Silence in the Face of Evil Is Evil Itself

Hello, America, from Las Vegas, Nevada.

I got up this morning, and I prayed about what I was going to say to you today. Because I have a lot on my mind. And I thought to myself, "Maybe I, maybe I don't say anything."

You know, it's really interesting. I've had an interesting 15 years. And for the life of me, I can't figure it out. I know my talent didn't get me here. I am quite possibly the worst talk show host on radio. My talent didn't get me here. My talent got me to where I was in the 1990s, and that was pretty much nowhere.

But I was on the air in WABC in New York. So the first talk show broadcast I ever did. Clinton had just bombed the aspirin factory, and Stu was my producer at the time. And I had spent the day reading the words of Osama Bin Laden because that was the target, according to Clinton. That was the target of that aspirin factory. Because he said, "Osama Bin Laden is a very dangerous man." And I didn't trust Clinton at all. And so I looked up this Osama bin Laden. I couldn't even pronounce his name. You know me with names.

I think I called him "Bean La Dean." I don't know how I even said it. It was embarrassing. But the point was, nobody was saying his name.

America really hadn't heard his name. And I spent the day reading his words. And I got on the air, and I said, "This guy is a danger. Clinton was right."

And I was accused by Republicans of trying to make the poll numbers of Bill Clinton go up by saying that. I said, "Look, you don't even know me. I'm not a fan of Bill Clinton at all. You don't know me. I want to talk to you about the facts of Osama Bin Laden." Nobody wanted to talk about the facts. They wanted to make it about politics. They just wanted that guy out.

And in frustration, after taking many phone calls, all of them accusing me of just trying to help Clinton, I snapped. And I said, "Mark my words, there will be blood, bodies and buildings in the streets of this city, New York City, within the next ten years. And the signature on those deaths will be Osama Bin Laden. Will you then care about terrorism?"

I forgot I even said that until I heard the name Osama Bin Laden about September 13th. And I looked at Stu and I said, "Oh, my gosh."

In 2004 --- late 2003 and 2004, I started talking internally and then started talking a little bit on the air because I wasn't sure, and I was afraid honestly. I was afraid of you.

I started saying on the air, "I don't, there's something wrong with the GOP. There's something wrong with the Bush administration. We're not going to be able to continue down this road. They're betraying all of the principles that we hold."

I was a big supporter of George Bush. I wasn't in 2000. But 2001 changed my mind. He got up there with a bullhorn, and all of a sudden I found myself "rah-rah. The Patriot Act. Rah-rah. Let's go kick some ass."

By 2004, the rah-rah had worn off, and I started to see what they were doing. By 2006, I saw what was happening on the border. And I had guest after guest after guest after guest on, all of them GOP, and I said, "Do you realize what's happening? Do you realize --- are you hearing, are you feeling the people out here? Because you have to change your ways because something is happening in America that I've never seen before. I can feel it." Very few understood what I was talking about.

2004, I start talking about a housing crisis, a banking crisis. By 2007, I'm ringing the bell so much, I'm losing radio stations. They're saying, "Glenn, you sound crazy." I'm on CNN. Just weeks before the crash, I have a guy on the air and he's talking about the Dow going to 33,000. In the middle of this interview, this expert that was on, beloved, everybody thought he was a genius, in the middle of the interview, I stopped and I looked right at the camera and I said, "Whatever you do, do not listen to this guy. We have a better chance in the next year of going to 5,000 than 33,000. Don't listen to this man." It didn't go well for the rest of the interview.

But more people listened to him than listened to me.

I'm putting together this crazy trip over to Israel. And I'm hearing in my prayers, "You have to announce this Monday." And I'm like, "I don't even know what I'm supposed to do."

"You have to announce it this Monday."

I fly over. Miracles happen. Open up --- we're the first Christians to ever speak at the Western Wall, ever, since Roman times. The mayor of Jerusalem is shocked. The rabbi of all of the holy places tells me he's shocked that the Lord told him, "Yes, let this Christians speak." It was a miracle. I didn't even know what was supposed to happen. I still don't know why we did it. I had to --- I had to announce it on Monday. I don't know why.

Friday, following after that Monday, Friday, Barack Obama comes out and asks for the Auschwitz lines to be reinstated, the 1968 borders. I get it.

I come back, and all I can think of was Restore Love. Restore Honor, that was in Washington, D.C. Then Restore Courage. That was in Israel. And as soon as that's done, Restore Love.

I didn't realize at the time all I was doing was faith, hope and charity. Where does honor come from? Where does courage come from? Where does love come from? How do you put them into practice? Honor, courage, love.

And nobody wants to hear me talk about Martin Luther King. Not a damn person. Nobody wants to hear me talk about Gandhi. Not a damn person.

Every time I talk about Gandhi, I hear from Christians, "Why don't you talk about Jesus." Every time I talk about Jesus, "Why are you talking about Jesus?" Every time I talk about Martin Luther King, "Why are you talking about that communist?"

Nobody wants to hear that. Nobody.

But I do as I'm told. (See, I told you he had Zionist masters.) Well, if you consider the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob my master, you'd be right. And I say we must not allow hatred to conquer our hearts.

At the time, internally, I'm telling people, "I don't even know why we're saying this. We're not Martin Luther King. We're not Gandhi. We're a million miles away from that kind of anger. There's no real oppression happening."

You most likely were saying the same thing. The same time . . . I read the words of the people in the Middle East. And the people in Washington were all saying this is a wonderful revolution in the Middle East. The Arab Spring. It's a new era. It's Jeffersonian. I read the words of the people in the Middle East. It felt an awful lot like 1999.

And I say the Muslim Brotherhood is not a peaceful organization. The people in Washington like Grover Norquist that have brought the Muslim Brotherhood into our society, have brought some of the worst people into our government, into the highest levels, into the Oval Office. They should not be held up on a pedestal. They should be shunned. They shouldn't be on the board of directors of CPAC. Grover Norquist should not be at CPAC. Grover Norquist should not be on the board of directors of the NRA. We'll find out if anybody listens to that. They're trying to pull him off the board of directors of the NRA now with a recall vote. Do you belong to the NRA? You have until this weekend to vote. Your ballot is in the magazine. It's already come out. You have to have it in by March 1st. That's Tuesday.

I talk about the caliphate. Nobody wants to listen to the caliphate. I'm mocked by the right. I'm mocked by the left. I'm mocked by the media. Nobody wants to hear it.

I didn't get here by my talent. I know what I'm capable of. Why does God give you a voice if you can't do anything about it? Why does God tell you what is coming when you can't do anything about it?

I got up this morning, and I thought, "What am I going to say to people?" Tuesday is your last chance, America. Super Tuesday is your last chance. Everybody is making this about politics. Everybody thinks I'm sitting here talking about Ted Cruz because, I don't know, I get money from Ted Cruz, and I just don't like Donald Trump because I was in his office asking him for money, or whatever the hell his excuse his.

I'm not standing for Ted Cruz. I'm standing for the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm standing for the principles we all swore to each other, to our families, and to ourselves on September 11th, we would never forget.

There is a storm coming of biblical proportions, a storm coming beyond your recognition. When the economy collapses, when our currency is worth toilet paper, who do you want, who do you want handling our nation? You want somebody who has divide us, who is grooming Brownshirts? I was at the caucus last night. I had never seen anything like it. These Trump supporters were beyond recognition as anything I've ever seen --- rude, vile, nasty.

I don't want to say all of them. But there's enough of them. And the ones that I met that were nice, I don't how you can stand in the same room with them. I don't know if you look --- how do you look at those people and say, "Wait a minute. That's what my guy is encouraging." I have some audio to play for you from yesterday. "That's what my guy is encouraging." Everybody said the same thing, "I want change." Boy, America, you are going to get change.

Don't you even hear yourself when you say that? Because you were the ones that stood up and said, "Change to what? Hope and change, Mr. Barack Obama. Mr. Barack Obama supporters, change to what?" I just want change. Oh, dear God.

Why is a man given a voice? Why is a man given the vision of what is to come if he can't do a damn thing about it?

As I wondered what to say to you this morning, and I still don't know, all that went through my head over and over again --- and I know what this means for my business, and I know what this means for my friends, and I know what this means for my family. Because Dana Loesch is going to the FBI because she's getting death threats. I know another very famous media reporter that is also on the highest level of security because of the death threats that's coming in on them.

I know what all of this means. Just in your business, I know what it means. In your popularity, I know what it means. But all I heard this morning was, "Silence in the face of evil is evil itself."

3 BIGGEST lies about Trump's plans for deportations

Rebecca Noble / Stringer | Getty Images

To the right, Trump's deportation plans seem like a reasonable step to secure the border. For the left, mass deportation represents an existential threat to democracy.

However, the left's main arguments against Trump's deportation plans are not only based on racially problematic lies and fabrications they are outright hypocritical.

Here are the three BIGGEST lies about Trump's deportation plans:

1. Past Deportations

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The left acts like Donald Trump is the first president in history to oversee mass deportations, but nothing could be further from the truth. Deportations have been a crucial tool for enforcing immigration laws and securing the country from the beginning, and until recently, it was a fairly bipartisan issue.

Democrat superstar President Obama holds the record for most deportations during his tenure in office, clocking in at a whopping 3,066,457 people over his eight years in office. This compares to the 551,449 people removed during Trump's first term. Obama isn't an anomaly either, President Clinton deported 865,646 people during his eight years, still toping Trump's numbers by a considerable margin.

The left's sudden aversion to deportations is clearly reactionary propaganda aimed at villainizing Trump.

2. Exploitative Labor

John Moore / Staff | Getty Images

Commentators on the left have insinuated that President Trump's deportation plan would endanger the agricultural industry due to the large portion of agricultural workers in the U.S. who are illegal aliens. If they are deported, food prices will skyrocket.

What the left is conveniently forgetting is the reason why many businesses choose to hire illegal immigrants (here's a hint: it's not because legal Americans aren't willing to do the work). It's because it is way easier to exploit people who are here illegally. Farmowners don't have to pay taxes on illegal aliens, pay minimum wage, offer benefits, sign contracts, or do any of the other typical requirements that protect the rights of the worker.

The left has shown their hand. This was never about some high-minded ideals of "diversity" and "inclusion." It's about cheap, expendable labor and a captive voter base to bolster their party in elections.

3."Undesirable" Jobs

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Another common talking point amid the left-wing anti-Trump hysteria is that illegal aliens take "undesirable" jobs that Americans will not do. The argument is that these people fill the "bottom tier" in the U.S. economy, jobs they consider "unfit" for American citizens.

By their logic, we should allow hordes of undocumented, unvetted immigrants into the country so they can work the jobs that the out-of-touch liberal talking heads consider beneath them. It's no wonder why they lost the election.

Did the Left lay the foundations for election denial?

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Did Glenn predict the future?

Just a few days after the election and President Trump's historic victory, the New York Times published a noteworthy article titled "How Russia Openly Escalated Its Election Interference Efforts," in which they made some interesting suggestions. They brought up several examples of Russian election interference (stop me if you think you've heard this one before) that favored Trump. From there, they delicately approached the "election denial zone" with the following statement:

"What impact Russia’s information campaign had on the outcome of this year’s race, if any, remains uncertain"

Is anyone else getting 2016 flashbacks?

It doesn't end there. About two weeks before the election (October 23rd), Glenn and Justin Haskins, the co-author of Glenn's new book, Propaganda Wars, discuss a frightening pattern they were observing in the news cycle at the time, and it bears a striking similarity to this New York Times piece. To gain a full appreciation of this situation, let's go back to two weeks before the election when Glenn and Justin laid out this scene:

Bad Eggs in the Intelligence Community

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

This story begins with a top-secret military intelligence leak. Over the October 19th weekend, someone within the U.S. Government's intelligence agencies leaked classified information regarding the Israeli military and their upcoming plans to Iran. The man responsible for this leak, Asif William Rahman, a CIA official with top security clearance, was arrested on Tuesday, November 12th.

Rahman is one of the known "bad eggs" within our intelligence community. Glenn and Justin highlighted another, a man named Robert Malley. Malley is an Iranian envoy who works at the State Department under the Biden/Harris administration and is under investigation by the FBI for mishandling classified information. While Malley was quietly placed on leave in June, he has yet to be fired and still holds security clearance.

Another suspicious figure is Ariane Tabatabai, a former aide of Mr. Malley and a confirmed Iranian agent. According to a leak by Semafor, Tabatabai was revealed to be a willing participant in an Iranian covert influence campaign run by Tehran's Foreign Ministry. Despite this shocking revelation that an Iranian agent was in the Pentagon with access to top-secret information, Tabatabai has not faced any charges or inquires, nor has she been stripped of her job or clearance.

If these are the bad actors we know about, imagine how many are unknown to the public or are flying under the radar. In short, our intelligence agencies are full of people whose goals do not align with American security.

Conspicuous Russian Misinformation

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The story continues with a video of a man accusing former VP candidate and Minnesota Governor, Tim Walz of sexual assault. The man alleged to be Matthew Metro, a former student of Walz claimed that he was assaulted by the Governor while in High School. The man in the video gave corroborating details that made the claim seem credible on the surface, and it quickly spread across the internet. But after some deeper investigation, it was revealed this man wasnot Matthew Metro and that the entire video was fake. This caught the attention of the Security Director of National Intelligence who claimed the video was a Russian hoax designed to wound the Harris/Walz campaign, and the rest of the intelligence community quickly agreed.

In the same vein, the State Department put out a $10 million bountyto find the identity of the head of the Russian-owned media company Rybar. According to the State Department, Rybar manages several social media channels that promote Russian governmental political interests targeted at Trump supporters. The content Rybar posts is directed into pro-Trump, and pro-Republican channels, and the content apparently has a pro-Trump spin, alongside its pro-Russia objectives.

Why Does the Intelligence Community Care?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

So what's the deal? Yes, Russia was trying to interfere with the election, but this is a well-known issue that has unfortunately become commonplace in our recent elections.

The real concern is the intelligence community's uncharacteristically enthusiastic and fast response. Where was this response in 2016, when Hillary Clinton and the Democrats spent months lying about Donald Trump's "collusion" with Russia? It has since been proven that the FIB knew the entire story was a Clinton campaign fabrication, and they not only kept quiet about it, but they even played along. Or what about in 2020 when the Left tried to shut down the Hunter Biden laptop story for months by calling it a Russian hoax, only for it to turn out to be true?

Between all the bad actors in the intelligence community and their demonstrated repeated trustworthiness, this sudden concern with "Russian disinformation" that happened to support Trump was just too convenient.

Laying the Foundations for Election Denial

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

This is when Glenn and Justin make a startling prediction: the Left was preparing for a potential Trump victory (remember, this was two weeks before the election) so they would have something to delegitimize him with. They were painting Trump as Putin's lapdog who was receiving election assistance in the form of misinformation from the Kremlin by sounding the alarm on these cherry-picked (and in the grand scheme of things, tame) examples of Russian propaganda. They were laying the foundation of the Left's effort to resist and delegitimize a President-elect Trump.

Glenn and Justin had no idea how right they were.

Trump's POWERFUL 10-point plan to TEAR DOWN the Deep State

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Since 2016 President Trump has promised to drain the swamp, but with Trump's new ten-point plan, do we finally have a solid roadmap to dismantle the deep state?

In March 2023, President Trump released a video detailing his plan to shatter the deep state. Now that he is the President-Elect, this plan is slated to launch in January 2025. Recently, Glenn reviewed Trump's plan and was optimistic about what he saw. In fact, he couldn't see how anyone could be against it (not that anything will stop the mainstream media from spinning it in a negative light).

But don't let Glenn tell you what to think! Check out Trump's FULL plan below:

1. Remove rouge bureaucrats

U.S. Air Force / Handout | Getty Images

Trump's first order of business will be to restore an executive order he issued in 2020 that allowed him to remove rouge bureaucrats. Trump promises to use this power aggressively eliminate corruption.

2. Clean and overhaul the intelligence apparatus

SAUL LOEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Next, Trump promises to oust corrupt individuals from the national intelligence apparatus. This includes federal bureaucracies like the CIA, NSA, and other agencies that have been weaponized against the left's political opponents.

3. Reform FISA courts 

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump's next promise is to reform the FISA courts, which are courts tasked with reviewing and approving requests to gather foreign intelligence, typically through surveillance. These courts have been unaccountable to protections like the 4th Amendment that prohibits the government from unwarranted surveillance, resulting in severe government overreach on American citizens, both on US soil and abroad.

4. Expose the deep state. 

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Trump want to establish a "Truth and Reconciliation" commission that will be tasked with unmasking the deep state. This will be accomplished by publishing and declassifying all documents on deep state spying, corruption, and censorship.

5. Crackdown on government-media collusion

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Next, Trump will crack down on government "leakers" who collaborate with the mainstream media to spread misinformation. These collaborators purposefully interject false narratives that derail the democratic process within the country. The plan will also prohibit government actors from pressuring social media to censor content that goes against a particular political narrative, as was done, for example, in the case of the Biden administration pressuring Facebook to crack down on Hunter Biden laptop-related content.

6. Isolate inspector generals

MANDEL NGAN / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump promises to physically separate every inspector general from the department they are tasked with overseeing. This way, they don't become entangled with the department and end up protecting them instead of scrutinizing them.

7. Create a system to monitor the intelligence agencies

SAUL LOEB / Stringer | Getty Images

To ensure that the intelligence agencies are no longer spying on American citizens, Trump proposed to create an independent auditing system. This auditing system, created by Congress, would keep the intelligence agencies in check from spying on American citizens or political campaigns as they did on Trump's campaign.

8. Relocate the federal bureaucracy

SAUL LOEB / Staff | Getty Images

Relocating the federal bureaucracy, Trump argues, will keep the internal politics of the individual bureaucracies out of the influence of DC. He says he will begin by relocating the Bureau of Land Management to Colorado.

9. Ban federal bureaucrats from taking corporate jobs

J. David Ake / Contributor | Getty Images

To keep money ties out of politics, Trump proposes that federal bureaucrats should be banned from working at the companies that they are regulating. American taxpayer dollars should not go to agencies run by bureaucrats who cut special deals for corporations, who will later offer them a cushy role and a huge paycheck.

10. Push for congressional term limits

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Finally, Trump wants to make a constitutional amendment placing term limits on members of Congress. This proposal has been popular on both sides of the political aisle for a while, preventing members of Congress from becoming swamp creatures like Nancy Pelosi who was just re-elected for her 19th term.

The Democrats are turning on Biden

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

The election is over, Kamala Harris has officially conceded, and now the Democrats are doing some serious soul-searching.

After reflecting long and hard (approximately 24 hours), the Democrats have discovered the real reason Harris lost the election. Was it Trump's excellent campaign that resonated with voters? Was it Harris's off-putting personality? Or was it her failure to distinguish herself from the Biden administration's failed policies?

No, it was Joe Biden. All the blame lies on President Biden's shoulders. The Left sees no need to take any real responsibility for the landslide defeat the Democrats suffered earlier this week; just pass the blame on to 'ole Joe.

Here are the leading excuses the Left is spinning up to explain Harris's crushing defeat:

"Biden should have dropped out sooner."

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

This is the crux of the left-wing media's argument against Biden. They claim that if Joe Biden had dropped out earlier, Harris would have had more time to campaign and would not have had to carry around the baggage of Biden's abysmal debate performance. This could make sense, but what these commentators are conveniently forgetting are the years of propaganda these very same people promoted arguing that Biden's declining mental acuity was nothing more than a right-wing conspiracy theory. If Biden had been as sharp as they had told us, why would he have dropped out?

Also, if a lack of time was Harris's biggest issue this election, she sure didn't act like it. She was practically in hiding for the first several weeks of her campaign and she took plenty of days off, including during the last few crucial weeks. More time wouldn't have helped her case.

"Harris failed to distance herself from Biden."

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

This is media gaslighting at its finest. Yes, Harris failed to distance herself from Biden. However, that's because she, along with the rest of the Left, publically went on record defending Biden's policies and his mental acuity. By the time Harris became the nominee, she had already said too much in favor of Biden. Don't forget Harris's infamous “There is not a thing that comes to mind,” quote after being asked on The View if she would do anything differently than Biden. In a way, Harris couldn't separate herself from Biden without drawing attention to the greatest flaw in her campaign: if she knew how to fix the country, why hasn't she?

"Harris did the best anyone could have done in that situation."

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

But did she really? As mentioned earlier, she was noticeably absent for much of the campaign. While Trump was busy jumping into interviews, events, and rallies non-stop, Harris was MIA. Whenever Harris did manage to make an appearance, it almost always did more harm than good by highlighting her lack of a robust policy platform and her inability to string together a coherent sentence. Notable examples include her aforementioned appearance on The View and her disastrous interview on Fox News with Bret Baier. The point is, even considering the limited time to campaign she had, Kamala Harris wasnot the best person for the job and there are undoubtedly many other Democrats who would have run a much more successful campaign.