June 17, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show delivers a high-impact political discussion centered on U.S. foreign policy, national debt, media bias, and digital freedom, featuring exclusive interviews with Senator Rand Paul and FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr. This hour dives deep into the escalating tensions with Iran, with KY Senator Paul urging President Donald Trump to avoid direct military involvement and emphasizing constitutional limits on war powers. Paul critiques the potential consequences of U.S. intervention, including the risk of accelerating Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the dangers of regime change. The conversation shifts to the “Big Beautiful Bill,” where Senator Paul voices strong concerns about the national debt, criticizing the bill’s weak spending cuts and the proposed $5 trillion debt ceiling increase. He calls for fiscal responsibility and outlines his conditional support for the bill, contingent on separating the debt ceiling from tax reform. Paul also reflects on his complex relationship with President Trump, highlighting mutual respect despite policy disagreements. Later in the hour, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr joins the show to discuss media fairness, spectrum policy, and digital censorship. Carr addresses the imbalance in political coverage by legacy media outlets like ABC, CBS, and NBC, and outlines the FCC’s efforts to empower local broadcasters and investigate potential violations by NPR, PBS, and CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He also discusses the importance of restoring spectrum leadership to support emerging technologies like autonomous vehicles and AI, and defends free speech in the digital age, warning against government-corporate collusion in online censorship. Additional listener calls and commentary touch on Iran’s historical context, the role of Elon Musk’s Starlink in bypassing state media, and the cultural shift in how younger generations consume news via platforms like YouTube and TikTok. The hour concludes with breaking news from the U.S. State Department advising against travel to Iran and Israel due to escalating conflict. This hour is a must-listen for anyone interested in U.S. foreign policy, constitutional governance, media accountability, and the future of digital freedom under President Donald Trump’s administration.
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 in our number three Tuesday edition Clay Travis buck
Sexton Show. Appreciate all of you hanging out with us.
We're about to be joined by Senator Ran Paul of Kentucky.
I am in Washington, d C. Buck is on the
French Riviera for the Big Can Advertising Conference. A lot
of people want to buy into this show as the
(00:20):
audience has continued to grow, and so Buck is over there,
Senator ram Paul with us.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Now.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We're following a.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Lot of different stories, ongoing uncertainty about exactly what the
United States actions and responses will be as it pertains
to Iran.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
We'll talk about that with Senator ran Paul right now.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Also continued fallout of the Big Beautiful Bill and where
that is headed. But let's start with the number one
question that is out there right now, Senator ram Paul.
What if President Trump called you and he said, hey,
what do you think I should do about the situation
in a ra on?
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Your response would be, what.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
You know?
Speaker 5 (01:03):
The President's had good instincts traditionally on this, and his
instincts have been for restraint, for thinking things through, and
hopefully for not getting us involved in this war. I
think it would be a bad idea for US to
be involved directly in the war. I think the chance
of negotiation pretty much goes out the window with the
first US bombs dropping. Even as it is, we're so
(01:25):
closely linked with Israel, I think that it's almost depicted
as a joint action now, but I think it is
a step for the worse if we actually are involved
actively with bombing. The other thing in our country is
we have this thing called the Constitution that says you
can't go to war with countries without permission. So if
he did decide, and he told me he's absolutely made
the decision, I would recommend to him that he has
(01:47):
to come before Congress ask us for permission, and we'll
have a vote the same night on whether or not
to go to war.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Do you yourself, are you concerned about the idea of
Iran having nuclear wayapons? Do you think that's a threat
to the United States?
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Well, you know, I think potentially, I think.
Speaker 5 (02:06):
That it's more a threat to their regional neighbors. But
I would say that I don't want them.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
To have nuclear weapons. I don't think anybody does.
Speaker 5 (02:13):
But the question about every activity is does it make
it more or less likely. So I think you can
argue both sides of does Israel's bombing make it more
or less likely that.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
They get a nuclear weapon?
Speaker 5 (02:25):
You can say, well, they're destroying their capability, or you
could say that this is the last straw from Iran's
point of view, and Iran will simply rush headlong into
developing a weapon. They may well have stockpiles of highly
enricheranium we don't know about, and once you have it,
you can really hide a cupful of highly enricheranium anywhere,
(02:47):
and probably one couple is probably enough for a decent
sized bomb, and so they have the ability to enrich
I don't think the bombing gets rid of their knowledge
of nuclear power.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Even though they killed many different scientists.
Speaker 5 (03:01):
I hope they don't go this direction. But there's always
a question will they passively come back and you know,
hang their head and say we're sorry and we want
to negotiate, or will they you know, have this sense
of nationalism, rally around their flag, put aside their differences
and really unify the sense of uh trying to you know,
come at an attack.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
I presume that since you wouldn't like to see United
States force, you know, bunker busting bombs used. I think
that would be your position based on the answer so
far that you also would want to have no US
involvement in any potential regime change relating to the Ayatolas
or anything else. Your general proposition would be that we
should not get involved.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Well, you know, we tried that.
Speaker 5 (03:47):
You know, we tried it in Afghanistan and for twenty years,
and Afghanistan was a very very tiny backwards country, no
wealth and very few people compared to Iran, and we
weren't very successful even in that backwater of trying to
get you know, a stable government, and the Taliban ended
up walting in and you know, a matter of days
taking over that government. So I don't know that we're
(04:10):
very good at nation building, nor do I think that
that's really what we should be doing. So no, I'm
not involved with it. Do I wish they're people? Well, yeah,
I would love to see their people get rid of
their government. Nobody wants to see their people oppressed. The
you know, the women that have been you know, snatched
up off the street, beaten, and who knows else, you know,
simply for not wearing.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
A face covering.
Speaker 5 (04:32):
And you know, the young people of Iran are said
to be very pro western, very much more open than
where the Mullas are as far as you know culture.
And it is sad to see what's happening.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
But you know, our job really isn't.
Speaker 5 (04:48):
To send armies everywhere and to send our soldiers and
that's the way people need to think of this. Are
you ready to send your son or daughter, you know,
to march in a trench and you know, trench to
trench in Iran? And it really is not what that
we should be involved with.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
We're talking to Senator Ram Paul.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
All right, let's shift from Iran right now to what's
going on with the so called big beautiful bill. Last
week we had Senator Ron Johnson in. I think you
and he share a lot of the same ideas on
this bill not cutting spending enough. I don't know if
things have changed since the last week. What would you
tell us? What should we know about the current status
(05:24):
of the bill as you see it.
Speaker 5 (05:27):
You know, a lot of the bill is tax cuts,
which I'm for. Making the tax cuts permanent, which I'm for.
I voted for these tax cuts in twenty seventeen, most
of them. I think they were largely responsible for the
economic growth.
Speaker 4 (05:39):
And prosperity in the first Trump.
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Administration with low historic unemployment, we were doing great until
you know, they set the government down, shut the world
down for the pandemic. But I'm for all of that.
The spending cuts, I agree with Ron Johnson.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
They're weak, their anemic, and they will.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Not materially affect our accumulation of debt. And this is
the thing people need to understand. Our deficit decis is
going to be two point two trillion if you believe
the numbers of the bill, which really probably are not
accurate in the first year or two, but that we're
going to have cut spending one hundred and fifty billion.
That means instead of a two point two trillion, you'd
have a two point zero five trillion. So it's really
(06:18):
not materially changing the accumulation of debt, and probably in
the first couple of years the debt will grow because
when you reduce tax rates, you do usually get less.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
Revenue in the beginning.
Speaker 5 (06:30):
Now you tend to get economic growth and grow out
of it, but for.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
A year or two that revenue will go down.
Speaker 5 (06:35):
They also have some fake pay fors in there. They
have a pay for that says, we're getting rid of
the Biden forgiveness of student loans. Well, the course ruled
that illegal and it never went into action. So they're
going to get rid of something that isn't currently happening.
And only in Washington do you call that a cut
when you get rid of something that actually isn't occurring.
But some of these things aren't real. Some of the
(06:58):
real findings, like putting work requirements on Medicaid, don't start
occurring until after the election in twenty twenty six. So
I think in the first couple of years.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
The devisit does get worse.
Speaker 5 (07:10):
So but my biggest complaint really though.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
Is the debt ceiling.
Speaker 5 (07:15):
Raising the debt ceiling five trillion when Congress I think
is terrible with money.
Speaker 4 (07:19):
They're irresponsible. We've accumulated thirty six fin dollars debt.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
They show no signs of wisening up and actually spending cuts,
and so I think to raise the debt ceiling five
trillion is giving irresponsibility too much, irresponsible people too much credit.
So I'd give them three months and in three months
it's going to be the end of the fiscal year.
You realize in three months they're going to be coming
back with a big, beautiful omnibus, and so that's going
(07:44):
to be we'll face that in September. And so if
they're going to keep spending money the same way they have,
I would say, you get very little installments of debt ceiling.
We vote on it every three months until we see
if we can trust you with money.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
What do you think the timeframe is? You just laid
out the debt ceiling. President Trump has said he'd like
to have this done by July fourth. Ron Johnson said
he didn't think that was very likely. When do you
think the Senate might be able to vote on this bill?
What does your horizon look like? In that respect?
Speaker 5 (08:15):
It all depends on how many people are have courage.
Four principled conservatives with courage could make this into a
conservative bill. All would take would be four of us
to say that we don't want the debt ceiling on
there and we're not voting for five trillion of debts,
and they would have to change it. Right now, I
think it's me and possibly Ron Johnson, and then there
(08:40):
may be one or two others out there. But I
really haven't heard a lot that indicates to me that
there are people.
Speaker 4 (08:46):
You have to say you're going to be a no who.
Speaker 5 (08:48):
You have to be steadfast and loud, and you have
to tell them why, and you have to tell them
what it takes to get to yes. And that's why,
despite getting some critic from some of the attack dogs
at the White House, I've been very clear to the President.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
I like a lot of the bill.
Speaker 5 (09:03):
I like him personally, I support him, and I'll support
the bill, but they have to separate out.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
The dead ceiling. They don't want to do that, but
they will.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
Do it if I'm the deciding vote. That's what I
also told my supporters, just that I can't believe you
will vote forever the tax reduction. I said I will.
I'm for it, and if I'm the deciding vote, I
promise you I'll vote for it. But if I'm the
deciding vote, they're going to have to negotiate, and they
will because that's why it works. The only reason they're
not negotiating with me on the dead ceiling now is
we don't have the four votes to oppose them. If
(09:32):
we had the four votes, we'd have already separated the
dead ceiling and I would be a yes.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Now, how frustrated you just mentioned it a little bit.
Do you think the president is with you.
Speaker 4 (09:44):
A little bit?
Speaker 5 (09:45):
You know, I've known him for quite a while, But.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Is your relationship with the president, sorry to cut you
off a little bit, Is your relationship with the president
a little bit of a roller coaster? Because sometimes it
seems like you guys are thickest thieves, and then other
times it's like you're kind of at each other a
little bit. Do you feel like a little bit over
the decade that you've been a roller coaster with the president?
Speaker 5 (10:05):
Well, it's kind of funny because I personally like him,
played golf with him a dozen times. I played golf
with him before he was president, probably twenty thirteen twenty fourteen.
I asked him to support some of my mission trips
when I did surgery in Guatemala and I believe it
was twenty thirteen or twenty fourteen, and then at Haiti.
He supported both trips, and so I've gotten to know
(10:26):
him over time and actually enjoy his company.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
I was probably one of his biggest defenders on the impeachment,
but you know, there is a mercurial.
Speaker 5 (10:34):
Nature to it though that you know, I think those
were very important things that defense on that, I think
this bill is just a policy difference, and I'm not
changing anything.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
I'm poor.
Speaker 5 (10:45):
I've always been against raising massive raises of the dead ceiling,
whether it's.
Speaker 4 (10:49):
Biden or anybody else.
Speaker 5 (10:51):
But I think some of his attack dogs at the
White House simply you know, it's it's my way to
the highway kind of stuff. But the last time I
talked and we had a good conversation, it was after
the big beautiful parade, and he was in good spirits,
and you know, I reiterated what it would take. And
my goal is not to defeat the bill. My goal
(11:12):
is to you know, present a conservative bill that I
can be happy to support. And a lot of the
bill I like, all you got to do is separate
on the dead ceiling or shorten it, and they could
well get my vote. But yeah, the relationships up and down,
but I think.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Still a lot of you know, respect on my part.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
We're talking to Senator Rampaul. Last question for you. You know,
I know, looking ahead to twenty twenty eight is a
ways away. We still have to get past the midterms.
But there's a lot of talk about Andy Basheer in
your state running for president. He was one of the
worst governors in America, certainly the worst governor, I would say,
of a red state during COVID.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
Is it kind of.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Staggering to you that he would be a national political
figure based on what you have seen of his leadership
in Kentucky.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
To see that he'll be any kind of national figure.
I think he lacks the you know, charisma, But he
also the things that he did to us in our state.
I mean, shutting down churches, shutting down gym, shutting down
you know, stores, you name it, limiting how many people
can show up anywhere, banning travel. I mean, the authoritarian
things he did in our state are what many other
(12:23):
Democrats did too. Whittmer did some of the same stuff
in Michigan, but I don't think that'll be popular. I
think he fools himself into thinking, well, he's a Democrat,
had won in a Republican state. All Democrats like that
think they're going to be the next Jimmy Carter or
Bill Clinton. And that's yet to be seen, but I
kind of doubt it from what I've seen. I can't
imagine that he'll be much of a force in the
(12:44):
Democrat primary.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
Senator Ran Paul we appreciate the time. Happy to have
you on whenever and keep us updated on how the
bill goes. Thanks that is Senator Ran Paul. Look, if
you're frustrated with the cost of your health insurance, you're
not alone. You might want to consider a new plan
available for everyone out there offers a monthly cost as
low as two hundred and sixty two dollars. Insurance plan
called Ease for Everyone. Compared to Obamacare, Ease for Everyone affordable,
(13:08):
you get to keep your doctor, and you get free
unlimited virtual primary care. With the Ease for Everyone, you
also have access to over four hundred prescription drugs for free,
not just at a lower cost, but at no cost
zero bucks. Ease for Everyone created as a solution to
the broken system that's complicated healthcare. Go online to Ease
for Everyone dot com slash clay to get started. That's
(13:31):
Ease for Everyone. Dot com slash clay. Get affordable healthcare
for as low as two hundred and sixty two dollars
a month today. That's Ease for Everyone dot com slash clay.
We are going to be joined by the Commissioner of
(13:52):
the FCC or the car. He's going to be with
us here at the bottom of the hour, we got
a couple of different things. I will hit a lot
of you weighing in on a variety of different stories.
I love Mary Beth. Let's listen to a a firing
back yesterday at the criticisms undaunted, and uh and and
and unjustified. I should say, unjustified criticisms of my outfit
(14:15):
on Fox News.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
This is Mary Beth Clay.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Don't listen to him.
Speaker 6 (14:19):
I saw you on the Media Buzz show, and you
looked fantastic.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
It was the perfect shade of.
Speaker 5 (14:26):
Pink for a man, and it was very very appropriate
for summer. You look fantastic.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
I don't know that I was in pink, so I
was gonna give Mary Beth a real plaudit's here. But
I do appreciate that she thought I looked good. It
was a light, airy color, and I can see how
the white could have looked a little bit pink in
conjunction with my amazing jacket. Anna and Raleigh, what did
you think of the incredibly masculine crying stunt from Senator
(14:55):
Padilla that we just saw on the Senate floor as
a woman, where you swept off your feet.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
He needs a grabby. No all planned ign Okay, because
he could have stacked out a phone call to make
an appointment to meet with DHF and ask his questions.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
Okay, that's all in reality.
Speaker 7 (15:19):
In reality, he would.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
Have expected the exact same courtesy from DHF if they
had questions for him.
Speaker 3 (15:27):
Thank you for the call.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
Doesn't sound like you were overwhelmed by his raw masculine
power on the Senate floor. Jeff in Houston, we got
a lot of reactions coming in bb KT RH down
in Houston, one of our top affiliates.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
What's Jeff got for us?
Speaker 4 (15:43):
Clay.
Speaker 8 (15:43):
As far as Iran goes, we owe them revenge going
all the way back to nineteen seventy nine. But as
far as Iran being a free country, they were never
a free country. They were Westernized, but Deshaw had the Savac.
Back then, people were terrorized, And I talked to people
back then who were from Persia as they called it.
(16:07):
It was much better than it is now, but it
was not free.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
When I say free, I mean in the context of
Middle Eastern freedoms at the time. Iran in the nineteen seventies,
before the revolution, the people were far freer than they
are today, and I think that many people who lived
through that envy that era. In fact, I think the
percentages and again team can look this up, but Iran
(16:31):
has a huge population of people under the age of
thirty who look back on that era very fondly and
actually would love to have more of a connection with
the West than they do right now.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
And I give credit to Elon Musk.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
My understanding is he's turned on the starlink Internet so
that the people of Iran don't have to just be
listening to the state subsidized media coverage of what's going
on there. We'll talk about that a little bit with
Brendan Carr of the fc SEE and how that impact
can be even in the foreign countries as it pertains
to your ability to know what exactly is going on.
(17:11):
And we may may get an update on the President
being in the situation room before the program ends today,
so we are certainly going to keep you updated on
that as well. But I want to tell you as
we get ready for Brinton Carr to be on with
us next, we have got an incredible offer for all
of you rapid radios. These are phenomenal. They last charged
(17:34):
us five days. My wife has got this set up.
Sometimes gives it to our ten year old. He doesn't
have a cell phone yet, but he wants to run around.
He gets to pretend he's Gi Joe, and he gets
to stay in touch with his mom and his dad.
But this is a nationwide wireless device that will allow
you to connect with everyone in your household. We've talked
(17:54):
about this a lot in times of awful weather. For instance,
what happened to Ashville, North Carolina. Book's sister in law
was able to get in touch with their family when
virtually every cell phone network was down. These charges last
for five days. They're great safety and security. For you
to be able to have limited time offer, all you
have to do is go to rapid Radios dot com.
(18:15):
You can save up to sixty percent free ups shipping
from the guys up in Michigan, where this company is based.
And when you use the promo code Radio, you get
an extra five percent off.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
That's code Radio.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
Rapid radios dot Com Code Radio up to sixty percent off.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
Get hooked up right now.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Make sure that you are taking care of your family
in the event of needing to be in touch nationwide.
Get hooked up now Rapid radios dot com code Radio.
That's rapid radios, dot com code radio, get hooked up today.
(18:54):
We're joined now by FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. He's in
studio with us here in Washington, DC. And I know
you got a ton of different things on your plate,
so I'm gonna hit you with questions. You may try
to dodge some of them, just because I understand you
guys are pretty good at that.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
So let's start off here.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
I think now that President Trump is in office, it's
fair to say that we have seen maybe a little
bit of unfairness from ABC, CBS, NBC, among others.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
They have a.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
Government responsibility based on the fact that we have given
them a license as a country. How fair now that
we're through the election season, do you think news coverage
has been What could occur from your perspective, to make
it fair er because they're supposed to be as a
part of getting a license. You correct me if I'm
wrong not providing some form of biased news coverage. But
(19:51):
I think most people that are listening to us right
now would really roll their eyes at the idea that ABC,
NBC and CBS are providing in some way fair and
balanced news coverage.
Speaker 7 (20:01):
Yeah, thanks so much. Great to be with you.
Speaker 6 (20:03):
You know, look, if you step back and you think
about speakers in this country, you've got, you know, the
guy in the soapbox gets to say whatever he wants.
You've got cable channels which are lightly regulated. When it
comes to television stations. Those are licensed by the FCC, Yes,
and they are required by federal law to operate in
the public interest. Now, if you step back over the years,
the FCC and regulators in Washington, I think have walked
(20:25):
away completely from enforcing that public interest obligation, and I
don't think we're better off for it. To your question,
if you step back, I don't think the national programmers.
So if you look at ABC, CBS, NBC they own
some stations, but in the mainly program content that goes
out through licensed stations, I don't think they've been fair
at all if you step back and look at their
coverage in terms of Republicans or President Trump, and frankly
(20:48):
that's not just my opinion. If you look at trust
in that national programmers again, focusing on ABC, CBS, NBC,
trust is at an all time low. Again, Jeff Bezos,
of all people, did an op ed not that long
ago saying that these national media outlets have lost the
thread when it comes to where the American public is.
But the good news is this, there's another side of
(21:08):
the coin. When top of the actual local broadcast TV stations,
the ones that actually hold the license by the FCC,
when they run programming, it's actually really trusted by local communities.
Speaker 7 (21:17):
So the biggest policy that we're running.
Speaker 6 (21:20):
At the FEC in terms of media right now is
how do we empower the local broadcasters to serve the
public interest and allow them to get some distance from
the national programmers that are really just generating content in
Hollywood in New York and sort of force feeding it
out there. So I think there's actually a lot the
FCC can do that addresses this issue, and again focusing
(21:41):
on that unique public interest obligations that TV channels have.
Speaker 1 (21:45):
That is super interesting because I think most people out
there listening to us right now, when there is a
major thunderstorm, for instance, and they are at home, they
trust their local news to provide them accurate coverage about danger, tornadoes,
everything else. But they certainly don't trust the national news
to provide them. So I hadn't really thought about that dichotomy.
It's interesting NPR PBS we have seen the vote barely
(22:08):
get passed in the House to take away their funding
as it pertains to government dollars. I've always thought it's crazy.
To my knowledge, we don't get a massive amount of
government support. We compete with NPR. This show does the
premiere networks all over the country, and it's always felt
like an unfair competition that they get these dollars we don't.
(22:28):
What do you think what kind of optics does the
FCC have on those issues?
Speaker 7 (22:32):
It really wasn't that long ago.
Speaker 6 (22:34):
If you looked at a cross section of the listeners
and viewer to NPR and PBS, you'd get a pretty
decent cross section of the country as a whole. And
at some point not that long ago, things changed dramatically,
and it appears that NPR and PBS have been appealing
to a very narrow bespoke, almost Acella horde or portion
of the country. And you can do that right as
(22:55):
a First Amendment matter. But if you are going to
Congress and saying I want you Congress to force people
to take money out of their pocketbooks, send it to
Washington and then send it to subsidize that. I think
it's entirely legitimate for people to be asking questions about that.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
It's your point.
Speaker 6 (23:11):
Recently recisions package past the House that would save about
a billion dollars from that funding. The FCC, we've launched
actually an investigation into NPR and PBS. And here's why
they are. Unlike any other station, like a station here
at commercial station, they're non commercial, which means they get
special benefits above and beyond those that regular broadcasters get.
(23:33):
But as a consequence, they can't run advertising. But what
it looks like they've been doing is running programs that
appear to be very close, if not to advertisements themselves.
So we've launched an inquiry at the FCC to make
sure that they're not violating the law, because really you
can't have it both ways. You can't be getting you know,
public funding and claiming that you're you know, a non
commercial and then potentially the same time running commercial. So
(23:54):
we're looking at as well. Right now, CBS News in
the news a lot. You got the transcriptra East of
sixty minutes, the interview that they did with Kamala Harris
right before the election, that was edited in many different
ways potentially beneficially to her. What can you tell us
about the investigation into sixty minutes and how does that
impact the larger paramount idea they're trying to sell to Skydance.
(24:18):
I believe where is all of that from your perspective? Yeah,
right before January twentieth, inf I think read around January tenth.
I believe the prior administration, the Biden FCC summarily dismissed
a news distortion complaint that had been filed against sixty
Minutes based on claims of editing around that answer to
Kamala Harris in the sixty Minutes episode.
Speaker 7 (24:39):
They dismissed it.
Speaker 6 (24:40):
Without actually doing any real inquiry, without doing any due diligence.
And so one of the very first things that we
did was we restored that complaint against CBS. We've put
it out for public comment, and to your point, we
obtained the unedited transcript in video of that interview. We've
put it all out there. I think Sunlighty's the best disinfected.
So right now the American people are participating in this process.
We haven't made a final decision, but we are weighing whether,
(25:02):
in fact it is a news distortion or not, and
that's under active investigation at the FCC. Separate from that,
we do have a transaction before the FCC where the
owners of CBS are looking to sell and as of
right now, we're just running our normal course review on
that and no significant update as to where we are
on that.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
When you look at the spectrum, and I know people
think about this a lot. I was out in San
Francisco recently, got to go in a weymo. I felt
like I was in the future.
Speaker 6 (25:29):
For all the weymouth started getting before good get out
of that clay.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
We got out safely. There doing research on that. The
amount of spectrum that's going to be required for autonomous
vehicles actually pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 3 (25:43):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
The government, I'm sure a lot of people out there
understand this, may not has control of the wireless spectrum
universe out there. Is there enough to be able to
handle all the technology coming? What would be beneficial in
your mind as you look at the auctions of this
spectrum and the utilization of the spectrum.
Speaker 6 (26:02):
Yeah, this is a really important issue. It's a practical issue,
it's a national security issue. Most people they pick up
their smartphone or they hop into a weaimo, they just
assume it works. They don't know how. Maybe they think
it's magic or pixie dust. But it's these invisible airwaves
that you need to power everything. And when you look
at the future of technology, whether it's autonomous vehicles, whether
it's ARVR AI, the data demand to carry data traffic
(26:26):
wirelessly is just like a hockey stick through the roof.
And right now China has leaped out to a really
significant lead over the US.
Speaker 7 (26:33):
Didn't used to be this way.
Speaker 6 (26:35):
If you batch the first Trump administration, China was ahead
of US early on, and President Trump stepped in, showed
strong leadership, and the US closed the gap. That's why
you saw four G and five G explode in the US.
Now President Biden stepped in and we just fell into
a deep malaise when it comes to freeing up spectrum.
And President Trump recently has articulately that he wants the
US to lead again and we're going to do it.
(26:56):
So one of the things that the One Big Beautiful
Bill does is it restore the FC's authority to free
up these airways, which lapsed during the Biden years. Senator
Cruz Chairman Cruz has been phenomenal in leading on this,
but we are hundreds of megahertz behind where China is
right now, and to your point, our commercial sector needs it,
DoD uses it as well. But I think ultimately right
(27:18):
now where we're short is commercial spectrum for high power use.
President Trump and Chairman Crews have been clear. But it's
national security, it's economic growth, and it's bridging the digital
divide because we use that spectrum to connect people, to
connect communities.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
Your job, to a large extent, I would think, and
you can correct me if I'm wrong, is to try
to allow the marketplace of ideas to work at the
best of its manner and ensure that the government is
not putting a hand or a finger on the scale
to allow one side to have an advantage. How fair
do you think the overall media environment is from your
(27:53):
perspective as FCC chairman, when you look at it across
the scope of all of the different arenas that you
are monitoring right now, do you think we have a
fair system in place right now or do you think
there's still a lot of things that need to be
done well.
Speaker 6 (28:07):
I think there's still a significant ways to go in
terms of making sure that broadcasters in particular live up
to the public interest obligation. Again, the studies and survey
in terms of lack of trust speak to that. But
if you step back, particularly during COVID, we saw this
massive acceleration of censorship in this country, and a lot
of it took place on social media and on big
(28:28):
tech platforms. Silicon Valley was deciding whether you got to
stay on the digital town square what you could say.
And the evidence also shows that the Biden administration was
effectively colluding with a lot of these social media companies
to shut down free speech. And it didn't just happen
here in the US, it's spreading globally. In Brazil, there's
this justice stayle Moray, this government official there that's been
censoring social media. In Europe, they're passing laws to sort
(28:51):
of force US technology companies to abide by their version
of censorship, and so to some extent, we are on
the back side of that, meaning as the government controls
with COVID RESCIND, we see free speech re emerge because
you can't have both, right, if you're gonna have massive
government controls that came with censors that came with COVID,
you necessarily have censorship as well. Because free speech is
a check on those types of government controls. And President
(29:13):
Trump has come in and very clearly said that he's
going to restore free speech in this country. So, whether
it's the work of the FCC, the Federal Trade Commission
is doing great work on this, the DOJ, we're looking
to sort of break up that collusive conduct that really amounted,
in my view, to a censorship cartel. There's still work
to do, but I think we're finally turning the tide
on that.
Speaker 1 (29:32):
Yeah, and I'm sure a lot of people out there
listening right now listening to us on traditional radios podcast,
certainly still watching some news broadcast CBSABC, NBC. But for
my kids, they get almost all their news from TikTok
and YouTube. So to your point on the power of media,
the dynamic has shifted in a big way. Like I
(29:53):
don't even know that my kids could find local news
on television other than watching sports. They never watch it.
Everything through YouTube. And I'll give you an example on
this program. YouTube wouldn't allow our interview with President Trump.
Would we just had ran Paul on at the top
of the last at the top of the hour. They
wouldn't allow our interview with Rand Paul to be posted
(30:14):
because they said something that YouTube didn't like. But in
an election universe, in a democratic universe, should it, at
a bare minimum, everything that a political figure says be
distributed as widely as possible and not restricted and censored.
Speaker 6 (30:30):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (30:30):
Absolutely.
Speaker 6 (30:31):
One of the things that I focused a lot on
is this concept of user empowerment, Like, we don't want
any one, single centralized authority, whether it's a Silicon Valley
company or otherwise, deciding who can participate in the town square.
What can they say in the digital town square. We
need to empower individuals. If you don't want to see
Ram Paul, great, don't follow him. If you don't want
to see this video, Okay, block or unfollow the show.
Speaker 7 (30:51):
But we need to sort of get those.
Speaker 6 (30:52):
Decision making, this decisions back into the hands of individual
users and take it out of the hands of the
big corporations, for instance, on social media. You know, one
idea we've talked about is should we have content filters
that you can choose, Like, let's say you want the
reasons that Escape me, but you want MSNBC to filter
your feed for you. Okay, yeah, plug that in and
do it if you want you know this show to
have one. Great if you want Fox News to do it, great,
(31:14):
but let's let's get that power back to individuals unless
this centralized, because when you make a mistake at a
system wide level like that, like, the consequences are very serious. Yeah,
people think about, Wow, there's harm that comes from hate speech,
which obviously is protected by the First Amendment, But think
about the other side of it, like when you couldn't
talk about the origins of COVID nineteen, when you couldn't
talk about the costs and benefits of masking young children
(31:36):
who were trying to get speech development at that point
in time. So there's very real harms that flowed from
the sensors that we live through. Let alone, you know,
electoral consequences with a Hunter Bye laptop story that.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Goes on the last question for you. AI is taking
off at a rapid rate, and we have fun with
AI memes that people will post of me playing the
flute like and all sorts of ridiculous things out there.
But it's rapidly evolving to the point where I think
being able to determine what's real and what's fake is
going to become really very difficult. Are you concerned about that,
(32:10):
because it's one thing to restrict something that we know
is real, But how in the world do we have
the ability to let people know what is true and
what is false, and what someone's actually said and not said.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
Yeah, if you've seen these AI general videos of the
podcasters that are in the baby, yeah, Yeah, they're hilarious. Yes,
those are the very fun I don't know if they've had
any those use of you or not, but.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
I think they may think I'm a baby already. Yeah.
Speaker 6 (32:32):
I felt on a meme hole at one time looking
at all those. I thought they were hilarious. Mean, Look,
I think we'd be very careful here. During the last administration,
President Biden had the FCC proposed putting labels on political
speech political ads that were generated in any way with
AI content, and really it just became a way of
sort of slowing down the use of AI because they
(32:53):
viewed it as in my view, Republicans were being more
successful in the mem wars than they were. So I
think there is some harm, as you noted, but I
think we be very careful that we don't stifle this
early on, because ultimately it can start to look a
lot like censorship. So I do think that people need
to be vigilant and we need to educate people. And
it's I think it easier for younger folks. Think older
people can get, you know, fooled a little more easy.
Well if you just step mechl online scams in general.
(33:15):
But I think this in area we have to proceed
very cautiously, and I'd be very skeptical of regulation at
this point.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, appreciate the time.
Speaker 1 (33:22):
Appreciate you coming in video, coming in studio with us,
sitting in on video here and we hope to talk
to you again soon.
Speaker 7 (33:28):
Yeah, good be with you.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Thanks for sure.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
Look a lot of you out there right now, got
all sorts. We're just talking about all the different ways
media can evolve. You got VCRs, you got old film reels,
you got old photographs? How many of you have digitized
those forever? Because the VCR wasn't made to last forever?
Do you have the ability to share old movies with
your family? Do you have old slides, old pictures digitized?
(33:52):
This is what Legacy Box does. They help you preserve
and ensure that your family's history lives on long after
or all of us are gone. They've done it for
a million and a half families, and they rely on
Legacy Box to carefully handle saved photos, film videos and
return them all with brand new digital files as well.
They hand transfer everything one videotape at a time, one
(34:14):
photo of time, carefully preserving your families most cherished memories.
Visit legacybox dot com slash clay right now, unlock fifty
percent off when you do so, legacybox dot com slash
clay fifty percent off. Preserve your families memories for years
and years to come at legacybox.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Dot com slash clay like Thanks to all of our
guests today.
Speaker 1 (34:42):
You just heard from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr here in
our DC studio, Senator Rand Paul and Senator Ted Cruz.
We have been following minute by minute everything surrounding the
decisions that will be made in Iran, and in particular
about potentially the United States involvement there.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
Latest news in case.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Any of you were planning a summer vacation in Tehran,
the US State Department has said US citizens should not
travel to Iran under any circumstances. Now, I don't know,
maybe some of you out there. That's breaking news. Maybe
you were like, oh Man, I was thinking, you know,
summer in Tehran, it's only one hundred and eighty degrees
and there's a you know, a chance of getting hit
(35:28):
by bomb. That sounds like an amazing way to take
off for summer vacation.
Speaker 3 (35:33):
Don't do it.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
So that is news from the State Department that was
just released. I'm not even making that up. So do
not travel to Iran in case you were thinking about it. Also,
they are suggesting no one traveled to Israel more seriously,
and I know that that's probably far more common. But
(35:55):
given the situation that's going on, I know there's not
very many planes that are traveling into Israel right now.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
But that also being told.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
That's Tammy Bruce just in the last few minutes State
Department spokesperson saying both of those things.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
So we'll see.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
What happens tonight as the drama continues to build surrounding
what exactly is going to happen, and the Iranian Crown
Prince has said a nationwide uprising could put the nightmare
to an end and he would be with you soon.
That is potentially a new regime much to follow. We
will get you all of that tomorrow live from DC.
(36:34):
Have great Tuesdays. Sleeve Travis and Buck Sexton on the
front lines of truth.
Welcome in our number three Tuesday edition Clay Travis buck
Sexton Show. Appreciate all of you hanging out with us.
We're about to be joined by Senator Ran Paul of Kentucky.
I am in Washington, d C. Buck is on the
French Riviera for the Big Can Advertising Conference. A lot
of people want to buy into this show as the
(00:20):
audience has continued to grow, and so Buck is over there,
Senator ram Paul with us.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Now.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We're following a.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Lot of different stories, ongoing uncertainty about exactly what the
United States actions and responses will be as it pertains
to Iran.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
We'll talk about that with Senator ran Paul right now.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Also continued fallout of the Big Beautiful Bill and where
that is headed. But let's start with the number one
question that is out there right now, Senator ram Paul.
What if President Trump called you and he said, hey,
what do you think I should do about the situation
in a ra on?
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Your response would be, what.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
You know?
Speaker 5 (01:03):
The President's had good instincts traditionally on this, and his
instincts have been for restraint, for thinking things through, and
hopefully for not getting us involved in this war. I
think it would be a bad idea for US to
be involved directly in the war. I think the chance
of negotiation pretty much goes out the window with the
first US bombs dropping. Even as it is, we're so
(01:25):
closely linked with Israel, I think that it's almost depicted
as a joint action now, but I think it is
a step for the worse if we actually are involved
actively with bombing. The other thing in our country is
we have this thing called the Constitution that says you
can't go to war with countries without permission. So if
he did decide, and he told me he's absolutely made
the decision, I would recommend to him that he has
(01:47):
to come before Congress ask us for permission, and we'll
have a vote the same night on whether or not
to go to war.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Do you yourself, are you concerned about the idea of
Iran having nuclear wayapons? Do you think that's a threat
to the United States?
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Well, you know, I think potentially, I think.
Speaker 5 (02:06):
That it's more a threat to their regional neighbors. But
I would say that I don't want them.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
To have nuclear weapons. I don't think anybody does.
Speaker 5 (02:13):
But the question about every activity is does it make
it more or less likely. So I think you can
argue both sides of does Israel's bombing make it more
or less likely that.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
They get a nuclear weapon?
Speaker 5 (02:25):
You can say, well, they're destroying their capability, or you
could say that this is the last straw from Iran's
point of view, and Iran will simply rush headlong into
developing a weapon. They may well have stockpiles of highly
enricheranium we don't know about, and once you have it,
you can really hide a cupful of highly enricheranium anywhere,
(02:47):
and probably one couple is probably enough for a decent
sized bomb, and so they have the ability to enrich
I don't think the bombing gets rid of their knowledge
of nuclear power.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Even though they killed many different scientists.
Speaker 5 (03:01):
I hope they don't go this direction. But there's always
a question will they passively come back and you know,
hang their head and say we're sorry and we want
to negotiate, or will they you know, have this sense
of nationalism, rally around their flag, put aside their differences
and really unify the sense of uh trying to you know,
come at an attack.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
I presume that since you wouldn't like to see United
States force, you know, bunker busting bombs used. I think
that would be your position based on the answer so
far that you also would want to have no US
involvement in any potential regime change relating to the Ayatolas
or anything else. Your general proposition would be that we
should not get involved.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Well, you know, we tried that.
Speaker 5 (03:47):
You know, we tried it in Afghanistan and for twenty years,
and Afghanistan was a very very tiny backwards country, no
wealth and very few people compared to Iran, and we
weren't very successful even in that backwater of trying to
get you know, a stable government, and the Taliban ended
up walting in and you know, a matter of days
taking over that government. So I don't know that we're
(04:10):
very good at nation building, nor do I think that
that's really what we should be doing. So no, I'm
not involved with it. Do I wish they're people? Well, yeah,
I would love to see their people get rid of
their government. Nobody wants to see their people oppressed. The
you know, the women that have been you know, snatched
up off the street, beaten, and who knows else, you know,
simply for not wearing.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
A face covering.
Speaker 5 (04:32):
And you know, the young people of Iran are said
to be very pro western, very much more open than
where the Mullas are as far as you know culture.
And it is sad to see what's happening.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
But you know, our job really isn't.
Speaker 5 (04:48):
To send armies everywhere and to send our soldiers and
that's the way people need to think of this. Are
you ready to send your son or daughter, you know,
to march in a trench and you know, trench to
trench in Iran? And it really is not what that
we should be involved with.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
We're talking to Senator Ram Paul.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
All right, let's shift from Iran right now to what's
going on with the so called big beautiful bill. Last
week we had Senator Ron Johnson in. I think you
and he share a lot of the same ideas on
this bill not cutting spending enough. I don't know if
things have changed since the last week. What would you
tell us? What should we know about the current status
(05:24):
of the bill as you see it.
Speaker 5 (05:27):
You know, a lot of the bill is tax cuts,
which I'm for. Making the tax cuts permanent, which I'm for.
I voted for these tax cuts in twenty seventeen, most
of them. I think they were largely responsible for the
economic growth.
Speaker 4 (05:39):
And prosperity in the first Trump.
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Administration with low historic unemployment, we were doing great until
you know, they set the government down, shut the world
down for the pandemic. But I'm for all of that.
The spending cuts, I agree with Ron Johnson.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
They're weak, their anemic, and they will.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Not materially affect our accumulation of debt. And this is
the thing people need to understand. Our deficit decis is
going to be two point two trillion if you believe
the numbers of the bill, which really probably are not
accurate in the first year or two, but that we're
going to have cut spending one hundred and fifty billion.
That means instead of a two point two trillion, you'd
have a two point zero five trillion. So it's really
(06:18):
not materially changing the accumulation of debt, and probably in
the first couple of years the debt will grow because
when you reduce tax rates, you do usually get less.
Speaker 4 (06:29):
Revenue in the beginning.
Speaker 5 (06:30):
Now you tend to get economic growth and grow out
of it, but for.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
A year or two that revenue will go down.
Speaker 5 (06:35):
They also have some fake pay fors in there. They
have a pay for that says, we're getting rid of
the Biden forgiveness of student loans. Well, the course ruled
that illegal and it never went into action. So they're
going to get rid of something that isn't currently happening.
And only in Washington do you call that a cut
when you get rid of something that actually isn't occurring.
But some of these things aren't real. Some of the
(06:58):
real findings, like putting work requirements on Medicaid, don't start
occurring until after the election in twenty twenty six. So
I think in the first couple of years.
Speaker 4 (07:07):
The devisit does get worse.
Speaker 5 (07:10):
So but my biggest complaint really though.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
Is the debt ceiling.
Speaker 5 (07:15):
Raising the debt ceiling five trillion when Congress I think
is terrible with money.
Speaker 4 (07:19):
They're irresponsible. We've accumulated thirty six fin dollars debt.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
They show no signs of wisening up and actually spending cuts,
and so I think to raise the debt ceiling five
trillion is giving irresponsibility too much, irresponsible people too much credit.
So I'd give them three months and in three months
it's going to be the end of the fiscal year.
You realize in three months they're going to be coming
back with a big, beautiful omnibus, and so that's going
(07:44):
to be we'll face that in September. And so if
they're going to keep spending money the same way they have,
I would say, you get very little installments of debt ceiling.
We vote on it every three months until we see
if we can trust you with money.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
What do you think the timeframe is? You just laid
out the debt ceiling. President Trump has said he'd like
to have this done by July fourth. Ron Johnson said
he didn't think that was very likely. When do you
think the Senate might be able to vote on this bill?
What does your horizon look like? In that respect?
Speaker 5 (08:15):
It all depends on how many people are have courage.
Four principled conservatives with courage could make this into a
conservative bill. All would take would be four of us
to say that we don't want the debt ceiling on
there and we're not voting for five trillion of debts,
and they would have to change it. Right now, I
think it's me and possibly Ron Johnson, and then there
(08:40):
may be one or two others out there. But I
really haven't heard a lot that indicates to me that
there are people.
Speaker 4 (08:46):
You have to say you're going to be a no who.
Speaker 5 (08:48):
You have to be steadfast and loud, and you have
to tell them why, and you have to tell them
what it takes to get to yes. And that's why,
despite getting some critic from some of the attack dogs
at the White House, I've been very clear to the President.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
I like a lot of the bill.
Speaker 5 (09:03):
I like him personally, I support him, and I'll support
the bill, but they have to separate out.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
The dead ceiling. They don't want to do that, but
they will.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
Do it if I'm the deciding vote. That's what I
also told my supporters, just that I can't believe you
will vote forever the tax reduction. I said I will.
I'm for it, and if I'm the deciding vote, I
promise you I'll vote for it. But if I'm the
deciding vote, they're going to have to negotiate, and they
will because that's why it works. The only reason they're
not negotiating with me on the dead ceiling now is
we don't have the four votes to oppose them. If
(09:32):
we had the four votes, we'd have already separated the
dead ceiling and I would be a yes.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Now, how frustrated you just mentioned it a little bit.
Do you think the president is with you.
Speaker 4 (09:44):
A little bit?
Speaker 5 (09:45):
You know, I've known him for quite a while, But.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Is your relationship with the president, sorry to cut you
off a little bit, Is your relationship with the president
a little bit of a roller coaster? Because sometimes it
seems like you guys are thickest thieves, and then other
times it's like you're kind of at each other a
little bit. Do you feel like a little bit over
the decade that you've been a roller coaster with the president?
Speaker 5 (10:05):
Well, it's kind of funny because I personally like him,
played golf with him a dozen times. I played golf
with him before he was president, probably twenty thirteen twenty fourteen.
I asked him to support some of my mission trips
when I did surgery in Guatemala and I believe it
was twenty thirteen or twenty fourteen, and then at Haiti.
He supported both trips, and so I've gotten to know
(10:26):
him over time and actually enjoy his company.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
I was probably one of his biggest defenders on the impeachment,
but you know, there is a mercurial.
Speaker 5 (10:34):
Nature to it though that you know, I think those
were very important things that defense on that, I think
this bill is just a policy difference, and I'm not
changing anything.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
I'm poor.
Speaker 5 (10:45):
I've always been against raising massive raises of the dead ceiling,
whether it's.
Speaker 4 (10:49):
Biden or anybody else.
Speaker 5 (10:51):
But I think some of his attack dogs at the
White House simply you know, it's it's my way to
the highway kind of stuff. But the last time I
talked and we had a good conversation, it was after
the big beautiful parade, and he was in good spirits,
and you know, I reiterated what it would take. And
my goal is not to defeat the bill. My goal
(11:12):
is to you know, present a conservative bill that I
can be happy to support. And a lot of the
bill I like, all you got to do is separate
on the dead ceiling or shorten it, and they could
well get my vote. But yeah, the relationships up and down,
but I think.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Still a lot of you know, respect on my part.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
We're talking to Senator Rampaul. Last question for you. You know,
I know, looking ahead to twenty twenty eight is a
ways away. We still have to get past the midterms.
But there's a lot of talk about Andy Basheer in
your state running for president. He was one of the
worst governors in America, certainly the worst governor, I would say,
of a red state during COVID.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
Is it kind of.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Staggering to you that he would be a national political
figure based on what you have seen of his leadership
in Kentucky.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
To see that he'll be any kind of national figure.
I think he lacks the you know, charisma, But he
also the things that he did to us in our state.
I mean, shutting down churches, shutting down gym, shutting down
you know, stores, you name it, limiting how many people
can show up anywhere, banning travel. I mean, the authoritarian
things he did in our state are what many other
(12:23):
Democrats did too. Whittmer did some of the same stuff
in Michigan, but I don't think that'll be popular. I
think he fools himself into thinking, well, he's a Democrat,
had won in a Republican state. All Democrats like that
think they're going to be the next Jimmy Carter or
Bill Clinton. And that's yet to be seen, but I
kind of doubt it from what I've seen. I can't
imagine that he'll be much of a force in the
(12:44):
Democrat primary.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
Senator Ran Paul we appreciate the time. Happy to have
you on whenever and keep us updated on how the
bill goes. Thanks that is Senator Ran Paul. Look, if
you're frustrated with the cost of your health insurance, you're
not alone. You might want to consider a new plan
available for everyone out there offers a monthly cost as
low as two hundred and sixty two dollars. Insurance plan
called Ease for Everyone. Compared to Obamacare, Ease for Everyone affordable,
(13:08):
you get to keep your doctor, and you get free
unlimited virtual primary care. With the Ease for Everyone, you
also have access to over four hundred prescription drugs for free,
not just at a lower cost, but at no cost
zero bucks. Ease for Everyone created as a solution to
the broken system that's complicated healthcare. Go online to Ease
for Everyone dot com slash clay to get started. That's
(13:31):
Ease for Everyone. Dot com slash clay. Get affordable healthcare
for as low as two hundred and sixty two dollars
a month today. That's Ease for Everyone dot com slash clay.
We are going to be joined by the Commissioner of
(13:52):
the FCC or the car. He's going to be with
us here at the bottom of the hour, we got
a couple of different things. I will hit a lot
of you weighing in on a variety of different stories.
I love Mary Beth. Let's listen to a a firing
back yesterday at the criticisms undaunted, and uh and and
and unjustified. I should say, unjustified criticisms of my outfit
(14:15):
on Fox News.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
This is Mary Beth Clay.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Don't listen to him.
Speaker 6 (14:19):
I saw you on the Media Buzz show, and you
looked fantastic.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
It was the perfect shade of.
Speaker 5 (14:26):
Pink for a man, and it was very very appropriate
for summer. You look fantastic.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
I don't know that I was in pink, so I
was gonna give Mary Beth a real plaudit's here. But
I do appreciate that she thought I looked good. It
was a light, airy color, and I can see how
the white could have looked a little bit pink in
conjunction with my amazing jacket. Anna and Raleigh, what did
you think of the incredibly masculine crying stunt from Senator
(14:55):
Padilla that we just saw on the Senate floor as
a woman, where you swept off your feet.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
He needs a grabby. No all planned ign Okay, because
he could have stacked out a phone call to make
an appointment to meet with DHF and ask his questions.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
Okay, that's all in reality.
Speaker 7 (15:19):
In reality, he would.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
Have expected the exact same courtesy from DHF if they
had questions for him.
Speaker 3 (15:27):
Thank you for the call.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
Doesn't sound like you were overwhelmed by his raw masculine
power on the Senate floor. Jeff in Houston, we got
a lot of reactions coming in bb KT RH down
in Houston, one of our top affiliates.
Speaker 3 (15:41):
What's Jeff got for us?
Speaker 4 (15:43):
Clay.
Speaker 8 (15:43):
As far as Iran goes, we owe them revenge going
all the way back to nineteen seventy nine. But as
far as Iran being a free country, they were never
a free country. They were Westernized, but Deshaw had the Savac.
Back then, people were terrorized, And I talked to people
back then who were from Persia as they called it.
(16:07):
It was much better than it is now, but it
was not free.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
When I say free, I mean in the context of
Middle Eastern freedoms at the time. Iran in the nineteen seventies,
before the revolution, the people were far freer than they
are today, and I think that many people who lived
through that envy that era. In fact, I think the
percentages and again team can look this up, but Iran
(16:31):
has a huge population of people under the age of
thirty who look back on that era very fondly and
actually would love to have more of a connection with
the West than they do right now.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
And I give credit to Elon Musk.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
My understanding is he's turned on the starlink Internet so
that the people of Iran don't have to just be
listening to the state subsidized media coverage of what's going
on there. We'll talk about that a little bit with
Brendan Carr of the fc SEE and how that impact
can be even in the foreign countries as it pertains
to your ability to know what exactly is going on.
(17:11):
And we may may get an update on the President
being in the situation room before the program ends today,
so we are certainly going to keep you updated on
that as well. But I want to tell you as
we get ready for Brinton Carr to be on with
us next, we have got an incredible offer for all
of you rapid radios. These are phenomenal. They last charged
(17:34):
us five days. My wife has got this set up.
Sometimes gives it to our ten year old. He doesn't
have a cell phone yet, but he wants to run around.
He gets to pretend he's Gi Joe, and he gets
to stay in touch with his mom and his dad.
But this is a nationwide wireless device that will allow
you to connect with everyone in your household. We've talked
(17:54):
about this a lot in times of awful weather. For instance,
what happened to Ashville, North Carolina. Book's sister in law
was able to get in touch with their family when
virtually every cell phone network was down. These charges last
for five days. They're great safety and security. For you
to be able to have limited time offer, all you
have to do is go to rapid Radios dot com.
(18:15):
You can save up to sixty percent free ups shipping
from the guys up in Michigan, where this company is based.
And when you use the promo code Radio, you get
an extra five percent off.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
That's code Radio.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
Rapid radios dot Com Code Radio up to sixty percent off.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
Get hooked up right now.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Make sure that you are taking care of your family
in the event of needing to be in touch nationwide.
Get hooked up now Rapid radios dot com code Radio.
That's rapid radios, dot com code radio, get hooked up today.
(18:54):
We're joined now by FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. He's in
studio with us here in Washington, DC. And I know
you got a ton of different things on your plate,
so I'm gonna hit you with questions. You may try
to dodge some of them, just because I understand you
guys are pretty good at that.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
So let's start off here.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
I think now that President Trump is in office, it's
fair to say that we have seen maybe a little
bit of unfairness from ABC, CBS, NBC, among others.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
They have a.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
Government responsibility based on the fact that we have given
them a license as a country. How fair now that
we're through the election season, do you think news coverage
has been What could occur from your perspective, to make
it fair er because they're supposed to be as a
part of getting a license. You correct me if I'm
wrong not providing some form of biased news coverage. But
(19:51):
I think most people that are listening to us right
now would really roll their eyes at the idea that ABC,
NBC and CBS are providing in some way fair and
balanced news coverage.
Speaker 7 (20:01):
Yeah, thanks so much. Great to be with you.
Speaker 6 (20:03):
You know, look, if you step back and you think
about speakers in this country, you've got, you know, the
guy in the soapbox gets to say whatever he wants.
You've got cable channels which are lightly regulated. When it
comes to television stations. Those are licensed by the FCC, Yes,
and they are required by federal law to operate in
the public interest. Now, if you step back over the years,
the FCC and regulators in Washington, I think have walked
(20:25):
away completely from enforcing that public interest obligation, and I
don't think we're better off for it. To your question,
if you step back, I don't think the national programmers.
So if you look at ABC, CBS, NBC they own
some stations, but in the mainly program content that goes
out through licensed stations, I don't think they've been fair
at all if you step back and look at their
coverage in terms of Republicans or President Trump, and frankly
(20:48):
that's not just my opinion. If you look at trust
in that national programmers again, focusing on ABC, CBS, NBC,
trust is at an all time low. Again, Jeff Bezos,
of all people, did an op ed not that long
ago saying that these national media outlets have lost the
thread when it comes to where the American public is.
But the good news is this, there's another side of
(21:08):
the coin. When top of the actual local broadcast TV stations,
the ones that actually hold the license by the FCC,
when they run programming, it's actually really trusted by local communities.
Speaker 7 (21:17):
So the biggest policy that we're running.
Speaker 6 (21:20):
At the FEC in terms of media right now is
how do we empower the local broadcasters to serve the
public interest and allow them to get some distance from
the national programmers that are really just generating content in
Hollywood in New York and sort of force feeding it
out there. So I think there's actually a lot the
FCC can do that addresses this issue, and again focusing
(21:41):
on that unique public interest obligations that TV channels have.
Speaker 1 (21:45):
That is super interesting because I think most people out
there listening to us right now, when there is a
major thunderstorm, for instance, and they are at home, they
trust their local news to provide them accurate coverage about danger, tornadoes,
everything else. But they certainly don't trust the national news
to provide them. So I hadn't really thought about that dichotomy.
It's interesting NPR PBS we have seen the vote barely
(22:08):
get passed in the House to take away their funding
as it pertains to government dollars. I've always thought it's crazy.
To my knowledge, we don't get a massive amount of
government support. We compete with NPR. This show does the
premiere networks all over the country, and it's always felt
like an unfair competition that they get these dollars we don't.
(22:28):
What do you think what kind of optics does the
FCC have on those issues?
Speaker 7 (22:32):
It really wasn't that long ago.
Speaker 6 (22:34):
If you looked at a cross section of the listeners
and viewer to NPR and PBS, you'd get a pretty
decent cross section of the country as a whole. And
at some point not that long ago, things changed dramatically,
and it appears that NPR and PBS have been appealing
to a very narrow bespoke, almost Acella horde or portion
of the country. And you can do that right as
(22:55):
a First Amendment matter. But if you are going to
Congress and saying I want you Congress to force people
to take money out of their pocketbooks, send it to
Washington and then send it to subsidize that. I think
it's entirely legitimate for people to be asking questions about that.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
It's your point.
Speaker 6 (23:11):
Recently recisions package past the House that would save about
a billion dollars from that funding. The FCC, we've launched
actually an investigation into NPR and PBS. And here's why
they are. Unlike any other station, like a station here
at commercial station, they're non commercial, which means they get
special benefits above and beyond those that regular broadcasters get.
(23:33):
But as a consequence, they can't run advertising. But what
it looks like they've been doing is running programs that
appear to be very close, if not to advertisements themselves.
So we've launched an inquiry at the FCC to make
sure that they're not violating the law, because really you
can't have it both ways. You can't be getting you know,
public funding and claiming that you're you know, a non
commercial and then potentially the same time running commercial. So
(23:54):
we're looking at as well. Right now, CBS News in
the news a lot. You got the transcriptra East of
sixty minutes, the interview that they did with Kamala Harris
right before the election, that was edited in many different
ways potentially beneficially to her. What can you tell us
about the investigation into sixty minutes and how does that
impact the larger paramount idea they're trying to sell to Skydance.
(24:18):
I believe where is all of that from your perspective? Yeah,
right before January twentieth, inf I think read around January tenth.
I believe the prior administration, the Biden FCC summarily dismissed
a news distortion complaint that had been filed against sixty
Minutes based on claims of editing around that answer to
Kamala Harris in the sixty Minutes episode.
Speaker 7 (24:39):
They dismissed it.
Speaker 6 (24:40):
Without actually doing any real inquiry, without doing any due diligence.
And so one of the very first things that we
did was we restored that complaint against CBS. We've put
it out for public comment, and to your point, we
obtained the unedited transcript in video of that interview. We've
put it all out there. I think Sunlighty's the best disinfected.
So right now the American people are participating in this process.
We haven't made a final decision, but we are weighing whether,
(25:02):
in fact it is a news distortion or not, and
that's under active investigation at the FCC. Separate from that,
we do have a transaction before the FCC where the
owners of CBS are looking to sell and as of
right now, we're just running our normal course review on
that and no significant update as to where we are
on that.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
When you look at the spectrum, and I know people
think about this a lot. I was out in San
Francisco recently, got to go in a weymo. I felt
like I was in the future.
Speaker 6 (25:29):
For all the weymouth started getting before good get out
of that clay.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
We got out safely. There doing research on that. The
amount of spectrum that's going to be required for autonomous
vehicles actually pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 3 (25:43):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
The government, I'm sure a lot of people out there
understand this, may not has control of the wireless spectrum
universe out there. Is there enough to be able to
handle all the technology coming? What would be beneficial in
your mind as you look at the auctions of this
spectrum and the utilization of the spectrum.
Speaker 6 (26:02):
Yeah, this is a really important issue. It's a practical issue,
it's a national security issue. Most people they pick up
their smartphone or they hop into a weaimo, they just
assume it works. They don't know how. Maybe they think
it's magic or pixie dust. But it's these invisible airwaves
that you need to power everything. And when you look
at the future of technology, whether it's autonomous vehicles, whether
it's ARVR AI, the data demand to carry data traffic
(26:26):
wirelessly is just like a hockey stick through the roof.
And right now China has leaped out to a really
significant lead over the US.
Speaker 7 (26:33):
Didn't used to be this way.
Speaker 6 (26:35):
If you batch the first Trump administration, China was ahead
of US early on, and President Trump stepped in, showed
strong leadership, and the US closed the gap. That's why
you saw four G and five G explode in the US.
Now President Biden stepped in and we just fell into
a deep malaise when it comes to freeing up spectrum.
And President Trump recently has articulately that he wants the
US to lead again and we're going to do it.
(26:56):
So one of the things that the One Big Beautiful
Bill does is it restore the FC's authority to free
up these airways, which lapsed during the Biden years. Senator
Cruz Chairman Cruz has been phenomenal in leading on this,
but we are hundreds of megahertz behind where China is
right now, and to your point, our commercial sector needs it,
DoD uses it as well. But I think ultimately right
(27:18):
now where we're short is commercial spectrum for high power use.
President Trump and Chairman Crews have been clear. But it's
national security, it's economic growth, and it's bridging the digital
divide because we use that spectrum to connect people, to
connect communities.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
Your job, to a large extent, I would think, and
you can correct me if I'm wrong, is to try
to allow the marketplace of ideas to work at the
best of its manner and ensure that the government is
not putting a hand or a finger on the scale
to allow one side to have an advantage. How fair
do you think the overall media environment is from your
(27:53):
perspective as FCC chairman, when you look at it across
the scope of all of the different arenas that you
are monitoring right now, do you think we have a
fair system in place right now or do you think
there's still a lot of things that need to be
done well.
Speaker 6 (28:07):
I think there's still a significant ways to go in
terms of making sure that broadcasters in particular live up
to the public interest obligation. Again, the studies and survey
in terms of lack of trust speak to that. But
if you step back, particularly during COVID, we saw this
massive acceleration of censorship in this country, and a lot
of it took place on social media and on big
(28:28):
tech platforms. Silicon Valley was deciding whether you got to
stay on the digital town square what you could say.
And the evidence also shows that the Biden administration was
effectively colluding with a lot of these social media companies
to shut down free speech. And it didn't just happen
here in the US, it's spreading globally. In Brazil, there's
this justice stayle Moray, this government official there that's been
censoring social media. In Europe, they're passing laws to sort
(28:51):
of force US technology companies to abide by their version
of censorship, and so to some extent, we are on
the back side of that, meaning as the government controls
with COVID RESCIND, we see free speech re emerge because
you can't have both, right, if you're gonna have massive
government controls that came with censors that came with COVID,
you necessarily have censorship as well. Because free speech is
a check on those types of government controls. And President
(29:13):
Trump has come in and very clearly said that he's
going to restore free speech in this country. So, whether
it's the work of the FCC, the Federal Trade Commission
is doing great work on this, the DOJ, we're looking
to sort of break up that collusive conduct that really amounted,
in my view, to a censorship cartel. There's still work
to do, but I think we're finally turning the tide
on that.
Speaker 1 (29:32):
Yeah, and I'm sure a lot of people out there
listening right now listening to us on traditional radios podcast,
certainly still watching some news broadcast CBSABC, NBC. But for
my kids, they get almost all their news from TikTok
and YouTube. So to your point on the power of media,
the dynamic has shifted in a big way. Like I
(29:53):
don't even know that my kids could find local news
on television other than watching sports. They never watch it.
Everything through YouTube. And I'll give you an example on
this program. YouTube wouldn't allow our interview with President Trump.
Would we just had ran Paul on at the top
of the last at the top of the hour. They
wouldn't allow our interview with Rand Paul to be posted
(30:14):
because they said something that YouTube didn't like. But in
an election universe, in a democratic universe, should it, at
a bare minimum, everything that a political figure says be
distributed as widely as possible and not restricted and censored.
Speaker 6 (30:30):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (30:30):
Absolutely.
Speaker 6 (30:31):
One of the things that I focused a lot on
is this concept of user empowerment, Like, we don't want
any one, single centralized authority, whether it's a Silicon Valley
company or otherwise, deciding who can participate in the town square.
What can they say in the digital town square. We
need to empower individuals. If you don't want to see
Ram Paul, great, don't follow him. If you don't want
to see this video, Okay, block or unfollow the show.
Speaker 7 (30:51):
But we need to sort of get those.
Speaker 6 (30:52):
Decision making, this decisions back into the hands of individual
users and take it out of the hands of the
big corporations, for instance, on social media. You know, one
idea we've talked about is should we have content filters
that you can choose, Like, let's say you want the
reasons that Escape me, but you want MSNBC to filter
your feed for you. Okay, yeah, plug that in and
do it if you want you know this show to
have one. Great if you want Fox News to do it, great,
(31:14):
but let's let's get that power back to individuals unless
this centralized, because when you make a mistake at a
system wide level like that, like, the consequences are very serious. Yeah,
people think about, Wow, there's harm that comes from hate speech,
which obviously is protected by the First Amendment, But think
about the other side of it, like when you couldn't
talk about the origins of COVID nineteen, when you couldn't
talk about the costs and benefits of masking young children
(31:36):
who were trying to get speech development at that point
in time. So there's very real harms that flowed from
the sensors that we live through. Let alone, you know,
electoral consequences with a Hunter Bye laptop story that.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Goes on the last question for you. AI is taking
off at a rapid rate, and we have fun with
AI memes that people will post of me playing the
flute like and all sorts of ridiculous things out there.
But it's rapidly evolving to the point where I think
being able to determine what's real and what's fake is
going to become really very difficult. Are you concerned about that,
(32:10):
because it's one thing to restrict something that we know
is real, But how in the world do we have
the ability to let people know what is true and
what is false, and what someone's actually said and not said.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
Yeah, if you've seen these AI general videos of the
podcasters that are in the baby, yeah, Yeah, they're hilarious. Yes,
those are the very fun I don't know if they've had
any those use of you or not, but.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
I think they may think I'm a baby already. Yeah.
Speaker 6 (32:32):
I felt on a meme hole at one time looking
at all those. I thought they were hilarious. Mean, Look,
I think we'd be very careful here. During the last administration,
President Biden had the FCC proposed putting labels on political
speech political ads that were generated in any way with
AI content, and really it just became a way of
sort of slowing down the use of AI because they
(32:53):
viewed it as in my view, Republicans were being more
successful in the mem wars than they were. So I
think there is some harm, as you noted, but I
think we be very careful that we don't stifle this
early on, because ultimately it can start to look a
lot like censorship. So I do think that people need
to be vigilant and we need to educate people. And
it's I think it easier for younger folks. Think older
people can get, you know, fooled a little more easy.
Well if you just step mechl online scams in general.
(33:15):
But I think this in area we have to proceed
very cautiously, and I'd be very skeptical of regulation at
this point.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, appreciate the time.
Speaker 1 (33:22):
Appreciate you coming in video, coming in studio with us,
sitting in on video here and we hope to talk
to you again soon.
Speaker 7 (33:28):
Yeah, good be with you.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Thanks for sure.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
Look a lot of you out there right now, got
all sorts. We're just talking about all the different ways
media can evolve. You got VCRs, you got old film reels,
you got old photographs? How many of you have digitized
those forever? Because the VCR wasn't made to last forever?
Do you have the ability to share old movies with
your family? Do you have old slides, old pictures digitized?
(33:52):
This is what Legacy Box does. They help you preserve
and ensure that your family's history lives on long after
or all of us are gone. They've done it for
a million and a half families, and they rely on
Legacy Box to carefully handle saved photos, film videos and
return them all with brand new digital files as well.
They hand transfer everything one videotape at a time, one
(34:14):
photo of time, carefully preserving your families most cherished memories.
Visit legacybox dot com slash clay right now, unlock fifty
percent off when you do so, legacybox dot com slash
clay fifty percent off. Preserve your families memories for years
and years to come at legacybox.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Dot com slash clay like Thanks to all of our
guests today.
Speaker 1 (34:42):
You just heard from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr here in
our DC studio, Senator Rand Paul and Senator Ted Cruz.
We have been following minute by minute everything surrounding the
decisions that will be made in Iran, and in particular
about potentially the United States involvement there.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
Latest news in case.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Any of you were planning a summer vacation in Tehran,
the US State Department has said US citizens should not
travel to Iran under any circumstances. Now, I don't know,
maybe some of you out there. That's breaking news. Maybe
you were like, oh Man, I was thinking, you know,
summer in Tehran, it's only one hundred and eighty degrees
and there's a you know, a chance of getting hit
(35:28):
by bomb. That sounds like an amazing way to take
off for summer vacation.
Speaker 3 (35:33):
Don't do it.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
So that is news from the State Department that was
just released. I'm not even making that up. So do
not travel to Iran in case you were thinking about it. Also,
they are suggesting no one traveled to Israel more seriously,
and I know that that's probably far more common. But
(35:55):
given the situation that's going on, I know there's not
very many planes that are traveling into Israel right now.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
But that also being told.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
That's Tammy Bruce just in the last few minutes State
Department spokesperson saying both of those things.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
So we'll see.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
What happens tonight as the drama continues to build surrounding
what exactly is going to happen, and the Iranian Crown
Prince has said a nationwide uprising could put the nightmare
to an end and he would be with you soon.
That is potentially a new regime much to follow. We
will get you all of that tomorrow live from DC.
(36:34):
Have great Tuesdays. Sleeve Travis and Buck Sexton on the
front lines of truth.
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
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!