×

Clay and Buck

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

Delusional Liz Cheney Loses by 37 Points, Compares Herself to Lincoln

17 Aug 2022

BUCK: It takes gall, honestly, to go on TV and — not courage ’cause they’re being compensated for this and they’re megalomaniacs and they’re narcissists and they’re selfish, but it does take a certain chutzpah. That’s a good word for it, to go and present yourself as a Republican who only spends time attacking other Republicans. Like, your job as the one true Republican is to undermine everything that the GOP and, yes, Trump and the Trump movement stands for. Liz Cheney has been pulling that routine, to much applause from Democrats, the strange found new respect, Clay, that they have for Liz Cheney in Democrat circles. “I don’t agree with her, but she shows so much gumption, so much backbone.”

In fact, Clay, she even compares herself to Abraham Lincoln.

CHENEY: The great and original champion of our party, Abraham Lincoln, was defeated in elections for the Senate and the House before he won the most important election of all. Lincoln ultimately prevailed, he saved our union, and he defined our obligation as Americans for all of history. Speaking at Gettysburg of the great task remaining before us, Lincoln said that “We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth.” As we leave here tonight, that remains our greatest and most important task.

BUCK: She should be on Mount Rushmore, Clay, obviously.

CLAY: In honor of Abraham Lincoln, she only lost by two score votes. I think I got that right. Four score, 80-some-odd years. Yes, she lost by almost 40 points in Wyoming. I’m looking at the current results. 66 to 29 with around 95% of the vote in. So if my math is right, 37 points she lost by in Wyoming. And this might be the most delusional speech that we have seen. This is like not making your high school basketball team and declaring for the NBA. Because what she’s trying to do now is she’s not good enough to win a congressional seat in Wyoming, but instead she’s going to declare to run for president of the United States.

Make no mistake, I’ll tell you the next two years and how this plays out, she’s gonna raise tens of millions — unfortunately, Buck, maybe even hundreds of millions of dollars — so that Trump can be directly attacked. And if it weren’t Trump, it would be Ron DeSantis or whoever’s running in 2024. She’s going to get to the debate stage initially. They’re probably gonna have to come up with new criteria to keep her off the debate stage, because she’ll get 1 or 2% of the vote, right? And she’ll spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to destroy the Republican candidate. Then she’ll announce she was treated unfairly by the Republican Party as a part of the race. I’m just telling you what’s gonna happen — and, therefore, for democracy, to save Republicans from themselves, she is going to launch an independent campaign to run for president in 2024 with the idea being that she might take away some small scintilla of vote that otherwise would go to Trump.

BUCK: Yeah. I mean, this has been done before, by the way. So I agree with what her plan is although I’m not even sure she will be able to execute on that pointless and worthless plan. Evan McMullin — you remember that guy?

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: He ran for president. No one even remembers the guy anymore.

CLAY: She’ll have the resources, though, to get on the ballots, Buck. That’s what’s gonna be frustrating. They’ll spend hundreds of millions of dollars to find a way to get her on —

BUCK: You think? I don’t think she’s gonna raise hundreds of millions of dollars.

CLAY: I think she’ll raise hundreds of millions of dollars.

BUCK: Because, Clay, at some level that amount of money is going to detract from what they can actually put toward the Democrat, right? I mean, you know, millions — millions, yes. Hundreds of millions of dollars?

CLAY: How much did the Lincoln Project raise?

BUCK: I think about 70 million, but that was over the course of a number of years. And also, man, they’re not raising 70 million again, my friends. They’ve had some problems over there.

CLAY: I think that she’ll be — I mean, there’s so much more money being spent in politics now, like, every election cycle, I think there’s more money being spent in 2022 —

BUCK: Yeah, it’s a billion on both sides now. It’s in the billions, I should say, on both sides.

CLAY: Yeah. And so I think she’ll be able to raise a hundred million dollars or more because that’s how much people hate Trump. And they’ll try the hardest to get her on in Georgia, to get her on in Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, any state that they think is gonna be close, they’ll spend whatever it takes to get her on the ballot.

BUCK: And I think it’s important that we all understand what Liz Cheney has become. Whatever her voting record was before, whatever her espoused principles were before, she is now a false flag Republican. Meaning in no real way is she somebody who is working for the benefit of anybody who believes in Republican values, policy, platform, you name it, across the country, the people who want less government, who want a secure border, who want less crime on the streets, who want lower taxation, who believe in Second Amendment rights, who believe in First Amendment rights, which is now a conservative value because the left has abandoned and is in fact openly attacking the First Amendment both on religious and free speech grounds in every way they can, Liz Cheney undermines all of that, and she does it because she is monomaniacal.

She is obsessed with Donald Trump as if somehow, even if she got her way, all these other problems would be solved. If Trump said, “I’m retiring tomorrow,” what does Liz Cheney stand for then? And, by the way, I’m just going to point this out. The Bush-Cheney legacy for the Republican Party is a disaster, folks. All right? If we’re really gonna call it like it is here ? I think George W. Bush was a nice guy. I briefed him a couple times back in the day. Iraq war, Afghanistan war did not turn out well. Handed over the government to Barack Obama after the biggest recession we had had since the Great Depression. Not a lot to point to to say, yeah, it’s great.

CLAY: I think George W. Bush is the worst president — I understand there’s still some Bush people out there — I think George W. Bush, if you look at it objectively, is the worst president of the last 40 or 50 years.

BUCK: Oh, Barack Obama is much worse than George W. Bush!

CLAY: I think George W. Bush is worse. Because the war in Iraq — this is one thing that Trump got right because almost no other Republican would say it — spending trillions of dollars like we did for nothing in Iraq is indefensible, in my mind, for what he did there. So look. Obama got a lot of things wrong. Certainly Biden is a — should say two-term president. ‘Cause Biden’s the worst president of any of our lives; let’s be honest. But two-term president? It’s hard for me to point to George W. Bush and say, man, he did a really good job on X. I mean, maybe his initial response to 9/11 when he rallied everybody together. But spending trillions of dollars in Iraq was wrong.

BUCK: To be fair, the initial response to Afghanistan that was really CIA led was brilliant and a massive success. And, unfortunately, big Pentagon came in afterwards and it was Special Forces operators, the elite of the elite, you know, working with the intel community at presidential directive to take out Al-Qaeda and the Taliban right after 9/11. Then you had the massive mission creep, all the things we said, “Oh, we don’t do that,”that all happened for 20 years and now the Taliban and in fact Al-Qaeda, basically, is in charge again in Kabul. So it went back in a big way. Iraq, I think, is, in retrospect, a massive blunder and even Republicans agree.

CLAY: And you agree — I mean, there were so many Republicans afraid to say it. One thing that I think rallied a lot of people behind Trump was he is a disruptive candidate, but he also was looking at that clear-eyed ’cause he wasn’t involved in it, right? He wasn’t a politician who cast a lot of votes on Iraq and everything else. And he pointed out that it was a disaster, and that’s really when I think the rupture with Bush-Cheney world started, when they were angry that he attacked them there.

BUCK: Yeah, because all of a sudden the right turns around, looks at Bush-Cheney and says, “What exactly did you guys accomplish here? What did you leave as the Republican Party legacy and handing it over to eight years of Obamaism?” And keep in mind, Obama was really among the only Democrats running then — there were a couple of other lower level candidates — who had not cast a vote — this is important — had not cast a vote for the Iraq war. Now, he wasn’t in office then so he gets kind of a pass but the point is — or not — you know, he wasn’t a senator. But it was certainly to his benefit.

But bringing it back here to Cheney. First of all, I think we should give some credit to Harriet Hageman, who ran a good campaign. She didn’t win by 10 points. What was the final tally?

CLAY: 37% right now with 95% of the vote in.

BUCK: Here she is saying a line has been drawn in the sand.

HAGEMAN: Wyoming has drawn a line in the sand that if we put in you power, you will be accountable to us, you will answer to us, and you will do what is in our best interests. And if you don’t, we will fire you.

BUCK: And I think that this is my line in the sand. I obviously am a Trump supporter. You voted for him in the last election. I voted for him in two elections. I think Trump did some fantastic things in office, and I could sit there and go the length as I know you can — and we do, right? We talk about the good things he did. I also occasionally have criticized some decisions that Trump made. And for the people that are super Trump fans, Trump agrees with me on those now. So he admits — no one’s perfect, right? So the idea that anybody was perfect never made any sense. Trump did the best he could under the circumstances and a lot of good things happened, and I think — I mean, compared to Biden it’s just night and day.

But the line in sand has to be, you can criticize Trump, you can criticize anybody in the GOP — and I don’t mean legally. I mean whether you’re, you know, still somebody who cares about the Republican Party. But when you all of a sudden find yourself hating Trump so much that you’re going on TV or, you know, you’re taking part in a Stalinist show trial on Capitol Hill or you’re going on TV and saying, we really don’t need a wall. Walls don’t work. When you abandon everything else the Republican Party stands for, everything else that rational, sensible policy would dictate, there’s a problem. And that’s what Liz Cheney started to do. That’s the issue.

CLAY: Not only that, Buck, she — I mean, we know January 6th was a show trial. She brought, I believe, the same Hollywood people to choreograph that ridiculous speech where she compared herself to Abraham Lincoln. I mean, this was all planned. When you lose by 37, you know you’re not going to win and it’s not going to be particularly close. And all of that, Dick Cheney calling Donald Trump the biggest threat to America in the history of the country, I mean, it’s all so overwrought and histrionic. And I also love the sloppy embrace now that we’re getting between Dick Cheney who was the most hated Republican ever, probably in most of our lives, by the left wing of the Democrat Party. And now all of a sudden they’re like, “Oh, I’ve always — the Cheneys have always told the truth.”

BUCK: Teah. This is what I mean. The strange new found respect, which we all put in quotes, this is just the convenient political weaponization of a false flag Republican, which is what Cheney became.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

CLAY: I still am laughing, Buck, during the commercial break about Liz Cheney with her prewritten Hollywood speech from Wyoming. Again, congratulations to Harriet Hageman. But the idea that she would compare herself to Abraham Lincoln and then go on — I think she went on the Today show this morning — and said I’ve gotta decide about whether to run for president in 2024 or not is one of the all-time delusional political moves I can ever think of. And again I made the joke, it’s like not making your high school basketball team and then declaring for the NBA. If you lose by 40 points, almost, in Wyoming.

BUCK: In your home state where you’re a Cheney, by the way, too.

CLAY: Yeah. That’s what I’m saying. Like, you have every advantage, in theory — it’s a home-court advantage. And then you think to yourself, well, this is the launching pad to my presidential campaign, I can’t think of a more delusion — I’m trying to think politically. Somebody who gets absolutely destroyed — I’m not talking about losing a close race and being like, hey, I want to run again, which happens all the time in politics. I’m talking about destroyed and running for a bigger office.

BUCK: I told you this. The most amusing thing back in the days when I watched American Idol with my parents and with the whole family sometimes —

CLAY: The bad singers?

BUCK: The bad singers who are like, “Oh, yeah? Well, I’m gonna go triple platinum.”

CLAY: “I’ll show you.” I mean, we make fun of Beto and Beto is very, as you see evil Keanu Reeves, is very easy to make fun of. He’s gonna get trounced down in Texas by Greg Abbott. We need to talk about how this masterstroke of putting migrants on buses and sending them to the East Coast has actually played out credible for him.

BUCK: I will say this. I was wrong. I thought it was a stunt that would kind of just go down with a fizzle. He was right. Here’s why I made a mistake on that. I thought that the Democrats would be smart enough to realize the political optics of complaining about the — you know, if you’re Eric Adams you’ve gotta say, “Oh, my gosh, I can’t get enough illegal migrates in this city.”

CLAY: “This is amazing. We’re so happy.”

BUCK: But nope. That’s not what he’s saying.

CLAY: Well, what I was —

BUCK: — Bowser is saying in D.C.

CLAY: What I made of Beto about is he lost a close race to Cruz and used that as a catapult to run for president in 2020. Now, that was a disaster. And now he’s gonna get smoked by Greg Abbott. But you can lose a race and argue, hey, this has increased overall my brand awareness. You can’t get beat like Liz Cheney did and run for a bigger race. Right?

BUCK: The whole point. The Lincoln Project only supports losers. Of losers, for losers, by losers. The whole thing.

CLAY: I mean, Abraham Lincoln, if he could still sue for defamation, of all the people to take his name, he should definitely come after them.

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.

C&B 24/7: Clay & Buck’s Show Prep

17 Aug 2022

  • FOXNews: Trump Mar-a-Lago raid: Judge schedules hearing on potentially unsealing FBI search records
  • Daily Caller: FBI Asked Cops To Let Protesters Into Michigan State Capitol Building, Informant Says
  • Daily Caller: ‘He Is The Executive Branch’: CNN Legal Analyst Undercuts Hype Over Trump Allegedly Possessing Classified Docs

  • Federalist: ​In Latest Anti-Trump Operation, DOJ And Media Deploy Same Old Russiagate Tricks
  • PJ Media: Russia Collusion Hoaxer Wants Us to Trust the FBI on Trump Raid. Um, That’s a Hard Pass, Peter Strzok
  • New York Post: Norah O’Donnell’s ‘desperate’ Trump passport tweet not up to CBS reporting standards: sources

  • Daily Wire: After Losing Election, Liz Cheney Compares Herself To Abraham Lincoln And Gets Torched
  • Daily Wire: Sarah Palin Advances To House General Election
  • FOXNews: After landslide primary defeat, Liz Cheney announces new anti-Trump group, says she’s ‘thinking about’ WH bid
  • Federalist: If Big Tech Isn’t Regulated Before 2024, The Election Will Be Rigged Again
  • Breitbart: Donald Trump, Dynasty Killer: 2023 Will Mean No More Bush, Cheney, McCain, or Clinton in Office
  • BizPacReview: Florida incumbent Sen. Marco Rubio is shockingly down by four points to challenger in new poll

  • Daily Caller: ‘Marketing Device’: CNN Reporter Says Inflation Reduction Act’s Name Was Meant To Trick Manchin Into Voting Yes
  • Daily Caller: Top Biden Adviser’s Consulting Clients Stand To Benefit From New Gov’t Spending
  • ZeroHedge: Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act “Secretly” Brought To You By Bill Gates

  • Daily Wire: Asset Management Firm Founder: State AGs Have ‘A Lot Of Power’ To Fight Woke Corporations’ ESG Initiatives
  • HotAir: Biden slammed “every single Republican” for voting against Inflation Reduction Act at bill signing
  • Breitbart: Cost of Living Crisis: UK Sees Double-Digit Inflation, Highest Level in 40 Years

  • FOXNews: Biden and congressional Democrats have spent about $3.8 trillion on their agenda since Inauguration Day
  • FOXNews: Restaurants in deep-blue cities starved for diners while Florida is feasting
  • FOXBusiness: Retirement accounts take hit with inflation, but investors stay the course
  • New York Post: Most illegal immigrants do not qualify for US asylum
  • JustTheNews: Border encounters in July soar 325% from Trump administration average
  • UK Daily Mail: Did the US learn anything in Afghanistan? Former NATO assistant secretary general says billions was spent building wrong type of military and that D.C. was more interested in getting presidents re-elected than telling the truth, in scathing report

  • HotAir: Environmentalists don’t seem to care about golden eagles when it comes to wind power
  • FOXNews: Fairfax County School Board criticized for ‘baffling,’ ‘anti-science’ memo on masking
  • UK Daily Mail: Minneapolis school district DEFENDS deal with teachers’ union to lay off white staff ahead of people of color because it will ‘remedy the effects of past discrimination’
  • HotAir: UK Air Force chief of recruitment quits over exclusion of white males

  • PJ Media: Why Are the Man Suspected of Raping a 10-Year-Old and His ‘Wife’ Represented by Prestigious Law Firms?
  • FOXBusiness: Planned Parenthood midterm spending to top record $50M after Supreme Court abortion ruling
  • FOXNews: ‘Defund the Police’ Rep. Bowman sees 30% violent crime spike in Northern Bronx
  • HotAir: Squad member expands rental property ownership while pushing landlord relief fund

  • HotAir: China is facing a real estate bust
  • UK Daily Mail: Putin’s army puts more inept tactics on display: Moment Russian armoured vehicle driver speeds past two of his comrades’ wrecked BMPs and STRAIGHT into a mine blowing his own vehicle to smithereens

  • Recent Stories

    F&F: Clay Rips Woke NBA, Chimes in on PGA/LIV Feud

    17 Aug 2022

    Clay stopped by Fox & Friends to discuss the latest NBA wokeness and also the PGA-LIV golf rivalry.

    Recent Stories

    Clay’s Advice for Trump: Announce 2024 Run Now

    16 Aug 2022

    CLAY: The way I think about this is, it feels like such a calculated attempt to turn Trump into a referendum on the midterms and not make us focus on everything Joe Biden has done that’s a disaster. I think that Trump should go — and this is just my opinion — I think that Trump should go ahead and announce, if I were advising him. Now, I don’t think it’s the best thing for Republicans. I think it’s the best thing for Trump. And let me explain what I mean by this.

    Because if they charge him, Buck — and I think there’s a decent chance they will — it plays completely into his narrative and might make it less likely that they charge him if he’s already announced as a 2024 presidential candidate. Because then he can say, “Look what happened. I announced for president, and they immediately charged me with a bunch of different crimes. This is the way they’re gonna keep me from winning in 2024,” versus, Buck, if they charge him with crimes and then he ends up announcing after the crimes, narratively, he doesn’t have the same cache. I think it plays much better if he announces for president, then gets charged with a crime.

    Now, we can think, “Oh, he’s going to run,” which I think everybody out there does, and that’s why they’re charging him. But if he’s already an announced candidate, then they charge him, I think narratively he’s got a really popular and powerful attack. I don’t know that it’s best for the midterms ’cause it does make him already a part of the story. But I think as soon as they raided him, they made — Democrats did — Trump a part of the midterms in a way that he would not have been minus the raid. That make sense?

    BUCK: Yeah, of course. What’s fascinating is that you have this decision-making that goes along the lines of, well, we can’t charge him before the election because that will seem political.

    CLAY: Yeah, of course.

    BUCK: But if you’re moving charging decisions until after an election, that in itself is a political decision as well. So, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t from that perspective. Obviously, the thing to do here would be to not charge him because I think the whole thing is bogus and insane. But that doesn’t mean that it’s going to slow down Democrats at all from it.

    I also think at some level, too, the decision-making around this is affected by what Democrats think their prospects are going in here. I think there’s a lot of discussion going on — anybody who believes, what, Merrick Garland never talks to anybody in the White House, there’s no conversations going on about is Joe Biden even gonna run again? Give me a break, folks. Right? These people are all having, you know, lunch with each other in D.C. It’s a swamp for a reason. So I think that all weighs in, that all factors into this as well. And, I mean, on the one hand it feels like they have to charge him. On the other hand, to charge President Trump would be so crazy that it’s hard to fathom they would go through with it.

    CLAY: Yeah. And I think the other aspect of this is, a lot of this is calculus in Trump’s mind and his advisers’ mind. Are they going to charge him? Does this affidavit — remember the big hearing on whether this affidavit gets released is Thursday — does this affidavit come out? That would be very helpful, I think, to Trump. I understand why he’s arguing for that. He would like to see the information that they’re basing their warrant request on. All of these things are difficult.

    The best possible timing would be if Trump could announce for president and then he got charged like a week later. If you’re trying to put it out in Trump World. The better opportunity for him would have been if the FBI had raided him after he were already announced. But I think what we’re seeing is Trump is going to be a big part of the midterms, and what is the calculus on his impact on the elections, Buck? How many people are going to vote or not vote based on Trump? It’s unfortunate because Biden is the story. He’s the failure as president. It should be a referendum on him.

    BUCK: And of course when we have the results in, it will be, did Trump candidates do well? How did Dr. Oz and Herschel Walker end up faring, for example? There are a lot of Trump-backed candidates, obviously, but those two in particular we’ve been talking about. You know, it is going to be a difficult fight against Raphael Warnock in Georgia for sure. It’s gonna be a difficult fight against Fetterman in Pennsylvania. And then does Trump have the golden touch, so to speak, or not? A lot of things we’re gonna see.

    CLAY: And what in the world is going to happen with January 6th, right? Are they gonna try to bring that back just in time for the midterms too?

    Recent Stories

    Rubio Losing? Senate Races Looking Tougher and Tougher for GOP

    16 Aug 2022

    CLAY: You’re spending a lot of time in Florida. I’m spending a lot of time in Florida. Poll results have come out in the last couple of hours. University of North Florida. One of the polls, not particularly surprising, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis up seven points on Nikki Fried, up eight points on Charlie Crist. Democrats still have to pick their nominee on the Democrat side.

    BUCK: And when they do, by the way, you’re gonna see that DeSantis number go up a couple points just when we know who the Democrat nominee is.

    CLAY: I think it will be Charlie Crist. He seems to be kind of running away with it in many ways.

    BUCK: He’s been running for office in Florida for the last hundred years, from what I can understand.

    CLAY: Here is a good example of this, Buck. Two different polls in Florida today — and I’m looking at Real Clear Politics, I love looking at polls, I’m a nerd, they post these new every day. In St. Petersburg, they did a poll, St. Pete Polls, Charlie Crist up 32 points over Nikki Fried in the Democrat primary.

    BUCK: I believe that. Sure.

    CLAY: Okay. In the University of North Florida poll, Nikki Fried up four points, they came out the same day, a 36-point poll difference and a difference in who would win. So that is kind of hard to explain, and it brings me to this. We’ve been talking a lot about the Senate.

    BUCK: Can I ask, which one do you think is right? I’ve never looked at a poll before between the two of them. The assumption has been that Fried is the agricultural commissioner and she’s —

    CLAY: That’s right.

    BUCK: — make a lot of noise. I think people realize she’s a little off.

    CLAY: Yes.

    BUCK: And then there’s, you know, old man Crist who’s just been around forever.

    CLAY: Yeah. I think Crist is probably gonna be the nominee.

    BUCK: Yeah.

    CLAY: But the fact that we got 36-point difference ties me in here. They’ve got Rubio down to Val Demings in the Senate race. Now, I do not believe this is accurate, but you’re probably gonna see this start to ricochet around because Democrats want to sell the ideas that they have tremendous momentum, right? They’re trying to sell this idea, Joementum, Joe Biden passed the House and the Senate bill. They trying to sell this idea that he’s on the comeback trail. And so I guarantee you that this poll is going to get a lot of attention. Val Demings, they have her up four points over Rubio, University of North Florida poll. Now, the reason why I want to share with you — I don’t want to run from it.

    BUCK: Gonna be tough, folks. Gonna be tough. Dr. Oz, did you see the Dr. Oz commercial where he goes in, the campaign thing where he goes in to talk about the price of things and he’s asking about what he needs to buy for his crudite? I mean, it’s like he should go in there and ask if they have any Grey Poupon. This was not good, right? I mean, the team here, you guys saw it, right? Dr. Oz, I know — you talked to him last week when I was out.

    CLAY: Yeah, we had him on. He was great on the show.

    BUCK: Yeah. Look. He’s super compelling. He’s been crazy successful in media. But as his campaign is going here, Clay, some people are starting to say he’s down almost double digits to Fetterman, and Fetterman —

    CLAY: Fetterman can’t talk.

    BUCK: — looks like he doesn’t — you know, looks shaky. And he’s not an old guy. He just looks crazy, he had a serious health event recently.

    CLAY: Yeah, he had a stroke. And Fetterman cannot speak. And Dr. Oz has challenged him to five different debates. I don’t think that Fetterman’s gonna be able to debate. And I think it’s gonna be even more aggressive in Pennsylvania trying to hide him than they did with Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election, except Fetterman is even in worse state than Biden was. So Pennsylvania’s gonna be a mess.

    We’ve got a big battle going on in Wisconsin. Georgia, certainly we know about. And Nevada, hopefully New Hampshire can end up being competitive. They’re picking a nominee here soon. And then Arizona. But if you have been out there and you’ve been of the belief, hey, there’s a huge Red Wave coming, we don’t really need to worry about it too much, I don’t need to get active, I don’t need to speak out, in the Senate in particular, that is not necessarily going to be the case. You need to be as aggressive as you can.

    BUCK: We’re speaking to, with this show, millions of voters across the country. We’re speaking to conservative and Republican activists, people that are doing a lot of grassroots organizing, people that are fired up to try to create a groundswell of support for the right candidates whether it’s for the school board all the way up to Senate seat in this election. This is not the time to coast. This is when, you know, you’re kicking hard at the end of the race. This is when it’s time to absolutely hit the afterburner, because it’s looking pretty good for JD Vance in Ohio, but it’s not a sure thing. It’s very tight. I think he’s gonna be all right, but Laxalt, I think he’s gonna win in Nevada, but that one’s gonna be close. Blake Masters, strong candidate, steep hill to climb against Mark Kelly, the combatant. And then you get into Herschel v. Warnock in Georgia and —

    CLAY: Warnock.

    BUCK: — Dr. Oz versus Fetterman in Pennsylvania. Those are tough ones, man. Those are tough right now.

    CLAY: Reverend Warnock has been a — has been a poor candidate who managed to win once. And we’ll see what ends up happening in that next one. And so this is going to be a real challenge to see exactly what’s going to happen there. I don’t think you can overrate how competitive a bunch of these are gonna be. And look. This Rubio versus Val Demings race down in Florida is gonna get trumpeted; so I just want you to hear from us as these polls are coming out, we’re gonna try to keep you apprised of everything.

    BUCK: And that’s why I think it’s so important to stay focused on this. And look. I know it’s a Republican seat, but not really, up in Alaska. That’s the problem. You know, you win some, you lose some with Murkowski on the Republican Party side, which is why I think Tshibaka would really would be almost like a Republican pickup if she can win that seat, because you can count so much more on her for judicial nominees.

    You and I were talking about this. The House goes to Republicans, likely. Everyone thinks so. Off-year election. Okay, great. That slows down the Biden agenda for sure. And that’s a good thing. But it doesn’t stop it. And if you have a Supreme Court vacancy or even just federal circuit court that will be up, they will stack these circuit courts with the most activist left-wing lunatics they possibly can. And they’ll put in more of these nominees to head the federal agencies, to use those, the fourth branch of government, the federal agencies to push Biden agenda items. So the Senate is — it’s obviously — to say it’s important is an understatement, and it’s obvious. But it’s not looking like it did a couple months ago where — you know, we were talking about the Red Wave, the annihilation, Clay, in May and June.

    CLAY: Yeah.

    BUCK: Democrats, we knew they had a bag of tricks, and they’re reaching deep into it.

    CLAY: Well, and look. The other thing is if they control the Senate — I hate to say it, but you never know — Clarence Thomas, 74 years old, Buck. You’ve got John Roberts. I mean, he’s coming up on 68. Alito is 72 going on 73. There are a lot of people out there, when you get into your seventies — we know this happens — unfortunately people can have unexpected health related issues. And this is a real issue in terms of being able to be a check on the Biden administration and their agenda. And it’s not going to be a cakewalk. People need to be super active and aware of how much of a battle this is gonna be in many parts of the country.

    Recent Stories

    Alex Berenson Tells Us Why He’s Suing the White House

    16 Aug 2022

    CLAY: Appreciate all of you hanging out with us. Encourage you to go subscribe to the podcast, sign up for YouTube, TRUTH Social, Rumble, we’re everywhere. And one reason a lot of those social numbers are growing so rapidly is because we’ll have conversations that, frankly, don’t occur very many places, such as the one we’re about to have with Alex Berenson. Alex, when we were having you on last year and you were starting to share the data on the covid shot and the fact that it was not going to limit the spread or keep people from getting covid, it was considered to be unacceptable, the White House was furious, and this is why I want to start with you.

    On your Substack you have a story up, you have written documentation that the White House, in meetings with Twitter, demanded that you no longer be able to share your opinions on social media because the White House considered it to be disinformation, misinformation, however you want to classify it. For people who don’t know exactly what happened, what happened and what was the impact of that White House activity?

    BERENSON: Well, I think the short answer is I’m still investigating that, I’m still finding that out. But what happened that I know for certain is last August, Twitter banned me. And they had been ratcheting up the pressure on me starting in mid-July of last year, July of 2021. I’d been a pretty popular Twitter user, probably one of the more prominently skeptics, first about lockdowns and, you know, school closures and stuff like that in 2020, and then raising questions about the vax.

    I think, you know — and I say it was in a very data-driven and measured way. But they clearly didn’t like that, people in the public health community didn’t like that, Democratic politicians didn’t like that, journalists didn’t like that. And so — and yet Twitter, you know, for most of 2020 and early ’21 told me essentially we have your back, basically. We know what you’re doing, we think it’s okay.

    So, at some point in the late spring or summer of 2021, that changed. And it changed very publicly for me in July of 2021. They banned me or locked me out of my account for the first time after President Biden said — he didn’t mention me, but he said, you know, these social media platforms are killing people. So, that led me to sue Twitter in December of 2021 saying, look, you guys banned me in August. That was wrong. I didn’t do anything wrong. You know, you made these representations to me, and you’re violating your own, you know, contract with me and you’re violating my First Amendment rights, you’re acting, you know, on behalf of the state. You know, by state, I mean federal government.

    Okay. In April of this year, a couple months ago, a judge, a federal judge in California said I had a viable claim, that I had proven or at least stated plausibly that Twitter had indeed violated its terms of service with me. That led to settlement negotiations between me and Twitter. In July, a month ago, Twitter put me back on the platform and acknowledged that it shouldn’t have taken me off. So that was where we were until a couple days ago. A couple of days ago I posted these documents. And what the documents show is that in April of 2021, before I came under public pressure, the White House appears to have specifically targeted me with Twitter. They went — they had a meeting at the White House, and nobody’s disputing the authenticity of these documents, and after the meeting, Twitter people said to each other internally, they were very interested in Alex Berenson. They wanted to know why he’s still on the platform.

    So, that gives me a viable claim to sue the White House and to sue a guy named Andy Slavitt, who at that time was a covid — an adviser to the covid response team who has — you know, who’s been very prominent in the Democratic response to covid. But he was working in the White House at that time, and he’s specifically mentioned in these documents and say, look. You guys tried to use the power of the federal government against me specifically. You leaned on Twitter and four months later Twitter banned me. So, I’m gonna — I need to know how that happened, I need to know how you silenced me. I have a right as a — you know, as an American citizen under the First Amendment to speak, to speak publicly. Twitter is a very, very important platform. You obviously knew that. You wanted me off. What happened? So, I’m gonna sue, you know, the White House, and I’m gonna sue Slavitt, and we’ll see what happens.

    BUCK: Speaking to Alex Berenson. He has a Substack, which you should all check out, and also his book is Pandemia. Alex, I want to ask you about covid because Clay and I have just — if I hear, as we know, Dr. Jill Biden, what was your line, Clay, on Twitter? Not a good enough doctor to avoid covid, you know.

    CLAY: I don’t think she — she should have taken it more, seriously —

    BUCK: Should have gotten five shots.

    CLAY: Yeah.

    BUCK: This — with Bourla and the other, the CEO of Moderna bemoaning the disposal of 30 million shots ’cause nobody wants them, it feels like the whole thing is collapsing. Is there even any good evidence at this point to suggest that if someone got their booster six months ago, let’s say, they are any more protected than anybody else?

    BERENSON: Oh, absolutely not, no. Six months ago, no. Against Omicron, no. You probably are at higher risk of infection. The booster seems to work for somewhere between two and six weeks against Omicron. That’s about it. No. Here’s the — you know, the punch line is, yeah, Moderna’s dumping 30 million doses. The U.S. government is spending almost $2 billion to buy 66 million boosters from them and three billion to buy another hundred million boosters from Pfizer. They are reloading with shots that nobody’s gonna want, that we’re spending $5 billion on.

    BUCK: Can I just ask you, Alex, is this an even bigger failure — a year ago we were having you on, and I might add to some considerable heat that Clay and I got for this, including from other people on the right. “I think Alex is going too far on the vaccine. Alex is, you know, he’s lost it on this one,” even for people that were open to, you know, your initial research. Is this even more of a collapse of the vaccine Biden mandate regime than you had anticipated?

    BERENSON: God. I mean, you know, on the one hand, yes. On the other hand, people — so they’re sort of the only things happening, right? Everybody knows, right, everybody knows that the vaccines don’t really work, right, at best. And that’s why people won’t get — we talked about this in the past. That’s why people are not getting their kids vaccinated. That’s why vaccine demand has collapsed. On the other hand, you still have to sort of — I mean, I don’t and you don’t, but people will still sort of throw out, but they do protect against severe disease and death. And, frankly, for that at this point is essentially close to anything like, if you really know what the data says. So I mean — I guess what I — I guess I don’t need to have that fight. I guess you’re right. As long as nobody’s getting the shot, that’s people knowing the truth, whether they want to talk about it or not.

    CLAY: You know, but, Alex, I actually think — you just mentioned that we’re gonna spend $5 billion on a lot of boosters that nobody wants. And I’m sure you’ve seen the articles about the Moderna executives who are buying multimillion-dollar estates and fancy housing. Certainly that’s happening at Pfizer as well with what they’re paying these top people. I think we do need some sort of recompense here. And I know — and this has been something that you’ve talked about and we’ve hammered on this show, right now you can’t see over anything that goes wrong with these shots which should have been terrifying in the first place for anybody out there thinking about taking them. But shouldn’t there be some investigations?

    If the Republicans take the House and maybe the Senate, but certainly the House at a minimum, shouldn’t we have a real investigation into how this money got spent, the failure, and, frankly, I think that there should be potentially criminal investigations because it seems quite clear — I’m curious if you agree with this.

    It seems quite clear that we were fraudulently induced to take these shots and that there has to be substantial evidence of fraud inside of Moderna and Pfizer over the fact that these things were not working while they were getting people fired for refusing to take them, right? I feel like there needs to be some consequence other than everybody just says, “Ha-ha, these don’t work, we’re not gonna take ’em anymore.” Well, they’re still making billions of dollars and people still lost their jobs.

    BERENSON: So, look. I mean, we need to investigate. Whether or not there was criminal behavior or anything like that, I’m sure not prepared to go there at this point. Here’s what you have to remember. This collapse happened extremely fast, the collapse in vaccine efficacy. Okay. These vaccines were only invented in the spring of 2020. They were only put into people’s arms beginning in the summer of 2020.

    By November, it was suddenly they were a miracle, okay? So the companies were only a few weeks or months, a couple months, at most, ahead of everybody else. The reason that I — you know, the reason that, like, I, you know, was so loud in sounding the alarm in the spring of 2020 wasn’t that I knew something was wrong. It’s that I knew that the data wasn’t there to support what the companies were saying. But it wasn’t just the companies. It was the public health authorities. And then over the summer it became clear that efficacy was gonna collapse much faster than people thought. And that became clear, as I stated, because of data out of Israel.

    CLAY: Yeah.

    BERENSON: But the crime here, I mean, and “crime” is sort of the wrong word, but let’s say crime. The crime here isn’t what we know. It’s that we don’t know — what we don’t know. And the companies haven’t been forced to collect the data properly. They haven’t been forced — so there is a study that came out a couple of days ago showing that the vaccines seem to have some heart impact on a lot of teenagers, okay, out of Thailand.

    Now, we already knew that myocarditis and pericarditis are a risk for young people who get these shots, okay? This study wasn’t that big, it wasn’t definitive but, you know, it adds to the questions about whether or not any teenager or any young adult should be getting the shot. That’s good. Why was this done, you know, out of a Thai military hospital? Why wasn’t Moderna required to do this last year? Why didn’t the NIH do this itself last year?

    Why are we spending a billion dollars on long covid, which I will continue to insist to the end of my days is basically nonexistent. And, you know, it’s yet another sort of like made-up syndrome looking for insurance dollars and drug company dollars.

    BUCK: Yeah. And sympathy online, by the way. People love to talk about, “Oh, my long covid,” and they get all the comments about, “Be brave, push through your long covid,” as in, you know, you’re a little depressed. Alex, before we let you go —

    BERENSON: Exactly but — last thing — but why don’t we — why didn’t we spend the money to figure out about myocarditis?

    BUCK: Yeah. We don’t want any answers here. I mean, you know, Fauci’s — is going around dressed like a hipster talking about the Fauci Effect. I mean, anybody who still believes that guy is anything other than the worst public health official in the history, I think, of the modern world is out of their minds. But I did want to ask you quickly ’cause you alluded to this — and I saw some study out of Iceland. I don’t know if it’s, you know, real deal. I know you read all the studies — that suggests negative efficacy as in there is a concern that you could be more likely to contract a strain of covid based on if you’ve gotten X-number of shots. Where are we on that? Is there real data to support negative efficacy?

    BERENSON: I read the article, I think it’s real, it’s good, is a national level study from, you know, rich country that has smart scientists. Yeah. What that says is you are infected and then vaccinated, you have a better chance of getting covid than if you were infected and did not get vaccinated. Then it’s really amazing how bad the vaccines are turning out to be. But this is what happens when you rush a technology that basically didn’t exist and put it in a billion people after a couple of months of research. It’s a bad idea. And we would have been lucky, very lucky if none of this has happened. Instead we’re just getting what you would expect.

    And by — one last thing. I know I gotta go, I know you guys are short on time. The all-cause mortality numbers are bad. They are bad all over the world in the mRNA countries. What I mean is, for months now, in the U.K., in Australia, in Germany, and a lot of countries that collect data better than we do, they are seeing a rise in overall death count. Not a huge rise, but a 5 to 10% rise in noncovid deaths that is strikingly correlated to the you know, to the mass vaccination.

    CLAY: And, Alex, isn’t that also even younger people, right, like 18 to 49s you’re seeing some of the highest increases in, you know, sort of unexplained death relative to expectations?

    BERENSON: So, that’s gotten thrown around a lot because there’s this one insurance company executive that talks about it. It’s not actually clear to me that that’s true, although actually in the next few minutes I’m gonna have a Substack that’s gonna strike people about some data out of New Zealand. So — so — look. Older people die at much, much higher rates than younger people. So you can see it more clearly when there’s less statistical noise. But when you look around the world, this is something that we should be talking about. But how are the public health authorities going to admit this if it’s a problem? How do they admit, hey, you know, maybe we caused a 5% increase in overall deaths worldwide?

    BUCK: Oh. Oh, man. Go check out Alex’s Substack, everybody, subscribe to it, support his work, pick up a copy of Pandemia. Alex, you know we’ll have you back soon. Thanks so much.

    BERENSON: Thanks, guys.

    Recent Stories

    DOCTOR Jill Biden Gets Covid (And the Real Story of Lemmings)

    16 Aug 2022

    CLAY: Jill Biden, “Dr. Jill Biden,” as all the left-wingers would have you say, has gotten four covid shots, and she now has tested positive for covid as well. She’s trying to kill our grandmas, Buck.

    BUCK: I have to remind everybody that for about the first 18 months of covid there was this really despicable game that thereby media played where if you were opposed to masking, eventually opposed to vaccine mandates when those came out, but opposed to lockdowns, and you got covid, it was always, “What did you do? You know, maybe if you took the virus” — this is why we say things, if you follow Clay and me on Twitter, will say things like, should have taken the virus more seriously.

    Because they made it, to serve their political purposes, they made getting covid a moral failing and one that was subjective, meaning, when libs got covid, it was, “They did everything possible.” But when anyone else got covid, especially if you were vocal about opposing this stuff, it was, “See? That’s what you get for not taking the virus seriously.”

    CLAY: That’s a hundred percent right.

    BUCK: People ask me, not even trying to be mean, they’d say, you know, I had it twice, you had it twice, say, “Where’d you get it?” As if it’s like a flat-screen TV that I picked up yesterday. Like, I don’t know where I got it.

    CLAY: The number of people that are continue — I think Lloyd Austin, the defense secretary, I think they announced yesterday he’s had four shots and now he’s had covid a couple of times. The number of people that have gotten four shots and are testing positive for covid is continuing to grow at such a rate — we talked about it yesterday, the Pfizer CEO, Albert Bourla, I believe, tested positive. Did you go through and read some more of those comments, Buck?

    BUCK: (imitation) He prefers the pronunciation Bourla. You have to roll the R.

    CLAY: — one of my favorite —

    BUCK: There are four condoms but my wife got pregnant anyway. I’m so glad I used the four condoms, is one of the funniest internet comments I’ve seen in a very long time.

    CLAY: I just love the fact that they have stopped protecting Moderna and Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson and the covid shot because for a long time you couldn’t ridicule them. And what I saw beneath the Bourla is the masses are waking up.

    There’s a lot of sheep that have been running off the side of a hill — a lot of lemmings, I should say, I guess — that are suddenly saying, hey, maybe running off the side of this hill just ’cause everybody’s doing it is not the smart play.

    BUCK: You know the lemming thing is not true? The lemming thing is made up. Lemmings do not run off a cliff to their death. Maybe I’ll get more into — this is very — this is very interesting, actually.

    CLAY: We’ve slandered lemmings for no reason?

    BUCK: We’ve been slandering lemmings for no reason. Lemmings do not —

    CLAY: For generations.

    BUCK: — do not jump off cliffs. They are actually little furry animals that like to stay alive just like all others. And it goes back to a 1958 Disney video, Clay, that won an Oscar for best documentary where the lemmings were jumping in the water. It’s all staged, man. Kind of like the Mar-a-Lago raid.

    CLAY: No! I can’t believe it.

    Recent Stories

    Senate Candidate Kelly Tshibaka on Election Day in Alaska

    16 Aug 2022

    BUCK: We have Kelly Tshibaka with us now. She’s running for Senate up in the great state of Alaska. Kelly, thanks for calling in. Appreciate you making the time. I know it’s a big day.

    TSHIBAKA: I’m so happy to be with you. And thanks for making time for me.

    BUCK: Tell us about what everybody, not just across the country, but certainly in your home state of Alaska ’cause we got a great Alaska audience listening to this. What do they need to know about why they should go with you as the real Republican here over Lisa Murkowski as the fake Republican. Maybe I just gave too much away, but go ahead.

    TSHIBAKA: I think you just summed it up. But here’s like three top reasons. Number one. We need someone who’s going to block all those Biden nominees that are harmful for Alaska, instead of having a senator who has confirmed nearly all the radical nominees, including those leftist environmentalists who are working to shut down our state and pursue the energy annihilating agenda that’s killing our fossil fuel industry and driving up gas prices.

    Number two, we need a senator who isn’t bought and paid for by dark money from D.C. insiders and radical environmentalists and Big Tech and instead have a senator who represents our Alaska voices and won’t be bullied, silenced, and controlled by the D.C. insiders.

    And I’d say number three, we need a senator who doesn’t say one thing in Alaska and do the opposite in D.C. and instead votes for what’s in the best interests of Alaska, like now Senator Murkowski says she supports our Second Amendment interests but then she goes back to D.C. and works with Joe Biden and the Democrats to vote for red flag laws, and she loses her NRA endorsement and votes for gun control. We love our guns up here. We have to look both ways when we walk outside our door because grizzly bears coming. So, we need a senator who just talks straight.

    BUCK: Clay, I told you about the grizzly bears, man.

    CLAY: Yeah, I know.

    BUCK: They’re everywhere.

    CLAY: They really are everywhere. We’re talking to Kelly Tshibaka. She is a candidate for Alaska Senate. All right. So explain. Buck and I were trying to make sense of this ranked choice voting system. And obviously we are, you know, borderline intelligent on this issue, and that’s probably an exaggeration. We don’t really understand it that well. So today, is it right that there will be four people who advance to the general election? And if people are listening to us right now and they are big supporters of yours, what’s the best way to vote, both now and in November, from a ranked choice perspective?

    TSHIBAKA: I can break it all down super simple. Today, vote Kelly. And in November vote Kelly number 1. Leave the rest of your ballot blank. The ballot will not be disqualified. You won’t lose your vote. And this is what’s actually happened. Project Veritas just exposed undercover videos that Lisa Murkowski colluded with her campaign staff to deceive Alaskans and manipulate this change in our election system so she’d have some kind of limited chance of being able to maintain the 41-year Murkowski monarchy. They hand down our Senate seat like a birthright. But it doesn’t belong to the Murkowskis. It belongs to Alaska.

    So what we’re doing is we’re fighting to get our Senate seat back in the hands of Alaskans. She wouldn’t win this primary if it was a party primary. Her career would be done today. But instead she wants to drag it on to November, and I’m confident we’re gonna retire here. The way that we do that is very vote Kelly number one in November. If we get 50 percent on round one, we win. Otherwise what happens is number four drops off, number three drops off. Here subsequent votes go and get resorted into person one and person two. It will be head-to-head between me and Lisa Murkowski. But I’ll tell you, I’ve talked to thousands of Alaskans, even common-sense Democrats are supporting us because they can’t line up with Joe Biden and Lisa Murkowski. So I think we’re gonna win this. We just have to wait to November to do it.

    CLAY: Okay, Kelly, that’s important because a lot of people out there listening to us right now are used to Republican primaries and Democrat primaries. If you were running against Lisa Murkowski today for the Republican nomination in Alaska, you would trounce her, right?

    TSHIBAKA: That’s absolutely correct. She knows it; I know it; the data shows it. That’s why she had to manipulate a change in the election system so she would survive.

    BUCK: We’re speaking to Kelly Tshibaka. The primary is today in Alaska. She’s running for Senate there. And, campaign, I see you’re a Harvard Law grad from 2002, very impressive, by the way. The decision by Murkowski to vote to impeach Donald Trump and to maintain that she is a Republican who did this, what do you think her calculation was? Like, who was she trying to please with that one? What game was she playing?

    TSHIBAKA: So when you look at her rhetoric and the things she’s done, I think she has a personal vendetta against Donald J. president whether he’s president or whether he’s just a citizen. The fact is, it’s not constitutional to impeach somebody who’s no longer holding office as president or in any position in the government. It’s just a personal vendetta for her.

    But Lisa Murkowski can’t really hold herself out as a Republican when she’s voting with Chuck Schumer 20% more often than she votes with Ted Cruz and when she’s voting with Joe Biden 70% or more of the time, she’s often that tie-breaking vote on nominees or on legislation for Joe Biden, just saving Kamala the walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. We all know up here in Alaska that she’s not a Republican. Our Republican Party has actually censured her and removed her from membership 37 the only people who are still pretending she’s Republican really is Mitch McConnell. We can’t figure out why. Because up here in Alaska she looks like a Democrat, she talks like a Democrat, she walks by a Democrat, her campaign is run by Democrats and you noticed by Democrats. That makes you a… that’s right. A Democrat.

    BUCK: Wondering, Kelly —

    TSHIBAKA: — gonna classify it, that’s what it is.

    BUCK: Sarah Palin’s running in a congressional rate up there. Any thoughts on that one? Just, you know, she’s somebody who really put Alaska on the national political map some years ago. Any thoughts at all?

    TSHIBAKA: That one’s gonna be a tight race. That is to close and finish or vacant congressional seat from when our congressman passed away earlier this year, and that one’s gonna be decided today. And she has a very tight race with another Republican who’s been endorsed by our Republican Party. So we’ll see what happens up here. They’re splitting the vote and then there’s a Democrat in that race. And that’s the ranked choice election. So we’re gonna see how that plays out. Today she’s got a lot of support, but so does her challenger, her Republican challenger. We’ll see what happens.

    CLAY: Kelly, you’ve got a law degree, as Buck just mentioned. I do, too, and we’ve talked a ton about this Mar-a-Lago raid by the FBI. What was your reaction when you heard it happened?

    TSHIBAKA: You know, it’s something that Buck and I share in common is our background in national security. I spent over a decade doing oversight of FBI. I come from the watchdog world. So not only from my past as a recovering lawyer, my past as doing oversight of the FBI. This is very disturbing. We’re seeing that there’s violation of the equal treatment of law and we’re seeing a concern here, at least we need to ask questions why they didn’t use least intrusive means. That’s a Fourth Amendment protection. We need to ask why didn’t they just endorse their subpoena to ask for documents instead of going in with a warrant and invading a home and flipping over things and looking in safes and people’s clothes.

    These are the kind of questions we need to ask because it looks like a politicization and weaponization of law enforcement against political enemies and opponents. And they’re not doing that against other people who are political friends and allies. And that’s concerning. So it’s time for Congress to ask some hard questions. It’s time to hold DOJ and FBI officials accountable. And there’s lots of ways to do that.

    CLAY: Kelly, good luck today. Good luck in November. I’m sure we’ll talk to you again. She is Kelly Tshibaka. She is running for the Alaskan Senate seat that is currently occupied by Lisa Murkowski. Thank you for the time.

    TSHIBAKA: Thanks. And I’m at KellyforAK.com if people want to learn more. Have a great day.

    BUCK: Thank you.

    Recent Stories

    Woke NBA Announces Plan to Meddle in Midterm Elections

    16 Aug 2022

    CLAY: The NBA has announced that they are not going to play games on Election Day this year, and instead all 30 teams are going to play the day before, and they are going to encourage everyone to go out and vote I’m sure in an incredibly woke fashion. Every time I think, “Hey, maybe sports is starting to get back a little bit to normal and they’re just gonna entertain us,” they do something like this. They’ve never taken off Election Day before. It’s normal because they’re entertainers. They entertain pretty much every day of the week. Instead, all 30 teams will play the day before, they will lecture us about politics, and they will not play on Election Day.

    BUCK: I don’t think it’s gonna move the needle, but it does move the needle of annoying people like me. So there’s that. I doubt it will change any of the election outcomes, although, you know, who knows? In a super tight election, anything can. But it just goes to show you, I think, that the Democrat apparatus in all of its forms and all of its manifestations, they’re mobilizing, they’re circling the wagons, they’re doing everybody they can to prevent the electoral justice that they so richly deserve.

    I mean, this is the thing. The Democrats have sucked at running the country for the last two years. They just have. We’ve all known it. We’ve all seen it. So I’m sorry that people now regret their votes for Biden, and I’m sorry that people were disappointed because they believed all the stupid talking points. But they shouldn’t vote for the same thing because they don’t want to admit that they were wrong. That’s just how I feel about this. I’m not even on the covid thing yet. And you know that’s when I really lose my mind.

    CLAY: Well, we’re gonna talk with Alex Berenson at the top of the next hour about the covid thing. Buck, one thing I do wonder about the raid is whether — I know we’ve talked a lot about whether Trump might announce for 2024 before the midterm. Did the raid serve as a default Trump announcement in that it basically soaked up all of the attention, and instead of pointing out all of the things that Joe Biden is doing wrong now, all of the attention is on should there or should there not have been a raid on Donald Trump?

    BUCK: Important question, Nashville Nostradamus. More or less likely today that Trump is going to be indicted, in your mind? Meaning is it moving more toward that or a little bit back from that?

    CLAY: I think it’s more likely still that he’s gonna be indicted because I don’t think you can do this raid and then basically just come up empty-handed, right? I think that’s hard to justify for all of the Democrat voters —

    BUCK: I think that’s right. I think that’s right.

    Recent Stories

    Dems Save DA Gascon by Disqualifying Recall Signatures

    16 Aug 2022

    BUCK: As you know, we’ve been all over the progressive prosecutor issue really for as long as we’ve been on air together because this has led to a massive increase. Lib, lunatic prosecutors who just think let criminals go free. The criminal justice system is racist. Just don’t even lock people up. Don’t even charge them. A hundred arrests? No big deal. Must have had a bad day, a hundred times in a row. That’s resulted in less safe cities. It’s resulted in more people being murdered, raped, robbed, assaulted. We all see it. We know it. The numbers all back it up. And some of the worst offenders in the progressive prosecutor pantheon are the former now DA of San Francisco, Chesa Boudin; Bragg, Alvin Bragg in New York City; Kim Foxx in Chicago; and Gascon of Los Angeles.

    Now, there is a recall effort underway, has been a recall effort, I have to say, to get rid of Gascon in Los Angeles after the successful recall effort to get rid of Boudin in San Francisco. And, unfortunately, the recall effort has hit a little snag. Clay, there’s so much going on here. This is so interesting, isn’t it?

    To get a recall measure on the ballot for the upcoming election, you needed to have for the petition — this is from the L.A. registrar — county registrar — 566,857 signatures. Now, they had over 700,000 signatures to recall Gascon. But we just find out today that only 520,050 signatures were found to be valid. 195,783 signatures they have said are invalid. I’ve seen the reasons. There’s all kinds of stuff, and we can get into some of what the basis is for — alleged basis — for removing these signatures may be. But, Clay, a lot of people reporting this up there right now. It’s really interesting.

    What percentage of mail-in ballots in the 2020 election were rejected in Los Angeles County? Less than 1%. Basically none. What percentage of signatures to get this Gascon recall on the ballot were rejected? Almost 30%. It’s about mathematically a 60X when you add it all up. For every one signature from a mail-in ballot or from a mail-in ballot in general, for every one that was rejected in 2020, 60 signatures were rejected in the Gascon effort. I have a feeling at best here they decided to get a whole lot more strict with the rules when it was their guy who wanted the strict rules.

    CLAY: Yeah. And also the idea of a written recall effort feels really antiquated to me in the modern era, right, where you’re sitting and looking at every single signature? And all of these, right, we had massive issues in Michigan with a lot of the people who wanted to be on the ballot in Michigan. Now, Tudor Dixon ended up being the nominee. I spent a lot of time up in Michigan and was talking to people about this. But they had a bunch of people that they thought were gonna be leading contenders for governor that weren’t able to get these signatures validated. It just seems like it’s messy, doesn’t it?

    I mean, when you’re talking about almost 200,000 signatures being rejected, you’re almost to the point now where whatever ballot you’re trying to advocate for needs to get twice as many as the minimum number in order to feel like you even have a chance to get on the ballot itself. And getting Gascon out in LA is something that cuts across partisan lines in a substantial way, much like we saw what happened down in San Francisco with Chesa Boudin, and you didn’t mention him, but Philadelphia, I mean, we’ve talked a little bit about —

    BUCK: Krasner. That’s the name I left out.

    CLAY: Larry Krasner. If he feel is on pace right now for the deadliest and highest level shootings that have existed in the history of Philadelphia. And a lot of it is being pointed at Larry Krasner as the reason. And certainly if you’re listening to us in Los Angeles now, I’ve been fortunate gotten to spend a lot of time in L.A. over the years. I really like the city of Los Angeles. But, my goodness. The amount of health and safety and danger that has changed in the last decade in L.A. is pretty significant. And we haven’t talked much about it, Buck. But they’re having a big mayoral election in Los Angeles, and that’s really kind of being divided in many ways along political line they do not even both of the final two, if I remember correctly, are both Democrats.

    One of them was a longtime Republican developer who is now saying, “Hey, I’m a Democrat as well.” Karen Bass is on one side. And what’s the guy who’s gonna beat Karen Bass hopefully? I mean, I think he’s the more rational and reasonable of the L.A. mayoral candidates and it would be a big win and he’s actually been endorsed by a lot of the people who are just fed up in Los Angeles with the collapse that they’ve seen there.

    BUCK: There’s a big point of hypocrisy here as well because in the Gascon recall effort. Now, Gascon is up for reelection in 2024 anyway, and it is looking very unlikely that he will be reelected, ’cause even Democrats realize. Look, I think I sent you a photo of it this morning, Clay. I live in Midtown Manhattan. I live within a stone’s throw of Times Square right in the heart of the city, and I walk out any front door, and there are used needles and drug baggies 50 feet from the front door.

    I mean, this is just what happens when you decriminalize open-air drug usage, when all of a sudden shooting up heroin in broad daylight in front of children on a crowded street is no big deal, you see a lot more of it, right? And when you don’t prosecute people that are gang — gang members and have, you know, multiple felonies already on the record, you don’t give them a stiff sentence, they end up shooting somebody. And that’s what’s happened in Krasner’s Philadelphia. Do you know there were 12 people who are shot Friday night alone in Philadelphia? You I know people say, well, some weekends there’s 30 or 40 shot in Chicago. Well, it’s one night. And Philly is a fraction the size of Chicago. Philadelphia is gonna end up having one of the highest murder rates in the entire country, and it all coincides with commie, lunatic Krasner being the prosecutor who comes in and just says, “Prosecuting criminals feels racist to me.”

    Which, by the way, that sentiment, I would argue, is completely insane, right? Because what you’re effectively — what you’re claiming with all of this is that the disparate impact of prosecution, somehow you never take into effect the disparate impact on the communities where this violence is occurring. You know, are you going to side with the 99% of minorities who are law-abiding or the 1% in certain communities who are not law-abiding, right? But for Krasner it’s an easy decision. He’s made that decision. And this is what we see. We see it’s spiraling out of control.

    CLAY: Well, let me clear this up too. The L.A. mayor race gonna come down Rick Caruso, who is a former developer, billionaire, and former Republican. And he’s going up against Karen Bass. So that’s the decision that L.A.’s going to have to make.

    To your point on Philadelphia and the allegations Larry Krasner would toss out that policing is racist, I think you destroy that argument with one analogy. And I think it’s a good one that I would encourage everybody out there —

    BUCK: My men and women violent thing?

    CLAY: Yeah.

    BUCK: Yeah. It’s true.

    CLAY: As soon as you ask — somebody, okay, it’s racist. ‘Cause 50% people who are being arrested for violent crime are black and they only represent 12% of the population, whatever it is. Say, okay. Ninety-seven percent of the people that are being arrested for violent crime in America regularly, certainly well over 90% every community, you know what they are? Mail. Is it sexist that police waging War on Men by arresting men wildly higher percentages than their percentage of population?

    BUCK: If you took the left-wing view on this, what’s the word — misogyny is hating women — no — is it mis — what’s the word for hating men? I’m blanking on it now —

    CLAY: I don’t even know.

    BUCK: There is a word. And I think it’s andro something or other. I’m forgetting right now. But, anyway, if you took the left-wing argument about criminal justice and race to apply it to gender, what you would — you go through all the same iterations. You say there are so many men who are in prison for crimes they didn’t commit. And women get off for murders all the time. This is what is often said, right?

    CLAY: Misandry or misandry. I’m not sure how you pronounce it.

    BUCK: Misandry? Okay. Yeah. And there are so many men who are in prison who are innocent and beyond that we should just let a lot of men who are murders out of prison because clearly it can’t be true that there are more men committing murders than women, therefore let’s just empty out the prison population of murderers and see what happens. That is the argument that the left has engaged in just with race instead of gender involved. And, you know, you saw this playing out with Krasner, you see this playing out with Gascon.

    But just another thing, Clay, on the process, the recall process . They’re saying things like — I pulled this up so I could see exactly — the reasons they got rid of a lot of, folks, almost 200,000 signatures found to be invalid, right? Not registered, max number of times signed, different address. Different address. 32,000. That’s close to being the margin. You know how — you know there were thousands of people who voted in the wrong county in Georgia in the 2020 election and their votes were counted and they don’t seem to care?

    Mollie Hemingway over at The Federalist has done excellent work on this. They just figure well, they basically should count because people’s votes should count so we’re just ignore it is rules. Notice the left becomes hyperfocused on ways to use integrity laws about elections or anything else when it’s to their advantage. And when it’s not to their advantage, those laws are racist.

    CLAY: Yeah. And it’s systemic racism. Not just racism. Systemic racism. So I would ask all of you out there the next time you hear — maybe it’s your kids, maybe it’s your grandkids arguing the criminal justice system is systematically racist, just sit ’em down and say, “Is it also systematically sexist?” And then walk through that argument with them and see what their reaction is. Because a lot of times when people play the systemic racism card, they examine, because there is a fear and you’re racist if you question anything that has had to do with systemic racism allegations, just say you know what? In addition to the being systematically racist, I think our criminal justice system is systematically sexist because men are overwhelmingly going to prison, and it’s not fair. And just see what the reaction is. Why are police so sexist? Why are they consistently arresting men and not arresting women?

    BUCK: And in order to balance things out in society, should we just arrest fewer men for violent crimes? Look, it’s not fair. Clearly men aren’t just committing more violent crimes than women, the argument goes. So we should just arrest fewer men for violent crime. This is the argument laid bare for everybody. So there you go. And what happens when you do that, by the way? There’s more crime. What a shock.

    Recent Stories