October 27, 2026 • 12 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Talk Station. 829-55KRC, The Talk Station. Very happy Tuesday
to you. Always a special time of the week to
be tuning in or listening to the 55KRC Morning Show
or checking out the podcast later in the day, 55KRC. iHeart. com.
It's that time of the week where we get the
alliterative Daniel Davis deep dive. Retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis
offering up all his knowledge and wisdom and tapping into
(00:20):
his resources to give us updates about the various wars
going on in the world. Welcome back, my friend, Daniel Davis.
It's always good to have you on the program.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
And it's always good to be here, Brian. Thanks for
having me back.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
And forgive me a little bit for not being as
up-to-date on the conflicts, the various conflicts. Really been focusing
a lot on the upcoming election. We've got a hell
of a battle going on here in the state of Ohio,
so it's been dominating the morning show news. But I
know it's still going on over there, and the challenges
seem to be getting a little bit bigger. One of
the developments which... I thought was interesting. Uh, Egypt is
(00:52):
now decided to, has decided to send troops into Saudi
Arabia to defend against the Houthi rebel attacks that have
been going on for some time now. And I think
talking to you, the Houthis are a substantial military presence.
I'm hundreds of thousands of Houthis that are, that are
waging this kind of this war against Saudi and, and, and,
and they're doing it primarily because we have a presence
(01:12):
in Saudi Arabia is, is that correct?
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Uh, Partially. It's not really about us, actually. There are
definitely hundreds of thousands, and apparently they're mobilizing more. It
could be north of half a million here shortly, if
it's not already. This is an issue that goes back
for many, many years, and actually decades, between Ansar Allah,
the Houthis, and Saudi Arabia. And it was sparked when
(01:38):
Saudi Arabia attacked the airport at Sana'a last August, when
the Supreme Leader's funeral was going on, and they were
sending a delegation there. that sparked, re-sparked, because they had
been in a ceasefire since 2022, and now it's come
back into a hot phase. You mentioned about Egypt. We'll
see what actually comes about from that, how many troops
and what kind of troops. That's kind of important because
(02:01):
Egypt itself has some bad experience in the past with
the Houthis in Yemen. So I doubt that they're going
to sign up to be putting a lot of combat power.
But I don't think that all of Saudi Arabia's allies
together have enough ground forces to be able to stop
Ansar Allah on the ground. And Ansar Allah may take
even three Saudi provinces on the southwest corner of Saudi
(02:24):
Arabia because they're at real risk right now.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Well, which sort of brings to mind Russia going into
the Ukraine and taking over a chunk of Ukraine. Are
we going to be doing this now? Is this what
we should expect in the future? Because that's a real
new development, Daniel Davis.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, you know, there was, I mean, I would say
just think about last year, last May, when President Trump
went to Saudi Arabia and on this whole Middle East tour. And, man,
it looked like the whole Gulf Arab countries and the
whole Emirates were all this strength, the bastion of strength
and economic power and oil and all that. Right. And
all these deals that were going to be done. And
(03:01):
now then just barely a year, a little over a
year later, the whole place is on fire and potentially
falling apart in Saudi Arabia itself. is genuinely at risk
of a dissolution, both from fracturing inside and then from
the external pressure of the Houthis. So it's just hard
to believe how much change is coming. So at least
right now, yeah, there are some real problems, and you
(03:22):
could add Iraq to that if you wanted to.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Well, go ahead and add Iraq to that now. How
do they factor into this equation?
Speaker 2 (03:27):
Yeah, so the United States finally completed its final withdrawal,
so that took a lot of the pressure off. off
of the Iraqi government, but it also opened up some space.
And by the way, I'm definitely for the withdrawal, and
I applaud President Trump for doing so, because all it
did is make it more difficult, not even impossible, for
(03:49):
the Iran-backed militia, which are part of the official Iraqi
security forces. They may actually take action against Saudi Arabia, too.
And you may recall before we left, the U.S. and
Saudi Arabia together attacked forces inside of Iraq, which just
kind of stirred that pot up, in my personal opinion.
So now there are three separate directions that Saudi Arabia
(04:12):
is at risk from, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Where are we relative to our military strategy just with Iran?
I mean, ignoring the chaos that's unfolding all around the area, I, again,
keep hearing these– suggestions or veiled or otherwise or out loud,
overt suggestions that the kinetic activity, the bombing is going
to start and that really don't know when these threats
keep coming from Donald Trump. But we always you and
(04:37):
I always go back to the practical reality. It sounds
great to the rabid mob out there that just wants
to roll over Iran as if it would be an
easy thing. It's not. It never has become easier. We
still have, you know, a country that's two and a
half times the size of Texas. We have limited arms
that we can use. They have a seemingly unlimited number
of drones and missiles they can rely on. It's just
(05:00):
day after day status quo and week after week, as
far as you and I are concerned, or rather year
after year we're getting on. Daniel, has anything changed at all?
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Yeah, you know, there are really contradictory signals coming not
just out of the White House, but out of President
Trump himself, because on the one hand, he, I think
on Sunday, made a pretty strong statement that, you know, hey,
they're either going to make a deal or we're going
to go in and finish the job, etc., But then
he also said, I think the day before, he said,
or maybe we could just do nothing. You just let
them wither on the vine and just let this go
(05:32):
indefinitely until they eventually just starve out or the economy
finally collapses because of our Operation Economic Fury or whatever
they're calling it today. So we don't really know. I
can tell you, though. For anyone who thinks that, no,
go finish the job, then you have to explain how,
if you're going to have the same weapons, the same missiles,
the same rockets going against the same targets on these
(05:54):
mountains and underneath these mountains that didn't work in two
kinetic rounds already, and actually three if you go back
to 2025, then you have to say, why would you
want to go back again and expect a different outcome?
Speaker 1 (06:06):
Because here's the key thing.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Whereas we don't have any new targets to go after
of military significance, meaning where the missiles and drones are located,
Iran does have additional targets it has not attacked from
our side, which are very much out in the open
and vulnerable, like economic targets, energy targets, desalination plants, etc.
All are indefensible from us. So we don't want to
(06:28):
go down this path because we can't knock them out
and we can suffer a lot more harm.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Well, and that brought to mind these easy-to-hit military targets
or United States-affiliated targets. That could be anywhere in the
United States, too. And I saw the Pentagon... released this
doomsday scenario, this fortress, unprecedented planned branded fortress, which is
hardening our military bases so they can be self-sufficient, have
their own energy, their own stockpiles. In other words, be
(06:54):
able to live off a grid that they expect is
going to be taken out by the Chinese Communist Party
or some foreign actor who's hacked into our systems. I mean,
we are open targets. The oceans of the world don't
protect us like they used to anymore, Daniel Davis. Do
you have any concerns along those lines? This could expand,
the Iranians would look beyond the region and start targeting
American interests literally anywhere they happen to be?
Speaker 2 (07:18):
I'll tell you why that worries me. Not because of Iran.
Iran doesn't have the capacity to do that. There are
only two states on the planet that have the capacity
to prompt that kind of protection on American bases throughout
the continental United States, and that is Russia and China.
And the fact that they're talking about doing this right
now makes me worry. Do they know something that we
don't know yet? Because to The level of protection and
(07:41):
expansion of the infrastructure and to be able to sustain
for 90 days on.
Not just get a cyber attack somewhere. We've got a
pretty good system against those, obviously. And for Iran itself,
they wouldn't do that because, number one, they don't have
the capacity. And all they're interested in is to get
(08:02):
the United States out of the Middle East. And to
do that at the lowest cost, striking the continental United
States they know would almost certainly prompt a nuclear weapon.
So they're not going to do that. It's not in
their interest. You don't have to trust them or anything else.
But if we're getting ready like that, I'm worried about
the two nations that can do something and do have
the capacity. And I just don't know if they know
(08:22):
something we don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Well, the timing was rather suspicious because the British Defense Secretary,
Wes Streeting, said his country needs to be ready within
1,000 days and advised citizens to stock up on essential supplies.
because of these same kind of veiled threats. Now, he
did specifically say Russia, which is one of the reasons
why I bring this up. The timing with the warning
here in the United States is a concern, and they're
(08:43):
warning the British population about this. But I think this
has to be concerning them more beyond Russia, because as
you and I have talked about, the likelihood of Russia
launching a war against a NATO country is pretty slim,
unless your perception of that has changed. So maybe they're
concerned as well.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
Well, Streeting actually, and I'm going to be showing this
on my show here in a couple of hours, he
met with his Polish counterpart, and it was either this
morning or yesterday, and he did expressly say, we have
to be ready for war against Russia because they're a
terrorist state. So he specifically named them, at least in
this particular iteration here. And Russia is never going to
(09:25):
attack Europe and NATO unless Europe and NATO continue to
press attacks into Russia via– So we're playing with fire.
When we continue to support Ukraine, which can never win
this war, it's definitely impossible for them to do so.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
But it is.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
Possible for us to expand the war if we keep
striking long enough and hard enough. And also yesterday, this
is critically important and possibly related to this development of
the United States. Karaganov, who was a well-known kind of
far-right figure in Russia, openly advocated the use of nuclear
weapons against the West as a means of restoring deterrence.
(10:05):
And he said, we should not be afraid of using them.
We could win a war in Europe in three days.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
A nuclear war.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
He thinks they can win it. Now, he's been out
on the right. The problem is, from some other sources
I have, his thoughts are more centrist.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
In Russia now.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
And he has a direct line to President Putin. So
we can never rule out that they may finally get
tired enough and say, you know what, we're just going
to have to go. So we should not unnecessarily poke
the bear if it's not going to help us out.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Well, and I think most people when they consider attack,
they think about bombs being dropped, people, you know, forces invading.
But I would argue, and I think I may be
on solid ground here, even though I'm just pulling this
out of my sphincter, you could probably do as much
damage as a nuclear weapon by just shutting off the
electric grid. People will die. Chaos will ensue. You can't
(10:53):
get access to your bank accounts. Grocery stores won't be
open anymore. I mean, the entire society would come to
a screeching halt if the energy system were to completely
go under. That, to me, is a bigger threat than
even a bomb.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
And I'll tell you, that idea is definitely on the
minds of many Russian thinkers right now. And they are
even saying that. They're saying, listen, We don't need to
have an army to go invade NATO. If that's what
you guys, if you're forcing one on us, we would
go with our ballistic missiles. We would go with our arrestings.
We would go with our hypersonics. And they have openly
(11:26):
said we would hit your economic centers, your banking centers,
your electric centers, and your factories to produce long-range drones
and missiles. I mean, they would go after those specific things.
And you're right. That would literally just bring our economic
to a standstill, aside from all the other problems that
are already out there. Now, Russia is vulnerable, too, but
(11:46):
that's not helping anybody if we get into a war
that we can't win and could cause that much damage
for a country that has no interest or ability to
invade us. So we need to cool the jets and
start talking a lot more about diplomacy.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Well, I concur with you on that. And that's about
as far as we're going to get towards solutions today,
Daniel Davis. We keep trying. Someday it'll happen. You and
I'll come up with the answer to everyone's problems and
We'll just go on.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
We will.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
Find something else to do with our days. Daniel Davis,
Deep Dive. Find his podcast wherever you get your podcasts
and tune in every week to the 55KRC Morning Show
at 830 for another thoughtful analysis. Thank you again, Daniel Davis.
I appreciate your time on the program.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
See you then.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Take care. 841-55KRC, the talk station. We're going to ask
an expert. Like Steve from USA is going to come in.
Got something to tell you about. Don't go away. More
to talk about.
The Talk Station. 829-55KRC, The Talk Station. Very happy Tuesday
to you. Always a special time of the week to
be tuning in or listening to the 55KRC Morning Show
or checking out the podcast later in the day, 55KRC. iHeart. com.
It's that time of the week where we get the
alliterative Daniel Davis deep dive. Retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis
offering up all his knowledge and wisdom and tapping into
(00:20):
his resources to give us updates about the various wars
going on in the world. Welcome back, my friend, Daniel Davis.
It's always good to have you on the program.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
And it's always good to be here, Brian. Thanks for
having me back.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
And forgive me a little bit for not being as
up-to-date on the conflicts, the various conflicts. Really been focusing
a lot on the upcoming election. We've got a hell
of a battle going on here in the state of Ohio,
so it's been dominating the morning show news. But I
know it's still going on over there, and the challenges
seem to be getting a little bit bigger. One of
the developments which... I thought was interesting. Uh, Egypt is
(00:52):
now decided to, has decided to send troops into Saudi
Arabia to defend against the Houthi rebel attacks that have
been going on for some time now. And I think
talking to you, the Houthis are a substantial military presence.
I'm hundreds of thousands of Houthis that are, that are
waging this kind of this war against Saudi and, and, and,
and they're doing it primarily because we have a presence
(01:12):
in Saudi Arabia is, is that correct?
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Uh, Partially. It's not really about us, actually. There are
definitely hundreds of thousands, and apparently they're mobilizing more. It
could be north of half a million here shortly, if
it's not already. This is an issue that goes back
for many, many years, and actually decades, between Ansar Allah,
the Houthis, and Saudi Arabia. And it was sparked when
(01:38):
Saudi Arabia attacked the airport at Sana'a last August, when
the Supreme Leader's funeral was going on, and they were
sending a delegation there. that sparked, re-sparked, because they had
been in a ceasefire since 2022, and now it's come
back into a hot phase. You mentioned about Egypt. We'll
see what actually comes about from that, how many troops
and what kind of troops. That's kind of important because
(02:01):
Egypt itself has some bad experience in the past with
the Houthis in Yemen. So I doubt that they're going
to sign up to be putting a lot of combat power.
But I don't think that all of Saudi Arabia's allies
together have enough ground forces to be able to stop
Ansar Allah on the ground. And Ansar Allah may take
even three Saudi provinces on the southwest corner of Saudi
(02:24):
Arabia because they're at real risk right now.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Well, which sort of brings to mind Russia going into
the Ukraine and taking over a chunk of Ukraine. Are
we going to be doing this now? Is this what
we should expect in the future? Because that's a real
new development, Daniel Davis.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, you know, there was, I mean, I would say
just think about last year, last May, when President Trump
went to Saudi Arabia and on this whole Middle East tour. And, man,
it looked like the whole Gulf Arab countries and the
whole Emirates were all this strength, the bastion of strength
and economic power and oil and all that. Right. And
all these deals that were going to be done. And
(03:01):
now then just barely a year, a little over a
year later, the whole place is on fire and potentially
falling apart in Saudi Arabia itself. is genuinely at risk
of a dissolution, both from fracturing inside and then from
the external pressure of the Houthis. So it's just hard
to believe how much change is coming. So at least
right now, yeah, there are some real problems, and you
(03:22):
could add Iraq to that if you wanted to.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Well, go ahead and add Iraq to that now. How
do they factor into this equation?
Speaker 2 (03:27):
Yeah, so the United States finally completed its final withdrawal,
so that took a lot of the pressure off. off
of the Iraqi government, but it also opened up some space.
And by the way, I'm definitely for the withdrawal, and
I applaud President Trump for doing so, because all it
did is make it more difficult, not even impossible, for
(03:49):
the Iran-backed militia, which are part of the official Iraqi
security forces. They may actually take action against Saudi Arabia, too.
And you may recall before we left, the U.S. and
Saudi Arabia together attacked forces inside of Iraq, which just
kind of stirred that pot up, in my personal opinion.
So now there are three separate directions that Saudi Arabia
(04:12):
is at risk from, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Where are we relative to our military strategy just with Iran?
I mean, ignoring the chaos that's unfolding all around the area, I, again,
keep hearing these– suggestions or veiled or otherwise or out loud,
overt suggestions that the kinetic activity, the bombing is going
to start and that really don't know when these threats
keep coming from Donald Trump. But we always you and
(04:37):
I always go back to the practical reality. It sounds
great to the rabid mob out there that just wants
to roll over Iran as if it would be an
easy thing. It's not. It never has become easier. We
still have, you know, a country that's two and a
half times the size of Texas. We have limited arms
that we can use. They have a seemingly unlimited number
of drones and missiles they can rely on. It's just
(05:00):
day after day status quo and week after week, as
far as you and I are concerned, or rather year
after year we're getting on. Daniel, has anything changed at all?
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Yeah, you know, there are really contradictory signals coming not
just out of the White House, but out of President
Trump himself, because on the one hand, he, I think
on Sunday, made a pretty strong statement that, you know, hey,
they're either going to make a deal or we're going
to go in and finish the job, etc., But then
he also said, I think the day before, he said,
or maybe we could just do nothing. You just let
them wither on the vine and just let this go
(05:32):
indefinitely until they eventually just starve out or the economy
finally collapses because of our Operation Economic Fury or whatever
they're calling it today. So we don't really know. I
can tell you, though. For anyone who thinks that, no,
go finish the job, then you have to explain how,
if you're going to have the same weapons, the same missiles,
the same rockets going against the same targets on these
(05:54):
mountains and underneath these mountains that didn't work in two
kinetic rounds already, and actually three if you go back
to 2025, then you have to say, why would you
want to go back again and expect a different outcome?
Speaker 1 (06:06):
Because here's the key thing.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Whereas we don't have any new targets to go after
of military significance, meaning where the missiles and drones are located,
Iran does have additional targets it has not attacked from
our side, which are very much out in the open
and vulnerable, like economic targets, energy targets, desalination plants, etc.
All are indefensible from us. So we don't want to
(06:28):
go down this path because we can't knock them out
and we can suffer a lot more harm.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Well, and that brought to mind these easy-to-hit military targets
or United States-affiliated targets. That could be anywhere in the
United States, too. And I saw the Pentagon... released this
doomsday scenario, this fortress, unprecedented planned branded fortress, which is
hardening our military bases so they can be self-sufficient, have
their own energy, their own stockpiles. In other words, be
(06:54):
able to live off a grid that they expect is
going to be taken out by the Chinese Communist Party
or some foreign actor who's hacked into our systems. I mean,
we are open targets. The oceans of the world don't
protect us like they used to anymore, Daniel Davis. Do
you have any concerns along those lines? This could expand,
the Iranians would look beyond the region and start targeting
American interests literally anywhere they happen to be?
Speaker 2 (07:18):
I'll tell you why that worries me. Not because of Iran.
Iran doesn't have the capacity to do that. There are
only two states on the planet that have the capacity
to prompt that kind of protection on American bases throughout
the continental United States, and that is Russia and China.
And the fact that they're talking about doing this right
now makes me worry. Do they know something that we
don't know yet? Because to The level of protection and
(07:41):
expansion of the infrastructure and to be able to sustain
for 90 days on.
Not just get a cyber attack somewhere. We've got a
pretty good system against those, obviously. And for Iran itself,
they wouldn't do that because, number one, they don't have
the capacity. And all they're interested in is to get
(08:02):
the United States out of the Middle East. And to
do that at the lowest cost, striking the continental United
States they know would almost certainly prompt a nuclear weapon.
So they're not going to do that. It's not in
their interest. You don't have to trust them or anything else.
But if we're getting ready like that, I'm worried about
the two nations that can do something and do have
the capacity. And I just don't know if they know
(08:22):
something we don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Well, the timing was rather suspicious because the British Defense Secretary,
Wes Streeting, said his country needs to be ready within
1,000 days and advised citizens to stock up on essential supplies.
because of these same kind of veiled threats. Now, he
did specifically say Russia, which is one of the reasons
why I bring this up. The timing with the warning
here in the United States is a concern, and they're
(08:43):
warning the British population about this. But I think this
has to be concerning them more beyond Russia, because as
you and I have talked about, the likelihood of Russia
launching a war against a NATO country is pretty slim,
unless your perception of that has changed. So maybe they're
concerned as well.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
Well, Streeting actually, and I'm going to be showing this
on my show here in a couple of hours, he
met with his Polish counterpart, and it was either this
morning or yesterday, and he did expressly say, we have
to be ready for war against Russia because they're a
terrorist state. So he specifically named them, at least in
this particular iteration here. And Russia is never going to
(09:25):
attack Europe and NATO unless Europe and NATO continue to
press attacks into Russia via– So we're playing with fire.
When we continue to support Ukraine, which can never win
this war, it's definitely impossible for them to do so.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
But it is.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
Possible for us to expand the war if we keep
striking long enough and hard enough. And also yesterday, this
is critically important and possibly related to this development of
the United States. Karaganov, who was a well-known kind of
far-right figure in Russia, openly advocated the use of nuclear
weapons against the West as a means of restoring deterrence.
(10:05):
And he said, we should not be afraid of using them.
We could win a war in Europe in three days.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
A nuclear war.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
He thinks they can win it. Now, he's been out
on the right. The problem is, from some other sources
I have, his thoughts are more centrist.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
In Russia now.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
And he has a direct line to President Putin. So
we can never rule out that they may finally get
tired enough and say, you know what, we're just going
to have to go. So we should not unnecessarily poke
the bear if it's not going to help us out.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Well, and I think most people when they consider attack,
they think about bombs being dropped, people, you know, forces invading.
But I would argue, and I think I may be
on solid ground here, even though I'm just pulling this
out of my sphincter, you could probably do as much
damage as a nuclear weapon by just shutting off the
electric grid. People will die. Chaos will ensue. You can't
(10:53):
get access to your bank accounts. Grocery stores won't be
open anymore. I mean, the entire society would come to
a screeching halt if the energy system were to completely
go under. That, to me, is a bigger threat than
even a bomb.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
And I'll tell you, that idea is definitely on the
minds of many Russian thinkers right now. And they are
even saying that. They're saying, listen, We don't need to
have an army to go invade NATO. If that's what
you guys, if you're forcing one on us, we would
go with our ballistic missiles. We would go with our arrestings.
We would go with our hypersonics. And they have openly
(11:26):
said we would hit your economic centers, your banking centers,
your electric centers, and your factories to produce long-range drones
and missiles. I mean, they would go after those specific things.
And you're right. That would literally just bring our economic
to a standstill, aside from all the other problems that
are already out there. Now, Russia is vulnerable, too, but
(11:46):
that's not helping anybody if we get into a war
that we can't win and could cause that much damage
for a country that has no interest or ability to
invade us. So we need to cool the jets and
start talking a lot more about diplomacy.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Well, I concur with you on that. And that's about
as far as we're going to get towards solutions today,
Daniel Davis. We keep trying. Someday it'll happen. You and
I'll come up with the answer to everyone's problems and
We'll just go on.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
We will.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
Find something else to do with our days. Daniel Davis,
Deep Dive. Find his podcast wherever you get your podcasts
and tune in every week to the 55KRC Morning Show
at 830 for another thoughtful analysis. Thank you again, Daniel Davis.
I appreciate your time on the program.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
See you then.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Take care. 841-55KRC, the talk station. We're going to ask
an expert. Like Steve from USA is going to come in.
Got something to tell you about. Don't go away. More
to talk about.
Brian Thomas News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.