January 10, 2025 • 36 mins
Andy McCarthy, former Federal Prosecutor, breaks down the Trump sentencing. Facebook has an aboutface on censorship. Zuck goes on Rogan and blasts Biden admin for flagrant violations of the First Amendment. Data nerd Ryan Girdusky tells us about his new podcast, It’s a Numbers Game. When do you take Christmas decorations down?
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 back in final hour of the week, fourteen hours up.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Working on the fifteenth hour.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Now, we've been talking about the TikTok band, the President
Trump lawf air officially coming to a conclusion in New
York City. In many ways, at least we're going to
be joined now by our friend Andy McCarthy. But I
also want to mention in the meantime, I think we
have like one hundred thousand TikTok followers on the Clay
and Buck Show, so I should mention that we are
(00:27):
active on TikTok. Basically, if you go on to any
social media platform, in addition to being able to hear
us three hours every day, whether it's TikTok, whether it's Instagram,
whether it's Facebook, whether it's Twitter, you can put in
my name, you can put in Buck's name, you can
put in Clay and Buck, and you will find us
on every social media platform under the sun. I doubt
(00:49):
that Andy McCarthy has been like Buck Sexton, practicing dance
moves in his apartment, trying to get ready for TikTok's celebritydom.
Maybe he has. He's a Mets fan. After all, There's
not a lot to answer for though at least not historically.
And Andy joins us, Now we're gonna get into a
bunch of stuff. Andy Mett's had a good offseason. By
(01:09):
the way, congratulations on your owner being so rich he
can pay whatever he wants for anybody.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
It's a nice thing to have.
Speaker 1 (01:15):
But let's dive into some of these legal related issues.
I just I understand that the Trump team is angry
about the fact that a sentence dosn't occurred. But if
you and I had gone on the air when all
this started and said, if Trump is convicted of everything,
eventually it's going to lead to an unconditional discharge, where
(01:36):
effectively Judge mrchan acknowledges that there is no punishment and
there are no consequences other than the process itself for Trump.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
I think a lot of people would have called us crazy.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
Yet this is where we are, basically after all this
merchand says, Okay, I'm gonna stamp him. He's a felon,
but nothing at all is going to happen to him.
This case is over unconditional discharge. I mean, it's kind
of an un recedented procedural posture from my perspective. Would
you agree, how would you analyze it?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
Well, I think it's the best outcome play for Trump. Now,
I say that as someone who's been I've kind of
been pushing against the grain with a number of my
friends who point out, and I do not disagree with
this in principle, that this is a preposterous case. Trump
(02:28):
has an excellent chance of getting it reversed on appeal.
But those of us who've been in the biz know
that you can't get to your appeal until you've been
sentenced and the judgment of conviction is formally entered. And
that means this had to happen today if you were
going to get onto the appeal. And I think a
lot of people look at this and say, you know, look,
(02:48):
Trump's got a great chance of winning an appeal. Why
doesn't he just like, let the sentencing happen and let's
get on with it. But the thing is, it's not
my criminal record. You know, It's easy for me to
say on balance, I I think he should just get
on with the sentencing so he can get on with
the appeal. But President Trump is a seventy eight year
(03:09):
old guy who was proud of the fact that he
never had a run in with the law that left
him with a criminal record before, and I think he's
appalled at the fact that he got dragged through this
totally absurd criminal proceeding which wouldn't have happened to anyone else,
brought by a district attorney who's notorious to not enforcing
(03:29):
the laws. So it couldn't have been more clear that
it was just a rig political thing. So I understand
why he didn't want to have this happen. And look,
he came within ten days of basically getting to the
point where they couldn't touch him anymore, which is why
they were in such a hot panic to do this.
(03:51):
But I think when they all step back from this,
what they're going to linger on is what you just summarized.
And the way I've been putting this point is this.
Remember that in bringing this case and converting what's normally
a misdemeanor in New York into a felony, what Bragg
(04:12):
claimed was Trump falsified his business records for the purpose
of committing another crime. And the other crime they said
he committed basically was to steal the twenty sixteen election.
And I think everybody now knows that if you really
believe this guy stole the most important office on the planet,
(04:35):
all the power of the presidency. How on earth could
you sentence him to no jail, no probation, and no fine.
So I think in the end, it just really shows
how absurd this thing was from soup to nuts.
Speaker 4 (04:51):
Andy, do you feel like this has, on the one hand,
greatly undermine respect for the law, But on the other
hand there's the reject of lawfair that has occurred at
the ballot box?
Speaker 5 (05:02):
Right?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
So?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
I mean, to me, looking at this, it seems like
this has been a really bad time for the law
as a general concept and for the system. But also
it's been preserved in another sense. How do you look
at this now that we've gone through the four criminal prosecutions,
we've seen where it all goes.
Speaker 5 (05:21):
You know, how do you assess the damage?
Speaker 3 (05:24):
I think it's really bad. I'm thankful that it wasn't
worse because I think the good fortune buck that happened here,
which isn't getting enough attention, is the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.
If it hadn't been to the immunity litigation, then Jack
(05:46):
Smith would have been able, with Judge Chuckin's help, to
rush the j six case to trial, and I think
if they had tried Trump, say for two or three
months beginning in April or so of twenty twenty four,
and what they what that case was about was something
(06:06):
that people are not happy about. Right the January sixth thing.
You can argue, and I have argued that prosecution in
the criminal courts was not the right check on that behavior.
But that's a technical legal argument. That would have been
you know, two or three months of trial with you know,
(06:28):
a reminder of that event in the middle of the campaign,
and I think people might have had a different impression
of law en of law fare. What ended up happening
was because the Supreme Court issued first of the immunity litigation,
which Smith didn't anticipate, put the whole January sixth case
(06:49):
on ice, and then when the Supreme Court decided it
in July, it was clear that there was no way
that Smith was ever going to get to trial. And
as a result, in the public mind law there is
Bragg's case, and that's what Trump should always have wanted.
So I think it worked out well for Trump because
(07:10):
in the public mind law there is this very abusive
use of the criminal proceedings to invent a case unabashedly
partisan as it was done by Bragg, and break every
rule in the book to get him convicted in the end,
and it's an idiotic case. So I think that was
(07:31):
a real turn off to people and as a result
that helped Trump a lot in the election. But it
might not have worked out that way if if it
hadn't been to the immunity litigation.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Let's wait into the weeds. You mentioned that you think
there might be an appeal that could work. I presume
that could be a multi front appeal in both What
is the second crime that allowed this to be elevated
from a misdemeanor to a felony. That's always been a
bit of a mess in this brag case. Also, how
could presidential immunity, if at all, ultimately weigh in here
(08:07):
in terms of worthies or worthies not official presidential tactics
in some way. What do you think the chances, if
you were setting odds are on appeal for Trump at
this point, Not that it matters that much, because again
there is an unconditional discharge and there's no actual crime
but a punishment. But two years from now, what do
(08:28):
you think the chances are that we basically have this
entire thing wipe clean.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
I don't know what a number i'd put on it,
but I would be shocked if this case survives appeal.
And that's because I think it's shot through with reversible error,
even in the bringing of the case in the first place. So,
for example, since you're inviting me to get in the weeds,
(08:52):
I think it's a violation of New York's constitution to
bring the case the way brag Thing brought it because
the statute that he relied on did not make it
clear and does not make it clear that a state
district attorney has a right to enforce federal campaign law.
Then I think the indictment fails as an indictment because
(09:13):
it fails to state the second crime, so it doesn't
put the defendant on notice of what the crime is,
which is what an indictment supposed to do.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I'm sorry to cut you off here.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
In fact, if I remember correctly, didn't they say the
second crime could be any one of three different second crimes,
Like they didn't even specify which one you had to
convict on.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Yeah, you're hitting the one at the end that I
think is the most egregious era of all, which is
that Merchon told the jury that they didn't need to
be unanimous on what the other crime was. That you know,
basically there was three choices, but he didn't even make
them choose from those three choices. He told them, you know,
you don't have to tell us which one it is,
and you don't need to be unanimous. And the Supreme Court,
(09:55):
i think, cannot have been more clear that in a
criminal case, when you're talking about a fact that is
consequential in terms of what the sentence will be. And
let's remember, this is the fact that turns the misdemeanor
into a felony, right, it's the fact that turns something
that would be you know, zero to less than a
(10:16):
year into a four year felony when which, when strung
together the way braggedon, we're talking about like one hundred
and thirty years potential of incarceration. Right. So obviously under
Supreme Court jurisprudence, the jury had to be unanimous on
what the crime was, and murchad told them they didn't
have to.
Speaker 4 (10:34):
Be andy, can you also give us your sense we
only got a couple of minutes, but on the whole
TikTok fiasco, the oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court today.
Just what do you make of forcing the sale or
shutdown of this app and the Congress stepping in and
all that.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Yeah, I guess because of the work I've done in
the national security realm over the years, I really thought
this was kind of a frivolous appeal. I mean, I
don't like to throw that word around, although I do
feel like in the age of lawfair have thrown it around.
Speaker 6 (11:13):
It a whole lot.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
But this is not a First Amendment case. Nobody is
stopping anybody's speech. What they're saying, basically is that a
hostile foreign power cannot own a platform for expression in
the United States. No one's saying that somebody else can't
operate TikTok the same way. And no one is saying
(11:37):
that if somebody else does by TikTok and they want
to run it exactly the same way as it's run
now that they no one's saying they can't do that.
What they're saying is that a hostile foreign power can't
own a platform like this in the United States. That
seems to me to be common sense, all right.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
Karthia everybody, and you appreciate you being with us as always.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
All right, guys, have a good one.
Speaker 5 (12:05):
Start the new year.
Speaker 4 (12:06):
With more energy. My making Chalk daily supplements part of
your routine. Formulated with natural ingredients, Chalk products are for everyone.
For guys, Chalk's Male Vitality Stack includes a league ingredient
that replenishes diminished to stosterol levels. That's your body's natural
source of energy when your T levels are low, and
that happens as we age. Chalk's Male Vitality Stack can
replenish it naturally in just three months time. Chalk's Female
(12:28):
Vitality Stack can help regulate hormone health for the ladies.
If you remember our conversation yesterday, but having the right
tone when speaking to the fair sex, this will help
a little inside joke there. Maximize your potential this year
with a subscription to Chalk Supplements. Use my name Buck
as your promo code. Get a massive discount on any
subscription for life. Go online to Chalk dot com. That's
choq dot com. Use my name Buck choq dot com.
(12:51):
Use my name Buck for a great discount on any
subscription for life. Chalkcchoq dot com promo code Buck.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Sometimes all all you can do is laugh, and they
do a lot of it with the Sunday Hang. Join
Clay and Buck as they laugh it up in.
Speaker 6 (13:07):
The Clay and Buck podcast feed on the iHeartRadio app
or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Welcome back into Clay and Buck. So we've been talking
about social media platforms. TikTok on the chopping block rhymes.
I guess you all knew that, but I just wanted
to point it out. Uh, TikTok maybe on the way out,
or it's probably gonna get sold to somebody.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
I know there are people that are talking about maybe
buying it. I don't know.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
Some of them sound like they just want some attention.
Others maybe you're serious about buying it. But this is
what is going on right now. Meanwhile, Facebook has had
an about face from well look at that, an about
face from its censorship ways and Mark Zuckerberg went on
the Joe Rogan Show and talked about what it was
(13:51):
like with the Biden administration during COVID and all the
vaccine stuff.
Speaker 5 (13:56):
Play this cut twenty six.
Speaker 7 (13:57):
These people from the Biden administration will call up our
team and like scream at them and curse and it's like,
these documents are it's all kind of out there.
Speaker 5 (14:06):
Do you record any of those phone calls? I don't know.
I don't think.
Speaker 7 (14:09):
I don't think we were, but but I think listen,
I mean, there are emails, the emails are published, it's
all it's all kind of out there, and and they're
like and basically it just got to this point where
we were like, no, we're not gonna We're not gonna
take down things that are true. That's ridiculous. They want
us to take down this meme of Leonardo DiCaprio looking
at a TV talking about how ten years from now
(14:30):
or something, you know, you're gonna see an ad that says, okay,
if you took a COVID vaccine, your eligible you know,
like uh for for this kind of payment. Except it
was sort of like class action lawsuit type meme. And
they're like, no, you have to take that down. We
said no, we're not actually take take down humor and satire.
We're not gonna take down things that are that are true.
(14:51):
And then at some point, I guess, uh, I don't
flipped a bit. I mean Biden when he was he
gave some statement. At some point I don't know if
his press conference or to some journal U square bisk
was like, these guys are killing people. And then like
all these different agencies and branches of government basically just
like started investigating and coming after our company.
Speaker 5 (15:11):
It was brutal.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
This is the worst kinds of censorship we've ever heard of. Honestly,
it's criminal. And I know we got a lot of
Trump people who listen. I know we got a lot
of state attorney generals who listen. That testimony testimony is
the wrong word. That statement that you heard Mark Zuckerberg
making on Joe Rogan's show, it should be grounds to
(15:34):
open a full fledged investigation into whether the Biden administration
criminally engaged in behavior that pressured a big company like
Facebook to do what the Biden administration itself could not do.
And this is important, and we've hammered it on this
(15:56):
show for years, but I think a lot of people
have still missed it. The government cannot restrict your First
Amendment speech. Thankfully, that is the bill of rights. We've
got it. But the government decided, through all of these
individuals inside of the Biden administration, that they would basically
demand that Facebook, due the censoring that it could not do,
(16:21):
and it is important corollary associated with the Bill of Rights.
The government can't take away your right to speech. They
also can't give a third party license to do something
that they could not do, and that seems quite clearly
what they did as it pertains to COVID, but also
(16:41):
just to criticism in general, that they would be calling
up Facebook and screaming and threatening Facebook if they didn't
take action that they wanted and do you want the
government meant like deciding what memes can be shared on Facebook?
This is crazy stuff.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
It is absolutely crazy, and it's also a window into
the certainty and wrongness of the Democrats during COVID. They
would scream and curse and make demands about things that
turned out to be wrong, and they have no humility
about this whatsoever. There's nothing about the Democrats, whether it's
(17:18):
Biden or anybody who worked for them, that says, wow,
we were demanding things and saying that this is the
truth and we were wrong. Because the point was they
think that they're the good people, and so they should
be in the position to make the call even if
the call is wrong. They're the people they get to
tell you what to do. Doesn't matter if it's true
or not. They're the good people. We need to shut
up and obey. That was their mentality all throughout COVID.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
And they get to control what you can see, even
what you can see, not only what you can say,
which is a problem, but even what you can see.
I mean, think about how.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Crazy this is.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
The Biden White House is monitoring memes that are being
shared on Facebook and calling and screaming and demanding they
be taken down. This is flagrant violations of the First Amendment.
That's Zuckerberg. Like I said on Rogan, a lot of
logic behind investing a portion of your savings account in gold, silver,
other precious metals. That's because gold has been an appreciating asset,
growing in value by roughly thirty percent over the past year.
(18:12):
Our US dollar unfortunately lost value due to inflation out
of control government spending.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
We think Birch Gold.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Group does the best job of any company helping you
with this investment and modification to your four oh one
K or customer servings so savings account. Their customer service
team also excellent and explaining how it benefits you and
millions of people. It's simple, get signed up, find out more, text,
call or visit the website Birchgold dot com slash Clay.
(18:40):
Text my name Clay to ninety eight ninety eight ninety
eight to get your free infoKit the website Birchgold dot
com slash Clay ninety eight ninety eight ninety eight from
your cell phone for the latest. Welcome back in Clay
Travis Buck Sexton Show. Appreciate all of you hanging.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Out with us. Friday edition of the program.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
We are excited about the growth of the podcast feed,
so many different shows getting a lot of attention because
so many of you have signed up for the Clay
and Buck feed, and we have got a variety of
different shows in there from a ton of different perspectives.
Whether you're a mom like Mary Catherine Ham and Carol Markowitz,
who are doing a fabulous job of talking to moms
and others. Whether you're a former Special Forces up like
(19:24):
our buddy Sean Parnell looking at things in the state
of Pennsylvania. But from that perspective, and I say this affectionately,
our favorite data guru nerd Ryan Gerdusky, who has been
on with us a lot breaking down all of the
numbers out there. He is now part of the Clay
and Buck podcast network. He's going to be doing a
weekly show diving into numbers that he thinks are important.
(19:47):
You've got a great podcast up about redistricting and how
many actual and I was reading about it as well,
how many different congressional seats are actually up for grabs.
But I wanted to start with you about a numbers
game that I think is going to be really significant,
and that is when the next census comes down, We're
going to see a real reallocation of electoral College votes
(20:11):
that is going to overwhelmingly favor red states that voted Trump.
May not be an application in full force in twenty eight,
but by thirty two, this is seismic. What should people
know about where we're headed as that census recalibrates the population?
Speaker 8 (20:27):
Hey, thanks for having me on. Yeah, I mean, the
biggest hot take is that by twenty thirty two, a
Republican or a Democrat, either which one can win the
more than likely a Republican can win the presidency without
winning a single Roust Belt state aside from Ohio. They
don't need Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin anymore. The entire Roust
(20:48):
Belt is taken out of the equation because Michigan and
Pennsylvania more like they're going to lose one congressional seat,
California will lose three, four or five, depending on who's esther,
and you're looking at Florida and Texas. North Carolina are
set to gain and Georgia as well set to gain,
and that alone will make it possible to win the
(21:08):
presidency without having to compete in the Rost Belts. And
it will change our politics, you know, quite a bit.
It may end up becoming where our politics are a
lot less populous than they were. You know, a lot
of economic patoism comes out of the Rost Belts. But
it may it may create a solid conservative majority for
the presidency going into the next decade if they can
(21:31):
hold Georgia and North Carolina, which are the two big questions.
If they lose Georgia, they have to win just one
Rost Belt state then, but it becomes a lot more
difficult for Democrats. They basically wouldn't have to make North
Carolina more competitive, turned Georgia back blue and they just
a horrendous I mean, they got a beating in Arizona,
so they'd have to make Arizona competitive again, and Nevada.
(21:53):
They'd have to run the Gama and make more states competitive.
Concerning they've written off Florida, Texas is not what they
thought it was to be the perpetual belief that Texas
would be a blue state one day. And as people
continually flee Oregon, Washington, New York, California, and New Jersey,
these big blue states is heavily taxed, overly regulated states
(22:15):
for the South, for the Midwest and the Prairie states,
it makes it a lot more difficult for Democrats for
in the next decade.
Speaker 4 (22:25):
How have the numbers continue to play out? Ryan on
those migrations if you will, from the Blue states, I mean,
I think that we saw a lot during COVID.
Speaker 5 (22:35):
We all know that I moved to Florida. A lot
of people.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
Left California, New York went to Florida, Texas, Tennessee, a
handful of other states. But the post COVID migration seems
to be a reality that continues on. And is this
putting any pressure on some states to actually do something
to stop the outflow. It just feels like at some point,
how can New York shore up its budget and pay
fourteen billion dollars for illegals and all the other things
(23:00):
that it's doing. If a lot of top earners are
deciding they want to live in Texas, well those I.
Speaker 8 (23:05):
Mean, that's two different questions. One, how do they pay
for it? New York has had that problem forever. I
mean New York when I worked for the state Senate
back in two thousand and nine, I think it was
a third of the budget came from Wall Street bonuses.
So if like Nasdak moved to Florida, or the Dow
Jones moved to Tennessee or Texas or whatever, New York
State would be like Illinois, which can't afford to pay
lottery winners sometimes because they're so behind their budget. But
(23:29):
the question on the congressional or a portion of what
they're looking for is what you're seeing out of California
right now. They're in a special session, not for the fires,
but to protect their illegal population, mass immigration and mass
illegal immigration and warring people to Blue states, especially let's
say Trump and Tom Homan borders are Tom Homan decided
(23:50):
to do their mass deportation efforts and Blue states say no,
come here, will protect you, you won't be deported and
that wars some people from Florida or North Carolina or
Georgia to New York and New Jersey. That's what saves
their congressional reapportion and that's what saves their electoral college
without the illegal alien population. And had we have the
(24:12):
same immigration numbers that we had in nineteen ninety eight,
which is not which is a long time ago now,
but it doesn't good ones that long time ago, California
would be down four or five points four or five seats.
New York would be down two or three seats. Ohio
would have more seats. Red states in the Midwest would
have more seats, like Indiana and Texas may have fewer,
(24:34):
but it wouldn't be that much more concidering how much
other states, other Blue states would lose. So that's what
they're going to be looking for. They're going to be saying, hey,
we need to continue legal immigration because a lot of
legal immigrants, because they have family and associations, go to
Blue states and there's a lot of welfare programs for
their children and schools and whatnot, and illegal aliens will
(24:55):
sit there and go there to be protected from maths deportation.
That's their only way of decreasing their population losses. And
what you saw is some from twenty twenty one estimate
of twenty twenty five that's a corus estimate, is that
the number of seats that bluses are going to lose
has actually gone down post COVID in great part because
of immigration, both legal and illgal Ryan.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
One of my favorite lessons so far that I have
seen from the twenty twenty four election from a positive perspective,
is that it was actually the least racially polarized election
that we've had since nineteen sixty four. That is all
the way back sixty years in the life of many
of our listeners right now, entire voting life, there has
(25:40):
never been a less racially polarized election.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
Do you think that.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Is a symptom of something that is likely to continue
to evolve or would you say Trump is a unicorn
in the way that he had so much appeal to black,
Hispanic and Asian voters. How much of this is Trump?
How much of this is a large JR. Realignment going
on with the political parties that Trump is benefiting from.
Speaker 8 (26:04):
It's funny on it's a numbers game. Not this upcoming
week which is on immigration from an administrative perspective. But
on the following week we are going to have on
Patrick Raffini from Echelon Insights to talk about this very thing.
Part of it is definitely because Trump is not a
classical Republican, right he has never been pro you know,
he never talked very heavily about slashing budgets, and he's
(26:27):
very populous on economic issues slashing spendings to balance budgets.
He's not you know, your George hw Bush Republican, and
that has large appeals to people who are former Democrats
and also Democrats becoming high on their supply of you know,
white liberal women and also black women, and defending things
like mass criminality that comes heavily out of the black
(26:50):
community and other things that turned away a lot of
Asians and Hispanics who said, I'm not about this, and
a lot of Black Americans who also don't like any
of that stuff, especially black men who you know, they're
they're legal there, they're regular, law abiding citizens, and they
don't like that either. All trends are going one direction
until they're not anymore. So we'll have to sit there
(27:12):
and see. Ultimately, when you're talking about building an electoral
mandate right. From a Republican perspective, the batter is the
white working class. That's if you're making a cake, the
main source of what you're making is from the white
working class. Everything after that is the cream filling and
the icing and the cherry on top. That it definitely
helps in some states. How much does it continue, I
(27:34):
don't know. A portion of the realignment came from conservatives,
conservative people who are minorities who have maybe they were
pro life, or they loved guns, or they wanted small taxes,
but they were just ancestrally Democrat and they made their
first crossover, and they may continue being Republicans for the
rest of their lives. They could also switch if the
Republican parties then switches back to sit there and say,
(27:56):
you know what, this Trump experimental last decade was fun.
Let's get back to you know, the politics of George W. Bush.
And they say, well, this is not really, well, whar
about it anymore? I think Trump opened the door for
a lot of it. It just is a question if
the Republican Party chooses to continue walking through the door.
Some Republicans, you know, like Senator Jim Banks for example,
(28:16):
and other ones definitely want to continue that momentum. Jade
Vancel is that momentum. Other of themse would love to
shut that door and go back to the tribe into
true beliefs that they had maybe forty years ago, because
they haven't flipped the calendar in a long time and
don't realize what the year is anymore.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Speaking of Ryan Gardusky, it's a numbers game. As this
podcast and the Clay and Buck Network first episode out
this week, he's got another one coming out Monday. To
that end, Ryan, on the immigration side of things, what
are you talking to the podcast? And just as an
additional question to throw at you, do you think that
there's more support for the mass deportations than the Democrat
(28:52):
corporate media is ready for.
Speaker 8 (28:55):
Well, I mean I definitely. I mean you're seeing it
with the Lake and Riley Act, where you know, I
think it was eighty plus members, including a ton of Democrats,
joined in hand and Hanman. Basically any Democrat in a
tough district, a few of them sat there and voted
against it, but almost every House member in a top
district voted for the Lake and Riley Act. I think
they're sitting there and saying wow, defending criminality is very,
(29:17):
very very bad for US. I have on THEO Wold
as my guest. THEO Wold is the is the solicitor
general from the state of Idaho, and he worked for
both Jared Kushner and Steven Miller in the first from administration.
So we go over, you know, there's an The data
that I want everyone to come across with is there's
two point four million net million new migrant new immigrants
(29:40):
per year under the Biden administration, the most in our history.
So THEO goes over, what what can the administration do
by itself? What does it need Congress to do? And
what really can we expect from a Trump two point
zero term. What can we sit there and say that
they can do unilaterally, you know, regardless if Republicans and
(30:01):
Democrats kick and drag their feet and the corporate media
and the donors sit there and kick and drag their feet,
if he has the will, what is the way to
sit there and really change our immigration?
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Last question for you, Ryan, we saw Nevada go red,
and I know it's gone red before, but it's been
a while. California and New York both moved massively. Read
all fifty states moved red and it actually got close
in New Jersey and Virginia early. I know we just
finished an election, but the next elections to take place
(30:34):
governorships in New Jersey and Virginia. How competitive do you
think those will be? Do you buy into the idea
that New Jersey or Virginia could be in play not
only for the governorships but as potential flippable states as
twenty twenty eight moves into the next cycle.
Speaker 8 (30:53):
Well, Virginia has a great nominee for the Republican and
Democratic side, So in Virginia will be very, very very
tough win some sears of the lieutenant governor's running Governor Glenn
Younkin is super popular outgoing, so who knows, but Virginia
is definitely starting off as a toss of place. I'll
say a good piece of data for you about New Jersey.
In two thousand and nineteen, Democrats have abated about a
(31:16):
one million voter registrated advantage in New Jersey than Republicans
is about one million more Democrats and Republicans. It's under
eight hundred thousand, or about eight hundred thousand now they have.
Republicans have outregistered them every month continually for over three years.
Now it's six thousand months, five thousand months. But over time,
(31:37):
that matters, that goes in one direction, and it's continuous,
and I don't you know, could it be, could have happened.
It'll be a tough it'll be a tough fight, but
it's not impossible in New Jersey. You know, this is
the third straight election we've seen New Jersey get closer
and closer and closer. It is a trend. It is
not a fluke. The governor's race wasn't a fluke, the
state legislative race of the year before that wasn't a fluke.
(32:00):
And this presidency is not a fluke. And they need
to wake up for that. Just like in New York City,
we've seen trans moving to the right. And the crazy
thing is it's happening organically because there is no real
super effort on the part of the GOP to flip
these states in these areas. This is happening because people
are looking around saying what's going on is not working.
Speaker 4 (32:19):
Ryan Gerduski, everybody go check out. It's a numbers game
coming out on Monday. It's already doing great numbers. Thanks
to all of you. Downloading it and listening. Ryan, we'll
talk to you soon. Congrats on the podcast, the first episode.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
Thank you all right, Buck, I gave you picks yesterday
Prize picks dot Com. Use my name Clay. You get
fifty dollars when you play five dollars. NFL playoffs are
coming up. I told you that Buck's favorite player, George
Pickens was going to go more on receiving yards. I
(32:52):
said that Jalen Hurts was going to score a touchdown.
I gave you those picks, gave you four of them
and said, this is going to end up with a win.
Jordan Jefferson touchdown for the for the Minnesota Vikings star
wide receiver there. And I also gave you one other.
I don't have it in front of me right now,
(33:14):
but we will tweet it out. Gave it out to
you on Thursday, giving it out to you. A get
on Friday because the games are taking place on Saturday,
on Sunday and on Monday.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
You can go. It's super easy to use. It's fun.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
You can play in California, Georgia, Texas. If you're feeling
left out, trust me, go sign up. It's super easy
to use, very intuitive, lots of fun. If you like
football like I do. Prizepicks dot com my name Clay,
you get fifty bucks prize picks dot com my name Clay.
Speaker 6 (33:44):
Patriots radio hosts a couple of regular guys, Clay Travis
and Buck Sexton. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app
or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 5 (33:55):
We'll close enough shop here before the weekend. On Clay
and Bucks. Please do make.
Speaker 4 (34:00):
Sure you subscribe to Clay and Buck podcast network, Ryan
or Rescue new show goes in there, Sean Parnell, The
Buck Breef, Carol Marko which show Toe to Dixon. A
lot of great content for you to check out there,
all free, just downloaded. Subscribe on the iHeartMedia app or
wherever you get your podcasts. Highly how do you recommend it?
And yeah, we've got some talkbacks as well. Speak of
(34:22):
that iHeart app. There's a little microphone on it. You
press it, it allows you to do a talkback, which
is like a voicemail. Do you remember having an answering machine,
Clay back in the day, Oh yeah, machine.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
It was fun.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
You'd come home, you didn't have the ability to get
reached and that thing's blinking and you're like, oh, man,
who tried to call me?
Speaker 2 (34:39):
What might be there?
Speaker 4 (34:40):
Yeah, and you'd have to always try to sound a
little clear, like hey, you've reached five five five five five,
you know, and yeah, you know what I'm talking about,
you answer machine.
Speaker 5 (34:49):
People know what I'm talking about.
Speaker 4 (34:51):
Let's get talkback here from George, a listener out of
Denver Freedom ninety three seven k KDFD.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
What's going on, George?
Speaker 9 (35:00):
I wanted to weigh in on what Buck is talking
about the decorations this year. What I'm going to do
is when I normally only leave the lights on all
night on Christmas Eve, but this year I'm going to
leave the lights on all night for inauguration night for Trump.
Speaker 5 (35:15):
It's going to be awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
Oh, that's actually cool.
Speaker 1 (35:17):
You're talking about when you need to bring down your lights,
and that's a cool idea to leave them up until
the twentieth of January when Trump is inaugurated as a celebration.
I kind of respect that you and I will be
up in DC starting next week.
Speaker 4 (35:32):
I also think Clay, it's really nice, you know, for
you going in this weekend to know that there are
those in this audience who are so devoted to Clay
and all things Clay Travis that they're willing to back
you up on your absolute worst takes, no matter what
your take is, no matter how bad it is. There
are those in this audience who will stand in the flames.
Speaker 5 (35:52):
They'll do anything too.
Speaker 4 (35:53):
And here is podcast listener Jill and Ohio on your
pizza taste, Play.
Speaker 10 (35:57):
It up, Clay and Bock. Jill in Ohio and I
say absolutely, one hundred percent jalapeno, mushroom, maybe even some
banana peppers, and the kicker a.
Speaker 5 (36:13):
Little Anchovies fast pizza.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
Ever, stay cho First of all, I appreciate Jill having
my back. Buck, I got obliterated for my true, honest
opinion the best possible pizza out there, mushroom and jalapeno
on top. Not saying everybody's gonna love it, I'm saying
it's the best in my anchovies though, do We've never
had Anchoby pizza. Honestly, I'm a big fan of seafood,
(36:40):
so I probably would like it. I had a tuna
steak last night. It was fabulous. Hey, stay safe out there.
Weather is brutal in many parts of the country. Enjoy
the games. We love you Guys make sure you stay safe.
Welcome back in final hour of the week, fourteen hours up.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Working on the fifteenth hour.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Now, we've been talking about the TikTok band, the President
Trump lawf air officially coming to a conclusion in New
York City. In many ways, at least we're going to
be joined now by our friend Andy McCarthy. But I
also want to mention in the meantime, I think we
have like one hundred thousand TikTok followers on the Clay
and Buck Show, so I should mention that we are
(00:27):
active on TikTok. Basically, if you go on to any
social media platform, in addition to being able to hear
us three hours every day, whether it's TikTok, whether it's Instagram,
whether it's Facebook, whether it's Twitter, you can put in
my name, you can put in Buck's name, you can
put in Clay and Buck, and you will find us
on every social media platform under the sun. I doubt
(00:49):
that Andy McCarthy has been like Buck Sexton, practicing dance
moves in his apartment, trying to get ready for TikTok's celebritydom.
Maybe he has. He's a Mets fan. After all, There's
not a lot to answer for though at least not historically.
And Andy joins us, Now we're gonna get into a
bunch of stuff. Andy Mett's had a good offseason. By
(01:09):
the way, congratulations on your owner being so rich he
can pay whatever he wants for anybody.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
It's a nice thing to have.
Speaker 1 (01:15):
But let's dive into some of these legal related issues.
I just I understand that the Trump team is angry
about the fact that a sentence dosn't occurred. But if
you and I had gone on the air when all
this started and said, if Trump is convicted of everything,
eventually it's going to lead to an unconditional discharge, where
(01:36):
effectively Judge mrchan acknowledges that there is no punishment and
there are no consequences other than the process itself for Trump.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
I think a lot of people would have called us crazy.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
Yet this is where we are, basically after all this
merchand says, Okay, I'm gonna stamp him. He's a felon,
but nothing at all is going to happen to him.
This case is over unconditional discharge. I mean, it's kind
of an un recedented procedural posture from my perspective. Would
you agree, how would you analyze it?
Speaker 3 (02:06):
Well, I think it's the best outcome play for Trump. Now,
I say that as someone who's been I've kind of
been pushing against the grain with a number of my
friends who point out, and I do not disagree with
this in principle, that this is a preposterous case. Trump
(02:28):
has an excellent chance of getting it reversed on appeal.
But those of us who've been in the biz know
that you can't get to your appeal until you've been
sentenced and the judgment of conviction is formally entered. And
that means this had to happen today if you were
going to get onto the appeal. And I think a
lot of people look at this and say, you know, look,
(02:48):
Trump's got a great chance of winning an appeal. Why
doesn't he just like, let the sentencing happen and let's
get on with it. But the thing is, it's not
my criminal record. You know, It's easy for me to
say on balance, I I think he should just get
on with the sentencing so he can get on with
the appeal. But President Trump is a seventy eight year
(03:09):
old guy who was proud of the fact that he
never had a run in with the law that left
him with a criminal record before, and I think he's
appalled at the fact that he got dragged through this
totally absurd criminal proceeding which wouldn't have happened to anyone else,
brought by a district attorney who's notorious to not enforcing
(03:29):
the laws. So it couldn't have been more clear that
it was just a rig political thing. So I understand
why he didn't want to have this happen. And look,
he came within ten days of basically getting to the
point where they couldn't touch him anymore, which is why
they were in such a hot panic to do this.
(03:51):
But I think when they all step back from this,
what they're going to linger on is what you just summarized.
And the way I've been putting this point is this.
Remember that in bringing this case and converting what's normally
a misdemeanor in New York into a felony, what Bragg
(04:12):
claimed was Trump falsified his business records for the purpose
of committing another crime. And the other crime they said
he committed basically was to steal the twenty sixteen election.
And I think everybody now knows that if you really
believe this guy stole the most important office on the planet,
(04:35):
all the power of the presidency. How on earth could
you sentence him to no jail, no probation, and no fine.
So I think in the end, it just really shows
how absurd this thing was from soup to nuts.
Speaker 4 (04:51):
Andy, do you feel like this has, on the one hand,
greatly undermine respect for the law, But on the other
hand there's the reject of lawfair that has occurred at
the ballot box?
Speaker 5 (05:02):
Right?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
So?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
I mean, to me, looking at this, it seems like
this has been a really bad time for the law
as a general concept and for the system. But also
it's been preserved in another sense. How do you look
at this now that we've gone through the four criminal prosecutions,
we've seen where it all goes.
Speaker 5 (05:21):
You know, how do you assess the damage?
Speaker 3 (05:24):
I think it's really bad. I'm thankful that it wasn't
worse because I think the good fortune buck that happened here,
which isn't getting enough attention, is the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.
If it hadn't been to the immunity litigation, then Jack
(05:46):
Smith would have been able, with Judge Chuckin's help, to
rush the j six case to trial, and I think
if they had tried Trump, say for two or three
months beginning in April or so of twenty twenty four,
and what they what that case was about was something
(06:06):
that people are not happy about. Right the January sixth thing.
You can argue, and I have argued that prosecution in
the criminal courts was not the right check on that behavior.
But that's a technical legal argument. That would have been
you know, two or three months of trial with you know,
(06:28):
a reminder of that event in the middle of the campaign,
and I think people might have had a different impression
of law en of law fare. What ended up happening
was because the Supreme Court issued first of the immunity litigation,
which Smith didn't anticipate, put the whole January sixth case
(06:49):
on ice, and then when the Supreme Court decided it
in July, it was clear that there was no way
that Smith was ever going to get to trial. And
as a result, in the public mind law there is
Bragg's case, and that's what Trump should always have wanted.
So I think it worked out well for Trump because
(07:10):
in the public mind law there is this very abusive
use of the criminal proceedings to invent a case unabashedly
partisan as it was done by Bragg, and break every
rule in the book to get him convicted in the end,
and it's an idiotic case. So I think that was
(07:31):
a real turn off to people and as a result
that helped Trump a lot in the election. But it
might not have worked out that way if if it
hadn't been to the immunity litigation.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Let's wait into the weeds. You mentioned that you think
there might be an appeal that could work. I presume
that could be a multi front appeal in both What
is the second crime that allowed this to be elevated
from a misdemeanor to a felony. That's always been a
bit of a mess in this brag case. Also, how
could presidential immunity, if at all, ultimately weigh in here
(08:07):
in terms of worthies or worthies not official presidential tactics
in some way. What do you think the chances, if
you were setting odds are on appeal for Trump at
this point, Not that it matters that much, because again
there is an unconditional discharge and there's no actual crime
but a punishment. But two years from now, what do
(08:28):
you think the chances are that we basically have this
entire thing wipe clean.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
I don't know what a number i'd put on it,
but I would be shocked if this case survives appeal.
And that's because I think it's shot through with reversible error,
even in the bringing of the case in the first place. So,
for example, since you're inviting me to get in the weeds,
(08:52):
I think it's a violation of New York's constitution to
bring the case the way brag Thing brought it because
the statute that he relied on did not make it
clear and does not make it clear that a state
district attorney has a right to enforce federal campaign law.
Then I think the indictment fails as an indictment because
(09:13):
it fails to state the second crime, so it doesn't
put the defendant on notice of what the crime is,
which is what an indictment supposed to do.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I'm sorry to cut you off here.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
In fact, if I remember correctly, didn't they say the
second crime could be any one of three different second crimes,
Like they didn't even specify which one you had to
convict on.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Yeah, you're hitting the one at the end that I
think is the most egregious era of all, which is
that Merchon told the jury that they didn't need to
be unanimous on what the other crime was. That you know,
basically there was three choices, but he didn't even make
them choose from those three choices. He told them, you know,
you don't have to tell us which one it is,
and you don't need to be unanimous. And the Supreme Court,
(09:55):
i think, cannot have been more clear that in a
criminal case, when you're talking about a fact that is
consequential in terms of what the sentence will be. And
let's remember, this is the fact that turns the misdemeanor
into a felony, right, it's the fact that turns something
that would be you know, zero to less than a
(10:16):
year into a four year felony when which, when strung
together the way braggedon, we're talking about like one hundred
and thirty years potential of incarceration. Right. So obviously under
Supreme Court jurisprudence, the jury had to be unanimous on
what the crime was, and murchad told them they didn't
have to.
Speaker 4 (10:34):
Be andy, can you also give us your sense we
only got a couple of minutes, but on the whole
TikTok fiasco, the oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court today.
Just what do you make of forcing the sale or
shutdown of this app and the Congress stepping in and
all that.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Yeah, I guess because of the work I've done in
the national security realm over the years, I really thought
this was kind of a frivolous appeal. I mean, I
don't like to throw that word around, although I do
feel like in the age of lawfair have thrown it around.
Speaker 6 (11:13):
It a whole lot.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
But this is not a First Amendment case. Nobody is
stopping anybody's speech. What they're saying, basically is that a
hostile foreign power cannot own a platform for expression in
the United States. No one's saying that somebody else can't
operate TikTok the same way. And no one is saying
(11:37):
that if somebody else does by TikTok and they want
to run it exactly the same way as it's run
now that they no one's saying they can't do that.
What they're saying is that a hostile foreign power can't
own a platform like this in the United States. That
seems to me to be common sense, all right.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
Karthia everybody, and you appreciate you being with us as always.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
All right, guys, have a good one.
Speaker 5 (12:05):
Start the new year.
Speaker 4 (12:06):
With more energy. My making Chalk daily supplements part of
your routine. Formulated with natural ingredients, Chalk products are for everyone.
For guys, Chalk's Male Vitality Stack includes a league ingredient
that replenishes diminished to stosterol levels. That's your body's natural
source of energy when your T levels are low, and
that happens as we age. Chalk's Male Vitality Stack can
replenish it naturally in just three months time. Chalk's Female
(12:28):
Vitality Stack can help regulate hormone health for the ladies.
If you remember our conversation yesterday, but having the right
tone when speaking to the fair sex, this will help
a little inside joke there. Maximize your potential this year
with a subscription to Chalk Supplements. Use my name Buck
as your promo code. Get a massive discount on any
subscription for life. Go online to Chalk dot com. That's
choq dot com. Use my name Buck choq dot com.
(12:51):
Use my name Buck for a great discount on any
subscription for life. Chalkcchoq dot com promo code Buck.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Sometimes all all you can do is laugh, and they
do a lot of it with the Sunday Hang. Join
Clay and Buck as they laugh it up in.
Speaker 6 (13:07):
The Clay and Buck podcast feed on the iHeartRadio app
or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Welcome back into Clay and Buck. So we've been talking
about social media platforms. TikTok on the chopping block rhymes.
I guess you all knew that, but I just wanted
to point it out. Uh, TikTok maybe on the way out,
or it's probably gonna get sold to somebody.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
I know there are people that are talking about maybe
buying it. I don't know.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
Some of them sound like they just want some attention.
Others maybe you're serious about buying it. But this is
what is going on right now. Meanwhile, Facebook has had
an about face from well look at that, an about
face from its censorship ways and Mark Zuckerberg went on
the Joe Rogan Show and talked about what it was
(13:51):
like with the Biden administration during COVID and all the
vaccine stuff.
Speaker 5 (13:56):
Play this cut twenty six.
Speaker 7 (13:57):
These people from the Biden administration will call up our
team and like scream at them and curse and it's like,
these documents are it's all kind of out there.
Speaker 5 (14:06):
Do you record any of those phone calls? I don't know.
I don't think.
Speaker 7 (14:09):
I don't think we were, but but I think listen,
I mean, there are emails, the emails are published, it's
all it's all kind of out there, and and they're
like and basically it just got to this point where
we were like, no, we're not gonna We're not gonna
take down things that are true. That's ridiculous. They want
us to take down this meme of Leonardo DiCaprio looking
at a TV talking about how ten years from now
(14:30):
or something, you know, you're gonna see an ad that says, okay,
if you took a COVID vaccine, your eligible you know,
like uh for for this kind of payment. Except it
was sort of like class action lawsuit type meme. And
they're like, no, you have to take that down. We
said no, we're not actually take take down humor and satire.
We're not gonna take down things that are that are true.
(14:51):
And then at some point, I guess, uh, I don't
flipped a bit. I mean Biden when he was he
gave some statement. At some point I don't know if
his press conference or to some journal U square bisk
was like, these guys are killing people. And then like
all these different agencies and branches of government basically just
like started investigating and coming after our company.
Speaker 5 (15:11):
It was brutal.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
This is the worst kinds of censorship we've ever heard of. Honestly,
it's criminal. And I know we got a lot of
Trump people who listen. I know we got a lot
of state attorney generals who listen. That testimony testimony is
the wrong word. That statement that you heard Mark Zuckerberg
making on Joe Rogan's show, it should be grounds to
(15:34):
open a full fledged investigation into whether the Biden administration
criminally engaged in behavior that pressured a big company like
Facebook to do what the Biden administration itself could not do.
And this is important, and we've hammered it on this
(15:56):
show for years, but I think a lot of people
have still missed it. The government cannot restrict your First
Amendment speech. Thankfully, that is the bill of rights. We've
got it. But the government decided, through all of these
individuals inside of the Biden administration, that they would basically
demand that Facebook, due the censoring that it could not do,
(16:21):
and it is important corollary associated with the Bill of Rights.
The government can't take away your right to speech. They
also can't give a third party license to do something
that they could not do, and that seems quite clearly
what they did as it pertains to COVID, but also
(16:41):
just to criticism in general, that they would be calling
up Facebook and screaming and threatening Facebook if they didn't
take action that they wanted and do you want the
government meant like deciding what memes can be shared on Facebook?
This is crazy stuff.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
It is absolutely crazy, and it's also a window into
the certainty and wrongness of the Democrats during COVID. They
would scream and curse and make demands about things that
turned out to be wrong, and they have no humility
about this whatsoever. There's nothing about the Democrats, whether it's
(17:18):
Biden or anybody who worked for them, that says, wow,
we were demanding things and saying that this is the
truth and we were wrong. Because the point was they
think that they're the good people, and so they should
be in the position to make the call even if
the call is wrong. They're the people they get to
tell you what to do. Doesn't matter if it's true
or not. They're the good people. We need to shut
up and obey. That was their mentality all throughout COVID.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
And they get to control what you can see, even
what you can see, not only what you can say,
which is a problem, but even what you can see.
I mean, think about how.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Crazy this is.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
The Biden White House is monitoring memes that are being
shared on Facebook and calling and screaming and demanding they
be taken down. This is flagrant violations of the First Amendment.
That's Zuckerberg. Like I said on Rogan, a lot of
logic behind investing a portion of your savings account in gold, silver,
other precious metals. That's because gold has been an appreciating asset,
growing in value by roughly thirty percent over the past year.
(18:12):
Our US dollar unfortunately lost value due to inflation out
of control government spending.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
We think Birch Gold.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Group does the best job of any company helping you
with this investment and modification to your four oh one
K or customer servings so savings account. Their customer service
team also excellent and explaining how it benefits you and
millions of people. It's simple, get signed up, find out more, text,
call or visit the website Birchgold dot com slash Clay.
(18:40):
Text my name Clay to ninety eight ninety eight ninety
eight to get your free infoKit the website Birchgold dot
com slash Clay ninety eight ninety eight ninety eight from
your cell phone for the latest. Welcome back in Clay
Travis Buck Sexton Show. Appreciate all of you hanging.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Out with us. Friday edition of the program.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
We are excited about the growth of the podcast feed,
so many different shows getting a lot of attention because
so many of you have signed up for the Clay
and Buck feed, and we have got a variety of
different shows in there from a ton of different perspectives.
Whether you're a mom like Mary Catherine Ham and Carol Markowitz,
who are doing a fabulous job of talking to moms
and others. Whether you're a former Special Forces up like
(19:24):
our buddy Sean Parnell looking at things in the state
of Pennsylvania. But from that perspective, and I say this affectionately,
our favorite data guru nerd Ryan Gerdusky, who has been
on with us a lot breaking down all of the
numbers out there. He is now part of the Clay
and Buck podcast network. He's going to be doing a
weekly show diving into numbers that he thinks are important.
(19:47):
You've got a great podcast up about redistricting and how
many actual and I was reading about it as well,
how many different congressional seats are actually up for grabs.
But I wanted to start with you about a numbers
game that I think is going to be really significant,
and that is when the next census comes down, We're
going to see a real reallocation of electoral College votes
(20:11):
that is going to overwhelmingly favor red states that voted Trump.
May not be an application in full force in twenty eight,
but by thirty two, this is seismic. What should people
know about where we're headed as that census recalibrates the population?
Speaker 8 (20:27):
Hey, thanks for having me on. Yeah, I mean, the
biggest hot take is that by twenty thirty two, a
Republican or a Democrat, either which one can win the
more than likely a Republican can win the presidency without
winning a single Roust Belt state aside from Ohio. They
don't need Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin anymore. The entire Roust
(20:48):
Belt is taken out of the equation because Michigan and
Pennsylvania more like they're going to lose one congressional seat,
California will lose three, four or five, depending on who's esther,
and you're looking at Florida and Texas. North Carolina are
set to gain and Georgia as well set to gain,
and that alone will make it possible to win the
(21:08):
presidency without having to compete in the Rost Belts. And
it will change our politics, you know, quite a bit.
It may end up becoming where our politics are a
lot less populous than they were. You know, a lot
of economic patoism comes out of the Rost Belts. But
it may it may create a solid conservative majority for
the presidency going into the next decade if they can
(21:31):
hold Georgia and North Carolina, which are the two big questions.
If they lose Georgia, they have to win just one
Rost Belt state then, but it becomes a lot more
difficult for Democrats. They basically wouldn't have to make North
Carolina more competitive, turned Georgia back blue and they just
a horrendous I mean, they got a beating in Arizona,
so they'd have to make Arizona competitive again, and Nevada.
(21:53):
They'd have to run the Gama and make more states competitive.
Concerning they've written off Florida, Texas is not what they
thought it was to be the perpetual belief that Texas
would be a blue state one day. And as people
continually flee Oregon, Washington, New York, California, and New Jersey,
these big blue states is heavily taxed, overly regulated states
(22:15):
for the South, for the Midwest and the Prairie states,
it makes it a lot more difficult for Democrats for
in the next decade.
Speaker 4 (22:25):
How have the numbers continue to play out? Ryan on
those migrations if you will, from the Blue states, I mean,
I think that we saw a lot during COVID.
Speaker 5 (22:35):
We all know that I moved to Florida. A lot
of people.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
Left California, New York went to Florida, Texas, Tennessee, a
handful of other states. But the post COVID migration seems
to be a reality that continues on. And is this
putting any pressure on some states to actually do something
to stop the outflow. It just feels like at some point,
how can New York shore up its budget and pay
fourteen billion dollars for illegals and all the other things
(23:00):
that it's doing. If a lot of top earners are
deciding they want to live in Texas, well those I.
Speaker 8 (23:05):
Mean, that's two different questions. One, how do they pay
for it? New York has had that problem forever. I
mean New York when I worked for the state Senate
back in two thousand and nine, I think it was
a third of the budget came from Wall Street bonuses.
So if like Nasdak moved to Florida, or the Dow
Jones moved to Tennessee or Texas or whatever, New York
State would be like Illinois, which can't afford to pay
lottery winners sometimes because they're so behind their budget. But
(23:29):
the question on the congressional or a portion of what
they're looking for is what you're seeing out of California
right now. They're in a special session, not for the fires,
but to protect their illegal population, mass immigration and mass
illegal immigration and warring people to Blue states, especially let's
say Trump and Tom Homan borders are Tom Homan decided
(23:50):
to do their mass deportation efforts and Blue states say no,
come here, will protect you, you won't be deported and
that wars some people from Florida or North Carolina or
Georgia to New York and New Jersey. That's what saves
their congressional reapportion and that's what saves their electoral college
without the illegal alien population. And had we have the
(24:12):
same immigration numbers that we had in nineteen ninety eight,
which is not which is a long time ago now,
but it doesn't good ones that long time ago, California
would be down four or five points four or five seats.
New York would be down two or three seats. Ohio
would have more seats. Red states in the Midwest would
have more seats, like Indiana and Texas may have fewer,
(24:34):
but it wouldn't be that much more concidering how much
other states, other Blue states would lose. So that's what
they're going to be looking for. They're going to be saying, hey,
we need to continue legal immigration because a lot of
legal immigrants, because they have family and associations, go to
Blue states and there's a lot of welfare programs for
their children and schools and whatnot, and illegal aliens will
(24:55):
sit there and go there to be protected from maths deportation.
That's their only way of decreasing their population losses. And
what you saw is some from twenty twenty one estimate
of twenty twenty five that's a corus estimate, is that
the number of seats that bluses are going to lose
has actually gone down post COVID in great part because
of immigration, both legal and illgal Ryan.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
One of my favorite lessons so far that I have
seen from the twenty twenty four election from a positive perspective,
is that it was actually the least racially polarized election
that we've had since nineteen sixty four. That is all
the way back sixty years in the life of many
of our listeners right now, entire voting life, there has
(25:40):
never been a less racially polarized election.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
Do you think that.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Is a symptom of something that is likely to continue
to evolve or would you say Trump is a unicorn
in the way that he had so much appeal to black,
Hispanic and Asian voters. How much of this is Trump?
How much of this is a large JR. Realignment going
on with the political parties that Trump is benefiting from.
Speaker 8 (26:04):
It's funny on it's a numbers game. Not this upcoming
week which is on immigration from an administrative perspective. But
on the following week we are going to have on
Patrick Raffini from Echelon Insights to talk about this very thing.
Part of it is definitely because Trump is not a
classical Republican, right he has never been pro you know,
he never talked very heavily about slashing budgets, and he's
(26:27):
very populous on economic issues slashing spendings to balance budgets.
He's not you know, your George hw Bush Republican, and
that has large appeals to people who are former Democrats
and also Democrats becoming high on their supply of you know,
white liberal women and also black women, and defending things
like mass criminality that comes heavily out of the black
(26:50):
community and other things that turned away a lot of
Asians and Hispanics who said, I'm not about this, and
a lot of Black Americans who also don't like any
of that stuff, especially black men who you know, they're
they're legal there, they're regular, law abiding citizens, and they
don't like that either. All trends are going one direction
until they're not anymore. So we'll have to sit there
(27:12):
and see. Ultimately, when you're talking about building an electoral
mandate right. From a Republican perspective, the batter is the
white working class. That's if you're making a cake, the
main source of what you're making is from the white
working class. Everything after that is the cream filling and
the icing and the cherry on top. That it definitely
helps in some states. How much does it continue, I
(27:34):
don't know. A portion of the realignment came from conservatives,
conservative people who are minorities who have maybe they were
pro life, or they loved guns, or they wanted small taxes,
but they were just ancestrally Democrat and they made their
first crossover, and they may continue being Republicans for the
rest of their lives. They could also switch if the
Republican parties then switches back to sit there and say,
(27:56):
you know what, this Trump experimental last decade was fun.
Let's get back to you know, the politics of George W. Bush.
And they say, well, this is not really, well, whar
about it anymore? I think Trump opened the door for
a lot of it. It just is a question if
the Republican Party chooses to continue walking through the door.
Some Republicans, you know, like Senator Jim Banks for example,
(28:16):
and other ones definitely want to continue that momentum. Jade
Vancel is that momentum. Other of themse would love to
shut that door and go back to the tribe into
true beliefs that they had maybe forty years ago, because
they haven't flipped the calendar in a long time and
don't realize what the year is anymore.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Speaking of Ryan Gardusky, it's a numbers game. As this
podcast and the Clay and Buck Network first episode out
this week, he's got another one coming out Monday. To
that end, Ryan, on the immigration side of things, what
are you talking to the podcast? And just as an
additional question to throw at you, do you think that
there's more support for the mass deportations than the Democrat
(28:52):
corporate media is ready for.
Speaker 8 (28:55):
Well, I mean I definitely. I mean you're seeing it
with the Lake and Riley Act, where you know, I
think it was eighty plus members, including a ton of Democrats,
joined in hand and Hanman. Basically any Democrat in a
tough district, a few of them sat there and voted
against it, but almost every House member in a top
district voted for the Lake and Riley Act. I think
they're sitting there and saying wow, defending criminality is very,
(29:17):
very very bad for US. I have on THEO Wold
as my guest. THEO Wold is the is the solicitor
general from the state of Idaho, and he worked for
both Jared Kushner and Steven Miller in the first from administration.
So we go over, you know, there's an The data
that I want everyone to come across with is there's
two point four million net million new migrant new immigrants
(29:40):
per year under the Biden administration, the most in our history.
So THEO goes over, what what can the administration do
by itself? What does it need Congress to do? And
what really can we expect from a Trump two point
zero term. What can we sit there and say that
they can do unilaterally, you know, regardless if Republicans and
(30:01):
Democrats kick and drag their feet and the corporate media
and the donors sit there and kick and drag their feet,
if he has the will, what is the way to
sit there and really change our immigration?
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Last question for you, Ryan, we saw Nevada go red,
and I know it's gone red before, but it's been
a while. California and New York both moved massively. Read
all fifty states moved red and it actually got close
in New Jersey and Virginia early. I know we just
finished an election, but the next elections to take place
(30:34):
governorships in New Jersey and Virginia. How competitive do you
think those will be? Do you buy into the idea
that New Jersey or Virginia could be in play not
only for the governorships but as potential flippable states as
twenty twenty eight moves into the next cycle.
Speaker 8 (30:53):
Well, Virginia has a great nominee for the Republican and
Democratic side, So in Virginia will be very, very very
tough win some sears of the lieutenant governor's running Governor Glenn
Younkin is super popular outgoing, so who knows, but Virginia
is definitely starting off as a toss of place. I'll
say a good piece of data for you about New Jersey.
In two thousand and nineteen, Democrats have abated about a
(31:16):
one million voter registrated advantage in New Jersey than Republicans
is about one million more Democrats and Republicans. It's under
eight hundred thousand, or about eight hundred thousand now they have.
Republicans have outregistered them every month continually for over three years.
Now it's six thousand months, five thousand months. But over time,
(31:37):
that matters, that goes in one direction, and it's continuous,
and I don't you know, could it be, could have happened.
It'll be a tough it'll be a tough fight, but
it's not impossible in New Jersey. You know, this is
the third straight election we've seen New Jersey get closer
and closer and closer. It is a trend. It is
not a fluke. The governor's race wasn't a fluke, the
state legislative race of the year before that wasn't a fluke.
(32:00):
And this presidency is not a fluke. And they need
to wake up for that. Just like in New York City,
we've seen trans moving to the right. And the crazy
thing is it's happening organically because there is no real
super effort on the part of the GOP to flip
these states in these areas. This is happening because people
are looking around saying what's going on is not working.
Speaker 4 (32:19):
Ryan Gerduski, everybody go check out. It's a numbers game
coming out on Monday. It's already doing great numbers. Thanks
to all of you. Downloading it and listening. Ryan, we'll
talk to you soon. Congrats on the podcast, the first episode.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
Thank you all right, Buck, I gave you picks yesterday
Prize picks dot Com. Use my name Clay. You get
fifty dollars when you play five dollars. NFL playoffs are
coming up. I told you that Buck's favorite player, George
Pickens was going to go more on receiving yards. I
(32:52):
said that Jalen Hurts was going to score a touchdown.
I gave you those picks, gave you four of them
and said, this is going to end up with a win.
Jordan Jefferson touchdown for the for the Minnesota Vikings star
wide receiver there. And I also gave you one other.
I don't have it in front of me right now,
(33:14):
but we will tweet it out. Gave it out to
you on Thursday, giving it out to you. A get
on Friday because the games are taking place on Saturday,
on Sunday and on Monday.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
You can go. It's super easy to use. It's fun.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
You can play in California, Georgia, Texas. If you're feeling
left out, trust me, go sign up. It's super easy
to use, very intuitive, lots of fun. If you like
football like I do. Prizepicks dot com my name Clay,
you get fifty bucks prize picks dot com my name Clay.
Speaker 6 (33:44):
Patriots radio hosts a couple of regular guys, Clay Travis
and Buck Sexton. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app
or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 5 (33:55):
We'll close enough shop here before the weekend. On Clay
and Bucks. Please do make.
Speaker 4 (34:00):
Sure you subscribe to Clay and Buck podcast network, Ryan
or Rescue new show goes in there, Sean Parnell, The
Buck Breef, Carol Marko which show Toe to Dixon. A
lot of great content for you to check out there,
all free, just downloaded. Subscribe on the iHeartMedia app or
wherever you get your podcasts. Highly how do you recommend it?
And yeah, we've got some talkbacks as well. Speak of
(34:22):
that iHeart app. There's a little microphone on it. You
press it, it allows you to do a talkback, which
is like a voicemail. Do you remember having an answering machine,
Clay back in the day, Oh yeah, machine.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
It was fun.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
You'd come home, you didn't have the ability to get
reached and that thing's blinking and you're like, oh, man,
who tried to call me?
Speaker 2 (34:39):
What might be there?
Speaker 4 (34:40):
Yeah, and you'd have to always try to sound a
little clear, like hey, you've reached five five five five five,
you know, and yeah, you know what I'm talking about,
you answer machine.
Speaker 5 (34:49):
People know what I'm talking about.
Speaker 4 (34:51):
Let's get talkback here from George, a listener out of
Denver Freedom ninety three seven k KDFD.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
What's going on, George?
Speaker 9 (35:00):
I wanted to weigh in on what Buck is talking
about the decorations this year. What I'm going to do
is when I normally only leave the lights on all
night on Christmas Eve, but this year I'm going to
leave the lights on all night for inauguration night for Trump.
Speaker 5 (35:15):
It's going to be awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
Oh, that's actually cool.
Speaker 1 (35:17):
You're talking about when you need to bring down your lights,
and that's a cool idea to leave them up until
the twentieth of January when Trump is inaugurated as a celebration.
I kind of respect that you and I will be
up in DC starting next week.
Speaker 4 (35:32):
I also think Clay, it's really nice, you know, for
you going in this weekend to know that there are
those in this audience who are so devoted to Clay
and all things Clay Travis that they're willing to back
you up on your absolute worst takes, no matter what
your take is, no matter how bad it is. There
are those in this audience who will stand in the flames.
Speaker 5 (35:52):
They'll do anything too.
Speaker 4 (35:53):
And here is podcast listener Jill and Ohio on your
pizza taste, Play.
Speaker 10 (35:57):
It up, Clay and Bock. Jill in Ohio and I
say absolutely, one hundred percent jalapeno, mushroom, maybe even some
banana peppers, and the kicker a.
Speaker 5 (36:13):
Little Anchovies fast pizza.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
Ever, stay cho First of all, I appreciate Jill having
my back. Buck, I got obliterated for my true, honest
opinion the best possible pizza out there, mushroom and jalapeno
on top. Not saying everybody's gonna love it, I'm saying
it's the best in my anchovies though, do We've never
had Anchoby pizza. Honestly, I'm a big fan of seafood,
(36:40):
so I probably would like it. I had a tuna
steak last night. It was fabulous. Hey, stay safe out there.
Weather is brutal in many parts of the country. Enjoy
the games. We love you Guys make sure you stay safe.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
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!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.