sexton Show and hit the subscribe button.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Takes less than five seconds to help ununk me.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
Do it for Clay, do it for freedom, and get
great content while you're there the Klay, Travis and Buck
Sexton Show YouTube channel.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
I know you were waiting for this.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
An astrologers called in and said she could see it
in the stars. Trump and Elon were not going to
be getting along hi anthe, What is the problem here?
From an astrology perspective.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
These two like each other.
Speaker 5 (15:34):
They have venus on one another's son. However, then Marge
opposed one another, So I was just waiting to see
how long it was going to be before there was
a fight and they split up. Now, for Trump's steak,
your analysis was brilliant, but I think you've been way
too easy on Elon Musk for Trump's state sake. I
(15:57):
hope they stay apart. They're not good for one another financially,
which Elon doesn't like. However, Trump, that won't affect Trump
as much because when you are going into cancer, it's
going to be good for Trump's financially, It's going to
be good for the country. We are so lucky to
have him. He has a chart that just it just shimmers.
(16:21):
It makes the page shimmer when you look at it.
Speaker 1 (16:24):
Does my art I appreciate this. Does my chart shimmer?
Or people listening right now in trouble? So I'm April sixth,
What does the chart say about me?
Speaker 5 (16:32):
You know you're I know you're in I know you're
in arising. I know I know that Leo moons, but
I haven't really looked.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
At your chart of well, I need you to look
at my chart if you would.
Speaker 5 (16:44):
Every once in a while you see something like how
many horses do you see like secretariat?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Yeah, that means Trump.
Speaker 5 (16:52):
That's Trump. Well, you don't see it very often, do you.
He's no regulars. The Star of the sixth Star of
Loyalty on his descendant. He's got his son up in
the tenth House. He was born to do this, and
every good thing that anyone says about him is true. Now.
Mousk unfortunately his planets have a way of making Trump
(17:16):
not look good, which is not good. He's technically intelligent.
He also his chart Trump, I mean, Musk's shark is
more similar to that of Bill Gates with the greed
or Princess Diana with the delusion. He's very immature. He's
(17:37):
beyond unbalanced. There's a drug issue which is going to
be the end of him if he doesn't address it.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
He all right, I've got to go to break. But
here's what I'm gonna ask you to do.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
I've got a guest coming up at one point thirty
who's going to talk about men and women's sports and
other things. I want you to look at my chart
and I want you to tell me if everybody's screwed
or if if the show's going to continue to do well.
So I'm gonna ask you to call back in in
the third hour. I'm gonna let our producers get I
want to make sure that I'm not leading everyone astray.
So Trump's chart, he's secretariat. I hope I'm not like
(18:14):
a glue horse. I don't want to lead you guys astray.
I'm thief from Rochester, New York. She's our astrologist, she's
on it. I was running around amusement parks and vacation
last week. You know what, I could have used rapid radios.
I saw the guys actually down at our big event
in rapid radios, and I told him, you know, hey,
Alice Beach, they have a big digital graffiti event. It's
(18:35):
an amazing event every year in May. And you know what,
the guys on security were using to communicate with each
other because the WiFi and the cell phone service can
be a little bit sketchy, they were using rapid radios.
My wife's got rapid radios. Got it right now on
the ten year old's hands because he's out of school
(18:55):
right now. We got no idea what he's going to
get into. You can help stay in touch with your kids,
with your family, and you can also protect yourself from catastrophe.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Five days worth the charges. These are amazing.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Rapid Radios dot Com sixty percent off free ups shipping
Code Radio. That's Rapid Radios dot Com Code Radio.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Buckle me back with me Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Eagerly awaiting my astrology reading also a little bit nervous.
I anthe working on it up in Rochester, New York.
She got more info about my birth or she's going
to steal my identity one of these two things. She
maybe is just the greatest con artist of all time
because she asked a lot of details about how I
was born. We bring in probably did not expect this introduction.
(19:43):
We bring in now. Dan zach Chesky does fantastic work
for OutKick, reporting on a variety of different stories, and
I wanted to shine some light on this because I
thought it was super interesting. Many of you out there
will remember a story went viral when the Indiana Fever
fans were accused of racial slurs in the direction of
(20:04):
Angel Reese in a WNBA game, and they did an investigation.
They determined that absolutely nothing inappropriate or racist had been said.
They couldn't find any evidence of it. Go figure, and
the WNBA at that time said, and I'm paraphrasing them,
but basically, we have no place in this league for
racism or mistreatment of others based on their race. There's
(20:27):
ender ethnicity, any of those things. And then within like
a day and a half, Britney Griner, who is a
women's basketball player that was traded for the merchant of death.
That seems like a not very fair trade. We got
a black lesbian basketball player in the WNBA, Russia got
back the merchant of death to help them theoretically create
(20:50):
more death. Again, I think that's a very unbalanced trade,
like herschel Walker for those of you who are old school,
when the Dallas Cowboys sorry Vikings fans got all of
the assets for no cost. But recently Deshaun Watson to
the Cleveland Browns probably the worst trade of all time.
Houston Texans get insanely fortunate. This was worse than those,
(21:10):
I would argue. But Britney Griner on the sideline appears
to insult white women in a phrase that went megaviral.
She has said nothing, The WNBA has said nothing. Now,
I would submit to you that if Kaitlin Clark were
on the sideline insulting black girls, that Kaitlin Clark's entire
(21:32):
career would probably be over everyone to be talking about it. So,
what did Britney Griner say? Has the WNBA investigated at all?
OutKick is like the only place that would we even
covered this, And so Dan Zack Sheesky is a reporter
at OutKick, and Dan appreciate you making the time for us.
I wanted to give a background. I think I laid
out everything there. You've been trying to go cover Britney
(21:53):
Griner and just ask the questions of her. What has happened?
What has the WNBA done?
Speaker 3 (22:00):
Clay, let me say that I don't know that the
Shawn Watson trades pretty bad. It might be closed as
far as worst trade.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
Which is the worst trade of all time?
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Britney Grinder for the Merchant of Death or Deshaun Watson
for all the first round picks the Cleveland Brown's a
good debate.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Yeah, I think you need to put up a pole
on your on your Twitter account anyway, So exactly, you
laid it out perfectly. It's pretty simple, Clay. Some people
say Brittany Grinder said fing white girl. Some people think
she said fing whack call. It was a pretty easy
way to figure out what she said. Asked her. It's
not that hard. Ask for the question, Britney Griner. There's
(22:35):
a viral moment. You know it, you've seen it. You
said it. What did you say? Not one person has
asked Britney Griner that question since it happened two weeks ago.
I mean, Grinder has played several WNBA games since then.
I mean, I know al kick has reached out to
the WNBA, to Grinder's management team. They aren't responding. But
(22:55):
I mean, this is really incumbent upon the so called
journalists and reporters who cover this league to ask. It
blows my mind that no one has even asked the question.
So we requested a credential for the game where Grinder
was playing in Los Angeles. Now, Grinder didn't actually end
up playing in that game, but we were denied that
(23:17):
credential request. We put in a request for the game
tonight against the Connecticut Sun. I have covered several Connecticut
Sun games over the past year. I was even allowed
to I'm sorry, granted a credential for a playoff game
against the Connecticut Sun against Caitlyn Clark and the Indiana Fever.
Now you want to talk about whether or not there's
enough space, because that was their response, We don't have
(23:39):
enough space to accommodate you. Really, you had enough space
for me to go to a playoff game that featured
Caitlin Clark playing at the Mohegan Sun Arena, which by
the way, is in the middle of absolutely nowhere. There
are not a lot of people that cover this team regularly,
because I mean, why would you. The Kanicett Sun have
one win and they're telling us they don't have enough
space for me to cover the game. I called bs
(24:01):
on that they don't want us asking Britney Grinder to
question that frankly should have already been asked.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Okay, so this is interesting to me. We have requested Throughoutkick.
I say we because I sold out Kick Fox owns it,
but I still do work for OutKick and I founded it.
You have asked to cover Britney Grinder's team in a
game in LA and now you have asked to cover
Britney Grinder's team on the East Coast in Connecticut, and
both of those in WNBA teams have said, no, we
(24:30):
don't have space, we can't handle one more journalist.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
That's my understanding. It was not me who requested the
credential in LA because I live in Connecticut. That would
have been quite the trick for me. I believe that
Los Angeles claimed that we requested the credential too late,
you know, late whatever.
Speaker 2 (24:48):
Fine, So let me ask you this.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
I will speak to this because I've been involved in
this for a long time. OutKick is credentialed for the
Super Bowl. You're a sports guy. Super Bowl pretty different
cult to get a credential for kind of a big deal.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
Yes, let's say so.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Out Kick has been credentialed for any NFL game, any
NBA game, any NHL game, and any major conference with
big ten sec all of these different sporting events to
my knowledge. But you, I'll ask you, is are all
of those sports that I just named? For instance, would
(25:28):
in Alabama Auburn game in general receive a little bit
more coverage than the than any w NBA game that's
ever existed, But certainly a random w NBA game in
the regular season?
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Is that fair?
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Super Bowl? Alabama, Auburn, Ohio State, Michigan. These are things
where there is a great deal of sports media demand
and yet we've gotten credentials. Would you agree probably a
little more popular than the WNBA.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Well, it's like the Deshaun Watson trade versus grind or
trade debate. But Clay, yes, I do think think you
are correct that there's a little bit more interest in
those events that you mentioned.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
In general, super Bowl more people interested in it than
women's professional basketball. I know that's going to really drive
the left wingers crazy, but it is. It is the
case that super Bowl, featuring only men, at least so far,
is more popular than a basketball game featuring only women. Okay,
so what do you attribute this to? Because I'll tell
you as the founder of out kick, I think that
(26:25):
the WNBA has decided that they will not credential OutKick
for anything. And this is a top down decision. Every
team has talked about it. They have decided they don't
like the way we're covering their league and therefore they
want credentialists. Do you buy that as a thesis? In
other words, do you think WNBA maybe they get enough
pressure from this and they change, But right now, do
(26:46):
you think that's their calculus?
Speaker 3 (26:48):
Yeah? I think that's one hundred percent true, and you know,
look like we're going to find out. I requested a
credential for the Atlanta Dream versus the New York Liberty.
Next week, I requested a credential for the Atlanta Dream
versus the Washington Mystics two days after that. Let's see,
let's see if they let us in, because we're we're
not going to stop asking. That's what we do at
out kick, right. We have questions, we want answers. We're
not going to stop asking.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Okay, I also think this is important.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
Ostensibly, the only reason for sports journalism to exist as
it pertains to games is for journalists, that is, reporters,
however you want to classify it, to go and ask athletes, coaches, owners,
anyone affiliated with teams questions about their performance in the game. Right,
(27:33):
That's the only reason why anyone should be credentialed to
a game, particularly in this day and age, because everybody
can sit and watch the actual game.
Speaker 2 (27:42):
It used to be that.
Speaker 1 (27:43):
You had to have journalists at games because you would
wake up the next morning and you wanted to get
the newspaper and otherwise you wouldn't know what happened in
the game. But now, every game streams, every game is available,
every fan knows the score of any team they care about.
The only reason why these jobs should exists is for
questions to be asked of the people involved in.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Them, right I would agree with that, Yes.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Okay, So if we believe that is the presumption, then
how in the world is it possible take out kick
off the table? Because I agree with you, we would
ask Britney Griner this question, How in the world from
a media perspective, from a journalistic perspective, from a big
jay journalism role, can the New York Times, the Washington Post,
(28:27):
the New York Times just had a big profile of
Britney Griner ironically that I read over the weekend. How
can they justify going and covering these games and not
asking Britney Griner about the megaviral clip of her in
the wake of the investigation of the Indiana fever over
inappropriate comments. I mean, it seems like the biggest, most
(28:49):
glistening orb in the sky. How could they possibly justify
from a journalistic perspective, not asking that question.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
It's pretty easy, Clay, and we're finding out right now,
because when you ask those questions, you don't get invited back. See,
the WNBA has put this, has put this in place
where it's like, hey, you cover our league the way
we want you to cover it, or we're not giving
you a credential. I mean, look at Christine Brennan, one
of the most radical left wing, progressive liberal sports writers
on the planet, dared to ask dj A Carrington if
(29:18):
she poked Caitlin Clark in the eye on purpose last
year and had the WNBA Players Association calling for her
credentials to be revoked. I mean, if Christine Brennan is
not immune from the WNBA considering revoking credentials, who is immune?
The answer is no one, So Clay, I think it
comes down to a simple calculus like, hey, we want
(29:39):
to continue to be allowed to cover games. The WNBA
doesn't want. Look, Clay, there's no such thing as a
WNBA reporter or a WNBA journalists. People might have it
in their LinkedIn bios or on their social media profiles,
but they're not telling the truth. The WNBA has a
group of people who act as essentially a pr firm
or a cheerleader for the league, and that's all it is,
and that's all they want. The media is here to
(30:01):
promote our product, talk about us only in a positive light,
and it drives me insane because the players talk about, oh,
we deserve equal pay, equal coverage to the men's game,
and this and that. But they're not telling the truth either.
They don't want equal, They want equal, but special. They
want everything that comes along with the positive, which is
more money, more advertisements, all of that, but they don't
(30:21):
want the criticism.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
Let me ask you one more question here.
Speaker 1 (30:24):
I appreciate the time dan Zach Sheesky at OutKick on
the news the WNBA is refusing to credential OutKick for
any Britney Grinder game. You've also been covering Nike. Nike
appears to have funded a study of trans miners to
see and I'm just trying to pair phrase it here,
to see what the impact of huberty related treatment, so
(30:48):
called gender affirming care might be on athletics. What is
going on here and what is happening such that Nike
is not in any way responding to questions that it
rose out of New York ixpose of all things relating
to gender treatments.
Speaker 3 (31:05):
Yeah, so, well, we don't know because Nike won't tell us.
We've only received one comment from Nike that was on background.
It was from you know, quote unquote anonymous source. I
spoke to a Nike executive who did not want to
be named, and said, the study is not moving forward essentially. Now,
we don't know when that happened. We don't know if
it's The speculation, of course, is that this was made
(31:25):
public by our reporting and they were like, oh crap,
we got to stop doing this, and the best way
to handle it is to just not say anything. So
I actually Clay went to Boston cause I also haven't
been able to speak with the researchers. The researchers who
were doing this study, who are not affiliated with Nike,
but we're receiving money from Nike allegedly. They also were
not responding to any inquiries. I sent dozens of emails
(31:47):
to doctor Katherine Ackerman, the lead researcher on the study,
and couldn't get a response. So Ackerman hosts a bi
annual female athlete conference. This year it was in Boston,
so I'll kick send me up to Boston to go
find Katherine Ackerman, ask her to her face what is
going on, and she basically would not say anything. She
knew right away who I was. After she asked my name,
(32:08):
I was like, hey, my name is Dan. She's like, oh,
I know who you are, and I know what you
want to talk about. And I was like, okay, well
do you want to talk about it? And she was like, no,
I do not. I also spoke with Joanna Harper, the
secondary researcher who you mentioned in that New York Times article.
That's who said it. Harper said it to New York
Times also told me I'm not supposed to talk about that. Okay,
not supposed to talk about it? Well, who told you
(32:28):
not to talk about it? I mean the obvious answer
would be Nike, but again we don't know because Nike
won't tell us. They could clear this up with one email,
one phone call, they're choosing not to, which only makes
them look more and more guilty in this situation.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
Thank you for filling in and for people out there.
I mean, this is way worse than bud Light giving
a random beer cans to a trans influencer. This, in theory,
would be Nike paying for miners to be treated to
see what the impact is in athletics, which is crazy.
Dan appreciate the words. Keep us updated on WNBA propagandasts
(33:04):
and more anytime, please thank you. Dan does really good work.
I do think that's important. And people will say, Okay, well,
you know, it's sports, why does it matter. The only
reason why anyone should be credentialed to go to a
sporting event in twenty twenty five is to ask questions
of athletes and of coaches and of owners other people
(33:28):
affiliated with the game, because everybody knows the outcome of
the game. The WNBA doesn't have reporters, they have propagandists,
and they won't even ask Britney Griner whether she gave
a racial slur to white people on the sideline and
a megaviral clip that's been watched over ten million times
on Twitter alone. It's shameful also predictable. Look, we just
(33:54):
came back. I was down in Palm Beach. We met
with the IFCJ face to face and help them raise
money because the attacks on Jewish people continue to grow,
including unfortunately what just happened in Bolder this past week,
chilling attack that anti Semitism is on the march. One
of the eight people injured, eighty eight year old who
(34:15):
had been through the Holocaust era, to have survived something
like that and then at eighty eight years old, deal
with molotov cocktails being thrown at you and bolder. We
also know what happened in our nation's capital, Washington, DC.
Globalizing the end of Fada has consequences, but also you
can push back against this awfulness by supporting the IFCJ.
(34:36):
They build bomb shelters, fortify ambulances, They provide donations, flack jackets,
other essential items. I saw it for myself in December
when I traveled to Israel. They also feed elderly Holocaust survivors.
When you give a gift of forty five dollars to
the IFCJ, you're putting faith into action right where it's
needed most. It stands for the International Fellowship of Christians
(34:57):
and Jews. You can stand up to anti Semitism, show
your support at IFCJ dot org. That's IFCJ dot org.
You can also call eight eight eight four eight eight
I f CJ again, IFCJ dot org or eight eight
eight four eight eight if CJ. I do think that
(35:24):
story is really important that we were just talking about
in terms of its cultural impact. Because if you are
going to say, which is something I agree with We're
not going to allow racism at all in any way
affiliated with our league. That's what the WNBA said, And
(35:45):
they lectured everyone and said, we're going to do a
deep investigation into every Indiana Fever fan that was there
to see if they said anything racist. And this has
happened recently, unfortunately for Byuve Volleyball. A Duke women's volleyball
player made up a fake racism allegation. There now a
lot of you listening in Utah are going to remember this.
(36:08):
Byu gets dragged through the mud, full investigation, nothing wrong,
same thing with the Indiana Fever.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
And if you're going to make those accusations, and then.
Speaker 1 (36:18):
You have a player who I think on the sideline,
Britney Griner, clearly insults a white girl based on her race,
calls her an fing white girl, how do you not
investigate it at all? And if you are a member
of the media that covers the league and aggressively ask
(36:39):
questions about the Indiana Fever fan allegations, how do you
not ask a single question of Britney Griner about the
megaviral video that appears to show her making a racist comment.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
How is that possible to occur?
Speaker 3 (36:53):
Well?
Speaker 1 (36:54):
It's because we have a fundamentally dishonest media, and I
think you have to call him out on it when
we come back. More on Trump elon Final Hour of
the Week here on Claybook
Speaker 3 (37:08):
M
Welcome back in Clay Travis buck Sexton show. We've been
diving into psychoanalyzing Trump, elon what happened yesterday afternoon, why
it matters, what drove it, where to go from here,
all of that.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
So if you.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Want to and you're just now getting into your car,
you're just now starting off your day, I think you
can enjoy that.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
We're not going to stop in that analysis. But that
was deep dive. Hey, here's what I think is going
to go on now.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I'm going to talk about a little bit spin it
forward and where I think we go from here, and
a lot of you weighing in. I'm going to also
share some of your emails, some of your thoughts from
many of you as well.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Buck.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
We'll be back with me, by the way, next week
in d C. We will be in d C all
next week and I will be in DC much of
the week after, so I'm going to be doing the
show from up there. We're going to have a lot
of Senators, a lot of representatives, a lot of members
of the Trump administration in our DC studios, so that
will be coming in the near future. I said that
(01:02):
I thought that there were many different factors that led
to Elon's temper tantrum yesterday. One I think is the
fact that Trump decided not to put his buddy in
charge of NASA. I think that was a precipitating factor.
I think that AI and the fact that Trump has
been leaning into a relationship with Sam Altman, who is
(01:25):
Elon's big AI rival. And let me just say this,
I'm a diehard Elon guy. I am invested alongside of
Elon with the x Ai company.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
So I'm a.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Partial shareholder of Twitter, I'm a partial shareholder of the
Ai company, and so I want Elon to be as
wildly successful there as possible. And if you want to
say that I'm biased in Elon's favor, you can certainly
argue that because I've got money that I believe is
well invested with Elon. But I'm telling you what I
(01:59):
think is coming out of the Elon Trump relationship where
that sort of emanates from.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So, I think it's NASA, I think it's AI.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
I think it's general frustration over the slow movement of
the government in general. Here's the other part of this,
it's the Big Beautiful Bill. Because this what precipitated, at
least publicly, the fight and let me kind of dive
in here and tell you what I think. Okay, So
(02:30):
the way that the government budget gets balanced really can
occur two ways, and I think this will in many
ways crystallize the battle between these two guys. One way
the government budget can get balanced is by cutting the
government expenses so that they are below the government revenues.
(02:54):
That is basic understandable economics for anybody out there that
has ever had to balance the checkbook, ever had to
balance the family budget. You say, hey, we've got ten
thousand dollars here in monthly expenses, we're only making seven
thousand dollars. Well, you're going to end up running a
(03:15):
deficit of three thousand dollars every month unless you cut
your expenses to under seven thousand dollars. Right, some basic economics.
Much of life is just basic economics. And I wish
we did a better job of teaching two things in schools.
There are a lot of things I wish well. History
is the one that is just giving up on. And
(03:35):
you guys know I'm a history nerd. But in terms
of things that matter to you, economics and probability and statistics,
all of life is economics and probability in statistics. Well,
everything in your life comes down to economics and probability
in statistics. And if you don't agree with me, it's
(03:58):
just because you haven't realized it yet. Every single decision
you make comes down to economics, probability, and statistics. The
people who are the richest in the world are the
best at analyzing risk, which is really just a combination
in many ways of economics, probability, and statistics. What is
the likelihood of an event that is going to occur.
(04:20):
If you are better at predicting the likelihood of an event,
you are going to make a lot of money. If
you are worse at predicting the likelihood of an event,
you are going to lose a lot of money. So
there's my ted talk. You can dive into it. You
can spend your whole life. That is the reality. Okay,
So two ways to balance a budget. One is by
(04:40):
cutting expenses. This is what Elon is focused on right now.
He has decided because of Doge, that government must be
reformed and expenses must be cut. That is one way
to balance the federal government. There are lots of people
that I respect that are aggressive on this take.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Senator Ran Paul Senator Ron Johnson.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I happen to think that they are right that more
expenses could be cut from the so called big beautiful bill.
Here's the other thing, though, The other way you balance
the budget is by exploding growth. Do you know what
explosive growth looks like? Three percent? If we can grow
(05:25):
the federal the larger United States economy at three percent
or more over the next several years, the budget will
balance too, because the overall growth rate of the economy
is going to exceed the growth in which we are
spending money. Now, this is really kind of a family
(05:48):
dive relationship here, right, You, in your own life may
be married to someone who is more on the cut
the expenses men. I will say, in general, a lot
of times are cut the expenses in a household, generally speaking,
(06:09):
sometimes women are. But then there's also the grow the
pie vision of life. Well, we can take that vacation
right now because we're gonna be making more money in
six months.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I know it's expensive to take the kids. I just
went trust me to Universal Studios.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And it's gonna mean that we don't we spend more
this month than we're making. But you know, in three months,
I'm gonna be getting a raise, or in three months
we're gonna be coming into a little bit of extra money.
So really we're growing the pie and we're.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Still gonna be okay financially.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
One is realistic, look at the world as it is
and adjust right now planning. The other is, hey, let's
think about where we're going. We can afford to spend
more right now. And guess what in my household, my
wife will tell you, I am the person who is
(07:20):
always thinking into the future.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
Yeah, we can buy that.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
On big expenses, We'll be fine because X, Y or
Z is going to happen big picture, I know. I think, well,
my wife might disagree where our finances.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Are going to be.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
She meanwhile, is just looking at the bank account and
she's like, oh, well, what about this expense and what
about that expense. It has been our whole life, by
the way, and that I think is the essence of
the big beautiful build debate right now.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Trump as a builder is, hey, look at the plot
of land.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Well, in eight years, it's going to be sixty stories tall,
and we're gonna be renting to Tiffany and the revenue
is going to be two hundred million dollars a year,
and it's gonna pay the rate of the insurance, and
it's gonna pay the rate of the interest and all
these different things. And sometimes I think probably Trump himself
(08:23):
would say his view of the future is so optimistic
that it doesn't pan out. That's why he's had a
couple of companies go bankrupt. Most real estate guys gals two,
but most of them are guys. They sell the future
the beautiful vision. Trump, at his heart, is a real
(08:44):
estate guy. He is selling a beautiful vision. What he's
selling on the big beautiful Bill is the economy is
going to get roaring, and it's going to get rolling.
If we cut taxes, we're going to skyrocket growth. If
we allow hundred percent expenditures, companies are going to spend money,
and our actual growth of the economy is going to
(09:07):
be substantial enough that we're going to be able to
kill the national debt right that we're going to start
to have a surplus. This is Art Lafer's argument. One
of the greatest economists that has ever lived, Art Laugher.
We've had him on this program several times, the Laugher Curve.
He was the foundation of Ronald Reagan's entire economic argument
(09:30):
as they brought down taxes. You cut taxes, you create
growth such that your tax revenue actually grows faster than
it otherwise would. That is the essence of the Laffer curve.
That is what Trump is arguing, the big beautiful bill
is going to do. Elon came in through DOGE to
cut expenses, and he is saying the bill doesn't cut
(09:53):
expenses fast enough. Here's what neither guy is telling you.
That is the ultimate truth. The federal government is the
side as it is because of entitlements. And when as
virtually every politician does, when they tell you we're going
to do everything you want, but we're also not going
to cut in any way so security or medicare they
(10:16):
are basically Marie Antoinette and you, this is why I'm
not a politician, because I can sit here and tell
you it is virtually impossible to pay off our thirty
six trillion dollar debt without reforming entitlements. It just is
they eat up a huge percentage of our overall national debt.
(10:37):
And I think what Elon found out when he went
into DOGE and started to look at all the math
and all the numbers and all the expenses and everything else.
Deep down, I think he recognized that even if you
cut all of the so called discretionary expenses, we're still
going to have a budget that cost way too much. Now,
(11:00):
that doesn't mean we shouldn't be cutting a lot of
discretionary expenses. I one hundred percent agree with Senator Ron
Johnson and Ran Paul that our budget is too big.
But I actually think the arguments that Trump and Elon
are making, which are leading to a conflict on the
Big Beautiful Bill, are about two different perspectives of how
(11:20):
you look at a budget. Elon is looking at it
hyper focused, hyper rational, and saying, hey, we've got to cut.
Trump is looking at it and saying we've got to grow.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Now. Ideally, we would cut and grow. Right.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
It's like I want to have both sides of this
equation too. We would cut the size of the government
and we would grow. I would right now vote I
think for the Big Beautiful Bill, I would Is it imperfect?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Yes? Do I wish it cut expenses more? Yes?
Speaker 1 (11:55):
All of these things are true. I think what Elon
and Ron Johnson and Ram Paul are saying is true.
I also think what Trump is saying is true, and
I'm just looking at the challenge incarnate with a small
lead in the House and a small majority in the
Senate in getting it all through. By the way, great
email that just came in. I want to read it
(12:15):
from so many of you are weighing in, and let
me see if I can find the one that Ali
sent to me during the commercial break. This was Donna,
she said she subscribed just away in with this. I
had to subscribe right now to share my agreement with
your take on Musk versus Trump. I'm seventy something. Grew
up in the New York City suburbs.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Mulu Meulu.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
I can never pronounce that word milliulu some words you know,
guys know I can't pronounce same area as Trump.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
Yeah, it's two French. They tried to say it in
my year. I can't say it.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
My father was a hustler businessman, so I know the
type like Trump, bombastic salesman.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Doesn't bother me.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
I'm married to a tech engineer, and I have a
brother who is a highly technical engineer. Spot on about
the mindset of engineers. I joke with friends and family
about them having no social intelligence. They're perfectionist OCD, whatever
you call it. I'm sad the waste Musk identify isn't
(13:14):
being addressed fully.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
He's not wrong.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
I'm reading the biography of Teddy Roosevelt and his first
experience with politics and all that he is pretty alarming.
I'm guessing things are still that bad. Not surprised. Musk
has hit so many roadblocks. Yes, yes, and Musk and
founding his entire companies are all about destroying roadblocks. And
(13:38):
then he tries to do what he thinks is one
hundred percent right, gets ripped to the shreds for it.
And a lot of the things that he is doing
are not being implemented as he would implement them if
he's a CEO. He's frustrated, he lashes out. I think
that explains everything going on right now. If you have
a family, many of us do. Just talking about family budgeting,
the challenge of how to think about the future, you
(14:01):
should have a will that's a legal document spells out
exactly how you want things to go when you're no
longer around. I have one. I also have trust set
up all sorts of stuff. Only a third of Americans
have a will. That's crazy, that's crazy. Low and One
reason is a lot of people just don't know where
to begin, who to trust with taking care of their
(14:21):
family after they pass. You can take care of this,
take the stress away. Trust and Will dot com is
the website they make writing a will simple affordable. The
result will give you peace of mind, not just for you,
but your entire family. That website, Trust and Will dot com.
They're experts in creating personalized trust and wills that protect
your legacy. That's Trust and Will dot com. Hey, Buck,
(14:52):
one of my kids called me an unc the other
day and unk yep slang evidently for not being hip,
being an old dude. So how do we un get
more people to subscribe to our YouTube channel?
Speaker 2 (15:03):
At least that's what my kids tell me.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
That's simple enough. Just search the Klay, Travis and Buck
Sexton Show and hit the subscribe button.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Takes less than five seconds to help ununk me.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
Do it for Clay, do it for freedom, and get
great content while you're there the Klay, Travis and Buck
Sexton Show YouTube channel.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
I know you were waiting for this.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
An astrologers called in and said she could see it
in the stars. Trump and Elon were not going to
be getting along hi anthe, What is the problem here?
From an astrology perspective.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
These two like each other.
Speaker 5 (15:34):
They have venus on one another's son. However, then Marge
opposed one another, So I was just waiting to see
how long it was going to be before there was
a fight and they split up. Now, for Trump's steak,
your analysis was brilliant, but I think you've been way
too easy on Elon Musk for Trump's state sake. I
(15:57):
hope they stay apart. They're not good for one another financially,
which Elon doesn't like. However, Trump, that won't affect Trump
as much because when you are going into cancer, it's
going to be good for Trump's financially, It's going to
be good for the country. We are so lucky to
have him. He has a chart that just it just shimmers.
(16:21):
It makes the page shimmer when you look at it.
Speaker 1 (16:24):
Does my art I appreciate this. Does my chart shimmer?
Or people listening right now in trouble? So I'm April sixth,
What does the chart say about me?
Speaker 5 (16:32):
You know you're I know you're in I know you're
in arising. I know I know that Leo moons, but
I haven't really looked.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
At your chart of well, I need you to look
at my chart if you would.
Speaker 5 (16:44):
Every once in a while you see something like how
many horses do you see like secretariat?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Yeah, that means Trump.
Speaker 5 (16:52):
That's Trump. Well, you don't see it very often, do you.
He's no regulars. The Star of the sixth Star of
Loyalty on his descendant. He's got his son up in
the tenth House. He was born to do this, and
every good thing that anyone says about him is true. Now.
Mousk unfortunately his planets have a way of making Trump
(17:16):
not look good, which is not good. He's technically intelligent.
He also his chart Trump, I mean, Musk's shark is
more similar to that of Bill Gates with the greed
or Princess Diana with the delusion. He's very immature. He's
(17:37):
beyond unbalanced. There's a drug issue which is going to
be the end of him if he doesn't address it.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
He all right, I've got to go to break. But
here's what I'm gonna ask you to do.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
I've got a guest coming up at one point thirty
who's going to talk about men and women's sports and
other things. I want you to look at my chart
and I want you to tell me if everybody's screwed
or if if the show's going to continue to do well.
So I'm gonna ask you to call back in in
the third hour. I'm gonna let our producers get I
want to make sure that I'm not leading everyone astray.
So Trump's chart, he's secretariat. I hope I'm not like
(18:14):
a glue horse. I don't want to lead you guys astray.
I'm thief from Rochester, New York. She's our astrologist, she's
on it. I was running around amusement parks and vacation
last week. You know what, I could have used rapid radios.
I saw the guys actually down at our big event
in rapid radios, and I told him, you know, hey,
Alice Beach, they have a big digital graffiti event. It's
(18:35):
an amazing event every year in May. And you know what,
the guys on security were using to communicate with each
other because the WiFi and the cell phone service can
be a little bit sketchy, they were using rapid radios.
My wife's got rapid radios. Got it right now on
the ten year old's hands because he's out of school
(18:55):
right now. We got no idea what he's going to
get into. You can help stay in touch with your kids,
with your family, and you can also protect yourself from catastrophe.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Five days worth the charges. These are amazing.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Rapid Radios dot Com sixty percent off free ups shipping
Code Radio. That's Rapid Radios dot Com Code Radio.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Buckle me back with me Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Eagerly awaiting my astrology reading also a little bit nervous.
I anthe working on it up in Rochester, New York.
She got more info about my birth or she's going
to steal my identity one of these two things. She
maybe is just the greatest con artist of all time
because she asked a lot of details about how I
was born. We bring in probably did not expect this introduction.
(19:43):
We bring in now. Dan zach Chesky does fantastic work
for OutKick, reporting on a variety of different stories, and
I wanted to shine some light on this because I
thought it was super interesting. Many of you out there
will remember a story went viral when the Indiana Fever
fans were accused of racial slurs in the direction of
(20:04):
Angel Reese in a WNBA game, and they did an investigation.
They determined that absolutely nothing inappropriate or racist had been said.
They couldn't find any evidence of it. Go figure, and
the WNBA at that time said, and I'm paraphrasing them,
but basically, we have no place in this league for
racism or mistreatment of others based on their race. There's
(20:27):
ender ethnicity, any of those things. And then within like
a day and a half, Britney Griner, who is a
women's basketball player that was traded for the merchant of death.
That seems like a not very fair trade. We got
a black lesbian basketball player in the WNBA, Russia got
back the merchant of death to help them theoretically create
(20:50):
more death. Again, I think that's a very unbalanced trade,
like herschel Walker for those of you who are old school,
when the Dallas Cowboys sorry Vikings fans got all of
the assets for no cost. But recently Deshaun Watson to
the Cleveland Browns probably the worst trade of all time.
Houston Texans get insanely fortunate. This was worse than those,
(21:10):
I would argue. But Britney Griner on the sideline appears
to insult white women in a phrase that went megaviral.
She has said nothing, The WNBA has said nothing. Now,
I would submit to you that if Kaitlin Clark were
on the sideline insulting black girls, that Kaitlin Clark's entire
(21:32):
career would probably be over everyone to be talking about it. So,
what did Britney Griner say? Has the WNBA investigated at all?
OutKick is like the only place that would we even
covered this, And so Dan Zack Sheesky is a reporter
at OutKick, and Dan appreciate you making the time for us.
I wanted to give a background. I think I laid
out everything there. You've been trying to go cover Britney
(21:53):
Griner and just ask the questions of her. What has happened?
What has the WNBA done?
Speaker 3 (22:00):
Clay, let me say that I don't know that the
Shawn Watson trades pretty bad. It might be closed as
far as worst trade.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
Which is the worst trade of all time?
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Britney Grinder for the Merchant of Death or Deshaun Watson
for all the first round picks the Cleveland Brown's a
good debate.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Yeah, I think you need to put up a pole
on your on your Twitter account anyway, So exactly, you
laid it out perfectly. It's pretty simple, Clay. Some people
say Brittany Grinder said fing white girl. Some people think
she said fing whack call. It was a pretty easy
way to figure out what she said. Asked her. It's
not that hard. Ask for the question, Britney Griner. There's
(22:35):
a viral moment. You know it, you've seen it. You
said it. What did you say? Not one person has
asked Britney Griner that question since it happened two weeks ago.
I mean, Grinder has played several WNBA games since then.
I mean, I know al kick has reached out to
the WNBA, to Grinder's management team. They aren't responding. But
(22:55):
I mean, this is really incumbent upon the so called
journalists and reporters who cover this league to ask. It
blows my mind that no one has even asked the question.
So we requested a credential for the game where Grinder
was playing in Los Angeles. Now, Grinder didn't actually end
up playing in that game, but we were denied that
(23:17):
credential request. We put in a request for the game
tonight against the Connecticut Sun. I have covered several Connecticut
Sun games over the past year. I was even allowed
to I'm sorry, granted a credential for a playoff game
against the Connecticut Sun against Caitlyn Clark and the Indiana Fever.
Now you want to talk about whether or not there's
enough space, because that was their response, We don't have
(23:39):
enough space to accommodate you. Really, you had enough space
for me to go to a playoff game that featured
Caitlin Clark playing at the Mohegan Sun Arena, which by
the way, is in the middle of absolutely nowhere. There
are not a lot of people that cover this team regularly,
because I mean, why would you. The Kanicett Sun have
one win and they're telling us they don't have enough
space for me to cover the game. I called bs
(24:01):
on that they don't want us asking Britney Grinder to
question that frankly should have already been asked.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Okay, so this is interesting to me. We have requested Throughoutkick.
I say we because I sold out Kick Fox owns it,
but I still do work for OutKick and I founded it.
You have asked to cover Britney Grinder's team in a
game in LA and now you have asked to cover
Britney Grinder's team on the East Coast in Connecticut, and
both of those in WNBA teams have said, no, we
(24:30):
don't have space, we can't handle one more journalist.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
That's my understanding. It was not me who requested the
credential in LA because I live in Connecticut. That would
have been quite the trick for me. I believe that
Los Angeles claimed that we requested the credential too late,
you know, late whatever.
Speaker 2 (24:48):
Fine, So let me ask you this.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
I will speak to this because I've been involved in
this for a long time. OutKick is credentialed for the
Super Bowl. You're a sports guy. Super Bowl pretty different
cult to get a credential for kind of a big deal.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
Yes, let's say so.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Out Kick has been credentialed for any NFL game, any
NBA game, any NHL game, and any major conference with
big ten sec all of these different sporting events to
my knowledge. But you, I'll ask you, is are all
of those sports that I just named? For instance, would
(25:28):
in Alabama Auburn game in general receive a little bit
more coverage than the than any w NBA game that's
ever existed, But certainly a random w NBA game in
the regular season?
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Is that fair?
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Super Bowl? Alabama, Auburn, Ohio State, Michigan. These are things
where there is a great deal of sports media demand
and yet we've gotten credentials. Would you agree probably a
little more popular than the WNBA.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Well, it's like the Deshaun Watson trade versus grind or
trade debate. But Clay, yes, I do think think you
are correct that there's a little bit more interest in
those events that you mentioned.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
In general, super Bowl more people interested in it than
women's professional basketball. I know that's going to really drive
the left wingers crazy, but it is. It is the
case that super Bowl, featuring only men, at least so far,
is more popular than a basketball game featuring only women. Okay,
so what do you attribute this to? Because I'll tell
you as the founder of out kick, I think that
(26:25):
the WNBA has decided that they will not credential OutKick
for anything. And this is a top down decision. Every
team has talked about it. They have decided they don't
like the way we're covering their league and therefore they
want credentialists. Do you buy that as a thesis? In
other words, do you think WNBA maybe they get enough
pressure from this and they change, But right now, do
(26:46):
you think that's their calculus?
Speaker 3 (26:48):
Yeah? I think that's one hundred percent true, and you know,
look like we're going to find out. I requested a
credential for the Atlanta Dream versus the New York Liberty.
Next week, I requested a credential for the Atlanta Dream
versus the Washington Mystics two days after that. Let's see,
let's see if they let us in, because we're we're
not going to stop asking. That's what we do at
out kick, right. We have questions, we want answers. We're
not going to stop asking.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Okay, I also think this is important.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
Ostensibly, the only reason for sports journalism to exist as
it pertains to games is for journalists, that is, reporters,
however you want to classify it, to go and ask athletes, coaches, owners,
anyone affiliated with teams questions about their performance in the game. Right,
(27:33):
That's the only reason why anyone should be credentialed to
a game, particularly in this day and age, because everybody
can sit and watch the actual game.
Speaker 2 (27:42):
It used to be that.
Speaker 1 (27:43):
You had to have journalists at games because you would
wake up the next morning and you wanted to get
the newspaper and otherwise you wouldn't know what happened in
the game. But now, every game streams, every game is available,
every fan knows the score of any team they care about.
The only reason why these jobs should exists is for
questions to be asked of the people involved in.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Them, right I would agree with that, Yes.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Okay, So if we believe that is the presumption, then
how in the world is it possible take out kick
off the table? Because I agree with you, we would
ask Britney Griner this question, How in the world from
a media perspective, from a journalistic perspective, from a big
jay journalism role, can the New York Times, the Washington Post,
(28:27):
the New York Times just had a big profile of
Britney Griner ironically that I read over the weekend. How
can they justify going and covering these games and not
asking Britney Griner about the megaviral clip of her in
the wake of the investigation of the Indiana fever over
inappropriate comments. I mean, it seems like the biggest, most
(28:49):
glistening orb in the sky. How could they possibly justify
from a journalistic perspective, not asking that question.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
It's pretty easy, Clay, and we're finding out right now,
because when you ask those questions, you don't get invited back. See,
the WNBA has put this, has put this in place
where it's like, hey, you cover our league the way
we want you to cover it, or we're not giving
you a credential. I mean, look at Christine Brennan, one
of the most radical left wing, progressive liberal sports writers
on the planet, dared to ask dj A Carrington if
(29:18):
she poked Caitlin Clark in the eye on purpose last
year and had the WNBA Players Association calling for her
credentials to be revoked. I mean, if Christine Brennan is
not immune from the WNBA considering revoking credentials, who is immune?
The answer is no one, So Clay, I think it
comes down to a simple calculus like, hey, we want
(29:39):
to continue to be allowed to cover games. The WNBA
doesn't want. Look, Clay, there's no such thing as a
WNBA reporter or a WNBA journalists. People might have it
in their LinkedIn bios or on their social media profiles,
but they're not telling the truth. The WNBA has a
group of people who act as essentially a pr firm
or a cheerleader for the league, and that's all it is,
and that's all they want. The media is here to
(30:01):
promote our product, talk about us only in a positive light,
and it drives me insane because the players talk about, oh,
we deserve equal pay, equal coverage to the men's game,
and this and that. But they're not telling the truth either.
They don't want equal, They want equal, but special. They
want everything that comes along with the positive, which is
more money, more advertisements, all of that, but they don't
(30:21):
want the criticism.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
Let me ask you one more question here.
Speaker 1 (30:24):
I appreciate the time dan Zach Sheesky at OutKick on
the news the WNBA is refusing to credential OutKick for
any Britney Grinder game. You've also been covering Nike. Nike
appears to have funded a study of trans miners to
see and I'm just trying to pair phrase it here,
to see what the impact of huberty related treatment, so
(30:48):
called gender affirming care might be on athletics. What is
going on here and what is happening such that Nike
is not in any way responding to questions that it
rose out of New York ixpose of all things relating
to gender treatments.
Speaker 3 (31:05):
Yeah, so, well, we don't know because Nike won't tell us.
We've only received one comment from Nike that was on background.
It was from you know, quote unquote anonymous source. I
spoke to a Nike executive who did not want to
be named, and said, the study is not moving forward essentially. Now,
we don't know when that happened. We don't know if
it's The speculation, of course, is that this was made
(31:25):
public by our reporting and they were like, oh crap,
we got to stop doing this, and the best way
to handle it is to just not say anything. So
I actually Clay went to Boston cause I also haven't
been able to speak with the researchers. The researchers who
were doing this study, who are not affiliated with Nike,
but we're receiving money from Nike allegedly. They also were
not responding to any inquiries. I sent dozens of emails
(31:47):
to doctor Katherine Ackerman, the lead researcher on the study,
and couldn't get a response. So Ackerman hosts a bi
annual female athlete conference. This year it was in Boston,
so I'll kick send me up to Boston to go
find Katherine Ackerman, ask her to her face what is
going on, and she basically would not say anything. She
knew right away who I was. After she asked my name,
(32:08):
I was like, hey, my name is Dan. She's like, oh,
I know who you are, and I know what you
want to talk about. And I was like, okay, well
do you want to talk about it? And she was like, no,
I do not. I also spoke with Joanna Harper, the
secondary researcher who you mentioned in that New York Times article.
That's who said it. Harper said it to New York
Times also told me I'm not supposed to talk about that. Okay,
not supposed to talk about it? Well, who told you
(32:28):
not to talk about it? I mean the obvious answer
would be Nike, but again we don't know because Nike
won't tell us. They could clear this up with one email,
one phone call, they're choosing not to, which only makes
them look more and more guilty in this situation.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
Thank you for filling in and for people out there.
I mean, this is way worse than bud Light giving
a random beer cans to a trans influencer. This, in theory,
would be Nike paying for miners to be treated to
see what the impact is in athletics, which is crazy.
Dan appreciate the words. Keep us updated on WNBA propagandasts
(33:04):
and more anytime, please thank you. Dan does really good work.
I do think that's important. And people will say, Okay, well,
you know, it's sports, why does it matter. The only
reason why anyone should be credentialed to go to a
sporting event in twenty twenty five is to ask questions
of athletes and of coaches and of owners other people
(33:28):
affiliated with the game, because everybody knows the outcome of
the game. The WNBA doesn't have reporters, they have propagandists,
and they won't even ask Britney Griner whether she gave
a racial slur to white people on the sideline and
a megaviral clip that's been watched over ten million times
on Twitter alone. It's shameful also predictable. Look, we just
(33:54):
came back. I was down in Palm Beach. We met
with the IFCJ face to face and help them raise
money because the attacks on Jewish people continue to grow,
including unfortunately what just happened in Bolder this past week,
chilling attack that anti Semitism is on the march. One
of the eight people injured, eighty eight year old who
(34:15):
had been through the Holocaust era, to have survived something
like that and then at eighty eight years old, deal
with molotov cocktails being thrown at you and bolder. We
also know what happened in our nation's capital, Washington, DC.
Globalizing the end of Fada has consequences, but also you
can push back against this awfulness by supporting the IFCJ.
(34:36):
They build bomb shelters, fortify ambulances, They provide donations, flack jackets,
other essential items. I saw it for myself in December
when I traveled to Israel. They also feed elderly Holocaust survivors.
When you give a gift of forty five dollars to
the IFCJ, you're putting faith into action right where it's
needed most. It stands for the International Fellowship of Christians
(34:57):
and Jews. You can stand up to anti Semitism, show
your support at IFCJ dot org. That's IFCJ dot org.
You can also call eight eight eight four eight eight
I f CJ again, IFCJ dot org or eight eight
eight four eight eight if CJ. I do think that
(35:24):
story is really important that we were just talking about
in terms of its cultural impact. Because if you are
going to say, which is something I agree with We're
not going to allow racism at all in any way
affiliated with our league. That's what the WNBA said, And
(35:45):
they lectured everyone and said, we're going to do a
deep investigation into every Indiana Fever fan that was there
to see if they said anything racist. And this has
happened recently, unfortunately for Byuve Volleyball. A Duke women's volleyball
player made up a fake racism allegation. There now a
lot of you listening in Utah are going to remember this.
(36:08):
Byu gets dragged through the mud, full investigation, nothing wrong,
same thing with the Indiana Fever.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
And if you're going to make those accusations, and then.
Speaker 1 (36:18):
You have a player who I think on the sideline,
Britney Griner, clearly insults a white girl based on her race,
calls her an fing white girl, how do you not
investigate it at all? And if you are a member
of the media that covers the league and aggressively ask
(36:39):
questions about the Indiana Fever fan allegations, how do you
not ask a single question of Britney Griner about the
megaviral video that appears to show her making a racist comment.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
How is that possible to occur?
Speaker 3 (36:53):
Well?
Speaker 1 (36:54):
It's because we have a fundamentally dishonest media, and I
think you have to call him out on it when
we come back. More on Trump elon Final Hour of
the Week here on Claybook
Speaker 3 (37:08):
M
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.
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.