September 18, 2023 • 37 mins
Hunter Biden sues the IRS in questionable and brazen legal move. Trump on Meet the Press. Choice of VP in Trump-Biden election will be more important because each can only serve 4 years. Joy Behar -- of all people -- calls Vivek Ramaswamy and young Republicans stupid. $135 million F-35 jet goes missing.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Welcome everybody, it is Monday. It is time for Clay
and Buck all across the land.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Thanks for being here with us.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
We've got, as always is the case on Monday, because
it all comes together from over the weekend, a lot
to discuss. We've got Trump on Meet the Press with
its new host Kristen Welker. We've got Speaker McCarthy proceeding
with the impeachment inquiry without much pushback from Republican stories
(00:36):
on that over the weekend, so it looks like so
far unity on the impeachment inquiry. Numbers from the Border,
Customs and Border Patrol telling Fox News how many thousands
of encounters. I'm not going to tell you the number now,
you got to stay with us, but just think in
your head, how many in one weekend, how many people
entered into America at our southern border illegally. So that's
(01:00):
certainly something we will dive into a lot of stuff
from the Trump Meet the Press interview, some of which
we'll dive into here outlining his Trump's positions on Ukraine,
on abortion on I obviously talked about the trials January sixth.
Stuff a lot of things, so I'll have some time
(01:21):
for that in a little bit. But first up, one
thing that we've been processing here on the show is
the new reality that Hunter Biden is facing three felony
indictments related to a gun charge.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
This news broke last week.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Clay, I actually managed to do a backflip while still
seated in his chair. I didn't even know what was possible.
But when the news broke, he had been calling it
for a long time, this could happen. So we're going
to see if it turns into a reality that Hunter
Biden could face prison time. In the meantime, I still
think there are a lot of ways they're gonna try
(01:58):
to make this go away. But crazy world we live
in now we've got. I mean it's crazy enough, Clay
that Trump is facing four indictments when you add to
this though, that the president's son is facing a multiple
count indictment. So Trump is facing four different criminal trials
and also a civil trial and whatever else they're going
(02:18):
to throw at him. Hunter Biden facing three felony charges
in one indictment around the gun charge. The son of
the sitting president. We got a lot of things to
dive into. This was a strategy that I'm not sure
that many people saw coming, and it was Hunter Biden
over the weekend.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
This just broke.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Has sued the IRS for allegedly breaching his privacy. He
says that the whistleblowers is twenty seven page lawsuit Clay
Hunter Biden's lawyers say that a couple of IRS agents,
the whistleblower Shapley and Zieglert, have created problems for Hunter's privacy,
(03:00):
effectively putting the trying to put the whistleblowers on the
hot seat in this instance. What do you take from this?
What do you make of this strategy? Is it something
that might work?
Speaker 3 (03:12):
It's incredibly brazen and reckless. And if we had an
honest Department of Justice, immediately they would file felony charges
against Hunter Biden for income tax evasion.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
I mean, I just want everybody out there to think
about what's going on.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Hunter Biden is not saying, hey, these these releases are inaccurate,
because remember he hasn't paid millions of dollars that he
owed that we know of for sure in back taxes.
Buck he tried to write off hookers on his tax returns.
Right off Hookers. And the only reason why he didn't
(03:51):
get away with this sweetheart deal was because the house
was won by Republicans, and these two IRS agents step
forward and told us exactly how rig the investigation was
into Hunter Biden. So I think this is an incredibly
reckless legal strategy. At a minimum, buck it would require
that Hunter Biden testify under oath and be aggressively deposed.
(04:14):
This is a civil suit, but anything that he said
in a civil suit would potentially open him up to
criminal liability for what he said under oath. So I
just maybe there's a lawyer out there that has been
involved in cases like these that could even point out
what the legal strategy could be. Because but as soon
(04:36):
as I saw this this morning, I started reading about it,
and it just seems like a reckless, indefensibly dumb legal
strategy because I don't even know what his defense is.
I think that this is part of I mean, clearly,
it's a muddy the Waters thing, that's the obvious, and
I'm not sure how effective that is, but I think
(04:57):
it's part of a broader attempt here to turn all
of the Biden crime family allegation stuff into the opposite
end of the playing field, if you will, like the
opposite team from all the stuff up against Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (05:15):
In essence, Hunter's team is trying to say, this is
all political too, This is a hit job, just like
the stuff against Trump they say is a hit job.
This is a hit job. They want to elevate the
Biden crime family stuff to the same level of politicization
that the Trump stuff is. Right, this is I'm saying,
(05:37):
this is I think their goal. So that then that
gives Democrats the ability to say, you know, the Republic
is at stake. They would have left Hunter alone if
it wasn't for the politics of this, and Donald.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Trump is the real threat.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
You know what I mean to dismiss because legally he's guilty, right, Like,
from a statutory perspective, Hunter Biden's a criminal, full stop.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
We all know it.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
Yeah, the only defense they're gonna run with is is, oh,
this is politicized too, just like the Trump stuff. Now,
the Trump stuff is obviously very political. It's about it's
four crazy indictments. The Hunter stuff, they should have prosecuted
this guy years and years ago. That's what's political.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
Yeah, well, so what's weird about this to me?
Speaker 3 (06:14):
Buck is they're not even arguing like Trump is arguing,
I didn't commit these crimes. Right, Trump said, I didn't
mishandle the documents. Trump said I didn't do anything illegal.
On January sixth, Trump said, and again I'm just paraphrasing.
In New York City, this is a misdemeanor at worst,
I wasn't involved. I'm not criminally culpable. And in Atlanta
(06:38):
he's saying I didn't do anything wrong. What's interesting about
this is Hunter Biden's lawsuit implicitly is acknowledging that he
did everything wrong because basically what he's trying to sue
for is invasion of privacy. But in order for your
privacy to be invaded, at least so far by what
I have seen, he is saying that accurate information has
(07:01):
been released about him into the general public. So the laptop,
the failure to pay taxes, the gun charges, all these
things that have been written about are in fact true.
So the difference is to me, yes, I can see
the political angle. But the political angle for Trump is
this is all politics. I didn't commit any crime. What
(07:21):
Hunter Biden is saying is, okay, this is all politics.
My privacy was invaded well, which I remember a pretty
substantial distinction I would see there. The pitch is not
to convince a single Republican in the country that Hunter
Biden is not guilty of these things. It's to create
a narrative that Democrats can use to blunt the effectiveness
(07:46):
of the truth coming out about Hunter and the crime family.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Right, So this is just it's like a fallback. This
is the talking point. And so.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
To what you're saying, Yeah, Trump is saying I didn't
do anything wrong, I did nothing criminal. The Hunter team
is going to say, and this is you noticed they've
already said this, Oh, Hunter's gotten such harsh treatment. Whenever
looks at this and says that's that's absolutely absurd. They're
going to try to bring some of I'm just trying
to see what they're doing here and look at it
for some level of strategy. It's I think it's flailing,
(08:15):
but I I'm trying to see what their you know,
what their motive is, what their their action is based on.
And I think it's that they can say that this
would have never this would have been dealt with, you know,
in an easy fashion, and you know he's being treated
poorly because of the politics involved Republicans and the whistleblowers,
(08:37):
and it's a it's crap, but it is the line, right.
I mean, you gotta remember they went with Russia collusion
play for four years, so we can't assume that their
defense or their talking points will be reality based.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
That's not I'm actually that's what I'm surprised by.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I guess, Buck, is they're not as they're not as
aggressive in the defense as I would think they would
be if they were defending.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Because here's what I would say if I Hunter Biden's lawyer.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Right, I've represented convicted murderers, I've represented drug dealers, I've
represented reprobates.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Okay, so did the murder I just get off. You
always tell me about this, but you never tell me
did you get the.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Murderer of Oh no, No, so far as I know,
I believe he's still in jail. But but why would
the defense not be to build on what you're saying, Buck,
My client didn't do anything wrong. Like if I were
advising Hunter Biden and I were his lawyer, my defense
would be my client did nothing wrong. The only reason
why he's being investigated is because his dad's a president
(09:32):
of the United States, and the only reason we agreed
to a plea agreement at all was because we wanted
to take this distraction away from my father's re election
campaign in twenty twenty four. That would be my defense. Now,
I think it's bs right, but that's what I would
defend him. That's far more effective. I think that they're
(09:52):
suing the irs is a part is trying. They're trying
to create the paper trail, so to speak, to make
the case that this is being you know, this is
all a big political circus. Now it's become a function
of you know, trying to.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Get political back and forth, going here a you know
you did to me, I will do to you situation.
I don't know how well it's really going to work,
but remember Democrats will all go, They'll all they're signed on.
I think the Democrat media is largely signed on the
fact that you have people who make a living thinking
and speaking on television saying that Hunter Biden is only
(10:32):
being prosecuted because of who his dad is. I mean,
Hunter Biden clearly broke the law, as much as we
can know anyone before they're actually convicted in a court
of law broke the law. I mean effectively, the conduct
is clear it some of it's on video, right, what
else is there? I know we have a presumption of innocence,
and it is an important principle.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
I think it gets lost a lot.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
But the presumption of innocence in the case of Hunter
Biden is you know, you're really standing on a formality
with that one.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
Yeah, I guess I'm looking at it again. I always
try to think about it. If I were representing this guy,
like take away the politics everything else. The last thing
I want to do, Buck is put him in any
situation where he ever might have to testify under oath,
because that would create the largest possible criminal culpability for him.
When you are voluntarily suing you are and they're suing
(11:22):
the irs. If this case were to proceed, then it
would lead to Hunter Biden being directly under oath deposed
about every single detail of his tax return.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So the point that we always make about the processes
here and the machinery of the I'm assuing the irs.
This this is not going to the front of the line, buddy,
you know what I mean? This is good, I get it.
So this just this creates this is for the media
to have something to chew on. This is not for
the actual defense of Hunter via a lawsuit against whistleblowers
(11:53):
that's going nowhere. Anger is not a legal strategy When
I see this, Buck, this looks like a as a
legal strategy. Hunter is angry because he didn't get his
plea deal. Hunter is angry because he's now got an
indictment against him. And when your client is angry, and
every lawyer out there can talk about this, when you
have an angry client, you have an irrational client that
(12:15):
often requests that you do things that do not make sense.
I think this is coming from Hunter, Biden Buck. I
think he's behaving irrationally, and he's acting out in an
angry fashion, and I think he is exposing himself. Ironically enough,
given the phrase given him what he's already exposed, I
think he's exposing himself legally in a far more severe
(12:35):
fashion than he understands.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
And sometimes sometimes clients make you do things that are
stupid because they're the client and you are the attorney.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
I think this is driven by Hunter Well, he is
going through his lawyers.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Trump over the weekend was speaking about ongoing indictments against him,
in specificity without his law president without his lawyers say so,
he doesn't. He doesn't give a trump about the whole situation.
He's just going for it. So I'm curious when we
come back you, Telly, what do you think about this?
He is saying, Uh, yeah, He's saying a lot of
(13:15):
stuff again, lot of stuff on the TV for the trials.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
A lot of lawyers out there listening say I love
the practice of law except for the clients. I think
that's probably what Donald Trump's criminal defense attorneys are saying
right now. And to be fair to Trump and to
be fair to Hunter, they're really engaged in a unique
spot where they have to be both politically and legally
fighting simultaneously, and sometimes that can lead you in divergent paths.
(13:41):
You know what company's looking out for you when they
upgrade your service, don't charge you for it. Pure Talk
just did that for both new and current customers. They
increase the data on their plans fifty percent, including a
mobile hotspot with each one, with no price increases whatsoever.
Still just twenty bucks a month for unlimited talk text,
and now fifty percent more data plus mobile hotspots, most
(14:02):
families saving almost one thousand dollars a year. While enjoying
the most dependable five G network in America. Another bonus,
you'll be supporting a veteran owned company that only hires
in the good old USA keeping customer service team here
as well, great values, great service. Pure talk is the
way to go. Dial pound two point fifty, say Clay
and Buck to make the switch to pure Talk today,
(14:23):
and you'll save an additional fifty percent off your first month. Again,
dial pound two five zero say Clay and Buck and
make the switch to pure Talk today.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
Don't miss the day of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
Welcome back in Clay Travis Buck Sexton Show. We're talking
about the Hunter Biden I think insanely dumb decision to
file a lawsuit surrounding the IRS issues. To me, Buck, also,
we should mention this It puts on the table even
more the failure of the IRS to charge so far
(14:58):
like calling out the IR for an IRS investigation when
you clearly have not paid taxes. It's easy enough to
know whether or not you paid your millions of dollars
in back taxes. And arguably the thing that's so crazy
to me about the Hunter Biden story. Buck, far from
being treated unfairly. The fact that they just let him
(15:19):
not paying taxes I believe it was in twenty fifteen
and twenty sixteen and maybe twenty fourteen as well, just
expire under the statute of limitations without filing any charges.
Regardless of what you think of the politics. When Hunter
Biden didn't pay taxes in those years, the IRS default
is saying, yeah, we're not even going to try to
(15:40):
capture the money.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
That he owed.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
He's suing effectively, I mean'ssuing the IRS. He's suing these
two whistleblowers. He is suing an entity that covered his
you know, watched his back. So it's really amazing he
got special treatment from the IRS and issuing the IRS
for giving him special treatment in the other direction. Correct,
(16:05):
This is how this is how bonkers the situation really
is for all of us, and to watch it.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
And regardless of the politics, I would think this makes
the IRS far more likely to bring charges against him,
because if I'm sitting around and I'm an IRS agent
and I'm and I'm being objectively honest, It's one thing
to give him preferential treatment. But to your point, to
sue arguing that you've been unfairly treated when you've actually
(16:30):
been far too fairly treated. Is a level of brazenness
that I can't even believe any attorney worth his salt
would ever agree to. Which is why I think this
is coming from Hunter.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Well, this is this.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
Is a common thing among some liberals though. You know,
they'll get into an institution or get get hired under
regulations that treat them differently and in a positive way.
You get a leg up on the competition, and then
to get in there and they say, I don't like
the way I'm true to, I'm suing. So this is
this is actually something that the left wing mentality has,
I think on a pretty regular basis. But I think
(17:09):
Clay one part of this. For me, it's Monday September eighteenth,
in case anyone's winning with the data, is Monday September eighteenth.
I'm not sensing the Biden's gotta go chorus right now.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
It didn't happen over the weekend, and it you know,
it didn't kind of launch in now.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
That doesn't mean but we have weeks here before it
before they're stuck with Biden, and I do think at
some level they might just be trying to think through
guys what's the strategy here. I think that the people
who really make decisions within the DNC when the Democrat
Party aren't really sure what they're gonna do.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
Well.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
Not only that, Buck, I also this is the sad part.
I mean doctor Jill Biden and Hunter Biden. Do you
think they're gonna sit down with Joe and say, hey, Dad,
it's time for you to step down.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
No.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
They owe all of their relevance and all of their
power to their dad's and their husband's position. They're not
gonna ask him to walk away from that.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
There you go, pay close attention to our federal government's
Treasury Department for a future announcement on our currency system.
According to former Wall Street insider and digital currency expert
Tika Tawari, the government could soon announce a national recall
on the US dollar. It will be replaced with a
new digital version that'll be very different from what you
and I are used to right now. If it comes
(18:21):
to be, you're gonna want to be prepared for it
in advance. You don't want to be caught unaware by this.
You don't want this to be a thing that creeps
up on you. Tika Tawari is warning everybody who will
listen that the official announcement could come this fall. He's
exposing this government plan in a video that's up online now.
It shows you the three steps you need to take
to prepare. Go online to Dollar Recall dot Com to
(18:45):
watch this video and learn from it. That's Dollar Recall
dot Com and learn how to prepare in time for
this possible change. That's Dollar Recall dot Com. Paid for
by Palm Beach Research Group, Slave Travis and Buck Sexton.
On the lines of.
Speaker 5 (19:02):
The President, I want to talk.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
Wait, wait, did I say one thing?
Speaker 2 (19:06):
Looked at all the.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Lies he's told over the last couple of weeks. He
said he was at the World Trade Center and he wasn't.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
He said he.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
Flew airplanes, right, he didn't. He said he drove trucks
and he didn't.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
Everything he says is like a lie.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
It's terrible. Even his handicapped well, he said he's a six.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
He's not a six.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
So you had Kristen Welker there on her first Meet
the Press as the host, Chuck Todd stepped aside, I
don't I don't mean this to be unkind. I mean,
Chuck Todd, I always thought was a even look, it's
it's a regime democrat establishment show. Wasn't always people I know,
(19:48):
people on the right, he said, they actually liked the
the It was Russer, right, was the guy Tim Russer.
Tim Russer right back in the day. I don't know,
I've never been a big Sunday Show watcher in general,
but at the point being, it got worse under Chuck
Todd a lot worse, and then Underwhelker. We'll see how
it goes. It was her first outing interviewing Donald Trump.
(20:09):
Even if you're I'm just gonna say this, even if
you are, you know, as as on the Trump train
as possible, you're just not shaping the interview. Really, that
doesn't really it's not a thing like the you know,
when Trump is loose, he's he's going where.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
He's like a tiger, right, Like you can maybe sit
on the back of a tiger, but it's really hard
to control the direction that it goes.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Very often, Yeah, you're not telling it what to do.
Speaker 2 (20:33):
And that's a little bit like when you're interviewing Trump,
and you saw quite a bit of it with with Welker.
This was also what you saw when he did the
CNN Town Hall, because that's opposition. It's opposition media.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
It's when you just want to be like, hey, mister president,
can we can we get you on another issue? You'd
be excuse me, excuse me, and he goes back to
what he wants to talk about, and you just got
to go with what you got. But if your opposition media,
then you've really got your hands full.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
So you certainly saw some of that.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
I watched. I actually watch the whole thing. I was
I was very curious to see how it went. One
area where uh, you know this, this is going to
be very interesting. What is the Let's say that Trump
runs the gauntlet, Clay and is able to uh beat
all the trials and beat Biden and become president again,
(21:21):
what does he really do about all of this? Because
she asked him about retribution? This is this is cut five.
I want ever to hear this. I want and then
I want Clay, you tell me how how you think
this is going to shake out?
Speaker 1 (21:31):
Play it.
Speaker 5 (21:32):
When you talk about retribution, are you talking about directing
your attorney general to try to go after your political line?
Speaker 4 (21:40):
When I talk about retribution, I'm talking about fairness. We
have to treat people fairly. These people on January sixth,
they went some of them never even went into the building,
and they're being given sentences of you know, many years.
Speaker 5 (21:54):
Well, mister President, we're going to delve into that a
little bit later on, but I want to stay on
this idea of what you mean by retribution. Are you
looking to a point an attorney general who will prosecute
the people you tell him to prosecute.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
I'm looking to a point an attorney general who's going
to be tough on crime and fair, very simple.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
It's a good answer, I think. I think it's a
solid answer. What I'm wondering about here is do you
think Trump even knows at this point because he hasn't
gone through the full expanse of the Democrat deep state
ambush that we all know is coming next year?
Speaker 1 (22:31):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Is he going to take an approach that's magnanimous or
is he going to take an approach that's scorched earth.
I bring it up just because I remember all the
locker up chants with Hillary, lock her up. We remember that,
and then Trump became president. He said, for the basically
the best inserts of the country, We're just gonna let
Crooked Hillary go, yeah, you know, she's been through a lot.
Speaker 1 (22:52):
I think he said something she's been through a lot
like he has.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Trump has these two speeds where he goes from like
Conan the Barbarian to like mister Rogers sometimes with people
very quickly.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
I think that's business negotiation. I think that's ultimately the
way you understand Trump is everything in his mind is
a negotiation.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
And I think it speaks to.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Trump's willingness to forgive people who say bad things about him,
because sometimes in negotiation you say things that you don't
actually believe in an effort to get a deal done,
and then once the deal's done, you've got to come
together and you got to work for mutual purposes. I
don't know Buck. And the one thing that I don't
think is being discussed enough is to owe two things.
(23:35):
One who's going to go work for Trump? And I
say that, people can be like, oh, you know, there's
no but he's only got one term. So if you
have a good job, let's say you're a United States senator,
I'll give you an example. We've had Ted Cruz on
this program a lot. I think Ted Cruz would be
an amazing attorney general. I think Ted Cruz is going
(23:56):
to get re elected to the Senate on a six
year term in twenty two twenty four. If you were
Ted Kruz, you might be willing to leave the Senate
to go work for a president that had multiple terms
because maybe you think that you want to do that
for a couple of terms. Would you do it for
one term? I don't know, And I'm just using him
as an example and wondering about how many people out there,
(24:18):
if you like your job that you already have and
you are a success in it, when you know that
at the most Trump has one term, are you going
to get supremely talented people's That's part one, Part two
of this buck is, I think, and you're hitting on
a big part of this. Remember, after like a year
(24:41):
and a half, if you are not able to run
for reelection, your power diminishes in a hurry. So you
can only really get a lot done in that first
year and a half, and then everybody turns the page
and they start thinking about who's going to be next president,
and so there's not a lot of power that's going
to be vested.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
Yes it is. Patronage is a huge part of all this.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Still we don't often talk about that, But how do
you get people to work for you? I'd like to say, Oh,
it's because they just want to serve the country. You
got a lot of egomaniacs with many options, who are
highly successful in different fields, who aren't going to just
give up whatever it is that they're doing because they
want to serve an administration for a year or two.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
Right.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Yeah, I think there are a lot of people right
now who would be great in a second Trump administration,
who would think twice about it for a whole range
of reasons. And that's a bit of a challenge. But
in terms of the one just the general, one term
component of the election as it stands right now, and
you know, people keep reminding me, I read the emails
(25:44):
and the tweets and things. Primary is not over. We
get that, and the primary is the primary, and that
process is still plying out. But we also have to
look at the reality of what the Republican base is
showing people their preferences at this point resoundingly. And so
that's why we speak about the likely the likely face
off of a Biden Trump general election and Clay both
(26:09):
of them would only have one term to go. Yes,
which means the choice of vice president for either candidate
is enormously important for their party and their side because
you effectively and also given the age of both of
the I was gonna say contestants, sounds like they're on
the game show. Both of the candidates, thank you, candidates
(26:31):
not contestants. The age of the candidates means that the
choice of the vice president is incredibly important both I
think for the election more so than it normally would be,
but then also afterwards because to your point, once you've
been in for two years, a president who's got only
two years left and can't run for another term.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
No one's really gonna be doing your favors. No one's
really gonna go to the mat for you.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
And given that if we end up with Biden v. Trump,
which it seems like is very likely given where we're
sitting here on you know, a little bit less than
four months until the votes start in Iowa, if we
do that, Buck, it's not only going to be chaos
that whoever wins, let's say Trump wins, let's say Biden wins,
the number of people that are going to run for
(27:19):
president in twenty twenty eight is going to be an
all time record.
Speaker 1 (27:23):
I'm not even kidding. I think there will be thirty
people on.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
The Democrat side, and I think there'll be thirty people
on the Republican side. I think you are going to
see a bigger president. I'm talking about for twenty eight
a bigger presidential field of contenders than you have ever
seen in the history of the presidency. Because so many
people have felt that they were, you know, waiting out
Trump or you're waiting out the Biden situation. Everybody's throwing
(27:48):
their hat in the ring. We're going to have fifty
or sixty contenders for president.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Officially, fifty or sixty I mean a lot. I would
agree a lot.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
I don't know. Fifty or sixty seven.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
We had nineteen eighteen, nineteen or nineteen Republicans in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
I think it'll be more than that.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
That's not crazy when you look at the way the
numbers have stacked up in the past. I think also
we are all seeing that running for the presidency.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
For some people who.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
Know they probably won't win or have almost no shot
of winning, they want their voice to be heard at
the national level. For others, I think it's a marketing mechanism. Now, yeah,
full on marketing for whatever your next project is, for
whatever your company is, or you know, your your future,
and yeah, at some level building maybe for a future
(28:39):
political campaign of some kind. But it's free media and
that is how people see it now. It has changed,
I think pretty dramatically. It is free media that people want.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
And I think also Trump's success and then even using
the vague success this year, I think has opened the
sort of scope of who might consider run in a
way that that wouldn't have occurred in the past. In
other words, I think there's more celebrity contenders than there
will have been ever before.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
In twenty twenty eight, you.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
See Joy Behar was talking a little smack about the VEC.
Joy Behar was trying to throw down with vivec in
an area where I don't think. I don't think Joy
wants to go there. Clay, this was all the.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
We need to We need to play this back when
we u when we come back. It is.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
It is pretty incredible and ridiculous. Joy Behar continuing her
string as the dumbest woman on television, but now going
after someone that is objectively a thousand times as smart
as her. Guys we rely on testosterone for energy and stamina.
You know testosterone levels have dropped fifty percent in the
past fifty or so years. That is absolutely crazy. You
(29:49):
need more vim vigger vitality in your life. How about
some all natural testosterone in increase. Do you know that
the Chalk mal Vitality Stack will show over three months
that testosterone levels go up twenty percent.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
It's all natural. You can get hooked up.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
The leading ingredient has been proven in studies to replenish
diminished amounts of testosterone.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Again.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
Mal Vitality Stack choq dot com is the website choq
dot com. There's also a female vitality stack. You can
get hooked up. You get thirty five percent off your
subscription for life if you use my name Clay again.
If you don't have the energy you used to, want
to try to put back a little bit more vigor
in your life, check out chalk dot com. That's choq
(30:35):
dot com, thirty five percent off for the life of
a subscription choq dot com.
Speaker 1 (30:42):
My name Clay.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Check it out today clayanfuck twenty four to seven.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Subscribe today.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Welcome back in Clay, Travis buck Sexton, show our good
friend joybehar of the dumbest show in America. The view
has decided that there is a really dumb person running
for president of the United Her target, vi vike Ramaswami.
Now buck before we even play this clip. There are
(31:08):
many things that you can attack Vi vike Ramaswami. For
anybody out there can say, hey, I'm choosing to vote
for somebody else.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
We've had him on this program several times.
Speaker 3 (31:18):
Attacking him for not being smart enough to be president
is dumb, even by Joy Behar standards. But a particularly
dumb person like Joy Behar attacking a super smart guy
like vivike Ramaswami is so tone deaf. It would be
like me attacking Lebron James for not being able to
jump high enough.
Speaker 1 (31:36):
Uh. It is just next to the level ridiculous.
Speaker 6 (31:39):
And let's listen this business about the aging that keeps
coming up and talking about the young generation, the young
generation of Republicans A dumb one. You've got that be
back Ramasmamy, You've got Mojerie, Taylor Green, You've got a
w in a second, Lauren Bubblehead, Matt Gates. You have
(32:00):
all these people who went along with the insurrection, who
believe that Trump won all Marjorie is out there. Oh
Trump won by a landslide. They're liars there and they
are the new generation of their publican body.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
First of all, the thing about Viveke calling Viveke dom
Joy behar that is that is precious. I mean that
is a real moment. I also think it's interesting that
now the standard of the view is they'll pick three
or four people and say this is like the Republican future. Look,
all those people have name recognition and you know, are
doing their thing in the Republican Party. But to pick
(32:36):
that group, I mean if you really start to line
up the leadership of the Republican Party in general and
the leadership of the Democrat Party, and you're going to
have like a I don't know how you'd prove this.
If you really want to look at their cognition and IQ,
that would be interesting as well. But trust me when
I say that, I think the Republican leadership would smoke
the Democrat leadership when it comes to jeopardy, trivial pursuits
(32:59):
or whatever mind gave you want to play.
Speaker 3 (33:01):
What if you and I got to go head to
head against all the ladies of the view on like
celebrity Jeopardy but almost family Feud style, where you're on
you get to go. It's like quiz bowl style almost
how that nothing sound immodest, but Mercy rule would have
to be. They'd have to cut a commercial, they'd start
running old episodes of The Prices Right or something. I
don't even think they could be competitive, buck like, even
(33:23):
if pop cultures included, I think that we would be
as good or better than them on pop culture. I
don't know about music. We might have a little bit
of an issue with music. You won't you reveal what
instrument used to play. I'm basically tone deaf, so I
am not confident that I would do well in music.
Almost every other category, I would put us on being
(33:48):
able to smoke the view. And if they're asking only
about popular music, then I think we can do decently, right.
I mean, most people know although you didn't know who
Morgan Wallen was, so I may need to reinforce my
myrrvousness about this.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
Yeah, no, I would. I wouldn't know who Morgan Wallen is. Well.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I know now because we had this whole momently show,
but only because I discussed it.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
If I hadn't brought it up on the show. You
would still have no idea. He exists, no idea, none
at all.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
I couldn't even name I don't even know if I
could name five active NBA players right now, like I
would struggle to do that. I got you in sport. Yeah, no, no, no,
I know you've got that cover. But I'm saying there
are some things that I just I block out. I
pay absolutely it might be our blind spot. So if
they you know, I would be a little bit nervous there,
but otherwise I'm very confident we would beat the view
(34:37):
in every category. Yeah, I mean I think I told
you this, but I was asked when I did on
campus on campus interviews, we just know, yeah, this is
this and I and I they asked me who my
favorite New York Yankee was, because I was from New
York City, and I said Don Maddingly and they're like,
you know, he's been retired for like fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
It's like, what do you mean Don is retired? This
is crazy.
Speaker 3 (34:59):
Well, my favorite part of that interview you did for NBC,
I think it was NBC is where you said what's
the most ideal World Series matchup? And you said the
Yankees and the Red.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
Sox yes, and then I tried to double down on it.
When they explained to me that couldn't happen, I was like,
you didn't say possible, you just said the best. Theoretically.
I did not get a second interview with them anyway,
another thing I was gonna throw out there. I'm not
making any assumptions. I'm not making any assumptions about this
beloved audience and the state of in the state of
(35:31):
South Carolina. But I'm just saying, if any of you
happened to have a one hundred somedion one hundred and
thirty five million dollar F thirty five jet that you
just have thrown a tarp over and it's in your backyard,
maybe it's next to the camper, maybe it's next to
the you know, the addition to the house you're building.
(35:54):
Can you please give the government the F thirty five
Joint Strike Fighter back that it has long and is
now asking the general public to help fight.
Speaker 3 (36:03):
We need to talk more about this. Because I can
find my kid's iPhones if they are lost. I have
like to find my phone the tracker. I can go
like look up where my kids iPhones are. I can
see basically where my kids are based on where their
iPhones are. How does the government not know at all
(36:23):
times where every jet is.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
How can you lose a jet?
Speaker 3 (36:27):
I know this got discussed with Malaysian Airlines, but that
was at least out over the Indian Ocean. We're talking
about in the continental United States.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
You know, someone right now probably knows where a one
hundred and thirty five million dollar state of the art
F thirty five fighter plane is. And I think it
is one of these situations play where no questions asked,
just just turn it in, but don't fly it in, like,
tell them where it is. I would recommend not getting
in there yourself and trying to drop it off at
(36:57):
the airport.
Speaker 1 (36:58):
It's just my thought.
Speaker 3 (36:59):
I just it seems impossible that this could be the
world that we live in. Find the jet, hopefully
Welcome to today's edition of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Welcome everybody, it is Monday. It is time for Clay
and Buck all across the land.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Thanks for being here with us.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
We've got, as always is the case on Monday, because
it all comes together from over the weekend, a lot
to discuss. We've got Trump on Meet the Press with
its new host Kristen Welker. We've got Speaker McCarthy proceeding
with the impeachment inquiry without much pushback from Republican stories
(00:36):
on that over the weekend, so it looks like so
far unity on the impeachment inquiry. Numbers from the Border,
Customs and Border Patrol telling Fox News how many thousands
of encounters. I'm not going to tell you the number now,
you got to stay with us, but just think in
your head, how many in one weekend, how many people
entered into America at our southern border illegally. So that's
(01:00):
certainly something we will dive into a lot of stuff
from the Trump Meet the Press interview, some of which
we'll dive into here outlining his Trump's positions on Ukraine,
on abortion on I obviously talked about the trials January sixth.
Stuff a lot of things, so I'll have some time
(01:21):
for that in a little bit. But first up, one
thing that we've been processing here on the show is
the new reality that Hunter Biden is facing three felony
indictments related to a gun charge.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
This news broke last week.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Clay, I actually managed to do a backflip while still
seated in his chair. I didn't even know what was possible.
But when the news broke, he had been calling it
for a long time, this could happen. So we're going
to see if it turns into a reality that Hunter
Biden could face prison time. In the meantime, I still
think there are a lot of ways they're gonna try
(01:58):
to make this go away. But crazy world we live
in now we've got. I mean it's crazy enough, Clay
that Trump is facing four indictments when you add to
this though, that the president's son is facing a multiple
count indictment. So Trump is facing four different criminal trials
and also a civil trial and whatever else they're going
(02:18):
to throw at him. Hunter Biden facing three felony charges
in one indictment around the gun charge. The son of
the sitting president. We got a lot of things to
dive into. This was a strategy that I'm not sure
that many people saw coming, and it was Hunter Biden
over the weekend.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
This just broke.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Has sued the IRS for allegedly breaching his privacy. He
says that the whistleblowers is twenty seven page lawsuit Clay
Hunter Biden's lawyers say that a couple of IRS agents,
the whistleblower Shapley and Zieglert, have created problems for Hunter's privacy,
(03:00):
effectively putting the trying to put the whistleblowers on the
hot seat in this instance. What do you take from this?
What do you make of this strategy? Is it something
that might work?
Speaker 3 (03:12):
It's incredibly brazen and reckless. And if we had an
honest Department of Justice, immediately they would file felony charges
against Hunter Biden for income tax evasion.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
I mean, I just want everybody out there to think
about what's going on.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Hunter Biden is not saying, hey, these these releases are inaccurate,
because remember he hasn't paid millions of dollars that he
owed that we know of for sure in back taxes.
Buck he tried to write off hookers on his tax returns.
Right off Hookers. And the only reason why he didn't
(03:51):
get away with this sweetheart deal was because the house
was won by Republicans, and these two IRS agents step
forward and told us exactly how rig the investigation was
into Hunter Biden. So I think this is an incredibly
reckless legal strategy. At a minimum, buck it would require
that Hunter Biden testify under oath and be aggressively deposed.
(04:14):
This is a civil suit, but anything that he said
in a civil suit would potentially open him up to
criminal liability for what he said under oath. So I
just maybe there's a lawyer out there that has been
involved in cases like these that could even point out
what the legal strategy could be. Because but as soon
(04:36):
as I saw this this morning, I started reading about it,
and it just seems like a reckless, indefensibly dumb legal
strategy because I don't even know what his defense is.
I think that this is part of I mean, clearly,
it's a muddy the Waters thing, that's the obvious, and
I'm not sure how effective that is, but I think
(04:57):
it's part of a broader attempt here to turn all
of the Biden crime family allegation stuff into the opposite
end of the playing field, if you will, like the
opposite team from all the stuff up against Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (05:15):
In essence, Hunter's team is trying to say, this is
all political too, This is a hit job, just like
the stuff against Trump they say is a hit job.
This is a hit job. They want to elevate the
Biden crime family stuff to the same level of politicization
that the Trump stuff is. Right, this is I'm saying,
(05:37):
this is I think their goal. So that then that
gives Democrats the ability to say, you know, the Republic
is at stake. They would have left Hunter alone if
it wasn't for the politics of this, and Donald.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Trump is the real threat.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
You know what I mean to dismiss because legally he's guilty, right, Like,
from a statutory perspective, Hunter Biden's a criminal, full stop.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
We all know it.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
Yeah, the only defense they're gonna run with is is, oh,
this is politicized too, just like the Trump stuff. Now,
the Trump stuff is obviously very political. It's about it's
four crazy indictments. The Hunter stuff, they should have prosecuted
this guy years and years ago. That's what's political.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
Yeah, well, so what's weird about this to me?
Speaker 3 (06:14):
Buck is they're not even arguing like Trump is arguing,
I didn't commit these crimes. Right, Trump said, I didn't
mishandle the documents. Trump said I didn't do anything illegal.
On January sixth, Trump said, and again I'm just paraphrasing.
In New York City, this is a misdemeanor at worst,
I wasn't involved. I'm not criminally culpable. And in Atlanta
(06:38):
he's saying I didn't do anything wrong. What's interesting about
this is Hunter Biden's lawsuit implicitly is acknowledging that he
did everything wrong because basically what he's trying to sue
for is invasion of privacy. But in order for your
privacy to be invaded, at least so far by what
I have seen, he is saying that accurate information has
(07:01):
been released about him into the general public. So the laptop,
the failure to pay taxes, the gun charges, all these
things that have been written about are in fact true.
So the difference is to me, yes, I can see
the political angle. But the political angle for Trump is
this is all politics. I didn't commit any crime. What
(07:21):
Hunter Biden is saying is, okay, this is all politics.
My privacy was invaded well, which I remember a pretty
substantial distinction I would see there. The pitch is not
to convince a single Republican in the country that Hunter
Biden is not guilty of these things. It's to create
a narrative that Democrats can use to blunt the effectiveness
(07:46):
of the truth coming out about Hunter and the crime family.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Right, So this is just it's like a fallback. This
is the talking point. And so.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
To what you're saying, Yeah, Trump is saying I didn't
do anything wrong, I did nothing criminal. The Hunter team
is going to say, and this is you noticed they've
already said this, Oh, Hunter's gotten such harsh treatment. Whenever
looks at this and says that's that's absolutely absurd. They're
going to try to bring some of I'm just trying
to see what they're doing here and look at it
for some level of strategy. It's I think it's flailing,
(08:15):
but I I'm trying to see what their you know,
what their motive is, what their their action is based on.
And I think it's that they can say that this
would have never this would have been dealt with, you know,
in an easy fashion, and you know he's being treated
poorly because of the politics involved Republicans and the whistleblowers,
(08:37):
and it's a it's crap, but it is the line, right.
I mean, you gotta remember they went with Russia collusion
play for four years, so we can't assume that their
defense or their talking points will be reality based.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
That's not I'm actually that's what I'm surprised by.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I guess, Buck, is they're not as they're not as
aggressive in the defense as I would think they would
be if they were defending.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Because here's what I would say if I Hunter Biden's lawyer.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Right, I've represented convicted murderers, I've represented drug dealers, I've
represented reprobates.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Okay, so did the murder I just get off. You
always tell me about this, but you never tell me
did you get the.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Murderer of Oh no, No, so far as I know,
I believe he's still in jail. But but why would
the defense not be to build on what you're saying, Buck,
My client didn't do anything wrong. Like if I were
advising Hunter Biden and I were his lawyer, my defense
would be my client did nothing wrong. The only reason
why he's being investigated is because his dad's a president
(09:32):
of the United States, and the only reason we agreed
to a plea agreement at all was because we wanted
to take this distraction away from my father's re election
campaign in twenty twenty four. That would be my defense. Now,
I think it's bs right, but that's what I would
defend him. That's far more effective. I think that they're
(09:52):
suing the irs is a part is trying. They're trying
to create the paper trail, so to speak, to make
the case that this is being you know, this is
all a big political circus. Now it's become a function
of you know, trying to.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Get political back and forth, going here a you know
you did to me, I will do to you situation.
I don't know how well it's really going to work,
but remember Democrats will all go, They'll all they're signed on.
I think the Democrat media is largely signed on the
fact that you have people who make a living thinking
and speaking on television saying that Hunter Biden is only
(10:32):
being prosecuted because of who his dad is. I mean,
Hunter Biden clearly broke the law, as much as we
can know anyone before they're actually convicted in a court
of law broke the law. I mean effectively, the conduct
is clear it some of it's on video, right, what
else is there? I know we have a presumption of innocence,
and it is an important principle.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
I think it gets lost a lot.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
But the presumption of innocence in the case of Hunter
Biden is you know, you're really standing on a formality
with that one.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
Yeah, I guess I'm looking at it again. I always
try to think about it. If I were representing this guy,
like take away the politics everything else. The last thing
I want to do, Buck is put him in any
situation where he ever might have to testify under oath,
because that would create the largest possible criminal culpability for him.
When you are voluntarily suing you are and they're suing
(11:22):
the irs. If this case were to proceed, then it
would lead to Hunter Biden being directly under oath deposed
about every single detail of his tax return.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So the point that we always make about the processes
here and the machinery of the I'm assuing the irs.
This this is not going to the front of the line, buddy,
you know what I mean? This is good, I get it.
So this just this creates this is for the media
to have something to chew on. This is not for
the actual defense of Hunter via a lawsuit against whistleblowers
(11:53):
that's going nowhere. Anger is not a legal strategy When
I see this, Buck, this looks like a as a
legal strategy. Hunter is angry because he didn't get his
plea deal. Hunter is angry because he's now got an
indictment against him. And when your client is angry, and
every lawyer out there can talk about this, when you
have an angry client, you have an irrational client that
(12:15):
often requests that you do things that do not make sense.
I think this is coming from Hunter, Biden Buck. I
think he's behaving irrationally, and he's acting out in an
angry fashion, and I think he is exposing himself. Ironically enough,
given the phrase given him what he's already exposed, I
think he's exposing himself legally in a far more severe
(12:35):
fashion than he understands.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
And sometimes sometimes clients make you do things that are
stupid because they're the client and you are the attorney.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
I think this is driven by Hunter Well, he is
going through his lawyers.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Trump over the weekend was speaking about ongoing indictments against him,
in specificity without his law president without his lawyers say so,
he doesn't. He doesn't give a trump about the whole situation.
He's just going for it. So I'm curious when we
come back you, Telly, what do you think about this?
He is saying, Uh, yeah, He's saying a lot of
(13:15):
stuff again, lot of stuff on the TV for the trials.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
A lot of lawyers out there listening say I love
the practice of law except for the clients. I think
that's probably what Donald Trump's criminal defense attorneys are saying
right now. And to be fair to Trump and to
be fair to Hunter, they're really engaged in a unique
spot where they have to be both politically and legally
fighting simultaneously, and sometimes that can lead you in divergent paths.
(13:41):
You know what company's looking out for you when they
upgrade your service, don't charge you for it. Pure Talk
just did that for both new and current customers. They
increase the data on their plans fifty percent, including a
mobile hotspot with each one, with no price increases whatsoever.
Still just twenty bucks a month for unlimited talk text,
and now fifty percent more data plus mobile hotspots, most
(14:02):
families saving almost one thousand dollars a year. While enjoying
the most dependable five G network in America. Another bonus,
you'll be supporting a veteran owned company that only hires
in the good old USA keeping customer service team here
as well, great values, great service. Pure talk is the
way to go. Dial pound two point fifty, say Clay
and Buck to make the switch to pure Talk today,
(14:23):
and you'll save an additional fifty percent off your first month. Again,
dial pound two five zero say Clay and Buck and
make the switch to pure Talk today.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
Don't miss the day of the Clay Travis and Buck
Sexton Show.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
Welcome back in Clay Travis Buck Sexton Show. We're talking
about the Hunter Biden I think insanely dumb decision to
file a lawsuit surrounding the IRS issues. To me, Buck, also,
we should mention this It puts on the table even
more the failure of the IRS to charge so far
(14:58):
like calling out the IR for an IRS investigation when
you clearly have not paid taxes. It's easy enough to
know whether or not you paid your millions of dollars
in back taxes. And arguably the thing that's so crazy
to me about the Hunter Biden story. Buck, far from
being treated unfairly. The fact that they just let him
(15:19):
not paying taxes I believe it was in twenty fifteen
and twenty sixteen and maybe twenty fourteen as well, just
expire under the statute of limitations without filing any charges.
Regardless of what you think of the politics. When Hunter
Biden didn't pay taxes in those years, the IRS default
is saying, yeah, we're not even going to try to
(15:40):
capture the money.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
That he owed.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
He's suing effectively, I mean'ssuing the IRS. He's suing these
two whistleblowers. He is suing an entity that covered his
you know, watched his back. So it's really amazing he
got special treatment from the IRS and issuing the IRS
for giving him special treatment in the other direction. Correct,
(16:05):
This is how this is how bonkers the situation really
is for all of us, and to watch it.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
And regardless of the politics, I would think this makes
the IRS far more likely to bring charges against him,
because if I'm sitting around and I'm an IRS agent
and I'm and I'm being objectively honest, It's one thing
to give him preferential treatment. But to your point, to
sue arguing that you've been unfairly treated when you've actually
(16:30):
been far too fairly treated. Is a level of brazenness
that I can't even believe any attorney worth his salt
would ever agree to. Which is why I think this
is coming from Hunter.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Well, this is this.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
Is a common thing among some liberals though. You know,
they'll get into an institution or get get hired under
regulations that treat them differently and in a positive way.
You get a leg up on the competition, and then
to get in there and they say, I don't like
the way I'm true to, I'm suing. So this is
this is actually something that the left wing mentality has,
I think on a pretty regular basis. But I think
(17:09):
Clay one part of this. For me, it's Monday September eighteenth,
in case anyone's winning with the data, is Monday September eighteenth.
I'm not sensing the Biden's gotta go chorus right now.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
It didn't happen over the weekend, and it you know,
it didn't kind of launch in now.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
That doesn't mean but we have weeks here before it
before they're stuck with Biden, and I do think at
some level they might just be trying to think through
guys what's the strategy here. I think that the people
who really make decisions within the DNC when the Democrat
Party aren't really sure what they're gonna do.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
Well.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
Not only that, Buck, I also this is the sad part.
I mean doctor Jill Biden and Hunter Biden. Do you
think they're gonna sit down with Joe and say, hey, Dad,
it's time for you to step down.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
No.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
They owe all of their relevance and all of their
power to their dad's and their husband's position. They're not
gonna ask him to walk away from that.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
There you go, pay close attention to our federal government's
Treasury Department for a future announcement on our currency system.
According to former Wall Street insider and digital currency expert
Tika Tawari, the government could soon announce a national recall
on the US dollar. It will be replaced with a
new digital version that'll be very different from what you
and I are used to right now. If it comes
(18:21):
to be, you're gonna want to be prepared for it
in advance. You don't want to be caught unaware by this.
You don't want this to be a thing that creeps
up on you. Tika Tawari is warning everybody who will
listen that the official announcement could come this fall. He's
exposing this government plan in a video that's up online now.
It shows you the three steps you need to take
to prepare. Go online to Dollar Recall dot Com to
(18:45):
watch this video and learn from it. That's Dollar Recall
dot Com and learn how to prepare in time for
this possible change. That's Dollar Recall dot Com. Paid for
by Palm Beach Research Group, Slave Travis and Buck Sexton.
On the lines of.
Speaker 5 (19:02):
The President, I want to talk.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
Wait, wait, did I say one thing?
Speaker 2 (19:06):
Looked at all the.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Lies he's told over the last couple of weeks. He
said he was at the World Trade Center and he wasn't.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
He said he.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
Flew airplanes, right, he didn't. He said he drove trucks
and he didn't.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
Everything he says is like a lie.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
It's terrible. Even his handicapped well, he said he's a six.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
He's not a six.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
So you had Kristen Welker there on her first Meet
the Press as the host, Chuck Todd stepped aside, I
don't I don't mean this to be unkind. I mean,
Chuck Todd, I always thought was a even look, it's
it's a regime democrat establishment show. Wasn't always people I know,
(19:48):
people on the right, he said, they actually liked the
the It was Russer, right, was the guy Tim Russer.
Tim Russer right back in the day. I don't know,
I've never been a big Sunday Show watcher in general,
but at the point being, it got worse under Chuck
Todd a lot worse, and then Underwhelker. We'll see how
it goes. It was her first outing interviewing Donald Trump.
(20:09):
Even if you're I'm just gonna say this, even if
you are, you know, as as on the Trump train
as possible, you're just not shaping the interview. Really, that
doesn't really it's not a thing like the you know,
when Trump is loose, he's he's going where.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
He's like a tiger, right, Like you can maybe sit
on the back of a tiger, but it's really hard
to control the direction that it goes.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Very often, Yeah, you're not telling it what to do.
Speaker 2 (20:33):
And that's a little bit like when you're interviewing Trump,
and you saw quite a bit of it with with Welker.
This was also what you saw when he did the
CNN Town Hall, because that's opposition. It's opposition media.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
It's when you just want to be like, hey, mister president,
can we can we get you on another issue? You'd
be excuse me, excuse me, and he goes back to
what he wants to talk about, and you just got
to go with what you got. But if your opposition media,
then you've really got your hands full.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
So you certainly saw some of that.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
I watched. I actually watch the whole thing. I was
I was very curious to see how it went. One
area where uh, you know this, this is going to
be very interesting. What is the Let's say that Trump
runs the gauntlet, Clay and is able to uh beat
all the trials and beat Biden and become president again,
(21:21):
what does he really do about all of this? Because
she asked him about retribution? This is this is cut five.
I want ever to hear this. I want and then
I want Clay, you tell me how how you think
this is going to shake out?
Speaker 1 (21:31):
Play it.
Speaker 5 (21:32):
When you talk about retribution, are you talking about directing
your attorney general to try to go after your political line?
Speaker 4 (21:40):
When I talk about retribution, I'm talking about fairness. We
have to treat people fairly. These people on January sixth,
they went some of them never even went into the building,
and they're being given sentences of you know, many years.
Speaker 5 (21:54):
Well, mister President, we're going to delve into that a
little bit later on, but I want to stay on
this idea of what you mean by retribution. Are you
looking to a point an attorney general who will prosecute
the people you tell him to prosecute.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
I'm looking to a point an attorney general who's going
to be tough on crime and fair, very simple.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
It's a good answer, I think. I think it's a
solid answer. What I'm wondering about here is do you
think Trump even knows at this point because he hasn't
gone through the full expanse of the Democrat deep state
ambush that we all know is coming next year?
Speaker 1 (22:31):
Right?
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Is he going to take an approach that's magnanimous or
is he going to take an approach that's scorched earth.
I bring it up just because I remember all the
locker up chants with Hillary, lock her up. We remember that,
and then Trump became president. He said, for the basically
the best inserts of the country, We're just gonna let
Crooked Hillary go, yeah, you know, she's been through a lot.
Speaker 1 (22:52):
I think he said something she's been through a lot
like he has.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Trump has these two speeds where he goes from like
Conan the Barbarian to like mister Rogers sometimes with people
very quickly.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
I think that's business negotiation. I think that's ultimately the
way you understand Trump is everything in his mind is
a negotiation.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
And I think it speaks to.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Trump's willingness to forgive people who say bad things about him,
because sometimes in negotiation you say things that you don't
actually believe in an effort to get a deal done,
and then once the deal's done, you've got to come
together and you got to work for mutual purposes. I
don't know Buck. And the one thing that I don't
think is being discussed enough is to owe two things.
(23:35):
One who's going to go work for Trump? And I
say that, people can be like, oh, you know, there's
no but he's only got one term. So if you
have a good job, let's say you're a United States senator,
I'll give you an example. We've had Ted Cruz on
this program a lot. I think Ted Cruz would be
an amazing attorney general. I think Ted Cruz is going
(23:56):
to get re elected to the Senate on a six
year term in twenty two twenty four. If you were
Ted Kruz, you might be willing to leave the Senate
to go work for a president that had multiple terms
because maybe you think that you want to do that
for a couple of terms. Would you do it for
one term? I don't know, And I'm just using him
as an example and wondering about how many people out there,
(24:18):
if you like your job that you already have and
you are a success in it, when you know that
at the most Trump has one term, are you going
to get supremely talented people's That's part one, Part two
of this buck is, I think, and you're hitting on
a big part of this. Remember, after like a year
(24:41):
and a half, if you are not able to run
for reelection, your power diminishes in a hurry. So you
can only really get a lot done in that first
year and a half, and then everybody turns the page
and they start thinking about who's going to be next president,
and so there's not a lot of power that's going
to be vested.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
Yes it is. Patronage is a huge part of all this.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Still we don't often talk about that, But how do
you get people to work for you? I'd like to say, Oh,
it's because they just want to serve the country. You
got a lot of egomaniacs with many options, who are
highly successful in different fields, who aren't going to just
give up whatever it is that they're doing because they
want to serve an administration for a year or two.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
Right.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Yeah, I think there are a lot of people right
now who would be great in a second Trump administration,
who would think twice about it for a whole range
of reasons. And that's a bit of a challenge. But
in terms of the one just the general, one term
component of the election as it stands right now, and
you know, people keep reminding me, I read the emails
(25:44):
and the tweets and things. Primary is not over. We
get that, and the primary is the primary, and that
process is still plying out. But we also have to
look at the reality of what the Republican base is
showing people their preferences at this point resoundingly. And so
that's why we speak about the likely the likely face
off of a Biden Trump general election and Clay both
(26:09):
of them would only have one term to go. Yes,
which means the choice of vice president for either candidate
is enormously important for their party and their side because
you effectively and also given the age of both of
the I was gonna say contestants, sounds like they're on
the game show. Both of the candidates, thank you, candidates
(26:31):
not contestants. The age of the candidates means that the
choice of the vice president is incredibly important both I
think for the election more so than it normally would be,
but then also afterwards because to your point, once you've
been in for two years, a president who's got only
two years left and can't run for another term.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
No one's really gonna be doing your favors. No one's
really gonna go to the mat for you.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
And given that if we end up with Biden v. Trump,
which it seems like is very likely given where we're
sitting here on you know, a little bit less than
four months until the votes start in Iowa, if we
do that, Buck, it's not only going to be chaos
that whoever wins, let's say Trump wins, let's say Biden wins,
the number of people that are going to run for
(27:19):
president in twenty twenty eight is going to be an
all time record.
Speaker 1 (27:23):
I'm not even kidding. I think there will be thirty
people on.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
The Democrat side, and I think there'll be thirty people
on the Republican side. I think you are going to
see a bigger president. I'm talking about for twenty eight
a bigger presidential field of contenders than you have ever
seen in the history of the presidency. Because so many
people have felt that they were, you know, waiting out
Trump or you're waiting out the Biden situation. Everybody's throwing
(27:48):
their hat in the ring. We're going to have fifty
or sixty contenders for president.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Officially, fifty or sixty I mean a lot. I would
agree a lot.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
I don't know. Fifty or sixty seven.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
We had nineteen eighteen, nineteen or nineteen Republicans in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
I think it'll be more than that.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
That's not crazy when you look at the way the
numbers have stacked up in the past. I think also
we are all seeing that running for the presidency.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
For some people who.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
Know they probably won't win or have almost no shot
of winning, they want their voice to be heard at
the national level. For others, I think it's a marketing mechanism. Now, yeah,
full on marketing for whatever your next project is, for
whatever your company is, or you know, your your future,
and yeah, at some level building maybe for a future
(28:39):
political campaign of some kind. But it's free media and
that is how people see it now. It has changed,
I think pretty dramatically. It is free media that people want.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
And I think also Trump's success and then even using
the vague success this year, I think has opened the
sort of scope of who might consider run in a
way that that wouldn't have occurred in the past. In
other words, I think there's more celebrity contenders than there
will have been ever before.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
In twenty twenty eight, you.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
See Joy Behar was talking a little smack about the VEC.
Joy Behar was trying to throw down with vivec in
an area where I don't think. I don't think Joy
wants to go there. Clay, this was all the.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
We need to We need to play this back when
we u when we come back. It is.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
It is pretty incredible and ridiculous. Joy Behar continuing her
string as the dumbest woman on television, but now going
after someone that is objectively a thousand times as smart
as her. Guys we rely on testosterone for energy and stamina.
You know testosterone levels have dropped fifty percent in the
past fifty or so years. That is absolutely crazy. You
(29:49):
need more vim vigger vitality in your life. How about
some all natural testosterone in increase. Do you know that
the Chalk mal Vitality Stack will show over three months
that testosterone levels go up twenty percent.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
It's all natural. You can get hooked up.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
The leading ingredient has been proven in studies to replenish
diminished amounts of testosterone.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Again.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
Mal Vitality Stack choq dot com is the website choq
dot com. There's also a female vitality stack. You can
get hooked up. You get thirty five percent off your
subscription for life if you use my name Clay again.
If you don't have the energy you used to, want
to try to put back a little bit more vigor
in your life, check out chalk dot com. That's choq
(30:35):
dot com, thirty five percent off for the life of
a subscription choq dot com.
Speaker 1 (30:42):
My name Clay.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Check it out today clayanfuck twenty four to seven.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Subscribe today.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Welcome back in Clay, Travis buck Sexton, show our good
friend joybehar of the dumbest show in America. The view
has decided that there is a really dumb person running
for president of the United Her target, vi vike Ramaswami.
Now buck before we even play this clip. There are
(31:08):
many things that you can attack Vi vike Ramaswami. For
anybody out there can say, hey, I'm choosing to vote
for somebody else.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
We've had him on this program several times.
Speaker 3 (31:18):
Attacking him for not being smart enough to be president
is dumb, even by Joy Behar standards. But a particularly
dumb person like Joy Behar attacking a super smart guy
like vivike Ramaswami is so tone deaf. It would be
like me attacking Lebron James for not being able to
jump high enough.
Speaker 1 (31:36):
Uh. It is just next to the level ridiculous.
Speaker 6 (31:39):
And let's listen this business about the aging that keeps
coming up and talking about the young generation, the young
generation of Republicans A dumb one. You've got that be
back Ramasmamy, You've got Mojerie, Taylor Green, You've got a
w in a second, Lauren Bubblehead, Matt Gates. You have
(32:00):
all these people who went along with the insurrection, who
believe that Trump won all Marjorie is out there. Oh
Trump won by a landslide. They're liars there and they
are the new generation of their publican body.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
First of all, the thing about Viveke calling Viveke dom
Joy behar that is that is precious. I mean that
is a real moment. I also think it's interesting that
now the standard of the view is they'll pick three
or four people and say this is like the Republican future. Look,
all those people have name recognition and you know, are
doing their thing in the Republican Party. But to pick
(32:36):
that group, I mean if you really start to line
up the leadership of the Republican Party in general and
the leadership of the Democrat Party, and you're going to
have like a I don't know how you'd prove this.
If you really want to look at their cognition and IQ,
that would be interesting as well. But trust me when
I say that, I think the Republican leadership would smoke
the Democrat leadership when it comes to jeopardy, trivial pursuits
(32:59):
or whatever mind gave you want to play.
Speaker 3 (33:01):
What if you and I got to go head to
head against all the ladies of the view on like
celebrity Jeopardy but almost family Feud style, where you're on
you get to go. It's like quiz bowl style almost
how that nothing sound immodest, but Mercy rule would have
to be. They'd have to cut a commercial, they'd start
running old episodes of The Prices Right or something. I
don't even think they could be competitive, buck like, even
(33:23):
if pop cultures included, I think that we would be
as good or better than them on pop culture. I
don't know about music. We might have a little bit
of an issue with music. You won't you reveal what
instrument used to play. I'm basically tone deaf, so I
am not confident that I would do well in music.
Almost every other category, I would put us on being
(33:48):
able to smoke the view. And if they're asking only
about popular music, then I think we can do decently, right.
I mean, most people know although you didn't know who
Morgan Wallen was, so I may need to reinforce my
myrrvousness about this.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
Yeah, no, I would. I wouldn't know who Morgan Wallen is. Well.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I know now because we had this whole momently show,
but only because I discussed it.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
If I hadn't brought it up on the show. You
would still have no idea. He exists, no idea, none
at all.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
I couldn't even name I don't even know if I
could name five active NBA players right now, like I
would struggle to do that. I got you in sport. Yeah, no, no, no,
I know you've got that cover. But I'm saying there
are some things that I just I block out. I
pay absolutely it might be our blind spot. So if
they you know, I would be a little bit nervous there,
but otherwise I'm very confident we would beat the view
(34:37):
in every category. Yeah, I mean I think I told
you this, but I was asked when I did on
campus on campus interviews, we just know, yeah, this is
this and I and I they asked me who my
favorite New York Yankee was, because I was from New
York City, and I said Don Maddingly and they're like,
you know, he's been retired for like fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
It's like, what do you mean Don is retired? This
is crazy.
Speaker 3 (34:59):
Well, my favorite part of that interview you did for NBC,
I think it was NBC is where you said what's
the most ideal World Series matchup? And you said the
Yankees and the Red.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
Sox yes, and then I tried to double down on it.
When they explained to me that couldn't happen, I was like,
you didn't say possible, you just said the best. Theoretically.
I did not get a second interview with them anyway,
another thing I was gonna throw out there. I'm not
making any assumptions. I'm not making any assumptions about this
beloved audience and the state of in the state of
(35:31):
South Carolina. But I'm just saying, if any of you
happened to have a one hundred somedion one hundred and
thirty five million dollar F thirty five jet that you
just have thrown a tarp over and it's in your backyard,
maybe it's next to the camper, maybe it's next to
the you know, the addition to the house you're building.
(35:54):
Can you please give the government the F thirty five
Joint Strike Fighter back that it has long and is
now asking the general public to help fight.
Speaker 3 (36:03):
We need to talk more about this. Because I can
find my kid's iPhones if they are lost. I have
like to find my phone the tracker. I can go
like look up where my kids iPhones are. I can
see basically where my kids are based on where their
iPhones are. How does the government not know at all
(36:23):
times where every jet is.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
How can you lose a jet?
Speaker 3 (36:27):
I know this got discussed with Malaysian Airlines, but that
was at least out over the Indian Ocean. We're talking
about in the continental United States.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
You know, someone right now probably knows where a one
hundred and thirty five million dollar state of the art
F thirty five fighter plane is. And I think it
is one of these situations play where no questions asked,
just just turn it in, but don't fly it in, like,
tell them where it is. I would recommend not getting
in there yourself and trying to drop it off at
(36:57):
the airport.
Speaker 1 (36:58):
It's just my thought.
Speaker 3 (36:59):
I just it seems impossible that this could be the
world that we live in. Find the jet, hopefully
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.