Radical transparency IS coming to America, Glenn says, but only if Kash Patel is confirmed to head the FBI. In fact, Glenn makes one of his boldest predictions yet: Kash will release the Epstein client list on his FIRST DAY leading the bureau. On tonight’s episode of "Glenn TV," Glenn is joined by @PBDPodcast host Patrick Bet-David and co-hosts Tom Ellsworth, Adam Sosnick, and Vincent Oshana. They discuss the damning ramifications releasing the Epstein list (or the Diddy list) may have for those who were associated with the island but were not guilty of partaking in criminal activity there — something President Trump expressed concern for before becoming elected. Plus, what will releasing the JFK files do to the CIA? We now know the CIA was in Miami following Lee Harvey Oswald, so why then didn’t the CIA stop him? Public trust in our federal government dropped substantially after the JFK assassination, and it continued to plummet over the next several decades until it hit a new low (14%) under Biden. Can Trump — with the radical transparency Glenn predicts is coming — turn that all around? PBD predicts Trump could increase that number to 50% or even 60%. Democrats see it coming, too. Their meltdowns over the DOGE and Elon Musk ending wasteful spending now are on fully display: “Accountability is here, and they’re panicking.” Lastly, Glenn and the "PBD Podcast" guys discuss how the first assassination attempt against Trump changed him as a person, providing him with both laser focus and an understanding that his job in the White House is much bigger than himself.
PBD Reacts to Glenn Beck's Prediction the Epstein Files WILL Be Exposed | Glenn TV | Ep 413
Trump’s Treasury Secretary SHUTS DOWN Reporter Trying to Attack DOGE
The Biden government hired 80,000 new IRS agents to make sure YOU followed every one of their complicated tax laws. But when President Trump ordered DOGE to audit the government, politicians and the media squealed! That should speak volumes about what their true priorities are, Glenn says. Glenn and Pat review some of the latest pushback from the establishment, including how Democrats are whining about Elon Musk and how a judge tried to block even Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent from accessing Treasury data.
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: You know, it's astonishing how many people have found a very clear common sense voice and a lack of fear.
They seem to be all over this administration.
Stephen Miller is one of them, don't you think, Pat?
PAT: Definitely.
And he was talking about the angry Dems. And had some things to say about them. Deputy chief, Stephen Miller, cut 14.
VOICE: The Democrat use of the term unelected is really quite remarkable here. Donald Trump was elected in an overwhelming landslide.
These are Donald Trump staffers. It's like saying that Mike Walls, National Security adviser is unelected. Or Susan Wiles, the chief of staff is unelected. Or Donald Trump's communication team is unelected.
This is presidential staff that serves at the pleasure and for the president, just as I do. I am a staffer, for the president of the United States. He is elected. He is the one that the American people have chosen to implement his agenda. This is the agenda the American people voted for.
That he is asking his staff. His subordinates. His employees. To implement.
The unelected power in this country is the rogue bureaucracy.
USAID is unelected. The FBI, that persecuted President Trump for eight years, is unelected.
The CIA and those who have laundered intelligence to try to change the foreign policy of the United States are unelected.
President Trump is restoring democracy, by controlling the federal bureaucracy.
There is one man in the country, who is elected bit whole American people, to implement an agenda they support. That is the president.
Every other officer in this country, members of Congress and Senate are elected at the state and local level. The Constitution puts one man in charge of the federal executive branch. And that's the president.
GLENN: Understood. Understood.
PAT: Let him finish.
GLENN: He's absolutely awesome.
And absolutely right.
I mean, that's the thing -- I just don't understand. When they were -- when the federal judge tried to block and did for this weekend.
But it's not going to last long.
Tried to block the secretary of the Treasury
PAT: Yeah.
GLENN: From even looking at the data, that is produced by the Treasury?
PAT: Yeah.
GLENN: Who is running things? My gosh.
PAT: Well, Treasury secretary Scott Bessent was interviewed over the weekend, and he had some things to say about -- just about that!
VOICE: Mr. Secretary, we are inside the cash room in the Treasury department. It's almost impossible to overstate how important the work that's done in the US building. Is the US financial system.
Yet right now, there is widespread concern about the DOGE teams access to sensitive payment systems.
Are you worried at all, that that access and that tinkering of the payment systems, could affect the Treasury's market or cause any disruption.
VOICE: Well, good. Thank you for asking me about that.
Because there's a lot of misinformation out there.
First of all, when you say the DOGE team, these are Treasury employees. Two Treasury employees, one of whom I personally interviewed in his final round. There is no tinkering with the system. They are on read only. They are looking. They can make no changes. It is an operational program to suggest improvements. So we make 1.3 billion payments a year. And this is two employees who are working with a group of long-standing employees.
VOICE: The letter that the treasury department sent earlier this week, talked about how the team currently does not have access to change the system.
Have they, at any point this year, had the ability to make changes?
VOICE: Absolutely not. This is no different than you would have at a private company.
By the way, the ability to change the system, sits at the Federal Reserve.
So it does not even lie in this building. So they can make suggestions on how to change the system, but we don't even run the system.
VOICE: And if they ask her, they request the ability to change the system. Would you grant that?
VOICE: No. Again, they have no ability to change the system.
I have no ability to grant that change. That they can make suggestions. Then it would go to the Federal Reserve. And just like any large system. There would be tests.
There would be this. There would be that.
And then the fed will determine whether these changes are robust or not.
VOICE: As the Secretary of Treasury, you also oversee the IRS.
Do you know what kind of access the team has to IRS data or individual taxpayer data?
VOICE: Well, I'm glad you asked that too.
Because, look, the IRS, the privacy issue is one of the biggest issues. And over the past four years, we've seen a lot of leaks out of there. The IRS systems are quite poor.
When I started in college in 1980, I learned the program. I think, there are 12 different systems at the IRS that still run on COBOL. But as of now, there is no engagement at the IRS.
VOICE: Elon Musk just a few -- half an hour ago, tweeted out that Treasury needs to stop approving certain payments. Has your staff tried to block any payments at the Treasury?
VOICE: We have not.
And I'm glad you asked that too. And just to put it in perspective, Elon and I are completely aligned in terms of cutting waste and increasing accountability and transparency for the American people.
I believe that this DOGE program in my adult life is one of the most important audits of government. Or changes to government structure, we have seen.
That when I was in my 20s, we had the grace report. And there's some great suggestions that came out of that.
Never implemented under Clinton and Gore.
I think it was to government efficiency. Or to reduce government. Nothing happened.
So, you know, President Trump came in. There's a big agenda.
And I think there are gigantic cost savings for the American people here.
And I think it's unfortunate the way the media wants to lampoon what is going on.
PAT: Yes.
GLENN: Thank you.
VOICE: These are highly trained professionals. And this is not some broken band going around doing things. This is methodical, and it is going to yield big savings.
PAT: Jeez. And what's wrong with that? Is there anything wrong with that? I don't think so.
GLENN: Right. Did you hear a nonhostile question coming from the Bloomberg reporter?
PAT: No. A nonhostile? No. But he handled it in a nonhostile way.
He was great, wasn't he?
GLENN: Yeah, very well.
I mean, yeah. And it's a little scary, that the Treasury Secretary can't make any of these decisions, they're all made by the Federal Reserve.
That's a problem, which is why DOGE wants to bring Ron Paul in for an audit of the Fed, which would be fantastic.
PAT: It would be great.
GLENN: Can you imagine what we would find at the Fed now?
PAT: Oh, my gosh. I can't imagine it. And it's the fed with the power to make these changes.
That's amazing too.
That they can't even do it from the Treasury. That's kind of eye-opening.
But I think they need to use that term audit of government more. Because what's wrong with that.
GLENN: Yes. That's why they're going into the Pentagon. The seventh audit failed.
Let me ask you something: You know, she brings up the IRS.
The government hired 80,000 new IRS agents, to go over your records. To make sure nothing -- no funny business is going on with you.
That you're paying every dime that you're supposed to pay. Because there's a shortfall.
No! There's not a shortfall.
They're spending too much. When we go in, and try to send accountants in, to say, how did you spend this money?
The same thing the IRS does to you, every year, they squeal like little pigs.
I don't know.
If -- you know, you went in to the IRS every year with the attitude that the Democrats have.
You would be audited every year. Because somebody, probably rightfully so would go, wait a minute.
Why are you panicking so much. Why are you saying we can't have access to your records?
This is a legal operation. What's happening here?
And it -- it kills me that the media is sticking up for corruption.
Whose side are they on?
PAT: Well, they're on the side of corruption. Because they're benefiting from it.
And that's been the problem for how many decades now?
How many centuries now?
GLENN: I know. I know.
PAT: Have we run the nation in a way that the Founding Fathers intended, since, I don't know. 1830. Probably not.
GLENN: No. So, you know what, I have a copy of the first budget. It was on the front page of a Columbia newspaper from South Carolina.
And it -- it lays out George Washington's budget.
And it actually asks Congress to increase the budget for firewood, because the Capitol was cold.
And they needed extra firewood to keep things warm.
PAT: Uh-huh.
GLENN: And I don't even know if that got passed. I have no idea if that got passed.
PAT: Jeez.
GLENN: But that's the way we should be. Oh, you know what, put a sweater on, Congress. Oh, you're a little cold in there. Put a sweater on.
PAT: Exactly.
GLENN: They're the ones that should be putting the sweater on. Not us. Not us.
PAT: Look how Thomas Jefferson struggled with the Louisiana Purchase.
I mean, we almost didn't do it. Because he thought, it wasn't proper. He thought it was unconstitutional.
But it turned out to be too good a deal, and we did it anyway.
But they had a completely different mindset. You know, the funds that the federal government had, that they got from American taxpayers, whether they pay in excise taxes, or wherever their taxes came from. Those were sacred funds.
And they didn't just throw them out to anybody for any reason.
GLENN: Yes. And look at --
PAT: We've got to get back to that.
GLENN: We can spend a trillion dollars and have it all just vanish on us.
But if Donald Trump says, let's take $2 trillion and buy Greenland.
Everybody would freak out. Which one should you freak out about?
The investment, or the loss?
PAT: Uh-huh.
GLENN: It's -- it's -- it's an unspeakable horror, what is going on. And how the people are reacting to it.
You know, everybody in America should be happy about this.
One other truth speaker. Somebody else who is just very good at saying exactly what he means. And getting right to the truth. Is Hegseth.
Here he is, talking about our strength. Cut 22.
VOICE: I think the single dumbest phrase in military history, is our diversity is our strength.
I think our strength is our unity. Our strength is our shared purpose. Regardless of our background. Regardless of how we grew up. Regardless of our gender. Regardless of our race. In this department, we will treat everyone equally.
We will treat everyone with fairness. We will treat everyone with respect, and we will judge you as an individual by your merit. And by your commitment to the team and the mission.
That's how it has been. That's how it will be.
Any inference otherwise, is meant to divide or create complications, that otherwise should not and do not exist.
GLENN: I've got to tell you. How is that controversial at all?
We're -- you know why they keep teams together.
You go through buds and you keep that team together, because their strength is their unity. You don't send them into war with a bunch of people that are all different with each other. You send them into war that all have different skills, yes.
But are acting as one, with one purpose.
New Task Force Could Expose The Government's DARKEST Secrets
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna has been tapped to lead the House Oversight Committee's "Task Force on Declassification of Federal Secrets." This task force will look into declassifying information on the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations, UAPs/UFOs, the Jeffrey Epstein client list, the origins of COVID-19, 9/11, and more. But Glenn has a few questions, including whether getting Congress involved will slow the process down. Rep. Luna clears up the confusion and says that Trump appointees, like AG Pam Bondi and, hopefully, FBI Director Kash Patel, will still make the big decisions. Plus, she addresses criticism of her promise to subpoena witnesses related to the JFK assassination.
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Anna Paulina Luna is with me now from Congress.
She's just been appointed to lead the task force on declassification of federal secrets. Anna, welcome. How are you?
ANNA: Hey, Glenn. Happy to be back on. Thank you!
GLENN: Okay. Now, I just have to say, yesterday, unbeknownst to me before you are appointed, I was on a show with Patrick Bet-David.
And I said, within 15 days, they are going to release the client list for Jeffrey Epstein. No way! That can't be true. And I said, I'm telling you, Kash Patel, I talked to him over the summer. He is for radical transparency. It's in the hands of the director of the FBI.
I think he does it day number one. Let's give him a few days to settle in. They didn't believe me. They said, we're going to track this.
So, Anna, you're going to make me look bad.
And I don't care if lives are destroyed or whatever. But you can't make me look bad.
VOICE: No! You know, we actually also sent a letter yesterday to the Department of Justice. As you know, Pam Bondi is heading up that organization, and we also asked for it there. But I also -- I'm in the same belief, that Kash will get confirmed.
I think he will absolutely be pushing for radical transformation. I also too like to point out, you know, at the same time, that we're basically announcing our press conference at the declassification passports, we actually also found out that the SPI just so happened to locate thousands of pages of previously undiscovered JFK files.
So, look, I know a lot of people are like, well, the American people need to see the information first, and you actually will see it.
It will be declassified. But the reason why we're doing the task force is, A, just because President Trump signed an executive order doesn't mean that bureaucrats and even Intelligence agencies won't attempt to block it.
So we want to make sure that's followed through. We do have punitive authority to hold them accountable, if they don't, A.
And then, B, I think it's incredibly important to look at the evidence that we know now. Which is sure as heck a lot different than what they had even 60 years ago, and what we're finding. What we're finding, and from what I have looked at.
To stuff that's already out there. Also, too, taking into account, many of the doctors that were actually at that initial responding -- or at that initial hospital. I do think that there were two shooters.
And I think the whole Magic Bully theory that the Warren commission pushed, I think that was faulty.
I know another president at the time, also believed that that was a faulty theory.
And so, you know, I'm eager to accommodate this. I know that there's many Democrats and Republicans that also want to get to the bottom of this.
And I am simply asking the questions that every American has been asking for decades.
GLENN: So I have a very good friend, Paul Biets (phonetic), who has the museum of the American soldier in Texas. And he had -- he spent a long time to get the exact right gun, the way it was modified. A scope and everything else, and he just had it redone. And I have to tell you, I've held it.
I will take it out to the range next week. I've held the gun, looked through the scope.
I just don't think you could do it. I mean, it's just so difficult!
ANNA: There were reports from doctors at the time, some of which were first and second-year med students who were at the hospital, in the room where Kennedy was brought. And they reported an entry wound in the neck. From some of the footage that you can see.
Video of Kennedy being shot.
But also the doctors that ran the autopsies at Bethesda, Maryland, had reported seeing an entry wound in the back. And so we're talking about multiple shots here.
I think the whole idea that they would try to just ignore the evidence, or at least try to bury that, and not even answer the question. Is suspect to me. And so I think the whole idea of wanting to push against declassification or even trying to pooh-pooh the evidence that has now been brought to the forefront.
Look, the obligation of the US government to release this to the American people -- Kennedy was arguably one of the most popular presidents, and he was assassinated.
So why did they try so hard to push back against any questioning?
And that's where I come in.
And where the task force comes in.
You know, I'm also telling people, if you're seeing people with large -- especially, pushing against declassification or attempting to discredit. And I thought, immediately after my press conference, try to discredit the efforts of Congress to actually follow through and get this done.
In my opinion, bad actors are just on both sides. If you really have nothing to hide, then you should not be afraid of the questioning.
You shouldn't be afraid of information getting out to the American people.
GLENN: Let me push back on a couple of things, just from, you know, playing devil's advocate.
ANNA: Yeah.
GLENN: Why would you start with the JFK? Why is that even important?
It happened a year before I was born. Yesterday was my 61st birthday. How is this relevant? How is this relevant?
ANNA: I think -- so when we chose to kind of go through the timelines. It's the MLK files and the JFK files that are going to be released first.
So we wanted to help go through that information. And then also clip some of the historical narratives that were painted on these assassinations.
Obviously, confirming -- or holding hearings to actually present you evidence, I think is important for knowing and fully understanding the story, right?
So that's the first thing.
GLENN: Are these going to be open hearings?
ANNA: Yeah. These are all open. And the reason I want them open. Is because I think the American people will go through the evidence. I am also going to be doing something similar to what I did, to the UAP hearings, which allowed people to ask questions. We're also bringing in experts.
There's a few individuals that I want to bring in. From the previous investigations. That actually were pointing out some pretty incredible evidence, that pointed potentially second shooter.
And they were pooh-poohed. And I think those people deserve a platform.
And if we find anything, it's -- you know, having Kash confirmed is incredibly important. He's also going to bring forward -- I would argue, that have been hidden from the American people.
So this is obviously a big effort. We're not perfect. But we do know that the American people deserve this.
And what we're fighting for is total and complete transparency.
GLENN: The other pushback question I have. And this one is actually pretty sincere from me.
And that is, once we get Congress involved. Then we're re-litigating everything.
The more Congress gets involved, the slower it will happen.
And the higher the percentage is.
It's just not going to come out. We will just get pages and pages of redacted crap.
LINDY: Well, so the whole purpose and objective of this task force is to actually ensure, with President Trump's executive order. That the agencies and the bureaucrats in those agencies, do exactly what that executive order says, which is to declassify it.
So we're not going to be siloing or holding any information, that won't be available to the American people.
So this is all going to be out there.
You will be able to go through it yourself. It will be online from what I gather.
Similar to how they've declassified previous documents from the FBI and the CIA.
So, again, we are simply, reopening the investigation with new evidence. Also, bringing in credible witnesses that will be verified and confirmed via House Oversight, the committee itself.
And we are going to be opening this up to the American people.
So you will access to the same documents that we are looking at.
We are simply ensuring, we will not get blockaded. Or this information is not siloed.
GLENN: Unbelievable.
And when do we get to the things?
By the way, the answer for me, the answer to my first question to you, was, it's relevant. Because I think they've been doing this kind of stuff forever.
And it shows a pattern. If they were doing it in 63. What are they doing now?
I just don't think -- go ahead.
ANNA: You know what is interesting is, if you ask those questions. There are some people.
And to be clear, these people largely exist in the media. And they're largely bad actors.
When you have someone, instead of answering the question, and having a respectful dialogue. To discredit something as a conspiracy theory or try to gaslight into you thinking, you should not be asking the question. That's when you know they are hiding something.
GLENN: Right.
ANNA: So I've talked to many Democrats. Many well-known Democrats. That are just like, we want in on this task force. Because we have questions.
And it just doesn't sit right. Look, this -- this entire task force. I don't believe that this would be possible. Had President Trump not gotten into office.
Had our CIA director not been confirmed. Had there not been people placed in positions of power, that are true ideologues like you and I.
You know, to be clear, I think that also Marco Rubio played a part at -- the Secretary of State's office.
I think that, you know, there are going to be many people. And some of these investigations that will at least give us access to whatever information.
Look, we've asked to declassify everything I've list in that press conference.
COVID-19 origin. 9/11 files. Look what just came out yesterday.
We find out that the FBI was basically ordering lunch for someone that was working with the pilots that crashed the plane into the twin towers. I mean, that's ridiculous. And that's all coming out now.
And that's why we ask these questions on the 9/11 files.
How could it have been prevented? How much did the government truly know?
I mean, look, I could care less if people think I'm crazy for doing this.
I can tell you, I am joined by many high-profile people in Congress, Democrats who have the same questions. And so we are not going to stop.
GLENN: Jeffrey Epstein. When is that coming out?
ANNA: Well, I have the letter out to Pam Bondi. I know Kash Patel has been supportive of it.
So hopefully, once they're confirmed, previously they said that the Epstein list could not be released. This is mind you, under Biden's Department of Justice because there was an open case.
Right? That's what they kept pointing to.
You hear that Pam Bondi. Before she was confirmed.
She called for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein client list. So we're pushing for it. Go ahead.
GLENN: So will Pam and Kash be the ones to make the decision, we're going to release it? They will be the ones.
ANNA: Yes, they will be the ones.
Again, I'm going off what we were told as the previous administrations. But what they were saying, that there was an open investigation.
So I believe that Pam has the authority to release that. And, look, I don't believe that any of that should have been classified.
If there are people that were doing bad things. We should know about it.
GLENN: It's unbelievable.
I mean, radical transparency.
It is the only thing that will heal our nation.
Is if we deal with all of the corruption that we have been dealing with. That we know has happened.
And if we can get an honest look.
You know, maybe. Maybe the Warren commission was right.
I don't know.
CAROL: We should be able to know that, and look at the evidence for ourselves. Yes.
GLENN: Yes. All of the evidence. All of the evidence. Without protecting anybody.
Anna, thank you.
It's got to be -- what was it like to be -- did you get the call from the president?
How did this work?
ANNA: Initially, in full transparency, this was actually supposed to -- the task force looked a little bit different. And I chose to expand it. Because even our investigators said, there's a lot here. If we're truly -- our absolute objective is to begin restoring trust in the relationship with the American people.
We have to go into these, you know, different theories. Going to these cases. And investigate. And actually find the truth. And let the American people decide.
I agree with them.
Also, Glenn. There were two other members that were potentially going to be taking over the initial task force.
And they turned it downed, because there was a climate of fear, that it was considered dangerous territory.
And what I will tell you, I do not believe that it's dangerous territory. Because we have, you know, the 800-pound gorilla in the White House, and our allies in the Intelligence Agencies. That are pushing for this.
So it's not just one person. I think where you had, you know, previous historical -- it was one person that was leading up the charge.
But when it's a group effort pushing for this, it's -- it's a systematic change that occurred.
And so in my opinion, I think I'm going to be okay.
But, you know, a lot of people. I had a reporter that called me actually, a very well-known reporter from Fox News yesterday said, it's interesting.
One of the initial reporters that had reported that there were three shots heard at the JFK assassination. One that was -- one of the prizes for writing. And he actually committed suicide several years later.
Stuff like that has happened in the past. And I just -- I'm in the perspective and belief, that right now, we have a very small window of time. To bring true change. You see everything happening with USAID.
Mike Benz has been uncovering a lot. Elon Musk has been uncovering a lot.
But there are a lot of good people that are really cleaning the system. You saw 40,000 federal employees resigned. Or not resigned, but chose to leave the workforce.
So you're seeing a big change happen, and I'm not saying that this is a complete fix. But it definitely is going to change I think our country long-term and historically.
I'll also tell you this, Glenn. Yesterday, after we made the announcement, I felt a massive orchestrated campaign, specifically coming from a lot of other people that had typically been political on social media. That were trying to discredit what I was saying about potential witnesses, and trying to spin it.
And the reason why they were doing it, is because the Warren Commission presented a faulty theory on the bullet. The magic bullet theory.
To think that that was how Kennedy was taken out. And the Texas governor --
GLENN: But they were -- they were saying, nobody is alive. So who were you going to --
ANNA: Yeah, that's not true. First of all, I was using the Warren commission, as an example of the commissions that have been set up. The hearings that have been set up. But who we are actually looking to subpoena. I don't want to say their names yet.
GLENN: No. No. No.
ANNA: Are individuals that, A, were -- are at Bethesda, in the room during the 8:00 p.m. autopsy that the military did. Individuals that were on the assassination board, that that did not agree with the findings initially with the new evidence coming out. I think that they will -- it will reflect their government employees, that should pass backgrounds. And then there's another individual who is going to be very key, in I think resetting the narrative upon Kennedy.
GLENN: Interesting. Anna, thank you so much. Interesting.
And you sound like you are. You know exactly what you're walking into. There's a new stat out this morning.
Over three times more people in DC are Googling criminal defense lawyer than anywhere else in the US right now.
So you've got a lot of people who are freaking out.
Keep up the good work.
God bless you.
Thank you.
The REAL Reason Democrats are TERRIFIED of Elon Musk & DOGE
Democrats are mad that President Trump is trusting Elon Musk with so much. Glenn explains why it’s dumb for them to whine about Elon being an “unelected billionaire” and getting rid of USAID – which isn’t even an “aid” agency. Plus, Glenn reviews how Democrats tried to force a security guard to let them into the Department of Education: “It’s quite amazing how these people are so freaked out. They’ve got to cover their tracks!”
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: So Bret Baier asked Donald Trump if he trusts Elon Musk. Cut nine.
DONALD: I don't know if it's kickbacks, or what's going on.
Look, I ran on it, and the people want me to find it, and I've had a great help with Elon Musk, who has been terrific.
VOICE: You say you trust him?
DONALD: Trustee Elon, oh, he's not gaining anything.
In fact, I wonder how he can devote the time into it, he's so into it.
But I told him to do that. Then I will tell him, very soon, like maybe in 24 hours, to go check the Department of Education. He will find the same thing.
Then I will go to the military. Let's check the military. We will find billions. Hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud and abuse. And, you know, the people elected me on that.
GLENN: He's absolutely right about this. I don't know how everybody is squealing.
First of all, you know, he's an unelected bureaucrat. Well, almost all bureaucrats are.
I don't know if you --
PAT: Uh-huh.
GLENN: If you follow that. But, you know, the Treasury Secretary, is also somebody who, you know, wasn't voted in.
Unelected bureaucrat.
He was appointed by the president to do this.
And we're going to -- we're going to find out about what's happening with this judge. See if it's overruled. Did you hear about what happened with the judge over the weekend, with the Treasury Department?
PAT: Yeah. Where they blocked going into the treasury books. Which --
GLENN: It was so -- it was so poorly written, that they didn't even differentiate between Elon Musk's people, and the Treasury secretary.
PAT: Right.
GLENN: So as it's written, the Treasury secretary can't even look at any of the data.
PAT: It's incredible.
He also, the judge who did the block.
Also didn't mention what law they're violating. He just said, it's violating the law. What law is being violated here?
GLENN: What law? What law?
PAT: This is a person appointed by the president to look into this.
So I don't see how that could violate any laws.
GLENN: No. No.
I mean, and who is not for looking into all of this stuff?
Honestly, I mean, you know, I can't wait until he gets to the Pentagon. Because how are the Democrats going to say, that we somehow or another, are, you know -- we don't care about national defense? We care about national defense!
PAT: Yeah.
GLENN: I also care about fraud. You know, it's -- the same thing with all of this stuff about aid.
First of all, aid, USAID, it's not aid. It's AID. Okay? It is for international development. That's what that's for.
It's not an aid program. Or an aid agency.
We have aid agencies. That's not one of them.
This is soft power.
And, quite honestly, it is from the beginning, been a CIA operation.
So how are -- I'm not against aid.
I'm against corruption. And I'm also against a lot of this soft power being done, that nobody knows about.
Why are we just finding out about this stuff?
And what we going to find in the Pentagon, oh, my gosh. We're going to find really bad stuff in the Pentagon. Really bad.
PAT: And none of us is against aid. It's just the aid that is being dispersed to people that you mentioned isn't aid.
And the other thing, it's not government agencies, that should be doing this.
It's individuals who are tasked with charity.
GLENN: No!
PAT: And helping others.
We're the ones, individual choice. To -- we shouldn't be forced!
Once you're forced into it, it's not charity anyway.
GLENN: No. It's not.
PAT: So I don't understand how all of the responsibility for aid worldwide is now on the US government.
That's not the way it's supposed to be.
GLENN: Nope. Nope.
And I don't know if you saw this.
But the NIH. They're going crazy now.
Because the NIH. When Trump's people first came in.
They said, we're going to cut the maximum indirect cost rate for research institutions.
Now, most people read that. And they don't even understand what that is. That means, how much of this is going?
How much of 1 dollar is going actually to the program, of research, and how much is going for overhead?
Again, we told you before, any charity that is 85 cents on the dollar. Is one that you start to look at.
If it's 80, 75 cents. You're getting a bad rating for that.
This is 60 cents on the dollar, goes to the management.
Goes to overhead costs.
I want 40 cents on every dollar? You think that's wise?
This is going to save us billions. They're predicting now $9 billion for this project alone. $9 billion.
So go ahead and play cut two, here.
If members of Congress -- peoples cut 12.
This is members of Congress, trying to get into the Department of Education over the weekend.
VOICE: Do they know that --
VOICE: Ask the question again. That's important.
VOICE: Were you told. Are you making the decision to stand in front of the store, on your own behalf. On behalf of the Department of Education.
GLENN: This is the security guard.
VOICE: So everybody is --
VOICE: We're doing our jobs.
GLENN: Okay. So here they are, members of Congress trying to get in, trying to break into the Department of Education. It's closed for the weekend. And they say, they're doing their job. And they're questioning the security guard. Why aren't you letting us in. And all he said, it's not going to happen. Not today. It's not going to happen. You're not going in.
It's quite amazing how these people are so freaked out, they've got to cover their tracks.
I'm convinced that's what it is.
Here's Donald Trump responding to this. Cut 13.
VOICE: Democratic lawmakers trying to get into the Department of Education earlier today.
VOICE: Oh. I see the same ones.
I see Maxine Waters.
A low-life. I see all these people. They don't love our country. They don't love our country.
We want great education. So they ranked 40 countries in education, we're ranked dead last. Dead last.
But the good news is, we're number one in one category. You know what that is? Cost per pupil. We spend more per pupil than any other country in the world.
You look at Norway, Denmark, Sweden, various countries all up and down, Finland. China does very well in education, and then you look at us.
We spend much more money than they do per pupil than any other way. But we spend much more money than they do, and yet we're ranked this year, Biden's last year -- congratulations, Joe. We're ranked dead last. So what I want to see is education -- number one, I like choice. We all like choice.
But beyond choice, long beyond choice, I want to see it go back to the states, where great states who do so well, have no debt, they-re operated brilliantly. They'll be as good as Norway or Denmark or Sweden or any of the other highly ranked countries. They will -- I figure 35 to 38 states will be right at the top.
And the rest will come along. They'll have to come along, competitively. And, by the way, we will be spending --
GLENN: I will tell you -- I will tell you that it feels a little like when the allies marched into Germany, and the Germans were burning all of their documents to hide all the crimes.
It kind of feels a little like that.
Why Did Qualcomm FREAK OUT Over This Glenn Beck Interview?
Why is the big tech giant Qualcomm so nervous about ParkerVision CEO Jeffrey Parker appearing on The Glenn Beck Program? After Parker’s last appearance on Glenn’s show, Qualcomm filed a motion to shut him up and named Glenn over a dozen times. Parker joins Glenn again to give updates on the case and refute some of Qualcomm’s accusations against him.
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: So a couple of weeks ago, we had a guy on named Jeff Parker. He's the CEO and chairman of ParkerVision. He was making allegations that Qualcomm was in bed with the government, and -- and had screwed ParkerVision. Because what ParkerVision had done is come up with a chip that allows all of our phones and everything else to connect. To Bluetooth. They went into negotiation with Qualcomm.
Had all kinds of NDAs with them. And had to show them the technology. And suddenly, the deal fell apart. And then just a couple years later, Qualcomm comes out with this new amazing technology that can connect everybody's phones and other things to Bluetooth. Huh.
The story only gets more twisted and turned when you run into Eric Holder, and the DOJ. And a jury that says, Qualcomm took this technology and a judge who says, I'm going to sentence Qualcomm and talk about the -- the penalties. And a month later, the judge overturns the jury, and -- and says, no. Qualcomm didn't do anything wrong.
There's some weird stuff going on. Now, here's the update. Qualcomm freaked out about his appearance on this program.
And they filed a cease and desist against Jeff Parker and told him, not to speak out again!
And we called him.
And he said, I'll tell you what, why don't you book me for the show. I'll show you how much ceasing and desisting I'll be doing.
All right. Jeff Parker is with us.
Jeff, how are you, sir?
JEFF: Good morning, Glenn. I'm fine.
GLENN: So let's go over the part just quickly about you sign a cease and desist. All of a sudden, two years later, your technology is introduced by Qualcomm. They pretend, no. What are you talking about? That's not your technology. That's our technology. You take them to court. The jury rules in your favor, unanimous. The judge says, I'm going to apply penalties. Then a couple of weeks after that, Qualcomm has a fundraiser for Barack Obama. The head of Qualcomm has it at his house. Obama shows up. Then a couple of days after that, the DOJ under Eric Holder starts to probe your website. Finish that story.
JEFF: Sure. So thanks for having me back again.
GLENN: You bet.
JEFF: Yeah. So we win a unanimous jury verdict. We come back to the courthouse, after that jury verdict, and the judge hears the parties argue about what should happen next. And after listening to the arguments, the judge says, you know what, there is certainly going to be an ongoing royalty here, which is what Qualcomm would have to pay us for the continued use of our patents and technology.
GLENN: Right.
JEFF: And we are all excited. We leave the courthouse. A few days after that, we have a visit to our website by the White House.
The executive office of the president of the White House.
GLENN: Hmm.
JEFF: Just a few days before that visit, there's a fundraiser at the head of Qualcomm's home. One of the cofounder's homes. Raising money for the DNC.
And after that fundraiser, a few days later, there's this visit from the executive office of the president.
And about a month after that, is when the judge issued his final order, after having indicating before that his final order was going to include royalties. He not only didn't include royalties.
He reversed the jury verdict. And threw the case out.
GLENN: Unbelievable. So Eric Holder was at the DOJ at the time.
You start getting visits at your website, and you can track all of this. You have all of this. Eric Holder and the DOJ start to visit your website, that's only about this litigation. That's the only part they do.
And lo and behold, we find out that Eric Holder before he went to the DOJ, he worked for Qualcomm's largest lobbying firm. When he left the DOJ, guess where he went?
Back to Qualcomm's largest lobbying firm. So you're on the program, you lay all this out.
And now what has happened?
JEFF: Correct. So we're on your program about two weeks ago.
And literally, Glenn, the next day, Qualcomm contacts our attorneys, and they say, if your client doesn't remove his social media, and furthermore agree not to do anymore social media, we will file a motion with the court to gag him, to have this court take down the social media and prevent further conversation.
And, of course, I -- my attorneys are handling a patent case. So they say to me, we're not really experts in First Amendment rights. Freedom of speech rights. Could you please find an attorney who could help you with this?
So I ended up reaching out. And we engaged Marc Kasowitz of his firm. And the Kasowitz firm is a very fine law firm that handles these types of areas and many other areas of law. But Mark --
GLENN: Yeah. He's done a lot of work for Trump, has he not?
JEFF: He has. He has. Mark has handled a lot of president Trump's legal issues over the years. And I approach Mark.
And he heard this request from Qualcomm. And he said, outrageous. He said, this is -- this is ridiculous.
They can't gag you. So a couple days later, Qualcomm, in fact, filed a formal motion with the court that said, take down your social media and stop adding additional social media. And we were actually getting ready to file our opposition, but we first wanted to wait and see what the court was going to do.
And a few days later, the court finding this motion, frankly merit-less. And without any basis for what they're asking for, ruled at the end of last week, just this last Friday.
No. No Qualcomm. You don't get that request. So --
GLENN: Absolutely.
JEFF: So that was good to hear.
GLENN: That's fantastic. That's fantastic.
By the way, I don't have any firsthand knowledge of this.
But I -- I will bet you that our new director of the FBI and our new head of the DOJ saw that Blaze article, that lays all of this out. I'm just saying, that might have happened.
PAT: Well, Glenn, I hope so. Look, what Qualcomm has accused us of, is trying to taint a jury pool. We don't even have a trial date yet, set for this case.
So how are we going to taint a jury pool. But the thing that is really frustrating is the way they characterized our social media. And what we're saying. It's just completely false.
I'll give you an example. So an example of their -- of their characterization is they say, ParkerVision disparages the judicial process in the middle district of Florida and maligns the fairness of the forum.
Namely, ParkerVision impugns Judge Dalton's ruling, in the prior ParkerVision trial, falsely claiming that he improperly reversed the jury's verdict as a result of collusion between Qualcomm and the administration of then president Barack Obama.
Well, let me tell you, that's not true. What ParkerVision is doing is bringing public just facts. We're simply bringing facts. Here's the facts.
The facts are, the Department of Justice has been on our website 37 times.
We discovered shortly before our first trial, all the way until 2022 when I filed a freedom of information act request, asking, hey, Department of Justice. What are you doing on our website? Why are you on our website, so many days at the same time, looking at the same pages as Qualcomm.
Hey. What's this White House visit we had? Why were you only looking at litigation on Qualcomm on our patents? What's that about?
We've never had that fulfilled. So I'm not drawing any conclusions what this means. I'm simply stating the facts. The facts are that these visits happened. And we think we have a right to know, what they're about.
That's what they're asking for.
GLENN: Yeah. They're very suspicious. But that doesn't mean anything happened.
But, you know, there's enough there, not beyond a reasonable doubt. There's enough there, that, you know, we should probably ask some questions here.
JEFF: Yes. Exactly.
GLENN: There was a short seller. Can you tell me about the short seller? Whats his name? Farmwald. What's their name?
JEFF: Yeah, so when Qualcomm accuses us of trying to influence a jury. Again, a date hasn't even been set for a trial. It's pretty rich, Glenn.
Because back in our first trial. There was this persistent short seller. Who had been out posting on the financial message boards. Again and again and again. Trying to drive our stock price down. Our patents are no good. We don't have anything, blah, blah, blah. Well, let me tell you, from the time we filed this case against Qualcomm in 2011, until we won the jury verdict in 2013, over two years, he posted 200 times. Every business day he posted. And he posted predictions. The patents would fall.
They didn't.
The -- the patent case wouldn't go forward.
It did. Oh, even if we won. We would only win ten or $11 million.
He was only off by a factor of 20.
I mean, it went on and on and on.
Here's the real punch line. We got to depose this guy. And subpoena his emails, because after Qualcomm lost the case. He filed challenges to our patents. Which we found kind of suspicious.
And guess what we figured out in deposition of this guy?
Guess who he had been working against when we filed this lawsuit against Qualcomm.
GLENN: Qualcomm.
JEFF: Qualcomm.
GLENN: Do we have payments? And how do you mean working?
JEFF: Well, it turns out that Qualcomm was paying some of his lawyer's bills. Because he was worried apparently, about us suing him for something. I mean, if you're not doing something wrong, what are you worried about?
But he was worried about that. So he went to Qualcomm and he said, look, I'm not looking for you to pay me directly. But pay my legal bills. And our attorney said to him, you don't consider that to be some compensation?
No. I don't consider that to be any compensation. The point though --
GLENN: Why would --
JEFF: Yeah.
GLENN: Why would he meet his legal bills? If I'm not mistaken, this is years before -- three years before you knew that they were infringing, right?
JEFF: Yes. So we believe that he actually started communicating with them. Even before we filed our lawsuit.
So there's a lot of fishy things here.
But to keep it to the point of Qualcomm's motion to try to get us to be gagged, it's pretty interesting. That they would be so willing to work with a party, whose only mission was to put out mischaracterizations and falsehoods about ParkerVision. Its patents. Its technology. Et cetera.
But they be they turn around and accuse us of what they were supporting. Back during the time trial.
GLENN: All right. More in just a second. I have a new video, and I want to show you something from the judge in just a second.
First, let tell you about American Financing for just a moment.
What would it look like to be out of debt, especially all of our your high-interest debt? All of the stuff you have to put on your credit card. Even though, that interest rate is 20, 25, 30 percent?
It's not a fantasy to be out of debt. It could be your reality. If you're a homeowner, and you want to get out from under high-interest debt. Give American Financing a call today.
Last year, their salary-based mortgage consultants help customers save an average of $800 a month.
Now, imagine giving yourself a $10,000 raise. That's exactly what they can do for you today, if you start today. You might even be able to delay up to two mortgage payments, which could help you get out even further from that debt.
Don't take my word for it. I want you to do your own homework, as always. Go to American Financing at 800-906-2440. 800-906-2440. Or go to AmericanFinancing.net. That's AmericanFinancing.net. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
VOICE: NMLS 182334. NMLSConsumerAccess.org. APR rates in the five, starts at 6.725 for well-qualified buyers. Call 800-906-2440 for details about credit costs and terms.
(music)
GLENN: All right. Let me see this full screen here, if I can.
So tell me what this is, Jeff. This full screen, that we have up on the monitors.
This is from the judge, is it not?
VOICE: Oh, hold on. Yes. Yes.
GLENN: That's the ruling.
VOICE: Yes. This is the ruling from the judge, correct.
GLENN: My gosh, they are freaked out about you being on this program.
PAT: Wow.
VOICE: Yes. Yes.
PAT: You seem to be all over that document.
Wow!
VOICE: I know.
JEFF: You know, Glenn, the sad thing about it is, he does dismiss their motion, which we're very happy about.
And we thought it was meritless when they filed it. But he does go on, and he talks a little about some of his unhappiness with the things that we say.
And I've already had people call me up and say, what do you think about that?
I said, look, he only has that side of the story. He rules so fast, which we appreciate.
That we didn't even have time to file a reply. So he is simply looking at Qualcomm's reply, and assuming they are telling him the truth, which they're not telling him the truth.
Look, they say, I have no basis for thinking that Qualcomm has taken our technology to China. I mean, you're kidding. Here's an article, Glenn, I found. 2017, New York Times. How this US tech giant is backing China's tech ambitions. Interesting article. People should go read it. 2019. Jenwa Net (phonetic) of Asia. Interview: Qualcomm president says China to lead the world in 5G scale.
Look, I understand why Qualcomm wants to be a big player in China.
It's a big market. But we have to do this smartly.
We can't just put engineering facilities there.
Teach the Chinese how to develop their own products.
And then expect for the long hall, that we're going to be anything other than from the outside looking in.
I mean, their Belt and Road Initiative is being helped by big tech companies right here in the United States.
It's insane.
GLENN: So when do you suppose -- are you going to file and go to court again?
I know you've been waiting for 11 years.
JEFF: Well, we have a case. It is -- it is -- by the way one of the things Qualcomm mischaracterized is in our first video, they say, oh, Jeff Parker says, we've been waiting ten years for our case, I show you indicating that there's something I feel is nefarious.
No, I didn't say anything was nefarious.
GLENN: Right.
JEFF: What I said was it's been a long -- let me tell you why it's in ten years. Qualcomm filed challenges to the validity of our patents. That ate up four years.
Then they had a couple other ridiculous motions, which took the judge a year or two to sort through.
Now we're up to six years. Then we had the pandemic. That's another two years. The point is, it's been a long time. And all we're asking for is our day in court with the jury who can hear our case. And make a decision.
We think we have a compelling case to the jury.
And the judge right now is considering when to set the trial date. We're hoping it's going to be early, early to middle. Maybe this fall, of this year.
But soon. Very soon.
GLENN: Well, we will continue to follow the case. Are you releasing another video?
JEFF: We just released another video this morning.
GLENN: Yeah.
JEFF: And that video talks about the benefit of the technology.
Our interaction with Qualcomm. How we took this technology to them.
I hope people will go to against giants. And watch the video.
I think you'll find it highly informative.
GLENN: You'll find it on Twitter. At against underscore giants.
At against underscore giants.
Make sure you check that out. And share it with a friend. Share it with the DOJ.
With the FBI. With anybody that you feel would have interest in this.
I think this is something that should be looked into. And if there was corruption, it needs to be routed out.
People need to go to jail, if they did wrong.
And the -- the patents need to be set right.
If we can't count on our patents as small-business people, which Jeff Parker is and ParkerVision is.
If we can't count that those patents can be held by small people, against these giants!
We've got nothing in America.
We have nothing.
JEFF: Totally.
GLENN: This is David versus Goliath.
And they deserve their fair shake in a courtroom.
Jeffrey, thank you so much.
JEFF: Glenn, thank you for having me back.
GLENN: You bet. ParkerVision.com.
ParkerVision.com.