×

Clay and Buck

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

“Light It on Fire!” Pro-Abortion Activists Call for Violence

27 Jun 2022

BUCK: There was some rioting over the weekend, not that much. The blue-haired cat ladies at some of these protests less destructive — but still very angry — than some of the other riots we’ve seen from the left wing. But here, for example, is a pro-abortion activist calling for violence — this is a big, no-no, friends, calling for violence — against Supreme Court justices burning it all down, et cetera.

CLAY: This is a crime. Whoever this person is should be prosecuted for the crime. When you call for violence against sitting Supreme Court justices — and say, “I’m calling for actual violence,” so you’re not even able to say, “Well, that was metaphorically speaking.” When you call for violence and you demand that it be lit on fire, you are committing a crime and so you should be prosecuted for that crime.

Now, everybody can advocate, Buck — as you well know — for whatever political positions they want. But this is my concern is that when you have illogical, irrational people, and they sit and see a 5-4 Supreme Court decision, some of those people are going to think, “If we eliminate a justice, this choice — this decision — changes,” and we have to ensure that the justices are protected, but we also have to make sure that we hold accountable the people who are encouraging the acts of true violence.

Recent Stories

Get Password Hint

Enter your email to receive your password hint.

Need help? Contact customer service.

Forgot password

Enter your e-mail to receive your account information via e-mail.

Need help? Contact customer service.

SCOTUS Rules in Favor of High School Coach Fired for Prayer

27 Jun 2022

BUCK: Let’s start with this case that just came down on school prayer, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, and this is a pretty straightforward one. This is a pretty clear case, I think, in many respects. You had a high school football coach — who, by the way, served two decades in the Marine Corps. You had a high school football coach who, starting in 2008, after the game, would kneel down in prayer, silent prayer. Nothing coercive, didn’t invite anyone, didn’t say, “Hey, team, we have to go pray.”

I coached high school athletics. I know the routine here. I know what this is like and the schedule and the bond you form with your players — and I also went to a Jesuit school, so we had church before soccer; we had church after soccer. It was very different, but this is a public cool, and so he would kneel down, and he would say a silent prayer. And he did this for years. And no one had a problem with it. No one had a problem with it at all, until another coach saw this individual, Coach Kennedy.

Because other players understood what was going on, and they chose of their own volition to take a knee alongside Coach Kennedy in a 30-second quiet prayer of thanks. That’s it, and this other — this other coach, I believe it was, might have been a parent. But it was another adult brought this up to the school superintendent to praise it, actually, to say, “Oh, isn’t that great? Isn’t that cool? Your coach takes a knee after the game in silent prayer, and other players decide to join. Isn’t that such a nice situation.”

And the school superintendent completely flipped out and said, “You can’t do this anymore. And if you keep doing it, then we’re gonna put you on paid leave,” and eventually he was fired. So, a coach in America is fired… Remember, this is after the game is finished. He’s effectively on his own time but on school property saying a silent prayer, 30 seconds long, and he never said other players should do it. He said it’s a free country. You may take a knee alongside me if you choose to do so. Almost all of the players… I know a lot of you are thinking, “Well, that’s pretty great.”

A lot of the players, almost all of them took a knee alongside this coach of their own volition, and then this made its way to the courts ’cause the school fired him. He sued and said, “Hold on a second. This is a violation of both my free exercise, free exercise of religion and free speech rights under the First Amendment. And sure enough, today, by a 6-3 decision, they found for Coach Kennedy, that the school did in fact violate his rights of free speech and the free exercise of religion. Clay, I know you’re following this one too.

For me, if it wasn’t coming after Roe, this would be a situation, this would be a circumstance that might not get quite as much outrage from the liberal intelligentsia. It’s a pretty narrow decision. It’s not saying prayer in classrooms, not saying that, you know, that he can go and evangelize during the lunch hour. It’s saying if someone does a silent prayer for 30 seconds after the game when they could be making a cell phone to, you know, make reservation at a restaurant, make a cell phone call, that’s fine. They’re allowed to do that. The school is going too far here to shut that down. But post-Roe, I think we’re gonna hear a lot of, “Oh, my gosh. It’s The Handmaid’s Tale!”

CLAY: Yeah, Buck, look I think if Donald Trump wanted to decide not to run in the wake of all of the decisions that are coming down from this Supreme Court term, he could argue that he made America great again and it was time for a new generation of leaders to pick up from here because also he could argue this is what happens when Joe Biden wins. The Supreme Court decisions are the legacy of the Trump administration, and that legacy is likely to build and continue, barring unhealthy outcomes for some of these judges for a generation to come.

In this case, to me, is really remarkable in the context of, yes, there were six justices who said a coach after a game can kneel in prayer if he’s at a public school, but it took seven years for this coach, this former Coach Kennedy, and three judges still said he didn’t have the right to do it. That’s maybe what stands out to me the most about this. And I think for many of our listeners is so staggering, because there are so many sporting events, especially all over the red states where I go and watch college football games every weekend, oftentimes for Fox Sports to report on them, where they begin the game with a benediction of sorts before a college football game featuring a state institution.

So, the fact that the… Remember, this was out on the West Coast in the state of Washington. So, the Ninth Circuit out there completely rejected his ability to be able to do this. And again, it took him seven years, Buck, to be able to triumph. He lost his job. I hope he’ll be able to go back and get that job anew and there will be some sort of vindication outside of the Supreme Court ruling for a guy who probably liked coaching football. You know. You coached high school sports, as you were saying, and I certainly have coached Little League and beyond in an effort to impart hopefully a few life lessons than and make the teams a little bit better.

But the fact that there were still three justices who don’t believe that a public school coach of a sporting team, regardless, ’cause this would apply to multiple teams, right, can kneel in prayer after the game without being fired is, to me, evidence of how far outside the mainstream the left wing of this court has become. Because I think there are a lot of independents, I think there are a lot of Democrats out there who are saying, my goodness, you’re telling me a guy can’t profess his own faith on the field after the game, as he sees fit?

It’s really kind of crazy that we could have ever reached a point where it took him seven years and three justices would have not upheld his right to do this. And this is a vindication and victory for Trump and the justices that he put on the court because if Hillary had won in 2016 this guy wouldn’t have had the right. I mean, unfortunately, that’s the reality. If Hillary had gotten these three Supreme Court justice appointments this random high school football coach, Buck, wouldn’t have been able to take a knee and pray after a football game.

And you could say that doesn’t matter, but I think it does in the context of what liberty and freedom exists in this country. So, this is a big win, and I’m with you, Buck. I think it’s gotten a lot of attention because it comes on the heels of the overturning of Roe v. Wade that happened on Friday. But I think what it’s emblematic about is a reach back against the overreach that the left wing on this court has made the law of the land in many different respects.

BUCK: It also shows that the atheist left has a deep and abiding hostility to religion. I mean, you see the ACLU, for example, tries to root out, stamp out religion everywhere and anywhere. That seems to be its mission now. That and just being woke, of course, not actually standing up for civil rights and civil liberties in any meaningful sense if at all. And I think, though, Clay this decision — and I mentioned there are a couple of others that are likely to come down probably tomorrow, later this week for sure, that will be a slap down of the EPA. There will be Remain in Mexico, which is clearly constitutional, by the way.

The way that… What you’re seeing here is that the left, the libs are losing one of their favorite toys. They think of the Supreme Court as their thing. When it matters, it gives them what they want. You look back in the last 20 years or so, you can think off the top of your head of the only decisions that have really gone against them that they’re very upset about, it would be obviously George Bush in 2000, it would be Citizens United, which was an absurd case. The Democrats are actually claiming that it’s not a violation.

This was the Obama solicitor general claiming it wasn’t unconstitutional to ban the publication of books 60 or 90 days before an election, as if government should have that right. I mean, that’s completely a violation of First Amendment. And then, of course, Heller, right? So, there were a few decisions where the left gets really upset. Those are the only ones I can think of they get upset. Everything else they’ve gotten their way. And then you stretch back for decades to the really seminal cases, Roe at the very top of the list.

Roe and then all the way to Obergefell, they’ve gotten their way on so many of these, and it’s on issues where they needed a super legislature of nine people in black robes because they can’t actually… When they wouldn’t actually win at the state level with the states being able to do what they’re supposed to under the Tenth Amendment. I think this is dawning on the Democrats now. They have political fights that they have to wage that they thought were over, and this is going to continue well beyond just the rage that we’re seeing on the streets over the weekend, Clay. We’re entering a new legal era here, one actually rooted in the Constitution, and the left is pretty upset about it.

CLAY: There’s no doubt, and this is going to be, and this is why — and, unfortunately, we have to mention this. When there are some of these… Now, this was 6-3 decision, but when there are a bunch of these 5-4 decisions, I worry when you talk about the rage of the left, the willingness to kill Brett Kavanaugh, the attempted assassination of Brett Kavanaugh already, when these final Supreme Court opinions come out, we’re in a really dangerous spot. And I’ll talk about this a little bit more certainly in the months, unfortunately, ahead.

But between now and when theoretically the Democrats would lose control of the House and certainly of the Senate, I just reiterate this, if there were a vacancy on the Supreme Court and if it were in that five-person majority, then Joe Biden would have the opportunity, because he has a 50-vote Senate with the tie-break with Kamala Harris to ram through a new Supreme Court justice. And that might be the last time that the Democrats are going to have the White House and control of the Senate for 10 or 15 years.

We don’t know certainly what will happen in the years ahead, but that could be a, I think, cataclysmic and calamitous event coming off of potentially violence that led to the death of a Supreme Court justice like we saw the left-wing imbecile tried to do associated with Kavanaugh. So, we’ll talk about that; it’s a danger. But today I think everyone should be happy about that ruling, Coach Kennedy able to pray and so many other high school public school teachers out there who are coaching teams have that same ability as well.

Recent Stories

C&B 24/7: Clay & Buck’s Show Prep

27 Jun 2022

CNN Business: West pushes Russia into its first foreign debt default since 1918
CNN: Supreme Court rules school district cannot prohibit high school football coach’s prayers on field
CBS: Five things to know now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade
Star Advertiser: https://www.staradvertiser.com/2022/06/26/hawaii-news/the-forgotten-war-is-remembered-on-72nd-anniversary/
WP: Pence leans in on abortion as Trump, other potential 2024 candidates are more cautious
NY Times: Violent Threats to Election Workers Are Common. Prosecutions are Not.
OutKick: Adult Man, as Trans Skateboarder, Allowed To Compete Against Young Female Skaters; Places First in Event
The Hill: Doctors who perform abortions will be targeted for prosecution, South Dakota governor says
Boston Globe: Biden, other critics fear Thomas’s ‘extreme’ position on contraception
NY Post: USA Today demoted me for a tweet — because its woke newsrooms are out of touch with readers
NY Post: More than a million voters have switched to Republican Party in last year: report
Daily Mail: ‘I think you’re clear’: VOICEMAIL from Joe Biden to Hunter about NY Times report on his Chinese business dealings proves he DID speak to his son about his relationship with criminal dubbed the ‘spy chief of China’
Business Insider: Boris Johnson: Reports about the ‘death of democracy’ in the US are ‘grossly, grossly exaggerated’

Recent Stories

Life Wins: Roe v. Wade Overturned After 50 Years

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: A huge, huge day in the news with Roe v. Wade done. It took 50 years, give or take, but here we are. We’ll get into all of this. I’m solo today. Clay is tending to family matters. He may be joining us via phone at some point during the show. Depends on his obligations today. But this is Buck Sexton. I’m down in Florida currently, and I was watching live this morning as the massive, massive Supreme Court decision came down, arguably the biggest Supreme Court decision in my lifetime — certainly in the top two or three, I would think.

Massive decision, 6-3 here, a 200-page opinion released by the court this morning. So, I was reading it feverishly to get through as much as humanly possible before coming on air. So, there’s a couple of ways to look at this. And we’re gonna break down the legal aspect of it, the political implications, the possibility for civil unrest from Democrats, of course. As we know, they are — despite at one time they are fixated on a riot coming from their political opponents, the Democrats are — the riot as normal political discourse party. That could happen.

We’ll certainly look at that. What does this mean for the midterm elections as well? Can Democrats capitalize on this decision as a means of mobilizing the Democrat base? There’s so much going on here, there’s so much to look at, but I would start with the very simple proposition here that life wins in this case. The Supreme Court decision has not made abortion illegal nationally, but it will result in — and I believe the state of Missouri has already, because it had some laws ready to go in case of this decision. It has effectively outlawed almost all abortions.

But it does mean that there will be far more babies born. There will be far more children who grow up to be adults, people who have lives that they’re able to lead, and parents who will have made the right decision and will know that in time — even if they were scared at first, even if it was unplanned, even if it was a surprise or an inconvenient time or any of those things. So there will be now millions, millions of lives over the decades to come that will occur. It’s not even…

To say that the lives are saved is true, but there also will be people who get to enjoy their full lives, get to enjoy the experience of life and parents who will enjoy the experience of their children, of being parents, as a result of this decision. Now, there will still be abortion in New York and California — and Colorado just recently passed a radical state level abortion law. Abortion, all nine months of a pregnancy. But in this 6-3 decision, the critical change here is that both Roe and Casey were overruled. Both Roe and Casey were found to be bad law, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Now, there’s a lot of intricate legal analysis when you read this opinion authored by Alito in the majority. When you read this opinion, you find yourself saying, it’s stunning, honestly, at this point in time. It is stunning to look back and see how flimsy and dishonest and obtuse and just… The whole Roe regime was built on lies. The legal analysis was preposterous. It can’t even begin to hold up to rational scrutiny. It can’t even begin to be looked at as a good-faith argument. And you can start with this proposition.


The right to an abortion, according to Roe, came from a “right to privacy,” neither of which are actually mentioned in the Constitution, neither of which actually exist. And then the right to abortion that comes from a right to privacy was somehow tied to a bunch of different amendments. They weren’t somehow how many different amendments. They threw a bunch of numbers in there. And then later on it was, “Well, it’s actually a liberty right that comes from a due process right.” This was a complete…

This was not only, of course, violence to all the millions of preborn children who suffered as a result of this Roe regime. This was violence to the law. This was lunacy. It was astonishingly dishonest for the legal regime in this country to have upheld this as long as it did. It was astonishingly obtuse for Democrats to walk around with this certainty, this slogan, “a constitutional right to an abortion.” At the time of Roe, the costs of states outlawed abortion perform there was a long history of abortion as illegal, and abortion was certainly not even a procedure that one could engage in at the time of the founding.

So this was completely contrary to the rights — and this is all laid out in the opinion — that you would find as a result of driving into our history, looking at the history and what the implied and foundational routes are as a result of that history. So he this was always bad law. We knew it. I said it. And I’ve been thinking, stretching back to last fall, that they would be willing to do this. It is a massive step in the right direction for the rule of law and also for decency and morality in this country, on so many levels.

To demand that people not only accept that babies were being killed as a function of not only this massive abortion industry in so many of these Planned Parenthood and other facilities across the country — and we know that’s what was going on. We know just based on the language they always use. “Oh, it’s about freedom of a woman to control her destiny.” No, it’s, “Can you kill babies in the womb?” That’s actually the question. They can talk about all these other things. But the fundamental question was the protection of the life in the womb.

And now the states can look at and determine, “Well, when does that life begin?” And this is something that on the state-by-state basis there will be different responses. But to make everyone in this country go through with this… It was almost a Soviet-level pretense: “Yes, there’s a constitutional right to an abortion.” No one really thought that. It’s not in the Constitution. It’s not in our legal and constitutional history. The basis for this was a fabrication.

And so in that sense, they were forcing us all to be complicit in a lie. And what do I always say? To borrow from the great Solzhenitsyn, speaking of anti-Soviets, “Live not by lies.” Roe forced us all as a nation to live by lies for decades. And now these different states that have these policies are gonna have to justify what they’re doing. They no longer have this catch-all. They no longer have this facade of “It’s a constitutional right. Shut up! Decided. It’s over.” Not anymore. Now what’s the argument?

Now who is going to want to be that state legislator that stands up in Colorado and says, “A baby at nine months in the womb is not a baby. Do anything you want to it. It’s fine. It’s legal.” Who wants to make that barbarous argument now? I know there are a lot of very ardently pro-abortion legislators out there — Nancy Pelosi and others among them — who have been saying such things. But what you’re going to see is now it becomes much more difficult.

Now they have to actually engage with the substance. They have to engage with the merits of the argument. What is it, then, at nine months, if it’s not a baby? At eight months, at seven months, at six months? What is that little heartbeat? What are those tiny fingernails and eyes and the nose and the adorable little toes? What is all of that if it’s not a baby? Democrats are acting out with rage in a frenzy right now because for the first time in any of their — in, well, basically the first time in memory.

Some people may remember a pre-Roe era, but very few these days, comparatively. And for the first time, they’re going to have to make the case that convenience overrides a right to life and that the state — which has a fundamental, foundational responsibility to protect innocent life — should turn the other way as people continue to make this decision. This is often just so barbarous, it’s so clearly morally wrong. And yet here we are, after how many decades of this, after how many decades of having to pretend that this made sense.

To pretend that it was constitutional, to pretend that there was some ethical understanding that we had all reached as a country. No, we had not. I want to say — I’d be remiss if I did not say it — a huge amount of gratitude should be given to those who have been working patiently, tirelessly in the pro-life movement; for those who have been convincing people, who have been providing assistance to mothers who are having a crisis pregnancy, who are having a difficult time with this in their lives; for those who worked in legal circles, the legislature and the Federalist Society.

There has been an army of righteousness that for decades have been fighting to get to this point. Now, it’s not over. The army cannot disband, so to speak. Remember, an army of righteousness means one that is lawful and kind and loving and supportive of all lives, and supportive of lives of the unborn, helping everyone who is having a difficult time with their pregnancy, helping their fellow Americans understand why this is such an important issue, and now taking it to the legislature. But the fight continues on, because now we’ll see what states decide.

There will be some states that protect life. There will be other states that decide they want to go as far as possible — and this is going to be a political issue. Now I think you’re going to see a bit of hysteria from the Democrats about, “They want to ban contraception, they want to ban condoms, they want to ban…” No. That’s not what’s going on right now. But they are very upset, and I would just leave you with this thought before we get into some of the politics of this in a moment.

And I mean, you know, the electoral who’s in power, who’s calling the shots components here. There are a lot of people for whom today — and it will take time for this to sink in — either through their own personal actions or their support of the abortion regime for decades will slowly come around to realizing that the constitutional justification for this was always. And then that leaves you only with your own conscience and your own morality. And it’s gonna be a whole lot harder for people.

It’s gonna be very difficult on a lot of people in this country right now, I think, who have the ability to think critically and engage in some level of introspection over this. It’s gonna be painful when this finally seeps in, that this was not some constitutional right all along and that something else, something very different was at work here. So, it is a day that, as I’ve said, you can summarize it as, “Life wins, but the battle is not over.” It is a great day for the legacy of the Trump administration. There’s no question about it. It’s a great day for the Supreme Court.

They did not buckle to the obvious pressure campaign from the left to continue with this regime of infanticide. And it’s a good day for the country because the rule of law is starting to, at least for a moment here, feel like it means something again — and it’s not just the whim of dictatorial, activist judges. It’s not the demands of the mob out on the street or in front of the judges’ homes. It’s what is actually true, what is the law, what is right, and what is good. So those are all things that come together today.

Recent Stories

Clay Calls from Family Funeral to Weigh In on the Roe Decision

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: Enormous Supreme Court decision came down this morning. Roe v. Wade overturned, Planned Parenthood v. Casey overturned, 6-3 decision. It has been decades in the making. And we have to now turn to our cohost, our good friend, Clay Travis, who has family obligations today that have kept him away from the mic for the three hours of the show, but he is calling in now ’cause I know a lot of you wanted to hear his take on what all this means. Clay, first, the audience has been asking: How are you doing?

CLAY: It’s a tough day — and, by the way, I’m on the road. We’re pulled off here on the side of the road, so cell phone reception is always a tough situation like this. But he was 62-years-old, listened to the Rush Limbaugh Show for 30 years. His wife and daughter… His daughter did a phenomenal eulogy. She’s young. To be in that position where you’re eulogizing your father or your mother is something that’s incredibly difficult for anybody to do.

They came up and they said they had heard from so many people after we talked about it because so many of his friends listened as well and had been fans of the show for a long time, so it was tough. And I think, in addition to the daughter, my uncle is still alive at 90, and to hear over 90 that one of your sons has died totally unexpectedly is just a brutal thing I think for anybody to have to experience. So, I appreciate it.

I had so many people reach out to me on behalf of so many people from the show who were listening and have been through this. And obviously we are, in many ways, a big family, all of us together. And so that’s been tough. And that’s why I wasn’t on today. Obviously, the news broke, and it broke right as I was going in basically for the funeral. But my thoughts, first of all, on the news is, Buck — and I’m curious what you think, but — I’m extremely disappointed in John Roberts not signing on to the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

I know he supported the Mississippi law and concurred there but then did not sign on. And my concern is looking forward to we’ve had a lot of time to discuss a lot of this. My biggest concern is all of these justices in the conservative majority have a monster target on their backs still, and I just think it’s an awful… For someone like John Roberts — who claims that he cares so much about the legitimacy of the court, Buck, for him — not to be willing to stand up for legitimacy of the court and say, “Hey, we’re gonna make this a 6-3 decision so that all the nutjobs out there…”

And we already know this tried to happen with Brett Kavanaugh. So, that someone’s not trying to kill a justice to change the outcome of this case. To me, I’m disgusted with John Roberts for not joining this majority and making it 6-3. And then bigger picture, Buck, I think we’ve discussed a lot of the implications or ramifications already. But it is, to me, “Hey, if you truly believe in the democratic process in the United States, then right now you get the opportunity to make a choice about what you think the law should be as it pertains to abortion in this country.”

Whatever state you’re in, whatever community you live in, you now have an opportunity to make those decisions. And it’s the ultimate democratic process. The courts deciding on their own was the anti-democratic progress. So, to me, this is beyond a shadow of a doubt a moment for democracy to triumph, for us to have hard conversations about what the law should be all over this country and to, hopefully, reach a moment of realization as a country in the democratic process, as should have existed 50 years ago.

And then the last thing I would say — and then I’m curious what you would say about all this — is, will we have this violence, right? Are we going to have the “mostly peaceful protests” breaking out all over this country tonight? I’m gonna be in Atlanta, Georgia. I know you’re down, I believe, still in South Florida. People listening to us all over the country, are they confident that their cities and states are going to be calm tonight, or are we gonna see a reprisal of the summer of 2020 when everything came undone?

BUCK: Yeah, I’m not surprised at all, Clay, about Roberts being unwilling to go along with the overturning of Roe. I’m less concerned about the long-term implications for that although clearly the tension around the court is — and it is also a little bit confusing I think for folks, ’cause you hear, “Well, it’s a 6-3 decision.” So Roberts is with the majority on the Mississippi law, so everyone’s reporting this as a 6-3 decision. But Roberts did his own separate concurrence to state that he would not have gone along with the overturning of Roe specifically.

He would have done it in perhaps a more phased process. I’ve always thought that he just lacks internal fortitude and is an institutionalist above all else. But, overall, the impact here is Roe is gone so that’s obviously huge and momentous. And now, I wonder because these two things are tied together, right, Clay, the midterms coming up and your concern, my concern, everyone’s concern about riots, violence, anything like that. We had Ann Coulter on before, and I asked her about this.

I do think — and I wanted your take on this. There has been some violence against pro-life pregnancy centers and other things. But it’s been vandalism and it hasn’t been on the scale of, say, BLM riots that we saw in 2020. Do you think that may come from this decision? But also, how does the recognition of the imminent elections of Democrats…? It’s not a good look to burn down buildings, usually, right? I mean, they got away with it in 2020 but Trump was president, and the left was insane. What do you think about all that?

CLAY: Yes. So, that’s such an important question as we head into the weekend. And you and I have been discussing about when this opinion was gonna come down. And I kind of floated the idea — I don’t know if I said it on the air or just in our conversation — that maybe they would hold it into the long holy day weekend of July 4th. They obviously released it on a Friday going into a weekend. I don’t know. We had this Supreme Court leak. And, Buck, the Supreme Court leak obviously did not work, and it may, I think — I hope — have alleviated some of the tension because people have had weeks to be angry about this decision.

I also think Democrats have recognized that this isn’t their huge saving grace when everything is going on wrong because the base of the Democrat Party did not seem to be super motivated like I think a lot of Democrats thought and hoped they would be. So given the fact that we’ve had five or six weeks to come to grips with the fact that this opinion was coming down, I like to think that maybe we have alleviated the overall tension that could lead to an explosive protest. But — but — the other part of me thinks so much of this protest melt manufactured and organized.

And to your point, Buck, the party in power bears more of the brunt of the blame, but I’m still concerned that in some places there may be an incentive to create violence. And then there are lots of people out there who are not political in any nature that when violence occurs, they take it as an opportunity to riot, to loot, to plunder. And it doesn’t take very many people for all hell to break loose as everyone listening to us right now knows who lived through that summer of extreme voice in 2020. So, the other thing I would say, too, voted with this, Buck, is, we still don’t know who the leaker was.

And I still want to find out how that happened for purposes of the court’s legitimacy. And also, I’ll circle back around — to go Jen Psaki on everybody here — to what you said about Roberts as an institutionalist. I agree with that, to a certain extent. But if you are an institutionalist, your number one goal should be to protect the institution. And when you have attempted assassination attempts going on against your conservative justices and you’re allowing this to be a 5-4 decision?

Look, when you get to be in your sixties and seventies — as I should know and everybody else out there should know, though — things can happen unexpectedly in terms of health. And so, when this decision is hanging by the thread of one justice and we know already a left-wing lunatic went to Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh’s house with the express intent to kill him so this law would not become the law of the land, between now and the terms, Buck, Joe Biden theoretically would have the ability to replace a conservative justice in a opening emerged.

I don’t like the fact that John Roberts has allowed that same incentive to continue to exist in that if someone is killed — and I hate to even have to talk about it, but coming off an assassination attempt, I think it would be failure if we didn’t. If someone is killed, this opinion, given that it’s a 5-4 opinion, could flip. To me, if you’re an institutionalist like John Roberts, he had an obligation to support his institution and make this a 6-3 decision.

So, this choice doesn’t hang on the heartbeat of one justice — and right now that’s all it does. And there are enough crazy people as we all know who could be motivated, there’s already been one to try to take up arms over this issue. I think John Roberts failed the court, I think he failed the country, and I think he failed his own institution most prominently by failing to sign on and make this a legitimate 6-3 decision. As you mentioned, people are confused because it’s 6-3 upholding the Mississippi law but it’s only 5-4 in terms of overturning Roe v. Wade.

BUCK: We’re speaking to Clay Travis, cohost of the show, but he’s dealing with family today. Clay, one more thing before I know you gotta get back to taking care of the family. Former President Donald Trump, 45, put out this statement from his Save America PAC, President Donald J. Trump:

“Today’s decision, which is the biggest WIN for LIFE in a generation, along with other decisions that have been announced recently, were only made possible because I delivered everything as promised, including nominating and getting three highly respected and strong Constitutionalists confirmed to the United States Supreme Court. It was my great honor to do so! I did not cave to the Radical Left Democrats, their partners in the Fake News Media, or the RINOs who are likewise the true, but silent, enemy of the people.”

CLAY: (laughing)

BUCK: He goes on a bit more. But, Clay, first of all, it’s so Trump, right? Most pro-life president — by the numbers, by the reality — in my lifetime. I think you’d have to say, in our lifetime.

CLAY: When you look at what Trump did in getting three youngish, highly qualified justices on to the court, it is maybe the most consequential presidency since — I think it’s fair to say — Ronald Reagan in terms of advocating for conservative views. And I think if you had told anybody, Buck, when Donald Trump came down that escalator in Trump Tower and announced that he was running for president back in, I guess it would have been now, what, the summer of ’15 or whatever? I can barely even keep up. I guess it would have been…

Yeah, the summer of ’15, basically, when he announced that he was gonna be running for president, if you or had said, “Yeah, he’s gonna win,” and followed it up by saying, “and he’s going to be the most successful president in terms of transforming the court and advocating for conservative views in most of our lives — maybe, frankly, almost anyone’s life, even going back past before Reagan,” I don’t think anybody would have believed it, but I think the consequences are here.

You look at John Roberts. He had no spine, and when he has been faced with tough decisions. He’s tended to worry about what everybody in Washington thought. Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, they all were Trump appointees, and they all came in and delivered. They did not waver, they didn’t go Souter, and conservatives have been hoping for choices like these for generations. I think you have to give credit to the Federalist Society.

People may not pay a lot of attention to them, but they made the choice that they were going to vet the justices and vet judges and get fully qualified constitutionalists on the bench, and they have had a transformative impact on the federal judiciary. And given how crazy Democrats have gone, that formative impact has been transformative, but also incredibly protective of constitutionalist ideals. So, I wouldn’t have bet on it, but my goodness. What an incredible legacy for Trump, even if he only serves one term as president.

BUCK: This is kind of fun. I get say: Everyone be sure to listen in to Clay Travis —

CLAY: (laughing)

BUCK: — on the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Show on Monday, the show that he cohosts with me every day, but Clay —

CLAY: You and I usually worry about cell phone signals. Did I sound okay? That’s what I was most concerned about calling in on my cell phone.

BUCK: Nah, man, crystal clear. All good to go. Look, thoughts and prayers to you and yours. Appreciate you sharing your insight on a day when you have a lot of family stuff to tend to and obviously you and I will be back in the cockpit on Monday, my friend. Thanks so much.

CLAY: No doubt. I appreciate everybody out there. Thank you for all of the condolences and all of the incredibly heartfelt expressions. I’m glad that I could talk to everybody here. Back to the family now. I hope everybody has a fantastic weekend, and I hope we actually don’t have any rioting, looting, plundering to have to worry about all throughout the country.

BUCK: Amen to that. Talk to you Monday, my friend. Thanks, Clay.

Recent Stories

The Continuing Debate: Who’s Worse, Fauci or Birx?

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: Let’s get into the latest here with covid. Dr. Birx, I was shocked to hear… I forget who it was that told me on the show, but we found out that according to Scott Atlas, Dr. Atlas, Dr. Birx was actually more of an iron-fisted covid authoritarian than Fauci was (impression), “Which that is very authoritarian, let me tell you. Fauci may be tiny, but those tiny fists may as well be gloved in a medieval mail or plate armor-like substance.” Fauci likes to say, “Just do what I say or else,” and then it’s just, “Oh, no, it’s the committee! It’s the CDC. It’s ‘the science.’”

But Birx was asked this question; I thought it was so interesting. There’s been no accounting for what we now know to be 100% true, which is that the realities of the vaccine were misrepresented early on. They were wrong. They can say they were wrong in good faith, but telling everybody, “If you get the shot, you won’t get covid, and you definitely will not die,” neither of those things are true. If you are at risk, the shots are helpful for a period of time at reducing hospitalization and mortality, not eliminating either of those things, not even close.

And then when you’re beyond the period of efficacy, which is only a few months, then it’s almost like all bets are off. Then, all of a sudden, the data changes dramatically. Here is Dr. Birx of the covid task force, under Trump. But, remember, you go to war with the virus with the CDC army you have, you know what I mean? You had this… We had how many decades of a CDC, we’re waiting for the pandemic, and finally this happens, and it was a mess. It was a mess. But here’s Dr. Birx when she was asked if the government was lying or guessing about people not getting covid, ’cause the government said, “If you get the shot, you won’t get covid,” right? That’s what the government told us, the CDC.

Here’s Birx’s response. Play 10.

BUCK: Mmm-hmm. She doesn’t know. Notice how apparently no one is responsible, and this is the danger of bureaucracies always is that they can diffuse accountability. Nobody really knows who’s responsible, right? It’s like, you know what happens when you walk into a… Ever had the experience you walk into a government office — usually people say the DMV — I always tell you the truth. I’ve actually recently had… The last times I’ve gone to DMV, it hasn’t been that bad, hasn’t been that bad, just gonna tell you. I mean, it wasn’t great.

They weren’t giving me, like shiatsu massage and bringing me delicious cheeseburger or something, but it wasn’t bad. Wasn’t a bad situation. But I have been in government offices before where you want to shout out, “Who’s in charge here?” but you know the answer is really nobody. You say, “Well, what accountability is there for people worrying slowly, not caring, being incompetent?” There is none. They get paid the same either way. You get that sense dealing with any large bureaucracy. But you really get it when you’re talking about the CDC and the health authoritarians under covid who…

I have to keep bringing this up and reminding everybody. I was very pleased to see our friend Alex Berenson on Tucker Carlson’s very excellent show last night. I was on Sean Hannity’s very excellent TV show last night. But I was watching Fox before I went on Fox and I saw that Berenson was on. And we gotta stay on this stuff, meaning the stories of the vaccine and the mandates. They’re not done. I know people get frustrated. “Oh, Buck, come on.” Not only are they, the Fauciites, not done with you, they’re hoping that they can bring a lot of this stuff back.

I think the blue states are gonna go into seasonal mask and social distancing policies, which is stupid beyond words. It is pointless oppression and agitation of people to be some kind of anxiety-alleviation tool for neurotic libs. “I can’t see people breathing without masks on!” They need to calm down. But they won’t, and they’ll point to people like Fauci, and that’s why I think Fauci is the absolute worst. That is really… If you were writing Fauci’s bio on Twitter, it should be “Dr. Anthony Fauci and then in all capital letters beneath it “THE ABSOLUTE WORST.”

He thinks everything’s fine, though, with himself, with his response; he’s done a great job. He’s proud of all the wrong, of all the oppression, the destruction, the mental anguish, the anxiety, the fear — all of it totally unnecessary, did you not help us at all — masking, social distancing, lockdowns, and to a large extent, to a large extent, the vaccination. Totally worthless, totally worthless. Vaccines, like you said, it’s just like the flu, folks. It’s just like the flu in terms of some people should get it and everybody else should be left alone, and we go forward with life.

That’s it. We had the template, but Fauci shattered the template because the CNN, PBS, New York Times audience of coastal libs and the elites of the Democrat apparatus were, “Oh, my gosh. Covid!” And they wanted the country… Look at Joe Biden. How did we end up with this guy as president? We ended up with him as president because it was “a once-in-a-century pandemic” and “we’re all gonna die” and “Trump’s doing a terrible job,” they said, “and he’s not taking the virus seriously.” They created a maelstrom, a tornado of panic.

So they could have shoved anybody out there. Actually, they kept him in the basement during the tornado, so to speak. Actually, they just had this whole narrative. People were terrified, they just wanted change from what was going on. And Biden, for them, represented just enough change. And, please, don’t… I know I’m getting all these emails, “Oh, but he didn’t really win” or whatever. He’s the president now. What do you want me to do? (laughing) He’s sitting in 1600 Pennsylvania. He is the president. So, this is what they managed to pull off, whether it was ethical or…

It wasn’t ethical. Whether it was legal or not, fair or not? Well, that’s a whole other conversation. But they managed to pull this off because of the panic that was created. Oh, I mentioned Fauci. (impression) “I can’t let you go off for your weekend with your big celebration of a good Supreme Court decision without letting you know I am still lingering in the background ready at a moment’s notice to give you your eighth or ninth vaccination shot. That’s the one that really helps! That’s where maybe the super powers kick in. Can you see through walls? I don’t know. Let’s try shot number 9. Perhaps the laser eyes where you can cut open a steel safe? There’s no data to support this, but let’s see.”

Here he is. Play clip 12.

BUCK: (impression) “All is well with Fauci, who is a stunningly handsome and suave man as you will see on his thousands and thousands of media appearances over the last couple of years. Fauci’s still got that swagger. Ruined the country during covid but still got that Fauci swagger.”

Yep. Pretty much.

Recent Stories

Kari Lake Puts CNN Reporter in Her Place

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: Kari Lake is running for Arizona governor, and she had a little exchange with CNN yesterday that (chuckling) I wanted to share with you and here it is.

BUCK: Wow. Daaamn! Laying it down there. As long as it airs on CNN+, workers’ comp, workers’ comp. Too bad. No more CNN+. It didn’t last very long. Oh, CNN+, we barely knew ye, and here we are now. So, yeah, that’s one way to handle the media. I’m just gonna say, look, CNN and these other lib outlets, they only want to talk to Republicans really to attack them — unless it comes to an issue like the gun control bill that just passed with some Republicans support, and then they will praise Republicans for about a day and then start trashing them again. But for some Republicans, apparently that’s enough. I gotta say, I do not believe that the Supreme Court decision is going to have a major impact on the midterm elections. I do think the gun control thing from those Republican senators was not helpful.

Recent Stories

Democrats Always Make Emotional, Not Legal, Arguments

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: There was a big ruling that came down yesterday, too, though. Not quite in the same category of legal and political importance as the ruling today, obviously, but still big — big for Second Amendment rights — and, no surprise, the Democrats had that one totally wrong as well. I’ll just note this for all of you. They never really spend any time actually disagreeing with the legal side of it. It’s just slogans and emotions and talking points.

When I say why I think Roe is bad law or when I say why the right to carry, which was effectively ratified yesterday — carry a weapon outside the home — it’s amazing as we see that the Democrats don’t even feel the need to argue on these points. Right? They just say, “We don’t like it, guns are bad.” Here is President Biden yesterday who… His legal analysis is honestly childlike. It’s as though this man has…

He writes laws and went to law school or at least his staff writes laws and then he signs them when they shuffle him in the right direction and tell him to actually put his initials down. But here he is telling everything that the New York gun law that was dealt with yesterday — it’s more than just New York, other states, too — was also the wrong decision. Replay 22.

BUCK: How about, “Why?” Why was that a bad decision yesterday? Why is it? I know they’ll say a lot of things, but listen closely to what they say. Why is today’s Roe v. Wade decision, overturning it, a bad decision? They use all of this blather that doesn’t make any sense. “Women’s right to choose.” That’s a slogan. That’s not in the Constitution. To choose what? A woman’s right to choose to get vaccinated or not, that didn’t count, right? Bodily autonomy when it comes to vaccines, that argument was out the window. Get the shot or else!

Get the shot or else you’re a threat to society — a shot that at best lasts, what, two, three months? Get it or else. Right? “The power to control their destiny,” “the fundamental right of privacy,” “the health of women is now at risk”? Well the health was unborn babies was certainly at risk, and a lot of them will no longer be at risk as a result of this. So what is the argument? To just keep repeating it, to just keep saying it, it’s as though they have a religious faith, and that religious faith justifies the existence of a Supreme Court decision.

They really have elevated the state in place of religion, really the state in place of God. That’s how they view so many of these issues. And then on the issue of guns, just think about this. You have all these cities that are seeing huge increases in violent crime, the progressive prosecutors backed by Soros and left-wing Democrats all over the country have done their absolute best to legalize criminality and to allow for our cities to be turned into hellscapes where there’s just constant disorder, anarchy, roving biker and ATV gangs and broken needles and fentanyl out in the public and constant theft of retail stories, shoplifting everywhere.

People being assaulted and punched for no reason. People being shot in unprecedented numbers. All that going on, and these progressive prosecutors think they’re doing a great job. This is what justice demands, you see. These people are, honestly, something wrong with them. There’s something deeply unsettled in their minds, perhaps in their souls. And Eric Adams in New York City is presiding over a 25% increase — he’s the mayor of New York City, elected to get the city under control, and he’s presided over a 25% — year over year in crime increase. Now, that’s overall crime.

I think the violent… I think shootings may be slightly down but not much. But overall crime is up substantially. Actually no, shootings are up, I think 2%, 5 to 7%, something like that. But here he is in response to that Supreme Court decision yesterday which all it does is say (summarized), “You have to have a clear, lawful, permitting process for people to carry firearms who are citizens in good legal standing. You can’t do this game of only the connected and powerful and rich can have Second Amendment rights outside the home.” How can you only have Second Amendment rights in your home? That makes no sense. Well, here’s the mayor of New York City — again, very poor legal analysis, but he’s a bad mayor, so far. Play clip 21.

BUCK: In 2022 in New York City, all right, there have been — as of last month — over 2,000 gun arrests in the city of New York. Over 2,000 people had illegal guns who were arrested — never mind all the ones who walk around even today and have been walking around for months with illegal guns with no consequence. So what is this, “Oh, if we allow people to legally carry there might be shootings.” There are plenty of, unfortunately, shootings going on in New York as it is.

Just like there are in so many cities across the country that have restrictive firearms laws. So their argument is garbage. It’s not a sensible argument. To say, “Oh, no, now…” What they liked, is the libs wanted people like me to not be able to protect themselves, in the home or outside the home. Hope the police show up. Yeah? I think we’ve seen, unfortunately — as much as I do love law enforcement in general — if you depend on the police entirely, things can go very, very wrong for you.

Recent Stories

Larry Kudlow Tells Us Why He Sees Stagflation on the Horizon

24 Jun 2022

BUCK: Is the choice, Fox’s Peter Doocy asks, $5 a gallon gasoline or a $60,000 electric car?

BUCK: The White House doesn’t have a good answer. Maybe our next guest does. Larry Kudlow is with us now, the Fox News host and former senior economic adviser under the Trump administration. Larry, thanks for coming back.

KUDLOW: You know, Buck, I could be had. I could support Build Back Better, but I want the top-of-the-line Tesla. I want the $150,000 one.

BUCK: Is that the plaid, I think? It’s fancy.

KUDLOW: If they just give one to me, you know, I might reconsider.

BUCK: So, what happens now, Larry? Gas prices, the administration’s got… I think Teslas are cool, too, I gotta say and now that Elon may be single-handedly trying to save free speech on the internet at some level, I’m even more of a Tesla fan. But it can’t all be on his shoulders, and he obviously can’t do much about the gas prices. The Biden regime says they can do something about the gas prices, which is funny to me because a couple of weeks ago they were saying they couldn’t. So, which is it? And where is this going? Where are they going wrong?

KUDLOW: Well, you could start with yesterday’s meetings, okay, which was bait-and-switch. Biden chose to make with the window makers in the Roosevelt Room in the White House, and he sent his underboss, Jennifer Granholm, to meet with the CEOs of the oil and gas companies, in the energy department, all right? So, there’s a statement right there. The boss won’t even meet with the top guys.

And I know from friends of mine who were at that meeting, the energy meeting, not the window meeting. I know that they got nothing. I mean, it was a nice meeting. At least Granholm didn’t attack them or berate them or insult them the way Biden usually does. But other than that, they asked for all kinds of waivers for these onerous regulations that have stopped permitting and hence stopped fracking and drilling and pipelining and any new refining. They asked for wavers, and she couldn’t give it to them.

BUCK: That’s a part of this that I think more and more of the American people are just seeing clearly, which is that on the one hand, the Biden regime — people like Kerry, who is their climate czar — will come out and say, “You know, this is a good opportunity for everybody to really focus on the real issue, which is climate change,” while people can’t afford gas to get to work, to go pick up their kids, and live their lives.

Granholm says it a little bit more delicately than that but similar things. It can’t on the one hand that the Biden administration is willing to invoke the Defense Production Act for solar panels and on the other unwilling to waive regulation, as you just pointed out. And they don’t have an underlying ideological hostility to fossil fuel production; that’s a huge problem right now. It just doesn’t all add up.

KUDLOW: Well, they do have an underlying hostility, the administration. I mean, the administration is dominated by the radical climate change ideology, right? This is part of their woke progressive program which is so terribly unpopular in the country and why they’re gonna lose the Congress in November. The oil guys want to negotiate in some good faith. Look, this is their business, and they do it better than anybody in the world. And, by the way, we make the cleanest oil and natural gas and the cleanest gasoline in the world.

That’s why our carbon emissions have been falling for years and they continue to fall. So, all they really wanted was some sense that the administration would waive some of these onerous regulations, including the — here’s the thing for folks to think about. Leases are one thing. You can buy a lease. Some leases you get oil and gas, some you don’t. But if you don’t have a permit, then you can’t drill. And the administration is withholding permits everywhere. It started with the Keystone pipeline, but lately they’ve even the stopped permitting…

They promised they would go through it then they canceled it in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico — Gulf of Mexico, by the way, is cheapest oil in the world, $30 break even. So, they wanted some sense, the oil guys, and they didn’t get it. And so that’s that. There’s nothing else they can do. Their current refineries, Buck, are 95% operating capacity. They can’t get any more out of them. And it’s not easy to start one up anyway. But the point is, if Biden would be willing to let up on these permits, you would see the futures markets, oil prices would come down and therefore gasoline prices would come down. You’d see probably a 25, $35 drop right away from a hundred, whatever, a hundred and change down to at least 75 bucks.

BUCK: Larry Kudlow of Fox News and former senior Trump adviser. Larry, just one more for you. Do you think that we are…? Are we in a recession even though it’s obviously not official by the numbers yet? And are we going deeper into whatever this economic malaise is? I mean, I’m hearing people use the word “recession” a lot more but also stagflation and people are saying growth is going to really stall out. What does it look like as far as you can tell under this Biden administration for the Fnext six to 12 months?

KUDLOW: Well, I think we’re in the front end of a recession. We’re not seeing it yet in the jobs markets, but we are seeing it with the decline in real wages and we’re seeing it in a decline in real retail sales. So, those are very important statistics. And real incomes are falling. So, I’d see we’re on the front end. I think Jay Powell, the Fed head, basically told us in his hearings in the Senate and House this week that we’re going into recession. That was one of his messages. And it’s too bad, because if we’d slash taxes and we’d slash regulations on oil and other industries, we might avoid it.

Or at least we’d pave the way for a growth recovery. But we’re not doing that. So, I think you’ve got inflationary recession. That was a Milton Friedman term many, many years ago. Some people call it stagflation. In other words, output is gonna go down, the economy’s gonna sink, and the inflation rate is gonna stay high, at least for another year. So, it’s an unholy combination. But I think that’s the problem. And I think this election is gonna be all about inflation. It’s not gonna be about Roe v. Wade. It’s gonna be about inflation and then recession.

BUCK: I think you’re right. I think the Democrats wish it would be about Roe v. Wade, but that’s not gonna bail out Biden. I don’t see it. Larry Kudlow, everybody, Fox Business. Go check out Kudlow on Fox Business. Great show. Larry, always appreciate you making the time for us.

KUDLOW: Thank you. Anytime. Bye-bye.

Recent Stories

Biden Calls for Peace, But Enraged AOC Screams, “Into the Streets!”

24 Jun 2022

BIDEN: I call on everyone, no matter how deeply they care about this decision, to keep all protests peaceful, peaceful, peaceful, peaceful. No intimidation. Violence is never acceptable. Threats and (sputters) intimidation are not speech. We must stand against violence in any form regardless of your rationale.

BUCK: That was the president — just about, what, 45 minutes ago — saying that he doesn’t want there to be violence. It’s the right thing to say. So there’s that. I don’t think it’ll stop any of the lunatic Democrats who are calling for “a night of rage” from doing what they’re gonna do. The fliers, the social media organizing of lunatic leftists is already underway. By the way, welcome back to Clay and Buck. This is Buck Sexton. Clay Travis, my esteemed cohost, will be calling in at the top of the next hour to share his thoughts on this momentous day.

And I know I’m doing a lot of analysis of the politics and the law and all that. But, honestly, for those of you who have been pro-life for decades — for those of you who have donated either time or money to pro-life causes or just stood with your church or whatever, the center of your pro-life universe who are big pro-life personally — it’s just a great day. It’s not the end of the struggle for life, but just allow yourself to feel that it is a good day. It took decades to get to this point.

And there are a lot of people who — and I think for them they know the most important thing is the reality of what today means with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Here I am on radio all across the country getting to say, “Roe v. Wade is done,” that just legal and ethical monstrous is done. And that should feel really good, all of you across the country should just take a moment, think about that and say, “Wow. It is possible to at least live in a more just, a more moral and decent America.” Now, that doesn’t mean that it’s obviously even on this issue all settled and done.

Not by a long shot. But now things are going to change. You’re going to see a change in attitude. And I think give it a couple of generations and we shall see a very different feeling about the issue of life, now that we can really have it out in public. ‘Cause now they have to debate it. Now you’re gonna have state senators or state legislators are gonna say, “I want this,” and then somebody can oppose them and say, “Well, hold on a second. Why is that where you draw the line? Why is that the way you’re crafting this legislation?”

And they can’t just shout (smugly), “Because it’s a constitutional right!” ‘cause it’s not, and it never was. So now they gotta make the argument. Now they have to make the argument. There’s really something demonic about some of the far-left activists on this, too, the way they’re so just enraged at the prospect of more babies being born. Wow. There’s a darkness in the soul of the American left that this is exposing. So the president, though, said no violent protests. It’s fascinating.

I don’t remember for about two months there any prominent Democrats under the Trump administration when the BLM riots were happening… I don’t remember… In fact, I remember people like Chris Cuomo — oh, too bad. Remember him? — going on TV to say, “Where does it say you have to peacefully assemble or peaceably assemble?” And everybody was like, “Well, it actually says it in the Constitution.” But they were justifying the riots and the mayhem then.

Now Biden’s saying, “No, there shouldn’t be that kind of destruction,” and again, when he says the right thing… You know I’m not a leftist. I don’t just attack, attack, attack because my brain has been fried with hatred of the other side. He said the right thing. There shouldn’t be any violence or intimidation or any of that, but there will be. Why hasn’t he spoken out, for example, since the Dobbs v. Jackson draft was leaked? Lila Rose compiled this, who’s been a warrior for the cause of life here for a long time.

There were 16 churches vandalized, 16 pro-life pregnancy centers vandalized, firebombed. This is all pro-abortion activists. They firebombed four pro-life pregnancy centers and an attempted assassination of a Supreme Court justice. Does anyone even know those numbers? Think about that. Where’s all the media coverage? Well, it’s been absent of course because the same people that are convinced that a baby is not a baby at month eight of a pregnancy think that they have some constitutional right to firebomb a crisis pregnancy center for the crime of saying, “Hey, we know this is tough on women. We know this can be a challenge. We know it’s emotionally and financially draining. We’re here to help you.” There are pro-abortion activists who think that’s evil. Says a lot.

AOC is out there as of this morning right after the decision calling on people to get out into the streets. Play it.

BUCK: (impression) “Into the streets! Into the streets. Eeee!” Gonna hear a lot of this. A lot of really, honestly, very sad and unhappy women. A lot of emptiness inside. Can you imagine being so enraged as you take to the streets and maybe even engage in destruction and rioting? They haven’t done that yet, but they probably will. Some of them probably will. We’ll see. Hopefully not. All over this, all because some women have been convinced by the left that babies are some form of oppression instead of the greatest gift that a woman could ever have.

Recent Stories