×

Clay and Buck

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

Clay Responds to the CDC, Who Now Wants to Control Speech

11 Jan 2023

Clay joined Jesse Watters to discuss the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention getting into the thought-control business, presuming to prescribe what words we can and can’t use under the guise of ensuring health.

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.

Raid His Homes! Biden Caught Mishandling Classified Docs on Ukraine, Iran

10 Jan 2023

President Trump is on the same page with Clay on the huge scandal unfolding in the White House with the walls closing in on Joe Biden.

Clay & Buck weighed whether or not the revelations that Joe Biden, as vice president, illegally retained top-secret, classified documents will result in a special counsel, and how it impacts the witch hunt against President Trump. A president, Buck points out, has the power to declassify intelligence; a VP does not.

Don’t forget this hair-on-fire reaction leftists had to Trump.

And these weren’t nothingburgers like old passcodes. This was serious intelligence.

Naturally, Joe Biden is exercising his right — as a Democrat — to remain silent.

What do you think will be the end result of this scandal? Tweet us your take @ClayAndBuck — or, if you’re a 24/7 VIP, send us an email.

Recent Stories

Alex Berenson on the Twitter Files Revelations About Scott Gottlieb

10 Jan 2023

CLAY: Yesterday, our friend Alex Berenson joined the Twitter Files crew and had a really fascinating, eye-opening thread of information surrounding Scott Gottlieb, who sits, I believe, on the Pfizer board and has been zealously attempting to silence critics of the Pfizer covid shot. I think I’m summarizing that fairly well. Alex, a couple of questions here off the top. How did you come to join the Twitter Files team — that is Elon Musk opening up these revelations to you, and second part of that: Were you surprised by what you found as it relates to Scott Gottlieb?

BERENSON: Yeah, the first question, Elon actually texted me kind of out of the blue in late December and asked me if I would be part of this. And, frankly, I was surprised because I’ve been critical about certain things he’s done since he took over Twitter. You know, and at one point he actually blocked me from following him, and so I thought, “Well, I guess I’m not going to be part of this group that gets to investigate this.” But, you know, he, I guess, felt that it was important to have somebody who really knew covid and the censorship efforts to take a look. And so he asked me, and that’s why I said, “Yes.”

And, you know, I want to say one thing about this, which I don’t think people realize how extraordinary it is, what Elon Musk is doing with the files. Now, you can argue about, you know, since he took over, he let this person on. He didn’t let this person on, he let Kanye on and kicked him off various sort of decisions that he made. But this allowing people inside the records of the company that he bought is legally risky for him, and it’s an extraordinary decision on his part, and it’s giving us an unprecedented look into the way the government and social media companies work together and the pressure on Twitter.

Which to me — even though it’s not the largest, in some ways the most important of all these companies, because it is so, you know, used by journalists. So I think everyone deserves credit for that. And, frankly, if he kicks me off again because, you know, he’s annoyed with me or whatever, I still think he deserves credit for that. So that’s how I got involved. Now, in terms of what the files show, yes. They show that Scott Gottlieb, who… It’s very important to understand who this guy is. Although he didn’t have a position in government the last couple of years, he’s arguably the most important voice outside government in terms of setting covid policy because he was the former chairman or former commissioner of the FDA. He then left the FDA, very rapidly joined Pfizer.

And in 2020, when covid really, you know, when covid hit, he, you know, took a place for himself as the centrist Republican, as the guy who, you know, was going to tell Trump and Jared Kushner what to do and say it publicly. And, you know, hopefully they’ve listened to him, and that’s who… That’s who Scott Gottlieb is. And so he had, you know, he had a loud voice and he also, you know, had a real conflict of interest here with the vaccines because he was on the board of Pfizer, which has made more money from the vaccines than anybody else. Pfizer and BioNTech, they’ve sold more of these mRNA vaccines than anybody else, and so — and he said publicly, you know what, I’m not against debate on the vaccines. I want all voices to be heard. And it turns out we now know, having looked at these files, that’s not really true. It’s not true at all.

BUCK: Speaking to Alex Berenson. Check out his Substack. And, Alex, I wanted to, since we’re talking about vaccines, too, along with the Twitter censorship issue, what is the truth as we can say right now or as you can tell us right now of myocarditis, heart inflammation, problems from the shots based on the numbers, the data? You know, what do we know and what do we still need to find out about what these shots have done?

BERENSON: Oh, myocarditis is a very real risk for men under 40. And you can argue if myocarditis alone is a bigger risk than covid for the shots in that age group. We know that covid is a very low risk to anybody who’s under 40, who’s not, you know, morbidly obese or otherwise at death’s door. But myocarditis is a real risk. So myocarditis is a heart inflammation. You know, it seems we don’t know sort of how long the damage to the heart lasts. It may be different in different cases. To be clear, you know, most people or not most — you know, even young men who are injected are not going to suffer, you know, myocarditis and they’re not going to suffer a severe case, certainly.

But it is a real risk. And given how not risky covid is in that population all by itself, that probably means the shots would be a bad idea for that age group. So that’s myocarditis. But what I would say is there’s this issue — and we’ve talked about this, you and I and Buck in the past — about all-cause deaths, that all-cause deaths are up all over the world in the in the countries that use these vaccines in the last year. And when I talked to you about a month or month and a half ago, I was sort of optimistic that we were going back down to baseline. But unfortunately, some new data that’s come out since then suggests that I was I was wrong, that we’re not going back down to baseline, that in Europe all-cause mortality remains really high.

BUCK: So, Alex, can I ask, what is your working theory for that? I mean, just tell us, like, what do you think is going on?

BERENSON: I think that there’s a long-term problem with the shots, and there’s several different explanations for that. And to be clear, we’re not talking about a doubling or tripling in mortality. We’re not even talking about, you know, some people will say, “Oh, 40% in working-age people.” That’s not what it looks like. It looks like right now it’s ten or 15%, and some of that is due to the fact that covid actually still continues at a low level. But nonetheless, that’s a big number. Okay. Ten or 15% mortality above the historical norm of, you know, the previous, pre-covid, pre-vaccine error was enough to shut the world down when we thought it was covid.

Okay. So it’s a big number. It’s hundreds of thousands of deaths in Europe. It’s hundreds of thousands of deaths in the United States. It’s millions of deaths worldwide a year, certainly over a million. That’s a big number. And there’s lots of ways in which the vaccines could be contributing to it. They could be contributing to it. By now, there’s evidence that they change our response to covid itself in a way that may lead people to have a harder time clearing the infection. And for really old, sick people, that might be enough to push them over the edge. We don’t know. It could be that there’s spike protein still floating around in people’s bloodstreams — in some people’s bloodstreams — at a very low level, and that’s causing, for example, myocarditis.

That there’s a paper that came out a few days ago suggesting that. We don’t know. It could be that, in some people, again, the vaccine itself isn’t cleared quickly — although the companies and the regulators said it would be — and for some reason, it looks around. What I’m really saying to you is we need to investigate this. This needs to be a priority at the highest level of government. These companies have to be forced to disclose what they know, if they know anything. There needs to be serious epidemiological work done and there needs to be serious work at the cellular level. And it needs to be done without anyone being afraid of what the consequences of their findings might be.

So if the findings are that the vaccines actually don’t cause any of this and we’re all — you know, people like me are — completely wrong and the extra deaths are just the result of, you know, covid aftereffects, so be it. But if the findings are that vaccines have caused this in some way and that multiple boosters have made it worse, we need to know that both from a public health point of view and to know if there’s anything we can do about it. And it is approaching criminal right now that people won’t discuss this at the — you know, at the levels of government and academia and science and at the corporate levels where it needs to be discussed.

CLAY: Well, this ties in, Alex, because I texted you some over the weekend because Dr. Fauci came out and said you cannot even mention the possibility that the covid shot could be involved in Damar Hamlin’s collapse on the football field. And my antenna, especially with Dr. Fauci and I’m sure with your — and I know for Buck as well — goes up in a big way when a Dr. Fauci especially, but many of these public health experts say, “You can’t even mention this,” because generally what they say you can’t mention ends up being true. Do you think…? And we’re never going to know for sure, I think is the answer based on the health-related issues. But there are a lot of young people who are suddenly having heart issues. We’ve never seen somebody collapse like Damar Hamlin did on Monday Night Football a little over a week ago. Do you think we should be investigating and asking whether the covid shot could have been involved? What did you think of Fauci’s commentary there?

BERENSON: I mean, of course, we should be investigating. And, by the way, there is now evidence. There’s a paper that came out last year saying that people who suffered myocarditis were more likely if they were struck in an athletic activity to have ventricular fibrillation and collapse. This paper came out before Damar Hamlin. It has nothing to do with him, which means you can actually trust it more because it’s not in any way biased. And it was actually about rugby players. Okay. Am I saying that I know that’s what caused it? No. I do not, you do not, and Dr. Anthony Fauci does not. But what this notion that we have to avert the evidence of our own eyes and instantly say, “Oh, this couldn’t have been these vaccines which were given to a billion people worldwide with essentially no long-term studies being done on what their effects might be”?

That’s crazy. And so, yeah, I mean, this is just another example of this. But people like you and me, you know, there’s this effort to shout down. I think unfortunately for the public health experts and government, there’s now a little bit of the pendulum is swinging the other way where people are angry — and not just people like you and me who questioned this last year or even in 2021. But people who’ve, you know, sort of just woken up to this. They don’t like being told that the evidence of their own eyes, they can’t judge, and so I think the public health authorities need to take… They need to think about what they’re doing, because they are they are causing a crisis of confidence that it’s going to be very, very hard to undo.

BUCK: Alex, you are forgetting the last, final, and most essential command of the party, which is to ignore the evidence of your eyes, as you may well recall.

BERENSON: (laughing) Yes. Yes, I… You know, look, we, I thought and I hoped that we were coming out of the other side of this. Frankly, you know, I’ve been covering covid and vaccines for three years. It is my life. But unfortunately, it doesn’t look like we’re coming out of it yet.

BUCK: Is it even…? We only have, like, a minute and we really… We’re about to run into a break. But I just want to know, do you think it’s even possible to come up with…? (laughing) Now we’re going to run the gamut here. Come up with an experiment to prove that masks don’t work and this is idiotic. Or are we just, are we stuck with, like, the dead-enders forever?

BERENSON: There is plenty of evidence there. And there’s plenty of experiments you can run. They just have to run them. When they’ve been run they show that masks don’t work. By the way, there’s evidence. You know, we could… If we really wanted to know whether vaccines were causing harm or not, there’s ways we could do that. It’s complicated, but we could do it. So, but, you know, when guys like Scott Gottlieb want to shut down debate and then not tell the truth about what it is they’re doing, it gets hard. And so, I mean, I’m going to keep pushing. You know, I hope everyone will take a look at the piece, which is on my Substack and which is on my Twitter feed. But, you know, I’m going to wind up suing Pfizer and suing the White House. And hopefully we’ll get some sense of how those two entities were connecting and what they were talking about in the summer of 2021, because that really does seem to be the crucial moment in all of this.

BUCK: Alex Berenson, everybody. Alex, thank you so much. We’ll talk to you soon.

BERENSON: Thanks, guys. Happy 2023.

Recent Stories

Jenin Younes on Her Discovery of Biden WH Coercion of Big Tech

10 Jan 2023

BUCK: We talked to you yesterday about what came out in the lawsuit with regard to the Biden administration, telling Facebook, “Censor some people!” We had Tomi Lahren on. She was one of the censored. That op-ed, which was so widely shared and read, was co-written by Jenin Younes, who is a litigation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance, and Jenin is with us now. Good to have you on.

YOUNES: Thanks for having me.

BUCK: So, you know, we’ve been saying for a while that two things are going to come to light from this one — meaning on this show, Jenin — that there will be more evidence of social media platforms engaging in partisan censorship in a blatant and obvious and politicized way. And two, that it will be clear the Biden administration was all over this. Give us your sense of this. I mean, you’re on the frontlines legally of trying to deal with some of the Biden administration overreach on this issue. What did you think when you saw some of the revelations in this lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, I believe?

YOUNES: Yeah. So actually, I’m one of the attorneys on the lawsuit. I’m representing private plaintiffs. So that’s how I had access to that discovery very early. So, actually I was so shocked by it (laughing) I spent the weekend writing the op-ed because I thought the public really needed to know about it. I mean, our interest in it, we focus on suing the government; so, we’re not so concerned with what tech companies are doing of their own volition. But our focus is whether the government is driving social media censorship or telling the companies what or whom to censor, which we knew that they were, because, you know, the government — various members of the administration — had made statements saying that.

And in earlier phases of discovery, we got a lot of documents showing, you know, they were saying, “Censor this kind of thing,” especially about covid, you know, people who question whether masks and vaccines work. What the government has been saying is, “Oh, the companies want to do this, okay? They want to stop covid misinformation. And we’re just helping them. We’re telling them what kind of misinformation to stop.” Now, I think that’s problematic from a First Amendment standpoint anyway, because the government shouldn’t be able to work with private industry to accomplish, you know, censorship aims. But when the government is coercing the companies, that’s totally different. And I think the emails that came out on Friday sort of unequivocally established that that’s what was going on, that this was coercion.

CLAY: So, thanks for coming on the show. Your Wall Street Journal editorial was absolutely phenomenal, and it’s up at Clay and Buck, and both Buck and I have shared it for people who want to read it. When you see all of this revelation, one of the questions Buck and I have had is: What does this accomplish? Obviously, putting it out there in public, the smoking-gun evidence of clear intent to censor political rivals, not only for the factual information they were sharing, but oftentimes, too, just for opinions. What is the goal going forward? What should happen to keep this from continuing to happen, to keep it from happening in years ahead, in your mind?

YOUNES: So, the goal is basically to get a court to recognize that the government can’t work with private companies or coerce them or pressure them in order to censor people based on viewpoint. So, the law is clear that the government cannot censor people for expressing certain views. That’s basically what the First Amendment says. And the government also can’t use private companies to accomplish what it can’t do directly because otherwise there would be no point in the Constitution. The government could just circumvent all of it by hiring — you know, outsourcing to — private companies. So what we’re arguing here is that’s effectively what’s going on. And the —

CLAY: Case, I guess… I’m sorry to cut you off. What’s the redress here? Like, what is the…?

YOUNES: Yeah, yeah.

CLAY: Yeah, yeah, exactly.

YOUNES: So, yeah, what we want is a court to recognize that this is a First Amendment problem. We’re not asking for money, but that it’s a First Amendment violation so that going forward, the government can’t do this going forward. So, it’s hard to hold government officials personally accountable in lawsuits. They have what’s called qualified immunity. But if there’s clear law saying that violated the law, then they can’t get qualified immunity anymore. So that creates more incentives for them not to do it because they can be held personally responsible. So they can get fired. They can even, you know, owe money and stuff like that.

BUCK: Right, Jenin, so just to establish —

YOUNES: Yeah, go ahead. Sorry.

BUCK: No, it’s okay. I just wanted to just for purposes of clarity, so if you get the court to rule that what was done here was a first rate violation, that is a necessary step, then it seems, in creating the grounds for, you said people — yeah, people could be terminated by the government. But I think the thing that would be even more of a concern for them would be if they could be sued in their individual capacity for violating the rights of individuals as a government employee. So is that possible?

YOUNES: Yes.

BUCK: Could that be possible?

YOUNES: Yes, that is possible, and so, yeah. So it’s so the goal is sort of twofold to create good precedent going forward and also to, you know, make it so that these people can be held personally accountable, which will incentivize them not to, you know, just do it behind closed doors. And there’s even some — there are a couple of law professors who came up with a theory about criminal charges for violations of First Amendment rights when it’s very clear. So that could be a possibility, too.

BUCK: And I’m just wondering, what is the…? You know, you’re in this lawsuit, you’re one of the lawyers on it. What is the other side saying? Like, “Yeah, you know, First Amendment, who needs it?” Like, what is the counterargument that they’re making?

YOUNES: Their argument is that the companies want to do this. So, the companies want to censor misinformation. They did that before the Biden administration came into office, and that they can, they’re allowed to work together to accomplish mutual aims of stopping the spread of covid misinformation.

BUCK: Wow. So basically, this really comes down to whether the government… I mean, so they’re going to claim that the government can even say, “Hey, have you guys looked at this? You need to shut this person down!” And if Facebook is like, “Yeah, we totally want to shut that person down, then that’s okay.”

YOUNES: It’s not. But as I said, the case law is a little bit hazier, I think, because there’s not a lot of this in the First Amendment context. I could go on forever and bore everybody, but sort of put distinctly before social media, there just wasn’t a way that private companies and the government could work together to sort of silence Americans en masse. So I think it’s created a new terrain, and so there’s just not a lot of directly on-point case law. But what I’ve been sort of analogizing to is the Fourth Amendment. The government clearly cannot hire private companies to go break into your home, for instance, because they don’t have a warrant. And so likewise, they shouldn’t be able to outsource their censorship activities to private companies.

CLAY: Yeah, Jenin, the argument I’ve been making for years now is most people out there would acknowledge what China does is wrong, right, that you shouldn’t be able to restrict in general, like they do in China. For instance, you can’t look up Tiananmen Square. You can’t go on the Weibo app, which is basically China’s equivalent of Twitter, my understanding is, and say anything the Chinese government doesn’t like. They will directly censor you. What effectively is happening right now with the Biden administration is they’re getting to the same result as the authoritarian regime in China.

But they’re using the tech companies to do what they would not be able to do under our own Constitution, right? I think most people kind of understand that. Now when you look and see all of the things that are being put in writing — I read your editorial and I’ve read some of the documents that you’ve uncovered — what these Biden administration officials are willing to say in an email and what… This, I thought, was extraordinary; I’m sure you did, too. When you would look at what, for instance, Jen Psaki would say, she admitted that they were doing this. But then the emails out there — for both Facebook, YouTube, for all these — even yourself had to be sometimes staggered, I think, at the direct, blatant nature of this censorship.

YOUNES: Oh, absolutely. That’s why I wrote the op-ed. I was so shocked. I mean, this is really people on a power trip, I think, who think that they can do anything. This guy, Rob Flaherty in particular, is really shameless in the way that he’s, you know, berating and very aggressive with these tech companies and saying basically, “You’re not doing… You know, you’re not doing what I want, do what I want or else.” And, you know, this is as you identified, this is how authoritarian regimes work, not free democracies. And I think one thing… One reason I think this case is so important is it sort of shows why we have a First Amendment.

Lots of people instinctually think, “Oh, well, we should be censoring this information. You know, if people say the vaccine has a microchip or whatever.” But the problem is that, you know, someone has to make those decisions. And where do you start drawing the line? And we… You know, our clients are top scientists. Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Gould, our top epidemiologists, some of the most cited experts in the world who are being censored on the topic of their expertise at the behest of the government. And that’s not what should be happening in a free society.

BUCK: Great work you’re doing. Really appreciate you joining us. Jenin Younes. She had that op-ed at the Wall Street Journal, which we have up at ClayAndBuck.com, and she’s litigation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Jenin, come back and tell us how it goes.

YOUNES: I sure will. Thank you so much for having me.

Recent Stories

VIP Video: C&B Turn Up the Heat on Climate Crazies

10 Jan 2023

Clay and Buck take on Biden, who was in Mexico today talking with the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico about climate change. This comes as his administration makes noises about banning gas stoves. Will the left’s climate lunacy ever end? (Spoiler alert: no.)

Only VIPs can view this exclusive commercial-free video. If you’re not a member, sign up now. You can also use the special VIP email pipeline to Clay and Buck to share whatever is on your mind.

Watch It!

Recent Stories

Enjoy These Clips of Massive Lib Hypocrisy on Classified Documents

10 Jan 2023

Now that Biden’s been caught hoarding classified documents, including those marked “Top Secret,” leftists will want you to forget how they freaked out over President Trump having some documents he declassified as commander-in-chief — an option Joe Biden didn’t have as VP when he took these documents. Here’s a montage:

Two of the biggest leftists out there were happy to say this was treason by Trump, but don’t look for them to even say Biden did anything wrong.

Spread the word about this leftist hypocrisy and remember to tag us @ClayAndBuck — or, if you’re a 24/7 VIP, send us an email about how you’re spreading the word.

Recent Stories

This Data Point Will Make You Hate Millennials and Gen-Z Even More

10 Jan 2023

As you may know, Clay’s on the young end of Gen-X and Buck’s a graybeard Millennial. So, Clay made Buck explain the astounding findings of a new Morning Consult poll. You can hear Buck’s response in the audio above.

Are you proud to be an American?

Or a commie who recoils at Lee Greenwood?

Tweet us your take @ClayAndBuck — or, if you’re a 24/7 VIP, send us an email.

Recent Stories

Biden and the Climate Lunatics Want to Ban Your Gas Stove

10 Jan 2023

The left just can’t stop pushing their insane, unworkable plans on us. Their next target is your gas stove, which they used to love as a clean source of heat and fuel.

What do you think of Joe Biden caving to leftists who are at war with stoves? Tweet us your take @ClayAndBuck — or, if you’re a 24/7 VIP, send us an email.

Recent Stories

MTG Fires Back at Wuss Dr. Dre

10 Jan 2023

Yesterday, leftists were in a fit that Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene played a Dr. Dre song.

Now, the rapper — whose real name is Andre Romelle Young — has his lawyers leaning on her to stop listening to his music or something.

What do you think of Mr. Young’s actions? Tweet us your take @ClayAndBuck — or, if you’re a 24/7 VIP, send us an email.

Recent Stories

Clay Breaks Down GOP House Agenda as 2024 is on the Horizon

10 Jan 2023

Clay joined Sean Hannity to discuss what’s ahead for the Republicans in the House as they stand up to the disastrous Biden agenda, and looked forward two years to see the final matchup for president.

Recent Stories