
Daily Review with Clay and Buck - Sep 4 2026
About this episode
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show is made possible by:
The hosts analyzed reports of a pending mistrial and extraordinary courtroom drama surrounding jury deliberations. Clay and Buck focused extensively on allegations that an 11-1 jury split had emerged, with one juror reportedly refusing to join the majority in finding Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity. The hosts examined the defense team's unprecedented effort to seek intervention from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and remove the lone holdout juror, arguing that the juror was allegedly failing to apply the law as instructed. Clay and Buck discussed the legal implications of juror independence, mistrials, reasonable doubt standards, jury misconduct claims, and whether courts should ever intervene in deliberations when a single juror disagrees with the majority.
The conversation centered on dramatic courtroom exchanges between the defense attorney and trial judge, including arguments over emergency appeals, requests to delay a mistrial declaration, and disputes regarding jury instructions. Clay, drawing on his legal background, and Buck, offering a broader public perspective, questioned whether the defense was improperly attempting to overturn the jury process simply because one juror would not yield. They characterized the situation as highly unusual and debated what information from inside the jury room may have prompted the defense's claims that the holdout juror was disregarding legal standards.
The hosts also explored the broader significance of the reported jury split and what it revealed about public attitudes toward the insanity defense. They repeatedly returned to the possibility that the overwhelming majority of jurors appeared prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity while one juror remained opposed. Clay and Buck discussed the pressure facing a lone holdout juror, the dangers of exposing jury deliberations to public scrutiny, and whether the disclosures themselves represented an extraordinary breakdown in the normal judicial process.
A major theme throughout was criticism of the prosecution’s apparent passivity during the courtroom battle. Clay suggested that prosecutors seemed reluctant to aggressively challenge the defense’s motions, potentially indicating an expectation that a conviction would be difficult to obtain in any future retrial. Both hosts debated whether Massachusetts prosecutors would realistically pursue another trial if a mistrial were declared, particularly given indications that the jury was overwhelmingly leaning toward an insanity verdict. They examined possible outcomes ranging from retrial to plea negotiations and questioned how likely it would be for a second jury to reach a dramatically different conclusion.
The program also delved into the broader cultural and political implications of the case. Clay and Buck discussed public reactions to postpartum mental health defenses, gender differences in criminal responsibility, and the debate over whether society applies different standards to men and women accused of violent crimes. The hosts argued that the case had evolved beyond a local criminal proceeding into a nationally followed legal story, comparing public fascination with the trial to other landmark criminal cases and discussing the intense emotional reactions it has generated across the country.
The hour also featured a live interview with Congressman Jim Jordan, who joined the show to discuss both the Clancy case and the political landscape heading into the 2026 midterm elections. Jordan commented on congressional battleground districts, Republican campaign strategy, economic messaging, affordability concerns, border security, tax policy, school choice, and Democratic socialism. He argued that Republicans should focus on communicating policy achievements while contrasting their agenda with what he described as increasingly left-wing positions within the Democratic Party. Clay and Buck questioned him about competitive House races, voter sentiment, and the issues likely to shape the remainder of the campaign season.
During the interview, breaking news emerged that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had agreed to hear arguments from Clancy's defense team regarding the disputed juror. Clay and Buck reacted in real time, discussing the extraordinary nature of the appeal and debating whether higher-court intervention could alter the trajectory of the case. The hosts argued that removing a juror because of disagreement over the verdict could fundamentally undermine the jury system and continued to provide updates as developments unfolded.
The guys did an extensive interview with attorney and commentator Katie Zacharia, who joined the show to discuss the legal, cultural, and societal implications of the case. Drawing on both her legal background and her experience as a mother of four, Zacharia argued that the central legal question involves criminal responsibility, capacity, and the role of psychiatric medications, while emphasizing that Clancy was responsible for the deaths of her three children. The conversation explored the public movement supporting Clancy, the debate surrounding postpartum mental illness, and concerns that excusing criminal acts based on hormonal or psychological factors could undermine broader arguments about women's responsibility, leadership, and accountability.
Clay, Buck, and Zacharia also examined the growing role of social media, online activism, and viral narratives in shaping public perceptions of criminal justice cases. They discussed how the case has generated intense engagement among mothers, legal observers, and advocacy groups, while debating whether widespread online discussion has distorted understanding of the legal issues surrounding insanity defenses, mental health treatment, and parental responsibility. The hosts repeatedly returned to questions of individual accountability, arguing that the deaths of Clancy's children should remain the central focus of the public conversation.
Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8
For the latest updates from Clay & Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/
IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck
TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuck
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Get every episode summarized
Each time The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
Hosts & guests
Transcript ready
1,077 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.
Full transcript
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show — Daily Review with Clay and Buck - Sep 4 2026. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.
This is an I Heart Podcast. Guaranteed Human The Olympic and Paralympic Sport
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic The Olympic and Paralympic
with the absolute latest. Here is yesterday, I believe this is Lindsey Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington saying there's one juror who refuses to listen to the law, this is cut for. There's one juror who refuses to listen to the law that you've given him or her unreasonable doubt. And I suggest respectfully that the soft instruction that you gave them saying, at the side by, can you listen to the law as I instruct you, does not focus on the issue. And if we come back here in a half an hour with a mistrial because of a juror that has just spurned the instructions of this court, it's a shame. It's a real shame. Okay, so he's telling you a lot there when he's saying, if we come back with a mistrial because of one juror, he's letting everyone know basically 11 people have agreed and for the defense attorney to be making this argument.
The only reason he would be making this argument is if he's trying to get the unanimous 12 not guilty. Now the judge fired back at that. This is him today a little bit earlier in the courtroom. Cut three. Clearly, I would ask that you not just give them as I describe it yesterday, a soft inquiry. Will you listen to my instructions? I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and re-instruct them on that forcefully. Did you did it yesterday, didn't I? Yes. You did it yesterday. You did it soft. You didn't do it forcefully and I'm asking maybe what do you want me to do? I want to get a brass band. I read the instruction as written by the SJC. The fact that I perhaps didn't give it my full inflection, I'm sorry about them, I'm an actor. I've just given the instructions. Okay, Buck. A couple more here.
The defense is acting in histrionics here. This is absurd. But I have to say the prosecutors not fighting back against this in an aggressive way lets you know that basically they feel like they've lost the case. Now a couple more things this just happened. The defense as the judge is declaring a mistrial says, hey, give us an hour. We're in the middle of that hour. I don't know when the hour officially runs out. We'll explain exactly what's going on there too, but this was just the explosives in the courtroom, the explosive arguments cut one. Pull with the defendant's objection. I'm going to declare a mistrial at this point. But if I saw for a time to file a single justice appeal for this travesty, that's what I'm asking for. So you asked for emergency stay at this point? Yes. And the jurors don't have to come back tomorrow. They can be told they don't even have to come back if I lose the motion. But if I win the motion, then obviously they would have to come back Tuesday.
If you want to go up and petition to the SJC for a stay, I'll give you an hour before we bring the jury back down. I think it's just a request for the stay of the declaration of the mistrial. So I'll hold off for an hour and then we'll come back in. In regards to that. Okay. Now, the defense is abusing process here. This is nonsense. He doesn't like the outcome he's getting. So he's acting like there's some malfeasance that a court. What court? He's talking about the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. That's the SJC. That court is going to say, yeah, we're not even really on this case. We're going to look at it and just decide to overrule the verdict. Let me play cut two. This is his argument because whether you like it or not, this is what the defense is saying. If you're saying what in the world is going on here, they are saying basically that this juror should be dismissed. Cut two. Clearly, Judge, we have a person who under their oath stood in front of you yesterday.
When you did the individual of why dear, and according to this information under oath, look you in the eye and lie. That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law to the facts as you asked them. And based on this note from this juror, it clearly and unequivocally indicates that they are basically 11 to 1. And this person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a not guilty verdict. Okay. So this, first of all, to me, Buck, I got so many thoughts on this, but this part I think is the most intriguing here. Saying exactly how the jurors are voting and to have a note where again, he says he, so we know it's one of the three men on this court on this jury is refusing to find
not guilty and to be trying to get him dismissed so that the other 11 jurors all in agreement can say not guilty. It sounds like he's basing this on reports that are coming from inside of the jury deliberation room where basically other jurors are telling on this guy and saying he's not behaving appropriately as a juror. And therefore he could and should be dismissed because the rest of us have a unanimous verdict. Well, I think it's just pure inference, Clay, because if he's getting information from the jury deliberations, that's going to be a mistrial alone right there. Well, he said, I don't, I don't think it's inference. I think he's basic. I mean, he said there they have sidebar conversations. So the juror note must say were, I mean, he's basically let it all be known now. What I'm surprised by is that they've let the full deliberations of the jury now go out into the public. And there is one guy who is refusing just to be clear.
And now it's all public. But but his reason, Clay, it has to be inferences to why the guy is refusing. We know it's 11 one, but the other jurors, their opinion of his application of the law would be absolutely irrelevant. They have no standing to say, we think this juror, the whole point of the jury is that everybody gets to decide based on the evidence for themselves. This whole thing is trying to basically muscle through the jury process to stack it so that they get the by the way, it wouldn't, she hasn't walked. What they want is a not guilty by reason of insanity. She goes to the insane asylum. That's what, that's what would happen if this guy folded. She goes to the nut house. She doesn't get found guilty of murder. Clearly this guy Clay thinks because she did obviously she killed her three kids. He won't be a part of this and he is standing against this. All this stuff that the defense attorney is saying, but he's not applying. Well, that's just the defense attorney's analysis. He does. I think he, I think he knows that that's what the jurors are telling them. But that doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter. Well, I think the jurors allow to think whatever he wants about the, I think the argument is that I'm guessing again, we usually don't get this degree of specificity from inside of a jury, which is a sign that this thing is totally off the rails. And now the judge, even as outing, sorry, the defense attorney is saying he yesterday, he tried to say he or she today, he is saying he. So we know it's one of the three men based on the way that he is talking here. My presumption is that that what is occurring is the judges giving them a charge and saying, this is what you are called to do. And my bet is that this guy is saying in the jury room, I'm not applying reasonable doubt. I'm not applying any of these standards. My bet is he's saying she's a mom and she killed her three kids and we know it happened and I don't need to know anything else. And so they are saying that he is refusing to take the instructions from the judge and
apply them to the facts of the law. This is my surmiso based on all this evidence and that therefore he is violating his oath as a juror and should be removed from the case, which sometimes does happen. Now I think this is outrageous that we have ended up in this situation. And certainly if I were on this jury, I give credit to this guy because it's hard. They may have been 111 for six days, Buck. Imagine what it's like to be in that jury room. All he has to do is say yes and he can leave. And this guy is refusing to relent to the other jurors and now they're telling on him and saying he's not actually applying the law as he's required to do so judge. And as a result, the defense is saying he should be off the case. Right. But my fundamental point here stands, which is that a juror, a person on the jury is allowed to interpret the law as he or she sees fit. The rest of the jury saying this guy doesn't understand the law because they're not getting
their way cannot be. Otherwise you'd never have a mistrial. You just like boot the guy out. Who doesn't agree? Imagine that he said, Hey, I don't think a black person could be guilty of murder. And therefore I will not find a black person guilty of murder. That would be juror misconduct, right? The jury in theory would be removed, even though his position is one that is valid inside of the like you have an obligation as a juror to apply the law in some way, right? You can't just say I won't. Could make somebody. But this is clearly a very contentious area of the application of law in this way. So you're coming up with, if this guy is completely insane and says something crazy, then he should be removed. We're talking about something that 50% of the country disagrees with the other 50% on right now. I'm just saying this is unprecedented to have the actual votes of the jurors out there. I agree with the guy who is not, who is saying not guilty.
He may just be not very articulate in the way he's saying it. If he's saying I refuse to apply the law as part of the way that he is voting, then he is potentially opening himself up to a mess. There's, I mean, I don't think anybody in the jury room is so stupid as to be like, I'm not a plug. Why hold out if you're going to say that? You know what I'm saying? There's no, that's crazy. I get it. But I'm trying to explain what I think is going on here because the judge decided to not have the mistrust. Otherwise, it's exposed to my wife. It's extremely unusual to your point. The only thing can be these notes. The notes can be basically whatever they want. It goes to the judge first, then to the defense play. It is extremely unusual, according to all the research that we can do on the fly here, or a jury to single out another juror and basically say, this person's a moron. They want to apply the law. I've never heard of it before, which is why I'm saying like this whole scenario is just absolutely bonkers. I wonder if that alone could be grounds for some kind of a mistrown. We went so long, we got to go to break.
I'll do, we'll have a short segment here. We're fired up 800, 2A2, 2A2, eight minutes away in theory from the judge coming back and updating us on this. Play. Life, learn and hang with the guys. Play it, Buck. Preset on the I Heart app. Hitting your protein goals has never been this easy or tasted so good. Introducing Skypop Protein Soda, the refreshing soda with 10 grams of complete protein and no misleading collagen fillers. Visit your local Costco now and pick up the variety pack, featuring three delicious flavors. Light, refreshing and ready for wherever your day takes you. It's any time protein that helps you reach higher. Skypop Protein Soda, reach for the sky. Pick up your Skypop Protein Soda variety pack today at your local Costco. Looking for something new? Try fencing, the Olympic and Paralympic sport that mixes speed, strategy and fun. It's like chess meets cardio, quick feet, quick decisions and a satisfying beep when you
score a point. Kids, teens and adults can start anytime, no experience needed and many clubs have loaner gear. Coaches teach fundamentals and safety from day one. Find a beginner class for your kids near you at tryfencing.org. That's tryfencing.org. On September 19th, the Monster Energy SMX World Championship playoffs, races and a Los Angeles. This is it. It's all the line. Now the pressure is on to deliver. And for the world's best 22 dirt bike racers, only one will go home number one. It all comes down to this. Go experience all of the action live. Coming to Dignity Health Sports Park in Los Angeles, California, September 19th. Get your tickets now at supermodacross.com. Be honest, you don't feel as interesting as you used to. Maybe not as much fun or adventurous. Remember when you actually went out? Did stuff? A do more subscription brings concerts and comedy sports and museums back to your life.
For seven scrawny bucks a month, you get at least one pair of tickets to something great. Discover new bands. Laugh. Learn. Do more. And right now, do more makes interesting and adventurous. Simple and easy. Because your first month's free at domorestuff.com slash free. We've got a couple of questions for you. One is your current wireless provider giving you five star service. Two, are you paying more than 3499 a month for unlimited data? If you think you're paying too much for sub-par service, then do what I did. Switch to Puritalk. In a recent industry survey, Puritalk was the only wireless company to receive five stars in every category. Cover it, support, value, and data. This is the last week that Puritalk is offering unlimited data for just 15 bucks a month for your first three months. After that, get unlimited data for as low as 3499 a month with no contract. Go to PureTalk.com slash clay to make the switch to our favorite wireless company. Puritalk, there's a better wireless choice out there.
And it just 15 bucks a month for your first three months. Now's a great time to choose Puritalk. Again, that's puretalk.com slash clay. Welcome back in. We were talking off the air. I think this is important to point out too. Where the heck is the prosecution? The defense is dominating every one of these motions, creating huge storylines, letting it be known how the jurors are voting, everything associated with it. To me, this is a sign that the prosecution actually is okay with her being found not guilty, because they don't want to have to retry this case. And if she's found not guilty, once and for all, this is decided. If it's a mistrile, then the pressure goes to the state of Massachusetts to potentially retry her. But if you've already lost basically 11 to one in the first trial, what are the odds that you're going to get a 12.0? The other direction in the second trial, I think that's tough.
I just, I also just think we need to keep letting everyone know. First of all, I think it's no surprise to you. If I were on that jury or Clavers on that jury, it would be guilty of first-degree murder. Okay. There are votes. So that's just so everyone just to get on the record. But I also think we need to point out it's not not guilty period she walks. It's not guilty by reason of criminal insanity. And therefore she is put into a mental facility. She doesn't just walk out of there like nothing. Now I don't think that's the proper outcome. I think that's outrageous. But not guilty. There's a lot of people play sounds like, oh, she walks, right? She doesn't walk. It's not guilty by reason of criminal insanity, which under Massachusetts law means she is involuntarily committed to a criminal psychiatric facility. Unless she could. Yeah, that's right. But she could be out in his US 40 days. This is very much like primal fear. The movie with Richard Geer and Ed Norton where he play, he basically works in insanity defense. I'm a spoiler alert. Works in insanity defense into an extremely brutal murder murder trial.
And at the end, it's like he was actually just playing a game and they realized, oh, this guy could be out in 90 days. Yeah. And that's the whole thing. So again, that is if she has found mentally capable, she would be out of the insane asylum and 100% free in as little as 40 days. Now it's possible that the state of Massachusetts is going to keep her there longer. But all of this is chaos and we are following it in real time. Not surprisingly, a lot of you have questions. And to be fair, I've never seen anything like this. I don't imagine most attorneys out there, even ones who have been doing trial work in a criminal capacity for a long time have been either. And sorry, I'm watching right now in real time trying to assess. They keep running the same footage. Is it live, live inside of the courtroom or not? I think we're not live with the judge right now.
But guys, if you in our New York City studio can also help me with this so that do we have, I believe we do the capacity to take this live if they are going back to the judge live with any of this officially inside of the courtroom. We will be able to go to you. A bunch of calls. Michelle and Tennessee, fire away. They've got it wrong. I think the long descent is a not guilty. And the reasonable doubt in forensic is being scrutinized because the jury, you don't have to find somebody guilty. It doesn't have to be absolute guilt. It can be a reasonable guilt. And I think that that's what's going on here is that 11 people see that she is definitely guilty. And hold out is like, well, he's not proven it to be absolute. That doesn't make any sense. Michelle, I appreciate the argument. It doesn't make any sense. Let me explain why her juror, her, the defense is making this motion to get this juror
kicked off the jury. If the defense were trying to kick off the one person who was on the decide, the side of the defense, that would mean that the client was going to be convicted. Her attorney should then be immediately disbarred because he's too dumb to be able to represent a client. I appreciate the call. This is not that. Now if you want to argue and I do think this again, I'm surprised more people aren't asking this. The prosecution just kind of meekly sitting in their chairs and letting the defense say, I'm appealing this to the Supreme Court and not standing up and saying, this is outrageous judge. What in the world are you attempting to do here? This is unprecedented. To me, it suggests that they just want this case done and they don't want to try to convict her again because if you had a mistrial, basically it's like this thing never happened and you just go for round two, they spent a month making the best case they could and they lost
at best 11 to 1. How much better could the prosecution do? I think they're probably sitting around thinking about this themselves to get a 12, though, they have to this jury has to be a wildly outrageous outlandish representation of the jury pool and they would go get a different result with another 12. That doesn't seem likely to me. I agree. I mean, I think what you've seen here is that the jury pool, particularly of women in Massachusetts on this issue, you will have at least one who would not go in the other direction and convict that there's no chance that you're going to find 12 people that are going to convict on first degree murder. So the issue here is, I mean, I think I think Lindsey Clancy is going to a mental facility, one way or another. And I think though that Clay, they may have to retry it and the only other, the only alternative would be to let her plead to a lesser charge. But if you're the defense attorney, why would you take that?
I think you know that you're, you don't take it because you just basically nearly got a not guilty verdict unless it's something really minor like, hey, she's probably spent time in prison already. I would imagine if they say, hey, you'll do two years in prison and then you'll be free and clear. That would be maybe even worse innocent. Orgulable. Yeah. You know, then the other thing is, I think the state of Massachusetts, by the way, you're going to point about the prosecution, I think, is extremely important right now because the defense attorney is going wild. He's demanding the court come in from above the appeals court and he's talking, he knows that he has all the leverage right now and that things are going in his direction. And the prosecution, you pointed this out, you're correct, is very kind of passive about this because I think they realize they don't have a better shot at the next round. It's astonishing to me that only one person sees this case for what it is so far on this
jury. And then beyond that clay, I think it's just a really embarrassing to anyone who actually understands, well, I would just say reality, not even the law. If the state of Massachusetts brings this case again, only to send her to a psychiatric facility, not guilty by reason of insanity. That looks really bad for Massachusetts too, right? As just as a state prosecution and as the whole process unfolds. So they're in the worst spot here. But yeah, I know I think Lindsey Clancy is, she's going to the loony bin, so to speak, and is not going to be found guilty in this trial or the next. I think that's almost certainly where we are. I would also point out my wife has continued to hammer this. She was talking about it this morning. She was listening to a podcast about this case when I walked in to brush my teeth and get ready to come up and do the show. She is incredibly frustrated and thinks this is setting back women immensely because if
the argument is women are too emotional and they're too hormonal to such an extent that they cannot be held responsible for murdering their own three kids. How can you argue that women need to be in positions of power in any part of society? There is no man. Can you think of a man that has been able to get away by just saying, hey, my testosterone levels are too high. I was too mentally unstable and they're like, it is true that she's being held to a standard that is far more lenient in terms of her behavior based on her inability to control her emotions than we would ever allow a man to be held accountable in that same way. It's 100% true. She's absolutely correct. I would just say you've also seen a gender tribalism on display here. I know this, let's just point out, I think it was last week. We were getting people saying it's not even a story. Producer Ali is in France right now.
Not to blow. Producer Ali is on a well-deserved vacation with her wonderful husband. They're having a great time. Do you know what's on all the TVs in France right now? The Lindsay Clancy trial verdict. Everywhere. This has turned into, it was very quick how this happened, but it's like an OJ level criminal justice story in terms of how much interest there is. So I just want to note, you know, some of you, you can send us your, you, you are right buck and clay. I'm sorry, it emails, but this is a huge story. It's a very troubling story. It's really a gut punch of a story. I just think clay, this has shown, as I was saying, a gender tribalism where I have friends who are being told by women in their lives, I'll just put it that way, you're not, you don't get a vote on this or you're not, your opinion doesn't matter on this, which is a little bit of an extension of I will say how some women treat the abortion argument, but in this case in particular, I would still make the case that that's about life and it doesn't matter what one's gender is, but in this case, so you're not going to be
so you get to kill your kids if you're a woman because sometimes you get a little crazy and men can't, this my thing all along here has been play the state of Massachusetts has an obligation. Those are three human beings that the force of the state, you know, men with guns and handcuffs should be deployed to protect the people, these three young people and now, you know, after their horrific murder to arrest those guilty and to achieve justice for them, they are human beings who were killed here. It doesn't matter that their mother did it in terms of the guilt of the individual, if anything, it makes it much, much worse, much worse than a stranger, but it does, there's no special, you know, play under, under ancient Roman law, the male head of household could actually kill anybody in his household. If I remember my, my, uh, Greco Roman history, usually it didn't, usually didn't happen with wives, but they would, like, if you killed like a slave in your household, the slavery also existed 2,000 years ago, that's a whole other conversation.
It's existed thousands years before that. This is a little bit of a shades of that where there are women who seem to think, well, look, you know, postpartum things get crazy and, uh, you know, we got to stand with our postpartum sisters on this or something. It's, this is loony talk. Yes. This is crazy. It's immoral. It's demonic. It's dark. It's dark, dark, dark. And again, we're going to take a ton of your calls and talk backs of people are flooding us right now. The other thing we should say is I, and I got texted by somebody who's a friend this morning and she said, Hey, you and Buck need to be talking more about the fact the husband actually did this. I have a dear friend who takes the same position just so you know, a female friend who takes the same position, Clay, and I am jaw on the table shocked that that's where we are. Here is what I would say and I have said this before, but just take it. The defense did not in any way suggest that anyone else was involved in the murder.
That is because there is no evidence that anyone else was involved in the murder. The number one thing you do if you are in a murder trial to defend your client is say it was somebody else. This was the theme of remember the fugitive when Dr. Richard Kimball in the 1990s film I believe was based on a 1970 Chicago area true murder. It was based on a true story. Yes. Loosely he said, you know, it was the one arm man who actually committed the murder and I just came home and just found myself there at that point in time. One of the best defenses you can offer to reach a reasonable doubt is you have the wrong person held here for this crime. They have not. Did you do that in the OJ wasn't there an OJ theory that there was somebody else that could have done that? Yeah. I remember they tried to suggest, hey, it was somebody else who committed the OJ trial, the OJ murder and it's one of the best ways to build a reasonable doubt as a defense attorney is to say you've got the wrong person on trial because if you're a juror, it's
one thing to think, oh, hey, are they responsible? What is the mental culpability? All those things. But if you send the wrong person to prison or to the death penalty sometimes, that's compelling when it comes to reasonable doubt. It has been not even suggested by the defense attorneys. Like all of you, I'm really looking forward to this three day weekend. I know some of you who work through the weekends and that's greatly appreciated. But for a lot of us, we get that extra day. And in my case, we're going to be very family focused this weekend. I'm actually out in the woods with carry and speed and ginger spice. We're having a great time. So we're going to have a hundred or more photos and videos. I'm sure of our little guy and ginger over the weekend. And that's great because technology makes it easy. But back in the day, when I would go out in the woods for a little family retreat with my dad, my mom, my siblings, we didn't have that. In fact, my dad probably had his 35 millimeter camera, his big old cassette VHS recorder thing where he loved to do interviews on the fly. That's the stuff that you can't look at now because you don't have any means to play it
and you don't know how to transfer it. You don't have the technology. This is where legacy box comes in. Legacy box takes that old media for you. And this is a company with all the gear, technology, and know how to easily digitize 19 different forms of old media. Whatever you've got, photos, videos, however you recorded it back in the day, they can take it for you and make it digital. They're so good at this. Companies based in Tennessee. We love this company, what it stands for, millions of families have already used legacy box I have. Clay has it's a great thing this weekend for the Labor Day weekend. Get together with your family, pull together this stuff, and you know, get your legacy box. You put it in the box, you send it in, digitize, so easy. Go to legacybox.com slash book. They've got a special sale today. Legacy box dot com slash BUCK. Pre-send your files. Clay and book on the iHeard app. All right. Welcome back in here to Clay and book. Obviously, you're taking a lot of calls and talking about this Lindsey Clancy trial. It's very upsetting to a lot of people. The mistrial, so she was not found guilty. I do think Clay, they will try her again.
I don't think so. To be fair, the mistrial is not yet effective. They're going to have trial hearing again at two. The Massachusetts support could still step in and we could have another crazy wrinkle here that could allow 11 jurors to let her walk. So the mistrial is not effectively effective yet, even yet. Right. I mean, there is a, but I would say realistically, you got like a 5% shot that the court, if we get to a place where the mob of maniacs, what they're on the 11 side here, not the one juror, they can just be so adamant in their lunacy that the appeals court of the state of Massachusetts is going to remove a juror because he's not giving the quote right verdict based on quote the law. Now you're just saying that like this is, I mean, this is almost makes a parody of the
entire system. Like what's the point of having a jury in the first place? We got Jim Jordan. I'm going to bring him up. But Buck, Bill Maloojen just posted the appeal that has been filed to the Supreme Court. I want to read a couple of sentences here for you, Buck. And I want Jim Jordan. You can hear this as well. It says a juror is refusing to follow the law. And here the removal is particularly important because the juror's reasoning reflects a bias against those who suffer from debilitating mental illness, a protected category. Okay. Buck, what are the chances that he is simply saying as part of these deliberations, you're all retarded. All of you, everybody who's offended. They are saying that according to this filing, the removal is necessary because the juror's reasoning reflects a bias against those who suffer from debilitating mental illness.
Maybe it's not that they're unlikely to judge. Yeah. Congressman, Congressman Jordan, it's past it to you. Thank you for giving us your time. Obviously, the big news today, what do you think about all this? You take it away. Well, I think you just said it, Buck. That's the point. And if that's what this guy, what the judge is saying about this particular juror or what they're saying about this particular juror that just makes absolutely no sense, and I think the judge is probably accurate in saying this guy's got to go. Yeah. It's sad when you see this greatest country in the world and the system, we've set up our constitutional system, the three separate equal branches of government. And all the attacks on all those and how it's now down to the basic level where it's supposed to be a trial by the jury of your peers, where that doesn't seem to be working exactly the way it should be. So, yeah, we'll see.
Well, we'll just see what happens here. I guess there's still some deliberation to take place. I haven't followed as close as you guys have here in the last few hours. Can I just ask you, Congressman? This is, you know, we, I know you're, we usually you're here and you got your Congressman hat on, not your Congressman jacket because you tend not to wear our blazers. We all know the one we have of you has, I don't even know who this guy is with a blazer on in the photo that they put up on the screen on our YouTube. But anyway, have you just in your in your day to day experience, whether in DC or at home in Ohio, come across people, particularly women who think like the husband did it or that this they're very, I have, and have you been surprised by this or have you just been away from this entirely and haven't really had much personal experience of it? No, it's been the latter. I haven't, I haven't, I've not talked to anyone particularly about this and been following it and you're somewhat and then we've just gotten here in the last couple of minutes
and listen to you guys recap and I'm thinking, oh, I didn't know that. That sounds kind of crazy to me. No, I've not been followed that closely. All right, let's go ahead, Clay. Yeah, no, I was going to say, let's go in. You're on the road right now. There are only, and I'm curious if you would sign on to this because you know the story on the ground better than, then certainly we do. There have been reports that there are about 20 toss up house seats. That is real battlegrounds. You're traveling the nation working on these battlegrounds. Do you think that's right? Are there about 20 and how do you see what's the ground look like from your perspective? No, it's maybe, it's maybe a few more, but there aren't as many as in the past because of the redistricting and the gerrymandering that the Democrats down in the redistricting we've done here in this past cycle. So yeah, it's a smaller number of seats. But I think we can pick up a lot. Last night I flew back into Ohio and did an of Infra Derrick Marin who's running against Marcy Capter. So the pickup opportunities we have where we could, that district was redrawn.
It's now more favorable to Republicans. So I think we've got a chance. But our message over these last 60 days of my judgment has got to be plain and simple. If you allow Democrats to win, here's where they're going to go, all the crazy policy. And we have to just lay that out. I mean, remember, nine months and four days ago, Mom Donnie was sworn in as mayor of our city and he said in his speech, I was elected as a Democrat Socialist. I will govern as a Democrat Socialist. We have to replace the progenitor of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism. He believes that he told us he's going to do it. He's implementing that. And frankly, the party, the once great party of FDR and JFK is now run by these Democrats Socialists and they are bent on doing what they told us they were going to do. And it is scary. I think we have to tell our voters to persuade Republicans and like-minded independence come out. We have to tell them how real this is and that they're in, they're in control of doing what they said, which is very, very scary in my judgment.
Breaking news, Buck. CNN is reporting that the Massachusetts Supreme Court has granted a hearing for Lindsey Clancy's defense. Wow. Yeah. Yeah. That is coming down right now. Sorry, Congressman. I know, but we'll continue. But I just want to give people the absolute latest there again. CNN breaking news banner right now, Massachusetts Supreme Court grants a hearing for the Clancy defense to try to get the one juror kicked off who is preventing a not guilty verdict. I would like to think, sorry, Congressman, just a quick reflection on this one. I would like to think that this is just to show that they are being given a hearing and process if they actually remove this juror, the whole thing is a farce. And this is just the frenzied mob with pitchforks and torches getting their way, which in this case, it's kind of the reverse of a lynching situation.
If they want the, they want the guilty person to go free. They're not trying to take an innocent person and make them guilty. They want a guilty person to walk. I am, it's disgusting, Clay. Honestly. That is the latest. Okay. Back to back to we're talking to Congressman Jim Jordan. Thank you, by the way, for your super great quotes from the Wall Street Journal profile that is out online, but is coming out now on Saturday, Sunday. I was saying on the air, Congressman, only took 22 years of me being in media for someone to write something nice about me. So thank you for the quotes that article came out pretty well. No, it was a great article and well deserved for you guys. But they only took like one. I had a whole bunch of great things to say about y'all because I really think you guys do a tremendous job. And I put some, I tried to put some funny things there, but maybe they didn't think it was funny. I was, I was talking about Buckserv of 189 miles an hour. I was talking about sports and everything else, but they just went with one kind of basic generic one in the, in the online piece. But no, it was a great piece and you, and well deserved for you guys and, and the good
work that you do. Thank you. We have a few ahead of them now. Back to politics if I can for no, really is very nice. Some people are saying Jim Jordan, very nice. But talk to me about how you think the GOP messaging is going on. It's a word that we've said so many times. I think people are sick of it, of, of hearing it, but all of what we can see in the polls says that this is what the election will turn on. This is what the mid-term will turn on. It turn on. It's affordability. How do you think the GOP is doing on this right now? Do you think that there need to be some tweaks made or to just stay on message, stay on task and we should be able to defend the House and Senate majorities? Well, I always say, you know, we, we make the job too complicated. It's pretty basic. What? We tell the voters we're going to do. And then it, you know, and if they elect you, go do what you say. We've done that. We, we told them we cut taxes. We did. We told them we secure the border. We did. We told them we'd be for school choice. That was in the big, beautiful bill. Also, this welfare reform that we put in, it's actually making a difference and people's
lives and also I think that's message one. Message two is we understand things cost you much. We get that. But it's not all bad out there. You saw the jobs, the, report the jobs numbers today or way above what most, most people thought they would be. So our economy is pretty good. But again, things cost you much. We have to, I think, recognize that. But I do think what I said earlier is the key message, particularly now that we're down to less than nine weeks until election day. It's there. They want to ruin what this country's always given its people. This simple idea. You got a goal. You got a dream. You work hard. Good things happen. They will ruin that with their crazy left-wing policies. He talked, Mom Donnie talked about the warm tough collectivism. I was, I was given a speech out the Republican Jewish coalition in Vegas on Sunday. And I said, I've seen the warm tough collectivism. I wrestled in the Soviet Union in 1987. I mean, I tell people, I was in Moscow in February. Moscow in February. It's like 200 below zero. There is no food and stores. It's just a terrible, great, dismal place. That's where this left-wing craziness will take us.
And we have to let voters know that. And how we're, we're for the principles and the policies that we think make America special. So I do think that's a central theme. We have to pound that over these next next eight and a half weeks. Congressman Jim Jordan, appreciate you being with us, sir. Thanks for making the time as always and to have a great Labor Day weekend. All right. Take care. You guys too. That is always good to hear from Jim Jordan. The court is in recess until 2 p.m. Eastern. So that is what 15 minutes from now. And again, CNN is reporting that there is a hearing underway right now with the Massachusetts Supreme Court. They changed their headline somewhat. I can't hear it, Buck. So the team in New York, they can turn up the sound. If this Massachusetts appeals court, Ways in and says that they're removing that juror and then they're pushing for a verdict, the whole thing is rigged and it's a joke and
it's preposterous. It's a deeply unfunny joke, but it's a, it's a farce. So that's where we are. We'll see. Look, we got a headline a week ago about the USDA changing the way American beef producers can get their products to easier, get it product in 85% of all beef and all meat products are now coming from out of the country. If you are out there right now and you are trying to make sure that you have the best possible meat for your family and you want it coming in from the United States only, you want US grown beef. You want to be able to take care of everything. Food ranchers is making a difference for you. It's only American meat for you and your family. The number one company delivering 100% American meat to your door with 25,000 five star reviews on trust pilot for a limited time. You can get a free ground beef bundle with your first good ranchers order four pounds
of 100% American angus ground beef to stock in your freezer. Visit goodranchers.com slash clay to claim your free ground beef bundle. Plus, when you start a plan, you get free meat with every order. This is amazing four pounds of 100% American angus ground beef right in your freezer when you order today. Goodranchers.com slash clay free four pound ground beef bundle. That's goodranchers.com slash clay. Food ranchers.com American meat delivered. Hitting your protein goals has never been this easy or tasted so good. Introducing Skypop Protein Soda, the refreshing soda with 10 grams of complete protein and no misleading collagen fillers. Visit your local Costco now and pick up the variety pack featuring three delicious flavors. Meat, refreshing and ready for wherever your day takes you.
It's any time protein that helps you reach higher. Skypop Protein Soda, reach for the sky. Pick up your Skypop Protein Soda variety pack today at your local Costco. Have your kids ever wanted to try an Olympic and Paralympic sport? Try Fencing. It's fast, competitive and even offered at the NCAA level. Find a beginner class near you at tryfencing.org. That's tryfencing.org. On September 19th, the Monster Energy SMX World Championship playoffs, races into Los Angeles. This is it. It's all the line. Now the pressure is on to deliver. And for the world's best 22 dirt bike racers, only one will go home number one. Wow. It all comes down to this. Go experience all of the action live. Coming to Dignity Health Sports Park in Los Angeles, California, September 19th. Get your tickets now at supermodocross.com. 7 bucks. That's barely the delivery fee on an order of Dan Dan noodles.
But 7 bucks is enough to get you out of the house and into something interesting. Adventurous. Because for 7 scrawny bucks a month, do more. Get you at least one pair of tickets to something you'll be psyched to attend. A concert comedy, perhaps that new exhibit. Stuff you like? And stuff you didn't know you did. Yet. Try it free for a month at domorestuff.com slash free. And do more. You've got a couple of questions for you. One is your current wireless provider giving you five star service. Two, are you paying more than 3499 a month for unlimited data? If you think you're paying too much for sub-par service, then do what I did. Switch to Puritalk. In a recent industry survey, Puritalk was the only wireless company to receive five stars in every category. Cover, support, value, and data. This is the last week that Puritalk is offering unlimited data for just 15 bucks a month for your first three months. After that, get unlimited data for as low as 3499 a month with no contract.
Go to PureTalk.com slash clay to make the switch to our favorite wireless company PureTalk. There's a better wireless choice out there. And it just 15 bucks a month for your first three months. Now's a great time to choose PureTalk. Again, that's puretalk.com slash play. Welcome back in clay and buck. Appreciate all of you hanging out with us. We are rolling through the Friday edition of the program. We are waiting to see if the Lindsey Clancy trial is going to be updated in any way. If you are just getting in your car right now and catching up with everything that is going on, we have got really Lindsey Clancy all of the time. It has taken over earlier today. The jury was deadlocked and there was a mistrial that was declared that was then held
in a band to allow a last second appeal to the Massachusetts Supreme Court to try to get a juror kicked off the trial. And now we are according to the headlines that I am seeing. The Massachusetts Supreme Court is weighing the emergency request that has been filed by the defense to get this lone juror kicked off of the trial. So that is where we are. There appear to be 11 votes to find Lindsey Clancy not guilty. Only one who appears is one of the three men on the trial that is willing to say no, she is in fact guilty. And so we are waiting to see what is going to be the result of this trial. Okay. I believe we are joined that now by Katie Zachariah. She is with us right now. Katie, you are a mom of four. I want to read you what I tweeted earlier because I'm quoting her.
My wife Laura, a mom of three. She's furious with the Lindsey Clancy case. She was talking about it with me this morning. Since the worst thing possible for women because if women are so hormonal, they can't keep from killing their own kids. How can women argue they deserve any positions of high responsibility? She says it's anti woman to favor not guilty. And she also has been saying no man is ever able to cite his own hormones as justification for committing a murder and no one would even take it seriously if men tried to do it. You are a mom of four. As I just said, do you agree with her take? What is your take on this? Yeah, you know, when we first started talking about Lindsey Clancy, I was under the incorrect assumption. This is months ago that we all knew she was guilty of killing her children and it was a discussion, a legal discussion.
I'm also a lawyer as to whether or not the prosecution could prove beyond a reasonable doubt on that Lindsey Clancy had the capacity, right? So that only looks at murder, one murder to a man's slaughter. This is not she didn't do it. And to see this hyper focus on these pink shirt women that are rallying not just saying Lindsey Clancy didn't do it, but the husband may have done it. And this kind of hyperbolic and almost insane presence of the toxic feminism is to what you were just discussing is to the point that so much of the time if a woman is engaging in this type of discussion, you cannot be taken seriously. A serious discussion is capacity and whether or not the 13 psychiatric drugs and the contra indications diluted her ability to understand or appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct, which is that she murdered three of her children that she killed three children. Look Clay, she sent her husband out on an errand and she intentionally took those three
children down to her basement and killed them. This is not up for discussion and a society as a whole should be treating this and Lindsey Clancy truly as she is not the victim. She is the perpetrator and she destroyed three lives for it. But again, to your point, women will not be taken seriously if they start excusing every hormonal or hormone or postpartum depression. It alleviates all responsibility from women, which then makes them not serious candidates for positions as you just said. So Katie, appreciate you being with us and we were going to talk about the economy and things like that. But because of the news today, we've got to get you to weigh in on this. But as has been stated, you are a mother of four. You are clearly a woman and you are also a lawyer to the degree that you can take us into the mindset of some of the pink shirt wearing supporters here of Lindsey Clancy. You're also a Californian. You come on a lot to talk to us about what's going on with the golden state.
I assume you have been exposed to, if not in your immediate circle, women in your area, whether out protesting or just from conversation who are Lindsey Clancy supporters, what is going on there? What is it that these women are thinking? Why has this turned into a case of a national solidarity from a lot of women, millions of them, it seems, who are almost fans of Lindsey Clancy or view it as like some extension of their own problems in life? I know it's very complicated. It's a weird situation. What are they thinking? Well, yeah, first book, the thing is that I've noticed and it must be said is that this really hasn't gone down on Republican or Democrat lines. I've had actually a lot of women on the Republican like conservative women come out in support of Lindsey Clancy and even to my surprise, my more liberal side of the equation has,
at least from my vantage point, have come out against Lindsey Clancy. It's not always and completely a get on partisan lines right now, which I think is an even more interesting investigation that needs to be looked at it. What are these women watching? What are they looking into and what are they reading and who's challenging their thought process? From what I have seen is most women are against a dishonorating Lindsey Clancy because it will not allow for women to be taken seriously on the greater scale, but also because if you are a mother, you understand that this woman appreciated the wrongfulness of her conduct. And murdered her kids. And I have four kids. I had sleepless nights. I never thankfully had postpartum, depression postpartum, psychosis. I had what many have said postpartum euphoria, but there are long sleepless nights and to give this woman an excuse for her behavior will show other women that they can do whatever
they want with their children and they won't be held accountable. And I think to end here, the problem with our society right now is that we are finding reasons to excuse a woman who killed her children. And it's mostly women that are finding that a space to excuse her, but there are some men that are coming out and supportive her and whether that juror 111 where you have even two men that have gone over to the non-guilty, there is something happening in a society that says you can harm your kids and not be held accountable. And that is what we need to get at. We need to get at the root of this really, really toxic ideology. I think that what you said is important because really what it comes down to is individual responsibility and it feels like we are increasingly coming up with reasons why people are not responsible. Here's my concern. When unfortunately we see kids commit suicide in high school for instance, oftentimes there's an echo effect.
When one kid commits suicide, unfortunately several others often do the media attention, the just again, sort of the reverberating impact of this. My concern is something you just hit on there, Katie, which is other women out there who might be struggling see her and see the way that she is being supported. And I fear that it makes it more likely that we could see an echo effect of this similar to what we see with suicides where other young children are killed because Lindsey Clancy is in the mind of so many moms out there. Absolutely. If you look at this pattern on TikTok and I will not repost it and I will barely even look at it, but there are videos that are going viral of accidental deaths where they're holding a baby doll and throwing them down the stairs or tripping and it is as a parent horrifying to even imagine pretending that you would hurt your child or that you would
hurt an innocent life. Nonetheless, these people are getting viral retweets and feedback and moms are all recording themselves crying and it is a true online psychosis. This is not accidental. This is what happens when a society starts telling you from the beginning that abortion is okay up until 41 weeks. That is late term abortion. That child can survive outside of the womb. That just happened in Massachusetts. It is no mistake, in my opinion, that we are now facing, you can kill your three children and we can exonerate that behavior. And then we are going to have viral videos of other mothers essentially buffering that behavior and lightening it by making a TikTok video to light music of their baby falling down the stairs that they accidentally dropped. This type of stuff has to be immediately called out and it has to be completely disregarded in society as what it is, is it sick and toxic and if enough women push against it and
enough men together with women push against it, I think people will realize that they are on the fringe of society but what happens with social media is some little small part of society puts these viral videos out and it makes everyone think that everyone is going through this which a majority of mothers look, I have a lot of friends who have four plus kids okay. I don't know anyone who went through this. So to think that this is some mainstream problem, it is not a mainstream problem and we need to treat it like this psychosis toxic ideology, psychotic toxic ideology that it is. So Katie, where do we go from here? What do you think the response from those who see this for what it is? How do you, I just again, as a mom of four and somebody who, I think very importantly, you pointed out because this has been my experience too. This is not a hard partisan separation. There's definitely a hard gender separation overwhelming. There are some men maybe who are supportive, more supportive of Lindsey Clancy but overwhelmingly
it is women. It is not all left wing women. There are, I have experienced this, people, women who are right of center, how do we get back to a society that would understand unanimously that there's nothing worse than a situation where a parent kills their own children and that we all have to be accountable for our actions. Right. You asked the more than a million dollar question here but because what I view my response ability here is to call out truth and to argue each component of this reasonably and and intelligently and where we, where we lost the conversation is when everyone thinks that they can talk about very complicated legal topics in a very lighthearted or let's just say infused with so much emotion that you actually don't have any ability to see the legal framework that for instance these jurors were given beyond a reasonable doubt.
Everyone thinks that they can talk about capacity. Everyone thinks that they can talk about exactly what's happening in the minds of these jurors or the prosecution or the defense but the facts are is that this is a very, I would say it's straightforward in certain ways legally but there are complicated factors when you deal with capacity and the psychiatric meds and what the defense argues in the prosecution but everyone wants to weigh in on this case buck and I think that is also the symptom of having social media right and so what you and Clay are doing what I try to do and what a lot of other people do is to take it to contend in the battlefield intelligently to provide reasonable arguments on you know you don't have to reasonably argue both sides but a lawyer can always go in and say look the prosecution is going to argue this and here are some of the things that the defense is going to bring up that's going to make it hard for the prosecution to get beyond that reasonable doubt but I'm still not going to deter from the fact that this woman is guilty and needs to be held accountable for the
death of her three children that she caused and I think you just have to be strong and be willing to take the heat. All of us do because we cannot let again cannot let this toxic ideology continue to fester because it will destroy us as a society you cannot just you cannot kill your young children you cannot kill the elderly you have to protect the infirm and those that cannot protect themselves as a society or you are completely lost as a culture and America needs to be on the foreground and the forefront of this buck not in the background wondering what moral baton to hold. Katie Zachariah always great to have you here on the program and thank you for bringing your legal perspective your mom perspective and you're just human perspective on this appreciate you. Thank you. I talk to you about it before guys I'm talking about it again on a day like today I can't imagine a better way to turn toward the light and away from the darkness after a trial like this has shaken so many of us and it seems like there is a darkness that is spreading
on many many ways across the country. You can turn us toward the light with preborn preborn is saving babies right now they have clinics open all over the country and they have a very straightforward and critical mission it's to welcome moms to be with open arms and say hey before you make a decision like abortion for this baby let's have you meet that baby via ultrasound because over 80% of the time when that it's free by the way of course when that mom has a free ultrasound and that is provided with all the support that preborn offers for two years after the birth of the baby as well it's not just getting it to actually be born then they stick around and they help for years because they want these women to be able to build beautiful families and to enjoy the little boy or little girl that they brought into this world but they need your help they don't get a single dollar of tax taxpayer money they need you the pro life community to step up so if you want to be a part of this mission and help save some tiny babies today please support preborn a gift of twenty eight dollars with sponsor
one ultrasound 100% tax deductible a hundred and forty dollars would help five moms five different mothers with babies in the womb would come in meet their baby the ultrasound and get that love and support from preborn to donate use your cell phone and dial pound two five zero say the keyword baby that's pound two five zero say the word baby or visit preborn dot com slash buck preborn dot com slash buc k sponsored by preborn when hanging you're not just learning you're also laughing playing buck just pre-sit them on the i-hurt hitting your protein goals has never been this easy or tasted so good introducing sky pop protein soda the refreshing soda with ten grams of complete protein and no misleading collagen fillers visit your local Costco now and pick up the variety pack featuring three delicious flavors light refreshing and ready for wherever your day takes you it's any time protein that helps you reach higher sky pop protein soda reach for the sky pick up your
sky pop protein soda variety pack today at your local Costco never wanted to try an Olympic in Paralympic sport try fencing it's fast competitive and even offered at the ncaa level find a beginner class near you at try fencing dot org that's try fencing dot org on September 19th the monster energy smx world championship playoffs races into Los Angeles this is it it's all the line now the pressure is on to deliver and for the world's best 22 dirt bike racers only one will go home number one it all comes down to this go experience all of the action live coming to dignity health sports park in Los Angeles California September 19th get your tickets now at supermodocross dot com be honest you don't feel as interesting as you used to maybe not as much fun or adventurous remember when you actually went out did stuff a do more subscription brings concerts and comedy sports and museums back to your life for seven scrawny bucks a month
you get at least one pair of tickets to something great discover new bands laugh learn do more and right now do more makes interesting and adventurous simple and easy because your first months free at do more stuff dot com slash free what it sounds like when you road trip to the I heart radio music festival in the all new Hyundai Palisade hybrid wow this is really nice inside the Palisade hybrid has more luxury than ever whoa this sound system is awesome turn it up more tech than ever sweet you got the available built in dash cam and more range than ever because the Palisade hybrid gets up to 600 plus miles of range on a full tank so do we ever have to stop for gas visit Hyundai USA dot com or call five six two three one four four six oh three for more details
More episodes
More from The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

Buck Brief - Will AI Destroy Humanity Like Skynet in Terminator?
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

Clay Travis Show: NFL Is Back, LSU Backs Down to SEC & Michigan’s Controversial...
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

Normally Podcast: 25 Years After 9/11, Remembering Charlie Kirk & America’s Free...
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

The Karol Markowicz: Seth Dillon on The Babylon Bee, Elon Musk, Free Speech and...
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show