June 25, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show delivers a dynamic and in-depth discussion on major national security developments, foreign policy, and domestic political issues, with a strong focus on President Donald Trump's leadership and agenda. The hour opens with coverage of President Trump’s pivotal role at the NATO summit, where he continues to push allies to meet their defense spending commitments. The hosts highlight how Trump’s influence has reshaped NATO’s strategic posture, with European leaders even echoing his rhetoric, including a notable moment where the NATO chief jokingly referred to Trump as “daddy.” The conversation transitions into a critical analysis of a recent intelligence leak to CNN and The New York Times. Buck Sexton, leveraging his intelligence background, explains the dangers of leaking classified information, especially when it undermines national security and the president’s foreign policy. The hosts explore the challenges of identifying leakers, the political motivations behind such actions, and the broader implications for U.S. intelligence integrity. A major segment is dedicated to the aftermath of a successful U.S. military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. The hosts dissect conflicting media narratives, with Tulsi Gabbard and Israeli intelligence confirming the strike’s effectiveness, while legacy media outlets allegedly downplay the success using selectively leaked intelligence. The discussion underscores President Trump’s decisive leadership in neutralizing threats from Iran and the importance of transparency in national defense outcomes. Senator Marsha Blackburn joins the show to provide updates on the progress of the “Big Beautiful Bill,” President Trump’s signature legislative initiative. She confirms that the bill, which includes the largest tax cut in American history, is on track to be signed by July 4th. Key provisions include making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, eliminating taxes on tips, and protecting Social Security from taxation. Blackburn also discusses her recent ICE ride-along, emphasizing the Trump administration’s commitment to deporting criminal illegal aliens and securing the border. The hour wraps with a lighter but still politically charged segment on Florida’s proposed “Alligator Alcatraz” detention facility in the Everglades, designed to house illegal immigrants in a secure, natural barrier environment. The hosts also touch on invasive species in Florida and debunk common myths—like the presence of flamingos in the state. Finally, the show briefly covers the latest developments in the high-profile Sean “Diddy” Combs trial, predicting a potential hung jury due to lack of consensus on the charges.
Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8
For the latest updates from Clay and Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Third hour of play and Buck kicks off right now. Everybody,
Thank you so much for being here with us. As
we know, some big developments going on around the world
and here at home President Trump overseas for a NATO
summit and going through some of the more important things
on the national security front there. Of course, the President
(00:22):
very much wants our NATO allies to meet their financial
contribution thresholds.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Which almost none of them.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
I think a couple of them maybe have stepped it up,
but very few of them were making those kinds of
contributions to their own defense.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Mind you. This is about spending a portion.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Of GDP, of their GDP on their own ability to
contribute to NATO and therefore to the defense of these
individual nations.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
And so that's a big part of this.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
But this was interesting. I think you're gonna see some
memes about this. One at the Hague Clay in the Netherlands.
This is clip six. The NATO chief do you see
this refer to Trump as daddy play six.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
They fought like hell and then they said let's stop,
and they're gonna build themselves. And I really see it
as sticking. I mean, we may do papers on it.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
Marco.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Maybe we're going to do papers.
Speaker 4 (01:22):
I don't even know if you need them.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
They're not gonna be fighting each other.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
They've had it.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
They've got a big fight, like two kids at a
school yard. You know, they fight like hell. You can't
stop them. Let them fight for about two or three minutes.
Then it's easy to stop them.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
And sometimes languages strong.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Everyone said, all you have to use a certain word.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
I mean he kind of was Afrain. I would say,
called Trump daddy.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
That's what report is a little more of like he's
playing along with the analogy there. But here, here's another moment.
Here's Lithuanian, the Lithuanian president. I'm not even gonna pretend
that I know how to say his name. This is
cut seven, who has a new NATO motto that he
wanted to discuss play it.
Speaker 5 (02:02):
I think we should choose the motto make NATO great again.
I would like to send my gratitude to President Donald Trump,
because that's out his engagement. I can imagine that would
discuss probably the level of two point five percent, with
no clear outcome and positive outcome. Probably those discussions will
(02:24):
lead to nothing.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
So Clay Trump's mark on NATO is very clear. I
remember in the first term there were a lot of
people whose objection was that they said that Trump was
going to destroy NATO and he was so horrible for it.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
And I got the.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Whole North Atlantic Treaty organization mobilizing to spend more, to
prepare more, to be able to defend more. And Trump
has been a huge part of that shift, really the
leader of that shift.
Speaker 6 (02:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (02:53):
Look, there was a decision made that the United States
was going to protect the rest of the world, and
so the rest of the world didn't have any obligation
to have substantial military assets. I mean, this is certainly
the case with Canada, which basically has no military because
they are freeloading on the fact that they feel as
(03:14):
if the United States will protect them no matter what.
Speaker 6 (03:17):
And that's true.
Speaker 7 (03:18):
Look at Canada's military spending, look at the number of
people that they.
Speaker 6 (03:22):
Have in uniform.
Speaker 7 (03:23):
They are effectively of the opinion that they have no
danger because they happened to border the United States, and
there was that belief in many of the NATO countries
that to build on the analogy that was being made there,
Trump and the United States was the daddy of Europe,
and they didn't have to spend money on any of
their own defense because the United States had their back.
(03:45):
And that's something that frankly, a lot of American leadership
has wanted to foster for some period of time to
allow that to sort of become ingrained. And Trump said,
why would we continue to be the world's policemen? Would
we continue to be effectively your security guards? And you're
going to have to spend money and that seems totally rational.
(04:08):
I got a question for you also coming out of this,
this news has just broken recently. This is you know,
with your intelligence background, should there be an investigation on
the leaking of this high level intelligence sort of an
opinion that was given to CNN and the New York Times?
(04:29):
Is that worthwhile? Is that useful? Should it be something
that was not published in those newspapers? Based on your background?
Speaker 1 (04:39):
The leak investigation is always such a hotly contested and
charged issue, and you can tell based on whether people
think that the person is a quote whistleblower or a leaker, right,
That's one that's always the way those terms are used
is very much whom or what I like and whom
and what I don't like. So I think that's a
(05:01):
big piece of it. I think that in this case,
you know, the thing about leaks, there's leaks that damage
sources and methods that can put lives and national security
at risks, and there's leaks that are more political in nature.
To talk about the damage done to the nuclear facilities,
though this is this is and relying on classified sources
to do it and telling the media and trying to
(05:22):
shape a narrative. You know, you are breaking your oath
to protect classified information, right, So this isn't you know?
Speaker 2 (05:30):
There are always are.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Judgment calls about this kind of stuff, like is this
someone sharing their opinion about whether something's a good idea?
Speaker 2 (05:35):
I mean that's generally not something that is a national
security risk are classified.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
But if you're sharing an opinion based on information very
clearly that is derived from classified sources and that is
against regulations, you shouldn't be doing it. And no one
person in the Defense Intelligence Agency should think that he
or she should be trying to shape US foreign policy
by using the media as attack dogs against Trump based
(06:00):
off of classified sources.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
That's so that's a long way of saying, yeah, I
think they should try to chase down this leak, the
person should at a minimum be fired. It's very hard
to find leakers, very hard to prove that someone is
a leaker. So you know, we still don't know who
gave the Supreme Court the Dobbins Court, so, you know,
just to give you a sense of it, yeah, I
can say we should find the leaker, but it's very
(06:23):
hard to do.
Speaker 7 (06:24):
And that's a good point because there's only roughly one
hundred people and that may be too many who could
have ever leaked that information in the Supreme Court. How
many people do you think? And that's the of course,
the Dobbs decision coming out before the Dobbs decision was released,
which thankfully didn't get Brett Kavanaugh assassinated, but did provoke
(06:47):
the motive of until the opinion is published, if you
kill a member of the Supreme Court, it's scary, then
the opinion doesn't go into effect. And Biden would have
had the opportunity because he could trolled the Senate at
the time to replace Brett Kavanaugh and theoretically preserve Roe v.
Speaker 6 (07:05):
Wade.
Speaker 7 (07:06):
That was the logic behind why all this was leaked.
I believe, in addition to putting pressure on people to
change their opinions.
Speaker 6 (07:13):
Let me ask you this, how many.
Speaker 7 (07:14):
People do you think would have had the ability to
know and see this report? In other words, when you
conduct an investigation, the first thing you have to figure
is how many people had eyes on it? How many
people had the ability to contact the New York Times
CNN with a report like this. Is it one hundred,
is it a thousand? How many people out there do
you think would have seen this report to the extent
(07:37):
that it is accurate that they have conveyed on that report,
Because that tells you how hard it is to track
somebody down just based on how many eyeballs are on it.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
Yeah, well, it's very tough to know.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
And remember there's going to be a lot of different
cables coming in and out damage assessments that are on
the classified channels, and so you know, this is where
you get into more of a mosaic theory of what
how specific was the information and how much of this
was someone getting from one report versus another and without
(08:08):
I obviously have no access to any of this stuff,
so I can't.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
Speak to.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
The specificity that was leaked, and that that obviously would
go toward how easy it would be to catch somebody,
if they get very clear details that could only come
from a really small, like eyes only sort of report,
then it's much more likely you're gonna be able to
find out who is involved in the leak. The big
thing to do is usually you just pull somebody's cell
phone records and emails stuff, and then you see them
(08:35):
talking to New York Times reporter and now people get
very you know, depending again depending on who's doing it,
and the First Amendment starts to get a lot of attention,
and people talk about the right of the public to know,
and this stuff can get messy quickly.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
So but on this one, to me.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
It's it's egregious And why take this to the press
to try to undermine the president in this critical moment
where we're seeing the Iranians on the defensive and hoping
to bring about I mean, what is Trump trying to
do here stop the threat of a nuclear nuclear armed
Iran and move the region forward into a more peaceful place.
Speaker 7 (09:15):
Yeah, that's a very noble goal. Here's what I would wonder,
are you to the point now where certainly we know
Pete Hegseth has been very upset about leaks inside of
the Pentagon and to his credit and to the credit
of everybody involved in this attack, nobody knew this was
close to the vest. Iran seems to have been caught
unaware that. Certainly, this news didn't break until Trump went
(09:38):
on social media and said, Hey, our planes are now
out of Iranian airspace. We've successfully attacked all those things.
Here is one thing I wonder, do you set up
fake news to try to catch the leakers, Let them
believe that they have some information that you know is
inaccurate because it and start to give information to try
(09:59):
to catch.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
The people that there is an old counterintelligence technique and
if you if you were to flood, if you put
in the system stuff that is untrue but juicy, and
it finds its way and you know, then you know,
based on who you gave that to, right, you flush
it out on the other side and see, uh, look,
I think what's more to me, what's even more important
here is just that the administration is able to I mean, look,
(10:21):
Pete Hags at the Secuary Defense has been very clear
on this, Others have been very clear on this that
they're trying to that they're clear on this was a
massively successful strike and it has done catastrophic damage to
the Iranian nuclear program, and I think just it's the
most important thing is one that that is confirmed as
true with further analysis. In two, they let the public
(10:43):
know that because we are the final check on these things,
like we the American people should know what was the
end result of this and was it worth the risks
that were taking and the involvement here. So I want
that transparency from the Trump team. In terms of getting
this leaker, I think it's unlikely you'll get him. I
think they should try because you want to prevent these
(11:04):
kinds of leaks. And I just think it goes to
the mindset of some people who work inside the intelligence
agencies that they are They're like operating under some higher
power which is just always get you know, get Trump,
make Trump look bad, whatever that is. And people have
gone to prison for this, as we know, people have
gone to prison for leaking stuff that really was just
meant to make Trump look bad.
Speaker 7 (11:25):
On the leaking front, the thing that makes the most
sense to me without an intelligence background at all, is
when you bomb the side of a mountain, it is
hard to know how far and the entry ways to
the facility are completely obliterated and you cannot get in
it is I would imagine, hard to assess how far
(11:46):
into the interior of the mountain the overall damage goes,
so until you have boots on the ground, which Israel
claims that they have had the ability to do, to
try to assess how you get back inside. I would
think also that if Iran starts to unpack that nuclear facility,
that would be very visible and we would be able
(12:09):
to go in again and drop additional bombs as needed.
In the event that we have assessed that we didn't
get the full attack success level that we had hoped
we were going to be able to, we'll.
Speaker 6 (12:23):
Take some of your costs.
Speaker 7 (12:24):
By the way, Senator Marshall Blackburn is going to join
us at the bottom of the hour. It's worth mentioning
that there is the desire to get the big beautiful Bill,
which has not been much talked about over the past
few weeks. It has moved to the backburner given all
the other stories. But Trump's signature legislative goal and achievement
is getting closer and closer to fruition. We will talk
(12:46):
with Senator Blackburn at the bottom of this hour what
she thinks about the timeframe as it pertains to this process.
But I want to tell you all about rapid radios.
I'm up in Michigan right now at News Talk five
ADWTCM and a city. The guys who started rapid radios
are Michiganders. They put in place a business. They knew
(13:07):
that there was going to be a demand because at
any point in time, you could have a hurricane, you
could have a tornado, you could have power out in
your neighborhood. Maybe it's just an awful winter storm and
you got a lot of ice on branches, trees coming down,
and you want to be able to stay in touch
with people. Rapid radios. Keep five days worth of chargers
and you'll be able to talk to people all over
(13:29):
the country. Bucks sister in law during the big hurricane
that hit Ashville. People didn't anticipate the damage that would
occur in western North Carolina. She was able to continue
to use these rapid radios get in touch with bucks
father in law.
Speaker 6 (13:42):
They were able to get the help that.
Speaker 7 (13:43):
They needed when almost all other forms of communication were down.
Trust me on this, this is a great opportunity. You
can get an incredible offer. All you have to do
is go to Rapid Radios dot Com use code radio.
You will get the best possible deal. Give your family
the opportunity to be able to protect them for the
event of casualty in the event of catastrophe. Also, hey,
(14:06):
maybe you got young kids and you want them to
be able to run around outside, but you don't want
them having cell phones. Yet, every little kid likes to
use a walkie talkie. You can travel, you can use these.
We've used these at college football games when it's sometimes
difficult to otherwise be able to use cell phone service.
Get hooked up right now. You'll be glad that you did.
Rapid Radios dot Com code Radio.
Speaker 6 (14:28):
You'll love them. We have them in the Travis household.
Speaker 7 (14:30):
That's Rapid Radios dot Com Code Radio. We're going to
be joined by Senator Marsha Blackburn at the bottom of
the hour to tell us the latest on the Big
Beautiful Bill and also what she saw on her ice
(14:51):
right around some news breaking during that commercial break that
we were just running through.
Speaker 6 (14:59):
Tulca.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Gabbard has shared a take on what her intelligence analysis
is saying, which squares with what Israeli intelligence analysis has
also been saying. Different than what CNN and The New
York Times reported new intelligence.
Speaker 6 (15:17):
This is Tulsa Gabbert.
Speaker 7 (15:18):
New intelligence confirms what POTUS has stated numerous times. Iran's
nuclear facilities have been destroyed. If the Iranians choose to rebuild,
they would have to rebuild all three facilities entirely, which
would likely take years to do. The propaganda media has
deployed their usual tactive tactics, selectively released portions of illegally
(15:40):
leaked classified intelligence assessments, intentionally leaving out the fact that
the assessment was written with low confidence to try to
undermine President Trump's decisive leadership and the brave servicemen and
women who flawlessly executed a truly historic mission to keep
the American people safe and secure. I'm reading from Tulsi
(16:02):
Gabbard's most recent tweet from just a few minutes ago,
which says that the latest of the intelligence reports suggest
that these strikes were incredibly successful. Buck, I imagine how
many of these different versions of analysis do you think
are being written?
Speaker 6 (16:20):
Is there ten? Is there fifteen.
Speaker 7 (16:22):
Daily from all these different analysts trying to look at
all the information? How many different versions are they're floating around?
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Play? This is its own this is its own beast.
Speaker 1 (16:32):
There are interagency assessments where you have different entities from
within these different DA, CIA, NSA, n CTC.
Speaker 7 (16:42):
So would there be like twenty different opinions of exactly
what this strike went?
Speaker 5 (16:46):
More?
Speaker 7 (16:46):
How many different versions of this reports would be floated?
Speaker 6 (16:50):
Me?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
I don't even know.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
Usually there's there's primacy on the issue that certain and
a certain agency will have, But even within the agency,
they'll say they'll refer to them as equities, and the
say that different groups have equities on this issue, so
they have to all agree.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
This is what you get the I.
Speaker 6 (17:05):
Would lose my mind over this. It just even badly.
Speaker 7 (17:08):
The bureaucracy of analyzing what the strikes did would just
make me throw my hands up in the air, like
you could basically find any opinion that you want. Is
kind of what I'm getting at in terms of degradation
or variation of the success of these strikes.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
Yes, yes, that's well.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
This is what happened with Cheney and the WMD. By
the way, and I know that story better than even
the public knows the story because I know the people
that were involved in it. Dated is that Cheney heard
what he liked you got invited back down to the
White House.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Yes, Cheney didn't like the analysis. You didn't do a good.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
Job, and you got to You know, your your boss
got an email saying they got to replace you with
somebody else.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
It's pretty straightforward.
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Look, some of the best investment opportunities come by way
of research on your part. If you've not spent the
time learning what investment analyst Jim Rickards has to offer,
to take time this week to do so. He has
history in both Washington and Wall Street and is falling
development of a possible sovereign wealth fund in our nation.
Jim Rickards is one of those in the know kind
of people with great insight on a potential forthcoming opportunity
(18:09):
with huge benefit to our nation and to you in particular.
The first ever national sovereign wealth fund would be one
that provides citizens, or return to citizens, or retires national debt,
which would benefit us all. There's some really well informed
people who think that we actually have an asset in
this country that could be worth as much as one
hundred and fifty trillion dollars. It has been buried under
(18:29):
American soil and could be the basis for a Sovereign
Wealth Fund. Here Jim's thinking on this issue. Go to
Birthright twenty twenty five dot com. He's right, it's going
to be huge. Go to birthright twenty twenty five dot
com free of charge, paid for by Paradigm Press. Senator
(18:54):
Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee joins us right now. Senator, always
appreciate you making the time for us. Thank you so much,
you got it.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
I'm so happy to join you. Thanks.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
How are you feeling about the influx of New Yorkers
that you may be getting, Senator Blackburn, based on the
mayor's race, Do you.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Have Do you have room in the great State of Tennessee?
Speaker 1 (19:17):
If there, if they're good patriotic Americans fleeing your way, if.
Speaker 4 (19:21):
They are willing to leave New York and Illinois and
California and Massachusetts, Taxachuset's some of these states and leave
behind those Democrat policies and come to a state like
Tennessee with no state income tax, then we welcome them.
Speaker 7 (19:44):
I this is probably a question that I'm sure you
get all the time, but as somebody born and raised
in Tennessee, it's one of the questions that I get
most frequently from others who are born and raised in Tennessee.
We have data now on the twenty twenty four election,
and I know you, obvi, as an elected official, probably
have poured over that data. I know you've got a
lot of smart people in Tennessee, Florida and Texas. It
(20:07):
appears that the people moving are as a whole making
the states reader so far right. So to allay some
of those concerns that might be out there, oh that.
Speaker 4 (20:18):
Is so very true. And I meet people every single day, Clay,
and they will say, oh, did you really stop a
state income tax in Tennessee? And they're amazed. You know,
they are accustomed to paying these exorbitant state income tax fees.
(20:38):
And then you look at this issue that has come
up on the salt tax, and you have California and
New York trying to move that deduction to forty one
thousand dollars and say we want it to apply to
everybody making under a million dollars a year, and they
(21:02):
keep trying to expand it, and we keep saying no,
this is an issue for your state legislature. If you
think the taxes are too high, go talk to them,
tell them it's time for them to start right sizing
the federal government, and you don't need the federal art
(21:24):
to right size the state government. You don't need the
federal government saying, Okay, we're going to give you an
extra deduction because your states cannot get their fiscal house
in order. But people are voting with their feet and
they're choosing states like Tennessee.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Senator Blackburn, I see here on a Fox story that
you spend some time doing ride alongs and seeing firsthand
what the mission of Immigration and Customs Enforcement looks like
these days. What's going going on with it? What did
you see, and what do the American people need to
know about the Trump Administration's interior immigration enforcement efforts.
Speaker 4 (22:09):
Our Homeland security investigators and our ICE agents are working
about seventy five hours a week right now. They are
putting in the time. It takes a lot of time,
and in order to apprehend these individuals that have orders
of deportation, that are criminal, illegal aliens and meeting with them,
(22:33):
talking with them before we started the ride alongs. That
was so instructive to me now seeing how hard they
work as they surveil individuals and make certain that they're
in a public space. They're not inside a house when
they apprehend them. It is something that takes a lot
(22:56):
of time. We were surveilling someone who was a convicted
child molester and had come into the US, and I
have not met one single person that says, I am
really hopeful that we're going to have some trenda Uragua,
MS thirteen or other violent gangs move into our apartment
(23:20):
complex or into our community, or by the house that's
for sale down the street. They are hopeful they're going
to get a family that's got babysitters or kids that
can play with their kids. But they're not looking for
drug dealer, sex traffickers, gang members or convicted criminals to
(23:41):
buy those homes and move into their neighborhood or their community.
And ICE is working very hard to rid our communities
of those individuals and to see them deported back to
their home countries.
Speaker 7 (24:00):
Center Blackburn, we just saw that there's people throwing fits
inside of the Capitol as the big beautiful bill advances.
There's been talk that John Thune, Senate majority leader, is
holding everybody there to get the votes done. What's the
timeframe so far as you can tell, I know there's
going to be a lot going on. When are you
expecting it to pass? What are you expecting it to
(24:22):
look like? For people wondering out there, I.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
First of all, it is going to be the largest
tax cut in American history. That is what this bill
will give you. It will make those twenty seventeen tax
cuts permanent, the largest tax cut in history. Also, no
tax on tips over time, and my provision which will
hold our senior citizens harmless when it comes to paying
(24:51):
that tax on Social Security, which I have tried to
get rid of for years. So no tax tips overtime
social Security. In addition to that, if you are a freeloader,
a fraudster, an illegal alien, you do not deserve Medicare
(25:13):
or Medicaid benefits, and we are going to make certain
that you are removed from those roles so we can
strengthen those programs and have them there for the people
that deserve them. So the prospects look very good. Everybody
is united in getting President Trump's agenda across the finish line,
(25:36):
working out some of the final details, getting some of
the final scoring is where we are right now.
Speaker 7 (25:44):
And so you expect for President Trump, he's been wanting
to get it signed by July fourth or thereabouts. You
expect some time around July fourth.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
Yes, I think you'll see him signing it by July fourth.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Oh wow, excellent, that's really good news.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
We certainly hope that that gets done.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
People would like to get the largest tax cut in history.
Sigin filed delivered by President Donald Trump in time for
their Independence Day celebration.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Senator Blackburn, So, are there any last minute issues that
are still being hammered out or does it seem like
a pretty clear path to get that big, beautiful bill
done before the fourth of July holiday.
Speaker 4 (26:26):
Oh, there are always some little loose ends that are
going to be hammered out, and we're still waiting on
some scoring from CBO. And as I say, why don't
we wait on these people? They're always wrong, Their numbers
are never right. So we'll finish with those details during
(26:48):
the rest of the day and then hopefully we can
move to Klocher, Tomorraw on this thing.
Speaker 6 (26:54):
Outstanding stuff, Senator Blackburn.
Speaker 7 (26:56):
We appreciate the time, and we look forward to that
bill getting passed, the President Trump's agenda continuing to be executed.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
You got it, take care of final for sure.
Speaker 7 (27:06):
Look, we were just talking about some of the challenges
that come with being a parent. In fact, Buck's new dad.
I've got three kids. Last night they were fighting. I
couldn't get them to stop fighting, and eventually I had
to just grab one of them and be like, hey,
stop wrestling, keep your hands off each other. It's unbelievable.
And if you've got kids or grandkids, you know what
I'm talking about. And much of what you do in
(27:28):
life is about trying to give them the best possible
opportunity whatever you do. Have you thought about what will
happen after you are gone. Are your kids and your
grandkids going to be able to handle the wishes that
you would care about the most? Or are you concerned
that they'll end up fighting over what you have left
behind and what your wishes might be. Why not go
(27:50):
ahead and solve it. You know only thirty percent of
people have a trust in a will. You can get
this done. It doesn't have to be complicated. You spend
your whole life trying to make sure that your family
is taken care of. Don't you want to limit what
they're fighting about when you are gone. To the best
of your ability, solve.
Speaker 6 (28:07):
It once and for all. Today.
Speaker 7 (28:08):
It's not complicated. Just go to Trust and Will dot Com.
I have a trust, I have a will. I've done
it for my boys. No telling when that day is
going to come, but we are all going to one
day not be around.
Speaker 6 (28:20):
And we want to make sure.
Speaker 7 (28:22):
That what we cared about, that we have fought for
for our entire lives, that we preserve and take care
of all of that, and that our kids and our
grandkids are taken care of as we would like to
see fit. Trust and will dot Com that website one
more time. Trust and will dot Com I have both.
Only thirty percent of Americans. Do make the right decision
(28:42):
for your family, control what happens after you are gone,
and help to limit all the fracas that might otherwise
ensue at Trust and will dot Com Again, my thanks
Traverse City, Michigan. Seventy degrees up here today. I understand
(29:05):
the rest of the country is sweltering. News Talk five
eight WTCM. Appreciate them hosting us. You know where it
is definitely sweltering is down where Buck is and that's
where Florida ag James Upmeyer.
Speaker 6 (29:19):
Who we know, good dude, he has got an idea.
Speaker 7 (29:23):
We talked about Alcatraz and the fact that I'm one
of the greatest swimmers ever in that I could easily
swim across San Francisco Bay, and I'm glad that all
of you agreed with that. And there now is talk
that Florida is going to do their own version of Alcatraz,
except it's going to be called Alligator Alcatraz in the Everglades.
Listen to Cut twenty three.
Speaker 8 (29:42):
Florida has been leading on immigration enforcements, supporting the Trump
administration and ICE's efforts to detain and deport criminal aliens.
The governor task state leaders to identify places for new
temporary detention facilities. I think this is the best one,
as I call it, Alligator out Coatrez. This thirty square
(30:03):
mile area is completely surrounded by the Ever place presents
an efficient, low cost opportunity to build a temporary detention
facility because you don't need to invest that much in
the perimeter. People get out, there's not much waiting for
them other than alligators and pipelines. Nowhere to go, nowhere
to hide.
Speaker 6 (30:22):
This is actually a brilliant idea.
Speaker 7 (30:23):
I give credit to the State of Florida on this
because historically this is why places like Alcatraz existed. You
surrounded them with very difficult barriers for prisoners in the
event that they were to escape. I feel pretty good
about the difficulty of anybody getting out of Alligator Alcatraz
as a Floridian. Are you one hundred percent behind this idea?
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Certainly getting a lot of attention, and you need places
where you can hold people, quickly process them and then
get those deportation proceedings going. You know, you look at
the numbers, and I know the Trump administration is moving
rapidly on this stuff, but when you see the flood
that happened under Biden in four years, it's going to
(31:07):
take some real doing here to begin to really chip
away at the illegal invasion that happened in the country.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
But yeah, the thing about.
Speaker 1 (31:15):
You know alligators there, You know, during the daytime, they'll
leave you alone for the most part, not too bad.
It's really at night that you wouldn't want to be
trying to go up the like chest deep water in
the Everglades and hope that you don't make some new
friends you weren't intending on that.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
That would be tough.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
There's also crocodiles and as he mentions, pythons, anacondas. There's
like basically anything can live in the Everglades and they
do these python searches. I mean they're twenty foot pythons.
Speaker 6 (31:46):
Now they do python hunts.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
Yeah, well those are an invasive species brought here as pets.
The pythons are pets that were brought here and released.
Iguanas were pets that were brought here and release. The
iguanas are everywhere. You'll see it all over the place here.
A lot of the smaller lizards as well. They're not
indigenous to South Florida. They were brought here as pets.
So that's why when you go to places and they say,
(32:08):
did you bring any like animals or livestock products or whatever,
because if you introduce some of these things into the ecosystem,
I think lionfish as well, which you can go and
you can kill as many lionfish as you want down
here in Florida and you can, I think you can
eat them. They have a spines on them. They're very poisonous.
Parrots are there. I live next to flocks of wild
(32:29):
parrots now, they're all over the place here. Those were
brought here as pets. So a lot of stuff that
you think of, and you know what is not native
to Florida or you will not find in Florida flamingos.
Have I talked to you about this before people think
of there are thousands of businesses and places.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
There's a flamingo park here in Miami Beach.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
Flamingo is everywhere as a concept in Florida. Flamingo lawn ornaments,
we've all seen them.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
Clay. The flamingos that.
Speaker 1 (32:56):
Most people think of when they think of Miami were
actually a flock of flamingos brought from Africa at the
racetrack in the intro of Miami Vice. And everyone thought
from that show, because there's flamingos at the racetrack, there
must be flamingos in Florida. There are very rare, like
(33:17):
a handful of occasions where they think that maybe during
severe weather flamingos have basically been like blown here.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
But there are not indigenous.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Flamingos and any numbers in Florida, which I think even
shocks some Floridians when they find out.
Speaker 7 (33:33):
The most successful, most liked invasive species in American history
bees they did.
Speaker 6 (33:41):
It's crazy. People don't realize it.
Speaker 7 (33:43):
There were no bees, no honey bees in the United
States or in the Americas until they were brought over
from Europe. By the way, another crazy one, tomatoes not
native to Italy. We all think about tomatoes like because
so much of their cuisine involves tomatoes.
Speaker 6 (34:01):
Not native.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
So they say now that they think there are up
to one hundred flamingos in the state of Florida that
may have been blown here during Hurricane Idalia, but there
was There's been a long period where there were no
wild flamingos here. So now there's like a very small
colony of them. But you know, I always i'm down here.
(34:24):
You see pelicans all over the place. Yeah, they're not
as famous, but flamingos are the things you think of
as Florida.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
They're not really here.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
But yeah, so that's it's like the state bird for
a state that barely has any of these birds.
Speaker 7 (34:37):
By the way, breaking news that does not have anything
to do with international politics, but does have something to
do with New York City. In the wake of the
Democrat primary, both sides have rested their case in the
puff Daddy p Ditty whatever you want to call him,
Sean Combe's sex trafficking for lack of a better way
(34:59):
of describing it case, and that has now gone to
the jury. So this is a big story New York City.
You and I have both I think we're in agreement
on this. They've dropped some of the charges now because
they thought they were complicated before they even got to
the jury.
Speaker 6 (35:15):
I don't know that we're going to get a not
guilty verdict.
Speaker 7 (35:18):
I think based on following this entire case, I don't
think they've proven that this is a that this is
a crime. I don't think they're going to get a
unanimous jury verdict now is wrong on the.
Speaker 6 (35:28):
New York City mayoral race. Maybe I'll be wrong on this.
Speaker 7 (35:31):
There's eight men on the jury and basically this case
has been boiled down. We'll probably talk about it some
tomorrow now that the jury's got it to was this
coercive or consensual activity that these women were engaging in?
Speaker 6 (35:46):
And I don't think you're going to be able to
get all of the jury.
Speaker 7 (35:49):
To agree that huff Daddy is guilty here, based on
the evidence and what I have seen of the testimony.
Are you in agreement with me that you expect to
I'm not saying not guilty. I'm saying I don't think
twelve people are the total number of jurors here.
Speaker 6 (36:03):
I think it's twelve will agree to these charges.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
Yeah, he's definitely guilty of being a scumbag, but that's
not what the statutes are that are at it right,
and I think that that is that this could be
a shock to a lot of people. Now Whenmber we
had on Dershowitz who agreed with us in the flaughter sense,
but said they may just convict him because he's such
a clearly bad guy.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
But on the peel it will be overturned.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
That's another possibility, but definitely not an open and shutcase,
and I would not put a lot of money on.
Speaker 6 (36:33):
A guilty verdictue. We'll give you the latest on that
tomorrow
Third hour of play and Buck kicks off right now. Everybody,
Thank you so much for being here with us. As
we know, some big developments going on around the world
and here at home President Trump overseas for a NATO
summit and going through some of the more important things
on the national security front there. Of course, the President
(00:22):
very much wants our NATO allies to meet their financial
contribution thresholds.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Which almost none of them.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
I think a couple of them maybe have stepped it up,
but very few of them were making those kinds of
contributions to their own defense.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Mind you. This is about spending a portion.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Of GDP, of their GDP on their own ability to
contribute to NATO and therefore to the defense of these
individual nations.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
And so that's a big part of this.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
But this was interesting. I think you're gonna see some
memes about this. One at the Hague Clay in the Netherlands.
This is clip six. The NATO chief do you see
this refer to Trump as daddy play six.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
They fought like hell and then they said let's stop,
and they're gonna build themselves. And I really see it
as sticking. I mean, we may do papers on it.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
Marco.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Maybe we're going to do papers.
Speaker 4 (01:22):
I don't even know if you need them.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
They're not gonna be fighting each other.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
They've had it.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
They've got a big fight, like two kids at a
school yard. You know, they fight like hell. You can't
stop them. Let them fight for about two or three minutes.
Then it's easy to stop them.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
And sometimes languages strong.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Everyone said, all you have to use a certain word.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
I mean he kind of was Afrain. I would say,
called Trump daddy.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
That's what report is a little more of like he's
playing along with the analogy there. But here, here's another moment.
Here's Lithuanian, the Lithuanian president. I'm not even gonna pretend
that I know how to say his name. This is
cut seven, who has a new NATO motto that he
wanted to discuss play it.
Speaker 5 (02:02):
I think we should choose the motto make NATO great again.
I would like to send my gratitude to President Donald Trump,
because that's out his engagement. I can imagine that would
discuss probably the level of two point five percent, with
no clear outcome and positive outcome. Probably those discussions will
(02:24):
lead to nothing.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
So Clay Trump's mark on NATO is very clear. I
remember in the first term there were a lot of
people whose objection was that they said that Trump was
going to destroy NATO and he was so horrible for it.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
And I got the.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Whole North Atlantic Treaty organization mobilizing to spend more, to
prepare more, to be able to defend more. And Trump
has been a huge part of that shift, really the
leader of that shift.
Speaker 6 (02:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (02:53):
Look, there was a decision made that the United States
was going to protect the rest of the world, and
so the rest of the world didn't have any obligation
to have substantial military assets. I mean, this is certainly
the case with Canada, which basically has no military because
they are freeloading on the fact that they feel as
(03:14):
if the United States will protect them no matter what.
Speaker 6 (03:17):
And that's true.
Speaker 7 (03:18):
Look at Canada's military spending, look at the number of
people that they.
Speaker 6 (03:22):
Have in uniform.
Speaker 7 (03:23):
They are effectively of the opinion that they have no
danger because they happened to border the United States, and
there was that belief in many of the NATO countries
that to build on the analogy that was being made there,
Trump and the United States was the daddy of Europe,
and they didn't have to spend money on any of
their own defense because the United States had their back.
(03:45):
And that's something that frankly, a lot of American leadership
has wanted to foster for some period of time to
allow that to sort of become ingrained. And Trump said,
why would we continue to be the world's policemen? Would
we continue to be effectively your security guards? And you're
going to have to spend money and that seems totally rational.
(04:08):
I got a question for you also coming out of this,
this news has just broken recently. This is you know,
with your intelligence background, should there be an investigation on
the leaking of this high level intelligence sort of an
opinion that was given to CNN and the New York Times?
(04:29):
Is that worthwhile? Is that useful? Should it be something
that was not published in those newspapers? Based on your background?
Speaker 1 (04:39):
The leak investigation is always such a hotly contested and
charged issue, and you can tell based on whether people
think that the person is a quote whistleblower or a leaker, right,
That's one that's always the way those terms are used
is very much whom or what I like and whom
and what I don't like. So I think that's a
(05:01):
big piece of it. I think that in this case,
you know, the thing about leaks, there's leaks that damage
sources and methods that can put lives and national security
at risks, and there's leaks that are more political in nature.
To talk about the damage done to the nuclear facilities,
though this is this is and relying on classified sources
to do it and telling the media and trying to
(05:22):
shape a narrative. You know, you are breaking your oath
to protect classified information, right, So this isn't you know?
Speaker 2 (05:30):
There are always are.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Judgment calls about this kind of stuff, like is this
someone sharing their opinion about whether something's a good idea?
Speaker 2 (05:35):
I mean that's generally not something that is a national
security risk are classified.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
But if you're sharing an opinion based on information very
clearly that is derived from classified sources and that is
against regulations, you shouldn't be doing it. And no one
person in the Defense Intelligence Agency should think that he
or she should be trying to shape US foreign policy
by using the media as attack dogs against Trump based
(06:00):
off of classified sources.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
That's so that's a long way of saying, yeah, I
think they should try to chase down this leak, the
person should at a minimum be fired. It's very hard
to find leakers, very hard to prove that someone is
a leaker. So you know, we still don't know who
gave the Supreme Court the Dobbins Court, so, you know,
just to give you a sense of it, yeah, I
can say we should find the leaker, but it's very
(06:23):
hard to do.
Speaker 7 (06:24):
And that's a good point because there's only roughly one
hundred people and that may be too many who could
have ever leaked that information in the Supreme Court. How
many people do you think? And that's the of course,
the Dobbs decision coming out before the Dobbs decision was released,
which thankfully didn't get Brett Kavanaugh assassinated, but did provoke
(06:47):
the motive of until the opinion is published, if you
kill a member of the Supreme Court, it's scary, then
the opinion doesn't go into effect. And Biden would have
had the opportunity because he could trolled the Senate at
the time to replace Brett Kavanaugh and theoretically preserve Roe v.
Speaker 6 (07:05):
Wade.
Speaker 7 (07:06):
That was the logic behind why all this was leaked.
I believe, in addition to putting pressure on people to
change their opinions.
Speaker 6 (07:13):
Let me ask you this, how many.
Speaker 7 (07:14):
People do you think would have had the ability to
know and see this report? In other words, when you
conduct an investigation, the first thing you have to figure
is how many people had eyes on it? How many
people had the ability to contact the New York Times
CNN with a report like this. Is it one hundred,
is it a thousand? How many people out there do
you think would have seen this report to the extent
(07:37):
that it is accurate that they have conveyed on that report,
Because that tells you how hard it is to track
somebody down just based on how many eyeballs are on it.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
Yeah, well, it's very tough to know.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
And remember there's going to be a lot of different
cables coming in and out damage assessments that are on
the classified channels, and so you know, this is where
you get into more of a mosaic theory of what
how specific was the information and how much of this
was someone getting from one report versus another and without
(08:08):
I obviously have no access to any of this stuff,
so I can't.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
Speak to.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
The specificity that was leaked, and that that obviously would
go toward how easy it would be to catch somebody,
if they get very clear details that could only come
from a really small, like eyes only sort of report,
then it's much more likely you're gonna be able to
find out who is involved in the leak. The big
thing to do is usually you just pull somebody's cell
phone records and emails stuff, and then you see them
(08:35):
talking to New York Times reporter and now people get
very you know, depending again depending on who's doing it,
and the First Amendment starts to get a lot of attention,
and people talk about the right of the public to know,
and this stuff can get messy quickly.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
So but on this one, to me.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
It's it's egregious And why take this to the press
to try to undermine the president in this critical moment
where we're seeing the Iranians on the defensive and hoping
to bring about I mean, what is Trump trying to
do here stop the threat of a nuclear nuclear armed
Iran and move the region forward into a more peaceful place.
Speaker 7 (09:15):
Yeah, that's a very noble goal. Here's what I would wonder,
are you to the point now where certainly we know
Pete Hegseth has been very upset about leaks inside of
the Pentagon and to his credit and to the credit
of everybody involved in this attack, nobody knew this was
close to the vest. Iran seems to have been caught
unaware that. Certainly, this news didn't break until Trump went
(09:38):
on social media and said, Hey, our planes are now
out of Iranian airspace. We've successfully attacked all those things.
Here is one thing I wonder, do you set up
fake news to try to catch the leakers, Let them
believe that they have some information that you know is
inaccurate because it and start to give information to try
(09:59):
to catch.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
The people that there is an old counterintelligence technique and
if you if you were to flood, if you put
in the system stuff that is untrue but juicy, and
it finds its way and you know, then you know,
based on who you gave that to, right, you flush
it out on the other side and see, uh, look,
I think what's more to me, what's even more important
here is just that the administration is able to I mean, look,
(10:21):
Pete Hags at the Secuary Defense has been very clear
on this, Others have been very clear on this that
they're trying to that they're clear on this was a
massively successful strike and it has done catastrophic damage to
the Iranian nuclear program, and I think just it's the
most important thing is one that that is confirmed as
true with further analysis. In two, they let the public
(10:43):
know that because we are the final check on these things,
like we the American people should know what was the
end result of this and was it worth the risks
that were taking and the involvement here. So I want
that transparency from the Trump team. In terms of getting
this leaker, I think it's unlikely you'll get him. I
think they should try because you want to prevent these
(11:04):
kinds of leaks. And I just think it goes to
the mindset of some people who work inside the intelligence
agencies that they are They're like operating under some higher
power which is just always get you know, get Trump,
make Trump look bad, whatever that is. And people have
gone to prison for this, as we know, people have
gone to prison for leaking stuff that really was just
meant to make Trump look bad.
Speaker 7 (11:25):
On the leaking front, the thing that makes the most
sense to me without an intelligence background at all, is
when you bomb the side of a mountain, it is
hard to know how far and the entry ways to
the facility are completely obliterated and you cannot get in
it is I would imagine, hard to assess how far
(11:46):
into the interior of the mountain the overall damage goes,
so until you have boots on the ground, which Israel
claims that they have had the ability to do, to
try to assess how you get back inside. I would
think also that if Iran starts to unpack that nuclear facility,
that would be very visible and we would be able
(12:09):
to go in again and drop additional bombs as needed.
In the event that we have assessed that we didn't
get the full attack success level that we had hoped
we were going to be able to, we'll.
Speaker 6 (12:23):
Take some of your costs.
Speaker 7 (12:24):
By the way, Senator Marshall Blackburn is going to join
us at the bottom of the hour. It's worth mentioning
that there is the desire to get the big beautiful Bill,
which has not been much talked about over the past
few weeks. It has moved to the backburner given all
the other stories. But Trump's signature legislative goal and achievement
is getting closer and closer to fruition. We will talk
(12:46):
with Senator Blackburn at the bottom of this hour what
she thinks about the timeframe as it pertains to this process.
But I want to tell you all about rapid radios.
I'm up in Michigan right now at News Talk five
ADWTCM and a city. The guys who started rapid radios
are Michiganders. They put in place a business. They knew
(13:07):
that there was going to be a demand because at
any point in time, you could have a hurricane, you
could have a tornado, you could have power out in
your neighborhood. Maybe it's just an awful winter storm and
you got a lot of ice on branches, trees coming down,
and you want to be able to stay in touch
with people. Rapid radios. Keep five days worth of chargers
and you'll be able to talk to people all over
(13:29):
the country. Bucks sister in law during the big hurricane
that hit Ashville. People didn't anticipate the damage that would
occur in western North Carolina. She was able to continue
to use these rapid radios get in touch with bucks
father in law.
Speaker 6 (13:42):
They were able to get the help that.
Speaker 7 (13:43):
They needed when almost all other forms of communication were down.
Trust me on this, this is a great opportunity. You
can get an incredible offer. All you have to do
is go to Rapid Radios dot Com use code radio.
You will get the best possible deal. Give your family
the opportunity to be able to protect them for the
event of casualty in the event of catastrophe. Also, hey,
(14:06):
maybe you got young kids and you want them to
be able to run around outside, but you don't want
them having cell phones. Yet, every little kid likes to
use a walkie talkie. You can travel, you can use these.
We've used these at college football games when it's sometimes
difficult to otherwise be able to use cell phone service.
Get hooked up right now. You'll be glad that you did.
Rapid Radios dot Com code Radio.
Speaker 6 (14:28):
You'll love them. We have them in the Travis household.
Speaker 7 (14:30):
That's Rapid Radios dot Com Code Radio. We're going to
be joined by Senator Marsha Blackburn at the bottom of
the hour to tell us the latest on the Big
Beautiful Bill and also what she saw on her ice
(14:51):
right around some news breaking during that commercial break that
we were just running through.
Speaker 6 (14:59):
Tulca.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Gabbard has shared a take on what her intelligence analysis
is saying, which squares with what Israeli intelligence analysis has
also been saying. Different than what CNN and The New
York Times reported new intelligence.
Speaker 6 (15:17):
This is Tulsa Gabbert.
Speaker 7 (15:18):
New intelligence confirms what POTUS has stated numerous times. Iran's
nuclear facilities have been destroyed. If the Iranians choose to rebuild,
they would have to rebuild all three facilities entirely, which
would likely take years to do. The propaganda media has
deployed their usual tactive tactics, selectively released portions of illegally
(15:40):
leaked classified intelligence assessments, intentionally leaving out the fact that
the assessment was written with low confidence to try to
undermine President Trump's decisive leadership and the brave servicemen and
women who flawlessly executed a truly historic mission to keep
the American people safe and secure. I'm reading from Tulsi
(16:02):
Gabbard's most recent tweet from just a few minutes ago,
which says that the latest of the intelligence reports suggest
that these strikes were incredibly successful. Buck, I imagine how
many of these different versions of analysis do you think
are being written?
Speaker 6 (16:20):
Is there ten? Is there fifteen.
Speaker 7 (16:22):
Daily from all these different analysts trying to look at
all the information? How many different versions are they're floating around?
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Play? This is its own this is its own beast.
Speaker 1 (16:32):
There are interagency assessments where you have different entities from
within these different DA, CIA, NSA, n CTC.
Speaker 7 (16:42):
So would there be like twenty different opinions of exactly
what this strike went?
Speaker 5 (16:46):
More?
Speaker 7 (16:46):
How many different versions of this reports would be floated?
Speaker 6 (16:50):
Me?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
I don't even know.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
Usually there's there's primacy on the issue that certain and
a certain agency will have, But even within the agency,
they'll say they'll refer to them as equities, and the
say that different groups have equities on this issue, so
they have to all agree.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
This is what you get the I.
Speaker 6 (17:05):
Would lose my mind over this. It just even badly.
Speaker 7 (17:08):
The bureaucracy of analyzing what the strikes did would just
make me throw my hands up in the air, like
you could basically find any opinion that you want. Is
kind of what I'm getting at in terms of degradation
or variation of the success of these strikes.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
Yes, yes, that's well.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
This is what happened with Cheney and the WMD. By
the way, and I know that story better than even
the public knows the story because I know the people
that were involved in it. Dated is that Cheney heard
what he liked you got invited back down to the
White House.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Yes, Cheney didn't like the analysis. You didn't do a good.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
Job, and you got to You know, your your boss
got an email saying they got to replace you with
somebody else.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
It's pretty straightforward.
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Look, some of the best investment opportunities come by way
of research on your part. If you've not spent the
time learning what investment analyst Jim Rickards has to offer,
to take time this week to do so. He has
history in both Washington and Wall Street and is falling
development of a possible sovereign wealth fund in our nation.
Jim Rickards is one of those in the know kind
of people with great insight on a potential forthcoming opportunity
(18:09):
with huge benefit to our nation and to you in particular.
The first ever national sovereign wealth fund would be one
that provides citizens, or return to citizens, or retires national debt,
which would benefit us all. There's some really well informed
people who think that we actually have an asset in
this country that could be worth as much as one
hundred and fifty trillion dollars. It has been buried under
(18:29):
American soil and could be the basis for a Sovereign
Wealth Fund. Here Jim's thinking on this issue. Go to
Birthright twenty twenty five dot com. He's right, it's going
to be huge. Go to birthright twenty twenty five dot
com free of charge, paid for by Paradigm Press. Senator
(18:54):
Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee joins us right now. Senator, always
appreciate you making the time for us. Thank you so much,
you got it.
Speaker 4 (19:04):
I'm so happy to join you. Thanks.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
How are you feeling about the influx of New Yorkers
that you may be getting, Senator Blackburn, based on the
mayor's race, Do you.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Have Do you have room in the great State of Tennessee?
Speaker 1 (19:17):
If there, if they're good patriotic Americans fleeing your way, if.
Speaker 4 (19:21):
They are willing to leave New York and Illinois and
California and Massachusetts, Taxachuset's some of these states and leave
behind those Democrat policies and come to a state like
Tennessee with no state income tax, then we welcome them.
Speaker 7 (19:44):
I this is probably a question that I'm sure you
get all the time, but as somebody born and raised
in Tennessee, it's one of the questions that I get
most frequently from others who are born and raised in Tennessee.
We have data now on the twenty twenty four election,
and I know you, obvi, as an elected official, probably
have poured over that data. I know you've got a
lot of smart people in Tennessee, Florida and Texas. It
(20:07):
appears that the people moving are as a whole making
the states reader so far right. So to allay some
of those concerns that might be out there, oh that.
Speaker 4 (20:18):
Is so very true. And I meet people every single day, Clay,
and they will say, oh, did you really stop a
state income tax in Tennessee? And they're amazed. You know,
they are accustomed to paying these exorbitant state income tax fees.
(20:38):
And then you look at this issue that has come
up on the salt tax, and you have California and
New York trying to move that deduction to forty one
thousand dollars and say we want it to apply to
everybody making under a million dollars a year, and they
(21:02):
keep trying to expand it, and we keep saying no,
this is an issue for your state legislature. If you
think the taxes are too high, go talk to them,
tell them it's time for them to start right sizing
the federal government, and you don't need the federal art
(21:24):
to right size the state government. You don't need the
federal government saying, Okay, we're going to give you an
extra deduction because your states cannot get their fiscal house
in order. But people are voting with their feet and
they're choosing states like Tennessee.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Senator Blackburn, I see here on a Fox story that
you spend some time doing ride alongs and seeing firsthand
what the mission of Immigration and Customs Enforcement looks like
these days. What's going going on with it? What did
you see, and what do the American people need to
know about the Trump Administration's interior immigration enforcement efforts.
Speaker 4 (22:09):
Our Homeland security investigators and our ICE agents are working
about seventy five hours a week right now. They are
putting in the time. It takes a lot of time,
and in order to apprehend these individuals that have orders
of deportation, that are criminal, illegal aliens and meeting with them,
(22:33):
talking with them before we started the ride alongs. That
was so instructive to me now seeing how hard they
work as they surveil individuals and make certain that they're
in a public space. They're not inside a house when
they apprehend them. It is something that takes a lot
(22:56):
of time. We were surveilling someone who was a convicted
child molester and had come into the US, and I
have not met one single person that says, I am
really hopeful that we're going to have some trenda Uragua,
MS thirteen or other violent gangs move into our apartment
(23:20):
complex or into our community, or by the house that's
for sale down the street. They are hopeful they're going
to get a family that's got babysitters or kids that
can play with their kids. But they're not looking for
drug dealer, sex traffickers, gang members or convicted criminals to
(23:41):
buy those homes and move into their neighborhood or their community.
And ICE is working very hard to rid our communities
of those individuals and to see them deported back to
their home countries.
Speaker 7 (24:00):
Center Blackburn, we just saw that there's people throwing fits
inside of the Capitol as the big beautiful bill advances.
There's been talk that John Thune, Senate majority leader, is
holding everybody there to get the votes done. What's the
timeframe so far as you can tell, I know there's
going to be a lot going on. When are you
expecting it to pass? What are you expecting it to
(24:22):
look like? For people wondering out there, I.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
First of all, it is going to be the largest
tax cut in American history. That is what this bill
will give you. It will make those twenty seventeen tax
cuts permanent, the largest tax cut in history. Also, no
tax on tips over time, and my provision which will
hold our senior citizens harmless when it comes to paying
(24:51):
that tax on Social Security, which I have tried to
get rid of for years. So no tax tips overtime
social Security. In addition to that, if you are a freeloader,
a fraudster, an illegal alien, you do not deserve Medicare
(25:13):
or Medicaid benefits, and we are going to make certain
that you are removed from those roles so we can
strengthen those programs and have them there for the people
that deserve them. So the prospects look very good. Everybody
is united in getting President Trump's agenda across the finish line,
(25:36):
working out some of the final details, getting some of
the final scoring is where we are right now.
Speaker 7 (25:44):
And so you expect for President Trump, he's been wanting
to get it signed by July fourth or thereabouts. You
expect some time around July fourth.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
Yes, I think you'll see him signing it by July fourth.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Oh wow, excellent, that's really good news.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
We certainly hope that that gets done.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
People would like to get the largest tax cut in history.
Sigin filed delivered by President Donald Trump in time for
their Independence Day celebration.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Senator Blackburn, So, are there any last minute issues that
are still being hammered out or does it seem like
a pretty clear path to get that big, beautiful bill
done before the fourth of July holiday.
Speaker 4 (26:26):
Oh, there are always some little loose ends that are
going to be hammered out, and we're still waiting on
some scoring from CBO. And as I say, why don't
we wait on these people? They're always wrong, Their numbers
are never right. So we'll finish with those details during
(26:48):
the rest of the day and then hopefully we can
move to Klocher, Tomorraw on this thing.
Speaker 6 (26:54):
Outstanding stuff, Senator Blackburn.
Speaker 7 (26:56):
We appreciate the time, and we look forward to that
bill getting passed, the President Trump's agenda continuing to be executed.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
You got it, take care of final for sure.
Speaker 7 (27:06):
Look, we were just talking about some of the challenges
that come with being a parent. In fact, Buck's new dad.
I've got three kids. Last night they were fighting. I
couldn't get them to stop fighting, and eventually I had
to just grab one of them and be like, hey,
stop wrestling, keep your hands off each other. It's unbelievable.
And if you've got kids or grandkids, you know what
I'm talking about. And much of what you do in
(27:28):
life is about trying to give them the best possible
opportunity whatever you do. Have you thought about what will
happen after you are gone. Are your kids and your
grandkids going to be able to handle the wishes that
you would care about the most? Or are you concerned
that they'll end up fighting over what you have left
behind and what your wishes might be. Why not go
(27:50):
ahead and solve it. You know only thirty percent of
people have a trust in a will. You can get
this done. It doesn't have to be complicated. You spend
your whole life trying to make sure that your family
is taken care of. Don't you want to limit what
they're fighting about when you are gone. To the best
of your ability, solve.
Speaker 6 (28:07):
It once and for all. Today.
Speaker 7 (28:08):
It's not complicated. Just go to Trust and Will dot Com.
I have a trust, I have a will. I've done
it for my boys. No telling when that day is
going to come, but we are all going to one
day not be around.
Speaker 6 (28:20):
And we want to make sure.
Speaker 7 (28:22):
That what we cared about, that we have fought for
for our entire lives, that we preserve and take care
of all of that, and that our kids and our
grandkids are taken care of as we would like to
see fit. Trust and will dot Com that website one
more time. Trust and will dot Com I have both.
Only thirty percent of Americans. Do make the right decision
(28:42):
for your family, control what happens after you are gone,
and help to limit all the fracas that might otherwise
ensue at Trust and will dot Com Again, my thanks
Traverse City, Michigan. Seventy degrees up here today. I understand
(29:05):
the rest of the country is sweltering. News Talk five
eight WTCM. Appreciate them hosting us. You know where it
is definitely sweltering is down where Buck is and that's
where Florida ag James Upmeyer.
Speaker 6 (29:19):
Who we know, good dude, he has got an idea.
Speaker 7 (29:23):
We talked about Alcatraz and the fact that I'm one
of the greatest swimmers ever in that I could easily
swim across San Francisco Bay, and I'm glad that all
of you agreed with that. And there now is talk
that Florida is going to do their own version of Alcatraz,
except it's going to be called Alligator Alcatraz in the Everglades.
Listen to Cut twenty three.
Speaker 8 (29:42):
Florida has been leading on immigration enforcements, supporting the Trump
administration and ICE's efforts to detain and deport criminal aliens.
The governor task state leaders to identify places for new
temporary detention facilities. I think this is the best one,
as I call it, Alligator out Coatrez. This thirty square
(30:03):
mile area is completely surrounded by the Ever place presents
an efficient, low cost opportunity to build a temporary detention
facility because you don't need to invest that much in
the perimeter. People get out, there's not much waiting for
them other than alligators and pipelines. Nowhere to go, nowhere
to hide.
Speaker 6 (30:22):
This is actually a brilliant idea.
Speaker 7 (30:23):
I give credit to the State of Florida on this
because historically this is why places like Alcatraz existed. You
surrounded them with very difficult barriers for prisoners in the
event that they were to escape. I feel pretty good
about the difficulty of anybody getting out of Alligator Alcatraz
as a Floridian. Are you one hundred percent behind this idea?
Speaker 1 (30:47):
Certainly getting a lot of attention, and you need places
where you can hold people, quickly process them and then
get those deportation proceedings going. You know, you look at
the numbers, and I know the Trump administration is moving
rapidly on this stuff, but when you see the flood
that happened under Biden in four years, it's going to
(31:07):
take some real doing here to begin to really chip
away at the illegal invasion that happened in the country.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
But yeah, the thing about.
Speaker 1 (31:15):
You know alligators there, You know, during the daytime, they'll
leave you alone for the most part, not too bad.
It's really at night that you wouldn't want to be
trying to go up the like chest deep water in
the Everglades and hope that you don't make some new
friends you weren't intending on that.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
That would be tough.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
There's also crocodiles and as he mentions, pythons, anacondas. There's
like basically anything can live in the Everglades and they
do these python searches. I mean they're twenty foot pythons.
Speaker 6 (31:46):
Now they do python hunts.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
Yeah, well those are an invasive species brought here as pets.
The pythons are pets that were brought here and released.
Iguanas were pets that were brought here and release. The
iguanas are everywhere. You'll see it all over the place here.
A lot of the smaller lizards as well. They're not
indigenous to South Florida. They were brought here as pets.
So that's why when you go to places and they say,
(32:08):
did you bring any like animals or livestock products or whatever,
because if you introduce some of these things into the ecosystem,
I think lionfish as well, which you can go and
you can kill as many lionfish as you want down
here in Florida and you can, I think you can
eat them. They have a spines on them. They're very poisonous.
Parrots are there. I live next to flocks of wild
(32:29):
parrots now, they're all over the place here. Those were
brought here as pets. So a lot of stuff that
you think of, and you know what is not native
to Florida or you will not find in Florida flamingos.
Have I talked to you about this before people think
of there are thousands of businesses and places.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
There's a flamingo park here in Miami Beach.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
Flamingo is everywhere as a concept in Florida. Flamingo lawn ornaments,
we've all seen them.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
Clay. The flamingos that.
Speaker 1 (32:56):
Most people think of when they think of Miami were
actually a flock of flamingos brought from Africa at the
racetrack in the intro of Miami Vice. And everyone thought
from that show, because there's flamingos at the racetrack, there
must be flamingos in Florida. There are very rare, like
(33:17):
a handful of occasions where they think that maybe during
severe weather flamingos have basically been like blown here.
Speaker 2 (33:24):
But there are not indigenous.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Flamingos and any numbers in Florida, which I think even
shocks some Floridians when they find out.
Speaker 7 (33:33):
The most successful, most liked invasive species in American history
bees they did.
Speaker 6 (33:41):
It's crazy. People don't realize it.
Speaker 7 (33:43):
There were no bees, no honey bees in the United
States or in the Americas until they were brought over
from Europe. By the way, another crazy one, tomatoes not
native to Italy. We all think about tomatoes like because
so much of their cuisine involves tomatoes.
Speaker 6 (34:01):
Not native.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
So they say now that they think there are up
to one hundred flamingos in the state of Florida that
may have been blown here during Hurricane Idalia, but there
was There's been a long period where there were no
wild flamingos here. So now there's like a very small
colony of them. But you know, I always i'm down here.
(34:24):
You see pelicans all over the place. Yeah, they're not
as famous, but flamingos are the things you think of
as Florida.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
They're not really here.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
But yeah, so that's it's like the state bird for
a state that barely has any of these birds.
Speaker 7 (34:37):
By the way, breaking news that does not have anything
to do with international politics, but does have something to
do with New York City. In the wake of the
Democrat primary, both sides have rested their case in the
puff Daddy p Ditty whatever you want to call him,
Sean Combe's sex trafficking for lack of a better way
(34:59):
of describing it case, and that has now gone to
the jury. So this is a big story New York City.
You and I have both I think we're in agreement
on this. They've dropped some of the charges now because
they thought they were complicated before they even got to
the jury.
Speaker 6 (35:15):
I don't know that we're going to get a not
guilty verdict.
Speaker 7 (35:18):
I think based on following this entire case, I don't
think they've proven that this is a that this is
a crime. I don't think they're going to get a
unanimous jury verdict now is wrong on the.
Speaker 6 (35:28):
New York City mayoral race. Maybe I'll be wrong on this.
Speaker 7 (35:31):
There's eight men on the jury and basically this case
has been boiled down. We'll probably talk about it some
tomorrow now that the jury's got it to was this
coercive or consensual activity that these women were engaging in?
Speaker 6 (35:46):
And I don't think you're going to be able to
get all of the jury.
Speaker 7 (35:49):
To agree that huff Daddy is guilty here, based on
the evidence and what I have seen of the testimony.
Are you in agreement with me that you expect to
I'm not saying not guilty. I'm saying I don't think
twelve people are the total number of jurors here.
Speaker 6 (36:03):
I think it's twelve will agree to these charges.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
Yeah, he's definitely guilty of being a scumbag, but that's
not what the statutes are that are at it right,
and I think that that is that this could be
a shock to a lot of people. Now Whenmber we
had on Dershowitz who agreed with us in the flaughter sense,
but said they may just convict him because he's such
a clearly bad guy.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
But on the peel it will be overturned.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
That's another possibility, but definitely not an open and shutcase,
and I would not put a lot of money on.
Speaker 6 (36:33):
A guilty verdictue. We'll give you the latest on that
tomorrow
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!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.