×

Clay and Buck

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The CDC Admits We Were Right About Covid

15 Aug 2022

BUCK: We’re heading into election season. We’re also heading into, for what most of this country will be, cold and flu season. Remember we used to talk about that, you’d see ads for different, you know, Tylenol Cold and Flu —

CLAY: Oh, yeah.

BUCK: — and Advil, Cold and Flu, NyQuil, all this stuff, ’cause we know that the winter season, indoors more people get more respiratory viruses. The flu hits year in, year out. We know this. We’ve seen this our entire lives. And so that means we’re heading into the next round here of covidism, Fauciism, whatever you want to call it. Latest news on — and there’s so much, by the way.

I know on Friday Clay was talking to you when I was out about how some of the CDC has changed it so that you don’t have to treat the unvaccinated and vaccinated differently as a matter of policy.

CLAY: Which is massive, Buck, I knew you would love this be with I know you missed when the news came out, but we’ve spent basically the whole time that we’ve been on the show together with you telling you that the pandemic of the unvaccinated statistically was a lie, telling you that you were probably going to survive the Biden administration’s winter of death. And then suddenly they just basically said, “Oh, yeah, there’s no real distinction anymore. These covid shots don’t really provide much protection versus natural immunity or just kind of letting it ride.”

BUCK: It’s about individual decision-making, which is what it should have been all along. The most absurd overreaching, authoritarianism in our lifetimes, in our lifetimes from our own government, was on this issue of covid vaccines.

CLAY: Yes.

BUCK: Nothing else comes close. People talk about post-9/11, the Patriot Act. Please. They fired soldiers from their careers because they wouldn’t get a shot that didn’t matter, that they didn’t need, that didn’t stop the spread. I think we all need to hear this right now. Because that’s what’s gone on. And this is exactly as we’ve said they would eventually the approach they’d eventually take which is just weir just gonna let this kind of fade, we’re never gonna have accountability, we’re never gonna face up to what we did to people.

I remember a year ago — and, Clay, we’ll play in the next segment to what you’re saying about masks, we’ll have some fun on the mask situation here. But a year ago on vaccines, not only were they talking about the winter of death, the pandemic of the unvaccinated, all this stuff, but you’ll recall there were experts going around, “If you don’t get this shot, you are risking creating super bugs.” Remember that?

CLAY: Oh, yeah.

BUCK: Based on nothing. Based on just, you know, which casting at their side was the good guys, the other side was the bad guys. If you won’t get shots one, two, and then three soon thereafter, you were effectively a petri dish for the super covid that was gonna come. Turns out everyone got covid anyway, didn’t stop the spread at all. ‘Cause people say, “Well, for 60 days there’s a bigger antibody response.” Guess what? Month three, doesn’t matter, you get covid ’cause we’ve all been exposed to it. This is what we’ve seen all along.

So now in the U.K., Clay — this is where it is — they’ve just approved, the first country to have a — speaking of Moderna, on the one hand Moderna’s throwing out 30 million vaccines because — which we paid for because nobody wants them because they’re stupid, ’cause it’s not gonna actually save you from covid. This is what everyone’s realizing, you know.

You and I who are the big covid deniers, there was a hit piece on me in the New York Times, for God’s sakes. It’s an abject, complete disaster, what the libs did about covid. It’s indefensible. You and I had parents get shoots and we encouraged them to get boosted because they’re at higher risk because of their age. My parents, right now, if I told them, hey, guys, go get a booster, they’d laugh in my face.

CLAY: My parents said the same thing.

BUCK: ‘Cause they’re like, you know, everyone’s gotten covid.

CLAY: You, yeah.

BUCK: Everyone’s gotten covid.

CLAY: My parents just got it. And we’re fine. We’re 78-year-olds had gotten their shots, but they’re like we’re not going to get anywhere more shots and I think look at a lot of people out there who are 70 plus, right, that are saying like we gotta get back to normal life now, let people make decisions for themselves, but the fact that we allowed these companies to make tens of billions of dollars selling us, Buck, a fundamental lie because what they told us was you get this shot you’ll neither get more spread covid. That was the implicit sales pitch that they made.

If they were eligible for lawsuits, every plaintiff’s lawyer in America would be lining on the course steps because they fraudulently induced tens of millions of Americans to get the covid shot by telling them something that is 100 percent untrue. You wouldn’t get or spread covid — there’s a lot of people listening to us right now, Buck, who bought that sales pitch, who listened, who did what they thought was the right choice, and then they got covid. Everybody gets covid, no matter what, no matter how many times you got the shot. The fifth one ain’t gonna save you.

BUCK: So here’s where we are with the U.K., all right, just so everyone knows the situation. Moderna has this vaccine that is basically a split in fact so it’s a double doze but after dosage. They just approved this in the if you can’t, first country in the world where they’re gonna have an Omicron specific dose and an original covid dose just for extra protection.

Now, I’m just wondering, has anybody over at Moderna thought about how many people already have natural immunity to the original covid, how many people already have natural immunity to Omicron? And, oh, Clay, here’s the other problem. Does anyone think that we’re gonna be facing old school Omicron going into this fall? It’s gonna be a different virus.

CLAY: That’s right.

BUCK: It’s like these people with, for all their lab coats and their fancy degrees, are total morons except they made so much money.

CLAY: They’re not morons.

BUCK: They got away with it.

CLAY: It’s about the money. It’s about the money. You gotta follow the — and this is why I’m saying — look. If I — if you and I were — were applicants, instead of just trying to sit here and talk to people every day for three hours, I would be hammering home that when Republicans take back the House and the Senate, certainly when they take back the House, we’re passing a bill and we’re sending it to Joe Biden that takes away all of the profits that Pfizer and Moderna and Johnson & Johnson made off of these covid shots, which our government gave them tens of billions, if not hundreds of billions of dollars now, that don’t work. And we’re gonna take back their profits, we’re gonna — or — two options for them.

Either we are going to rescind your ability not to be sued over this and you can take us to court and we can fight out all those documents, everything else. or — and that would open the door to the plaintiffs, and there would be hundreds of billions of dollars in liability, Pfizer and Moderna might bankrupt over what I believe is clear fraud based on their sales pitch for this document or for this. Or you voluntarily disgorge all of your profits to United States government and we are redistributing those profits to everyone who was fired for refusing to take your shot this happen pesky I would be arguing

BUCK: I think we’re gonna head into now a winter period — we’re not gonna see these results before the election which is a shame because I just want every person to remember what it was like — think back to one year ago, think back to 12 months on the timeline in reverse here, what the Democrats were saying about you for not wanting — even if you wanted to get the shot yourself, a lot of already I’m sure got the shot, a lot of people did. But when they were mandating this, when they were saying get the shot or you get fired, get the shot or you can’t go to your brother’s wedding, get the shot or you can’t go to your daughter’s graduation, get the shot or else was the whole pitch that they — not the pitch, the demand that they made for everybody.

And we should all be single-issue voters going in — Democrats deserve complete political annihilation just for the way they politicized covid, just for the double mask, triple mask, N95 mask, get four shots, get five shots. It’s a mess. But I also think what we’re gonna see is that you’re gonna have blue states, Clay — California, New York, et cetera — gonna be getting all vaxxed up again, not to the same degree, but a lot of people in those places are gonna be saying, “Oh, I have to get the new fancy Omicron, slash, original covid, whatever shot, they’re gonna get it.” And a lot of people in the rest of the country are not gonna get it, you know what’s gonna happen? We’re gonna see the same thing that’s happened before. They’re gonna get covid too just like everybody else, and they’re not gonna stop until they finally realize that they’ve been had.

CLAY: They wanted us not to be honest with you. There was a lot of pressure back in the summer last year, Buck, when you and I were having Alex Berenson on and we were talking about this was in the days when everybody was cheerleading, remember, it was the hot vax summer, everybody wanted to say 2021, covid’s gone forever. How dare you ask questions about the fact that there are a lot of breakthrough cases. There’s a tiny minority of cases. That’s not a big issue.

Remember all those things that they told you? Remember how they attacked Buck and I for even having the audacity to say, hey, let’s just talk about some of this data. I’m not that comfortable with the numbers that are coming out of Israel and coming out of England. We were right on all of it. We were a hundred percent right.

BUCK: Here’s one of my favorites, Clay. February of the 2021, PolitiFact coming after yours truly, the biggest fact-checking site on the internet, got a good photo of me, I gotta say, the swoop, the hair looking good in this one so at least I got that going for me, which is nice. The science — this was my tweet — the science says open the schools, stop wearing masks outside, and everyone at low risk should start living normal lives.

CLAY: Yep.

BUCK: That’s in February of 2021, okay? So this is quite a ways back. And they write, “False. A popular Facebook blog,” blah, blah, blah, and they flag this, and they say they take it apart point by point. Open the schools, Clay. They hit me with a false information for opening the schools. They hit me with false information for wearing masks outside. They wrote, “Because coronavirus is relatively new, the research on outdoor masks is limited. But so far science has shown that masks prevent virus the transmission.” I mean, they’re hitting me on outdoor mask wearing as a fact check.

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: These people are such horrific morons, and they’re so dishonest, and they’re so grotesque. And I’m not letting this stuff go. And I know for a lot of our audience, we had people that lost their jobs in this audience.

CLAY: Oh, yeah.

BUCK: We have people that got screamed at by lunatics ’cause they didn’t mask up their 5-year-old outdoors like we were supposed to. I’m not letting this go.

CLAY: No. And when we come back, by the way, it’s been one year since I spoke out at my school board where the FBI’s out here raiding Donald Trump. Remember they also investigated parents who came in at their school boards about masking and CRT and everything else as domestic terrorists. And one of those school board meetings that received national attention, Joe Biden even commented directly, was Williamson County, Tennessee, where I spoke. I haven’t listened this since I did it. I only got a minute or two to speak or whatever it is. We’re gonna play you that audio. I think just like with you, Buck, when it came to PolitiFact, I think everything I say you’re gonna listen to and say, yeah, year later he was a hundred percent right.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

CLAY: Buck was talking about getting fact checked for his statements that were truthful. You guys know. I’ve got three kids. They’re all back in school, almost. One of them’s going back to ninth grade this year. I’ve got a sixth grader and I’ve got a second greater. So last year two elementary school students they were trying to reimplement masks in my school district. I was one of those domestic terrorist parents who went and spoke on behalf of their kids. This is last year. Anti-mask mandate in schools. Listen to this.

ARCHIVE

CLAY: For all these people walking around in masks, engaging in cosmetic theater thinking that they are making a difference against covid, they aren’t. Here’s the truth. Our kids under 25-year-olds, one in a million chance that they are gonna die of covid. They are more likely to be struck by lightning. They are more likely to be struck by lightning. They are more likely to die of the seasonal flu. Have any of you ever mandated masks with the seasonal flu? Well, shame on you, because every kid in Williamson County schools has been under more danger from the seasonal flu every year than they are from covid. I would tell every parent here, don’t let your kids wear masks. (Applause)

BUCK: That’s the most pissed off I’ve ever heard you, by the way, which I love.

CLAY: I’m still angry that they made any kid — first of all, they shut down schools, all that. But the mask people, the fact — I want the mask people to have to all acknowledge how wrong they were, particularly for kids. Because the fact — look, Buck. Philadelphia kids are going back to school and they’re making ’em all wear masks for two weeks to start school. There are still a lot of places masking kids under 5. You’re always gonna be walking around in a mask. You know what?

I’m thankful — you and I are gonna be in Salt Lake City this weekend — I’m thankful, Buck, that they haven’t been able to bring back masks on airplanes and at least the CDC new guidance makes it theoretically harder and harder for them to bring ’em back. But they’re making TSA agents wear ’em, which hasn’t gotten a lot of attention. If you go through an airport at any time recent history, you’ve started to see they’ve had to wear ’em. It’s all illogical. It’s all immoral. It’s absurd.

BUCK: I mean, I sit there, I go back — just the fun thing about Twitter, I go back in time, I’ve got a written record of this. And literally June of 2020, not June of 2020, June of 2020: “Mask wearing for the healthy outdoors in summer is absurd,” as many of us have been saying for weeks, that was in response to a CNBC piece that had all these people in the parks with masks on.

Like — I mean, I’ve — you and I have been on this train from the beginning. November of 2020: “Of course we’re going back to the your mask protects you, my mask protects you bullcrap. Just remember people who have been insisting that wearing a mask protects of you, and if you question ’em you’re a monster we’re WRONG,” in all caps. So we go back two years now, man, and we’re still having to have this fight with you? They’re out of their minds. This is a delusion. This is the result of Chinese Communist Party-style struggle sessions led by Dr. Fauci, who’s still going around with his little hipster outfit — you ever notice, by the way, Fauci dresses like a guy who’s, like, 35. He really does. Because he is a fame you-know-what. I can’t even say. He is obsessed with the Vanity Fair —

CLAY: We can say he’s a fame whore.

BUCK: I can say whore?

CLAY: We can say whore.

BUCK: I like how Clay never holds back on the words. I worry that the potty mouth will get me in trouble.

CLAY: When I started doing radio, I went and looked up all the FCC restrictions to see exactly what words could be used.

BUCK: Fauci’s the biggest fame whore on the planet, which is why he wears his little skinny ties and his little hipster shoes and the whole thing ’cause it’s all about his brand. He was wrong on everything. In case you’re wondering what I think of the guy.

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.

Trump Says the FBI Seized His Passports in Raid

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: We have got some breaking news. If you aren’t on TRUTH Social right now you should be on TRUTH Social, because President Trump is tweeting regularly. And I say “tweeting” — truthing regularly from the site. And, Buck, he sent out what information here recently?

BUCK: This is just — in the last half hour this broke. President Trump said, “Wow! In the raid by the FBI of Mar-a-Lago, they stole my three Passports (one expired), along with everything else. This is an assault on a political opponent at a level never seen before in our Country. Third World!” That was just 27 minutes ago as I speak to you right now. Clay, seizing someone’s passport, it’s usually an indicator.

CLAY: First of all, this is a huge deal. It’s a strong indication that, first of all, you seize someone’s passport when you think they’re going to flee the country. Again, this is Trump himself putting that out. If that is true — and it is maybe the strongest evidence yet that he is going to be indicted, Buck. Right? I mean, again, President Trump putting on TRUTH Social that the government has seized his passports.

First of all, I don’t think Trump has traveled, you know, outside of the country very much in the year and a half that he has not been president, but usually your passport is seized after you’re charged to try to keep you from being able to leave the country. I don’t know, Buck, that I have heard of a passport being seized before someone is charged.

Maybe one of you out there is an expert. This is where we love to be able to rely on this audience. It’s 800-282-2882. As we get ready for the third hour of the program, if you do criminal law or if you have been involved in high-level criminal defense, have you ever heard of a passport being seized before someone is charged with a crime?

Now, it’s also to believe, to be fair, maybe his passport was in some way connected — I’m just trying to think of —
BUCK: I don’t think he’s keeping his passport in boxes under lock and key in the basement. That must have been from his office, right? No one keeps their passport in dusty — ’cause you need it.

CLAY: I get it. I’m just trying to think of how the passport could have been seized and not been intentionally seized. ‘Cause, Buck, I’ve just never heard of it happening. And I’ve done criminal law. So, again, for most people, the only time they would take your passport is if they think you’re going to flee the country.

BUCK: Right. They ask you to surrender your passport as a condition of bail is usually what you hear.

CLAY: Right. But that’s my point is usually that happens after you’ve been charged with a crime. I can’t remember a passport being seized prior to someone — and, now, maybe they could argue — again, this is ridiculous — but maybe they are arguing, hey, we want to see where the passport has been stamped as evidence of some sort of trip. Again, I’m just trying to —

BUCK: I’m just gonna go on the record now. If they suddenly find a secret trip to Moscow where Trump has handwritten “meeting with Pootie-Poot, had a good conversation,” no, no, no. Trump has already said, he’s like, I don’t even know what they’re putting in there. And for anyone who says, how could he raise such a conspiracy, my friends, we all know this and we need to remember this, they falsified information for FISA. They falsified information for Trump-Russia. This is a matter of public record, of court record. So why should we not believe that they’re capable of that now? Of course we should believe they’re capable of that now.

CLAY: Yeah. Look. And I think it’s why so many people don’t trust the FBI. This is — I mean, to me this is a blockbuster — blockbuster statement. And again, I’m just trying to work through it live on radio like many of you are trying to process it as well. What sort of evidence could the passport have if it’s being taken for an evidentiary basis as opposed to as a restrictive travel basis.

But I just can’t remember, Buck — can you? Can you ever remember a time when, again, we’ll take calls on this in the third hour — where previous, prior to any criminal charges being brought, that a passport was seized? I’m sure that there have been situations where there have been ongoing investigations and they haven’t charged yet but they’ve said, “Hey, we want your passport.” This is just pretty, pretty rare. And I can’t even conceptualize in my head this occurring without there being criminal charges brought.

BUCK: I mean, it’s funny ’cause we just had Kash on who’s a federal prosecutor who says he doesn’t think there’s gonna be charges brought. I’ve spoken to former attorneys general who say there will be charges brought. I mean, clearly this could go either way. If they back down, though, from the charges, it’s really gonna be viewed as an admission that this is effectively a political hit. So can they really get away with that before the midterms?

Recent Stories

Kash Patel Explains How Trump Docs Were Declassified and Handled

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: We’re joined now by Kash Patel. First of all, thank you for joining us, formerly with the Trump team in a variety of different roles, I think, over your tenure there. But we had you on in May when this declassification, classified document scandal I put in quotation marks really started to take off. And you walked us through the process by which many of these documents were being declassified.

So, let me just kind of give you a broad question to start with here. What do you know about the documents that were in Mar-a-Lago and their classified or declassified-related state? And what do you think about the FBI investigation so far as you’ve been able to hear about so far?

PATEL: Yeah, hey, it’s great to be with you, Clay, thanks so much for having me. And back then, you know, you guys were the one, if not only, people willing to cover what we thought was a massive national security story related to the archives. And what I can tell you is that this is how this works, and you guys know this. The president of the United States has universal declassification authority. If he says it or writes it anywhere about documents or sets of documents, they become immediately declassified.

Now, in October of 2020, the president wrote a statement that’s now publicly available that said, I declassify every Russiagate document and every Hillary Clinton email investigation document. That’s it. That’s what it takes. And then out as he was leaving the presidency in December or January, he issued further sweeping declassification orders at the White House over whole sets of documents.

So, those documents should have been immediately declassified. But what happened was they went to the politicians and now we know the National Archives representative has shown himself to be a political politician, said he referred the matter to the Department of Justice because he wanted Trump investigated because the GSA, not Trump, had mishandled the packaging of the documents. This same individual is the one who gave Hillary Clinton a pass and could have referred her email matter to the Department of Justice, but he said, oh, he didn’t feel it was necessary to do so at the time.

So what it shows is, the two tier system of justice, which is what the FBI is currently exemplifying, if you have anything to do or related to with Donald Trump, they will literally pull the levers of justice unequally and prosecute you based upon politics instead of the facts and the law. And tragically, the same FBI characters that were involved in Russiagate or Hunter Biden laptop or Hillary Clinton are the same counterintel guys now running this, quote, unquote, national security investigation against President Trump.

BUCK: Kash, it’s Buck, man. Thanks for being with us. I remember we had you on, I feel like, what, six months ago or something like that now, in the early days of this because that was when the dispute — you were talking about this dispute where they were bringing some legal action in the courts about what Trump had taken out of Mar-a-Lago. And now here we are, the basis for this crazy raid.

Is this all going to turn on the claim, meaning, is the fight really going to be met here, the center of the battle going to be whether the president does have this unilateral declassification authority? Because, you know, I’m seeing, for example, the New York Times reporting, oh, national security experts are laughing at this notion the president can declassify. I remember when I was in the CIA they’re like, you tell the president anything he wants to know ’cause he can know literally anything in the government, he’s the top authority, and if he wants to go out on a press conference and talk about it, he can. So what has changed?

PATEL: Nothing. You’re absolutely right. And it’s been reported now recently that every president since Clinton and Bush has had standing orders that whenever documents leave the Oval Office and go to the residence at night ’cause he’s gotta go with work, they are automatically declassified. So there is a further level of declassification that occurs there automatically on top of when the president says it. And any national security former officials saying, “That’s not how it works,” that’s not how it works for the 99% of the other government employees because there’s a process in place so that classified information isn’t disposed or displayed improperly. But there’s a reason he’s the commander-in-chief. He’s the head of the United States government. And the Constitution gives him the power to declassify and classify as he sees fit. That’s the whole point.

CLAY: Kash, Buck and I were talking about this. Why do you think Trump had some of the documents that he did down at Mar-a-Lago? Do you think — and one of our theories is that he may have kept some of these documents because he wants them to be public and they aren’t being released publicly yet. What do you know about those documents? Why do you think he might have them?

PATEL: Well, I’ve never seen them or handled them, but I can tell you this. Barack Obama has 30 million documents at his house in Chicago. He has not released a single one, not one. He has cited the Presidential Records Act, ironically enough, to prevent the disclosure of any of the documents he took with him. Same for Bush. Same for Clinton. So, again, this two-tier system of justice, now everybody’s interested in 12 boxes of documents but not how every other president before President Trump was treated.

I don’t know what was in them, but I can tell you what happened before which is what we talked about at the top of the show. And it’s key to note that the GSA, the Government Service Administration, they’re the ones that packed up and moved these documents. It’s not like President Trump put him in his briefcase and hopped aboard Air Force One on January 20th and said, “Okay. I’ll see you guys later,” which is critical if you’re considering a case for improper use of classified information as we know from our friend James Comey during the Hillary Clinton investigation who set the standard when Hillary Clinton sent and received classified emails personally, she didn’t have the intent to violate the law. So if that’s the standard, then President Trump is as far away from it as you can possibly be.

BUCK: Speaking to Kash Patel, former DOD chief of staff under Trump and a deputy assistant to that White House. He’s also a Trump Media board member. Kash, now I’m asking you to do a little bit beyond the explanation and expertise asking into the, what do you see coming here or what’s between the lines on this one? Because, as I understand it, in those documents that have now been seized by the FBI, an FBI that we should not trust, there is a whole bunch of executive privilege covered documents that the deep state now has access to, perhaps even some privileged as legal communications between the president and his legal counsel documents they have access to. Do you think that this was more a fishing expedition, even, than anything else? How do you see that?

PATEL: Yeah, I think it’s a combination of both. And look. As a former national security prosecutor who worked in this national security division — and I remind people, there’s a difference between a criminal prosecution and a counterintelligence prosecution, which is supposedly what this is. It’s the latter ,that’s run out of the national security division of the DOJ. And I think what the world has seen is the shocking political overreach. And what this attorney general and this director of the FBI didn’t think would happen is, the boomerang would come back so quickly to hit them in the face. And so now we see the problems with this sort of government overreach.

You highlighted the biggest problem that no one’s talking about. Presidential privilege and executive privilege and attorney-client privilege, the DOJ’s now invading those usually off the limits documents because the target is Donald Trump. That is the ultimate two-tier system of justice. And that is a total violation of the law.

CLAY: Kash, you worked in the Trump White House. You know the guy. Do you think this raid has made him more or less likely to want to run for president again?

PATEL: I mean, I think all these things make it more and more likely, and, you know, you guys also know him real well. You know, his thing is not necessarily just correcting his own name in the public. His thing is, this is wrong for America. The 2022 America, we have a president’s house being raided for the first time in history on, quote, unquote, a national security basis over documents that were in a basement in boxes under lock and key, after the Department of Just went there with Trump’s cooperation months before. None of this adds up. And I think this is going to make him want to run more because he wants to make sure it doesn’t happen to somebody else.

BUCK: One more for you, Kash. You were a federal prosecutor and specifically working on a lot of national security issues. Are they gonna indict President Trump?

PATEL: I don’t believe so. I don’t believe the facts — you know, if you look at the search warrant that’s now public, they said they have to sort of lay out which crimes they are alleging might be violated. One is the National Defense Information Act for classified information. The other is the destruction of government property that you’re not supposed to have, and the other one is the concealment of it.

Well, as far as we can tell from the public reporting, he hasn’t destroyed anything. And also he hasn’t — it’s not like he concealed anything. The GSA packed the boxes, moved them to the president’s home like they did for Obama and Clinton and Bush, and President Trump invited the DOJ in and said, whatever you guys need in the summer of — this past summer and said, what do you guys want to know? That doesn’t look like someone who’s concealing or hiding or destructing anything. If they do go out and indict him, I literally think that will be the end of the — I mean, if we’re not already there, it will be the end of the DOJ and the FBI.

BUCK: Kash Patel, always illuminating, sir. Thanks for being with us.

PATEL: Thanks, guys. Have a great day.

Recent Stories

Clay Makes MIT Chart of Biggest Anti-Maskers

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: You’re jealous that the Biden White House is upset, the MIT people, I was on a list.

BUCK: Hold on. MIT did some analysis of the biggest mask haters, and for some reason I have not yet been highlighted on the MIT analysis.

CLAY: They had my name in bold. One of the most proud things I’ve seen.

BUCK: Berenson is in center. But like Avik Roy who is our friend he was like a pro-mask guy, he’s on there; so I demand a recount. This is nonsense. The fix is in.

And even our friend Ann Coulter, she became very anti-mask when the data came in. She thought I was crazy. I had dinner with her back in, what, maybe June of 20. June of 2020, Clay, and I’m like “Masks are ridiculous.” Okay. I was like full on. So MIT. I don’t know.

I might have to bring a lawsuit against MIT for defamation for not putting me on the biggest mask haters list ’cause that makes me sad.

Recent Stories

Pfizer CEO Catches Covid After 4 Shots of “100% Effective” Vaccine

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: Let me hit you with this, too, as we get ready to go to break. Our friends in the covid pharmaceutical industry are not having a good couple of days. Albert Bourla, Buck, is the CEO of Pfizer. In April of 2021 he put out this tweet: “Excited to share that updated analysis from our Phase Three study with biotech also showed our covid-19 vaccine was a hundred percent effective in preventing Covid-19 cases in South Africa!” A hundred percent, exclamation point. I think you probably know where I’m going.

This morning Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer, what do you think he said? “I would like to let you know that I have tested positive for covid-19. I’m thankful to have received four doses of the Pfizer biotech vaccine. I am feeling well while experiencing very mild symptoms. I am isolating and have started a course of Paxlovid.”

BUCK: He said it like this (impression) “I got the four required shots, not the 5th required shot but there were more shots coming for you, three shots, four shots, five shots, even better.”

CLAY: I think that’s perfect. I think we also have some audio from Moderna’s CEO because we made everybody at Moderna billionaires, we made everybody at Pfizer billionaires, and they’ve given us all a product that doesn’t work. We’ll hit you with some of that Moderna audio here in the near future as well, and I think you are going to not be shocked by it but you will be made furious.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

BUCK: Here’s the CEO of Moderna lamenting the realities of what people are doing when it comes to getting the shot now.

BUCK: Just to translate that from the French because it’s very thick accent there, he’s saying we are throwing million doses of vaccine in the trash. Why? Because people don’t want to take the short-term covid juice. Ain’t worth the squeeze.

CLAY: And they can’t even give them away anywhere in the world. And so I’m gonna continue to hammer this, and I hope that there are respect candidates listening, senators, representatives, congressmen, governors.

Look. We gotta end this inability to sue Moderna and Pfizer that we gave them and we need them to return all the profits that they made off the covid shot because, first of all, that 30 million garbage dumping shots, we paid for, you, me, and all the American taxpayers. It doesn’t work like they told us it was going to work. And it’s a lemon of a product. We do we not get all the profits back from the covid shots and rehire every single person who lost their job over the covid shot and give them back pay? I want all the profits from the covid shots at a minimum that we can retain to go to back pay for everybody who got fired.

I think that’s an easy, really rational policy that we should put in place. Why are we still rewarding Moderna and Pfizer with all these boosters that they are getting? We talked about, Buck, the Wall Street Journal had a huge piece about all the people who made tens of millions of dollars off the Moderna shots and bought brand-new, military million-dollar houses. That’s our taxpayer money that they are using. And it’s absolutely indefensible.

Recent Stories

Comedy Break: Veep Says Something Nonsensical Again

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: Let’s start off the second hour with just a nice, long, healthy laugh at our Vice President Kamala Harris, who continues to put together strings of words the likes of which we haven’t seen, Buck, since Shakespeare. I don’t know how it’s possible for her to talk so much and say so little, but here is Kamala Harris over the weekend bringing some sanity to an insane world. Of course all of that is a joke. But just listen to Kamala, let’s all.

BUCK: Are we speaking the same language as Kamala? Because I have no idea what she thinks she’s talking about. But I am certain of this we can get people I think to cosign this one, Clay. Hell is the endless H.R. lecture where Kamala Harris is the one giving you the speech. Just go droning on and on, buzzword after buzzword. It’s all corporate jargon. It’s all words connected without thoughts between them. And she is remarkable at this.

I’ve never actually come across somebody else — if SNL had created the character of the politician of Kamala, it would be the funniest thing they had done in a long time. And yet here we are. She keeps giving these speeches and saying this just utterly nonsensical stuff.

CLAY: It’s globalized. I can’t figure out which is the better analogy. Is Kamala Harris the student — and some of you have probably been in this camp before — certainly I bet you have, Buck. I mean, I have. Sometimes you gotta write a paper and you’re not really an expert in what you’re writing about and so you take what should be one sentence and turn it into a paragraph and you take a paragraph and you turn it into a page to hit your word count. It feels like she is the vice president of word count. Like, she has to hit a certain number on her speeches. That’s one.

The other one is — Buck, I can’t decide which one is better — she’s the worst boss that any of us have ever had.

BUCK: Oh, yes.

CLAY: Who is way promoted above her level of expertise.

BUCK: The competency.

CLAY: Yes. Every time she addresses the people who work for her she’s Michael Scott, right? Like, she is so bereft of the ability to do her job, I can’t decide which one of those is more accurate.

BUCK: You are one of the few people that I know in the media world who has pulled similar duration and crazy hours to me with radio and TV and everything, you know. At one point I was doing a 5AM wake-up for a TV show and I was finishing my radio show at 9 o’clock at night. I do not recommend this for anybody, by the way, right?

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: You were doing a morning show for years and I’ve ever been — I mean, you’re tweeting at like 1 o’clock in the morning. I don’t know how you do it. You’re like a machine. Have you ever had the thing where you’ve been on a breaking news day, you’ve done so much content, you’ve been on the air for, like, six solid hours plus you’ve been on, you know, maybe you’ve done Hannity’s show or Tucker’s show plus — and then you get to, like, your friend’s podcast that you said you’d do at 11 o’clock at night and at some point you realize the brain and the words just aren’t really syncing up? I’ve been there a couple times. When Kamala starts speaking, it sounds to me like how I sound when I’m about to smack my face on the table from exhaustion.

CLAY: I did 5 AM radio, Central time, ’cause I live here in Nashville. And I would get up at, you know, 4:15, 4:30 for years, and a lot of times I had to do that, Buck, after Monday Night Football ends or after it’s a late-night sporting event that’s gonna be your lead. And the thing I remember most about it is just sometimes your brain doesn’t click like you expect your brain to click. If that makes sense. We rely on live radio, live television being at least somewhat good at expressing ourselves on a day-to-day basis and making connections and all those things. And sometimes you can, like, feel the hamster running in the wheel and the hamster’s just really tired. So that’s the analogy that sometimes you get to by the end.

The problem is Kamala’s always that way. And if you’re always that way, at some point, you know, to use a sports reference, you are what your record says you are. And her record is bad, and, again, those two analogies — student who hasn’t done enough research to be able to write a paper or boss who’s been promoted way over her pay grade — I can’t figure out which one’s more perfect.

BUCK: We have fun with this, obviously, because it is funny. But it also does play into the much bigger conversation about what the dynamics will be here with the Biden administration. A big point of conversation — this is, you know, I’m on vacation at the beach, ended up talking politics all weekend. I didn’t mean to, but that’s what happened. Big point of conversation for everybody is who believes that Biden is — and everyone’s calling it the Weekend at Bernie’s situation, by the way.

CLAY: That’s caught on now. Yes.

BUCK: They’re gonna push Biden to a second term. The problem they have is not only whether or not they should — by the way, I believe they are gonna just Weekend at Bernie’s. I think they’re gonna push —

CLAY: You think they’re going Weekend at Bernie’s 2 — is saying they made a second movie —

BUCK: The first movie is not even really watchable, folks. I’ll cut to the chase on that one. The second one I can’t even imagine. I think they would wheel Biden out completely, you know, with a blanket across his knees and completely unable to really even finish a sentence.

I think, unfortunately, they are that reckless that they would do that and they wouldn’t care about it and they think that they could probably win with that. But the other part of this is, you have the first female, black vice president in the history of the country. How did the Democrats go around — let’s be honest — how do they deny her the promotion that is implied by this role without looking like they’re skipping the first black female vice president for promotion, if you know what I mean. That’s a tough one.

CLAY: Yeah. That’s a problem. If you promote someone and you keep promoting them, then at some point by diversity and exclusion rules, if you don’t continue to promote them, it’s racist and sexist not to do so.

Recent Stories

The Bob McDonnell Case Could Be a Blueprint for Trump

15 Aug 2022

CLAY: Buck, I just want to put this case out in everybody’s mind. Because again, we try to be ahead of where a lot of the media that you’re gonna listen to is, and so I think you’re right about the forum shopping and the aspect that if an indictment is brought against Donald Trump, that a D.C. court would be very likely to convict him. But that wouldn’t be end of the story.

There would be an appeal. And given the fact that any charges that are brought against Trump would theoretically be brought and against and involving statutes that have not been used ever to prosecute a president before, there’s an interesting case that came out I believe it was in 2014. Virginia governor Bob McDonnell was sentenced, found guilty of bribery in Richmond, Virginia. And they were accused of accepting gifts, vacations, loans from a Virginia businessman in exchange for helping the company. The Supreme Court, Buck, 9-0.

BUCK: I got very fired up about this at the time. There was never even an allegation that they took an official act in the further — essentially there was no pro in the quid pro quo. They accepted gifts, and then the appearance of being around the government was considered enough for — the state of Virginia didn’t want to bring charges. The Feds came after him. He was talked about as a vice presidential contender for the Romney ticket, just to give everybody a sense of how high up he was at the time. Go ahead.

CLAY: So 9-0 Supreme Court shot it down. And the ruling said that the federal government’s view was far too broad of bribery law and how it could stretch. And so the reason why I bring this up is these are not directly analogous cases, but given the Supreme Court’s skepticism, I think it’s fair to say a federal power, in its current makeup, it is not extraordinary for me to think about this case against Trump, Buck, going all the way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court being charged with determining what exactly are the extent of President Trump’s powers? Did he declassify these documents? Was there in any way a crime that was committed? I think it might well go to the Supreme Court if they bring charges.

BUCK: And I also just want to remind everybody — this is one of my favorites, Clay — when you’re wondering is the DOJ — are prosecutors weaponized against Republicans, think of all the high-level, bogus prosecutions, including the Bob McDonnell prosecution that was overturned 9-0. I was getting heat from conservatives at the time saying, “Hey, guys, look. Does it look a little gross? Yeah. Should his wife be accepting a Rolex from a businessman in her state just ’cause? I don’t know. It doesn’t look so good.” But if he didn’t do anything that was actually in exchange for the gift and he lifted the gift, which he did — Clay, they wanted to send him to prison for 11 years, federal prison. For I think it was $175,000 in total in gifts. They wanted to send his wife to prison for two years, and they used that to force the plea. She wasn’t even a public punishable. They said that she was part of the conspiracy to defraud the state of Virginia.

Bob McDonnell, bogus prosecution. Chris Christie, bogus prosecution. Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Donald Trump. Go down the line, man. This is what they do. They get some lib hack prosecutor at the state level or the federal level to come after our people. They hid exculpatory evidence so they could go after Ted Stevens, and that Senate seat, by the way, then flipped Democrat. They lied to go after Ted Stevens. And without that they wouldn’t have gotten Obamacare through.

CLAY: Well, one of the big ways, Buck, that you make a name for yourself is by attaching criminal charges as the prosecutor in cases like these. And most of the time the prosecutors who are bringing these cases are intensely political in their own right. That’s what’s going on with Trump. If you can take a pound of flesh away from Trump, you elevate yourself in your state political hierarchy whether you’re in Georgia, whether you’re in New York, whatever state you’re involved in.

I would just point out that whatever happens with Trump low-level potential of charges, this thing is probably gonna go all the way to the Supreme Court. So there’s a decent chance that Trump could be validated now. Now, think, Buck, what’s the immediate response gonna be if the Supreme Court…

BUCK: They’re gonna want to court pack and they’re gonna freak out.

CLAY: That’s right.

BUCK: Imagine get to a point where it’s a 6-3 decision, which I think it would be, saying that these charges against Trump are bogus, I mean, the libs — what comes beyond — you know, it is a bit like Spinal Tap. The dial will go to 11. Like, what comes beyond thereby melt down we’d already see if Trump didn’t face criminal charges or didn’t face actual prosecution?

CLAY: Just flag this audio. ‘Cause what they would say is the only way Trump could escape criminal charges is by selecting his own jury. And that’s what they would say because he got three appointments to the Supreme Court.

Recent Stories

C&B Take a Deep Dive Into All of Trump’s Potential Defenses

15 Aug 2022

BUCK: Governor Ron DeSantis is pointing something out here about the, “Oh, you can trust the FBI” line you’re hearing in the background.

BUCK: Clay, I remember it, and you remember it, and I think everybody listening does well. And it’s important context for everything that’s going on right now. The people that are demanding trust have broken our trust on these issues and related to Trump. But to circle back to what you just said a second ago —

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: — the documents. Why would president — I mean, I’m, honestly — this is beyond — you know, I was — I was a worker bee, right? Like, I was working in these documents, in a vault in a secure facility all day long at the CIA. But presidents have different powers, obviously, different authorities and also they’ll keep documents I believe to go into a presidential library; so perhaps that’s part of this. But I have had people tell me that they believe that some of these documents were declassified specifically having to do with Russiagate, and that is why Trump wanted custody of them so that he could have his team at some point go through them.

We’ll ask Kash Patel about this later. What do you think? Why the boxes of docs?

CLAY: I think the idea that Trump was going through, in the final hours of his time in the White House and saying “yes,” “no,” “yes,” “no,” the analogy that I’ve made that I think registers with a lot of people is if you’ve ever moved, how often are you unable to even hardly keep track of what you are moving from one residence to another residence? How long does it take you to get everything unpacked?

This is why, Buck, to your point, I do think some things, however, he intentionally. We discussed the Kim Jong-un letters. I think he may well have wanted to keep those. There may be investigative materials that are confidential that he believed buttresses his argument that he did nothing wrong with Ukraine or that the Russia collusion hoax was all made up. And remember, they, long before this became a controversy — and we’ll talk to Kash about this in the next hour — they made a big show, Buck, of saying the president has declassified a massive tranche of documents. And I don’t believe those have been released to the American public yet. So he may wanted to have keep some copies of these documents to ensure that they were not destroyed by members of the FBI or the intelligence community that he had come to distrust.

But this all kind of rolls into why this is such a difficult case, in my opinion, to bring criminal charges on but also why Trump’s responses can be somewhat contradictory. Number one, Buck, I think the president’s best defense is going to be all of these documents were declassified. I made it clear — we’ll talk to Kash about this — and so the idea that I was mishandling classified documents is impossible because I had declassified all of this. He has basically the absolute power and privilege, as you’ve talked about, to declassify documents.

Now, did he follow — the argument, I would imagine, from the Department of Justice will be, he didn’t follow properly protocols in order to officially declassify these documents. What were they, what did those protocols look like? But also I think he has a defense of, “Look. You came down here in early parts of this year and I said, hey, go through it. If you need to take some of these documents back, you can.” I think he has a good defense that he can offer there as well that he tried to comply with authorities and wasn’t trying to keep these.

And then I think he finally can say, I didn’t even know about some of this stuff, right? Like I’m not going through my boxes of memorabilia. Buck, I’ve got all of my baseball cards. My sons sometimes are going through them. I can barely remember what I had from the early eighties. There are sometimes finding stuff like, Dad, did you know you had this card? Yeah, got boxed up 25 years ago. I think he has a lot of defenses which would ordinarily lead to not a conviction being able to be granted. And remember, Buck, what they said about Hillary was no reasonable prosecutor would bring these charges ’cause they don’t believe they can get a conviction. That’s the one thing hanging out here about this that I think is significant. Can they get a conviction?

BUCK: The problem that we face — and I discussed this with a number of legal experts over the weekend. This is what I do on vacation, ask legal experts over at Gin & Tonic, “Excuse me, sir” — it’s true, actually. That’s what happened. A number of them were saying that if you bring this in D.C., the chances —

CLAY: — no matter what.

BUCK: — Trump jury, you can indict Trump for assassinating Abraham Lincoln and you’d get a guilty verdict in Washington, D.C., right now. It doesn’t matter, right? They would go anything that you brought against Donald Trump would be a sufficient charge to get a conviction.

I also think it’s interesting that there’s this story we’re told that there’s so much urgency. I saw this — I remember I was texting with you before the Friday show about, “Oh, now it’s nuclear secrets,” right, ’cause they have to, oh, my gosh, get everyone as scared as possible. Trump left 18 months ago, give or take. There’s been back-and-forth negotiation over this. If it really is the kind of information that they want people to believe, the notion that they should wait — and this would go back and forth between lawyers — seems a bit of a stretch, right? If this really was, “Hey, here’s where all of our, you know, super-secret submarines are with their nuclear capability”, whatever — I don’t know what the information is. But think of the most sensitive stuff imaginable. And if it’s not that, which I don’t believe it is, Clay, this stuff is being held under lock and key at Mar-a-Lago where there’s a Secret Service — you and I have been there numerous times —

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: — Secret Service detail patrolling the grounds, security patrolling grounds, surveillance cameras on the storage areas where this is. So, you know, how much more secure does the information have to be before they would say, well, maybe it isn’t some grave threat to national security after all. And that’s why we’re at some level we’re going back and forth in the dark here because without knowing what the info is, they keep saying you gotta take our word for it, and I refuse to take their word for it. That’s the problem. It would be silly to take their word for it.

Recent Stories

What Happens If Biden’s DOJ Indicts Trump?

15 Aug 2022

BUCK: The biggest thing obviously right now in the whole country is the situation of the raid on former president Trump, the documents at Mar-a-Lago. Reading about this all weekend. I was speaking to legal experts. There were a lot of conservatives, believe it or not, in the media and government folks head to the beach out on Long Island over the weekend. So I had some good company out there and was able to speak to them about where they all think this is going, Clay. And here’s one part of it.

You know, on politics we had been asking for months what’s coming, right? There’s gotta be a plan. We’ve been saying this. It can’t just be this decrepit Biden administration and decrepit Biden himself doddering around, looking confused, high inflation, saying things that aren’t true, deploying Kamala — we’ll talk about the latest Kamalaism later this hour — deploying Kamala Harris to just spew gibberish. I mean, I don’t even know what she thinks she’s trying to say. There had to be something else going on, and it feels like this is now the plan, we’re seeing it. This was coming all along. This is their version of going on offense.

This is either a distraction at minimum, right, a distraction from what a bad job the Biden administration — or it is in their minds the most recent offensive they can pull off against former president Trump to stop him, of course, from becoming future President Trump. I’m just gonna put this to you, Clay, and then we can dive into the documents ’cause I was reading a lot about what they have and what they’re saying. And sure enough, “Oh, the nuclear stuff, it’s all nuclear.” Oh, they choose the scariest sounding thing. I’ll discuss what I think is likely going on there. Clay, every person that I spoke to over the weekend in person, including a former attorney general, legal experts from across the media spectrum, say they think President Trump is getting indicted by this Merrick Garland, Biden DOJ.

CLAY: What’s interesting about the indictment potentially that might be coming is the timing, right? Because the whole thing is interesting in that aspect. First of all, I think the vast majority of sane people are going to recognize this for what it is: a political persecution designed to weaken Donald Trump in advance of 2024. And January 6th — I don’t know if you saw the data. They did a big Morning Consult I think it was deep dive on whether the summer of January 6th has impacted anybody’s beliefs —

BUCK: Nobody cared just like —

CLAY: Nobody cared.

BUCK: Yeah.

CLAY: Nobody cared. It had zero impact in terms of Donald Trump’s overall standing in the Republican Party and nationwide. And so I think they also have recognized — to me what this raid represents, Buck, is a default acknowledgment that there is no case to be made on January 6th. And so you’re kicking around trying to find whatever you possibly can, if you’re Merrick Garland and everybody on the left wing in this country is holding your feet to the fire and in general you are a fairly weak man, because I think he is, who has spent much of his career in sort of the political mainstream trying to avoid offending anyone. And so you’re going to bring charges having to do with what the raid was at Mar-a-Lago. And I think that’s the intent.

Now, I do think the political pressure could get ratcheted up on Merrick Garland to such an extent, and people like you and me who are rational and reasonable and are looking at all the evidence can point out, well, wait a minute. Hillary Clinton totally escaped all prosecution for mishandling way more documents. You’ve got the history of not prosecuting people very aggressively under many of the statutes they’re potentially citing. But what they want is to destroy Donald Trump politically. And that’s why I think it will be some time after the midterms ’cause I think, Buck, it will be way too political to charge him, I think, before the midterms in 90 days or whatever the heck it is now ’til the official midterms. But I think sometime in December — I would say probably right after the first of the year, that they will charge Trump.

BUCK: Now, a lot of this is premised or in the background of all this, I should say, we should remember that they’re asking us, is the people that are saying this is an enormous breach of the public trust and the nuclear secrets and Trump was basically writing down his golf scores next to the nuclear codes and the people —

CLAY: That’s right.

BUCK: — that are all going to the absolute maximum level of hysteria on this, they are also simultaneously asking us to trust them, whether it’s Merrick Garland or the FBI or the Biden White House or the people in the media.

I mean, you can go — there is a direct correlation — I want everyone to know this right now — a direct correlation. If someone right now is telling you in the national news media, somebody who has some kind of following in public life, that Donald Trump should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and you need to trust them on this, the documents, they have them, it’s so serious, these are the same people who are telling you that Donald Trump stole the 2016 election with some nefarious Kremlin plot that was never actually rooted in anything other than innuendo, fantasy, and outright lies. They haven’t admitted that, by the way, but we all know that to be the case.

So we sit here Clay, trying to analyze things — on the one hand we can’t see ’cause they won’t let us see the documents, and that’s part of the game. Part of the issue here for us is that they’re never going — if it’s super-secret stuff, the people that are gonna press charges against Trump will never be able to publicly release it because the public release of the documents of that level of high classification, TSSCI, New York Times writing about this, top secret and secret compartmented information, right, that means sensitive stuff — if that is what is going on here — and I do not believe that is the case — we’re going to have to take their word for it.

CLAY: That’s right.

BUCK: And that’s the part of this where, I’m sorry. The rational response is an extended solitary finger at the people who are saying, “We know we’ve lied to you constantly to try to take down Trump. We know he’s their white whale, but we promise captain Ahab has been has gotten on the straight and narrow now.”

CLAY: Think about this for a minute, Buck, ’cause I was thinking about — I like to go down the road and think about what happens if there are charges brought. We know they would probably be brought — where? — in Washington, D.C., where you have a forum that certainly would favor a conviction of Donald Trump for something or other.

What happens if Trump is the nominee, and couldn’t he run for president and pardon himself from all of the — like, have you thought about this? Just, I want everybody out there listening, you too, like everybody out there, illegal this is such an unbelievable mess that we are proceeding down, because you could end up with a situation where getting charged actually strengthens Trump politically because it confirms for his base what he’s been saying for a long time, which is the deep state is aligned against him.

Simultaneously, it could also strengthen things for the left wing in the country because it confirms their narrative that Trump was an awful human being and needed to be charged with crimes. So you could have both of the bases of the Democrat and Republican parties strengthened by charges. And then we got into 2024, and 2024 basically becomes a referendum on Trump again. If he were to win, couldn’t he come out with this pardon ability and pardon himself from any conviction that might have been levied against him? This is such newfound legal territory, I’m not sure there’s really well grounded legal philosophy here. But this is where we’re headed, in my mind, as I work through it.

BUCK: You’re going to see a lot of back-and-forth over where does the power to declassify really exist. Because there are statutes that they’re now claiming Trump violated. So if you violated the presidential directive about classified information and the handling of it ’cause Congress doesn’t actually set forth all these rules and regulations about who gets what. Security clearances don’t come from the Congress, right? There’s not some statute. It goes through the executive branch. So the executive function is involved here at the very top level. And it’s really executive branch information. It doesn’t belong to Congress.

This is getting into this weird place where Congress passes laws about it, but the top authority, the top declassification authority is the executive — is considered to be the president and the head of the executive branch. So now we’re gonna have Kash Patel joining who was senior — he was acting chief of staff for the secretary of defense for President Trump and somebody who was being talked about for an even more senior intelligence role Trump administration, right? He’s a guy, he knows this game backwards and forwards. We’re gonna talk to him about what happens when the president says this stuff — there’s a standing declassification order for any of these documents? Essentially, what does the law say about a president who goes, “Okay. This box of information, I deem it declassified”?

They’re going to see, “Oh, no, there’s a process that involves notification” or something. But that’s an executive branch process. Meaning, the president sets that. It’s almost like it’s an executive order or something the president has decided previously. If he decides that he’s declassifying, and I can tell you there have been presidents in the past including when I was in the CIA, Clay, who said something and we — and people in the community or people with clearances went, “Ooh. That’s actually technically not something you’re supposed to let rip like that.: We call that real-time declassification, which is not a statutory thing, but it’s the way it goes.

CLAY: Well, and I think what you’re hitting at — and this is why it’s going to be such a black hole of legality in many ways is because there aren’t a lot of precedents for what the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland is trying to do to President Trump. So, you know, there’s always this situation when you’re in law school — I’ll talk about this a little bit when I come back — but you get hypotheticals on uncertain law and have to analyze what might happen. We’re in uncharted territory here, and that’s where everyone is.

Recent Stories

C&B 24/7: Clay & Buck’s Show Prep

15 Aug 2022

  • Daily Caller: Kash Patel: Garland, Wray ‘Are Political Hucksters’ Who Have ‘Failed … To Uphold The Law’
  • JustTheNews: New twist in FBI raid: Trump had ‘standing order’ to declassify documents taken to residence
  • FOXNews: FBI bulletin warns of ‘dirty bomb’ threat, increasing calls for ‘civil war’ after raid of Mar-a-Lago
  • New York Post: There’s no sainthood for Obama, National Archives in Trump FBI raid uproar
  • Breitbart: Fmr DNI Ratcliffe: FBI, DOJ Have Become the Enforcement Arm of the Democratic Party
  • Daily Wire: World Economic Forum Shares Censorship Plan For Online Abuse
  • Daily Caller: Granholm Defends Inflation Bill By Explaining How Americans Can Spend More Money On Their Homes

  • JustTheNews: Whistleblowers revealed widespread FBI misconduct ahead of Trump raid
  • Federalist: Records Suggest A Backbench Bureaucrat’s Partisan Grievance Spurred The FBI’s Nakedly Political Raid On Trump
  • BizPacReview: ‘Obstructing justice on what, you jerks? Stuff that you had planted…’ Devin Nunes unloads on Trump raid

  • Gateway Pundit: Latest FBI Bullsh*t: Trump Supporters Are Threatening to Set Off a Dirty Bomb Over Mar-a-Lago Raid
  • ZeroHedge: Orwellian Moments Abound
  • Daily Caller: ‘I Don’t Know’: Schiff Can’t Explain Why DoJ Took So Long To Retrieve Documents From Trump

  • New York Post: ABC’s Jon Karl questions Inflation Reduction Act’s name: ‘Almost Orwellian’
  • HotAir: Bureau of Land Management suspends most oil/gas leases in Colorado
  • HotAir: The election quirk that may keep Lisa Murkowski in office

  • New York Post: Too little, too late: Disband the CDC now – Karol Markowicz
  • New York Post: The CDC FINALLY catches up (sort of) to reality
  • Breitbart: Monkeypox: UK Running Low on Vaccines After Pride Parade

  • New York Post: GOP Rep. McCaul blasts Biden for ‘failure to plan’ pullout of Afghanistan
  • Daily Wire: Brother Of Marine Killed In Afghanistan Withdrawal Dies By Suicide During Memorial Service

  • JustTheNews: Feds see American anger over Trump raid, insecure border as posing increased terror threat
  • Legal Insurrection: Over 700 People Illegally Crossed the Border into Eagle Pass, TX, on Sunday Morning Alone
  • New York Post: More migrants arrive in NYC from Texas, David Paterson calls strategy ‘brilliant’
  • FOXNews: Sen. Blackburn warns migrants on Texas buses are ‘threatening’ drivers: ‘We need to end this’
  • Breitbart: Immigration Poll: Public Says Hire Americans First
  • Daily Caller: Migrants Bused To DC Reveal How And Why They Came To The US

  • Federalist: Democrats’ TERM Act Would Pack The Supreme Court With Politicians In Black Robes
  • Breitbart: So Much for Privilege: White Working Class Boys to Fall Even Further Behind In Education
  • FOXNews: ‘Defund the police’ advocate Ilhan Omar’s city experiences sharp increase in majority of crimes, data shows
  • Daily Wire: Squad Member Peddled Rent Cancellation Bill During COVID — Then Pocketed As Much As $100K In Rental Income
  • HotAir: San Francisco’s $20K trash cans
  • ZeroHedge: An Unjustified Fear Of Nuclear Energy Is Holding The Industry Back

  • Gateway Pundit: Atlantic Writer Claims the Rosary is an Extremist Symbol for Christian Nationalists
  • FOXNews: Leonardo DiCaprio funneled grants through dark money group to fund climate nuisance lawsuits, emails show
  • FOXNews: Climate activists embrace extreme tactics, violence as deadline to ‘save the planet’ draws near
  • HotAir: Generation Z doesn’t remember when America worked

  • Recent Stories