Daily Review with Clay and Buck - Aug 15 2025

Summary

Below is a detailed summary of the Daily Review episode (August 15, 2025) of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show on iHeartPodcasts. The hosts cover high-stakes foreign policy maneuvers, domestic political battles, controversies over judicial authority and redistricting, and the shifting dynamics in the Ukraine–Russia conflict. Their conversation is interspersed with pointed commentary, biting satire, and memorable soundbites throughout.

─────────────────────────────

1. Episode Overview
   ───────────────────────────── • The main theme of the show is twofold. First, the discussion centers on President Trump’s high-profile meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska—a summit that promises to have significant implications for foreign policy and the ongoing Ukraine–Russia conflict.
   • Second, the hosts dissect the domestic political landscape—from challenges to Trump’s constitutional authority in Washington, D.C. to contentious redistricting battles in states such as California—and the broader role of media and the judiciary in shaping partisan narratives.

─────────────────────────────
2. Key Discussion Points & Insights
─────────────────────────────

A. Trump–Putin Summit in Alaska
• [00:00–00:55] The show opens with excitement about the upcoming high-stakes summit in Alaska where Trump is set to meet with Putin.
• The hosts note that the meeting (starting at 11:30 AM Alaska time) is being treated as one of the biggest foreign policy events, second only to major crises like war or terrorist attacks.
• They speculate on the meeting’s format – including a joint press conference—and consider how Trump’s negotiation tactics (demanding a ceasefire, for example) might transform the global narrative.
• Buck points out that Trump’s team, including figures like Steve Witkoff and Marco Rubio, underscores the seriousness with which the U.S. is approaching these talks.

B. D.C. Police Mobilization and Judicial Overreach
• [00:55–05:19] Trump’s action in Washington, D.C.—calling in active police forces—is discussed in depth.
• The conversation highlights an emergency lawsuit filed by D.C. officials challenging the president’s police mobilization.
• Notable discussion revolves around the interpretation of the 1973 Home Rule Act, with the hosts debating whether resistance judges may ignore the law simply to oppose Trump.
• Buck emphasizes that while constitutional and legal interpretations clearly vindicate Trump’s move, partisan bias within the judiciary may lead to unpredictable rulings.
• The hosts also explore how similar judicial overreaches played out in past cases (e.g., the effort to remove Trump from the ballot in Colorado).

C. Redistricting Battles and Political Theater
• [05:19–27:51] The episode shifts to domestic concerns, examining the contentious redistricting process.
• The discussion turns to Gavin Newsom’s recent campaign announcement in California to push a proposition for redistricting—a bid aimed partly at countering Texas’ moves to add Republican seats.
• They debate the likely impact of such a move on voter turnout and whether it is more a media play than a practical political reform.
• The hosts offer a blunt critique: Democrats appear to use redistricting as a way to symbolically resist Trump rather than to address substantive inequality.
• A key point raised is that partisan gerrymandering has long been a tool on both sides—with Buck noting the structural advantages already enjoyed by Democrats through court-drawn district lines and the counting of undocumented immigrants for congressional seat allocations.

D. Ukraine–Russia Negotiations and U.S. Security Guarantees
• [31:15–39:28] With the Trump–Putin summit looming, the conversation pivots to the protracted war in Ukraine.
• The hosts deliberate on what a negotiated ceasefire might look like and whether Trump’s intervention could force a long-awaited de-escalation.
• They examine the challenges Ukraine faces in securing a lasting peace deal, including tough questions on territorial concessions and the risks of future Russian aggression.
• A significant insight is the delicate balance the U.S. must maintain: providing economic and material support to Ukraine without committing American troops under extended guarantees such as a NATO Article 5 framework.
• Buck raises the issue of Putin’s long-term strategy—pointing out that while Trump’s presidency is time-limited, Putin can afford to play the long game.

E. Media Narratives and Political Messaging
• [41:02–47:27] The dialogue then turns introspective on media biases and partisan posturing.
• The hosts criticize how major media outlets have framed every factual development as inherently “anti-Trump” and note that this leaves little room for nuance.
• Clay and Buck argue that if Trump secures any concrete foreign policy successes (for example, negotiating an actual ceasefire), the narrative might shift unfairly to credit figures like Zelensky or dismiss Trump’s role entirely. • They also touch on internal Democratic contradictions, quipping that when Republicans succeed, it is credited to Trump—and when things go wrong, the blame is always deflected.

F. Additional Themes and Side Conversations
• There is also a lively discussion about broader topics such as: – The economic impact of potential peace deals on global energy markets.
– The interplay of judicial decisions in shaping political destiny, exemplified by past decisions in Colorado and Maine regarding ballot eligibility.
– The irony of partisan symbols—ranging from Ukraine and American flag displays to criticisms around sports nationalities—all used to score political points.
• The segment closes with humorous banter about the logistics of the Alaska meeting, including playful musings on what kind of working lunch the delegation might have (e.g., Quarter Pounders vs. Big Macs).

─────────────────────────────
3. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
─────────────────────────────

• “[03:20] B: It is indisputably the case that Trump has the constitutional authority to act as he did in Washington, D.C.… Yet some judges might rule otherwise—simply to write a headline-grabbing opinion.”
– Buck’s observation on the potential for partisan judicial activism.

• “[10:56] B: …the only people upset about more police on the streets are those who are actually engaged in criminal behavior.”
– A pointed, if polarizing, take on law enforcement and opposition to Trump’s security measures.

• “[32:30] B: …if Trump pulls off real progress, they’ll claim it was all Zelensky’s doing. Imagine if Trump actually brings peace—what then for his critics?”
– Highlighting the catch-22 of Trump’s media image.

• “[47:23] A: …if Trump did something good, they’d have to find a way to say it wasn’t his win at all.”
– Clay’s summation of the media’s reflexive oppositional stance.

• “[62:54] B: …when you have every top official gathered in Anchorage, you know the stakes are high.”
– Reflecting on the gravity of the Alaska summit and its potential global impact.

─────────────────────────────
4. Timestamps & Segment Highlights
─────────────────────────────

• 00:00–00:55 – Show introduction and announcement of the high-profile Trump–Putin summit in Alaska.
• 00:55–05:19 – Discussion of the Washington, D.C. police mobilization, legal challenges, and relevant constitutional issues under the 1973 Home Rule Act.
• 05:19–08:20 – Deliberation on redistricting battles, particularly focusing on California’s political maneuvers and the symbolism behind these moves.
• 08:20–11:00 – Further reflection on courtroom battles, past judicial missteps, and a critique of partisan legal actions.
• 31:15–39:28 – In-depth analysis of the Ukraine–Russia conflict, negotiations for ceasefire, and what security guarantees might be available from the United States.
• 41:02–47:27 – An introspective dialogue on media bias and the inherent challenges in presenting a balanced political narrative.
• 56:30–69:35 – Broader global economic and geopolitical issues surface, including a brief look at the BRICS summit and historical references like the Louisiana Purchase, while interlaced with humorous banter and side remarks about working lunches and fast food in Alaska.
• 71:15–74:48 – Final wrap-up with lighthearted producer banter, setting the stage for continued updates over the weekend, and a return to the summit coverage.

─────────────────────────────
5. Conclusion
───────────────────────────── In this fast-paced and wide-ranging episode, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton navigate complex issues—from Trump’s upcoming high-stakes summit with Putin and the intricate dynamics of domestic policing and redistricting to the potentially transformative negotiations in Ukraine. Their dialogue reveals both deep frustrations with entrenched media narratives and the extraordinary pressures of addressing global conflict in an era of heightened partisanship. Even as they trade witty jibes and memorable one-liners, the hosts make it clear: the stakes are high and the outcomes—both in foreign policy and domestic politics—will reverberate far beyond the newsroom.

This comprehensive conversation not only informs those who haven’t listened but also encapsulates the show’s signature blend of hard-hitting analysis, political theater, and irreverent humor.

Transcript

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast. Welcome everybody to the Friday edition of the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show. Appreciate you. Appreciate you. In fact, I just leaned into that one. I didn't even know it's gonna happen. Appreciate you being with us. Did it, I said a Clay style there for a moment.

[B]

There you go.

[A]

And we are excited to tell you about everything going on, including this major summit, this major sit down that is going on in Alaska with Trump and Putin. That especially for a Friday in the middle of August, that's going to be about as big time as it gets for any one individual foreign policy news story short of a war breaking out somewhere or major terrorist attack, it's a big deal. And we're going to get into some of the specifics here. I believe the meeting is occurring post show. Right.

[B]

So we don't, we don't have 3:30 Eastern time. It starts which I believe is 11:30am Alaska time.

[A]

11:30Am alaska time. We had some very interesting deep dive with the governor of Alaska yesterday into things that people might not have known about the lovely state where we have a number of fantastic, fantastic or even fabulous radio stations up there where we have a great listening audience. We appreciate you. It's pretty incredible that people that far away can hear us on the old radio stations. It's great. We love it. But we'll give you some of the details on all this. Also want to take a lot of your talk backs and calls today because it is a Friday. More on the DC Crime drama. They're still going for it. They're still pushing it. In fact, Clay, something that you see today, DC Files a lawsuit challenging the administration's police takeover. This just happened today and this is still breaking. So the District of Columbia has filed an emergency motion challenging the Trump administration's attempt. They're going to have a judge listen to this. The issue is, I see it here, it's pretty cut and dry that the president can do this. So you're going to have to find some. And you know, I know the Democrats have a million ways they'll say it violates the Administrative Procedures act or something. No one even knows the Administrative Procedures act is. So this is just what they say. The people who say they know what it is don't even know what it is. So I'm wondering where they're really going to take this and what this judge is going to say. And we still have the redistricting fight going on. By the way, the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, has kicked off his campaign for A proposition. Play your buddy Gavin. I think Gavin is still the lead. I think he is the leading Democrat in the country right now. Bernie Sanders gets more live hype from the, the tours he does, but I think Gavin views himself as, as the alpha male. We're going to get into the alpha males, Trump and Putin here in a second. But what do you think of Both the, the D.C. emergency order challenging this or emergency challenge, I should say, to the crime takeover? Well, let's start with that one. I'm, I'm seeing this as they're just making it worse for themselves. And at this point, all Trump has to do is just keep doing what he's doing and everybody who's opposing him is going to look increasingly foolish.

[B]

It is indisputably the case that Trump has the constitutional authority to act as he did in Washington D.C. with that in mind, it is also possible that a federal District court judge could in the D.C. area question whether Trump has that power, particularly Boasberg, um, and the, and the anti Trump contingent of the district court judges. So the media will chase whatever the district court judges do. But remember the ninth Circuit, I believe one of the federal district court judges, a brother of Stephen Breyer, if I'm not mistaken, in the San Francisco area, said that Trump didn't have the right to call in the guard in la. And almost immediately that was reversed as it moved up the legal hierarchy. But it wouldn't shock me if a judge said that Trump can't do what he clearly can do because many of these judges are basically politicians in robes. And so he can indisputably do this. Lawyers everywhere who have even spent a scintilla of time studying this, not a difficult case. But that doesn't mean that some judge might not say, well, I don't think he could do it, you know, for some reason, just to write an opinion to get a lot of attention, this.

[A]

Is what we're going to see. Are the resistance judges in D.C. willing to remember this is not an interpretation of like a broad spectrum authority that the President has. This, this is specifically in the District of Columbia and looking at a law passed in 1973 that has been good law for 50 years that deals exactly with this issue that says Trump can do this. This is, Trump has 30 days, he can do this. It says it in the law. Are we going to have a judge that comes along? I'm, I'm, I could go either way.

[B]

50, 50, 50, 50. Whether he does say that he can't do it, eventually judges will say he can but there might be one judge who says he cannot.

[A]

It'll just, it's fascinating, though, because you see this judges no longer, when it comes to Trump and the hashtag resistance judiciary, they're no longer, there's no longer the fear of embarrassment at being completely slapped down. 90 Remember when they tried to kick Trump off the ballot in Colorado. I think they talked about it in Maine. Right. But they actually were moving forward on her in Colorado Supreme Court. 90 even Sotomayor, even Ketanji Brown Jackson were like, guys, I mean, we got to pretend. We got to pretend at least, right? This is not even pretending to care what the law says. This is pretty close to that for me. Based on the reading of the 1973 Home Rule act, if a judge manages to come up with some way to stop Trump on this, it's just a judge saying, I don't like Trump. They're not even pretending the law matters.

[B]

I also think this is where there should be some consequences. When judges engage in behavior that's way outside the bounds of what the law is. When you get lifetime tenure, there's virtually nothing that happens to any of these federal district court judges. Sure, there's a measure of embarrassment on some level for people who want to actually apply the law, but I think in many ways that's canceled out by other judges giving them pats on the back and saying, way to stand up to that tyrant. Way to stand up to that authoritarian. This is what judges should do. And honestly, I, I think if you get overruled. 9 oh, I, I, I think you should actually have a consequence. Um, you know, the, the, a good example, as you were just pointing out, the Colorado Supreme Court, everybody wants to forget about it because now they're saying, oh, redistricting is putting democracy on the ballot and all these things. The state of Colorado voted to pull Donald Trump off of the ballot and not allow people there to vote for him. And the Colorado Supreme Court said, four, three, that's appropriate. We can do this. Looking at the federal constitution, and then the actual Supreme Court looked at it and said, nine, oh, no, this is unacceptable. But all of those people in Colorado, there were no consequences for them being wrong. There were no consequences. We barely even talk about what they tried to do. And what was it, Maine that followed up? There were multiple states that were willing to get in line and say Trump was disqualified from being able to be eligible for President of the United States. If that's not an actual legal insurrection, what is? You know, that's the phrase. Kathy Hochul used to describe Texas redistricting. Pulling a candidate off the ballot and not allowing your citizens to vote is, to me, a level of attack on basic democracy. In the process of electing the president.

[A]

That may be the worst judicial overreach we've seen in the Trump era against Trump, because it's. You think of it. They also were just deciding that this. There was no. There was no process to speak of. I mean, they just said, yeah, Trump did a thing I don't like, so he can't be on the ballot. You can't.

[B]

And you can't even point to that just being one Judge Buck, which is why I find it so troubling. The Colorado Supreme Court, I believe there's seven Supreme Court justices in the state of Colorado, voted for three. We're going to do this. So that actually went through the entire Colorado court system. And they said yes, and then they got slapped down nine. Oh, and I'm mentioning it now, and I bet a lot of you are just now thinking, oh, yeah, I totally forgot about that. Because there's so many legal process and procedures that have been put in place since then. I think that was, of all of them, the most egregious. And so when you hear somebody like Kathy Hochul, Governor of New York, say, oh, this is a legal insurrection, referring to Texas redistricting, I think it's important to remember what they did legitimately in trying to take Trump off the ballot. And it had to go all the way to Supreme Court to put his name on the ballot. I can't think of anything that's even remotely comparable that any Republican has ever done that is a legal attack of a similar nature on Democrats.

[A]

Meanwhile, there are Democrats out there. This is. As somebody who's been in Baghdad during a war, I gotta tell you, here's Tiffany Cross, Democrat, saying, I guess this is over at cnn, cnn, msnbc, you know, tomato, tomato, it's all the same these days. Here she is saying, remember, she's upset. This is cut 5. She's upset not because DC is dangerous, but because there are too many people who are there to make it safer on the streets. Play five.

[C]

I mean, this is frightening. I kind of disagree with you both. It's not a distraction. And the way we're normalizing fascism is frightening. I left D.C. today. It looked like Baghdad. The way that the National Guard has taken over, the way that they have militarized the police force there, it is scary. And so the fact that he. He has previously threatened to have Gavin Newsom arrested, he had The. Christy Noem, the Homeland Security secretary. I mean, for her, killing puppies is business as usual. She's not in any position to even be qualified to oversee a department with this. ICE does not have the authority to arrest anybody. He is deploying them, like you said, like it's his own personal police force.

[A]

Just ignoring everything that's true and just saying things that are crazy and emotionally charged and even, even a shot about the gnomes puppies in the past.

[B]

She did leave herself open to that, but I'm not, I'm not defending it.

[A]

I'm just saying work it. This is a kitchen sink strategy. It's fascism. Attacking gnome for the dog thing, all this stuff. She's, she's, she's going all in on this instead of just saying for a second. Hold on. First of all, there are. I've seen plenty of. There was an armory near where I grew up in New York. You see people in military uniforms all the time. Why is it scary to see people from the National Guard? Why would that be a bad thing? This is a little bit like why police on your block should make you feel safer. And if they don't, you should ask why.

[B]

I agree. And anybody out there who doesn't want more police is probably doing something illegal. And here's a big question. Worst case scenario, Trump does all this additional mobilization of resources to help try to make D.C. safer, and the crime rate stays basically the same. That's the worst case scenario. Absolute worst case scenario. Has anybody really considered what happens if it works? Imagine if Trump brings these resources to bear on the District of Columbia and suddenly violent crime drops by 40%. Look at what he did on the border, where basically nobody talks about the border. It's important sometimes to remember stories that were big. Oh, Trump can't be on the ballot. He's not constitutionally eligible to be president. It just vanishes. Nobody even mentions it. The border, Nobody mentions that at all. Has anybody really thought, this is why I love the move that Trump is making? I don't see a downside. Democrats say, hey, we've got too many police. Most people say, well, we should. If you're upset about too many police, you're probably a criminal. The only person who's upset about a drunk driving test is the person who's driving drunk, right? Like, if you're driving, you know, you know how the person, they can catch you because some guys are like, oh, and you turn and go the opposite direction and they pull you over. If you see a drunk driving checkpoint, it's probably a sign that you may have been drinking. The only people upset about drunk driving checkpoints are people that might have been drinking. To me, the only people upset about more police on the streets are people who are actually engaged in criminal behavior. But Buck, what if it works? What if in two months we have a 50% decline in violent crime in DC? What if carjacking plummets? What if the number of murders plummet? What do Democrats do then? And worst case scenario, nothing changes. And the problems are so intractable in D.C. right now that more troops and more police on the ground don't impact things. But I just see this as brilliant. When you write, when you analyze risk reward, if the risk is zero and the reward is massive, that to me seems like something you should do in all facets of life. And that to me is this.

[A]

Yeah. And yet they're still going to scream about this and say that it is fascism. Have you written your will yet? Or done something as important as establishing a trust? Here's a little inside tip on both they're no longer expensive or time consuming. Thanks to our sponsor, trustandwill.com they can help you create one or both without having to find and hire an attorney. It's important to do this because your trust or will will eventually become your voice. You don't want your family scrambling after the fact, because if there's no will or trust left behind, your estate can be tied up in probate for months or longer, depending on the state and set your family up the right way at the time it's needed most. The website to get started is trustandwill.com buck when you go there, you'll save 20%. That's trustandwill.com buck trustandwill.com buck making America.

[D]

Great Again isn't just one man, it's many. The Team 47 podcast Sundays at noon Eastern in the Clay and Buck podcast feed. Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[E]

There's nothing like sinking into luxury. At washablesofas.com, you'll find the Annabe sofa which combines ultimate comfort and design at an affordable price. And get this, it's the only sofa that's fully machine washable from top to bottom. Starting at only $699, the stain resistant performance fabric, slipcovers and cloud like frame duvet can go straight straight into your wash. Perfect for anyone with kids, pets or anyone who loves an easy to clean spotless sofa with a modular design and changeable slipcovers you can customize your sofa to fit any space and style. Whether you need a single chair, loveseat or a luxuriously large sectional, Annabe has you covered. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your home. Right now you can shop up to 60% off store wide with a 30 day money back guarantee. Shop [e-mail] Add a little to your life Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.

[F]

Life moves fast. A new home, a new baby, a new chapter. But without an estate plan, your future's still vulnerable. With Trust and will, you can name guardians, start a trust, create health care directives and more. All online in about an hour. It's attorney designed, state specific and built to protect what you love. Plans start at just $199 and every plan is safe, secure and kept completely private. From families with young kids to adults caring for aging parents, Trust in Will makes it simple to take control without a law office, paperwork, stress or court delays. Go to trustandwill.com and use code RADIO to save 20%. Start your plan today. Don't wait for life to force your hand. Estate planning is one of the smartest, most loving things you can do. Trust and Will is an online estate planning service. See website for details.

[G]

The reviews and ratings are in and Ice Cube's Big three is the surprise hit of the summer. And to cap off the season, iheart presents the big three basketball playoffs. Specifically Sunday at 3pm Eastern. The remaining four teams battle it out for the right to make the Big three championship in the most physical, fierce and competitive basketball league in the world. The action starts with the Big 3 Monster Energy Celebrity Game where your favorite stars compete in Big 33 on 3 basketball. Then the first of two semifinal games features Dwight Howard and the LA Riot taking on Montrez Harrell and Dr. J's first place Chicago Triplets. The finale will see popular Miami 305 with stars MVP Michael Beasley and Lance will make you, Dan Stevenson take on Nancy Lieberman's Dallas Power, who finished the season winning five straight weeks to capture second place. Can Glenn Rice, Greg Monroe and Paul Millsap stop Miami's physical assault? Or will Miami and Beasley put an end to Dallas winning ways? Who will make it to the Big Three championship? This no holds barred action starts Sunday at 3pm Eastern, 12 Pacific only on CBS.

[A]

In business, they say you can have better, cheaper or faster, but you only get to pick two too. What if you could have all three at the same time? That's exactly what cohere Thomson Reuters and Specialized Bikes have since they upgraded to the next generation of the cloud.

[B]

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure OCI is the blazing fast platform for your infrastructure, database, application development and AI needs where you can run any workload in a high availability, consistently high performance environment and spend less than you would with other clouds.

[A]

How is it faster? OCI's block storage gives you more operations per second cheaper.

[B]

OCI costs up to 50% less for computing, 70% less for storage and 80% less for networking better.

[A]

In test after test, OCI customers report lower latency and higher bandwidth versus other clouds. This is the cloud built for AI.

[B]

And all your biggest workloads right now with zero commitment. Try OCI for free. Head to oracle.com clay that's oracle.com clay how many times have you heard if it ain't broke, don't fix it? While that's great advice for most things, it's not applicable to a cell phone. Over time your cell phone battery fades, the processor can't keep up and it starts to operate slower.

[A]

Fortunately, thanks to PureTalk, your cell phone is something you can replace easily when you switch to PureTalk. This month they're going to give you a Samsung Galaxy A36 for free with a $35 monthly qualifying plan, just 35.

[B]

Bucks a month for talk, text and data, and a free Samsung phone with scratch resistant Gorilla glass and a battery that lasts all day. All on America's most dependable 5G network. Supporting Pure Talk is a good thing. You win by cutting your cell phone bill in half. They win by hiring more Americans and helping more veterans make the switch in.

[A]

As little as 10 minutes. Go to PureTalk.com buck to get your free phone today at. Again, that's PureTalk.com buck to switch to my wireless company, America's Wireless Company, Pure Talk.

[B]

President Trump I believe still en route to Alaska. I do not believe he has landed yet. Team, if you'll let me know when he officially lands Big news of course, his meeting with Vladimir Putin scheduled to begin at 3:30 Eastern shortly after we go off the air. We do not know how long that meeting would will go or what the joint press conference that occurs afterwards will end up looking and sounding like. So that will obviously dominate the news cycle as we head into the weekend. But something that has been a huge part of the news cycle prior to the start of this week was the Texas redistricting battle. It immediately kind of dove underneath the Washington D.C. rise of of troops on the streets in an attempt to limit violence, which Trump put in place on Monday. And again, I think the Putin Trump reaction and what comes out of this meeting on Friday is certainly probably, I would say, going to lead even this show on Monday because I would assume there will be multi days of reaction and fallout from whatever this face to face meeting actually brings to bear. But he has arrived in Alaska, by the way. So just an update there he is in Alaska and he is waiting now presumably to meet with Vladimir Putin going forward. So a aspect of of that story will continue to follow. We'll see if anything other further comes out of that. In the meantime, yesterday afternoon, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that California is going to try to redistrict yet again in response to Texas potentially adding five Republican seats. Typically, redistricting happens earlier in the decade. States like California and Texas and Illinois, sorry, California, New York and Illinois that are blue states, aggressively redistricted already states like Massachusetts have eliminated all Democrat congresspeople. There are almost no Republican congressmen from a state like Illinois. And the analysis from the New York Times shows that so far Democrats have benefited the most from redistricting. They are fed up with what Texas might do. And now the talk is that Gavin Newsom says he's putting redistricting on the ballot this November and that would allow California to cancel out Texas's actions and more. This, of course, is Gavin Newsom attempting to interject himself into the national political arena so that he can potentially be president in 2028. This is very easy to see. What is going on here? My question for you, Buck, I'm not convinced that Californians are going to show up and vote in massive numbers for this redistricting to happen. And some of you can say, okay, well, you disagree. The data actually reflects that so far about 2/3 of Californians, according to polling, do not agree with this idea that Gavin Newsom is putting forward. And also some of these ballot referendums in general have tended to trend more conservative in nature than many might expect. For instance, they've been trying to put back in place affirmative action policies and Californians have overwhelmingly said no. Therefore, I'm not sure that Gavin Newsom is going to get this massive wave of support that he is expecting in the event that this actually goes out as a referendum in November. What's your take on California's attempt to try to redistrict? And they've already got a huge advantage outside of the bounds of what would be expected based on the Republican voters already. So they're just going even further blue than they've already gone.

[A]

I think it's part of the overall trend we see, which is Democrats doing things that will either have minimal impact or maybe even have some blowback, but they have to look like they aren't just letting Trump have his way or letting the Republicans run roughshod over them. That's what I mostly see from this. I don't see this as likely to, and correct me if I'm wrong, the redistricting in California, how much more do they think they can already squeeze out of it if they were to go through this? I think Gavin Newsom is much more concerned with the press attention that he gets from this and the fact that he just, he needs to keep his name in his mind. I'm thinking about this now. If I were Gavin Newsom. He wants to be in the headlines. He wants people to be thinking about how Gavin Newsom is one of the biggest names in Democrat politics, because I don't think he views himself as having to do very much to be the only real option, or rather the most palatable option to the overall Democrat base and the Democrat Party in the next election, which crazily enough, is going to be kicking off, in a sense, in what, 18 months, basically not that far off from when real presidential politics starts. Again, this is the, this is one of the only things about Trump's second term that I think is going to require a lot of adjustment, even for his own side, is he doesn't have. We're used to a president being in office, and the perception is that they'll have eight years, or at least that's what their party wants this time around. This is going to move pretty quickly. How many seats does Gavin Newsom even think they could squeeze out if they did more redistricting? I mean, this. How many more drops of juice can they get from the lemon here?

[B]

Well, I think that's a fantastic question because again, around 40% of Californians vote Republican. And I know we have this idea of painting with a broad brush, red state, blue state, but if you look geographically at California, it actually becomes somewhat difficult to alienate some of these Republican districts because huge swaths of California are actually ruby red.

[A]

Now, they think they can get five. That's the number here they think they can get.

[B]

Well, they're basically trying to cancel out what Texas is doing.

[A]

But see, this is why. It's a, it's, it's a media, it's a media play more than anything else. It's. Texas is, you know, the, you know, Texas and Florida go back and forth on this, but Texas is A bigger state. And, you know, sorry, I have a little loyalty to Florida over here, but Texas is a great state and a red state. And really still, I think for a lot of people, the red heartland. And you know, it is our California, although maybe we should think of it as it is their Texas. And they're viewing this as Gavin Newsom is viewing this as. This is how I show that we're not just going to lay down and let this happen. Right. We're going to do more here in California. Now, it's funny, of course, the irony is that this undermines the argument that's being made about Texas. So they're saying, you know, it's like they're saying, you know, the refs are paid off. And then they're turning around saying, and we're paying off the refs in this other game because we're not just going to let the refs get paid off in this game. Well, you're saying that paying off refs is bad. That this is the argument is not that you do it and we don't do it. That's not what Democrats are saying. Democrats make this claim that gerrymandering is bad. Yes, but it's only gerrymandering when the other guys do it. So this is why the whole thing is preposterous. I.

[B]

This is why sometimes I just throw my hands up with politics. It is almost impossible to point to something that one side does that the other side never does. It is. It is. That is the game. And so what, what Texas is doing is reacting later to what Democrats have already done. And again, I point to the New York Times. Basically, if we were being 100% reflective of the will of the voter, the math would directly correspond to a nationwide popular vote when it comes to seats in the House of Representatives. So strip away the 435 electoral votes, strip away straight state boundaries, you would see that the percentages should roughly reflect what the actual voter will is in 2022. Republicans won the nationwide popular vote in that midterm election, and Democrats did better in terms of congressional seats than they would have based on the nationwide vote. And we talked about this. We expected a red wave, red tsunami. You got it in New York, you got it in Florida. It petered out as it went across the country. It didn't end up existing to a certain extent. New York Times went and looked and they said, well, that's because democr Republicans have been really successful in their redistricting and drawing the lines efforts. 2024 Republicans won the House again and won the nationwide popular vote for President of the United States. And Democrats actually did better in terms of the majority of the minority party that they got in the House. My point on this is if the New York Times is pointing out they've got an advantage, then they've got an advantage. And here is the huge structural. If we really want to have a conversation about redistricting and the 435 congressional seats, Democrats, by letting in 10 million illegals, continue to benefit immensely from illegal immigration populations because they're counted for purposes of congressional seat allocation. So a state like California, if they didn't have millions of illegal immigrants, would actually have lost congressional seats. Illinois, same way. New York, same way. If you want to talk about the big transformative, unfair political advantage that Democrats have from a, from a districting perspective, it's that they count 20 million illegals at least. Tom Holman tells me there's 20 million. So I'm using his number. Some of you like a bigger number. Buck. They count all of these people that are overwhelmingly clustered in blue cities in blue states, and that allows them to take an additional 10 to 15 seats, which would 100% be likely to swing the difference probably in 2026 if they were to take back the House. So that is the big structural advantage. They're not the victims here. They actually benefit by gerrymandering and redistricting, to say nothing of the fact that they actually screwed up the 2020 census and misallocated there in a substantial way, which Democrats are gonna benefit from in 26 and 28. So this is like the bank robber claiming that they're the good guy.

[A]

Yes. And they're gonna keep doing it because their other argument is what? They don't really have one. So they just have to hope that they can make arguments that are self refuting but are full of a lot of emotion and a lot of Republicans bad or Trump at really Trump. Republicans is same. You know, Trump is a stand in for all Republicans. And I think that Trump is more of a mobilizer of Democrat rage than anything else. So even though it's the Texas, this is the thing. It's a Texas state legislature that's handling this issue. It's Trump's fault. Right. You've noticed that it's anything that's bad that Republicans do anywhere to get Democrats to pay attention. They have to make it seem like Donald Trump has rolled his sleeves up and is in the back room pulling all of the strings and doing everything necessary to get this thing forward.

[B]

I'M laughing a little bit because I'm just thinking, because Trump is the ultimate villain, what are all those people with Ukraine flags in their bio gonna do if Trump actually gets peace in Ukraine? I do think that the cognitive dissonance of Trump bringing peace to the world, they expect him to bring World War Three. If we played the Hillary Clinton clause.

[A]

Can I tell you. Can I tell you what I think they'll do? Again, you're asking the rational question.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Which is if Trump. If Trump has clear success in this negotiation, if the pressure on Russian oil got Putin to the table, cease fire happens. And I think laying this out. Laying this out is, you know, important now because they're going to move. They're going to change up everything, right? They're going to change up the situation no matter what, because they don't want to give Trump the credit for it. But I think that if he does get an irrefutable win, like if we lay out what the win looks like, he gets the win, what they will say is, well, it was really all Zelensky. I think that's probably the move that Zelensky is the one they just. They shift the focus to he was doing. And remember, look, if that were to happen, should Zelensky get credit for standing up to Russian aggression? Sure, yeah, absolutely. But they'll just use the focus shift. So they'll make it seem like Trump was almost like a waiter bringing them bottles of Perrier during the negotiations.

[B]

I think that's a possibility. I think they'll claim that the settlement actually favors Putin and Trump did it because he's a Russian stooge. I think they'll just pretend Ukraine never happened. They never had the bios, and I think their brains are broken. They will say, oh, of course Putin negotiated with Trump. That's what you would expect a Russian asset to do. And. And he sold Ukraine down the river and Ukraine didn't have options otherwise. That's probably where I think they're going to have to go, because otherwise they would have to acknowledge that their chosen leader, Biden, was an impotent failure who allowed Ukraine to be invaded, and Trump was the one who protected them, and their brains won't allow them to do it. Speaking of protection, a lot of you out there right now, kids are going back to school. My two oldest go back to school on Monday. Many of you out there with kids going off to high school, college, maybe they're driving for the first time grandkids as well. Well, do you have protection for them? That's Non lethal pepper sprays. How about alarms in the house? How about alarms for the dorm rooms, for the apartments? Some of those places that your kids could end up living, a little bit sketchy, a lot of those college towns, maybe you want to provide them a little bit of protection, but you want it to be non lethal because everybody's got friends coming in at all hours. In college towns, when your kids going out, living on their own, probably not living in great neighborhoods those first few years, check out Sabre. They can provide non lethal protection. You can hook your kid up, you can hook your grandkid up with a lot of awesome devices. We have every single one of them in our own house. You can get them for your own house as well. This is a family business. They take care of you. The pepper gel projectile launcher, shaped like a pistol or rifle, depending on the model, fires off pepper gel projectiles, targeted long distance and effective to end any intruder, but also non lethal so you don't have to worry about somebody being injured. Decide together what you're most comfortable coming and relying on. Check it out [e-mail] that's s a b r e radio.com you say 15% there@sabre radio.com that's s a b R e radio.com you can also call 844-824 safe. That's 844-824 safe.

[D]

Stories of freedom, stories of America, Inspirational stories that unite us all each day. Spend time with Clay and Buck. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[B]

Awaiting more news from Alaska, where President Trump and Putin will meet up in the. On the flight the way there, Trump said, Buck, that he would be upset if Putin didn't agree to an immediate ceasefire. So on the gambling markets, there is a 2% chance that the immediate ceasefire comes to pass. So for those of you out there have not been paying a lot of attention to the negotiation elements associated with Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine's position has been in order to actually negotiate an end to the war, we need to have a guaranteed ceasefire in place. Both sides stop firing, put down their arms, and then the negotiation starts. Here's a question for you, Buck, because I think this is the thing that Ukraine is going to most care about. They're going to have to give up some territory. I don't think there's any doubt about that. Where exactly that territory line is will be negotiated extensively. What kind of guarantees, if any, should the United States make to Ukraine when it comes to providing security for them going forward? We know the mineral rights deal is there. Ukraine's biggest concern is Russia will agree to a cease fire and a negotiated settlement here, and then they'll just invade again somewhere down the line, probably after Trump is out of office, maybe when we get another weak Democrat in office that Putin feels like he can exploit. To what extent should America provide security guarantees over and above the mineral rights agreement that has already been put in place? Does that make you nervous? Ukraine obviously wants NATO. Russia is very opposed to Ukraine being allowed to be in NATO, which would provide more of a European security guarantee. What American involvement should there be, if any, in negotiating a ceasefire, not only for this situation, but to allay Ukrainian concerns that Putin will just invade again in another couple of years?

[A]

I think it's going to be economic and materiel support. But you know, we can't get into a situation where we have some tripwire for US Military. Basically we can't offer them, which really goes to the heart of a lot of the initial conflict here, which is membership in NATO and Article 5 protection. Can't do that. I mean, that would destroy. If Putin even thought that that was something we were going to ask for or demand, there would be no negotiation at all. Right. That's a total red line for him. And so getting to that through another, through other means, I think is, is just as much of a red line. So how do we guarantee it? We say, you know, one clay. I think we probably end up saying, ain't no guarantees in life. And second, we say that there'll be economic consequences and pressure and sanctions and things like that. But unless we want to start having our planes blow up, Russians and our boys in trenches, you know, having these little anti personnel drones flying at people, which we don't want, by the way, to be very clear, I completely oppose this. There are limits to what we can do, right? This is the thing. We're not willing to go to war, we're not willing to fight a war on behalf of Ukraine. So our guarantee of whatever this settlement is is going to have to be something along the lines of we'll give you a lot of guns, weapons and money and we'll be very mad at Russia, but we're not rolling in like the cavalry to clean up the mess.

[B]

Here's another aspect of this that I think is significant, and this is where the intelligence agencies would actually be useful, unfortunately. I'm sure there's 48 different explanations of this question or analysis of this question. How many more years is Putin going to have control of Russia? How Healthy is he, actually? Because one of the downsides of any negotiation between Trump and Putin is unfortunately, we've only got Trump for about three and a half more years as President of the United States. Now, hopefully he's followed up by someone who is of a Trumpian ilk and not someone who is like Joe Biden. But Putin can play the long game because he's in a position of power, presumably maybe for another generation. What is Putin, like, 68, 70 years old? Something like that? I think. I would think he probably has another decade. Again, you don't ever know about health, maybe a generation of leadership. So he can afford to play the long game and presume that at some point in time there's going to be another American president and maybe that president's going to be weak like Biden was. Because I don't think it's any coincidence that Putin waited until Biden was in office to invade Ukraine, just like I don't think it's any coincidence that Gaza, the Hamas occupants inside of Gaza went after Israel while Biden was in office either. I think they knew weakness when they saw it. I think they were right to strategically take advantage of the Biden administration's weakness and feckless inability to protect us and those around the world.

[A]

Yeah, I think that my expectations for this, just to be very clear, are pretty low. I think that it's very likely that what you'll see is some desire on both sides to suggest there's progress, which is completely understandable, certainly on the side of Trump, because Trump really does want progress. We want this thing over with. Right. There's no part of Trump, there's no part of maga. I really think there's no part of most of the Republican Party, you know, Democrats on this one, they want very clearly. Isn't it weird how this has become a partizan thing, too? Yes, it really shouldn't be partizan because you're getting beyond the normal party lines here, other than what Trump has said about it and what, what Biden has said about it. You know, because Democrats are generally like to think of themselves at least as anti war, though, as we know that's not true. They just tend to be more interested in wars that have no benefit to the American people whatsoever but make them feel good about themselves. Now, Republicans, I'm not saying, have done a great job. You go back to Bush administration with why and how they're, you know, running, running the war machine. But that's exactly the point though, is that you can, you can see these things Usually outside of. A wise enough person can see these things outside of just a straight Partizan lens. But the Ukraine flag thing was just. It was almost comedic for a while there where you had all these people who were just switching out their fauci syringes and masks for Ukraine flags all over social media. And this is real. You could see this happening sometimes. They, they had them both at the same time as part of the transition. But we should just all want this thing to end as quickly as possible. There's zero benefit to America of this continuing. And this is what I've said all along, too. There's no way that Ukraine can win, meaning kick Russia out of everywhere. So it's going to have to give up some stuff. The question is what it's going to.

[B]

Have to give up.

[A]

So negotiation is the only way this ends. Because the idea that Russia is going to just lose is not a real idea at all. But you got to, you know, was it. Pelosi said this. This is. This goes to. This is. Cut. 15 guys play this for a second. They're fighting for our democracy. This is Nancy Pelosi. Play it. We want the people of Ukraine. We commend them for fighting for democracy and in fighting for their democracy to. They're fighting for ours as well. They are fighting for democracy writ large.

[B]

This is why I think it's so amazing to contemplate if Trump actually gets peace and Vladimir Zelensky comes out. Vladimir Putin. The Zelensky and Putin press conferences. Presumably Trump would be involved with one in Ukraine and one in Russia. I can't imagine they would have a joint press conference, although maybe they would. But if Zelensky comes out and says President Trump was instrumental in bringing peace to Europe, we could not have done this without him. What in the world are all the Ukraine bio flag people going to do? I don't even know what flag they're going to put up next. They can't wear masks now because they're concerned ICE is wearing masks after wearing masks themselves for years. They can't fly the Ukraine flag. They can't fly the American flag because it's racist. I don't even know. The Palestine flag, I guess. But what if Trump brings peace in Gaza too? They're running out of things they can stand on. And I think it's funny, but I do think it goes to the essence of the Democrat Party. I can tell you pretty simply what someone who voted for Trump believes. America is the greatest country in the history of the world and we can be even better. Than we have been in the past. I mean, that's a story in a sentence for what a Trump voter would believe. What does a Democrat believe? What does the party? You ask this question. I think it's such a good question because I think it goes to the essence. All the Democrat believes is the opposite of whatever Trump says. That's not actually a foundational party. Because what we're seeing here is a lot of what Trump says is post partisan, meaning Trump's opposed to more murder in D.C. democrats are now aligned against it. Trump is opposed to the war in Ukraine continuing. He's painting Democrats into an incredibly tiny corner. Because when you make your entire party predicated on opposing Trump, what if Trump is doing as he is now? A lot of things that are very popular and aren't directly connected to traditional notions of political parties.

[A]

Well, I think it also, it is a reminder of what the mindset became openly at the Washington Post in Trump's first term, where the way that they tried to hold on to. We're a news organization that objectively reports the truth, but everything we say and do is geared toward attacking Trump is that whatever is true is inherently anti Trump. And I want to be clear, that was their philosophy. And this was. You would hear people, writers, people, the Washington Post would say this, that the problem, the roots of anti Trumpism in the reporting were directly from the fact that all truth, truth must be anti Trump because he's so bad. But, Clay, what you're raising here is, well, that, first of all, that's obviously an insane belief, but just put this aside for a second. What then happens whenever Trump does something good? If you're unwilling to tell the truth about it, you have to lie. So you have no room to go with. Right. If everything that Trump does, if all truth is, is bad for Trump and Trump does a good thing, how can you tell the truth about Trump? You can't. This is where we are with. This is why you're seeing on the foreign policy stuff. Well, they better hope that he doesn't pull off something good here, because this is like the old. If Trump cured cancer, they'd be pro cancer. Yeah, they would. Or they would come up with some way. I mean, there's maybe a little bit of a more sly way for them, which is what I was alluding to with, with Zelensky, which is just to say, even if it's, Even if Trump is the point man on something and gets the win, they'll find a way to make it someone else. If they, if they can't say it's bad, it's someone else's win, or Trump.

[B]

Didn'T really do that.

[A]

You didn't build that. You know, that's, that's the real move.

[B]

Well, and again, this is, I think there is a huge world to examine of, of groups that Trump broke because their only position was reflexively anti Trump. There was no nuance to it. I think the legacy media is dead. I think it's finished. I think that the Democrat Party right now as we know it is dead and buried. It does not exist. I think the woke universe that surrounded Trump in opposition has crumbled in essence around him too. You cannot define yourself as being opposed to someone else because at some point they checkmate you. And I think every day we are seeing Democrats getting checkmated. I mean, let me play this cut for you as we go to break. Eric Swalwell Buck is now saying there are no criminals in D.C. outside of politics. It's just transparently ridiculous. Listen to this.

[H]

Federal troops and federal law enforcement are coming to a federalized Washington D.C. the stated reason crime is on the rise. Well, I don't know if that's true, but I know there are way more criminals in Washington D.C. today than there were back in early January. And there's a direct line between a 34 count convicted felon coming to a northwest neighborhood, having other cases that disappear, that he should have been held accountable for bringing his seven bankruptcies and his network of other convicts and thieves and thugs into our community. Yes, there are more criminals in Washington D.C. most of them are in the Trump administration.

[B]

Most of them. I mean, it's so ridiculous.

[A]

Well, I got a fever as a Republican and the only prescription is more Swalwell. We need more of this guy. We need Swalwell, 247 out there in the media being the, he should be the guy that Democrats turn to on everything because they will never win another national election for the rest of their lives. I think this is fantastic. We need more Swalwell. I have, I'll tell you this, I have never met a Democrat that liked this guy that like would go, that would go out of their way. Now maybe they defend him or whatever because he's a Democrat sometimes, but none of them are even vaguely, you know, pro Swalwell. I know, I know people who are big, Bernie people, Hillary people, Obama people, everything else, AOC people. There's all these. But Swalwell is, we just need more of him. We need, we need him making the case all the time. It would be a great thing for America. If whenever somebody thought, what's a Democrat? It was this guy and his. His esteemed record with.

[B]

I think he and Jasmine Crockett should pair up. I think that's the best possible.

[A]

They should go on tour together.

[B]

They should. It really should.

[A]

Yeah, it would be. It would be a good move. I think that would be excellent. Because I don't. I agree. I don't even know what he thinks he's saying. It's so dumb that I'm not sure that he even understands the point that he's trying to make. It's not. It's so dumb. It's not even wrong, Clay. I don't know what it is. That's where Swalwell is. All right, we got to talk about Preborn here for a moment. Preborn is in a league of its own. This is a nonprofit saving the lives of tens of thousands of babies every year. In fact, they've saved 37,000 unborn babies this year alone. Preborn's mission is to save lives every day by offering pregnant moms support, love and the option of life for their child. The team of people working at Preborn provide these pregnant moms with all that assistance and the ultrasound that they give for free to these pregnant mothers and is the beginning of saving so many lives. The ultrasound experience costs $28 per ultrasound. If you can donate $28 today, you'll be helping Preborn save a tiny baby's life in the womb. Some mom is going to have a little boy or a little girl and it's going to be a huge part of it is that this ultrasound happened and that you funded it. Preborn operates clinics in communities across our nation where abortion rates are highest. To donate securely dial pound250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250. Say baby or go to preborn.com buck preborn.com b u c K Sponsored by Preborn.

[D]

Stories of Freedom, Stories of America. Inspirational stories that unite us all each day. Spend time with Clay and Buck. Find them on the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[E]

Tired of spills and stains on your sofa? WashablesOfAs.com has your back. Featuring the Annabe collection, the only designer sofa that's machine washable inside and out. Where designer quality meets budget friendly prices. That's right. Sofas start at just $699. Enjoy a no risk experience with pet friendly stain resistant and changeable slipcovers made with performance fabrics. Experience cloud like comfort with high resilience foam that's hypoallergenic and never needs fluffing. The sturdy steel frame ensures the longevity and the modular pieces can be rearranged anytime. Check out washablesofas.com and get up to 60% off your annabe sofa backed by a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. If you're not absolutely in love, send it back for a full refund. No return, shipping or restocking fees. Every penny back. Upgrade [e-mail] Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions must apply.

[F]

Life moves fast. A new home, a new baby, a new chapter. But without an estate plan, your future's still vulnerable. With Trust and Will, you can name guardians, start a trust, create health care directives and more. All online in about an hour. It's attorney designed, state specific and built to protect what you love. Plans start at just 100 and every plan is safe, secure and kept completely private. From families with young kids to adults caring for aging parents. Trust and will makes it simple to take control without a law office, paperwork, stress or court delays. Go to trustandwill.com and use code RADIO to save 20%. Start your plan today. Don't wait for life to force your hand. Estate planning is one of the smartest, most loving things you can do. Trust and Will is an online estate planning service. See website for details.

[I]

The reviews and ratings are in and Ice Cube's Big Three is the surprise hit of the summer. And to cap off the season, iheart presents the Big 3 Basketball Championship and 8th Annual Big 3 All Star Game this coming Sunday, August 24th live for more Lane Lando the remaining two teams fight it out for the Big 3 Championship Dr. Jake Trophy in the most physical, fierce and competitive basketball league in the world, don't miss the wild conclusion of Big Three's eighth and most historic season ever. This is the game no one wants to lose and there's no crying in the Big Three. The action starts with the Big Three eighth Annual All Star Game. Don't miss All Stars Dwight Howard, Montrez Harrell, MVP Michael Beasley, Lance will make you Dan Stevenson, Jordan Crawford, Greg Monroe, Earl Clark, Nasir Kor and more show you why they are the best three on three basketball players in the world. Big three's exciting all star game plus the crowning of a new big three champion. The no holds part action starts Sunday at 2pm Eastern, 11 Pacific only on CBS.

[B]

How many times have you heard if it ain't broke, don't fix it? While that's great advice for most things. It's not applicable to a cell phone. Over time, your cell phone battery fades, the processor can't keep up, and it starts to operate slower.

[A]

Fortunately, thanks to PureTalk, your cell phone is something you can replace easily when you switch to PureTalk. This month, they're going to give you a Samsung Galaxy A36 for free with a $35 monthly qualifying plan.

[B]

Just 35 bucks a month for talk, text and data, and a free Samsung phone with scratch resistant Gorilla glass and a battery that lasts all day, all on America's most dependable 5G network. Supporting Pure Talk's a good thing. You win by cutting your cell phone bill in half. They win by hiring more Americans and helping more veterans make the switch in.

[A]

As little as 10 minutes. Go to PureTalk.com buck to get your free phone today. Again, that's PureTalk.com buck to switch to my wireless company, America's Wireless Company, PureTalk.

[B]

Grand Canyon University, a private Christian university in beautiful Phoenix, Arizona, believes we're endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursu of happiness. GCU believes in equal opportunity, and the American dream starts with purpose. Whether your pursuit involves a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree, GCU provides a path to help you fulfill your dreams, offering over 340 academic programs as of September 2024. Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University. Private Christian affordable. Visit GCU Clay, have you heard of the Rio Reset? Sounds like a trendy new workout, Buck.

[A]

It does, but it's actually a big summit going on in Brazil. The formal name is brics, which stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. But they've just added five new members.

[B]

Smart move to stick with brics. We know what happens when acronyms don't end. They confuse everyone.

[A]

Well, that's an understatement. BRICS is a group of emerging economies hoping to increase their sway in the global financial order.

[B]

Now that sounds like the plotline of a movie. I'm listening.

[A]

Philip Patrick is our Bruce Wayne. He's a precious metal specialist and a spokesman for the Birch Gold Group. He's on the ground in Rio getting the whole lowdown on what's going on there.

[B]

Can he give us some inside intel?

[A]

Absolutely. He's been there since day one. In fact, a major theme at the summit is how BRICS nations aim to reduce reliance on the US Dollar in global trade.

[B]

Yikes. That doesn't sound good. We got to get Philip on the line, Stat.

[A]

Already did. And he left the Clay and Buck audience There this message. The world is moving on from the dollar. Quietly but steadily, these nations are making real progress towards reshaping global trade. And the US Dollar is no longer the centerpiece. That shift doesn't happen overnight, but make no mistake, it's already begun. Thank you, Philip. Protect the value of your Savings account, your 401k, your IRA, all of them, by purchasing gold and placing it into those accounts and reducing your exposure to a declining dollar value. Text my name, Buck to 9898. 98. You get the free information you'll need to make the right decision. You can rely on Birch Gold Group as I do, to give you the information you need to make an informed decision. One more time, text my name Buck to 9898. 98. Welcome back into Clay and Buck. Big news of the hour, of the day, of the moment. Is this a high stakes summit of Trump and Putin meeting in Alaska. And, and I would say one, one part of this as we're looking to see. I really everybody the same way that Clay has taken a very brave stand recently. That he is anti murder. I, I am. He, you know, it was bold. It was bold. Clay does not like the, the killing of, of. Of somebody in a crime for no reason. That's bad. Is bad. And I, you know what, I'm gonna, I co. Sign with him on that one. I'm not, I'm not gonna leave him out on there alone. I think also ending a, a war over territory that is killing hundreds of thousands of people is something that any human being could just very much be in favor of. Right. This is very obvious, very easy stuff to root for. This is not, it's not controversial. It's one of those rare things that really isn't, or I should say shouldn't be partisan, even though in this case it has been made very partisan. And I'm hopeful this will come to an end. I would also say though, Clay, the possibility here of, I think a really nice. Again, most important, I just want to say all that stuff because the most important thing is that, you know, young Ukrainian men, young Ukrainian, I mean young Russian men are not just, just getting blown up for what. Right. This is happening every day. It's horrible. But something else that could be an additional benefit of all this is it'd be good for business and the economy, which matters for a whole lot of people all over the world too, if Russia wasn't doing this. If Russia's war is aggressive war here and the sanctions that are in place and all the Rest. So, Claire, I think there's a possibility that this could have some nice movement in the markets, too, if it comes to what feels like a real move forward. It can't just be some empty words from Putin this time, but if it looks like it's. It's really going in the right direction, you know, we're heading to a place where the Iran, Iran nuclear program is not something anyone cares about right now. I mean, in general, I know there are people in the Pentagon and such who care, but it's not something that is worrying anybody. I think we're reaching the end here pretty soon of Israel's counterstrike against Hamas in Gaza. I think that's going to be. Everyone can see it's coming to a final phase. And now you have this. And if this were to be taken off the table as just a geopolitical flashpoint, as a point of instability for national security, but also on the economic front, energy, how it affects energy prices, it just would be a huge win all around. It's such a big win that if he pulls it off, Hillary, I know she said it in a snarky way, but she would even. I, I think she would should be held to this. If he pulls this off, he should get the Nobel Peace Prize.

[B]

I don't think there's any doubt. Some news on the meetup. It was unclear who exactly would be in the room. The room is a trio from the United States. Reportedly, Steve Witkoff, who is Trump's friend, billionaire adviser, who has been trying to negotiate peace around the world. Marco Rubio, obviously, Secretary of State and Donald Trump. We know Putin on the Russia side. We don't know the exact 3v3 setup that will be taking place. But that Witkoff is a Miami beach.

[A]

Guy, by the way.

[B]

He's my neighbor. Really?

[A]

Yeah, he's my neighbor. I could walk to Witkoff's house in like a couple minutes.

[B]

He's been all over the world trying to bring peace. I mean, he's basically Trump's global emissary for peace. So you've got that trio. I do think this is smart strategically, because if it were Trump, Putin, one on one, then there would be a lot of discussion about, oh, they're, you know, trying to Manchurian Candidate, Trump, all these different things. Rubio has been one of the best. There's been a bunch, but one of the best cabinet secretary picks, I think it's fair to say, of Trump. I mean, I think Marco Rubio has been just, just fabulous, just incredible. Steve Witkoff, obviously, but I think 3v3 is not a bad. It's not big enough number where there's tons of people talking and there's lots of conflicting voices, which is always a challenge in these negotiations, but it lets you know, okay, here are the guys, and I presume it'll be six men. Here are the guys that are going to be determining what the parameters of a potential peace deal could be.

[A]

Now, you know, it's just as a back. Sorry, go ahead.

[B]

No, I was just going to say we've talked a lot about the Trump side. I think Trump's motivations are pretty clear. Hey, let's have less people dying. To your point, I think it's very hard to say something negative about Trump as it pertains to this story, even if you're trying. Why would Putin go all the way to Anchorage, come to the United States and not have the intent of advancing talks in some way? It's not like Trump and Putin meet face to face all the time. I don't think Putin has met with a president in years and years. He hasn't been to the United States in eight years or something. Seems a little bit unlikely to me that he would travel all this way and spend all this time with no intent to advance towards peace or a negotiated settlement in some way. Just trying to analyze it from his perspective. It doesn't add up to me that he would go all the way, face to face to tell Trump, hey, screw you, we're not going to come to any kind of agreement.

[A]

At some level, I think you could argue. I think people might argue, Clay, on that one. I tend to agree with you that there's clearly some motivation here for Putin to. He's feeling some pressure and there's a desire to at least look like he wants to have some kind of a conversation about this. But I also think that there's the. He's legitimized on the world stage as not just like the Russian bad guy, but ahead of state, he's meeting with Trump. You know, it goes to the propaganda of. Oh, well, like Putin's actually. He's trying to. You know, he's reasonable. He. Russian, Russian aims in this war are not. Are not beyond the pale. It is kind of funny, though, that the. The venue for this negotiation is the place where America made the second best land deal in its history. What was 1867? Seven million bucks. Seward's Folly, they called it. Right. So Alaska is after the Louisiana Purchase.

[B]

Yep.

[A]

Which was really just because.

[B]

Greatest land deals of all time.

[A]

Yeah. The number one Number one greatest land deal ever done. Um, I'm sorry, Trump. I know Trump's done some great deals, but I think Louisiana Purchase, I think we gotta give credit. Probably the greatest. Probably the greatest deal for land of all time. Uh, but buying Alaska from the Russians for 7 million bucks, that one, in retrospect, that was quite a deal. That's quite a move. Do we want to talk the art of the deal? You get all that now? Of course, this is before the discovery of oil, right? So there's that. People didn't recognize that oil was going to be the, you know, most valuable in some ways, or one of the most valuable natural commodities in the world, natural resources in the world. But, yeah, America really showed Russia what's up back in. In 1867.

[B]

All right, there's going to be some. I love the. We get to get the history nerd contingent firing away the purchase of Manhattan for some trinkets. Probably a pretty good deal. Was it $23 in trinkets turned out to be a pretty good value back in the 1700s, if I'm remembering correctly, 1803, Louisiana Purchase.

[A]

Can I just throw this out there, though? That was. That's the Dutch, right? The Dutch did it.

[B]

Oh, we weren't a country yet. So, yeah, that's a good distinction.

[A]

You know what I'm saying? It's not an American. So we're talking about American land deals here, baby. That was the Dutch who were like, you know, they kind of faded after that. That was their high. That was their high point.

[B]

The. By the way, one update on the meeting. I said I'm reporting. This is Caitlin Collins from CNN, who put this out 3v3. They're also then going to expand at a working lunch.

[A]

This is.

[B]

I mean, I think the psychology on this is, do you really eat? I mean, are people like a working. Can you imagine? You're trying to hammer out the biggest peace treaty since World War II, and they're standing in line at a buffet or they're. I. Maybe they're getting delivered food on the base. Do you really eat?

[A]

I.

[B]

The working lunch element to this is really kind of. They're like, hey, guys, maybe we don't have the hamburgers. Maybe we just kind of focus on trying to hammer out the peace deal. But the bilateral working lunch is going to be Trump, Rubio, Hegseth Besant. So that's the Secretaries of State, of the Defense and of the treasury, as well as Scott Lutnick, who is Secretary of Commerce Witkoff, and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. My point again on this, that I would reiterate is that's basically everybody who matters at the top levels of the United States government. All of them have traveled all the way to Anchorage, Alaska for this meeting. We don't know exactly who Putin is bringing, but that's not the kind of crew you roll with. If this is supposed to be some sort of formality and not a significant discussion, again, we don't know what the outcome's going to be, but Trump basically is bringing the five or six most significant people in the administration to meet face to face with Russia's leadership as well. And I presume Putin must be bringing all of his top guys as well in order for this meeting to take place. But, yeah, lunch, working lunch, I mean, that seems kind of hard. It's just, it's weird.

[A]

Trump is going to. Do you think they brought some, some Big Macs and Diet Cokes for Trump? He's a fan.

[B]

Oh, 100%, I think, I think he's probably going to just roll out, you know, Quarter Pounders, although that's a cultural statement as well, since McDonald's had to pull out of Russia. That's one thing that I think is actually very interesting about all of this. How do we desanctify Russia? We took all Western assets effectively out of the country. They gave them all to interior.

[A]

How do we desanction. How do we desanction them to sanctions off at this?

[B]

Yeah. How do we, how do we, like, do they go back to McDonald's and Subway instead of the Russian, you know.

[A]

Not, not to open up, not to open up the tennis conversation again. But I will say this. I, I've seen this because there are a lot of great Russian tennis players. It's a sport where Russians are, I think that and probably ice hockey are the places where you got the highest Russian, you know, Russian level athletes at the top level. Am I missing one?

[B]

No, I was just going to say, to your point, it's a good one. Remember, we're hosting the Olympics in 28. Russian involvement could be significant. Historically, Russian American competition in the Olympics has been a very significant geopolitical flashpoint. So I wonder if that might get mentioned here.

[A]

And, and, and beyond that, though, I just think this, not having the Russian flag for Russian players in tennis, but having this little empty square is, is ridiculous. It's dumb. It's not the player's fault. That's their nationality. This is, this is like virtue signaling, you know, idiocy. Ok, it's, I agree. No one's, you're you're identifying the nationality of the player. You're not bowing down and, and saying Russia is great and playing the Russian national anthem before every tennis match. So I just think that this, but this goes to this mentality where people, a lot of the stuff you see around the Russia, Ukraine, war in this country is just posturing by people who like to think that they're braver than they are on issues where they're not taking any stand, really. They just want everyone to think they're taking some kind of a stand. I mean, what, like, why punish the Russian players? They're not. They didn't do anything.

[B]

Maybe don't put in racism in the end zone for NFL stadiums, like. Right. I mean, I think all of this political posturing in the world of sports is absurd. I sign off on that. I mean, the idea that you can't have the flag. By the way, breaking news coming down. Trump told Brett Baier, I won't be happy. Fox News is Bret Baier. I won't be happy if I walk away without some form of ceasefire. So I would just say he's raising a bit expectations for what this meeting will actually result in. So, heck, I mean, stay tuned. I mean, obviously Sean Hannity is in Alaska and will be live right after us. I don't know when this is going to. Officially, we'll get breaking news on this, but headed into the weekend, this is potentially going to be good. I'm going to throw producer Ali under the bus again, by the way.

[A]

You know, I hate to do this before the weekend.

[B]

Clay twice.

[A]

Harsh.

[B]

Within the same hour. Producer Ali, do you want to come up on the mic? You told us that Air Force One landed like an hour and a half before Air Force One actually landed. Thankfully, Air Force One has landed safely. Would you like to apologize to this massive audience for your failures not only here, but also for getting me to say kayfab.

[A]

Yes, I am crouched in the fetal position under the bus.

[B]

I said during a break, I was like, ali, they are. Brett Baier just tweeted, hey, we just landed in Alaska. And we said, and I thought, because I saw Trump taking off, how did they get there that fast? So producer Ali, I mean, all right, I blame AI, you know, we're trying to do these things.

[A]

Find this information for you fast.

[B]

I relied on AI and it failed me.

[A]

There you go.

[B]

Grock, Grok, Letter, Astray Rock dramatically underestimated.

[A]

The speed of the Buckster serve for any of you tried that one? Not even close. Not even close. Some people are Saying grok, I don't know. Elon got to look at a little more closely.

[B]

We're shareholders so I hope he looks at it very closely and gets a fair point.

[A]

Actually.

[B]

Xai, great company. We love it. When we come back, we'll close up shop on the on the weekend and give you the absolute latest, hopefully while being accurate. But in the meantime, I want to tell you Rapid Radio has got an incredible offer for you. You can get hooked up. I mentioned this. It's actually pretty fabulous for everyone in my family. We've been able to get hooked up with my mother in law who lives in a home that does not have consistently great cell phone service. She's been frustrated by it. My wife has been very frustrated by it. The other day, guess how they're communicating straight to Rapid Radios when my mother in law is in her home. This is in the Nashville area. Shouldn't be. She doesn't have pure talk, by the way. But there is a cell phone not working very well. If you have a situation like this and inevitably that can be very frustrating. It suddenly has has happened in your neighborhood. Maybe a cell towers now, maybe something's going wrong. You can communicate using this as a good backup for that. Rapid Radios, we've also got my 10 year old. He likes to go down to the grocery store and just buy himself a little snack sometimes with his friends. He doesn't have a cell phone yet, but if we want to let him walk into the neighborhood grocery store sometimes we will say, hey, just take this walkie talkie so we know you're okay. You can just hop on. They think it's cool because kids love walkie talkies. Maybe you're gonna be on a car trip and you are gonna be in multiple different cars and you just want to be able to stay in touch with somebody else. And also maybe you're worried about what might happen when it comes to hurricane season, which we're in the middle of right now, or tornado season, which is always going on here where I live in the Nashville area. You can get hooked up right now with Rapid Radio's fabulous offer. Get everyone hooked up, 200 team members, simple click of a button. Or just your family, only a few people. Whatever you want. Rapid Radios connects to a nationwide LTE network. They don't require any setup. They're Compact in size, five day, battery charge, 100 private, no monthly fees, 60% off. Right now if you go to rapid radios, that's rapidradios.com code radio for an extra 5% off. Rapidradios.com keep up with the biggest political.

[D]

Comeback in world history on the Team 47 podcast Clay and Buck highlight Trump replays from the week, Sundays at noon Eastern. Find it on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast.