RADIOOctober 09, 2024

We asked “60 Minutes” why they CHANGED Kamala’s answer on Israel

CBS News’ “60 Minutes” recently aired an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris about her 2024 presidential run. But keen-eyed social media users noticed that “60 Minutes” edited down her answer about Israel to cut out all the rambling and make her sound more coherent. However, it wasn’t just a simple edit. They appear to have copy-pasted an answer from another question! Glenn’s team reached out to CBS News for clarification, but has yet to receive a response. So, Glenn reviews what happened and how it appears to fit a growing trend: Kamala Harris is suddenly doing more interviews, but they’re more like propaganda pieces! Just this week, she had a beer with Stephen Colbert and was introduced as “the next president” by The View. But at least she answered one question honestly during that interview …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So yesterday, president Trump's campaign insisted that 60 Minutes. CBS News released an unedited transcript. They must release an unedited transcript, of vice president Kamala Harris' entire 60 Minutes interview.

Now, this came after her word salad about Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was cut from Monday's broadcast.

And it looks as though, it was a cut and paste job.

The dramatic edit was made after 60 Minutes correspondent, Bill Whitaker noted that it seems like Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening.

So her response to Monday night's show, was completely different. And far more coherent, than her rambling answer showcased in the preview clip that was released on Saturday.

So we wrote to 60 Minutes. We gave them until 9 o'clock Eastern to respond. We said, we want to give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you edited the clip down for time.

As often happens, in these pretaped interviews, but we looked into it for ourselves.

And sure enough, the answer she originally gave, and then CBS aired on Face the Nation, doesn't match what made it into their final edit of 60 Minutes, and it wasn't due to time.

Listen, here's her original answer.

VOICE: Does the US have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?

VOICE: The aid that we have given Israel, allowed Israel to defend itself, against 200 ballistic missiles, that were just meant to attack the Israelis and the people of Israel.

And when we think about the threat that Hamas, Hezbollah presents, Iran.

I think that it is without any question, our imperative to do what we can, to allow Israel to defend itself against those kinds of attacks.

Now, the work that we do diplomatically. With the leadership of Israel. Is an ongoing pursuit, around making clear, our principles. Which include the need for humanitarian aid. The need for this war to end.

The need for a deal to be done, which would release the hostages. And -- and create a cease-fire.

And we're not going to stop, in terms of putting that pressure on Israel, and in the region.

Including Arab leaders.

VOICE: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening.

KAMALA: Well, Bill, the work that we have done, has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel, that were very much prompted by -- or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.

GLENN: What? What does that -- okay.

STU: Huh.

GLENN: Now, here's what it sounds like, on air.

With their totally unbiased editing magic marker, a day later.

VOICE: Does the US have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?

KAMALA: The work that we do diplomatically with the leadership of Israel, is an ongoing pursuit.

Around making clear our principles.

VOICE: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening.

KAMALA: We're not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.

GLENN: Wow!

STU: That's from a different part of the interview.

VOICE: -- ally in Prime Minister Netanyahu?

KAMALA: I think with all due respect, the better question is, do we have an important alliance between the American people and the Israeli people?

And the answer to that is yes.

GLENN: Sound more coherent? Sound more certain. Sound more presidential.

Yes! That answer, by the way, Stu was right. Is from a different part of the interview.

What we ask 60 Minutes to explain, their apparent in kind contribution to the Harris campaign. We said, greetings. An X user noticed severe edits to VP Harris' answer to the 60 Minutes interview regarding Netanyahu from the time the clip aired on Face the Nation to the final export yesterday.

That we attached both the edited and unedited.

It doesn't appear to be edited for time. Rather, a cut and paste answer from a different question.

Can you provide an explanation to the Glenn Beck Program and Blaze news, as to why this edit was made?

There are claims of bias and selective edits to makes Vice President Harris' answer appear more coherent. Our deadline is 9:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow. We have not received, surprise, surprise, a response, from CBS News.

So are you getting anything, that is real?

Well, JD Harris pointed out. Or J.D. Vance pointed out yesterday, that, yeah. You -- you did get an honest answer from The View. Listen to what he said.

VOICE: But she walks into The View, and you would think that would be an interview. And you think that would be an easy question.

Really, propaganda. They said, can you name a single thing, where you disagree with Joe Biden?

Now, let's back up for a second. Because remember, Kamala Harris' entire campaign is to pretend that she hasn't been the vice president for the past three and a half years. You know, she stands up before crowds. And she will say on day one.

We will tackle the affordability crisis. On take one, we will secure the border. And you listen to her for five minutes. And you think, Kamala, are you going to vote for Donald Trump? Because you've been president for 1400 days. You haven't done anything.

(applauding)
So you think, after all this time, all this time, of thinking about how she would do things differently from Joe Biden.

She would have a well-prepared answer, for the interviewers on The View.

Well, they ask her one thing you would do differently from Joe Biden. You know what she says? I can't really think of anything off the top of my head.

GLENN: Wow.

VOICE: Now, in her defense, I'm not sure she could think of anything off the top of her head, whether about Joe Biden's policies or anything else.

GLENN: That is an incredible statement, that she made.

Now, Brian Stelter, who strangely is back on CNN.

STU: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: Said that he called The View, before she went on. Here's what he said. Cut two.

VOICE: She's also on The View tomorrow, talking to producers of The View last night.

They have some sharp questions for her as well. And let's remember, sometimes it's these non-traditional formats, that actually reveal a lot about a candidate.

GLENN: Uh-huh. So here is the View introducing Kamala.

VOICE: Please, welcome back the next president of the United States.
(applauding)

GLENN: Very sharp.

STU: Oh, yeah. Very sharp question.

GLENN: Very, very sharp.

STU: I will say, I agree with Stelter on that point though.

Oftentimes, it's not some big adversarial interview, where you get these good moments. I mean, this is the best moment of any of the things she's done so far. The thing that J.D. Vance was just highlighting.

Her admitting that, which is a massive strength for her campaign.

So far, she's been able to avoid responsibility, for Joe Biden.

And the fact that she just threw that out there, with no exceptions.

I mean, I don't know.

I think partially because she feels like she's in a safe zone.

She's able to kind of just let down her hair a little bit.

And blurt out things that are really helpful to her opponent.

GLENN: But can I ask. She's. Most of America is not in a safe zone right now.

I mean, you have the results of one hurricane. And another one, coming tonight.

Massive. Could be one of the biggest ones that has hit Tampa, in Florida. Of all time!

And she's last night, on Steven Colbert.

STU: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: Drinking a beer with him. Listen to this.

GLENN: But elections are won on vibes.

They just want someone they can have a beer with.

GLENN: Would you like to have a beer with me, so I can tell people what that's like?

This was. Now, we asked ahead of time. I can't just be able to drink to the vice president of the United States. You asked for Miller High Life.

I'm just curious.

KAMALA: Okay. The last time I had beer was at a baseball game with Doug. Okay. Cheers.

VOICE: There you go.

There she is. Cheers for drinking a beer.

VOICE: It tastes like the city of Milwaukee.

KAMALA: The champagne of beers.
VOICE: There you go.

STU: How pathetic. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Like she's picking her beers based on swing states?

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

STU: It's like, give me a break.

GLENN: But I really like that small brewery, right there in Nevada, and another one really in Arizona is very, very good.

STU: Don't sleep on Georgia and North Carolina.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Yeah. No. It's pretty pathetic.

GLENN: So what is -- you said this earlier.

What is the strategy change?

Why is it that she's suddenly doing all these interviews?

I think it is because they know they're in trouble.

I think there's been a shift in the polls.

And so she is doing all of these television shows, all friendly.

STU: Uh-huh. Not all -- well, yeah.

Look, there are -- nothing adversarial. You could argue 60 Minutes should be at least is a mainstream normal candidate type environment.

GLENN: Until they edit it.

STU: Until they edit it.

She did face the nation, I think too. Over the weekend. And then she did, of course, the podcast. She's done now the late night shows.

She did The View. She's going everywhere.

This is a massive change in strategy. They have been running this campaign for two or three months. The exact same way.

Keep her out of -- off TV. Just keep her on script, in front of an audience.

Get her in and out. Never have her face a question. The strategy was clear, for multiple months.

Now, all of a sudden, she's everywhere?

That is a massive change. This is a huge development in the campaign.

GLENN: So my gut would say, that the hurricane has changed an awful lot.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: But I'm not sure.

I haven't watched. I have been so busy, all over, everywhere.

I haven't watched mainstream media.

Are they even covering?

Or are they just debunking. Saying. No. FEMA is everywhere.

These are crazy Trump supporters that are saying that. Is there any -- is there any peek behind the curtain, from the mainstream media?

STU: My impression is that they are covering the hurricane. And what's happening to people.

But they are not associating it with a bad response for Kamala Harris.

Or Joe Biden, or anybody else.

I haven't seen that type of coverage. Outside of conservative media.

But they are covering it.

I don't think they're hiding.

I have seen a lot of coverage about it. I had some theories about it. Run them by you.

You pick one. You kind of already selected one. Let me give it to you already. Why has Kamala Harris, all of a sudden, on TV, all the time, doing interviews everywhere?

One, could be public pressure finally getting to the campaign. We've been talking about it for months. Why isn't she doing interviews?

Why isn't she doing interviews? She's even being asked in the occasional interviews that she does, why aren't you out there anymore?

Maybe that finally got to her campaign. Possibility one.

Possibility two. Could be a planned shift in strategy.

Could be that she said, at the outset of this campaign. Let's wait. Let me get up to speed. On all these things.

She wasn't planning on doing a million interviews.

Maybe she's slow walking it.

And doing a blitz in the last month.

It was a planned change in -- change in strategy from the beginning of the campaign.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Possibility number three.

Could be Kamala Harris.

Frustration behind the scenes. Now pushing back against her handlers.

We have seen this. We saw it with Joe Biden. Of course, it was the same strategy with Joe Biden, no. Don't go out there. Don't do anything. He was behind the scenes saying, I can do it. You're not letting me go out there. You're not letting Joe be Joe. And he pushed himself out there.

And, of course, wound up blowing up his campaign.

Could be the same type of thing from Kamala. She may be thinking, you're restraining me.

That's why I'm not winning by more.

Number four, could be that they're looking at internal polls and indicators. And thinking to themselves.

We're in real trouble here.

Something has changed in the past couple of weeks.

Maybe it's the hurricane. Maybe it's something else. We're in real trouble.

Another possibility.

I mean, I'm just kind of throwing these things out there.

GLENN: I've got one for you.

STU: Okay. You've got another one?

GLENN: Maybe the polls are so good. They don't care. They're internal polling.

Now, I don't believe that.

STU: You think it's so -- why would you change strategies, if things were so good?

GLENN: Because I agree with the one, you know, she's like, look, I could be winning by a large margin. You're restraining me.

STU: So kind of the sister of that one. Yeah.

GLENN: And they think they're safe. So why not?

I don't believe that. But that is another possibility.

STU: Another possibility for you, pressure from donors.

You know, maybe donors are like, look, we're not giving you more money, until you actually go out there and get your message out there. We think it's important. That does happen with donors sometimes. It's kind of like, you see this in foreign countries, when there's a war going on.

There's a bunch of people who are kind of pressuring the administration to do X, Y, and Z. Could be the donors are coming to the table. Hey, you're not blowing them out. Because you're sitting back there. And everyone knows you're hiding.

GLENN: Could be. Let me get your answer on this, here in just a second.

First, let me tell you about the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews.

It has been a year since the October 7th mask in Israel. By Hamas. One year since 1200 Israelis were murdered.

And more than 250 were taken hostage.

Did you see that Hezbollah is now saying, okay. Okay. Okay.

We give. Uncle. Uncle. Uncle. And Israel is saying to Lebanon. Until you completely renounce Hezbollah. We're not stopping.

I mean, they are fighting to win. Unlike we have seen anyone do, maybe since World War II.

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, is there, just purely as humanitarian. And letting the Israeli people know, that we are there.

And we are serving you. They have -- they have built bomb shelters.

They're providing flak jackets for people that are on neighborhood watch.

They're doing everything that they can, to support. Ambulances that are -- are bomb proof.

And bulletproof.

I can't believe you need those. But you do there. Let them know, you stand with them.

That we're not the same people, that, you know, we're around in the 1930s and '40s. Call to make your 100-dollar -- 150-dollar gift right now.

All of this will go right directly to help provide food and other necessities, to help these families survive.

Go online. SupportIFCJ.org. That's one word.

SupportIFCJ.org. Or call 888-488-4325.

Or call (888)488-4325. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

STU: So...

GLENN: Which one do you buy?

STU: The other one I put, the belief is maybe this campaign is actually hurting her.

And I certainly wouldn't select that one.

I think it's probably a combination.

But I do think that, they probably are seeing this, and seeing some internal indicators, thinking that they're seeing the beginning signs of trouble.

They probably are polling on the issue, and saying, and asking the question.

Internally.

Do -- is Kamala. You know, a version of essentially. Is Kamala Harris hiding?

Do you think Kamala Harris is not putting her positions out there?

Is she not speaking enough?

That stuff you can kind of test. And they might see negative reactions on this.

You look at this. You could say, it might be a tick ahead. You could say it's tied.

But they certainly don't believe that it should be tied.

They think Donald Trump is the worst person of all time.

GLENN: Right.

Well, here's another reason.

Here's Kamala Harris on Howard Stern. Listen to this. Cut 22, please.

KAMALA: To your point, I literally lose sleep. And have been over what is at stake in this election. I mean, honestly, I -- I end the day, pretty much every day, these days, asking myself, what can I do more?

STU: You know, there's a lot of reporting from inside the Kamala Harris campaign, about disappointment, that she is not doing more.

That she is not doing a lot of public events. That she is taking days off, all over the place.

Leading up to this campaign. And that also could be fueling this media blitz.

GLENN: Donald Trump is a machine, man.

STU: He's all over the place. And J.D. Vance is all over the place.

GLENN: Everywhere. Everywhere.

I mean, I went to North Carolina, then I went to Kansas City.

And I had to do the show in between all of those.

So I was just not getting much sleep. I was exhausted yesterday.

And I thought, how is Donald Trump holding this schedule for this long? And he's bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. The guy has not slowed down. It's amazing.

STU: It's hard to argue that about Trump.

GLENN: He is a machine. He is a machine.

SHOCK POLL: The % of Young People Who Support SOCIALISM is Insane

New polling reveals a shocking truth: young Americans aren’t just open to socialism... they overwhelmingly want a socialist president in 2028. Glenn Beck and Justin Haskins break down five alarming surveys showing massive ideological shifts among voters ages 18-39, including young Republicans. Why is socialism exploding in popularity, and what does this mean for the future of America? Are we on the brink of a political transformation or potentially even a national crisis?

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE

Property Taxes are OUT OF CONTROL - And Here's Why! | Guest: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott

Texas Governor Greg Abbott joins Glenn Beck to expose why Texans are being crushed by skyrocketing property taxes — and how local governments, not the state, keep driving homeowners deeper into financial distress. Gov. Abbott breaks down his five-point plan to impose strict spending limits, force voter approval for tax hikes, reform out-of-control appraisals, empower citizens to slash taxes themselves, and eliminate school district property taxes for homeowners altogether. Glenn argues that property tax is morally wrong because it prevents Texans from ever truly owning their land, and Abbott lays out his strategy to fight both parties in the legislature to finally deliver lasting relief.

Joe Rogan & Glenn AGREE: We just got CLOSER to civil war

Joe Rogan recently warned that we may have gotten to Step 7 of 9 in the lead-up to civil war. Glenn reviews the 9 Steps and explains why he believes Rogan nailed this one. But Glenn also lays out what Americans MUST do to reverse this trend...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So if you take what Fetterman said yesterday about how people are cheering for him to die on the left, and then you couple it with something that was on the Joe Rogan show on Tuesday. He was saying that the reaction to the death of Charlie Kirk makes him think that the US is closer to Civil War than -- than he thought.

Now, let me quote him. He said, after the Charlie Kirk thing. I'm like, oh, my.

We might be at seven. This might be he step seven on the way to a bona fide Civil War. Charlie Kirk gets shot, and people are celebrating.

Like, whoa. Whoa. Whoa.

You want people to die that you disagree with?

Where are we now on the scale of Civil War?

Well, let me go over the scale of Civil War, because it's sobering.

Now, none of this has to be true. If we wake up and decide, I don't want to do this anymore!

Okay?

Here's step one.

Step one. Loss of civic trust.

Every civil conflict begins when people stop believing that the system is fair. Are we there?

We're so far -- we're so far past the doorway, we are comfortably asleep on the couch on this one. Gallup and Pew both show trust in Congress, the media courts, and the FBI government are now at record lows.

The Edelman Trust Barometer classifies the US now as severely polarized. Majority of Republicans distrust federal elections. Majority of Democrats don't trust the Supreme Court.

Americans are really united on one thing, and that is the other side is corrupt!

When faith in the rules collapses, the republic begins to wobble. But that's step one. Step two, polarization hardens into identity!

Political disagreement is normal!

Identity conflict is fatal!

But that's what Marxists push. Identity politics. This is when politics stopped being about policy, and started being about who you are as a person.

Have we crossed this one into step two?

I mean, we're neck deep into this. A study on this, from PRRI.

It's a survey, found 23 percent of Americans believe political violence may be necessary to save the that I guess.

I think that's an old study. Americans now sort themselves by ZIP code into ideological enclaves. The big sort: Universities, activists, corporations. Everybody is promoting oppressor versus oppressed.

And that -- does what?

It puts us into incompatible tribes. Opponents aren't wrong anymore. The opponent is dangerous!

If I go back and you look at civil wars, Lebanon, before 1975. Yugoslavia, before 1991. That's -- we're doing that. Okay?

Step three. Breakdown of the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers are kind of like the referees of society. It's the media, political parties, churches, civic leaders.

When they fail, extremism fills the vacuum. Okay. Where are we on this? Have our gatekeepers failed us?

Yeah. I think both parties, especially the left, you know, everything I predicted that the left was going to be eaten by the extreme left, and then the communists and the socialists is now happening.

They've lost control of the fringe of each party. Media transformed, you know, from referees into team coaches. Tech platforms. It's outrage for profit. Universities are not there to cool things down. They heat them up.

Churches. Churches are useless. Useless.

When the referees leave the field, the game devolves into a brawl. And the refs are gone off the field. So there are only nine steps. We're at step four. Here's step four.

Are you ready for this one?

Parallel information realities.

Civil wars don't require different opinions. They require different realities.

I remember reading about Germany, at the beginning of, you know, the Nazi era. How the two new newspapers. One was propaganda for the government.

And the other one, it was the last one that was kind of the holdout.

And they said, you could read them, and they would cover the same thing.

But they had almost no information was the same. Except, that happened yesterday.

Here's what they said. And then everything else was different. That's exactly -- I mean, step four is complete!

We can't agree on facts, right?

Crime rates. Border numbers. Inflation. Election security.

Two Americans can watch the same video. And see opposite truths.

Social media algorithms are creating customized political universes.

Digital echo chambers. Deepfakes. We're just at the beginning of that. And both sides accuse the other of running disinformation machines.

Why? Because we don't have a shared reality. So if you don't have a shared reality. How do you settle any dispute?

On the nine steps, we're up to number five. Coming in at number five.

Loss of neutral rule of law.

This out of the nine steps with, five is the pivot point.

It's not corruption, it's the belief that the law is no longer neutral.

Are we there yet?

Let me tell you the CBS you.gov poll. 67 percent say the justice system is used for political purposes.

I think that's low. January 6 defendants given years in prison, 2020 rioters were released. High profile political figures, prosecuted or shielded based on party.

FBI whistle-blowers alleging pressure to inflate domestic extremism numbers. States like Texas, directly defying federal directives, on border enforcement.

And now, leading the way, with the federal government.

History is really cold and unforgiving on this point.

Once the people believe justice is political! Remember, this is the turning point.

The republic stands on borrowed time. Once you no longer believe that justice is achievable. Step six.

Are we there?

I think we are.

Step six. Normalization of political violence!

This is where violence stops shocking the system. Are we there?

Remember, where violence stops shocking the system. Look at evidence just from Virginia. What they just voted for.

He was calling for the death of a -- a political opposition.

Calling for his children to be killed.

Was called on it, never apologized.

Never said anything other than, yeah. I know. He dug it deeper.

Was anyone shocked by it? Apparently not. They elected him. Here's the evidence. 2020 riots.
574 events. $2 billion in damage. Was anybody outraged by that? Or was it downplayed and excused?
Assassination attempts. Assassination attempts against the president. Supreme Court justice.

Fistfights. And mob actions on college campuses. To silence speakers. Rising to do for punching a fascist or stopping genocide. Depending on the ideology. Online chatter discussing Civil War, national divorce, and revolution.

When violence becomes part of the political language, a nation crosses an invisible line. We're now up to step seven out of nine.

This is where Joe Rogan said, are we at step seven?

The rise of militias and parallel forces.

When a state loses he is monopoly on force.

Countdown accelerates. So where are we on this one?

I think we're seeing, maybe early signs of this.

You're starting to see the -- the states kind of organize these mobs, you know, to go after ICE.

Right?

Armed groups, right-wing, left-wing radical secessionists. Anyone.

Once they start forming their own police forces. Or their own option forces, then you have -- then you have everything really falling apart.

Entirely!

I don't think we're there, yet!

But we're starting to see the beginnings of this.

Step eight. The trigger event.

Civil Wars don't begin with a plan. They begin with a spark.

So where are we?

We're not here yet. The conditions are right. Potential triggers, disputed election in '26 or '28.

Political assassination or major attack.

Supreme Court decision that ignites mass unrest.

Financial crisis or dollar crisis.

A state federal standoff turning violent!

Nothing is ignited yet, but the room is soaked in gasoline. So we don't have seven. We're on the verge of eight, at any time. And here's nine.

This is the point of no return.

When police, military, or federal agencies split, even if no one calls it that, well, where are we?

Well, I just read a story about how with the Mamdani election in New York, a good number of the police force is going to leave. And they're going to go join police forces elsewhere. You also have the tension between the state National Guard, and the federal directives, the state guard and the state directives. Law enforcement recruitment is at crisis lows. The distrust of the FBI, DOJ, CIA. Tens of millions of Americans. I always really respected those institutions. I have no respect for them now. If you have states openly defying federal rules on immigration, drug laws, sanctuary policies.
Whistle-blower claims of internal politicization.

All of these things are in play for the first time in 150 years, people can imagine!

So I give this to you, not to be fearful of, but to know where you are. As a map!

Know where you are.

And hopefully, it might wake some people up, if you chart America on, on the nine step model of Civil War. Steps one through four, completed!

Step five, happening!

Step six, happening! Step seven, beginning! Step eight, just waiting for it. And step nine, avoidable, only if step eight, never happens. Again, I'm not telling you for doom purposes, this is diagnosis. This is a doctor going, I want you to look at the chart.

And this is a doctor saying, I want you to look at -- do you see what's happening to your body?

If you don't stop this habit, you are going to die. You don't have to die. You can stop smoking and drinking right now. You can start exercising. But if you don't, you are going to die.

The question is, are we the nation that says, nah, that's not going to happen to me. Or are we the nation that wakes up and sees our chart and says, good heavens, it's way far more gone than I thought it was. But I feel something in the air.

I'm going to change my behavior. The nation that refuses to look and wake up and stop calling their neighbors enemies, is the nation that fails!

We have to strengthen these things that have already fallen. And, you know what, the easiest one to do is?

Church. Where are you ministers and pastors priests and rabbis?

Where the hell are you?

I think there's going to be a special section for you, when you cross over to the -- because you're doing things in the name of God!

So when you get to the other side, I think there's going to be a special section for those who remained silent. While his rights were being taken away.

You don't own that right.

I don't own that right.

The Lord gave us those rights, and said, protect them!

By you, being the representative, the voice box, if you will, of the Lord, to shepherd his people. By you not standing up and saying, hey, by the way, we have -- we have a moral responsibility to protect these rights for the next generation! By you refusing because you're afraid. Because I think, there's no politics in the Bible! There's no politics in the Bible. Really?

The whole thing is about politics. Is about the moral way you have to live your life.

Calling things as you see them. Calling them back to eternal principles.

He didn't tell anybody how to vote. Render to Caesar what is Caesar's.

But there are certain principles that you have to have, or you lose not only this citizenship, but the next citizenship. The one that really matters. And, boy, if you are doing it because you're a coward, you are in the wrong business!

Get out of the pulpit, and go to work at Jack in the Box.

Democrat “SMOKING GUN” on Trump & Epstein gets DESTROYED by facts

The House Oversight Democrats recently released "new" emails allegedly proving President Trump lied about his knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. However, Glenn points out a glaring issue with these emails that destroys their entire narrative...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, let's dive right into the Epstein Maxwell emails. My gosh, Stu!

Why are they trying to cover up that Donald Trump had sex with children!

STU: I mean, it's just clear, as -- as day, in the emails!

GLENN: Yeah. No.

STU: He spent hours with one of the victims. What else could have possibly have occurred in that arrangement? We don't know!

GLENN: And it's -- it's one of the victims, Stu. One of the victims!

STU: One of the victims, that's all we know. One of the victims.

GLENN: Let me read what Jeffrey Epstein wrote. I want you to realize that the dog who hasn't barked is Trump. Victim redacted. Victim spent hours at my house with him. He has never once been mentioned. Police chief, et cetera.

Okay. New information, just released. Or is it?

Because in 2011, 2011, that was released and everybody knew it. It's been out floating around. Here's the change: In 2011, this is what it read.

I want you to realize that the dog hasn't barked is Trump. Virginia spent hours at my house with him.

Why would you redact a name that is already out in the public square!

It's already out!

The memo is already out. The email is already out. It's been out for years. Why would you redact that name now?

Well, because it makes it all of a sudden, new and shiny. Shiny and new. If you don't know who said it, you see victim, and you're like, oh, you see victim. Who is the victim?

I don't know. But when you know it's Virginia, you know this has already gone to court. This is -- she already testified about this!

He didn't partake in any of this, any sex with any of it. It's true. He didn't partake in any sex with us, and I'm quoting, this is from the testimony. But it's not true, that he flirted with me. Donald Trump never flirted with me. Have you ever met him?

Yes, at Mar-a-Lago, my dad and him. I wouldn't say they were friends, but my dad knew him, and they would talk. Have you ever been in Donald Trump or Jeffrey Epstein's presence with one another? No!

What's the basis of your statement that Donald Trump is a good friend of Jeffrey? Jeffrey has told me that Donald Trump is a good friend of his.

He didn't partake in any of -- any of the sex with any of it. He flirted with me.

It's true, that he didn't partake in any sex with us. But it's not true that he flirted with me.

So I don't understand that. But she goes on. Donald Trump never flirted with me!

Okay. So what -- what's new about this?

This is the same girl, this is the same person that -- didn't she work at Mar-a-Lago?

Or she was going to get a job at Mar-a-Lago.

STU: Yeah. I believe she did at one point.

GLENN: Yeah. So we know they know each other. We know they know each other.

We know that at Mar-a-Lago, Jeffrey Epstein would come, and he was poaching the employees. The girls there. To go work for him.

And Donald Trump went to him. And said, "Hey, man. Stop it. Stop poaching people from me. That's not cool. Don't do it." And then he said, "Oh, yeah. All right." And then he did it a second time. And he's like, "You know what, you're out. I don't want you here anymore. I asked you not to do it, and you did it." Now, that doesn't mean that he knew what was happening to the girls or what was happening or anything else.

And even if it did mean something was happening with the girls, he was saying, "Hey. Stop it! Don't take any of the girls or the women here.
Don't do it." I don't believe he knew anything about any of this. But God only knows! And really, God only knows!

This is not new news. Donald Trump, he might end up beating Bezos as the richest man on the planet! When all is said and done!

Because, again, the -- they're presenting this as new fact, a giant scandal. Stu, I don't know if you know this. This is -- this breaking news is a giant scandal.

STU: Yeah. I've heard democratic representatives saying that over the past 24 hours. Yeah. We need to investigate this.

This is shocking stuff. It's a massive scandal. Even ABC News, I heard, pushed back against this. And said, well, what scandal? What are you implying occurred here?

We know who the victim was. We know the victim. Like why. Why did you even redact that name?

And they're like we always redact name of victims.

Do you really? When they're already out publicly?

Not to mention, this particular victim is not even alive.

You know, she sadly died. I mean, it's a terrible, terrible story.

GLENN: Terrible story.

STU: Yeah. She passed away.

A suicide. It was at least the report I believe. But she has a posthumous book coming out. But like a terrible, terrible story.

But, you know, to act as if you have to protect her identity when, number one, she's dead.

GLENN: Is ridiculous.

STU: Number two, everybody already knows who she was, including the news sources, who also have a policy, you would think.

And ABC has a policy. They redact, that was in this type of situation. But it's already been out. We already knew who it was.

So they redacted to make it look like he's with other people who have not already told us nothing bad occurred! You know, and it is an absolutely awful tactic. And at least --

GLENN: I think litigation should follow again. I think he should sue them again. Anyone who is presenting this as new information.

ABC did their job. Congratulations for ABC. They did their job.

They pointed out, this is not new information.

Why would you redact. Why are you releasing this now? And you're redacting a name this -- this email is already out!

You're presenting this as a new scandal.

And you redacted that name. This is completely dishonest. The news media shouldn't even run with it. They shouldn't even run with it. They should have said, old news. Old news. And if you did run with it, you should have handle it had like ABC handle it had. Wait a minute. Why did you redact name.

What do you mean that there's a new scandal. She already testified exactly opposite of what you're believing Jeffrey Epstein over the victim right now. I just want to make sure you understand the Democrats right here. You're taking the name of Epstein, over the victim.

Oh, okay. All right.

STU: And Epstein doesn't even say that anything occurred.

GLENN: No.

STU: There's not -- it's just -- it would be something you would have to jump to a conclusion, to accuse Donald Trump of something like this.

And we know what happened, because the victim said nothing!

Said, it was nothing!

GLENN: Right.

STU: In fact, it wasn't even a flirtation. Which, by the way, even that, you might have thought was creepy. It wasn't even a crime.

It wasn't even flirtation. So it's a disgrace in every single way.

GLENN: All right. So let me take you here. Let me take you here.

If you remember when the shutdown first started, what did the Democrats say, the reason why they did the shutdown?

Not them! Why Mike Johnson and everybody else wouldn't negotiate!

Why wouldn't -- why wouldn't the Republicans negotiate?

Because the heat was on, to release the Epstein files.

And they didn't want to have to do that. So they shut the government down!

Okay?

They wouldn't negotiate. You didn't hear any of this? Oh, it's so arrogant.

STU: It doesn't make any sense at all. That's probably what they said.

GLENN: I know. I know. So the government is open, and what does Mike Johnson do yesterday?

He said the House is going to vote on a bill to release all of the files related to the late financier, convicted child sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein next week. He said on Wednesday that a discharge position to bypass leadership and force a vote on the bill, hit the benchmark for needed signatures. It's been decided by him to expedite the vote for the bill, which under the current rules could have been delayed until at least early September.

So he says, as soon as that petition hit, the needed 218 signatures, I brought it up. Unanimous consent. Let's go! Release it.

So he's pushing this forward. Good, Mike!
Release all of it. Thank you!

Get it out. Lance this boil.

I mean, if anybody thinks that you're ever going to get the truth on this in the first place, it's madness. It's madness. Everybody -- I mean, so many important people were involved in this, and it was in the hands of the Democrats for the longest time. Okay?

So they had all of this information. You don't think it was all picked through? And if there was anything about Donald Trump, you don't think that would have come up between 2020 and 2024?

There's nothing in there about Donald Trump. These people are so stupid. This time, we've got him, boys. This time, we've got him.

No, you don't. This time, it's like Wile E. Coyote. This time, we've got the Roadrunner!

No. You're never going to catch him on this. It doesn't work. The guy was the most investigated person in the history of the world, and you've got nothing! Now, it's good to come out.

But if you think you're going to catch a bunch of people on the left, you're not going to. Because they had it, you know, in their possession.

You don't think all of the names were taken out? You don't think things were destroyed, if there was anything? I believe there was something. But I don't believe there's any names in it anymore. You're not going to get the truth on this one. You're just not going to get the truth, but release everything that we have. Everything!

Oh. Oh, by the way, also in the Epstein emails. How come nobody is talking about this one, Stu?

This one is from Michael Wolff, to Jeffrey Epstein. And then Jeffrey Epstein responds.

So Michael Wolff writes, "What's the thumbnail on Nes Baum (phonetic) Foster?"

And Jeffrey Epstein writes back, "Nes Baum White House Counsel, dot, dot, dot, Hillary doing naughties with Vince."

Now, Vince Foster killed himself, you know, and then killed himself at the White House. And then drug himself across the street to the park.

I mean, I don't know -- the Vince Foster thing is so old. And it doesn't -- but why is nobody talking about that one?

Why is no one talking about that?

Also, this the Jeffrey Epstein email bundle, ABC, you don't feel that's necessary to bring that one up?

Huh. Interesting.