Daily Review with Clay and Buck - Dec 2 2025

The guys break down the escalating drug boat strikes in the Caribbean, a bold Trump administration initiative targeting narco-terrorist operations linked to Venezuela. The hosts analyze reports alleging a controversial “double-tap” strike on a vessel, sparking accusations of potential war crimes. They break down the legal and ethical implications under the Law of Armed Conflict, debate media narratives, and highlight Democrats’ efforts to use this story to politically damage Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. Clay offers a lawyer’s perspective on whether follow-up strikes were lawful, while Buck compares this situation to past drone strike controversies under previous administrations.

Adding to the tension, the show covers Trump’s ultimatum to Nicolás Maduro, giving the Venezuelan leader until Friday to vacate power or face possible U.S. action. The hosts weigh the pros and cons of regime change, its historical pitfalls, and its strategic significance given Venezuela’s vast oil reserves. They invite Venezuelan-American listeners to share their views on intervention and democracy restoration.

Clay and Buck continue the deep dive into the Venezuelan drug boat strike controversy and the political firestorm surrounding Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The discussion kicks off with legal analysis on the phrase “finish them off”, clarifying whether it referred to destroying the boat or targeting survivors. Former Assistant Secretary of State and Navy intelligence officer Bobby Charles joins the conversation, offering expert insight into rules of engagement, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and historical precedents for counternarcotics operations. He asserts that the strikes were lawful under U.S. policy and international law, emphasizing that narco-terrorist boats are legitimate targets as designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

They explore why the Trump administration’s communication strategy has faltered, allowing Democrats and media outlets like The Washington Post to frame the narrative as a potential war crime. Clay and Buck argue that clear messaging—supported by existing legal opinions—could neutralize the controversy and prevent political damage. They stress that the real story is deterrence: Trump’s aggressive maritime strategy aims to cripple cartel operations and reduce fentanyl trafficking, which kills over 100,000 Americans annually.

Listeners weigh in with passionate calls, debating war crimes, rules of war, and presidential authority. Some callers defend Trump’s hardline approach, while others question the legality of targeting non-uniformed combatants. A retired Air Force colonel shares firsthand experience from the decades-long war on drugs, comparing current maritime strikes to past air interdiction missions. Another caller highlights the political motive behind the attacks on Hegseth, framing it as a deliberate effort by the left to delegitimize key Trump cabinet members.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth addressed the September 2 strike on a narco-terrorist vessel, defending the decision to “eliminate the threat” and dismantle cartel operations responsible for flooding the U.S. with fentanyl. Hegseth blasted the Washington Post for publishing what he called “fake stories” about alleged kill orders, stressing the reality of the fog of war and reaffirming that commanders acted lawfully under the Law of Armed Conflict. Clay and Buck analyze the legal and strategic implications, warning that Democrats and the media are using this narrative to delegitimize Hegseth and weaken Trump’s foreign policy as part of a broader impeachment strategy.

The discussion expands to Venezuela, raising questions about whether Maduro’s removal signals a deeper U.S. commitment to regime change and intervention. Clay and Buck emphasize Trump’s aggressive stance against narco-terrorists as a national security imperative, contrasting deterrence with appeasement. They argue that clear, consistent messaging from the administration could neutralize the controversy and prevent political fallout. Listener calls add fiery energy to the hour, with viral moments like Linda’s blunt declaration—“When in doubt, take ’em out”—sparking debate over rules of engagement and ethics in warfare. Other callers draw parallels to historic military actions, from the Bin Laden raid to naval confrontations with Iran, fueling a lively discussion on legality, morality, and public perception.

Senator Marsha Blackburn joins the show to rally support for Republican candidate Matt Van Epps and warns against Democratic efforts to flip the seat. Blackburn addresses critical issues beyond the election, including Big Tech’s exploitation of children and her push for the Kids Online Safety Act, the fallout from Biden’s

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome everybody to the Tuesday, December second edition of the
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. We are racked and stacked.
First order of business, got to get to it right away,
just to get it on your radar, because we do have,
thanks to one of us being a born and raised
Tennessee and in fact a Nashvillian, more specifically, very important

(00:23):
seventh Congressional District in Tennessee, Afton Baine, trying to get
sneaky and take this seat away from the Republican mister
Van Epps, and I think that we need to make
sure that doesn't happen. My friends, you need to get
out and devote. Today is election day. It is happening

(00:43):
special election, special election. Do not be caught napping on
this one. This is important because if nothing else, they
will make fun of and antagonize our good friend Clay
every day if he has basically the most left wing
member of Congress in the United States Congress as his

(01:04):
home Congress. It's not just Clay. You got a hold
basically the whole Daily Wire. Shapiro doesn't live there, but
the rest of Daily Wires there. Matt Walsh, I think
is in the area right does Matt Walsh live roughly.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
In Matt Walsh is there, Michael Knowles, our friend Riley Gaines,
Tommy Kandarn Canvas Owens.

Speaker 1 (01:24):
So it's a lot, It's a lot. This is like,
this is a hometown fight here for the seventh Congressional
and all of you who are listening need to get
out and need to vote. Let's not give the Democrats
something early to celebrate going into.

Speaker 2 (01:36):
This this morning. So I'm telling you to do exactly
what I did. I dropped my son off at school
and then I walked right into the precinct there and
I voted. So I'm asking everybody in from the border
of Kentucky to the border of Alabama the seventh congressional district.
I even had a friend text me and say, hey,

(01:58):
I thought that that was my district right to go
to my polling place. There was no race, there was
no election going Okay, you did your part because this
is a new this is a new district in many ways,
and a lot of people are not aware of this
race going on. So I went on with Sean Hannity
last night. We've been talking about it like crazy on
this program. I feel like I have done everything I

(02:21):
can to help make people aware. This race is happening,
and today is the last day to go vote.

Speaker 1 (02:27):
So you got to get out there and vote. We've
talked about the race, you've heard it, you know what's
going on, you know the issues here. Just gonna be
giving you reminders today during the show, because of course
we are live here for three hours with you. It's
a great time to be listening to Clay and Buck
on your way to go vote in that district. So
get out there and get it done, all right. Other things,
the drug vote controversy, and Venezuela, the Caribbean unusual for

(02:52):
it to be quite the scene of action that it
is now, but the Caribbean and Venezuela and the drug
trade are all very much in the headlines. Pete Hegset
the Secretary of War getting a lot of heat, a
lot of criticism, no surprise for these strikes, and there's
been some reporting that has now contested about a double tap,

(03:16):
if you will, on one of these boats. I think
was the first boat strike. Actually, we're gonna discuss some
of that and also the implications for Venezuela, where it
is now being said the President has given Maduro was
it to Friday Sorry Tuesday Friday deadline. Trump went on
a truth posting bonanza last night, posting truths to truth

(03:40):
social We will get into some of those. The cabinet
is meeting currently, will bring you the highlights of that.
The Trump Cabinet Caroline Levitt also had a fire repress
conference yesterday. We'll bring you some of the best moments
from that. Zora Mamdani is being a crazy commie. Tom
Homan is saying the Biden administration it wasn't bad enough

(04:01):
for them to let ten million illegals flood the country. Clay.
They also said, you know what, let's just take in
all these Afghans and not vet them at all. Basically,
you raise your hand and say, hey, I did great
things for America. You owe me. Okay, we'll take you. Hmm.
Not a good idea. Not a good idea. But let's
talk first about the drug boat situation here, Clay. Now

(04:24):
they're making a thing of this, and we've discussed this.
They really have wanted to take Secretary Hegseeth off of
the chess board from the very beginning. I think the
media has gone after Trump. Would would you co sign
this one? In term two, Pete has been targeted number
two after Trump. Trump's always target number one. I think

(04:45):
that's accurate.

Speaker 2 (04:46):
I think Cash Patel has moved now number through the
number three spot on the attack list, and I think
we've kind of stayed in that range. I think there
would be probably a big off. I mean, Ewon obviously
was not in the cabinet, but he was probably the
most attacked in the first six months or so of Trump.

(05:08):
But in the cabinet, I think heg Seth's one. I
think that then Cash Bettel is two, and I would
you agree with me, there's a huge drop off after
those two. I don't even know who the third biggest
target would be. It's been like just kind of alternating
between heg Seth and with Cash.

Speaker 1 (05:27):
They have been trying to go after David Sachs as
well lately. The Crypto and Ais are who we would
like to get on this program soon to talk about
what he's doing. But he's a very savvy cat and
has been not only able to defend himself very effectively
without having to do very much because a lot of

(05:47):
the stuff that they're saying is just not true. Other
people have been coming to his defense as well, saying
he's in this position of he has so much money,
money has very little meeting for him. He actually thinks
that he's helping the country and that's why he's in
this special advisory role, special employee to the administration. But
we can get more into that too. But they wanted
they want hag Seth out. They want to be able

(06:09):
to show the Democrat base, Hey, we can still call
the shots in the media. We can still get a scalp,
so to speak. And so this is where we're talking about,
not just the boat strikes, which I'm going to tell
you right now, Clay. They're going to impeach Trump over
this if they win the House. All right, I do
you have any doubt whatsoever about that.

Speaker 3 (06:30):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (06:30):
They're going to be over this specifically, they're going to
impeach him, probably over whatever. I mean, they're going to
find something to impeach him over. We agree one hundred
percent that they will impeach him for a third time
for still impeach if they win the House.

Speaker 1 (06:43):
I think this is I think this is top of
the list, and that's why they're so dug in on this.
I believe it. They're going to try to make the
case that that these are war crimes. That's exactly, and
they're already saying it, so it's that's not a stretch
at all. But they also want to use it to
it as a cudgel to force Secretary of warhag Seth

(07:04):
out of office. Here is I mean, for example, for example,
here is former Deputy Assistant ag This is cut eight. John,
wait before we play the cut. So the claim Clay,
so we're clear on this is that Pete, let's call
on Pete. Sometimes we know oversaw and was watching in

(07:26):
real time a strike on the first of these boats,
and that they hit the boat, you know, jaysack blew
this boat up, and then there was wreckage. There was
you know, pieces of it, and there were a couple
of guys who were clinging to the wreckage. And then
the order that the affmative order was given to send
a second missile strike to kill the guys who were
clinging to the records. That's the claim. This is disputed.

(07:50):
Here is though, what it's being said by people in
the media now about this play eight.

Speaker 4 (07:54):
If you look at the US Law of Warm Manual,
which is the definitive interpretation of the way we fight.
The laws of armed conflict for the United States, it
says clearly that you were not allowed to give orders
that say no survivors. Commanders are not allowed to give
ors say no quarter, and so Haggseth can't give that
command legally. Also, again, there are gray errors, but one

(08:16):
gray one area that's not gray that's clear is you
can't fire on the wounded. You can't kill survivors who
can no longer fight. So the admiral should not have
obeyed the order that Secretary Hegseth gave, and even the
soldiers who carried out the admiral's orders should not have obeyed.

Speaker 1 (08:37):
Clay.

Speaker 2 (08:38):
Lawyer Clay work us through this a bit, okay, So
Warrior Clay, let me first say, I obviously don't have
firsthand knowledge, but if I were making a case here,
there are several angles that I think would be in play.
Let me start with defending the decision. If this were
what happened from them, I think they can say this

(08:59):
wasn't a set can strike to kill survivors. The boat
was still operable, and we were concerned that we hadn't
fulfilled the original mission. Right, you can hit a boat
or a vehicle multiple times if you do not believe
you have actually rendered it to be anoperable. In other words,
I think there's probably a defense that, hey, the first

(09:20):
strike did not do the complete damage that was necessary.
We did a second strike on top of it. I
also think that there is potentially an issue here where
if there are prisoners taken, then there is going to
be a legal challenge to whether the president has the

(09:42):
authority to undertake these actions, and do we then have
an obligation to go rescue the survivors all these other
different things. I think that could be in play. But again,
what are the facts, what were the exact orders, What
was the intent of the order? Remember, there are all

(10:03):
sorts of issues out there where we have an attack
that is ordered and it's the wrong attack, right. We
talked about this on the program before. In Afghanistan, we
killed an innocent family. We thought the guy was a
terrorist that obviously got a decent amount of attention. So
there are errors of interpretation that occur on these strikes too.

(10:24):
I think it's very hard to know direct intent right well,
we have to know the facts here. The facts are
not agreed upon, and I would say one thing that
has been established for a long time by the Obama
administration among others, but the Obama administration really accelerated it
was the signature drone strikes where they would hit a
target based upon a series of factors that were not

(10:45):
one hundred percent and clearly not because they did blow
up women and children sometimes. And this was going on
in Pakistan, a country with which we were not actually
at war, and a country that we were pretending publicly,
at least for a long time in the Obama years,
Oh no, we're not doing drone strikes there. That's classified.

Speaker 1 (11:05):
The New York Times was writing front page stories about it,
but the Obama administration, clay to avoid dealing with it
in public, would just say that there's you know, it's classified.
We're we're not talking about that. That was accepted by
all of the people who currently are sitting around angry
at the Trump administration or supposedly anger at Trump administration
for what's going on here. So we do know that

(11:25):
there are civilian casualties from strikes that are based on
presidential authority. That does happen, But as you pointed out,
it as accidental here, it would be to the point
made by John You. Now, John You, why do they
have John You making the rounds? Everybody? A little bit
of history if we all recall twenty years back or so,
he was the so called torture memo guy under the
Bush administration, so he was tied to enhanced interrogation techniques.

(11:49):
So what you have now is the media having former
Deputy Attorney General John You under Bush, a Republican saying
if you give an order for no survivors, that that's
a war crime. And this is from the guy who
was like, we got to waterboard people. Sometimes you gotta
do what you gotta do.

Speaker 2 (12:07):
And again all of this comes in rising tension with Venezuela.
Again we should mention also there's a cabinet meeting going
on right now. Trump is taking questions. We're monitoring it
in real time. As you said off the top, the
biggest part of this story is there is a report
that Trump has given Maduro and his family until Friday

(12:30):
to vacate the country or potentially we are going to
take him out and install a more democratic government in Venezuela,
which tons of people have a lot of opinions on.
I said yesterday on the program, I stand by it.
I think that this can be akin to the strikes

(12:51):
that happened in Iran in that they are very strategic
and ultimately beneficial for the overall country. And we have
tons of you out there that are Venezuelan. I mean
Buck lives in Miami, which is filled with tons of
Venezuelan refugees. As we said yesterday on the program, Venezuela
has the largest deposit of oil, certainly in the Western Hemisphere,

(13:15):
and used to be a thriving country that was very,
very successful before the Maduro and that regime came into power.

Speaker 1 (13:23):
Third richest country in the world after the United States
and Canada per capita at one point in recent memory.
So yeah, Venezuela should be doing great. It's not. Turns
out that communism ruins everything. Guys who could have known, well,
anybody who pays attention to history. We'll talk more about
this though, because I know, on the one hand we

(13:43):
hate commis. On the other hand, we also hate regime
change and rebuilding operations for other countries, and there are
people that are concerned that that may be something that
we face here sooner than later when it comes to Venezuela.
We'll discuss want to hear from you as well. Also,
if we have any Ventnezuelan refugees or Venezuelan Americans play

(14:04):
listening right now, if you want to weigh in on
this one, I'd be very curious to hear your thoughts
on should we topple Maduro? Should we just keep the
pressure on? How involved should we be? What do you
think is going to happen here? No doubtkay, yes, no doubt. Indeed,
if you believe in the life of a child as
a rather, if you believe the life of an unborn

(14:24):
child is precious, and all of you in the pro
life community certainly do you know that we have to
do everything we can to save the lives of tiny
babies in the womb. Right now, one in four pregnancies
ends in abortion. That's just a horrific fact, but it's true.
Thousands of lives lives lost every single day. We can
change hearts and minds, we can change laws. That takes time.

(14:45):
In the meantime, lives are being lost. How do we
save lives right now this Christmas season? How do you
go to bed at night knowing that you helped to
save the life of a tiny baby and changed the
mother to Bee's life with it as well. Preborn Preborn
Clinics have save over three hundred and fifty thousand babies
with their life giving work. What they do is they
welcome in mothers to their clinics. They give them a

(15:07):
free ultrasound because when mom meets that baby, the moment
of mom and child, meaning the ultrasound, the heart beating,
that changes everything. That ultrasound costs just twenty eight dollars
and that's where you come in. So as the year
comes to a close, please please consider a holiday season
tax deductible donation which could save the life of a

(15:27):
tiny baby. That donation could be the difference between life
and death for a baby this week, next week. Who
knows it can make the difference. To donate, dial pound
two five zero, say the keyword baby. That's pound two
five zero, say baby, or donate securely at preborn dot com,
slash buck, preborn dot com, slash b u c K
sponsored by Preborn.

Speaker 5 (15:48):
Saving America, One thought at a time, Clay Travis and
fuck Sex to them. Find them on the free iHeartRadio
app or wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 2 (15:59):
Welcome Back in Play Travis Buck Sexton Show We're going
to take a bunch of calls.

Speaker 1 (16:02):
On this because a lot of you have a variety
of takes.

Speaker 2 (16:05):
Bobby in Maine up first says he was in military intelligence.
What's your take on the Venezuelan boat strikes story.

Speaker 6 (16:15):
So play and buck. Here's the bottom line. This is
Bobby Charles. I was in charge of all counter narcotics
and O three zero four h five as the Assistant
Secretary of State, also ten years naval intelligence and an attorney.
The bottom line is what they are doing is well
within the law. Number one, and I think Clay you
probably or both of you know this. There is a
legal opinion somewhere justifying exactly what they're doing. Number two,

(16:36):
there would be no finish off order. Hegseth was in
the military. He knows very well you can't do that.
But here are the two facts people don't know. The
United States government has long supported shootdown policies by foreign countries,
including Peru, in which we shot down any plane that
we had cute intelligence for, or we allowed them to
shoot down the plane if it was known to be
carrying narcotics and avoiding interception. Second thing is in our

(17:00):
latoral waters legally all of our We have Coastguard Blackhawks
up there, Jayhawks that are fully armed, and they have
a sniper with a sling in the open door in
order to shoot out the engines of these boats. So
point number one, the law, they are well within the law.
When they take an enemy combat and designated as a
foreign terrorist organization, that does not stop. They have cute intelligence,

(17:24):
they know they can hit it. They hit it. They
would be outside the law if they did a finish
off order for survivors. I guarantee you they did not
do that.

Speaker 1 (17:32):
So can I just say, I think that you're saying, sir,
you have deep expertise in this. That's what we're I
think we're all in agreement here. That's that we're We
think it's lawful to do the strikes, but it wouldn't
be lawful to do a finish off order if the
guys were floating in the water.

Speaker 6 (17:45):
So heagsas was a military officer. He knows very well
what the orders are. He knows the UCMJ probably inside.

Speaker 1 (17:52):
Out right, and I don't think he gave that order.
So again, I think we're all keep him, keep them.
Let's keep talking to this stuy.

Speaker 2 (18:02):
While we're spending time with family this holiday season, and
Buck is stuck in a sound booth.

Speaker 1 (18:06):
Recording his new book. You can listen to us on
the podcast play Don't Rub It In But That's right.
Just fire up the iHeartRadio app and kick back with
the Sunday Hang guaranteed laughs, or check out any of
our other great hosts in the Clay in Buck podcast Network.

Speaker 2 (18:21):
There's so much content you won't even miss us, but
we'll miss.

Speaker 1 (18:25):
You and look forward to speaking with you again in
the new year. Until then, Shield Time.

Speaker 2 (18:29):
As we finished off the last hour, we were talking
about the boat strikes off Venezuela. A bunch of you
want to weigh in on those, and I was saying, again,
this is me behaving as a lawyer. Finish them off
can mean multiple things. It can mean to me finishing

(18:50):
off the boat so that it's no longer able to
do what it was intended to do, so that the
drugs are not there, still floating that could be picked
up by another vote. And so what is and is
not intended by the orders is likely to be an
issue right now. I don't think the communication has been

(19:12):
clear Buck as to exactly what the story is, just
that the White House has said, hey, we support the admiral. Here,
the President supports the admiral. The Secretary of War supports
the admiral and his ability to make decisions on the ground. There,
we had a call from a individual who was still

(19:33):
with us, and that is I want to make sure
that I get his name right. I got so many
different text messages in here. That is, let's see Bobby
Charles from Maine. He's running for governor. By the way,
the primaries in June. Not a bad way to get
people to know about the primary. Here, Bobby, you've got
a pretty big radio show, so you're a smooth operator.

Speaker 1 (19:56):
We like it.

Speaker 6 (19:58):
I feel like you guys invited this, and so I'm
just going to pick it up.

Speaker 2 (20:01):
Oh we did, We did, all right. So Bobby, when
I say what finished them off means this is me
being a lawyer. Finish them off can mean a lot
of different things. It can mean finish the boat off.
It can mean finish the survivors off. That seems like
a pretty clear defense. If I were advising Secretary of
War headset, if I were advising President Trump, if I
were advising the admiral in this case as an attorney

(20:24):
representing them, I would say, go ahead and get your
story out there. What has finished them off?

Speaker 1 (20:29):
Mean?

Speaker 2 (20:29):
We wanted to end the threat that this boat brought
to bear. We had not done that yet. It was
still floating out there. There was the possibility that drugs
could be picked up, and so we ordered a second
strike to.

Speaker 1 (20:42):
Take out that boat.

Speaker 2 (20:44):
Is that a valid argument from your perspective based on
your knowledge of the rules of engagement?

Speaker 6 (20:51):
Yes, so let me give you my perspective. I was
a US Court of Appeals clerk after Columbia Law School,
long before being Assistant Secretary managing count in our programs
around the world, among which were shoot down programs in
Peru and Columbia in which we gave orders that we
didn't give them. I worked with the heads of southcom
who gave them. But those field commanders gave orders to

(21:13):
finish off planes that were in the sky carrying drugs.
We had cute intelligence. They refused to comply. They continued
moving forward. The same way. If you were in World
War Two on a battlefield and a tank is coming
at you and you've disabled the gun, but the tank
keeps rolling, you have every right to stop it. So
I am believing, and I think they should ask for this,
and I think everything else is a false bogie. There

(21:34):
is a legal opinion I guarantee you, as a former
Navy intelligence guy for ten years and an assistant secretary
doing counter narcotics, there is a legal opinion in the
file that says something like this, that organization is identified
as an FTO. It is a foreign terrorist organization trafficking drugs.
Because it is an FTO, it is by definition engaging

(21:54):
in premeditated, politically motivated acts of violence against non combatant targets.
Because it is doing that, you have every right to
hit and destroy the drugs and to hit and destroy
the boat. And there is no under the rules of
law and the UCMJ, there is no requirement that you
warn the combatant that you're going to do that if
you hit half the boat. And we currently have policies

(22:14):
that the US Coast Guard uses in a latorial waters
with snipers. They don't call them snipers, but they're snipers.
They have big they have big firearms in a slang
dedicated to taking out the engines of a boat, of
a go fast drug boat. They've been there for twenty
five years. If we feel that we have not hit
and disabled and finished the task of a combatant coming

(22:35):
at us. We have every right to do that. You
do not have a right to then shoot folks in
the water. But I will guarantee you that there is
no legal opinion in the file in the Defense Department.
If they subpoena and I did oversight for five years
with Ginggrig, there is not going to be a legal
opinion it says you can finish off people in the water.
It will say just what I said here, and that
is what they're doing. And so it is completely lawful,
and it's protecting the national security the United States and

(22:58):
every single American, including in dates like Maine where we
had ten thousand overdoses last year.

Speaker 1 (23:03):
Okay, that's a perfect argument. Why isn't the Trump administration
making that argument right now?

Speaker 6 (23:09):
I'm guessing that as much as I'm a lawyer, I
hate lawyers. You know, if you're Irish, you get to
say words about the Irish, and I am that too.
If you're if you're a lawyer, you get to hate lawyers.
There's lawyers in the Pentagon going, hey, we can't release that.
That's a legal document. Hey we got to back off.
We can't we can't get the legal argument involved in politics. Yeah,
what what I think hegg says should do is just say, look,
I have every legal right to be doing what I'm doing.

Speaker 2 (23:30):
That's what That's what I'm Heagset is not we know him,
he's not an attorney. But what I'm saying is I
would if I were Secretary of War hegg Set or
I was advising him, I would be telling him to
say exactly what you just told us right now at
the press conference, because I think it would end this
story instantaneously. Also, it's unfortunately that hasn't happened play and

(23:54):
so now they have the back and forth of different
versions of what happened and what was this and what
was that?

Speaker 1 (23:58):
Why sure, that's my way, They're all Bobby, why wouldn't
he make that case? Well, because they screwed up, because
they've screwed up the comps, just like they screwed up
the I mean, I'm gonna jump in and just say
because they messed up, because this is where we are
right now, just like they did.

Speaker 6 (24:11):
You know, the truth is, your point is well taken.
You take the world as it is. What has transpired
up to this moment in time has the future is
for us to define. They should do the press conference.
Take it verbatim what I said, that's the truth. I
don't know the exact wording of the legal memo, but
I guarantee before they took one shot, there is a
legal memo there. They should release it. They should say,

(24:33):
we have every right to have done what we did.
Let's clarify the record and the facts of the facts.
You know.

Speaker 2 (24:39):
Yeah, Look, I think we're all we're all aligned on this.
I just want to be clear, Bobby, because there are
people out there who are saying, oh no, when I
say people, I mean online You'll see people who don't
know anything who are saying the clinging to the wreckuge
we could mow them down. To you, No, that's not true.
But what you've laid out is the legal justification for
what we believe happened here, which we're all aligned with.

(25:00):
But I just want to be very clear because I
have seen the argument made by people with followings and
buy people who are part of this conversation. If we
have to finish off people in the water, so be it.

Speaker 1 (25:09):
No, that's actually not that's actually not how this goes
And that's not what was what was going on here.

Speaker 6 (25:15):
You're absolutely right. And in World War Two there were
bad mistakes made on both sides. This is one where
we don't have to make a mistake. That would be
a mistake. We're not gonna do it. I'm gonna tell
you though, as a guy running for governor in Maine,
and I'm up by double digits on everybody. But the
reality is, right now, people throw crap at you that
is untrue every day and you just have to keep responding.
And that's what hegseth I suspect will do. And that's

(25:37):
what Trump does every day. And that's what you got
to do. You beat you know, it's like the old
Supreme Court case said, right, you beat bad speech with
good speech.

Speaker 1 (25:43):
You just keep going, Bobby, We're leveraging your expertise here
a lot. But I actually want to transition you because
you said you transition the topic.

Speaker 7 (25:50):
I should.

Speaker 1 (25:50):
I should. Yeah, I'm going to transition the topic. Dude. Hey,
got to be clear these days to you said you
oversaw or involved in overseeing NARK programs in the Caribbean. One,
how effective you think taking out these boats is actually?
And two talk to us about Venezuela. You would have
a very important perspective on what's going on there with Maduro,

(26:12):
the narco trafficking, the possibility of the overthrow. Talk us
through some of that.

Speaker 6 (26:18):
Yeah, So I have had multiple hats in life, blessed
a thousand ways from Sunday. But the reality is, yes,
I did oversight for five years for Gingrich. I was
his top oversight investigator looking at counter narcotics, but also
the Pentagon Justice I did to Waco hearings all that.
So at the end of the day, our counternarcotics policy
in the Caribbean was effective when we could create twenty

(26:40):
five percent deterrence. So when we could cover twenty five
percent of the Caribbean at a time, incidentally, when there
was no land bridge, as in there was no coming
up through the Mexico Pan American Highway, what we did
is we shut down the Caribbean by shutting down twenty
five percent, creating enough uncertainty that the traffickers thought they
would get more losses than it was worth. They shifted

(27:02):
to the land bridge. What they will do right now,
it is relatively effective because it's creating that one thing
we know again, let's go back to World War Two.
Everything is about deterrence versus appeasement. You do nothing, you
appease it. Same thing with people coming into this country.
You do nothing, you appease the behavior, appease bad behavior,
you deter it. All of a sudden, they're gonna stop coming.
All of a sudden, they're gonna stop shipping drugs through

(27:22):
the EPACH Eastern Pacific, which is where some of this
is happening, or through the Caribbean, and so deterrence works.
It absolutely works. But you always have to remember it's
like trying to block a water that is being pulled
by gravity down. It's going to look for another way around.
The bad guys always look for another way around. So
you've got to constantly be one step ahead. You know,
we don't ever win anything finally and decisively. You know.

(27:47):
You what you do is you you manage the process
so that you're always one step ahead. That's why we've
not had another nine to eleven. We've always stayed one
step ahead. Same thing is true with the drug traffickers.
What I love that he's doing, what Trump is doing,
is he's calling a spade a spade. He's saying we
lose more people every year to this foreign drug infusion,

(28:07):
this chemical weapon brought into this country than we lost
in all of Vietnam. We lose one hundred thousand more
or less every year to this. They are a threat
to the United States. We are going to treat them
as ftos. We are going to combat them. And so ultimately,
what you do is you start to destroy the industrial
strength of the cartel. There are Colombian cartels, there are

(28:29):
Mexican cartels, and you want You're never going to get
rid of all crime, but what you want to do
is drive it down to a level that's so low
that most people don't have to engage it. And here
in the state of Maine, I will tell you I
am going to thoroughly support law enforcement. I am going
to thoroughly stop these foreign drug traffickers from getting in
here and then, having created deterrence, I'm going to do
put the rest of the population that's addicted on a

(28:51):
get well, staywell plan, get real treatment programs in here,
and solve it. That is what Trump is doing in
all the places that he's been allowed to do it.
And by the way, I will mobilize the National Guard too.
If to support law enforcements.

Speaker 1 (29:02):
Bobby, thanks for all of this. I mean, this is
well said. You got my vote. You got to be
the next governor, remain buddy, so you got to come
back and talk to us more about this. We're very
impressed here.

Speaker 6 (29:12):
Thank you. Guys. Call me anytime, and I love talking
to Greg. So we're good to go, all.

Speaker 1 (29:16):
Right, producer, Greg is the man, so you have good
taste in radio and radio producers. Well done, sir, and
we'll talk to you again, Sue. But Clay, I just
want to say our legal analysis was all spot on,
so there's that you know before.

Speaker 2 (29:29):
And also again, I think we hit on this correctly.
It's a communication issue and I just I understand, and
he pointed out lawyers can sometimes say, well, we can't
talk about this publicly. Yet, Sir, I would talk about
it publicly if I repeat Hegseth, I would put this
story to Bed. I would say that this was the goal.
We had the authority to do it, and it vanishes

(29:50):
if you tell the story the way that he just did.

Speaker 1 (29:53):
It's a version of it's not the crime, it's the
cover up. There was no crime here. There are are
acting in the lawful authority. But if you have differing
narratives about what happened, even if it's in good faith.
But there's daylight between what the you know, Trump White
House says and what Secretary Hegseth says or whatever, then
that becomes the story and they just say, see they're hiding,

(30:15):
they're changing the So you just it's a comms issue
to be very clear on this, so that everybody understands.
Because what the Democrats that their biggest story this week
is the you know, the war crimes thing. What they
don't want to be talking about is the Biden Afghan
withdrawal slash importing people with no vetting whatsoever, including the

(30:35):
terrorists who just killed two, killed one and grievously wounded
another National Guard member. That's what they don't want to
be talking about this week.

Speaker 2 (30:42):
Correct, And you can limit their ability to drive the
narrative by telling your story in the best, most effective
way possible. And I don't think that has occurred yet,
But I think if they said what Bobby said, what
I said, what you have said, I think it would
go a long way towards putting this story to rest.
I want to tell you fighting in Ukraine, we'll talk

(31:02):
about this a little bit there. Right now are meetings
going on in Russia to try to end the war
in Ukraine. Both sides, Russia and Ukraine are acknowledging loss
of lives more than a thousand soldiers each day. Far
from the front lines, life can feel very difficult different
sort of way for people like Maria, eighty five year
old woman of Jewish faith living in Ukraine. Her needs

(31:23):
are severe. She's one of the many Ukrainian citizens in
need of food, medicine, and assistance with heating bills. When
war first broke out in Ukraine, many nonprofit organizations made
the needs of Ukrainian citizens a priority. There was and
still is a great need for humanitarian effort.

Speaker 1 (31:40):
Today.

Speaker 2 (31:41):
Many of the nonprofit organizations to have moved on, but
not the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews the IFCJ.
They're still there, continuing to do what they can to
help the Jewish faith in Ukraine, particularly the elderly. Through
the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. With your donations,
you can bring hope to and need. Your gift of

(32:01):
twenty five dollars will help provide a food box packed
full of life saving essentials that will help feed families
and individuals feeling them especially ignored and left to find
for themselves. To rush your gift called eight eight eight
four eight eight IFCJ that's eight eight eight four eight
eight four three two five. You can also give online

(32:21):
at Fellowship gift dot org. That's Fellowship gift dot org.

Speaker 5 (32:27):
Want to begin to know when you're on the go.
The Team forty seven podcast Trump Highlights from the week
Sundays at noon Eastern in the Clay and Buck podcast feed.
Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get
your podcasts.

Speaker 2 (32:42):
Welcome back in Clay, Travis, Buck Sexton show, all of
you hanging out with us.

Speaker 1 (32:49):
This is still live right if I'm not mistaken.

Speaker 2 (32:53):
The White House Cabinet meeting has now been going on.

Speaker 1 (32:57):
Buck.

Speaker 2 (32:57):
For the entirety of our radio show, we are competing
with the Trump Show head to head.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
It's another radio show, Clinn, That's really what it is.

Speaker 2 (33:06):
Trump has been doing over two hours straight along with
his cabinet, taking questions, and it does feel to some
extent Buck like this is a response to The New
York Times saying that he doesn't have the vitality and
the vigor that he used.

Speaker 1 (33:23):
To maybe I'm wrong on this, But then a couple of.

Speaker 2 (33:27):
Days later, he's like, all right, let's just do a
three hour potentially press conference that Fox News has been
carrying straight through and even CNN now has elected to
go live to Trump. So we're continuing to monitor that.
I just sent a couple of clips to producer Greg

(33:48):
as Hegseth has weighed in more on the on the
boat strike off Venezuela, which evidently Buck happened September second,
So this was one of the earliest strikes that occurred
on the votes. I do think that matters here. I
don't know that we've given a date, but he did

(34:08):
in his answer, which we will have soon.

Speaker 1 (34:12):
Vote Go vote, Go vote.

Speaker 2 (34:14):
If you are in the seventh Congression congressional district in
the state of Tennessee, it is election day.

Speaker 1 (34:21):
I went this morning.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
I took my fifth grader to school, I dropped him off,
and then I went into the polling place right there
at his school. My wife is working all day at
as a volunteer at this local polling center. I think
I mentioned this before Buck, but you know Laura quite well.
She was really fired up at the overall security issues

(34:48):
associated with elections, and so she said, well, heck, I
want to see this for myself. So she decided that
she would volunteer and watch as the election is taking
place here locally. By the way, President Trump standing up
right now, we are no longer competing with the Trump Show.
He has just walked out after a marathon two plus

(35:10):
hour session with his cabinet, and it is just now
breaking up in real time. All right, this is funny,
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, Buck. There are many different,
super serious stories that are going on, but you know,
I trust college football fans.

Speaker 1 (35:32):
Implicitly.

Speaker 2 (35:33):
In addition to everything else that was discussed, Marco Rubio
came out and said, if the Miami Hurricanes your new
hometown team, Buck, if they're not in the playoff, he's
furious and he's gonna put President Trump in charge of
next year's playoff. This is funny. This did just happen,
among many other things in the cabinet meeting. Listen to this.

Speaker 1 (36:00):
To be fast, but it was allowed to cover.

Speaker 8 (36:01):
I do want to say, this is the most wonderful,
magical time of the year. By that, of course, I'm
referring to the college football playoffs. I just want to
say this as a point of personal privilege. If if
and I'm on Florida Gator but at the University of
Miami gets screwed out of the college with the football
playoffs after going ten and two and being a notre dame,
the whole thing should be scrapped and you're gonna.

Speaker 1 (36:21):
Have to take over it next year, Marco Vetter, watch out.
He could get another job. Maybe he becomes like SEC
commissioner or something. In addition to I think key Secretary
of State, National Security Advisor, USAID director. The Marco portfolio
is a remarkable thing to behold. Your wife is a

(36:43):
Florida Gator grad. Marco Rubio's son is a football player
for the Florida Gators.

Speaker 2 (36:51):
So I was actually texting with him over the weekend,
nothing at all to do with serious things, just about
the college football coaching searches going on on. Marco Rubio
is doing a fantastic job, but so many different topics.
I did think it was funny that he decided that
he wanted to weigh in on that because Marco Rubio

(37:11):
is a Miami guy, big college football fan, which is
one reason we get along so well. Do we have
from producer Greg Yet the clip that I sent in
of heg Seth giving more details, it's not in yet, Buck, Okay,
we will have This is the lead story now for
people out there who are saying, what are you doing here?
Why are you talking about this? The lead story everywhere,
we want to make sure that we're addressing it well. CNN, MSNBC,

(37:35):
and Fox News basically all covering this as the top
news story of the day.

Speaker 1 (37:43):
Yeah. Well, because the implications of this, first of all,
aren't just about the attempts to undermine an attack Hegseth
and with him this administration. There's also this issue of
what this does to Venezuela, and increasingly we have what
seems to be a de facto regime change policy in place. Now.

(38:06):
Regime change in nation building are not necessarily things that
go hand in hand, but they often do, and so
this is going to start to bring up some very
important and difficult conversations. I think if Maduro goes but
here we have Secretary hegst just moments ago getting into
the details of this strike that has been widely reported

(38:28):
on Let's listen to the Secretary of War.

Speaker 3 (38:30):
I didn't stick around for the hour and two hours
whatever where all the sensitive side exploitation digitally occurs.

Speaker 1 (38:37):
So I moved on to my next meeting.

Speaker 9 (38:38):
A couple of hours later, I learned that that commander
had made the which he had the complete authority to do.

Speaker 10 (38:44):
And by the way, Edward Ready made the correct decision
to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat. He
sunk the boat, sunk the boat and eliminated the threat,
and he was the right call.

Speaker 3 (38:57):
We have his back, and the American people are sick
because narco terrorists. No, you can't bring drugs through the
water and eventually on land if necessary, I have to
do to the American people. We will eliminate that threat,
and we're proud to do it.

Speaker 1 (39:11):
So you didn't see any survivors, to be clear, after.

Speaker 9 (39:14):
The first run, first I did not personally see survivors,
but I stand because the thing was on fire, that
was exploded. In fire and smoke, you can't see anything
you got digital.

Speaker 1 (39:24):
There's this is called the fog of war. This is
what you and the press don't understand.

Speaker 3 (39:29):
You sit in your conditioned offices or up on Capitol
Hill and you nit pick.

Speaker 9 (39:32):
And you plant fake stories in the Washington post about
kill everybody, phrases on anonymous sources, not based in anything,
not based.

Speaker 3 (39:41):
In any truth at all, And then you want to throw.

Speaker 11 (39:43):
Up really irresponsible terms about American heroes, about the judgment
that they've made. I wrote whole book on this topic
because of what politicians and the press does to war fighters.
President Trump has empowered commanders, commanders to do what is necessary,
which is dark and difficult thing the dead of night
on half of the American people.

Speaker 1 (40:02):
We support them, and we will stop the poisoning of
the American people. Okay, that's a better answer.

Speaker 2 (40:08):
I still think, and this is the lawyer in me, buck,
I want a clear, concise, direct description of what the
admiral did. And it may be the case that they
haven't talked in detail about this decision, but that's that
would help to end.

Speaker 1 (40:24):
This story, I believe, once and for all. It's hard
to sound objective talking about Pete because you and I
both know Pete and or we're personally friends with Pete.
I've known Pete now for almost fifteen years. So I
just I say that because I think we need to
be honest about where we come from, especially talking with

(40:45):
some of these public figures we know on a personal level,
and I know Pete loves the country, and I know
he loves the war fighters in the United States military
like his own family, and so I bring all of
that to this discussion too, all right. That said, I
think that the problem that he's running into here a

(41:05):
little bit clay is when you start to say things again,
I'm looking at this like the enemy here in the media,
which he's addressing very clearly. He's saying, you guys are
a bunch of jerks that don't understand anything. But when
he says things like fog of war, that they're going
to take that now and say so you don't know
if there were survivors or not, that's what they're that's

(41:26):
the next stage.

Speaker 6 (41:27):
Now.

Speaker 1 (41:27):
I think in this process it went from the order
to kill survivors to now you're saying fog of war again.
I understand from the very beginnings, you know need to
call in and say what he did is totally lawful.
I believe that Pete Hegseth and the jaysok here joined
Special Operations Command. I think they operated in a lawful fashion.

(41:48):
I am just saying the way this is turning into
a story is leaving bits of daylight here with the
facts as presented, the narrative as constructed from the top
of the of the Pentagon hierarchy. And when you say
things like, you know, fog of war, I get it.
I know what he's saying. But they're going to say,

(42:09):
so you don't even know if there were you know,
there was smoke. You know, there could have been survivors.
You know, this is the next this is the next
phase of it, I think totally. And this is why
I say, and this is me speaking as a former
criminal defense attorney.

Speaker 2 (42:24):
Your story has to be consistent, and you have to
stick to it, and you have to put it out there,
and it has to be ironclad in terms of you
being able to prove what.

Speaker 1 (42:35):
Exactly it is.

Speaker 2 (42:37):
And I just think the story of we had to
hit the boat a second time because it had not
been completely obliterated and there were still drugs there, and
they could have brought another boat in and gotten those
drugs off, and they could have still come to the
United States. The purpose of the mission was to ensure
that that boat is completely obliterated and that there are

(43:00):
no drugs that survived the attack. The first attack. It
did we put in a second one. That's what happened.
I don't know anything about the people that were on
the boat. Frankly, I don't care about them, because they
were terrorist trying to kill people in the United States.
They may have survived, they may not have, but I
know that boat didn't and the drugs are going. That's
my answer. That's a pretty good one. I wish it
had been given. Yeah, I stop the threat. This is

(43:24):
a threat that's identified, a threat that we can lawfully
use the United States military to address. And Secretary of
War heeg Seth and those below him in the chain
of command who were directly involved in the strike, they
were operating to stop the threat against the American people.
And if two missiles is what it required to stop
the threat, then that is what it required. But this

(43:44):
is why, again, you know, the specificity of the same thing.
In a self defense case, if somebody came at me,
Clay in my own home, which would be a very
bad idea because I do have a lot of guns
here and I am pretty trained up these days. But
if somebody came at me in my own home and
I put one in him, and then they say, well,
why did you, why did you actually unload your whole

(44:05):
magazine into this person who was coming at you, let's
say with a knife or something. I would say because
in the moment, that's what I believe to stop the
threat against my life, that's the answer. Yes, right, it
doesn't whether it's one bullet or ten bullets. I acted
to stop the threat against me and my family. What
you don't want to get into is, well, I hit.

Speaker 1 (44:23):
Him five times, but then I thought, you know what,
I got to get some headshots in here to make
sure he's not moving anymore. You don't want to, in
a self defense situation say anything like that. This is
those of you. You don't have to know law of
war necessarily to understand how this. When you're talking about
use of force, you've got to be very specific about
why you're using that force. And I've sat through the classes.

(44:47):
I've sat through the discussion we had this in the CIA.
We had to have conversations about lethal force. Right, This
is you have to understand what the framework is. We're
using violence against another human being.

Speaker 2 (44:59):
Always, the threat wasn't eliminated with the first strike, so
we had to have a second strike to eliminate the threat.
This is not very complicated. But again, when they start
nitpicking at you, I appreciate the fact that Pete recognizes
he's the target here. Somebody, I think this is important,
leaked probably very classified information to a large extent to

(45:21):
the Washington Post, which may or may not be accurate.
But somebody obviously has Pete as the target here. They're
attempting to come after him, the admiral and the president.
I mean, their intent here matters, and so again I
think you have to eliminate this story to the best

(45:43):
of your ability. You know what happened over the weekend, Buck,
I was watching games my sister, My sister Lisa, she's awesome,
sat down on the couch. He's watching the games. She
had There was a cozy Earth blanket on the couch.
This is one hundred percent true. I didn't even know this.
She got the cozy Earth blanket a little bit and Florida.
She put the blanket over her. She didn't even know

(46:04):
that we had a code. She went got her phone.
The blanket was so comfortable and she ordered one for
my mom.

Speaker 1 (46:11):
And for her.

Speaker 2 (46:12):
That's how comfortable this blanket was. It's one hundred percent true.
I said, did you use a code. She said, I
didn't even know there was gonna say. I love this story,
except we don't get credit for the sale of blanket.

Speaker 1 (46:21):
But that's okay. We're going to sell a lot more
blankets now because that's how amazing they are. I said,
you use the code, right, She said, I didn't know
there was a code. Thanks for Lisa listening Lisa. But
that's how comfortable this blanket was. I'm not even kidding
about this. She sat down on the couch a little
bit chilly. She puts the blanket over her. Within twenty
minutes she got on. She was like, she asked my wife, like,

(46:43):
what where is this Cozy Earth? She got on.

Speaker 2 (46:45):
She bought her own. It's pretty incredible. Think about how
busy the holiday season is. Every Cozy Earth product is fantastic.
They're the perfect combination of luxury, comfort, relaxation. In fact,
you know what I was doing last night watching Stranger
Things season five with my boys, and guess what I
was covered up with Cozy Earth blanket A little bit chilly.

Speaker 1 (47:08):
And Tennessee right now is in the thirties.

Speaker 2 (47:10):
Last night, it's very cold for us, and I was like,
I'm gonna be watching Stranger things five. I need these
awesome covers, these blankets that feel so phenomenal to have
them on, and right now you can get a ten
year warranty. You get the gift of everyday luxury this
holiday season. Head to cozyearth dot com. Use my code
Clay for up to forty percent off. Make sure to

(47:32):
order by December twelfth for guaranteed Christmas delivery. You're gonna
love these products, trust me, they are fantastic. Cozyearth dot com,
Cozy earth dot com, most comfortable sheets, blankets, you name it,
you will have ever had. They are incredible forty percent off.
Don't be like my sister. Remember to use the code Clay.

(47:54):
She then went back and bought more, and she used
code Clay. By the way, cozyearth dot com Code Clay
that Cozy earth dot com Code Clay.

Speaker 5 (48:06):
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton mic drops that never sounded
so good. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 2 (48:18):
Clay Travis with the Clay and Buck Show, wishing you
and your family a very merry Christmas and a happy
New Year.

Speaker 1 (48:25):
Welcome back in here, everybody. We are joined by Senator
Marcia Blackburn. Senator Blackburn, always appreciate you being with us
and it.

Speaker 7 (48:35):
Is always so good to join you. Thank you so much.

Speaker 1 (48:39):
First off, can you just speak to some politics going
on in your home state, the seventh Congressional district. You
got a looney leftist trying to sneak a congressional seed
in what is not just a red area of the
wonderful state of Tennessee, Senator Blackburn, but also Clay's backyard,
like I think his yard is in fact considered part

(48:59):
of the district. What can you tell us about this
this race today?

Speaker 7 (49:04):
Well, indeed, and we need everybody to get out and vote,
that is for sure. And these off year special elections, uh,
sometimes they get a little funky on you. And what
you have are Democrats that are very excited. They saw
what they thought were big victories in blue areas and

(49:28):
so now they're trying to California Tennessee and are putting
a lot of energy in that today. But Matt Van
Epps is a good, solid candidate. He is going to win.
He is going to be an outstanding member of the
US House. He has wonderful experience and a record of service,

(49:53):
a good solid record of service for the people of
Tennessee and for this nation, his military service, his business expertise,
the way he served Governor Lee in his cabinet, and
I know that Matt is going to bring that fighting
spirit to work on the issues of cost of living
and access to affordable health care and really getting the

(50:19):
country back on track. You know, Joe Biden and the
Democrats raised taxes, they ran up the cost of health care.
Inflation was at nine point one percent, and President Trump
and Republicans are trying to get everything back on track.
Matt Vanipps is going to do a good job doing that,

(50:39):
and the people of Tennessee support President Trump and his agenda.

Speaker 2 (50:43):
We're talking to Senator Marshall Blackburn. She is also running
for governor of Tennessee. She's telling all of you to
get out in the seventh Congressional district all the way
from Fort Campbell up on the border with Kentucky, all
the way down south with Alabama, Nashville, included part of
Dave County, Franklin, Williamson County, Brentwood, all points in between.

(51:05):
You also are a mom and a grandma, and you
have a USA Today editorial piece of the up about
the lack of protection for young people online. And I
know in social media era there's a lot of mom's, dads, grandma's,
grandpa's out there that are deeply concerned about this. What
have you uncovered? What do people need to know and

(51:27):
what should happen going forward?

Speaker 7 (51:29):
Yes, and up ED is at time dot Com and
this is work that we have done on the Kids
Online Safety Act. And I was just on the phone
talking with a house colleague, Katchemick, out of Florida, and
she and I have several of these bills together. Look,
big tech uses our children as a cash cow, and

(51:53):
when kids are online, they are the product. And we've
been trying to pass legislation that would protect children in
the virtual space, just as we have laws in the
physical space that says, you can't sell alcohol and tobacco
to kids, you can't expose them to pornography, you can't

(52:15):
endangered children, you can't force children into contracts, you can't
traffic children, you can't groom children. All of this there
are laws, but it happens in the virtual space twenty
four hours a day, seven days a week. And when
you look at these apps that are catering to children,

(52:36):
when you look at these platforms catering to children, and
you know that big Tech is trying to get these
kids on their site and they want them to doom
scroll for hours on end. And then you talk to
parents and teachers and preachers and pediatricians and you hear

(52:57):
that addiction to these screens is one of the biggest
problems they have. When it comes to cyberbullying and behavioral
issues in schools, most of its start in the virtual space.
When kids meet a drug dealer, a pedophile, a trafficker,

(53:18):
a groomer, generally it is in the virtual space, and
we need to put these protections in place for our
children in the virtual space, just as they exist in
the physical space.

Speaker 1 (53:33):
We're speaking to Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. Senator. The
terrible terrorist attack that occurred just before the Thanksgiving holiday
took the life of a National Guard member of the
National Guard and almost took another life has got people
focused in here on how could something like this happen,

(53:54):
How was the vetting or really what was the lack
of vetting like to bring in many of these Afghans
during the Biden withdrawal. I wanted you to speak to
that and give us a census to what do you
think the Trump administration is going to be able to
or should do. Now that there's a recognition that there
was insufficient vetting for many, perhaps most, of the Afghans

(54:18):
who were brought here during the Biden.

Speaker 7 (54:19):
Withdrawal, and actually the Inspector General's report from twenty twenty
two with the Apartment of Homeland Security noted there was
insufficient vetting, and the response from the Biden administration was
they were going to go back and do this vetting.
Obviously they did not, And now what the Trump administration

(54:43):
is discussing doing is halting immigration while they'd catch up
and make certain that they have vetted all these individuals,
whether they came in through the Afghan Welcome program that
Biden had in place, or it is people that are
in the system that illegally were in the country, or

(55:06):
people that were here legally on a visa and have
overstayed their visa. You're going to see this administration, in
this Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State
circle back and actually clean up some of these and

(55:26):
if someone needs to go, they will be issued an
order of deportation and then deported and removed from the country.

Speaker 2 (55:35):
I don't think we've asked you about this, but I
asked you about it in person the last time I
saw you, and I want to make sure we hit it.
I think it's a pretty extraordinary, unbelievable story that at
least eight United States Senators, including you, had your phones
tapped as part of an investigation. I know that you
guys are continuing to follow up on that.

Speaker 1 (55:58):
Can you tell our audience what happened in there? Why?

Speaker 2 (56:01):
Obviously it's significant and should never happen again, and what
is going to happen as a result. Where is that
story for people who don't know very much about it
or haven't been paying attention.

Speaker 7 (56:13):
Yes, and the story is continuing to unfold as we're
getting more documents and hearing more from whistleblowers. And I
think it's tomorrow we have Judge Bosberg who is going
to come before us. He is the one who issued
as many as one hundred and ninety seven a subpoenas

(56:35):
for information on our phones, and on top of those
subpoena as he put a non disclosure order, which meant
that the wireless companies could not tell us that they
had a subpoena for our phone records. Now, we were
targeted from what we have learned, because we were all

(56:59):
republic we all support President Trump, and we each of
us had questions about the twenty twenty election. Now, the
reason we're continuing to dig on this and to get
information is because if they were going after phone records,

(57:20):
there is no doubt and we have reason to believe
that they went after other information. Where are they going
after the content of those contacts? Because what they did
was to get every phone call I made or received
and the location where I was when I made or

(57:44):
received that call, and who that call was made to
or received from. And it started on January first of
twenty one with me, and it was a pure spying effort.
It was a your phishing expedition. But we also want
to know did they get the content of emails? Did

(58:07):
they get the content of text messages? Was there any
wire tapping in real time that they did? Did they
surveil and investigate people that we were in contact with,
What was the extent of that surveillance. Did they go

(58:28):
after financial documents and other information about us? So we
are trying to get to the bottom of us that
I think each of the eight of us want to
know the extent of this, and I will tell you this.
We want to know what they've done to other conservatives.
They know there were one hundred and ninety seven subpoenas

(58:52):
issued against four hundred and thirty individuals conservatives, and it
was organizations and individuals in that mix, Citizens, Unine and
a turning point USA, different organizations. What they were after.
We know they got financial documents on some of those,

(59:16):
but we want to see that. We want to make
certain this never happens again, and conservatives have to be protected.
And of course, in this case, because you have some
whistleblowers over at DOJ, that we're aware of this. They

(59:38):
brought the information to Senator Grassly and that is how
we've been able to find out as much as we
have gotten so far. But what they did to conservatives
in the extent of it. Jack Smith, who ran Arctic Frost,
needs to be held to account. I think he ought
to be in jail. That we need to hold everyone

(01:00:02):
to account. I have written a letter that calls for
the Office of Professional Conduct at the Department of Justice
to look into his actions. He should be disbarred. We
also have written a letter to the DC bar about

(01:00:24):
his conduct and what the actions that he took and
the email chain that we got last week. You know,
the interesting thing is the attorney the Council that was
advising Jack Smith and Arctic Frost told them this is
a constitutional violation and pointed out to them what we

(01:00:50):
had said early on. It's a First and Fourth Amendment violation.
It is a violation of the separation of powers. It's
a violation of the Speech and Debate claus it is
a violation of due process. It is a violation of
the Stored Communications Act. And to think they did this

(01:01:11):
knowing it was outside of the law, but they hate
Donald Trump and people that support Donald Trump, and so
they did it anyway.

Speaker 1 (01:01:23):
Amen, it's a big story.

Speaker 2 (01:01:26):
I think we're going to continue to follow it on
this program. Please keep us updated on it, and thanks
taking the time, and one more time, tell everybody to
go vote.

Speaker 7 (01:01:35):
Senator you got it. Be certain that you go vote today.
Tennessee seven. Matt Van Epps needs your vote. Let's send
a message and that the Democrats are not going to
take this seat.

Speaker 2 (01:01:48):
Amen, that Senator Marsha Blackburn, Great State of Tennessee soon
to be Governor.

Speaker 1 (01:01:53):
Appreciate you, Senator, you got it. Take care all right, Buck.

Speaker 2 (01:01:58):
Your boy Pickles, he's actually turned into one of the
greatest receivers in the NFL. Right now, George Pickens, were
you a coming many miles away? This is not even
the least I said always bet On Pickles, and I
was correct. I appreciate your mom and dad saying that
they'll lie for you and claim that you were watching
college football to try to keep you from having to

(01:02:21):
be reprimanded by me for not spending time watching football.
Here is a pick, however, that you can play that
everybody in California, Texas, Georgia, forty States. Thirteen million people
signed up price picks dot Com code clay. This pays
out at five point five x. It begins on Thursday.
George Pickens aka George Pickles, according to Buck Sexton, more

(01:02:43):
than seventy seven and a half receiving yards, Jamier Gibbs
more than seventy six and a half rushing yards, Josh
Allen more than two hundred and twenty eight and a
half passing yards, and Jamar Chase more than ninety and
a half receiving yards. If all four of those hit
five point five X is the play. I will give
you that pick later this week. It's fun to play along.

(01:03:06):
We haven't had a lot of success lately, but I'm
optimistic that success will soon. Garland our achievements here George Pickens,
Jamiir Gibbs, Josh Allen, Jamar Chase Allmore go to pricepicks
dot com. You can download the app Price Picks as well.
When you play five dollars, you get fifty dollars. That's
price picks dot Com. Code Clay.

Speaker 5 (01:03:27):
Cheap up with the biggest political comeback in world history.
On the Team forty seven podcast, playin Book Highlight Trump
free plays from the week Sundays at noon Eastern. Find
it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.