BLOG

Adoption advocates ask Trump to intervene in ‘adoption crisis’ that started under Obama

Did you know that international adoptions have decreased worldwide by a shocking 80 percent in the last 14 years?

Nathan Gwilliam, CEO of Adoption.com, and Ron Stoddart, president of Save Adoptions, joined Glenn in the studio this week to talk about the international adoption crisis and how the number of adoptions in the U.S. has mysteriously dropped. They believe President Donald Trump will be sympathetic to their cause, so Adoption.com has created a White House petition asking Trump to investigate.

Watch the full clip (above) to find out why an Obama administration appointee who is “anti-adoption” was a key factor and learn how you can help.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: We have been kind of focusing on a few things in the last couple of weeks. One is, if Christians would just act like Christians, the world would be a much better place. If -- you know, I love the bumper sticker that says, Lord, save me from your followers.

The problem is not with Jesus, the problem is with a lot of people that say they're following Jesus and they're not. And statistics prove this out: There is no difference between somebody who doesn't go to church, doesn't believe in God, when it comes to marriages, alcoholism, drug use, any of this stuff.

That should tell us something, that we're attending church, instead of tending a church. And we brought in Nathan -- how do you say your last name?

NATHAN: Gwilliam.

GLENN: Gwilliam.

And Ron Stoddard. Ron is with Save Adoptions. And Nathan is the CEO of adoption.com. And first, tell me a little bit about adoption.com before you tell me why you're here.

NATHAN: Sure. So adoption.com is the connection engine for adoption. So if a family wants to adopt, they can put a profile online. And a woman who is pregnant, considering adoption can go and choose a family. Or we have photo listings of children waiting to be adopted. And families can go and look through thousands of photos of children and choose a child to adopt.

Or if an adoptee or a birth parent 20 years after the adoption want to find each other, they can put their information in, and we help facilitate a connection. So we connect people related to adoption.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I'm an adoptive father. And there is nothing better in my life than that choice to adopt. My children are everything. And, you know, we were afraid, you know, are we going to feel the same? Yeah, it's exactly the same. And it is a marvelous thing.

I tell you, if my wife -- if I could just -- if I could dye my hair so I didn't look like I look -- because my wife -- I'll say, we should adopt again. And she'll look at me, look at you. Like, we're going to adopt again.

So, anyway --

STU: That's a healthy relationship you got going on there.

GLENN: No, yeah, it's a little harsh.

Anyway, here's the problem: Adoptions -- overseas adoptions by Americans have gone down now 80 percent, and places like Romania have tried to pick up the slack before, and it didn't work. First, before we get to why this number is down, why aren't people in other countries like Romania, why doesn't adoption work like it does here? Do you know?

VOICE: Well, it does. There are people in Romania. But there are not as many people adopting in Romania because it is not culturally as acceptable as it is in the United States.

GLENN: That's weird.

RON: When we first started doing adoptions from Russia, very few Russian families would even consider adopting an orphan because they looked at them as children of alcoholics and socially inferior. But after Americans started adopting children from Russia and the Russians looked and said, maybe we're missing something here, now the number of domestic adoptions in Russia is much, much higher. And so we have an opportunity to show by example --

GLENN: Do you think that's a Christian thing? Is that a Christian trait that came from us or just something unique in us?

NATHAN: Brazil is the same way. A very Christian country, but they don't adopt their own children very much. It's the same -- same issue. It's a cultural issue. They're not used to going to an orphanage and finding a child and adopting a child.

GLENN: Huh.

RON: As you said, Christians ought to be doing it. So is it a Christian thing? It should be.

GLENN: Right. Right.

So now 80 percent drop in foreign adoptions. That's massive. And I warn you, the next few minutes are going to be to become excruciatingly painful to hear. In the former administration, that was the head of adoptions here? Helped setting the laws here and then?

NATHAN: She still is.

RON: Yeah, she is the chief of the adoption division, which is in the US State Department. And she's a civil service appointment, which is a problem in and of itself.

GLENN: Because she doesn't seem real high on adoptions.

NATHAN: She's anti-adoption.

GLENN: How could she have the job of being in charge of adoptions and being anti-adoption?

NATHAN: That's right. Why would we appoint someone to be our chief of adoptions in the United States, who is anti-adoption.

GLENN: When was she appointed?

RON: In 2014, she was moved from the Justice Department to the State Department.

GLENN: Any idea what the motivation was to put somebody anti-adoption in there? Why was that done? Don't speculate. If you know --

RON: Yeah. I think the attitude at that time, the hate convention had been implemented in the United States. And the focus of the government on any activity is to regulate and control. So she was moved into that position because she had experience in adoptions years earlier, even though she had a proven record of being opposed to the hate convention and the regulations.

GLENN: All right. So she put in regulations. They did not go into effect, because Trump came in. And he reversed them? Is that right?

VOICE: Well, Trump came in and said, we're going to require that you have -- eliminate two regulations for every new regulation you oppose.

GLENN: Right. Okay.

VOICE: So the regulation has already existed. But she proposed new regulations in September of 2016. That would further give them control over the adoption industry.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

All right. So what has to happen to get Donald Trump to -- I assume he's open to this.

What do we have to do to get him to kick -- kick her out, reverse these, what?

VOICE: Move her to a more appropriate position, that would use her skills in a more positive way.

STU: Very nice way of saying that.

VOICE: Put someone in that is pro-adoption if you're going to be in charge of a US adoption program.

GLENN: Wow. Okay. So what do you have people do?

NATHAN: So we believe Donald Trump would be very supportive of this, if this just got on his list of priorities, if this became something that he focused on. So we've created a White House petition. We started promoting it yesterday. Had been 2500 signatures this morning. The White House promises that if it reaches 100,000 signatures, that they will respond. The petition was actually created on petitions.whitehouse.gov. If your listeners wanted to find that petition, they could go to adoption.com. And right at the top, there's a bright yellow bar with a link to it. Click on that link.

GLENN: Sign the petition.

NATHAN: Sign the petition.

GLENN: Okay. So he'll look at it, if we have 100,000 signatures and take it seriously of correcting this.

How long will it take to reverse an 80 percent decline?

RON: It will take years. But, of course, it has to start with a person being put in that position that wants to increase adoptions.

GLENN: So we have a problem in America where we have a need for foster parents. And it's a lot easier to adopt a little child, than it is to adopt a 12-year-old. If it takes years to fix this, the problems in the other countries of -- because I got to believe. I mean, our foster system is not a pleasure. I can't imagine what it's like in some countries. Not good.

NATHAN: Well, most countries don't have foster systems. It's a system of orphanages. And you look at the outcomes of those children. You look at as many as 50 percent of the girls that age out of those orphanages are -- end up in prostitution. And you look at the homelessness at 60 percent or higher. You look at the suicide rate of 10 percent. Just ridiculously poor outcomes for the children that age out of those orphanages.

STU: You've been talking about this 80 percent in foreign adoptions. How much of that has to do with the Russian sanctions that we've heard so much about?

NATHAN: Very little.

RON: Very little. Russia closed in the end of 2011, and the decline has continued. So, yeah. There was a time when China put a pause on adoptions, that caused some of the decline. China's one-child policy was changed. That caused a little bit of it. But there are so many countries that are not even engaged in adoption because the US puts restrictions on them. If they do not have an administrative system for tracking documentation when a child is born out in the boondocks, then we suspect that there may be fraud with the documentation. So a country like Nepal, with children available for adoption, the US will not allow adoptions from Nepal because we don't trust their documentation.

NATHAN: And the key question about Russia isn't whether Russia closed its doors or not. The question is, what has the State Department done to help open those doors? What support have we provided to these countries to help them implement robust and ethical adoption programs? And that's the piece that's missing. We need a State Department that is innovating and helping create the type of adoption system they want, instead of trying to regulate everybody out of existence.

GLENN: So I want to take a quick break and come back. Ask you this question: I know there are people that, you know, will come across this interview and they'll say, well, why don't we start in our own country?

There's some problems here with adoption in our own country and some things that we can take care of and some things that, you know, we all should be aware of. There is a need in our own country. And let's talk about that and that concern, when we come back.

(music)

Again, you go to adoption.com. Adoption.com. Look for the banner up at the top and sign the White House petition. To get this Obama appointee removed from the State Department, or at least in this position, where she's overseeing adoptions. She's anti-adoption.

Do this at that now. Adoption.com.

GLENN: The United States is down 80 percent in -- in international adoptions. And that's because there is somebody that was appointed by Obama to the State Department, that is anti-adoption. And has put all of these rules and regulations in to stop international adoptions.

It's wrong and it's dangerous for humanity all around the world. And we're asking that you would go to adoption.com. And you'll see a banner up at the top. Click on it. It will take you to the White House for a petition. The White House has promised over 100,000 signatures. And they will take this up and review it.

So let me -- let me -- let me pick it up where we left our conversation with Nathan and Ron about international adoptions and adoptions here in America. Why not focus on the kids that we have here?

RON: That's a great question. Children in the United States and our foster care system were very important, and they need to be adopted. Children in orphanages in the United States are very important and they need to be adopted. It's not an either/or question. There are plenty of loving families that would love to bring these children into their homes. It's a matter of complexity, not a matter of numbers of families. We need to simplify the system and make it easy enough that these families can bring children home.

GLENN: I will tell you, I adopted my son Raphe. And Tania and I were terrified. I mean, she was beside herself for three years. We adopted in Texas, where it's pretty clear, you know, the new parents are the new parents, period. But still terrified that some -- somebody would come knocking at the door and say, yep. He's not your son.

RON: God touches our hearts in different ways. And sometimes we're motivated to adopt an orphan. And sometimes we connect with a 15-year-old child in the foster care system.

GLENN: Yeah. But we -- we have -- there are laws that -- I mean, that stuff does happen, but it is getting better here in America, isn't it?

VOICE: Yeah. And Texas has some of the best laws in the country. But unfortunately, that does happen.

GLENN: Okay. So --

VOICE: Working with the government is worse than labor.

GLENN: It is. It is. If you talk to my wife -- had two biological children and adopted twice. The labor that she went through with her biological children was nothing, compared to what we had to go through, to adopt.

GLENN: Yeah. No, it is.

But this is -- if we can correct this, we correct so many other problems.

NATHAN: That's correct.

GLENN: We correct homelessness. I mean, tell me about the rates of those in prison and homelessness and everything else.

VOICE: Well, a statistic I heard the other day, the CEO of the United States Institute Against Human Trafficking said that 60 to 70 percent of the children who are trafficked come out of the foster care system.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

RON: So the foster care system is good, but it's temporary. And you need to get those kids out of the foster care system, into a permanent home, as early as possible.

NATHAN: And the same thing happens internationally. We've seen statistics that as many as 50 percent of the girls that age out of the orphanage, that leave the orphanage without being adopted end up in prostitution. Going back to your original question, we've heard statistics a lot, that up to two-thirds of children within 18 months of aging out of the foster care system, two-thirds of the children end up either homeless, in jail, or dead.

The statistics for these kids -- the outcomes for these children that age out of an orphanage or a foster home are ridiculous. The question isn't whether we should adopt from the United States or internationally. The question is let's do everything we can to get them adopted. All of them.

RON: All of the above.

GLENN: And people say, there are not enough people. There are plenty, right? That want to adopt.

RON: There are.

NATHAN: A recent study from the Dave Thomas Center For Adoption show that 85 million Americans have considered adoption. And they said that the biggest reason they haven't adopted is the complexity and the cost. We need to focus on reducing complexity and reducing cost, instead of increasing regulations.

GLENN: Amen. Amen. Thank you guys, so much. Appreciate your hard work. And everything you do. And let me just -- let me tell you, as a dad, married to a wonderful woman who we couldn't have children and we wanted it so desperately and we worried about adoption, let me tell you, it's the greatest thing ever. The greatest thing ever.

RON: Amen.

GLENN: Go to adoption.com. And please sign that White House petition. And get that Obama appointee out of the State Department and correct that problem today. Adoption.com.

Thanks, guys.

Why You Must Prepare for the Left’s CHAOS If Trump Wins | Ep 390
TV

Why You Must Prepare for the Left’s CHAOS If Trump Wins | Ep 390

We are less than a week from the 2024 election. In 2020 at this time, Glenn was busy warning about some of the dirty tricks the Left was “war gaming.” It involved everything from mass protests and street demonstrations to secession. Serious Democrats in positions of power and influence were strategizing behind the scenes. And in 2024, they’re doubling down. Glenn warns that we need to start preparing for what happens if Donald Trump wins on November 5 or if the race is close. Marc Elias, the Democrats’ main lawfare operative, has already declared that this election year is “the most litigious in American history.” Kamala Harris has bragged that they have “teams of lawyers” at the ready. Democratic congressmen have hinted they might not certify the election if Trump wins. And the media is declaring that Trump might try to steal the election. Asra Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and “Woke Army” author, has been tracking the foot soldiers’ plans for the election and the weeks after. She says Trump MUST win by a landslide or the fight “will go from the courts to the streets.” She uncovered an orchestrated effort by progressive institutions and organizations that are getting support from “like-minded ideologues in China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea.” Their end goal? CHAOS. Glenn asks a final, chilling question: Are the Left’s election war games connected to a recent revision in DoD Directive 5240.01 that addresses the use of "lethal" military force against Americans? Whatever may happen, Glenn is sure of one thing: Americans MUST VOTE as soon as possible. We cannot stay silent.

PROPAGANDA EXPOSED: No, Trump didn't call for Liz Cheney’s execution
RADIO

PROPAGANDA EXPOSED: No, Trump didn't call for Liz Cheney’s execution

Some in the mainstream media are claiming that Donald Trump (who survived 2 assassination attempts) called for the execution of former Rep. Liz Cheney by firing squad. But Glenn and Stu review the clip and explain why that’s an outright LIE. Trump was clearly suggesting that Cheney wouldn’t be a “warmonger” if she actually experienced war herself. But the media has become a propaganda arm for the Democratic Party, so it will keep on lying its way to the election …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I was thinking about the Liz Cheney thing you talked about earlier.

Where Donald Trump -- who would have thought, Glenn. That, by the way, the source of all violent rhetoric was the person shot on stage?

It's odd!

Really, Shyamalan-esque, with that twist.

GLENN: Really weird. That's the only reason they're making a big deal out of this.

That and -- that and they want to say, he's a fascist, that will shoot everybody who disagrees with him.

STU: Right. It just seems like a strange approach, to say, well, you know, our closing argument is? He is going to shoot Liz Cheney!

He's almost been shot multiple times in front of our eyes. It doesn't seem like the right approach.

GLENN: And he wasn't given a gun, by the way. He was recommending -- he was talking about war.

Give her a gun. And have nine rifles, you know, target her.

Let's see how she feels then.

He's talking about war.

STU: It's a very standard. Honestly, liberal talking point about war.

And Trump has been this way consistently for a very long time.

He probably made that same point about Bush and Cheney in 2004.

Right?

I mean -- but I was thinking about this, as everyone was doing the Liz Cheney thing. And she's on stage, campaigning with Kamala Harris everywhere.

Can you imagine. We all have a use for a time machine.

Okay?

Sure, going back and killing Baby Hitler is something you might do from it.

But one thing I have to put in the rotation. If I had the time machine. Go back to 2004, 2005, and just tell Dick Cheney, what is going to happen in 2024. That he and his daughter are going to be the heroes of the left. What a freaking bizarre thing!

GLENN: Oh, he was Darth Vader.

STU: He was the most hated person in the world.

GLENN: He still is Darth Vader to them.

STU: Now that he's endorsed Kamala Harris. I don't think that is --

GLENN: You think he's going over to dinner at people's houses? You think they fully embraced him? No way.

STU: I don't know. Maybe. I kind of feel like --

GLENN: Of course. They're for -- they're for big business now. I mean, they are everything they ever said they were against.

STU: And I feel like, you know, the -- Dick Cheney's comments have been. He did endorse Harris.

Which is incredible.

GLENN: Incredible.

STU: But, you know, his comments weren't -- haven't been as egregious as Liz Cheney's. Who, again, we should remind everybody.

It's not like a Never Trumper. It's not like the person who is like, I don't know about this.

Liz Cheney voted for Donald Trump in 2020! This is a person who wanted Donald Trump to be president right now!

That was her vote. And here she is, as the most -- she's gone completely off the reservation. And I was thinking, how many -- how many of these stories can we tell like this?

Roseanne Barr would be one of them. Roseanne Barr couldn't stand you at one point.

GLENN: I don't think we need to --

STU: She's not on the phone yet. I can talk about this. She's probably asleep.

No. But she -- is it Arguing with Idiots.

GLENN: Yeah. Here it is. Here it is. Glenn Beck, he's a vampire and a death lover. That's what Roseanne Barr said about me.

STU: Right. It was used about, we always put quotes on the back of these books. Keith Olbermann. You know, many of these people still hate you.

GLENN: I'm proud.

STU: Whoopi Goldberg. Which, by the way, called you a lying sack of dog mess.

GLENN: Yeah, she's a piece of --

STU: Keith Olbermann.

Only in his wildest dreams could an actual suicide bomber hope to do as much damage to this country.

There's all sorts of great stuff like this. And we do this for several books in a row.

Roseanne was one of them. I want to say, RFK Jr. was another one, on one of the backs of the books.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. No. Yeah, I think he called for my execution.

STU: Well, he did want you dead at one point. I don't think he does anymore, though.

GLENN: No, he doesn't, and I kind of liked him!

STU: Yeah, it's just -- it's weird how this stuff happens. It really is.

GLENN: It is. That's what we were texting back and forth, yesterday, Roseanne and I. And I was like, weren't you a Communist at some point?

Didn't you -- weren't you, hey, go Marx!

And she was like, no, I went to the Occupy Wall Street thing, to see what they were doing.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And she said, and everybody roped me in to that movement.

She said, I saw them as rich kids, protesting daddy, who worked on Wall Street. She said, I hate the corruption in the big businesses.

She's like no commies, man. I want a return, right?

STU: I don't think that's right.

GLENN: I know!

I think that's revisionist.

STU: We will have to ask her about this. If my remembrance is correct here. She ran for the green party nomination, and did not win it. And actually did wind up being the nominee at the peace and freedom party, which is legitimately to the left of the Green Party.

It is an outward Socialist Party!

Now, a lot of people, sometimes you take a nomination because it's convenient. They've got a ballot and a line somewhere.

That stuff could happen, so it could be something like that. I don't know. But that's what I remember from the situation. You know, but who knows?

GLENN: Now she's the queen of the garbage people.

STU: That's crazy!

GLENN: I know. Crazy!

STU: Tulsi Gabbard.

Tulsi Gabbard was running Bernie Sanders' campaign in 2016 in Hawaii.

GLENN: By the way, I will take -- I will take one Tulsi for the entire Cheney family. That's a good trade.

STU: I like that.

I will -- some of these figures, that we've been embraced, I'm not a big fan of. Tulsi I like though. She's just really -- she's smart. I like how calm and balanced she is.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Even though, I don't think I agree with her on a lot of things.

And I am, I will say, concerned if Trump wins. That some of these people will have roles that are a little bit too large about --

GLENN: You know what he said about RFK?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: His people came out and said, he's not talking about a cabinet position. And he said RFK doesn't want one. He will put him in charge of studies and coming back, show us what the problem is.

STU: But what I liked about Trump's comments on this. Is I don't want him anywhere near the environment. Good. As long as --

GLENN: Good. And he's openly saying it. He's not trying to convince anybody -- which I absolutely love.

Let me ask you.

Who is the brain trust around Kamala Harris?

STU: I mean, it's --

GLENN: Right. You don't even know. You have no idea.

STU: Because all the people in the Biden administration hate her. Now, some of them I'm sure are trying to latch on to her now. But they've been leaking bad stuff about her for years. She has a couple of people around her. Her sister is a big one.

GLENN: Right.

STU: I don't know. Tim Walz?

GLENN: Right.

STU: He was a football coach once, sort of.

GLENN: You have Tulsi, you have RFK. You have Elon Musk.

STU: Uh-huh. Yeah. That's one. Another one. Like Elon Musk is a guy who is -- who has the biggest electric car company in the world.

Why?

Because he wants to stop global warming, so much.

GLENN: Right.

STU: He's building spaceships, so he can go to Mars one day, to avoid the potential output of global warming. And like, that's probably the one I'm most excited about it.

You know I can't stand the global warming stuff. But like, him with the idea of him just taking a butcher's knife to the size of the government.

And just going after waste, and all that. I think is legitimately really exciting. I mean, we can see a major, major change.

GLENN: Oh, I think, especially if you get the Congress. If they have the Senate and the Congress, massive change is coming.

Massive change. And change that honestly, the left used to say, they wanted.

You know, all that -- let's end the wars. Let's audit the Pentagon.

Let's make sure that big corporations aren't in bed with the government. I mean, this is all stuff.

Let's restore the Bill of Rights.

STU: Oh. That would be nice.

GLENN: I mean, that's all the stuff the Democrats used to be for.

I think most Democrats in the country, are still for that.

You know, they were talking about this suppressed voter that -- did you see the story?

Where is this? Yeah. AOC. AOC is encouraging female voters, who are decidedly siding with Harris. While more men are voting for Trump than previously.

She said, you should leave Post-It notes in bathrooms for these fearful women in red states.

This is real. Your vote is anonymous and confidential. Who you vote for, is your secret. No one knows, unless you tell them.

Like, really? You really think that women. This pisses me off.

STU: It would piss you off more if you were a woman.

Oh, they don't think I have enough pride in myself, to tell people who I voted for, honestly.

GLENN: And honestly, what they're trying to say is we know your husband is oppressive.

STU: Bad. What a surprising message from the left.

GLENN: He will beat you if you vote for Kamala Harris.

That's what she's saying.

STU: It's pathetic. It's the same type of message of, we will make sure black people can't -- don't need IDs to vote.

Right?

It's the same nonsense. It's just demeaning and disgusting.

You know, what -- they're like, where are the strong women on the right?

What women are you talking to?

What women are you talking to? That are terrified to tell their husband to vote.

What person is this? I don't know anybody like that. I don't know anyone like that.

GLENN: I know a woman who is afraid --

STU: There's more to this story?

GLENN: Yeah, who is afraid now, afraid to express who they're voting for. Broadway actress -- and I think I'm getting this name right.

Kari Melacos (phonetic), avid supporter of RFK.

She just pointed on -- posted on Instagram, that she's voting for Trump.

So all of her friends in show business, all of them saying, it's a no for me.

I'm so deeply disappointed in you. What a loss!

I met you performing at a fundraiser for Hillary. Was that just a show to further your career?

Wow, this deeply satisfies me.

STU: Oh, the career progress of being a Trump supporter on Broadway.

Oh, my gosh! The glory that comes in from that decision.

What kind of idiot even writes that?

GLENN: I'm not sure how you've reached this decision, or what brought you to this place.

But I'm sending you love and hope, that you will think of the rights of me, my husband, our daughter, and reconsider your position. You sold out your friends for a gig?

I'm completely shocked in reading this. Thank you for showing us who you really are.

What it is you value publicly! There's nothing worse than a wolf in sheep's clothing.

STU: None of these people are married to this woman, right? I don't think.

GLENN: Right.

STU: I'm not saying you don't get pushback, by saying who you vote for. Of course, you do. But like, if you're in a marriage, where that's going on. Probably not a good decision at the very least.

GLENN: Well, if you're in a marriage where you don't feel comfortable in saying who you are voting for.

STU: You're probably in an abusive marriage, or something close to it.

GLENN: Yeah, close to it, if not an abusive marriage. Or you're in a marriage that you won't work.

If you're afraid to tell your spouse anything, you're in a marriage that's not going to last.

STU: I don't tell her about my heroin habit.

Does that mean we're in a bad marriage?

GLENN: No, heroin is completely -- because that does good in the long-run. Really.

STU: It's a troubling sign, let's put it that way. It's a troubling sign, though.

GLENN: Troubling sing, yeah.

STU: By the way, I love this headline.

Because you mentioned, you know, to Congress. Can control Republicans.

This shocked me. This is from the New York Times. It's an eight-minute 41-second read, if you want to go through it. So A couple thousand words. Right?

Not a short story. Here's a headline: A unified Republican Congress would give Trump broad power for his agenda.

GLENN: Oh.

STU: Now, that's just describing our system of government. That's all that is.

That's all that headline says. Now, I find it fascinating for that reason. Because it doesn't tell you anything.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Of course, if Donald Trump wins and Republicans win back the Congress, he's going to have power, to implement his agenda.

That's literally how this works.

GLENN: Assuming the G.O.P. is not the G.O.P. of the past.

STU: Right. Right.

But they should, in theory, like tax cuts. That was part of his agenda. They got control of Congress.

What happened? They passed tax cuts. Yes, that's how this works.

But like, you could write this article, very easily the opposite way. A unified Democrat Congress would give Kamala Harris broad support for her agenda.

But that's not scary to New York Times readers.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Right stop they write it this way. Even though, it's obviously true both ways.

It's scary to the New York Times readers. So they write it this way, to terrify you for a victory for Trump.

GLENN: When was the last time you picked up a New York Times?

STU: Like a physical copy. It had to be at a hotel.

GLENN: Yeah. I was at a hotel yesterday.

And I picked up a physical copy. Oh, my gosh, it's worse. It's worse when you're actually reading -- sitting there.

You pick it up, and you read it. And the whole front page is like, clown country.

It is just crazy!

Trump’s response to Biden’s "GARBAGE" comment was EVERYTHING we wanted
RADIO

Trump’s response to Biden’s "GARBAGE" comment was EVERYTHING we wanted

Donald Trump has been giving us the campaign we’ve all been wanting, Glenn says. Instead of “vindicative,” it’s been fun and full of REAL joy, unlike the Kamala Harris campaign. Glenn reviews the latest example: Trump responded to Biden calling his supporters “garbage” by donning a bright orange vest and taking a ride in a garbage truck.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Glenn, how are you? Nice outfit.

GLENN: Well, where is your costume?

STU: I'm going as you today. I'm sitting in your chair.

GLENN: Yeah. Don't get used to that, pal.

STU: No problem. That is not something you have to worry about.

GLENN: I'm going as --

STU: Your bag that you're wearing.

GLENN: I'm going as a Trump supporter today.

It's the greatest costume at the last minute. You know, you put a belt around it, and it's very stylish. It is a little hot to wear a garbage liner. It's a little hot.

STU: That's interesting.

GLENN: Yeah. They don't really breathe. They don't really breathe.

So, yeah. Yeah.

So, anyway, I was looking at what happened yesterday, with Trump pulling in, on the garbage truck.

Wearing the -- you know, the orange vest.

Which I've never seen him out of the blue suit.

I thought that thing was sewn on to his body, you know.

He comes out with the orange vest, right off Trump force one. And did you see his rally last night by any chance?

STU: I saw a chunk of it. I didn't see all of it.

I did see him in the vest. I saw him driving around in the garbage truck, with Trump on the side.

Smart -- I will say, the campaign for Trump in 2016 and 2020. I wasn't really impressed with. This one, I think was pretty good.

GLENN: I don't think we'll ever see a campaign like this again. I mean, think of the images we have. Donald Trump working at a McDonald's, and it worked. I mean, it actually wasn't a Michael Dukakis moment. Anybody else trying to do that, it would destroy them.

This worked for him. Then coming off the plane in a construction outfit, driving a -- a garbage truck, that wouldn't work for anybody else.

But it worked for him.

And then you have the image of him holding his fist up, after an assassination.

You're never going to have another campaign like this, ever. Ever.

STU: Yeah. And I keep thinking to myself, you know, these have worked. It looked pretty good.

I wouldn't keep pushing my lucky with them.

I feel like, one of them will eventually feel like Michael Dukakis. But, honestly, he's been able to pull off a couple of them.

GLENN: Yeah, every single one. Did you see Ramaswamy in the garbage truck?

He was picking up garbage, and he looked like a typical politician doing it.

Which, he's really not the typical politician.

He said, okay. I grabbed this can. And I put it in the back.

No offense to Vivek. I love him.

It didn't work!

With Trump, I don't know how these things are working. But they are.

And then he got on stage, and he was making fun of himself, you know, and he was dancing.

He's gotten better at dancing.

I mean, this honestly is the campaign.

I mean, yeah.

It's not -- he's not like, you know, me. On the dance -- thank God, he's not.

On the dance floor.

You know, but he's just -- he's hit exactly the right tone.

And they're hitting all the wrong tone. I mean, you know, they started out with, it's got to be a positive campaign. And look where they are. You know, calling Americans garbage. By the way, cut five. Here's what Trump said about that last night.

DONALD: 250 million Americans are not garbage.
(applauding)
This week, Kamala has been comparing her political opponents to the most evil mass murderers in history. And now, speaking on a call for her campaign last night, crooked Joe Biden finally said, what he and Kamala really think of our supporters. He called them garbage.

No way. No way.

And I actually mean it, even though without question. My supporters are far higher quality than crooked Joe or lying Kamala.
(applauding)

GLENN: You know, it's --

DONALD: Our response to Joe and Kamala is very simple. You can't lead America if you don't love Americans. That's true.

GLENN: Amen. Amen. Amen.

And it's clear, isn't it? Isn't it becoming very, very clear, they don't like Americans?

I mean, look at everybody around them.

That they're not people that you would want to hang out with. Are they? Pragmatism there anyone on the Kamala side, on that time, that you're like, you know, they just seem like fun. You know. They just seem like fun.

Where on the other side, you have people who disagree with each other. You have -- you have Tulsi, on Trump's side.

You have RFK Jr. You have Elon Musk. I mean, it is kind of the cool kids club. And they're all fun. They're all having fun. Well, I mean, RFK is not exactly fun.

It hurts.

Every time he speaks, I grab my throat, it hurts.

STU: What are you talking about?

He's the most fun. The guy is putting whales in his car. He's just picking up bears on the side of the road, and strapping them to his steering wheel for some reason. He's got all the good stories.

GLENN: You know, just a normal day in America, when the headlines read, Biden bites babies at White House event. I mean, nothing to see here, right? Just a normal -- another day in America.

Okay. There -- there is also from Fox news, an exclusive report, House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer accused the White House of releasing a false transcript of President Biden's remarks in which he referred to people as garbage.

Now, this is crazy!

We -- we saw the video!

And they release a transcript, that is not what he said. And then -- and then they tried to defend it, saying, well, no. He was just talking about the one comedian.

No!

No! He wasn't. He wasn't.

Go ahead. Here it is.

BIDEN: From Puerto Rico, where I am from. From my home state of Delaware. They're good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there, is his supporters. It's unconscionable.

STU: Yeah. But where is the possessive apostrophe in that? That is the debate.

I mean, they really are trying to say, that he was saying the garbage is held by only one supporter.

That was like their real argument on this, which is nonsense. Just say the guy is incoherent. And shouldn't be president of the United States. It would solve all your problems on this. You can't say this.

GLENN: You can't say that.

Because there's a deal. Shut up, Joe. Just shut up. Let's get through this. And maybe we'll help you build this library.

You notice? He can't raise the money for a presidential library.

Hmm. Yeah. You're the best president ever.

Did Biden call Trump supporters “GARBAGE” to SABOTAGE Kamala?
RADIO

Did Biden call Trump supporters “GARBAGE” to SABOTAGE Kamala?

President Biden recently called Trump supporters “garbage”, although his handlers insist that he meant to say the MAGA agenda is “garbage.” But did Biden have an ulterior motive? Was this meant to sabotage Kamala Harris’ campaign as revenge for his ousting? Or did Biden just fumble his response to comedian Tony Hinchcliffe’s joke about Puerto Rico? Glenn and Stu discuss. Plus, they review the latest election stats: Will the 2024 election be a landslide or a close race? And will Democrats believe it if Trump wins?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. So President Biden last night, I mean, I just -- I love the Kamala Harris speech. We will go into that, a little bit later on in the program.

The Kamala Harris speech is all, he's a Nazi. He's a Nazi.

He's a Nazi.

We should unite and put our divisions behind us.

By the way, he's a Nazi, he's a Nazi. He's a Nazi.

At the same time she's doing that, President Biden says this. Cut four.

BIDEN: From Puerto Rico where I'm -- in the state of Delaware, there are good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there, is his supporters. His -- his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable.

GLENN: So that is a good, happy message for six days before the election.

STU: I've heard that a bunch of times since he said it. I hadn't paid attention to this next sentence. So he says, the -- every Trump supporter is garbage, but I can't believe their demonization.

He's just, I mean, look, he's -- I don't know. Is it -- that he's just so far down the dementia road, that he doesn't even know what he's saying at this point? But whatever.

GLENN: There's a chance he's trying to sabotage.

STU: There is something. It's not 0 percent chance he's trying to sabotage her campaign. Because this totally destroyed her day. Her big day in the sun. Celebrating the January 6th anniversary. The site of the January 6th speech.

GLENN: I know that's what everybody is talking about. At the grocery store. They're not talking about the prices of groceries and gas and everything -- they're just talking about what happened on the ellipse, on January 6th.

STU: That's the big thing people are discussing. And it's laughable. Whatever she tried to accomplish today. Whether it was intentional or not, it was a blessed event. I love Joe Biden today. I never felt better about the guy.

GLENN: Try cut five, please. Here's Trump.

DONALD: That's what it says. That's what it says.

So you have -- remember Hillary?

She said deplorable?

And then she said irredeemable. But she said deplorable, and that didn't work out.

Garbage, I think is worse. But he didn't know. Please forgive him. Please forgive him, for he knoweth not what he said.
(laughter)

GLENN: Tell me Trump hasn't been around the Bible lately, and people who believe in the Bible.

By the way, CNN said, it is just -- that happened because of his stutter.

Well, was he going to say garbage.

STU: Great garbage!

GLENN: So stupid.

This thing is going to come down to the wire. Now, I hope, that it is a landslide.

And there are some things out there, that make it look like it could be a landslide. At least in some states. But do you have any doubt, Stu. That in the swing states, this is going to come down to the wire?

STU: Yeah.

It might not feel like that afterward.

I think the -- there's a good chance that one of these candidates wins all seven of them.

I was looking at -- I can't remember whose model it was. It might have been Nate Silvers, who said the most likely outcome in his model, when it comes to the swing states, is someone wins all seven them. The number one outcome is Donald Trump winning all seven of the swing states. The number two most likely outcome is Kamala Harris winning all seven swing states.

GLENN: Well, of course. That's like the number three model is Daffy Duck winning all three. I mean --

STU: No. No, no. You don't have to win all seven. You can win four and lose three. The point is, it looks like, the way these things usually run. They're correlated. Right?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So you usually don't -- you can't just flip a coin on all the swing states. And say, well, this is what is going to happen. Usually, if one person wins, there's more likely a chance they will win the next state and the next state.

So at the end of the day, that won't feel like a close election. I think people will be like, oh, gosh. Trump won 310 electoral votes, that doesn't mean it's not a close election. But that doesn't mean it isn't a close election.

GLENN: Yeah. It will be a close election state by state.

Yeah, Biden won 306 last time. That felt like the closest election possible, right? He still won 306. It was 306 to 232 in the electoral account.

GLENN: They will be counting for weeks. Weeks. Unless it's an absolute blowout. Weeks.

STU: Be honest. There's a path of Kamala Harris winning this election. We find out pretty much on election night.

Because the first two states that will know, that really matter will be Georgia and North Carolina.

And if Kamala Harris wins those. If she wins those by three or four points. I don't want to say what the outcome of the election is.

Most likely that means that Trump has lost it. It's not impossible for him to win till.

If he loses Georgia and North Carolina. He's probably in really big trouble.

So we -- that's probably the most likely -- everyone is like, I want to know on election night. Do you?

Because the most likely we know on election night, is Kamala Harris does really well in Georgia and North Carolina.

GLENN: I don't know. I'm not sure that's true.

STU: As far as early -- early on that night, I would say yes.

If Kamala Harris wins Georgia and North Carolina, to me, you're at a 95 percent chance she's winning this election.

But if Trump -- if it's close, and then Trump winds up winning, or whatever. He can still go up to the blue wall, and pick out a few states.

GLENN: They will absolutely declare a win on that night. Both candidates will declare a win on that night.

This will be -- I lay it out in tonight's show, and it is fascinating to see what the Democrats have planned.

Because they have planned for all of this stuff. There's a five-step plan, after the vote!

Five steps that they are going to do to make sure that Donald Trump doesn't get into office. And it's all laid out. It's amazing!

This is -- according to Mark Alias, this is going to be the most litigated election in all of human history!

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: That sounds like fun, huh? That sounds like real fun. We'll give you that tonight on my Wednesday night special that you don't want to miss.

By the way, everything that is going on now, with -- with Media Matters and the New York Times, they are setting up, the silencing of voices.

Across the spectrum of conservatives!

Our voices will be lost. And they could be lost, you know, during any kind of recount. Or any kind of -- they will start suppressing us hard. They already are!

I mean, our algorithms are so skewed against you finding our voice, it's unbelievable.

However, when this thing takes off. If there's any kind of anybody, saying that the election was tinkered with at all, unless it's the left saying it, if it's us saying that, that this election was stolen.

This election -- we have to look into this. We will be silenced. If the left is saying that, they will be amplified.

And the defense will be silenced.

That's what's happening.

That's what they have in play, right now.

You have to be the person, that can look at the news, and say, no. Wait. Wait. Wait.

Don't believe that.

Believe this. And that's what Propaganda Wars, my new book is all about.

You have a chance of losing us. You have a very good chance of losing contact with us, in the next couple of months, unless you are really going right directly to our source.

But you won't find us in your news feed. I'm convinced of it. I hope I'm wrong. But I'm convinced that the algorithms, if there's any question on this. The algorithms will silence us.

And I mean, everybody in the conservative world.

They will suppress our voices.


STU: Do you think there's any chance that there are aren't massive claims of fraud after this election?

GLENN: Landslide is the only way.

STU: Landslide one side or the other?

GLENN: Yeah.

Landslide on the other side, I don't think our side will believe.

STU: And I think the same thing applies with them. Don't you think?

I think they will -- you think they will believe it if Trump blows her out.

GLENN: What have Republicans done to cheat in this? We know --

STU: What factor is that?

You're talking about having evidence of further claims?

What does that have to do with anything?

GLENN: You're right. You're right.

STU: They will say it. If Trump wins a close election, they will say this election is stolen.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Every election that I've experienced in my adult life, that they've lost, they've said that.

I'm trying to think of, is there an exception to that? Trump 2016, they lost. They said the election was stolen.

2012, they won. They didn't have to say it. 2008, they won. They didn't have to say it. 2004, they said it. 2000, they said it.

GLENN: Yeah. John Kerry. Al Gore.

STU: 1996, they didn't -- they won, so they didn't need it. 1992, they won, they didn't need it. 1988, I was 12. So every single election --

GLENN: Of your lifetime.

STU: -- of my lifetime as an adult, they have said that the election was stolen.

GLENN: And every -- every Republican, in my lifetime, because in '67, '68, I was three.

So every -- every Republican in my lifetime has been called a fascist or a Nazi. Every single time.

STU: Gosh. And how can they have any currency anymore?

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: It's amazing, they're still doing this same playbook.

GLENN: Still doing it. Still doing it.

Things are changing though.

Things are dramatically changing.