RADIOJanuary 20, 2023

Are risk-reluctant parents actually HARMING their kids?

Some parents have decided it’s time to cancel sleepovers. In this clip, Pat and Stu discuss all the reasons why sending your kid away for the night contains too many risks for some families. But, does a lack of risk in children’s lives actually HARM their development into able and free-thinking adults…?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

PAT: There's an interesting situation, I would like to know your thoughts on this, Stu. Because you still have young kids. My kids are grown now. So they don't do a lot of sleepovers. But I'm guessing that you -- yeah. They don't.

As adults, they don't sleep over friends' houses that often. It's weird.

But there is a thing apparently now, where a lot of parents are kind of giving second thoughts to sleepovers and not allowing them. For any number of reasons, one of which, I guess they're afraid of abuse.

STU: Is that --

PAT: I think that's one of the reasons. Because do you ever know for sure what's going on in somebody else's house?

STU: No. You never know for sure. But, again, this ties into the fact that despite the world being aimed statistically a much safer place from crime.

PAT: Then it was when we were young. Yeah. That's true.

STU: You know, this is -- Lenore Skenazy talks about this a lot, where we kind of put this bubble wrap around our kids. I'm totally guilty of this at some level.

PAT: Me too.

STU: Where my kids are young. And I remember when I was their age, you know, I would just wander out. The summer, my mom would go to work, and I would walk to my friends house, a mile away. And we would hang out and play all day. You know, this typical story, you come back when it gets dark. And maybe have dinner.

And people kind of new around the neighborhood. And people kind of kept an eye on you, a little bit.

But basically, we did whatever we wanted, which was most of the time eating Hostess products and playing Wiffle Ball.

You came back, and that was it. My kids don't do that. I'm not letting my kid walk around for a mile by himself with his friends. I don't do that at all.

PAT: No.

STU: I know. Because we think this way a lot. I'm a guy who likes numbers. I can look at them and say, hey. I know intellectually, this viewpoint makes no sense. I know it.

I live in a safe area. We are in a low crime period. While we've seen it tick up. The 2020 period was a little bit different.

PAT: Murder rate has gone up in some cities.

STU: There are some problems. Obviously, some drug abuse issues have risen over the years. But generally speaking, we are in a low crime period.

We are -- the most profound example of this, is I was more than double -- or twice as likely to be killed, in a mass shooting, at my school, when I was a kid.

PAT: Than kids are now?

STU: Than kids are now.

PAT: It's double?

STU: And that blows people's minds. It's more than double.

PAT: Oh, wow. Really?

STU: When I was in high school, it was in the '90s. And crime rates reason higher. And the difference between mass shootings. School shootings, I should say, back then and now, is what we see now, are very disturbed kids who get guns and try to essentially out-- take the leader board on their video game. Right?

They come in, and they decide, they're going to try to kill as many people as possible.

So we see mass shootings. What we saw in the '90s, were two or three people being shot in a fight.

We saw people get gangs, bring guns to school. You know, like -- but it wasn't as much -- it wasn't 20 or 30 people dying. But people were shot, at school, all the time, back in the '90s. It just wasn't noticed as much. And I find it hard to believe, that a mom in the '90s, who loses their kid. Because one person is shot at school. Feels better about it, than someone today, who loses their kid in a mass shooting. But what this also means is more schools go without any shootings at all. Far more schools, when you look at the percentage of schools, go without mass shootings, because when we do see a shooting, it's usually one of these larger spectacle shootings. People looking for attention. And look, that's a whole different problem hard to solve.

But the bottom line is, when you send your kids to school, in today's era, they're much more likely to survive and not be shot.

PAT: It's safe.

Yeah, and they've taken a lot of precautions too, the schools. They're usually locked. It's usually much, much harder to get in.

STU: Yeah, that wasn't the case back in the day.

PAT: It used to be, you just walked into a school, if you needed to give a note to your child. Or bring them something that they needed medication, or whatever.

And you were not stopped or asked, or frisked or --

STU: No. No security guards.

PAT: No security at all. It's a much different situation now. So --

STU: If there was a fight that broke out in a school, the gym teachers are coming down the hallway to help break that it up. That's how it worked. That's not how it works now.

PAT: No.

STU: So it is -- in some ways, it's so much better. And the sleepover thing I think is part of this.

We hear these terrible stories, and they do happen.

But generally speaking, these rates are a lot lower than they used to be. And that's positive.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: We don't need to bubble wrap our kids as much as we need to.

PAT: One of the concerns, apparently, in addition to the abuse. If you don't know the parents really well. And do you really know anyone well enough to trust your kids to be there over night?

I don't know. Because you just never know.

STU: It's so funny. We just talked about this. And it's not logical. It's not logical.

PAT: It's not. It's not. But here's how illogical I am.

My daughter -- my youngest daughter was 16. So this was a few years ago, because she's 22 now. When she was 16. She wanted to walk down -- my wife wasn't home. So she came to me and said, I'm going down to the pond. We have a pond like half a block from the house, she just wanted to go down there and hang out.

I don't know. Throw rocks, or whatever she was going to do with the pond. I'm like no. No, you can't.

STU: Wait. Wait.

Sixteen. She couldn't go to the pond, a half a block away?

PAT: Sixteen.

Half a block away.

No, I don't want you at the pond. Because who knows?

STU: Yeah.

PAT: So I'm illogical that way.

STU: I am too.

PAT: And I'm not sure why. Because logically, I do know that the crime rate is much lower. And what are the chances of being kidnapped or whatever, at 16? It's low. Really, really low.

STU: Very low. Very low. I think part of this is -- I can only speak for myself here. Part of it is I just don't want to be the one who approves the thing that goes wrong. It's almost selfish in a way. I know I would beat myself up until the end of time if I was like, yeah, sure, go down to the pond, and God forbid, something terrible happens. And so you just decide, no. Just eliminate every bit of risk from their lives. That's not how to build, you know, a healthy adult. Right?

PAT: It's not.

STU: I think we're seeing the effects of that. So I do try. When I realize this instinct in myself, I try to cure it. My kids do sleepovers.

PAT: They do?

STU: They do. However, I've noticed, there is their hesitance among parents now.

You know, I'm not in the parents group as much as my wife. But occasionally she talks to me about this, when she's talking to one of her friends. They don't really like to do sleepovers with their kids. Again, these are people that are friends.

And, you know, a lot of times, that they know. And I would think trust. But there is -- there is a hesitance. And I just -- I just think we jump to the worst-case scenario, a lot.

PAT: Yeah. We do. And according to this article, it's pretty prevalent now, where parents say no to sleepovers like this.

Yeah, they're worried about -- not only are they worried about crime. But they're worried about whether or not people have guns in their home, and whether they're locked away safe or whatever. So there's a gun fear.

STU: So let's say I'm a liberal. And my kid wants to sleep over at Pat Gray's house. Pat Gray probably has them all over the place.

PAT: I used to, of course. Yes. I leave them out on the kitchen counter. Yeah. AR-15s out there. A couple of 9 millimeters.

STU: Just hang out.

If you about it to the dog toy basket. There's an AR-15. And I don't want my kid in that environment. That's kind of the stuff you're talking about?

What else? Are there any other concerns?

PAT: COVID exposure.

STU: So I'm a COVID zero guy. I'm wearing a mask. Three masks to the gym.

PAT: Yep. I'm coming home. And I don't want my kid -- because you, as an evil conservative.

PAT: Not only do I have guns. I have the COVID virus, that's in petri dishes all over the house. All over the house. And they spill it a lot of the time.

STU: Instead of salt, you're sprinkling on COVID.

PAT: Yes. Also, are there alcohol or drugs in the home?

STU: Okay. Because, I mean, that's -- there's a -- some people have alcohol in their house.

Some people have it, and make sure that it's protected from their kids. And others, might just have an open liquor cabinet.

PAT: Might, yeah.

STU: I remember this back in the day. There were kids, that their parents would drink. Drank alcohol.

And they would -- they would have their ways of drinking some while the parents were at work. And filling the bottle with water. And trying to cover it. And like that stuff happened. That was a real thing.

PAT: Yep. What about older siblings? Is that a consideration? Did they have older siblings, where something could happen?

STU: Yeah, right. I could see that. Oh, my God. I'm never letting my kids go anywhere. Why are you scaring me like this?

Again, I think there are appropriate -- you have to think about these things as a parent. I think one of the big things is, do you trust that other parent? Is the parent going to be home?

PAT: Can they keep you safe?

STU: Are they going to make sure that things don't go awry in the middle of the night? You know, you don't want your kids sneaking out and vandalizing the neighborhood, right?

You want to make sure that they actually stay in the house. Maybe -- especially when they're younger. Do they actually go to bed at a decent hour?

We've had our kids sleep over their friend's houses a couple times, and they come back. And like, you said up until 2:00 a.m. I can tell. Because you're a different person today, and you look like you went on a bender for six weeks.

So you have to get that sense of not every parent has the same standards as you. You know, my kid, they will go to bed, basically at the same time every night. It's not going to be too late.

PAT: And speaking of that, some parents apparently, have come to a compromise, where you can stay there until, you know, late. Like 10:00. Or midnight.

STU: Yeah. And then go pick them up.

PAT: Yeah. They call that a halfover.

STU: A halfover.

PAT: Or a lateover. Stupid. Stupid.

STU: We are a weird group of people, aren't we?

PAT: Oh, man. It's amazing.

But I just find it interesting, because apparently a lot of people have just decided, it's not worth it. And so they just say no. Just because they don't want to mess with any of the risk. Who knows what could happen? Maybe nothing.

But I'm not going to take the chance. Which kind of makes sense to me. Being the -- probably oversensitive parent to those kinds of things as I am. So...

IHEART FEED

Will Trump's Cabinet Expose the Obama CIA’s BIGGEST Secrets?

During her Senate confirmation hearing to become Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard mentioned an Obama-era CIA program called “Timber Sycamore.” The program gave weapons and training to Al Qaeda affiliated groups with the goal of toppling the Assad regime in Syria. But the American people and many soldiers fighting in the Middle East were kept in the dark. What other secrets are government bureaucrats still hiding from us? Is the CIA connected at all to the Benghazi tragedy? And would Tulsi Gabbard reveal the truth as DNI? Glenn and Stu discuss.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: FBI agents are starting to pack up their desks. As fear of FBI mass firings swirl. That's -- that's sad.

And good. I'm glad.

Benjamin Netanyahu just arrived in DC. He said that he's meeting with Trump. And they hope to redraw the lines in the Middle East.

That's an interesting thing. I think Donald Trump is absolutely headed that way. The USAID headquarters have been closed.

Thank you, Donald Trump, for that. And there was something else.

Oh. And Mexico just came out.

The Mexican president just talked to Donald Trump.

And that 25 percent tariff?

Well, that's on hold.

She said, I talked to Donald Trump, we had and a great conversation.

And he put that on hold.

And I'm sending 10,000 troops to the US/Mexico border right now.

So I've got that under -- and Justin Trudeau. God bless his soul.

He's going to talk at 3 o'clock this afternoon. Yeah. Who is a good Prime Minister?

What a joke. Now, let me tell you about -- I just told you about USAID. And how that is a CIA front.

And Donald Trump is going to do two things with DOGE. He's going to cut all the bad guys. Try to find them.

He may not find all of them. But he will find a lot of them

Oh, did I mention that the FBI people are clearing out their desks.

Getting ready for a firing.

Anyway, he will clean out a lot of the mess, and a lot of the black ops that are happening.

And he will also cut the budget.

So he has that going for him. Now, the left and the Deep State. They're a little freaked out.

If they could have shredders at their disposal, 24 hours a day. I don't think there would be a lick of paper left, in I forget these agencies.

Consider some of the questions that have been swept under the rug. All the way back to Obama.

Let's see. Consider the American lives that are lost, overseas.

Consider the foreign lives lost. Consider the regimes that have changed.

And the chaos that is spread all over the world, in our names, with our tax dollars.

Now, consider what Donald Trump's team has pledged to break and uncover.

So if you listen to some of the confirmation hearings in the Senate, you might hear a little sneak peak at what's to come.

Tulsi Gabbard over on Friday, revealed for many Americans, they don't know about it. It's a clandestine, Obama program, that sought regime change in the Middle East.

And unloaded over a decade of violence and chaos.

Listen to this.

VOICE: Senator, as someone who enlisted in the military, specifically because of al-Qaeda's terrorist attack on 9/11 and committing myself and my life to doing what I could to defeat these terrorists. It was shocking. And a betrayal to me. And every person who was killed on 9/11. Their families. And my brothers and sisters in uniform.

When as a member of Congress, I learned about President Obama's dual programs that he had begun. Really, to overthrow the regime of Syria.

And being willing to -- through the CIA's timber sick more program, that has now been made public. Of working with and arming and equipping al-Qaeda, in an effort to overthrow that regime, starting yet another regime change war in the Middle East. DOD train and equip program, again, begun under President Obama, has widely been known, looked at, and studied that ultimately resulted in half a billion dollars being used to train who they called "moderate rebels," but were actually fighters working with and aligned with al-Qaeda's affiliate on the ground in Syria.

GLENN: Hmm. That's weird.

Most Americans have never heard about Obama's Timber Sycamore. It's possibly the largest gun running and training operation our little spy agencies have ever pulled off.

How many people died in Syria, as a result of this? How many people died all over the Middle East?

How many terrorists received weapons and training from our government?

Al-Qaeda?

We know that many of those same terrorists now control the government of Syria, right now.

And the horror show is not over yet.

Why haven't we heard about this?

Why does every school kid know about Reagan and Iran-Contra, but not Obama and Timber Sycamore?

It is because it not only reveals terrorists receiving our training and weapons, that we supplied. But it also reveals American lives that have been lost.

We still don't know the full details on what happened in Benghazi.

Why is that?

Why is it that Hillary Clinton and Obama made sure of that?

That wasn't part of some gun-running operation to Syria, was it?

Is this part of the peace of the fallout from Obama's Timber Sycamore?

Why was the US ambassador even in Benghazi? Why was there a State Department annexed in such a dangerous place? And why was it so unguarded?

Why was there a secret CIA substation there? Why was it kept so low-key?

Why didn't the military respond? Why were they so quiet and ineffective? Were they trying to keep Obama and Clinton's little secret hidden?

And all at the cost of four American lives. Say their names. They like to say that. Say their names.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Sean Smith. Tyrone Woods. Glen Doherty.

They still deserve justice. We deserve answers. I just want you to know, what's happening in Washington, DC, right now, is because cutting the budget.

But it has a dual purpose. In everything they're doing. They're cutting the heart out of these secret ops. They are exposing what our government is doing. By moving USAID over to the State Department. USAID can't that have.

I mean, I don't think of the State Department as someplace that's clean and has a good agenda.

But apparently, that's being cleaned up as well.

What is it we are going to learn, over the next few months?

What is it we're going to see exposed?

It's quite amazing. It is quite amazing.

By the way, Sunday, yesterday, Musk wrote, that career Treasury officials are breaking the law every hour of every day by approving payments that are fraudulent or do not match the funding laws passed by Congress.

Oh, boy. What's this? Apparently, the Treasury Secretary, the new one, has allowed the department of government efficiency to gain access to the federal government's payment system.

Okay. Wait a minute. So USAID won't allow the DOGE officials any access to their aid programs? But the Treasury is like, yeah. Open up the books!

They discovered, among other things, that payment approval officers, at Treasury were structured to always approve payments, even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups!

They literally have never denied a payment in their entire career.

Not once!

So why do you have them.

And why would they be told that? My gosh, this house of cards is going to come crashing down.

They are in -- they're going to have serious issues.

Trump's Tariffs EXPLAINED: Will Canada Cave Like Mexico?

Did Donald Trump start a trade war with Mexico and Canada, or is it all part of his negotiation strategy? Mexico has already agreed to help improve border security. But Canada has pushed back against Trump’s promise to slap 25% tariffs on many Canadian goods. Glenn explains what Justin Trudeau doesn’t seem to understand: This isn’t about “punishing” Canada. It’s about national security and getting the best deal for Americans.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Welcome to the program. Donald Trump just got off the phone with Justin Trudeau.

Apparently, they're going to talk again at 3:00 this afternoon.

But he's not -- he's not going -- he's not going light on Justin, which I'm very happy about. Canada, immure -- I'm sorry. When we're there too.
-- I don't want to feel like we're pointing out Canada going, you guys suck! We sucked too. We just woke up and changed leadership.

And we're -- we are going in a different direction. Because we've learned the same things you know. Okay? You know it!

This can't continue this way. Right?

STU: Yeah. The one. I have several issues with some of these policies.

One that I do, is really -- a little bothersome to me. Trudeau is so unpopular, in Canada. So on the way out.

Now there's this nationalist Canadian thing going on. Where they're --

GLENN: Wait a minute. Trudeau is becoming a nationalist?

STU: It's hilarious. He's now getting the benefits of the support, of people who are just rallying around him mindlessly.

Whether the policy is right or not. I just don't like good things happening to Justin Trudeau.

I don't know if that's part --

GLENN: That was an unforeseen consequence.

STU: We will see, obviously, with where this lands, much more important than not.

GLENN: Here's the thing. We have a president that is not actually trying to destroy us.

STU: Yeah. That's true.

Whether you like this policy or not, when it comes to tariffs. You know that the motivation behind it is to make the country better. And I don't know if it's always the motivation behind these policies, when we've seen previous presidents go after them.

Obviously, a lot of Democrats have gone after similar policies. I think a lot of times, their motivations have been much, much worse.

So at least we've got good motivations behind this.

I mean, I think Trump is looking at this and saying, he thinks this will work long-term. I think most clearly, you pointed this out, Glenn, with Panama. With Colombia. Most clearly, he believes they're going to back down from this eventually.

And give us concessions. And I think that's probably the most likely outcome.

GLENN: That seems to be what's happening with Panama.

STU: Yeah, definitely happened with Colombia.

It does seem to be, we are the big boys on the block. And Donald Trump is not only familiar with that fact, but also comfortable with it, unlike other presidents. He's comfortable with us being the big boys on the block.

He's comfortable with us being the world power. That's okay in his eyes. It's okay in my eyes. It's okay in your eyes.

GLENN: As long as you don't become a big bully. I mean, listen to what Justin Trudeau said.

Let's go to cut three, please.

VOICE: Now is also the time to choose Canada. There are many ways for you to do your part. It might mean checking the labels at the supermarket. And picking Canadian-made products. It might mean opting for Canadian rye over Kentucky bourbon, or foregoing Florida orange juice altogether. It might be changing your vacation plans to stay here in Canada and explore the many national and provincial parks, historical sites, these tourist destinations our great country has to offer.

STU: Useless job, yeah.

GLENN: I know he is. I know he is.

STU: He's using this to turn around his own political fortunes. Which is infuriating. He doesn't care about any of this other stuff. He's motivated by his own political interest here.

GLENN: Here's cut six.

VOICE: I think Canadians are a little perplexed as to why our closest friends and neighbors are choosing to target us, instead of so many other challenging parts of the world.

I don't think there's a lot of Americans who wake up in the morning saying, oh. Damn Canada! Oh, we should really go after Canada.

GLENN: You're right!

Why were you targeting us? Why -- why was your -- your number two in command that just quit, why was she targeting people here for, you know, giving to a freedom movement in Canada?

I mean, it's not like you've been our best friend, Justin.

STU: No, he's been horrible.

GLENN: Terrible. But Canadians are great. I love Canadians, and I love Canada. And Canada should love Canada.

STU: Sure.

GLENN: And you should be concerned about what the state of your country is in.

You know, look at your immigration problems. Look at what's happening to your country.

That's what started all of this.

Is the fentanyl coming across our borders. Both north and south.

And the illegals. Stop it. Stop it.

And the great way to stop it is to make sure you stop it at your borders.

From them coming into your country!

That's -- that's really what this is about.

STU: Right. And that's what's clear here.

You know, Trump always says tariffs are his favorite word.

You've talked to him privately about that.

GLENN: I disagree with him on that happen.

STU: A way, I don't think that's exactly what he means.

Tariffs are good, to the extent that they get something else done. Right?

They're not good in and of themselves.

They're just taxes in and of themselves.

They do raise prices on us. The calculation however is, will the pain, that is applied to both sides as Trump has outwardly stated. And it's important to be fair to him.

A lot of people are saying, he's not saying this.

He's saying, there will be pain.

Those are his word. There will be pain on us.

The calculation is, the pain on us, will be the pain less on them.

And they will give first. And then he will get what he wants, outside of the tariffs.

That's the calculation here.

I mean, it is a risky one at times. And, you know, these -- you can call it a trade war or not.

But the bottom line is, when we escalate them, then they escalate. It's -- you could say it's not a trade war. But it kind of is.

I mean, it's a trade competition, if you feel more comfortable with those terms.

But the bottom line is, we believe we're going to win it. That's what he's saying!

And he believes we will win it. And at the end of the day, we get concessions that improve the country. The proof is going to be in the pudding on that.

Will it work? As you pointed out, it has worked kind of with Panama, so far, it seems like.

It's worked kind of with Columbia. It's going to work with some of these countries, it will be more difficult with a country like China.

I think what we saw in his first term.

Was a renegotiation of NAFTA, which basically became the US embassy. Right?

GLENN: Which he still doesn't like. It was the best he could do.

STU: It was the best he could do at the time.

He's I guess not happy with it now.

Because, you know, you're not allowed to put new tariffs either one of these countries in that agreement, which he negotiated. But he wants something better. I mean, how can we be upset with a president who wants something better for the country?

It -- it's just a question as to whether it works or not. The guy -- the Dallas Mavericks traded Luka Doncic this weekend.

The DM came out and said, you'll have to judge me as to how it turns out. We will!

Right? Congratulations, we will!

GLENN: In fact, we kind of already have.

STU: Well, that one, we already have.

That's probably a bad example.

That's exactly what will happen. If this works, and you get something out of it.

People will probably be okay with it, even if it is short-term pain.

Generally speaking, though, the American people only have so much tolerance for that.

And Donald Trump has a finally tuned eye for that type of thing. And I'm sure he will walk that line carefully.

GLENN: He does. Oh, yes, he is.

Yes, he is. And like I said, he's not trying to destroy America. He's trying to save America. And I know that's a new concept, to the American people.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I'm sure it's new to Americans as well. Cut one.

Here's Donald Trump talking about tariffs on Europe.

DONALD: Well, you're asking me a question.

There's a period in here, am I going to oppose tariffs by the European Union? You want the truthful answer, or should I give you a political answer? Absolutely.

STU: He wants stuff, and this is how he gets stuff.

GLENN: Yeah. But what does he want?

STU: I mean, various things from various countries, right?

GLENN: Yeah. He wants. The big things, he wants an end to the World War II order.

Where we are protecting Mercedes Benz. Allowing Mercedes to come in here, and have all kinds of access to our market. And Ford can't.

We don't have that!

We don't have that in Germany.

Why? Because we wanted to make sure the German countries could recover. And all the car companies could recover.

You know, the world is just not a good place without all that citron.

So that's what that is all for.

That's why we did that. And it never changed.

And it's got to change. It's over.

It's got to change. The other thing that absolutely has to change. They have to pay their 5 percent. Into NATO.

You've got to pay it.

STU: That's -- everyone is in this agreement.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: It exists with the terms of the agreement.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: In place. Follow them.

That's not a difficult thing. We're doing a lot more than everyone else, anyway.

Even if we all pay 5 percent, we're the ones footing the bill. We're the ones basically running that organization.

The least you can do is get to whatever that percentage is.

GLENN: Yeah. And that's fine if you don't.

If you don't want to do that, that's fine.

Then the agreement doesn't exist, and we're not going to protect you all the time.

You know, Winston Churchill. He had to beg the United States to come in because the Americans don't want to be involved in everybody else's business. We don't!

Our government, our state department seems to want to.

The military industrial complex wants to. But the American people don't!

So we're totally fine with that, Europe.

We don't think that's a good idea for you. But, you know, in time, you will learn to defend yourself. And then you will probably get pissed off at the French and start bombing them.

And then we'll be in it all over again. Again, we don't recommend it.

But go ahead. We're not protecting.

What do you think Justin Trudeau will say, if we said, oh, well, you don't want to protect your borders.

Okay. All right.

You want a trade war. Okay.

Well, I think we're done helping your military.

I mean, that's -- we win at the end. Hopefully, we'll never get to that. We win at the end.

STU: They have to know that.

GLENN: Yes, they do. They do.

STU: They have to know that.

I'm not surprised they're retaliating, with the 25 percent tariffs of their own.

Obviously, there are a lot -- we do send a lot of products to Canada as well.

We are the second largest exporter in the world.

GLENN: But --

STU: So we do send products to a lot of these countries. And it will burn those companies. And it will hurt at times.

If these things even get into place. We're not even in place yet.

Would it be surprising at all, if there was a most of negotiating. No.

GLENN: Let me ask you. He was just on the phone with Justin Trudeau just a few minutes ago.

Hung up the phone. What's he doing at 3:00 this afternoon?

Getting back on the gonna Justin Trudeau. This is a negotiation.

GLENN: Yes. Exactly. You can't get too worked about it. Because you don't know where the story ends.

GLENN: We have no idea. We're not the ones negotiating.

Here's what we do know, our negotiator is trying to get the best deal for us.

And he's a businessman. He understands it. Unlike attorneys who run the rest of the world.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

NEW EVIDENCE: Shroud of Turin Shows Exact Moment of Resurrection?! | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 243

In 2022, a prize of one million dollars was promised to anyone who could recreate the Shroud of Turin. If the Shroud is a forgery, that should be a simple task. Yet, no one has accepted the challenge. “The Shroud of Turin is the most lied about artifact in history,” says distinguished New testament scholar, Pastor, and President of Christian Thinkers Society, Jeremiah J. Johnston, who guides Glenn through a scientific, historic, and theological exploration “beyond the mystery” to the “message of the Shroud.” Discredited and marginalized as a relic only relevant to the Catholic faith, Jeremiah contends that the Shroud of Turin has something to offer every follower of Christ. He reveals what he believes to be the rare blood type of Jesus, the real design of the crown of thorns, and why, in his opinion, Christ was buried at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Glenn shares what he saw when given a behind the scenes look at the artifacts housed in the Vatican, and asks Jeremiah whether he is concerned about the AI recreation of the face of Christ. Not only may the Shroud of Turin provide a deeper understanding of the crucifixion, but does it also miraculously uncover the exact moment of Christ’s resurrection? Find out in this paradigm shattering episode of the Glenn Beck Podcast.

Glenn GOES OFF on Senators Trying to Block Trump’s Cabinet Nominees

What's actually going on in Washington, DC? President Trump's cabinet nominees like Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, and RFK Jr. faced hostile confirmation hearings as both Republican and Democratic senators grilled them on insane things. But why would Bernie Sanders, for instance, oppose RFK Jr., a fellow critic of Big Pharma? And why would someone like Doug Burgum get an easy pass to lead the Department of the Interior when climate change is allegedly the biggest crisis we face? It's because these senators don't actually care about "truth," Glenn argues. They care more about preserving themselves and stopping any nominee who will expose their corruption. But the American people have had enough. The truth WILL be revealed. And that's why Trump needs his cabinet ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All righty. I have a few things to say.

Let's start with, who is having a hard time getting confirmed?

Okay. Let's just go through the names here in a second.

What's really being discussed here.

Who is under the gun?

Let's start with Pete Hegseth. What is he going to do?

He's going into the Department of Defense. He's looking for those weasels, that have been changing everything in our Defense Department.

Has been culling anybody who disagreed with Joe Biden.

Anybody who thought Donald Trump might be right.

They got rid of all of those people.

Then they committed another atrocity, I believe, for our military.

Demanded that you get the COVID shot, or you were out! It was crimes, incompetence, maybe crimes of incompetence, in Afghanistan, at least. They were trying to control the message. Control the military through DEI.

So Pete Hegseth is a target. Why? Because he's going to find out what's going on. He's going to run investigations. And he's going to stop it.

Okay! Next. FBI DOJ.

So why -- what is he going to do? What is Kash Patel going to do when he gets into the FBI?

Well, he's going to investigate crimes, the weaponization of the FBI. Also, the way that they protected those in Congress, or those in power.

I.e., the Hunter Biden laptop. I.e., the FISA courts.

So he's looking for bad guys, while also trying to clean it up. Because you can't clean it up, if you don't know who the bad guys are.

Then you have the Director of National Intelligence. And Tulsi Gabbard. She's under fire. Why?

Well, she needs to go in and expose all of the black ops, and those leaking lies to the press. And shoring up lies to the members of Congress.

And rooting out the darkness between the members of Congress, the White House, the military industrial complex, and the intelligence community.

What is RFK? Why is he being challenging?

Because he's going to expose the lies of COVID, the corruption, and corruption with pharmaceutical companies.

He's going after and breaking that all up. These are all big businesses. You know, big businesses, for congressmen and senators. And the government!

This is -- this is the center of public/private partnerships. Okay?

And they all involve people who want to go in and find out the root of what's really going wrong here! So they're all under attack.

But what did the Democrats say, is the existential threat to the republic, and all mankind?

What was it?

STU: Global warming!

GLENN: Global warming. Global warming. Guess who just -- whose nomination just flew by!

Doug Burgum.

STU: Burgumentum, yeah. It sure did fly by.

GLENN: Doug Burgum. That is weird.

STU: You would think for Department of the Interior, the concern for a bunch of people who think global warming is the big concern.

GLENN: What he's going to do is reverse a lot of the things and make coal, gas, oil exploration okay for many parts of the Interior of the United States.

He sailed through!

Now, how does he sail through, if he's just going to be -- his role will be to destroy the opposition to oil, gas, and coal?

Notice what he's not going to be doing. He's not going to be investigating the government.

So forget about what we said about the biggest threat. No, no. The biggest threat seems to be the people who are looking into corruption!

So I was a little outraged. I've been a little outraging all week.

And I want to clarify things. And make very, very clear.

We're talking about threats to our democracy.

That's what they said. And I believe that to be true! We're talking about the rule of lay. Right?

But let's -- let's actually look at what is being said in the so-called confirmation hearings.

On day one, with Bernie Sanders and RFK. America's favorite millionaire socialist was railing about onesies.

Onesies! What? That's the great moral crisis facing this country? While we teeter on the edge of war. While the economy is in free fall. While we have corruption all throughout our government? With COVID and pharmaceuticals. Onesies is the thing you're bringing up?

While the very institutions, he claims to protect, have all been turned into political weapons.
Then when RFK Jr had the audacity, the unmitigated gall to point out, that this self-styled champion of the working class was the single largest recipient of pharmaceutical money in 2020, what happened? What happened?

The old man went -- oh! I knew this was going to come up in my socialist dreams.

What did he do?

He did what they all do. He had to silence RFK.

He had to have him dismissed. He needed to discredit him.

He needed people not to hear what RFK was saying.

The same man who spent decades raging against corporate greed. Suddenly has nothing, but caveats and excuses, when the money was going his way.

Now, I don't think it was. But let's just say, that was a lie about Bernie Sanders!

Let's just say that RFK just made that up.

Okay. What had to happen?

Well, Bernie Sanders needed to be able to clarify. Right?

He needed to be able to say, that's not true. And here's why that's not true.

But he couldn't. Okay? He just had to shout it over what RFK was saying. He had to silence and talk over RFK to stop the accusation.

He needed to defend himself, and explain. That's what would happen in a fair system.

But no one on the receiving end can silence the senators. No one on the receiving end can talk over them, and say, that's a lie! And get the control of the room back, so they can set the record straight. The senators can. See, the questions are akin to, when did you stop beating your wife? And I think that was an actual question for Pete Hegseth, last week. Was it not? When did you stop beating your wife?

These hearings are not advice and consent as the Constitution requires. They are smear, destroy, and delay.

Let's move on to Kash Patel. The man accused, without any evidence, of course, of planning to weaponize the DOJ and FBI. That's laughable!

Who is accusing him of that? The very senators, who have spent the last 20-plus years. Weaponizing the entire government, against the American people.

The same people who oversaw the raids on journalists. The spying on sitting presidents. The suppression of political opponents. The imprisonment of pro-life activists, while violent rioters just walked free.

Are these the people who have the audacity, to clutch their pearls about the politicization about law enforcement?

The hypocrisy is so thick, I almost choked to death on it!

And then there's Tulsi Gabbard. God bless Tulsi Gabbard.

When she finally got a chance to speak, she laid it out, plain. Corruption in our intelligence community, is not a theory. It's a fact!

It's a matter of record. It's not even in dispute.

But did anybody talk about that?

No!

Smear, silence, destroy.

Instead, they smeared her. She's a Russian agent.

She's a traitor. She's a spy for Syria. She doesn't care about the Constitution.

These people are so desperate to maintain their stranglehold on power, they will destroy anyone who has -- who has the gall or the opportunity to expose them. They're all rallying around the idea that these people must be stopped, why?

Why did Doug fly through with the Department of Interior, if that's the biggest problem? Because that's not the biggest problem.

They know the biggest problem right now is, they're about to be exposed. So they have got to destroy and delay and stop these people.

They asked her if Edward Snowden was a traitor. They weren't interested in their answer. Because the truth is too dangerous for them. They're not interested in an actual answer on any of these questions.

Here's the truth: Is Edward Snowden a traitor?

Well, I don't know. We could talk about that back and forth.

But I know he shouldn't have ever had to blow the whistle.

Especially to the press.

But it's because of this very committee, senators, it is because of many of you, in fact, you from Colorado, that are questioning me on that!

You were in the Senate, at the time.

Why did -- why didn't -- why wasn't he comfortable coming to you, to blow the whistle.

Why is it he couldn't, become a whistle-blower?

He had to go to the outside press?

See, all of the things that they were doing, that he exposed, I don't like the fact that he exposed them.

Because it hurt the United States. But I'm glad he exposed them. Because what you were doing. What you in Oversight were allowing to happen for years, was against the Constitution.

Was against our rule of law.

So he shouldn't have had to have blown the whistle.

You, all of you, sitting right here on this panel, you're in charge of oversight. You failed!

And you dare question me. Maybe you should do your damn job. Maybe you should stop the unconstitutional surveillance programs, before they ever begin.

These are the people that oversaw the FBI lying to the American people about Hunter Biden's laptop. The laptop that proved the sitting president of the United States and his family took tens of millions of dollars from foreign adversaries, including China!

The same China that is threatening the United States, threatening Taiwan, the same China that these very senators allowed to buy up American farmland and land around our own military bases.

The same China that floods our streets with fentanyl, while their partners in Mexico, butcher Americans, at the same border. While these same senators do nothing, while millions of unknown, undocumented people flood over our borders. And have empowered the cartels.

Don't you dare ask me who the traitor is, Senator!

Don't do it.

Where are you on any of these?

Let me ask you, Senator. Let me all of you.

Who is the traitor here?

Is Edward Snowden the traitor that just has to be executed?

Because treason comes with execution. So is he the traitor here?

Is he the biggest traitor? That happened 15 years ago. Your technology on spying, and corruption, is far beyond anything he ever said!

Is he the traitor? Or is Senator, let me ask you, the president.

President Joe Biden, is he the traitor for taking millions of dollars from our enemy!

Is his family? Did they commit treason? Or is it the people under your oversight, who knowingly spread false information, to protect that family?

Or is it you, Senator? Are you complicit? Are you corrupt, or are you just simply incompetent!

Because it's one of the three. Incompetence. Corruption. Or outright treason. Which is it, Senator. That's what I would like to hear.

Pick one! Because the country is waking up. And the American people are demanding an answer.

And we will get it in the end.

You cannot build this house of lies.

It's already crumbling around. Now would be the time to tell the truth, senator.

Because we're looking for a lot of answers here.

Who was actually executing the duties of the president of the United States, in the last six months?

Maybe the last four years.

I don't know how long. When did you know, Senator? Did you know who was protecting? Who was silencing anyone that was trying to say, maybe we have a problem here? The president is clueless.

By the way, while we're on this topic. Who was responsible for the coup?

To overthrow a president of the United States!

Because that's what it was.

How did that happen?

Who was actually there? Who made that happen? And then selected Harris to be the democratic candidate. Who did that? How did that happen? I'm so interested to know, because none of it is constitutional. And why did, whomever actually came up with the huge list of names for presidential pardons. Include so many of you!

Senators.

So many congressmen, so many people who dared to point the finger my way. Who was in charge of that list. And why are you on those lists?

Is this the reason you're afraid of people that are simply looking for the truth?

Because I want to be crystal clear on what this really is.

I'll continue in 60 seconds.

First, let me tell you about Rob, who wrote in a while back about Relief Factor.

Besides working on his regular job.

Rob built houses on the side for years.

It's a nice side job. That led to horrible hip and back pain. He heard about Relief Factor. Decided to give it a shot. Within 4 days, his pain pretty much subsided.

He continued to get better over time. Rob summed it up, saying. Being pain-free is indescribable. Thank you!

I know the feeling. Relief Factor is a daily supplement that helps your body fight pain naturally by fighting inflammation, which is the source of most of the pain in our bodies.

And, frankly, a lot of our disease. It's 100 percent drug-free, developed by doctors to help reduce or eliminate pain.

And over a million people have tried Relief Factor's Quick Start kit. Seventy percent of them have gone on to order it again and again.

So make 2025, the year of feeling good and living great. Get their thee-week Quick Start for only 19.95. That's less than a dollar a day. 1-800-4-Relief.

1-800-4-Relief. ReliefFactor.com.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: I want to be clear at this point in my rant, of what this is really about. What's really happening in Washington, DC, right now.

This is the Deep State, and all of the corrupt senators, right now, fighting for their survival.

That's all this is.

It is the act of desperate people doing all they can, to stay out of jail. Literally, stay out of jail. You start exposing the corruption in the military-industrial complex.

It goes right to the senators. You start exposing the corruption, and the black ops that are happening in Intel community, it goes right to the senators.

You start exposing what happened next at the DOJ and FBI. It goes right to the senators.

They're all Oversight. Many of them benefited from these things, politically. And in power. They're trying to stay out of jail. This is the ruling class. Democrats and Republicans panicking for the first time in decades, their grip on power is slipping.

Because this president is appointing people in all positions, that are going to go grab it by its roots, and root it out! And show it to the American people. At best, it's -- it's those who have been in bed with the intelligence and military complex.

Who believe at best, that war and American intervention works. Doing all that they can, to keep their secrets and their secret policies, that keep us in these wars, alive.

The problem is: None of their old tricks work. We've had these tricks for over 100 years.

Conspiracy theory. That's a Karl Marx thing. That was used by Woodrow Wilson.

That was used again, by the Soviet Union. And the plants here in the United States.

Call them conspiracy theorists. Discredit them.

Destroy them. You've called us so many names now. We don't believe any of them.

Words don't have any meaning anymore. Your tricks don't work. The smears. The leaks. The media hit jobs.

The fake outrage.

You've played that role too many times. It's a -- no.

It's a Mexican soap opera. A Spanish soap opera. They're so over the top, they're hysterical.

You've played that role too many times.

We know. We know the system is corrupt. We know the game is rigged. And we know there is no moral high ground left for you to stand on.